Loading...
Item 4G - MemoItem 4G Page 1 of 2 M E M O R A N D U M (December 6, 2022) To: Shana Yelverton, City Manager From: Rob Cohen, Director of Public Works Subject: Approve an Engineering Services Agreement (ESA) with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. to provide engineering design and construction phase services for Central Avenue Improvements in an amount not to exceed $65,000. Action Requested: Approve an Engineering Services Agreement (ESA) with Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. to provide engineering design and construction phase services for Central Avenue Improvements in an amount not to exceed $65,000. Background Information: The purpose of this item is to seek City Council approval of an Engineering Services Agreement (ESA) with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. to provide engineering design and construction phase services for Central Avenue Improvements in an amount not to exceed $65,000. This agreement includes preliminary and final design plans, surveying, and additional engineering services to enhance safety and provide accessibility for pedestrians. Concerns have been raised about the safety of vehicles and pedestrians at the intersection of Central Avenue and Main Street as well as concerns about pedestrian safety along Central Avenue. Following the reports of these concerns, staff engaged traffic engineering consultants to provide pedestrian and vehicle studies to evaluate existing conditions and offer recommendations for safety improvements. The first study, conducted by Lee Engineering was finalized in March of 2021 and confirmed that the intersection at Central Avenue and Main Street presents sight constraints for vehicles approaching and leaving the intersection, posing safety concerns for pedestrians. The second study, conducted by Kimley Horn was finalized in August 2022, and evaluated safety concerns along Central Avenue from Main Street to State Highway 114. Both studies noted the volume and direction of pedestrians and inadequate pedestrian facilities. These studies presented various pedestrian improvement recommendations along Central Avenue, Item 4G Page 2 of 2 including adding sidewalk ramps, crosswalks, striping and signage. The proposed improvements at Central Avenue and Main Street intersection will consist of modifications to all four corners of the intersection to enhance pedestrian access and visibility. If approved, survey and design should be completed within three to four months and construction estimated to commence spring/summer. City staff met with Parkview, Meeting Street, and Brownstone residents on Monday, November 14, 2022, to provide project background information and present the recommendations from the studies. During this meeting, attendees had the opportunity to ask questions about the project as well as present any additional concerns. The residents’ main concerns were the proposed sidewalk crossing locations, duration of the project, and potential continuous speeding. Staff will be working with the Kimley Horn Associates, Inc. to take a closer look at the conceptual crossing and addressing the feedback from the residents during the design. Financial Considerations: Funding for this agreement is budgeted in the FY 2023 budget as part of the Capital Improvement Program. Strategic Link: This item links to the City’s Strategy Map strategic focus area of Mobility. It specifically relates to the City’s Corporate Objectives, C2: Provide Travel Convenience Within City & Region, and B5: Enhance Service Delivery Through Continual Process Improvements. The Critical Business Outcome is CBO2: Enhance Mobility Through Aggressive Traffic Management Initiatives and Capital Project Implementation. Citizen Input/ Board Review: City staff met with Parkview, Meeting Street, and Brownstone residents on Monday, November 14, 2022, to provide project background information and present the recommendations from the studies. The meeting report is attached to this memo. Legal Review: The proposed agreement is a standard agreement that the City Attorney has reviewed and approved. Alternatives: The City Council may approve or deny the agreement. Staff Recommendation: Approve an Engineering Services Agreement (ESA) with Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. to provide engineering design and Item 4G Page 2 of 2 construction phase services for Central Avenue Improvements in an amount not to exceed $65.000. Supporting Documents: Attachment A: Engineering Services Agreement Attachment B: Location Map Attachment C: Central Avenue & Main Street Study – Lee Engineering, March 2021 Attachment D: Central Avenue Pedestrian Study – Kimley Horn, March 2022 Attachment E: November 14, 2022 Resident Meeting Report Staff Contact: Rob Cohen, Director of Public Works Kevin Ferrer, P.E., City Engineer Bryan Ahumada, P.E., Civil Engineer Page 1 AGREEMENT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT is made this _____ day of ____________, 2022, by and between the City of Southlake, Texas (hereinafter referred to as “CITY”), and Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as “ENGINEER”). WHEREAS, CITY contemplates the need to make improvements along Central Avenue and at the Intersection of Central Avenue and Main Street. This Project is to be known as the Central Avenue Improvements project and hereinafter referred to as the “Project”. WHEREAS, ENGINEER is qualified, able, and desirous of performing the necessary engineering work upon which the Project is based and is willing and able to work with CITY staff to organize and coordinate the professional services necessary to complete the Project. NOW, THEREFORE, CITY engages ENGINEER to perform, and ENGINEER agrees to perform, the engineering work for the Project, as more fully described herein below, and CITY agrees to pay as compensation, and ENGINEER agrees to accept as compensation, the payments on the dates and in the amounts herein specified, all in accordance with the terms more fully set out below and as provided in Attachment A which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein. I. ARTICLE ENGINEERING SERVICES A. Scope of Work ENGINEER will provide the supervision, direction, personnel and equipment to perform the engineering Services outlined in Attachment A in accordance with the terms set forth in this Agreement and in Attachment A. B. Definitions Services refer to the professional services performed by ENGINEER pursuant to this Agreement. C. Changes CITY, without invalidating the Agreement, may order changes within the general scope of the work required by the Agreement by altering, adding to and/or deducting from the work to be performed. If any change causes an increase or decrease in ENGINEER’s cost of, or the time required for, the performance of any part of the Services under the Agreement, an equitable adjustment will be made by mutual Agreement and this Agreement shall be modified in writing accordingly. ATTACHMENT A Page 2 D. Coordination with Owner The CITY shall make available to ENGINEER for use in performing Services hereunder all existing plans, maps, field notes, statistics computations and other data in the CITY’s possession relative to existing facilities and to the Project. E. Site and Local Conditions ENGINEER has the right to examine the site in order to become acquainted with local conditions and accepts conditions at the site unless otherwise noted in writing to the CITY. Any coordination or scheduling of work by CITY shall not relieve ENGINEER from its responsibilities specified hereunder. Necessary arrangement for access to any site by ENGINEER’s employees will be made with CITY. F. Assignment and Subcontractors/Third Party Rights The rights and obligations covered herein are personal to each party hereto and not to any third party and for this reason neither this Agreement nor any contract hereunder shall be assigned by either party in whole or in part; nor shall ENGINEER subcontract any of its obligations under this Agreement without the prior written consent of CITY. G. Independent Contractor ENGINEER covenants and agrees that it will perform the work hereunder as an independent contractor, and not as an officer, agent, servant, or employee of CITY; that ENGINEER shall have exclusive control of and exclusive right to control the details of the work performed hereunder, and all persons performing same, and shall be solely responsible for the acts and omissions of its officers, agents, employees, contractors, subcontractors, and consultants; that the doctrine of respondent superior shall not apply as between CITY and ENGINEER, its officers, agents, employees, contractors, subcontractors, and consultants, and nothing herein shall be construed as creating a partnership or joint enterprise between CITY and ENGINEER. H. Disclosure By signature of this Contract, ENGINEER warrants to CITY that it has made full disclosure in writing of any existing conflicts of interest or potential conflicts of interest, including personal financial interests, direct or indirect, in property abutting the proposed Project and business relations with abutting property owners. ENGINEER further warrants that it will make