Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAmendment 2 with Hillier Group l&o-J-- ;?? 0 6 ~ 12/22/2005 AMENDMENT NO.2 TO THE AGREEMENT DATED APRIL 30, 2003 BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH AND HILLIER GROUP ARCHITECTURE, NEW JERSEY, INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR THE CITYWIDE WAYFINDING SIGNAGE SYSTEM FOR FEES IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $23,000.00, AND FOR REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $16,900.00, FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT OF $39,900, FOR THE PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR FIELD TESTING OF THE VISIBILITY OF THE FUTURA TYPEFACE This Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement made and entered this 71t day of -p~utJetl- , 2005, by and between the CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, a Municipal Corporation existing under the laws of the State of Florida (hereinafter referred to as CITY), having its principal offices at 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, and HilliER GROUP ARCHITECTURE, NEW JERSEY, INC., a New Jersey corporation whose address is The Widener Building, Mezzanine, One South Penn Square, Philadelphia PA 19107-3502 (hereinafter referred to as CONSULTANT). RECITALS WHEREAS, pursuant to Request for Proposals (RFP) No. 48-01/02, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2003-25182, on April 30, 2003, approving and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an Agreement with firm of Hillier Group Architecture, New Jersey, Inc. (Consultant) for Planning, Design and Construction Administration services for a Wayfinding Signage System; and WHEREAS, the Agreement was executed on April 30, 2003, for a lump sum fee of $185,770.00 for professional fees and $22,230 for reimbursable expenses; and WHEREAS, Consultant created three different conceptual designs for the signage system based upon the public input from the Identity Forum, and presented the three design options in several public meetings, including the Design Review Board and the Historic Preservation Board; and WHEREAS, on February 25, 2004, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2004-25508, approving the schematic design concept for the Citywide Wayfinding Sign age System; and Amendment NO.2 - Hillier Agreement - Citywide Wayfinding Signage System 1 12/22/2005 WHEREAS, on August 17, 2004, the final design for the Citywide Wayfinding Signage System was reviewed and approved at a joint public hearing by the Design Review Board and the Historic Preservation Board; and WHEREAS, on May 16, 2005, Invitation to Bid No. 16-04/05 was issued for the fabrication and installation of a sign age package in accordance with the Citywide Wayfinding Signage and Identity System, with an optional sign maintenance service agreement (the Bid); and WHEREAS, on July 27,2005, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2005-25975, approving and awarding a contract to the lowest and best bidder, GablesSigns and Graphics, Inc., in the amount of $1,476,623.62, pursuant to Bid No. 16- 04/05 for the fabrication and installation of the signage package with a two-year sign maintenance service agreement, in accordance with the City of Miami Beach Citywide Wayfinding Signage and Identity System; and further approving $137,205 for contingencies; approving $61,884 for construction administration; and appropriating funds, in the amount of $218,726, from Fund 481 Parking Revenue Bonds Series 1997, for a total project budget of $1,675,713.00. WHEREAS, in April 2005 the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) initiated procedures for adoption of Rule Chapter 14-51 concerning Florida's Highway Guide Sign Program, thereby taking precedence over preliminary approvals forthe design of the City of Miami Beach Wayfinding Signage program given by the District VI office; and WHEREAS, the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Rule Chapter 14-15 requires all lettering- used on Wayfinding Signs on the State Highway System to be highway gothic fonts or other Federal Highway Administration (FHW A) approved fonts, and the Futura font proposed for the City of Miami Beach Wayfinding signs has not yet been approved by FHWA; and WHEREAS, Amendment No.1, dated August 11, 2005, authorized the Consultant to engage the services of a sub-consultant, Visual Communication Research Institute (VCRI), a nationally recognized research institute on the legibility of