Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutR2026-084 20260518RESOLUTION NO. R2026-84 A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pearland, Texas, authorizing a professional service contract with STV Incorporated associated with the City’s Sidewalk Gap and Replacement Program, in the estimated amount of $163,790.00. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PEARLAND, TEXAS: Section 1. That certain contract for professional services, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and made a part hereof for all purposes, is hereby authorized and approved. Section 2. That the City Manager or his designee is hereby authorized to execute and the City Secretary to attest a contract for professional services. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this the 18th day of May, A.D., 2026. ________________________________ QUENTIN WILTZ MAYOR ATTEST: ________________________________ FRANCES AGUILAR, TRMC, MMC CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM: ________________________________ LAWRENCE G. PROVINS CITY ATTORNEY Docusign Envelope ID: 59AAAFD5-CCF1-8E61-8137-E468BBC48473 Design 1 of 7 D2. Revised 04/2019 CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES THIS CONTRACT is entered into upon final execution by and between the City of Pearland ("CITY") and STV Incorporated ("CONSULTANT"). The CITY engages the CONSULTANT to perform professional services for a project known and described as Concrete Sidewalk Gaps and Replacement ("PROJECT"). (Project #TR2404, Contract # 66-26) SECTION I - SERVICES OF THE CONSULTANT The CONSULTANT shall perform the following professional services to CITY standards and in accordance with the degree of care and skill that a professional in Texas would exercise under the same or similar circumstances: A. The CONSULTANT shall provide professional services. See Exhibit A, attached, for a detailed SCOPE OF WORK and PROJECT schedule. The PROJECT schedule shall be submitted in digital and hard copy form in the Microsoft Project for Windows format. B.The CONSULTANT shall prepare and submit a detailed opinion of estimated cost of the PROJECT. C.The CONSULTANT acknowledges that the CITY (through its employee handbook) considers the following to be misconduct that is grounds for termination of a CITY employee: Any fraud, forgery, misappropriation of funds, receiving payment for services not performed or for hours not worked, mishandling or untruthful reporting of money transactions, destruction of assets, embezzlement, accepting materials of value from vendors, or consultants, and/or collecting reimbursement of expenses made for the benefit of the CITY. The CONSULTANT agrees that it will not, directly or indirectly; encourage a CITY employee to engage in such misconduct. D.The CONSULTANT shall submit all final construction documents in both hard copy and electronic format. Plans shall be AutoCAD compatible and all other documents shall be Microsoft Office compatible. The software version used shall be compatible to current CITY standards. Other support documents, for example, structural calculations, drainage reports and geotechnical reports, shall be submitted in hard copy only. All Record Drawings electronic files shall be submitted to the CITY in TIF format. E.The CONSULTANT recognizes that all drawings, special provisions, field survey notes, reports, estimates and any and all other documents or work product generated by the CONSULTANT under the CONTRACT shall be delivered to the CITY upon request, shall become subject to the Open Records Laws of this State. F.The CONSULTANT shall procure and maintain for the duration of this Agreement, insurance against claims for injuries to persons, damages to property, or any errors EXHIBIT A Resolution No. 2026-84Docusign Envelope ID: 59AAAFD5-CCF1-8E61-8137-E468BBC48473 Design 2 of 7 D2 Revised 04/2019 and omissions relating to the performance of any work by the CONSULTANT, its agents, employees or subcontractors under this Agreement, as follows: (1) Workers’ Compensation as required by law. (2) Professional Liability Insurance in an amount not less than $1,000,000 in the aggregate. (3) Comprehensive General Liability and Property Damage Insurance with minimum limits of $1,000,000 for injury or death of any one person, $1,000,000 for each occurrence, and $1,000,000 for each occurrence of damage to or destruction of property. (4) Comprehensive Automobile and Truck Liability Insurance covering owned, hired, and non-owned vehicles, with minimum limits of $1,000,000 for injury or death of any one person, $1,000,000 for each occurrence, and $1,000,000 for property damage. The CONSULTANT shall include the CITY as an additional insured under the policies, with the exception of the Professional Liability Insurance and Workers’ Compensation. The CONSULTANT shall agree to waive its Right to Subrogation. Certificates of Insurance and endorsements shall be furnished to the CITY before work commences. Each insurance policy shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled, and/or reduced in coverage or in limits (“Change in Coverage”) except with prior written consent of the CITY and only after the CITY has been provided with written notice of such Change in Coverage, such notice to be sent to the CITY either by hand delivery to the City Manager or by certified mail, return receipt requested, and received by the City no fewer than thirty (30) days prior to the effective date of such Change in Coverage. Prior to commencing services under this CONTRACT, CONSULTANT shall furnish CITY with Certificates of Insurance, or formal