Capital Improvements Commission

Agenda Village of Glen Ellyn Capital Improvements Commission Meeting Wednesday, April 9, 2025 7:00 PM Glen Ellyn Civic Center, Room 301 Any individual with a disability requiring a reasonable accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should contact The Village of Glen Ellyn ADA Coordinator, 630-469-5000, at least five (5) business days in advance of the next scheduled meeting. All matters on the Agenda may be discussed, amended, and acted upon. A. Call to Order B. Public Comment C. Approval of Minutes 1) Motion to approve the March 12, 2025 Capital Improvements Commission Meeting Minutes D. Current Business 1) Pavement Management Program Summary Presentation 2) Amendment Number 3 to Phase II Engineering and Architectural Design Services for the Glen Ellyn Metra Station and Multimodal Access Improvements Project E. Trustee Liaison's Report F. Other Business G. Public Works Report H. Project Report 1) Engineering Division Project Activity Report Dated 4-5-2025 I. Adjourn Village of Glen Ellyn Page 1 of 191  Glen Ellyn Capital Meeting 4/9/2025 7:00 PM Improvements Commission Department: Public Works - Internal Services 535 Duane Street Department Head: Dave Buckley Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 Category: Minutes Prepared By: Richard Daubert AGENDA ITEM (ID # 2025- DOC ID: 2025-293 293) Motion to approve the March 12, 2025 Capital Improvements Commission Meeting Minutes Statement of the Issue: The draft meeting minutes for the March 12, 2025 Capital Improvements Commission Meeting are attached hereto for review and consideration of approval. Analysis: Budget Impact: Contribution to Strategic Plan Action Requested: Attachments: 1. CIC Meeting Minutes March 12 2025 - Draft Page 2 of 191 Village of Glen Ellyn Meeting Minutes Village of Glen Ellyn Capital Improvements Commission March 12, 2025 7:00 PM Glen Ellyn Civic Center Room 301 Board or Commission: Capital Improvements Date: March 12, 2025 Meeting: Regular Called to Order: 7:00 p.m. Quorum: Yes Adjourned: 9:14 p.m. Member Attendance: Steve Szymanski Chair Present Joel Baldin Commissioner Present Tom Drapinski Commissioner Present Orion Galey Commissioner Absent Michael Lindquist Commissioner Present John MacDonald Commissioner Present Adil Saeed Commissioner Present Jill Ziegler Commissioner Absent Rocco Zucchero Commissioner Present Donna Jean Simon Trustee Liaison Present Richard Daubert Staff Liaison/Professional Engineer Present Also Present: Dave Buckley Public Works Director Elisa Pollina Recording Secretary A. CALL TO ORDER The March 12, 2025 meeting of the Capital Improvements Commission was called to order by Chairman Szymanski at 7:00 p.m. at the Glen Ellyn Civic Center. Engineer Daubert introduced the new commissioner, Tom Drapinski. Commissioner Drapinski shared that he is a Glen Ellyn resident with a background in architecture, home building, and commercial construction. The CIC members took a moment to introduce themselves and welcomed Drapinski to the Commission. Page 3 of 191  Capital Improvement March 12, 2025 Meeting Minutes | 2 B. PUBLIC COMMENT – None C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES APPROVAL OF JANUARY 8, 2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MOTION TO APPROVE THE JANUARY 8, 2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MOTION BY: Commissioner Saeed SECOND BY: Commissioner Lindquist AYES: Szymanski, Baldin, Lindquist, MacDonald, Saeed, Ziegler, Zucchero ABSTAIN: Drapinski (was not present at January 8, 2025 Meeting) RESULT: APPROVAL D. CURRENT BUSINESS 1. Traffic Signal Modernization – Recommendations Report and Design Contract Engineer Daubert gave a presentation outlining a study of Village-owned traffic signals including a recommended improvements report. Engineer Daubert noted staff is ultimately seeking a recommendation from the CIC to approve a design contract for the traffic signal modernization improvements. Daubert noted that there are 26 traffic signals in Glen Ellyn with the Village owning and operating 6 at the following locations: Main/Elm, Taylor Underpass, Park/Sheehan, Lambert/Fawell, Lambert/Tallgrass, and Lambert/College. The Village is also working towards owning and operating the Lambert pedestrian crossing signal by the College of DuPage. Daubert noted that the Village’s signals, equipment, and other intersection elements date back as far as 1990 with some of the equipment being obsolete, unreliable and not ADA compliant. He noted that specific recommended improvements are identified for each of the Village’s signalized locations. The recommended improvements not only include equipment upgrades but also hardscape upgrades to curbs, sidewalks, pavement markings. Daubert overviewed typical improvements including cabinet and/or controller replacement, wiring replacement, signal head improvements, roadway lighting, pedestrian safety, and signal optimization. He then showed slides overviewing the recommended improvements and costs by location. Daubert noted there are some items that will be further evaluated during design including cabinet replacement at Lambert and Fawell as well as the Intelligent Transportation Systems. The main Intelligent Transportation System of scrutiny would be a railroad communication device. This would serve to notify the public of roadway crossings at Prospect, Main and Park being closed at the UP-West Line but it comes at a high preliminary estimated cost. Commissioner MacDonald inquired about the Intelligent Transportation System for communicating roadway crossing closures at the UP-West Line and how communication would work. Engineer Daubert noted we don’t have a specific system identified but if implemented the Page 4 of 191  Capital Improvement March 12, 2025 Meeting Minutes | 3 goal would be to have it communicate closures through navigation platforms such as Google or Waze. MacDonald also asked whether cost escalators and contingencies had been factored into the estimated cost of the project. Daubert noted that cost escalation of 2.5% was included. Chairman Szymanski asked about the maintenance plan. Director Buckley noted that the Village has an agreement with Meade for maintenance of EVP (Emergency Vehicle Preemption) equipment but not for routine signal maintenance. Minor repairs are handled internally with the Village calling Meade for anything beyond. Engineer Daubert noted that staff will be budgeting for this for next year. Acting Village President Simon raised a question about whether the schedule prioritizes intersections near schools or high-traffic areas. Daubert agreed that this was an important consideration and noted that the schedule can be adjusted to prioritize critical intersections. Commissioner Zucchero agreed with prioritizing work by schools and noted challenges with crossing Taylor Avenue just south of the Prairie Path and whether or not a push-button or something similar could be incorporated. Daubert responded that we can certainly review that during the design of the project. Zucchero also inquired about potential cooperative purchasing opportunities with neighboring communities. Daubert noted he would explore this; there may be an opportunity to partner with the County. Director Buckley inquired Daubert about which location required the most work. Daubert noted that Lambert/ College is in greatest need of improvements. The signal has failed several times and parts are hard to get. Engineer Daubert mentioned that funding opportunities, particularly through grants, will be explored to support the project. He noted that priorities and the project schedule will be reviewed and brought back to the CIC for further discussion as part of the preparation of the 2026 Budget. Daubert then reviewed the design contract and associated cost ($203,726.59) from AECOM. He noted that the proposal is slightly over the $200,000 budget for the assignment. Commissioner Drapinski inquired if there was a way to talk AECOM down to the budgeted amount. Engineer Daubert noted that staff did already reduce the scope and fee from an initial amount of approximately $214,000. Daubert and the Commission discussed the matter, and there was support to recommend the contract at $203,726.59. Daubert read a recommended motion to the CIC. The CIC made and approved the motion. Daubert closed the item by noting that the item will go before the Village Board for approval at the April 14, 2025 Village Board Meeting. Page 5 of 191  Capital Improvement March 12, 2025 Meeting Minutes | 4 MOTION TO RECOMMEND TO THE GLEN ELLYN VILLAGE BOARD THE APPROVAL OF A CONTRACT WITH AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC. OF CHICAGO, ILLINOIS FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODERNIZATION DESIGN AND DEPLOYMENT SUPPORT IN THE TOTAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $203,726.59 TO BE EXPENSED TO THE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND. MOTION BY: Commissioner MacDonald SECOND BY: Commissioner Saeed AYES: Szymanski, Baldin, Drapinski, Lindquist, MacDonald, Saeed, Ziegler, Zucchero RESULT: APPROVAL 2. Crescent-Glenwood Parking Lot and Median Rehabilitation – 60 Percent Plan Review Engineer Daubert introduced this agenda item and noted that staff is looking to revisit a few design elements for the project to ensure staff is on the right track. Pedestrian Access Points – Engineer Daubert explained that the original plan included landscaped islands along the north side of the parking lot but these have been replaced with pedestrian access points per previous direction from the CIC. The access points do need to extend into the parking lot to make them fully ADA compliant. However, striping will be added in front of the access points to clearly indicate no parking is allowed in front of the access point. Daubert asked if there were any concerns. There was some discussion concerning whether the striping was enough to deter people from parking in front of the access points. Daubert noted, and Commissioners supported, that the pavement markings along with some supplemental signage should be suffice to deter people from parking. Daubert noted it would no be ideal, but we could add bollards if the pavement markings and signage are not suffice. Director Buckley added the Village’s Community Service Officer would also likely get involved and serve as another reinforcement on the matter. The CIC was comfortable with the proposed pedestrian access design. Southwest Corner of Parking Lot – Daubert noted that the plan is to extend the fencing along the south side of the Parking lot to Prospect Avenue and widen the planter along the west side of the parking lot. These improvements are being implemented to encourage pedestrians to use the sidewalk rather than cut through the parking lot. Southeast Corner – It was noted that the sidewalk/ramp setup in the southeast corner of the parking lot will be reconstructed to make it ADA complaint. Daubert also wanted to note that no landscaping is proposed here. Plantings – It was overviewed that the plan emphasizes low-maintenance plantings, primarily perennials to minimize sight obstructions at driveways/intersections. Commissioner Baldin noted he has comments on the use of ornamental trees in lieu of street trees. He noted that ornamental trees tend to grow outward into sidewalks whereas street trees grow upward and provide more shade. Engineer Daubert acknowledged the feedback and stated that this would be reviewed. Lighting – Combination poles were noted to be used with upper fixtures to be mounted at 25.5 feet. The poles will match the existing streetscape design and lighting levels and controls will be optimized for efficiency. Engineer Daubert notes that we are considering switching to a new manufacturer, Spring City, for the lighting units. Page 6 of 191  Capital Improvement March 12, 2025 Meeting Minutes | 5 Variations – Daubert overviewed that there are some variations that will be requested from the Plan Commission and Village Board due to a lack of some landscaped islands as well as for parking stall dimensions. Staging – Engineer Daubert noted that we are currently planning for 3 stages of construction. For Stage 1, the contractor will work along the north side of the parking lot with that area closed to parking. Parking would be available on the south side of the lot. Stage 2 would involve constructing entrances to the parking lot with access to be maintained to the parking spaces along the south side of the lot. For Stage 3, the entire parking lot would be closed for approximately one week to allow for milling, paving, and striping of the parking lot. He noted that construction would likely take around 6 weeks but some items could linger such as lighting and landscaping. We would like to begin construction after the July 4th Holiday. Budget – Daubert noted that we budgeted $2,000,000 for construction in 2025. The current estimate is approximately $1,686,000 which includes construction engineering and a 10% contingency. E. TRUSTEE’S REPORT – Acting Village President Simon provided updates on the following: 1. The board approved the design of the downtown event park. 2. The Village is working on an ADA Transition Plan and assessments are underway to identify and address accessibility barriers in the community. 3. The Full Circle Communities housing project has been approved by the Village Board. The project will move forward towards construction. 4. The Village annexed property on Acorn Avenue which will create additional opportunities for housing development in the area. 5. A Village Board Workshop was held last night to discuss e-bikes and electric mobility devices. An educational campaign is needed to inform the public about these devices. There is also consideration of conducting a survey to gather resident input and inform the Village in making any decisions on regulation of the devices. F. OTHER BUSINESS – None G. PUBLIC WORKS REPORT – Public Works Director Buckley provided several updates. Street sweeping began this week. The Village Board approved the purchase of Meridian Barriers which will be set up at events to protect the public. Public Works is assessing its building and developing a plan to determine whether remodeling or rebuilding the facility is the best option. An intergovernmental agreement has been established with the Park District to manage Panfish Park and Manor Woods. H. PROJECT REPORT – Engineer Daubert provided updates on the following projects: Central Business District Streetscape Project: Sewer televising and capping of abandoned laterals is underway this week. Progress is slower than anticipated and work will likely extend into next week. IDOT Butterfield Road Project: Utility relocation work continues. We are awaiting the schedule for the roadway work and will share it once received. Roosevelt Road Bridge Work: The State will be rehabilitating the Roosevelt Road Bridge or IL-53. Work is expected to begin around May 1 with sections of the bridge to be closed at times. During Page 7 of 191  Capital Improvement March 12, 2025 Meeting Minutes | 6 construction, eastbound traffic will be reduced from two lanes to one. Traffic will be shifted across the bridge during construction. The contract provides 55 working days to complete which would push construction into mid to late July; however, the contractor is not charged working days during inclement weather so the direction could be longer. Commissioner Zucchero noted that a survey regarding the East Brach DuPage River Trail is currently ongoing with 850 responses received so far. He encouraged continued promotion of the survey. I. ADJOURNMENT – Commissioner Baldin motioned and Commissioner Zucchero seconded to adjourn the meeting. The motion was unanimously approved and meeting adjourned at 9:14 p.m. Submitted by Elisa Pollina, Recording Secretary Reviewed by: Richard Daubert, Professional Engineer Page 8 of 191  Glen Ellyn Capital Meeting 4/9/2025 7:00 PM Improvements Commission Department: Public Works - Internal Services 535 Duane Street Department Head: Dave Buckley Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 Category: Report Prepared By: Richard Daubert AGENDA ITEM (ID # 2025- DOC ID: 2025-294 294) Pavement Management Program Summary Presentation Statement of the Issue: Staff is looking to affirm its approach towards maintaining a Pavement Condition Index of 70 with the Capital Improvements Commission. Analysis: The Village has traditionally conducted a quadrennial survey of its pavement network as to update the pavement inventory including objective measurement of the network condition. The effort was initiated and funded locally with the data used more from a relative standpoint in lieu of from a dynamic standpoint. In 2021, the Village applied for technical assistance from the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) for development of an improved Pavement Management Program, which included not only a pavement inventory and condition survey, but also a study of the Village’s Pavement Management Program including consideration of five different maintenance and rehabilitation scenarios. The effort was fully funded by a State Planning Grant with no cost to the Village. In addition, the Village received a license for PAVER software, which allows the Village to more actively manage its pavement inventory. In 2024, AECOM analyzed data collected by Applied Pavement Technology (APTech) and established an updated Pavement Management Program for the Village, which includes evaluating different budget scenarios for maintaining different pavement condition index levels. The pavement condition survey information was imported into PAVER software to establish a tabular summary of the Village’s roadway pavement condition index. The overall Pavement Condition Index (PCI) for the roadway network is 69. The tabular summary quantifies the inventory condition into 5 condition categories: • Good (86-100) 40% • Satisfactory (71-85) 12% • Fair (56-70) 14% • Poor (26-55) 30% • Serious (0-25) 4% Page 9 of 191 Three graphical representations of pavement condition are provided and categorized by the three functional classifications for the roadway network (Collector Roadways, Residential Roadways, and Arterial Roadways), by surface type (Asphalt Concrete and Portland Cement Concrete), and by pavement age. The condition survey data was used in concert with the Village’s master roadway and utility improvement plan and PAVER software to establish an updated Pavement Management Program (i.e. Pavement Management System). Unit costs were assigned for the maintenance and rehabilitation work items based on unit prices received in the Village’s historical bids. To develop a 10-Year Pavement Management Program, a 10-Year Budget Allocation for Roadway Improvements was calculated to comparatively model nine different maintenance and rehabilitation scenarios, which are summarized as follows: 1. Eliminate Backlogs (perform all major maintenance and rehabilitation work) 2. Reach PCI of 75 3. Reach PCI of 70 4. Maintain PCI of 65 5. Maintain PCI of 60 6. No spending for 6 years, PCI drops to 60 then reach PCI of 70 7. No spending for 7 years, PCI drops to 55 then reach PCI of 70 8. Worst first under PCI of 40 9. Maintain Current Condition 10. No work/do nothing In the context of other capital initiatives, there has understandably been statements made to staff about potentially deferring roadway work to free up funding for other capital projects. Staff accordingly worked with AECOM to develop scenarios which would achieve this objective, albeit at the cost of Pavement Condition while also increasing the overall cost of maintaining the Village’s pavement. Conversely, staff wanted to paint a picture of what it would take to increase the Village’s PCI to 75 as well as to eliminate backlogs. Staff has been striving to maintain the Village’s PCI at 70 and ultimately recommends continuing to do so. This seems to best balance pavement condition, align with available funding, and be reasonable in terms of construction impact on the community. The modeling yielded that for the Village to reach and maintain a PCI of 70, it will need to continue to invest approximately $6.5M per year (over the next 10 years) for maintenance and rehabilitation work to the roadway network. It is noted that this is based on modeling by the PAVER software including assumptions on unit costs and an average annual expenditure of $1.5M for sidewalk and storm sewer improvements as part of roadway improvement projects, which includes 5% annual increases in construction costs. The current iteration of the Village’s CIP includes $64,385,491 over the next 10 years; i.e. the plan funding is on par with maintaining a PCI of 70 but will nevertheless require ongoing adjustments. Budget Impact: Page 10 of 191 Contribution to Strategic Plan Action Requested: This memo is intended to serve as a cover to the 2024/2025 Pavement Management Program Summary Presentation which is attached to this memorandum. Staff and AECOM will be giving a presentation on this matter to the Capital Improvements Commission at its April 9th Meeting. Staff is looking to affirm its approach towards maintaining a Pavement Condition Index of 70 with the Capital Improvements Commission. Attachments: 1. Presentation Page 11 of 191 Village of Glen Ellyn, IL 2024/2025 Pavement Management Program Summary April 2025 Page 12 of 191 CONDITION CATEGORY Page 13 of 191 5-COLOR PAVEMENT CONDITON MAP Page 14 of 191 5-COLOR PAVEMENT CONDITON DISTRIBUTION Overall Network Level PCI Condition is 69 60 50 40 40 Percent Area 30 30 20 14 12 10 4 0 Good Satisfactory Fair Poor Serious (86-100) (71-85) (56-70) (26-55) (0-25) PCI Condition Category Page 15 of 191  ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION Page 16 of 191 PAVEMENT CONDITON DISTRIBUTION BY SECTION RANK 100 Pavement Area by Class PCI 79 80 71 68 69 Arterial, 282,194., 2% Collector, 60 2,045,693., 18% (Area-Weighted Average) 40 20 0 Residential, Arterial Collector Residential OVERALL 9,101,284., 80% Section Rank Page 17 of 191 SURFACE TYPE Page 18 of 191 PAVEMENT CONDITON DISTRIBUTION BY SURFACE TYPE 100 Pavement Area by Surface Type PCI 79 PCC, 1,726,895., 80 69 15% 67 60 (Area-Weighted Average) 40 20 0 AC PCC OVERALL AC, 9,702,276., 85% Surface Type Page 19 of 191 PAVEMENT AGE Page 20 of 191 PAVEMENT CONDITION DISTRIBUTION BY AGE 100 97 90 Pavement Area by Age Category 80 75 21+ Pavement Condition Index (PCI) 16% 70 00-05 70 27% 60 60 50 41 40 30 16-20 27% 20 06-10 10 18% 0 11-15 00-05 06-10 11-15 16-20 21+ 12% Age Category Note: Pavements with age over 20 year may have incomplete work history records. Page 21 of 191  PAVEMENT DISTRESSES Page 22 of 191 AVERAGE WEIGHTED PCI DEDUCTS Load Related Distresses Climate Related Distresses Other Distresses • Alligator Cracking* • Block Cracking* • Bleeding* • Rutting* • Joint Reflection Cracking • Corrugation • Potholes* • Longitudinal & transverse • Depression* • Corner Breaks* (L&T) Cracking* • Jet Blast • Linear Cracking* • Raveling* • Oil Spillage • Divided Slabs* • Weathering* • Patching* • Blow-ups • Polished Aggregate • Durability cracking* • Slippage Cracking* • Joint Seal Damage* • Swelling • Shrinkage Cracks* • Faulting* • Joint Spalling* • Popouts • Corner Spalling* • Pumping • Scaling* LOAD % CLIMATE % OTHER % 45 44 11 Distresses shown with asterisk (*) are present in the Village Page 23 of 191 PAVEMENT DISTRESS DISTRIBUTION Pavement Distress Primary Deducts Asphalt Surfaced Alligator Cracking 44.5 L&T Cracking 19.2 Weathering 10.9 Patching 4.2 Other AC Distresses 1.1 Concrete Surfaced Faulting 11.6 Linear Cracking 10.1 Joint Seal Damage 2.2 Joint Spalling 1.6 Other PCC Distresses 3.0 Page 24 of 191 EXAMPLE PICTURES Page 25 of 191 EXAMPLE – GOOD PAVEMENTS CRESCENT BOULEVARD – Section 032 Colcord Pl to Roger Rd CRESCENT DRIVE – Section 249 Crescent Blvd to End PCI 100 PCI 100 Page 26 of 191 EXAMPLE – GOOD PAVEMENTS EDWARD RD – Section 407 Raintree Dr to Prince Edward Rd GLENWOOD AVE– Section 423 Ridgewood Ave to Hill Ave PCI 95 PCI 90 Page 27 of 191 EXAMPLE – GOOD PAVEMENTS BRYANT AVE – Section 170 Wingate Rd to Revere Rd HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD – Section 729 Prairie Rd to Pleasant Rd PCI 96 PCI 89 Page 28 of 191 EXAMPLE – SATISFACTORY PAVEMENTS DUANE ST – Section 680 Lorraine St to Melrose Ave ELM ST– Section 780 N Main St to Forest Ave PCI 83 PCI 77 Page 29 of 191 EXAMPLE – SATISFACTORY PAVEMENTS MAIN ST– Section 009 Philips Ave to Ridgewood Ave PCI 71 Page 30 of 191 EXAMPLE – FAIR PAVEMENTS LOWDEN AVE – Section 806 S Park Ave to End BRIAR ST– Section 295 Londonberry Ave to Brighton St PCI 68 PCI 59 Page 31 of 191 EXAMPLE – FAIR PAVEMENTS KENILWORTH AVE – Section 501 Cottage Ave to Sheffield Ln PCI 62 Page 32 of 191 EXAMPLE – POOR PAVEMENTS ROSLYN RD – Section 622 Cumnor Ave to Woodstock Ave Sheehan Ave Section 131 Ellyn Ave to S Milton Ave St PCI 52 PCI 43 Page 33 of 191 EXAMPLE – POOR PAVEMENTS KENILWORTH AVE – Section 504 Maple St to Marion Ave PCI 48 Page 34 of 191 EXAMPLE – VERY POOR PAVEMENTS FOREST AVE– Section 391 Cottage Ave to Anthony St SPRING AVE - Section 272 Hill Ave to Glen Oak Ave PCI 38 PCI 26 Page 35 of 191 EXAMPLE – SERIOUS PAVEMENTS HILL AVE– Section 970 560 ft North of Acorn Ave to 460 ft South of FOREST AVE - Section 395 Illinois Prairie Path to Duane St Town Line PCI 13 PCI 17 Page 36 of 191  NETWORK LEVEL BUDGET ANALYSIS Page 37 of 191  10-YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS Page 38 of 191 10-YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS RESULTS 10-year Pavement 10-year Projected Pavement Repair Avg. Annual %Good %Satisfactory %Fair %Poor %Serious Budget Scenario Backlog Total Costs PCI Centerline Funding (86-100) (71-85) (56-70) (26-55) (0-25) Costs (Funded + Backlog) (FY 2034) Miles Current Condition 40% 12% 14% 30% 4% Backlog Elimination $9.6 M - $96 M 81 51 mi. 31% 60% 9% Reach PCI of 75 $7.9 M $28 M $107 M 75 45 mi. 28% 56% 9% 7% Reach PCI of 70 $6.4 M $54 M $118 M 70 39 mi. 27% 50% 9% 14% Maintain PCI of 65 $5.1 M $82 M $133 M 65 31 mi. 27% 42% 9% 22% Maintain PCI at 60 $4.0 M $111 M $151 M 60 24 mi. 27% 35% 9% 29% No spending for 6 years; PCI drops to 60 then reach PCI of $8.1 M $60.8 M $142 M 70 40 mi. 42% 22% 20% 16% 70 No spending for 7 years; PCI drops to 55 then reach PCI of $9.3 M $70.5 M $163 M 70 37 mi. 42% 19% 20% 19% 70 Worst-First Under PCI 40 $8.0 M $28.3 M $108 M 75 40 mi. 18% 47% 27% 8% No Work - $161.1 M $161 M 45 - 1% 31% 17% 20% 31% Note: 1. An average annual spend of $1.5M for sidewalk and storm sewer improvements are included in the cost above. 2. An escalation of 5% is included for all spending. Page 39 of 191 10-YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS – PCI COMPARISON Backlog Elimination Reach PCI 75 Reach PCI 70 Reach PCI 65 Maintain PCI at 60 No spending till PCI drops to 60 then reach PCI 70 No spending till PCI drops to 55 then reach PCI 70 No Work 90 Pavement Condition Index (PCI) 80 70 60 50 40 30 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 Fiscal Year Page 40 of 191 10-YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS – CONDITION COMPARISON 60 50 50 42 40 40 Percent Area 30 30 27 27 22 20 14 14 12 10 9 9 4 0 Good Satisfactory Fair Poor Serious (86-100) (71-85) (56-70) (26-55) (0-25) PCI Condition Category 2025 Condition Reach PCI of 70 over 10 Years Reach PCI of 65 over 10 Years Page 41 of 191  20-YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS Page 42 of 191 20-YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS RESULTS 20-year 20-year Projected Annual Avg. Pavement Repair %Good %Satisfactory %Fair %Poor %Serious Budget Scenario Pavement Total Costs PCI Funding Centerline Miles (86-100) (71-85) (56-70) (26-55) (0-25) Backlog Costs (Funded + Backlog) (FY 2044) Current Condition 40% 12% 14% 30% 4% Reach PCI 75 $8.1 M $50 M $212 M 75 91 mi. 38% 26% 19% 13% 4% Reach PCI 70 $7.3 M $85 M $231 M 70 83 mi. 36% 24% 15% 16% 9% Maintain PCI of 65 $6.5 M $116 M $246 M 65 74 mi. 30% 23% 14% 19% 14% No work for first 10 years, $10.9 M $103 M $321 M 70 68 mi. 29% 53% 1% 17% then reach a PCI of 70 No work for first 10 years, $9.7 M $140 M $333 M 65 63 mi. 27% 49% 1% 22% then reach a PCI of 65 No work for first 10 years, $8.4 M $181 M $348 M 60 57 mi. 25% 45% 1% 29% then reach a PCI of 60 Note: 1. An average annual spend of $2M for sidewalk and storm sewer improvements are included in the cost above. 