Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPacket - 11/11/2019 - Public Works CommitteeThe City of McHenry is dedicated to providing the citizens, businesses and visitors of McHenry with the highest quality of programs and services in a customer-oriented, efficient and fiscally responsible manner. Public Works Committee McHenry Municipal Center 333 S. Green Street; McHenry, IL 60050 November 11, 2019 – 6:00 PM Meeting Agenda 1.Call to Order 2.Public Comment: Any person wishing to address the Committee will be asked to identify themselves for the record and will be asked but are not required to provide their address. Public Comment may be restricted to three minutes for each individual speaker. Order and decorum shall be maintained at all public meetings. 3. Motion to approve the April 9, 2019 Public Works Committee Meeting report. 4. Review of 2020 Surface Transportation Program candidates for the January 2020 call for projects; Surface Transportation Program background and update. 5. Motion to Adjourn Public Works Committee Meeting Minutes April 9, 2019 Call to Order/Roll Call Alderman Santi called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Deputy Clerk Meadows proceeded to call the roll. Roll call: Members present: Alderman Curry, Alderman Mihevc and Alderman Santi. Others present: Director of Public Works Schmitt, Engineer Strange, Street Division Superintendent Schweda and Wastewater Superintendent Ruzicka. Public Comment Alderman Santi addressed Ms. Evans who was a resident in attendance wishing to comment on roadway concerns. He asked if she would mind holding her comments until the Committee Members began their discussion on agenda item # 6, which was an agenda topic regarding the proposed 2019 Road Resurfacing Program. Ms. Evans agreed to hold her comments until the Committee Members addressed agenda item #6. Motion to approve the January 15, 2019 Public Works Committee meeting minutes Alderman Santi asked the Committee Members if they had any questions or comments on the January 15, 2019 Committee Meeting Minutes. The Committee Members offered no comments. A Motion was made by Alderman Mihevc and seconded by Alderman Curry to approve the Committee Meeting minutes as presented. Roll call: Vote: 3-ayes: Alderman Mihevc, Alderman Curry and Alderman Santi. 0-nays, 0-abstained. Motion carried. Annual Summary of National Pollutants Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Discharge Permit Wastewater Superintendent Ruzicka provided the Committee Members with a summary of the annual inspection requirements with respect to stormwater management. He reported that the IEPA MS4 permit requires the following best management practices: Public education and outreach on stormwater impacts Public involvement and participation Illicit discharge detection and elimination Construction sites used for stormwater runoff control Post construction stormwater management in new development and redevelopment Pollution prevention/good housekeeping for municipal operations Superintendent Ruzicka continued on to discuss the way in which each of the prescribed best management practices are addressed by the Wastewater Department's personnel. He reported the City partners with the Friends of the Fox to provide public education on ways in which to avoid negatively impacting stormwater runoff. Alderman Santi questioned what type of organization was the Friends of the Fox.Superintendent Ruzicka reported that the Friends of the Fox River is a non-profit organization of concerned citizens taking action to protect and maintain the quality of the Fox River Watershed. In addition, the City is mandated by the IEPA to annually place at least one article in the City's newsletter which provides household tips to avoid polluting stormwater systems. Superintendent Ruzicka commented on the Wastewater Department's inspection of the City's 197 outfalls. He reported that they are required by the IEPA to inspect each of the outfalls every four years. Staff inspects 25% of the outfalls each year. They have detected several residential illicit discharge violations mainly due to the draining of backyard pools. None of which introduced any contaminates into the stormwater systems. Alderman Curry asked if the City had recently added any new outfalls. Superintendent Ruzicka replied yes,they had added two new outfalls due to the expansion of the Wastewater Treatment Plant. Superintendent Ruzicka concluded his report by thanking the Committee Members for their time. Review and possible recommendation to present to the full City Council the 2019 Road Resurfacing Program for authorization to publicly bid. Alderman Santi asked Ms. Evans if she would like to address the Committee Members at this time. Ms. Evans proceed to join the Committee Members at the meeting table. Ms. Evans reported that she had circulated a petition to her neighbors who all reside on Loch Glen Lane. She proceed to read the petition's headline as follows (the petition is attached to the minutes as Exhibit "A"): We the residents of Loch Glen Lane, McHenry, Illinois, hereby petition the City of McHenry, Illinois to resurface Loch Glen Lane rather than patching it. It has been in need of repair for several years. It is our opinion that simply patching this street is not sufficient and a waste of time and money". Ms. Evans reported that she and her husband has resided on Loch Glen Lane for 17 years and many of their neighbors had lived on Loch Glen Lane for over 27 years and they had reported that the street has never been resurfaced. In addition, she reported that as she canvased the neighborhood every neighbor was very willing to sign the petition and thanked her for her efforts. A lengthy discussion ensued with respect to the resurfacing of Loch Glen Lane. The Committee Members and Staff noted that Loch Glen Lane is one of the roadways ranked at the top of the five year road program's list. Receiving a current condition ranking of 3 points out of a 10 point system, with the ranking of #1 being equivalent to a gravel road and a ranking of #10 being equivalent to a newly paved