disclosure in writing of any conflicts of interest that develop subsequent to the signing of this Contract and prior to final payment under the Contract. Finally, Engineer warrants that it has submitted to the City a completed Conflicts of Interest Questionnaire as required by Chapter 176 of the Texas Local Government Code. Page 3 I. Approval by CITY Approval by CITY of this Agreement shall not constitute or be deemed to be a release of the responsibility and liability of ENGINEER, its officers, agents, employees, and subcontractors for the accuracy and competency of the Services performed under this Agreement, including but not limited to surveys, designs, working drawings and specifications and other engineering documents. Such approval shall not be deemed to be a waiver or an assumption of such responsibility and liability by CITY for any negligent act, error, or omission in the performance of ENGINEER’s professional services or in the conduct or preparation of the subsurface investigations, surveys, designs, working drawings and specifications or other engineering documents by ENGINEER, its officers, agents, employees and subcontractors, it being the intent of the parties that approval by CITY signifies the CITY’s approval of only the general design concept of the Improvements to be constructed. J. Indemnification ENGINEER SHALL AND DOES HEREBY AGREE TO INDEMNIFY AND HOLD HARMLESS CITY, ITS OFFICERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES FROM ANY AND ALL DAMAGES, LOSS OR LIABILITY OF ANY KIND WHATSOEVER, BY REASON OF DEATH OR INJURY TO PROPERTY OR PERSON CAUSED BY ANY OMISSION OR NEGLIGENT ACT OF ENGINEER, ITS OFFICERS, AGENTS, EMPLOYEES, INVITEES, OR OTHER PERSONS FOR WHOM IT IS LEGALLY LIABLE, WITH REGARD TO THE PERFORMANCE OF THIS CONTRACT, AND ENGINEER WILL, AT ITS COST AND EXPENSE, DEFEND, PAY ON BEHALF OF, AND PROTECT CITY AND ITS OFFICERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES AGAINST ANY AND ALL SUCH CLAIMS AND DEMANDS. THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION ARE SUBJECT TO THE LIMITATIONS OF TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 271.904 AND SHALL BE CONSTRUED TO THAT EFFECT. K. No Third Party Beneficiary For purposes of this Agreement, including its intended operation and effect, the parties specifically agree and contract that: (1) this Agreement only affects matters/disputes between the parties to this Agreement, and is in no way intended by the parties to benefit or otherwise affect any third person or entity (except the indemnitees identified or described in Article I, Section J., above), notwithstanding the fact that such third person or entities may be in a contractual relationship with CITY and ENGINEER, or both; and (2) the terms of this Agreement are not intended to release, either by Contract or operation of law, any third person or entity from obligations they owe to either CITY or ENGINEER. Page 4 L. Successors and Assigns CITY and ENGINEER each bind themselves and their successors, executors, administrators and assigns to the other party to this Agreement and to the successors, executors, administrators and assigns of such other party with respect to all covenants of this Agreement. Neither CITY nor ENGINEER shall assign or transfer its interest in this Agreement without prior written consent of the other. II. ARTICLE CITY’S RESPONSIBILITIES CITY will: 1. Provide full information as to CITY’s requirements for the Project; 2. Assist ENGINEER by placing at ENGINEER’s disposal all information in CITY’s control or knowledge which is pertinent to the Project, including executed right-of-way easements and final field survey data; 3. Examine all work presented by ENGINEER and respond within reasonable time and in writing to the material submitted by ENGINEER; 4. Pay all costs incident to advertising for obtaining bids or proposals from Contractors; 5. Give prompt written notice to ENGINEER whenever CITY observes or otherwise becomes aware of any defect in ENGINEER’s work or in Contractor’s work; 6. Designate in writing a person to act as its representative with respect to this Agreement, such person having complete authority to transmit instructions, receive information, and make or interpret the CITY’s decisions; 7. Provide all information and criteria as to the CITY’s requirements, objectives, and expectations for the Project including all numerical criteria that are to be met and all standards of development, design, or construction. 8. Provide to the ENGINEER all previous studies, plans, or other documents pertaining to the Project and all new data reasonably necessary in the ENGINEER’s opinion, such as site survey and engineering data, environmental impact assessments or statements, zoning or other land use regulations, etc., upon all of which the ENGINEER may rely; and 9. Arrange for access to the site and other private or public property as required for the ENGINEER to provide its services. Page 5 III. ARTICLE COMPENSATION FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES The CITY shall compensate ENGINEER for services rendered under this Agreement, in accordance with the following: For the completion of the work contemplated in Article I, the ENGINEER shall be paid on a lump sum basis in the amount of $43,000 for Basic Services (as outlined in the attached proposal) with a total not to exceed cost ceiling of $65,000 as billed monthly by ENGINEER. This Contract only authorizes Task 1 through Task 3 as described in Attachment A. Task 4 will need written notice to proceed from the CITY to be authorized for billing. IV. ARTICLE TIMES OF BILLING AND PAYMENT The ENGINEER shall bill CITY monthly for any services and expenses incurred in accordance with the work performed subject to the limits set out in Article III. Payment shall be due within thirty (30) days of receipt by CITY of a properly prepared and correct invoice from ENGINEER. ENGINEER’s invoices shall be accompanied by such records or other written proof as CITY deems necessary to verify the billings. Invoices shall be made to City Finance Department’s office at 1400 Main Street, Suite 440, Southlake, Texas 76092. If CITY fails to make payment due ENGINEER within thirty (30) days of the day when payment for services and expenses is due under the terms of this Agreement, ENGINEER shall be entitled to interest on such unpaid sums at the rate provided in Chapter 2251 of the Texas Government Code. V. ARTICLE ADDITIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES In addition to performing the engineering services set out in Article I, hereof, ENGINEER agrees to perform additional services as requested by CITY from time to time and CITY agrees to compensate ENGINEER for such services in accordance with ENGINEER’s standard hourly fee and expenses (see Attachment B) for actual time expended and actual out-of-pocket sums expended, such services to be one or more of the following: 1. Make or prepare detailed description of sites, maps, or drawings related thereto and outside the scope of the Project; 2. Appearances before courts or boards on matters of litigation or hearings Page 6 related to the Project; 3. Preparation of environmental impact assessments or statements for any governmental agency; 4. Miscellaneous engineering work for CITY not related to the Project; 5. To provide resident project construction inspection, unless such inspection is not required, in writing, by the CITY; 6. Other services agreed to by the parties in writing and incorporated herein. VI. ARTICLE STANDARD OF CARE In performing its professional services, the ENGINEER will use that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable members of its profession in the same locality at the time the services are provided and in accordance with any applicable governmental laws, regulations and ordinances. VII. ARTICLE PERIOD OF SERVICE This Agreement shall be effective upon execution by CITY and ENGINEER, and shall remain in force until work is completed on the Project or until terminated under the provisions hereinafter provided in Article VIII. VIII. ARTICLE TERMINATION The CITY may terminate this Agreement at any time for convenience, with or without cause by giving written notice to the ENGINEER. Such termination may be made effective on such future date as agreed by the parties, but absent such Agreement shall be immediate. Upon receipt of such notice the ENGINEER shall immediately discontinue all services and work and the placing of all orders or the entering into contracts for supplies, assistance, facilities, and materials in connection with the performance of this Agreement and shall proceed to cancel promptly all existing contracts insofar as they are chargeable to this Agreement. The ENGINEER, upon termination, shall be paid for all services rendered through the date of termination together with any additional reimbursable expense then due. Page 7 IX. ARTICLE OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS 1. All completed or partially completed reports prepared under this Agreement, including the original drawings in both paper and electronic formats, shall become the property of CITY if this Agreement is terminated. Upon completion and payment of the Contract, the final design, drawings, specifications and documents in both paper and electronic formats shall be owned by CITY. 2. Reuse, change or alteration by CITY or others acting by or on behalf of CITY of such documents without the permission of ENGINEER shall be at CITY’s sole risk. X. ARTICLE INSURANCE ENGINEER shall carry and maintain at all times relevant hereto, at ENGINEER’s expense, insurance of the type and of minimum coverage limits as follows: 1. Workers Compensation - Statutory Employer’s Liability - Limits as required by the State of Texas. 