Greater Minnesota Transportation Alternatives Solicitations/tapsolicitation/... · Click here to...

Transportation Alternatives Solicitation Full Application 1

Greater Minnesota Transportation Alternatives Solicitation

2017‐2018 Full Application


Table of Contents

Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................................ 2

2017‐2018 Solicitation Timeline ................................................................................................................. 3

Related Documents ..................................................................................................................................... 3

Transportation Alternatives Solicitation Full Application ........................................................................... 4

General Information ............................................................................................................................... 4

Project Information ............................................................................................................................. 4

Contact Information ............................................................................................................................ 4

Project Budget ........................................................................................................................................ 5

Table A – Eligible Items ....................................................................................................................... 5

Table B – Non‐Eligible Items ............................................................................................................... 5

Total Project Budget ........................................................................................................................... 5

ATP Project Evaluation ............................................................................................................................ 6

MPO Project Evaluation ........................................................................................................................ 12

Sponsoring Agency Resolution ............................................................................................................. 13

Resolution Agreeing to Maintain Facility .............................................................................................. 15

Resolution of Support from Participating Local Unit of Government – N/A ........................................ 17

Application Checklist ............................................................................................................................. 18

Signatures ............................................................................................................................................. 19

Exhibits: Other Enclosures .................................................................................................................... 20

Notes: The solicitation for transportation alternatives funding for the seven‐county Twin Cities metropolitan

area (Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott and Washington counties) is conducted by the

Metropolitan Council and the Transportation Advisory Board. For more information about the metro area

solicitation, visit the Met Council website.

Click here to enter name of project


2017‐2018 Solicitation Timeline

Monday, October 2nd, 2017 – Announce solicitation / call for letter of intent.

Tuesday, October 31st, 2017 – Deadline for applicants to submit letters of intent.

Friday, November 17th, 2017 – Deadline for RDO / MPO / district review of letters of intent.

Recommendation to proceed forward with full application given to applicants.

Monday, November 20th, 2017 – Official start of full application period.

Friday, January 12th, 2018 – Deadline for applicants to submit full applications.

Monday, April 16th, 2018 – Deadline for ATPs to select projects for inclusion in the State Transportation

Improvement Program for fiscal years 2019 to 2022.

Related Documents

Transportation Alternatives Solicitation Letter of Intent Worksheet – The document includes

information on the letter of intent review process and a worksheet to assist with completing the online

letter of intent form.

Transportation Alternatives Solicitation Full Application – The document is the full application form for

the transportation alternatives solicitation.



Transportation Alternatives Solicitation Full Application

General Information

Notes: If your overall project contains non‐eligible or non‐transportation related elements, please mention the

entire project in the brief project description, but concentrate the application, budget, etc. on the elements that

are eligible and transportation related.

Sponsoring Agencies, if sponsoring for another project applicant, are advised to have dialog with the project

applicant to ascertain the level of commitment by the applicant to follow through on delivery of the project,

including the potential use of Eminent Domain.

Project Information

Name of project:

Rochester 2022 Bundled Trail Project

Project is located in which area transportation partnership(s): ATP 6

Project is located in which county(ies): Olmsted County

Brief project description: The project is a bundled project to address gaps in the Rochester trail system in three

separate locations.

Contact Information

Project applicant (not Sponsor): City of Rochester

Contact person (from applicant agency / organization): Dillon Dombrovski, PE

Mailing address: 201 4th Street SE, Room 108

City: Rochester State: Minnesota Zip: 55904

Phone: 507‐328‐2421 Fax: 507‐328‐2401 Email: [email protected]

Sponsoring agency (if different than applicant): N/A

Contact person (from sponsoring agency, if different than applicant): N/A

Mailing address: N/A

City: N/A State: N/A Zip: N/A

Phone: N/A Fax: N/A Email: N/A



Project Budget

Notes: Please identify what costs will be incurred to carry out the proposed project, using the following budget

categories as a guideline. Where appropriate, break down your costs by units purchased. For example: number

of acres, cubic yards of fill, etc. Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary.

Cost estimates are to be submitted in year of construction dollars (FY 2022).