road. However, funding the resurfacing with respect to this year's proposed budget is highly unlikely. Ms. Evans questioned the cost difference between the large scale patching project and the full resurfacing of the roadway. Engineer Strange reported that he did not have the number of asphalt yards required to patch the roadway and could not guess on the cost. However,the cost to resurface Loch Glen Lane is estimated to be $167,000. Alderman Santi recommended Ms. Evans attended the April 15th City Council meeting at which time the FY-19/20 Budget will be discussed. Ms. Evans thanked the Committee Members for their time. Engineer Strange provided the Committee Members with an overview of the proposed 2019 road resurfacing program. He reported that the City has approximately 125 centerline miles of roadway. In order to establish the priority list of street improvements,Staff visited each street to inspect the current conditions. In addition,the City has over 100,000 square yards of parking lots and facility access roads. Engineer Strange continued on to discussed the proposed 2019 Road Resurfacing Project. He reported that the majority of the Glacier Ridge Subdivision's roadways had not been constructed to the current City standards. Staff is recommending that Chickaloon Drive be totally reconstructed to include milling and resurfacing. He provided the Committee Members with details of the scope of the project. Public Works Director Schmitt commented on the Curran Road S Curve safety improvement project. Which is 90% funded by Federal funds and 10% funded by local matching funds (MFT) and scheduled for a June IDOT letting. He noted depending on the bid outcome there might be some mobilization cost savings. Engineer Strange concluded his overview of the proposed 2019 Road Resurfacing Project by discussing Staffs recommendation to provide a base bid for the reconstruction of Chickaloon Drive along with alternative bids for Curran Road, Katmai Trail, Denali Trail and Illiamna Trail. A lengthy discussion ensued with respect to the details of the RFP. At the conclusion of the discussion regarding the 2019 Road Resurfacing Project, a Motion was made by Alderman Curry and seconded by Alderman Mihevc to brine the base bid alone with the alternative bids and authorization to publicly bid to the full City Council for their consideration. Roll call: Vote: 3-ayes: Alderman Curry, Alderman Mihevc and Alderman Santi. 0- nays, 0-abstained. Motion carried. Staff Reports Engineer Strange provided the Committee Members with an update on the Pearl Street/ Lincoln Road project. He reported that the punch list work began the week of April 81n The punch list items includes ditch grading, pouring of ADA sidewalk ramps along the multi-use path, stone rip rap installations, sign relocation;'and other necessary and incidental work. Engineer Strange provided the Committee Members with an update on the Green Street Bridge project. He reported that the punch list work began on April 8th. Engineer Strange commented on the outstanding punch list items which needs to be completed are some remaining structural concrete repairs, bridge fascia cleaning, grinding of imperfections along concrete pour joint lines, site cleanup, as well as other necessary and incidental work. Engineer Strange provided the Committee Members with an update on the Timothy Clover Water Main Replacement project. He reported that Staff will be meeting with representative from Maneval Construction, Inc. to begin coordination of completion of punch list work. The punch list work includes adjustment of drainage structures, ditch regrading, and correction/repair of landscaping items. Public Works Director Schmitt noted that due to the extreme winter weather the roadways had experienced a thaw/heave like he has never seen before. Street Division Superintendent Schweda reported that the Street Department usually uses 15 tons of cold patch. However, this winter season they used 50 tons of material in order to continuously patch the winter potholes. Other Business Alderman Santi reported that Public Works Director Schmitt will be retiring in 2 % weeks. He along with the other Council Members thanked Director Schmitt for his 35 years of dedicated public service. Alderman Santi noted that Director Schmitt will be greatly missed by all. Motion to Adjourn There being no further public business to discuss, a Motion was made by Alderman Mihevc and seconded by Alderman Curry to adjourn from the public meeting at 7.23 p.m. Roll call:Vote: 3- ayes: Alderman Mihevc, Alderman Curry and Alderman Santi. 0-nays, 0-abstained. Motion carried. Respectfully submitted, Debra Meadows Approved this day 2019 Alderman Santi We the residents of Loch Glen Lane, McHenry, Illinois, hereby petition the City of McHenry, Illinois to resurface Loch Glen Lane rather than patching it. It has b been in need of repair for several years. It is our opinion that simply patching this street is not sufficient and a waste of time and money. V Are you a re hone # Name Address istered vote Signature - 57. r 5 a'3 - R -h . { L1Y" a Inc 227 Al P e We the residents of Loch Glen Lane, McHenry, Illinois, hereby petition the City of McHenry, Illinois to resurface Loch Glen Lane rather than patching it. It has been in need of repair for several years. It is our opinion that simply patching this street is not sufficient and a waste of time and money. a Are you a reg- Name Address nfor Signature 5'1 3 V 9q& Xt- h4k-ooA C22,6-let- L-&) Iem /=A Z,LJ v 30--022tom Ti- 207M Xf 224 . 6, 56 - 0154 JJ 24 I,,c 6 1-e te LIZ,alIA-e-Im- V-4-f— I S 1 Loc1 C le .Odd We the residents of Loch Glen Lane, McHenry, Illinois, hereby petition the CityofMcHenry, Illinois to resurface Loch Glen Lane rather than patching it. It hasbeeninneedofrepairforseveralyears. It is our opinion that simply patchingthisstreetisnotsufficientandawasteoftimeandmoney. Name Are you a reg-AdAddressss L%teLr d-voter.