rfpaddendum__2.docx

Request for Proposals (RFP) Addendum #2 SWIFT Event #: 2000016156 Agency: Department of Natural Resources Addendum Number: 2 Date of Addendum: September 20, 2024 Title: Shooting Star State Trail, Lake Louise State Park to Taopi

END DATE HAS NOT CHANGED – SEPTEMBER 26, 2024

SCOPE OF ADDENDUM

The following are changes to the RFP: Sharing vendor questions and State’s answers.

Vendors’ questions to the RFP and the State’s answers are as follows:

Q1. Is there any anticipation of removing/replacing or rehabilitating bridges along the trail, such as the one just east of 730th Avenue over the Upper Iowa River? If so, which bridges are anticipated to be worked on?

A1. Currently there is no plans to rehabilitate or remove bridges along this section. The contract will be amended if it is determined the need to do so.

Q2. Is any work anticipated to be performed within the limits of the Highway 56 trail underpass?

A2. The approach railing will need to be replaced at a minimum on both sides of the tunnel. The consultant will need to look at the feasibility of paving thru the tunnel which is our current policy.

Q3. Outside of those described in the Bicycle Facility Design Manual, are there any design considerations the DNR wishes to implement where paved trails cross a gravel road?

A3. Typically, if the DNR’s ROW runs thru the road crossing than those are paved (i.e. railroad grades). For this trail, the DNR ROW ends at the township or county ROW line. The DNR will work with the local units of government to obtain the agreements for the installation of pedestrian ramps and signage at those crossings. Currently, there isn’t any intention of paving thru the gravel roads. If this changes, the DNR will provide the required details to the Consultant to include in the plans.

Q4. Will there be any Right of Way or trail boundary CAD linework information provided by the DNR?

A4. The original design was delegated to the County to perform. The DNR will reach out to obtain the CAD drawings but at this time, the DNR can guarantee that those drawings still exist.

Q5. Is it the intention of the DNR to reutilize any signs or posts along the way, or to have all new signage supplied and installed as designed?

A5. New signs and posts shall be included in the plans and specifications. All signage shall be in accordance with the MUTCD. The existing signs are to be salvaged.

Q6. Can the DNR provide locations, either known intersections or coordinate numbers, of known areas of flooding concern? A sign was encountered during a site visit and the abovementioned bridge crossing that read “PATH SUBJECT TO FLOODING” leading us to believe several of these areas have been previously identified.

A6. A kick off meeting will be held along with a site visit to review all sections with flooding or drainage issues that need to be addressed.

Q7. Can the DNR provide an inventory of structures including culverts, bridges, etc. along the project’s segments of trail? If so, is there a structural assessment component to this inventory to which we could have access?

A7. There is an inventory of the bridges and not the culverts. Those reports can be provided to the consultant who is selected to design the project.

Q8. Is there a desire of the DNR to have a structural inspection of the existing features on site as part of this project in the event that one doesn’t currently exist?

A8. The DNR Bridge section performs structural inspections of the existing bridges.

Q9. Is there any flexibility in the interim completion dates if the final completion date is held? For example, would it be acceptable for us to propose a later date or modify the scope of the preliminary plans, as long as the final plans are on time with full details?

A9. There is some flexibility with the schedule. The current funding expires on June 30, 2025. Final invoices from the consultant need to be approved & paid by that date unless less the DNR obtains an extension which hasn’t always been approved in the past.

Q10. Are there any wetland impacts anticipated, and if so, have they been delineated prior?

A10. The DNR will provide a shapefile of known wetlands that have been previously delineated. I don’t know if adjusting the grade in areas that have flooded in the past will impact existing wetlands. That is to be determined and addressed as the design progresses.

Q11. Would it be possible to see a PDF of a sample plan set for a similar project or simply an example of the template we will need to use?

A11. Attached is an example plan set, however this project will be following AIA specifications instead of MnDOT Specifications.

Q12 Section 2.2, item d, lists a DNR provided base drawing with LiDAR surface. Can any additional information be shared on what will be included in the base drawing? For example: Existing alignment, ROW, culvert data, trailside assets like guardrails.

A12. The base drawing will be the ACAD template drawing with the title sheet setup. The LIDAR surface will be added. Current ROW drawings will be requested from Lands & Minerals Section, but it isn’t known at this time if those drawings exist. Parks & Trails will be reaching out to the county to obtain the original design CAD drawings.

Q13. Section 2.2, item e references record drawings for S.P 50-090-02. Are these in PDF format only? Can CAD files also be provided?

A13. See answer to Q12.

Q14. The summary of scope and section 2.4 mention the need to address drainage issues at several areas and altering the vertical alignment. Is there an inventory of the known areas of concern?

A14. A kick off meeting will be held along with a site visit to review all sections with flooding or drainage issues that need to be addressed.

Q15. Section 2.4, item a lists rendering as part of the concept plan task. Can you expand on what renderings may consist of?

A15. Renderings are not required but many times when there is an issue that is found that needs to be remediated, the consultant will provide a rendering to explain/illustrate the proposed design.

Q16. The project schedule notes a kickoff meeting within 45 days of NTP and concept plan 30 days after NTP. Is this accurate or are concept plans anticipated 30 days after the kickoff meeting?

A16. Concept plans within 30 days after kickoff meeting.

Q17. Is there an estimated construction cost?

A17. A construction estimate has not been generated.

Q18. Does hydrology analysis include bridges?

A18. No

Q19 Approximately how many culverts are to be evaluated (hydraulics)?

A19. Currently it isn’t known if any hydraulics is necessary. However, there may be a need identified during the site visit if an additional culvert is required or if the existing culvert isn’t adequate than a hydraulic analysis is required to properly size the structure. An addendum can be executed if it is determined if a hydraulic study is required.

Q20. Do we need to clarify the permitting? Or will this vary depending on how many areas need to be realigned?

A20. Typically, the DNR Resource Specialist will need a shape file from the design consultant showing the limits of fill/disturbance and they determine what/if permits are required.

Q21. Are there any existing easements or private ownership that we are to determine the location of or is this provided?

A21. The DNR will provide locations of easements or private ownerships. The design consultant will need to review the trail corridor to include field crossings at the proper locations in the plans. The DNR will provide a typical detail for those crossings.

Q22. How many sections of the trail does the DNR anticipate rerouting will be required?

A22. There may be a few locations where the horizontal alignment will need to be changed at road crossings to shorten the crossing lengths. Also, will need to review the feasibility of adjusting the horizontal alignment where the trail runs parallel to the Upper Iowa River along segment 2.

Q23. Will we need permanent stormwater treatment.

A23. The current stormwater permit states “Recreational trails that are distinctly set apart from a roadway (i.e. not parallel) and intended for non-motorized recreational uses are not considered impervious surfaces.”

Q24. Does the westerly 1.1 miles that currently is 8’ paved with 2’ shoulders require widening to accommodate a 10’ paved trail with 2’ shoulders or is the intent to leave this as is.

A24. This section will require widening to accommodate a 10’ paved trail with 2’ shoulders.

Q25. Is the current existing timber protection rail to be replaced as part of the project.

A25. The existing timber railing will need to be replaced. The DNR will provide the standard detail.

Q26. Will the DNR be conducting all environmental work necessary to obtain the regulatory permits?

A26. The DNR will be obtaining the required permits but will need assistance from the consultant as needed to identify impacted areas, volumes, etc.