00009828_5B-23_Mini-RFP_Final~1.docx

OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

A&E “Related Services” MINI-RFP/ OregonBuys Bid Solicitation Number: S-73000-00009828 (TGM File Code: 5B-23) for Work Order Contract (“WOC”) Assignment Under Price Agreement (“PA”) series:

Transportation Land Use Planning 2021 (“TLUP ‘21”) TLUP ’21 Discipline (Subject Area): Transportation System Planning

[NOTE: Only Consultants that have been awarded a PA in the above PA series may respond to this Mini-RFP.]

Project Name: City of Hermiston, Transportation System Plan Update

Project Location: Hermiston, OR

ODOT Key Number: 21732

DBE Participation Goal: 3% (see section 1.5.1 for more information)

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION DEADLINE: See “Bid Opening Date” and time for this Mini-RFP in OregonBuys.

Buyer/Single Point of Contact: See “Buyer” for this Mini-RFP in OregonBuys.

Accessibility: The Oregon Department of Transportation is committed to complying with all statutory requirements to ensure that it is providing information that is more accessible to people with disabilities, as required by Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 794d), and 36 C.F.R. 1194 Appendix A. This includes information regarding the solicitation process. Please contact the Single Point of Contact (“SPC”) identified in OregonBuys (see “Buyer”) to request reasonable accommodation for access, due to a disability, to information related to this solicitation, or the solicitation process, or both. Accommodation requests must be received by the SPC 3 business days prior to the Proposal Submission Deadline (see “Bid Opening Date” and time in OregonBuys).

Non-Discrimination Notice: ODOT in accordance with the Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 78 Stat. 252. 42 U.S.C. 2000d to 2000d-4 and Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Department of Transportation, Subtitle A, Office of the Secretary, Part 21, Nondiscrimination in Federally-Assisted programs of the Department of Transportation issued pursuant to such Act, hereby notifies all Bidders that it will affirmatively ensure that all business enterprises will be afforded full opportunity to submit bids in response to this solicitation and will not be discriminated against on the grounds of race, color, or national origin in consideration for an award.

SECTION 0.0 OREGONBUYS, ATTACHMENTS, SOLICITATION SCHEDULE

This Mini-RFP is advertised in OregonBuys (https://oregonbuys.gov/bso/) as a Bid Solicitation, which is open only to registered vendors that have an existing PA with ODOT for the needed Services.

0.1 INFORMATION AND ATTACHMENTS INCORPORATED FROM OREGONBUYS

In addition to the provisions set forth and linked within the Mini-RFP, the Mini-RFP incorporates by this reference the information published on the OregonBuys Bid Solicitation page for this Mini-RFP, including but not limited to:

· The Bid Opening Date and time specified under the Active Bid Solicitation section;

· The Buyer name and contact information specified in the Header Information section;

· Any documents, forms, or other files linked in the Bid Solicitation Attachments section.

0.2 CROSSWALK OF TERMS USED IN OREGONBUYS

Definition of terms used in OregonBuys.

Bid Opening Date means “Closing” as defined in Oregon Administrative Rule (“OAR”) 137-046-0110(6). In OregonBuys it is the deadline for submitting Quotes (Bids, Proposals or other required responses) required for a Bid Solicitation.

Change Order means A formal change to an existing MBPO (i.e., any form of contract; agreement; price agreement or on-call contract, etc.; purchase order; or WOC).

Master Blanket Purchase Order (“MBPO”) means Any form of contract, agreement (i.e., price agreement, on-call contract, etc.), purchase order or WOC.

Quote means Any form of offer submission by vendors (i.e., Bids, Technical Proposals, Price Proposals, or any other type of offer required by a Bid Solicitation or a Mini-RFP).

Vendor means Any form of business entity registered in OregonBuys. Only registered vendors are eligible to submit a Quote and enter into Purchase Orders, MBPOs, or Release Requisitions pursuant to a Bid Solicitation or Mini-RFP advertised in OregonBuys.

0.3 GUIDANCE FOR OREGONBUYS

For quick reference information regarding common questions from vendors when using OregonBuys, see User Guides under “OregonBuys eProcurement System” on the Contracting with ODOT webpage: https://www.oregon.gov/odot/Business/Procurement/Pages/HowTo.aspx.

0.4 SOLICITATION SCHEDULE

· Proposer Question Deadline: 5 business days prior to the Proposal Submission Deadline.

· Proposal Submission Deadline: See details on front page of this Mini-RFP (see also Section 1.4.6).

Oregon Department of Transportation (“Agency” or “ODOT") is requesting supplemental information regarding specific A&E and Related Services experience relevant to the above referenced planning project.

