HomeMy WebLinkAbout49-92 RESOLUTION•
RESOLUTION NO. 49-92
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY
CLERK TO EXECUTE A ENGINEERING CONTRACT WITH
DESHAZO, STAREK AND TANG, INC., IN THE AMOUNT
NOT TO EXCEED $36,500.00 FOR THE 1992 CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM TRAFFIC STUDY PLUS A
CONTINGENCY OF $5,500.00 FOR AN UNIDENTIFIED
INTERSECTION ANALYSIS.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
5ection 1. That the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby
authorized and directed to execute an engineering contract with
DeShazo, Starek and Tang, Inc., in the amount not to exceed
$36,500.00 for the 1992 Capital Improvement Program traffic study
plus a contingency of $5,500.00 for an unidentified intersection
analysis. A copy of the contract authorized for execution hereby
is attached hereto marked Exhibit "A" and made a part hereof.
PASSED AND APPROVED this 7th day of April , 1992.
APPROVED:
By:
ATTEST:
By:/c/...-1-4---(/ re)1
City Cljbrk
Mayor
•
CON1RACT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES
AGREEMENT
made this the 7,et day of April in the year Nineteen Hundred Ninety Two
BETWEEN
City of Fayetteville, Washington Coun:y, Arkansas, the Owner, acting by ar.d through
the Mayor, City of Fayetteville, and DeShazo, Starek & Tang, Inc., Dallas, Texas,
Engineer.
A. SCOPE OF WORK
Provide professional semces on the following project:
Fayetteville Traffic and Transportation Study
13. BASIC SERVICES
The Engineer shall provide professional services as follows:
Consult with the Owner to ascertain the requirements of the project and
confirm such requirements to the Owner.
2. Prepare a study consistent with the Work Program in Attachment A.
C. THE OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITIES
The Owner will furnish information and efforts as identified within the Work
Program in Attachment A
D. COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT
The Owner agrees to pay the Engineer as compensation for :he basic services a sum
not to exceed S36,500. Invoices wil! be submitted monthly and will indicate actual
€me and expense charges incurred during the preceding month Time and expense
charges are based on the following:
•
Page 2 -- Engineering Services
• [Hour:y Salary Rate (Hourly Salary Rate X 1.613 overhead): X 1.10 profit
= Hourly salary rate X 2.874
• Sub -Consultant Fees (if any) X 1.10 profit
• Direct Expense Charges (travel anc m:scellaneous) X 1.00
E CONSULTANTS
h is contemplated that during the process of the work to be performed under this
agreement, both parties may wish to retaic consultants at their own expense. It is
specifically understood and agreed that any consultant retained by the Engineer shall
be the Ergineer 's expense: however. the Owner reserves the right to approve such
consultants ar.d :he conditions of their employment. It is further understood that the
Owner may retain consultants and tha: the expense for the same shall be norne by
:he Owner.
F. CONTINUING SERVICES
Following completion of any phase of the work, the Owner may elect to continue,
de:ay, abandon or revise the work. The payrnent for services accordingly will be as
mutually agreed.
G. NONDISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT
There shall be no discrimination against any employee or applicant for emplcyment
because of race, religion, color, national origin, age, handicap or sex.
II. ACCOUNTING RECORDS
Records of the Engineer' s direct personnel expenses and records of accounts of
reimbursable expenses for which reimbursement is requested shall be kept on a
generally recognized accounting basis and shall be available to the Owner. Said
records shall be preserved for a period of three years after final paymen..
Page 3 -- Engineering Services
I. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT
This agreement may be terminated by either party on thirty (30) days written notice
to the other party for failure or refusal to perform in accordance with the terms and
conditions of this agreement. Such termination shall be made by the Owner, given
written notice directed as follows:
DeShazo, Starek & Tang, Inc.
330 Ur.ion Stat'on
Dallas, Texas 75202-4802
Likewise, termination by the Engineer shall be accomplished by directing written
notice to:
Mayor, City of Fayetteville
City Administration Bui ding
113 West Mountain
Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701
In the event of termination, the Engir.eer shall be paid his compensation for services
performed to termination date based upon co:npletion of services performed :o
termination date, and based upon completion of work througn any phase under the
fee basis as applicable, or on a direct personnel expense basis as mutually agreed.
