Downtown RFP 23-ED22 Consultant Questions - May 19, 2023.pdf

Downtown Urban Design RFP #23-ED22 Submitted Questions and City Response May 19, 2023

The following questions were submitted regarding the above referenced Request for Proposals. Answers are being provided to all potential responders so that all are working from the same information. [The City’s responses are provided in bracketed, bold italics below.]

1. The RFP indicates that City Engineering staff will prepare the plans and specifications for bidding for the Main Street Pedestrian Improvements and Cannery Square Plaza Re-visioning and that, “Design-development plans shall specify, among other items, the layout, configuration, proposed paving materials and patterns, street furniture, signage, and landscaping desired for each of the identified spaces.” Are we correct to understand that the selected consultant will provide drawings and specifications to a design development level (approximately 60% CD) and that final construction document production, detailing, and final specifications will be completed by the City? [Deliverables shall include the design information that the Engineering Department will need for bid documents. This would include a complete plan set for bidding and construction, bid items, specifications and quantities. The selected consultant will not be responsible for items such as grades, providing spot elevations, dealing with storm water runoff, etc.]

2. Is there a budget for the project design? [In a recent discussion with City Council, we estimated a budget of between $70K and $100K for the design work. Cost is a factor in the evaluation of proposals, however, and a specific budget has not been finalized.]

3. What level of support is City Staff able to provide to support any traffic engineering, or should we plan to engage a traffic engineer as necessary? [The City’s Engineering Department is working with a consultant to manage the traffic engineering aspect of the Main Street Pedestrian Safety project. This portion of RFP #23-ED22 will deal primarily with the treatment of the spaces behind the curb, with the possible exception being King Street, south of Main Street. King Street will involve the conversion of an existing two-way street with parallel parking to a one-way street with angled parking. Design work should include options for the layout of the street, parking, sidewalks, and any new pedestrian areas to be created, in addition to paving materials and patterns, landscaping, street furniture, etc.]

4. Lighting upgrades are mentioned in each of the three projects, what level of engineering is expected for electrical? [Work on lighting should focus on the type and location of lighting, including streetlights and any decorative lighting or pedestrian scale lighting recommended through the design process. Coordination with Sun Prairie Utilities (SPU) should occur to discuss power needs, pedestal locations, fixtures and poles. SPU is one of the stakeholders that should be included in the engagement process, both as a resource for these issues and as a property owner in this vicinity.]

5. What is the anticipated budget for this project? [See 2 above.]

6. Is there existing traffic data, or does the City anticipate collecting it before the project start?

[See 3 above. If existing traffic volumes are desired, some information can be provided in a timely fashion.]

7. Is there an existing conditions survey and site survey for utilities? [A site survey was completed for the Main Street Pedestrian Safety portion of the downtown, including King Street. This information can be provided to the selected consultant. No site survey has been prepared for the Lane Street or Cannery Square areas.]

8. Form C of the RFP solicitation mentions a surety bond may be required. Is a surety bond applicable to this project? [There will be no surety bond required for the design work. You can skip that section of Form C.]

9. The scope of work does not include construction drawings or specifications for any of the project sites, correct? Instead, final construction drawings and specifications will be created by the City? [See 1 above.]

10. Has a topographic survey been completed for all three sites? [See 7 above.]

11. Has the City determined a budget for this project? [See 2 above.]

12. Are there current topographic and utilities surveys available for the 3 sites? If not, should the consultant include cost for surveying as part of base services or as an additional service to the base proposal? [See 7 above. We do not believe that surveys are necessary to complete the design work desired for the Festival Street or Cannery Square locations, but if responders feel otherwise we would suggest that this be explained in the proposal and included as an additional service.]

13. Is it assumed that all three sites can be discussed at each of the listed meetings? Are all meetings assumed to be in person? [Yes, we see all three as interrelated sites that should be discussed together, even though they may be constructed at different times. It is preferred that any presentations made at City boards or committees be conducted in person. For other public engagement and stakeholder meetings, we are looking for responders to provide the process that they feel will be most effective. We understand that efficiencies may be achieved through virtual meetings, and that we may be able to reach a broader audience by providing options for participation. We would rather not dictate one type of engagement over another, and are giving responders the latitude to lay out an engagement plan that each feels provides the most effective and efficient process.]

