Public Works Director Hans Mercer recommended awarding a targeted feasibility, geotechnical and environmental analysis of Gillespie Draw to Morrison-Maierle, with Jacobs Engineering as a subconsultant, in the amount of $353,000.

Mercer said the city has advanced a West Corridor concept since the 1980s and incorporated preferred alternatives into land-use plans; the recent focus narrowed to Gillespie Draw after public meetings flagged steep grades, soil stability and residential impacts. "Those concerns are slopes, soils, steepness of the grade of the road, environmental noise, wildlife and fence shed concerns," Mercer said, describing public feedback and the need to assess feasibility and cost of crossing the draw.

Staff told the council the recommended contract includes a level of engineering, detailed geotechnical coring, a NEPA-aligned environmental approach to coordinate with WYDOT and a benefit-cost analysis intended to improve the city’s competitiveness for federal BUILD funding. Mercer said public involvement in the proposal includes web-based virtual rooms and stakeholder interviews; the proposal allocates roughly $46,000 for public engagement and about $42,000 for benefit-cost analysis in staff estimates.

Council Member Brandt questioned why the recommended proposal was roughly four times higher than the lowest proposer and about $80,000 above a third proposer; staff replied that the price difference reflects scope and level of certainty, and that federal scoring requires a more robust BCA and NEPA-ready documentation. "It's all depends on what their scope is," Mercer told Brandt, adding that staff would share the proposals and the evaluation matrix with council members.

Mercer said the proposed contract would be funded by GPET and public-benefit funds and that the city had notified the County Commission of its intent to study Gillespie Draw. The study was presented as preparatory work to improve grant scoring and to determine constructability, probable failure planes, mitigation needs and cost estimates. The study recommendation was informational at the study session; no formal award vote was recorded.