2. Comprehensive General Liability, Bodily Injury and Property Damage including contractual liability in a combined single limit - $500,000 per occurrence. 3. Comprehensive Automotive Liability, Bodily Injury and Property Damage in a combined single limit - $1,000,000 per accident. Certificates of insurance for the above coverage in a form acceptable to CITY, evidencing the coverage required above, shall be provided to CITY within ten (10) business days after execution of this Agreement and prior to issuing Notice to Proceed. Such certificates shall provide that the insurer will give CITY not less than ten (10) days notice of any material changes in or cancellation of coverage. In the event any subcontractor of ENGINEER, with or without CITY’s consent, provides or renders services under this Agreement, ENGINEER shall ensure that the subcontractor’s services are covered by the same insurance limits as set forth above. ENGINEER shall not commence work under this Agreement until it has obtained Professional Liability (Errors and Omissions) Insurance as required hereunder and such insurance coverage has been approved by CITY. Such insurance shall be in the minimum amount of $1,000,000 and shall include coverage of Contractually Assumed Liability. The insurance coverage prescribed herein shall be maintained until one (1) Page 8 year after CITY’s acceptance of the construction project and shall not be canceled without prior written notice to CITY. In this connection, upon the signing and return of this Agreement by ENGINEER, a Certificate of Insurance shall be furnished to CITY as evidence that the insurance coverage required herein has been obtained by ENGINEER, and such certificate shall contain the provision that such insurance shall not be cancelled or modified without thirty (30) days prior written notice to CITY. ENGINEER shall notify CITY within ten (10) days of any modification or alteration in such Professional Liability (Errors and Omissions) Insurance. XI. ARTICLE AUTHORIZATION, PROGRESS AND COMPLETION CITY and ENGINEER agree that the Project is planned to be completed as expeditiously as possible. ENGINEER shall employ manpower and other resources, and use professional skill and diligence to meet the schedule; however, ENGINEER shall not be responsible for schedule delays resulting from conditions beyond its control. By mutual Agreement, CITY and ENGINEER may modify the Project schedule during the course of the Project and if such modifications affect ENGINEER’s compensation, it shall be modified accordingly, subject to CITY’s approval. It is understood that this Agreement contemplates full and complete engineering services for this Project, including any and all Services necessary to complete the work. For additional Engineering Services, the authorization by CITY shall be in writing and shall include the definition of the services to be provided, the schedule for commencing and completing the services, and the basis for compensation as agreed upon by CITY and ENGINEER. XII. ARTICLE NOTICE Any notice required under this Agreement will be in writing and given either personally, by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, or by a nationally recognized overnight courier service, addressed to the parties as follows: If to CITY: Shana Yelverton City Manager City of Southlake 1400 Main Street, Suite 460 Southlake, Texas 76092 Phone: 817-748-8400 Fax: 817-748-8010 Page 9 If to ENGINEER: L. Nathan Ante, P.E. Senior Vice President Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2201 W. Royal Lane, Suite 275 Irving, Texas 75063 Phone: (214) 420-5622 All notice shall be effective upon the date of receipt. XIII. ARTICLE SEVERABILITY In the event that any provision of this Agreement shall be found to be void or unenforceable, such finding shall not be construed to render any other provisions of this Agreement either void or unenforceable. All provisions, which are void or unenforceable, shall not substantially affect the rights or obligations granted to or undertaken by either party. XIV. ARTICLE VENUE-LAW Venue of any suit or cause of action under this Agreement shall lie exclusively in Tarrant County, Texas. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed in two equal originals on the date and year first above mentioned. CITY OF SOUTHLAKE: By: _________________________________ John Huffman, Mayor ATTEST: By: _________________________________ City Secretary Attachment A - Page 1 kimley-horn.com 2201 West Royal Lane, Suite 275, Irving, TX 75063 214.420.5600 November 3, 2022 Bryan Ahumada, P.E. City Engineer 1400 Main Street, Suite 320 Southlake, Texas 76092 Re:Central Avenue Improvements; Southlake, TX Dear Mr. Ahumada, Project Understanding Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (the “ENGINEER”) is pleased to submit Attachment A of the Agreement for Engineering Services to the City of Southlake (the “CITY”) for providing professional services to provide design and construction phase services for various improvements along Central Avenue. This scope of services includes the design of the following: · Pedestrian improvements at Main Street at Central Avenue · Pedestrian improvements at Central Avenue at alley way north of Moxie’s · Pedestrian improvements at Central Avenue at Federal Way · Pavement marking and signing improvements · Street improvements to modify valley gutter inside the intersection of Central Avenue at Main Street Scope of Services Task 1 – Topographic and Boundary Survey (Lump Sum) The ENGINEER (through a Subconsultant) will perform topographic survey for areas included shown in red in the following two exhibits: Southern Topographic Survey Limits Page 2 kimley-horn.com 2201 West Royal Lane, Suite 275, Irving, TX 75063 214.420.5600 Northern Topographic Survey Limits · Data Collection and Property Research o Gather existing plat information o Collect property owner information o Gather existing right-of-way and easement information based on available plats and record drawings. Title research, if required by the CITY, can be provided as an Additional Service · Perform field survey ground control · Locate pertinent objects and above-ground features, typically including: o Roadway pavement o Drainage structures (i.e. culverts, ditches, inlets, manholes, and outfalls) o Utilities (signs or markers showing the presence of underground utilities, valves, manholes, flowlines, meters, backflow preventers, vents, poles, and guy wires) o Traffic signal equipment (poles, cabinets, ground boxes) o Large (6 inch diameter and up), significant trees (identify species and caliper) o Limits of landscaped areas will be defined. Individual plants and or trees (less than 6 inch diameter) will not be located. o Fences (including material type) and gates o Sidewalks o Street lights o Signs o Right-of-Way monumentation · Process survey data to create plan view of existing features · Prepare a final topographic drawing in digital format (including contours and break lines) showing the features located in the field as well as right-of-way information. Digital files will be in .DWG format. The ENGINEER will conduct one site visit to field verify the topographic survey. Page 3 kimley-horn.com 2201 West Royal Lane, Suite 275, Irving, TX 75063 214.420.5600 Task 2 – Preliminary Design Construction Plans (Lump Sum) · Project Management and Administration o Develop project production plan and schedule o Prepare for and attend up to one (1) meeting o Project site visits o Data collection o Coordination with CITY o Coordination with subconsultants o Prepare meeting agendas and summaries o Project correspondence and invoicing o Quality control and internal plan reviews · The ENGINEER will prepare preliminary construction plans for the improvements. The preliminary construction plans may include the following sheets: o Title Sheet o Index o General Notes o Project Control o Paving (plan only) o Existing Drainage Area Map o Erosion Control Plan o Pavement Markings and Signing o Traffic Control Narrative o Traffic Control plans · Opinion of Probable Construction Cost (OPCC) o OPCC – A 60% OPCC will be prepared and included with the Preliminary submittal. · The ENGINEER will submit .PDF files of the preliminary design items to the CITY. · The ENGINEER will address comments from the CITY on the preliminary design items, which will be reflected in the Final Design submittal. Task 3 – Final Design Construction Plans (Lump Sum) · Project Management and Administration o Prepare for and attend up to one (1) meeting o Project site visits o Coordination with CITY o Coordination with subconsultants o Prepare meeting agendas and