Copies of drawings, specifications or any other materials to date of termination will
be furnished to the Owner on date of termination.
J. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS
Original Drawings and Specifications as instruments of service are, and shall re:nain,
the property of the Engineer whether the project for which they are made is executed
or not. The Owner shall be pe:-m:tted to retain copies, including reproducible copies,
of Drawings and Specifications for information and reference in connection with the
Owner's use and occupancy of the project. The Drawings and Specifications may be
used by the Owner on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion
of this project by others at no additional charge to Owner.
•
Page 4 -- Engineering Services
K. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS
The Owner hereby binds itself, its successors, assigns and legal representatives to the
Engineer in respect so all stipulations, terms and covenants of this Agreement; and
likewise, the Engineer hereby binds himself, his successors, assigns and legal
representatives to the Owner, in respect to all stipulations, terms and covenants of
this Agreement.
L ASSIGNMENT
Neither the Owner nor the Engineer shail assign. sublet or in any ma-iner transfer
it or their respecnve interest in this Agreement to any other person, individual, firm,
corporation or o:her interest without prior written consent of the other respective
party.
M. EXTENT OF AGREEMENT
This Agreement represents the en:ire and integrated agreement between the Owner
and the Engineer and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or
agreements, either written or oral. This Agreement may be amended only by written
instrument signed by both the Owner and the Engineer.
N. APPLICABLE I AW
This Agree:pent shall be considered :o be performed in Washington County,
Arkansas.
0. DESIGNATION OF REPRESENTATIVE
Owner hereby designa.es the Mayor, City of Fayetteville as its duly authorized and
designated representative to act for and on behalf of Owner.
This designation sha:1 remain in full force and effect until and unless Engineer is
otherwise notified in writing by Owner and directed to Engineer at the address above
set forth.
Venue shall be in Washington County, Arkansas.
Page 5 -- Engineering Services
In WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their banes.
OWNER ENGINEER
CITY OF FAYETIEVILLE DESHAZO, STARER & TANG, INC.
,----Th
/
By
/MID-4A1b\ Bv: , 6-::::-.7--; • _)54"-C 4•-g .‘ ft.
.-D •
John JeShazo, Preside:it
,
re orsanger, Mayor
Date:
ffI
Attest: ,-;„(,
Sherry Tnordas, City Clerk
Date: 4LT?
•
ATTACHMENT A
WORK PROGRAM
TASK 1. REVIEW PROJECT SCOPE
Objective: Review the proposed scope and schedule and refine the project plan.
Approach: Upon rece.ving the Notice to Proceed, we will conduct a "kick off'
meeting with Fayetteville staff to discuss *le following:
a. Coordination of the Consultant's effort with Fayetteville staff and other staff.
b. A list/description of major transportation concerns.
c. Availability and quality of existing roadway data.
d. Analysis techniques for the level of service calculations.
e. Criteria for project prioritization.
f. Project schedule and significant milestones.
g. Format for Master Construction Plan report.
Product: One (1) reproducible original of a memorandum documenting the kick-off
meeting.
CV Support: We expect :he City's Project Manager and other staff to meet with us
for a few hours. We would like for City staff to bring the following materials to the
meeting:
• A map hthlighting roadways with transportation prohlents.
• Maps and drawings depicting the City's existing functional classification system
and roadway design standards.
• Maps and/or database listings showing recent traffic counts.
• A recent traffic impact study.
• A plot of AIITLYs 1980 and 2010 24-hour traffic assignments.
Both parties recognize that City staff may not be able to provide all information
.equested.
A - 1
TASK 2. REVIEW PREVIOUS DATA AND STUDIES
Objective: Review and analyze data and findings from other studies.