Project Purpose – Transportation Relationship The City of Hermiston (“City”) Transportation System Plan (“TSP”) Update (the “Project”) will assist and guide the next 20 years of growth in the community. The most recent City TSP, adopted in May 1997 and subsequent amendments, (“Current TSP”) requires comprehensive updates to address transportation challenges, development pressures and incorporate regional plans, including the 2022 Umatilla River Bridge Plan. With the region entering a new period of rapid growth, the fundamental assumptions and strategies of the Current TSP are overdue for revisiting and updating. A modern TSP along with amendments to the development code and comprehensive plan policies will assist the community with responding to population growth, transportation capacity issues and implementation of multimodal improvements to the transportation network within the City (“Updated TSP”).

Project Objectives

· Commit to achieving zero roadway fatalities and serious injuries.

· Provide transportation choices for underserved residents.

· Improve pedestrian mobility and safety.

· Create a walkable and transit-friendly community.

· Enhance Safe Routes to School (“SRTS”) and neighborhood connectivity.

· Foster collaborative local and regional partnerships.

· Support economic vitality and growth.

· Implement sustainable and equitable solutions.

· Seek ways to relieve traffic congestion.

The expected outcome of the WOC is an Updated TSP, including final code and policy updates, to meet all key objectives identified within the scope of Services set forth in Mini-RFP Section 3.0 – SAMPLE STATEMENT OF WORK (or) TASKS, DELIVERABLES & SCHEDULE (the “Services”). Proposers responding to the Mini-RFP do so solely at their expense. Agency is not responsible for any Proposer expenses associated with the Mini-RFP.

The selected Proposer and Agency will negotiate the delivery schedule, costs and final Statement of Work, within the scope of Services set forth below and in Mini-RFP Section 3.0, for inclusion in the final WOC:

A&E and Related Services related to Transportation Planning including, but not limited to:

· Project Management and Coordination

· Analysis and Recommendations

· Concept Designs

· Public Outreach

· Policy and Plan Development and Adoption

The WOC is anticipated to start in Fall of 2024 and is expected to be completed within 17 months. Pending successful negotiations, the selected Proposer shall perform its obligations according to the WOC and applicable terms and conditions of the parent PA and exhibits thereto.

Funding Source(s):

FHWA

WOC Payment. Payment will be made for completion of, or acceptable monthly progress on, tasks and deliverables in conformance with PA requirements and all applicable standards. The method of compensation will be:

· Fixed Price per Deliverable.

For further information see PA Exhibit B “Compensation”.

Offer Period: A Proposer's Proposal is a firm offer, irrevocable, valid and binding on the Proposer for not less than 180 days following the closing date for this Mini-RFP. Agency may request, either orally or in writing, that Proposer extend the offer period in writing.

Contingent upon Agency need and available funding, Agency may (for up to 9 months following the close of this Mini-RFP), in Agency’s sole discretion, make additional award(s). Agency may select the next ranked responsible Proposer who has submitted a responsive proposal (provided Proposer agrees to an extended offer period, which would cover the balance of the 9 months, if at that time the offer period stated in the paragraph above has expired or soon will expire), issue an intent to award. If agreement with that Proposer is not reached, Agency may offer award to the next ranked Proposer and so on until agreement is reached or until Agency terminates the process. Agency reserves the right to require confirmation of the qualifications of any Proposer.

Insurance Requirements:

As set forth in Exhibit C of the PA, the following Insurance requirements apply to the prospective WOC from this Mini-RFP:

· Professional Liability in the amount of $ 1,000,000 per occurrence and $ 2,000,000 annual aggregate.

· General Liability in the amount of $ 1,000,000 per occurrence and $ 2,000,000 annual aggregate.

· Automobile Liability in the amount of $ 1,000,000 combined single limit.

Future Work Limitations:

· If a Consultant or an Affiliate of Consultant enters into a WOC or other contract for the purposes of administering, managing, monitoring, inspecting, evaluating compliance with or otherwise overseeing a public contract, that Consultant or an Affiliate of that Consultant will not be eligible to enter into a public contract that is subject to administration, management, monitoring, inspection, evaluation or oversight by means of the personal services. See ORS 279C.307, and 279C.307(3) regarding possible Agency applications for exceptions.

· If a Consultant or any Associate of Consultant enters into a WOC or other contract with Agency for the purpose of advising or assisting in developing specifications, a scope or statement of work, an invitation to bid, a request for proposals or other solicitation documents and materials related to a given procurement, the Consultant may not be eligible to propose/bid on the prospective procurement (based on a case-by-case assessment by Agency).

The “Buyer” identified in OregonBuys for this Mini-RFP is the Agency’s Single Point of Contact for this solicitation. All inquiries regarding this procurement, whether relating to the Mini-RFP process, administration, deadline or award, potential COI issues, or to the intent or technical aspects of the Services must be submitted in writing via email to the Buyer. Failing to follow the foregoing requirements regarding the Buyer/Single Point of Contact for inquiries may result in Proposal rejection by Agency.

All questions must be received not later than 5 business days prior to the Proposal submission deadline.

Question and Answer documents, if any, will be posted on OregonBuys (in the Bid Solicitation Attachments section for this Mini-RFP) to respond to inquiries that Agency determines, in its sole discretion, do not effect changes to this Mini-RFP. Question and Answer documents provide clarifications and interpretations but do not change Mini-RFP requirements.

