March 5, 2020
Question: Can you provide the details on the cabinet and controller architecture? What variation of NEMA are they? (TS1, TS2-Type 1 or TS2-Type 2)
Response: Please see the attached cabinet prints we have on file. Assume IL 137/Butterfield Square is TS2 Type 1.
137 and Butterfield
Butterfield and Allanson
Butterfield and Crane
Butterfield and Golf
Butterfield and Huntington
Butterfield and 176
Butterfield and Virginia
Butterfield and Winchester
Question: Is there advanced detection at all intersections? If not which ones have advanced detection?
Response: Any detector location should be the best fit for the ASCT system being proposed. For existing conditions, assume advanced detection on the mainline only.
February 25, 2020
Question: Section 26 – Joint Purchasing – We interpret this as other governmental units may require performance and payment bonds but it is not a requirement of this RFP, can you please confirm?
Response: Section 26 allows for the purchase of goods and services pursuant to the terms of this Contract shall also be offered for purchases to be made by other governmental units, as authorized by the Governmental Joint Purchasing Act, 30 ILCS 525/0.01, et seq. (the “Act”).
This RFP does not require a performance and payment bond.
February 24, 2020
The System Requirements includes a column for Verification Method. Can you provide information on the intent of this column? Is it something that needs to be completed and, if so, can you provide an example response?
Response: The Verification Method corresponds to Chapter 4 in the Concept of Operations document. Every requirement in the Systems Requirements that has a Need Statement shall have a Verification Method. The Verification Methods are found in the FHWA published document, Model Systems Engineering Documents for Adaptive Signal Control Technology (ASCT) Systems (August 2012 Edition) on page 58.
The RFP mentions the fiber interconnect between the nine intersections. Is there communication with the railroad crossing to allow the adaptive system to respond to railroad events? How/where is railroad preempt currently configured at these signals?
Response: There is no communication with the railroad crossings.
The first mandatory criterion in the evaluation criteria says “The proposed ASCT system equipment shall be compatible with approved IDOT District 1 traffic signal controllers.” No list of approved controllers was included in this RFP. Where can a list of approved controllers be obtained?
Response: The intent of this statement is compatibility with a controller in which the vendor or manufacturer can support the IDOT District 1 region in a timely manner. For more information on what IDOT will accept for traffic signal controllers, please contact IDOT.
The update from February 18 included a list of the existing controllers at these intersections. Do the existing Econolite ASC/3 controllers have Ethernet and NTCIP compatibility? If only some controllers were replaced (e.g. the remaining ASC/2 controllers), is there a preference to supply similar controller models as are installed on the rest of the corridor?
Response: Existing ASC/3 controllers have ethernet and are NTCIP compliant, per LCDOT specifications. Any proposed controllers should be the best fit for the ASCT system being proposed with the capability of collecting high-resolution traffic signal event data as defined in the “Indiana Traffic Signal Hi Resolution Data Logger Enumerations” report.
The RFP mentions that the PASSAGE system has 390 traffic monitoring cameras and 450 video detection cameras. Would the adaptive system have access to any detection cameras upstream of the intersections in this adaptive system? If so, what type of detection is currently being used?
Response: This is contingent on the individual response of each proposal, as there are too many variables to consider. Please see previous clarifications for the type and manufacturer of the detection at each intersection.
Is it possible to make intersection plans available, including phasing/timing information?
Response: Please see the attached intersection phasing and timing information.
137 and Butterfield Square Timing
137 and Butterfield Timing
137 and Butterfield Plan
137 Butterfield Square Plans
176 and Butterfield Timing
176 Butterfield Plans
Butterfield and Allanson Timing
Butterfield and Crane Timing
Butterfield and Golf Timing
Butterfield and Huntington EMC Revision
Butterfield and Huntington Timing
Butterfield and Virginia Timing
Butterfield and Winchester Timing
Butterfield Crane Plans
Butterfield Golf Plans
Butterfield Greggs Parkway Allanson Plans
Butterfield Virginia Plans
Butterfield Winchester Plans
February 18, 2020
Since the response requires a lot of details for each requirement, would it be possible to get an extension for the RFP due date?
Response: No.
At each location , please the list the type / manufacturer of the detection and controller.
Response:
IL 137/Butterfield: Controller – Econolite ASC/3; Detection – Induction Loops (contractor installed)
IL 137/Butterfield Square: Controller – Econolite ASC/3; Detection – Induction Loops (contractor installed)
Butterfield/Virginia: Controller – Econolite ASC/3; Detection – Autoscope Solo Terra
Butterfield/Winchester: Controller – Econolite ASC/3; Detection – Autoscope Solo Pro II
IL 176/Butterfield: Controller – Econolite ASC/2; Detection – Induction Loops (contractor installed)
Butterfield/Crane: Controller – Econolite Cobalt; Detection – Autoscope Solo Pro II
Butterfield/Golf: Controller – Econolite Cobalt; Detection – Autoscope Solo Pro II
Butterfield/Huntington: Controller – Econolite ASC/2; Detection – Induction Loops (contractor installed)
Butterfield/Allanson: Controller – Econolite Cobalt; Detection – Autoscope Solo Pro II
February 6, 2020
Question 1. Are the System Requirements in Exhibit A of RFP 20015 for adaptive traffic control on Butterfield Rd is available in an excel or editable format. If so I would like to request a copy.
Response: Exhibit A is only available in PDF document provided.
Question 2. In reviewing the Butterfield Road Adaptive RFP, Item 2 – Background of the General Information section includes reference to a Systems Engineering Analysis and Concept of Operations. Would it be possible to post these documents online along with the RFP?
Response: Systems engineering analysis refers to the planning and engineering process to develop documents that will enable Lake County to procure an ASCT system in accordance with 23 CFR 940 and 23 CFR 635.411. The concept of operations document is attached.
Question 3. On page 17 of the RFP under the Mandatory Criteria, Question 2. There must be at least (2) current operational deployments of the ASCT in the U.S. Would it be acceptable to change the criteria from U.S. to North America?
Response: No.