Approach: Information from previous studies will be examined for applicability to
this studv. Subtasks include:
a. We will provide tie City's Project Manager with a written request for specific
reports and other relevant data.
b. Summarize all relevant data and cross-check the information for accuracy.
c. Drive the study area to gain first-hand knowledge of transportation proolems.
d. Work closely with City staff to identity up to 10 intersections to be subject to
a signalized intersection capacity ana ysis
e. Identify deficiencies in :Pe available data and prepare a program for
additional field surveys.
Product: One (1) reproducible original of a memorandum documenting the findings
of this task.
City Support: We expect City staff to provide us with all available reports, maps,
data and suggestions in a timely manner (all requests for NWARPC data and AHTD
data will be channeled through the City's Project Manager). Information desired
from Ai -IID includes :980 and 20..0 print-outs depicting traffic model link data such
as distance functional class, directional capacity and speed. Both panes recognize
that City staff may not be able to provide all information requested.
TASK 3. ANALYZE EXISTING CONDITIONS
Objective: Review and ana:yze existing traffic conditions within the City and identify
potential solutions to problen-ss.
Approach: We will make 1SC of available data as much as possib:e and supplement
this data with surveys. Subtasks include:
a. Conduct limited field surveys. Surveys by DS&T staff vvill include:
• peak and off-peak "floating cal' travel time runs on up to 10 streets.
• 15 -minute "quick" counts at up to 10 locations (to verify anv questions
regarding unusual peak hour turning movements and/or directional distn-
butions).
A - 2
• field verification of key link data (e.g., number of lanes) to be included
in the computer inventory of Task 3.c.
b. Review the City's existing functional classification system and design standards.
c. Develop a computer inventory (in Lotus 123 format) of roadway segments to
include functional class, link length, number of lanes, hourly capacity, speed
limit and available directional traffic counts (weekday, AM peak hour and PM
peak hour). [Note: the inventory excludes "local" streets that are no: coded
ir AHTD's traffic model network].
d. Calculate the link -based level of service for each roadway segment, based on
the estimated AM and PM peak hour volume/capacity ratio
e. Based on available peak hour turning movement counts, conduct a signalized
intersection capacity analysis for up to 10 intersections (as identified in Task
2.d) using procedures from the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual
f. Surrunarize the calculations from Tasks 3.d and 3.e and rank the street
segments and intersections according to level of service.
identify the roadway modifications that will be required (e.g., additional
'trough lanes or turning lanes) to achieve reasonable levels of service
g.
Product: Or.e (1) reproducible original of a memorandum documenting the Endings
of this task; one (a) diskette containing :he roadway network database (in Lotus 123
format).
City Support: We expect City staff to share their in-depth knowledge of the area.
e also expect Ciw staff to furnish some of :he foilowing:
• 24 hour machine counts on selected street segments that do have adequate
data available (we prefer tha: all new counts be completed in Apri:, while the
spring semester of :he University of Arkansas is still in session).
• AM and PM peak hour manual turn:ng movement counts at the intersections
identified in Task 2.d that do not have adequate data available (we prefer that
all new counts be completed in Apri:, while the spring semester of the
University of Arkansas is stEl in session).
• Approach :ane geometries and peak period signal timings for the intersections
identified in Task 2.d.
Both parties recognize that City staff may not be able to provide ail information
requested.
TASK 4. PREPARE PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC FORECASTS
Objective: Identify year 2010 weekday traffic volume forecasts for major roadways
in the City of Fayetteville and convert to AM and PM peak hour volumes.
Approach: This task consists of :he creation of year 2010 "most likely" AM and PM
peak hour traffic forecasts. Subtasks include the following:
a. Examine AHTD's 1980 and 2010 weekday traffic assignments and compare
against current counts and existinejprected land use data.
b. Modify the computer inven:ory from Task 3.c to include year 2010 "baseline"
r.etwork data—functional class, link length, number of lanes, hourly capacity
and speed limit. [Note: the inventory excludes "local" streets that were not
coded in AFITUs traffic model network].
c. Assis: City staff :n :he adjustment of the "rawcomputer forecasts to obtain
realistic year 2010 weekday traffic volume estimates; incorporate the estimates
into the roadway network datanase.
d. Based on available (or synthesized) K Factors and directional distributions,
convert the 2010 weekday traffic volume estimates into AM and PM peak
hour directional link volumes and add to the network database.
e. For the intersections identified in Task 2.d, translate the AM and PM peak
hour directional link volumes into turning movement volumes.
