Exhibit A – Scope of Work and Deliverables General ...45 Materials Design Recommendation (Source...

MnDOT Contract No. 1033732 Trunk Highway 13 Corridor Evaluation and Dakota Improvements Design

Exhibit A – Scope of Work and Deliverables

General Statement of Scope of Work 6

General Information and Requirements 6 Background 6 Draft Schedule & Contract Completion Timeline 6 Source Type Codes and P6 Activity Codes 6 Standards 7 Items provided by State 7 Plain Language and Accessibility Standards 8

Plain Language 8 Accessibility Standards 8

Tasks 9

1 Project Management, Coordination, and Meetings (Source Type Code 1010) (P6 Activity OPM1000) 9 1.1 Schedule 9 1.2 Monthly Progress Meetings 9 1.3 Project Instructions and Quality Assurance 10 1.4 Subcontractor Management and Oversight 10 1.5 Risk Analysis and Tracking 10

2 Public Involvement Plan (PIP) (Source Type Code 0054) 10 2.1 Initial PIP Deliverables 11 2.2 PIP Deliverables 11

2.2.1 Project Analysis (P6 Activity PIP1000) 12 2.2.2 Stakeholder Identification (P6 Activity PIP1010) 12 2.2.3 Conflict Identification (P6 Activity PIP1020) 12 2.2.4 Conflict Mapping (P6 Activity PIP1030) 12 2.2.5 Conflict Assessment (P6 Activity PIP1040) 12 2.2.6 Public Involvement Strategy (P6 Activity PIP1050) 12

3 Request Scoping Input (Source Type Code 1003) (P6 Activity FDB1000) 12

4 Preliminary Environmental Investigation (Source Type Code 1071) 13 4.1 Early Notification Memo (P6 Activity ENM1000) 13 4.2 Identify Section 4(f) (P6 Activity SFF0900) 13 4.3 Air Quality Analysis for Corridor Evaluation (Source Type Code 1071) 13

4.3.1 Determine Level of Air Quality Analysis (P6 Activity AIR1000) 14 4.4 Noise Analysis for Corridor Evaluation (P6 Activities NOI1000, NOI1020, NOI1030 and NOI1040) 14

4.4.1 Determine Level of Noise Analysis (P6 Activity NOI1000) 14 4.4.2 Develop Receptor Sites (P6 Activity NOI1020) 14 4.4.3 Monitor Noise (P6 Activity NOI1030) 15 4.4.4 Model Noise Impacts for All Viable Alternatives (P6 Activity NOI1040) 15

4.5 Identify Section 6(f) (P6 Activity SSF0900) 16 4.6 Environmental Justice Review (No P6 Activity Part of EAW1020) 16 4.7 Contamination Database Review (Part of RFR1002) 16 4.8 Develop Draft Purpose and Need Statement and Evaluation Criteria (P6 Activity CSR1000) 16

5 Corridor Evaluation (Source Type Code 6244) 18 5.1 Determine Study Area (P6 Activity CSR1010) 18 5.2 Complete Existing Conditions Technical Memorandum (P6 Activity CSR1020) 18 5.3 Draft Study Alternatives Report (P6 Activity CSR1030) 19 5.4 Develop Study Alternatives Cost Estimates (P6 Activity CSR1040) 20 5.5 Study Benefit Cost Analysis Report (CSR1050) 20 5.6 Study Alternatives Evaluation (P6 Activity CSR1060) 20

1



5.6.1 Prepare Draft Intersection Control Evaluations for Study Alternatives Evaluation (P6 Activity ICE0900) 21

5.7 Develop Study Implementation Plan (P6 Activity CSR1070) 21 5.8 Complete Corridor Study Report (P6 Activity CSR1080 and CSR2010) 21

5.8.1 Draft Corridor Study Report (P6 Activity CSR1080) 22 5.8.2 Finalize Corridor Study Report (P6 Activity CSR2010) 22

6 The Dakota Improvements Evaluation (Source Type Code 1071) 22 6.1 Draft Dakota Improvements Alternatives Report (P6 Activity AAA1020) 23 6.2 Logical Termini Report (P6 Activity AAA1030) 23 6.3 Benefit-Cost Analysis for Dakota Improvements Alternative Screening (P6 Activity AAA1300) 24 6.4 Dakota Improvements Alternatives Evaluation (P6 Activity AAA1050) 24

6.4.1 Dakota Improvements Alternatives Evaluation Report 24 6.4.2 Dakota Improvements Alternatives Evaluation Presentation to Project Team 25

7 Preliminary Traffic Studies (Source Type Code 1016) 25 7.1 Existing Traffic Conditions Report (P6 Activity TFM1010) 25

7.1.1 Traffic Counts (P6 Activity TFC1000) 26 7.1.2 Freight Traffic Counts (P6 Activity TFC1005) 26 7.1.3 Prepare Traffic Forecasts and ESALs (P6 Activity TRF1000) 27 7.1.4 Perform Crash Analysis (P6 Activity TFM0900) 27 7.1.5 Existing Conditions Modeling (P6 Activity TFM1000) 27

7.1.5.1 Building of Base Model 27 7.1.5.2 Base Model Calibration Report 27

7.1.6 Update Existing Conditions Modeling for Seasonal Peak (P6 Activity TFM1005) 28 7.2 Traffic Operations Analyses (P6 Activity TFM1020, TFM1030, TFM1035, and TFM1040) 28

7.2.1 Travel Demand Forecasts (P6 Activity TFM1020) 28 7.2.1.1 Travel Demand Modeling and Forecast Report 28 7.2.1.2 Sensitivity Analysis on Travel Demand Modeling 29 7.2.1.3 Travel Demand Forecasts for Study and Dakota Improvements Alternative Evaluations 29

7.2.2 Study and Dakota Improvements Alternative Evaluations Modeling (P6 Activity TFM1040) 29 7.2.2.1 VISSIM Analysis for Study and Dakota Improvements Alternative Evaluations 29 7.2.2.2 VISSIM Analysis Report for Study and Dakota Improvements Alternative Evaluations 30

7.3 Perform Safety Analysis (P6 Activity TFM1035) 30 7.4 Travel Time Reliability Analysis (P6 Activity TFM1030) 30

8 Preliminary Transportation Management Plan (TMP) (Source Type Code 1254) 30 8.1 Define Staging Alternatives TMP (P6 Activity MTM1000) 31

9 Visual Quality Manual (Source Type Code 1071) 31

10 Geometric Layouts (Source Type Code 1140) 32 10.1 Submit Survey Request (P6 Activity Code SUR1000) 32 10.2 Draft Preliminary Geometric Layout Alternatives (P6 Activity LAY1030) 32 10.3 Preliminary Geometric Layout & Profile (P6 Activity LAY1040) 32

11 Geotechnical Investigation (Source Type Code 1190) 33 11.1 Review Existing Geotechnical Data for Study Area (P6 Activity FDR0050) 33 11.2 Geotechnical Recommendation for Project Alternatives (P6 Activity FDR0100, FDR0500 and FDR0900) 33

12 Material Design Recommendation (Source Type Code 1180) 33 12.1 Conduct Roadway Borings/Field Work for Alternatives (P6 Activity MDR0500) 33 12.2 Prepare Pavement Recommendation for Alternatives (P6 Activity MDR0900) 34

13 Drainage Overview Map (Source Type Code 1141) 34 13.1 Initial Drainage Overview Map for Alternatives Evaluation (P6 Activity AAA1200) 34

2



13.1.1 Identify Floodplain Impacts for Alternatives 36

14 Cost Estimates (Source Type Code 1003) 36 14.1 Draft Preliminary LWD Estimates (P6 Activity AAA1040) 36 14.2 Final Preliminary LWD Estimates (P6 Activity AAA1045) 36

15 Bridge Evaluation (Source Type Code 1003) 36 15.1 Bridge Scoping and Structure Determination for Dakota Improvements Alternatives 37

16 Cross Sections and Construction Limits of Dakota Improvements Alternatives (Source Type Code 1200) (P6 Activities LIM1000 & LIM1010) 37

17 Value Engineering (Source Type Code 1068) (P6 Activity VEA1010 & VEA1020) 38

18 Wetland Delineation (Source Type Code 1071) 38 18.1 Perform Level 1 Field Prep (Wetlands) (P6 Activity WTL2000) 38 18.2 Perform Level 1 Field Work (Wetlands) (P6 Activity WTL2010) 39 18.3 Perform Level 1 Post Field (Wetlands) (P6 Activity WTL2020) 39 18.4 Determine Wetland Impacts (P6 Activity WTL2030) 39

THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

3



Future work to be included in future amendments (Phase 2) 39

19 Prepare Preliminary Schedule (Source Type Code 1003) 39

20 Public Involvement Plan (Source Type Code 0054) 39

21 Project Funding Application Assistance (Source Type Code 6244) 40

22 Early Notification Memo (Source Type Code 1071) 40

23 Initial Design Project Baseline (Source Type Code 1003) 40

24 Finalize Visual Quality Manual (Source Type Code 1071) 40

25 Design Memorandum (Source Type Code 1150) 40

26 Noise Analysis for Dakota Improvements Design (Source Type Code 1071) 40

27 Air Quality Analysis (Source Type Code 1071) 40

28 Section 6(f) (Source Type Code 1071) 41

29 Section 4(f) (Source Type Code 1071) 41

30 Environmental Document (Source Type Code 1071) 41

31 NPDES Stormwater Discharge Permit (Source Type Code 1071) 41

32 Wetland Delineations (Source Type Code 1071) 41

33 Wetland/WCA & Aquatic Resources (404/401/Section 10) (Source Type Code 1071) 41

34 MnDNR Public Waters Permit (Source Type Code 1071) 42

35 Watershed District Permit (Source Type Code 1071) 42

36 Traffic Studies (Source Type Code 1016) 42

37 Mainline Staging Alternatives Modeling (Source Type Code 1016) 42

38 Local Traffic Mitigation (Source Type Code 1016) 42

39 Transportation Management Plan (TMP) (Source Type Code 1254) 42

40 Layouts (Source Type Code 1140) 42

41 R/W Construction Limits (Source Type Code 1200) 43

42 Municipal Consent (Source Type Code 1140) 43

43 Hydraulics Design (Source Type Code 1141) 43

44 ADA Recommendations (Source Type Code 1250) 43

45 Materials Design Recommendation (Source Type Code 1180) 43

46 Bridge Hydraulics Letter (Source Type Code 1141) 43

47 Foundations Analysis and Design Report (Source Type Code 1190) 43

48 Preliminary Bridge Plans (Source Type Code 1250) 44

49 Final Bridge Plans (Source Type Code 1250) 44

50 Foundation Recommendation (Source Type Code 1190) 44

51 Geotechnical Investigation (Source Type Code 1190) 44

52 Subsurface Utility Engineering (Source Type Code 1195) 45

4



53 Utility Coordination (Source Type Code 1195) 45

54 Final Design Road Plans (Source Type Code 1250) 45

55 Final Design Traffic Plans (Source Type Code 1250) 45

56 Special Provisions (Source Type Code 1297) 46

57 Project Turn In (Source Type Code 1250) 46

58 District Land Surveys (Source Type Code 1032) 46

59 Design Surveys (Source Type Code 1040) 46


5



General Statement of Scope of Work Contractor will study the highway corridor to determine ultimate corridor vision and potential implementation plan. Assist State in the development of a Federal Environmental Assessment (EA) for the corridor with project footprints within the study area and a preferred alternative at one location, including but not limited to public involvement and outreach, alternatives analysis, cost estimates, traffic operational analysis, Traffic Management Plan (TMP), preliminary drainage overview map, construction limits, staff approved layout and right of way (R/W) acquisition report.

General Information and Requirements

Background This Project is located on Minnesota (MN) Trunk Highway (TH) 101 from United States (US) Highway 169 to TH 13, and on TH 13 from TH 101 to east of Nicollet Avenue (Ave), for a total length of approximately eight miles in the Cities of Savage and Burnsville. The purpose of this contract is to conduct a corridor study of TH 13 to determine an ultimate vision of the corridor in order to facilitate choosing a preferred alternative at the intersections of TH 13 and Dakota Ave, Yosemite Ave, and Vernon Ave. For the sake of this contract, the work related to the corridor study and ultimate corridor vision will be called the Corridor Evaluation and the work related to the project located at Dakota Ave and Yosemite Ave will be referred to as the Dakota improvements. Conduct the necessary scoping and project development to facilitate a 2022 start of construction of the preferred alternative of the Dakota improvements. The current Carto Miles reference points are from 0.000 to 2.665 on TH 101 and 91.950 to 97.612 on TH 13.

TH 13 (and TH 101) serves as an east-west principal arterial roadway and is part of the National Highway System (NHS). TH 13 provides a highway connection between two major river crossings in the area: the Bloomington Ferry Bridge on US 169 to the west and Interstate (I)-35W Minnesota River Bridge to the east. It is one of few continuous east-west corridors in northern Scott County, making it a primary route for both commuter and business traffic connecting to the rest of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. There have been many studies completed on TH 13 that have evaluated the remaining at grade intersections between Dakota Ave and Chowen Ave. These remaining at-grade intersections have been identified in the February 2017 Principal Arterial Intersection Conversion Study as High and Medium Priority for high-capacity at-grade or grade separation improvements.

Scott County recently completed a study titled Trunk Highway 13 Dakota Ave-Yosemite Ave Design Study, which evaluated the remaining at-grade intersections of the TH 13 corridor from Dakota Ave to Chowen Ave. The purpose of the study was to identify and evaluate improvement alternatives at Dakota and Yosemite Avenues that would improve truck mobility, safety, and access to the local businesses, as well as improve safety and mobility for TH 13 traffic. An alternative was selected, and Scott County applied for and received Minnesota Highway Freight Program (MHFP) funding for fiscal year 2022. The Scott County study selected an alternative for addressing the project needs outside of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. A comprehensive investigation of the TH 13 corridor and more detailed design and environmental evaluation of the Dakota improvements might point towards a different solution.

Additional project files and reports for this project can be viewed at: ftp://ftp2.dot.state.mn.us/pub/outbound/MetroWatersEdge/TH13_Dakota_Freight_Improvement/

Draft Schedule & Contract Completion Timeline State will provide a draft P6 schedule which includes a placeholder activity for this work. Contractor will work with State in scheduling the activities in this scope of work with the goal of making a project letting in spring of 2022. Once the schedule is agreed upon by Contractor and State, the late finish dates for the activities in that schedule are the due dates for the tasks in this scope of work. Additionally, Contractor will need to evaluate the entire schedule for accuracy and feasibility for project delivery and provide corrections where needed. The schedule provided by State is subject to change. Activities marked as “by State” do not preclude work by Contractor to complete the activity, and activities marked as “by Contractor” do not preclude work by State to complete the activity.

Source Type Codes and P6 Activity Codes

6

ftp://ftp2.dot.state.mn.us/pub/outbound/MetroWatersEdge/TH13_Dakota_Freight_Improvement



Every deliverable will list a Source Type Code and a P6 Activity Code. The Source Type Code is used by Contractor to invoice multiple deliverables together under one number for billing and budgeting purposes.

The P6 Activity Code matches the P6 activity in the P6 schedule. Contractor can use this code to understand the due dates for that deliverable in the schedule, and how the activity relates to other activities in the schedule. The overall goal is to get Contractor deliverables and cost estimate for the contract proposal to match the format and organization of the P6 schedule, as much as possible.

Contractor is not required to know how to use Primavera P6 or work within the program itself. Contractor is expected to understand the concept of Critical Path Method scheduling, be able to understand hard copy reports printed by the P6 schedule, update the hardcopy reports using a pencil, and recommend changes to the schedule to reflect changes in the scope or flow of work.