1.2.2 ADDENDA

Answers to questions Agency receives and that Agency, in its sole discretion, determines are substantive and provide new information, will be issued as official Addenda to this Mini-RFP. When appropriate, as determined by Agency in its sole discretion, revisions, substitutions, or clarifications of the Mini-RFP will be issued as Addenda to this Mini-RFP. Changes or modifications to this Mini-RFP will be binding on Agency only if in the form of written Addenda issued by the Agency. Any Addenda to this Mini-RFP will be published on OregonBuys in the Bid Solicitation Attachments section for this Mini-RFP.

1.3 PUBLIC RECORDS

After the evaluation/selection and negotiation process is complete, Proposals will be open to public inspection in accordance with Oregon Revised Statute (“ORS”) 279C.107. If a Proposal contains any information that may be considered exempt from disclosure under the various grounds specified in Oregon Public Records Law, ORS 192.311 through 192.478, the Proposer must clearly designate the portions of its Proposal that Proposer claims are exempt from disclosure, along with a justification and citation to the authority relied upon. Application of the Oregon Public Records Law shall determine whether any information is actually exempt from disclosure. Identifying the Proposal in whole as exempt from disclosure is not acceptable. If Proposer fails to identify the portions of the Proposal that Proposer claims are exempt from disclosure and the authority used to substantiate that claim, Proposer is deemed to waive any future claim for non-disclosure of that information.

· Items in Section 1.4 marked as “PASS/FAIL” that are incomplete (except for minor informalities), not submitted by Proposal due date and time, or are otherwise not in substantial conformance with the requirement, will be rejected as non-responsive. Proposals must comply with ALL requirements marked as “PASS/FAIL” to be considered for further evaluation.

1.4.2 REQUIRED ITEMS AND SCORING DEDUCTIONS

· Proposals will receive a 2% scoring deduction, based upon the total available points, for each item in Section 1.4 marked as “REQUIRED” that is incomplete (except for minor informalities) or not submitted with the Proposal in substantial conformance of the requirement. Incomplete or missing items must be completed and submitted within 2 business days of email request by Agency (this does not apply to “PASS/FAIL” items which must be submitted by Proposal due date and time). Missing or incomplete items must be delivered via email. In order to provide an appropriate time stamp. Failure to complete and deliver missing or incomplete “REQUIRED” items within 2 business days of request by Agency shall result in Proposal rejection. Time limitations will be based upon the time of the email sent by Agency and the time of the e-mail sent in response to Agency notification. ·

· Proposals not in conformance with the 12-point minimum font requirements for substantive text (including text in tables) and 11-point minimum font size for resumes or Key Staff Resume form (if required) will receive a 3% scoring deduction and will not be sent back to Proposer for correction.

· Scoring deductions are on an average score per Proposal basis and not a deduction per evaluator. For example, if a Proposer received an average score of 92 points from the evaluation committee, a 2% scoring deduction would result in a Proposal score of 90. (Percentage will be rounded to either the lower number if under .5% or to the higher number if .5% or over.)

1.4.3 PROPOSAL

The Proposal must describe how Proposer meets the requirements that are specified in this Mini-RFP as related to the scoring criteria below. Be clear and concise.

The Proposal must include a completed Proposal Cover Sheet using the form Mini-RFP Attachment A - Proposal Cover Sheet (located on the Bid Solicitation “File Attachments” section in OregonBuys), with the “APPROVED” checkbox marked to certify approval.

1.4.6 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION DEADLINE (PASS/FAIL)

Agency will not accept Proposals submitted after the Proposal submission deadline, which is specified as the Bid Opening Date and time for this Mini-RFP in OregonBuys.

1.4.7 SUBMITTAL FILE SIZE AND REQUIRED FORMS (REQUIRED)

The total combined size of all files for Proposal, Coversheet and any forms must not exceed 5 megabytes.

· (REQUIRED) Key Staff Resumes form (using Agency form and minimum 11-point font). Key Staff Resumes form is, available at: https://www.oregon.gov/odot/Business/Procurement/DocsPSK/keystaff.docx.

1.4.8 SUBMITTAL VIA OREGONBUYS

All required submittals must be submitted via OregonBuys (submittals by any other means will be rejected).

When submitting a Proposal (“Quote”) in response to this Mini-RFP:

· Do not enter pricing or any other information in the Item Information section.

· Select the “Confidential” checkbox on the Create Quote page when uploading Proposal and any other files (“Quote”).

1.4.9 FORMAT FOR PROPOSAL AND PAGE LENGTH LIMITATION

The Proposal must be organized in accordance with the list of Scoring Criteria categories in Section 2.2. The Proposal must not exceed 4 pages, excluding Proposal Cover Sheet, any tabs or indexes, table of contents, “Key Staff Resumes” (if required, including any limitations, in Section 2.2), and “Work Samples” (if required, including any limitations, in Section 2.2). If a Proposer submits a Proposal exceeding this limit, Agency will consider the pages up to the allowable page limit and discard all subsequent pages. Any links to external information included in Proposal, Proposal Cover Sheet, Key Staff Resumes or Work Samples will not be considered. The Proposer may choose how to allocate the number of pages between any sections, within the overall page limit.