Product: One (1) reproducible original of a memorandum documenting the findings
of this task; one (1) diskette containing the roadway network database (in Lotus 123
format).
City Supporj: We expect Ci y staff to perform the following:
• Work closely with AIITD staff in the adjustment of AHTD's yea:- 2010
weekday traffic volume estimates.
• Identify the changes to the existing roadway system that will represent :he
current year 2010 "baseline" network.
• Assist in the creation of reasonable K Factors and directional distributions.
A - 4
TASK 5. ANALYZE PEAK HOUR FORECASTS
Objective: Identify future peak hour levels of service and capacity deficiencies in the
roadway system.
Approach: We will identify year 2010 :evels of service for a baseline condition ir.
which the future roadway network consists of the existing network plus improvements
already programmed for construction. This task consists of two types of analysis:
a. A link -level volume/capacity analysis for all major roadway segmer.ts. For
sum:nary purposes, .he segrnen:s will be sorted from the highest to the lowest
volume/capaci:y ratio.
b. An intersection capacity analysis for the intersections identified in Task 2.d.
For summary purposes, the intersections will be sorted from :he highest to the
lowest level of service.
Product: Or.e (1) reproducible origir.al of a memorandum documenting the analysis
approach and results.
City Support: We expect City staff to review our level of service results in a timely
manner.
TASK 6. TEST ALTERNATIVE IMPROVEMENTS
Objective: Analyze alternative improvements tha: are designed to reduce the
deficiencies identified in Task 5.
Approach: We wit examine the level of service problerns identified in Task 5 and
identify potential improvernen:s (e.g., additional through lanes or turning lanes)
Subtasks include:
a. Estimate changes in peak hour traffic volumes (if any) that may result from
the alternative roadway improvements.
b. Re -run the :ink -level volume/capacity analysis and intersection capacity
analysis to determine the levels of service for the alternative improvements.
Product: One (1) reproducible original of a memorar.durn documenting the peak
hour levels of service for alternative roadway improvements.
A - 5
City Support: We expect City staff to review our level of service results in a timely
manner. We also expect City staff to assist in the identification of alternative
roadway improvements necessary to solve specific level of service problems.
TASK 7. PREPARE RECOMMENDATIONS
Objective: Prepare recommendations for a short-range and long-range construction
plan.
Approach: The information obtained from the previous tasks will be used to develop
a prioritized iist of projects. Subtasks include:
a. Prepare pre:iminary cost estirnates for the roadway improvements identified
in Task 6.
b. Prioritize each transportation frnprovement according to pre -established
criteria.
c. Prepare a preliminary schedule for roadway construction from 1993 to 2010.
Product: One (1) reproducible original of a draft technical report containing the
recommended plan and technical justifications.
City Support: We expec: City staff to review and comment on our recommended
plan in a timely manner.
TASK 8. DEVELOP MASTER CONSTRUCTION PLAN
Objective: Prepare the Master Construction Earl for use as a basis for street
construction and the continuing Capital Improvement Program.
Approach: The Master Construction Plan report represents the culmination of all
preceding tasks. Subtasks include:
a. Review comments made by City staff on al: previous memorandums and
reports.
b. Combine and re -write the information from the previous memorandums and
reports.
c. Subnut the Master Construction Plan report to the City. The expected format
is as follows:
A - 6
• Introduction—nurpose and scope of plan; general growth trends in the
City; sun-Jr.a.ry of previous studies.
• Technical Evaluation Process—street classifications, roadway design
standards and the level of service concept; Al-ITD's methodology for
developing traffic volume projections; DS&T's methodology for
calculating :ir.k-level and intersection -based levels of service; criteria for
project prioritization.
• Existing Traffic Conditions—major traffic generators and :ravel patterns;
identification of street segments by functional class; results of the leve: of
service analysis; description of the causes (and solutions) for level of
service problems.