Table A – Eligible Items

Table B – Non‐Eligible Items1

Total Project Budget

1. Total cost of proposed project (Total Table A + Total Table B): $1,678,000

2. Items not eligible for Alternative funding (Total Table B): $410,000

3. Total eligible costs (minimum $250,000)2 (Total Table A): $1,268,000

4. Applicant’s contribution toward the eligible alternative project costs (20% minimum)3: $323,000

5. Total amount requested in transportation alternatives funds (#3 minus #4): $945,000

1 Includes Right of Way or Land Acquisition (e.g. appraisal fees, legal fees, etc.), Administrative Costs (e.g. preliminary and construction

engineering and contingencies) 2 See ATP Project Evaluation section of this document for any additional requirements related to project costs

3 The applicant’s contribution must be a minimum of 20% (cannot be “in-kind”). If the project is let for an amount above the proposed cost noted above, the applicant will need to contribute more in local match to meet the 20% minimum requirement. In addition to the increased local match, the applicant may also be responsible for the difference between the proposed cost and the let cost.

Eligible work / construction item Estimated quantity Unit cost Total cost

Bridge Improvements 1620 SF $400/SF $648,000

Bituminous Trail 55,000 SF $10.00/SF $550,000

Storm Sewer 1 Lump Sum $40,000

Miscellaneous Grading 1 Lump Sum $10,000

Pedestrian Ramps 4 Each $5000/Each $20,000

Non‐eligible work / construction item

Estimated quantity Unit cost Total cost

Water Main $25,000

Engineering and Administration $230,000

Easements $25,000

Contingencies $130,000


ATP Project Evaluation

Below are criteria that the application must satisfy. Based on the information you provide, the ATP will

determine project eligibility and prioritization.

1. Eligibility. The project is eligible for Transportation Alternatives funding.

a. The project must fall within one of the eligible activities listed below (please check the appropriate category(ies)):

☒ On-road and off-road trail facilities for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-motorized forms of transportation.

☐ Conversion and use of abandoned railroad corridors for trails for pedestrian, bicyclists, or other non-motorized transportation users.

☐ Safe routes for non-drivers, including children, older adults, and individuals with disabilities to access daily needs.

☐ Transportation projects to achieve Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 compliance.

☐ Construction of turnouts, overlooks, and viewing areas.

☐ Inventory, control, or removal of outdoor advertising.

☐ Vegetation management to improve roadway safety, prevent against invasive species, and to provide erosion control.

☐ Archaeological activities. ☐ Environmental mitigation to address storm water management. ☐ Reduce vehicle-caused wildlife mortality or restore/maintain habitat connectivity. ☐ Scenic byways

b. Describe the work you want to do for which you are seeking Transportation Alternative funding:

The project includes two (2) trail segments that fill in a gap in the network totaling 5,500‐feet of multi‐use trail and a third project that consists of the widening of the south side of the 37th Street NW bridge over the Zumbro River. The bridge widening will provide the necessary width for a multi‐use trail that safely carries all users across the bridge

2. Serves a Transportation Purpose. TA projects must serve a transportation purpose. For the TA program, “Transportation purpose” is defined as primarily serving a commuting purpose

and / or that connect two destinations points; a facility may serve both transportation and recreation

purposes; a facility that connects people to recreational destinations may be considered to have a

transportation purpose.

a. Describe how your project serves a transportation purpose:

The project is the construction of two separate trail segments and the widening of a bridge to

provide room for two‐way pedestrian and bicycle traffic. Each of the trail segments provides a

transportation purpose by connecting people to destinations.

Project 1: The East River Road NE trail link will connect Foster Arends Park, Rochester Public Utilities

offices, and the Public Works and Transit Operations Center and neighboring trail system to the


newly constructed trail along 48th St/55th St NE/NW that connects to Essex Park and the greater

northwest area of the City of Rochester.

Project 2: The trail link in southeast Rochester along the CP Rail spur will connect the Olmsted

County Fairgrounds, South Broadway trail and South Zumbro trail with trails along 20th Street SE

and Bear Creek. Schools in the vicinity of this project and connecting trails include Ben Franklin

Elementary, Pinewood Elementary, Friedell Middle School, Willow Creek Middle School and Mayo

High School. There is also a large commercial business center to the south of this trail segment

with anchor tenants such as Walmart, Kohls, Shopko and Menards.

Project 3: The 37th Street widening project will provide a more comfortable user experience as the

current bridge configuration provides only a 6‐foot walk between a concrete barrier and a chain

link fence. The posted speed limit along 37th Street NE at this location is 45 mph, with 26,000

vehicles traveling this corridor daily. The narrow walk does not allow for two‐way traffic, so

bicyclists will sometimes be observed along the roadway shoulder to avoid getting off of their bike

when encountering an oncoming pedestrian or bicyclist. The widened trail segment will allow for

two‐way pedestrian and bike traffic, which will be much safer than riding along the roadway. This

link connects to the West River Parkway trail system and further south to Silver Lake Park and also

to the North Broadway trail. There are numerous businesses along both 37th Street NE/NW and

Broadway Avenue North that are accessible from this network of trails.

b. Describe who the anticipated users of your project will be, once implemented.