One Page is defined as: one side of a single 8-1/2" x 11" page, with 12-point minimum font size for the substantive text (including text in tables) and 11-point minimum font size for resumes or Key Staff Resume form. Any page over this size will be counted as 2 pages. Any page, or partial page, tabs, indexes or table of contents with substantive text, tables, graphics, charts, resumes, etc., will be counted as 1 page.

· The Proposal Cover Sheet, Proposal, Key Staff Resumes and Work Samples must be submitted as a single combined pdf file.

· Conflict of Interest (“COI”) information (see Mini-RFP Attachment A - Proposal Cover Sheet) must be submitted as a separate pdf file. Submit the TGM COI Disclosure form.

(REQUIRED) Proposals must use 12-point minimum font size for the substantive text in Proposals (including text in tables). “Key Staff Resumes” (if required) or other resume formats (if required) must use an 11-point minimum font. Proposers may use their discretion for the font size of other materials that do not include substantive text (e.g., headings, graphics, picture or graphics captions, and org charts).

1.4.10 TERMS AND CONDITIONS (PASS/FAIL)

Unless otherwise provided in this Mini-RFP, by submitting a Statement of Proposal (“SOP”), each Proposer agrees to be bound by and comply with the terms and conditions of the Proposer’s existing PA, as amended. Any SOP that is conditioned on Agency’s acceptance of terms and conditions other than those set forth in the existing PA and the requirements specified in this Mini-RFP (as they may be revised by an addendum to this Mini-RFP) will be rejected as non-responsive.

1.4.11 OTHER MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS (PASS/FAIL)

Proposer must clearly indicate on Mini-RFP Attachment A - Proposal Cover Sheet how they meet each of the minimum requirements listed in this Section 1.4.11.

1. PROPOSED SUBCONSULTANTS – Proposer must list by name all subconsultant firms that, if selected, will be utilized on Proposer’s team for this WOC.

2. LAND USE PLANNER – Proposer must list by name a member of their proposed staff that, if selected, will be utilized as a land use planner on Proposer’s team for this WOC.

3. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT * – An Oregon-registered Landscape Architect shall conduct analysis appropriate for the disciplines.

4. REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER * – An Oregon-registered Professional Engineer (“PE”) (civil or traffic) with expertise in traffic analysis.

Consultant may not provide engineering Services unless the Services are performed or provided under the full authority and responsible charge of an Oregon Registered Professional Engineer as defined in ORS 672.002(2). The Professional Engineer must be currently registered in active status with the Oregon State Board of Examiners for Engineering and Land Surveying and must supervise and direct the Services proposed under the WOC. As required by Oregon law, Consultants shall place their official Oregon Registered Professional Engineer certified seal and signature on all reports, maps, design drawings, and specifications delivered under the WOC.

Licenses Outside of Oregon If the Proposer is an “individual, firm, partnership or corporation offering to practice engineering or land surveying” and “holds a certificate of registration to engage in the practice of professional engineering or land surveying (as applicable) issued by the proper authority of any other state, a territory or possession of the United States, or a foreign country”, the Proposer, on the Proposal Cover Sheet (Mini-RFP Attachment A), shall:

Include a written statement that the Proposer is not registered to practice engineering or land surveying (as applicable) in the State but will comply with ORS 672.002 to 672.325 by having an individual holding a valid certificate of registration in the State in responsible charge of the work prior to performing any engineering or land surveying (as applicable) work within the State. [ORS 672.060(9)(a) and (b)]

* In the space provided on the Proposal Cover Sheet (Mini-RFP Attachment A), list the name and registration number of at least one Oregon Registered Civil Engineer and one Landscape Architect (may be same person) in active status intending to perform Services under the WOC. Proposer shall provide the following information:

· The name of the individual employed by Proposer who currently holds a valid certification of registration to practice engineering), the jurisdiction of the registration and the registration number; and one or both of the following:

· The name of the individual not employed by Proposer who currently holds a valid certificate of registration to practice engineering in the State who Proposer has engaged to be in responsible charge of the work; or

· The name of the individual employed by Proposer who will be in responsible charge of the work and will obtain a valid certificate of registration to practice engineering or land surveying (as applicable) in the State prior to performance of engineering Services under the WOC.

The WOC will include Federal funding:

· A DBE participation goal, as set forth on page 1, has been assigned for the prospective WOC. This goal will apply to the overall WOC including amendments. If a given phase of the WOC (such as CA-CEI, if applicable) will include little or no opportunity for DBEs, then DBE utilization in other phases of the WOC will need to be sufficient to meet the overall WOC goal. Exceptions for a given WOC or amendment will need to be assessed by Agency on a case-by-case basis.