Standards Comply with all State, Federal, and local standards, laws and regulations related to the scope of work and project area. Work must comply with the latest edition or revision of that standard in effect on the Proposal Due Date, including any amendments in effect on that date, unless otherwise specified in the contract or otherwise directed by State.

Items provided by State 1. Draft P6 project schedule. 2. State Metro District’s Length Width Depth (LWD) cost estimate template and guidance for usage 3. Available planimetric mapping, TIN model, R/W and utility information, using the following datums:

a. Vertical datum: NAVD 88 b. Horizontal datum: NAD 1986 (1996 HARN adj)

4. Trunk Highway 13 Dakota Ave-Yosemite Ave Design Study, July 2017: a. https://www.scottcountymn.gov/DocumentCenter/View/10204/TH-13-Dakota-Yosemite-Study-FINAL

5. Trunk Highway (TH) 13 Corridor Study Update, May 2013 6. Principal Arterial Intersection Conversion Study, February 2017:

a. https://metrocouncil.org/Transportation/Planning-2/Transit-Plans,-Studies-Reports/Highways-Roads/Principal-Arterial-Intersection-Conversion-Study/PAIS-Draft-Project-Report.aspx

7. Congestion Management Safety Plan (CMSP) Phase IV, Secondary Screening Technical Memorandum, March 2018:

a. http://www.dot.state.mn.us/metro/programmanagement/pdf/cmsp-phase4-tech-memo-secondary-screening.pdf

8. Regional Truck Highway Corridor Study, May 2017: a. https://metrocouncil.org/Transportation/Publications-And-Resources/HIghways-and-Roads/Regional-

Truck-Freight-Corridors-Study.aspx 9. Minnesota Statewide Freight System and Investment Plan, January 2018:

a. http://www.dot.state.mn.us/planning/freightplan/pdf/statewidefreightplanrevised2018.pdf 10. Twin Cities Metropolitan Region Freight Study Summary Report, August 2013:

a. https://metrocouncil.org/Transportation/Publications-And-Resources/FREIGHT/Freight-Study-Summary-(2013).aspx

11. Minnesota Go Statewide Ports and Waterways Plan, September 2014: a. http://www.dot.state.mn.us/ofrw/PDF/portswaterwaysplan.pdf

12. Minnesota Go State Rail Plan – Draft, March 2015: a. https://www.dot.state.mn.us/planning/railplan/2015report/DraftMNStateRailPlan.pdf

13. Minnesota Go 20-year State Highway Investment Plan, 2018-2037, January 2017: a. http://minnesotago.org/application/files/3414/8431/5979/MnSHIP_Final_Jan2017.pdf

14. Metropolitan (Met) Council 2016 Transportation System Performance Evaluation: a. https://metrocouncil.org/Council-Meetings/Committees/Transportation-Advisory-Board-TAB/TAB-

Technical-Advisory-Committee/TAC-Planning-Committee/2017/TAC-Planning-Committee-5-11-17/6-TSPE-Exec-Summary.aspx

7

https://metrocouncil.org/Council-Meetings/Committees/Transportation-Advisory-Board-TAB/TAB

http://minnesotago.org/application/files/3414/8431/5979/MnSHIP_Final_Jan2017.pdf

https://www.dot.state.mn.us/planning/railplan/2015report/DraftMNStateRailPlan.pdf

http://www.dot.state.mn.us/ofrw/PDF/portswaterwaysplan.pdf

https://metrocouncil.org/Transportation/Publications-And-Resources/FREIGHT/Freight-Study-Summary

http://www.dot.state.mn.us/planning/freightplan/pdf/statewidefreightplanrevised2018.pdf

https://metrocouncil.org/Transportation/Publications-And-Resources/HIghways-and-Roads/Regional

http://www.dot.state.mn.us/metro/programmanagement/pdf/cmsp-phase4-tech-memo-secondary

https://metrocouncil.org/Transportation/Planning-2/Transit-Plans,-Studies-Reports/Highways

https://www.scottcountymn.gov/DocumentCenter/View/10204/TH-13-Dakota-Yosemite-Study-FINAL



15. Met Council 2040 Transportation Policy Plan (2018 Update) Overview: a. https://metrocouncil.org/Transportation/Planning-2/Key-Transportation-Planning-

Documents/Transportation-Policy-Plan/tpp-update/2018-Transportation-Policy-Plan-Update/2040-Transportation-Policy-Plan-2018-Update-Overvi.aspx

16. Dakota County Minnesota River Greenway Master Plan, January 2012: a. https://www.co.dakota.mn.us/parks/Planning/Greenways/Documents/MinnesotaRiverMasterPlan.pdf

17. Dakota County Comprehensive Plan DC2040 – Draft, April 2018: a. https://www.co.dakota.mn.us/Government/Planning/CompPlan/Documents/DC2040Draft.pdf

18. Scott County 2040 Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 6 Transportation – Draft, April 2018: a. https://www.scottcountymn.gov/DocumentCenter/View/9908/2040-Transportation-Plan-March-

2018?bidId= 19. Burnsville 2040 Comprehensive Plan - Draft, March 2017:

a. http://www.burnsville.org/DocumentCenter/View/12364 20. Savage Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan, June 2018:

a. https://www.cityofsavage.com/images/Departments/Parks_NaturalResources/Final-Ped-BikeMasterPlan-June2018.pdf

21. Hybrid Environmental Assessment Proposal Table 22. Scoping report template 23. Bridge Inventory 24. MnDOT’s Technical Memorandum No. 13-05-T-02:

a. http://www.dot.state.mn.us/trafficeng/safety/ice/ICE-TechMemo.pdf 25. Minnesota Intersection Control Manual 2017:

a. http://www.dot.state.mn.us/trafficeng/safety/ice/2007_ICE_Manual.pdf

Plain Language and Accessibility Standards

Plain Language Provide all documents or exhibits specifically designed to be used by the public in “Plain Language”. Technical documents, presentations, spreadsheets, and drawings used by technical staff do not need to be in plain language. Executive Order 14-07 requires the Office of the Governor and all Executive Branch agencies to communicate with Minnesotans using Plain Language. As defined in Executive Order 14-07, Plain Language is a communication which an audience can understand the first time they read or hear it. Additional information can be read at this website: http://ihub.dot.state.mn.us/plainlanguage/index.html. To achieve that, the successful responder will take the following steps in the deliverables:

1. Use language commonly understood by the public; 2. Write in short and complete sentences; 3. Present information in a format that is easy-to-find and easy-to-understand; and 4. Clearly state directions and deadlines to the audience.

Accessibility Standards Comply with the State of Minnesota’s Accessibility Standard (http://mn.gov/oet/images/Stnd_State_Accessibility.pdf) for all documents or exhibits specifically designed to be used by the public. Technical documents, presentations, spreadsheets, and drawings used by technical staff do not need to be in plain language. 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. Additional requirements can be found at this website: http://www.dot.state.mn.us/ada/accommodation.html and include:

1. Providing interpreters, translators or other special accommodations, 2. Providing documents in an alternative format, 3. Following the Portable Document Format (PDF) accessibility guidance.

Compliance with the State of Minnesota’s Accessibility Standard includes, but is not limited to, the specific requirements as follows:

8

http://www.dot.state.mn.us/ada/accommodation.html

http://mn.gov/oet/images/Stnd_State_Accessibility.pdf

http://ihub.dot.state.mn.us/plainlanguage/index.html

http://www.dot.state.mn.us/trafficeng/safety/ice/2007_ICE_Manual.pdf

http://www.dot.state.mn.us/trafficeng/safety/ice/ICE-TechMemo.pdf

https://www.cityofsavage.com/images/Departments/Parks_NaturalResources/Final-Ped-BikeMasterPlan

http://www.burnsville.org/DocumentCenter/View/12364

https://www.scottcountymn.gov/DocumentCenter/View/9908/2040-Transportation-Plan-March

https://www.co.dakota.mn.us/Government/Planning/CompPlan/Documents/DC2040Draft.pdf

https://www.co.dakota.mn.us/parks/Planning/Greenways/Documents/MinnesotaRiverMasterPlan.pdf

https://metrocouncil.org/Transportation/Planning-2/Key-Transportation-Planning



1. All videos must include closed captions, audio descriptions and a link to a complete transcript; 2. All documents, presentations, spreadsheets, drawings, and other material must be provided in an accessible

format. In addition, provide native files in an editable format. Acceptable formats include InDesign, Word and Excel; and

3. 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.

Contractor will complete the tasks below:

Tasks 1 Project Management, Coordination, and Meetings (Source Type Code 1010) (P6 Activity OPM1000)

This task focuses on effective communication and coordination of the contract work to expedite the decision-making process and maintain the scheduled completion dates. Contractor’s Project Manager’s (PM) team will also be responsible for transferring/saving electronic files/deliverables to State’s ProjectWise system prior to requesting State’s review of said task/deliverable.

1.1 Schedule Modify the draft P6 schedule supplied by State by analyzing the work required to complete this project, evaluating each activity’s duration and networking to create a schedule that will accomplish the June 3, 2022 letting date. Updates to the schedule will be entered into the State P6 system by State utilizing the information provided by Contractor. Create an activity for each task in this scope (one activity can also represent multiple tasks if agreed to by Contractor and State), and link activities to reflect the planned progression of the work. Schedule a review meeting to evaluate the schedule and revise as needed. The schedule will need State approval. Once agreed upon, the schedule will set the expected progression and due dates of the tasks.

Create and actively maintain a detailed schedule using Primavera P6 or other commercially available scheduling software. Update the schedule monthly in time for the monthly invoicing and progress meetings and at other times deemed necessary to allow the use of the schedule as an effective management tool. Provide the State with a marked up P6 report at each update. At a minimum the schedule will include durations and due dates for all deliverables listed in this scope of work.

1. Deliverable (Meetings): Three Scheduling Meetings with State PM, State Scheduler and other team members as needed to revise Project Schedule

2. Deliverable (Schedule): One electronic schedule to be updated monthly. Sixteen updates. 3. Format: All files submitted electronically. Monthly reports must be in Adobe Acrobat (pdf extension). 4. Due: The first revised schedule is due within 40 business days of Notice to Proceed with monthly updates on

progress. 5. Standard: Critical Path Method (CPM). EPMS Primavera P6 software. 6. State Review: Five business days. 7. Contractor Update: Five business days.

1.2 Monthly Progress Meetings Contractor’s PM will meet with State’s PM once per month to review the monthly progress and invoices. Solicit feedback from State’s PM to assess whether all services meet or exceed the requirements of the project. If needed, direct changes to personnel and/or procedures to correct identified deficiencies and implement opportunities for improvements.

1. Deliverable: Sixteen informal meetings to review invoices and progress. 2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Meeting will be in person, teleconference, or web conference. Send

email to State’s PM at completion of meeting documenting that meeting occurred per work order requirements. 3. Due: Monthly at the same time as the invoices. 4. Standard: Meeting minutes are not required. 5. State Review: During the meeting. 6. Contractor Update: Update invoices within five business days.

9



1.3 Project Instructions and Quality Assurance Develop tools (Project Instructions, Work Plans, and a Quality Assurance Plan) to establish budgets, roles, and responsibilities for the project team members throughout the project. Provide project oversight, leadership to the project team, and facilitate team meetings. Perform Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) functions throughout the project duration to ensure delivery of a quality product. Develop resource utilization tool to indicate "burn rate" to aid in budget management.

1. Deliverable: Electronic copies of project instructions, work plans, and quality assurance plan for the Work Order Contract.

2. Format: Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension) and Adobe PDF. 3. Standard: None. 4. Schedule: Within 15 business days from notice to proceed. 5. State Review: five business days. 6. Final submittal: five business days after State review.

1.4 Subcontractor Management and Oversight Manage, coordinate, direct, and monitor subcontractor services. This includes review of progress reports, deliverables, schedule and invoices.

1. Deliverable: Sixteen 16 monthly invoices, progress reports and deliverables. 2. Format: As stated within this contract for specific items. 3. Standard: As stated within this contract for specific items. 4. Schedule: Throughout contract. 5. State Review: Monthly 6. Final submittal: five business days after State review.

1.5 Risk Analysis and Tracking Develop a project risk register to track large cost and schedule risks in the project.

1. Deliverable: Electronic copy of risk register maintained regularly throughout project 2. Format: Microsoft Excel 2013 spreadsheet, using MnDOT Risk Register Template 3. Standard: As stated within this work order contract for specific items. 4. Schedule: Throughout contract. 5. State Review: Quarterly 6. Final submittal: five business days after State review.

2 Public Involvement Plan (PIP) (Source Type Code 0054) Develop and implement the Public Involvement Plan (PIP) to include both public and agency stakeholders. PIP consists of nine steps:

1. Project Analysis 2. Stakeholder Identification 3. Conflict Identification 4. Mapping 5. Assessment 6. Strategy 7. Implementation and Management 8. Resolution, Review, and Regeneration 9. Post-Project Analysis

Design the PIP to engage, inform, and gather input from all stakeholders throughout the corridor evaluation and Dakota improvements design, including both the general public, local residents and businesses, and agency representatives.

Establish ongoing project coordination meetings with all agency stakeholders including, but not limited to: a. State b. State’s PM

10



c. State Functional Groups d. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) e. MetCouncil f. Metro Transit g. Minnesota Valley Transit Authority (MVTA) h. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR) i. Scott and Dakota Counties j. Cities of Savage and Burnsville k. Other Governmental Agencies l. Private and Public Utilities m. Other agencies as required

Assumptions: a. This work will deliver the first six PIP steps, listed above, and finish with the first PIP Strategy. One or more

amendments will be written to deliver PIP steps seven to nine, which are the implementation and completion of the PIP.

b. Municipal Consent activities will follow State's Highway Project Development Process (HPDP) manual, Municipal Consent section. Assumes Municipal Consent is needed from Savage for the Dakota improvements.

c. Up to sixteen Project Management Team (PMT) meetings (one PMT meeting per month). PMT members to include State, Scott County, Dakota County, City of Savage, Burnsville, and FHWA staff. The purpose of the PMT meetings is to review project progress, resolve issues involving multiple functional areas, and gain input on project deliverables. Each meeting is two hours not including travel.

d. One PIP work session with State staff only. Assume a four hour meeting not including travel. e. One PIP work session with State, FHWA Cities of Savage and Burnsville, Scott County, Dakota County,

MetCouncil, MVTA and Metro Transit. Assume a four hour meeting not including travel. f. Create a Strategic Advisory Group (SAG) to review goals, objectives, alternatives, and receive input. Meet with

the SAG quarterly, up to six times. Assume each meeting is two hours long not including travel. The exact membership of the SAG is not precisely known at this time. Assume the SAG will be made up of key State Staff, FHWA staff, Metropolitan Council, MVTA, Metro Transit, City staff, County staff and MnDNR as a minimum. Additional members may be neighborhood representatives, and other representatives of key organizations, e.g. trucking, biking, cultural, etc.

g. Up to six Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) meetings. Assume the TAC is mainly to go over the traffic modeling. Membership will be State staff, FHWA, Metro Council, Cities of Savage and Burnsville, and Scott and Dakota Counties. Other stakeholders may need to be added. Up to four hours per meeting including travel.

h. Two public meetings as part of PIP (open house format). Each meeting is three hours long not including travel. i. Contractor will seek resolutions of support for the recommended TH 13 ultimate vision resulting from the

corridor evaluation from the cities and counties.

2.1 Initial PIP Deliverables 1. Deliverable: 16 PMT meetings. One PIP work session with State staff only. One PIP work session with key

stakeholders. Six SAG meetings. Six TAC meetings. Two public meetings. 2. Format: Meetings. Create hardcopy exhibits as needed. Create agendas and minutes of meetings. All files

submitted electronically in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension). Complete package in Adobe Acrobat (pdf extension) and pdf will be created by using Adobe Acrobat to convert the source file to a pdf whenever possible with the use of scanned pages minimized if not eliminate with the exception of actual signature pages.