— Si gnature - Z( L. ; , K6 Yt 15) q0 3--73Z7 v, T) FYI r` Lo C f}L av f s Department of Public Works Troy Strange, Director of Public Works 1415 Industrial Drive McHenry, Illinois 60050 Phone: (815) 363-2186 Fax: (815) 363-2214 www.cityofmchenry.org The City of McHenry is dedicated to providing the citizens, businesses and visitors of McHenry with the highest quality of programs and services in a customer-oriented, efficient and fiscally responsible manner. PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE AGENDA SUPPLEMENT DATE: November 7, 2019 TO: Public Works Committee FROM: Troy Strange, Director of Public Works RE: January 2020 Surface Transportation Program Call for Projects ATT: Attachment A, Program Background Attachment B, Program Candidate Scoring Attachment C, EOPC for Recommended Program Candidates Draft Complete Streets Policy, Staff Markup STP Program Presentation Powerpoint AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY: Public Works Staff requests a recommendation from Public Works Committee for the presentation of Surface Transportation Program candidates for application for the January 2020 call for projects to City Council and preparation of a Complete Streets Policy to bring before City Council for approval. Staff further requests a recommendation to select a consultant to begin negotiations for a scope of services to include Phase I Engineering and assistance with project applications which will be brought before City Council for award before the end of the year. BACKGROUND: The Surface Transportation Program (STP) is a source of federal funding by which local agencies including municipalities are able to fund maintenance and improvements of municipally maintained federal aid routes. The McHenry County Council of Mayors and Illinois Department of Transportation act as the liaison to local agencies with regard to the distribution of federal funding on local federal aid routes. In years past, STP projects have included the Crystal Lake The City of McHenry is dedicated to providing the citizens, businesses and visitors of McHenry with the highest quality of programs and services in a customer-oriented, efficient and fiscally responsible manner. Road Project, Bull Valley Road and Curran Road Intersection Improvements, and the Pearl Street and Lincoln Road Improvements which were completed in 2019. The next STP call for projects will open in January of 2020 and will be a particularly well funded program due to a long gap between calls for projects. Staff have been focused on preparing projects which are financially feasible to complete though this program by focusing efforts on resurfacing only projects which will need to be completed at some point regardless of the City’s participation in the program. ANALYSIS: Staff have generated a listing of all federal aid routes in the City system which are eligible for financial aid and a STP project selection score projection (Attachment B). Projects are being submitted as resurfacing only Local Agency Functional Overlay (LAFO) projects. Based upon these rankings the three following projects score the highest, are most financially feasible, and can be completed on an acceptable schedule. • Green Street (Charles Miller Road to Elm Street) • Bull Valley Road (East of Curran Road to Crystal Lake Road) • Dartmoor Drive (Bridge to Crystal Lake Road) Due to project readiness being part of the selection criteria and the need for a certain amount of assistance with the completion of the applications, staff have discerned the possibility of contracting with a firm to assist in the completion of the application as well as the completion of a Phase 1 Engineering study. For a resurfacing only project however, the Phase 1 scope of services is extremely limited and a minimal cost. Contracting with a firm would need to begin before the end of the year in order to meet certain deadlines of the program. RECOMMENDATION: Therefore, if Public Works Committee concurs, it is recommended to allow staff to present Surface Transportation Program candidates for application for the January 2020 call for projects to City Council and to prepare a Complete Streets Policy to bring before City Council for approval. Staff further requests a recommendation to select a consultant and begin negotiations for a scope of services to include Phase I Engineering and assistance with project applications which will be brought before City Council for award before the end of the year. SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM (STP) FUNDING PRESENTATION CITY OF MCHENRY, IL NOVEMBER 7, 2019 STP FUNDING -OVERVIEW •REGIONAL PROGRAM •MUST BE A FEDERAL AID URBAN (FAU) ROUTE •ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS –INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS, RESURFACING •FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CMAP COUNCIL OF MAYORS MUNICIPALITY •80%(FED)/20%(LOCAL) COST SHARE TYPICALLY 2020 STP FUNDING PROGRAM •MORATORIUM ON PROJECTS SINCE 2016 •REVISED FUNDING CRITERIA •ALLOWS FOR RESURFACING PROJECTS (LAFO) •CONSIDERS GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE/BICYCLE ACCOMODATIONS/PAVEMENT CONDITION IN SELECTION CRITERIA •$4.0M FUNDING IN TYPICAL YEAR FOR McHENRY COUNTY •SPECIAL FUNDING CYCLE IN 2020 -$20M AVAILABLE FOR McHENRY COUNTY PROJECTS •LIMITATION ON AWARDS (2 MAX) AND FUNDING ($1.5M per project) POTENTIAL CITY PROJECTS •EVALUATED ALL CITY’S FAU ROUTES •DEVELOPED A PROJECTED SCORE WITH NEW CRITERIA •DID NOT INCLUDE ADDITIONAL CROSS-SECTIONAL ELEMENTS (PERMIABLE PAVERS, BIKE PATHS, ROAD WIDNING) IN SCOPE •DID INCLUDE ADDITIONAL SIGNS, MARKINGS OR TREES •IDENTIFIED 3 POTENTIAL PROJECTS •DARTMOOR DRIVE •BULL VALLEY ROAD •GREEN STREET DARTMOOR DRIVE CITY PARTICIPATION:$107,910 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION:$287,760 TOTAL PROJECT COST:$395,670 •BOONE CREEK BRIDGE TO GREEN STREET ( 3,350 LF) •RESURFACING PROJECT •ADD SHARED BIKE ARROWS/SIGNS •ADD 50 STREET TREES Example of Shared Bike Arrow & Sign BULL VALLEY ROAD CITY PARTICIPATION:$79,141 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION:$211,043 TOTAL PROJECT COST:$290,184 •CRYSTAL LAKE AVE TO 700’ E. OF CURRAN RD (2,800 LF) •RESURFACING PROJECT •NO BIKE ACCOMODATIONS •ADD 56 STREET TREES No Bike Accommodations Proposed GREEN