HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/18/2020 Melas-Meadows Bridge Phase I Engineering Services4/14/2020 BoardDocs® Pro
Agenda Item Details
Meeting Feb 18, 2020 - REGULAR MEETING OF THE MOUNT PROSPECT VILLAGE BOARD - 7:00 p.m.
Category 8. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT
Subject 8.2 Motion to accept proposals for Melas-Meadows Bridge Phase I Engineering Services in
an amount not to exceed $124,131.36
Access Public
Type Action
Preferred Date Feb 18, 2020
Absolute Date Feb 18, 2020
Fiscal Impact Yes
Dollar Amount 124,131.36
Budgeted Yes
Budget Source Capital Improvements Fund
Recommended Action Accept the proposal from Burns & McDonnell consulting engineers to provide Phase 1
engineering services for the Melas-Meadows Bridge Project in an amount not to exceed
$124,131.36.
Public Content
Information
This memorandum transmits a recommendation to award a contract for Melas-Meadows Bridge Phase I engineering
services.
This matter was initially discussed at the April 3, 2018, Regular Meeting of the Village Board. At that time, no award
was approved and staff was directed to solicit financial commitments from referenced stakeholders to participate in
funding the proposed work.
Subsequently, staff met with executives from Township High School District 214, Mount Prospect School District 57,
Mount Prospect Park District, Arlington Heights Park District, and the Village of Arlington Heights. The purpose of the
meeting was to entreat the agencies to join the Village in an intergovernmental agreement to develop Phase 1 with an
equally distributed financial stake.
In turn, the governing board of each agency considered this request. The Mount Prospect Park District indicated it
would participate at the requested share if all other agencies agreed to do so. The Village of Arlington Heights
indicated that it would not participate at the requested share but might consider a lesser financial contribution.
Township High School District 214, Mount Prospect School District 57, and the Arlington Heights Park District all
declined to participate.
The Village Board contemplated this outcome at the February 11, 2020, Committee of the Whole meeting. This award
recommendation is conveyed for reconsideration pursuant to discussion at that meeting. In addition, as explicitly
petitioned during discourse at the February 11 COW, staff will apply for an "Invest in Cook" grant to mitigate this
proposed expenditure.
https://go.boarddocs.com/il/vomp/Board.nsf/Private?open&login 1/4
4/14/2020
BoardDocs® Pro
The Village of Mount Prospect's Comprehensive Plan and Bicycle Plan both identify opportunities for better connections
between parks, schools, destinations, and neighboring communities for pedestrians and bicyclists. One challenge that
has been recognized to promote walking and biking is to provide a safe crossing between Melas Park and Meadows
Park. The two parks are divided by Northwest Highway (US Route 14) and the Union Pacific Railroad tracks. A key
transportation goal for the Village of Mount Prospect is to construct a pedestrian bridge over the roadway and railroad
tracks linking these two parks. A location map depicting the location of this proposed project area is attached.
Both parks are unique and draw residents from all areas of town. Melas Park is co-operated by the Mount Prospect
Park District and the Arlington Heights Park District. It is owned by the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of
Greater Chicago and leased to the Village of Mount Prospect. Melas Park facilities include a Visual Arts Center, soccer
fields, baseball/softball diamonds, dog park, and walking paths. The park also hosts the Village's annual 4th of July
festivities. Meadows Park is owned by the Mount Prospect Park District and includes an aquatic center, playground,
and baseball/softball diamonds. The proposed pedestrian bridge will be constructed at the northeast corner of Melas
Park and the southwest corner of Meadows Park.
Approximately 17,000 vehicles travel Northwest Highway and the Union Pacific Railroad handles 70+ freight and
commuter trains on a daily basis. The closest pedestrian crossing to the project location is approximately 2/3 of a
mile away at Central Road. This limitation discourages residents from biking and walking in the Village. The proposed
pedestrian bridge will improve safety for those wanting to visit the parks as well as other local and regional
destinations. Video clips captured by the Mount Prospect Police Department depicting these hazards can be viewed at
the links below, which show people, likely high school -aged, crossing Northwest Highway and the railroad tracks mid -
block:
h................................................................1...................m/f�.l.....................1.........E.1.n.........VV.Rh.B.I.V........D.m......YwRI.Z...........2....X7......X...............V.l......
tt s://drive. oo eco / e/d/ O t G o tQ t ec e
https://drive.google.com/file/d/112HoOsYOATRipYebf YIS4HnZIcKQ13 view
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rwfw8yXBofbFRhsOr .]mIUKPCLDrgubm/view
The proposed bridge will also provide a key link to our bikeway system and expand opportunities for alternative
modes of transportation in the Village. Construction of a pedestrian bridge at this location will accomplish a key goal
of the Village's Strategic Plan.
Village staff will follow the formal federal process to complete a Phase I Engineering Study that includes a right-of-
way survey, topographic survey, data collection, alternatives analysis, drainage analysis, environmental survey, and
lighting review all incorporated into a Project Development Report. Completion of a Phase I Engineering Study
approved by IDOT will make the project eligible to apply for state and federal funding for final design engineering
(Phase II) and construction (Phase III). The Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality Program (CMAQ), Illinois
Transportation Enhancement Program (ITEP), Surface Transportation Program (STP), and Invest in Cook Program are
some of the programs that provide up to 80% funding (Phase II and III only) to improve transportation systems. The
Village has been successful in the past securing federal funding for transportation projects and staff will be prepared
to apply for funding when there are future calls for projects.