3. Standard: Coordinate with State to determine standard 4. State Review: seven calendar days. 5. Contractor Update: seven calendar days.

2.2 PIP Deliverables

11



2.2.1 Project Analysis (P6 Activity PIP1000) Conduct thorough project research and scale to the size of the project or policy. Formalize the Project Goals Statement.

1. Deliverable: Document all the project goals from major goals to minor goals. Include explanation for each goal.

2.2.2 Stakeholder Identification (P6 Activity PIP1010) Identify internal and external stakeholders, including agencies, elected and appointed officials, advocacy groups, businesses and adjacent property owners/tenants. Create the membership to the PMT, SAG, and TAC.

1. Deliverable: Document identifying all stakeholders. Create membership document of PMT, SAG and TAC.

2.2.3 Conflict Identification (P6 Activity PIP1020) Identify existing and potential issues related to the identified stakeholders.

1. Deliverable: Document identifying all conflicts.

2.2.4 Conflict Mapping (P6 Activity PIP1030) Produce an influence/interest grid of stakeholders. Map relationships between stakeholders, including alliances, relationships with friction, broken relationships, relationships that don’t exist and relationships that need to exist. Indicate power imbalances and triggering events which may create issues.

1. Deliverable: Influence/interest grid document.

2.2.5 Conflict Assessment (P6 Activity PIP1040) Review conflicts for likelihood of occurring, risk to the project for time, scope and budget, and risk to the agency’s reputation.

1. Deliverable: Assessment document that explains risk of each conflict.

2.2.6 Public Involvement Strategy (P6 Activity PIP1050) Generate possible options for resolution with input by the team with a focus on identifying impacts, outcomes, strategies and planned responses. Develop practices that may be used to ensure the opportunity for involvement for all individuals and/or groups within the project area.

1. Deliverable: Strategy document. 2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Report written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension).

May use Microsoft Excel 2013 (xlsx extension). Complete package in Adobe Acrobat (pdf extension) and pdf will be created by using Adobe Acrobat to convert the source file to a pdf whenever possible with the use of scanned pages minimized if not eliminate with the exception of actual signature pages.

3. Due: To be determined upon completion of the schedule. See State’s sample schedule for intent. 4. Standard: As determined during Project Analysis 5. State Review: seven calendar days. 6. Contractor Update: seven calendar days.

3 Request Scoping Input (Source Type Code 1003) (P6 Activity FDB1000) Begin the process to complete the Metro District Scoping Report for the Dakota improvements. Coordinate with the State Functional Areas to request scoping input. Provide a response to all scoping worksheet questions. The response will either state that the question has been evaluated and there are no needs associated with this project, or state that there is a problem or need that requires further investigation. Worksheets included in the Metro District Scoping Report are:

a. Bridge b. Contamination Investigation c. Design d. Environmental Engineering e. Maintenance f. Materials g. Pedestrians and Bicycles h. Planning i. Project Management

12



j. Regional Traffic Management Center (RTMC) k. R/W l. State Aid m. Surveys n. Team Transit o. Traffic Engineering p. Utilities q. Water Resources Engineering

1. Deliverable: Respond to all scoping worksheet questions identifying needs that require further investigation. 2. Format: Metro Scoping Database. 3. Standard: Metro Scoping Database. 4. State and FHWA Review: Along with the Metro Scoping Report. 5. Contractor Update: Along with the Metro Scoping Report

4 Preliminary Environmental Investigation (Source Type Code 1071) The activities in this section have been identified as critical to completion of the Study and Project Alternatives Evaluation.

4.1 Early Notification Memo (P6 Activity ENM1000) State will prepare and distribute the Early Notification Memo (ENM) for this project. Contractor will need to meet with the State Metro District Project Documentation group to discuss the content of the ENM and responses received.

1. Deliverable: Meet with State Functional Group 2. Format: This information received from the ENM responses will be compiled into the Preliminary Environmental

Investigation to aid in alternative review. 3. Standard: HPDP http://www.dot.state.mn.us/planning/hpdp/ 4. State Review: Five days 5. Contractor Update: One day

4.2 Identify Section 4(f) (P6 Activity SFF0900) No trails or park land are adjacent to State R/W within the corridor. Work with FHWA to identify Section 4(f) properties within the study area. Map the 4(f) properties and document the potential impacts to them, such as showing potential construction limits within the properties with area of impact measured. Section 4(f) resources in the study area include the Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge (Wilkie Unit), Schroeder’s Acres Park, Eagle Creek Corridor and “Boiling Springs” Maka Yusota, City of Savage Dog Park/Historical Marker, Savage Fen Scientific Natural Area, Warren Butler Park, Hollywood Park, Rudy Kraemer Nature Preserve, and the Sue Fischer Memorial Park.

1. Deliverable: Map of known 4(f) properties adjacent to the project with documentation on potential impacts. 2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Report written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension).

Complete package in Adobe Acrobat (pdf extension) and pdf will be created by using Adobe Acrobat to convert the source file to a pdf whenever possible with the use of scanned pages minimized if not eliminate with the exception of actual signature pages.

3. Standard: EA standards referenced herein. 4. State and FHWA Review: Along with the Metro Scoping Report. 5. Contractor Update: Along with the Metro Scoping Report

4.3 Air Quality Analysis for Corridor Evaluation (Source Type Code 1071) Provide air quality analysis services, done according to guidance provided at the State HPDP website: http://www.dot.state.mn.us/planning/hpdp/ . It is anticipated that the corridor evaluation and Dakota improvements will only require a qualitative air quality analysis, and that quantitative air quality modeling will not be required. Services include analysis of National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) criteria pollutants, Carbon Monoxide (CO), and Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSATs). Prepare an Air Quality Report for inclusion in the project’s NEPA document.

13

http://www.dot.state.mn.us/planning/hpdp




Current State Air Quality Guidance available at: http://dotapp7.dot.state.mn.us/edms/download?docId=647184

Updated Interim Guidance on Air Toxic Analysis in NEPA Documents October 18, 2016 FHWA Memo available at: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/air_quality/air_toxics/policy_and_guidance/msat/

4.3.1 Determine Level of Air Quality Analysis (P6 Activity AIR1000) Determine if the threshold for a federal quantitative air quality analysis is crossed with the 20-year traffic forecast for the ultimate TH 13 corridor vision. Coordinate with appropriate State, MPCA, and Metropolitan Council staff to determine the correct level of air quality analysis and confirm that quantitative CO and/or MSAT analysis is not required.

1. Deliverable: One electronic memorandum stating requirements for air quality monitoring and proposed MSAT modeling analysis methodologies.

2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Report written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension). Complete package in Adobe Acrobat (pdf extension) and pdf will be created by using Adobe Acrobat to convert the source file to a pdf whenever possible with the use of scanned pages minimized if not eliminate with the exception of actual signature pages.

3. Standard: EA standards referenced herein. 4. State and FHWA Review: Along with the Metro Scoping Report 5. Contractor Update: Along with the Metro Scoping Report

4.4 Noise Analysis for Corridor Evaluation (P6 Activities NOI1000, NOI1020, NOI1030 and NOI1040) Prepare a Preliminary Noise Analysis to assist State in identifying where noise level impacts are likely and in determining where noise barriers are likely reasonable and feasible. All noise analysis modeling will be performed using approved FHWA and State noise model – currently TNM 2.5 and 2017 MnDOT Noise Requirements. Follow current State Noise Requirements and Guidance available at: http://www.dot.state.mn.us/environment/noise/policy/index.html . This work must be completed by a Contractor approved for Noise Analysis & Abatement on the State Pre-Qualification Program.

4.4.1 Determine Level of Noise Analysis (P6 Activity NOI1000) Assumptions:

a. Assumes no noise exemption request/noise exemption report application. b. Follow current State Noise Requirements and Guidance available at:

http://www.dot.state.mn.us/environment/noise/policy/index.html

Analyze the project and applicable state and federal standards and determine the level of noise analysis that will be required for the corridor evaluation and Dakota improvements. Work with State’s Central Office and Metro District Noise Analysis Units to gain concurrence on determination.

1. Deliverable: One electronic memorandum stating required level of Noise Analysis. 2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Report written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension).

Complete package in Adobe Acrobat (pdf extension) and pdf will be created by using Adobe Acrobat to convert the source file to a pdf whenever possible with the use of scanned pages minimized if not eliminate with the exception of actual signature pages. All source files from model.

3. Standard: All noise analysis modeling will be performed using approved FHWA and State noise model – currently TNM 2.5 and 2017 State Noise Requirements

4. State and FHWA Review: seven calendar days 5. Contractor Update: seven calendar days

4.4.2 Develop Receptor Sites (P6 Activity NOI1020) Identify modeling receptor sites and acquire approval to use them. For the corridor evaluation where only a footprint level analysis is being done, model between two and ten representative receptor sites for each individual Noise Sensitive Area (based on land use type). For the Dakota improvements model all noise receptor sites within 500 feet of the project corridor including residential, commercial, industrial, educational, and other land uses such as parks and trails. Review

14



https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/air_quality/air_toxics/policy_and_guidance/msat

http://dotapp7.dot.state.mn.us/edms/download?docId=647184



future known development plans to determine if additional noise receptors will be included in the analysis based on future planned development. Prepare a map of proposed location for noise receptors and monitoring locations and obtain approval from State.

1. Deliverable: One map and draft write-up for Noise Report of the proposed modeling receptor sites and proposed monitoring sites.

2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Report written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension). Complete package in Adobe Acrobat (pdf extension) and pdf will be created by using Adobe Acrobat to convert the source file to a pdf whenever possible with the use of scanned pages minimized if not eliminate with the exception of actual signature pages. All source files from model.



4.4.3 Monitor Noise (P6 Activity NOI1030) Conduct noise monitoring. Create draft write-up of results for the Noise Report. Perform a 30-minute background noise measurement during the daytime (9:00 AM to 4 PM only) at a minimum of five receptor sites. Collect data for hourly L10, L50, L90, and Leq. At a minimum, conduct classified, directional traffic counts (cars, medium trucks, heavy trucks) during measurement periods. Collection of 24-hour classified vehicle counts is preferable. In addition, vehicle speed measurements will be collected during the noise measurement period. Noise measurements will not be conducted during periods of traffic congestion. Provide a log of the date, time, weather conditions, and measurement devices at each monitoring location consistent with the State Noise Requirements.

1. Deliverable: PDF versions of noise monitoring logs. One electronic draft write-up of the noise monitoring results and map of receptor locations for the Noise Report.

2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Report written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension). Complete package in Adobe Acrobat (pdf extension) and pdf will be created by using Adobe Acrobat to convert the source file to a pdf whenever possible with the use of scanned pages minimized if not eliminate with the exception of actual signature pages. All source files from model.



4.4.4 Model Noise Impacts for All Viable Alternatives (P6 Activity NOI1040) Conduct noise impact modeling for all alternatives, for both the Corridor Evaluation and Dakota Improvements. Create draft write-up of results for the Noise Report. Noise modeling will be conducted using TNM 2.5 or most current version. Determine worst case noise hour using classified traffic counts from monitoring data, 24-hour classified vehicle counts, and/or State traffic data. Work with State Metro Noise staff if there are other major noise sources in area besides traffic noise to determine if and how these sources will be incorporated into the noise model. Prepare the Preliminary Noise Analysis modeling for the following conditions: Existing conditions (worst case noise hour), No-build conditions (worst case noise hour) 20 years after project is open to traffic, Future Build Alternative conditions (worst case noise hour) 20 years after project is open to traffic for Dakota improvements, Future “Footprint” Build Alternative conditions (worst case noise hour) 20 years after project is open to traffic for the corridor evaluation. Coordinate with State PM and Metro Noise and Air Quality Group to determine appropriate traffic and geometric assumptions.

1. Deliverable: Preliminary Traffic Noise Analysis Memo documenting the results of the noise modeling process. 2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Report written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension).

Complete package in Adobe Acrobat (pdf extension) and pdf will be created by using Adobe Acrobat to convert

15



the source file to a pdf whenever possible with the use of scanned pages minimized if not eliminate with the exception of actual signature pages. All source files from model.



4.5 Identify Section 6(f) (P6 Activity SSF0900) Review the database of Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (LAWCON) funded facilities in the study area and provide a map showing these properties. Document the potential impacts to them, such as showing potential study footprints and construction limits within the properties with area of impact measured. Known 6(f) properties include Schroeder’s Acres Park and Warren Butler Park in the city of Savage.

1. Deliverable: Map of known 6(f) properties adjacent to the project with documentation on potential impacts. 2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Report written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension).


3. Standard: EA standards referenced herein. 4. State and FHWA Review: Along with the Metro Scoping Report. 5. Contractor Update: Along with the Metro Scoping Report.

4.6 Environmental Justice Review (No P6 Activity Part of EAW1020) Conduct a preliminary analysis and collect information from desktop resources to identify if environmental justice issues exist within the corridor. This information will aid in the study and Dakota improvements alternatives evaluation.

4.7 Contamination Database Review (Part of RFR1002) State will conduct a contaminated materials review. Contractor will coordinate with State consultant to determine where investigation is needed and when information is needed to meet the project schedule. Compile information provided by the State consultant into the Preliminary Environmental Investigation to aid in the study and Dakota improvements alternatives evaluation.

4.8 Develop Draft Purpose and Need Statement and Evaluation Criteria (P6 Activity CSR1000) Develop draft purpose and need statement and determine evaluation criteria. This will be reviewed with the State, FHWA and other stakeholders. This task assumes up to three revisions of the statement and evaluation criteria. Revisions are anticipated to occur as the study deliverables are completed.

The Need statement will identify transportation problems along the corridor. The Purpose statement will summarize the objectives and goals for addressing some or all of the corridor needs, and will summarize regional transportation plans regarding the corridor.

At a minimum, but not limited to, the following items need to be incorporated into the Purpose and Need as necessary with particular attention to any additional issues noted by FHWA:

a. Coordination with other separate projects occurring within this corridor or in relative close proximity to this corridor

b. Analysis defining logical termini of the corridor evaluation and the Dakota improvements c. Traffic operations outlining current traffic problems d. Describe current geometric deficiencies e. Safety Analysis/Crash Analysis f. Pedestrian connectivity and surrounding land uses g. Need Statement will summarize and explain transportation needs based on:

a. Minnesota State Highway Investment Plan (MnSHIP) and/or the Metro District 20 Year Plan.

16



h. Purpose Statement will summarize regional transportation plans for this corridor, and explain the objectives and goals.

i. Regional transportation plans are listed below. a. Metropolitan Council’s 2040 Transportation Policy Plan, Chapter 4 b. State Metro District’s 2008-2030 Transportation System Plan

Develop an evaluation matrix that will be utilized to summarize the results of the comparative alternatives evaluation. The evaluation criteria will be based on the following:

1. Stakeholder and public engagement 2. Utilities footprint-level impacts (P6 Activity SUE2000) 3. Traffic modeling Measures of Effectiveness (MOEs) (P6 Activity TFM1040) 4. Travel Time Reliability Analysis (P6 TFM1030) 5. Safety Benefits (P6 Activity TFM1035) 6. Cultural Resource footprint-level impacts (P6 Activity CRU1020) 7. Environmental footprint-level impacts (P6 Activity EDD1010) 8. Potential Noise impacts (P6 Activity NOI1000) 9. Potential Air Quality impacts (P6 Activity AIR1000) 10. Endangered Species footprint-level impacts (P6 Activity TES0900) 11. Vegetation/Tree footprint-level impacts (P6 Activity VGT1000) 12. Wetland footprint-level impacts (P6 Activity WTL2020) 13. Section 6(f) footprint-level impacts (P6 Activity SSF0900) 14. Section 4(f) footprint-level impacts (P6 Activity SFF0900) 15. Contaminated soils footprint-level impacts (P6 Activity RFR1002) 16. Geotechnical footprint-level impacts/feasibility (P6 Activity FDR0050) 17. Visual footprint-level impacts and Visual Quality Goals (P6 Activity VQM1030) 18. Potential footprint-level R/W impacts 19. Freight impacts/benefits 20. Railroad impacts/benefits 21. Savage access impacts/benefits 22. Land use impacts/benefits 23. Transit impacts/benefits 24. Pedestrian/bicycle impacts/benefits 25. Drainage/stormwater impacts/benefits 26. Cost estimates (P6 Activitiy CSR1040) 27. Benefit-Cost analysis (P6 Activity CSR1050)

1. Deliverable: One electronic Draft Purpose and Need Statement and evaluation criteria matrix 2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Report written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension).