14. Can the City provide the Current Concept Plans mentioned on page 14 of the RFP to proposers prior to proposal submittal? [The concept plans for the Festival Street and the Main Street Pedestrian Safety projects were included as images in the Project Overview posted on the vendor sites. Attached is an excerpt from the Sun Prairie Stronger Plan for the Festival Street.

The Main Street Pedestrian Safety concept is included as Option #4 (W/Option 2) in the attached presentation per the response to question 15 below. There is not a concept plan for the Cannery Square space – the statement on page 14 of the RFP was inaccurate in this regard.]

15. Are notes from the public engagement that formed consensus for the Main Street, Cannery Square and Festival Street process available? [There was no written report associated with this process. The public engagement effort was summarized in a PowerPoint presentation that was prepared for a couple of public meetings that were held last year. The presentation is attached.]

16. Any discussion with WisDOT regarding the improvements along Main Street through the 100 and 200 blocks? [See 3 above. Discussions with WisDOT are part of a separate consultant contract. We will ensure that relevant information from such discussions is provided to the selected consultant.]

17. In the Sun Prairie Stronger Plan, the Festival Street is shown to extend to Ashely Field terminating at the extension of Jones Street (which is on land currently owned by the School District). Is this extension (into the school district property) still part of the project? If yes, what is the assumed role or involvement by the school district in this process? [At this point, we are concerned primarily with the portion of Lane Street between South Street and S. Bristol Street.

The potential extension of improvements onto the School District property is a possibility, but we are unsure of the District’s interest at this time. There will be an attempt to engage the District as part of the stakeholder engagement process to explore this further, but as for deliverables, the design work should focus on the segment mentioned above.]

18. The scope of work identifies this project as design development to allow City’s Engineering staff to prepare plans and specifications for bidding. Bullet 5 under Deliverables section notes “…and specifications for each project including….”, which suggest Construction Documents. Can you verify the level of plans desired at the outcome of this process? Does it include construction plans and specifications? [See 1 above.]

a. If construction plans, should we assume specifications would be written in a public works/WisDOT, “special provisions” format. Could the City provide an example or template for our information prior to proposal submittal? If not, could the City clarify the nature of the specifications requested for the deliverable? [Yes, we have attached a ‘special provisions’ excerpt from a recent bid package as an example.]

19. Have start and end dates for the actual work on the project been established yet? [We hope to have the selected consultant under contract by the end of June, and work under the contract substantially completed by the end of the year. The Main Street Pedestrian Safety component of the project will possibly be bid for construction in 2024, and if funded the Engineering Department will be designing the road improvements and preparing the plans and specifications over the winter.]

STAFF REPORT

REPORT TO: BID Beautification Committee

FROM: Scott Kugler, Community Development Director;

Tom Veith, City Engineer;

Alexander Brown, Transportation Coordinator

AGENDA ITEM: Downtown Pedestrian Safety Options and Feedback from Stakeholders

DATE: April 20, 2022

Background:

Over the past year, a work group consisting of several BID members, city staff, and others have been discussing pedestrian safety issues in the downtown. This work included several brain storming sessions and walk-throughs of the downtown. The work group quickly identified the primary area of concern at the offset intersection of Main and Columbus/King Streets, as well as the 200 block of E. Main between this intersection and Market/Church Street.

To address concerns raised in these areas, the work group created several options for consideration. Each option would involve physical alterations to the roadways involved, all with the interest of pedestrian safety and the pedestrian experience downtown in mind. After refinements to each option, the work group asked that staff meet with downtown business owners/operators and other stakeholders individually to explain the options and get their feedback, and to bring that feedback back to the BID for consideration. The balance of this report provides a summary of the feedback received, as well as a staff recommendation for pursuing the option that seem to be favored by most.

Discussion

Overall, the discussions with downtown business owners/operators and other stakeholders went quite well. In total, staff met with 21 different stakeholders/stakeholder groups in 19 different meetings, involving 36 individuals. While concerns and questions about specific items related to individual businesses and locations were expressed, overall stakeholders seemed to take the big picture into account and clearly recognized that the good of the overall downtown needs to be the center of the conversation. Staff was encouraged by the discussions.