2. An escalation of 5% is included for all spending. Page 43 of 191 20-YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS – PCI COMPARISON Reach PCI 75 Reach PCI 70 Reach PCI 65 No Work for the first 10 years then Reach a PCI of 70 No Work for the first 10 Years then Reach a PCI of 65 No Work for the first 10 Years then Reach a PCI of 60 90 80 Pavement Condition Index (PCI) 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 Fiscal Year Page 44 of 191 20-YEAR BUDGET ANALYSIS - CONDITION COMPARISON 60 50 40 40 36 Percent Area 30 30 30 24 23 20 19 15 16 14 14 14 12 10 9 4 0 Good Satisfactory Fair Poor Serious (86-100) (71-85) (56-70) (26-55) (0-25) PCI Condition Category 2025 Condition Reach PCI of 70 over 20 Years Reach PCI of 65 over 20 Years Page 45 of 191 Thank you. Glen Ellyn Pavement Management System Program Page 46 of 191 Page 47 of 191  Glen Ellyn Capital Meeting 4/9/2025 7:00 PM Improvements Commission Department: Public Works - Internal Services 535 Duane Street Department Head: Dave Buckley Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 Category: Change Order Prepared By: Richard Daubert AGENDA ITEM (ID DOC ID: 2025-296 # 2025-296) Amendment Number 3 to Phase II Engineering and Architectural Design Services for the Glen Ellyn Metra Station and Multimodal Access Improvements Project Statement of the Issue: Staff has worked with CDM Smith to develop the attached Amendment No. 3 to the Phase II Engineering Services Agreement for the Glen Ellyn Metra Station and Multimodal Access Improvements Project. Staff is looking for any input the CIC may have on the Amendment. Staff otherwise requests the Capital Improvements make and approve a "Motion to recommend to the Glen Ellyn Village Board the approval of Amendment No. 3 to the Phase II Engineering and Architectural Design Services Agreement for the Glen Ellyn Metra Station and Multimodal Access Improvements Project in the not-to-exceed amount of $301,759 to be expensed to the Capital Projects Fund." Analysis: The 2025 Budget provides $300,000 for supplemental consulting services for the Glen Ellyn Metra Station and Multimodal Access Improvements Project. The funds were intended to cover additional services for: 1. Parking Alternatives ($92K Estimated at Budget, ~$75K in Amendment) - Covers additional preliminary and final engineering services to review, develop, and finalize on-street and off- street parking design changes. 2. Utility Undergrounding ($30K Estimated at Budget, ~$45K in Amendment) - Preliminary Engineering to define limits and costs for undergrounding overhead lines along Forest Avenue (Duane to UP-West Line) and Duane Street (Forest to Park). It is imperative to explain that supplemental design services (at a supplemental cost) will be required once the limits/scope are confirmed. 3. Land Acquisition Services ($150K Estimated at Budget, ~$151K in Amendment) - To secure required real estate approvals for construction of project on UP property as well as for vendor space. Involves development of plat of highway, appraisal, review appraisal, and negotiation services. 4. Renderings ($25K Estimated at Budget, ~$25K in Amendment) - Development of additional renderings for Commission and Board Approvals Page 48 of 191  5. Administration/PM (The above budget amounts tally to $297K, staff budgeted $300K total for the assignment leaving essentially $3K for potential overages on items as the detailed scope of services/tasks was developed, CDM Smith Separated Admin/PM in Amendment at ~$6K). Updated milestone dates and a detailed scope of services/task is included in the attached Amendment No. 3. Staff emphasizes that the milestone schedule continues to be subject to cooperation of other parties including IDOT, FHWA, UP, ICC, etc. Budget Impact: The amendment is $1,759 over what was budgeted for 2025. Staff reiterates the budget amount was estimated last year with the fully developed cost just now being available. Staff also notes that it worked with CDM Smith to reduce Admin/PM costs, particularly in removing the Client Service Leader hours from the Utility Undergrounding, Land Acquisition and Admin/PM tasks. Contribution to Strategic Plan Action Requested: Staff is looking for any input the CIC may have on the Amendment. Staff otherwise requests the Capital Improvements make and approve a "Motion to recommend to the Glen Ellyn Village Board the approval of Amendment No. 3 to the Phase II Engineering and Architectural Design Services Agreement for the Glen Ellyn Metra Station and Multimodal Access Improvements Project in the not-to-exceed amount of $301,759 to be expensed to the Capital Projects Fund." Attachments: 1. Amendment No. 3 Page 49 of 191  AMENDMENT NO: 03 TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND ENGINEER CDM SMITH PROJECT NUMBER 284380 This Amendment Number 03 is made and entered on ______________, 2025, and amends the terms and conditions of the Agreement between CDM Smith Inc. (“CDM Smith” or “ENGINEER") and Glen Ellyn, Illinois ("OWNER"), dated April 5, 2023 ("the Agreement"). WHEREAS, ENGINEER and OWNER entered into the Agreement for the performance of Phase – II Engineering and Architectural Design Services for the Glen Ellyn Metra Station and Multimodal Access Improvements Project: and WHEREAS, ENGINEER and OWNER have previously amended said agreement through Amendment Number 01 dated November 13, 2023 and Amendment Number 02, dated July 29, 2024; and WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Agreement so as to amend the scope of work or scope of work time periods of performance and payment, and/or responsibilities of OWNER; and WHEREAS, the Agreement provides that any amendments shall be valid only when expressed in writing and signed by the parties. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual understandings and Agreements contained herein, the parties agree to amend the Agreement as follows: 1. The Basic Services of ENGINEER as described in the Agreement are amended and supplemented as follows: a. The Scope of Services is amended to include Engineering and Architectural Design Services and support as described in Attachment 01, Amendment No.3. 2. The responsibilities of OWNER as described in the Agreement are amended and supplemented as follows: Page 50 of 191  a. There are no changes to the Basic Services of the OWNER as described in the Agreement. 3. The time periods for the performance of ENGINEER's services as set forth in the Agreement are amended and supplemented as follows: a. The overall contract duration is extended to December 31, 2026. b. The following Phase II Engineering Milestones are amended per the 10% Design Phase through the 100% Design Phase as follows: Phase II Engineering Milestones Milestone Dates Notice to Proceed April 14, 2023 10% Design December 2023 10% Design Agency Review February 2024 30% Design June 2024 60% Design November 2024 90% Design June 2025 IDOT Prefinal Plans, 95% Submittal October 2025 IDOT Final 99% Plans, 99%Specifications, 99% Estimate January 2026 IDOT 100% Final Plans and Specifications April 2026 IDOT Letting April 2026 c. The time period for performance for Land Acquisition Services set forth in this Agreement are as follows: Land Acquisition Milestones Milestone Dates Notice to Proceed April 2025 Plat of Highways May 2025 Pre-Acquisition Activities April to July 2025 Negotiations/Acquisition July 2025 to February 2026 Relocation Advisory Services April 2025 to April 2026 (Scheduling 12 months to file relocation claim currently, but may not be required) d. The time period for performance for Phase 1 Undergrounding Utility Services set forth in this Agreement are as follows: Undergrounding Utilities, Phase 1 Milestone Dates Notice to Proceed April 2025 Site and Utility Survey May 2025 Coordination of Relocation with Utilities, ComEd June 2025 Preliminary Relocation Design July 2025 Preliminary Construction Cost Estimate August 2025 e. The time period for performance for Photorealistic Renderings Services are part of the Phase II Engineering effort, and do not have a separate schedule from that listed in Section 3.b. Renderings will be developed as requested by Village Staff as the project is developed to the 100% level, as required. 4. The payment for service rendered by ENGINEER shall be as set forth below: Page 51 of 191  a. Total cost for the Basic Services outlines in ATTACHMENT 01 of Amendment No. 3 are (301,759.00). The breakdown of costs is as follows: i. Parking Alternatives: $ 75,116.00 ii. Utility Undergrounding (Phase 1): $ 44,673.00 iii. Land Acquisition Support: $ 150,846.00 iv. Photorealistic Renderings: $ 25,168.00 v. Administration $ 5,956.00 $ 301,759.00 b. The total cost of all Services is increased from ($4,026,097.00) to ($4,327,856). 5. Except as herein modified, all terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force an effect. IN ITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment on the date indicated above for the purpose herein expressed. CDM Smith, Inc. Village of Glen Ellyn, Illinois Name: Steve S. Pasinski, P.E. Name: Mark Franz Title: Associate | Client Services Leader Title: Village Manager Date: Date: Address for giving Notices: Address for giving Notices: 125 S. Wacker Drive, Suite 2510 535 Duane Street Chicago, IL 60606 Glen Ellyn Illinois, 60137 Page 52 of 191  ATTACHMENT 01 Glen Ellyn Metra Station and Multimodal Access Improvements Project Amendment Number 03 - Scope of Services The Village is pursuing a project known as the Glen Ellyn Metra Station and Multimodal Access Improvements Project to construct a larger station building and a pedestrian tunnel under the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) West Line, reconstruct parking lots, provide ADA access throughout the project area, and reconstruct affected roadways including utility and streetscape improvements. The Village has advanced Phase I Engineering for the project with said services being rendered by CDM Smith of Chicago, Illinois. In April 2023, the Village issued an approval for Phase II Engineering Services for the design of the project to the 30% Design Phase. In November 2023, the Village issued approval of Amendment No. 1 for the remainder of fee to complete Phase II Engineering Services for the design of the project from the 30% design phase through 100%. The Village of Glen Ellyn also recently requested that a Life Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA) be completed for the project to estimate maintenance and operational costs for the completed facility, which was approved in July of 2024 under Amendment No. 2. This Amendment No. 3 includes four additional pieces of work in addition to the original scope: 1) Parking Alternatives, which includes all of the out of scope work required to revert the design from parallel to angled parking on Crescent Boulevard post 30% design, 2) Preliminary Utility Undergrounding Design, with the goal of advancing preliminary work to move select pole mounted utilities underground along Duane Street to improve the aesthetic to the entrance of the proposed U.S. Bank Park for the future, 3) Land Acquisition Support, which includes support for creation of Plat of Surveys, acquisition support, appraisal analysis, planning, relocation advisory services and negotiations from CDM Smith and 4) additional photorealistic renderings, in support of obtaining Village Architectural Appearance Commission (ACC) approval. This amendment also includes additional administration efforts to manage the additional work and oversee sub consultants and vendors (direct costs). Details are given below for each of the four main scope sections. 1.0 Scope of Services – Parking Alternatives CDM Smith has supported the Village of Glen Ellyn Staff with a robust effort to develop parking design alternatives for the project starting in July of 2023. Consistent with the Village’s Streetscape Ordinance, direction received at project initiation from Village Staff was that the parking configuration on Crescent Boulevard would be revised from the current angled configuration to parallel parking following IDOT’s BLRS Manual. It was understood that on-street parking configurations would be a point of review as the design advanced. CDM Smith developed several design alternatives that included parallel parking on Crescent Boulevard and presented those concepts to the Village Capital Improvements Commission (CIC) for review and approval in March and April of 2024. The CIC made suggestions to improve the design and ultimately supported the parallel design direction. CDM Smith and Village Staff with CIC backing, presented the parking alternatives at a Village Board Workshop on April 15, 2024. The workshop identified that the number of space reductions required for the project was an area of concern for some of the six board trustees and the Board President who 1 Page 53 of 191 attended that evening. Additional requests were presented for CDM Smith to review the design and try to find additional parking spaces. Receiving this valuable feedback and with support from the board to continue using parallel parking, CDM Smith and the Village Staff improved the parking design, using the parallel parking configuration as it best met the requirements of the IDOT design criteria and did not require any special variances. CDM Smith, in collaboration with Village Staff, presented the improved parallel parking design and its additional benefits of parallel parking, along with specific parking space data, back to the Board at a workshop on May 28th, 2024. The workshop concluded with CDM Smith requesting the Board’s preference between parallel and angled parking given the looming 30% Design Submittal deadline. With the Board’s support (4 to 3 in favor of parallel parking), CDM Smith finalized development of the 30% drawings to include parallel parking on Crescent Boulevard and advised the drainage and landscaping subconsultants to update their designs accordingly. The 30% Design of the Glen Ellyn Metra Station was submitted on time on June 28, 2024. As part of the requirements for this project, a Public Meeting was held to inform the Public about the project, summarize the work that the Public could expect, and show the parking designs currently underway. The Public Meeting was advertised and publicized in several ways locally. It was held on May 30, 2024, in the Village Civic Center and was well attended. Several weeks after the meeting, Village Staff began to receive questions regarding the project and the parking configurations on Crescent Boulevard from local businesses. The common message from the businesses was that they were unaware of the project and that parking might change from its current configuration. To address this in a proactive manner, Village Staff held a presentation with the Glen Ellyn Business Alliance on July 10, 2024, to better inform businesses that did not attend the Public Meeting. CDM Smith assisted with this effort by helping develop and deliver a brief in-person presentation to the Alliance. On July 15, 2024, CDM Smith and Village Staff presented revised designs for parallel and angled parking options on Crescent Boulevard as requested by the Board. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Village Board voted in favor of the angled parking configuration (4 to 3). CDM Smith updated the parking configuration post 30% design and returned to angled parking. This portion of the Amendment is to cover the out-of-scope work performed in the development of parallel parking design iterations and support provided to Village Staff in the form of alternative development, meetings, and presentations. A summary of meetings attended by CDM Smith in support of the development of the parallel parking alternative is shown below in Table 1.0: 2 Page 54 of 191 Table 1.0 – Summary of Meetings CDM Smith Prepared for and Attended for Parallel Parking Task 1.1 – Zoning No revisions to Task 1 (Task 1.1) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. Task 1.2 – Surveying No revisions to Task 2 (Task 1.2) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, the OWNER and ENGINEER. Task 1.3 – Site Design – Civil Engineering CDM Smith has updated the parking configuration on Crescent Boulevard to utilize angled parking the 60% submittal. That submittal was transmitted to the Village on 11/25/2024. The following was required to make those revisions: 1.3.1 30% Design Revisions - Plan Sheets  Typical Section - The proposed typical section on Crescent Boulevard from Main Street to Forest Avenue was revised to the new cross section in which angled parking will be provided on the north side of Crescent. Parallel parking on the south side of Crescent was eliminated.  Alignment Plan – The alignment of Crescent Boulevard was revised based on the revised typical section and required the crown of the pavement to be shifted to the south.  Roadway Removals -The removal limits were reviewed and updated based on the updated plan geometry for Crescent Boulevard. Limited impacts due to the change in geometry were observed.  Plan and Profile – The proposed plan geometry was revised based on the description in the project understanding. Due to the change in alignment, the proposed profile was also revised. This effort included 3D modeling work. 3 Page 55 of 191   Phase of Construction – The phases of construction were updated and further detailed based on the revised geometry for Crescent and for the parking lots located north of the UPRR between Main Street and Park Boulevard.  Cross Sections – Due to the change in the plan geometry, alignment and profile, the cross sections had to be revised. Twenty-two cross sections were updated in total.  Site Plan – The proposed site plan was updated for the parking lots located north of the UPRR between Main Street and Park Boulevard. This work included adding coordinates for break points as necessary.  Grading Plan – The contours for the grading plan were updated based on revisions to the 3D model. 1.3.2 Parking Review – CDM Smith reviewed the viability of placing two additional parallel parking spaces on the south side of Crescent Boulevard adjacent to the ADA drop-off area within the proposed plaza area. 1.3.3 Drainage Coordination – Time for additional coordination amongst the project team to coordinate the design revisions for drainage in and near the revised parking areas was required. Design revisions within the drainage design were performed by CDM Smith’s subconsultant, CivilTech Inc. 1.3.4 Phase I PDR Update The Project has not officially been moved from Phase I into Phase II from IDOT’s perspective. That transition will be made soon, once the final Project Design Report (PDR) is submitted, reviewed, and approved by IDOT. Due to the changes to the parking configuration, CDM Smith’s initial submittal for the PDR to IDOT will need to be revised so it reflects the final design direction with angled parking. This will require edits to the report and Type, Size & Location (TS&L) drawings required by IDOT that shows a summary of the project and proposed parking. 1.3.4 IDOT Variances The angled parking design requested by the Village Board is not 100% compliant per the IDOT BLRS Manual. CDM Smith and the Village worked together to file the proper forms, drawings and attend the required meetings with IDOT to submit a series of variances to IDOT for consideration to implement the desired angled parking solution. Task 1.4 – Structural Engineering No revisions to Task 4 (Task 1.4) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. Task 1.5 – Landscaping Design The revisions to include angled parking required changes to the landscaping design. Design revisions were performed by CDM Smith’s subconsultant, The Lakota Group. 4 Page 56 of 191 Task 1.6 – Electrical Engineering No revisions to Task 6 (Task 1.6) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. Task 1.7 – Permitting No revisions to Task 7 (Task 1.7) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. Task 1.8 – Construction Cost Estimating No revisions to Task 8 (Task 1.8) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. Task 1.9 Value Added Tasks No revisions to Task 9 (Task 1.9) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. Task 1.10– Project Management Coordination with the Village of Glen Ellyn Staff, CDM Smith’s subconsultants and IDOT were placed as priorities as the design moved to a 60% completion. This effort included status of parking revisions at weekly client meetings with the Village of Glen Ellyn, as well as coordination with IDOT in advance of the Variance Meeting. Project Administration is also included in this additional work. Task 1.11 – Quality Assurance This work was combined with the primary project scope from a Quality Perspective. Execution of a Quality Management Plan which documents the necessary information required to effectively manage design work was required. The plans, policies, procedures, and processes to ensure that project deliverables meet client and CDM Smith quality management system requirements were applied to the scope of work under this Addendum. Task 1.12 - CDM Smith Other Direct Costs (ODC) No direct costs related to this Scope of Services is expected. project. 2.0 Scope of Services – Utility Undergrounding Design, Phase 1 The planned development of the existing US Bank Site into a community park adjacent to the Glen Ellyn Metra Station Project has become a priority for the Village of Glen Ellyn and the Village Park District. As a result, they would like to pursue preliminary efforts to design the undergrounding of several pole-mounted utilities in the area to enhance the aesthetics of the future park. Based on preliminary investigations these overhead utilities consist of medium voltage bare electrical lines and telephone lines. These overhead utilities run south from the intersection of Forest Avenue and the South Parking Lot along the west side of Forest Avenue, to the intersection of Forest Avenue and Duane Street, and then east to Utility Pole No. 454113Q1 at 586 Duane Street. 5 Page 57 of 191 The Village would like to begin preliminary engineering to relocate these overhead facilities to be underground along Forest South and east along Duane Street, within the greenspace along the roadway. This work will be done in two (2) phases ( 1. Concepts and 2. Final Design), and only Phase 1 (concepts) is included in this Amendment:  Phase 1 will focus on initial coordination with ComEd and communications utilities in defining undergrounding limits, utility survey, development of a preliminary relocation plan, and estimated construction costs for the preliminary relocation. Task 2.1 – Zoning No revisions to Task 1 (Task 2.1) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. Task 2.2 – Surveying 2.2.1 Topographic Survey A topographic survey and utility will be required to complete work in Phase 1 and will supplement information already surveyed. The topographic survey project area will include the intersection of Forest Avenue and Duane Street and extend 100 feet west down Duane Street, and 480-feet from the center of the intersection, east down Duane Street. The survey will include the Village ROW including the sidewalks, stopping 2 feet outside the ROW line. The survey will be continuous and will be performed by CDM Smith’s survey sub-consultant Jorgensen and Associates, Inc. Survey plats will be incorporated into the drawing set, 2.2.2 Utility Survey Subsurface Exploration (SUE) Level A Potholing To verify the precise horizontal and vertical location of utilities the utilities will be required to be exposed and measured. This is accomplished by excavating small pits until the utilities are exposed. Subsurface Utility Engineering (SUE) standards will be in accordance with the CI/ASCE 38-02 Standard Guideline for the Collection & Depiction of Existing Subsurface Utility Data. Four (4) SUE potholing locations are anticipated with each requiring pavement to be restored : Two (2) between depths of 6.01 and 12.00 feet, and two (2) between 3.01 and 6.00 feet. For this work, the horizontal datum will be NAD 83 (1986), and the vertical datum will be NAVD 88. Potholing will be performed by CDM Smith’s survey sub-consultant American Survey, Inc. Task 2.3 – Civil Engineering Phase 1: The scope of work for Phase 1 for the civil engineering discipline consists of updated topographic and utility survey, coordination, development of a preliminary relocation plan of utilities in sketch format, and estimated construction costs of the preliminary plan to aid the Village in Glen Ellyn is understanding costs to underground selected pole mounted utilities. 2.3.1 Survey Coordination Phase 1: The civil design team will coordinate the execution of additional survey with the Village. CDM Smith will review the deliverables from the surveyors to ensure includes all items in their scope of work. 6 Page 58 of 191 2.3.2 Utility Coordination Phase 1: The civil design team will engage in utility coordination and will contact utilities to verify existing locations along Duane to avoid conflicts. Additionally, the civil design team will work with utilities whose facilities are impacted by the proposed improvement to resolve potential conflicts as the preliminary relocation plan is developed. Task 2.4 – Structural Engineering No revisions to Task 4 (Task 2.4) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. Task 2.5 – Landscaping Design No revisions to Task 5 (Task 2.5) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. Utility undergrounding will be located within the parkway grass area between the sidewalk and roadway curb (where possible). The parkway will be returned to its original condition following completion of the work. Task 2.6 – Electrical Engineering Preliminary electrical engineering design will be required for the utility undergrounding. This will include initial discussions and coordination with the Village of Glen Ellyn, Commonwealth Edison (ComEd) and telephone and cable companies whose utilities need to be relocated from existing poles. CDM Smith utility and electrical engineers will coordinate design work with ComEd. ComEd will require payment from the Village in advance before any design work is initiated and after ComEd provides a Service Entrance Location (the document that assign tasks for customers as well as for the ComEd workforce.) Task 2.7 – Permitting No revisions to Task 7 (Task 2.7) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. Task 2.8 – Construction Cost Estimating Opinions of Probable Construction Costs for undergrounding will be performed by our team’s construction costs estimator, Vistara. For Phase 1, following the identification and survey of all utilities in the area of the utility undergrounding along Duane Street, and following the development and approval of the preliminary relocation plan, a preliminary construction cost estimate will be developed. Task 2.9 - Value Added Tasks No revisions to Task 9 (Task 2.9) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. 