HomeMy WebLinkAboutRFP - P739 ADVANCED TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT SYSTEMCity of Fort Collins
Admin alive Services
Purchasing Division
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
ADVANCED TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
G'1 ac-loo]
PROPOSAL DATE: 3:00 p m (our clock) JANUARY 12, 2000
256 W Mountain Avenue • PO Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6775 • FAX (970) 221-6707
REVIEW AND ASSESSMENT
Professional firms will be evaluated on the following criteria
for review of the written proposals and interview session
i
These criteria will be the basis
i
i
The rating scale shall be from 1 to 5, with 1 being a poor rating, 3 being an average rating,
and 5 being an outstanding rating
WEIGHTING
QUALIFICATION
STANDARD
FACTOR
20
Scope of Proposal
Does the proposal show an unde'rstanding
of the protect objective, methodology to be
used and results that are desired from the
project? j
2 0
Assigned Personnel
Do the persons who will be working on the
project have the necessary skills? Are
sufficient people of the requisite skills
assigned to the project? j
10
Availability
Can the work be completed in the
necessary time? Can the targetistartand
completion dates be met? Are other
qualified personnel available toIassist in
meeting the project schedule if required?
Is the project team available to attend
meetings as required by the Scope of
Work?
10
Motivation
Is the firm interested and are they
capable of doing the work in the required
time frame?
20
Cost and
Do the proposed cost and work hours
Work Hours
compare favorably with the protect
Manager's estimate? Are the work hours
presented reasonable for the effort
required in each protect task or phase?
20
Firm Capability
Does the firm have the support
capabilities the assigned personnel
require? Has the firm done previous
protects of this type and scope?
i
i
i
i
Reference evaluation (Top Ranked Firm)
The project Manager will check references using the following criteria The evaluation
rankings will be labeled Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory
QUALIFICATION STANDARD
i
Overall Performance Would you hire this Professional again? Did they
show the skills required by this project?
Timetable Was the original Scope of Work completed within
the specified time? Were interim deadlines met in
a timely manner?
Completeness Was the Professional responsive to client needs,
did the Professional anticipate problems? Were
problems solved quickly and effectively?
i
i
Budget Was the original Scope of Work completed within the
protect budget?
I
Job Knowledge a) If a study, did it meet the Scope of
work?
i
b) If Professional administered a I construction
contract, was the protect functional upon
completion and did it operate properly? Were
problems corrected quickly and effectively
i
i
i
i
i
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
i
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into the day and year set forth below, by and
between THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO, a Municipal Corporate in, hereinafter
i
referred to as the "City" and , [insert either a corporation, a partriership or an
individual, doing business as 1, hereinafter referred to as "Professional"
WITNESSETH
i
I
In consideration of the mutual covenants and obligations herein expressed, it is
l
agreed by and between the parties hereto as follows
1 Scope of Services The Professional agrees to provide! services in
accordance with the scope of services attached hereto as Exhibit " A", consisting of
i
( ) page[s], and incorporated herein by this reference
2 The Work Schedule [Optional] The services to be performed pursuant to
this Agreement shall be performed in accordance with the Work Schedule attached hereto
i
i
as Exhibit "B", consisting of ( ) page[s], and incorporated herein by this
I
reference
i
3 Time of Commencement and Completion of Services The services to be
performed pursuant to this Agreement shall be initiated within L_) days following
I
execution of this Agreement Services shall be completed no later than Time is of
the essence Any extensions of the time. limit set forth above must be agreed upon in
i
writing by the parlies hereto
i
4 Early Termination by City Notwithstanding the time periods contained
i
herein, the City may terminate this Agreement at any time without cause by providing
I
written notice of termination to the Professional Such notice shall be delivered at least
I
fifteen (15) days prior to the termination date contained in said notice unless otherwise
i
i
i
i
agreed in writing by the parties All notices provided under this Agreement shall be
i
i
effective when mailed, postage prepaid and sent to the following addresses
Professional Copy With Copy to
i
i
i
i
In the event of any such early termination by the City, the Professional shall be paid for
i
services rendered prior to the date of termination, subject only to the satisfactory
performance of the Professional's obligations under this Agreement Such payment shall
f
be the Professional's sole right and remedy for such termination
i
5 Design, Protect. Indemnity and Insurance Responsibility Thel Professional
i
shall be responsible for the professional quality, technical accuracy, timely completion and
the coordination of all services rendered by the Professional, including but not limited to
i
designs, plans, reports, specifications, and drawings and shall, without additional
i
compensation, promptly remedy and correct any errors, omissions, or other deficiencies
The Professional shall indemnify, save and hold harmless the City, its lofficers and
I
employees in accordance with Colorado law, from all damages whatsoever claIimed by third
parties against the City, and for the City's costs and reasonable attorneys Ifees, arising
I
i
directly or indirectly out of the Professional's performance of any of the services furnished
i
i
under this Agreement The Professional shall maintain commercial general liability
insurance in the amount of $500,000 combined single limits, and errors and omissions
i
insurance in the amount of
i
6 Compensation [Use this paragraph or Option 1 below ] In consideration
i
i
of the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement, the City agrees to pay
i
Professional a fixed fee in the amount of ($ ) plus reimbursable direct costs
All such fees and costs shall not exceed
($ ) Monthly partial payments based
i
i
upon the Professional's billings and itemized statements are permissible ThIe amounts of
all such partial payments shall be based upon the Professional's City-venfieid progress in
I
completing the services to be performed pursuant hereto and upon the City' is approval of
i
the Professional's actual reimbursable expenses Final payment shall be made following
i
acceptance of the work by the City Upon final payment, all designs, plans, reports,
i
specifications, drawings, and other services rendered by the Professional shall become the
i
sole property of the City
i
6 Compensation [Option 11 In consideration of the services to be performed
I
pursuant to this Agreement, the City agrees to pay Professional on a time and (reimbursable
I
i
direct cost basis according to the following schedule
Hourty bdhng rates
Reimbursable direct costs
with maximum compensation (for both Professional's time and reimbursablel direct costs)
not to exceed ($ ) Monthly partial payments based upon the PIrofessional's
billings and itemized statements of reimbursable direct costs are permissible I he amounts
I
of all such partial payments shall be based upon the Professional's City -verified progress
i
in completing the services to be performed pursuant hereto and upon the City's approval
of the Professional's reimbursable direct costs Final payment shall be made following
i
acceptance of the work by the City Upon final payment, all designs, plans, reports,
specifications, drawings and other services rendered by the Professional shalll become the
sole property of the City
i
7 City Representative The City will designate, prior to commencement of