highway signs, to prepare an Analytical Evaluation of Futura Typeface's Acceptability for Use on Miami Beach, FL Road Signs, for a fee of $5.000.00; and WHEREAS, after reviewing said Analytical Evaluation, the Federal Highway Administration (FHW A) declined to approve the Futura typeface until the City conducts Field Testing to document the Visibility of the Futura Typeface in comparison to the Standard Highway Alphabet; and WHEREAS, Consultant proposes to engage the services of a sub-consultant, Visual Communication Research Institute (VCRI), to conduct the field testing, and the Administration has negotiated a fee proposal with Consultant for these services, in an Amendment No.2 - Hillier Agreement - Citywide Wayfinding Signage System 2 12/22/2005 amount not to exceed $15,600 in fees and an amount not to exceed $9,400 in reimbursable expenses, for a total amount of $25,000.00; and WHEREAS, Consultant proposes an amount not to exceed $7,400 in fees, as set forth in Article 5 Additional Services, for Hillier to coordinate the work of the sub- consultant, manufacture of prototype signs and the review and approval by FOOT and FHWA of the Futura font testing process, and reimbursable expenses not to exceed $7,500, for a total amount of $14,900.00; and WHEREAS, funding is available for said services, in an amount of $39,900.00 from Fund 481 Parking Revenue Bonds 1997. NOW_ THEREFORE_ the parties hereto, and in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants, agreements, terms, and conditions herein contained, and other good and valuable consideration, the respect and adequacy are hereby acknowledged, do agree as follows: 1. ABOVE RECITALS The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated as a part of this Amendment No.2. 2. MODIFICATIONS The Agreement is amended as defined in Schedule "A-2", attached herein. 3. OTHER PROVISIONS. All other provisions of the Agreement, as amended, are unchanged. 4. RATIFICATION. The CITY and CONSULTANT ratify the terms of the Agreement, as amended by this Amendment No.2. Amendment No.2 - Hillier Agreement - Citywide Wayfinding Signage System 3 12/22/2005 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment No.1 to be executed in their names by their duly authorized officials as of the date first set forth above. ATTEST: David Dermer ~k f fM-duA- City Clerk Robert Parcher ATTEST: CONSULTANT: Hillier Group Architecture of New Jersey, Inc. By GlJC. r-.l Sw~ rl6r ~ Print Name \)11Ui ~i) Print Name APPROVED AS TO FORM & lANGUAGE & FOR EXECUTION 12.-~ J...3-os Date Amendment No.2 - Hillier Agreement - Citywide Wayfinding Signage System 4 .. 12/22/2005 SCHEDULE "A-2" SCODe of Services: The following is a description of Additional Services for tasks that are required as part of the testing process for the use of the Futura font on use on the Miami Beach Citywide Wayfinding Program. This requires the following Hillier scope as well tasks to be performed by sub-consultant Visual Research Communications Institute (VRCI) and the necessary prototype signs. Hillier Scooe 1. Attend meeting with FOOT and FHW A to outline testing goals and requirements 2. Selection of sign locations / testing sites 3. Provide drawings and graphic layouts for sample signs 4. Assist in coordination of sample sign fabrication 5. Attend testing process (2 - 3 days) 6. Coordinate information and results with testing facilitator 7. Attend meeting with FOOT and FHW A to review results (if required) Visual Research Communications Institute (VRCI) Sub-consultant Scooe 1. Field testing and research report development - see Attachment B for detailed scope 2. Attend meeting with FOOT and FHWA to outline testing goals and requirements 3. Attend meeting with FOOT and FHW A to review results (if required) ComDensation Fees for Additional Services provided by Consultant shall be compensated as set forth in Article 5, Article 7 and Schedule C of the Agreement. The estimated fees for Hillier scope are $7,400.00. The estimated fees for VRCI scope are $15,600.00, as per itemized Budget in Attachment B. Reimbursable EXDenses Prototype Signs (est. 12) to be used for testing purposes (Gable Signs) Standard reimbursable charges for Hillier as per Agreement . VRCI reimbursable expenses as per Itemized Budget in Attachment B Total reimbursable $3,000 $4,500 .