summaries o Project correspondence and invoicing o Quality control and internal plan reviews · The ENGINEER will update the plans based on comments received on the Preliminary Design. · Opinion of Probable Construction Cost o OPCC – The 60% OPCC will be updated and included with the Final submittal. · The ENGINEER will submit .PDF files of the preliminary design items to the CITY. · The ENGINEER will address comments from the CITY on the final plan sheets. Page 4 kimley-horn.com 2201 West Royal Lane, Suite 275, Irving, TX 75063 214.420.5600 Task 4 – Additional Services (Reimbursable/Hourly) The scope of services listed may or may not be performed as part of our services. Work under this task shall only be performed at the discretion of the CITY. This task includes up to 88 hours and may include the following: Task 4.1 – Construction Phase Services ·Attend the pre-construction meeting ·Visits to Site and Observation of Construction. ENGINEER will provide on-site construction observation services during the construction phase. ENGINEER will make visits at intervals as directed by CITY in order to observe the progress of the Work. Such visits and observations by ENGINEER are not intended to be exhaustive or to extend to every aspect of Contractor's work in progress. Observations are to be limited to spot checking, selective measurement, and similar methods of general observation of the Work based on ENGINEER’s exercise of professional judgment. Based on information obtained during such visits and such observations, ENGINEER will evaluate whether Contractor's work is generally proceeding in accordance with the Contract Documents, and ENGINEER will keep CITY informed of the general progress of the Work. The purpose of ENGINEER’s site visits will be to enable ENGINEER to better carry out the duties and responsibilities specifically assigned in this Agreement to ENGINEER, and to provide CITY a greater degree of confidence that the completed Work will conform in general to the Contract Documents. ENGINEER shall not, during such visits or as a result of such observations of Contractor's work in progress, supervise, direct, or have control over Contractor's work, nor shall the ENGINEER have authority over or responsibility for the means, methods, techniques, equipment choice and usage, sequences, schedules, or procedures of construction selected by Contractor, for safety precautions and programs incident to Contractor's work, nor for any failure of Contractor to comply with laws and regulations applicable to Contractor's furnishing and performing the Work. Accordingly, ENGINEER neither guarantees the performance of any Contractor nor assumes responsibility for any Contractor's failure to furnish and perform its work in accordance with the Contract Documents. ·Recommendations with Respect to Defective Work. ENGINEER will recommend to CITY that Contractor's work be disapproved and rejected while it is in progress if, on the basis of such observations, ENGINEER believes that such work will not produce a completed Project that conforms generally to Contract Documents. ·Clarifications and Interpretations. ENGINEER will respond to reasonable and appropriate Contractor requests for information and issue necessary clarifications and interpretations of the Contract Documents to CITY as appropriate to the orderly completion of Contractor's work. Any orders authorizing variations from the Contract Documents will be made by CITY. ·Change Orders. ENGINEER may recommend Change Orders to CITY, and will review and make recommendations related to Change Orders submitted or proposed by the Contractor. ·Shop Drawings and Samples. ENGINEER will review and approve or take other appropriate action in respect to Shop Drawings and Samples and other data which Contractor is required to submit, but only for conformance with the information given in the Contract Documents. Such review and approvals or other action will not extend to means, methods, techniques, equipment choice and usage, sequences, schedules, or procedures of construction or to related safety precautions and programs. ·Substitutes and "or-equal." Evaluate and determine the acceptability of substitute or "or-equal" materials and equipment proposed by Contractor in accordance with the Contract Documents, but subject to the provisions of applicable standards of state or local government entities. ·Inspections and Tests. ENGINEER may require special inspections or tests of Contractor's work as ENGINEER deems appropriate, and may receive and review certificates of inspections within ENGINEER’s area of responsibility or of tests and approvals required by laws and regulations or Page 5 kimley-horn.com 2201 West Royal Lane, Suite 275, Irving, TX 75063 214.420.5600 the Contract Documents. ENGINEER’s review of such certificates will be for the purpose of determining that the results certified indicate compliance with the Contract Documents and will not constitute an independent evaluation that the content or procedures of such inspections, tests, or approvals comply with the requirements of the Contract Documents. ENGINEER shall be entitled to rely on the results of such tests and the facts being certified. ·Disagreements between CITY and Contractor.ENGINEER will, if requested by CITY, render written decision on all claims of CITY and Contractor relating to the acceptability of Contractor's work or the interpretation of the requirements of the Contract Documents pertaining to the progress of Contractor's work. In rendering such decisions, ENGINEER shall be fair and not show partiality to CITY or Contractor and shall not be liable in connection with any decision rendered in good faith in such capacity. ·Applications for Payment. Based on its observations and on review of applications for payment and accompanying supporting documentation, ENGINEER will determine the amounts that ENGINEER recommends Contractor be paid. Such recommendations of payment will be in writing and will constitute ENGINEER’s representation to CITY, based on such observations and review, that, to the best of ENGINEER’s knowledge, information and belief, Contractor’s work has progressed to the point indicated and that such work-in-progress is generally in accordance with the Contract Documents subject to any qualifications stated in the recommendation. In the case of unit price work, ENGINEER’s recommendations of payment will include determinations of quantities and classifications of Contractor's work, based on observations and measurements of quantities provided with pay requests. By recommending any payment, ENGINEER shall not thereby be deemed to have represented that its observations to check Contractor's work have been exhaustive, extended to every aspect of Contractor's work in progress, or involved detailed inspections of the Work beyond the responsibilities specifically assigned to ENGINEER in this Agreement. It will also not impose responsibility on ENGINEER to make any examination to ascertain how or for what purposes Contractor has used the moneys paid on account of the Contract Price, nor to determine that title to any portion of the work in progress, materials, or equipment has passed to CITY free and clear of any liens, claims, security interests, or encumbrances, nor that there may not be other matters at issue between CITY and Contractor that might affect the amount that should be paid. ·Substantial Completion. ENGINEER will, promptly after notice from Contractor that it considers the entire Work ready for its intended use, in company with CITY and Contractor, conduct a site visit to determine if the Work is substantially complete. Work will be considered substantially complete following satisfactory completion of all items with the exception of those identified on a final punch list. If after considering any objections of CITY, ENGINEER considers the Work substantially complete, ENGINEER will notify CITY and Contractor. ·Final Notice of Acceptability of the Work. ENGINEER will conduct a final site visit to determine if the completed Work of Contractor is generally in accordance with the Contract Documents and the final punch list so that ENGINEER may recommend, in writing, final payment to Contractor. Accompanying the recommendation for final payment, ENGINEER shall also provide a notice that the Work is generally in accordance with the Contract Documents to the best of ENGINEER’s knowledge, information, and belief based on the extent of its services and based upon information provided to ENGINEER upon which it is entitled to rely. ·Limitation of Responsibilities. ENGINEER shall not be responsible for the acts or omissions of any Contractor, or of any of their subcontractors, suppliers, or of any other individual or entity performing or furnishing the Work. ENGINEER shall not have the authority or responsibility to stop the work or direct Contractor. Task 4.2 – Record Drawings (Reimbursable/Hourly) · The CITY will furnish to the ENGINEER a “marked-up” field set of plans that identifies any modifications to the “As-Bid” contract documents. The ENGINEER will be entitled to rely upon the Page 6 kimley-horn.com 2201 West Royal Lane, Suite 275, Irving, TX 75063 214.420.5600 “marked-up” field set for the purpose of preparing the record drawings. · Record drawings submittal will include the following: o The record drawings shall be sealed in accordance with current Texas Board of Professional Engineers’ requirements o All changes shall be shown and noted in the revision block o AutoCAD (.dwg file format) of design files o Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF file format) of record drawings o Hard copies as requested by the CITY Task 4.3 – TDLR Fees and Coordination – (Reimbursable/Hourly) · Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation (TDLR) o Identify and analyze the requirements of the Texas Architectural Barriers Act, Chapter 68 Texas Administrative Code, and become familiar with the governmental authorities having jurisdiction to approve the design of the Project o Register the project with TDLR. o Submit construction documents (final, signed and sealed plans) to a TDLR licensed Registered Accessibility Specialist (RAS) no later than the 20th day after the date the ENGINEER issues the plans for construction. o Complete all TDLR forms/applications necessary. o Request an inspection from the RAS no later than 30 calendar days after construction substantial completion. Advise the CITY in writing of the results of the inspection. o Respond to agency comments and requests. o ASSUMPTIONS § ENGINEER will pay project registration, plan review, and inspection fees. § The scope does not include services related to obtaining a variance from TDLR. Page 7 kimley-horn.com 2201 West Royal Lane, Suite 275, Irving, TX 75063 214.420.5600 Additional Services Any services not specifically identified in the Scope of Services shall be considered Additional Services. These may be performed on an individual basis upon written authorization by the CITY at our then current hourly rates under the existing Agreement if budget allows. Additional Services include, but are not limited to, the following: · Additional meetings. · Bidding Phase Services · Landscaping design · Storm drain hydraulic design. · Utility design. · Public Meetings. · Services related to survey for easement or property acquisition and preparation of associated documents. · Services related to historical artifacts and any review or coordination required for the Texas Historical Commission. · Services related to regulatory permitting outside of that defined herein. · Identifying or correcting any deficiencies found in any data provided by others. ENGINEER will be entitled to rely upon any information provided by the CITY. · Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. · Any services not specifically defined above. · Any item not specifically mentioned in our Scope of Services. Schedule The ENGINEER will provide its services as expeditiously as practical to meet a mutually agreed upon schedule. Page 8 kimley-horn.com 2201 West Royal Lane, Suite 275, Irving, TX 75063 214.420.5600 Fee and Billing The ENGINEER will perform the services identified in the Scope of Services on either a Lump Sum or Reimbursable/Hourly basis in accordance with the following tasks: Lump Sum:Task Fee: Task 1 – Topographic and Boundary Survey $12,000 Task 2 – Preliminary Design Construction Plans $21,500 Task 3 – Final Design Construction Plans $9,500 Total Lump Sum:$43,000 Reimbursable/Hourly:Task Fee: Task 4 – Additional Services (Reimbursable/Hourly)$22,000 Total Reimbursable/Hourly:$22,000 Total $65,000 The ENGINEER will perform the Lump Sum Tasks identified in the Scope of Services for a lump sum fee of $43,000. All permitting, application, and similar project fees will be paid directly by the CITY. Lump Sum fees will be invoiced monthly based upon percentage of services performed as of the invoice date. The ENGINEER will provide the Reimbursable/Hourly Tasks services on a labor fee plus expense basis. For your budgeting purposes, we recommend allocating $22,000 for these tasks (not-to-exceed). The fee breakdowns for each task are for budgeting purposes only and ENGINEER reserves the right to reallocate the reimbursable budget among tasks as necessary. Direct reimbursable expenses (subconsultant fees, out-of-house printing, courier services, etc.) will be billed at a rate of 1.10 times cost. Labor fee will be billed on an hourly basis based on then hourly rates. A percentage of labor fee (6%) will be added to each invoice and is included in the not-to-exceed budgets, to cover certain other expenses such as telecommunications, printing, in-house reproduction, postage, computer expenses, supplies, and local mileage. Administrative time related to the project will be billed hourly. All permitting, application, and similar project fees will be paid directly by the CITY. Fees will be invoiced monthly based on the actual amount of services performed and expenses incurred. A description of services provided and hourly breakdown will be provided with each invoice. Payment will be due within thirty (30) days of your receipt of the invoice. Page 9 kimley-horn.com 2201 West Royal Lane, Suite 275, Irving, TX 75063 214.420.5600 Closure We appreciate the opportunity to provide these services to you. Please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Brendan Yarborough, P.E. Project Manager kimley-horn.com 2201 W Royal Lane, Suite 275, Irving, TX 75063 214 420 5600 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Hourly Labor Rate Schedule Classification Rate Analyst $150 - $230 Professional $200 - $275 Senior Professional I $240 - $330 Senior Professional II $295 - $350 Senior Technical Support $150 - $260 Support Staff $105 - $135 Technical Support $95 - $140 Effective through December 31, 2022 Subject to annual adjustment thereafter ATTACHMENT B ARIZONA TEXAS NEW MEXICO OKLAHOMA 3030 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1660, Dallas, TX 75234 (972)248-3006 office (972) 248-3855 fax | www.leeengineering.com Page 1 of 5 March 26, 2021 Mr. Robert Cohen City of Southlake 1400 Main Street, Suite 320 Southlake, Texas 76092 Re: Central Avenue Pedestrian Crossing Review Dear Mr. Cohen: Lee Engineering has completed our review of the pedestrian crossing on Central Avenue north of Main Street. This letter documents our study efforts, our findings, and our recommendations related to pedestrian treatments within the study area. BACKGROUND When Town Square was initially planned, the crossings at traditional four-way intersections were generally located at the end of the curb radius and identified with curb ramps and inlaid pavers. Most if not all four- way intersections in Town Square are controlled by All-Way Stop Control (AWSC). In general, the stop signs and stop bars, if present, have been placed upstream of the crosswalks at the curb radii, and thus, all four crossings at a traditional intersection are generally controlled by the stop signs. As Town Square has developed over time, crossings have generally continued to be located at the end of the curb radius though paver crossings have ceased to be implemented. Sidewalks in Town Square generally extend from building face to curb with tree wells between the back of curb and the primary pedestrian access route. In areas where the sidewalk is wide, and the curb radius is small, the access route and the crossing at the end of the radius are near each other and a relatively small deviation from the natural walking path is necessary to cross roadways. At the intersection of Central Avenue and Main Street, the cross walk on the north leg is located at the end of the radius for the westbound to northbound curb. This results in the crossing being approximately 45-52 feet back from the edge of the Main Street traveled way. The stop bar on the southbound approach is located downstream of the marked pedestrian crossing. The marked crossing functions as a midblock crossing because it is not part of the intersection. The crossing on the west leg is 32-43 feet back in comparison and the stop bar is upstream of the crossing making the marked pedestrian crosswalk part of the intersection. DRAFT ATTACHMENT C Page 2 of 5 FIELD OBSERVATIONS Lee Engineering personnel visited the crossing on three occasions, once during the midday (lunch) hour and twice during the PM peak period to observe traffic operations and the interaction of pedestrians and vehicles in the vicinity of the intersections. The numbered list that follows contains a variety of field observations from Lee Engineering staff. Additional information for our field visits appears on the various attachments to this letter. 1. During our field observations, the peak hour of traffic occurred from 4:20 PM to 5:20 PM. During this 60 minute period: o 16 total pedestrians were observed crossing the north leg of the intersection.  13 pedestrians used the marked pedestrian crossing  Only 3 pedestrians crossed south of the stop bar in the more natural walking path crossing locations. o 100 southbound vehicles were observed on the approach and 151 northbound vehicles departed the intersection toward the north. o The 5:05 to 6:05 hour saw a slightly larger number of vehicles on the north leg and pedestrians using the crosswalk (113 southbound, 156 northbound, and 23 pedestrians). 