3. Standard: Must use the latest version of the MN Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) located on the Environmental Quality Board’s (EQB) website at: http://www.eqb.state.mn.us/EnvRevGuidanceDocuments.htm. FHWA’s guidebook or State’s HPDP must be used as guidance to ensure that National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) laws have been fulfilled in the EA. Refer to the following web sites: http://environment.fhwa.dot.gov/guidebook/index.asp, http://www.dot.state.mn.us/planning/hpdp/, and https://www.environment.fhwa.dot.gov/legislation/nepa/guidance_preparing_env_documents.aspx.

4. State and FHWA Review: Arrange a meeting within two weeks of submitting to State with both State and FHWA staff in attendance.

5. Contractor Update: The outcome of the meeting will determine the amount of work needed to complete the Final Purpose and Need Statement.

17

https://www.environment.fhwa.dot.gov/legislation/nepa/guidance_preparing_env_documents.aspx


http://environment.fhwa.dot.gov/guidebook/index.asp

http://www.eqb.state.mn.us/EnvRevGuidanceDocuments.htm

5



Corridor Evaluation (Source Type Code 6244) Study the highway corridor to determine ultimate corridor vision and potential implementation plan. The corridor evaluation will include: the determination of the study area, summary of existing conditions, creation of study alternatives and initial screening, and evaluation of study alternatives that will result in the selection of an ultimate vision for TH 13 (and TH 101) from US 169 to Nicollet Avenue. Generate a maximum construction footprint for the corridor for the purposes of identifying environmental impacts based on the ultimate vision and remaining study alternatives at each intersection. Select a preferred vision, but not a preferred alternative at each location. Identify interim and long-term improvements in an implementation plan following the determination of the ultimate vision. The preferred vision will designate each existing intersection as being closed, at-grade, or grade-separated as well as the three sketch-level designs used to determine the footprint for the designation at each intersection.

5.1 Determine Study Area (P6 Activity CSR1010) Determine the study area limits that capture all traffic and transportation related impacts and benefits that influence and are influenced by the TH 13 corridor. At a minimum the study area will include the nearest continuous alternative east-west route south of TH 13 (McColl Drive/Williams Drive) and all significant north-south connections to TH 13.

Create a write-up detailing the reasons for selecting the study area. The study area and the draft purpose and need statement influence each other. The study area may differ from the area of influence for the purposes of sensitivity analysis in the regional model.

The Study Area will be used to determine traffic counts needs and locations, existing crash analysis, travel demand forecasting needs, the existing conditions modeling including local roads, and the identification of existing environmental resources.

5.2 Complete Existing Conditions Technical Memorandum (P6 Activity CSR1020) Create a technical memorandum that documents the existing conditions within the study area and the TH 13 corridor. This memo will serve as the basis for developing interim and ultimate vision improvement alternatives, determining the impacts of improvement alternatives, and will include the following:

1. Previous Studies – Review and summarize the primary findings and recommendations of earlier relevant studies in the study area.

2. Plans and Policies – Review and summarize applicable State, Scott County, Dakota County, City of Savage, City of Burnsville, and MetCouncil plans and policies related to the study area.

3. Basemapping – Assemble a base map which includes CAD (computer aided drafting) files, Geographic Information System (GIS) files, and R/W Data for use in CAD and GIS. Topographic and existing R/W maps will be received from the State.

4. Land Use – Summarize and map existing and planned land uses in the study area based on tax records, visual inspection, and the city of Savage 2040 Comprehensive Plan.

5. Access Inventory – Map and summarize existing access conditions by number of access points by TH 13 highway segment. Existing access conditions relative to State Access Management guidelines and comparable corridors will be documented.

6. Freight – Review existing and future freight operations, by truck, rail and barge, in the study area including the need to provide for oversized truck loads. The traffic analysis will take into account heavy truck traffic entering and exiting TH 13 from surrounding businesses. Coordinate with local freight generators to understand the potential for changes to the train and truck traffic in the corridor. Determine highway freight origin-destination both through and within the project area as much as practicable.

7. Environmental Review – Review past environmental studies combined with existing data sources to identify at a high level environmental resources in the study area to be aware of as improvement concepts are developed and evaluated.

8. Pedestrian and Bike Facilities – Identify existing pedestrian/bike facilities, existing needs, and future planned improvements/connections in the study area. Existing and planned facilities will be mapped, and pedestrian volumes will be included in the traffic counts.

18



9. Existing Traffic Conditions Report – Reference the Existing Traffic Conditions Report and Existing Local Conditions Traffic Report in the Existing Conditions Technical Memorandum.

1. Deliverable: One electronic memorandum. 2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Report written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension).


3. Standard: Report. The modeling will conform to the current State modeling requirements that can be found at the web site, http://www.dot.state.mn.us/trafficeng/modeling/modelreq.html, and are incorporated herein by reference.

4. State and FHWA Review: 14 calendar days 5. Contractor Update: 14 calendar days

5.3 Draft Study Alternatives Report (P6 Activity CSR1030) Create a draft study alternatives report that will identify and document at-grade and grade separated improvement alternatives at all TH 13 intersections that address the purpose and need of the corridor. Improvement alternatives at the US 169 and I-35W interchanges are excluded and will not be identified or evaluated. These alternatives will ultimately define four possible visions of the TH 13 corridor including:

1. No Build 2. At-grade Build – high-capacity at-grade intersection improvements, access closures, and supporting roadway

improvements. Existing grade-separated interchanges remain unchanged. 3. Hybrid Build – a mix of high-capacity at-grade intersection improvements, access closures, grade separation

elements, and grade separated interchanges. Existing grade-separated interchanges remain unchanged. 4. Freeway Build – grade separated interchanges, access closures, and supporting roadway improvements. Existing

grade-separated interchanges remain unchanged.

These improvement alternatives will serve as the basis of the alternatives evaluation, travel demand modeling, traffic modeling analysis, and safety analysis. Local roadway improvement alternatives includes work outside the TH 13 corridor that would benefit the operations of TH 13.

Conceptual design of improvement alternatives will be to a level of detail to understand feasibility, scale, operations, capacity, and cost. Conceptual design work will include two-dimensional drawings of at-grade alternatives with field and topographic evaluation of feasibility of grade-separated alternatives to understand clearance, touch-down locations, and footprint.

Initially screen the improvement alternatives based on a fatal flaw analysis. Secondary, high-level screenings using FHWA’s Capacity Analysis for Planning of Junctions tool (CAP-X) and Safety Performance for Intersection Control Evaluation (SPICE) may reduce alternatives further to be evaluated at a higher level of detail in the evaluation of study alternatives. Interactions between improvement alternatives along the corridor, both at-grade and grade separated, need to be understood.

1. Deliverable: One electronic Draft Study Alternatives Report 2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Report written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension).


3. Standard: Must use the latest version of the MN EAW located on the EQB’s website at: http://www.eqb.state.mn.us/EnvRevGuidanceDocuments.htm. FHWA’s guidebook or State’s HPDP must be used as guidance to ensure that NEPA laws have been fulfilled in the EA. Refer to the following web sites: http://environment.fhwa.dot.gov/guidebook/index.asp, http://www.dot.state.mn.us/planning/hpdp/, and https://www.environment.fhwa.dot.gov/legislation/nepa/guidance_preparing_env_documents.aspx.

19





http://www.dot.state.mn.us/trafficeng/modeling/modelreq.html



4. State and FHWA Review: Arrange a meeting within one week of submitting to State with both State and FHWA staff in attendance.

5. Contractor Update: two weeks

5.4 Develop Study Alternatives Cost Estimates (P6 Activity CSR1040) Prepare high-level, comparative cost estimates for each of the remaining study alternatives. Use State Metro’s LWD cost estimate template and methodology. Cost estimates for bridges may use the dollars per square foot method. Coordinate with State Bridge Office in determining the appropriate unit pricing for the estimate. The study-level cost estimates will be used in alternatives evaluation task.

1. Deliverable: One electronic copy of the LWD estimates for each alternative. 2. Format: Electronic files in Microsoft Excel 2013 (xlsx extension) 3. Standard: State Metro’s LWD method guidelines 4. State and FHWA Review: 14 calendar days 5. Contractor Update: two weeks

5.5 Study Benefit Cost Analysis Report (CSR1050) The purpose of this benefit-cost analysis is to compare alternatives advancing from the initial screening of the corridor evaluation improvement alternatives. Because study alternatives and benefits will be at a planning-level of detail, the benefit-cost analysis is for comparative purposes only. Obtain alternative cost estimates and results from the traffic forecasting, and VISSIM operations modeling tasks and format data to be used in benefit-cost analysis for the alternatives plus the No Build. Conduct an incremental benefit-cost analysis for the No Build, and the Build alternatives. Report results in terms of net present value and benefit-cost ratio. Document the data, methods, and results of the benefit-cost analysis in a technical memorandum and submit to State for review.

1. Deliverable: One electronic technical memorandum. 2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Report written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension).

Complete package in Adobe Acrobat (pdf extension) and pdf will be created by using Adobe Acrobat to covert the source file to a pdf whenever possible with the use of scanned pages minimized if not eliminated with the exception of actual signature pages.

3. Standard: To be coordinated with Met Council and State staff. 4. State Review: 14 calendar days 5. Contractor Update: 14 calendar days

5.6 Study Alternatives Evaluation (P6 Activity CSR1060) Evaluate and compare the remaining alternatives based on evaluation criteria and footprint level impacts. The primary goal of the study alternatives evaluation is the recommendation and selection of the ultimate vision for the TH 13 corridor.

Complete the evaluation matrix summarizing the results of the comparative evaluation. Recommend the ultimate vision for the TH 13 corridor, including the top three improvement alternatives that achieve the ultimate vision at each intersection. The maximum footprint of the improvement alternatives will be used to determine and document total cumulative footprint-level impacts for the TH 13 corridor. The ultimate vision will not select a preferred alternative at each intersection but will narrow the range of anticipated solutions to inform sizing the footprint.

1. Deliverable: One electronic Project Alternatives Evaluation Report 2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Report written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension).


3. Standard: Must use the latest version of the MN EAW located on the EQB’s website at: http://www.eqb.state.mn.us/EnvRevGuidanceDocuments.htm. FHWA’s guidebook or State’s HPDP must be used as guidance to ensure that NEPA laws have been fulfilled in the EA. Refer to the following web sites:

20




http://environment.fhwa.dot.gov/guidebook/index.asp, http://www.dot.state.mn.us/planning/hpdp/, and https://www.environment.fhwa.dot.gov/legislation/nepa/guidance_preparing_env_documents.aspx.



5.6.1 Prepare Draft Intersection Control Evaluations for Study Alternatives Evaluation (P6 Activity ICE0900) Use the Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) process to screen the draft study alternatives, aid the study alternatives evaluation, and aid in the selection of a preferred ultimate vision for the TH 13 corridor. The study alternatives evaluation stops short of the selection of preferred alternatives for individual intersections, but will identify which intersections will be closed, remain at-grade, or be grade-separated. This activity will be the basis for future ICE reports to be continued in the Dakota Improvements alternatives evaluation and future projects in the corridor. Follow the guidance set forth in MnDOT’s Technical Memorandum No. 13-05-T-02 (http://www.dot.state.mn.us/trafficeng/safety/ice/ICE-TechMemo.pdf) and the 2017 Minnesota Intersection Control Manual (http://www.dot.state.mn.us/trafficeng/safety/ice/2007_ICE_Manual.pdf).

5.7 Develop Study Implementation Plan (P6 Activity CSR1070) Develop an implementation plan for the corridor based on the preferred ultimate vision. Divide implementation plan for the corridor into individual project areas, of single or multiple intersections. Document how these improvements over time benefit safety, mobility, access and progress towards the ultimate vision for the TH 13 corridor. Identify implementation triggers for improvements which may be based on time, traffic volume thresholds, safety thresholds, local land use changes, or funding. The individual project areas will have independent utility and benefits, and will not depend on future projects to realize benefits. Prepare an implementation matrix that summarizes the implementation plan.

Long-term improvements will meet the ultimate vision for the corridor. Improvement alternatives that do not meet the ultimate vision but provide benefits may be retained as interim improvements. Interim improvements will not preclude the long-term improvements associated with the ultimate vision, and may even advance towards them, as projects along the corridor are implemented over time. Include both long-term and interim improvements in the implementation plan.

Retain three interim and long-term alternatives at each improvement location as a result of the study alternatives evaluation. These alternatives and their total footprints will serve as the basis for the design alternatives evaluated for specific improvement projects resulting from the study. The remaining study alternatives at the Dakota-Yosemite Avenue must be consistent with the design alternatives identified in the Draft Design Alternatives Report (P6 Activity AAA1020).

Review and recommend funding strategies to implement interim and long-term improvements identified in the corridor evaluation.

1. Deliverable: One electronic implementation matrix and funding strategies report 2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Report written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension).


3. Standard: To be coordinated with State staff. 4. State and FHWA Review: 14 calendar days 5. Contractor Update: two weeks

5.8 Complete Corridor Study Report (P6 Activity CSR1080 and CSR2010) Complete a Corridor Study report that will compile and summarize the corridor evaluation tasks into a single document. The purpose of the Corridor Study report is to document the process, analysis, findings and recommendations that will determine the ultimate vision for the TH 13 corridor. The report that will not only serve as documentation of the study but will be used as a primary resource for the Hybrid Environmental Assessment for the corridor. The appendices will contain all technical memorandums developed through the study process. Contents may include but are not limited to:

21

http://www.dot.state.mn.us/trafficeng/safety/ice/2007_ICE_Manual.pdf

http://www.dot.state.mn.us/trafficeng/safety/ice/ICE






1. Executive Summary – targeted to general audience 2. Public and Agency Engagement and Participation 3. Existing Conditions 4. Traffic Forecasting 5. Development and Evaluation of Improvement Alternatives 6. Implementation Plan 7. Appendices to include meeting minutes, public comments, technical memorandums, cost estimates, resolutions

5.8.1 Draft Corridor Study Report (P6 Activity CSR1080) Complete a Draft Corridor Study Report and submit to State, FHWA and other stakeholders for review.

1. Deliverable: One electronic Draft Corridor Study Report 2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Report written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension).





5.8.2 Finalize Corridor Study Report (P6 Activity CSR2010) Revise the draft corridor study report based on comments received, and finalize the report for final submission to State.

1. Deliverable: One electronic Final Corridor Study Report 2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Report written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension).