See PA Exhibit E for:

· information on reporting requirements and how credit toward meeting an assigned DBE participation is determined (for goal and no-goal WOCs), and

· further explanation and description of the DBE program.

Agency will evaluate Proposals in accordance with the Pass/Fail criteria identified in Section 1.4. Proposals meeting those criteria will be forwarded to an evaluation committee of at least 3 members that will independently review, score and rank Proposals according to the Scoring Criteria set forth in Section 2.2.

The outcome of the Evaluation process may, at the Agency’s sole discretion, result in:

Agency reserves the right to reject any or all Proposals and reserves the right to cancel this Mini-RFP at any time if doing either would be in the public interest as determined by Agency. Agency is not liable for any costs a Proposer incurs while preparing or presenting the Proposal or during further evaluation stages. All unreturned Proposals will become property of Agency and part of the public file without obligation to Agency.

False or Misleading Statements. Any statements, written or verbal, provided by the Proposer deemed by the Agency to be false or misleading will result in all or portions of the proposal including demonstrations to be rejected and removed from consideration in the evaluation for project award.

The City has many individuals who have worked on outsourced projects and those individuals may be called upon to evaluate proposals.

2.1.2 INTERVIEWS/FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS

Agency may conduct interviews/follow-up questions. If interviews/follow-up questions are conducted, the following will apply:

· The number of Proposers selected for interviews/follow-up questions is at the sole discretion of Agency.

· A minimum of 3 evaluators shall score the interviews/follow-up questions;

· Interview/follow-up question scores (up to a maximum of 50 points) will be combined with the other criteria scores to arrive at a total score. The total score will be ranked to determine the apparent successful Proposer.

· Interviews normally require physical attendance at Agency’s offices; however, Agency may elect to conduct interviews via teleconference or video conference. Further details will be included with notification of time and date of interviews, if conducted.

· Evaluation and scoring will be based on one or more of the following criteria:

· Understanding of Requested Services

· Technical Approach

· Project Management/Cost Effectiveness

· Proposer’s General Qualifications

· Proposer’s Capabilities

· Proposer’s Relevant Experience

· Project Team and Qualifications

2.1.3 RESERVED

2.1.4 AGENCY QUESTIONS

Agency may require any clarification it needs to understand the Proposer’s Proposal. Any necessary clarifications or modifications which are in the best interest of the Agency may be made before the Proposer is awarded a WOC, and some or all of the clarifications or modifications may become part of the final WOC.

2.1.5 METHOD OF AWARD

The total scores and selection for tentative WOC assignment will be determined as follows:

· Total Proposal Score = Total of all evaluator scores for a given Proposal, divided by the number of evaluators, minus any SCORING DEDUCTIONS received per Section 1.4.

· Total Interview Score (if conducted) = Total of all evaluator scores for a given interviewee, divided by the number of evaluators.

Final Score = Total Proposal Score plus Total Interview Score (if conducted).

Agency will negotiate the payment amount and methodology with the top ranked Proposer (based on Final Scores). If negotiations are not successful, Agency may terminate negotiations with the top ranked Proposer and may begin negotiations with the next highest ranked Proposer and so on, until successful negotiations are completed or Agency determines that cancellation of this Mini-RFP is in the best interest of the State.

2.2 SCORING CRITERIA

Proposal scoring will be based on the criteria stated in the subsections below.

2.2.1 EVALUATION ITEM 1 – Specific Experience of Key Staff MAX. POINTS: 45 Using the Key Staff Resumes form (see Mini-RFP Section 1.4.7), provide information for Project Manager and Key Staff proposed roles and experience working as a team with:

Scoring will be based on relevance of experience, qualifications, and technical competence of Project Manager and Key Staff proposed for this specific Project. The Key Staff put forward for work on this Project should have availability to do the work. No substitutes will be allowed without prior authorization by Agency and City.

Key Staff Resumes are not included in the Proposal page limit identified for this Mini-RFP; however, a maximum of 4 Key Staff Resumes may be submitted (a Project Manager is deemed Key Staff and is therefore among one of the 4 Key Staff Resumes that must be submitted). Any resumes submitted beyond this limit will be discarded by Agency and will not be included in the evaluation. The fields on the Key Staff Resumes form may be expanded, but may not exceed 1 page per resume.

2.2.2 EVALUATION ITEM 2 – Project Approach MAX. POINTS: 45

Given the information provided within this Mini-RFP, describe your approach to cost effectively meet the Agency’s deliverables/objectives in the timeline needed for the following:

Provide up to 3 Work Samples. A Work Sample is 1 actual page from a document demonstrating Consultant's ability to communicate key information and inform decisions for one or more projects with a scope and magnitude that is similar to the Project described in this Mini-RFP. Each Work Sample must contain a project performed by at least one of the proposed team's Project Manager or Key Staff, in the same or similar roles.