2. One potential pedestrian/vehicle conflict was observed when a pedestrian crossed behind a queued vehicle at the southbound stop sign. The northbound motorist failed to yield to the pedestrian in the crosswalk. 3. In general, the traffic control devices, sidewalks, and ramps, are in good condition for a development of this age. Some minor grade issues are present in the attached photos that need added to maintenance plans in order to provide a more level walking surface. 4. The intersection of Central Avenue and Main Street does not have any ALL WAY plaques beneath the stop signs. 5. The eastbound stop sign at the intersection of Main Street and Summit Avenue street is faded from sun exposure. 6. Numerous vehicles were observed going straight from the left lane on the northbound Central Avenue approach. 7. Other findings and observations are documented in the photos attached. MIDBLOCK CROSSING TREATMENT REVIEW The exisng crossing on the north leg of the intersecon funcons as a midblock crossing. Lee Engineering ulized the guidelines detailed in Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings (NCHRP 526) to verify the appropriate treatment for this unsignalized crossing. The guidelines in NCHRP 562 present crossing treatments in graduated levels of intensity. The intensity level at a crossing locaon is a step funcon determined by the relaonships of the following measures: pedestrian crossing distance, pedestrian volumes, vehicle speeds, and vehicle volumes. The crossing treatments, ranked from least to most intensive, are the following: 1. Crosswalk - standard crosswalk markings and signs 2. Enhanced - enhanced crosswalk markings & signage DRAFT Page 3 of 5 3. Active - devices designed to display a warning only when pedestrians are present 4. Red Beacon - devices that display a circular red indication to motorists at the pedestrian location 5. Signal - full traffic signal Lee Engineering conducted the crossing analysis using the volumes observed from 5:05 to 6:05 PM. Figure 1, below, shows a graph of the results of the pedestrian crossing treatment analysis. As evidenced by the analysis, vehicle and pedestrian volumes could both more than triple at the intersecon before an acve/enhanced crossing using a flashing yellow light would be needed. In fact, the volumes are barely above the threshold recommended for a marked crossing at all. RECOMMENDATIONS The recommendations below are numbered for ease of reference and do not represent a priority ranking. Short Term Recommendations At the intersection of Central Avenue and Main Street, LEE has identified two short term alternatives that may improve the pedestrian experience at the intersection. 1) Option 1 includes the following: a. Add a Pedestrian crossing sign with downward arrow plaque at the northbound approach to the crosswalk north of Main Street. b. Add a downward arrow to the existing pedestrian sign in the southbound direction. c. Remove the crosswalk lines and install a high visibility crosswalk similar to the markings on the west leg. LEE recommends that the crosswalk markings extend at least 15 feet to the south from the exiting north edge of the crosswalk. DRAFT Page 4 of 5 2) Option 2 includes the following: a. Relocate the stop sign for the southbound approach of Central Avenue should be relocated immediately north of the existing crosswalk. i. Care should be taken in placing the stop sign so at least a 4 feet wide minimum sidewalk width is maintained. ii. It may be necessary to place the stop sign in the void area near the first parking space. b. A 12” thermoplastic stop bar should be added 4 feet north of the existing crosswalk on the north leg of the intersection. The stop bar should be in line with the stop sign if possible. The existing stop bar should be removed when this is done. c. Remove the crosswalk lines and install a high visibility crosswalk similar to the markings on the west leg. LEE recommends that the crosswalk markings extend at least 15 feet to the south from the exiting north edge of the crosswalk. This will provide a higher conspicuity crossing marking to alert motorists that the crossing is present on that leg of the intersection. Lee Engineering recommends Short Term Option 2 be implemented by the City. This would make the crossing operate more consistently with other AWSC intersections within Town Square. Other short-term recommendations that are independent of either option above are listed below. 3) Install all way (R1-3P) plaques beneath the stop signs on all four approaches to the intersection. All way plaques are required per the Texas MUTCD section 2B.05. a. It should be noted that the ALL WAY plaque is missing from the majority of all way stop controlled intersections in town square. 4) Replace the eastbound stop sign on Main Street at Summit Ave. 5) Perform sidewalk panel replacement, leveling, or grinding at areas where the sidewalk or utilities have heaved or sunken. a. Add other ramp modifications or replacements to curb ramp improvement program. i. New ramp at alley south of Moxie on west side of Central ii. Replacement ramp at Federal and Central on SW corner. iii. Provided long term improvements are not imminent, consider replacing the existing ramp on the east side of Central Avenue at the crosswalk north of Main Street to provide a flare. Also the ramp run length should be verified to assure it complies with TAS and PROWAG. 6) Trim bushes as noted in the photos. 7) Install permanent stop sign at Federal Way eastbound approach to Central Ave. 8) Add a northbound lane control sign in advance of the Main Street intersection on Central Avenue to inform motorists of the lane configuration at the intersection. DRAFT Page 5 of 5 Long Term Recommendations 1) The intersection should be reconfigured to allow for crossings closer to the natural walking path along the sidewalks. This improvement would involve significant design and construction effort and should be programmed amongst other capital improvement projects on the City’s long-range CIP. The benefit-costs of this project are limited and other projects will likely be higher priority. a. The ramps and pedestrian crossings on all four approach should be redesigned so the overall intersection is smaller and the crossings are more in line with the natural paths. b. The NE corner of the intersection should be reconstructed to allow for directional ramps closer to the corner. This will likely require complete reconstruction of the corner, including the relocation of illumination and possibly other utilities. c. The existing ramps for the crossing of the north leg should be removed once new ramps are in place. d. The existing valley gutter along Central Avenue represents a barrier along the pedestrian path and relocation of the ramps will likely require complete reconstruction of the intersection in order to maintain positive drainage and an accessible route. 2) The are multiple desired crossings along Central Avenue north of Main Street, generally at T intersections and/or alleys where a pedestrian walking path terminates at a crossing of Central. Ramps should be designed and constructed for these locations when feasible. If you have any questions, please contact me at (972) 248-3006. Sincerely, John Denholm, P.E., PTOE Senior Project Manager Lee Engineering, LLC TBPELS Firm F-450 DRAFT Valley Gutter within crossing path may represent barrier that needs reconstructed in order to relocate crossing to align more with sidewalks Existing illumination pole likely requires relocation if ramps are moved to align more with the sidewalk paths. Patio wall restricts vision for eastbound motorists to pedestrians entering crosswalk from west side of street. Previous tenants had fence that allowed better line of sight Existing ramp has returned curb. Ramp should have a flared side adjacent to walking surface.DRAFT Sidewalk panel leveling /grinding necessaryDRAFT Sidewalk panel/utilitycover require leveling. DRAFT Ramp slope too steep and does notsatisfy accessibility requirements. Ramp should be upgraded soon sincenew sidewalk was installed at landing.Permanent stop signnecessaryNo ramp / crossing present on east sideof Central opposite Federal.DRAFT Bushes should betrimmed and kept lower. Present height mayimpedes visibility tocrosswalk for a motoristbacking from parkingspace. Western mostbush should beconsidered for removal.Returned curb adjacent towalking surface should bereplaced with a flare. DRAFT Patio wall may block line ofsite for eastbound motoristto pedestrian in crosswalkleaving western curb.Previous tenant hadwrought iron fencing thatallowed visibility acrosspatio. DRAFT No ramp present on eastside of Central to line upwith this crossing.DRAFT Ramp necessaryDRAFT Level/reconstruct ramp toeliminate lip. DRAFT Page 1 August 23, 2022 kimley-horn.com 2201 West Royal Lane Suite 275, Irving, Texas 75063 214-420-5680 To:Kevin Ferrer, PE., CFM City of Southlake, TX From: Tom Grant, P.E., PTOE Brendan Yarborough, P.E. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Texas Registered Eng. Firm No. F-928 Date:August 23, 2022 Subject:Central Avenue Pedestrian and Vehicle Study; Southlake, Texas At the City of Southlake’s direction, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. analyzed Central Avenue between SH 114 and Main Street for pedestrian and vehicle improvements. At the City’s direction, Kimley-Horn observed traffic and pedestrian movements on Wednesday, May 11th, 2022. Kimley-Horn also performed an all-way stop warrant for the intersection of Central Avenue and Federal Way. Using a subconsultant, Kimley-Horn collected pedestrian counts at various zones along Central Avenue, 48-hours of turning movement counts at Central Avenue and Federal Way, and 72-hours of speed counts at various locations in Town Square. This memorandum summarizes the findings of the study. Figure 1 Location Map 08/23/2022 ATTACHMENT D Page 2 August 23, 2022 kimley-horn.com 2201 West Royal Lane Suite 275, Irving, Texas 75063 214-420-5600 ALL-WAY STOP WARRANT The Texas Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (TMUTCD) provides guidelines for performing an all-way stop warrant analysis in Section 2B.07. An all-way stop may be warranted based on traffic volume, crash history, high pedestrian traffic, or inadequate sight distances. This study evaluated the traffic volume, pedestrian volume, and other criteria. The traffic volume criteria warrants when the total of both the major volumes (vehicles only) and the minor street (total of vehicles, pedestrians, bikes, etc) approach volumes average 300 vehicles per hour (vph) and 200 vph, respectively, for 8 hours of an average day. In the Attachment A, the exhibit shows the existing peak hour volumes for both Thursday, April 21, 2022 and Saturday, April 23, 2022. Central Avenue has no stop signs between SH 114 frontage road and Main Street and was considered the major street, Federal Way is stop controlled at Central Avenue and was considered the minor street. In Attachment B, the exhibits compare the measured vehicular traffic to the volumes required by the warrant for the intersection of Central Avenue and Federal Way. Central Avenue traffic volumes exceed the minimum 300 vehicles per hour for 5 hours on Thursday, April 21, 2022 but the volumes along Federal Way do not exceed the minimum threshold of 200 vehicles for any hour of the day. On Saturday, April 23, 2022, Central Avenue exceeded 300 vehicles per hour for 7 hours but the volumes along Federal Way do not exceed the minimum threshold of 200 vehicles for any hour of the day. Therefore, an all-way stop is not warranted based on the vehicular traffic at the intersection. SPEED STUDY GUIDELINES Kimley-Horn, using a subconsultant, collected 72-hours of speed counts at 4 locations around Town Square (Central Avenue north of Park Ridge Boulevard, Central Avenue south of Meeting Street, Grand Avenue north of Federal Way, and State Street north of Prospect Street). The current posted speed around Town Square is 30 mph. The average of the four speed counts is 24.1 mph. The summary of the counts can be found in Attachment C for the different locations. Texas Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (TMUTCD) and TxDOT provides guidelines for performing speed zone studies. Speed limits are set by the 85th percentile method, which represents the speed the majority of drivers will be traveling at or below. The speeds are observed under free-flow speeds for vehicles, typically mid-day and not during the morning or afternoon peak hours. Speed counts should also be taken on an average weekday under favorable weather conditions. · The speed limit can be reduced up to 10 mph below the 85th percentile speed if some of the following conditions are present: o Roadway pavement width of 20 feet or less o Curves and hills o Hidden driveways and other developments o High number of driveways o Crash history o Rural residential or developed areas o Lack of striped, improved shoulders Page 3 August 23, 2022 kimley-horn.com 2201 West Royal Lane Suite 275, Irving, Texas 75063 214-420-5600 The disadvantage of setting a speed limit too low is vehicles tend to ignore the signs and speed. The State of Texas current state law states that the lowest speed limit that can be set in an urban district on a street other than an alley is 30 mph. The speed limit may be lowered to 25 mph if the municipality determines 30 mph is deemed unreasonable or unsafe. Due to Town Square being a high pedestrian generator and the amount of on-street parking, it is recommended to set the speed limit to 25 mph for all of the Town Square streets, and replace and add speed limit signs. PEDESTRIAN STUDY Kimley-Horn, using a subconsultant, collected pedestrian counts across 3 zones along Central Avenue. The counts have been summarized into the exhibit in Attachment A. Each of the three zones had similar numbers of pedestrians crossing. It is recommended to construct a receiving ramp on the south side of Federal Way at Central Avenue with crosswalk markings and signage. RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the information from previous sections, below are short-term and long-term recommendations for Central Avenue between Main Street and SH 114 Frontage Road. Short-term Recommendations: · Provide a pedestrian crossing at Federal Way and Central Avenue. o Install a receiving ramp on the east side of Central Avenue at Federal Way. o Install crosswalk markings and pedestrian signage. · Remove pedestrian ramp on west side of Central Avenue at Meeting Street and replace with landscaping. Page 4 August 23, 2022 kimley-horn.com 2201 West Royal Lane Suite 275, Irving, Texas 75063 214-420-5600 · Recommend changing speed limits all around Town Square from 30 mph to 25 mph. · Install longitudinal striping (50’ of transition) for southbound Central Avenue to narrow roadway from 24’ to 20’ so pedestrian crossing is shorter and provides better sight distance for vehicles exiting Federal Way onto Central Avenue. · When upgrading or installing new pedestrian improvements/crossings around Town Square, consider one or more of the following enhancements: o Continental style crosswalk markings at designated pedestrian crossings o LED edge-lit stop signs o Pedestrian crossing signs Long-term Recommendations: · Recommend reconstructing curb radius at Federal Way and Central Avenue to 15-feet radius. This will help tighten the intersection and provide shorter crossing distance for pedestrians. · Recommend bulbing out southwest corner of Central Avenue at Federal Way to provide better sight distance around parked vehicles. August 2022 kimley-horn.com 2201 West Royal Lane Suite 275, Irving, Texas 75063 214-420-5600 ATTACHMENTS Attachment A:Summary of Traffic Counts Attachment B:All-way Stop Warrant Attachment C: Speed Study August 2022 kimley-horn.com 2201 West Royal Lane Suite 275, Irving, Texas 75063 214-420-5600 ATTACHMENT A: SUMMARY OF TRAFFIC COUNTS SOUTHLAKE Central Avenue Vehicle and Pedestrian Counts 8/23/2022 NORTHAerial imagery captured 1/07/2022 by E STATE HIGHWAY 114FRONTAGE ROADPARK RIDGE BOULEVARDMEETING STREETMAIN STREETE SOUTHLAKE BOULEVARDCENTRAL AVENUE C E N T R A L A V E N U EFEDERAL WAY19 , [ 4 1 ] , ( 5 2 ) 40 , [ 1 0 4 ] , ( 1 0 4 ) 95 , [ 1 6 1 ] , ( 1 5 0 ) 10 7 , [ 1 9 6 ] , ( 1 9 6 )11,[25],(34) 26,[49],(75)17,[32],(30) 22,[67],(79)Daily Pedestrian Counts: Thursday total peds - 79 peds Saturday total peds - 168 peds Daily Pedestrian Counts: Thursday total peds - 101 peds Saturday total peds - 176 peds Daily Pedestrian Counts: Thursday total peds - 76 peds Saturday total peds - 191 peds 32 , [ 2 5 ] , ( 2 3 ) 46 , [ 5 3 ] , ( 5 8 ) 95 , [ 1 3 7 ] , ( 1 2 7 ) 13 5 , [ 1 8 5 ] , ( 1 8 5 ) LEGEND AM, [MD], (PM) - Thursday peak hour vehicle turning movement counts AM, [MD], (PM) - Saturday peak hour vehicle turning movement countsData collected in April 2022 August 2022 kimley-horn.com 2201 West Royal Lane Suite 275, Irving, Texas 75063 214-420-5600 ATTACHMENT B: ALL-WAY STOP WARRANT 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 VolumesperHour(vph)Min NB+SB Warrant Volume Min EB+WB Warrant Volume NB+SB Hourly Volume EB+WB Hourly Volume THIS DOCUMENT, TOGETHER WITH THE CONCEPTS AND DESIGNS PRESENTED HEREIN, AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE, IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE AND CLIENT FOR WHICH IT IS PREPARED. REUSE OF AND IMPROPER RELIANCE ON THIS DOCUMENT WITHOUT WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION AND ADAPTATION BY KIMLEY-HORN, AND ASSOCIATES INC. SHALL BE WITHOUT LIABILITY TO KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 ExhibitVolume Warrant for All-way Stop at Central Avenue and Federal Way - Thursday 4/21/2022 200 vph threshold for 8 hours on minor street300 vph threshold for 8 hours on major street Central Avenue at Federal Way Southlake, Texas August 2022 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 VolumesperHour(vph)Min NB+SB Warrant Volume Min EB+WB Warrant Volume NB+SB Hourly Volume EB+WB Hourly Volume THIS DOCUMENT, TOGETHER WITH THE CONCEPTS AND DESIGNS PRESENTED HEREIN, AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE, IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE AND CLIENT FOR WHICH IT IS PREPARED. REUSE OF AND IMPROPER RELIANCE ON THIS DOCUMENT WITHOUT WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION AND ADAPTATION BY KIMLEY-HORN, AND ASSOCIATES INC. SHALL BE WITHOUT LIABILITY