7 Page 59 of 191 Task 2.10 – Project Management Coordination with the Village of Glen Ellyn, stakeholders, agencies, utilities, and other team members will be a priority with the effort for undergrounding. This effort includes providing status of undergrounding effort into bi- weekly client meetings with the Village of Glen Ellyn. Project Administration will also be included for this additional work. 2.10.1 Coordination with Subconsultants Development of this work will require Project Management hours for coordination with CDM Smith’s cost estimation sub-consultant, Vistara, and our surveyors Jorgensen & Associates, Inc., and American Survey, Inc. Task 2.11 – Quality Assurance Execution of our already developed Quality Management Plan will be required on all work performed. The plans policies, procedures, and processes to ensure that project deliverables meet client and CDM Smith quality management system requirements will be applied to the scope of work under this Amendment. Task 2.12 - CDM Smith Other Direct Costs (ODC) The following are anticipated other direct costs related to the project. All direct costs will be billed at cost until the upper limits are reached. 2.12.1 Travel This includes costs associated with travel to and from the project site including mileage and fuel. 3.0 Scope of Services – Land Acquisition Support The Glen Ellyn Metra Station and Multi-Modal Access Improvements Project will be receiving CMAQ and STP funding. As a result, IDOT will be requiring the Village of Glen Ellyn to follow the IDOT Land Acquisition Policies and Procedures as it relates to the purchase of the existing building(s) located at the existing Metra station. CDM Smith will be responsible for supporting the Village with acquisition and relocation services, as per the IDOT Acquisition and Relocation Manual and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act 1970 (URA). The CDM team will review existing project documents, title commitments, plats, coordinate necessary noticing as required under the URA to both property owner(s) and displacees. CDM Smith will also identify any potential project delays and/or risks. This will include working in close coordination with UPRR, the Village, displacees, and reviewing any previous signed agreements between both parties and supporting the Village. CDM Smith will support Village staff with these negotiations as required and work will include reviewing offers and attending meetings where negotiations are discussed. It is understood that there is an existing coffee shop operating within the Metra Station that would be displaced due to the project. The relocation team will meet with the coffee shop owner to complete a relocation questionnaire that will help the team better understand the possible impacts and/or hardship the relocation could have on their business. Over the course of the meeting(s with the displacee(s), the team will support the 8 Page 60 of 191 coffee shop owner(s) with relocation advisory services, explain the benefits they may be entitled to under the URA and ensure their relocation claims are paid out according to the URA and expeditiously. Records maintained by CDM Smith in accordance with the URA are confidential regarding their use as public information unless otherwise determined by applicable law. CDM Smith will also support the Village in submitting reports/updates of its real property acquisition and displacement activities if required by the Federal Agency funding the project. Current project understanding and the Village’s need for IDOT land acquisition support extends to the following building structures; 1) the existing Glen Ellyn Metra Station, 2) the existing inbound side shelter, and 3) the proposed pedestrian underpass (with supporting ramp/stair access). The existing railroad right-of-way assets are being purchased as part of the Project so that they can be demolished to make way for the new station and new warming shelters. Note that the existing Metra station current has a tenant, therefore CDM Smith will be supporting relocation efforts of that tenant per the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act 1970 (URA) as required. CDM Smith will coordinate and manage railroad right-of-way building acquisition and relocation. The appraiser and review appraiser will be selected from the IDOT approved appraiser list. Task 3.1 – Zoning No revisions to Task 1 (Task 3.1) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. Task 3.2 – Surveying 3.2.1 Plat of Highways The land acquisition process from IDOT will require a Plat of Highways be produced for the area being acquired by the Village of Glen Ellyn from UPRR. CDM Smith will be coordinating with our survey sub-consultant to develop the required, certified Plat of Highways. CDM Smith’s survey Subconsultant Jorgensen & Associates, Inc will be developing a Plat of Highways for the Project. As part of their work, title commitments will be obtained and reviewed, along with boundary information. The Surveyor is also responsible for researching deeds, railroad maps and other recordation to accurate generate the required Plat of Highways. The Surveyor will also locate field monuments and geometrically tie existing buildings to the state coordinate system. The Plat will be developed using MicroStation Open Roads and delivered to CDM Smith and the Village in PDF format. Direct costs for title commitments, or cost for copies of official documents, and well as travel will be included with direct costs. Task 3.3 – Civil Engineering 3.3.1 Preacquisition Activities Preacquisition activities will include but are not limited to the process of identifying and building relations with key stakeholders, displacees, and the property owner(s) and coordination of appraisal inspections for the impacted properties. During this phase of the project, CDM Smith will review existing project documents, title 9 Page 61 of 191 commitments, plats, coordinate necessary noticing as required under the URA to both property owner(s) and displacees and provide support to the Village. CDM Smith will also identify any potential project delays and/or risks. The success of this acquisition will depend a large part on proper preparation. CDM Smith will seek guidance and support from the Law Firm Neal & Leroy as it pertains to strategy when working with the railroads and leverage their experience on best practices and approach for acquisition. 3.3.2 Acquisition Activities The Acquisition team will support all necessary steps to acquire the station and building assets for the Village of Glen Ellyn. This will include working in close coordination with UPRR, the Village and displacees, reviewing any previous signed agreements between both parties and supporting the Village with all required acquisition and relocation steps as per the IDOT Acquisition and Relocation Manual. 3.3.3 Negotiations/Acquisition Acquisition of the two structures from UPRR, as well and property for the pedestrian tunnel will require a series of discussions between UPRR and the Village of Glen Ellyn, with the goal of each discussion to reach a fair and equitable agreement that is beneficial for the public good and in the public’s best interests. CDM Smith will support Village Staff with these negotiations as required. Work will include reviewing offers and attending meetings where negotiations are discussed with the goal of providing expert recommendations from CDM Smith’s acquisition team. 3.3.4 Relocation Advisory Services The services provided include relocation support and relocation advisory services as required under the URA. This includes reviewing any existing leases, interviewing the displacee(s) that will require relocation, understanding possible relocation impacts for the displacee(s), issuing the required noticing, support in identifying potential replacement sites and preparing applicable relocation claims in compliance with the URA. It is understood that there is an existing coffee shop operating within the Metra Station that would be displaced due to the project. The relocation team will meet with the coffee shop owner to complete a relocation questionnaire that will help the team better understand the possible impacts and/or hardship the relocation could have on their business. Over the course of the meeting(s with the displacee(s), the team will support the coffee shop owner(s) with relocation advisory services, explain the benefits he/she/they may be entitled to under the URA and ensure their relocation claims are paid out according to the URA and expeditiously. The claim packets will be prepared and reviewed by the appropriate client liaison prior to recommending for payment. A photo recordation as well as property inventory will be completed at the displacement site as well as the replacement site. CDM Smith will maintain adequate records of the acquisition and displacement activities in sufficient detail to demonstrate compliance. These records shall be retained for at least 3 years after the property owner and each person displaced from the property receives the final payment to which he or she is entitled or in accordance with the applicable regulations of the Federal funding Agency, whichever is later. 10 Page 62 of 191 Records maintained by CDM Smith in accordance with the URA are confidential regarding their use as public information unless otherwise determined by applicable law. CDM Smith will support the Village in submitting reports/updates of its real property acquisition and displacement activities if required by the Federal Agency funding the project. 3.3.5 IDOT Land Acquisition Support Assumption CDM Smith’s land acquisition support scope does not include payment of any relocation benefits associated with the displacee(s). Task 3.4 – Structural Engineering No revisions to Task 4 (Task 3.4) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. Task 3.5 – Landscaping Design No revisions to Task 5 (Task 3.5) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. Task 3.6 – Electrical Engineering No revisions to Task 6 (Task 3.6) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. Task 3.7 – Permitting No revisions to Task 7 (Task 3.7) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. Task 3.8 – Construction Cost Estimating No revisions to Task 8 (Task 3.8) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. Task 3.9 - Value Added Tasks No revisions to Task 9 (Task 3.9) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. Task 3.10 – Project Management Coordination with the Village of Glen Ellyn and UPRR will be required for the facility/land Acquisition. CDM Smith will be request documents from UPRR, Metra, DuPage County, or other legal jurisdictions to aid in the Plat of Highways development, and Land Acquisition Coordination. The Project Manager will aid in coordinating the acquisition team, development of the Plat of Surveys, and attending meetings where required, as requested by Village Staff. Project Administration will also be included within this work. 11 Page 63 of 191 Task 3.11 – Quality Assurance Execution of our already developed Quality Management Plan will be required on all work performed. The plans policies, procedures, and processes to ensure that project deliverables meet client and CDM Smith quality management system requirements will be applied to the scope of work under this Addendum. Task 3.12 - CDM Smith Other Direct Costs (ODC) The following are anticipated other direct costs related to the project. All direct costs will be billed at cost until the upper limits are reached. 3.12.1 Travel This includes costs associated with travel for CDM Smith staff to attend any in person meetings in support of Land Acquisition, and survey travel to and from the project site including mileage or vehicle rental and fuel. 4.0 Scope of Services – Photorealistic Renderings CDM Smith, with Village Staff support held a pre-application meeting with the Village Architectural Appearance Commission (AAC) on July 31, 2024. At this meeting CDM Smith and Village Staff presented the 30% Design of the Glen Ellyn Metra Station with the goal to obtain initial feedback from the Commission. A joint meeting with the Village Historical Preservation Commission and the Environmental Commission was held on August 20, 2024 to further illicit comments from those commissions jointly as well so that CDM Smith had a full picture of the aesthetic revisions that be required for all commissions to approve the station. After all comments were received, CDM Smith held an in-person independent meeting with Village staff on September 30, 2024, to discuss how to best address comments from the AAC, Historical Preservation Commission, & Environmental Commission. After discussion on the comments made and how they can be handled by CDM Smith, it was decided that additional photographic rendering with revisions would be the best way to convey the changes to the various commissions. The Village directed CDM Smith to revise the current 360-degree rendering with three additional viewpoints, as well as make revisions to on-street parking, station and plaza, and provide two additional still renderings of the station. Renderings were revised, completed and presented to the AAC on December 5, 2024. The Commission appreciated the revisions made, but still had comments on several material types they wanted to see revised, as well as the general aesthetic of the stone arches. At the closing of the meeting the Commission stated that they would like to see further revised renderings of the revisions discussed before approval will be given. This scope of work for renderings includes the rendering revisions completed as of December 5th for the Commission Meeting, rendering revisions completed for the AAC meeting held February 12, 2025, and additional effort to cover any future renderings that may be requested by the Village Board or Village Staff between the time of this Amendment and the completion of the project. Rendering work for the most recent AAC meeting included further updates to the 360-degree rendered model, for multiple viewpoints, as well additional still renders of the station. 12 Page 64 of 191 Task 4.1 – Zoning No revisions to Task 1 (Task 4.1) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. Task 4.2 – Surveying No revisions to Task 2 (Task 4.2) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. Task 4.3 – Civil Engineering No revisions to Task 3 (Task 4.3) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. Task 4.4 – Structural Engineering No revisions to Task 4 (Task 4.4) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. Task 4.5 – Landscaping Design No revisions to Task 5 (Task 4.5) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. Task 4.6 – Electrical Engineering No revisions to Task 6 (Task 4.6) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. Task 4.7 – Permitting No revisions to Task 7 (Task 4.7) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. Task 4.8 – Construction Cost Estimating No revisions to Task 8 (Task 4.8) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. Task 4.9 - Value Added Tasks No revisions to Task 9 (Task 4.9) of the Agreements dated April 5, 2023, May 26, 2023, and July 29, 2024, between the OWNER and ENGINEER. 13 Page 65 of 191 Task 4.10 – Project Management Architectural Support for the development of renderings and Project Administration will be included for this additional work. Task 4.11 – Quality Assurance Execution of our already developed Quality Management Plan will be required on all work performed. The plans policies, procedures, and processes to ensure that project deliverables meet client and CDM Smith quality management system requirements will be applied to the scope of work under this Addendum. Task 4.12 - CDM Smith Other Direct Costs (ODC) The following are anticipated other direct costs related to the project. All direct costs will be billed at cost until the upper limits are reached. 4.12.1 Rendering Subconsultant CDM Smith uses a subconsultant to provide much of the rendering work. Renders are based on three- dimensional models developed by CDM Smith. Our sub-consultant, Visualized Concepts, Inc., are treated as an Other Direct Cost (ODC) to the project. 14 Page 66 of 191 SUMMARY CECS Page 67 of 191  PAYROLL ESCALATION TABLE FIXED RAISES FIRM NAME CDM Smith Inc DATE 03/21/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime PTB-ITEM# 1 Prepared By Pasinski CONTRACT TERM 12 MONTHS OVERHEAD RATE 161.98% START DATE 2/1/2025 COMPLEXITY FACTOR 0 RAISE DATE 3/31/2025 % OF RAISE 4% END DATE 1/31/2026 ESCALATION PER YEAR year First date Last date Months % of Contract 0 2/1/2025 3/31/2025 2 16.67% 1 4/1/2025 1/31/2026 10 86.67% The total escalation = 3.33% Page 68 of 191  PAYROLL RATES FIRM NAME CDM Smith Inc DATE 03/21/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime PTB-ITEM # 1 ESCALATION FACTOR 3.33% Note: Rates should be capped on the AVG 1 tab as necessary IDOT CLASSIFICATION PAYROLL RATES CALCULATED RATE ON FILE Administrative 1 - Szczepanik, Candice A $34.90 $36.06 Professional 2 - Connolly, John $33.89 $35.02 Professional 2 - Mechanical Engineer (TBD)) $35.42 $36.60 Professional 2 - Peroni, Anthony M $42.51 $43.93 Professional 2 - Alvarez, Kassandra $40.09 $41.43 Professional 3 - Electrical Engineer (TBD) $38.63 $39.92 Professional 3 - Pyshnov, Erik $40.38 $41.73 Professional 3 - Eull, Jacob N $45.84 $47.37 Professional 4 - Hostettler, Julia $41.49 $42.87 Professional 4 - Geotechnical Engineer (TBD) $43.80 $45.26 Professional 4 - Ordaz, Webster U $55.41 $57.26 Professional 4 - Power, Gavin M $56.72 $58.61 Professional 4 - Carson, Raymond T $54.01 $55.81 Professional 4 - Pereda, Christian $47.79 $49.38 Professional 4 - Philpott, John M $56.04 $57.91 Professional 4 - Cunningham, Brian $55.87 $57.73 Professional 5 - Buirge, Dennis E $57.31 $59.22 Professional 5 - Suba, Cody J $57.42 $59.33 Professional 5 - Murdock, Jacquelyn K $67.36 $69.61 Professional 5 - Laria, Tomas A $60.42 $62.43 Professional 5 - BIM Modeler (TBD) $56.90 $58.80 Professional 5 - Figus, Chris $65.12 $67.29 Professional 8 - Aklan, Matthew $100.97 $104.34 Professional 5 - Sutherlin, Sarah $65.31 $67.49 Professional 5 - Diffenderfer, Brandon J $73.23 $75.67 Professional 5 - Lopez Gonzalez, Irvin J $73.59 $76.04 Professional 5 - Walsh, Kevin $51.74 $53.46 Professional 6 - Watkins, Michael S (Mike) $78.78 $81.41 Professional 7 - Cheval, Robert A $71.06 $73.43 Professional 7 - Sarich, Pete $71.52 $73.90 Professional 7 - Ricketts, April $82.59 $85.34 Professional 7 - Yang, Wendell W $75.87 $78.40 Professional 7 - Kahn, Michael E $82.95 $85.72 Professional 7 - Wendorf, Jared W $84.98 $87.81 Professional 7 - Burdett, Stephen M $90.04 $93.04 Professional 7 - Cerda, Antonio A $86.88 $89.78 Professional 7 - Newby, John E $89.70 $92.69 Professional 7 - Hands, Steve $92.84 $95.93 Professional 8 - Harber, Benjamin O $86.44 $89.32 Professional 8 - Fry, Karl D $95.44 $98.62 Professional 8 - Klein, Kevin $81.74 $84.46 Professional 9 - Pasinski, Steven S $112.35 $116.10 Professional 9 - Khwaja, Mahmood $128.22 $132.49 Professional 9 - Martel, Christopher M $137.20 $141.77 Professional 6 - Melody Carvajal $53.85 $55.65 Page 69 of 191  COST PLUS FIXED FEE COST ESTIMATE OF CONSULTANT SERVICES FIRM CDM Smith Inc DATE 03/21/25 PTB-ITEM # 1 OVERHEAD RATE 161.98% PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime COMPLEXITY FACTOR 0 DBE OVERHEAD SERVICES % OF DROP ITEM MANHOURS PAYROLL & DIRECT FIXED BY DBE TOTAL GRAND BOX FRINGE BENF COSTS FEE OTHERS TOTAL TOTAL (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (G) (H) (B-G) Parking Studies and Design 325 19,965 32,339 6,276 16,536 - 75,116 24.89% Utility Undergrounding Concepts 56 4,673 7,569 300 1,469 30,662 - 44,673 14.80% 612 34,014 55,097 10,693 12,848 - - Land Acquisition&Support Services 646 38,888 62,990 21,000 12,225 15,743 - 150,846 49.99% Renderings 16 1,080 1,749 0 339 22,000 - 25,168 8.34% Administration 26 2,030 3,288 0 638 - 5,956 1.97% - TOTALS 1681 100,650 163,032 21,300 31,640 97,789 - 301,759 100.00% 263,682 DBE 0.00% Page 70 of 191  AVERAGE HOURLY PROJECT RATES FIRM CDM Smith Inc PTB-ITEM# 1 DATE 03/21/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime SHEET 1 OF 5 PAYROLL AVG TOTAL PROJ. RATES Parking Studies and Design Utility Undergrounding Con 0 Land Acquisition&Support Services Renderings HOURLY Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd CLASSIFICATION RATES Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Administrative 1 - Szczepanik, Candice A 36.06 10.0 0.59% 0.21 Professional 2 - Connolly, John 35.02 266.0 15.82% 5.54 126 38.77% 13.58 140 22.88% 8.01 Professional 2 - Mechanical Engineer (TBD)) 36.60 0.0 Professional 2 - Peroni, Anthony M 43.93 0.0 Professional 2 - Alvarez, Kassandra 41.43 100.0 5.95% 2.46 100 16.34% 6.77 Professional 3 - Electrical Engineer (TBD) 39.92 0.0 Professional 3 - Pyshnov, Erik 41.73 0.0 Professional 3 - Eull, Jacob N 47.37 0.0 Professional 4 - Hostettler, Julia 42.87 32.0 1.90% 0.82 32 5.23% 2.24 Professional 4 - Geotechnical Engineer (TBD) 45.26 0.0 Professional 4 - Ordaz, Webster U 57.26 0.0 Professional 4 - Power, Gavin M 58.61 0.0 Professional 4 - Carson, Raymond T 55.81 0.0 Professional 4 - Pereda, Christian 49.38 60.0 3.57% 1.76 60 9.80% 4.84 Professional 4 - Philpott, John M 57.91 0.0 Professional 4 - Cunningham, Brian 57.73 0.0 Professional 5 - Buirge, Dennis E 59.22 0.0 Professional 5 - Suba, Cody J 59.33 174.0 10.35% 6.14 66 20.31% 12.05 8 14.29% 8.48 88 14.38% 8.53 12 1.86% 1.10 Professional 5 - Murdock, Jacquelyn K 69.61 0.0 Professional 5 - Laria, Tomas A 62.43 0.0 Professional 5 - BIM Modeler (TBD) 58.80 0.0 Professional 5 - Figus, Chris 67.29 32.0 1.90% 1.28 32 5.23% 3.52 Professional 8 - Aklan, Matthew 104.34 101.0 6.01% 6.27 23 7.08% 7.38 12 21.43% 22.36 18 2.94% 3.07 32 4.95% 5.17 Professional 5 - Sutherlin, Sarah 67.49 121.0 7.20% 4.86 55 16.92% 11.42 8 14.29% 9.64 42 6.86% 4.63 16 100.00% 67.49 Professional 5 - Diffenderfer, Brandon J 75.67 0.0 Professional 5 - Lopez Gonzalez, Irvin J 76.04 0.0 Professional 5 - Walsh, Kevin 53.46 264.0 15.70% 8.40 264 40.87% 21.85 Professional 6 - Watkins, Michael S (Mike) 81.41 0.0 Professional 7 - Cheval, Robert A 73.43 0.0 Professional 7 - Sarich, Pete 73.90 0.0 Professional 7 - Ricketts, April 85.34 0.0 Professional 7 - Yang, Wendell W 78.40 0.0 0 0.0 Professional 7 - Kahn, Michael E 85.72 8.0 0.48% 0.41 8 1.31% 1.12 Professional 7 - Wendorf, Jared W 87.81 34.0 2.02% 1.78 6 1.85% 1.62 6 10.71% 9.41 8 1.31% 1.15 14 2.17% 1.90 Professional 7 - Burdett, Stephen M 93.04 0.0 Professional 7 - Cerda, Antonio A 89.78 54.0 3.21% 2.88 14 4.31% 3.87 4 7.14% 6.41 12 1.96% 1.76 24 3.72% 3.34 Professional 7 - Newby, John E 92.69 0.0 Professional 7 - Hands, Steve 95.93 32.0 1.90% 1.83 16 4.92% 4.72 16 2.48% 2.38 Professional 8 - Harber, Benjamin O 89.32 0.0 Professional 8 - Fry, Karl D 98.62 0.0 Professional 8 - Klein, Kevin 84.46 90.0 5.35% 4.52 18 32.14% 27.15 72 11.76% 9.94 Professional 9 - Pasinski, Steven S 116.10 19.0 1.13% 1.31 19 5.85% 6.79 Professional 9 - Khwaja, Mahmood 132.49 0.0 Professional 9 - Martel, Christopher M 141.77 0.0 0 0.0 Professional 6 - Melody Carvajal 55.65 284.0 16.89% 9.40 284 43.96% 24.46 0 0.0 TOTALS 1681.0 100% $59.87 325.0 100.00% $61.43 56.0 100% $83.45 612.0 100% $55.58 646.0 100% $60.20 16.0 100% $67.49 Page 71 of 191 ' AVERAGE HOURLY PROJECT RATES FIRM CDM Smith Inc PTB-ITEM# 1 DATE 03/21/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime SHEET 2 OF 5 PAYROLL AVG Administration 0 0 0 0 0 HOURLY Hrs % Wgtd Hrs % Wgtd Hrs % Wgtd Hrs % Wgtd Hrs % Wgtd Hrs % Wgtd CLASSIFICATION RATES Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Administrative 1 - Szczepanik, Candice A 36.06 10 38.46% 13.87 Professional 2 - Connolly, John 35.02 Professional 2 - Mechanical Engineer (TBD)) 36.60 Professional 2 - Peroni, Anthony M 43.93 Professional 2 - Alvarez, Kassandra 41.43 Professional 3 - Electrical Engineer (TBD) 39.92 Professional 3 - Pyshnov, Erik 41.73 Professional 3 - Eull, Jacob N 47.37 Professional 4 - Hostettler, Julia 42.87 Professional 4 - Geotechnical Engineer (TBD) 45.26 Professional 4 - Ordaz, Webster U 57.26 Professional 4 - Power, Gavin M 58.61 Professional 4 - Carson, Raymond T 55.81 Professional 4 - Pereda, Christian 49.38 Professional 4 - Philpott, John M 57.91 Professional 4 - Cunningham, Brian 57.73 Professional 5 - Buirge, Dennis E 59.22 Professional 5 - Suba, Cody J 59.33 Professional 5 - Murdock, Jacquelyn K 69.61 Professional 5 - Laria, Tomas A 62.43 Professional 5 - BIM Modeler (TBD) 58.80 Professional 5 - Figus, Chris 67.29 Professional 8 - Aklan, Matthew 104.34 16 61.54% 64.21 Professional 5 - Sutherlin, Sarah 67.49 Professional 5 - Diffenderfer, Brandon J 75.67 Professional 5 - Lopez Gonzalez, Irvin J 76.04 Professional 5 - Walsh, Kevin 53.46 Professional 6 - Watkins, Michael S (Mike) 81.41 Professional 7 - Cheval, Robert A 73.43 Professional 7 - Sarich, Pete 73.90 Professional 7 - Ricketts, April 85.34 Professional 7 - Yang, Wendell W 78.40 0 Professional 7 - Kahn, Michael E 85.72 Professional 7 - Wendorf, Jared W 87.81 Professional 7 - Burdett, Stephen M 93.04 Professional 7 - Cerda, Antonio A 89.78 Professional 7 - Newby, John E 92.69 Professional 7 - Hands, Steve 95.93 Professional 8 - Harber, Benjamin O 89.32 Professional 8 - Fry, Karl D 98.62 Professional 8 - Klein, Kevin 84.46 Professional 9 - Pasinski, Steven S 116.10 Professional 9 - Khwaja, Mahmood 132.49 Professional 9 - Martel, Christopher M 141.77 0 Professional 6 - Melody Carvajal 55.65 0 TOTALS 26.0 100% $78.08 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 Page 72 of 191 PARKING STUDIES AND DESIGN Page 73 of 191  PAYROLL ESCALATION TABLE FIXED RAISES FIRM NAME CDM Smith Inc DATE 03/18/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime PTB-ITEM# 1 Prepared By Aklan CONTRACT TERM 12 MONTHS OVERHEAD RATE 161.98% START DATE 2/1/2025 COMPLEXITY FACTOR 0 RAISE DATE 3/31/2025 % OF RAISE 4% END DATE 1/31/2026 ESCALATION PER YEAR year First date Last date Months % of Contract 0 2/1/2025 3/31/2025 2 16.67% 1 4/1/2025 1/31/2026 10 86.67% The total escalation = 3.33% Page 74 of 191  PAYROLL RATES FIRM NAME CDM Smith Inc DATE 03/18/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime PTB-ITEM # 1 ESCALATION FACTOR 3.33% Note: Rates should be capped on the AVG 1 tab as necessary IDOT CLASSIFICATION PAYROLL RATES CALCULATED RATE ON FILE Administrative 1 - Szczepanik, Candice A $34.90 $36.06 Professional 2 - Connolly, John $33.89 $35.02 Professional 2 - Mechanical Engineer (TBD)) $35.42 $36.60 Professional 2 - Peroni, Anthony M $42.51 $43.93 Professional 2 - Alvarez, Kassandra $40.09 $41.43 Professional 3 - Electrical Engineer (TBD) $38.63 $39.92 Professional 3 - Pyshnov, Erik $40.38 $41.73 Professional 3 - Eull, Jacob N $45.84 $47.37 Professional 4 - Hostettler, Julia $41.49 $42.87 Professional 4 - Geotechnical Engineer (TBD) $43.80 $45.26 Professional 4 - Ordaz, Webster U $55.41 $57.26 Professional 4 - Power, Gavin M $56.72 $58.61 Professional 4 - Carson, Raymond T $54.01 $55.81 Professional 4 - Pereda, Christian $47.79 $49.38 Professional 4 - Philpott, John M $56.04 $57.91 Professional 4 - Cunningham, Brian $55.87 $57.73 Professional 5 - Buirge, Dennis E $57.31 $59.22 Professional 5 - Suba, Cody J $57.42 $59.33 Professional 5 - Murdock, Jacquelyn K $67.36 $69.61 Professional 5 - Laria, Tomas A $60.42 $62.43 Professional 5 - BIM Modeler (TBD) $56.90 $58.80 Professional 5 - Figus, Chris $65.12 $67.29 Professional 8 - Aklan, Matthew $100.97 $104.34 Professional 5 - Sutherlin, Sarah $65.31 $67.49 Professional 5 - Diffenderfer, Brandon J $73.23 $75.67 Professional 5 - Lopez Gonzalez, Irvin J $73.59 $76.04 Professional 5 - Walsh, Kevin $51.74 $53.46 Professional 6 - Watkins, Michael S (Mike) $78.78 $81.41 Professional 7 - Cheval, Robert A $71.06 $73.43 Professional 7 - Sarich, Pete $71.52 $73.90 Professional 7 - Ricketts, April $82.59 $85.34 Professional 7 - Yang, Wendell W $75.87 $78.40 Professional 7 - Kahn, Michael E $82.95 $85.72 Professional 7 - Wendorf, Jared W $84.98 $87.81 Professional 7 - Burdett, Stephen M $90.04 $93.04 Professional 7 - Cerda, Antonio A $86.88 $89.78 Professional 7 - Newby, John E $89.70 $92.69 Professional 7 - Hands, Steve $92.84 $95.93 Professional 8 - Harber, Benjamin O $86.44 $89.32 Professional 8 - Fry, Karl D $95.44 $98.62 Professional 8 - Klein, Kevin $81.74 $84.46 Professional 9 - Pasinski, Steven S $112.35 $116.10 Professional 9 - Khwaja, Mahmood $128.22 $132.49 Professional 9 - Martel, Christopher M $137.20 $141.77 Professional 6 - Melody Carvajal $53.85 $55.65 Page 75 of 191  COST PLUS FIXED FEE COST ESTIMATE OF CONSULTANT SERVICES FIRM CDM Smith Inc DATE 03/18/25 PTB-ITEM # 1 OVERHEAD RATE 161.98% PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime COMPLEXITY FACTOR 0 DBE OVERHEAD SERVICES % OF DROP ITEM MANHOURS PAYROLL & DIRECT FIXED BY DBE TOTAL GRAND BOX FRINGE BENF COSTS FEE OTHERS TOTAL TOTAL (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (G) (H) (B-G) Task 3.1 - Parking Studies - - - - - 0.00% CIC Workshop, 3/13/24 - - - - - 0.00% CIC Workshop, 4/10/24 33 1,968 3,188 619 - 5,775 7.69% Board Workshop, 4/15/24 42 2,478 4,014 779 - 7,271 9.68% Board Meeting, 5/28/24 36 1,992 3,227 626 - 5,845 7.78% Bus. Alliance Meeting, 7/10/24 38 2,394 3,878 753 - 7,025 9.35% Board Meeting, 7/15/24 24 1,576 2,552 495 - 4,623 6.15% - - - - - Task 3.2 - Redesign - - - - - 0.00% 30% Plan Revisions 28 1,418 2,298 446 - 4,162 5.54% Parking Review 24 1,453 2,353 457 - 4,263 5.68% Drainage/Landscape Coord. 