6 The Dakota Improvements Evaluation (Source Type Code 1071) The Dakota-Yosemite Ave improvement alternatives to be evaluated must be consistent with the ultimate vision for the TH 13 corridor and are the result of the Study Alternatives Evaluation. The improvement alternatives will include:

a. No Build b. At-grade Build – high-capacity at-grade improvement alternatives that are consistent with the ultimate vision c. Hybrid Build – high-capacity at-grade improvement alternatives with grade separation elements that are

consistent with the ultimate vision d. Freeway Build – grade separation improvement alternatives consistent with the ultimate vision

The alternatives evaluation is a key deliverable that must be understood by the public. Develop alternatives evaluation documents, presentations, spreadsheets, drawings, and other material meant for use by the public in a plain language and accessible format. Supporting documentation created during project development does not need to meet the plain language and accessible format, but select information from those materials will need to be converted into plain language

22











and accessible format before it is released to the public.

This task will require information from several other tasks in this scope to be completed, such as alternatives layouts, cost estimates, traffic modeling, and preliminary environmental investigation. Explain why all rejected alternatives were rejected. Describe the remaining alternatives in detail with an illustrative project layout.

6.1 Draft Dakota Improvements Alternatives Report (P6 Activity AAA1020) Create a report that identifies all of the Dakota improvements alternatives consistent with the Study Alternatives Evaluation and provide illustrative examples. This report is a continuation of the study alternatives evaluation of the Corridor Study Report. The report will need to be reviewed by FHWA, State, and other stakeholders. Completion of this task and meeting with FHWA and State must occur early in the project to determine how much work will be needed to complete the Dakota improvements alternatives analysis.

1. Deliverable: One electronic Draft Dakota Improvements Alternatives Report 2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Report written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension).



4. State and FHWA Review: Arrange a meeting within one week of submitting to State with both State and FHWA staff in attendance.


6.2 Logical Termini Report (P6 Activity AAA1030) Create a logical termini write-up detailing the reasons for the end points of the Dakota improvements project. The logical termini for the Dakota improvements and the purpose and need influence each other, because the logical termini analysis can influence the outcome of the purpose and need just as the purpose and need can influence the outcome of the logical termini.

The FHWA has a particular interest in this topic. Guidance from the FHWA Environmental Guidebook explains the following about logical termini:

“Logical termini for project development are defined as (1) rational end points for a transportation improvement, and (2) rational end points for a review of the environmental impacts. The environmental impact review frequently covers a broader geographic area than the strict limits of the transportation improvements. In the past, the most common termini have been points of major traffic generation, especially intersecting roadways. This is due to the fact that in most cases traffic generators determine the size and type of facility being proposed. However, there are also cases where the project improvement is not primarily related to congestion due to traffic generators, and the choice of termini based on these generators may not be appropriate. The next section will show some examples where this is the case.

Choosing a corridor of sufficient length to look at all impacts need not preclude staged construction. Therefore, related improvements within a transportation facility will be evaluated as one project, rather than selecting termini based on what is programmed as short range improvements. Construction may then be "staged," or programmed for shorter sections or discrete construction elements as funding permits.”

Use the travel demand and VISSIM modeling scope described herein to help provide data needed during the analysis and write-up of this task.

1. Deliverable: One electronic logical termini write-up

23











6.3 Benefit-Cost Analysis for Dakota Improvements Alternative Screening (P6 Activity AAA1300) The purpose of this benefit-cost analysis is to compare alternatives during the initial screening of Dakota improvement alternatives. Obtain alternative cost estimates and results from the traffic forecasting, and VISSIM operations modeling tasks and format data to be used in benefit-cost analysis for the alternatives plus the No Build. Conduct an incremental benefit-cost analysis for the No Build, and the Build alternatives. Report results in terms of net present value and benefit-cost ratio. Document the data, methods, and results of the benefit-cost analysis in a technical memorandum and submit to State for review.

1. Deliverable: One electronic technical memorandum. 2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Report written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension).

Complete package in Adobe Acrobat (pdf extension) and pdf will be created by using Adobe Acrobat to covert the source file to a pdf whenever possible with the use of scanned pages minimized if not eliminated with the exception of actual signature pages.

3. Standard: To be coordinated with Met Council and State staff. 4. State Review: 14 calendar days 5. Contractor Update: 14 calendar days

6.4 Dakota Improvements Alternatives Evaluation (P6 Activity AAA1050)

6.4.1 Dakota Improvements Alternatives Evaluation Report Create the Dakota Improvement Project Alternatives Evaluation Report when the following tasks are completed and conclusions can be drawn from those tasks:

a. Draft Dakota improvements alternatives report b. Alternative layouts c. Alternative cost estimates d. Initial drainage overview map e. Traffic modeling f. TMP and Staging Evaluation g. Benefit-Cost Analysis h. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) field review i. Preliminary Environmental Investigation

Rank any remaining alternatives and provide State with justification of the ranking. Identify specific evaluation criteria in coordination with the TAC to rank the alternatives. Identify the appropriate measures for each criterion and complete an analysis of each alternative for each criterion. Prepare a matrix summarizing the results. Recommend which alternatives have the most merit and support that recommendation within the report.

Assume that Dakota improvements alternatives report will include the alternatives identified in the Dakota Improvements Alternatives Evaluation section.

24







1. Deliverable: One electronic Dakota Improvements Alternatives Evaluation Report 2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Report written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension).





6.4.2 Dakota Improvements Alternatives Evaluation Presentation to Project Team Summarize the Dakota Improvements Alternatives Evaluation Report in a presentation to the project team including all pertinent stakeholders. The purpose of this presentation will be to summarize the alternatives studied and support the alternatives report.

1. Deliverable: One presentation meeting assumed to be two hours in length 2. Format: Microsoft PowerPoint 2013 document (pptx extension) and Adobe Acrobat (pdf) copy of presentation 3. Standard: To be coordinated with State PM 4. State Review: 14 calendar days 5. Contractor Update: 14 calendar days.

7 Preliminary Traffic Studies (Source Type Code 1016) Model and analyze the TH 13 corridor and study area for existing and proposed conditions for all alternative concepts that would impact traffic mobility and queue lengths. The modeling will conform to the current State modeling requirements that can be found at the web site, http://www.dot.state.mn.us/trafficeng/modeling/modelreq.html. The mainline east-west TH 13 model limits will be from the US 169/TH 101 interchange to east of Nicollet Avenue, with the north-south model limits dependent upon the determination of the study area limits. Include the alternatives identified in the Study and Dakota Improvements Alternatives Evaluation sections.

7.1 Existing Traffic Conditions Report (P6 Activity TFM1010) This task and its subtasks make up the P6 Schedule activities:

a. TFC1000 b. TFC1005 c. TRF1000 d. TFM0900 e. TFM1000 f. TFM1005 g. TFM 1010

Develop an Existing Traffic Conditions Report discussing the field observations and explaining the existing geometric and operational deficiencies. Provide information about existing bottleneck locations, high weave areas, delays, levels of service and queue lengths.

Review data for this project that relates to traffic counts, turning movements, signal timing, ramp metering, and geometrics as supplied by State and other agencies, by accessing State’s Metro website, and by accessing State’s data extraction workstation. Obtain more recent data if data obtained is more than two years old.

Conduct field review of the traffic operations during the morning (AM) peak, afternoon (PM) peak, and freight peak

25








periods to aid in the calibration of the base model and to verify geometrics and operations. Review corridor operation from State’s RTMC facility during peak periods if desired. To schedule and coordinate corridor operations, contact the RTMC Operations staff at (651) 234-7040.

Create the Existing Conditions Modeling to support the report including calibration of an existing conditions VISSIM model for the corridor.

1. Deliverable: One electronic report including: 1.1. Traffic counts including freight count update 1.2. Traffic forecasts and Equivalent Single Axle Loads (ESALs) for material design recommendation only 1.3. Existing crash analysis 1.4. VISSIM existing base model calibration report 1.5. Existing base model MOEs 1.6. Draft electronic reports for review and comment. Electronic final reports. All pertinent modeling files

required to replicate all model runs and results 1.7. Includes all subtasks for this task


3. Standard: Report. The modeling will conform to the current State modeling requirements that can be found at the web site, http://www.dot.state.mn.us/trafficeng/modeling/modelreq.html , and are incorporated herein by reference.

4. State and FHWA Review: 14 calendar days 5. Contractor Update: 14 calendar days

7.1.1 Traffic Counts (P6 Activity TFC1000) Collect current traffic count data for the TH system included in the traffic model using the State Traffic Information System (TIS). Identify traffic count needs and missing information in the existing traffic data and supplement the traffic data as needed. This information will be used in the various traffic models in this scope of work.

1. Deliverable: One electronic report. Data will need to be inputted into the various traffic models describe in this scope.


3. Standard: Report. 4. State and FHWA Review: 14 calendar days 5. Contractor Update: 14 calendar days

7.1.2 Freight Traffic Counts (P6 Activity TFC1005) The TH 13 corridor has many freight generators, destinations and freight through traffic. Understanding the movement of the freight traffic through the corridor is critical to the development of the ultimate corridor vision. Verify the traffic counts reflect the freight usage of the corridor. Update traffic counts with additional data collected for overall freight volumes and seasonal peak volumes. This information will be used in the various traffic models in this scope of work.

1. Deliverable: Formal update to traffic count report. 2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Report written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension).


3. Standard: Report. 4. State and FHWA Review: 14 calendar days

26




5. Contractor Update: 14 calendar days

7.1.3 Prepare Traffic Forecasts and ESALs (P6 Activity TRF1000) Prepare a traffic forecast and ESALs report for the TH system. This information is only to be used to create the Materials Design Recommendation (MDR) for the TH system.

1. Deliverable: One electronic report. 2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Report written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension).



7.1.4 Perform Crash Analysis (P6 Activity TFM0900) Obtain crash data for the past five and 10 years. Five-year crash data will be analyzed and findings reported while 10-year data will be used to confirm trends and provide historic perspective. Include railroad crashes at at-grade crossings in the study area. Crash data will be provided by Metro Traffic Engineering via access to MnDOT’s Crash Mapping Analysis Tool (MnCMAT) database. Analyze crash types and locations to determine crash patterns. The crash analysis will provide a basis for the benefits analysis of improvement alternatives.

1. Deliverable: One electronic report. 2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Report written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension).



7.1.5 Existing Conditions Modeling (P6 Activity TFM1000) Build an existing base traffic model for the AM and PM peak periods using VISSIM and meeting State modeling requirements.

7.1.5.1 Building of Base Model a. Develop a lane schematic that graphically represents the existing network and includes all key design features. b. Interpolate bad or missing volume data, convert data into 15-minute volumes, and balance the volume data for the

AM and PM time period. c. Develop the AM and PM O-D matrixes for all freeway entrances and exits. d. Update the AM and PM base models to reflect the existing freeway and arterials of the modeling limits. This

includes entering volume data and traffic signal and ramp meter control data. e. Verify that the network data has been coded correctly and develop a freeway quality control worksheet and an

arterial quality control worksheet that lists link information. f. Perform ten runs on each model using different random seeds for each run. The same random number set will be

used for each model. g. Develop the arterial and freeway measure of effectiveness tables and graphics. h. Submit the base models and any supportive materials to State for review and approval.

7.1.5.2 Base Model Calibration Report Calibrate the AM and the PM base models. Write a report explaining the process needed to calibrate the model and the changes that were required. Submit the report, the AM & PM calibrated models, and supportive materials to State and FHWA for review and approval.

27



7.1.6 Update Existing Conditions Modeling for Seasonal Peak (P6 Activity TFM1005) Update the calibrated AM and PM base models with seasonal peak truck traffic, and include an additional peak period if seasonal peak truck traffic does not coincide with the AM and PM peaks. Verify that seasonal truck queues in the base model approximate observations. Update Existing Base Model Calibration Report

7.2 Traffic Operations Analyses (P6 Activity TFM1020, TFM1030, TFM1035, and TFM1040) This task and its subtasks make up the P6 Schedule activities:

a. TFM1020 b. TFM1030 c. TFM1035 d. TFM1040

1. Deliverable: Traffic modeling report including, a. Travel demand forecast and analysis, b. Sensitivity analysis on travel demand modeling, c. VISSIM modeling and analysis, d. VISSIM base model calibration report, e. Sensitivity Analysis on VISSIM Modeling, f. Comparison of alternatives. Draft electronic reports for review and comment. Electronic final reports. All

pertinent modeling files required to replicate all model runs and results. g. Includes all subtasks for this task.

2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Report that is approximately 10 pages or less written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension). Complete package in Adobe Acrobat (pdf extension) and pdf will be created by using Adobe Acrobat to covert the source file to a pdf whenever possible.

3. Standard: Requirement found at this website http://www.dot.state.mn.us/trafficeng/modeling/modelreq.html 4. State Review: 14 calendar days 5. Contractor Update: 14 calendar days.

7.2.1 Travel Demand Forecasts (P6 Activity TFM1020) Determine the opening year and the project horizon year to be used for the travel demand forecast. Develop and document in the Travel Demand Forecasting report the methodology for developing the opening year and the horizon year forecasts. Forecasts will address the requirements of the VISSIM analysis, air analysis, noise analysis, environmental analysis and benefit-cost analysis.

7.2.1.1 Travel Demand Modeling and Forecast Report Identify and compile previous forecasts, plus comprehensive plan land use development assumptions and roadway network assumptions to be used. Assumes full travel demand model runs for validation for opening year and horizon year. Identify extent of modeling data to be reported. Meet with State and others as applicable to obtain concurrence on assumptions and methods.

Conduct validation review of base year model run, adjust model calibration parameters within State guidelines as appropriate, and report validation changes based on adjustments. Meet with State to discuss any anomalies.

Prepare travel demand forecasts (no build and build) for the opening year and the horizon year in accordance with adopted State and Met Council forecasting and modeling guidelines. Prepare traffic lane assignments and turning volumes for all intersections and interchanges within the study limits for the opening year and the horizon year. Include heavy commercial counts and forecasts. Assemble data in tables, charts, maps or other easily understood formats.

Prepare a report which documents the methodologies used to develop the forecast for each travel demand forecast prepared for State. Describe the methodology used to generate the 15-minute volume data for the forecasted AM and PM peak hour volumes. The methodology will be consistent with the guidelines that can be found at the web site, http://www.dot.state.mn.us/trafficeng/modeling/modelreq.html . Document multiple forecasts on the same segment

28





highway (multiple forecast years). Draft forecasts presented for review and comment will be accompanied by a draft documentation reports.

Each documentation report will address each bulleted item in the guidelines Twin City Travel Demand Forecasts Prepared for the State Metro District: “Model and Parameters for Adjustments to Model Inputs” and “Model Output Checks for Reasonableness and Post Processing Adjustments”. In addition, the report will include the rationale for selecting the forecast area for which forecasted Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Vehicle Hours traveled (VHT) are calculated as inputs for the benefit/cost analyses.

7.2.1.2 Sensitivity Analysis on Travel Demand Modeling Conduct sensitivity tests, select link analyses and other modeling analyses to provide origin-destination information, trip length and what-if analysis of potential improvements. Develop and format outputs for use in freeway and arterial operations analysis, air and noise, other environmental analyses, and costs-benefit analysis.

7.2.1.3 Travel Demand Forecasts for Study and Dakota Improvements Alternative Evaluations Coordinate with FHWA and the State to determine what alternatives will be evaluated as part of the study and Dakota improvements alternative evaluations modeling. Develop daily and peak hour forecasts for the alternatives. Calculate system-wide VHT and VMT. Develop peak hour origin-destination percentages for use in the VISSIM modeling.

7.2.1.3.1 Travel Demand Forecasts Report for Study and Dakota Improvements Alternative Evaluations Prepare a report which documents the methodologies used to develop the forecast for each travel demand forecast prepared for State. Document multiple forecasts on the same segment highway (multiple forecast years). The report will address each bulleted item in the guidelines Twin City Travel Demand Forecasts Prepared for the State Metro District: “Model and Parameters for Adjustments to Model Inputs” and “Model Output Checks for Reasonableness and Post Processing Adjustments”. In addition, the report will include the rationale for selecting the forecast area for which forecasted VMT and VHT are calculated as inputs for the benefit/cost analyses.