$9.400 $ 16,900 F:\PLAN\$ALL\Meyers\Signage System\Amend 2\Amendment No 2 Hillier agreement.doc Amendment No.2 - Hillier Agreement - Citywide Wayfinding Signage System 5 Attachment B Title The Visibility of Futura versus Standard Highway Fonts on Iv1ialni Beach \Vayfinding Signs Principal Investigator Philip M. Garvey The Visual Communication Research Institute (YCRI) 123 MacDuff Circle State College, P A 16801 Proposal Summary The city of Miami Beach would like to use the Futura typeface for wayfinding road signs in the Miami Beach, FL area. However, the federal Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), and by reference the Standard Highway Signs book, specify that all signs on public access roads in the United States shall use the Standard Highway Alphabet (SHA). For the Federal Highway Administration (FHW A) to approve an alternate typeface, such as Futura, its visibility must be shown through valid scientific experimentation to be equal to or greater than the comparable SHA series. (There are six SHA series: B, C, D, E, E(M), and F, illustrated in Figure 1). The proposed study will provide the research required by the FHW A to determine whether Futura provides this level of visibility when used as part of a wayfinding system proposed for the city streets of Miami Beach. Serie.s ABC DEl 2 3 4 Serie.e ABC DEI 2 3 4 Serieso ABC DEl 234 serie.. ABCDE1234 seriesElMIA BCD E 1234 lowereesea bed e f CJ h i j SeriesF ABCDE 1234 Figure 1. Standard Highway Alphabet Series B - F with lower case E(M). Page - 2 The objective of the proposed research is to compare the Futura typeface (Figure 2) with the Standard Highway Alphabet Series Band C (Figure 2). To do this, the visibility distance thresholds (or furthest point at which the signs can be read) will be determined for the proposed and standard typefaces. The research will be conducted using full-sized wayfinding signs located on city streets in the Miami Beach area. The signs will be viewed by older and younger motorists from a vehicle moving at posted speed limits of 25 and 45 mph through live traffic in the daytime and at night. The data will be analyzed to determine if there are statistically significant differences in the relative visibility of Futura and the Standard Highway Alphabets. Figure 2. Futura lower case letters a and e. Figure 3. Standard Highway Alphabet Series Band C, upper and lower case. R cS(,~l 1eh In ~ti tu%<: 11(:i:~::\' ~}~:;~c/:~ (~lt( lll~:~)!!~~~'~; ,:~::~;~I 1,:~~:~:! :;;~:;i :(l:~; i;';:'~l:;"~~;~:~';~: ~~':lu~j,~ '~\l:ln;i:~~j:~:\l ~jp~111!~\,~'::1:uaj ('0:11.1(1' I ni C:l ti () n l'ccomrrit'mJarions :Uh\ ckcisions: by accepting thi'~ lcs('arch IH\l)o;:aL Hillier (\!'chilcnure tre:it it by UN its conWTW: F::Jf any other purpose \/ (' RJ Page - 3 Methodology Typeface Selection ~1iami Beach's wayfinding plan includes signs with legends that combine upper and lower case letters. Specifically the words on the signs will have initial uppercase letters followed by lower case. Prior to the Millennium edition of the MUTCD, this type of so-called mixed-case lettering for sign legends was only permitted on freeway guide signs, while conventional road guide signs such as those proposed for the wayfinding system in Miami Beach were required to use all uppercase letters. However, the current MUTCD states, "Word messages on street name signs and destinations on [conventional road] guide signs may be composed of a combination of lowercase letters with initial uppercase letters." Prior to the publication of the latest version of the Standard Highway Signs book, lowercase letters only existed for the SHA Series E(M) (Figure 1) and the FHW A required that Series E(M) be used in any instance where lowercase letters were required. The current SHS book, however, includes lowercase letters for all the SHA Series. Lowercase Series Band C (Figure 3) are condensed versions of the Series E(M) with thinner stroke widths and smaller letter width-to- height ratios (i.e., narrower letters). These are the SHA Series that would normally be used on guide signs in a place like Miami Beach and which the city is proposing to replace with Futura in their proposed wayfinding signage plan. The proposed research will, therefore, evaluate the relative effectiveness of Futura versus Standard Highway Alphabet Series Band C on wayfinding signs. This will be done using procedures developed, tested, and replicated at Penn State's Pennsylvania Transportation Institute (PTI) for the evaluation of highway and commercial sign font visibility. Subject Recruitment and Screening Fifty-six subjects will be paid ten dollars each to participate in the half hour test sessions. All subjects will