endorsements as required by this CONTRACT, issued by CONSULTANT’S insurer(s), as evidence that policies providing the required coverage, conditions, and limits required by this CONTRACT are in full force and effect. G. The CONSULTANT shall indemnify and hold the CITY, its officers, agents, and employees, harmless from any claim, loss, damage, suit, and liability of every kind for which CONSULTANT is legally liable, including all expenses of litigation, court costs, and attorney's fees, for injury to or death of any person, for damage to any property, or errors in design, any of which are caused by the negligent act or omission of the CONSULTANT, his officers, employees, agents, or subcontractors under this CONTRACT. H. All parties intend that the CONSULTANT, in performing services pursuant to this CONTRACT, shall act as an independent contractor and shall have control of its own work and the manner in which it is performed. The CONSULTANT is not to be considered an agent or employee of the CITY. Docusign Envelope ID: 59AAAFD5-CCF1-8E61-8137-E468BBC48473 Design 3 of 7 D2 Revised 04/2019 SECTION II - PERIOD OF SERVICE This CONTRACT will be binding upon execution and end September 30, 2026. SECTION III - CONSULTANT'S COMPENSATION A. The total compensation for the services performed shall not exceed the total noted in Section B. B. The CITY shall pay the CONSULTANT in installments based upon monthly progress reports and detailed invoices submitted by the CONSULTANT based upon the following: 1. Basic Services (Not to Exceed) $163,790.00 2. Additional Services shall require independent and specific authorization and shall be billed as (Not to Exceed): 3. Bid Phase Services (Hourly Not to Exceed) 4. Construction Phase Services (Hourly Not to Exceed) 5. Reimbursable Expenses (Not to Exceed) 6. Total: $163,790.00 C. The CITY shall make payments to the CONSULTANT within thirty (30) days after receipt and approval of a detailed invoice. Invoices shall be submitted on a monthly basis. D. CONSULTANT shall invoice for work performed during the preceding thirty day period (“Billing Period”). The Billing Period shall run from the 26th day to the 25th day of each consecutive month. Invoices shall be submitted to CITY not more frequently than once every 30 days. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for timely submittal of all invoices and CONSULTANT shall not be entitled to payment for invoices in arrears. All invoices shall reflect most recent single Billing Period only and represent the true, correct and accurate account of work performed during the Billing Period. E. For an agreed contract amount identified as “Lump Sum”, Not to Exceed” and “Reimbursable” the CONSULTANT shall not exceed the fixed contractual amount without written authorization in the form of a Contract Amendment. CONSULTANT shall provide 45 days prior notice to the CITY in the event contract fees may exceed the fixed contract amount. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for ensuring that such authorization is complete and executed by all parties Docusign Envelope ID: 59AAAFD5-CCF1-8E61-8137-E468BBC48473 Design 4 of 7 D2 Revised 04/2019 performing any work or submitting any invoices for work that exceeds the fixed contract amount under any expense category. F. Allowable Reimbursable Expenses CONSULTANT shall identify and include in the proposal any anticipated Reimbursable Expenses, and shall itemize Reimbursable Expenses by work category. Reimbursable Expenses shall be invoiced AT COST without subsequent markup by the CONSULTANT. All invoices containing a request for Reimbursable Expenses shall include copies of the original expense receipts itemized per the allowable category. Allowable Reimbursable Expenses include: • Hard copy reproductions, copies and/ or binding costs • Postage • Mileage, for travel from Consultant’s local office (within a 25 mile radius) to meetings at the City or job-site. Mileage shall be charged at the current IRS rates. • Travel expenses, mileage from local office to State or federal regulatory agency office beyond 100 miles. • Lodging expenses, for destinations beyond 100 miles from the Consultant’s local office AND when business hours exceed eight hours within one business day OR requires more than one eight hour day. F.2. Disallowed Expenses Disallowed Expenses include travel expenses for professional expertise traveling into the greater Houston area from Consultant offices outside of the greater Houston area. SECTION IV - THE CITY'S RESPONSIBILITIES A. The CITY shall designate a project manager during the term of this CONTRACT. The project manager has the authority to administer this CONTRACT and shall monitor compliance with all terms and conditions stated herein. All requests for information from or a decision by the CITY on any aspect of the work shall be directed to the project manager. B. The CITY shall review submittals by the CONSULTANT and provide prompt response to questions and rendering of decisions pertaining thereto, to minimize delay in the progress of the CONSULTANT'S work. The CITY will keep the CONSULTANT advised concerning the progress of the CITY'S review of the work. The CONSULTANT agrees that the CITY'S inspection, review, acceptance or approval of CONSULTANT'S work shall not relieve CONSULTANT'S responsibility for errors or omissions of the CONSULTANT or its sub- Docusign Envelope ID: 59AAAFD5-CCF1-8E61-8137-E468BBC48473 Design 5 of 7 D2 Revised 04/2019 consultant(s) or in any way affect the CONSULTANT’S status as an independent contractor of the CITY. SECTION V - TERMINATION A. The CITY, at its sole discretion, may