• Future Traffic Conditions—major traffic generators and travel patterns;
summary at roadway improvements already programmed for construction
by :he year 2010; description of year 2010 forecasts; results of the year
20:0 level of service analysis; description of the causes (and solutions) for
level of set -vice problems.
• Alternative lmprovements--results of an analysis of alternative
improvement plans, preliminary cost estimates for proposed projects;
ranking of proposed prqects.
• Technical Recommendations—street classifications (shown on a black -and -
white 8.5" X 11" map) and roadway design standards; intersection design
considerations; recommendations for prioritized roadway construction
from 1993 to 2010.
• Appendix A --a print-out of the roadway network database to ir.clude
existing and pro ected numbe, of lanes, functional classifications. traffic
volumes and capacities.
• Appendix B --copies of all travel time summaries, :raffic counts and inter-
section capacity analysis worksheets.
d. Submit a brief (3-5 page) Executive Summary to the City.
Product: One (1) reproducible original of :he Master Construction Plan report and
Executive Summary; one (1) diskette containing the roadway network database (in
Lotus :23 format).
City Support: We expect City staff to provide a timely review of the Master
Construction Plan report. For this ano all other tasks, both parties recognize that
City staff may not be able to provide all information requested.
A -
Tie
r
,
0
rin
Cs1
r
.
r
r-
0
r
.
CI)
P.'
CD
WS -
et
in
p4.
I'
1
ape
lecommendations
8. Develop Master Construction Plan
ik Hour Tratfic.Forecas1
lyzepeak Hour Forecasts
Alternative Improvemen1
usDa
IngCc
$ei mg
BUDGET
Cum.
MGG KJC WGB RAR Support Tond Total
TASK 1. REVIEW PROJECT SCOPE
a_ Coordina.ion : -
- 0 o 0 3
b. Major transptranon concerns 1 - 0 0 1 4
c. Amiability of data 1 3 ri
Q 0 0 4
d. Level of Serr.ce cntena 2 3 1 1 1 8
e. Project prianszacion 1 3 1 1 7
:
f. Schedule 1 1 u 0 1 3
g. Master Plan format 2 o 1 5
SUBTOTAL 8 16 3 2 5 34 34
TASK 2. REVIEW PREVIOUS DATA AND STUDIES
a. Dam requests 2 ..,
- 0 0 t
b. Data stur.rnaries 2 11 1 2 16 32
c. Famtanty with study area 0 4 0 0 0 4
d. Idennfy tntersecacns 0 4 0 1 .. 7
e. Identify fie:d surveys 2 2 1 1 - 8
SUBTOTAL 6 23 2 4 12 57 91
TASK 3. ANALYZE EXISTING CONDITIONS
a Conduct surveys 2 8 o o s 18
b. Classificanon system and design standards 1 s 1 2 5 14
c. Roadway inventcny o g o o 10 18
d. Linx-based level of same o 5 o 2 5 10
e. Signalized inzrsecnor. capacity ana:ysis o 8 0 s 19 35
f. Ranlang of street segments ... 4 o 0 2 8
g. Recited roadway changes 3 :0 1 2 8 26
SUBTOTAL 8 48 2 57 129 =0
TASK 4. PREPARE PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC FORECASTS
a. Examine AHTD tomcats 1 4 0 C 3 a
h. Prep= 2010 database 1 5 0 1 6 13
c. Adjust forecasts 1 4 0 0 2
d. Peak hour volumes 0 8 0 1 6 15
e. Turning movement volumes 0 -; 0 2 8 17
SUBTOTAL 3 28 0 4 25 60 280
TASK 5. ANALY71 PEAK HOUR FORECASTS
a Link -level volume/capacity analysts 6 3 2 6 :5
b. Iaterseccon capacity anaiyas 1 12 0 4 15 32
SUBTOTAL 2 18 0 6 21 47 327
A — 9
•
BUDGET (Continued)
- HOURS
Cum.
