SLED Opportunity · OHIO · METRO REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY
AI Summary
METRO RTA seeks proposals for a Locally Preferred Alternative study to evaluate Bus Rapid Transit corridors in Summit County, Ohio, aiming to improve transit connectivity, travel times, and economic development through community engagement and technical analysis.
METRO RTA will be undertaking a Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) study to evaluate potential Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) corridors across Summit County. This study will be a critical next step in advancing METRO’s long-term vision of building a more connected and efficient transit network. Building upon the foundation of the Reimagine METRO system redesign, the LPA will identify where BRT investments will have the greatest impact in improving travel times, reliability, and access to opportunity for riders.
The LPA study will include a comprehensive analysis of ridership demand, travel time savings, capital and operating costs, land use patterns, and community impacts. Engagement with municipal partners, regional agencies, business leaders, and community members will be central to the process, ensuring that the selected alternative reflects local priorities and supports broader goals related to mobility and economic development.
The outcome of this effort will be the formal adoption of a Locally Preferred Alternative, identifying the recommended corridor and defining the scope of the initial BRT investment. This decision will provide the technical justification and regional consensus needed for subsequent project development phases, including environmental review, detailed design, and federal funding applications under the FTA’s Capital Investment Grant program. By completing the LPA study, METRO will establish a clear and actionable path forward, positioning Summit County to make transformative transit improvements that strengthen the region’s economy, support workforce access, and enhance quality of life for residents.
In 2023, METRO RTA completed a countywide BRT Feasibility Study that screened multiple corridors and identified four high-potential candidates: Market/Exchange, State/Main, Kenmore/Barberton, and South Arlington. The study was built on the Reimagine METRO network redesign and evaluated travel demand, reliability, equity and access needs, and implementation feasibility. METRO coordinated with AMATS, ODOT District 4, partner cities, and community stakeholders to confirm problem statements such as slow travel times, signal delay, transfer friction, and inconsistent stop amenities, and to scope potential solutions including BRT treatments, station upgrades, and targeted TSP and queue jumps. The LPA study is the next step. It will refine alternatives, select the first corridor for advancement, and produce design, cost, and environmental documentation needed to move into project development and pursue federal funding.
Demonstrated experience in transit service/operations planning, transit and passenger facility design, traffic operations engineering, and transit ridership forecasting.
|
Proposed project team staff ability and record of achievement, particularly the
|
The proposed project approach and overall work plan and schedule demonstrates a full comprehension of the scope of services and the ability to consistently provide such services at a high performance level and meet the project requirements
|
| Demonstrated ability to manage project and successfully complete it on time based on proposed schedule, manager, organizational structure of staff team, availability and location(s) of staff, experience with past projects, and references. |
| Project Management and Admin |
| Project Purpose and Need |
| Public & Stakeholder Involvement |
| Determine Preferred Initial BRT Project |
| Analyze & Refine the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) |
| Environmental Screening & NEPA Readiness |
| Risk Register & Early Constructability Workshop |
| Full FTA Standard Cost Categories (SCC) Cost Package |
| Small Starts Project Development Entry Materials |
| Notes |
| Labor Subtotal |
| Other Costs Subtotal |
| Notes |
| Total Cost of Subcontractors |
| Travel Costs |
| Project Management and Admin |
| Project Purpose and Need |
| Public Involvement |
| Determine Locally Preferred Initial BRT Project |
| Analyze and Refine Locally Preferred Alternative |
| Small Starts Application Process |
| Total Hours |
| Notes |
| Aggregate $/Hour |
Does your company have at least 3-5 years of experience at performing services and providing products of a similar size and scope of that noted for this RFP?
Including a brief narrative on capabilities as specifically related to the scope of this RFP.
Please provide your subcontractor information (if applicable) in the following format for each individual subcontractor: (if no subcontractors, please simply state "no subcontractors")
Please upload a printout from SAM.gov to confirm that your company currently has no active exclusions. The printout must be no greater than seven (7) calendar days prior to the due date of this bid.