30 1,602 2,595 504 - 4,701 6.26% Phase I Updates 42 2,608 4,224 820 - 7,652 10.19% IDOT Variances 22 1,948 3,156 612 - 5,716 7.61% - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Task 11 - Quality Assurance - - - - - 0.00% Quality Assurance 6 527 853 166 - 1,546 2.06% Sub Work - - - - - 0.00% Landscaping (Lakota) - - - 10,180 - 10,180 13.55% Drainage/Site (Civiltech) - - - 6,356 - 6,356 8.46% - - - - - ODC Travel - - - - - 0.00% - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - TOTALS 325 19,964 32,338 - 6,277 16,536 - 75,115 100.00% 52,302 DBE 0.00% Page 76 of 191  AVERAGE HOURLY PROJECT RATES FIRM CDM Smith Inc PTB-ITEM# 1 DATE 03/18/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime SHEET 1 OF 5 PAYROLL AVG TOTAL PROJ. RATES Task 3.1 - Parking Studies CIC Workshop, 3/13/24 CIC Workshop, 4/10/24 Board Workshop, 4/15/24 Board Meeting, 5/28/24 HOURLY Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd CLASSIFICATION RATES Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Administrative 1 - Szczepanik, Candice A 36.06 0.0 Professional 2 - Connolly, John 35.02 126.0 38.77% 13.58 12 36.36% 12.73 20 47.62% 16.68 16 44.44% 15.56 Professional 2 - Mechanical Engineer (TBD)) 36.60 0.0 Professional 2 - Peroni, Anthony M 43.93 0.0 Professional 2 - Alvarez, Kassandra 41.43 0.0 Professional 3 - Electrical Engineer (TBD) 39.92 0.0 Professional 3 - Pyshnov, Erik 41.73 0.0 Professional 3 - Eull, Jacob N 47.37 0.0 Professional 4 - Hostettler, Julia 42.87 0.0 Professional 4 - Geotechnical Engineer (TBD) 45.26 0.0 Professional 4 - Ordaz, Webster U 57.26 0.0 Professional 4 - Power, Gavin M 58.61 0.0 Professional 4 - Carson, Raymond T 55.81 0.0 Professional 4 - Pereda, Christian 49.38 0.0 Professional 4 - Philpott, John M 57.91 0.0 Professional 4 - Cunningham, Brian 57.73 0.0 Professional 5 - Buirge, Dennis E 59.22 0.0 Professional 5 - Suba, Cody J 59.33 66.0 20.31% 12.05 8 24.24% 14.38 6 14.29% 8.48 8 22.22% 13.19 Professional 5 - Murdock, Jacquelyn K 69.61 0.0 Professional 5 - Laria, Tomas A 62.43 0.0 Professional 5 - BIM Modeler (TBD) 58.80 0.0 Professional 5 - Figus, Chris 67.29 0.0 Professional 8 - Aklan, Matthew 104.34 23.0 7.08% 7.38 4 12.12% 12.65 4 9.52% 9.94 4 11.11% 11.59 Professional 5 - Sutherlin, Sarah 67.49 55.0 16.92% 11.42 8 24.24% 16.36 8 19.05% 12.85 8 22.22% 15.00 Professional 5 - Diffenderfer, Brandon J 75.67 0.0 Professional 5 - Lopez Gonzalez, Irvin J 76.04 0.0 Professional 5 - Walsh, Kevin 53.46 0.0 Professional 6 - Watkins, Michael S (Mike) 81.41 0.0 Professional 7 - Cheval, Robert A 73.43 0.0 Professional 7 - Sarich, Pete 73.90 0.0 Professional 7 - Ricketts, April 85.34 0.0 Professional 7 - Yang, Wendell W 78.40 0.0 0 0.0 Professional 7 - Kahn, Michael E 85.72 0.0 Professional 7 - Wendorf, Jared W 87.81 6.0 1.85% 1.62 Professional 7 - Burdett, Stephen M 93.04 0.0 Professional 7 - Cerda, Antonio A 89.78 14.0 4.31% 3.87 Professional 7 - Newby, John E 92.69 0.0 Professional 7 - Hands, Steve 95.93 16.0 4.92% 4.72 Professional 8 - Harber, Benjamin O 89.32 0.0 Professional 8 - Fry, Karl D 98.62 0.0 Professional 8 - Klein, Kevin 84.46 0.0 Professional 9 - Pasinski, Steven S 116.10 19.0 5.85% 6.79 1 3.03% 3.52 4 9.52% 11.06 Professional 9 - Khwaja, Mahmood 132.49 0.0 Professional 9 - Martel, Christopher M 141.77 0.0 0 0.0 Professional 6 - Melody Carvajal 55.65 0.0 0 0.0 TOTALS 325.0 100% $61.43 0.0 0.00% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 33.0 100% $59.64 42.0 100% $59.00 36.0 100% $55.34 Page 77 of 191 ' AVERAGE HOURLY PROJECT RATES FIRM CDM Smith Inc PTB-ITEM# 1 DATE 03/18/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime SHEET 2 OF 5 PAYROLL AVG Bus. Alliance Meeting, 7/10/24 Board Meeting, 7/15/24 0 Task 3.2 - Redesign 30% Plan Revisions Parking Review HOURLY Hrs % Wgtd Hrs % Wgtd Hrs % Wgtd Hrs % Wgtd Hrs % Wgtd Hrs % Wgtd CLASSIFICATION RATES Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Administrative 1 - Szczepanik, Candice A 36.06 Professional 2 - Connolly, John 35.02 16 42.11% 14.75 8 33.33% 11.67 16 57.14% 20.01 8 33.33% 11.67 Professional 2 - Mechanical Engineer (TBD)) 36.60 Professional 2 - Peroni, Anthony M 43.93 Professional 2 - Alvarez, Kassandra 41.43 Professional 3 - Electrical Engineer (TBD) 39.92 Professional 3 - Pyshnov, Erik 41.73 Professional 3 - Eull, Jacob N 47.37 Professional 4 - Hostettler, Julia 42.87 Professional 4 - Geotechnical Engineer (TBD) 45.26 Professional 4 - Ordaz, Webster U 57.26 Professional 4 - Power, Gavin M 58.61 Professional 4 - Carson, Raymond T 55.81 Professional 4 - Pereda, Christian 49.38 Professional 4 - Philpott, John M 57.91 Professional 4 - Cunningham, Brian 57.73 Professional 5 - Buirge, Dennis E 59.22 Professional 5 - Suba, Cody J 59.33 4 10.53% 6.25 6 25.00% 14.83 6 21.43% 12.71 6 25.00% 14.83 Professional 5 - Murdock, Jacquelyn K 69.61 Professional 5 - Laria, Tomas A 62.43 Professional 5 - BIM Modeler (TBD) 58.80 Professional 5 - Figus, Chris 67.29 Professional 8 - Aklan, Matthew 104.34 2 5.26% 5.49 3 12.50% 13.04 Professional 5 - Sutherlin, Sarah 67.49 8 21.05% 14.21 3 12.50% 8.44 4 14.29% 9.64 6 25.00% 16.87 Professional 5 - Diffenderfer, Brandon J 75.67 Professional 5 - Lopez Gonzalez, Irvin J 76.04 Professional 5 - Walsh, Kevin 53.46 Professional 6 - Watkins, Michael S (Mike) 81.41 Professional 7 - Cheval, Robert A 73.43 Professional 7 - Sarich, Pete 73.90 Professional 7 - Ricketts, April 85.34 Professional 7 - Yang, Wendell W 78.40 0 Professional 7 - Kahn, Michael E 85.72 Professional 7 - Wendorf, Jared W 87.81 Professional 7 - Burdett, Stephen M 93.04 Professional 7 - Cerda, Antonio A 89.78 2 8.33% 7.48 Professional 7 - Newby, John E 92.69 Professional 7 - Hands, Steve 95.93 4 10.53% 10.10 2 8.33% 7.99 Professional 8 - Harber, Benjamin O 89.32 Professional 8 - Fry, Karl D 98.62 Professional 8 - Klein, Kevin 84.46 Professional 9 - Pasinski, Steven S 116.10 4 10.53% 12.22 2 8.33% 9.67 2 7.14% 8.29 2 8.33% 9.67 Professional 9 - Khwaja, Mahmood 132.49 Professional 9 - Martel, Christopher M 141.77 0 Professional 6 - Melody Carvajal 55.65 0 TOTALS 38.0 100% $63.01 24.0 100% $65.65 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 28.0 100% $50.66 24.0 100% $60.53 Page 78 of 191  ' AVERAGE HOURLY PROJECT RATES FIRM CDM Smith Inc PTB-ITEM# 1 DATE 03/18/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime SHEET 3 OF 5 PAYROLL AVG Drainage/Landscape Coord. Phase I Updates IDOT Variances 0 0 0 HOURLY Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd CLASSIFICATION RATES Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Administrative 1 - Szczepanik, Candice A 36.06 Professional 2 - Connolly, John 35.02 8 26.67% 9.34 20 47.62% 16.68 2 9.09% 3.18 Professional 2 - Mechanical Engineer (TBD)) 36.60 Professional 2 - Peroni, Anthony M 43.93 Professional 2 - Alvarez, Kassandra 41.43 Professional 3 - Electrical Engineer (TBD) 39.92 Professional 3 - Pyshnov, Erik 41.73 Professional 3 - Eull, Jacob N 47.37 Professional 4 - Hostettler, Julia 42.87 Professional 4 - Geotechnical Engineer (TBD) 45.26 Professional 4 - Ordaz, Webster U 57.26 Professional 4 - Power, Gavin M 58.61 Professional 4 - Carson, Raymond T 55.81 Professional 4 - Pereda, Christian 49.38 Professional 4 - Philpott, John M 57.91 Professional 4 - Cunningham, Brian 57.73 Professional 5 - Buirge, Dennis E 59.22 Professional 5 - Suba, Cody J 59.33 20 66.67% 39.56 2 9.09% 5.39 Professional 5 - Murdock, Jacquelyn K 69.61 Professional 5 - Laria, Tomas A 62.43 Professional 5 - BIM Modeler (TBD) 58.80 Professional 5 - Figus, Chris 67.29 Professional 8 - Aklan, Matthew 104.34 2 4.76% 4.97 4 18.18% 18.97 Professional 5 - Sutherlin, Sarah 67.49 2 6.67% 4.50 6 14.29% 9.64 2 9.09% 6.14 Professional 5 - Diffenderfer, Brandon J 75.67 Professional 5 - Lopez Gonzalez, Irvin J 76.04 Professional 5 - Walsh, Kevin 53.46 Professional 6 - Watkins, Michael S (Mike) 81.41 Professional 7 - Cheval, Robert A 73.43 Professional 7 - Sarich, Pete 73.90 Professional 7 - Ricketts, April 85.34 Professional 7 - Yang, Wendell W 78.40 0 Professional 7 - Kahn, Michael E 85.72 Professional 7 - Wendorf, Jared W 87.81 Professional 7 - Burdett, Stephen M 93.04 Professional 7 - Cerda, Antonio A 89.78 8 19.05% 17.10 4 18.18% 16.32 Professional 7 - Newby, John E 92.69 Professional 7 - Hands, Steve 95.93 6 14.29% 13.70 4 18.18% 17.44 Professional 8 - Harber, Benjamin O 89.32 Professional 8 - Fry, Karl D 98.62 Professional 8 - Klein, Kevin 84.46 Professional 9 - Pasinski, Steven S 116.10 4 18.18% 21.11 Professional 9 - Khwaja, Mahmood 132.49 Professional 9 - Martel, Christopher M 141.77 0 Professional 6 - Melody Carvajal 55.65 0 TOTALS 30.0 100% $53.39 42.0 100% $62.09 22.0 100% $88.56 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 Page 79 of 191  ' AVERAGE HOURLY PROJECT RATES FIRM CDM Smith Inc PTB-ITEM# 1 DATE 03/18/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime SHEET 4 OF 5 PAYROLL AVG 0 0 Task 11 - Quality Assurance Quality Assurance Sub Work Landscaping (Lakota) HOURLY Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd CLASSIFICATION RATES Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Administrative 1 - Szczepanik, Candice A 36.06 Professional 2 - Connolly, John 35.02 Professional 2 - Mechanical Engineer (TBD)) 36.60 Professional 2 - Peroni, Anthony M 43.93 Professional 2 - Alvarez, Kassandra 41.43 Professional 3 - Electrical Engineer (TBD) 39.92 Professional 3 - Pyshnov, Erik 41.73 Professional 3 - Eull, Jacob N 47.37 Professional 4 - Hostettler, Julia 42.87 Professional 4 - Geotechnical Engineer (TBD) 45.26 Professional 4 - Ordaz, Webster U 57.26 Professional 4 - Power, Gavin M 58.61 Professional 4 - Carson, Raymond T 55.81 Professional 4 - Pereda, Christian 49.38 Professional 4 - Philpott, John M 57.91 Professional 4 - Cunningham, Brian 57.73 Professional 5 - Buirge, Dennis E 59.22 Professional 5 - Suba, Cody J 59.33 Professional 5 - Murdock, Jacquelyn K 69.61 Professional 5 - Laria, Tomas A 62.43 Professional 5 - BIM Modeler (TBD) 58.80 Professional 5 - Figus, Chris 67.29 Professional 8 - Aklan, Matthew 104.34 Professional 5 - Sutherlin, Sarah 67.49 Professional 5 - Diffenderfer, Brandon J 75.67 Professional 5 - Lopez Gonzalez, Irvin J 76.04 Professional 5 - Walsh, Kevin 53.46 Professional 6 - Watkins, Michael S (Mike) 81.41 Professional 7 - Cheval, Robert A 73.43 Professional 7 - Sarich, Pete 73.90 Professional 7 - Ricketts, April 85.34 Professional 7 - Yang, Wendell W 78.40 0 Professional 7 - Kahn, Michael E 85.72 Professional 7 - Wendorf, Jared W 87.81 6 100.00% 87.81 Professional 7 - Burdett, Stephen M 93.04 Professional 7 - Cerda, Antonio A 89.78 Professional 7 - Newby, John E 92.69 Professional 7 - Hands, Steve 95.93 Professional 8 - Harber, Benjamin O 89.32 Professional 8 - Fry, Karl D 98.62 Professional 8 - Klein, Kevin 84.46 Professional 9 - Pasinski, Steven S 116.10 Professional 9 - Khwaja, Mahmood 132.49 Professional 9 - Martel, Christopher M 141.77 0 Professional 6 - Melody Carvajal 55.65 0 TOTALS 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 6.0 100% $87.81 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 Page 80 of 191  Sub-Consultant Fees Cost 5% Markup Fee Lakota $ 9,695.00 $ 484.75 $ 10,179.75 Civiltech $ 6,053.00 $ 302.65 $ 6,355.65 GRAND TOTALS $ 787.40 $ 16,535.40 Page 81 of 191  PAYROLL ESCALATION TABLE FIXED RAISES FIRM NAME Civiltech Engineering, Inc. DATE 01/20/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT SUPPLEMENT PTB-ITEM# 250 Prepared By Joseph Abramson, P.E., CFM CONTRACT TERM 2 MONTHS OVERHEAD RATE 136.98% START DATE 1/27/2025 COMPLEXITY FACTOR 0 RAISE DATE 4/1/2025 % OF RAISE 2% END DATE 3/26/2025 ESCALATION PER YEAR Year First date Last date Months % of Contract 0 1/27/2025 3/26/2025 2 100.00% The total escalation = 0.00% Printed 1/20/2025 3:13 PM Page 1 of 1 BDE 3608 Template (Rev. 09/28/23) Page 82 of 191  PAYROLL RATES FIRM NAME Civiltech Engineering, Inc. DATE 01/20/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT SUPPLEMENT PTB-ITEM # 250 ESCALATION FACTOR 0.00% Note: Rates should be capped on the AVG 1 tab as necessary IDOT CLASSIFICATION PAYROLL RATES CALCULATED RATE ON FILE Water Resources Senior Project Manager $89.00 $89.00 Water Resources Project Manager $55.00 $55.00 Water Resources Engineer III $42.00 $42.00 Printed 1/20/2025 2:34 PM Page 1 of 1 BDE 3608 Template (Rev. 09/28/23) Page 83 of 191  COST PLUS FIXED FEE COST ESTIMATE OF CONSULTANT SERVICES FIRM Civiltech Engineering, Inc. DATE 01/20/25 PTB-ITEM # 250 OVERHEAD RATE 136.98% PRIME/SUPPLEMENT SUPPLEMENT COMPLEXITY FACTOR 0 DBE OVERHEAD SERVICES % OF DROP ITEM MANHOURS PAYROLL & DIRECT FIXED BY DBE TOTAL GRAND BOX FRINGE BENF COSTS FEE OTHERS TOTAL TOTAL (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (G) (H) (B-G) 001 – Revising Design to Account for Village-Driven Changes Since 30% 46 2,242 3,071 740 - 6,053 100.00% - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Subconsultant DL - - TOTALS 46 2,242 3,071 - 740 - - 6,053 100.00% 5,313 DBE 0.00% Printed 1/20/2025 3:12 PM Page 1 of 1 BDE 3608 Template (Rev. 09/28/23) Page 84 of 191  AVERAGE HOURLY PROJECT RATES FIRM Civiltech Engineering, Inc. PTB-ITEM# 250 DATE 01/20/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT SUPPLEMENT SHEET 1 OF 5 PAYROLL AVG TOTAL PROJ. RATES 001 – Revising Design to Account for Village-Driven Changes Since 30% HOURLY Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd CLASSIFICATION RATES Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Water Resources Senior Project Manager 89.00 3.0 6.52% 5.80 3 6.52% 5.80 0 0 Water Resources Project Manager 55.00 13.0 28.26% 15.54 13 28.26% 15.54 0 0 Water Resources Engineer III 42.00 30.0 65.22% 27.39 30 65.22% 27.39 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 TOTALS 46.0 100% $48.74 46.0 100.00% $48.74 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 Printed 1/20/2025 2:34 PM Page 5 of 9 BDE 3608 Template (Rev. 09/28/23) Page 85 of 191  Cost Estimate of Consultant Services (Direct Labor Multiple) Firm The Lakota Group, Inc. Date 02/10/25 Route Section Overhead Rate 110.51% County Cook Job No. Complexity Factor 0 PTB & Item (2.80+R) TIMES DIRECT SERVICES DBE % OF ITEM MANHOURS PAYROLL PAYROLL COSTS BY TOTAL TOTAL GRAND OTHERS TOTAL (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (C+D+E) (C+D+E) Streetscape Revisions Evaluation 6 420.00 1,176.00 1,176.00 12.13% Design Revisions 11 748.70 2,096.35 2,096.35 21.63% Plant and Material Quantity Updates 12 816.76 2,286.93 2,286.93 23.59% Drawing Sheet Set Revisions 7 484.19 1,355.73 1,355.73 13.99% Coordination Review/Meetings 13.155 903.12 2,528.73 2,528.73 26.09% Printing 0.00 0.00 250.00 250.00 2.58% TOTALS 49.155 3,372.76 9,443.74 250.00 0.00 0.00 9,693.74 100.00% Page 1 of 1 Printed 2/10/2025 12:50 PM Page 86 of 191 UTILITY UNDERGROUNDING CONCEPTS (Phase 1) Page 87 of 191  PAYROLL ESCALATION TABLE FIXED RAISES FIRM NAME CDM Smith Inc DATE 03/18/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime PTB-ITEM# 1 Prepared By Aklan CONTRACT TERM 12 MONTHS OVERHEAD RATE 161.98% START DATE 2/1/2025 COMPLEXITY FACTOR 0 RAISE DATE 3/31/2025 % OF RAISE 4% END DATE 1/31/2026 ESCALATION PER YEAR year First date Last date Months % of Contract 0 2/1/2025 3/31/2025 2 16.67% 1 4/1/2025 1/31/2026 10 86.67% The total escalation = 3.33% Page 88 of 191  PAYROLL RATES FIRM NAME CDM Smith Inc DATE 03/18/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime PTB-ITEM # 1 ESCALATION FACTOR 3.33% Note: Rates should be capped on the AVG 1 tab as necessary IDOT CLASSIFICATION PAYROLL RATES CALCULATED RATE ON FILE Administrative 1 - Szczepanik, Candice A $34.90 $36.06 Professional 2 - Connolly, John $33.89 $35.02 Professional 2 - Mechanical Engineer (TBD)) $35.42 $36.60 Professional 2 - Peroni, Anthony M $42.51 $43.93 Professional 2 - Alvarez, Kassandra $40.09 $41.43 Professional 3 - Electrical Engineer (TBD) $38.63 $39.92 Professional 3 - Pyshnov, Erik $40.38 $41.73 Professional 3 - Eull, Jacob N $45.84 $47.37 Professional 4 - Hostettler, Julia $41.49 $42.87 Professional 4 - Geotechnical Engineer (TBD) $43.80 $45.26 Professional 4 - Ordaz, Webster U $55.41 $57.26 Professional 4 - Power, Gavin M $56.72 $58.61 Professional 4 - Carson, Raymond T $54.01 $55.81 Professional 4 - Pereda, Christian $47.79 $49.38 Professional 4 - Philpott, John M $56.04 $57.91 Professional 4 - Cunningham, Brian $55.87 $57.73 Professional 5 - Buirge, Dennis E $57.31 $59.22 Professional 5 - Suba, Cody J $57.42 $59.33 Professional 5 - Murdock, Jacquelyn K $67.36 $69.61 Professional 5 - Laria, Tomas A $60.42 $62.43 Professional 5 - BIM Modeler (TBD) $56.90 $58.80 Professional 5 - Figus, Chris $65.12 $67.29 Professional 8 - Aklan, Matthew $100.97 $104.34 Professional 5 - Sutherlin, Sarah $65.31 $67.49 Professional 5 - Diffenderfer, Brandon J $73.23 $75.67 Professional 5 - Lopez Gonzalez, Irvin J $73.59 $76.04 Professional 6 - Watkins, Michael S (Mike) $78.78 $81.41 Professional 7 - Cheval, Robert A $71.06 $73.43 Professional 7 - Sarich, Pete $71.52 $73.90 Professional 7 - Ricketts, April $82.59 $85.34 Professional 7 - Yang, Wendell W $75.87 $78.40 Professional 7 - Kahn, Michael E $82.95 $85.72 Professional 7 - Wendorf, Jared W $84.98 $87.81 Professional 7 - Burdett, Stephen M $90.04 $93.04 Professional 7 - Cerda, Antonio A $86.88 $89.78 Professional 7 - Newby, John E $89.70 $92.69 Professional 7 - Hands, Steve $92.84 $95.93 Professional 8 - Harber, Benjamin O $86.44 $89.32 Professional 8 - Fry, Karl D $95.44 $98.62 Professional 8 - Klein, Kevin $81.74 $84.46 Professional 9 - Pasinski, Steven S $112.35 $116.10 Professional 9 - Khwaja, Mahmood $128.22 $132.49 Professional 9 - Martel, Christopher M $137.20 $141.77 Professional 6 - Melody Carvajal $53.85 $55.65 Page 89 of 191  COST PLUS FIXED FEE COST ESTIMATE OF CONSULTANT SERVICES FIRM CDM Smith Inc DATE 03/18/25 PTB-ITEM # 1 OVERHEAD RATE 161.98% PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime COMPLEXITY FACTOR 0 DBE OVERHEAD SERVICES % OF DROP ITEM MANHOURS PAYROLL & DIRECT FIXED BY DBE TOTAL GRAND BOX FRINGE BENF COSTS FEE OTHERS TOTAL TOTAL (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (G) (H) (B-G) Site Design - Civil Engineering 12 789 1,278 248 - 2,315 5.18% Electrical Engineering Support 16 1,351 2,189 425 - 3,965 8.88% Meetings 14 1,200 1,944 377 - 3,521 7.88% Project Management 6 626 1,014 197 - 1,837 4.11% QA/QC 8 706 1,144 222 - 2,072 4.64% - - - - - - - - - - Jorgensen & Associates, Inc. - Survey - - 6,564 - 6,564 14.69% Vistara - Construction Cost Estimating - - 13,921 - 13,921 31.16% American Survey (S.U.E.) - - - 10,177 - 10,177 22.78% ODC.Travel - - 300 - - 300 0.67% - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - TOTALS 56 4,672 7,569 300 1,469 30,662 - 44,672 100.00% 12,241 DBE 0.00% Page 90 of 191  AVERAGE HOURLY PROJECT RATES FIRM CDM Smith Inc PTB-ITEM# 1 DATE 03/18/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime SHEET 1 OF 5 PAYROLL AVG TOTAL PROJ. RATES Site Design - Civil EngineeringElectrical Engineering Supp Meetings Project Management QA/QC HOURLY Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd CLASSIFICATION RATES Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Administrative 1 - Szczepanik, Candice A 36.06 0.0 Professional 2 - Connolly, John 35.02 0.0 Professional 2 - Mechanical Engineer (TBD)) 36.60 0.0 Professional 2 - Peroni, Anthony M 43.93 0.0 Professional 2 - Alvarez, Kassandra 41.43 0.0 Professional 3 - Electrical Engineer (TBD) 39.92 0.0 Professional 3 - Pyshnov, Erik 41.73 0.0 Professional 3 - Eull, Jacob N 47.37 0.0 Professional 4 - Hostettler, Julia 42.87 0.0 Professional 4 - Geotechnical Engineer (TBD) 45.26 0.0 Professional 4 - Ordaz, Webster U 57.26 0.0 Professional 4 - Power, Gavin M 58.61 0.0 Professional 4 - Carson, Raymond T 55.81 0.0 Professional 4 - Pereda, Christian 49.38 0.0 Professional 4 - Philpott, John M 57.91 0.0 Professional 4 - Cunningham, Brian 57.73 0.0 Professional 5 - Buirge, Dennis E 59.22 0.0 Professional 5 - Suba, Cody J 59.33 8.0 14.29% 8.48 8 66.67% 39.56 Professional 5 - Murdock, Jacquelyn K 69.61 0.0 Professional 5 - Laria, Tomas A 62.43 0.0 Professional 5 - BIM Modeler (TBD) 58.80 0.0 Professional 5 - Figus, Chris 67.29 0.0 Professional 8 - Aklan, Matthew 104.34 12.0 21.43% 22.36 6 42.86% 44.72 6 100.00% 104.34 Professional 5 - Sutherlin, Sarah 67.49 8.0 14.29% 9.64 2 16.67% 11.25 6 42.86% 28.92 Professional 5 - Diffenderfer, Brandon J 75.67 0.0 Professional 5 - Lopez Gonzalez, Irvin J 76.04 0.0 Professional 6 - Watkins, Michael S (Mike) 81.41 0.0 0 0.0 Professional 7 - Cheval, Robert A 73.43 0.0 Professional 7 - Sarich, Pete 73.90 0.0 Professional 7 - Ricketts, April 85.34 0.0 Professional 7 - Yang, Wendell W 78.40 0.0 0 0.0 Professional 7 - Kahn, Michael E 85.72 0.0 Professional 7 - Wendorf, Jared W 87.81 6.0 10.71% 9.41 6 75.00% 65.86 Professional 7 - Burdett, Stephen M 93.04 0.0 Professional 7 - Cerda, Antonio A 89.78 4.0 7.14% 6.41 2 16.67% 14.96 2 25.00% 22.44 Professional 7 - Newby, John E 92.69 0.0 Professional 7 - Hands, Steve 95.93 0.0 Professional 8 - Harber, Benjamin O 89.32 0.0 Professional 8 - Fry, Karl D 98.62 0.0 Professional 8 - Klein, Kevin 84.46 18.0 32.14% 27.15 16 100.00% 84.46 2 14.29% 12.07 Professional 9 - Pasinski, Steven S 116.10 0.0 Professional 9 - Khwaja, Mahmood 132.49 0.0 Professional 9 - Martel, Christopher M 141.77 0.0 0 0.0 Professional 6 - Melody Carvajal 55.65 0.0 0 0.0 TOTALS 56.0 100% $83.45 12.0 100.00% $65.77 16.0 100% $84.46 14.0 100% $85.70 6.0 100% $104.34 8.0 100% $88.30 Page 91 of 191  Sub-Consultant Fees Subconsultant / Vendor Cost 5% Markup Fee Jorgensen $ 6,251.26 $ 312.56 $ 6,563.82 Vistara $ 13,258.00 $ 662.90 $ 13,920.90 American (S.U.E. $ 9,692.00 $ 484.60 $ 10,176.60 3.01' to 6.00'deep location hole 2 holes at $1,954 each $ 3,908.00 6.00' to 12.00' deep location hole 2 holes at $2,892 each $ 5,784.00 GRAND TOTALS $ 1,460.06 $ 30,661.32 Page 92 of 191 Page 93 of 191  SCOPE OF SERVICES Topographic Survey General: The topographic survey to include: structures, ground shots, roadway and shoulders, guardrail, utilities, locate trees 3” and larger, soil borings, inverts and J.U.L.I.E. markings (as requested by others) within the project corridor. The project corridor being Duane Street from a point 100 feet West of Forest Avenue to a point 480 feet East of Forest Avenue. The survey will extend 2 feet beyond the existing R.O.W. lines of Duane Street. The survey will include the establishment of the existing R.O.W. lines within the project corridor. Establish bench marks and horizontal control points based on NGS geodetic survey monuments with G.P.S. survey methods. Locate and describe bench marks. The project will be based on NAD '83(2011) and NGVD '88 datums. Prepare “MicroStation with Power GEOPAKSS10” base file of the topographic survey and provide “GEOPAK” T.I.N. and contoured at 1 foot intervals. Certify the topographic survey. All work will be completed according to the current I.D.O.T. Design Survey Procedures. The survey DOES NOT include a SUE Level B, contacting J.U.L.I.E. for location requests, contacting the Union Pacific Railroad concerning utilities lying in Railroad R.O.W. and adding “As-Built” information by others to the survey. E:\CDM Smith\Glen Ellyn\Metra Station\Supplement\Scope of Services Page 94 of 191 Route: Metra Station Rehabilitation Section: County: DuPage Job No.: Exhibit “A” Payroll Burden & Fringe Costs % of Direct Productive Payroll Federal Insurance Contributions Act 11.96% State Unemployment Compensation 0.32% Federal Unemployment Compensation 0.13% Workmen's Compensation Insurance 1.35% Paid Holidays, Vacation, Sick Leave, Personal Leave 11.22% Bonus 4.12% 401(K) 0.88% Group Insurance 42.24% Total Payroll Burden & Fringe Costs 72.22% E:\CDM Smith\Glen Ellyn\Metra Station\Supplement\EXA Page 95 of 191 Route: Metra Station Rehabilitation Section: County: DuPage Job No.: Exhibit “B” Overhead and Indirect Costs % of Direct Productive Payroll Business Insurance 4.26% Depreciation 4.22% Indirect wages and salaries 43.10% Office Expenses 1.18% Office Supplies 2.59% Dues & Subscriptions 0.54% Computer Software 4.32% Professional Fees 1.57% Telephone 2.77% Fees, license & dues 0.05% Repairs and maintenance 2.30% Business space rent 4.74% Facilities - capital 0.33% In-house mileage -5.71% Survey Supplies 0.80% Automobile/travel expense 7.16% Miscellaneous Expense 0.54% State Income Tax 0.39% Recruiting 1.05% Postage 0.10% Educational & Professional Registrations 0.26% Tech 1.66% Total Overhead 78.22% E:\CDM Smith\Glen Ellyn\Metra Station\Supplement\EXB Page 96 of 191  PAYROLL ESCALATION TABLE FIXED RAISES FIRM NAME Jorgensen & Associates, Inc. DATE 01/06/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime 0.00 PTB NO. CONTRACT TERM 12 MONTHS OVERHEAD RATE 150.44% START DATE 1/7/2025 COMPLEXITY FACTOR RAISE DATE 1/7/2026 % OF RAISE 0.00% ESCALATION PER YEAR 1/7/2025 - 1/7/2026 12 12 = 100.00% = 1.0000 The total escalation for this project would be: 0.00% Printed 1/6/2025 Bureau of Design and Environment (Rev. 05/08/15) Page 97 of 191  PAYROLL RATES FIRM NAME Jorgensen & Associates DATE 01/06/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime PSB NO. ESCALATION FACTOR 0.00% CLASSIFICATION CURRENT RATE CALCULATED RATE Supervisor, P.L.S. $47.00 $47.00 Survey Party Chief, P.L.S. $34.50 $34.50 Instrument Operator $22.00 $22.00 Cadd Supervisor $36.25 $36.25 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Bureau of Design and Printed 1/6/2025 PREPARED BY THE CONSULTANTEnvironment (Rev. 05/08/15) Page 98 of 191  COST PLUS FIXED FEE COST ESTIMATE OF CONSULTANT SERVICES FIRM Jorgensen & Associates, Inc. DATE 01/06/25 PSB OVERHEAD RATE 1.5044 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime COMPLEXITY FACTOR 0 DBE OVERHEAD IN-HOUSE Outside SERVICES % OF DROP ITEM MANHOURS PAYROLL & DIRECT FIXED Direct BY DBE TOTAL GRAND BOX FRINGE BENF COSTS FEE Costs OTHERS TOTAL TOTAL (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G) (H) (B-G) (1) Field-Topographic Survey 46 1,299.50 1,954.97 201.00 501.04 3,956.51 63.29% (2) Office-Compile Field Data 6 249.75 375.72 90.69 716.17 11.46% (3) Office-Create Existing Topogrpahy Base File 8 290.00 436.28 105.31 831.59 13.30% (4) Office-Create T.I.N. & Contours 2 72.50 109.07 26.33 207.90 3.33% (5) QC/QA 4 188.00 282.83 68.27 539.10 8.62% Subconsultant DL 0.00 0.00 0.00% TOTALS 66 2,099.75 3,158.86 201.00 791.64 0.00 0.00 0.00 6,251.26 100.00% DBE 0.00% DBE Printed 1/6/2025 PREPARED BY THE CONSULTANT Bureau of Design and Environment (Rev. 05/08/15) Page 99 of 191  AVERAGE HOURLY PROJECT RATES FIRM Jorgensen & Associates, Inc. PSB DATE 01/06/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime SHEET 1 OF 1 PAYROLL AVG TOTAL PROJECT RATES (1) Field-Topographic Survey (2) Office-Compile Field Data (3) Office-Create Existing Topogrpahy Base File (4) Office-Create T.I.N. & Contours (5) QC/QA HOURLY Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd CLASSIFICATION RATES Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Supervisor, P.L.S. 47.00 7 10.61% 4.98 3 50.00% 23.50 4 100.00% 47.00 Survey Party Chief, P.L.S. 34.50 23 34.85% 12.02 23 50.00% 17.25 Instrument Operator 22.00 23 34.85% 7.67 23 50.00% 11.00 Cadd Supervisor 36.25 13 19.70% 7.14 3 50.00% 18.13 8 100.00% 36.25 2 100.00% 36.