hold valid driver's licenses. Twenty-eight subjects will be "younger" ranging in age from 18 to 34 and twenty-eight will be "older" from 65 to 80 years of age. Subject's high contrast, binocular, distance visual acuity will be measured using a standardized test. All subjects will have visual acuity of 20/40 or better as required by the Florida Department of Motor Vehicles. Variables The independent variables will be font (Futura and SHA Series B and C), posted speed limit (25 and 45 mph), letter height (3.5 and 4.0 inches), time of day (day and night), and subject age group (younger and older). Half of the subjects (14 younger and 14 older) will be run at night and half will be run in the daytime. All subjects will be exposed to all typeface conditions. Reading way finding signs is based on either recognition, where motorists look for a specific location (e.g., Ocean Drive) and couple their mental picture of the word with the legend on the sign, or legibility, where motorists are looking for general information (e.g., cultural landmarks) and must read each sign completely before they can cognitively process the specific message. The dependent variables will, therefore, be recognition and legibility distance thresholds. Site and Apparatus The test site will be city streets in the Miami Beach area. The observation vehicle will be a late model sedan instrumented with a distance measuring instrument (DMI). Six signs with 3.5- Nore.: Tlm: rescardj p.wposaJ subtnitred tuHiIhcr A.H:bjteclure 1S 11);;.' properly ()fthe Visu,d C\ll)JtD.unlcaticn IZest';uch Institute, LLC lVCIUl. Ii hilS been made <lv,libbk to lFUier:\1cllHecture t;)1 the sole pUlT!>!?'': n.:(x~mnwlldari(H\S nnd decisions: by accepting rhis resc;arch proposal, IliHJCr Architecture ag)'('(',-; to trt':lt it fl'A' cODteTlts for any other purpose. F'utCU;l Page - 4 inch capital letter heights and proportionally sized lowercase letters will be tested on roadways with 25 mph posted speed limits. Six signs with 4.0-inch capital letter heights and proportionally sized lowercase letters will be tested on roadways with 45 mph posted speed limits. Three of the signs at each speed location will display a single destination and three will display three destinations (See Figure 4 for examples). The signs type will be the Miami Beach wayfinding system's Destination Directional Signs with the backgrounds painted blue and white engineer grade 3M Scotchlite cut vinyl letters applied to form the words. One single-destination and one triple-destination sign at each speed location will use Futura, one will use SHA Series B, and one will use SHA Series C. All words on each sign will use a single typeface. Figure 4. Example of test signs with Futura typeface. >':Ole: 'TIns 1\:'senrclJ ph1jlOsaJ :mhlnitted Hillier 11;,' Rc::,e.ndl Institute, LLC' (VCRI). it has b('cn rDade (J\iiiLlhk' w JhUicr /\rchih;;:nm: fiYl fGCOlrnnendations rind (kcisiOllii: by accepting ILi'.: n(\t disclosing eOIHcnu for any other purpose Page - 5 Procedure The subjects will be located in the front passenger seat with an experimenter seated in the driver seat. The observation vehicle will be driven over a prescribed course through the streets of Miami Beach. To determine typeface legibility, the subjects will be asked to read the destinations on the single-destination signs. In the Figure 4 example, the experimenter would simply point to the sign and ask the subject to read it. When the subject says "Bass Museum of Art," the experimenter will press a button on the DMI recording the legibility distance for that condition on a laptop computer located in the rear seat of the observation vehicle. To determine typeface recognition, the subjects will be told a destination to look for on a sign (e.g., Wolfsonian Museum) and will be asked to determine the position of that destination on the sign (top, middle, or bottom). When the subject responds "top," the experimenter will press a button on the DMI recording the recognition distance for that condition. The subjects will be asked to respond as soon as they are close enough to do so accurately. This process will be repeated with each subject for all twelve signs. Analysis Descriptive Statistics Mean legibility and recognition distance tables will be generated for each sign condition. These tables will show age group and time of day specific legibility distance as well as data collapsed across those two variables (for examples see Tables I and 2). Font Futura Standard H B Standard H C Font Futura Standard H B Standard H C Inferential Statistics Analysis of variance (ANOV A) statistical techniques will be used to determine the main effects of font, letter height, age group, and time of day on legibility distance. Post-hoc evaluations will determine the relative visibility Futura vs. Standard Highway Series Band C. The results of the inferential statistics will be displayed in appropriate figures and tables. No[e: 'This n'scarch PI\.