7.2.2 Study and Dakota Improvements Alternative Evaluations Modeling (P6 Activity TFM1040) This evaluation will consist of high-level travel demand forecasting and VISSIM analysis. More detailed analysis will be conducted for the Dakota improvements preferred alternative which is described in Phase 2 of this scope.

Perform modeling and analysis for AM, PM, and seasonal truck traffic peak conditions for No-build and the alternatives listed in the Study and Dakota Improvements Alternatives Evaluation sections.

Assumptions: a. Existing travel demand modeling (including model validation) will occur before this task begins. b. No build forecasts will be developed before this task begins. c. Alternatives forecasts will be developed before this task begins. d. Existing VISSIM model calibration will occur before this task begins. e. All meetings will be attended by two staff members.

7.2.2.1 VISSIM Analysis for Study and Dakota Improvements Alternative Evaluations Develop future one-hour models for the no build scenario and the study and Dakota improvements alternatives using the existing calibrated VISSIM model. Summarize results of the analysis. Measures of Effectiveness (MOEs) will include Level of Service (LOS), corridor travel time (by vehicle and person-trips), vehicle and person through-put, transit travel time, and queue lengths.

The traffic modeling will include: a. Convert the forecasted traffic data into AM, PM and seasonal peak 15-minute volume data, balance the volume

data, and check the volume data for capacity constraints.

29



b. Develop AM, PM and seasonal peak O-D matrixes for all freeway entrances and exits. c. Build the AM, PM and seasonal peak models. This includes entering volume data, traffic signal and ramp meter

control data, and the appropriate calibration values. d. Verify that the network data has been coded correctly and develop a freeway quality control worksheet and an

arterial quality control worksheet that lists link information. e. Perform ten runs on each model using different random seeds for each run. The same random number set will be

used for each model. f. Develop the arterial and freeway measure of effectiveness tables and graphics. g. Submit the models and any supportive materials to State for review and approval.

7.2.2.2 VISSIM Analysis Report for Study and Dakota Improvements Alternative Evaluations Prepare a report which documents the modeling process and results of the VISSIM analysis. The methodology will be consistent with the guidelines that can be found at the web site, http://www.dot.state.mn.us/trafficeng/modeling/modelreq.html.

7.3 Perform Safety Analysis (P6 Activity TFM1035) Determine the safety benefits of the study and Dakota improvements alternatives compared to No-Build in accordance with the Highway Safety Manual for the purposes of the alternatives evaluations and benefit-cost analyses.

7.4 Travel Time Reliability Analysis (P6 Activity TFM1030) Perform Travel Time Reliability Analysis consistent with the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). Collect one year of travel time and traffic volume data along the TH 13 corridor. Compile data using Strategic Highway Research Program 2 (SHRP2) reliability database tools and incorporate MnCMAT crash data and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) weather data. Separate travel time records by condition and develop demand-speed curves for each condition for 12 segments along the TH 13 corridor.

Prepare a custom travel time model using the results of the data collection and analysis task to predict future travel time reliability performance along the TH 13 corridor. This model will allow for future increases in traffic forecasts and geometric changes.

Develop travel time reliability estimates for the TH 13 corridor under year 2040 conditions for the four possible visions outlined in the Draft Study Alternatives Report section: No-Build, At-grade Build, Hybrid Build, and Freeway Build. Report results in terms of average travel time, planning time index, and VMT-VHT.

Assumptions: 1. Reliability analysis will be conducted along TH 13 between the US 169 and east of Nicollet Avenue. 2. Contractor will use available data such as Streetlight Insight, National Performance Management Research Data

Set and/or the loop detector data, and not buy additional data for this analysis.

Preliminary Transportation Management Plan (TMP) (Source Type Code 1254) Develop the Transportation Management Plan (TMP). Follow the State Metro TMP process described on this website: http://www.dot.state.mn.us/metro/trafficeng/control_striping.html

Complete the TMP Scoping Worksheet, TMP Worksheet, and TMP Report using the TMP template, all of which are found on the website.

The management of traffic during construction is critical to this project. Begin work on the TMP at the time of contract execution. Propose concept staging during layout development and before layouts are completed, because the staging of traffic may play an important role in how the layouts are developed.

30

8

http://www.dot.state.mn.us/metro/trafficeng/control_striping.html




8.1 Define Staging Alternatives TMP (P6 Activity MTM1000) Complete the Staging Alternatives TMP to coincide with the conclusion of the Dakota Improvements Alternatives Evaluation process. Complete drafts of the TMP Scoping Worksheet for each layout alternative. The purpose of the Staging Alternatives TMP is to discuss the layout alternatives and how traffic management, pedestrian routes and staging alternatives may or may not change between them. The benefits and disbenefits of each staging alternative will then be used to help decide which layout alternative will be selected as the preferred alternative. Detailed analysis and solutions for traffic management of the preferred alternative occurs with P6 Activity MTM1010. Due to the number of alternatives that could be analyzed, staging evaluations will only be carried forward to viable alternatives, which will be coordinated with State. Six alternative TMP evaluations are expected.

1. Deliverable: One electronic report with TMP Scoping Worksheets. 2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Report written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension).


3. Standard: State Metro TMP process. 4. State Review: 14 calendar days 5. Contractor Update: 14 calendar days.

9 Visual Quality Manual (Source Type Code 1071) The need for this work will be determined, if necessary, by the project team, including city and county, and will aid in the development and evaluation of study and project alternatives. Activities included in this work package:

a. VQM1000 Identify/Document Visual Quality Review b. VQM1010 Develop Visual Quality Goals/Workbook c. VQM1030 Draft Visual Quality Manual

Prepare a Visual Quality Manual (VQM) of sufficient detail to successfully communicate design intent to provide guidance for future final design and construction of the project. Document and illustrate visual quality, architectural, and aesthetic design recommendations for the preliminary visual design elements used in transportation planning and design, including but not limited to, bridges, retaining walls, grading, signing, lighting, planting, fencing, storm water ponds, bike and pedestrian facilities, and barriers.

Collect and present the information needed to develop the VQM. The details in the manual will be determined through collaboration with State staff only. State will handle all Visual Quality coordination with stakeholders. Contractor will be required to attend meetings as needed to display their work on the VQM. State will direct Contractor to make changes as needed.

The VQM will include design guidelines, directives, and recommendations documented by plan layouts, elevations, sections, and details drawn to scale, text annotations with design intent and construction directives, as appropriate for the element. The scale drawings will show proportional relationships, approximate color representation, and appropriate textures. Information on cost analysis and comparisons and maintenance discussion and requirements will be included. Preliminary structural information will be shown on 11x17 plan sheets with borders, title blocks and text descriptors. Include the treatment of the bridges, the retaining walls and noise walls. Write and edit the narrative portions of the manual, refine the visual and graphic exhibits from materials developed from State meetings, and compile these materials into a single document.

1. Deliverable: One electronic copy and 10 hardcopies. 2. Format: Written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension). Complete package in Adobe Acrobat (pdf

extension) and pdf will be created by using Adobe Acrobat to covert the source file to a pdf whenever possible with the use of scanned pages minimized if not eliminate with the exception of actual signature pages.

3. Standard: Intentionally left blank. 4. State Review: 14 calendar days

31



5. Contractor Update: 14 calendar days.

10 Geometric Layouts (Source Type Code 1140) Assumptions:

a. Geometric layouts will be for Dakota Improvements only. b. Assumes State’s PM will provide a comprehensive comment list for each deliverable. Contractor will provide a

comprehensive comment response letter for each deliverable addressing its response to each comment.

10.1 Submit Survey Request (P6 Activity Code SUR1000) Evaluate survey needs and submit survey requests as needed. Establish a priority of survey needs with State’s surveying team via a web meeting in order to expedite higher priority information.

1. Deliverable: Electronic survey request and one hour web meeting with State survey team. 2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Request written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension). 3. Standard: State Survey Request Form 4. State Review: 14 calendar days 5. Contractor Update: N/A

10.2 Draft Preliminary Geometric Layout Alternatives (P6 Activity LAY1030) Prepare and process for review from State, FHWA and other stakeholders draft preliminary geometric layouts for the alternatives listed in the Project Alternatives Evaluation section. Incorporate comments received from each of the Draft Layouts into the Final Geometric Layouts.

Develop the layouts to the same level of detail as a Staff Approved Layout with profiles, except use 200 scale for the layouts. Show coordinate-correct aerial photography on all layouts.

1. Deliverable: One electronic copy of each of the alternatives with aerial photography. One electronic copy of each alternative without the aerial photography and the file size minimized to allow for easy downloading from the internet. Five hardcopies of each alternative with aerial photography.

2. Format: Electronic copies are to be delivered in 200 scale in both Adobe Acrobat (pdf extension) and MicroStation/GEOPAK formats. Hardcopies to be delivered in 200 scale in one continuous roll plot with layout and profiles on separate roll plots.

3. Standard: Requirements for Geometric Layouts described on State’s HPDP and Geometric Design & Layout Development websites. State CADD Level II standards. Must use GEOPAK. (standards as of August 1, 2014)

4. State and FHWA Review: 14 calendar days 5. Contractor Update: See final preliminary geometric layouts task.

10.3 Preliminary Geometric Layout & Profile (P6 Activity LAY1040) Prepare and process for review from State, FHWA and other stakeholders final preliminary geometric layouts for each of the build alternatives that make the necessary changes from the review described in the draft preliminary geometric layouts task. Assume each alternative has two submittals, where the second submittal incorporates comments from the first submittal.

Refine alternative layouts, profiles, and cost estimates based upon accepted Value Engineering (VE) Study recommendations.

Develop the layouts to the same level of detail as a Staff Approved Layout with profiles except use 200 scale for the layouts. Show coordinate-correct aerial photography on all layouts.

1. Deliverable: Two submittals will be provided. One electronic copy of each alternative with aerial photography. One electronic copy of each alternative without the aerial photography and the file size minimized to allow for easy downloading from the internet. Five hardcopies of each alternative with aerial photography.

32



2. Format: Electronic copies are to be delivered in 200 scale in both Adobe Acrobat (pdf extension) and Microstation/GEOPAK formats. Hardcopies to be delivered in 200 scale in one continuous roll plot with layout and profiles on separate roll plots.

3. Standard: Requirements for Geometric Layouts described on State’s HPDP and Geometric Design & Layout Development websites. State CADD Level II standards. Must use GEOPAK. (standards as of August 1, 2014).

4. State and FHWA Review: 14 calendar days 5. Contractor Update: To be determined based on the scope of work required.

11 Geotechnical Investigation (Source Type Code 1190) Submit a report that includes preparation of final boring logs and an analysis of subsurface conditions and materials. The report includes, but is not limited to; bearing capacity for deep or shallow foundations, settlement analysis, slope stability analysis, locations of unsuitable soils, subcut depths and type of backfill, muck excavation limits and treatment, culvert treatments, pavement designs, and geologic recommendations. The report will also include definite foundation recommendations for providing a safe and cost effective foundation system.

Additional information can be found on the Geotechnical Consultant Contract website that can be found at: http://www.dot.state.mn.us/materials/tcontract.html

11.1 Review Existing Geotechnical Data for Study Area (P6 Activity FDR0050) Review available sources of geotechnical data for the study area to aid in the Study Alternatives Evaluation.

11.2 Geotechnical Recommendation for Project Alternatives (P6 Activity FDR0100, FDR0500 and FDR0900) Develop a geotechnical investigation plan (FDR0100), conduct geotechnical borings/field work (FDR0500), and prepare a geotechnical recommendation (FDR0900) that will aid in the development and refinement of project alternatives and LWD estimates for the Dakota Improvements.

12 Material Design Recommendation (Source Type Code 1180) Prepare a Draft Pavement Recommendation to be used to complete high level cost estimates for the alternatives evaluation of the Corridor Evaluation and Dakota Improvements. Address all grading, base, and pavement features including subcuts, removals, mainline pavement and shoulders at representative locations. Complete work in accordance with and addressing the categories listed in the outline in Section 830 of the MnDOT Pavement Design Manual. Do not address foundation design recommendations in the Draft Pavement Recommendation, as those are addressed in the Foundation Reports.

Coordinate all work with the State Project Manager as appropriate. Revise and resubmit pavement designs based on comments from State and external partners.

1. Deliverable: One electronic report 2. Format: All files submitted electronically. Report written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension).

Complete package in Adobe Acrobat (pdf extension) and pdf should be created by using Adobe Acrobat to convert the source file to a pdf whenever possible with the use of scanned pages minimized if not eliminate with the exception of actual signature pages.

3. Standard: Refer to the following documents: Work Type Definition 6.8, Solid Stem Auger Drilling, found at www.dot.state.mn.us/consult/worktypes.html ; Work Type Definition 6.9, Soils Analysis and Recommendations, found at www.dot.state.mn.us/consult/worktypes.html ; MnDOT Pavement Design Manual www.dot.state.mn.us/materials/pvmtdesign/manual.html ;

4. State Review: 7 calendar days 5. Contractor Update: 7 calendar days

12.1 Conduct Roadway Borings/Field Work and Laboratory Testing for Alternatives (P6 Activity MDR0500) Determine the number of roadway borings needed to evaluate pavement needs for the Corridor Evaluation and Dakota Improvements. Conduct roadway borings, consisting of the following tasks:

33

www.dot.state.mn.us/materials/pvmtdesign/manual.html

www.dot.state.mn.us/consult/worktypes.html

www.dot.state.mn.us/consult/worktypes.html

http://www.dot.state.mn.us/materials/tcontract.html



1. Receive permits on State, County, or City owned property. Notification must be given to the State Project Manager prior to commencing work.

2. Locate and stake proposed boring locations in the field. Meet with the State Project Manager to review boring locations. The meeting will be to review locations, especially borings that had to be relocated from the coordinates specified to avoid utilities.

3. Clear utilities using the Gopher State One Call System. 4. Locate and stake the actual boring locations. Due to utility conflicts it may be necessary to move the boring

locations. Provide comments on the boring logs giving distance and direction that borings were moved with regard to the staked location.

5. Provide traffic control (including flaggers) where necessary. Conduct work in accordance with Metro Traffic guidelines, the MN MUTCD and the State Lane Closure Manual. Consult the State Metro Traffic website for guidance on allowable lane closures www.dot.state.mn.us/metro/trafficeng/laneclosure/index.html .

6. For any necessary lane closures fill out and submit the Metro Lane Closure Form www.dot.state.mn.us/metro/trafficeng/laneclosure/files/Lane_Closure_Form.pdf .

7. Perform auger borings on proposed roadway alignments. All borings through existing pavement will be backfilled and patched with the same material, i.e. bituminous road then a bituminous patch.

8. Collect a minimum of two samples from each soil type per roadway for laboratory tests [Atterberg limits (Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, Plasticity Index) on representative material samples, particle size (full gradation and gradation of material passing the #10 sieve), and organic content]. Collect samples for organic content for any material with suspected organic content above 5%. Submit these samples to an AMRL accredited lab for testing.

9. Classify soils according to the State Triaxial Textural Soils Classification System see www.dot.state.mn.us/materials/gbmanual.html .

10. Produce an electronic boring log file for each boring. See www.dot.state.mn.us/metro/materials/soils.html to obtain the current copy of the electronic boring log file.

11. Produce weekly updates on work progress (e-mail reports). 12. Attend and report at progress meetings as necessary.

12.2 Prepare Pavement Recommendation for Alternatives (P6 Activity MDR0900) Prepare a draft pavement recommendation for the purposes of the Dakota Improvements and Study Alternatives Evaluations. Design all bituminous and/or concrete pavement structures using the most recent MnPAVE software version found at www.dot.state.mn.us/materials/pvmtdesign/software.html .