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTALS 66 100% $31.81 46 100.00% $28.25 6 100% $41.63 8 100% $36.25 2 100% $36.25 4 100% $47.00 Bureau of Design and Printed 1/6/2025 PREPARED BY THE CONSULTANT Environment (Rev. 05/08/15) Page 100 of 191 Route: Metra Station Rehabilitation Section: County: DuPage Job No.: Manhour Breakdown Topographic Survey Estimate Duane Street + 580’ = + 0.110 mile Total Length + 580’ = + 0.110 mile 1. Field – Topographic Survey a. Measure traverse & level circuit 3 hours x 2 men = 6 MH b. Search & locate existing R.O.W. line occupation 6 hours x 2 men = 12 MH c. Locate existing topography & inverts 14 hours x 2 men = 28 MH Sub-total Item #1 46 MH 2. Office – Compile Field Data a. Compute traverse & level circuit 1 hour x 1 man = 1 MH b. Edit & compile field data 3 hours x 1 man = 3 MH c. Compute existing R.O.W. & property lines 2 hours x 1 man = 2 MH Sub-total Item #2 6 MH 3. Office – Create Existing Topography Base File & Plat of Topography a. Layout and drafting 8 hours x 1 man = 8 MH (1) Page 101 of 191 4. Office - Create T.I.N. & Contours a. Compute contours 2 hours x 1 man = 2 MH 5. QC/QA a. Check topographic survey & Plat of Topography 3 hours x 1 man = 3 MH b. Check contours 1 hour x 1 man = 1 MH Total All Items 66 MH (2) E:\CDM Smith\Glen Ellyn\Metra Station\Supplement\LOP Page 102 of 191 Route: Metra Station Rehabilitation Section: County: DuPage Job No.: Breakdown of In House Direct Costs Item 1. Field - Topographic Survey a. Trips to project site - 3 ea. + 100 miles/trip x 3 trips = + 300 miles + 300 miles @ $0.67/mile = $ 201.00 E:\CDM Smith\Glen Ellyn\Metra Station\Supplement\IHC Page 103 of 191  March 18, 2025 Matthew Aklan, PE Senior Project Manager CDM Smith 125 S Wacker Dr, Suite 2510, Chicago, IL 60606 Re: Phase II Metra Station Glen Ellyn Cost Estimate Change in Fee – Scope Amendment – Utilities Relocation Dear Matthew: Based on your email of March 18, 2025 we propose the following estimating schedule for the proposed underground utility work: PHASE FEE Phase 1 (Preliminary – Go/No Go) $13,258.00 TOTAL $13,258.00 Note, 1) The utilities being considered for this estimate are those in the immediate vicinity of the station. 2) This fee is good through 12/31/2025. If you have any questions regarding this proposal or need further information, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely Sanjiv Pillai, PE President 728 West Jackson Boulevard  Suite 526  Chicago  Illinois 60661 (312) 986-8660 (Phone) www.vistara.com Page 104 of 191 From: Pasinski, Steven S. To: Aklan, Matthew L. Cc: Pasinski, Steven S. Subject: American Survey, SUE (A) Services Date: Tuesday, March 18, 2025 5:41:25 PM To File and estimate basis for SUE work amending American proposal for inclusion in amendment 3. From: Aklan, Matthew L. <aklanml@cdmsmith.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2025 11:16 AM To: Pasinski, Steven S. <pasinskiss@cdmsmith.com> Subject: American Survey, SUE (A) Services Steve- I’m not sure you need this but for American Survey, potholing was pricing in our original contract. Holes from 3.01 to 6.00 = $1,954 each. Holes from 6.01 to 12.00 = $2,892.00 Total = 2x $1,954.00 + 2x $2892.00 = $9692.00. American did not include a separate proposal – they just directed us to use the same cost per hole as dictated in our original contract per message below. Regards, Matt From: John Dybas <j.dybas@americansurvey.com> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2025 2:48 PM To: Aklan, Matthew L. <aklanml@cdmsmith.com> Cc: Tom Sanderson <t.sanderson@americansurvey.com>; Thano Tziforos <t.tziforos@americansurvey.com>; Chris Mason <c.mason@americansurvey.com> Subject: RE: SUE (A) Services Needed Matt, It looks like our original proposal included costs for 10 Level A exposures. You chose not to do the Level A work at that time so we removed the SUE from the final proposal. The unit costs for SUE shown in the attached original proposal are still valid. American Surveying & Engineering, Ltd. John Dybas, PLS Project Manager Page 105 of 191 Cell | 773-251-1162 Chicago | 312.277.2000 | fax 312.277.2002 Dixon | 815.288.6231 | fax 815.288.6277 Naperville | 630.897.4105 | fax 630.897.4121 Visit our website at www.americansurvey.com Celebrating 47 years in 2025          The information contained in this electronic message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are informed that any dissemination, copying or disclosure of the material contained herein, in whole or in part, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us and purge this message. Due to the unsecured nature of electronic documents and any attachments, American Surveying & Engineering, Ltd. assumes no responsibility for any consequences from the use of this data. The user should rely only on signed and sealed paper copies and shall assume all liabilities from the use of this data. P Please consider the environment before printing this message Page 106 of 191 F O R R E F E R E N C E O N L Y Scope of Work PROJECT SUMMARY Project Name Glen Ellyn Metra Station ASE Proposal No. 222084 Owner Metra Date August 16, 2022 Agent CDM Smith Revision Date Project Description – Professional Services to provide a pre-design survey for the improvement of the Glen Ellyn Metra Station. The topographic features and grades will be obtained primarily by using LiDAR. This proposal includes 10 Subsurface Utility Engineering (SUE) Quality Level A Utility Exposures anticipated near the Pedestrian Tunnel Ramps and Stairs. Project Limits and Location – The project limits are shown in red in this client supplied exhibit: Page 107 of 191 GENERAL CONDITIONS AND SCOPE ASSUMPTIONS 1. All professional services will be performed to appropriate Minimum Standards of practice and Section 1270.56, Minimum Standards of Practice for surveys in Illinois. 2. The horizontal datum will be NAD 83 (1986) and the vertical datum will be NAVD 88. 3. Subsurface Utility Engineering (SUE) standards referred to within this scope of work are in accordance with the CI/ASCE 38-02 Standard Guideline for the Collection & Depiction of Existing Subsurface Utility Data. 4. SUE QL A exposures will be billed at the following rates. a. Location holes 0-3.00 feet in depth will be billed at $1,423.00 per hole. b. Location holes 3.01-6.00 feet in depth will be billed at $1,954.00 per hole. (Assume 4) c. Location holes 6.01-12.00 feet in depth will be billed at $2,892.00 per hole. (Assume 4) d. Location holes 12.01-18.00 feet in depth will be billed at $3,734.00 per hole. (Assume 2) e. Location holes 18.01 feet and over will be billed on an hourly rate. 5. This proposal assumes 200 linear feet of SUE QL B. The cost of designating, surveying, and mapping SUE QL B is $2.46 per linear foot. 6. This proposal assumes 4 of the 10 Locations Holes will fall in pavement which will be cored and restored at cost of $505/per hole. 7. American Surveying & Engineering shall not be responsible for any erroneous or missing information provided by underground utility providers. 8. All previous and relevant survey information such as pertinent site information including, but not limited to previous horizontal and vertical survey control survey information, existing aerial photography, Right-of-Way plans, centerline alignment, construction plans and plats of highway will be furnished to ASE, at no cost to ASE, prior to commencement of field operations. 9. Owner/Agent will provide a Letter of Introduction to facilitate field operations. 10. American Surveying & Engineering shall not be responsible for any erroneous or missing information provided by underground utility providers. 11. Hazardous Waste sites designated as requiring protective equipment of “Class D” or greater will not be entered unless provided for otherwise in the Scope of Work Tasks. 12. American Surveying & Engineering is not signatory to any organized labor agreements. We will not provide services in any capacity where labor disputes may exist. We will not be responsible for costs or delays associated with labor disputes relevant to work on this project. 13. Field work performed on this project are subject to the vagaries of weather. In the event weather impairs our ability to perform any specified professional services, we will contact the Owner/Agent to determine changes in schedule or cost. No additional work will be performed until the owner/agent has reviewed and approved a revised cost or schedule. 14. This proposal assumes the flowlines of project drainage structures (culverts, manholes, inlets, etc.) will be surveyed as existing conditions. ASE will not clean, excavate, pump or otherwise remove debris, silt, trash or other material from project structures. 15. ASE will begin work after Notice to Proceed at a mutually agreed upon date. 16. This SOW shall become part of the contract between Owner/Agent and ASE. 2 Page 108 of 191 PROPOSED TASKS 1. Administration 1.1. Meetings with Owner or Agent, including in-house meetings. Progress Reports, scheduling, invoicing, and other project administrative tasks. 1.2. Technical direction of staff. 1.3. Project Management, resource coordination. 2. Document Compilation 2.1. Obtain relevant project documents from Owner/Agent. 2.2. Compile, review, and index information. 2.3. Prepare compiled information for field and office tasks. 3. Horizontal and Vertical Control 3.1. Search and reconnaissance for record control points. Recover and verify previous control points. 3.2. Set additional control points for Data Collection and provide swing tie sketches as required in field book format. 3.3. Traverse/GPS/level through found monuments to establish primary control. Traverse/GPS/level through secondary control to densify control. 3.4. Office calculations, adjustment, tabulations of coordinates, and working drawings. 4. Topographic Survey 4.1. Locate the following visible, marked, or available from record man-made topographic features within the survey limits: Point(s) of access to property(ies), sewers, culverts, and discharge pipes (including size and invert elevation), catch basins, inlets, drainage structures, fire hydrants, manholes, hand holes, traffic signals, wells, guardrails, retaining walls, large and/or overhead signs, railroad tracks, pavement, curbs and other manmade improvements. 4.1.1.Locate Buildings. Dimension buildings with exterior dimensions at ground level. 4.1.2.Locate roadways, driveways, sidewalks, paved paths, and parking lots. 4.1.3.Locate fences and other evidence of occupation. 4.1.4.Locate trees 4.1.4.1. Obtain location of trees. Dense groups of trees may be located by representation/outline. 4.1.4.2. Measure and record tree diameter (in inches). Measure and record tree type (deciduous or coniferous). Tree genus and species, common name or health will not be determined. 4.2. Conduct elevation surveys at intervals and at locations necessary to create DTM (Note: Shots may be taken on random stationing and locations as required to create a Digital Terrain Model “DTM”). Elevations shall be obtained to provide client with a DTM with an appropriate accuracy to depict existing conditions. Hard surface elevations will be obtained to an equivalent of cross sections at 50-foot intervals. Cross sections will extend to the survey limits on either side (previously described in this scope). Locations may be obtained with terrestrial based, 3-D LiDAR scanning or conventional survey methods. 4.2.1. Site elevations shall be obtained to provide client with a DTM. Provide elevation data at apparent Right-of Way, edge of sidewalks, centerline of driveways, edge of pavement, centerline of pavement, edge of curb, flowline of curb and back of curb, and ground elevations at break points. 3 Page 109 of 191  4.2.2.Elevations on paved surfaces shall be reported to 0.01 of a foot. 4.2.3.Elevations on other surfaces shall be reported to 0.1 of a foot. 4.3. Detail utility structures (Assume 50 utility structures to be located and detailed) ASE will complete details for manholes/drainage/utility structures. ASE will collect and record this data using in-house detail sheets. Manholes or other confined spaces (as defined by OSHA) will not be entered, pumped or cleaned. ASE shall not be responsible for underground topographic information not physically locatable or visible at the time of the survey; or any information provided by utility provider. ASE will only submit reduced field details of underground structures for this task. ASE will not map the underground structures and/or their connections with other underground structures. That underground mapping will be performed by others. 4.3.1.Detail utility features including: Manholes, handholes, culverts, catch basins, valve vaults or other surface indications of subsurface utilities. Measure inverts, pipe sizes and observed flow direction in manholes and other underground facilities. Pipe size/type details will be created but will be a check on plan information only. Electric/Communications vaults will be observed if accessible, with the number of observed cables and open or unoccupied conduits included. 4.3.2.Coordinate access to structures, manholes and vaults with utility owners; ASE will not be responsible for opening or accessing large or restricted manhole/utility vault covers. 4.4. Office calculations for data, downloading, and editing. LiDAR registration & extraction. 4.5. CADD drafting and incorporate the following topographic features into mapping: 4.5.1.Digital Terrain Model (DTM) will be generated and will include one-foot contours; 4.5.2.Manhole tables with invert information. 5. SUE Quality Level A Exposures (Test Holes) 5.1. Perform SUE QL B to confirm presence of utility. 5.2. Obtain Dig tickets as required for QLA Test Holes. 5.3. Perform Air vac excavation to expose specified utilities for accurate depiction of the utility location and subsequent backfill with excavation spoils or sand (billed as direct unit cost). 5.4. Obtain X, Y, Z coordinates of top of utility locations and ground elevation. 5.5. Provide a Test Hole Data Sheet for each QLA Test Hole. 6. QA/QC 6.1. Review contract documents and survey requirements to verify ASE project QA/QC requirements. Create project-specific QA/QC plan. 6.2. Periodic project review to assure compliance with policy and contract documents. 6.3. Final review and report of QA/QC compliance. ASE WILL DELIVER TO CLIENT: A. Copies of field notes with reductions made. B. Electronic versions of drawings client specified CADD platform. C. Field detail drawing sheets of underground structures. D. Test hole data sheets. 4 Page 110 of 191 DIRECT/UNIT COST ITEMS Location holes 3.01-6.00 feet in depth $1,954.00 4 $7,816.00 Location holes 6.01-12.00 feet in depth $2,892.00 4 $11,568.00 Location holes 12.01-18.00 feet in depth $3,734.00 2 $7,468.00 SUE QL B per foot $2.46 200 $492.00 Core and Restore Hard Surface Pavements $505.00 4 $2,020.00 RR Protective Liability Insurance $900.00 1 $900.00 RR Entry Application Fee $1,045.00 1 $1,045.00 RR Flagging per day $1,250.00 2 $2,500.00 RR Entry Agreement Fees $2,000.00 1 $2,000.00 Total Other Direct Costs = $35,809.00 $9,692.00 ITEMS SUPPLIED BY OTHERS A. Record plans, including any previous survey information (if available). B. Any and all pertinent site information including, but not limited to previous horizontal and vertical survey control survey information, existing aerial photography, Right-of-Way plans, centerline alignment, construction plans, and plats of highway will be furnished to ASE, at no cost to ASE, prior to commencement of field operations. C. Permission and access to closed or locked areas requiring access to complete the survey. D. Letter of Introduction and written authorization for access to subject property for ASE’s services on subject site. 2 HOLES @ $1,954 = $3,908 2 HOLES @ $2,892 = $5,784 Estimates revised per 3/18/2025 email from American Survey (see preceding pages). 5 Page 111 of 191 PARKING STUDIES AND DESIGN Page 112 of 191  PAYROLL ESCALATION TABLE FIXED RAISES FIRM NAME CDM Smith Inc DATE 03/18/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime PTB-ITEM# 1 Prepared By Aklan CONTRACT TERM 12 MONTHS OVERHEAD RATE 161.98% START DATE 2/1/2025 COMPLEXITY FACTOR 0 RAISE DATE 3/31/2025 % OF RAISE 4% END DATE 1/31/2026 ESCALATION PER YEAR year First date Last date Months % of Contract 0 2/1/2025 3/31/2025 2 16.67% 1 4/1/2025 1/31/2026 10 86.67% The total escalation = 3.33% Page 113 of 191  PAYROLL RATES FIRM NAME CDM Smith Inc DATE 03/18/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime PTB-ITEM # 1 ESCALATION FACTOR 3.33% Note: Rates should be capped on the AVG 1 tab as necessary IDOT CLASSIFICATION PAYROLL RATES CALCULATED RATE ON FILE Administrative 1 - Szczepanik, Candice A $34.90 $36.06 Professional 2 - Connolly, John $33.89 $35.02 Professional 2 - Mechanical Engineer (TBD)) $35.42 $36.60 Professional 2 - Peroni, Anthony M $42.51 $43.93 Professional 2 - Alvarez, Kassandra $40.09 $41.43 Professional 3 - Electrical Engineer (TBD) $38.63 $39.92 Professional 3 - Pyshnov, Erik $40.38 $41.73 Professional 3 - Eull, Jacob N $45.84 $47.37 Professional 4 - Hostettler, Julia $41.49 $42.87 Professional 4 - Geotechnical Engineer (TBD) $43.80 $45.26 Professional 4 - Ordaz, Webster U $55.41 $57.26 Professional 4 - Power, Gavin M $56.72 $58.61 Professional 4 - Carson, Raymond T $54.01 $55.81 Professional 4 - Pereda, Christian $47.79 $49.38 Professional 4 - Philpott, John M $56.04 $57.91 Professional 4 - Cunningham, Brian $55.87 $57.73 Professional 5 - Buirge, Dennis E $57.31 $59.22 Professional 5 - Suba, Cody J $57.42 $59.33 Professional 5 - Murdock, Jacquelyn K $67.36 $69.61 Professional 5 - Laria, Tomas A $60.42 $62.43 Professional 5 - BIM Modeler (TBD) $56.90 $58.80 Professional 5 - Figus, Chris $65.12 $67.29 Professional 8 - Aklan, Matthew $100.97 $104.34 Professional 5 - Sutherlin, Sarah $65.31 $67.49 Professional 5 - Diffenderfer, Brandon J $73.23 $75.67 Professional 5 - Lopez Gonzalez, Irvin J $73.59 $76.04 Professional 5 - Walsh, Kevin $51.74 $53.46 Professional 6 - Watkins, Michael S (Mike) $78.78 $81.41 Professional 7 - Cheval, Robert A $71.06 $73.43 Professional 7 - Sarich, Pete $71.52 $73.90 Professional 7 - Ricketts, April $82.59 $85.34 Professional 7 - Yang, Wendell W $75.87 $78.40 Professional 7 - Kahn, Michael E $82.95 $85.72 Professional 7 - Wendorf, Jared W $84.98 $87.81 Professional 7 - Burdett, Stephen M $90.04 $93.04 Professional 7 - Cerda, Antonio A $86.88 $89.78 Professional 7 - Newby, John E $89.70 $92.69 Professional 7 - Hands, Steve $92.84 $95.93 Professional 8 - Harber, Benjamin O $86.44 $89.32 Professional 8 - Fry, Karl D $95.44 $98.62 Professional 8 - Klein, Kevin $81.74 $84.46 Professional 9 - Pasinski, Steven S $112.35 $116.10 Professional 9 - Khwaja, Mahmood $128.22 $132.49 Professional 9 - Martel, Christopher M $137.20 $141.77 Professional 6 - Melody Carvajal $53.85 $55.65 Page 114 of 191  COST PLUS FIXED FEE COST ESTIMATE OF CONSULTANT SERVICES FIRM CDM Smith Inc DATE 03/18/25 PTB-ITEM # 1 OVERHEAD RATE 161.98% PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime COMPLEXITY FACTOR 0 DBE OVERHEAD SERVICES % OF DROP ITEM MANHOURS PAYROLL & DIRECT FIXED BY DBE TOTAL GRAND BOX FRINGE BENF COSTS FEE OTHERS TOTAL TOTAL (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (G) (H) (B-G) Task 3.1 - Parking Studies - - - - - 0.00% CIC Workshop, 3/13/24 - - - - - 0.00% CIC Workshop, 4/10/24 33 1,968 3,188 619 - 5,775 7.69% Board Workshop, 4/15/24 42 2,478 4,014 779 - 7,271 9.68% Board Meeting, 5/28/24 36 1,992 3,227 626 - 5,845 7.78% Bus. Alliance Meeting, 7/10/24 38 2,394 3,878 753 - 7,025 9.35% Board Meeting, 7/15/24 24 1,576 2,552 495 - 4,623 6.15% - - - - - Task 3.2 - Redesign - - - - - 0.00% 30% Plan Revisions 28 1,418 2,298 446 - 4,162 5.54% Parking Review 24 1,453 2,353 457 - 4,263 5.68% Drainage/Landscape Coord. 30 1,602 2,595 504 - 4,701 6.26% Phase I Updates 42 2,608 4,224 820 - 7,652 10.19% IDOT Variances 22 1,948 3,156 612 - 5,716 7.61% - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Task 11 - Quality Assurance - - - - - 0.00% Quality Assurance 6 527 853 166 - 1,546 2.06% Sub Work - - - - - 0.00% Landscaping (Lakota) - - - 10,180 - 10,180 13.55% Drainage/Site (Civiltech) - - - 6,356 - 6,356 8.46% - - - - - ODC Travel - - - - - 0.00% - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - TOTALS 325 19,964 32,338 - 6,277 16,536 - 75,115 100.00% 52,302 DBE 0.00% Page 115 of 191  AVERAGE HOURLY PROJECT RATES FIRM CDM Smith Inc PTB-ITEM# 1 DATE 03/18/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime SHEET 1 OF 5 PAYROLL AVG TOTAL PROJ. RATES Task 3.1 - Parking Studies CIC Workshop, 3/13/24 CIC Workshop, 4/10/24 Board Workshop, 4/15/24 Board Meeting, 5/28/24 HOURLY Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd CLASSIFICATION RATES Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Administrative 1 - Szczepanik, Candice A 36.06 0.0 Professional 2 - Connolly, John 35.02 126.0 38.77% 13.58 12 36.36% 12.73 20 47.62% 16.68 16 44.44% 15.56 Professional 2 - Mechanical Engineer (TBD)) 36.60 0.0 Professional 2 - Peroni, Anthony M 43.93 0.0 Professional 2 - Alvarez, Kassandra 41.43 0.0 Professional 3 - Electrical Engineer (TBD) 39.92 0.0 Professional 3 - Pyshnov, Erik 41.73 0.0 Professional 3 - Eull, Jacob N 47.37 0.0 Professional 4 - Hostettler, Julia 42.87 0.0 Professional 4 - Geotechnical Engineer (TBD) 45.26 0.0 Professional 4 - Ordaz, Webster U 57.26 0.0 Professional 4 - Power, Gavin M 58.61 0.0 Professional 4 - Carson, Raymond T 55.81 0.0 Professional 4 - Pereda, Christian 49.38 0.0 Professional 4 - Philpott, John M 57.91 0.0 Professional 4 - Cunningham, Brian 57.73 0.0 Professional 5 - Buirge, Dennis E 59.22 0.0 Professional 5 - Suba, Cody J 59.33 66.0 20.31% 12.05 8 24.24% 14.38 6 14.29% 8.48 8 22.22% 13.19 Professional 5 - Murdock, Jacquelyn K 69.61 0.0 Professional 5 - Laria, Tomas A 62.43 0.0 Professional 5 - BIM Modeler (TBD) 58.80 0.0 Professional 5 - Figus, Chris 67.29 0.0 Professional 8 - Aklan, Matthew 104.34 23.0 7.08% 7.38 4 12.12% 12.65 4 9.52% 9.94 4 11.11% 11.59 Professional 5 - Sutherlin, Sarah 67.49 55.0 16.92% 11.42 8 24.24% 16.36 8 19.05% 12.85 8 22.22% 15.00 Professional 5 - Diffenderfer, Brandon J 75.67 0.0 Professional 5 - Lopez Gonzalez, Irvin J 76.04 0.0 Professional 5 - Walsh, Kevin 53.46 0.0 Professional 6 - Watkins, Michael S (Mike) 81.41 0.0 Professional 7 - Cheval, Robert A 73.43 0.0 Professional 7 - Sarich, Pete 73.90 0.0 Professional 7 - Ricketts, April 85.34 0.0 Professional 7 - Yang, Wendell W 78.40 0.0 0 0.0 Professional 7 - Kahn, Michael E 85.72 0.0 Professional 7 - Wendorf, Jared W 87.81 6.0 1.85% 1.62 Professional 7 - Burdett, Stephen M 93.04 0.0 Professional 7 - Cerda, Antonio A 89.78 14.0 4.31% 3.87 Professional 7 - Newby, John E 92.69 0.0 Professional 7 - Hands, Steve 95.93 16.0 4.92% 4.72 Professional 8 - Harber, Benjamin O 89.32 0.0 Professional 8 - Fry, Karl D 98.62 0.0 Professional 8 - Klein, Kevin 84.46 0.0 Professional 9 - Pasinski, Steven S 116.10 19.0 5.85% 6.79 1 3.03% 3.52 4 9.52% 11.06 Professional 9 - Khwaja, Mahmood 132.49 0.0 Professional 9 - Martel, Christopher M 141.77 0.0 0 0.0 Professional 6 - Melody Carvajal 55.65 0.0 0 0.0 TOTALS 325.0 100% $61.43 0.0 0.00% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 33.0 100% $59.64 42.0 100% $59.00 36.0 100% $55.34 Page 116 of 191 ' AVERAGE HOURLY PROJECT RATES FIRM CDM Smith Inc PTB-ITEM# 1 DATE 03/18/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime SHEET 2 OF 5 PAYROLL AVG Bus. Alliance Meeting, 7/10/24 Board Meeting, 7/15/24 0 Task 3.2 - Redesign 30% Plan Revisions Parking Review HOURLY Hrs % Wgtd Hrs % Wgtd Hrs % Wgtd Hrs % Wgtd Hrs % Wgtd Hrs % Wgtd CLASSIFICATION RATES Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Administrative 1 - Szczepanik, Candice A 36.06 Professional 2 - Connolly, John 35.02 16 42.11% 14.75 8 33.33% 11.67 16 57.14% 20.01 8 33.33% 11.67 Professional 2 - Mechanical Engineer (TBD)) 36.60 Professional 2 - Peroni, Anthony M 43.93 Professional 2 - Alvarez, Kassandra 41.43 Professional 3 - Electrical Engineer (TBD) 39.92 Professional 3 - Pyshnov, Erik 41.73 Professional 3 - Eull, Jacob N 47.37 Professional 4 - Hostettler, Julia 42.87 Professional 4 - Geotechnical Engineer (TBD) 45.26 Professional 4 - Ordaz, Webster U 57.26 Professional 4 - Power, Gavin M 58.61 Professional 4 - Carson, Raymond T 55.81 Professional 4 - Pereda, Christian 49.38 Professional 4 - Philpott, John M 57.91 Professional 4 - Cunningham, Brian 57.73 Professional 5 - Buirge, Dennis E 59.22 Professional 5 - Suba, Cody J 59.33 4 10.53% 6.25 6 25.00% 14.83 6 21.43% 12.71 6 25.00% 14.83 Professional 5 - Murdock, Jacquelyn K 69.61 Professional 5 - Laria, Tomas A 62.43 Professional 5 - BIM Modeler (TBD) 58.80 Professional 5 - Figus, Chris 67.29 Professional 8 - Aklan, Matthew 104.34 2 5.26% 5.49 3 12.50% 13.04 Professional 5 - Sutherlin, Sarah 67.49 8 21.05% 14.21 3 12.50% 8.44 4 14.29% 9.64 6 25.00% 16.87 Professional 5 - Diffenderfer, Brandon J 75.67 Professional 5 - Lopez Gonzalez, Irvin J 76.04 Professional 5 - Walsh, Kevin 53.46 Professional 6 - Watkins, Michael S (Mike) 81.41 Professional 7 - Cheval, Robert A 73.43 Professional 7 - Sarich, Pete 73.90 Professional 7 - Ricketts, April 85.34 Professional 7 - Yang, Wendell W 78.40 0 Professional 7 - Kahn, Michael E 85.72 Professional 7 - Wendorf, Jared W 87.81 Professional 7 - Burdett, Stephen M 93.04 Professional 7 - Cerda, Antonio A 89.78 2 8.33% 7.48 Professional 7 - Newby, John E 92.69 Professional 7 - Hands, Steve 95.93 4 10.53% 10.10 2 8.33% 7.99 Professional 8 - Harber, Benjamin O 89.32 Professional 8 - Fry, Karl D 98.62 Professional 8 - Klein, Kevin 84.46 Professional 9 - Pasinski, Steven S 116.10 4 10.53% 12.22 2 8.33% 9.67 2 7.14% 8.29 2 8.33% 9.67 Professional 9 - Khwaja, Mahmood 132.49 Professional 9 - Martel, Christopher M 141.77 0 Professional 6 - Melody Carvajal 55.65 0 TOTALS 38.0 100% $63.01 24.0 100% $65.65 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 28.0 100% $50.66 24.0 100% $60.53 Page 117 of 191  ' AVERAGE HOURLY PROJECT RATES FIRM CDM Smith Inc PTB-ITEM# 1 DATE 03/18/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime SHEET 3 OF 5 PAYROLL AVG Drainage/Landscape Coord. Phase I Updates IDOT Variances 0 0 0 HOURLY Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd CLASSIFICATION RATES Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Administrative 1 - Szczepanik, Candice A 36.06 Professional 2 - Connolly, John 35.02 8 26.67% 9.34 20 47.62% 16.68 2 9.09% 3.18 Professional 2 - Mechanical Engineer (TBD)) 36.60 Professional 2 - Peroni, Anthony M 43.93 Professional 2 - Alvarez, Kassandra 41.43 Professional 3 - Electrical Engineer (TBD) 39.92 Professional 