STREET CITY PARTICIPATION:$306,572 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION:$817,526 TOTAL PROJECT COST:$1,124,098 •BULL VALLEY RD TO IL-120 (8,800 LF) •RESURFACING PROJECT •ADD SHARED BIKE MARKINGS AND SIGNS •176 STREET TREES FOR GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE Add Shared Bike Markings November 7, 2019 City Council Meeting Attachment A 2020 Surface Transportation Program Background & City Strategy The City of McHenry is dedicated to providing the citizens, businesses and visitors of McHenry with the highest quality of programs and services in a customer-oriented, efficient and fiscally responsible manner. Surface Transportation Program (STP) Background The Surface Transportation Program is a source of funding by which local agencies including municipalities are able to fund maintenance and improvements of municipally maintained federal aid routes. The McHenry County Council of Mayors and Illinois Department of Transportation act as the liaison to local agencies with regard to the distribution of federal funding on local federal aid routes. These agencies also assist local agencies with program management of these projects as they are required to follow a very structured project development process. Projects which are funded by STP funds are divided into two categories: capacity improvement projects and Local Agency Functional Overlay (LAFO) projects which are essentially resurfacing projects. The upcoming call for projects is currently scheduled to open in January of 2020 with final applications due in March. The last STP call for projects was over five years ago and due to this lag there is a much larger pool of funding available for this particular call for projects than during previous calls. Additionally, the next call will be two years from now but will only contain two years’ worth of funding and thus will become much more selective with projects that are funded. Previous City STP Projects In previous years the City of McHenry has utilized these funds for both categories of projects. Previously completed STP projects include the Crystal Lake Road resurfacing project, Bull Valley Road and Curran Road Intersection Improvements, and the Pearl Street and Lincoln Road Project. Previous Council of Mayors Methodology & Selection Process The process by which agencies secure funding for these projects is a competitive process based upon a project scoring system created by the local Council of Mayors liaison which incorporates categories determined by the Federal Highway Administration. In the past LAFO projects for resurfacing only were more difficult for larger agencies such as the City of McHenry to score well on. Because of this previous project scoring system, larger agencies tended to utilize their STP funds for capacity improvements which involved projects of much larger scope as well as construction and engineering expenditures. Smaller agencies had much more ability to secure funding for LAFO projects while larger agencies were more inclined to complete projects which modified cross sections. Rule Changes to Selection Process In 2019 the Council of Mayors adopted a new set of rules for the STP selection process which has made the pursuit of LAFO projects by larger agencies such as the City of McHenry much more feasible. While smaller agencies still receive a small project scoring benefit for LAFO projects this effect has been significantly reduced which makes LAFO projects completed by larger agencies much more competitive in the selection process. One of the selection categories which is much more heavily weighted is the pavement condition of the route based upon the CMAP condition inspection and ratings, the most recent of which was completed last fall. Another category which is heavily weighted in the selection rankings is an in place Complete Streets Policy, which are essentially planning and new construction requirements for bicycle accommodations. The City of McHenry has over the years begun to introduce more bicycle and pedestrian accommodations on both new development and rehabilitative infrastructure projects. Therefore an in place Complete Streets Policy which still allows the City a significant amount of discretion in its application is recommended. Approach to STP Applications Some of the past projects completed by the City were completed as non-LAFO projects and incorporated cross sectional elements such as the addition of multi-use paths and sidewalks which did not currently exist. Based upon staff research and analysis, the majority of federal eligible routes which have not recently been completed through the STP program either have these elements already or the addition of these elements would significantly increase engineering and construction costs to a point which may not be financially feasible. Therefore staff would recommend the City’s approach to change to strictly resurfacing only LAFO projects. While these projects may not score as well as other projects of greater scope, should these projects be selected, the engineering costs will be low, therefore resurfacing projects which would have had to be completed at some point can be funded at an 80% federal share. Because of the large fund balance the Council of Mayors currently is carrying in STP funding, projects which typically may not have been as competitive may be much more competitive. This means the City can focus on its true needs rather than attempting to create a project that will score better and have a better chance of selection. ANALYSIS OF PROJECT CANDIDATES Provided for the consideration of the committee is a listing of all federal aid routes in the City system which are eligible for financial aid and a STP project selection score projection (Attachment B). Projects are submitted as resurfacing only LAFO projects. Based upon these rankings the three following projects score the highest, are most financially feasible, and can be completed on an acceptable schedule: • Green Street (Charles Miller Road to Elm Street) • Bull Valley Road (East of Curran Road to Crystal Lake Road) • Dartmoor Drive (Bridge to Crystal Lake Road) For each of these projects staff have also generated an estimate of total project cost including all phases of engineering, federal participation amounts, and an estimate of a 100% locally funded project cost (Attachment C). The 100% locally funded costs were generated based upon lower engineering and construction expenditures due to the non-federal process. ATTACHMENT BSTP FUNDINGPRELIMINARY SCORING10/8/20192456FAU From  To Functional Class PCI PtsPts ReadinessADT Pts Pts SafetyPts Bicycle AccomodationsPts Com CohortComplete Streets PolicyGreen InfractructurePts Total CommentsProjected OMEMcCullom Lake Rd IL‐31 Ringwood Major Collector 89 0 2 4,600 4.6 0 0 0 15 0 21.6Recently Re‐surfacedRingwood Road McCullom Lk Rd Il‐120 Minor Arterial 96 0 2 7,900 7.9 0 0 0 15 0 24.9Recently Re‐surfacedMartin Rd IL‐120 Ringwood Minor Collector 17 10 2 1,700 1.7 0 0 0 15 0 28.7Shore Drive/Meadow Ln Ringwood IL‐120 Minor Collector 25 10 2 1,400 1.40 0 0 15 0 28.4Shore Dr ONLY ‐ Meadow recently re‐surfacedOak Dr/Industrial Dr/Orleans St IL‐120 McCullom Rd Major Collector82 0 2 4,500 4.5 0 0 0 15 0 21.5Recently Re‐surfacedFront St/Millstream/Maple IL‐120 IL‐31 Major Collector 35 10 2 2,250 2.3 0 0 0 15 0 29.3N Riverside Dr IL‐120 Johnsburg Rd Major Collector 33 10 2 4,650 4.7 0 0 015 0 31.7Pearl St IL‐31 River Rd Major Collector cant find 0 2 4,800 4.8 0 0 0 15021.8Pearl/Lincoln IL‐120 Chapel Hill Rd Minor Arterial 92 0 2 5,500 5.5 0 0 0 15 0 22.5Recently Re‐surfacedN Curran IL‐120 Bull Valley Rd Major Collector 31 10 2 5,950 6.0 0 0 0 15 0 33.0W Dartmoor Rd Curran Rd W Crystal Lake Rd Major Collector 32 10 2 2,350 2.4 0 6 0 15 10 45.4From Bridge to Cry Lk Ave 3,352 LF.  Add shared bike lane, signs.  Add 50‐100 street trees.3352 @ $100/LF=$335,200Front Royal Dr IL‐120 W Crystal Lake Rd Minor Collector 93 0 2 1,150 1.2 0 0 0 15 0 18.2Recently Re‐surfacedMain St W Crystal Lake Rd IL‐31 Major Collector 47 30 2 2,000 2.0 0 0 0 15 10 59.0IL‐31 to Cry Lk Ave ONLY.  1,232 LF. Add planter boxes for green infrastructure1,232@$100/LF=$123,200W John St IL‐31 N Green St Major Collector 40 10 2 1,350 1.4 0 0 0 15 0 28.4W Kane Ave IL‐31 N Green St Minor Collector 18 10 2 950 1.0 0 0 0 15 0 28.0N Lillian St W Crystal Lake Rd IL‐31 Major Collector 59 30 2 3,200 3.2 00 0 15 0 50.2Just Resurfaced 2012.  No need to re‐surfaceN Green St IL‐120 Charles Miller Rd Major Collector 35 10 2 5,250 5.3 0 60 15 10 48.38800 LF.  Add Sharrows.  8,200 LF to be paved.  Barreville Rd Charles Miller IL‐176 Major Collector 31 10 2 1,200 1.2 0 60 15 10 44.2Add Prairie plants to ditches, maybe street trees, 4' paved shoulder and 11' lanes. 8,200Lf in City8,200@$75/LF=$615,000Ridgeview Dr/Prime Pkwy Bull Valley Rd IL‐31 Major Collector 87 0 2 6,150 6.2 0 0 0 15 0 23.2Recently Re‐surfacedVeterans Pkwy IL‐31 Barreville Minor Collector 41 10 2 1,850 1.9 0 0 0 15 0 28.9W Crystal Lake Ave IL‐120 IL‐176 Major Collector 80 0 2 14,00014.0 0 0 0 15 0 31.0Recently Re‐surfacedBull Valley Rd Crystal Lake Ave Draper Major Collector 47 30 2 10,00010.0 0 0 0 15 10 67.0 7,400 LF.  2,800Lf Needs to be resurfaced 7,400@$75/LF= $555,000173 ATTACHMENT CSCHEDULE I ‐ GREEN STREET (CONSTRUCTION ONLY) ‐ 8,800 LF (centerline) ‐ 28'E‐E PLUS PARKING & TURN LANESNo. ItemQuantityUnit Unit Price Extension QuantityUnit Unit Price Extension1 HMA BC IL 4.5 (Polymerized), N50 ‐ 0.75" 1,483 TON 100.00$       148,300.00$     1,483 TON 100.00$       148,300.00$        2 HMA SC IL 9.5, N50 ‐ 1.5" 2,965 TON 75.00$           222,375.00$     2,965 TON75.00$          222,375.00$        3 HMA Surf Removal ‐ 2.0" 35,300SY3.50$             123,550.00$     35,300SY3.50$             123,550.00$        4 Comb Curb & Gutter Removal 1,760 LF 10.00$           17,600.00$       1,760 LF10.00$          17,600.00$          5 Comb. Curb & Gutter Type M3.12 1,760 LF 25.00$           44,000.00$       1,760 LF25.00$          44,000.00$          6 Class D Patch ‐ 4" 1,765 SY 35.00$           61,775.00$       1,765 SY35.00$          61,775.00$          7 Bit Driveway Removal and Replacement ‐ 3" 100 SY 90.00$           9,000.00$         100 SY90.00$          9,000.00$            8 Structures to be Adjusted 60 EA 500.00$       30,000.00$       60 EA500.00$       30,000.00$          9 Thpl Pvt Marking ‐ 24" Line 650 LF 3.00$            1,950.00$         650 LF3.00$            1,950.00$            10 Thpl Pvt Marking ‐ 4" Double Yellow 8,800 LF 2.00$             17,600.00$       8,800 LF2.00$            17,600.00$          11 Thpl Pvt Marking ‐ 4" White 3,000 LF 1.00$            3,000.00$         3,000 LF1.00$            3,000.00$            12 Thpl Pvt Marking ‐ Letter and Symbols 100 SF 10.00$           1,000.00$         100 SF10.00$          1,000.00$            13 Thpl Pvt Marking Letters and Symblos (Special) ‐ Sharrow 36 EA 350.00$       12,600.00$       0 EA350.00$       ‐$ 14 Signs36 EA 350.00$       12,600.00$       0 EA350.00$       ‐$ 15 Street Trees176 EA 350.00$       61,600.00$       0 EA350.00$       ‐$ 16 PCC Sidewalk Removal & Replacement ‐ ADA Ramps only 3,600 SF10.00$           36,000.00$       3,600 SF10.00$          36,000.00$          17 Detectable Warnings 288 SF 30.00$           8,640.00$         288 SF30.00$          8,640.00$            18 Traffic Control 1 LUMP SUM 30,000.00$  30,000.00$       1 LUMP SUM 30,000.00$  30,000.00$          19 Mobilization  1 LUMP SUM 5,000.00$    10,000.00$       1 LUMP SUM 10,000.00$  10,000.00$          SUBTOTAL SCHEDULE I ‐ GREEN STREET (CONSTRUCTION ONLY) 851,590.00$     764,790.00$        Phase I Engineering, Surveying and Permitting @ 2% 17,031.80$       0%‐$ Phase II Design Engineering and Permitting @10%85,159.00$       6%45,887.40$          Phase III Construction Engineering and Testing @ 10% 85,159.00$       6%45,887.40$          SUBTOTAL SCHEDULE I ‐ GREEN STREET (ENGINEERING ONLY) 187,349.80$     91,774.80$          SUBTOTAL SCHEDULE I ‐ GREEN STREET (CONTINGENCY)10% 85,159.00$       10%76,479.00$          TOTAL COST SCHEDULE I ‐ GREEN STREET 1,124,098.80$ 933,043.80$        CITY PARTICIPATION (100% PHASE I AND II + 20% OF PHASE III ENG AND CONSTRUCTION)306,572.40$     933,043.80$        FEDERAL PARTICIPATION817,526.40$     $0.00Notes:1) Project costs are in current year dollars.  