Provided Work Samples must address how the work relates to the other scoring criteria and must list Key Staff involved with each Work Sample and what role they played.

Each actual page should be marked only to call out a specific section or sections demonstrating the applicability to this Project (circle or highlight a particular area of a page); any supplemental explanation must be included within the Proposal page limit set forth in Section 1.4.9.

Work Samples will be scored by evaluators, up to a total of 10 points max. for all samples provided, based on applicability to Project as well as format including appropriate use of tables and graphics; clear, concise text; and errors, including misspellings, grammatical, and typographic.

Work Samples are not included in the Proposal page limit identified for this Mini-RFP; however, a maximum of 3 pages (1 page for each Work Sample) may be submitted for this criterion. Any pages submitted beyond this limit will be discarded by Agency and will not be included in the evaluation.

Following development of the Statement of Work, the selected Proposer shall submit a detailed Breakdown of Costs (“BOC” or “BOC-NBR”, as applicable, available at https://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/Business/Procurement/Pages/PSK.aspx) with cost information as required in the WOC Assignment and Requirements Exhibit of the PA.

2.3.2 COMMITTED DBE BREAKDOWN AND CERTIFICATION FORM-AE

During negotiations of the WOC, Consultant shall submit a Committed DBE Breakdown and Certification Form-AE (one for each DBE subcontractor that will be utilized) if a DBE goal greater than 0% is assigned to the WOC. [Note: The Committed DBE Breakdown and Certification Form-AE will not be required for WOCs with no goal assignment or if a DBE goal is not required (i.e., if WOC includes no federal funding)]. The Committed DBE Breakdown and Certification Form-AE must be submitted and approved prior to WOC execution and shall be used to determine Consultant’s responsiveness to the DBE requirements. See PA Exhibit E, DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE (DBE) PROVISIONS for detailed requirements.

The Committed DBE Breakdown and Certification Form-AE is available at: https://www.oregon.gov/odot/Forms/2ODOT/7345235.pdf.

2.3.3 PROPOSER RESPONSIBILITY, DEBT OWED to STATE

Agency may reject an offer and rescind the Intent to Award notice if Agency determines Proposer is not responsible or if Proposer has liquidated and delinquent debt owed to the State or any department or agency of the State.

2.3.4 RESERVED

[Remainder of page left intentionally blank]

SECTION 3.0 SAMPLE STATEMENT OF WORK (or) SUMMARY of TASKS, DELIVERABLES & SCHEDULE

SOLICITATION NOTE: This Section contains a Sample Statement of Work. The selected Proposer shall use the Statement of Work (“SOW”) as a baseline document during WOC negotiations to develop a proposed Statement of Work which must identify all Work and Services described in the Mini-RFP and address all design considerations and requirements described for the Project. The selected Proposer shall add sufficient detail to Tasks and Deliverables that are included in the Services and omit any not needed for the Project. Items left highlighted in this baseline document will be negotiated or filled in at the time of WOC execution.

Once finalized and approved by ODOT, that document will become the Statement of Work for the WOC for the Project.

TGM 5B-23

City of Hermiston Transportation System Plan Update

A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION and OVERVIEW of SERVICES

Definitions and Acronyms

Project Purpose – Transportation Relationship The City of Hermiston (“City”) Transportation System Plan (“TSP”) Update (the “Project”) will assist and guide the next 20 years of growth in the community. The most recent City TSP, adopted in 1997 and subsequent amendments, (“Current TSP”) requires comprehensive updates to address transportation challenges, development pressures and incorporate regional plans, including the 2022 Umatilla River Bridge Plan. With the region entering a new period of rapid growth, the fundamental assumptions and strategies of the Current TSP are overdue for revisiting and updating. A modern TSP along with amendments to the development code and comprehensive plan policies will assist the community with responding to population growth, transportation capacity issues and implementation of multimodal improvements to the transportation network within the City (“Updated TSP”).

Project Area The Project Area is the lands within the City’s city limits and unincorporated areas of Umatilla County (“County”) within the Urban Growth Boundary (“UGB”).

Background The Current TSP dates to 1997 with 5 major updates, most recently in 2015 to accommodate new retail development. A 2019 TSP Assessment conducted by the Department of Land Conservation and Development (“DLCD”) included a recommendation to update the Current TSP. Likewise, the 2021 Hermiston 2040 Program Outreach identified the community ranked improved transportation planning as a priority.

Hermiston is serviced by 2 state highways which act as the community’s principal arterials. The Current TSP’s focus on utilizing existing state highways as the principal arterials is leading to congestion, circuitous commuting patterns, and citizen frustration. Hermiston’s population has doubled from 10,000 to 20,000 since 1997 resulting in significant increases in trip length and increases in number of trips. Commercial traffic on state highways has increased, contributing to additional transportation challenges. The fundamental assumptions and strategies of the Current TSP are overdue for revisiting and updating.