i
work, its protect representative who shall make, within the scope of his or her, authority, all
necessary and proper decisions with reference to the protect All requestsi for contract
i
interpretations, change orders, and other clarification or instruction shall be diirected to the
i
i
3 �
City Representative
i
8 Protect Drawings [Optional] Upon conclusion of the protect and before final
i
i
payment, the Professional shall provide the City with reproducible drawings'of the protect
i
containing accurate information on the protect as constructed Drawings shall be of archival
quality, prepared on stable mylar base material using a non -fading process to prove for long
storage and high quality reproduction
i
9 Montt Report Commencing thirty (30) days after the date 0 execution of
this Agreement and every thirty (30) days thereafter, Professional is required to provide the
City Representative with a written report of the status of the work with respect, to the Scope
i
of Services, Work Schedule, and other material information Failure to provide any required
I
I
monthly report may, at the option of the City, suspend the processing of any partial
payment request
10 Independent Contractor The services to be performed by Professional are
those of an independent contractor and not of an employee of the City of Fort; Collins The
City shall not be responsible for withholding any portion of Professional's
hereunder for the payment of FICA, Workers' Compensation, other taxes or benefits or for
any other purpose
11 Personal Services It is understood that the City enters into thifs Agreement
based on the special abilities of the Professional and that this Agreement shall be
I
considered as an agreement for personal
services Accordingly, the Professional shall neither assign any responsibilities nor
i
i
delegate any duties arising under this Agreement without the prior written consent of the
City
12 Acceptance Not Waiver The
i
i
i
i
I
City's approval of drawings, deisigns, plans,
i
i
jd
1
I
I
I
specifications, reports, and incidental work or materials furnished hereunder shall not in any
I
I
way relieve the Professional of responsibility for the quality or technical accuracy of the
I
work The City's approval or acceptance of, or payment for, any of the services shall not
I
be construed to operate as a waiver of any rights or benefits provided to the City under this
I
Agreement
i
13 Default Each and every term and condition hereof shall be deemed to be
a material element of this Agreement In the event either party should fail or refuse to
i
perform according to the terms of this agreement, such party may be declared in default
14 Remedies In the event a party has been declared in default, such
defaulting party shall be allowed a period of ten (10) days within which to cure said default
I
In the event the default remains uncorrected, the party declaring default may elect to (a)
I
terminate the Agreement and seek damages, (b) treat the Agreement as continuing and
require specific performance, or (c) avail himself of any other remedy at law or equity If
i
the non -defaulting party commences legal or equitable actions against the defaulting party,
I
I
the defaulting party shall be liable to the non -defaulting party for the non -defaulting party's
reasonable attorney fees and costs incurred because of the default
15 Binding Effect This writing, together with the exhibits hereto, constitutes the
I
entire agreement between the parties and shall be binding upon said parties, itheir officers,
I
employees, agents and assigns and shall inure to the benefit of the respectiI ve survivors,
heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns of said parties
I
16 Law/Severability The laws of the State of Colorado shall govern the
I
I
construction, interpretation, execution and enforcement of this Agreement In the event any
I
provision of this Agreement shall be held Invalid or unenforceable by any court of
i
competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not invalidate or render unenforceaI ble any other
provision of this Agreement
1
I
I
5
I
I
I
I
I
17 I)ecial Provisions [Optional] Special provisions or conditioi ns relating to
the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement are set forth in Exhibit "C",
I
consisting of ( ) page[s], attached hereto and incorporated HI erein by this
reference
THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
By
John F Fischbach
City Manager
ATTEST
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Assistant City Attorney
ATTEST
Corporate Secretary
By
James B O'Neill II, CPPO
I
Director of Purchasing & Risk Management
DATE
Insert Professional's name
Z
Title I
CORPORATE PRESIDENT OR VICE PRESIDENT
Date
(Corporate Seal)
6
I
1
I
I
I
EXHIBIT C
YEAR 2000 COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATION AND INDEMNITY
I
Section 1 Contractor hereby certifies that all information resources or systems to
be provided or used in connection with the performance of this Agreement are "Year
2000 Compliant" except as otherwise expressly described in Section 2, below "Year
2000 Compliant" shall mean that information resources meet the following ci riteria
a Data structures (e g , databases, data files) provide 4-digit date century
recognition For example, "1996" provides date century recognition, °96" does not
I
i
b Stored data contains date century recognition, including (but not limited
to) data stored in databases and hardware/device internal system dates
i
c Calculations and programs logic accommodate both same century and
multi -century formulas and date values Calculations and logic include (but fare not
limited to) sort algorithms, calendar generation, event recognition, and all processing
actions that use or produce date values
I
I
d Interfaces (to and from other systems or organizations) prevent non-
compliant dates and data from entering any state system
I
i
e User interfaces (i e , screens, reports, etc ) accurately show 4 digit years
I
f Year 2000 is correctly treated as a leap year within all calculation and
calendar logic 1
Section 2 Contractor agrees to notify the City immediately of any information
resources or systems that are not Year 2000 Compliant upon encountering the same in
connection with the performance of the Agreement, including without limitation any
information resources or systems in use by Contractor in the performance of the
Agreement or information resources or systems of the City regarding which Contractor
obtains information in the course of its performance of the Agreement
Section 3 Contractor agrees to permit examination, by the City or agents thereof, of
any and all information resources and systems in use in connection with this Agreement,
and related Year 2000 Compliance implementation plans, in order to evaluate Year
2000 Compliance and potential implications of the same for the City and for
performance of the Agreement
I
I
Section 4 The Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, an, d its
officers, agents and employees, from and against all claims, damages, losses, and
expenses, including attorneys fees, arising out of or resulting from the Contractor's
information resources or systems that are not Year 2000 Compliant
1
City of Fort Collins
Admin,. tive Services
Purchasing Division
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
ADVANCED TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
PROPOSAL NO P-739
The City of Fort Collins is seeking professional engineering consulting services to plan, design,
prepare bid and contract documents, and assist the City in overseeing the installation of an
Advanced Traffic Management System (ATMS) The system will be funded and implemented over
a two-year period
Written proposals, four (4) will be received at the City of Fort Collins' Purchasing Division, 256
West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 Proposals will be received before 3 00 p m
(our clock), January 12, 2000 Proposal No P-739
A copy of the Proposal may be obtained as follows.