!HOG LUC WGB RAB Support Total To:al
TASK 6. TEST ALTERNATIVE IMPROVEMENTS
a- Changes in peak hour volumes 4 4 1 2 5 26
b. Rerun :esti of senuce analysts C 8 0 2 a 20
SUBTOTAL 4 22 1 4 13 46 373
TASK 7. PREPARE RECOMMENDAT:ONS
a. Cost esornates 2 6 3 8 4 20
b. Pnorinzanon 2 8 3 2 4 19
c. Plan for roadway consfrucnon from 1993 to 2010 4 16 C 0 5 25
SUBTOTAL 8 30 3 10 13 64 437
TASK 8. DEVELOP MASTER PLAN
a_ Review com-r 4 2 2 2 17ments ,
b. Rewrite 6 16 3 2 8 35
c. Submit Master Consaucoon P1ar. 4 15 2 2 12 35
d. Submit Executive Summary 4 8 2 0 :0 24
SUBTOTAL 21 43 9 6 32 111 548
TOTAL
60 228 20 50 188 548
A - 10
BUDGET
Cost —
Cum
MGG KJC WGB RAE Support Tote. Total
TASK 1. REVIEW PROJECT SCOPE
a Coon:benison 591 5127 50 50 SO 3219
b. Major ransponanon concerns 59: 5127 30 SO 540 3259
c. Availability of Cam $9: 5191 SO SO 50 5283
d. Level of Sernce criteria 5183 5191 576 564 540 5555
e. Project priontizaton 59: 5191 576 56 4 540 3463
f. Schecule 591 364 SO SC S40 5195
g Master Plan format 591 5127 576 SC 540 5335
SUBTOTAL 5731 51.020 5228 3129 5201 $2309 52,309
TASK 2.. REVIEW PREVIOUS DATA AND STUDT.S
a. Data requests 5183 5127 so SC 580 5391
b. Data sumrearies 5183 5701 376 5129 5644 51,733
c. Farrilianty with study area 50 3255 SO SC SO 5255
d. Identify intersecnons SO 5255 SO 564 580 $400
e. Identify field arveys 5183 5127 576 564 580 5531
SUBTOTAL 5548 51.466 5152 5258 5885 53,309 55,618
TASK 3. ANALYZE EXISTING CONDITIONS
a- Conduct surveys 5183 3510 $0 50 5322 51,014
b. Classification sysern ar.d des.gn standards 391 5219 $76 5129 5201 5816
c. Roadway inventory 50 5510 SO 50 3402 5912
d. Link -based level of service 50 5319 SO 3129 5201 5649
e. Signalized inrsection capacity aniLysis 50 5510 SO 5516 5765 5:,790
5. Ranking of street segments 3183 5255 SO 50 580 3518
g. Required roadway changes 5274 5637 576 5129 5322 5A38
SUBTOTAL 3731 53.059 5152 590.1. 52,294 37,138 5:2,755
TASK 4. PREPARE PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC FORECASTS
a. Exarrdee ARID forecasts 591 5255 SO SO 5121 5467
b. Prepare 2010 database 591 53 19 SO $64 5241 5
716
c . Adjust forecasts 591 5255 SO SO 580 5427
d. Peak hour volumes 30 $510 SO 564 5241 5816
e. Turning movement volumes 50 5446 SO 5129 5322 5897
SUBTOTAL 5274 51.784 so 5258 51,006 53322 516.073
TASK 5. ANALYZE PEAK HOUR FORECASTS
a. Link -level volume/capacity analysis 591 53 82 SO 5129 5241 5844
b. Intersection capacity analysts 591 5765 50 5258 5604 51.717
SUBTOTAL 3183 51,147 SO 5387 5845 52561 518,640
A — 11
BUDGET (Continued)
Cost
Cum.