By completing Phase I, the Village will have an understanding of the overall cost, feasibility and challenges associated
with the project. These answers are essential to gaining the support of potential partner organizations; they are
assured of the Village's desire to move forward with the project, and as a result will better understand the project
cost and benefit.
The primary focus of the study will be to analyze various bridge designs and solicit input from stakeholders including
our residents. A pedestrian bridge is often visually appealing and can serve as a gateway feature for the Village.
Challenges include spanning both the railroad tracks and Northwest Highway, and designing ramps on either end that
meet handicap accessibility requirements. To ensure a comprehensive study is performed, consideration will also be
made for an underpass below the rail and roadway facilities. While an underpass allows for easier access for all users,
challenges include potential underground utility conflicts, lighting, and drainage. The chosen consulting firm will assist
the Village in determining the optimal design for the project.
Village staff is seeking to enter into a contract with a consulting firm for Phase I Engineering services. The study is
expected to be completed by the end of 2021 but will include a status presentation to the Village Board of Trustees in
early 2021. Funds for this project have been allocated in the 2020 Village Budget.
Request for Proposals (RFP),
https://go.boarddocs.com/il/vomp/Board.nsf/Private?open&login 2/4
4/14/2020
BoardDocs® Pro
As permitted by the Qualification Based Selection process, the Village solicited a Request for Proposals and Cost
Proposal from six (6) engineering consulting firms to provide Phase I Engineering services for the pedestrian
connection of Melas and Meadows Parks. Each firm was asked to submit as part of their proposal the following
information:
1. Resumes of key personnel and related experience on similar type projects
2. Summary of the firm's approach to the project
3. Staff hour estimate and cost proposal for major phases of work
4. Project schedule
The Village received three (3) submissions. The three consulting firms' proposals were reviewed on the basis of their
understanding of our goals and their methodology to complete the study. These firms were also interviewed by Village
staff. They were then rated (with a maximum score of 100 points) according to these specific categories: background
of firm & personnel, related project experience, proposed services, proposed schedule, work effort, and proposal
content. The rankings are as follows:
Task
Burns & McDonnell
Benesch Christopher Burke
...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Background
...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
18
18
18
Experience
...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
17
18
17
Scope of Work
23
22
22
...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Schedule
...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
15
15
15
Work Effort
10
8
7
...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Proposal Content 10
10
10
Tota/s,
93
91
89
In addition, each firm was asked to submit a separate cost proposal for the scope of work proposed. A summary of
these costs is provided below:
Firm Total Cost Work Hours Cost/Hour
.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Burns & McDonnell $124,131 907 $118
Benesc.........................................................1.9.5.,4.1..1.........1.2.6.0.............................................1.3.0...............................
Christopher ...Burke
......... $285,098
2.1.0.$ ............................................. $1.1.7...............................
r
Burns & McDonnell has put together a very strong project team with extensive experience working on complex Phase
I Engineering studies, including bridge and underpass design. Their proposal is thorough and anticipates the many
tasks to complete a study that can smoothly move to Phase II Design Engineering. They have a working relationship
with Union Pacific Railroad, Metra, the Illinois Commerce Commission, and IDOT as well as the necessary skills to
engage key stakeholders and the community throughout the process. Their experience and proposal gives Village staff
confidence they can successfully analyze both bridge and underpass structures and guide us in determining the
optimal design for the project. It is Village staff's opinion that Burns & McDonnell understands the goals of the study,
has provided a thorough proposal based on their extensive experience, and will provide the best product at an
appropriate number of hours dedicated to the study. Village staff estimated 1000 hours to complete the study at an
approximate cost of $125,000.00 ($125 per hour).
Staff has recently been in contact with Burns & McDonnell representatives regarding this project. The firm has
verbally indicated they will still honor their 2018 technical and cost proposals for the Phase i study. That
is, Burns & McDonnell will perform the elan -Meadows Bridge Phase 1 Study for a cost not to exceed
$124,131.36 (no fee increase or scope of work reduction).
Alternatives
1. Accept Burns & McDonnell proposal for Melas-Meadows Pedestrian Bridge Phase 1 Engineering Services.
2. Action at discretion of Village Board.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Village Board accept the proposal from Burns & McDonnell consulting engineers to prove
Phase 1 engineering services for the Melas-Meadows Pedestrian Bridge Project in an amount not to exceed
$124,131.36.
https://go.boarddocs.com/il/vomp/Board.nsf/Private?open&login 3/4
4/14/2020 BoardDocs® Pro
MM Bridge Layout.jpg (272 KB) Melas Meadows Bridge RFP.pdf (510 KB)
Burns&McDonnell Phase I Proposal.pdf (6,991 KB) BurnsMcDonnell revised cost proposal.pdf (48 KB)
Administrative Content
Executive Content
Motion & Voting
Accept the proposal from Burns & McDonnell consulting engineers to provide Phase 1 engineering services for the
Melas-Meadows Bridge Project in an amount not to exceed $124,131.36.
Motion by Michael Zadel, second by Colleen Saccotelli.
Motion Carries
Yea: Richard Rogers, Colleen Saccotelli, Michael Zadel
Nay: William Grossi, Paul Hoefert
https://go.boarddocs.com/il/vomp/Board.nsf/Private?open&login 4/4