TO KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 2 ExhibitVolume Warrant for All-way Stop at Central Avenue and Federal Way - Saturday 4/23/2022 200 vph threshold for 8 hours on minor street 300 vph threshold for 8 hours on major street Central Avenue at Federal Way Southlake, Texas August 2022 August 2022 kimley-horn.com 2201 West Royal Lane Suite 275, Irving, Texas 75063 214-420-5600 ATTACHMENT C: SPEED STUDY SOUTHLAKE Central Avenue Speed Counts 8/23/2022 NORTH E S T A T E H I G H W A Y 1 1 4 PARK RIDGE BOULEVARD MEETING STREET MAIN STREET E SOUTHLAKE BOULEVARDCARROLL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUEGRAND AVENUE85% Speed: -Thursday (4/21) -NB: 31.6 MPH -SB: 31.1 MPH -Friday (4/22) -NB: 28.6 MPH -SB: 28.7 MPH Saturday (4/23) -NB: 26.6 MPH -SB: 26.3 MPH PL A Z A P L A C E Aerial imagery captured 1/07/2022 by Data collected in April 2022 SOUTHLAKE Central Avenue Speed Counts 8/23/2022 NORTH E S T A T E H I G H W A Y 1 1 4 PARK RIDGE BOULEVARD MEETING STREET MAIN STREET E SOUTHLAKE BOULEVARDCARROLL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUEGRAND AVENUEPL A Z A P L A C E 85% Speed: -Thursday (4/21) -NB: 27.0 MPH -SB: 27.0 MPH -Friday (4/22) -NB: 24.6 MPH -SB: 25.5 MPH Saturday (4/23) -NB: 24.1 MPH -SB: 24.6 MPH Aerial imagery captured 1/07/2022 by Data collected in April 2022 SOUTHLAKE Central Avenue Speed Counts 8/23/2022 NORTH E S T A T E H I G H W A Y 1 1 4 PARK RIDGE BOULEVARD MEETING STREET MAIN STREET E SOUTHLAKE BOULEVARDCARROLL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUESTATE STREETGRAND AVENUEPL A Z A P L A C E 85% Speed: -Thursday (4/21) -NB: 21.4 MPH -SB: 19.2 MPH -Friday (4/22) -NB: 19.8 MPH -SB: 19.1 MPH Saturday (4/23) -NB: 19.8 MPH -SB: 18.9 MPH PROSPECT STREET Aerial imagery captured 1/07/2022 by Data collected in April 2022 SOUTHLAKE Central Avenue Speed Counts 8/23/2022 NORTH E S T A T E H I G H W A Y 1 1 4 PARK RIDGE BOULEVARD MEETING STREET MAIN STREET E SOUTHLAKE BOULEVARDCARROLL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUESTATE STREETGRAND AVENUEPL A Z A P L A C E PROSPECT STREET 85% Speed: -Thursday (4/21) -NB: 24.0 MPH -SB: 24.5 MPH -Friday (4/22) -NB: 22.3 MPH -SB: 22.9 MPH Saturday (4/23) -NB: 19.7 MPH -SB: 21.7 MPH Aerial imagery captured 1/07/2022 by Data collected in April 2022 Page 1 of 11 CENTRAL AVE. TRAFFIC STUDY MEETING REPORT Meeting Date: November 14, 2022 Meeting Location: 1400 Main Street, Southlake, TX City Council Chambers Attendees Invited: Brownstone, Parkview, and Meeting Street Residents Total Attendance: Estimated 25 Presenters: Lauren LaNeave, Kevin Ferrer City Staff Present: Lauren LaNeave, Deputy Director of Public Works Administration Kevin Ferrer, City Engineer Jose Luna, Police Captain Hannah McKenzie Public Works Admin. Assistant MEETING SUMMARY: The purpose of this meeting was to present the recommendations of the Central Avenue study to Southlake Town Square residents to inform and gain feedback prior to taking the engineering agreement for design to City Council on December 6, 2022. The agreement under consideration by City Council is for the design of improvements to the Main/Central Avenue intersection as well as improvements along Central Avenue to improve visibility, make crosswalk and ramp adjustments, Ms. LaNeave and Mr. Ferrer presented a recap of resident concerns, which include speeding along Central Avenue, pedestrian safety, requests for additional signage, and sight distance issues at Central Avenue/Main Street and Central Avenue/Federal Way. The project background and timeline was presented, along with a high-level overview of the speed counts and data points taken for the study. Study recommendations completed by Kimley Horn suggests visibility improvements, crosswalk adjustments, speed limit reduction, crosswalk safety modifications, and traffic calming striping adjustments. Staff discussed the new TxDOT regulations for crosswalk signage to say “Stop for pedestrians” instead of “Yield to pedestrians.” The study did not recommend a three-way stop at Central Avenue and Federal Way due to traffic volume warrants. Mr. Ferrer discussed the use of stop signs and the requirements for installation. The timeline for the design and construction was discussed. The design agreement is being taken forward to City Council for consideration on December 6, 2022. Design will begin December 7, 2022, and is estimated to take three to four months, with construction commencing ATTACHMENT E Page 2 of 11 spring/summer 2023. In the interim, staff plans to move forward with the speed limit reduction and striping traffic calming measures. After the presentation concluded, the floor was opened for resident questions and concerns, summarized below. QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS SUMMARY: Question: Are you addressing the crossing at Main and Central, specifically the sight distance? A: Yes, sight distance will be taken into consideration and done in conjunction with the rest of the project. This intersection will be completely reworked as a result of these improvements. Question: When is the entire project projected to be complete? A: The design phase will take about 3-4 months. After that the construction phase will take approximately another 3-4 months, give or take, starting in Spring/Summer 2023. Question: Why not permit the mid-block crosswalk at Meeting and Central? A: Per the study results, it is safer to consolidate pedestrian movements at the intersection of Federal and Central. Question: What is the significance of ‘consolidating pedestrian traffic’? A: A mid-block crosswalk is a safety concern for pedestrians. Question: Why not a crosswalk at both Federal/Central and Meeting/Central? A: The proximity of the crosswalks causes the value to decline and decrease the safety for pedestrians in the crossing. Question: What about the safety of cars on Federal turning onto Central and the visibility? A: The stop bar will be moved closer to Central Avenue and the travel lane narrowed with striping. Through the design we will evaluate the sight distances to determine if parking spots need to be removed. Question: For the pedestrian crosswalk, why a stop bar but not a stop sign? A: The new law requires the operator of a vehicle to stop for pedestrians that is crossing a street. A “Stop here for pedestrian crossing” with a stop bar will be added. Also, the traffic counts on Federal Way do not warrant a three-way stop sign. Question: Will the narrowing of the travel lane increase the parking depth on Central, which would perpetuate the visibility issues? A: We will look at the sight improvement with the consultant during the design. Question: Will the striping go all the way to SH 114? It should go to Division. A: It will continue to Park Ridge Blvd. The narrow road is to encourage drivers to reduce speed coming off SH114. We will follow up with the traffic engineers on the striping to discuss the most effective option for traffic calming Question: When a vehicle is parked on Central, visibility turning off Federal onto Central is extremely obscured. Will that be considered? Page 3 of 11 A: The stop will be moved closer to Central, but we will also look into if changes need to be made to those last spots closest to Federal. Question: What will the striping be like for the pedestrian crossing at Federal? A: It will be striped with Continental striping, reflective, and a sign that reads “Stop here for Pedestrians” will be installed. Question: I am concerned that drivers won’t adhere to the new signage. Could there be flashing lights? A: The pedestrian numbers in the study did not warrant flashing lights and was not recommended by the consultant. Question: Is this study taking into account the projected growth for the area or just current status? A: We have been looking at current needs and would re-evaluate when new buildings are constructed. Question: Is there anything that can be done about drivers running the stop sign at Central/Main such as “blind stop” signs? A: We will look into an interim options with the Consultant. Question: Could there be an increase of the new state pedestrian crossing sign, possibly at every intersection? A: This would cause sign pollution, and ultimately drivers would not acknowledge any of the signs due to frequency. However we will evaluate areas of Town Square where this may be appropriate. Concern: Several attendees expressed concern for what human nature would suggest to a pedestrian walking (cut across at Meeting Street rather than go down to Federal and cross there) and were strongly opposed to removing the crossing at Meeting Street, suggested the City get more of the residents’ perspective rather than the consultant and data with many non- residents moving about, and future use of the projected plans due to the increase of homes and residents preference. A: Through the design process the City will remain in contact with residents and schedule another touchpoint before finalizing the design. Additionally, the City will work with the consultant to evaluate the Meeting Street crossing. Page 4 of 11 Presentation: Page 5 of 11 Page 6 of 11 Page 7 of 11 Page 8 of 11 Page 9 of 11 Proposed ecommendation Page 10 of 11 Page 11 of 11