Call the Purchasing Fax -line, 970-416-2033 and follow the verbal instruction to
request document #30739
Download the Bid from the Purchasing Webpage, Current Bids page, at
www ci fort-collins co us\CITY_HALL\PURCHASING htm then via the
Current Bids pushbutton
3 Come by Purchasing at 256 W Mountain Ave , Fort Collins, and request a copy
of the Bid
Questions concerning the scope of the project should be directed to the Eric L Bracke, P E
Traffic Engineer, Project Manager, (970) 224-6062
Questions regarding proposals submittal or process should be directed to James B O'Neill II,
CPPO, Director of Purchasing and Risk Management, (970) 221-6775
Sales Prohibited/Conflict of Interest No officer, employee, or member of City Council, shall have
a financial interest in the sale to the City of any real or personal property, equipment, material,
supplies or services where such officer or employee exercises directly or indirectly any decision -
making authority concerning such sale or any supervisory authority over the services to be
rendered This rule also applies to subcontracts with the City Soliciting or accepting any gift,
gratuity favor, entertainment, kickback or any items of monetary value from any person who has
or is seeking to do business with the City of Fort Collins is prohibited
256 W Mountain Avenue • PO, Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6775 • FAX (970) 221-6707
City of i 011 Collins
n�✓%ar�aamvrc�^�5ee a+
ATTACHMENT "A"
i
i
'I he City of Fort Collins
The City 01 Fort Collins
Natural Resources Depaifiient
P O Boa 580
Fort Collttvs, CO 80522-0580
(970)224-6085
June30 1999
M
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction
I Community Descriptions
II System Descriptions 2
Traffic Control System Type 2
Engineering Software 2
Age of Computer 3
Signal type 4
III Communication System 5
System Features 5
IV System Operation 7
V System Maintenance 7
Signal Timing Philosophies 9
Signal Timing Constraints 10
Left -Turn Strategics 10
VI Costs 13
VII Common Problems IS
VIII Conclusions 18
APPENDIX A — Survey Instrument
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Responding Community Charactei istics
Table 2 Signal Type
Table 3 System Features
Table 4 Approaches to System Operation
Table 5 Approaches to System Design
F Table 6 Timing Strategies
1
4
6
7
7
10
0
A
LIST OF FIGURES
]Figure I
Traffic Control System Type
2
]Figure 2
Usage by Manufacturet
3
Figure 3
Signal Type
4
Figure 4 Communication Media
5
Figure 5
Communication Media Source
5
Figure 6
Signal Inspections
8
Figure 7
Lamp Replacement
8
Figure 8
Lamp Cleaning
8
Figure 9
Signal Tuning Philosophies
9
Figure 10
Timing Strategy
9
Figure l l
Left - Turn Phasing
10
Figure 12
Left-Tum Sequencing
11
Figure 13
Use of "Measures of Effectiveness"
11
Figure 14
Signal Optimization
12
Figure 15
Strategies to Evaluate Optimization
13
Figure 16
Signal System Costs, Excluding Electricity Costs
14
Figure 17
Annual Cost per signal, excluding Electricity Costs
15
Figure 18
Signal System Costs, including Electricity
16
Figure 19
Signal System Cost per capita, Including electricity
17
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The City of Fort Collins Natural Resources Depaitment giatef illy acknowledges the assistance of the Air
Quality Advisory Board's Benchmark Committee in conducting this study
Pete Peikms
John Fooks
Nancy York
John Scanlon
We also greatly appreciate the assistance and direction provided by the City's'Lansportation Services
Area, especially from Eric Braeke, Fred Jones, and Gary Diede
Finally, we appreciate the funding provided by the Colorado Department of Public IIealth and
Environment which enabled its to hire Book Engineering, Inc to complete the study
G Foit Collins Benchmark Project
v Trattr. Sienahzahon Survey Results
]INTRODUCTION
In February 1998, the Fort Collins Benchmark Project mailed a six page Community Traffic Signalizanon
Survey to 81 conununitres across the country having populations between 50,000 and 200,000 A total of
66 of surveys were returned, for a response rate of 91% The results ate summarized below
]I. COMMUNITY DESCRIPTION
A total of sixty-six responses were received from sixty-threc croes and three wunties, covering twenty-one
states The average population size of responding communities was 103,100 The average number of
signals, per 1000 population was 1 1, with the maximum being 2 4 and the minimum being 0 08 The
number of signals per capita identified by this survey is lowei than the number (1 24 signals/1000 people)
ieported in the 1992 ITE North American Traffic Signal Inventory
Table 1 Responding Community Charactei istics
Number
Average
Max
Min
Fort Collins
Responding
Population
205
33
(x1000)
65
103 1
Greensboro, NC
Monterey, CA
109
Growth rate's
10
-0 8
Annual (%)
56
28
Richardson, TX
R7 Hartford, CT
32
Beaverton, OR
2400
8
Size (sq/mi)
58
124
San Luis Obispo
Monterey, CA
45
Cly
Density (pop/sq
13,056
63
mr)
58
3,138
Ingle wood, CA
San Luis Obispo
2,422
357
8
Total Signals
7094 signals
113
Montgomery, AL
Humboldt Cry,
143
CA
Signals/
24
008
1000 people
1 62
1 1 1
1 Wilmington,NC
1 San Luis Obispo
1 31
Signals/
C 44
07
sq mi
1 53
3 7
Inglewood, CA
Santa Cruz, CA
3 2
1 When reporting growth rate, it is unclear whether most respondents gave annual growth late, or change
over one decade
As shown in Table 1, Fort Collins is neat the average city of those responding to the survey Fort Collins
has slightly higher signals per 1000 people than the average, but slightly less signals per square mile than
the average This is a good result and the results of the survey are comparable to the City of Fort Collars
11. SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
Craffic Control System Type
The most common type of traffic
control system reported was
Distributed Control/
Distributed Monitoring, used by
:;3% of respondents, followed by
Centralized Conti oUCentralized
Monitoring, followed by conven-
tional time clock The City of Fort
Collins uses the latter two methods
Twenty-three percent of
respondents use a combination
of types All responses at e
incorporated in the graph to the
right
Figure 1
Traffic Control System Type
DStnbuted
Conventional
Control/
Time Clock
Distributed
9%
Monitoring
Distributed
Control/
Centralized
Centralized
Monitoring
Control/ 20%
Centralzed
Monitoring
28%
Mostjurisdictrom, are moving towards distributed control and centiahzed monitoring The advantage of
this type of system is that the system can operate on a predetermined pattern and continue operating on this
Pattern in the event of communications failure or central system failure In other words, if there is a
communication error, the controller at the local intersection can continue to operate without any
inconvenience to the driver This type of strategy also greatly reduces the workload of the central
computer
Engineering Solt ware
The most frequently used engineering software is Tiansyt-7F (61%), followed by Passer 1190 (48%) and
HCS(39%) The majority of locations (76%) use more than one software Figure 2 shows the number of
users by equipment manufacturer
Twenty-eight respondents (42%) indicated they are "Very happy' with their equipment which includes the
following manufacturers Astbiavo, 13rtrans, Concurrent 3212, Crouse -Hinds Digital, Eagle, Econohte,
IDC, JHK, Monaic, Nastee, Peek, Safetians, TCT, FMM, TMP, Traconex, Iranscore, Transyt, VMS, and
Wapiti Only five respondents reported dissatisfaction with their equipment
Figure 2 shows the number of users by equipment manufacturer
Equipment Manufacturers
Eagle t a igPFRd;. I MVia- ,t{,. -aw a: -a=,.. -M
llll-
Peek �,iNfi h- `HH.,„.A,�1.,f,liv! am' !"•,$!l„ii+;i'ir,.�WW�l;���t �5a3•i J , 10,;'"'1
UP
ECOnOlte i
e y,
,
d
BlTrans ! ;,erI3'tdH! r•;,' :`g', �'fH3f3HEH', i,81,, �„ "d,' ,^r�'
SafeTrans " , •'E"� ` ol
,,,,a,= !,i ; ,,E, ,EE ij; ;;,,,,
�i '=i - ' 'y.neaidl'a= u,i =�'', P, Pj'+,n,= i" .n,�''A i `;�i
qy^IBP ! (;", � ���a;�t;l '1, �'=y'�4 m�{F'H`'-
IDC/Miltisonics n_ -- II;;';,s, 7(i1 1',; "I,j, ,,,„I, F=•S
n,M,4k'Ha.`,6 ta,= , „ .nn,iE laag m (1°' '•' ' „4I"'
i i„„IP;,'ii
TransYt.4;i;i'+„'r, Itl� ��,3IIi'
�" i'( 7 ' ,, iu„ ' i • 1, I;i''
Traconex(t) - td , _ „a, 4b{!1 Fd�i;�,=�„a't'•r ,
d!�I,i 'ITwr'i"
,,I,1 `!( 'i..... IV1
TCT -6, „aasa,,t �3 ,`;P j(rt,. ''�I�;,I I,i k„1'II,I -III "1i6 ;
it=hIll'I'll��'��III^,1 ,, h`i vlb'„h i[ ili, l`ii�� ,'$,' �(dn,'i` �._.{„ dh''a;�Ii
Nastex , '=>,H312,,, !',t„II;'n,I„11Ii,,,;•,'�tf'Ijd"k�'Sfi"„' '''I y, r„�•,;'fi''� i
O
,, „t,, E, H „Id �� +'i ='a!'I; i, ir,;�, "I'' i; {I�'Llrii �a 0(�;,
1
Monarc :'j121I i';pll ; I'(j,l+„''e„al; ^'r�Er=!' Yd, ��i, ,I'
a 'e.at y�{I„• i�!�AI:P, 7,iI; .,E „i,'' .. LM P���(I,"I,;E"5„(�Ii" i,I, ;'`�1I3
Wa Itl '{ 51"r,t;;i;l''n�I;I;�,III i';v;',KS!�j E==j',I I'II9FI,ai fi( i, '•{v""'1
r'p,I''Id•F'' , ;iYI i;SN; Ekl � ( k;` " "�' Pill
�{ � 'I` ;� { $
VMS �' 'l2gij l;�i''<''Iry,J;u�i�s'�I+,,,jn ��y';'i,{1�+"EI[''„{'tIE''„`I�ili•i�+¢?i',I Al, r"'';F�'�'i' i
TMP =IiI`1 �1, '{��a:ii•,"„yE�i�i;1�°tj��...