Contingency or cost escallation should be addedto reflect projected construction year.2) EOPC based on engineer's experience and research of other similar projects.  Due to circumstancesbeyond our control such and the bidding environment, labor rates, material costs and contractor interest, the projected costs in this EOPC are not a gurantee or warantee. 3) Paving limits from Bull Valley Rd to Rte120.ENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE COST (EOPC)GREEN STREET10/15/2019STP FUNDED IMPROVEMENT CITY FUNDING ONLY SCHEDULE I ‐ BULL VALLEY ROAD (CONSTRUCTION ONLY) ‐ 2,800 LF (centerline) ‐ 24'E‐ENo. ItemQuantity Unit Unit Price Extension Quantity Unit Unit Price Extension1 HMA BC IL 4.5 (Polymerized), N50 ‐ 0.75"450 TON 100.00$        45,000.00$       450 TON 100.00$        45,000.00$          2 HMA SC IL 9.5, N50 ‐ 1.5"900 TON75.00$          67,500.00$       900 TON75.00$          67,500.00$          3 HMA Surf Removal ‐ 2.0"10732 SY3.50$             37,562.00$       10732 SY3.50$            37,562.00$          4 Aggregate Wedge Shoulder, Type B ‐ 2"307 TON15.00$          4,605.00$          307 TON15.00$          4,605.00$             5 HMA Shoulders ‐ 4"44 TON75.00$          3,300.00$          44 TON75.00$          3,300.00$             6 Class D Patch ‐ 4"537 SY35.00$          18,795.00$       537 SY35.00$          18,795.00$          7 Thpl Pvt Marking ‐ 24" Line25 LF3.00$            75.00$                25 LF3.00$            75.00$ 8 Thpl Pvt Marking ‐ 4" Double Yellow2800 LF2.00$            5,600.00$          2800 LF2.00$            5,600.00$             9 Thpl Pvt Marking ‐ 4" Lane Line White5600 LF1.00$            5,600.00$          5600 LF1.00$            5,600.00$             10 Thpl Pvt Marking Letters and Symbols140 SF10.00$          1,400.00$          140 EA10.00$          1,400.00$             11 Trees ‐ 2.5" Caliper56 EA 275.00$        15,400.00$       0 EA275.00$        ‐$ 12 Traffic Control1 LUMP SUM 10,000.00$  10,000.00$       1 LUMP SUM 10,000.00$  10,000.00$          13 Mobilization 1 LUMP SUM 5,000.00$    5,000.00$          1 LUMP SUM 5,000.00$    5,000.00$             SUBTOTAL SCHEDULE I ‐ BULL VALLEY ROAD (CONSTRUCTION ONLY)219,837.00$     204,437.00$        Phase I Engineering, Surveying and Permitting @2%4,396.74$          0%‐$ Phase II Design Engineering and Permitting @10%21,983.70$       6%12,266.22$          Phase III Construction Engineering and Testing @10%21,983.70$       6%12,266.22$          SUBTOTAL SCHEDULE I ‐ BULL VALLEY ROAD (ENGINEERING ONLY)48,364.14$       24,532.44$          SUBTOTAL SCHEDULE I ‐ BULL VALLEY ROAD (CONTINGENCY)10%21,983.70$       10%20,443.70$          TOTAL COST SCHEDULE I ‐ BULL VALLEY ROAD290,184.84$     249,413.14$        CITY PARTICIPATION (100% PHASE I AND II + 20% OF PHASE III ENG AND CONSTRUCTION)79,141.32$       249,413.14$        FEDERAL PARTICIPATION (80% OF PHASE III ENG AND CONSTRUCTION)211,043.52$     $0.00Notes:1) Project costs are in current year dollars.  Contingency or cost escallation should be addedto reflect projected construction year.2) EOPC based on engineer's experience and research of other similar projects.  Due to circumstancesbeyond our control such and the bidding environment, labor rates, material costs and contractor interest, the projected costs in this EOPC are not a gurantee or warantee. 3) Project limits from 700' Crystal Lake Rd to City LimitsENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE COST (EOPC)BULL VALEY ROAD10/15/2019STP FUNDED IMPROVEMENT CITY FUNDING ONLYATTACHMENT C SCHEDULE I ‐ DARTMOOR DRIVE (CONSTRUCTION ONLY) ‐ 3350 LF (centerline) ‐ 31'E‐ENo. ItemQuantity Unit Unit Price Extension Quantity Unit Unit Price Extension1 HMA BC IL 4.5 (Polymerized), N50 ‐ 0.75"533 LF 100.00$        53,300.00$       533 LF100.00$        53,300.00$          2 HMA SC IL 9.5, N50 ‐ 1.5" 1067 TON 75.00$           80,025.00$       1067 TON75.00$          80,025.00$          3 HMA Surf Removal ‐ 2.0" 12700 SY 3.50$             44,450.00$       12700 SY3.50$            44,450.00$          4 Comb Curb & Gutter Removal 750 LF 10.00$          7,500.00$         670 LF10.00$          6,700.00$            5 Comb. Curb & Gutter Type M3.12 750 LF 25.00$           18,750.00$       670 LF25.00$          16,750.00$          6 Class D Patch ‐ 4" 635 SY 35.00$           22,225.00$       635 SY35.00$          22,225.00$          7 Bit Driveway Removal and Replacement ‐ 3" 100 SY 90.00$          9,000.00$         100 SY90.00$          9,000.00$            8 Structures to be Adjusted 10 EA 500.00$        5,000.00$         10 EA500.00$        5,000.00$            9 Thpl Pvt Marking ‐ 24" Line 100 LF 25.00$          2,500.00$         100 LF25.00$          2,500.00$            10 Thpl Pvt Marking Letters and Symblos (Special) ‐ Sharrow 15 EA 350.00$        5,250.00$         0 EA350.00$        ‐$ 11 Signs10 EA 350.00$        3,500.00$         0 EA350.00$        ‐$ 12 Trees ‐ 2.5" Caliper50 EA 275.00$        13,750.00$       0 EA275.00$        ‐$ 13 PCC Sidewalk Removal & Replacement ‐ ADA Ramps only 1500 SF10.00$           15,000.00$       1500 SF10.00$          15,000.00$          14 Detectable Warnings 150 SF 30.00$          4,500.00$         150 SF30.00$          4,500.00$            15 Traffic Control 1 LUMP SUM 10,000.00$  10,000.00$       1 LUMP SUM 10,000.00$  10,000.00$          16 Mobilization  1 LUMP SUM 5,000.00$    5,000.00$         1 LUMP SUM 5,000.00$    5,000.00$            SUBTOTAL SCHEDULE I ‐ DARTMOOR DRIVE (CONSTRUCTION ONLY) 299,750.00$     269,450.00$        Phase I Engineering, Surveying and Permitting @ 2% 5,995.00$         0%‐$ Phase II Design Engineering and Permitting @10%29,975.00$       6%16,167.00$          Phase III Construction Engineering and Testing @ 10% 29,975.00$       6%16,167.00$          SUBTOTAL SCHEDULE I ‐ DARTMOOR DRIVE (ENGINEERING ONLY) 65,945.00$       32,334.00$          SUBTOTAL SCHEDULE I ‐ DARTMOOR DRIVE (CONTINGENCY)10% 29,975.00$       10%26,945.00$          TOTAL COST SCHEDULE I ‐ DARTMOOR DRIVE  395,670.00$     328,729.00$        CITY PARTICIPATION (100% PHASE I AND II + 20% OF PHASE III ENG AND CONSTRUCTION)107,910.00$     328,729.00$        FEDERAL PARTICIPATION287,760.00$     $0.00Notes:1) Project costs are in current year dollars.  