2021/06/30 Council Agenda Packet

Task 1-2 — Conceptual Design The Consultant will develop, under this task, a minimum of three (3) alternatives for the alignment, intersection treatments, and facility type for the Project in each of the three segments. At the project kickoff, the Consultant and the City will agree on and document the project goals. 1-2.1 Identification of Alternatives Based on the survey provided by the City, the Consultant will develop at least three (3) alternatives per project segment Draft line drawings and cross -sections will be prepared to illustrate the concepts. A project team meeting, including the City project manager, will be held midway through this process to review the range of alternatives and discuss other potentially feasible alternatives. The goal of the meeting will be to identify which concepts are to be carried forward to evaluation and ensure all feasible and desirable alternatives have been considered. Several figures will be prepared to describe each alternative in more detail. The alternatives will incorporate the following considerations: • Recommended and maximum vehicle lane widths, and number of vehicle lanes, adhering to City of Everett standards and WSDOT recommendations for lane widths on roadways with the desired characteristics of the California Street corridor. • Alternative bicycle facilities in each segment, such as bike lanes, buffered bike lanes (climbing or bi-directional) two-way cycle tracks and off-street shared use paths, including identifying minimum widths. Transitions between on -road and off -road facilities will be identified • Intersection treatments, including stop -controlled modifications, signalized intersection modifications, striping configurations for visibility and safety of bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and pedestrian or cyclist activated beacons or signals. • Alternative concepts to provide pedestrian facilities in each segment on both sides of California Street (Segment A), and Fulton/Pine/Maple (Segment B), such as sidewalks, curb ramp upgrades, optimal crossing locations (midblock or at intersections) and shared use paths and identification of minimum widths. • Paved width increases to accommodate recommended active transportation facilities. • Urban corridor improvements, such as planter strips, landscape architecture treatments, low impact development stormwater infrastructure, pedestrian and vehicle scale lighting and on -street parking • Added right of way requirements to accommodate recommended paved width increases, drainage facilities and urban corridor improvements. The City will conduct any right of way outreach and negotiation required in support of the chosen alternative. AcutanzaSTS (a DBE firm) will provide technical peer review of concepts and alternatives identified within this task, as described in the attachment to this Scope. Alternative details will be analyzed and investigated to the extent necessary to evaluate feasibility, but design -level drawings and detail will be avoided to the extent possible until after the selection of a preferred alternative. The City has provided survey for Segments A, C and one alternative for Segment B Supplemental survey will be completed in Phase 2, and GIS and orthophotos will be used to evaluate alternatives outside of the existing survey limits, provided by the City. The Consultant will include a feasibility -level analysis of vertical geometry as part of the identification and evaluation of alternatives. Consultant Deliverables • Conceptual design exhibits for at least three (3) alternatives per project segment Task 1-3 — Traffic Analysis The Consultant will prepare a traffic analysis of up to three (3) corridor alternatives. Corridors will be defined as multiple segments and may include all three project segments. Additional requested transpogroup cilrr Page 4