A total of four options that were presented for discussion, with some variations offered for two of the options. The options are summarized below, and detailed in the drawings attached to this memo:

• Option 1 includes the addition of a median that would eliminate all left turns at the offset intersection of Main Street and Columbus/King Streets, and bump outs of the curbs to make the pedestrian crosswalk in this location more visible and safer.

• Option 2 also includes the addition of a median at this intersection, and would eliminate all left turns except for the westbound-to-northbound left turn from Main onto Columbus Street. This option would include the crosswalk enhancements noted above in Option 1.

• Option 3 would extend the median proposed in Options 1 and 2 to the east all of the way to Market/Church Street, eliminating parking on the north side of the street to make room for the median.

• Option 4 would expand the sidewalk on the south side of the street to provide a substantial pedestrian/flex space, while shifting travel lanes to the north. Parking would be eliminated on the north side of Main Street, and retained on the south side.

• Both Options 3 and 4 could be implemented in combination with either Option 1 or Option 2. Stakeholders were shown how these alternatives would work with both Options 3 and 4.

Of the options presented, Option 4 (with Option 2) was the clear favorite among the participants, with 68% of the groups favoring that option, and another 16% favoring Option 4 (with Option 1). No one mentioned a dislike for Option 4, and a few who preferred other options also mentioned that Option 4 would be a positive change. The following table breaks down the support for each option based upon staff notes from the stakeholder meetings.

The proposal to convert King Street to a one-way heading south was incorporated into all of the options because the work group responded well to the idea. In addition to being part of the options above, support for this specific idea was also mentioned by 37% of the stakeholder groups (although staff’s general impression is that this option was seen as positive by most stakeholders).

In addition to opinions about the specific options presented, stakeholders provided several other ideas and comments that staff felt should be shared, including the following:

Staff is following up on several of these items separately, and one (the idea of a ‘bump-in’ for additional parking in front of the Museum) is being incorporated into the revised option that is being presented as the staff recommendation.

In addition, there were a number of comments and concerns expressed about various issues, some related to the options and some not related, that we wanted to share with the Committee for consideration.

Recommendation

Staff recommends that the Committee consider sending a modified version of Option 4 (with Option 2) forward for further study and consideration. It was clearly the favored option among the stakeholders, and in staff’s opinion provides the most opportunity for positive change in the downtown while also addressing the pedestrian safety concerns that the work group identified. Much more work is needed before such a project would move forward for discussion, including review by the BID Board, the Wisconsin Department of Transportation, the Public Works and/or Public Safety Committee, and City Council. The project has not yet been funded, although staff will be proposing to include a placeholder in the Capital Improvement Plan for such a project for design work in 2023 and construction in 2024 (these dates are not certain at this point).

Staff plans to look more closely at many of the concerns and comments provided by stakeholders if this project moves forward toward design. In addition, staff has followed up already on concerns related to the loss of on-street parking in the 100 block of E. Main Street, and it appears that these spaces can be replaced with the proposed ‘bump-in’ of parking spaces in front of the Museum, as illustrated below.

Next Steps

If the Committee agrees with the staff recommendation, this recommendation should be forwarded to the BID for consideration. If supported by the BID, staff would bring the project forward for inclusion in the 2023-2032 CIP. Review of the concept by the Public Works and/or Public Safety Committee would be part of the CIP review process. If incorporated into the CIP, the project would need to be reviewed with WisDOT to ensure that it would meet their needs for STH 19. If the project appears workable after WisDOT review, a more refined design would be prepared and presented for approval through the Public Works Committee like any other public street project, and this process would include a public information meeting, as well. Staff is proposing that we tentatively plan for 2023 design and 2024 construction, assuming the project is received well by City boards and committees, the City Council, and WisDOT.

Downtown Pedestrian Safety Improvement Options - 2022

• 1. Offset intersection at Main and Columbus/King Streets.

• Visibility, difficult turning movements

• Drivers making risky decisions

• 2. Crosswalk at Main and King Street.

• Visibility of and by pedestrians

• Cars bypassing left turning vehicles

• 3. Travel speeds along Main.

• Exacerbated by COVID pandemic

• 4. U-Turns on Main Street

• 5. BoSP Drive-Thru.