13 Drainage Overview Map (Source Type Code 1141) Assumptions:

a. The project will need to manage runoff from increased impervious surface and provide rate control according to State and local requirements. Stormwater treatment will meet all applicable water quality standards of the Minnesota Pollution Contract Agency (MPCA) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and watershed districts and watershed management organizations in the corridor

b. HydroCAD, XPSWMM, GEOPAK Drainage, Flowmaster, CulvertMaster, HY8 and HEC-RAS are acceptable software for the hydrologic and hydraulic modeling of the drainage infrastructure and the stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) for the existing condition and preferred alternative in the Dakota improvement area.

c. Drainage Overview map will be prepared for up to four alternatives. One round of revisions for each map is included in this scope.

13.1 Initial Drainage Overview Map for Alternatives Evaluation (P6 Activity AAA1200) Activities include in this work package:

1. AAA1200 Initial Drainage Overview Map 2. PND1000 Preliminary Stormwater Treatment Design 3. PND1010 Request Soil Borings/Piezometers

34

www.dot.state.mn.us/materials/pvmtdesign/software.html

www.dot.state.mn.us/metro/materials/soils.html

www.dot.state.mn.us/materials/gbmanual.html

www.dot.state.mn.us/metro/trafficeng/laneclosure/files/Lane_Closure_Form.pdf

www.dot.state.mn.us/metro/trafficeng/laneclosure/index.html



1. Prepare drainage overview maps for the alternatives listed in the Study Alternatives Evaluation and Dakota Improvements Alternatives Evaluation sections herein. The level of detail needed is just enough to describe and compute where the water is coming from, where the water is going to, how large the storm water treatment facilities need to be and where they are located, including if they need to be located in areas where R/W must be acquired, and enough detail to compute costs in the LWD cost estimates. The storm water treatment facilities will be shown on the preliminary geometric layout alternatives.

2. Collect and review all applicable data and permitting requirements relating to water resources. Prepare regulatory criteria matrix with the watershed district and watershed management organization Rules/Standards and the MPCA NPDES permit requirements and submit to State for review. Data to be collected includes: Stormwater Rules/Standards As-built plans or other record drawings for the trunk highway, and adjacent roadways (update base files as appropriate), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) floodplain, MnDNR Public Waters Inventory, National Wetland Inventory, impaired waters, special waters, contaminated soil areas, groundwater table elevations where treatment areas are proposed, karst areas, Emergency Response Areas (ERAs), Drinking Water Supply Management Areas (DWSMAs) including the degree of vulnerability of each, Bridge Inventory (provided by State), Contour base mapping (provided by State), GIS & CAD files including R/W, municipal utilities (storm drain and sanitary sewer) (update base files as appropriate), and Hydinfra data.

3. Review existing televising and inspection reports on existing storm sewer infrastructure within project R/W. Provide list of locations where video is missing or is 8 years or more old. Where interchanges are proposed, no video is needed. Coordinate with State Water Resource Engineering (WRE) Staff to determine preservation needs.

4. Meet with regulatory agencies to confirm permitting requirements and design approach. Assumes four meetings attended by two Contractor WRE staff.

5. Perform a field walk to review existing conditions and prepare survey request.

6. Prepare existing conditions drainage area map, including available existing storm drain and culvert infrastructure, hydrologic boundaries, existing stormwater treatment BMPs, and surface flow direction.

7. Prepare hydraulic model of existing conditions to use as a base line for the design of the proposed condition.

8. For each of the build alternatives:

a. Determine the volume of stormwater treatment required, type of BMPs needed to meet treatment requirement, potential storm water BMP locations and sizes, as required to meet watershed management organization, watershed district and NPDES permit requirements. Review and discuss potential BMP locations with State staff.

b. Review proposed ditch locations and update based on review of preliminary cross sections.

c. Analyze existing bridges for compliance with State Drainage Manual criteria.

d. Perform preliminary stormsewer and culvert sizing sufficient to verify feasibility of BMP locations, drainage patterns, and roadway elevations. Does not include drafting of trunk line or culvert profiles.

e. Review soils and geological features and evaluate potential BMP locations for limitations to BMP types (infiltration in particular). Assess likelihood of impacts to groundwater. Request Soil Borings/Piezometers.

f. Prepare preliminary cost estimates for each BMP and proposed preliminary storm sewer.

35



g. Identify R/W needs for identified BMPs.

9. State will provide existing contour data at two-foot contour intervals or better.

10. State and the cities surrounding the corridor will provide GIS files, TAMS, HydInfra, As-builts and any other available data for the existing drainage system, including pipe and invert information, drainage features (ponds, etc.); and existing drainage boundary shape files as available. Contractor will identify the areas needed.

1. Deliverable: Drainage overview maps. One electronic copy of each drainage overview map alternative with the storm water treatment facilities transferred onto the preliminary geometric layout alternatives. Drainage Report with summary matrix to document design criteria, correspondence and decisions, modeling and calculations.

2. Format: Electronic copies are to be delivered in both Adobe Acrobat (pdf extension) and Microstation/GEOPAK formats.

3. Standard: State standards including, CADD Level 2 standards, State Special Provisions, State Technical Memoranda, State Standard Specifications for Construction, State Drainage Manual, and State Road Design Manual.

4. State Review: 14 calendar days 5. Contractor Update: 14 calendar days

13.1.1 Identify Floodplain Impacts for Alternatives Collect preliminary information from desktop resources to identify if floodplain issues exist within the corridor. Compile this information into the Preliminary Environmental Investigation to aid in corridor evaluation and Dakota improvements alternatives review.

14 Cost Estimates (Source Type Code 1003) Prepare cost estimates for the alternatives listed in the Dakota Improvements Alternatives Evaluation section.

14.1 Draft Preliminary LWD Estimates (P6 Activity AAA1040) Prepare cost estimates for each of the draft preliminary geometric layouts. Use State Metro’s LWD cost estimate template and methodology. Cost estimates for bridges may use the dollars per square foot method. Coordinate with State Bridge Office in determining the appropriate unit pricing for the estimate.

1. Deliverable: One electronic copy of the LWD estimates for each alternative. 2. Format: Electronic files in Microsoft Excel 2013 (xlsx extension) 3. Standard: State Metro’s LWD method guidelines 4. State and FHWA Review: 14 calendar days 5. Contractor Update: See final preliminary geometric layouts task.

14.2 Final Preliminary LWD Estimates (P6 Activity AAA1045) Prepare cost estimates for each of the preliminary geometric layouts. Use State Metro’s LWD cost estimate template and methodology. Scoping cost estimates for bridges will use the Form A/B process. Coordinate with State Bridge Office.

1. Deliverable: One electronic copy of the LWD estimates for each alternative. 2. Format: Electronic files in Microsoft Excel 2013 (xlsx extension) 3. Standard: State Metro’s LWD method guidelines 4. State and FHWA Review: 14 calendar days 5. Contractor Update: See final preliminary geometric layouts task.

15 Bridge Evaluation (Source Type Code 1003) Contractor will be required to do the preliminary engineering and cost estimating for any modifications to bridges or new

36



bridges that may be required as part of the study and Dakota improvements alternatives analysis.

Create a bridge evaluation report with General Plan and Elevation (G, P, & E) sheets for up to six bridges that represent a most likely bridge type that would be constructed including recommendations on foundation type. Where soil borings are not available, use information from the plans of existing bridges in the area. A preliminary bridge plan is not required. Note that bridge cost estimating is covered under the cost estimating task.

State will provide existing bridge structure reports, inspection reports, page two of the Bridge Repair Scoping Reports and maintenance reports. Contractor will complete page 3 of the Bridge Repair Scoping Report for all bridges along the corridor. State will provide scope of work to rehab bridges within the project limits that are not otherwise impacted by geometric changes due to the project.

15.1 Bridge Scoping and Structure Determination for Dakota Improvements Alternatives This task involves these P6 Activities:

a. STR2000 Receive Form A b. STR2005 Identify Structures and Determine Bridge Work Type c. STR2010 Receive ABC Stage 2 d. STR2020 Hydraulic Assessment e. STR2030 Prepare Form B f. STR2040 Bridge Estimating Assessment g. STR2050 Distribute and Document Form B

Prepare bridge evaluation reports for the concept geometric layout Dakota improvements alternatives described herein. Each report will detail geometric constraints, effects on required clearances, loading issues, constructability review and impacts to potential staging of construction. Ensure the design life of the bridge will match that of the approach roadway. Include any effects that traffic staging may have on rehabilitation or replacement alternatives.

Prepare bridge evaluation report for the preliminary geometric layout Dakota improvements alternatives described herein. Each report will detail geometric constraints, cost estimates, effects on required clearances, and reasoning behind selection of structure type.

1. Deliverable: Preliminary bridge evaluation reports. One electronic copy of each impacted bridge. Bridge Repair Scoping Report for all bridges along the corridor

2. Format: Report written in Microsoft Word 2013 document (docx extension). Complete package in Adobe Acrobat (pdf extension) and pdf will be created by using Adobe Acrobat to convert the source file to a pdf whenever possible with the use of scanned pages minimized if not eliminate with the exception of actual signature pages. Supply source files in MicroStation/GEOPAK formats.

3. Standard: State standards including, CADD Level 2 standards, State Special Provisions, State Technical Memoranda, State Standard Specifications for Construction, AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, State LRFD Bridge Design Manual, MnDOT Bridge Preservation and Improvement Guidelines Fiscal Year 2016 – 2020, AASHTO Manual for Bridge Evaluation , and State Road Design Manual.

4. State Review: 14 calendar days 5. Contractor Update: 14 calendar days.

16 Cross Sections and Construction Limits of Dakota Improvements Alternatives (Source Type Code 1200) (P6 Activities LIM1000 & LIM1010)

Prepare two submittals of cross sections for the alternatives described in the Dakota Improvements Alternatives Evaluation section herein. The level of detail needed is just enough to describe and compute where retaining walls may be required, and construction limits at any points where it is believed the work will require additional R/W, and enough detail to compute costs in the LWD cost estimates. Cross sections for the entire length of the project or earthwork quantities are not required for this task. Show retaining walls on the preliminary geometric layout alternatives. Create a MicroStation construction limit file that only shows construction limits that go beyond the State R/W, and then show these construction

37



limits on the preliminary geometric layout alternatives.

1. Deliverable: Two submittals of cross sections. One electronic copy of cross section plan set for each alternative with retaining walls and construction limits transferred onto the preliminary geometric layout alternatives.

2. Format: Electronic copies in plan sheet form are to be delivered in both Adobe Acrobat (pdf extension) and MicroStation/GEOPAK formats.

3. Standard: State standards including, CADD Level 2 standards, State Special Provisions, State Technical Memoranda, State Standard Specifications for Construction, State Drainage Manual, and State Road Design Manual.

4. State Review: 14 calendar days 5. Contractor Update: 14 calendar days.

17 Value Engineering (Source Type Code 1068) (P6 Activity VEA1010 & VEA1020) State will hire a separate consultant to perform Value Engineering (VE) on this project. This task will be performed prior to the completion of the Dakota improvements alternatives evaluation. The VE occurs over five business days. Contractor will participate in the Value Engineering and provide the following items:

a. Provide layout, graphics, cost estimates, schedules, preliminary construction staging, and other project data request by State for use during the Value Engineering (VE) study.

b. Present an overview of the project to the VE Study team if requested by State (assumes two Contractor staff attending meeting).

c. Answer questions from the VE Team as needed during the VE study (may require multiple Contractor staff and time to produce rough concept drawings and cost estimates of changes requested).

d. Attend the final VE Study presentation if requested by State (assumes two Contractor staff attending). e. Review the VE Study recommendations and provide explanations for accepting or rejecting the VE

recommendations, if requested by State.

1. Deliverable: Attend VE Study workshops. Prepare rough concept drawings and cost estimates, as needed. 2. Format: Adobe Acrobat (pdf extension) for any products produced. 3. Standard: Intentionally left blank. 4. State: Intentionally left blank. 5. Contractor: Intentionally left blank.

18 Wetland Delineation (Source Type Code 1071) Contractor is responsible for doing the level 1 wetland delineation for the project.

18.1 Perform Level 1 Field Prep (Wetlands) (P6 Activity WTL2000) Meet with State PM and wetland staff to discuss project approach, timelines, and scope for Level 1 wetland delineations. Identify all aquatic resources within and adjacent to the project limits, including lakes, streams, ponds, ditches and wetlands. Complete desktop mapping including a Level 1 wetland delineation. Desktop mapping is defined as mapping the wetlands by reviewing existing documentation only from your desk and not doing any field observations. Resources used to locate basins for Level 1 Delineations could include (but are not limited to): National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) mapping, MnDNR Public Water Inventory (PWI) mapping, MnDNR Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) mapping, County Soil Survey mapping, Floodplain Mapping, United States Geological Survey (USGS) Topographic Mapping, Current Aerial Photos and Historic Aerial Photos.

1. Deliverable: Assemble all documents containing existing information about wetlands and produce an electronic map showing location and preliminary boundary of wetlands.

2. Format: Electronic 3. Standard: USACE 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual and its Regional Supplement. 4. Schedule: Refer to project schedule.

38



18.2 Perform Level 1 Field Work (Wetlands) (P6 Activity WTL2010) Field review level 1 aquatic resource mapping. Confirm desktop delineation mapping with a field walk to review identified areas. The field review can occur outside of the growing season, but apparent vegetation and topography will be analyzed to determine if boundary lines were drawn in the correct location or make changes as needed.

1. Deliverable: Perform the field walk. Update hardcopy delineation maps. 2. Format: Hardcopy 3. Standard: Aerial photo mapping. 4. Schedule: Refer to project schedule. This task must be completed before permits are submitted to permitting

agencies.

18.3 Perform Level 1 Post Field (Wetlands) (P6 Activity WTL2020) Update Level 1 mapping to reflect field review. Level 1 wetland delineations will be reviewed by State’s wetland staff before the permitting agency coordination meeting.

1. Deliverable: Level 1 Wetland Delineation Mapping, including all source files with the MSExcel wetland impact table, minus impact data, from the USACE/WCA Joint Application.

2. Format: Mapping to be done using State’s Level 1 Basic CADD Data Delivery Specifications and ArcMap compatible shapefile of the aquatic resources.

3. Standard: USACE 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual and its Regional Supplement, State Surveying and Mapping Manual.

4. Schedule: Refer to project schedule. This task must be completed before permits are submitted to permitting agencies.

5. State Review: State will take five business days to review deliverable before permitting agency coordination meeting.

18.4 Determine Wetland Impacts (P6 Activity WTL2030) Avoid and minimize wetland impacts with the proposed designs. Document how wetland impacts were avoided with each of the alternatives. Determine the impacts associated with alternatives (if any) and suggest a mitigation plan. Prepare a matrix summary showing the proposed impacts and mitigation required for the alternatives.

Future work to be included in future amendments (Phase 2) This work is optional work that may be added via contract amendments as initial Phase 1 activities are nearing

completion. This work is shown here to demonstrate the tasks that might occur. The tasks below are not included in the Phase 1 price proposal. Contractor will prepare a separate cost for Phase 2. Contractor to use 25,000 hours and divide those hours throughout the tasks 19-59. This cost will be used as a basis for negotiating optional tasks for Phase 2.

19 Prepare Preliminary Schedule (Source Type Code 1003) Create and maintain a schedule to complete all remaining tasks leading to project turn in.

Activities include in this work package: a. FDB1030 Prepare Preliminary Schedule

20 Public Involvement Plan (Source Type Code 0054) Implement the Public Involvement Plan that was developed in Phase I and complete report of post project analysis.

