Easy as A, B, C

A Precisely Written RFP.

A Precisely Written RFP. For the first time in the history of the university, strategic efforts began to formalize a mobility master plan. The request for proposals (RFP) was detailed, considered campus interests and initiatives, included measurable goals, defined the scope of the plan, ensured integration with existing systems, and required budget and timeline estimates. Transportation Services led the effort that resulted in an actionable plan completed last year and is already getting results.

The RFP for the project required alignment with the goals of the university’s 2015 Bicycle District Strategic Plan, 2017 Campus Master Plan (CMP), 2018 Sustainability Master Plan, and 2018 Residence Life Sustainability Plan, as well as community input. Elements of importance from these plans included a Transportation Mode Hierarchy, rating the priority and environmental impact of people traveling by foot, bike, bus, service vehicle, rideshare, carpool, and single occupancy vehicle; reducing vehicle miles traveled by campus users; increasing capacity of the on-campus transit system; increasing the number of students, faculty, and staff who commute to campus using something other than a single occupancy vehicle; operating a campus fleet that minimizes demand for fossil fuels; and increasing use of alternatively fueled vehicles.

The resulting MMP would outline policies that frame the future transportation network in an environmentally sensitive manner and embrace the concept of “Complete Streets”—the approach to planning streets that are designed, operated, and maintained to enable safe, convenient, and comfortable travel and access for users of all ages and abilities.

The primary goals of the RFP included:

• A well-connected, coordinated network of efficient, safe, and convenient multimodal transportation options implemented in an environmentally sensitive manner to improve accessibility and mobility, and minimize congestion.
• Diminishing greenhouse gases released from university-related commuter transportation by reducing single occupancy vehicle trips to, from, and around campus by shifting travel behavior to sustainable modes of transportation.
• Improvements to sidewalk and path accessibility, safety, and continuity of campus travel in aesthetically pleasing ways.
• A transit operation that builds upon its success providing student service and strives to support future needs of faculty and staff and in support of the CMP, which identifies a need for faculty and staff to have travel alternatives from perimeter parking to their offices and around the campus during the day to attend meetings and manage business. The plan should explore and outline various approaches to transit vehicles and routing. The result should be an on-campus service so dependable that a broad range of faculty and staff would consider it a viable daily alternative. The solutions could include, but were not limited to, fixed routes, on-demand service, park and ride, and micro transit.
• An improved system that enhances student and employee health and job satisfaction.
• A plan which minimizes capital, operational, and maintenance costs.
• A plan that integrates the various modes of transportation recommending requisite infrastructure, roadway connectivity, technology, and facilities to facilitate a smooth travel experience.
• Parking policies and related privileges that minimize traffic, provide adequate access, and maximize interconnectivity with other modes of travel.
• Provide an implementation plan focusing on prioritization, methodology for measuring success, and projected costs.

The plan should be used to seek cooperation between administrators, faculty, staff, students, sports fans, the wider campus community, and local cities to explore and modernize transportation systems to meet future mobility needs. The RFP included the requirement for a robust stakeholder engagement process conducted by the consultant with close input from Transportation Services staff and focused heavily on last-mile solutions with an emphasis on “Park Once” concepts and reinforcing the essential need of faculty and staff to consider walking, biking, busing, and other sustainable mobility options. Engagements should use metrics such as walking distances, mobility options, and distances from bus stops or other points of interest to gauge viability with our constituents. The RFP included 30 additional transportation-specific considerations that would be used to evaluate and select the winning proposal.

The RFP was written to help select a partner who could help us achieve the outcomes we desired for our campus. The plan had to be specific to our campus, evoke culture change, incorporate multiple mobility options and not a one-size-fits-all approach, prioritize the list of recommendations, estimate costs, and provide tangible, usable solutions. It should evaluate and incorporate existing services and not focus on ideas too futuristic to realistically be implemented in the specified timeframe. The winning proposal would result in a planning tool that would not sit on the shelf and gather dust, but rather guide the continuous mobility-improvement process for the next 10 years.