The primary users of the trail will include both pedestrians and bicyclists. Other non‐motorized

forms of transportation will most likely occur as well, including in‐line skating, cross‐country skiing,

etc. Equestrians are not accommodated on City of Rochester trails. The users will include people

commuting to work and to the many services available near the trail system, including parks and

other recreational opportunities, pet owners exercising themselves and their pets, and people using

the trail for leisure, exercise, and more.

Each of the three trail segments was analyzed to determine the estimated population that could be

served by the segments. We analyzed the number of homes within 1 mile of each of the segments,

and using an average of 2.58 persons/home, we estimated that there are 4,680 residents within a

mile of East River Road, 12,970 residents within a mile of the CP Rail Spur, and 10,730 residents

within a mile of the 37th Street bridge. (Refer to the Exhibits for information related to these

calculations.)

3. Safety. Describe how the proposed project will address or alleviate safety issues or concerns.

The East River Road NE (Project 1) and 37th Street NE (Project 3) segments will provide non‐

motorized alternative routes, providing a safe, separate, off‐road travel alternative to very high

volume roadways which are paralleled. The CP Rail link (Project 2) will provide an off‐road travel

alternative to the parallel and narrow 3rd Avenue SE, which has a daily traffic count of 8,500

vehicles.

4. Planning. Preference will be given to projects that have undergone a public input/participation and

review process. Examples of plans include: State, Regional, MPO Transportation Plan, Safe Routes to

School Plan, Scenic Byway Corridor Management Plan, ADA Transition Plan, GreenStep City, Active


Living Plan, Comprehensive/Land Use Plan. Please include pages from the plan(s) that relate to or

support the project described in this application (do not send the entire plan).

a. Describe the public process this project has undergone and/or where this project emerged.

Each of the three projects was identified as a future improvement in the 2012 Rochester‐Olmsted

Bicycle Master Plan that has been adopted by the Rochester‐Olmsted Council of Governments

(ROCOG) and Rochester City Council. The public input that went into the development of the plan

included focus group meetings and a meeting with the Rochester Convention and Visitors Bureau in

February/March 2011, along with a public open house in May 2011. In addition to the public input,

the plans went before both the ROCOG board and Rochester City Council for adoption. The

upcoming TAP solicitation was also reviewed by the City of Rochester Pedestrian and Bicycle

Advisory Committee in August 2017. The committee prioritized these three projects in an overall

bundled project. The projects are now identified in the City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP),

as adopted by the City Council in December 2017. The City‐wide ADA Transition Plan and goals of

the plan are consistent with this project.

b. Describe the goals of the plan and how this project will advance those goals.

The goals of the Bicycle Master Plan are to reduce travel conflict between bicycling and other modes

and the number of bicycling injuries; develop a network of bicycle travel corridors connecting key

centers and destinations with service to all neighborhoods; insure that all areas have access to the

bikeway network and that the network adequately serves anticipated users; improve supporting

facilities and services to make bicycle travel more convenient and improve in‐trip and end‐of‐trip

service quality; and increase the number of bikeway system users and the share of trips made by

bicycle. The proposed project will promote the use of bicycles as a safe, viable alternative to autos

and will promote a healthier lifestyle by providing non‐motorized alternative transportation. This

project advances the vision of creating an environment that fosters bicycle travel as a healthy,

environmentally sustainable transportation alternative that will improve the character of the

community for bicyclists to safely access public transportation, schools, workplaces, shopping areas,

services, recreation and residences.

c. Describe how the project serves current and future land use.

The project serves as a connection between where people live and destinations. The current land

uses and associated destinations along the project routes are residential, commercial, public service,

educational, recreation and open‐spaces, and developing lands.

d. Describe if there have been objections to the project and how were they resolved, responded to, or handled.

There have been no objections to the East River Road NE (Project 1) and 37th Street North (Project

3) trail segments. There was some concern from the residential property owners to the east of the

CP Rail spur (Project 2) segments as it relates to privacy and security. As a result, the project will

incorporate a fence for those properties that are not currently fenced along the eastern right‐of‐way

line to ease the concerns of the property owners. In addition, the CP Rail has granted a Trail

Easement but will require a fence be installed between the trail and tracks.

e. Describe how this project will address system gaps (if applicable).


The project will close a gap in three different locations, which will significantly impact the trail

networks in these locations to provide enhanced, safe connections to public transportation, schools,

workplaces, shopping areas, services, recreation and residences. This will increase the overall

utilization of the city’s trail network.

f. How it will increase the connectivity of transportation facilities.