• Exiting vehicles turning left

• Use of drive-thru lanes to access parking lot

SAFETY CONCERN RAISED DOWNTOWN

1.

3.

2.

4.

5.

3.

Stakeholder Engagement

Stakeholder Meetings:

• 19 stakeholder meetings in late 2021 through early 2022

• 21 different stakeholder groups/businesses participated

• In total, 36 individuals attended the stakeholder meetings

• In addition to individual owners and businesses, also:

• Emergency Service Agencies

• Public Works Staff

• Sacred Hearts

Participating Stakeholders:

• Bank of Sun Prairie

• Chamber of Commerce

• Cannery Wine Bar

• Prairie Flowers

• Faded Roots

• Meant to Bead

• Burn Boot Camp

• Flavors! Wine Bar

• State Farm Insurance

• Forever Yours Jewelry

• Washington Mills

• Sacred Hearts

• Sun Prairie Public Works

• Sun Prairie Emergency Service Providers

• Abarrotes el Primo

• Sun Prairie Historical Museum

• Salvatore’s

• Budding Butterfly

• Carpe Diem

• The Wire Basket

• Freidel (building owner)

Stakeholder Engagement

• 16 of 19 (84%) stakeholder groups identified Option 4 as the preferred alternative, with most of them favoring the Option 4 w/Option 2 alternative.

• Broad support for the conversion of King Street to one-way.

OPTION #4 (w/Option 2) – Updated Based on Stakeholder Input

• Incorporates all of the changes proposed with the original Option 4 (w/Option 2);

• Adds a potential ‘bump-in’ for off-street parking in front of the Historical Museum to address concerns raised about the parking lost within this block.

Parking ‘Bump-In’

Next Steps

• April 22, 2022 – BID Beautification Committee

• May 5, 2022 – BID Board Meeting

• May 10, 2022 – Public Works Committee (as part of a CIP Discussion)

• 2023 design work

• 2024 construction

• Discussions with WisDOT

• Design work in 2023, including streetscaping design for bump outs and new sidewalk areas

• Would likely include more public input

• Public Information Meeting prior to public bidding of the project

• Best case scenario would be 2024 construction

Downtown Pedestrian Safety Improvement Options - 2022

Parking ‘Bump-In’

OPTION #1

• Median installation to restrict turning movements at both Columbus and King Streets.

• King Street converted to one-way southbound with angled parking.

• Columbus Street right-in/right-out access only.

• Curb bump-outs to shorten pedestrian crossings.

• Expanded sidewalks at corners.

• Concern: Access to parking lot and Bank drive-thru restricted.

OPTION #2

• Median installation to restrict turning movements at both Columbus and King Streets.

• King Street converted to one-way southbound with angled parking.

• Columbus Street left turn lane for northbound left, but no eastbound left turn allowed.

• Curb bump-outs to shorten pedestrian crossings.

• Expanded sidewalks at corners.

OPTION #3 (w/Option 1)

• Median installation along full length of the block east to Market/Church Street, prohibiting U-turns and left turns out of Bank drive-thru.

• Removal of parking on north side of Main Street.

• Expansion of sidewalk on south side of Main Street by approximately 2.5 feet.

• Incorporates Option 1 improvements at Columbus and King Street intersections.

OPTION #3 (w/Option 2)

• Median installation along full length of the block east to Market/Church Street, prohibiting U-turns and left turns out of Bank drive-thru.

• Removal of parking on north side of Main Street.

• Expansion of sidewalk on south side of Main Street by approximately 2.5 feet.

• Incorporates Option 2 improvements at Columbus

OPTION #4 (w/Option 1)

• Removal of parking on north side of Main Street.

• Significant expansion of the sidewalk on the south side of Main Street (11 feet), providing opportunities for outdoor dining, sales, seating areas, events, etc.

• On-street parking is retained on the south side of Main Street.

• Incorporates Option 1 improvements at Columbus

OPTION #4 (w/Option 2)

• Removal of parking on north side of Main Street.

• Significant expansion of the sidewalk on the south side of Main Street (11 feet), providing opportunities for outdoor dining, sales, seating areas, events, etc.

• On-street parking is retained on the south side of Main Street.

• Incorporates Option 2 improvements at Columbus