Upload your complete proposal here, including any pricing information. This does not include any of the required forms that are also requested here in this submittal section.
Please upload your proposal here but be sure that it does not include any pricing or cost information as you will be uploading that separately as required.
Upload your pricing/cost information separately here. It must not be included within any of your other uploaded files.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please upload the applicable document(s) here as part of your bid response.
Please upload the applicable document(s) here as part of your bid response.
Please upload the Commercial General Liability Insurance Certificate with Declaration(s) page here as part of your bid response.
Please upload the Commercial Auto Liability Insurance Certificate and applicable document(s) here as part of your bid response.
If warranty information has been requested with this bid, please upload the applicable information here.
If any section required you to provide additional information, you would upload it to this section here. If you wish to provide any additional information about your bid that has not already been addressed then you would do so here.
Upload price sheet
By submitting a proposal to the County, the individual submitting is confirming that they are authorized to do so on behalf of the Company named in the Proposal.
For the advertising dates of the Legal Notice in the Akron Beacon Journal.
What is the First Date of advertisement for this project?
Please use the following format to enter the date (Month, Day, Year):
Example
June 15, 2023
For the advertising dates of the Legal Notice in the Akron Beacon Journal.
What is the Second Date of advertisement for this project?
Please use the following format to enter the date (Month, Day, Year):
Example
June 22, 2023
What is the current estimated value of this project or purchase?
NOTE: Your selection here does affect Terms and Conditions, including several FTA Clauses, that are included with this posting. If you wish to include all potentially applicable Terms and Conditions and all FTA Clauses, then simply select the option for over $150,000.
If there is a requirement to obtain sealed cost or separate cost files with this RFP, you must select the appropriate option here. This is often used with Qualifications Based Evaluations or when grant funding guidelines require that cost not be a factor in selection. If there is no such requirement for this RFP then you may select "Not Applicable".
Be mindful of the Bid Bond section when reviewing as it contains applicable information. Will warranty information be required from bidders?
Bid Bond information is located within Bid and Proposal Information when the amount exceeds $100,000.
Do you wish to use the Electronic Pricing Table within OpenGov to capture some or all of the pricing information for this RFP?
Keep in mind that you can also receive additional pricing information such as pricing breakdowns within the proposal uploads (Vendor Questionnaire) even if you use the pricing table.
Q (No subject): Will the selected LPA consultant be precluded from providing design services on future BRT corridors?
A: No. The selected LFP consultant will not be precluded from providing design services on future BRT corridors. Any future services would be subject to METRO’s procurement requirements and any applicable conflict of interest provisions in effect at that time.
Q (No subject): On page 7 of the RFP states “Each bidder, who is a foreign corporation, i.e., a corporation not chartered in Ohio, but licensed to do business in Ohio, is required to submit with his bid an affidavit duly executed by the President or Executive Director of the corporation, stating in said affidavit that said foreign corporation had, in accordance with the provisions of the Revised Code of the State of Ohio, obtained a certificate authorizing it to do business in the State of Ohio.” Is there an affidavit form that Akron Metro can provide for us to complete and satisfy this requirement?
A: There is a certification box to select under Vendor Questionnaire - certifications and bid amounts.
Q (No subject): Under Vendor Questionnaire, item 13.23 Certifications and Bid Amounts (page 46), can you please clarify what should be submitted in this section as part of this requirement?
A: There is no bid bonds you are uploading any certifications or additional information you would like added to the proposal.
Q (No subject): Section 6.1 AWARD OF CONTRACT (page 13) states, "The contract shall be awarded to the lowest and best overall bid meeting the minimum requirements as set forth in the specifications." This implies a price-focused evaluation. However, Section 12 - Evaluation Phases (page 41-43) outlines a scoring methodology based on "Firm qualifications, relevant experience, references," "Project Team Staff," "Technical Project Approach/Work Plan," and "Project Management," with cost being a separate category in Phase 2 (page 44). Could METRO clarify the primary criteria for contract award, specifically the balance between "lowest and best overall bid" and the detailed evaluation phases?