The end of the Current TSP’s functional life comes at an opportune time in Hermiston’s history. Hermiston and the entire west Umatilla County area is a region that grows sporadically. Historically, the region sees periods of slow, stable growth punctuated by periods of very rapid expansion. The region is entering a new period of rapid growth. The current boom focuses on data center construction in the lower Columbia basin. Multiple data center campuses are under active construction in 2023 and multiple additional campuses are in the planning phases.

Data center, construction, security, and other ancillary jobs are anticipated to add up to 3,000 jobs to the region in just a few years. This period of growth has the potential to create a secondary tipping point of economic development for additional retail and service development. The primary growth will make Hermiston an attractive market and push the City’s population above the 25,000 threshold in short order. The Project provides a timely opportunity for an Updated TSP to consider pending economic and population challenges and create a transportation network planned for new growth.

The current growth cycle is also different than previous periods. Unlike previous high growth times which focused on Hermiston, current growth is rapid not only in Hermiston, but also in the nearby communities of Stanfield and Umatilla. This is creating challenges not anticipated in the Current TSP. There is an increase in travel from nearby communities via state highways and county roads to the employment centers in Hermiston. Umatilla County is in the process of updating the County TSP and the Project will enable Hermiston to participate more actively in the County’s process and incorporate the County’s TSP findings.

The Project will focus on developing a connected network of circulation routes, especially streets paralleling and intercepting the highways. Upgrading the classification of interceptors and improving streets to match classifications will be a priority. Hermiston’s residential growth has generally been on the periphery with large residential neighborhoods developing adequate internal transportation infrastructure, but connectivity between neighborhoods and the city’s commercial areas and employment centers is lacking. Project will plan new corridors connecting these newly developed neighborhoods with all areas of the city.

The Current TSP did not include a local transit system. Hermiston is focusing on developing public transit options through a partnership with Kayak Public Transit, operated by the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Reservation. These transit elements need to be refined and developed. The transit services provided by the Kayak partnership are less than five years old but provide transit options within the city as well as connectivity to the surrounding area, including the cities of Pendleton, Boardman, and Umatilla, as well as other communities. Looking at the existing transit system and considering transit growth over the planning horizon will help to keep the transit system effective and responsive to the community’s needs.

Improving pedestrian mobility options is also a priority. Much of Hermiston’s core is lacking in pedestrian facilities and where facilities do exist, accessible ramps are not always in place. Inventorying existing facilities and identifying necessary upgrades is a crucial component. Hermiston is fortunate to have relatively low vehicle crash rates, but pedestrian incidents are increasing. Improving pedestrian safety is a City priority. Considering separated pedestrian corridors, identifying locations for enhanced crossing treatments, and other safety improvements are included in the Project.

Hermiston’s rapid residential growth in the 21st Century has been primarily in single-family housing. Many of these neighborhoods at the community’s periphery and may have one or two primary points of access and little connectivity with surrounding development. Project will reconsider the City’s approach to neighborhood design and ensure that the development code contains necessary elements to provide connectivity and walkable elements.

The Project will also consider the existing built environment and the strengths and weaknesses therein. Hermiston is a city of many parks and schools. The ability of the existing transportation network to provide adequate access to these activity centers must be evaluated and upgrades, especially in bicycle and pedestrian access, planned.

Hermiston’s commercial development is focused almost entirely upon corridors bordering the state highways, with limited off-highway commercial development occurring. This focus on the state highway network for commercial land is creating congestion issues. Attempts by the City to encourage off-highway commercial growth have met with limited success. Project will identify land use and transportation improvements to support infill and redevelopment opportunities.

City implemented a transportation system development charge in 2020, setting aside funds for necessary transportation improvements. Updating the Current TSP with a revised project list and properly considering multimodal transportation needs will provide a more balanced investment strategy and focus resources where they are most effective and serving the needs of underserved residents.

The Project will be coordinated with the City’s upcoming federal Safe Streets and Roads for All Action Plan. The desired alternative circulation network will help address equity considerations, safety, and provide more direct paths, saving energy and emissions.

The Updated TSP and final code and policy updates will be adopted by the City Planning Commission (“PC”) and City Council (“CC”). After City adoption, the Updated TSP will also be co-adopted by Umatilla County in accordance with the City and County’s Joint Management Agreement.

Project Objectives

· Commit to achieving zero roadway fatalities and serious injuries

· Provide transportation choices for underserved residents

· Improve pedestrian mobility and safety

· Create walkable and transit-friendly community

· Enhance Safe Routes to School (“SRTS”) and neighborhood connectivity

· Foster collaborative local and regional partnerships

· Support economic vitality and growth

· Implement sustainable and equitable solutions

· Seek ways to relieve traffic congestion

B. STANDARDS and GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

1. Standards

a. Planning, Survey, Preliminary Engineering and Design Manuals, Standards and Guidance:

b. Website or Web Content Development and Maintenance Standards

c. ODOT Communications Standards

1. Software Requirements

1. Professional Licenses, Registrations and Qualifications

1. General Requirements

1. Endorsement of Data.

1. Electronic Documents, Digital Seal and Signature.

1. Personnel, Materials, and Equipment.

1. State-Owned Assets.

1. Legal Services and Fees.

f. General Requirements for Project Management Consultant and City shall each provide a Project Manager throughout the Project and other adequate staff to complete the Project in accordance with the anticipated timeline. City shall maintain effective communication and coordination between Agency and Consultant throughout the Project.