~P()SaJ suhmiHed to BilJi.:r ArcJjrccturc IS rho;: property \lfthe Visua.l C.'omnlullic;Hilirl Institute, LtC' I VCRI). It has fwen made 3\,liJabJ\:.' to Hilli~r ;\n:hillxturc hYl the sole puqw.~;;;' of nuking ~.:~:~(lln!'ncndatiorl~'~~:l{;e~~~~~it~~~H:~L.b~t~~~~~~~~~:;::;sl;~iS l\'sGarch l\f(;posal, HiHicr t\rchitcCiUlC agrc(:s to treat it by . . Page - 6 Qualifications of the Research Team The proposed research will be lead by Philip Garvey of the Visual Communication Research Institute. Philip M. Garvey - Principal Investigator Philip Garvey has been working in the field of visual perception in transportation since 1984. His educational training is in psychology where he specialized in experimental design and measuring visual acuity for objects in motion. Mr. Garvey wrote the Federal Highway Administration guidelines for the visibility of changeable message signs and the ADA sign. visibility guidelines for the visually impaired. Mr. Garvey was also a principal investigator on research to develop the Clearview Typeface, which in 2004 became the fITst new guide sign font allowed by the FHW A in over fifty years. He also developed and tested "NPS Roadway," the typeface that will be used on all future National Park Service guide sign installations. Mr. Garvey's expertise in the field of human interaction with the roadway environment led to his selection as the chairman of the National Academy of Sciences' TRB Committee on User Information Systems, a post he served for six years. Mr. Garvey recently wrote the Sign Visibility chapter for the Handbook of Transportation Engineering published in 2004 by McGraw- Hill, was integral in developing the commercial sign legibility criteria endorsed by the on-premise sign industry, and assisted the Dubai Municipality (United Arab Emirates) this year in developing their outdoor advertising control manual. Timeline Task Design Signs Find Si n Locations Fabricate and Mount Signs Recruit Sub' ects Collect Data Analyze Data Deliver Draft Final Re ort Revise Draft Final Report Deliver Final Re ort t<Ole: This research pL'posnJ ,;u1.mnHed to lIiUi;;;f /\rchiteclurc is (11;: properly oftheVisua1 COHllUunicatlnn 1\,;s(';11<h Inslihlic, LtC' {VCR!) It has b~:cnmadc avaiLlbk 1.0 Ililli'~r !\rchit<;)clurc t;.Yf the sole puqws;;; r\;,;~)m;n(.'l)(ia(ions ,tnd d(;cisi~m'j: by accepting this H's,;arch prope'sal, IjiJ!icr ,\rehitcclurc agr('..:;s to tTC(!! it not ('.~YDti;nts 1:~)r any: oth{:.~r pt1rpo~;e, ~~tU_Jl(jdf'd Budget V('R! ITEMIZED BUDGET November 1, 2005 - January 31, 2006 Proposal Title: The Legibility of Futura versus Standard Highway Fonts on Miami Beach Wayfinding Signs Sponsor: Hillier Architecture Contractor: Visual Communication Research Institute(VCRI) Budget starts with fiscal year 2005 The itemized budget for estimated cost presented below is based on three months. # of Months in Year 1 #of Months in Year 2 %of Time Salaries P.M. Garvey Research Associate Staff Assistant Total Salaries 2,0 0.0 0.0 Fringe Benefits 30% of Salaries Consultan t Consul tan t Travel Reports Communications Subject Payments Equipment (Sign Fabrication) Miscellaneous Items Total Total Direct Costs and Fringe Facilities & Administration (Overhead) 60% of Total Direct Costs and Fringe Total Requested Cost Person Monthly Hours Rate Sub Total 120.0 $10,000.00 $7,500.00 0,0 $5,000.00 $0.00 0.0 $3,400.00 $0.00 1.0 0.0 0,0 25.0 0.0 0.0 $0.00 $0.00 $4,225.00 $100.00 $100.00 $600.00 $500.00 $350.00 NCde:rllis rt'se,uch pnlj)os,d suhrmHed ;0 Hjllicr Architecture is 111(' property of the Visual (onlHHHIication R(~~e;H('h Institute, LL(' {VCRI). It has been made availabk to Hillier Arcbitedurc f;:lr tht: sole pUrp(lS,~ of nuking hmding f<:;(\)rnrn('lhJariclfls and decisions: hy accepting rhis research proposal, Hillier Architecture agw(;$ to trear it confi(k'ntia!!y hy 11.'.)t (ODWJHS ]()f ;my other purpose. Page - 7 Totals $7,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $7,500.00 $2,250.00 $0.00 $0.00 $4,225.00 $100.00 $100.00 $600,00 $500.00 $350.00 $5,875.00 $15,625 $9,375 $25,000 I