�,,4(',
TMM 76'l'iIi '`''!'''t`I�I�I�i�I'h';;I�j„',j,liid fi1°!�''Ii�i,!!� '{I''ii t {' t'I �`1, ;'` �i;`.,={�hiE',SlralE e�I;
`CI 1 (
I'li rf ,4i
WCainI'VINSOM , ,,I�1, �i;i ,iiii{ �,ry'�,
';1u ,;�y�h , , "VIT ItiH,i N('I?ru�;ty' ,nvE+ „dH,
,IlY i' i'4yj ignn ii
Hr,'d„=,�iI ����„i'J'i'�4'dlj,(i���l `4;+1�„'
�Irc� „au' l `d(i� it' ii SIIi'{l�i��i ,I {�E .
JHK ita '1 dI'�I'i'I' II'„ (' {df("���Li' IIII ,I'�i 'i6'r' Ep!
err • 7;'I' ,,:;v'r'sp•,, „��'I 'I'' 1 {I,;;I';7 'rt ,� H•" pn"i
Digital "" HI,1IIll ;�=i;i't' 1,"i„p; 'Ii,i'+i! a'I"'` , ����I{, �C'{i, R'
'In IIi I•YIG" �',,Ikl,�ir�I,I�;� i'hC"�'rl��S� �',i; + dl ,i
np�+' ni�� ;I ,�i lily un ('ti y,'t4 ill,+,`all,p 1 Poll'!
Crouse -Hinds ;;', f(�I'yr4+
';0,Ilb",'i, 1i�t h'"Ili'' TV I,
Concurrentip' -
r n�"I
�dyJYiiLn 1p;l' ,i, i'
AstBravo',;i;i;S'`i,I �, ' ;°III"t `'''`It 'iiI= 'iiq '''
i {i ;,ii "k (' �i';,i"I'd I VI t,i I;,' `i'h' 4'Ig,;ii/' l IVe
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Number using this type off equipment
12
tagure 2 Usage by Manutactuier
The highest degree of satisfaction came horn Econohte users (6 respondents indicated "Very Happy") and
Eagle (5 respondents indicated "Very Happy" )
Age of Computer
The average age of the ougmal computer in the haffie control system is 10 3 yern s, based on the 32
responses Fort Collins ougmal computer was 14 years old in 1998 Albany GA has the oldest original
computer, at 20 years
3
One problem with older computers is the availability of parts Since there is little aftermaiket for these
parts, one replacement part can be more expensive then 10 brand new Pentmm 1I computers Expensive
maintenance contracts are often necessary to ensure that the pai is will be available for older computers
signal Tvoe
Survey -wide, the most common
types of signals are fully -actuated,
followed by semi -actuated
'Cable 2 shows the average number of each type of control reported by the i espondents which is also shown
graphically in Figure 3 Fully actuated signals have loop detection on every approach Semi -actuated
signals only have loops on the minor street and fixed time signals have no loops The more loops, the more
t ontrol you can have for a signal
"Cable 2 Signal Type
Signal type
Total number reported
Average #/ city
Percent of
total
Fort Collins
Fully Actuated
3139
57
40 %
0
Semi -actuated
2471
47
32 %
117
Fixed time
1372
29
20 %
20
Ped
62
8
6 %
Not reported
Volume density
74
3
2%
0
Forty-one Communities (62%) reported the use of pedestrian signals, and indicated an average of 13
pedestrian signals per every 100,000 people The City of Fort Collins has seveial pedesti tan signals
Sixteen cities (24%) conduct bicycle detection, including Berkeley, La Mesa, Moreno Valley, Pleasanton,
Raucha Cucamonga, Santa Ci uz in Cahtorma, the City and County of Boulder, Fort Collins, and
Lakewood in Colorado, Salem, Eugene, and Beaverton in Oregon, Richardson, rX, LaCrosse, WI, and
Varicouver, WA
III COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
Communication Media
-4'ird-wired
telephone line
v U'f'!`'S43 4 it{At ti3 it i�4h ! 9 Y "q"giii °iA+ ,
°"°°'° alms;yi^'art 28i ax
,:lip^ =IPl
apvae^�Y" trFn av{'';'S'''h;a'lIIlldEll;A='iv9r�
41dr4mr .._ CC' rb' 'I'l tit�diii d!!I'f+n�3�rhhh,d {i
fiber optic
lr�rie �uE���j
radio
�t
''pt(Iiai'r,�,nrrrol fat! dA� r t i it {E(EIY';d i Ei t h,'
cable TV
3
a 3z-3 „"=t.r `xai'yrilElpiaSl�3a�i'k'd'I i''�''i'' OW
i ti4 u
rllA IeY�iPPi m i;
flAr3ti4 3;3Y
Ia tEkEir�i'!lllai,lAc'(�„ 't' ,='''''i' it s' I(� �r��' r rr
coaxial cable
'�' l'r�Er,l'i;"ri=t'(=it°'�t�,�ll
�3 =h,S
' I Ed I4hhP'i;a41i'3ili! d(;Ida� r ,i3 r i'°'�'''i l o ii
rp� vttifl,dr r�:,r r_,,,, R
rocrowave
,
2x+rl'k'''I'EIrJv�IiiSrh�
° Iv_ `4ILS 3 3,EiAS"! "9411Elvk' `iU
! 4 96nti 89i i,d9, ' iEE�Jt7AA
0 10 20 30 40 50
FLNumber
of responses
The majority of communities
own their communication media,
but a sipmficant percent lease
Imes from the telephone
( ompany Two of the three
( able TV users had cable
access donated by the local
( able franchise In both "Other"
cases, media were owned by
another government agency
(state of county)
Figure
Nearly half (42%) of all
communities use more than one
type of communication system A
paid -wired system is predominant,
followed by telephone line, then
fiber optics
Communication (Media Source
.6i fl-11 "10";-
City ow ned
`rl6x'rltit�,i°drmgaS'!'s�,SErialf3h
leased from phone company
I,'i a3e#t,4j r itlAr[lr!