MGG 1CJC WI013 RAB &Ippon Fetal Tool
TASK 6. TEST ALTERNAL1VE 131PROVEN.ENTS
a. Changes Ir. peak hour volumes 5365 5892 $76 $129 5201 51.664
b. Re -run level of service analysts 33 550 SC 5129 $322 5961
SUBTOTAL 5365 51.402 576 5258 5523 52,624 521.264
TASK 7. PREPARE RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Cost estimates 5183 5382 50 5516 516: 51,242
b. Pnoritizai ion 5183 5510 5228 5129 5161 $1.21:
c. P:an for roadway cnnstrucnor froir. 1993 to 110 5565 S "20 53 SO 52C1 51.586
SUBTOTAL 5731 51.912 5228 5644 5523 54.039 525 303
TASK 8. DEVELOP MASTER PLAN
a. Review comments 5640 3255 5152 5129 580 51,156
b. Rewrite 5548 54.320 5228 5129 5322 52.247
c Submit Master Construct or. Plan 5365 S956 5152 5129 5183 52.085
d. Submit Execut ve Summary 5365 5510 5152 SO 5402 51.430
SL:1310TAL 51.9:9 32.740 5685 5387 S...238 57,0:9 532.321
TOTAL 55.482 514,529 51,523 53 222 57.565 532.321
Total Labor Cost (inclades ovcrnead and profti)
Experses
Travel (5220/trip X 7 tnps) 5:540
*Telephone. Reproduction, and M scellarectus 400
Subtotal Expenses
SUBTOTAL PROJECT COST
Estimated Cast for Aeditional Data Collectizn
TOTAL PROJECT COST
532.321
51.943
534.261
52.239
336300
A - 12
.Modification of Engineering.Services Contract page 1 of 1
Project no.
92061-0000
Amendment/Modification No. 1
Contractor:
DeShazo, Starek & Tang, Inc.
330 Union Station
Dallas, Tx 75202-4802
Accounting and Appropriation data:
Account no.
Increase
210-550-5-315.00
in Contract Amount: $5,500.00
Previous contract amount: $36,500.00
Revised Contract Amount: $42,000.00
Description of Modification/Scope of Work
Add to the existing Engineering Services contract all
necessary to include additional intersection analysis
described on the attached letter from DeShazo, Starek
Inc., dated April 20, 1992.
Except as specifically provided above, all terms and conditions
of the contract dated 7 April 1992 shall remain in full force and
effect.
work
as
& Tang,
Name and title of signers:
Ukti C e4441411
for DeShazo, Starek & Tang, Inc. P.E.
City Manager
date signed 10 2
1/ //
date signed
-/
APR 20 '92:0::1 DES-4AZO s
April 20, 1992
Mr. Jim Beavers, P E
City Administration Building
113 West Mountain Street
Fayetteville. Arkansas 72701
TING
De Sham, Stank & Tang, Inc.
Faginsers • Pbuiners
Re: Fayetteville Traffic and Transportation Study: Proposed Contract
Modification; J92008
Dear Mr. Beavers:
We have reviewed your letter dated April 17, 1992 and agree that the ten intersections
listed in paragraph 1 shall be part of our base contract, which includes a signalized
intersection capacity analysis for up to ten Intersections.
We have also reviewed the additional six locations identified in paragraph 2, "Potential
amendment." We estimate that the total lumpsum adjustment for these locations is
$51500. The following tasks are included in this estimate:
1. Conduct AM and PM peak period data collection (for estimation of AM and PM
peak hour turning movement volumes) at six locations:
• Mt Comfort/Garland and adjacent side streets
• Happy Hollow/Huntsville
• Cato Springs/South School
• Sycamore/Garland and Deane/Garland
• Millsap/North College
• Green Acres/College
2. Perform a current -year AM and PM peak hour traffic operations analysis of the Mt.
Comfort/Garland location; perform a current -year AM and PM peak hour signalized
intersection capacity analysis for the remaining five locations.
3. Examine the results of Task 2 and identify modifications required to achieve a
reasonable level of service.
4. Prepare year 2010 estimates of AM and PM peak hour turning movement volumes.
5. Perform a year 2010 AM and PM peak hour traffic operations analysis of the Mt.
Comfort/Garland location; perform a year 2010 AM and PM peak hour signalized
intersection capacity analysis for the remaining five locations.
330 Union Station
Dallas. Tens 7520241102
2147484740 Metro 2140263-542$
feu 2140411.7037