By closing the gap in three locations, these projects will provide more safety and comfort for all

users. The projects will “fill the gap” between existing bicycle/pedestrian network facilities, allowing

users improved access to employment, entertainment, recreation and shopping.

g. If the project is not part of a plan at this time, please indicate what will be the process to obtain public input and gauge public support for the project. When will the public input occur?

The three projects are part of an approved plan, but as the project is further developed, additional

public input and review will be sought through the Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee, as

well as when the City Council is considering final approval of the project to proceed into

construction.

5. Ensure Project Deliverability. Transportation Alternative funds must be used in the federal fiscal year in which they are approved. In previous years, ATPs permitted projects to slide a year if they were not ready for construction. The ATP no longer has this flexibility. It is important that the applicant describe processes that have been completed/planned and will lead to timely project delivery:

a. Describe the project development and deliverability using a timeline with estimated dates (consult an engineer if needed).

The City of Rochester Public Works Department is very experienced in delivering Federal Aid

Projects that meet the various milestone dates required by the funding source. The following list of

dates outlines our proposed schedule for this project:

1. Project is included in the STIP June 2018

2. Complete project social, environmental and economic impact documents Nov. 2019

3. MnDOT approval of documents Dec. 2020

4. MnDOT Construction Plan Review submittal June 2021

5. Authorization to bid project Oct. 2021

6. Conduct bid letting Jan. 2022

7. DBE Certification Feb. 2022

8. Bonds, insurance and contracts Mar. 2022

9. Initiate Construction Apr. 2022

b. Describe the Project Sponsor and Applicant’s (recipient agency) role and support of the project (e.g. staff and elected official roles, project funding, commitment to on‐going maintenance needs). If the applicant is different than the sponsor, describe how the responsibilities will be delegated and indicate Project Sponsor and Applicant’s knowledge and experience with administering projects funded with federal dollars.

The City of Rochester is the sponsoring agency, project owner, and annual maintenance provider.

Rochester is a City of the First Class, a Municipal State Aid City, and manages one to three federally


funded projects (Federal Highway Administration funding) each year. The city has managed one (1)

federally funded Enhancement or TAP project approximately every two years. The City understands

the federal processes and has an outstanding record of delivering on‐time, high quality federally

funded transportation projects.

c. To ensure project delivery Applicant’s should be aware of the following potential issues. Please mark “yes” or “no” next to each of the items below:

COMMENTS (If you would like to further explain any of your responses to 5c, please feel free to do

so in the comment box below):

d. Describe potential supporters and potential opponents of the project.

Potential supporters of the project include the local bicycling community, bikers/walkers that utilize

the trail system, Rochester Public School District, City of Rochester Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory

Committee and neighborhoods being served by the project. Potential opponents are the typical

citizens that show up at public open houses to say that there aren’t enough bicyclists in the

community to support such infrastructure or those taxpayers who think we could find better uses

for public funds.

Does the project use Section 4(f) Park Lands or properties and / or Section 6(f)?

☐No

Does the project occur within any areas of effect on properties listed, or eligible

for listing, on the National Register of Historic Places? ☐No

Does the project affect species or critical habitat protected by the

Endangered Species Act?

☐No

Does the project involve placement of fill into Waters of the U.S.? ☐No

Does the project encroach into a floodplain /wetlands? ☐No

*Does the project add sidewalk in a residential area? ☐No

Is the project anticipated to be controversial? ☐No

Will the project involve relocation of utilities? (water, sewer, electric, cable) ☐Yes

Will the project involve assessing costs to affected property owners? ☐No

Have maintenance responsibilities been determined? ☐Yes

Does the project involve removal of trees? ☐Yes

Does the property involve redevelopment of an area? ☐No

Does the project involve properties with previous uses that involved

hazardous materials?

☐No

**Does the project involve work on or immediately adjacent to railroad right of way? ☐Yes

Is the project within the airport influence zone? ☐No

*Sidewalk will not be constructed in a residential area, but a trail will be constructed in a

residential area along the CP Rail.

**The CP Rail spur segment has involved prior negotiation with the CP Rail staff, and the design

is complete. We don’t anticipate any issues receiving a final permit from CP Rail, as they have

already granted a signed trail easement document.


e. If the project takes place within a local unit of government, where the LUG is not the project applicant, nor the project sponsor, describe how all LUG’s have come to support and approve the project. Attach resolutions of support from the applicant, the sponsor if different from the applicant) and any other local unit of government affected by the project (affected entities may include townships, tribal governments, school districts, municipalities, counties, byways, etc).