W ME
cable N
AIj 3AliF'rt(iI
�]E sS°i� 3ttiF�ueS'r'yl"t"`vy';�E[y`
'rr
other
1da'v darm r, v v'r'
In
,r,2 ,''",Sr F9E' t, rtn"'f
Pi= :j4r r rA
a-'1
0 10 20 30 40
Number of responses
5
The City of Fort Collins uses leased telephone lines the advantagc of leased telephone lines is that they
(an be easily obtained and there is low initial cost The phone company provides maintenance of leased
lines It is convenient to not have to maintain the phone Imes, but it is veiy difficult to get adequate
response from the phone company
system Features
Table 3 describes system features used by respondents It appears the most common feature is "Time of
day Control", used by 59 of 66 total respondents The City of Fort Collins also implements time of day
control The next highest-ranking features are traffic volume counting and program download Because
of the age of the City of Fort Collins computei, their system does not have this capability
Program download is probably the single most important featme missing fiom the City of Fort Collins
system This is the ability to generate a timing scheme and automatically download this into the computer
Without this capability, it takes approximately 4 homs to download a timing plan for a particular corridor
Data upload is the ability to obtain local controllet information The City has limited data upload
c apability
RI1]
The traffic responsive feature is the ability to choose a timing plan based upon defected traffic volumes If
the computer senses that traffic volumes at a particular location are higher than normal, the computer can
automatically choose a pre -determined signal timing plan to handle the traffic This feature is extremely
useful if operated correctly
Table 3 System Features
System Feature
Number
time of day control
59
traffic volume counting
52
program download
50
failure (alarm) report
50
data upload
50
c olor graphic
45
internal modem
41
fixed -trine control
40
external modem
40
fire lane preemption
39
traffic responsive control
38
railroad preemption
37
Diagnostics
35
Softfail
25
sec/sec control
21
surveillance cameras
12
on-line generation of traffic plans
9
wall map
9
projection 1V
8
transit preemption
8
IV. SYSTEM OPERATION
The majority of respondents operate all aspects of then Baffle system in-house, including system operation
(76%), computer software maintenance (44%), computer hardware maintenance (67°G,), and signal repair
(80%), as does Fort Collins Computer software is maintained by suppliers 33% of the time, signals are
repaired by a signal repair company 21% of the time
Table 4 Approaches to System Operation
In -House
Consultant
Supplier
Other
Signal
Other gov
Repair Co.
agency
Operates the
50
1
0
4
NA
NA
SYSTEM
Software
29
7
22
5
NA
NA
Maintenance
Hardware
44
2
10
NA
NA
Maintenance
signalrepair
53
1 1
1 2
0
14
6
Whereas most of the system operations are peifouncd in -]louse, more cities use a consultant to assist in the
system planning and design Most (42%) use a consultant to conduct feasibility studies, although many
(32%) conduct them in-house, and12% combine staff and consultants to conduct feasibility studies Plans
and specification, for the traffic signal systems aie done most commonly in-house (33%), then by a
consultant (30%) then cooperatively with staff and a consultant (23%) Sixty-two percent of respondents
determine the signal timing plans solely in-house, while another 27% walk together with a consultant to
update signal timing plans
Table 5 Approa<bes to System Design
In -House
Consultant
Supplier
NA
Contractor
Other gov
Feasibility
29
36
2
5
NA
NA
Plans/Specs
37
35
7
4
NA
NA
Design
35
32
14
4
NA
NA
Signal Timing
Plans
63
19
2
NA
3
9
V. SYSTEM MAINTENANCE
Sixty respondents (91%) conduct some type of routine signal inspection on an average of every 6 6
months, although the scope of the inspection vanes Six cities have a weekly inspection routine, seventeen
conduct an annual inspection, and three conduct a biennial signal inspection The City of Port Collins
conducts signal inspection every six months which appears to be a reasonable time fiame compared to
other jurisdictions
M
Collusive or sham proposals Any proposal deemed to be collusive or a sham proposal will be
rejected and reported to authorities as such Your authorized signature of this proposal assures
that such proposal is genuine and is not a collusive or sham proposal
The City of Fort Collins reserves the right to reject any and all proposals and to waive any
irregularities or informalities
Sincerely, n n
C)
Jam s B O'Neill il, CPPO
91 ctor of Purchasing & Risk Management
,
Frequency of
routine signal inspections
(Total responses = 60)
w 30
25
rm 1tt''
i( 20
41 15
it
C 10 1y++p11 f4.a1,3+0h,r REE
p I'dt
i
t1 diiim-�, , +_ ` 'l�X 4I'''EEll1'k'i,t,�`RI5 �`, 't'',
G 5 - , i�i E` �+,lifim ;ii +i;il E,Bd�i�i � n+�n €�naN� im,,i 'r`ritrtnl,' Ei �t,i t'! _ r'r'o3l
'vi'i - .,niy {++�Ht+ oiii t'V'' '
'+Rt+nv'i,++,� E t�s!, di i id,,+l� N 0 t "''S��+Y'�'''".?.,m.s,u, {lax=„
Routine Lamp Replacement
(Number of responses = 43)
40
i
y N 30
Gf C 20
1= p
CC
d G',�'4i
, ��E„�'$"tic i �+kl+G IeP, k i b(i �,t''('' _ 44h(,4(u � �`it (b;uitl (`,� +i 3
R X 'ID'� ` E ,tiA dj��i `9;i, tE ,,,t'+i+,al,I'+ ,¢ir+,'tlth;Er'
'''d'I' 9,
�n�i3'i�i i;i'ilti5"``, ` 'ytiki ti`"s „�'9lI44"iI ,t( e it E'1{,kk i"i''Iri�+lyy. a ti4L,ikik
Q aE'E @i'Eiiisii-+,+`EE' �l4,na k,,",,,(dd11d'il ,��i;,;,ki;E;�I,,,,,u4 t,�,n
I";I','' '1 F_,+`'ti i�",x,+++la+,, ,a�k„4„I�+„Elii�ll -' ntSHI"ly, `r'(
alE,;.r'`, €`�'ai;'Sf,,a rn'r'rE'Et "+'SS,�='+''S,,t'6'(iti1k++,�t'I=,,,,='
Replacement
Frequency of Lamp Cleaning
(Number of responses = 48)
80 ",
K
i?? 80
d
> wlli(�F)'1 N t
40
>_
C 1= �, i,I, r,,i,, iir,it.•.•.:�: ik t� Si {Itfi,S • `Ir t A ��, i`, ili'"'�tlq,iii9S t�xtl„t,
io 20
jtl,li+°
Q QC"yi+T"a'i t!�o+J,
�-
Figure 6 Signal
]Inspections
Forty-four respondents
(67%) replace lamps
periodically before
they burn out on an
average of every 17
months
Figure 7 Lamp
Figure 8 Lamp Cleaning
73% of all respondents
i outinely clean signals on an
average of 16 4 months The
City of Fort Collins cleans
signals every 24 months which
is slightly higher than the
oveiall average
8
Frequency of Timing Plan Updates
Total responses = 18
40
;� dIl` S'i'�
.� 35 -=� �'u'h�;,�;;1;�€I» ',�(�i�, I,i,;i�€IFI°itt'IEs�°u„�;�"`;`r!ilj1-�"
•+ Fd 9'dn°-c iifH94; to gryi°'€�� dIF 7 ,F'}C{i" , !'°(;,,i , 5£UFq"',i
O 30
i� 25d�i
IEhiy',"!,>s,sa„',�iis'$'Ii�F,'��;kSI"t,.ilit�i�i `, ki€,'fIi9F(�SIilI
S� 2U - tv'y; ;°�;"F" �' rir,NtiEW€`r tli�9 }",`�'w°i4i
,y s;ll€ sj €'�'y y;l;, '';;;;•;!ti ;{;I�
°i� F't �ir�1, a,tla_ ,�,F,, ;! "I ii {;II�1E� `-^ ,€�3ii, €h,, ussk;CE
��•'�,L'n�'ti i
.ram. 10 u;;i''i�y1131'i'h'I'il�'a:;'jy5's,9ti,nu-;;%yi'Ii'°'�5i
n„l,nd!`"EirFr�i`'"+i(yaEn
M g -,JilykIE°,tI,dt€iie'f,ti,.',+
'&'x'g-,,
0
Timing Updates
Only 18 respondents
(27%) indicate a routine
schedule for re -timing
signals, with the average
time being every 20
months The majority
(62%), including the City
of Fort Collins, re -time
signals in response to
public complaints
1-I
1{
T1�
1V1
lv
O Figure 9 Signal
Only 27% of respondents have a signal head replacement program, and only 45% maintain a computerized
signal inventory The City of Fort Collins does not have a replacement pi ogram and they do not maintain a
computerized signal inventory
Annual emergency calls range hom 1 to 1380, with an average of 284 call pei year Fort Collins reported
156 calls per year Respondents defined "emergency calls" differently
Signals Timing Philosophies
A vast majority of respondents (85%) use the "tune of day/day of week" stiategy when timing signals, as
does Fort Collins
Timing Strategy
,t, e�,n e ,iun,l „p `; ,f`•""° ^,,1 ,P-i'n••i ('�
k,t a l; 1 !ss'i i b
time of day
k I _`�' � ((' t ! i5
Ii MAMMON _ t-llii
,�§r}i3s
h',iY't,�'4 'e"�`'n, n,u�ii i
is ! n,
traffic.