3 - Pyshnov, Erik 41.73 Professional 3 - Eull, Jacob N 47.37 Professional 4 - Hostettler, Julia 42.87 Professional 4 - Geotechnical Engineer (TBD) 45.26 Professional 4 - Ordaz, Webster U 57.26 Professional 4 - Power, Gavin M 58.61 Professional 4 - Carson, Raymond T 55.81 Professional 4 - Pereda, Christian 49.38 Professional 4 - Philpott, John M 57.91 Professional 4 - Cunningham, Brian 57.73 Professional 5 - Buirge, Dennis E 59.22 Professional 5 - Suba, Cody J 59.33 20 66.67% 39.56 2 9.09% 5.39 Professional 5 - Murdock, Jacquelyn K 69.61 Professional 5 - Laria, Tomas A 62.43 Professional 5 - BIM Modeler (TBD) 58.80 Professional 5 - Figus, Chris 67.29 Professional 8 - Aklan, Matthew 104.34 2 4.76% 4.97 4 18.18% 18.97 Professional 5 - Sutherlin, Sarah 67.49 2 6.67% 4.50 6 14.29% 9.64 2 9.09% 6.14 Professional 5 - Diffenderfer, Brandon J 75.67 Professional 5 - Lopez Gonzalez, Irvin J 76.04 Professional 5 - Walsh, Kevin 53.46 Professional 6 - Watkins, Michael S (Mike) 81.41 Professional 7 - Cheval, Robert A 73.43 Professional 7 - Sarich, Pete 73.90 Professional 7 - Ricketts, April 85.34 Professional 7 - Yang, Wendell W 78.40 0 Professional 7 - Kahn, Michael E 85.72 Professional 7 - Wendorf, Jared W 87.81 Professional 7 - Burdett, Stephen M 93.04 Professional 7 - Cerda, Antonio A 89.78 8 19.05% 17.10 4 18.18% 16.32 Professional 7 - Newby, John E 92.69 Professional 7 - Hands, Steve 95.93 6 14.29% 13.70 4 18.18% 17.44 Professional 8 - Harber, Benjamin O 89.32 Professional 8 - Fry, Karl D 98.62 Professional 8 - Klein, Kevin 84.46 Professional 9 - Pasinski, Steven S 116.10 4 18.18% 21.11 Professional 9 - Khwaja, Mahmood 132.49 Professional 9 - Martel, Christopher M 141.77 0 Professional 6 - Melody Carvajal 55.65 0 TOTALS 30.0 100% $53.39 42.0 100% $62.09 22.0 100% $88.56 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 Page 118 of 191  ' AVERAGE HOURLY PROJECT RATES FIRM CDM Smith Inc PTB-ITEM# 1 DATE 03/18/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime SHEET 4 OF 5 PAYROLL AVG 0 0 Task 11 - Quality Assurance Quality Assurance Sub Work Landscaping (Lakota) HOURLY Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd CLASSIFICATION RATES Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Administrative 1 - Szczepanik, Candice A 36.06 Professional 2 - Connolly, John 35.02 Professional 2 - Mechanical Engineer (TBD)) 36.60 Professional 2 - Peroni, Anthony M 43.93 Professional 2 - Alvarez, Kassandra 41.43 Professional 3 - Electrical Engineer (TBD) 39.92 Professional 3 - Pyshnov, Erik 41.73 Professional 3 - Eull, Jacob N 47.37 Professional 4 - Hostettler, Julia 42.87 Professional 4 - Geotechnical Engineer (TBD) 45.26 Professional 4 - Ordaz, Webster U 57.26 Professional 4 - Power, Gavin M 58.61 Professional 4 - Carson, Raymond T 55.81 Professional 4 - Pereda, Christian 49.38 Professional 4 - Philpott, John M 57.91 Professional 4 - Cunningham, Brian 57.73 Professional 5 - Buirge, Dennis E 59.22 Professional 5 - Suba, Cody J 59.33 Professional 5 - Murdock, Jacquelyn K 69.61 Professional 5 - Laria, Tomas A 62.43 Professional 5 - BIM Modeler (TBD) 58.80 Professional 5 - Figus, Chris 67.29 Professional 8 - Aklan, Matthew 104.34 Professional 5 - Sutherlin, Sarah 67.49 Professional 5 - Diffenderfer, Brandon J 75.67 Professional 5 - Lopez Gonzalez, Irvin J 76.04 Professional 5 - Walsh, Kevin 53.46 Professional 6 - Watkins, Michael S (Mike) 81.41 Professional 7 - Cheval, Robert A 73.43 Professional 7 - Sarich, Pete 73.90 Professional 7 - Ricketts, April 85.34 Professional 7 - Yang, Wendell W 78.40 0 Professional 7 - Kahn, Michael E 85.72 Professional 7 - Wendorf, Jared W 87.81 6 100.00% 87.81 Professional 7 - Burdett, Stephen M 93.04 Professional 7 - Cerda, Antonio A 89.78 Professional 7 - Newby, John E 92.69 Professional 7 - Hands, Steve 95.93 Professional 8 - Harber, Benjamin O 89.32 Professional 8 - Fry, Karl D 98.62 Professional 8 - Klein, Kevin 84.46 Professional 9 - Pasinski, Steven S 116.10 Professional 9 - Khwaja, Mahmood 132.49 Professional 9 - Martel, Christopher M 141.77 0 Professional 6 - Melody Carvajal 55.65 0 TOTALS 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 6.0 100% $87.81 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 Page 119 of 191  Sub-Consultant Fees Cost 5% Markup Fee Lakota $ 9,695.00 $ 484.75 $ 10,179.75 Civiltech $ 6,053.00 $ 302.65 $ 6,355.65 GRAND TOTALS $ 787.40 $ 16,535.40 Page 120 of 191  Cost Estimate of Consultant Services (Direct Labor Multiple) Firm The Lakota Group, Inc. Date 02/10/25 Route Section Overhead Rate 110.51% County Cook Job No. Complexity Factor 0 PTB & Item (2.80+R) TIMES DIRECT SERVICES DBE % OF ITEM MANHOURS PAYROLL PAYROLL COSTS BY TOTAL TOTAL GRAND OTHERS TOTAL (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (C+D+E) (C+D+E) Streetscape Revisions Evaluation 6 420.00 1,176.00 1,176.00 12.13% Design Revisions 11 748.70 2,096.35 2,096.35 21.63% Plant and Material Quantity Updates 12 816.76 2,286.93 2,286.93 23.59% Drawing Sheet Set Revisions 7 484.19 1,355.73 1,355.73 13.99% Coordination Review/Meetings 13.155 903.12 2,528.73 2,528.73 26.09% Printing 0.00 0.00 250.00 250.00 2.58% TOTALS 49.155 3,372.76 9,443.74 250.00 0.00 0.00 9,693.74 100.00% Page 1 of 1 Printed 2/10/2025 12:50 PM Page 121 of 191  PAYROLL ESCALATION TABLE FIXED RAISES FIRM NAME Civiltech Engineering, Inc. DATE 01/20/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT SUPPLEMENT PTB-ITEM# 250 Prepared By Joseph Abramson, P.E., CFM CONTRACT TERM 2 MONTHS OVERHEAD RATE 136.98% START DATE 1/27/2025 COMPLEXITY FACTOR 0 RAISE DATE 4/1/2025 % OF RAISE 2% END DATE 3/26/2025 ESCALATION PER YEAR Year First date Last date Months % of Contract 0 1/27/2025 3/26/2025 2 100.00% The total escalation = 0.00% Printed 1/20/2025 3:13 PM Page 1 of 1 BDE 3608 Template (Rev. 09/28/23) Page 122 of 191  PAYROLL RATES FIRM NAME Civiltech Engineering, Inc. DATE 01/20/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT SUPPLEMENT PTB-ITEM # 250 ESCALATION FACTOR 0.00% Note: Rates should be capped on the AVG 1 tab as necessary IDOT CLASSIFICATION PAYROLL RATES CALCULATED RATE ON FILE Water Resources Senior Project Manager $89.00 $89.00 Water Resources Project Manager $55.00 $55.00 Water Resources Engineer III $42.00 $42.00 Printed 1/20/2025 2:34 PM Page 1 of 1 BDE 3608 Template (Rev. 09/28/23) Page 123 of 191  COST PLUS FIXED FEE COST ESTIMATE OF CONSULTANT SERVICES FIRM Civiltech Engineering, Inc. DATE 01/20/25 PTB-ITEM # 250 OVERHEAD RATE 136.98% PRIME/SUPPLEMENT SUPPLEMENT COMPLEXITY FACTOR 0 DBE OVERHEAD SERVICES % OF DROP ITEM MANHOURS PAYROLL & DIRECT FIXED BY DBE TOTAL GRAND BOX FRINGE BENF COSTS FEE OTHERS TOTAL TOTAL (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (G) (H) (B-G) 001 – Revising Design to Account for Village-Driven Changes Since 30% 46 2,242 3,071 740 - 6,053 100.00% - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Subconsultant DL - - TOTALS 46 2,242 3,071 - 740 - - 6,053 100.00% 5,313 DBE 0.00% Printed 1/20/2025 3:12 PM Page 1 of 1 BDE 3608 Template (Rev. 09/28/23) Page 124 of 191  AVERAGE HOURLY PROJECT RATES FIRM Civiltech Engineering, Inc. PTB-ITEM# 250 DATE 01/20/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT SUPPLEMENT SHEET 1 OF 5 PAYROLL AVG TOTAL PROJ. RATES 001 – Revising Design to Account for Village-Driven Changes Since 30% HOURLY Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd CLASSIFICATION RATES Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Water Resources Senior Project Manager 89.00 3.0 6.52% 5.80 3 6.52% 5.80 0 0 Water Resources Project Manager 55.00 13.0 28.26% 15.54 13 28.26% 15.54 0 0 Water Resources Engineer III 42.00 30.0 65.22% 27.39 30 65.22% 27.39 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 TOTALS 46.0 100% $48.74 46.0 100.00% $48.74 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 Printed 1/20/2025 2:34 PM Page 5 of 9 BDE 3608 Template (Rev. 09/28/23) Page 125 of 191 UTILITY UNDERGROUNDING CONCEPTS (Phase 1) Page 126 of 191  PAYROLL ESCALATION TABLE FIXED RAISES FIRM NAME CDM Smith Inc DATE 03/18/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime PTB-ITEM# 1 Prepared By Aklan CONTRACT TERM 12 MONTHS OVERHEAD RATE 161.98% START DATE 2/1/2025 COMPLEXITY FACTOR 0 RAISE DATE 3/31/2025 % OF RAISE 4% END DATE 1/31/2026 ESCALATION PER YEAR year First date Last date Months % of Contract 0 2/1/2025 3/31/2025 2 16.67% 1 4/1/2025 1/31/2026 10 86.67% The total escalation = 3.33% Page 127 of 191  PAYROLL RATES FIRM NAME CDM Smith Inc DATE 03/18/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime PTB-ITEM # 1 ESCALATION FACTOR 3.33% Note: Rates should be capped on the AVG 1 tab as necessary IDOT CLASSIFICATION PAYROLL RATES CALCULATED RATE ON FILE Administrative 1 - Szczepanik, Candice A $34.90 $36.06 Professional 2 - Connolly, John $33.89 $35.02 Professional 2 - Mechanical Engineer (TBD)) $35.42 $36.60 Professional 2 - Peroni, Anthony M $42.51 $43.93 Professional 2 - Alvarez, Kassandra $40.09 $41.43 Professional 3 - Electrical Engineer (TBD) $38.63 $39.92 Professional 3 - Pyshnov, Erik $40.38 $41.73 Professional 3 - Eull, Jacob N $45.84 $47.37 Professional 4 - Hostettler, Julia $41.49 $42.87 Professional 4 - Geotechnical Engineer (TBD) $43.80 $45.26 Professional 4 - Ordaz, Webster U $55.41 $57.26 Professional 4 - Power, Gavin M $56.72 $58.61 Professional 4 - Carson, Raymond T $54.01 $55.81 Professional 4 - Pereda, Christian $47.79 $49.38 Professional 4 - Philpott, John M $56.04 $57.91 Professional 4 - Cunningham, Brian $55.87 $57.73 Professional 5 - Buirge, Dennis E $57.31 $59.22 Professional 5 - Suba, Cody J $57.42 $59.33 Professional 5 - Murdock, Jacquelyn K $67.36 $69.61 Professional 5 - Laria, Tomas A $60.42 $62.43 Professional 5 - BIM Modeler (TBD) $56.90 $58.80 Professional 5 - Figus, Chris $65.12 $67.29 Professional 8 - Aklan, Matthew $100.97 $104.34 Professional 5 - Sutherlin, Sarah $65.31 $67.49 Professional 5 - Diffenderfer, Brandon J $73.23 $75.67 Professional 5 - Lopez Gonzalez, Irvin J $73.59 $76.04 Professional 6 - Watkins, Michael S (Mike) $78.78 $81.41 Professional 7 - Cheval, Robert A $71.06 $73.43 Professional 7 - Sarich, Pete $71.52 $73.90 Professional 7 - Ricketts, April $82.59 $85.34 Professional 7 - Yang, Wendell W $75.87 $78.40 Professional 7 - Kahn, Michael E $82.95 $85.72 Professional 7 - Wendorf, Jared W $84.98 $87.81 Professional 7 - Burdett, Stephen M $90.04 $93.04 Professional 7 - Cerda, Antonio A $86.88 $89.78 Professional 7 - Newby, John E $89.70 $92.69 Professional 7 - Hands, Steve $92.84 $95.93 Professional 8 - Harber, Benjamin O $86.44 $89.32 Professional 8 - Fry, Karl D $95.44 $98.62 Professional 8 - Klein, Kevin $81.74 $84.46 Professional 9 - Pasinski, Steven S $112.35 $116.10 Professional 9 - Khwaja, Mahmood $128.22 $132.49 Professional 9 - Martel, Christopher M $137.20 $141.77 Professional 6 - Melody Carvajal $53.85 $55.65 Page 128 of 191  COST PLUS FIXED FEE COST ESTIMATE OF CONSULTANT SERVICES FIRM CDM Smith Inc DATE 03/18/25 PTB-ITEM # 1 OVERHEAD RATE 161.98% PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime COMPLEXITY FACTOR 0 DBE OVERHEAD SERVICES % OF DROP ITEM MANHOURS PAYROLL & DIRECT FIXED BY DBE TOTAL GRAND BOX FRINGE BENF COSTS FEE OTHERS TOTAL TOTAL (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (G) (H) (B-G) Site Design - Civil Engineering 12 789 1,278 248 - 2,315 5.18% Electrical Engineering Support 16 1,351 2,189 425 - 3,965 8.88% Meetings 14 1,200 1,944 377 - 3,521 7.88% Project Management 6 626 1,014 197 - 1,837 4.11% QA/QC 8 706 1,144 222 - 2,072 4.64% - - - - - - - - - - Jorgensen & Associates, Inc. - Survey - - 6,564 - 6,564 14.69% Vistara - Construction Cost Estimating - - 13,921 - 13,921 31.16% American Survey (S.U.E.) - - - 10,177 - 10,177 22.78% ODC.Travel - - 300 - - 300 0.67% - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - TOTALS 56 4,672 7,569 300 1,469 30,662 - 44,672 100.00% 12,241 DBE 0.00% Page 129 of 191  AVERAGE HOURLY PROJECT RATES FIRM CDM Smith Inc PTB-ITEM# 1 DATE 03/18/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime SHEET 1 OF 5 PAYROLL AVG TOTAL PROJ. RATES Site Design - Civil EngineeringElectrical Engineering Supp Meetings Project Management QA/QC HOURLY Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd CLASSIFICATION RATES Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Administrative 1 - Szczepanik, Candice A 36.06 0.0 Professional 2 - Connolly, John 35.02 0.0 Professional 2 - Mechanical Engineer (TBD)) 36.60 0.0 Professional 2 - Peroni, Anthony M 43.93 0.0 Professional 2 - Alvarez, Kassandra 41.43 0.0 Professional 3 - Electrical Engineer (TBD) 39.92 0.0 Professional 3 - Pyshnov, Erik 41.73 0.0 Professional 3 - Eull, Jacob N 47.37 0.0 Professional 4 - Hostettler, Julia 42.87 0.0 Professional 4 - Geotechnical Engineer (TBD) 45.26 0.0 Professional 4 - Ordaz, Webster U 57.26 0.0 Professional 4 - Power, Gavin M 58.61 0.0 Professional 4 - Carson, Raymond T 55.81 0.0 Professional 4 - Pereda, Christian 49.38 0.0 Professional 4 - Philpott, John M 57.91 0.0 Professional 4 - Cunningham, Brian 57.73 0.0 Professional 5 - Buirge, Dennis E 59.22 0.0 Professional 5 - Suba, Cody J 59.33 8.0 14.29% 8.48 8 66.67% 39.56 Professional 5 - Murdock, Jacquelyn K 69.61 0.0 Professional 5 - Laria, Tomas A 62.43 0.0 Professional 5 - BIM Modeler (TBD) 58.80 0.0 Professional 5 - Figus, Chris 67.29 0.0 Professional 8 - Aklan, Matthew 104.34 12.0 21.43% 22.36 6 42.86% 44.72 6 100.00% 104.34 Professional 5 - Sutherlin, Sarah 67.49 8.0 14.29% 9.64 2 16.67% 11.25 6 42.86% 28.92 Professional 5 - Diffenderfer, Brandon J 75.67 0.0 Professional 5 - Lopez Gonzalez, Irvin J 76.04 0.0 Professional 6 - Watkins, Michael S (Mike) 81.41 0.0 0 0.0 Professional 7 - Cheval, Robert A 73.43 0.0 Professional 7 - Sarich, Pete 73.90 0.0 Professional 7 - Ricketts, April 85.34 0.0 Professional 7 - Yang, Wendell W 78.40 0.0 0 0.0 Professional 7 - Kahn, Michael E 85.72 0.0 Professional 7 - Wendorf, Jared W 87.81 6.0 10.71% 9.41 6 75.00% 65.86 Professional 7 - Burdett, Stephen M 93.04 0.0 Professional 7 - Cerda, Antonio A 89.78 4.0 7.14% 6.41 2 16.67% 14.96 2 25.00% 22.44 Professional 7 - Newby, John E 92.69 0.0 Professional 7 - Hands, Steve 95.93 0.0 Professional 8 - Harber, Benjamin O 89.32 0.0 Professional 8 - Fry, Karl D 98.62 0.0 Professional 8 - Klein, Kevin 84.46 18.0 32.14% 27.15 16 100.00% 84.46 2 14.29% 12.07 Professional 9 - Pasinski, Steven S 116.10 0.0 Professional 9 - Khwaja, Mahmood 132.49 0.0 Professional 9 - Martel, Christopher M 141.77 0.0 0 0.0 Professional 6 - Melody Carvajal 55.65 0.0 0 0.0 TOTALS 56.0 100% $83.45 12.0 100.00% $65.77 16.0 100% $84.46 14.0 100% $85.70 6.0 100% $104.34 8.0 100% $88.30 Page 130 of 191 ' AVERAGE HOURLY PROJECT RATES FIRM CDM Smith Inc PTB-ITEM# 1 DATE 03/18/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime SHEET 2 OF 5 PAYROLL AVG ###### 0 Jorgensen & Associates, In Vistara - Construction Cost Es American Survey (S.U.E.) ODC.Travel HOURLY Hrs % Wgtd Hrs % Wgtd Hrs % Wgtd Hrs % Wgtd Hrs % Wgtd Hrs % Wgtd CLASSIFICATION RATES Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Administrative 1 - Szczepanik, Candice A 36.06 Professional 2 - Connolly, John 35.02 Professional 2 - Mechanical Engineer (TBD)) 36.60 Professional 2 - Peroni, Anthony M 43.93 Professional 2 - Alvarez, Kassandra 41.43 Professional 3 - Electrical Engineer (TBD) 39.92 Professional 3 - Pyshnov, Erik 41.73 Professional 3 - Eull, Jacob N 47.37 Professional 4 - Hostettler, Julia 42.87 Professional 4 - Geotechnical Engineer (TBD) 45.26 Professional 4 - Ordaz, Webster U 57.26 Professional 4 - Power, Gavin M 58.61 Professional 4 - Carson, Raymond T 55.81 Professional 4 - Pereda, Christian 49.38 Professional 4 - Philpott, John M 57.91 Professional 4 - Cunningham, Brian 57.73 Professional 5 - Buirge, Dennis E 59.22 Professional 5 - Suba, Cody J 59.33 Professional 5 - Murdock, Jacquelyn K 69.61 Professional 5 - Laria, Tomas A 62.43 Professional 5 - BIM Modeler (TBD) 58.80 Professional 5 - Figus, Chris 67.29 Professional 8 - Aklan, Matthew 104.34 Professional 5 - Sutherlin, Sarah 67.49 Professional 5 - Diffenderfer, Brandon J 75.67 Professional 5 - Lopez Gonzalez, Irvin J 76.04 Professional 6 - Watkins, Michael S (Mike) 81.41 0 Professional 7 - Cheval, Robert A 73.43 Professional 7 - Sarich, Pete 73.90 Professional 7 - Ricketts, April 85.34 Professional 7 - Yang, Wendell W 78.40 0 Professional 7 - Kahn, Michael E 85.72 Professional 7 - Wendorf, Jared W 87.81 Professional 7 - Burdett, Stephen M 93.04 Professional 7 - Cerda, Antonio A 89.78 Professional 7 - Newby, John E 92.69 Professional 7 - Hands, Steve 95.93 Professional 8 - Harber, Benjamin O 89.32 Professional 8 - Fry, Karl D 98.62 Professional 8 - Klein, Kevin 84.46 Professional 9 - Pasinski, Steven S 116.10 Professional 9 - Khwaja, Mahmood 132.49 Professional 9 - Martel, Christopher M 141.77 0 Professional 6 - Melody Carvajal 55.65 0 TOTALS 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 Page 131 of 191  Sub-Consultant Fees Subconsultant / Vendor Cost 5% Markup Fee Jorgensen $ 6,251.26 $ 312.56 $ 6,563.82 Vistara $ 13,258.00 $ 662.90 $ 13,920.90 American (S.U.E. $ 9,692.00 $ 484.60 $ 10,176.60 3.01' to 6.00'deep location hole 2 holes at $1,954 each $ 3,908.00 6.00' to 12.00' deep location hole 2 holes at $2,892 each $ 5,784.00 GRAND TOTALS $ 1,460.06 $ 30,661.32 Page 132 of 191 Page 133 of 191  SCOPE OF SERVICES Topographic Survey General: The topographic survey to include: structures, ground shots, roadway and shoulders, guardrail, utilities, locate trees 3” and larger, soil borings, inverts and J.U.L.I.E. markings (as requested by others) within the project corridor. The project corridor being Duane Street from a point 100 feet West of Forest Avenue to a point 480 feet East of Forest Avenue. The survey will extend 2 feet beyond the existing R.O.W. lines of Duane Street. The survey will include the establishment of the existing R.O.W. lines within the project corridor. Establish bench marks and horizontal control points based on NGS geodetic survey monuments with G.P.S. survey methods. Locate and describe bench marks. The project will be based on NAD '83(2011) and NGVD '88 datums. Prepare “MicroStation with Power GEOPAKSS10” base file of the topographic survey and provide “GEOPAK” T.I.N. and contoured at 1 foot intervals. Certify the topographic survey. All work will be completed according to the current I.D.O.T. Design Survey Procedures. The survey DOES NOT include a SUE Level B, contacting J.U.L.I.E. for location requests, contacting the Union Pacific Railroad concerning utilities lying in Railroad R.O.W. and adding “As-Built” information by others to the survey. E:\CDM Smith\Glen Ellyn\Metra Station\Supplement\Scope of Services Page 134 of 191 Route: Metra Station Rehabilitation Section: County: DuPage Job No.: Exhibit “A” Payroll Burden & Fringe Costs % of Direct Productive Payroll Federal Insurance Contributions Act 11.96% State Unemployment Compensation 0.32% Federal Unemployment Compensation 0.13% Workmen's Compensation Insurance 1.35% Paid Holidays, Vacation, Sick Leave, Personal Leave 11.22% Bonus 4.12% 401(K) 0.88% Group Insurance 42.24% Total Payroll Burden & Fringe Costs 72.22% E:\CDM Smith\Glen Ellyn\Metra Station\Supplement\EXA Page 135 of 191 Route: Metra Station Rehabilitation Section: County: DuPage Job No.: Exhibit “B” Overhead and Indirect Costs % of Direct Productive Payroll Business Insurance 4.26% Depreciation 4.22% Indirect wages and salaries 43.10% Office Expenses 1.18% Office Supplies 2.59% Dues & Subscriptions 0.54% Computer Software 4.32% Professional Fees 1.57% Telephone 2.77% Fees, license & dues 0.05% Repairs and maintenance 2.30% Business space rent 4.74% Facilities - capital 0.33% In-house mileage -5.71% Survey Supplies 0.80% Automobile/travel expense 7.16% Miscellaneous Expense 0.54% State Income Tax 0.39% Recruiting 1.05% Postage 0.10% Educational & Professional Registrations 0.26% Tech 1.66% Total Overhead 78.22% E:\CDM Smith\Glen Ellyn\Metra Station\Supplement\EXB Page 136 of 191  PAYROLL ESCALATION TABLE FIXED RAISES FIRM NAME Jorgensen & Associates, Inc. DATE 01/06/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime 0.00 PTB NO. CONTRACT TERM 12 MONTHS OVERHEAD RATE 150.44% START DATE 1/7/2025 COMPLEXITY FACTOR RAISE DATE 1/7/2026 % OF RAISE 0.00% ESCALATION PER YEAR 1/7/2025 - 1/7/2026 12 12 = 100.00% = 1.0000 The total escalation for this project would be: 0.00% Printed 1/6/2025 Bureau of Design and Environment (Rev. 05/08/15) Page 137 of 191  PAYROLL RATES FIRM NAME Jorgensen & Associates DATE 01/06/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime PSB NO. ESCALATION FACTOR 0.00% CLASSIFICATION CURRENT RATE CALCULATED RATE Supervisor, P.L.S. $47.00 $47.00 Survey Party Chief, P.L.S. $34.50 $34.50 Instrument Operator $22.00 $22.00 Cadd Supervisor $36.25 $36.25 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Bureau of Design and Printed 1/6/2025 PREPARED BY THE CONSULTANTEnvironment (Rev. 05/08/15) Page 138 of 191  COST PLUS FIXED FEE COST ESTIMATE OF CONSULTANT SERVICES FIRM Jorgensen & Associates, Inc. DATE 01/06/25 PSB OVERHEAD RATE 1.5044 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime COMPLEXITY FACTOR 0 DBE OVERHEAD IN-HOUSE Outside SERVICES % OF DROP ITEM MANHOURS PAYROLL & DIRECT FIXED Direct BY DBE TOTAL GRAND BOX FRINGE BENF COSTS FEE Costs OTHERS TOTAL TOTAL (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G) (H) (B-G) (1) Field-Topographic Survey 46 1,299.50 1,954.97 201.00 501.04 3,956.51 63.29% (2) Office-Compile Field Data 6 249.75 375.72 90.69 716.17 11.46% (3) Office-Create Existing Topogrpahy Base File 8 290.00 436.28 105.31 831.59 13.30% (4) Office-Create T.I.N. & Contours 2 72.50 109.07 26.33 207.90 3.33% (5) QC/QA 4 188.00 282.83 68.27 539.10 8.62% Subconsultant DL 0.00 0.00 0.00% TOTALS 66 2,099.75 3,158.86 201.00 791.64 0.00 0.00 0.00 6,251.26 100.00% DBE 0.00% DBE Printed 1/6/2025 PREPARED BY THE CONSULTANT Bureau of Design and Environment (Rev. 05/08/15) Page 139 of 191  AVERAGE HOURLY PROJECT RATES FIRM Jorgensen & Associates, Inc. PSB DATE 01/06/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime SHEET 1 OF 1 PAYROLL AVG TOTAL PROJECT RATES (1) Field-Topographic Survey (2) Office-Compile Field Data (3) Office-Create Existing Topogrpahy Base File (4) Office-Create T.I.N. & Contours (5) QC/QA HOURLY Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd CLASSIFICATION RATES Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Supervisor, P.L.S. 47.00 7 10.61% 4.98 3 50.00% 23.50 4 100.00% 47.00 Survey Party Chief, P.L.S. 34.50 23 34.85% 12.02 23 50.00% 17.25 Instrument Operator 22.00 23 34.85% 7.67 23 50.00% 11.00 Cadd Supervisor 36.25 13 19.70% 7.14 3 50.00% 18.13 8 100.00% 36.25 2 100.00% 36.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTALS 66 100% $31.81 46 100.00% $28.25 6 100% $41.63 8 100% $36.25 2 100% $36.25 4 100% $47.00 Bureau of Design and Printed 1/6/2025 PREPARED BY THE CONSULTANT Environment (Rev. 05/08/15) Page 140 of 191 Route: Metra Station Rehabilitation Section: County: DuPage Job No.: Manhour Breakdown Topographic Survey Estimate Duane Street + 580’ = + 0.110 mile Total Length + 580’ = + 0.110 mile 1. Field – Topographic Survey a. Measure traverse & level circuit 3 hours x 2 men = 6 MH b. Search & locate existing R.O.W. line occupation 6 hours x 2 men = 12 MH c. Locate existing topography & inverts 14 hours x 2 men = 28 MH Sub-total Item #1 46 MH 2. Office – Compile Field Data a. Compute traverse & level circuit 1 hour x 1 man = 1 MH b. Edit & compile field data 3 hours x 1 man = 3 MH c. Compute existing R.O.W. & property lines 2 hours x 1 man = 2 MH Sub-total Item #2 6 MH 3. Office – Create Existing Topography Base File & Plat of Topography a. Layout and drafting 8 hours x 1 man = 8 MH (1) Page 141 of 191 4. Office - Create T.I.N. & Contours a. Compute contours 2 hours x 1 man = 2 MH 5. QC/QA a. Check topographic survey & Plat of Topography 3 hours x 1 man = 3 MH b. Check contours 1 hour x 1 man = 1 MH Total All Items 66 MH (2) E:\CDM Smith\Glen Ellyn\Metra Station\Supplement\LOP Page 142 of 191 Route: Metra Station Rehabilitation Section: County: DuPage Job No.: Breakdown of In House Direct Costs Item 1. Field - Topographic Survey a. Trips to project site - 3 ea. + 100 miles/trip x 3 trips = + 300 miles + 300 miles @ $0.67/mile = $ 201.00 E:\CDM Smith\Glen Ellyn\Metra Station\Supplement\IHC Page 143 of 191  March 18, 2025 Matthew Aklan, PE Senior Project Manager CDM Smith 125 S Wacker Dr, Suite 2510, Chicago, IL 60606 Re: Phase II Metra Station Glen Ellyn Cost Estimate Change in Fee – Scope Amendment – Utilities Relocation Dear Matthew: Based on your email of March 18, 2025 we propose the following estimating schedule for the proposed underground utility work: PHASE FEE Phase 1 (Preliminary – Go/No Go) $13,258.00 TOTAL $13,258.00 Note, 1) The utilities being considered for this estimate are those in the immediate vicinity of the station. 2) This fee is good through 12/31/2025. If you have any questions regarding this proposal or need further information, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely Sanjiv Pillai, PE President 728 West Jackson Boulevard  Suite 526  Chicago  Illinois 60661 (312) 986-8660 (Phone) www.vistara.com Page 144 of 191 From: Pasinski, Steven S. To: Aklan, Matthew L. Cc: Pasinski, Steven S. Subject: American Survey, SUE (A) Services Date: Tuesday, March 18, 2025 5:41:25 PM To File and estimate basis for SUE work amending American proposal for inclusion in amendment 3. From: Aklan, Matthew L. <aklanml@cdmsmith.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2025 11:16 AM To: Pasinski, Steven S. <pasinskiss@cdmsmith.com> Subject: American Survey, SUE (A) Services Steve- I’m not sure you need this but for American Survey, potholing was pricing in our original contract. Holes from 3.01 to 6.00 = $1,954 each. Holes from 6.01 to 12.00 = $2,892.00 Total = 2x $1,954.00 + 2x $2892.00 = $9692.00. American did not include a separate proposal – they just directed us to use the same cost per hole as dictated in our original contract per message below. Regards, Matt From: John Dybas <j.dybas@americansurvey.com> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2025 2:48 PM To: Aklan, Matthew L. <aklanml@cdmsmith.com> Cc: Tom Sanderson <t.sanderson@americansurvey.com>; Thano Tziforos <t.tziforos@americansurvey.com>; Chris Mason <c.mason@americansurvey.com> Subject: RE: SUE (A) Services Needed Matt, It looks like our original proposal included costs for 10 Level A exposures. You chose not to do the Level A work at that time so we removed the SUE from the final proposal. The unit costs for SUE shown in the attached original proposal are still valid. American Surveying & Engineering, Ltd. John Dybas, PLS Project Manager Page 145 of 191 Cell | 773-251-1162 Chicago | 312.277.2000 | fax 312.277.2002 Dixon | 815.288.6231 | fax 815.288.6277 Naperville | 630.897.4105 | fax 630.897.4121 Visit our website at www.americansurvey.com Celebrating 47 years in 2025          The information contained in this electronic message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are informed that any dissemination, copying or disclosure of the material contained herein, in whole or in part, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us and purge this message. Due to the unsecured nature of electronic documents and any attachments, American Surveying & Engineering, Ltd. assumes no responsibility for any consequences from the use of this data. The user should rely only on signed and sealed paper copies and shall assume all liabilities from the use of this data. P Please consider the environment before printing this message Page 146 of 191 F O R R E F E R E N C E O N L Y Scope of Work PROJECT SUMMARY Project Name Glen Ellyn Metra Station ASE Proposal No. 222084 Owner Metra Date August 16, 2022 Agent CDM Smith Revision Date Project Description – Professional Services to provide a pre-design survey for the improvement of the Glen Ellyn Metra Station. The topographic features and grades will be obtained primarily by using LiDAR. This proposal includes 10 Subsurface Utility Engineering (SUE) Quality Level A Utility Exposures anticipated near the Pedestrian Tunnel Ramps and Stairs. Project Limits and Location – The project limits are shown in red in this client supplied exhibit: Page 147 of 191 GENERAL CONDITIONS AND SCOPE ASSUMPTIONS 1. All professional services will be performed to appropriate Minimum Standards of practice and Section 1270.56, Minimum Standards of Practice for surveys in Illinois. 