Activities include in this work package: a. PIP1060 PIP Implementation and Management b. PIP1070 PIP Resolution, Review, and Regeneration

39



c. PIP1080 Post PIP Analysis

21 Project Funding Application Assistance (Source Type Code 6244) Activities included in this work package include:

a. CSR2020 Project Funding Application Assistance

22 Early Notification Memo (Source Type Code 1071) Activities included in this work package:

a. ENM3000 Prepare and Distribute ENM

23 Initial Design Project Baseline (Source Type Code 1003) Complete the scoping report and prepare the preliminary design package.

Activities included in this work package: a. AAA1080 Draft Construction Risk Management b. AAA1085 Construction Risk Management c. AAA1180 Final Layout Staging Alternatives Analysis d. AAA1190 Preliminary Design Package e. AAA1340 ITS Layout f. AAA1350 Signing Layout Preferred Alternative g. AAA1380 R/W Report h. AAA1390 Quantities Based Estimate i. FDB1010 Prepare Scoping Worksheets j. FDB1020 Prepare Scoping Document, PMP, TPCE

24 Finalize Visual Quality Manual (Source Type Code 1071) Contractor will finalize the draft visual quality manual used to develop study and Dakota improvements alternatives for the preferred Dakota Improvements alternative.

Activities included in this work package: a. VQM1050 Finalize Visual Quality Manual

25 Design Memorandum (Source Type Code 1150) Prepare and process for review the draft design memorandum. The draft design memorandum is to be done for the two highest ranking layouts identified in the Dakota Improvements Alternatives Evaluation.

Activities included in this work package: a. DME0500 Draft Design Memo in District b. DME1000 Prepare & Approve Design Memo in District

26 Noise Analysis for Dakota Improvements Design (Source Type Code 1071) Activities included in this work package:

a. NOI1050 Model Noise Mitigation for Preferred Alternative b. NOI1055 Prepare and Hold Public Noise Meeting c. NOI1060 Draft Noise Report d. NOI1080 Incorporate Comments & Prepare Final Noise Report e. NOI1090 Solicit Benefited Receptors & Document Results of Noise Solicitation

27 Air Quality Analysis (Source Type Code 1071) Perform air quality analysis. This work must be completed by a Contractor approved for Air Quality Analysis on the State

40



Pre-Qualification Program.

Activities included in this work package: a. AIR1020 Develop Receptor Sites and Ambient Background Monitoring b. AIR1040 Air Quality Modeling and Draft Report c. AIR1090 Incorporate Comments & Prepare Final Air Report

28 Section 6(f) (Source Type Code 1071) Prepare write up of section 6(f) impacts for an environmental document.

Activities included in this work package: a. SSF1000 Prepare and Review Section 6(f)

29 Section 4(f) (Source Type Code 1071) Prepare write up of section 4(f) impacts for an environmental document.

Activities included in this work package: a. SFF1000 Prepare and Review Section 4(f)

30 Environmental Document (Source Type Code 1071) During Phase I Contractor will coordinate with State and FHWA regarding the type of environmental document that will be required. At the publishing of this RFP, it is expected that the environmental document will be a hybrid environmental assessment. A hybrid EA includes full environmental impacts analysis and clearance for the preferred Dakota Improvements alternative, and footprint-level environmental impacts and clearance for the remainder of the TH 13 corridor. A table summarizing a hybrid EA will be provided by the state. Complete the environmental documentation for the project.

Activities included in this work package: a. EAW1000 Prepare EA Statement of Purpose and Need b. EAW1020 Prepare EA Document c. EAW1040 Revise EA Document based off of OES Comments d. EAW1070 Revise EA Document based off of FHWA Comments e. EAW1080 Obtain District, OES, FHWA Signatures for EA f. EAW1095 Revise EA based off of Public Comments g. EAW1100 Prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions h. EAW1120 Revise Findings of Fact and Conclusions based off of OES Comments i. EAW1145 Revise Findings of Fact and Conclusions based off of FHWA Comments j. EAW1150 OES and District Sign FOFC and Request FONSI from FHWA k. EAW1170 Public Notice of FONSI and Negative Declaration

31 NPDES Stormwater Discharge Permit (Source Type Code 1071) Activities included in this work package:

a. NPP1040 Prepare NPDES Permit Application

32 Wetland Delineations (Source Type Code 1071) Activities included in this work package:

a. WTL2040 Early Coordination Meeting with Regulators (Wetlands) b. WTL2050 Perform Level 2 Field Work (Wetlands) c. WTL2060 Perform Level 2 Post Field (Wetlands) d. WTL2070 Write Report Documentation (Wetlands)

33 Wetland/WCA & Aquatic Resources (404/401/Section 10) (Source Type Code 1071)

41



Activities included in this work package: a. WTP0900 Prepare & Submit Draft Combined Permit Application b. WTP1000 Coordinate Review of Draft Permit by COE c. WTP1010 Prepare & Submit Combined Permit Application d. WTP1030 Respond to COE Draft Permit Questions e. WTP1040 Permit Application Complete f. WTP1050 Process 401 MPCA Review g. WTP1060 Process 404 Permit (Specify GP, LOP, SIP) COE Review h. WTP1070 Prepare WCA Notification i. WTP1080 MnDOT Receives & signs 401/404/Section 10

34 MnDNR Public Waters Permit (Source Type Code 1071) Activities included in this work package:

a. PWP1000 Coordinate Permitting Needs With MnDNR b. PWP1010 Prepare & Submit MnDNR Public Waters Permit Application c. PWP1020 Public Waters Review by MnDNR d. PWP1030 MnDNR Public Waters Permit Received

35 Watershed District Permit (Source Type Code 1071) Activities included in this work package:

a. WDP0900 Coordinate With Watersheds b. WDP1000 Prepare & Submit Watershed District Permit Applications c. WDP1010 Permit Review by Watershed Districts d. WDP1020 Watershed District Permits Received

36 Traffic Studies (Source Type Code 1016) Activities included in this work package:

a. TFM1050 Preferred Alternative Modeling (with Geometric Enhancements) b. ICE1000 Prepare Intersection Control Evaluation

37 Mainline Staging Alternatives Modeling (Source Type Code 1016) Activities included in this work package:

a. MTM1010 Construction Conditions Mainline Road Modeling b. MTM1020 Mitigation Approval c. MTM1030 Complete Mainline Traffic Mitigation Report

38 Local Traffic Mitigation (Source Type Code 1016) Local Traffic Mitigation is for during construction of the Dakota Improvements. Activities included in this work package:

a. LTM1010 Existing Local Traffic Conditions Report b. LTM1020 Existing Conditions Local Road Modeling c. LTM1030 Construction Conditions Local Road Modeling d. LTM1040 Select Locations for Further Study e. LTM1050 Data Collection at Selected Locations f. LTM1060 Mitigation Development & Modeling g. LTM1070 Mitigation Approval h. LTM1080 Complete Local Traffic Mitigation Report

39 Transportation Management Plan (TMP) (Source Type Code 1254) Activities included in this work package:

a. TMP1000 Prepare TMP

40 Layouts (Source Type Code 1140)

42



Activities included in this work package: a. LAY1050 Prepare Final Geometric Layout & Profile b. LAY1075 Revise and Sign Geometric Layout by District c. LAY1080 State Design Engineer Approve Geometric Layout

41 R/W Construction Limits (Source Type Code 1200) Activities included in this work package:

a. LIM1020 Prepare & Submit Construction Limits b. LIM1030 COE's Cross Sections & Narratives for Wetland Impacts

42 Municipal Consent (Source Type Code 1140) Activities included in this work package:

a. MNC1000 Prepare & Send Municipal Consent Submittal Package to City b. MNC1005 Schedule Public Hearing c. MNC1010 Conduct Public Hearing for Municipal Consent by City d. MNC1020 Pass Resolution Approving/Disapproving Municipal Consent by City e. MNC2000 Appeal of Municipal Consent

43 Hydraulics Design (Source Type Code 1141) Activities included in this work package:

a. HYD0900 Inspection and Cleaning of Stormwater Features b. HYD1000 Preliminary Hydraulics Design/Recommendation c. HYD1010 Final Hydraulics Design/Recommendation d. HYD1020 Develop Staging for Temporary Drainage e. HYD1030 Prepare SWPPP and Review Erosion Control Plans

44 ADA Recommendations (Source Type Code 1250) Activities included in this work package:

a. ADA1010 Conduct ADA Field Walk and Prepare Draft Recommendations b. ADA1020 District Review of ADA Field Walk Recommendations

45 Materials Design Recommendation (Source Type Code 1180) Activities included in this work package:

a. MDR1000 Conduct Roadway Borings/Field Work b. MDR1010 Prepare Pavement Alternatives/PDM/LCCA c. MDR1030 Review of LCCA by Maplewood/Industry (by MnDOT) d. MDR1050 Prepare Pavement Recommendation e. MDR1060 Prepare MDR

46 Bridge Hydraulics Letter (Source Type Code 1141) Activities included in this work package:

a. BHL1000 Receive Bridge Survey Data b. BHL1010 Bridge Research & Field Review c. BHL1020 Bridge Hydraulic Modeling d. BHL1030 Bridge Risk Assessment e. BHL1040 Write Bridge Hydraulic Letter f. BHL1050 Review & Finalize Bridge Hydraulic Letter g. BHL1060 Deck Drain Study h. BHL1070 Scour Confirmation Letter

47 Foundations Analysis and Design Report (Source Type Code 1190) Activities included in this work package:

43



a. BFR1010 Receive Substructure Locations for Geotechnical Investigation b. BFR1020 Develop Geotechnical Investigation Plan c. BFR1030 Perform Geotechnical Investigation d. BFR1040 Perform Geotechnical Lab Analysis & Logging e. BFR1050 Prepare Geotechnical Recommendation/Report f. BFR2000 Perform Geotechnical Investigation (revise if needed) g. BFR2010 Perform Geotechnical Lab Analysis & Logging Final Design (revise if needed) h. BFR2020 Update Geotechnical Recommendation/Report (revise if needed)

48 Preliminary Bridge Plans (Source Type Code 1250) Activities included in this work package:

a. PBP2000 Receive Form B b. PBP2010 Conduct Site Visit c. PBP2020 Receive Roadway Design and Survey Data d. PBP2030 Geotechnical Coordination e. PBP2040 Hydraulic Coordination f. PBP2050 Finalize Bridge Aesthetic Recommendation g. PBP2060 Railroad Coordination (If Necessary) h. PBP2070 Structure Recommendation i. PBP2080 Structure Type Study Completed j. PBP2105 Receive Final Hydraulic Letter k. PBP2090 Preliminary Bridge Plan Preparation l. PBP2100 Receive & Plot Bridge Borings m. PBP2110 Distribute Bridge Plan, Borings, Foundation Report to Regional Construction Engineer n. PBP2120 Distribute Bridge Plan to Project Manager for Final Review o. PBP2125 District Review of Final Preliminary Bridge Plan p. PBP2130 Receive Bridge Foundation Recommendation q. PBP2140 Check and Revise Preliminary Bridge Plans r. PBP2150 Obtain State Bridge Engineers' Signature Preliminary s. PBP2160 Distribute Signed Preliminary Bridge Plan and Update Documentation t. PBP2170 Preliminary Bridge Estimate & District Letter

49 Final Bridge Plans (Source Type Code 1250) Activities included in this work package:

a. FBP1000 Receive Signed Preliminary Bridge Plan b. FBP1005 Bridge General Coordination c. FBP1031 Prepare 30% Final Bridge Plans d. FBP1061 Prepare 60% Final Bridge Plans e. FBP1071 Draft Bridge Plan to District for Time and Traffic f. FBP1091 Prepare 95% Final Bridge Plans g. FBP1100 Bridge Specs h. FBP1120 Obtain State Bridge Engineer's Signature - Final i. FBP1130 Bridge Final Estimate

50 Foundation Recommendation (Source Type Code 1190) Activities included in this work package:

a. FRF1000 Prepare Bridge Foundation Recommendation

51 Geotechnical Investigation (Source Type Code 1190) Activities included in this work package:

a. FDR1010 Develop Geotechnical Investigation Plan b. FDR1020 Perform Geotechnical Investigation

44



c. FDR1030 Perform Geotechnical Lab Analysis & Logging d. FDR1040 Prepare Geotechnical Recommendation/Report e. FDR1050 Perform Geotechnical Investigation Final Design f. FDR1060 Update Geotechnical Recommendation/Report

52 Subsurface Utility Engineering (Source Type Code 1195) Activities included in this work package:

a. SUE2000 SUE Investigation XY Mapping Only b. SUE2010 SUE Investigation for Design

53 Utility Coordination (Source Type Code 1195) Activities included in this work package:

a. UTI1000 Send Plan Information & Conduct Utility Information Meetings b. UTI1010 Conduct Utility Design Meeting c. UTI1020 Obtain & Review Utility Relocation Plans, Schedules & Estimate & Permit Application by Utility

Company d. UTI1025 Conduct Utility Design Meeting (2nd) e. UTI1027 Obtain & Review Utility Relocation Plans, Schedules & Estimate & Permit Application by Utility

Company (2nd) f. UTI1030 Prepare & Send Utility Verification Letters g. UTI1040 Verification Letter Responses h. UTI1050 Review Utility Permit Application by District i. UTI1060 Prepare & Approve Utility Permit by CO Utilities Unit j. UTI1070 Prepare & Send Utility Notice & Orders

54 Final Design Road Plans (Source Type Code 1250) Activities included in this work package:

a. PLN3000 Prepare 30% Plans b. PLN6000 Prepare 60% Plans c. PLN6600 Incorporate Functional Group Plans d. PLN9125 Prepare 100% District Plans e. PLN9250 Incorporate Functional Group Comments f. PLN9500 Finalize 100% District Plans

55 Final Design Traffic Plans (Source Type Code 1250) Activities included in this work package:

a. TCP2000 Prepare Preliminary Staging Plan b. TCP2010 Prepare Final Staging Plan c. TCP2020 Prepare Traffic Control Plan d. TPM1000 Prepare Pavement Marking Plan e. SGN1010 Prepare & Review 60% Signing Plan f. SGN1030 Prepare & Review 100% Signing Plan & Special Provisions g. TSG1000 Prepare Signal Plan h. TSG1010 Prepare Signal Special Provisions & Estimate i. TLT1000 Prepare Lighting Plan j. TLT1010 Prepare Lighting Special Provisions & Estimate k. TMS1000 Prepare and Review 30% TMS Plan l. TMS1010 Prepare and Review 60% TMS Plan m. TMS1020 Prepare and Review 30% TMS Plan n. TMS1030 Prepare and Review 30% TMS Plan o. TTT1000 Prepare Time and Traffic

45



56 Special Provisions (Source Type Code 1297) Activities included in this work package:

a. PRO1000 Prepare Special Provisions

57 Project Turn In (Source Type Code 1250) Activities included in this work package:

a. TUR1030 Prepare Final Construction Cost Estimate by District

58 District Land Surveys (Source Type Code 1032) Activities included in this work package:

a. SDL1000 Conduct Public Land Surveys (PLS) b. SDL1010 Conduct Existing R/W Surveys c. SDL1020 Conduct As-Built Alignment Surveys d. SDL1030 Conduct Existing Properties Surveys

59 Design Surveys (Source Type Code 1040) Activities included in this work package:

a. SDE1000 Annotate & Fill Voids on Photo Map b. SDE1010 Conduct Topography/DTM Survey c. SDE1020 Conduct Drainage Survey d. SDE1030 Conduct Utilities Survey e. SDE1040 Conduct Bridge Survey


46

Exhibit A – Scope of Work and Deliverables General ...45 Materials Design Recommendation (Source...

Documents

Transcript of Exhibit A – Scope of Work and Deliverables General ...45 Materials Design Recommendation (Source...