m "'t
a',"
I '25,
response
MP
PY
adaptive
p
A ,,,
;�;9ti', ''�I'" �„",(irFi!`a` '' -All, ; ,
0 20 40 60
Number of responses
Figure 10 Timing Strategy
'I he City of Fort Collins does not use traftic responsive or adaptive control as they are limited by the signal
system Traffic responsive control is the ability to change the timing plans "on -the -fly" based upon traffic
9
M
conditions These could be special events, high shopping days, etc Most jui isdichons are specifying some
type of traffic responsive conhol foi new signal systems
Signal Timing Constraints
An overwhelming majoi try of respondents (92"/") use the following signal timing constraint "vehicle first,
with pedestrian timings when peds push Ped button"
If pedestrian crossing tines are used all the time, this can have a significant impact on traffic flow By
using a pedestrian push button, pedestrian clearance tunes are only provided when the need is there Most
jurisdictions realize the significant impact and have systems which utilize pedestrian push buttons
Table 6 Timing Strategies
Strategy
# using
✓ehicle timing fist, ped timings when peds push ped button
61
Ped constrained timings regardless of vehicle demands
14
led phasing separate (barn dance)
5
Lett -Turn Strategies
Left -turn phasing
protected/ permissive
protected only
permissive
splht phasing
0 10 20 30 40 50
Number of responses
Figure I Left-lurnPhasing
"Protect
Permissi
ve"
phasing
for
left -turn
arrows
is used
most
common
ly by
respond
ents
When asked about left -turn phase sequencing, most communities (fifty of sixty responding) used a high
percentage (average 76%) of "leading left -turns, followed by through movements," with much smaller
percentages of `lagging left turd' or "a combo of lead/lag and through movements "
Left -Turn Sequencing
Average percentage used lead left -
(based on 60 responses) other
turns
combo of
lead/lag
F through
E
Figure 12 Left Turn Sequencing
The ability to use leading or lagging phasing by trine of day allows greatest flexibility in developing signal
timing schemes
When asked to prioritize "Measures of Effectiveness" for determining appropriate cycle length and phasing
sequence, the majority of communities (56%) use "Stop Delay" as their primary measure of effectiveness
The next most popular measure is "Number of Stops", used by 24% of communities as the primary
measure of effectiveness Fourteen percent use "Average Speed" as the number one measure, and only 2%
use "Fuel Use" as the number one measure However, all these measures of eftechveness are linked in
some fashion
E
KA
Priority Measures of Effectiveness
50
40
30
20
10
0
tc] (3) LO
(4)
Fuel Use
'g Speed
Delay
signals using "a common background cycle for all arterials while balancing the system for stops, delays,
and travel speeds"
Signal Optimization
,6ii�'7"d•rE' rtdq � n Nh•=' S'���64i i,'r=,,ii i_s
arterial -based
ry nfil'=E3' E,3;
i°i°l,=='tllli��'tiy�(3'�t,1
travel demand
;t 16`!" t; ^, '=.r,„It,,,;lq., ;i„
`E'i°-1
`,_ ' {{EiE�) sr
background cycle
,'a' ,aYt� i,ur• , a,ts'sEj =' I i,i ,,;
section based
j
0 10 20 30 40
Number of responses
Twenty-four percent
orannize signals "based on
navel demand, giving
sheets with higher volumes
higher pi ority in terms of
flow " Fort Collins uses a
combination of the latter
two approaches Only 8%
of respondents optimize
only certain sections of
roadway
Figure 14 Signal Optimization
When evaluating flow optimization, most (52%) use time/space diagrams to see if vehicles arrive when
then should, then adjust as needed Forty-five pet cent observe the individual intei sections then adjust splits
and offsets Twenty-six percent use Time/Speed/Delay studies to calculate efficiencies, 24% use
simulation models, and 20% drive sections of roadway and make changes on a "feels good" basis 1 hirty-
six percent use a combination of approaches Fort Collins uses "Time/Speed/Detay studies", "Observe
intersections an adjust splits and offsets periodically", and "Time/Space diagrams "
Strategies to evaluate optimization
ry{+ ii't+?;t(;,;`, ,(it'{! 411 a �7IT,„ 111t,, c+',$iN* INNI!I;i,' I'N+ All
ad+I ,N { t
a°v NN ° 4
d° "Wei ,S Eiaa "31 `EiN ' +'1� Bk NEI I rld1 i9 itPP
0 ?fvti° vu,it'S +EiEt{;',`! �!Itlil't,a, m''i ' „ „„-,,;,, all
_Ifi5!1I,e +aa,'` �.�ii,N,i m{„9.,NIP „!'t,, NN d`dly'',, I,a ='o t{f''- !"1
AN, - Ian `,N,N, _ IN , A ' AN I j1, 1' it ! ., ia4gN ; ild`„ - 'E
I, a„ 'i'{' ' 4'¢N mh 3 3 N I'., , t it ``,;
m tINNI
5 c II°I. C"!NE`i3Ii91r° N`ig� 30'�,,° N,s t a='�idl
0
G
«, ,tEC, I „ry
xey� C`ya-,,,llil`U��,,.; "�9,I„ 6,,,,3 :'Eit°NiN0i3iAiI+N,,�N„,..............