Contingency or cost escallation should be addedto reflect projected construction year.2) EOPC based on engineer's experience and research of other similar projects.  Due to circumstancesbeyond our control such and the bidding environment, labor rates, material costs and contractor interest, the projected costs in this EOPC are not a gurantee or warantee. STP FUNDED IMPROVEMENTCITY FUNDING ONLYENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE COST (EOPC)DARTMOOR DRIVE10/15/2019ATTACHMENT C WHEREAS, safe accommodations for all users and a connected network are important needs of any transportation system; and WHEREAS, Complete Streets are defined as improvements that provide safe, connected transportation networks for pedestrians, cyclists, transit users, freight, emergency services, and motor vehicles including but not limited to bicycle facilities, streetscaping, pedestrian treatments, refuge islands, access control and lower speeds on local roads; and WHEREAS, [MUNICIPALITY] CITY OF McHENRY recognizes the need to accommodate all modes of transportation because of the associated improvements to safety, the environment, quality of life, health, and economic development; and WHEREAS, many jurisdictions within McHenry County and the Chicago region have already adopted Complete Streets policies; and WHEREAS, by adopting a Complete Streets policy the [MUNICIPALITY] CITY OF McHENRYis helping to implement the region’s ON TO 2050 Plan and will therefore be entitled to bonus points during the upcoming 2020 STP-L Call for Projects.. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the [MUNICIPALITY] CITY OF McHENRY, by this resolution, adopts the Complete Streets Policy attached as Exhibit A. DATED    (City/Village) CITY OF McHENRY  Complete Streets Policy  (Date)    I. VISION  Complete Streets provides significant health, safety, environmental, economic, and social benefits. By  accommodating all users of our transportation system, including pedestrians, cyclists, transit users,  freight trucks, and single‐occupancy vehicles, the City can capitalize on the numerous other benefits of  Complete Streets. The  City supports the creation of amenities that enhance the quality of life of  residents and improve the physical and social environment in ways that attract businesses and workers.  The purpose of this policy is to, first and  foremost, ensure that all users of the  transportation system are accommodated.  This policy directs the City to develop and  maintain a safe and equitable  transportation system that anyone can  access, utilize, and enjoy. This policy shall be  observed when planning, designing,  constructing, and operating City streets.   Goals   Enhance roadway safety for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motor vehicles   Provide a variety of choices for active, non‐motorized transportation to routine destinations   Increase the capacity and efficiency of the transportation network, reduce traffic congestion,  and improve air quality by improving mobility options   To create a comprehensive, integrated, and connected transportation network   To recognize the need for flexibility to accommodate different types of streets and users   Promote environmental benefits such as preserving the natural environment and reducing  greenhouse gas emissions   Improve the local economy by creating quality of life resources for the City residents and  promoting sustainable development   Improve health and physical fitness among residents   Create aesthetically beautiful and physically pleasant streets for all modes   To ensure that the Complete Streets design solutions fit within the context(s) of the community     II. DIVERSE USERS  The City shall ensure that the safety and convenience of all users of the transportation system are  accommodated, including pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, people of all ages and abilities,  motorists, emergency responders, freight providers, and adjacent land users. Vulnerable users in  Cross‐section of a Complete Street. The street accommodates bus riders,  cyclists, pedestrians, and motor vehicles.  particular will be prioritized. Those with disabilities and senior citizens shall be given extra  consideration in the design and planning processes.   When there are conflicting needs among users and modes, the following prioritization will apply:  A. Above all, safety is paramount, followed by mobility  B. Among modes, pedestrians shall come first citywide, followed by the next most vulnerable  types of users  C. Seek balance among all modes involved  It is recognized that all modes cannot receive the same type of accommodation and space on every  street, but the overall goal is that everyone – young, old, and of varying ability – can safely and  conveniently travel across the network using whatever mode they choose.    III. PROJECTS AND PHASES  The City shall approach every transportation project phase as an opportunity to create safer, more  accessible streets for all users. These phases include, but are not limited to: planning, programming,  design, right‐of‐way acquisition, construction, construction engineering, reconstruction, operation and  maintenance. Other changes to transportation facilities on streets and rights‐of‐way, including capital  improvements, re‐channelization projects and major maintenance, must also be included.   IV. EXEMPTIONS  There may be a number of reasons why implementation is not feasible.  