Agency Project Manager (“APM”), City Planning Director, City Public Works Director, and Consultant Project Manager (“PM”) shall serve as the Project Management Team (“PMT”) and may invite others to participate. PMT has the responsibility of guiding Project and providing direction on policy issues, in a manner that furthers Transportation and Growth Management (“TGM”) objectives, at various stages of Project.

Project utilizes a Technical Advisory Committee (“TAC”) that will review work products and make recommendations to City PC, CC, County PC, and County Commissioners.

Consultant shall maintain effective communication and coordination between Agency and City throughout the Project.

g. General Requirements for Written and Graphic Deliverables All documents must be written concisely, in plain language and use an easily understood format. Where possible, Consultant shall present information in tabular or graphic format, with a simple and concise accompanying narrative.

Consultant shall write materials intended for the public, such as meeting presentations, at no higher than a school 8th grade level using the Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level Formula. City shall translate and prepare Spanish language materials for public involvement.

Consultant shall provide Geographic Information Systems (“GIS”) layers used for inventory and graphic deliverables to ODOT’s Geographic Information Services Unit.

Written deliverables must include the Project name, a title that refers to the contract deliverable, draft number, subtask number, and date of preparation.

h. General Requirements for Final Deliverables Consultant shall prepare final, adoption ready plans and amendments to plans as final policy statements of the local government and must not include language such as “it is recommended…” or “City should…” Consultant shall prepare new and amended code language as final, adoption ready regulatory statements of City. Final plan, plan amendments, code, and code amendments must include necessary amendments or deletions to existing City plans or code to avoid conflicts and enable full integration of proposed plan with existing City documents.

Final deliverables must not include names and logos of Consultant, TGM Program, ODOT, or DLCD or project codes. These items are only allowed on the acknowledgement page.

Final plans and amendments must include the following statement:

“This Project is partially funded by a grant from the Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) Program, a joint program of the Oregon Department of Transportation and the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development. This TGM grant is financed, in part, by Federal Highway Administration, local government, and State of Oregon funds.

The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect views or policies of the State of Oregon.”

i. General Requirements for Meetings and Public Events Meetings may include, but are not limited to: kick-off, project coordination, committee and public meetings or work sessions.

Public Events include any public outreach opportunities, but are not limited to: open houses, workshops, tabling, focus groups, small group or one-on-one briefings, interviews, and public meetings.

“Arrange” meetings and Public Events includes but is not limited to: scheduling dates and times with participants, distribution of agendas and relevant materials in advance of the meeting or Public Event, reserving a suitable location, placing advertisements in local media, and posting notices in public locations (such as City buildings and libraries). Unless otherwise stated within specific tasks, “arrange” includes attendance.

Unless specified for specific tasks or otherwise agreed to in writing by Agency, City is responsible for meeting arrangements. City shall, in accordance with City standards regarding meetings, prepare and distribute all staff reports, agendas, relevant materials, necessary public notices, and notifications, and provide public outreach for community involvement. City shall arrange, schedule and pay for meeting room accommodations; coordinate and pay for meeting materials and refreshments, including printed materials and postcards that will be mailed to residents (postage also paid by City). Additionally, City shall coordinate, print and distribute advertising materials and information in City social media accounts, citywide utility bills and other City controlled medium, as appropriate.

“Conduct” meetings and Public Events includes but is not limited to: preparing agendas and relevant materials, making presentations, facilitating discussion of relevant issues, and preparing summaries.

j. Requirements for Civil/Traffic Analysis, Landscape and Land Use Planning

· Consultant, by and through an Oregon registered Professional Engineer, shall perform or oversee all traffic analysis services. Final memoranda containing traffic analysis must be stamped by a Professional Engineer with license being current and in good standing, with expertise in civil or traffic engineering.

· A Landscape Architect and a Land Use Planner shall conduct analysis appropriate for those disciplines.

· Intersection performance must be determined using the Highway Capacity Manual 7th Edition (published by the Transportation Research Board with manual calculations for signalized intersection Volume to Capacity (“V/C”). All traffic analysis software programs used must be consistent with Highway Capacity Manual procedures. The City Engineer may approve a different intersection analysis method prior to use when the different method can be justified for City intersections.

· Traffic analysis software must follow Highway Capacity Manual 7th Edition procedures. Signalized intersection V/C ratios must be manually calculated. Traffic analysis must be consistent with ODOT’s Analysis Procedures Manual.

· Traffic analysis at non-State intersections must be compatible with Agency procedures and must follow standard engineering procedures and practices.

· Future build conditions (alternatives) must be consistent with City, County and Agency design standards.