'QO _ l'r i m„' d,7 {';{{ d ,;`,'`'id l`'ii(` 3iNty5i l;, ex!la�ahN{ty.j' f N.!,`ji
RI'Ifi,,,J",,, , t xd, ry 9 Ii yr i `''`I, E E
ad,i!'H` �2,ial�.rye=l);,�;j,!�{IryI{'1ji'('a ,It(; I933' N,N '=i+mNLi'3,IN'A N ��`�
=d `{,i, iN g t,,,3 + q�Iy!p,,, ' �nd,,ryn ° II' EE'{=a'sN,:f'' N`N {,
rI
i vv i 'rf' �aN,N, N Ea M I) ' "'+{ii;va
9 rid
E
3E��e� ' 3°ii�N���d>„I'�
J QO 5 - m °{;', vad+m a.+pee ,;Ea3H`u E9iII,e �N;,;,
C \,aay;,IE�,t,,;,,.,,t'+'="";u,,�t3''i,,;�t;;!_„3I� 16�,;iN s!',!, m
Ql Z 'C {ni1.i+'� it +' { m ,3a ,�a„ �, 'ilai it9 3`3 trN3' "5,i
0 a, L6 - t`ik�,'t,Eh'n i`' s
1, � m,
�O „`A,
52 gtry l!N+{ °ryas ,,13`i�;j?'!!,r i`��' PIi;j!3��;3IE, yiI'!,��_+�$,!i{,`IR `N'E'(, r'1
i;,d
I
,,E`'i".�,' d
�tC �\ y in �; _-s
\.�O .�a ;EIdJ `�I{Ia[5,I,4i`N,,,,;y,13,,I'i, ;`{iN`"j" `r'!'aJ!{''y3yl! 3 �!,N,is EI,..� _-IN SA
„ 5!I!{` „lNa i°!Ia{ I�'?;;�dRP=65y`i'{!,�{�`tEi!I)'v�;{33`, ° ha`-'ti!!=(�"��IIG, I'wN't{`°'t:E'E
Q ry , 2Z , ,",,;!{, NE 'i u P� „"tI`t H7_H° t'{ �' +'+I{ �;�E;! ,I i3(N , I; Iht:q,'�I,ma
O 'Ed i,{<d;31 iN„,= I!h,I I{�� ,, !;' i'`IA I t�,,.,,, I)N �[`_;t
IE' ;?{'i';�3{�i I�!E�a!'{3! Nt �'lE�I`!IN�hd-`i ; u°I?'I Eir'�!i i�ydt �� q �`' N `` i i i {
'ti ,sryaNm'!!�atit
'tQ Q
0 10 20 30 40
Number of responses
Figure 15 Strategies to Evaluate Optimization
371. COSTS
Although 51 of 66 respondents provided some cost information, it was not necessarily complete of
consistent, making it difficult to do meaningful cost comparisons 'therefore, cost comparisons were done
in two sets, those reporting all costs, including electricity (N=9, including Fort Collins), and those reporting
all costs except electricity (N=30)
Of the 30 communities that reported all costs except electricity, the average total annual cost per capita for
operation and maintenance of the traffic systems is $4 30 per capita and $3,784 per signal
12
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
00
Traffic System Annual Cost (without Electricity), per capita
1 2 d 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Plgure 16 Signal System Costs, excluding Electricity Costs
13
120-
100
20
00
Traffic System Annual Cost (without electricity), per Signal
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Figure 17 Annual Cost pet signal, excluding elechutty costs
Of the nine reporting all costs including electricity, the average total annual cost Qcr canna for operation
and maintenance of the traffic systems 1s $6 36 per capita and $4,516 per signal Costs calculated in the
per capita category vary from $0 37 to $24 81 Folt Collins total annual cost pet capita 1s $6 40 and total
annual cost per signal is $4,900
14
Traffic System Annual Cost (With electricity), per signal
14000
12000
10000
O
� 6000
N
C
Q
4000
2000
Figure 18 Signa) System Costs, Including Electricity
15
Traffic System Anual Cost (with electricity), per capita
30
25
20
Figure 19 Signal System Costs per capita, including electicity
Of the 30 respondents providing cost information (excluding electricity), it is iinciesting to note that the
average system operation cost per signal ($3,974) is slightly higher foi the 23 cities who conduct periodic
i clamping, than it is for the seven cities who do not conduct periodic relampng ($3,158) The average
number of emergency call reported by cities who conduct periodic relampmg is 412 per year, as opposed to
the average number of emergency call reported by those who do not conduct periodic relampmg (268)
Note that the definition of "emergency calls" may vary Fort Collins does not conduct routinely scheduled
relampmg
The average cost of an 8-phase mast aim signal is $100,100, based on 56 responses, with costs ranging
from $20,000 (covers only equipment, installation is done in-house) to $180 000 Fort Collins pays $60-
70,000 for this type of signal
Fifty-nine percent of respondents do employ some type of cneigy saving measure, with the majority (42%)
using LED's Seven additional cities plan to install LED's in the near future Other energy saving devices
and measures include flashing signals (8%), dimming signals (5%), using photo cells, krypton and sodium
bulbs, using solid state controls, optimizing signalization, and using low sated bulbs
16
`VII. COMMON PROBLEMS
The predominant "main problem" reported is inadequate staff and resources to stay abreast of changing
signalization demands A number of sites reported problems with loop failures resulting from construction
damage, power outages, or unreliability Problems with lightening strikes were also fiequently reported, as
was timely repair of signal problems Another common response was inability to please everyone all the
time, or other customer satisfaction issues
VIII. CONCULSIONS
Based upon this benchmaiking project, the following conclusions can be drawn
• The City of Fort Collins is about average with respect to numbei of signals per population than the
other communities surveyed The, City of Fort Collins has slightly less signals per mile than the
average
• The City of Fort Collins uses central control and monitoring This control sit ategy may be outdated
and it the conputei system is replaced some time in the future, the City should consider other control
strategies
•� The VMS system is not in use by many of the other jurisdictions surveyed 7 he most popular system
is the Eagle system 'I his system also ranked high with respect to customer satisfaction
• The Fort Collins computer is 14 years old, which is 4 yeats older than the average Old computers
have very high maintenance costs and do not allow tot system features that are being demanded by
today's drivers
• The City uses leased telephone Imes fm communications The majority of cities surveyed used hard-
wired communications The disadvantage to hai d-wire communications is the high initial cost and the
added responsibility for maintenance
• The City of Fort Collins does not utilize traffic volume counting, program download, or data upload
The City does not utilize traffic responsive eontiol These features are used by a majority of other
jurisdictions and can have a tremendous impact on system operation The existing computer system is
the reason for this limitation
• The City of Fort Collins performs most of the signal system operation in-house This is consistent
with the great majority of the other cities surveyed
• The City conducts maintenance or a schedule that is near the average with respect to signal inspection
and lamp replacement
• The City does not have a signal head replacement program but only 27% of the jurisdictions do Only
45% maintain a computes ized signal inventory The City of Fort Collins does not maintain a
computerized signal inventory
• The City of Fort Collins uses Time of Day ( Day of Week strategies as did 85% of the respondents
• The vast majority of respondents use pedestrian push buttons as does the City of Fort Collins
• The City uses leading and lagging phasing which provides for the maximum flexibility for signal
pi ogression strategies
• The City of Fort Collins' cost to maintain the signal system is very near the average
Overall, it appears that the City of Fort Collins operates their signal system at the same level of the
communities surveyed From the results of the survey, it appears that the biggest limitation to the City is
the computer system which is four years older than the average and does not allow fo system features that
can greatly improve traffic mobility
q be results of the survey show that the staff is adequately utilize d and provides the services to the City at
about the same level as other communities acsoss the nation
17
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
ADVANCED TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
PROPOSAL NO P-739
The City of Fort Collins is seeking professional engineering consulting services to plan, design,
prepare bid and contract documents, and assist the City in overseeing the installation of an
Advanced Traffic Management System (ATMS) The system will be funded and implemented over
a two-year period
Written proposals, four (4) will be received at the City of Fort Collins' Purchasing Division, 256
West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 Proposals will be received before 3 00 p m
(our clock), January 12, 2000 Proposal No P-739
A copy of the Proposal may be obtained as follows
Call the Purchasing Fax -line, 970-416-2033 and follow the verbal instruction to
request document #30739
Download the Bid from the Purchasing Webpage, Current Bids page, at