The following are considered  reasonable exemptions from policy implementation:   The cost of providing full accommodation would be excessively disproportionate to the need or  probability of use, now or in the future;   Accommodation is not practically feasible because of severe topographic constraints or  significant adverse impacts to the natural environment, historic or cultural resources, or  neighboring land uses;   The project is under construction or in the final design stages at the time of the adoption of this  Policy   A reasonable and equivalent alternative already exists  for certain users or is programmed as a separate project   The existing and planned population, employment  densities, traffic volumes, or level of transit service around a  particular roadway, as documented by the [appropriate  plan/s], is so low as a to demonstrate an absence of current  and future need   The [Public Works] Public Works Director or his  designee issues a documented exemption concluding that the  application of Complete Streets principles is unnecessary,  unduly cost prohibitive, or inappropriate because it would be  contrary to public safety  When projects are exempted from the Policy, a greater effort  shall be made to accommodate affected users elsewhere,  including on adjacent streets and on streets that intersect  with the street or facility.   V. NETWORK  This Policy shall result in a comprehensive, integrated, and connected transportation network for all  modes. This ensures that the needs of all users are met, regardless of mode.   VI. JURISDICTIONS   This Policy shall apply to all city (or village) owned transportation facilities in the public right‐of‐way  including but not limited to: streets, sidewalks, alleys, bridges, trails, parking lots, and all other  connecting pathways.   Looking to the future, the City shall also foster partnerships with other agencies that further the City’s  vision of a connected, integrated transportation network that reaches beyond city borders. Partners  should include but not be limited to:   Illinois Department of Transportation   McHenry County Division of Transportation   Township Highway Departments   School Districts   Local businesses   Private developers   Neighboring communities    Wayfinding is an essential part of Complete  Streets.  VII. DESIGN GUIDANCE & FLEXIBILITY   The City shall follow and use  shall consider the  latest design standards available, including but  not limited to: existing design guidance from the  American Association of State Highway Officials  (AASHTO), state Departments of Transportation,  the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE),  the National Association of City Transportation  Officials (NACTO), the Americans with Disabilities  Act (ADA), and the Public Right‐of‐Way  Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG).  The City shall maximize design flexibility and innovation for balanced user and modal needs in our  community. This includes a shift toward designing at the human scale for the needs and comfort of  pedestrians. Design criteria shall be at the discretion of the City and shall not be purely prescriptive but  shall be based on the thoughtful application of engineering, architectural, urban and rural design  principles.   VIII. LAND USE & CONTEXT SENSITIVITY  The City shall implement Complete Streets solutions in a manner that is sensitive to the local context  and character, aligns transportation and land use goals recorded in the City Comprehensive Plan, and  recognizes that the needs of users may vary by case, community or corridor.   IX. PROJECT SELECTION CRITERIA  The City shall follow shall consider accepted or adopted design standards, including but not limited to,  existing design guidance from:   Active Transportation Alliance (ATA)   State Department of Transportation   Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)    Public Right‐of‐Way Accessibility Guidance (PROWAG)   American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials  o Guide for Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities  o Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities   National Association of City Transportation Officials – Urban Bikeway Design Guide   The Access Board – Pedestrian Rights‐of‐Way Accessibility Guidelines    X. IMPLEMENTATION  The City shall view Complete Streets as integral to everyday transportation decision‐making practices  and processes. Toward this end, this policy shall be implemented through the following directives:  1) Revisions. The City and other relevant department, agencies, or committees will incorporate  Complete Streets principles into all new projects and improvements. It will consider this policy  when designing new roads or facilities.  2) Inventory. The City will maintain a comprehensive inventory of the pedestrian and bicycling  infrastructure and will prioritize projects to eliminate gaps in these networks.   3) Funding. City staff will actively seek sources of funding to implement Complete Streets.   4) Coordination. The City shall continue to utilize inter‐departmental project coordination to  promote the better use of fiscal resources for activities that occur within the public right‐of‐way.  5) Education. Every Complete Streets project shall include an educational component to ensure  that all users understand and can safely utilize the Complete Street.  The implementation of Complete Streets shall begin  through the consideration of the following identified  projects and initiatives that will be considered starting  points:  1) Incorporate Policy into the City Comprehensive  Plan (if applicable)   2) Work on connection to and between trails,  including improved signage  3) Seek funding support through all Federal, State,  and local sources  4) Ensure that all bridge projects include sufficient pedestrian and bicycle accommodations where  economically feasible  5) Ensure consistency in street projects to create broader community benefits  6) Preserve and further maximize on‐street parking for both convenience and commerce  7) Build intersections right the first time, with a vision for the present and future, and correct  existing issues whenever possible  8) Work with the School District to develop a Safe Routes to School program where economically  feasible.  9) Pursue certification as a walk‐friendly or bicycle‐friendly City    Separated bike facilities ensure safety for drivers and  cyclists, like this bike lane above.