A: METRO confirms that this is not a price-only evaluation. While cost is an important consideration, award will not be based solely on the lowest proposed price. Rather, the contract will be awarded to the proposer whose submission is determined to represent the best overall value to METRO, based on the evaluation process and criteria described in Section 12, including qualifications, experience, staffing, technical approach, project management, and cost.
Q (No subject): Section 12.1 PHASE 1 (page 42) and Section 12.2 PHASE 2 (page 43) outline evaluation criteria. Phase 1 includes "Firm qualifications, relevant experience, references," "Project Team Staff," "Technical Project Approach/Work Plan," and "Project Management," each weighted at 25% of Total. Phase 2 includes "Cost by category" and "Hours by category (as percent of total hours)," each weighted at 50% of Total. Could METRO clarify the overall weighting of Phase 1 versus Phase 2 in the total evaluation score?
A: METRO confirms that this is not a price-focused evaluation. Award will be based on the overall evaluation of proposals in accordance with the scoring rubric set forth in the RFP, with cost representing 10 percent of the total score. The evaluation is intended to consider: • Firm Qualifications, Relevant Experience, and References, 20 % • Project Team Staff, 20% • Technical Project Approach/Work Plan, 30% • Project Management, 20% • Cost, 10% In this context, the phrase “lowest and best overall bid” should be understood to mean the proposal offering the best overall value to METRO under the full evaluation criteria, not simply the lowest price.
Q (No subject): Will the Transit Authority consider consultant proposed modifications to the same contract terms and conditions?
A: Yes, proposers may submit requested exceptions or proposed modifications to the contract terms and conditions. Any such exceptions must be clearly stated in the proposal. The Transit Authority reserves the right to review and accept or reject proposed changes and to determine whether any exception is material to the solicitation requirements.
Q (No subject): On Page 5, the Proposal Requirements section indicates that proposals should follow an exact sequence, but only lists the RFP cover page and proposer experience. Since the evaluation criteria reference additional information, could you clarify what other content is expected and the preferred format or organization for that information?
A: METRO clarifies that proposers are expected to provide all information necessary to address the services described in Section 11, Scope of Work, and to support evaluation under the criteria identified in the RFP. In addition to the cover page and proposer experience, proposals should clearly address the project team, technical approach/work plan, project management, references, and cost. Proposers are encouraged to organize their submissions in a format that generally follows the RFP and corresponds to the evaluation criteria to facilitate review.
Q (No subject): Regarding Section 5.5, DBE Participation Requirements (p. 10), is there a DBE participation goal established for this study?
A: There is no DBE requirement. however please still fill out the forms
Q (No subject): Task 6: Do you truly need an independent consultant under the Prime consultant’s direction to complete the environmental screening report and draft NEPA class of action? As the prime design consultant we routinely complete these documents and full NEPA documentation (including EIS documents for very large LRT projects) for FTA review and objectivity is never an issue. It will be more efficient and cost effective for the prime to complete this task in conjunction with other study activities.
A: No. METRO does not require a separate independent consultant under the prime consultant’s direction to prepare the environmental screening report and draft NEPA class of action. The intent is that this work be completed by qualified personnel with demonstrated FTA and NEPA experience. If the prime consultant has the expertise to perform these tasks in a thorough, objective, and defensible manner, METRO is comfortable with that approach. METRO agrees this may be a more efficient and cost-effective way to coordinate the work with the overall study.
SLED stands for State, Local, and Education. These are solicitations issued by state governments, counties, cities, school districts, utilities, and higher education institutions — as opposed to federal agencies.
SamSearch Platform
AI-powered intelligence for the right opportunities, the right leads, and the right time.