www ci fort-collins co us\CITY_HALL\PURCHASING htm then via the
Current Bids pushbutton
Come by Purchasing at 256 W Mountain Ave , Fort Collins, and request a copy
of the Bid
Questions concerning the scope of the protect should be directed to the Eric L Bracke, P E
Traffic Engineer, Protect Manager, (970) 224-6062
Questions regarding proposals submittal or process should be directed to James B O'Neill II,
CPPO, Director of Purchasing and Risk Management, (970) 221-6775
Sales Prohibited/Conflict of Interest No officer, employee, or member of City Council, shall have
a financial interest in the sale to the City of any real or personal property, equipment, material,
supplies or services where such officer or employee exercises directly or indirectly any decision -
making authority concerning such sale or any supervisory authority over the services to be
rendered This rule also applies to subcontracts with the City Soliciting or accepting any gift,
gratuity favor, entertainment, kickback or any items of monetary value from any person who has
or is seeking to do business with the City of Fort Collins is prohibited
E
Collusive or sham proposals Any proposal deemed to be collusive or a sham proposal will be
rejected and reported to authorities as such Your authorized signature of this proposal assures
that such proposal is genuine and is not a collusive or sham proposal
The City of Fort Collins reserves the right to reject any and all proposals and to waive any
irregularities or informalities
Sincerely, n n n
� C)'
Jam s B O'Neill II, CPPO
9J ctor of Purchasing & Risk Management
2
I. Introduction -
The City of Fort Collins is seeking professional engineering consulting services to plan,
design, prepare bid and contract documents, and assist the City in overseeing the
installation of an Advanced Traffic Management System (ATMS) The system will be
funded and implemented over a two-year period
To complete this protect successfully, the consultant is expected to have expertise in the
following areas
• Protect Management,
• Traffic signal control systems,
• Advanced traffic management systems,
• Traffic related electronic communications,
• Computer local area and wide area networks,
• Computer hardware and software for traffic control systems,
• Prepare bid specification and aid in evaluation, and
• Visual presentation preparation
The City of Fort Collins reserves the right to reject any or all proposals, and to waive any
irregularities or informalities
11, General.
The City of Fort Collins is a rapidly growing community located in northern Colorado,
approximately 65 miles from Denver The population has grown from 90,000 in 1990 to
approximately 110,000 in 1999 The traffic control system currently consists of 164 traffic
and pedestrian signalS, 39 school zone flashing signals, 4 Fire Department signals, and a
Multisonics 330NT master computer system The system was originally installed in the late
1970's as aVMS 220 and upgraded in 1990 to the existing system The on -street
controllers are all NEMA, and the City uses US West leased lines as the communication
medium
The City of Fort Collins has recognized that the current Master Computer System is archaic
and in need of replacement The City currently has a major investment in the proprietary
system and recognizes that any changeover from this system is a major effort in time and
dollars The City is therefore requesting proposals from qualified consultants to review and
examine the state-of-the-art traffic control systems and assist the City in making the
appropriate choice of a new system The new traffic control system is expected to be
versatile and have the ability to be expanded with the advent of new technology
III. Consultant Selection Process and Schedule
The following process and schedule will be used to select a consultant for this protect
• RFP Submittal — January 12, 2000
• Selection of at least 3 qualified consultants — January 28, 2000
• Conduct Interviews —Week of February 14, 2000
• Select Consultant and begin negotiations — February 16, 2000
• Notice to Proceed to Consultant — March 8, 2000
• Protect Completed — September 30, 2000
IV. Scope of Work
The following is an outline of a general scope of work The consultant should expand, in
outline form, each of the tasks listed below Additional tasks that the consultant feels are
necessary to assure a good product should be added to the general scope of work
A Current Signal System Review
The City's Natural Resources Department recently conducted a national
benchmark survey addressing traffic signalization See Attachment "A" The
consultant is expected to utilize this information as a foundation in the review of
the current signal system The expected product of this task is a report detailing
the current status of our system in relation to other cities of similar size The
reportshould detail the computer system, communication deficiencies, staffing,
and areas of maintenance
B Signal System Control
This particular task will evaluate various type of control systems in relation to the
Fort Collins system The consultant will provide a report detailing the
advantages and disadvantages of the following types of systems'
Centralized Control/Monitoring
Distributed Control/Monitoring
Distributed Control/Centralized Monitoring
The analysis will include, at a minimum, the issues of capital and operating
costs, communication issues, maintenance, and staffing
C Local Intersection Control
The consultant will prepare a thorough review of the types of intersection control
that is currently available and its relation to the types of master system control
The report will also be in the form of Task "B" where the types of controllers are
evaluated in terms of advantages and disadvantages, operating and capital
costs, interchangeability standards, environmental standards, architecture, and
maintenance At a minimum, the consultant will evaluate the following families
of controllers
0
• NE -MA (TS1 and TS2 Standards) Controller Family
• Model 2070 Family
• Advanced Controllers
D NTCI' (National Transportation Communications for ITS Protocol)
i
The consultant will provide a technical memorandum on the statuslof the NTCIP
process for establishing interfaces between proprietary equipment The
evaluation of this process will be a key point in the determination of the most
appropriate type of system for Fort Collins
E Communications Media
The consultant will prepare a report on the advantages and disadvantages
of the various type of communication media available At a minimum the
consultant will evaluate the following
Hardwire
• Private Twisted Pair
• Leased Twisted Pair
• Private Coaxial Cable
• Leased CATV
• Private Fiber Optic
• Leased Fiber Optic
Wireless
• Radio (packet and spread Spectrum)
• Microwave
• Cellular
• Infrared
• Laser
• Satellite
i
This particular task will also investigate communications topology and report
on the following
• Point-to-point
• Star
• Ring
• Video Options for incident management and vehicle detection including analog and
digital communications
The consultant is also encouraged to investigate hybrid systems for the Fort
Collins protect As in previous tasks, the evaluation needs to be in terms of
capital and operating costs, staffing, and maintenance
F External Systems Interface
The consultant will investigate and report options for external systems
interface including transit information and road/weather information systems
G Additional System/Database Capabilities
I
i
The consultant will investigate and report on options regarding integrated
database capabilities to allow for system resources I inventories,
management and operational reports, varied database printing capabilities
and other possible database resource functions
i
H Procurement Processes
i
I
Once a decision has been made by the City of Fort Collins as to which
system best suits the traffic needs of the community, the consultant will work
with Traffic Operations staff in the procurement process The consultant will
be expected to prepare bidding specifications
i
V. Information Inquires
Any questions regarding this request for proposal should
individuals
Eric L Bracke, P E
Traffic Engineer
City of Fort Collins
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, Colorado 80522-0580
(970) 224-6062
Ward Stanford
Traffic Systems Engineer
City of Fort Collins
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, Colorado 80522-0580
(970)221-6820
i
i
I
i
be directed to one oflthe following
i