The City of Rochester is the project applicant, and the project has the full support of the Rochester‐

Olmsted Council of Governments and the Rochester City Council.

f. Transportation Alternative projects must be submitted through/by a public agency, regional transportation authority, tribal government, county or a city with a population greater than 5,000 persons. Cities with less than 5,000 population, townships, school districts, and organizations must have their alternative application/project sponsored by their respective county. The sponsoring county or city must pass a resolution indicating their willingness to be the project sponsoring agency with responsibility for seeing the project through to its completion. The local unit of government, if different from the Sponsoring Agency, must also adopt a Resolution of Support.


MPO Project Evaluation

The La Crosse Area Planning Committee (LAPC) has an established set of criteria for Transportation Alternative

projects. For more information on their prioritization criteria, please contact:

Tom Faella, Executive Director

La Crosse Area Planning Committee (LAPC)

La Crosse County Administrative Center

212 6th Street North, Room 1200

La Crosse, WI 54601

(608) 785‐5977

[email protected]


Sponsoring Agency Resolution


Resolution Agreeing to Maintain Facility


Resolution of Support from Participating Local Unit of Government – N/A

A Resolution of Support from each participating Local Unit of Government (LUG) is required for each project.

The resolution must be approved by the governing body of the LUG. Please attach an original signed copy of

the resolution. An example of sample language which can be used by a participating LUG is listed below.

Be it resolved that _____________________________________ is a party to a “Transportation Alternatives” (City, County or Agency Name)

project identified as and has

reviewed and approved the project as proposed. As a participating member the LUG understands their role

in the project, which includes a willingness to secure and guarantee the local share of costs associated with

this project as appropriate, as well as the responsibility for seeing this project through to its completion,

with compliance of all applicable laws, rules and regulations. The applicant also hereby agrees to assume

full responsibility for the operation and maintenance of property and facilities related to the aforementioned

transportation alternative project,

Be it further resolved that ________________________________ is hereby authorized to act as agent on behalf (Name and Title)

of this Local Unit of Government.

Certification

I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution is a true and correct copy of a resolution adopted by [city, county

or agency name] on this [date] day of [month], [year].

SIGNED:

(Signature)

(Title)

(Date)

WITNESSED:

(Signature)

(Title)

(Date)


Application Checklist

CHECKLIST OF COMPLETION: This checklist is for the convenience of the Applicant to ensure all Transportation Alternative elements have been addressed. Applications must specifically and directly address each criterion to qualify and receive points.

X Applicant completed the Letter of Intent (LOI)

X MnDOT District 6/MPO reviewed LOI and recommended that the project move forward to full application

MnDOT District 6/MPO reviewed LOI and suggested applicant wait until project is further developed, but we are submitting anyway

No LOI was submitted

____X_____ Application Form Information

Section 1

X Provided brief project description X Has an eligible sponsoring agency

X Contact Person/information for sponsoring agency and applicant

X Appropriate signatures/approvals have been obtained

Section 2

X Itemized Project Budget

X Meets Minimum ($250,000) eligible cost

X Documentation of 20% or more funding match

Section 3

X Resolution of Sponsorship from Eligible Agency

Section 4

X Resolution to Maintain / Operate Facility

Section 5

X Project is eligible for TA funding

X Project was in a plan and a copy of the page was provided

X Identified how it serves a transportation purpose

X Project Deliverability – answered risk assessment questions

X Adequately identified role of Project Sponsor vs. Project Applicant

N/A Resolution of Support from Local Unit(s) of Government (Section 7)

N/A Letter of Support from State or Federal agency(ies), if applicable

_X________ Other Enclosures (where applicable)

X Project Location Map (with enough detail to show the proposed project in relation to surrounding features)

N/A Documentation of financial support (letters, agreements, etc)

X Documentation of Plans and Public participation

X Maps, Graphics, photos


Exhibits: Other Enclosures

Project Location Map – Area Map


Project Location Map – Location Map


Project Location Map – 37th Street NW Bridge and East River Road NE Segments


Project Location Map – CP Rail Spur Segment


Planning Page Enclosure – Ward 1 Bicycle Master Plan Improvements


Planning Page Enclosure – Ward 5 Bicycle Master Plan Improvements


MPO Review: ROCOG Memo of Support

Greater Minnesota Transportation Alternatives Solicitations/tapsolicitation/... · Click here to...

Documents

Transcript of Greater Minnesota Transportation Alternatives Solicitations/tapsolicitation/... · Click here to...