2. The horizontal datum will be NAD 83 (1986) and the vertical datum will be NAVD 88. 3. Subsurface Utility Engineering (SUE) standards referred to within this scope of work are in accordance with the CI/ASCE 38-02 Standard Guideline for the Collection & Depiction of Existing Subsurface Utility Data. 4. SUE QL A exposures will be billed at the following rates. a. Location holes 0-3.00 feet in depth will be billed at $1,423.00 per hole. b. Location holes 3.01-6.00 feet in depth will be billed at $1,954.00 per hole. (Assume 4) c. Location holes 6.01-12.00 feet in depth will be billed at $2,892.00 per hole. (Assume 4) d. Location holes 12.01-18.00 feet in depth will be billed at $3,734.00 per hole. (Assume 2) e. Location holes 18.01 feet and over will be billed on an hourly rate. 5. This proposal assumes 200 linear feet of SUE QL B. The cost of designating, surveying, and mapping SUE QL B is $2.46 per linear foot. 6. This proposal assumes 4 of the 10 Locations Holes will fall in pavement which will be cored and restored at cost of $505/per hole. 7. American Surveying & Engineering shall not be responsible for any erroneous or missing information provided by underground utility providers. 8. All previous and relevant survey information such as pertinent site information including, but not limited to previous horizontal and vertical survey control survey information, existing aerial photography, Right-of-Way plans, centerline alignment, construction plans and plats of highway will be furnished to ASE, at no cost to ASE, prior to commencement of field operations. 9. Owner/Agent will provide a Letter of Introduction to facilitate field operations. 10. American Surveying & Engineering shall not be responsible for any erroneous or missing information provided by underground utility providers. 11. Hazardous Waste sites designated as requiring protective equipment of “Class D” or greater will not be entered unless provided for otherwise in the Scope of Work Tasks. 12. American Surveying & Engineering is not signatory to any organized labor agreements. We will not provide services in any capacity where labor disputes may exist. We will not be responsible for costs or delays associated with labor disputes relevant to work on this project. 13. Field work performed on this project are subject to the vagaries of weather. In the event weather impairs our ability to perform any specified professional services, we will contact the Owner/Agent to determine changes in schedule or cost. No additional work will be performed until the owner/agent has reviewed and approved a revised cost or schedule. 14. This proposal assumes the flowlines of project drainage structures (culverts, manholes, inlets, etc.) will be surveyed as existing conditions. ASE will not clean, excavate, pump or otherwise remove debris, silt, trash or other material from project structures. 15. ASE will begin work after Notice to Proceed at a mutually agreed upon date. 16. This SOW shall become part of the contract between Owner/Agent and ASE. 2 Page 148 of 191 PROPOSED TASKS 1. Administration 1.1. Meetings with Owner or Agent, including in-house meetings. Progress Reports, scheduling, invoicing, and other project administrative tasks. 1.2. Technical direction of staff. 1.3. Project Management, resource coordination. 2. Document Compilation 2.1. Obtain relevant project documents from Owner/Agent. 2.2. Compile, review, and index information. 2.3. Prepare compiled information for field and office tasks. 3. Horizontal and Vertical Control 3.1. Search and reconnaissance for record control points. Recover and verify previous control points. 3.2. Set additional control points for Data Collection and provide swing tie sketches as required in field book format. 3.3. Traverse/GPS/level through found monuments to establish primary control. Traverse/GPS/level through secondary control to densify control. 3.4. Office calculations, adjustment, tabulations of coordinates, and working drawings. 4. Topographic Survey 4.1. Locate the following visible, marked, or available from record man-made topographic features within the survey limits: Point(s) of access to property(ies), sewers, culverts, and discharge pipes (including size and invert elevation), catch basins, inlets, drainage structures, fire hydrants, manholes, hand holes, traffic signals, wells, guardrails, retaining walls, large and/or overhead signs, railroad tracks, pavement, curbs and other manmade improvements. 4.1.1.Locate Buildings. Dimension buildings with exterior dimensions at ground level. 4.1.2.Locate roadways, driveways, sidewalks, paved paths, and parking lots. 4.1.3.Locate fences and other evidence of occupation. 4.1.4.Locate trees 4.1.4.1. Obtain location of trees. Dense groups of trees may be located by representation/outline. 4.1.4.2. Measure and record tree diameter (in inches). Measure and record tree type (deciduous or coniferous). Tree genus and species, common name or health will not be determined. 4.2. Conduct elevation surveys at intervals and at locations necessary to create DTM (Note: Shots may be taken on random stationing and locations as required to create a Digital Terrain Model “DTM”). Elevations shall be obtained to provide client with a DTM with an appropriate accuracy to depict existing conditions. Hard surface elevations will be obtained to an equivalent of cross sections at 50-foot intervals. Cross sections will extend to the survey limits on either side (previously described in this scope). Locations may be obtained with terrestrial based, 3-D LiDAR scanning or conventional survey methods. 4.2.1. Site elevations shall be obtained to provide client with a DTM. Provide elevation data at apparent Right-of Way, edge of sidewalks, centerline of driveways, edge of pavement, centerline of pavement, edge of curb, flowline of curb and back of curb, and ground elevations at break points. 3 Page 149 of 191  4.2.2.Elevations on paved surfaces shall be reported to 0.01 of a foot. 4.2.3.Elevations on other surfaces shall be reported to 0.1 of a foot. 4.3. Detail utility structures (Assume 50 utility structures to be located and detailed) ASE will complete details for manholes/drainage/utility structures. ASE will collect and record this data using in-house detail sheets. Manholes or other confined spaces (as defined by OSHA) will not be entered, pumped or cleaned. ASE shall not be responsible for underground topographic information not physically locatable or visible at the time of the survey; or any information provided by utility provider. ASE will only submit reduced field details of underground structures for this task. ASE will not map the underground structures and/or their connections with other underground structures. That underground mapping will be performed by others. 4.3.1.Detail utility features including: Manholes, handholes, culverts, catch basins, valve vaults or other surface indications of subsurface utilities. Measure inverts, pipe sizes and observed flow direction in manholes and other underground facilities. Pipe size/type details will be created but will be a check on plan information only. Electric/Communications vaults will be observed if accessible, with the number of observed cables and open or unoccupied conduits included. 4.3.2.Coordinate access to structures, manholes and vaults with utility owners; ASE will not be responsible for opening or accessing large or restricted manhole/utility vault covers. 4.4. Office calculations for data, downloading, and editing. LiDAR registration & extraction. 4.5. CADD drafting and incorporate the following topographic features into mapping: 4.5.1.Digital Terrain Model (DTM) will be generated and will include one-foot contours; 4.5.2.Manhole tables with invert information. 5. SUE Quality Level A Exposures (Test Holes) 5.1. Perform SUE QL B to confirm presence of utility. 5.2. Obtain Dig tickets as required for QLA Test Holes. 5.3. Perform Air vac excavation to expose specified utilities for accurate depiction of the utility location and subsequent backfill with excavation spoils or sand (billed as direct unit cost). 5.4. Obtain X, Y, Z coordinates of top of utility locations and ground elevation. 5.5. Provide a Test Hole Data Sheet for each QLA Test Hole. 6. QA/QC 6.1. Review contract documents and survey requirements to verify ASE project QA/QC requirements. Create project-specific QA/QC plan. 6.2. Periodic project review to assure compliance with policy and contract documents. 6.3. Final review and report of QA/QC compliance. ASE WILL DELIVER TO CLIENT: A. Copies of field notes with reductions made. B. Electronic versions of drawings client specified CADD platform. C. Field detail drawing sheets of underground structures. D. Test hole data sheets. 4 Page 150 of 191 DIRECT/UNIT COST ITEMS Location holes 3.01-6.00 feet in depth $1,954.00 4 $7,816.00 Location holes 6.01-12.00 feet in depth $2,892.00 4 $11,568.00 Location holes 12.01-18.00 feet in depth $3,734.00 2 $7,468.00 SUE QL B per foot $2.46 200 $492.00 Core and Restore Hard Surface Pavements $505.00 4 $2,020.00 RR Protective Liability Insurance $900.00 1 $900.00 RR Entry Application Fee $1,045.00 1 $1,045.00 RR Flagging per day $1,250.00 2 $2,500.00 RR Entry Agreement Fees $2,000.00 1 $2,000.00 Total Other Direct Costs = $35,809.00 $9,692.00 ITEMS SUPPLIED BY OTHERS A. Record plans, including any previous survey information (if available). B. Any and all pertinent site information including, but not limited to previous horizontal and vertical survey control survey information, existing aerial photography, Right-of-Way plans, centerline alignment, construction plans, and plats of highway will be furnished to ASE, at no cost to ASE, prior to commencement of field operations. C. Permission and access to closed or locked areas requiring access to complete the survey. D. Letter of Introduction and written authorization for access to subject property for ASE’s services on subject site. 2 HOLES @ $1,954 = $3,908 2 HOLES @ $2,892 = $5,784 Estimates revised per 3/18/2025 email from American Survey (see preceding pages). 5 Page 151 of 191 LAND ACQUISITION AND SUPPORT SERVICES Page 152 of 191  PAYROLL ESCALATION TABLE FIXED RAISES FIRM NAME CDM Smith Inc DATE 03/21/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime PTB-ITEM# 1 Prepared By Pasinski CONTRACT TERM 12 MONTHS OVERHEAD RATE 161.98% START DATE 2/1/2025 COMPLEXITY FACTOR 0 RAISE DATE 3/31/2025 % OF RAISE 4% END DATE 1/31/2026 ESCALATION PER YEAR year First date Last date Months % of Contract 0 2/1/2025 3/31/2025 2 16.67% 1 4/1/2025 1/31/2026 10 86.67% The total escalation = 3.33% Page 153 of 191  PAYROLL RATES FIRM NAME CDM Smith Inc DATE 03/21/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime PTB-ITEM # 1 ESCALATION FACTOR 3.33% Note: Rates should be capped on the AVG 1 tab as necessary IDOT CLASSIFICATION PAYROLL RATES CALCULATED RATE ON FILE Administrative 1 - Szczepanik, Candice A $34.90 $36.06 Professional 2 - Connolly, John $33.89 $35.02 Professional 2 - Mechanical Engineer (TBD)) $35.42 $36.60 Professional 2 - Peroni, Anthony M $42.51 $43.93 Professional 2 - Alvarez, Kassandra $40.09 $41.43 Professional 3 - Electrical Engineer (TBD) $38.63 $39.92 Professional 3 - Pyshnov, Erik $40.38 $41.73 Professional 3 - Eull, Jacob N $45.84 $47.37 Professional 4 - Hostettler, Julia $41.49 $42.87 Professional 4 - Geotechnical Engineer (TBD) $43.80 $45.26 Professional 4 - Ordaz, Webster U $55.41 $57.26 Professional 4 - Power, Gavin M $56.72 $58.61 Professional 4 - Carson, Raymond T $54.01 $55.81 Professional 4 - Pereda, Christian $47.79 $49.38 Professional 4 - Philpott, John M $56.04 $57.91 Professional 4 - Cunningham, Brian $55.87 $57.73 Professional 5 - Buirge, Dennis E $57.31 $59.22 Professional 5 - Suba, Cody J $57.42 $59.33 Professional 5 - Murdock, Jacquelyn K $67.36 $69.61 Professional 5 - Laria, Tomas A $60.42 $62.43 Professional 5 - BIM Modeler (TBD) $56.90 $58.80 Professional 5 - Figus, Chris $65.12 $67.29 Professional 8 - Aklan, Matthew $100.97 $104.34 Professional 5 - Sutherlin, Sarah $65.31 $67.49 Professional 5 - Diffenderfer, Brandon J $73.23 $75.67 Professional 5 - Lopez Gonzalez, Irvin J $73.59 $76.04 Professional 5 - Walsh, Kevin $51.74 $53.46 Professional 6 - Watkins, Michael S (Mike) $78.78 $81.41 Professional 7 - Cheval, Robert A $71.06 $73.43 Professional 7 - Sarich, Pete $71.52 $73.90 Professional 7 - Ricketts, April $82.59 $85.34 Professional 7 - Yang, Wendell W $75.87 $78.40 Professional 7 - Kahn, Michael E $82.95 $85.72 Professional 7 - Wendorf, Jared W $84.98 $87.81 Professional 7 - Burdett, Stephen M $90.04 $93.04 Professional 7 - Cerda, Antonio A $86.88 $89.78 Professional 7 - Newby, John E $89.70 $92.69 Professional 7 - Hands, Steve $92.84 $95.93 Professional 8 - Harber, Benjamin O $86.44 $89.32 Professional 8 - Fry, Karl D $95.44 $98.62 Professional 8 - Klein, Kevin $81.74 $84.46 Professional 9 - Pasinski, Steven S $112.35 $116.10 Professional 9 - Khwaja, Mahmood $128.22 $132.49 Professional 9 - Martel, Christopher M $137.20 $141.77 Professional 6 - Melody Carvajal $53.85 $55.65 Page 154 of 191  COST PLUS FIXED FEE COST ESTIMATE OF CONSULTANT SERVICES FIRM CDM Smith Inc DATE 03/21/25 PTB-ITEM # 1 OVERHEAD RATE 161.98% PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime COMPLEXITY FACTOR 0 DBE OVERHEAD SERVICES % OF DROP ITEM MANHOURS PAYROLL & DIRECT FIXED BY DBE TOTAL GRAND BOX FRINGE BENF COSTS FEE OTHERS TOTAL TOTAL (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (G) (H) (B-G) T1 - Plat of Highways 46 3,811 6,173 1,198 - 11,182 7.41% T2.1 - Pre-Acquisition Planning 172 9,930 16,084 3,122 - 29,136 19.32% T2.2 - Acquisition Planning 188 10,973 17,773 3,449 - 32,195 21.34% T2.3 - Negotiation/Acquisition 80 4,789 7,757 1,505 - 14,051 9.31% T2.4 - Relocation Advisory Services 140 7,659 12,407 2,408 - 22,474 14.90% - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Admininistration - - 1,000 - - 1,000 0.66% QC/QA 20 1,726 2,796 543 - 5,065 3.36% - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Appraisal Services - - 20,000 - 20,000 13.26% Jorgensen and Associates (Plat) - - 15,743 - 15,743 10.44% - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - TOTALS 646 38,888 62,990 21,000 12,225 15,743 - 150,846 100.00% 101,878 DBE 0.00% Page 155 of 191  AVERAGE HOURLY PROJECT RATES FIRM CDM Smith Inc PTB-ITEM# 1 DATE 03/21/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime SHEET 1 OF 5 PAYROLL AVG TOTAL PROJ. RATES T1 - Plat of Highways T2.1 - Pre-Acquisition Plann T2.2 - Acquisition Planning T2.3 - Negotiation/Acquisition T2.4 - Relocation Advisory Servi HOURLY Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd CLASSIFICATION RATES Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Administrative 1 - Szczepanik, Candice A 36.06 0.0 Professional 2 - Connolly, John 35.02 0.0 Professional 2 - Mechanical Engineer (TBD)) 36.60 0.0 Professional 2 - Peroni, Anthony M 43.93 0.0 Professional 2 - Alvarez, Kassandra 41.43 0.0 Professional 3 - Electrical Engineer (TBD) 39.92 0.0 Professional 3 - Pyshnov, Erik 41.73 0.0 Professional 3 - Eull, Jacob N 47.37 0.0 Professional 4 - Hostettler, Julia 42.87 0.0 Professional 4 - Geotechnical Engineer (TBD) 45.26 0.0 Professional 4 - Ordaz, Webster U 57.26 0.0 Professional 4 - Power, Gavin M 58.61 0.0 Professional 4 - Carson, Raymond T 55.81 0.0 Professional 4 - Pereda, Christian 49.38 0.0 Professional 4 - Philpott, John M 57.91 0.0 Professional 4 - Cunningham, Brian 57.73 0.0 Professional 5 - Buirge, Dennis E 59.22 0.0 Professional 5 - Suba, Cody J 59.33 12.0 1.86% 1.10 12 26.09% 15.48 Professional 5 - Murdock, Jacquelyn K 69.61 0.0 Professional 5 - Laria, Tomas A 62.43 0.0 Professional 5 - BIM Modeler (TBD) 58.80 0.0 Professional 5 - Figus, Chris 67.29 0.0 Professional 8 - Aklan, Matthew 104.34 32.0 4.95% 5.17 4 8.70% 9.07 8 4.65% 4.85 8 4.26% 4.44 8 10.00% 10.43 Professional 5 - Sutherlin, Sarah 67.49 0.0 Professional 5 - Diffenderfer, Brandon J 75.67 0.0 Professional 5 - Lopez Gonzalez, Irvin J 76.04 0.0 Professional 5 - Walsh, Kevin 53.46 264.0 40.87% 21.85 88 51.16% 27.35 92 48.94% 26.16 24 30.00% 16.04 60 42.86% 22.91 Professional 6 - Watkins, Michael S (Mike) 81.41 0.0 Professional 7 - Cheval, Robert A 73.43 0.0 Professional 7 - Sarich, Pete 73.90 0.0 Professional 7 - Ricketts, April 85.34 0.0 Professional 7 - Yang, Wendell W 78.40 0.0 0 0.0 Professional 7 - Kahn, Michael E 85.72 0.0 Professional 7 - Wendorf, Jared W 87.81 14.0 2.17% 1.90 6 13.04% 11.45 Professional 7 - Burdett, Stephen M 93.04 0.0 Professional 7 - Cerda, Antonio A 89.78 24.0 3.72% 3.34 24 52.17% 46.84 Professional 7 - Newby, John E 92.69 0.0 Professional 7 - Hands, Steve 95.93 16.0 2.48% 2.38 4 2.33% 2.23 8 4.26% 4.08 Professional 8 - Harber, Benjamin O 89.32 0.0 Professional 8 - Fry, Karl D 98.62 0.0 Professional 8 - Klein, Kevin 84.46 0.0 Professional 9 - Pasinski, Steven S 116.10 0.0 Professional 9 - Khwaja, Mahmood 132.49 0.0 Professional 9 - Martel, Christopher M 141.77 0.0 0 0.0 Professional 6 - Melody Carvajal 55.65 284.0 43.96% 24.46 72 41.86% 23.29 80 42.55% 23.68 48 60.00% 33.39 80 57.14% 31.80 0 0.0 TOTALS 646.0 100% $60.20 46.0 100.00% $82.84 172.0 100% $57.73 188.0 100% $58.36 80.0 100% $59.86 140.0 100% $54.71 Page 156 of 191  ' AVERAGE HOURLY PROJECT RATES FIRM CDM Smith Inc PTB-ITEM# 1 DATE 03/21/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime SHEET 3 OF 5 PAYROLL AVG QC/QA 0 0 0 Appraisal Services Jorgensen and Associates (Pla HOURLY Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd CLASSIFICATION RATES Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Administrative 1 - Szczepanik, Candice A 36.06 Professional 2 - Connolly, John 35.02 Professional 2 - Mechanical Engineer (TBD)) 36.60 Professional 2 - Peroni, Anthony M 43.93 Professional 2 - Alvarez, Kassandra 41.43 Professional 3 - Electrical Engineer (TBD) 39.92 Professional 3 - Pyshnov, Erik 41.73 Professional 3 - Eull, Jacob N 47.37 Professional 4 - Hostettler, Julia 42.87 Professional 4 - Geotechnical Engineer (TBD) 45.26 Professional 4 - Ordaz, Webster U 57.26 Professional 4 - Power, Gavin M 58.61 Professional 4 - Carson, Raymond T 55.81 Professional 4 - Pereda, Christian 49.38 Professional 4 - Philpott, John M 57.91 Professional 4 - Cunningham, Brian 57.73 Professional 5 - Buirge, Dennis E 59.22 Professional 5 - Suba, Cody J 59.33 Professional 5 - Murdock, Jacquelyn K 69.61 Professional 5 - Laria, Tomas A 62.43 Professional 5 - BIM Modeler (TBD) 58.80 Professional 5 - Figus, Chris 67.29 Professional 8 - Aklan, Matthew 104.34 4 20.00% 20.87 Professional 5 - Sutherlin, Sarah 67.49 Professional 5 - Diffenderfer, Brandon J 75.67 Professional 5 - Lopez Gonzalez, Irvin J 76.04 Professional 5 - Walsh, Kevin 53.46 Professional 6 - Watkins, Michael S (Mike) 81.41 Professional 7 - Cheval, Robert A 73.43 Professional 7 - Sarich, Pete 73.90 Professional 7 - Ricketts, April 85.34 Professional 7 - Yang, Wendell W 78.40 0 Professional 7 - Kahn, Michael E 85.72 Professional 7 - Wendorf, Jared W 87.81 8 40.00% 35.13 Professional 7 - Burdett, Stephen M 93.04 Professional 7 - Cerda, Antonio A 89.78 Professional 7 - Newby, John E 92.69 Professional 7 - Hands, Steve 95.93 4 20.00% 19.19 Professional 8 - Harber, Benjamin O 89.32 Professional 8 - Fry, Karl D 98.62 Professional 8 - Klein, Kevin 84.46 Professional 9 - Pasinski, Steven S 116.10 Professional 9 - Khwaja, Mahmood 132.49 Professional 9 - Martel, Christopher M 141.77 0 Professional 6 - Melody Carvajal 55.65 4 20.00% 11.13 0 TOTALS 20.0 100% $86.31 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 Page 157 of 191  Sub-Consultant Fees Cost Markup Fee Jorgensen and Associates (Plat) $ 14,993.43 $ 749.67 $ 15,743.10 GRAND TOTAL $ 749.67 $ 15,743.10 Direct Costs Cost Markup Fee Appraisal Services $ 20,000.00 $ - $ 20,000.00 Mileage, Postage, Prints, Etc $ 1,000.00 $ - $ 1,000.00 GRAND TOTAL $ - $ 21,000.00 Page 158 of 191 Page 159 of 191 Page 160 of 191 Page 161 of 191 Page 162 of 191 Page 163 of 191 Page 164 of 191 Page 165 of 191 Page 166 of 191 Page 167 of 191 Page 168 of 191 Page 169 of 191 Page 170 of 191 Page 171 of 191 Page 172 of 191 RENDERINGS Page 173 of 191  PAYROLL ESCALATION TABLE FIXED RAISES FIRM NAME CDM Smith Inc DATE 03/18/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime PTB-ITEM# 1 Prepared By Aklan CONTRACT TERM 12 MONTHS OVERHEAD RATE 161.98% START DATE 2/1/2025 COMPLEXITY FACTOR 0 RAISE DATE 3/31/2025 % OF RAISE 4% END DATE 1/31/2026 ESCALATION PER YEAR year First date Last date Months % of Contract 0 2/1/2025 3/31/2025 2 16.67% 1 4/1/2025 1/31/2026 10 86.67% The total escalation = 3.33% Page 174 of 191  PAYROLL RATES FIRM NAME CDM Smith Inc DATE 03/18/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime PTB-ITEM # 1 ESCALATION FACTOR 3.33% Note: Rates should be capped on the AVG 1 tab as necessary IDOT CLASSIFICATION PAYROLL RATES CALCULATED RATE ON FILE Administrative 1 - Szczepanik, Candice A $34.90 $36.06 Professional 2 - Connolly, John $33.89 $35.02 Professional 2 - Mechanical Engineer (TBD)) $35.42 $36.60 Professional 2 - Peroni, Anthony M $42.51 $43.93 Professional 2 - Alvarez, Kassandra $40.09 $41.43 Professional 3 - Electrical Engineer (TBD) $38.63 $39.92 Professional 3 - Pyshnov, Erik $40.38 $41.73 Professional 3 - Eull, Jacob N $45.84 $47.37 Professional 4 - Hostettler, Julia $41.49 $42.87 Professional 4 - Geotechnical Engineer (TBD) $43.80 $45.26 Professional 4 - Ordaz, Webster U $55.41 $57.26 Professional 4 - Power, Gavin M $56.72 $58.61 Professional 4 - Carson, Raymond T $54.01 $55.81 Professional 4 - Pereda, Christian $47.79 $49.38 Professional 4 - Philpott, John M $56.04 $57.91 Professional 4 - Cunningham, Brian $55.87 $57.73 Professional 5 - Buirge, Dennis E $57.31 $59.22 Professional 5 - Suba, Cody J $57.42 $59.33 Professional 5 - Murdock, Jacquelyn K $67.36 $69.61 Professional 5 - Laria, Tomas A $60.42 $62.43 Professional 5 - BIM Modeler (TBD) $56.90 $58.80 Professional 5 - Figus, Chris $65.12 $67.29 Professional 8 - Aklan, Matthew $100.97 $104.34 Professional 5 - Sutherlin, Sarah $65.31 $67.49 Professional 5 - Diffenderfer, Brandon J $73.23 $75.67 Professional 5 - Lopez Gonzalez, Irvin J $73.59 $76.04 Professional 5 - Walsh, Kevin $78.78 $81.41 Professional 6 - Watkins, Michael S (Mike) $78.78 $81.41 Professional 7 - Cheval, Robert A $71.06 $73.43 Professional 7 - Sarich, Pete $71.52 $73.90 Professional 7 - Ricketts, April $82.59 $85.34 Professional 7 - Yang, Wendell W $75.87 $78.40 Professional 7 - Kahn, Michael E $82.95 $85.72 Professional 7 - Wendorf, Jared W $84.98 $87.81 Professional 7 - Burdett, Stephen M $90.04 $93.04 Professional 7 - Cerda, Antonio A $86.88 $89.78 Professional 7 - Newby, John E $89.70 $92.69 Professional 7 - Hands, Steve $92.84 $95.93 Professional 8 - Harber, Benjamin O $86.44 $89.32 Professional 8 - Fry, Karl D $95.44 $98.62 Professional 8 - Klein, Kevin $81.74 $84.46 Professional 9 - Pasinski, Steven S $112.35 $116.10 Professional 9 - Khwaja, Mahmood $128.22 $132.49 Professional 9 - Martel, Christopher M $137.20 $141.77 Professional 6 - Melody Carvajal $53.85 $55.65 Page 175 of 191  COST PLUS FIXED FEE COST ESTIMATE OF CONSULTANT SERVICES FIRM CDM Smith Inc DATE 03/18/25 PTB-ITEM # 1 OVERHEAD RATE 161.98% PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime COMPLEXITY FACTOR 0 DBE OVERHEAD SERVICES % OF DROP ITEM MANHOURS PAYROLL & DIRECT FIXED BY DBE TOTAL GRAND BOX FRINGE BENF COSTS FEE OTHERS TOTAL TOTAL (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (G) (H) (B-G) Renderings/Coordination 16 1,080 1,749 339 - 3,168 12.59% - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Thorsten - Renderings - - 22,000 - 22,000 87.41% - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - TOTALS 16 1,080 1,749 22,000 339 - - 25,168 100.00% 2,829 DBE 0.00% Page 176 of 191  AVERAGE HOURLY PROJECT RATES FIRM CDM Smith Inc PTB-ITEM# 1 DATE 03/18/25 PRIME/SUPPLEMENT Prime SHEET 1 OF 5 PAYROLL AVG TOTAL PROJ. RATES Renderings/Coordination 0 0 0 0 HOURLY Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd Hours % Wgtd CLASSIFICATION RATES Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Part. Avg Administrative 1 - Szczepanik, Candice A 36.06 0.0 Professional 2 - Connolly, John 35.02 0.0 Professional 2 - Mechanical Engineer (TBD)) 36.60 0.0 Professional 2 - Peroni, Anthony M 43.93 0.0 Professional 2 - Alvarez, Kassandra 41.43 0.0 Professional 3 - Electrical Engineer (TBD) 39.92 0.0 Professional 3 - Pyshnov, Erik 41.73 0.0 Professional 3 - Eull, Jacob N 47.37 0.0 Professional 4 - Hostettler, Julia 42.87 0.0 Professional 4 - Geotechnical Engineer (TBD) 45.26 0.0 Professional 4 - Ordaz, Webster U 57.26 0.0 Professional 4 - Power, Gavin M 58.61 0.0 Professional 4 - Carson, Raymond T 55.81 0.0 Professional 4 - Pereda, Christian 49.38 0.0 Professional 4 - Philpott, John M 57.91 0.0 Professional 4 - Cunningham, Brian 57.73 0.0 Professional 5 - Buirge, Dennis E 59.22 0.0 Professional 5 - Suba, Cody J 59.33 0.0 Professional 5 - Murdock, Jacquelyn K 69.61 0.0 Professional 5 - Laria, Tomas A 62.43 0.0 Professional 5 - BIM Modeler (TBD) 58.80 0.0 Professional 5 - Figus, Chris 67.29 0.0 Professional 8 - Aklan, Matthew 104.34 0.0 Professional 5 - Sutherlin, Sarah 67.49 16.0 100.00% 67.49 16 100.00% 67.49 Professional 5 - Diffenderfer, Brandon J 75.67 0.0 Professional 5 - Lopez Gonzalez, Irvin J 76.04 0.0 Professional 5 - Walsh, Kevin 81.41 0.0 Professional 6 - Watkins, Michael S (Mike) 81.41 0.0 Professional 7 - Cheval, Robert A 73.43 0.0 Professional 7 - Sarich, Pete 73.90 0.0 Professional 7 - Ricketts, April 85.34 0.0 Professional 7 - Yang, Wendell W 78.40 0.0 0 0.0 Professional 7 - Kahn, Michael E 85.72 0.0 Professional 7 - Wendorf, Jared W 87.81 0.0 Professional 7 - Burdett, Stephen M 93.04 0.0 Professional 7 - Cerda, Antonio A 89.78 0.0 Professional 7 - Newby, John E 92.69 0.0 Professional 7 - Hands, Steve 95.93 0.0 Professional 8 - Harber, Benjamin O 89.32 0.0 Professional 8 - Fry, Karl D 98.62 0.0 Professional 8 - Klein, Kevin 84.46 0.0 Professional 9 - Pasinski, Steven S 116.10 0.0 Professional 9 - Khwaja, Mahmood 132.49 0.0 Professional 9 - Martel, Christopher M 141.77 0.0 0 0.0 Professional 6 - Melody Carvajal 55.65 0.0 0 0.0 TOTALS 16.0 100% $67.49 16.0 100.00% $67.49 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 0.0 0% $0.00 Page 177 of 191  Sub-Consultant Fees Cost Markup Fee Jorgensen and Associates (Plat) $ 14,993.43 $ 749.67 $ 15,743.10 GRAND TOTAL $ 749.67 $ 15,743.10 Direct Costs Cost Markup Fee Appraisal Services $ 20,000.00 $ - $ 20,000.00 Mileage, Postage, Prints, Etc $ 1,000.00 $ - $ 1,000.00 GRAND TOTAL $ - $ 21,000.00 Page 178 of 191  Glen Ellyn Capital Meeting 4/9/2025 7:00 PM Improvements Commission Department: Public Works - Internal Services 535 Duane Street Department Head: Dave Buckley Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 Category: Report Prepared By: Richard Daubert AGENDA ITEM (ID # 2025- DOC ID: 2025-295 295) Engineering Division Project Activity Report Dated 4-5-2025 Statement of the Issue: The April 4, 2025 Engineering Division Project Activity Report is attached for review by the Capital Improvements Commission. Analysis: Budget Impact: Contribution to Strategic Plan Action Requested: Attachments: 1. Engineering Project Report 4-4-25 Page 179 of 191 April 4, 2025 ENGINEERING DIVISION PROJECT ACTIVITY REPORT CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS IN PROGRESS 2025 MFT/Rebuild Illinois Street Resurfacing Project – Contractor: A Lamp Concrete Contractors (Project No. 25001; Value of Construction Contract = $3,052,075.77) This project involves utility and roadway improvements along approximately 2.4 centerline miles of streets shown in the location map to the right. The project was awarded to A Lamp Concrete Contractors at the February 24 Village Board Meeting. The construction and construction engineering services contracts have been executed. The preconstruction meeting was held with the contractor on March 14th. Sidewalk and curb replacement limits are being finalized in the field. The Contractor anticipates starting with underground work on Kenilworth Avenue the week of April 7th. Preliminary activities will include potholing utilities along the path of the storm sewer prior to directional drilling the storm sewer along Kenilworth Avenue. Once underground work along Kenilworth is complete, the contractor will shift to Evergreen Avenue. They also tentatively plan to begin concrete removal work in the Anthony-Cottage-Newton area the week of April 21st. Work will then proceed into the Hillside-Montclair-Annandale area, followed by the Arlington-Regent area. Substantial completion is required to be completed by August 29th. Page 1 of 11 Page 180 of 191 CBD STREETSCAPE AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS – Phase 1 – Contractor: A Lamp Concrete Contractors (Project No. 15006; Value of Construction Contract = $5,704,293) Post-construction televising of the sewers in the Phase 1 area was completed over the spring break week. Minor remaining items in the Phase 1 area include: completion of a remaining electrical item at 504 Hillside (in coordination with ComEd), and replacement of concrete around the gangway trench drain behind Fire & Wine (spring 2025). The other big item in the Phase 1 area is the sanitary sewer replacement, storm sewer work, and pavement reconstruction in the Main Street alley (west of Main, south of Duane). As per previous communication, this alley work was not part of the original Phase 1 construction contract, but was an add-on item in response to the inability to line the alley sanitary sewer as part of the Phase 1 work. The contractor was not able to undertake the alley reconstruction in 2024 given other work commitments. BLA is in the process of preparing the alley design and bid package for competitive bidding, with a target of being able to start construction in July/August of this year. CBD STREETSCAPE AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS – Phase 2-3 – Contractor: A Lamp Concrete Contractors (Project No. 15006; Value of Construction Contract = $16,298,499 The underground work of lining designated sanitary sewer laterals (quantity: 2) and capping abandoned laterals (quantity: 45) to prevent inflow/infiltration, was largely completed in March. Remaining Phase 2-3 streetscaping items to be completed this spring are as follows: • Retaining wall – The wall materials have arrived, but due to winter conditions, the wall installation will be a spring 2025 project once the ground thaws and work forces permit. • Punchlist items (e.g. concrete replacement, replacement plantings) – Spring 2025 • Glenwood Station apartment building streetscaping completion including irrigation, granite curb planters, plantings (private project) 2024 UTILITY AND ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS – Contractor: John Neri Construction (Value of Construction Contract = $13,148,961) Construction was largely completed last November. There are a handful of remaining work items including isolated sod placement, landscaping installation, and culvert epoxy injection at Glen Crest creek which will be fully completed in the spring when weather permits. Page 2 of 11 Page 181 of 191  OTHER AGENCY PROJECTS Butterfield Road Reconstruction (IDOT) The State continues to advance its project to reconstruct Butterfield Road from 700 feet west of Arboretum Drive to I-355. The project involves complete reconstruction of IL-56 with the end deliverable being 3 through travel lanes in each direction from Route 53 to IL-355. The intersection of IL-56 and IL-53 will also be improved with all approaches to the intersection to have dual left- turn lanes and exclusive right-turn lanes. The intersection improvements will extend north and south along IL-53 with the State continuing to work through the design process for future reconstruction of IL-53 down to Park Boulevard. The project will also include the construction of a 10-foot-wide shared use bicycle path on the north side of IL-56 between Arboretum Drive and Lloyd Avenue. As part of the shared use path construction, a new pedestrian bridge will be constructed over the East Branch of the DuPage River. New sidewalks will also be constructed along the west side of IL-53 from the southern Walmart entrance to Pinegrove Court and along the south side of IL-56 from the Abbington to IL-53. Utility relocation work continues to be the focus on the project. ComEd has 3 crews working on aerial and underground relocations. MCI is anticipated to be completed this week. The Mobil gas station at the northwest corner of IL-56 and Route 53 will start its equipment relocation next week. Once completed, that will allow Nicor to move forward with gas main work, tentatively late March. Illinois American also has water main replacement work to do within the corridor with timing of that work unknown. Given all the ongoing utility relocation, there is understandably still no definitive progress schedule for the roadway work. However, IDOT is meeting with the Contractor, RW Dunteman, to discuss potential advancement of some roadway/bridge work. Roosevelt Road Bridge Repair (Over IL-53/West of Baker Hill Drive) IDOT recently awarded a contract to “D” Construction for the rehabilitation of the Roosevelt Road Bridge over IL-53. Work will involve reconstructing the joints at each end of the bridge, partial and full depth bridge deck and abutment repairs, overlaying the bridge with a latex modified concrete, asphalt overlay of ~40’ of the concrete pavement approaching the bridge, sidewalk replacement, railing/fencing replacement, guardrail replacement, and other various items of work. The work will require moving two-way traffic to one-half of Roosevelt Road. This will require removal of the concrete median along IL-38 east of Baker Hill Drive, installation of temporary signals, and a somewhat dynamic maintenance of traffic plan. Due to the general poor condition of this stretch of Roosevelt Road, staff has requested that the State complete additional pavement rehabilitation work along IL-38 as well as advance more comprehensive repairs of the roadway. The State has indicated it will perform some limited patching work with this project and look longer term towards more comprehensive rehabilitation of the roadway. Staff attended a preconstruction meeting with the State Resident Engineer and Contractor in December. Staff communicated to the State and Contractor that communication on the project is Page 3 of 11 Page 182 of 191 imperative, especially with the adjoining businesses. The State is awaiting a progress schedule from the Contractor but it is tentatively anticipated that work will start around May 1 st. The Contract requires that work to be completed in 55 working days which would put completion around mid to late July depending on weather (contractor not charged working days when weather is inclement). Route 53 Resurfacing from Bemis Road to ~ 400’ south of Pershing Avenue IDOT is working through the final design of a resurfacing project for this section of IL-53. The work to be performed consists of pavement patching, milling of the asphalt surface, placing new binder and surface course, replacing aggregate shoulders with asphalt shoulders, drainage structures adjustment and cleaning, placement of pavement markings, sidewalk ADA improvements, detector loops replacement, and incidental and collateral work necessary to complete the improvement. Staff has provided the State with comments on the preliminary scope of work and staff is now reviewing the prefinal plans. The State is looking to complete letting, award, and construction of the project in 2025. Route 53/Spring Avenue Traffic Signal Installation and APS Pushbuttons at IL- 38/Pershing IDOT is working through the design of a project involving the replacement of the temporary cable hung (trombone) traffic signal equipment at Route 53 and Spring Avenue. The project proposes to install all new permanent traffic signal equipment including a new controller cabinet and electrical service, post and mast arm mounted signal heads, accessible pedestrian signals, and sidewalk ADA improvements. The State is also looking to replace the pedestrian pushbuttons at IL-38 and Pershing with Accessible Pedestrian Signal (APS) pushbuttons. APS pushbuttons provide non-visual walk and don’t walk indications (audible and vibrotactile) for visually impaired individuals. The State is currently reviewing staff’s request that the project be communicate to residents within a logical vicinity of the intersection of 53/Spring. Staff provided sample notification letters to IDOT along with a phone conversation as to outline communication expectations. Page 4 of 11 Page 183 of 191  ENGINEERING PROJECTS 2025 UTILITY AND ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT DESIGN – Engineer: AECOM (Project No. 25002) Staff worked with AECOM to finalize the design of this project for a bid advertisement on March 14th. During the design process, more comprehensive roadway and utility work was identified which has increased the cost of the project beyond what was budgeted. Consequently, staff worked to reduce costs where possible but has also directed AECOM to incorporate an alternate bid for the work on Marion Avenue. This would allow Marion to not be included in the awarded contract and keep the project within budget. A location map of the project along with the coinciding scope is included below for reference. Page 5 of 11 Page 184 of 191 Concurrently, staff has also set up the Crescent Glenwood Parking Lot project to utilize MFT funding in lieu of all Capital Projects Funding. In summary, staff is taking a multi-faced approach to ensure there are multiple options for the Village given the increased cost of the project. Bids for the 2025 Utility and Roadway Improvements Project were opened on March 28 th, with John Neri Construction being the low bidder in both the Base bid and Base plus Alternate bid scenarios: Bidder Base Bid* Alternate Bid** Engineer’s Estimate (AECOM) $4,363,527 $1,092,960 John Neri Construction Company, Inc. of Addison, IL $4,568,405 $1,031,110 RW Dunteman Company of Addison, IL $4,796,176 $1,019,624 A Lamp Concrete Contractors, Inc. of Schaumburg, IL $4,759,920 $1,138,963 Due to the low bid for the Base plus Alternate bid being approximately $400K over what was budgeted, staff is recommending that only the Base bid be awarded. Staff is working to submit a recommendation for award of the construction and construction engineering contracts at the April 28th Village Board meeting. This schedule would correspond with construction starting in mid- May, with contract completion specified for mid-November. LAMBERT AND RIFORD FEDERAL AID PROJECTS – Engineer: AECOM These projects involve the potential use of federal funding through the Local Surface Transportation Program. They are on contingency lists for funding in the amounts of $1,201,306 for Lambert and $338,788 for Riford. The Lambert Road project involves the resurfacing of Lambert Road from Roosevelt Road to the southern Village Limit which is just south of the College of DuPage. The Riford Road project involves the resurfacing of Riford Road between Crescent and Saint Charles Road. In February, both projects cleared the Environmental Survey Request screening process. In summary, this means the projects do not have any impacts on biological or cultural resources with the projects to gain significant momentum in completing the federal aid design and letting process. With the clearances now in place, staff and AECOM are preparing to hold public meetings for the projects, tentatively on 4/10 (for Lambert Road) and 4/17 (for Riford Road). HILL AVENUE UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS – Engineer: Walter E. Deuchler Associates (Project No. 00511) This project involves the construction of sanitary sewer and water distribution system improvements on Hill Avenue between Golf Avenue and the East Branch of the DuPage River. The improvements will ultimately result in the Village’s water main being continuous and looped along both Hill Avenue and Crescent Boulevard. Also, this will allow the Village to serve the fronting properties on Hill Avenue with potable water service. Easement documentation was prepared for the Elliot Construction property with the documents signed by the respective party. A similar easement is needed on the north side of Hill Avenue; staff has met with the property owner to review draft easement documents. Most recently, staff Page 6 of 11 Page 185 of 191 evaluated an alternative corridor that the property owner requested and a follow up meeting was held with the property owner and his attorney to discuss the complications of an alternative alignment for the utilities. Having said that, staff was able to identify and opportunity to reduce the footprint of the easement which was of interest to the property owner. Next step is to revise the design plans to align with the revised easement. Other various comments will also need to be addressed by the Engineer. This will allow the project design to ultimately be finalized, easements secured, permits amended or refreshed, and project to be competitively bid. TRAIN STATION / PEDESTRIAN TUNNEL – Engineer: CDM Smith/KMI Architects (Project No. 16016) The Architectural Appearance Commission made a motion to recommend approval of the exterior appearance of the project on 2/12. Staff along with consultant structural, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing reviews of the 60% plans were completed for the project. Metra also completed its review of the 60% plans and provided comments. CDM Smith is working through the review comments with staff providing necessary support to clarify direction on any conflicting matters. Staff is working with CDM Smith on finalization of an amendment to the ongoing engineering services agreement. The amendment will include additional design services due to the roadway changes as well as land acquisition services and rendering updates. The amendment will be reviewed with the Capital Improvements Commission on April 9th with the goal to bring the amendment before the Village Board for approval on April 28th. TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODERNIZATION PROJECT – Engineer: AECOM (Project No. 23006) The Traffic Signal Modernization Recommendations Report has now been completed. Staff has also worked with AECOM on their proposal for the Assignment #2 work which includes the preparation of bid plans and specifications for the proposed improvements. The design work for the recommended improvements to the Village-owned traffic signals is anticipated to largely occur in 2025 with project implementation to follow in 2026-2029. The Assignment #2 scope was reviewed with Capital Improvements Commission at the March 12th CIC meeting with the CIC approving a motion to recommend approval to the Village Board. The design contract will be placed on the consent agenda for the April 14th Village Board Meeting. ADA PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY TRANSITION PLAN – CMAP TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE – Project Partner: Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) In March of 2024, Public Works applied to CMAP for assistance with creation of its federally- required ADA Transition Plan, as part of CMAP’s 2024 Technical Assistance Call for Projects. Out of a competitive process (122 applications submitted, 30 awarded), the Village was selected to receive assistance. The planning process began in February with the first Public Engagement Open House on February 25th. The project has been advertised through the Village newsletters and social media, along with advance individual outreach to some target groups. In addition, CMAP has set up a project website: https://engage.cmap.illinois.gov/glen-ellyn-ada. The overall planning process will Page 7 of 11 Page 186 of 191 involve extensive outreach and is expected extend through October, culminating in adoption of the Village’s ADA Public Right-of-Way Transition Plan. Over the past few weeks, CMAP’s consultant on the project, Oates Associates has been completing the field data collection. The consultant is working with DeepWalk, a group that has pioneered the use of LIDAR on the higher-end iPhones to scan sidewalks and curb ramps, combined with algorithmic processing of the collected laser data to identify accessibility impediments in accordance with the State and Federal established accessibility criteria. In addition, the consultant has started formation of a Steering Committee consisting of community stakeholders (residents, school districts, park district, advocacy groups, etc). The first meeting is targeted for mid-April. WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM STUDY – Engineer: Christopher B. Burke Engineering Limited (CBBEL) This project involves the development of a model of the Village’s water distribution system which will be used to optimize operation of the system as well as identify and confirm needed capital improvements. The model and a technical report will be the ultimate deliverables of the assignment. Through a competitive RFP Process, staff identified CBBEL as the best firm for the completion of the assignment. The Village Board approved an agreement with CBBEL on January 27th. The study has now formally begun with the consultant is in the process of evaluating the Village’s GIS pipe network and water facilities. The project is expected to take approximately 6 months to complete. CONSTRUCTION MAINTENANCE PROGRAMS Public Works seeks the best vendor prices for various annual municipal and utility maintenance and operations activities. This effort includes local bidding of projects or joint purchasing initiatives, including the Municipal Partnering Initiative (MPI), a consortium of DuPage County communities. 2025 Estimated Project Status Glen Ellyn Cost* The project scope includes roadway patching throughout the Village. Locations will be determined by staff utilizing both the Village’s 2024 Pavement Management System Data and field inspections. 2025 Asphalt $188,630 This program had a February 26th bid opening and R.W. Dunteman Roadway Patching provided the low bid of $188,630. R.W. Dunteman was awarded the contract at the March 10th Board Meeting for the full bid amount. Work will likely start in June. The 2025 Crack Sealing program targets candidate locations using Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Study data and visual inspections. The 2025 budget for the program is $45,000. Bids were opened on February 12th with Denler, Inc. providing the low, responsible, and responsive bid of $33,700. Denler, Inc. was awarded the contract at 2025 Crack Sealing $40,000 the March 10th Board meeting in the not-to-exceed amount of $40,000, which resulted in $5,000 in savings in the Capital Projects Fund. The contract specifies that crack sealing takes place between August 1st-October 15th, which is the ideal time for this maintenance. Page 8 of 11 Page 187 of 191  2025 Estimated Project Status Glen Ellyn Cost* This annual program includes repairs to deteriorated or damaged sidewalk and concrete roadway infrastructure and the installation of new sidewalk throughout the Village. Bids were opened on February 12th, with Schroeder & Schroeder (S&S) providing the low, responsible, and responsive base bid of $424,700. Since the 2025 2025 Sidewalk and $400,000 budget included $150,000 for Sidewalk Replacement and $250,000 Concrete Street for Concrete Patching, staff asked the contractor to agree to reduced Repairs quantities to bring their proposal within budget limits. S&S was awarded the contract at the March 10th Board Meeting in the not-to- exceed amount of $398,620. Staff met with Schroeder & Schroeder on 3/6 to discuss the project timing. Staff and S&S agreed to a target project start date of 6/9. Staff is proposing to use Safe Step to evaluate sidewalks for trip hazards in three areas (the Derby Glen neighborhood, the Surrey/Briar neighborhood, and Revere Rd between Main and Park Blvd. – see attached location map) based on the defect identification criteria that Safe Step and the Village developed together. Safe Step will provide a report with locations, descriptions, suggested repair types, and photos of each identified defect. Once the data is reviewed by the Village, Safe Step will make sawcut repairs tapered Sidewalk Sawing $35,000 to a 1:12 slope ratio with a smooth, uniform finish and are ADA- Repair Program compliant. Safe Step’s patented process used waterless saws, which eliminated slurry and water runoff contamination, and a dust- abatement system designed to capture fine dust. Staff is recommending that competitive bidding is waived as Safe Step is considered a sole source bidder due to the unique, patented construction methods they have utilize and the professional services and asset management they provide. Staff recommends that Safe Step is awarded the contract at the April 14th Board Meeting. This program allows Public Works to use one contractor to restore Village right-of-way following in-house utility repairs instead of relying on the availability and coordination of the Village’s separate concrete and asphalt contractors. The program requires the contractor to make three mobilizations throughout the construction season. The contractor must be capable of doing full-depth concrete and asphalt pavement patches, and concrete sidewalk, driveway, and 2025 Utility curb and gutter repairs. Bids were opened on February 26, 2025, Pavement $58,340 with the low bid being provided by G.A. Paving, of Bellwood, IL, in Restoration the amount of $58,340; the 2025 budget is $60,000. The amount of work under this contract will be subject to the actual number of utility pavement patch repairs required and the availability of funds for this work. G.A. Paving performed the work for Glen Ellyn last year and has experience doing similar work for the Villages of Oak Park, Melrose Park, and Bellwood. G.A. Paving was awarded the contract at the March 10th Board Meeting. Restorations will begin once the area asphalt plants open for the year. For the last fifteen years, the Village has utilized local purchasing cooperatives to obtain competitive pricing for pavement marking work. In 2024, the Village joined the Suburban Purchasing Cooperative’s contract 2025 Pavement and entered an agreement with the low bidder to refresh pavement $100,000 Markings markings in Glen Ellyn. The contractor was overwhelmed with work demands around the region and was unable to complete their work in Glen Ellyn before temperatures dropped too low to meet the specifications for pavement marking installation. The 2024 contractor will hold their unit Page 9 of 11 Page 188 of 191  2025 Estimated Project Status Glen Ellyn Cost* prices and complete the balance of the 2024 work this spring. After last year’s experience with scheduling delays, staff decided to bid out this project locally in order to have more control over project completion dates and to be higher on the contractor’s priority list. The bid opening was held on February 26th; Precision Pavement Marking was the lowest bidder out of four with a bid proposal of $101,908, which was slightly over the $100,000 budget. Precision Pavement Marking agreed to reduced quantities to allow the Village to stay under budget; however, the total price still comes at a significant premium compared to historic cooperative pricing. DuPage County (DPC) opened bids for their pavement marking program on March 20th and Precision Pavement Marking was their lowest bidder, too. DPC will award the contract to Precision on April 8th. Suburban Purchasing Cooperative is still negotiating 2025 prices as part of a 2024 contract extension. Staff recommends that we formally reject the bids that we received on Feb 26th and utilize DPC’s pricing for our 2025 program. The annual line striping contract was awarded to Superior Road Striping (SRS), the low bidder of both the DuPage County and Suburban Purchasing Cooperative contracts, on April 22, 2024, in the not-to-exceed amount of $100,000. The Village utilized Suburban Purchasing Cooperative’s contract unit prices, which provided the lowest total cost for the program. SRS began pavement marking on October 29th and completed one day of thermoplastic pavement marking installations, which represented approximately 25% of the planned scope; however, they were unable to complete the remaining work in the Village due to commitments elsewhere and weather delays. IDOT specifies that pavement markings are installed between April 1 and November 15 and communities typically follow that rule 2024 Pavement for their own local jobs. Completed locations include: the Lake Rd $105,000* double yellow center line, the Pennsylvania Ave. double yellow Markings center line and parking stalls (between Western and the Village’s western limit), and numerous intersections. (In October, SRS installed the pavement markings in the CBD while working as a sub-consultant for A Lamp.) Superior Road Striping has committed to putting Glen Ellyn on their early April work schedule. The Streets Division refreshed pavement markings using paint in various locations, including the handicap symbols in all of the Village-owned parking lots. The Streets Division’s 2024 budget for paint materials is $5,000. *The Village paid Superior Road Striping $17,912.39 for work completed in 2024; the P.O. was carried over to the 2025 budget and the remainder of the work will be completed this spring. Candidate locations include streets that have been resurfaced one to three years prior. Staff is awaiting pricing from a municipal 2025 Asphalt partnering initiative with single source vendor, Corrective Asphalt Surface $90,000 Materials, in the hopes that the pricing will be more advantageous Rejuvenation for the Village. Construction is anticipated to be completed in late summer. The 2025 program will provide for sanitary sewer lining and repairs 2025 Sanitary Sewer $200,000 throughout the Village including within the Street Improvements Lining and Repairs Project Areas. The proposed budget for this program is $200,000. Page 10 of 11 Page 189 of 191 *All costs are rounded to nearest dollar. X:\Public Works\ENGINEER\Monthly Construction Reports\Engineering Project Report 4-4-25.docx Page 11 of 11 Page 190 of 191 Priority Areas Map Map Data: Google Survey Area and Priorities 1. Priority 1: Red (1.97 Miles) 2. Priority 2: Yellow (2.86 Miles) 3. Priority 3: Green (.55 Miles) 4. Total Miles: 5.38 Philip Sitton • Project Manager • 331.444.4822• Philip@NoTrippin.com • www.notrippin.com Information contained in this proposal is proprietary and confidential, and is to be used solely by Village of Glen Ellyn personnel in evaluating the project. Copying, unauthorized disclosure, reuse in any form is prohibited. 3 Page 191 of 191