terminate this CONTRACT for any reason -- with or without cause -- by delivering written notice to CONSULTANT personally or by certified mail at 11757 Katy Freeway, Suite 1540 Houston, TX. 77079. Immediately after receiving such written notice, the CONSULTANT shall discontinue providing the services under this CONTRACT. B. If this CONTRACT is terminated, CONSULTANT shall deliver to the CITY all drawings, special provisions, field survey notes, reports, estimates and any and all other documents or work product generated by the CONSULTANT under the CONTRACT, entirely or partially completed, together with all unused materials supplied by the CITY on or before the 15th day following termination of the CONTRACT. C. In the event of such termination, the CONSULTANT shall be paid for services performed prior to receipt of the written notice of termination. The CITY shall make final payment within sixty (60) days after the CONSULTANT has delivered to the CITY a detailed invoice for services rendered and the documents or work product generated by the CONSULTANT under the CONTRACT. D. If the remuneration scheduled under this contract is based upon a fixed fee or definitely ascertainable sum, the portion of such sum payable shall be proportionate to the percentage of services completed by the CONSULTANT based upon the scope of work. E. In the event this CONTRACT is terminated, the CITY shall have the option of completing the work, or entering into a CONTRACT with another party for the completion of the work. F. If the CITY terminates this CONTRACT for cause and/or if the CONSULTANT breaches any provision of this CONTRACT, then the CITY shall have all rights and remedies in law and/or equity against CONSULTANT. Venue for any action or dispute arising out of or relating to this CONTRACT shall be in Brazoria County, Texas. The laws of the State of Texas shall govern the terms of this CONTRACT. The prevailing party in the action shall be entitled to recover its actual damages with interest, attorney’s fees, costs and expenses incurred in connection with the dispute and/or action. CONSULTANT and CITY desire an expeditious means to resolve any disputes that may arise between under this CONTRACT. To accomplish this, the parties agree to mediation as follows: If a dispute arises out of or relates to this CONTRACT, or the breach thereof, and if the dispute cannot be settled through negotiation, then the parties agree first to try in good faith, and before pursuing any legal remedies, to settle the dispute by mediation of a third party who will be selected by agreement of the parties. Docusign Envelope ID: 59AAAFD5-CCF1-8E61-8137-E468BBC48473 Design 6 of 7 D2 Revised 04/2019 SECTION VI – ENTIRE AGREEMENT This CONTRACT represents the entire agreement between the CITY and the CONSULTANT and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, or contracts, either written or oral. This CONTRACT may be amended only by written instrument signed by both parties. SECTION VII – COVENANT AGAINST CONTINGENT FEES The CONSULTANT affirms that he has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working for the CONSULTANT to solicit or secure this CONTRACT, and that he has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee, any fee, commission, percentage brokerage fee, gift, or any other consideration, contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of the CONTRACT. For breach or violation of this clause, the CITY may terminate this CONTRACT without liability, and in its discretion, may deduct from the CONTRACT price or consideration, or otherwise recover, the full amount of such fee, commission, percentage brokerage fee, gift, or contingent fee that has been paid. SECTION VIII- SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS This CONTRACT shall not be assignable except upon the written consent of the parties hereto. ____________________________ CITY OF PEARLAND, TEXAS DATE ____________________________ CONSULTANT DATE (Vice President)05/06/2026 Docusign Envelope ID: 59AAAFD5-CCF1-8E61-8137-E468BBC48473 5/19/2026 | 8:23 AM CDT ATTEST: ________________________________ FRANCES AGUILAR, TRMC, MMC CITY SECRETARY Docusign Envelope ID: 59AAAFD5-CCF1-8E61-8137-E468BBC48473 Docusign Envelope ID: 59AAAFD5-CCF1-8E61-8137-E468BBC48473 EXHIBIT A – PROJECT SCOPE (Page 1 of 11) Scope of Work – Pearland Sidewalk Feasibility Study STV Incorporated (the “Engineer”) will conduct a Sidewalk Feasibility Study to verify and update the City of Pearland’s (the “City”) sidewalk gap feasibility designations currently identified on the City’s Public Sidewalk Dashboard. For purposes of this study, the Engineer’s scope is limited to 467 gap locations identified on the City’s Dashboard as “Medium priority” and “High Priority”, as of May 2, 2026. Table 1.1 below summarizes the City’s latest priorities for these sidewalk gaps. Table 1.1 – Sidewalk Gap Locations (as of May 2, 2026) City’s Current Priority Rating City of Pearland’s Feasibility Labels / Designations Not Considered Considered Totals Not Feasible Recommended Low 384 0 0 384 Medium 395 31 9 435 High 17 11 4 32 Sub-Total 796 42 13 851 TOTAL 796 55 851 Table 1.2 summarizes the corresponding approximate lengths of the sidewalk gaps shown in Table 1.1. Table 1.2 – Sidewalk Gap Lengths (as of May 2, 2026) City’s Current Priority Rating City of Pearland’s Feasibility Labels / Designations Not Considered Considered Totals Not Feasible Recommended Low 121,039 LF 0 LF 0 LF 121,039 LF Medium 126,229 LF 9,691 LF 1,770 LF 137,690 LF High 8,159 LF 4,723 LF 978 LF 13,860 LF Sub-Total 255,427 LF 14,414 LF 2,748 LF 272,589 LF TOTAL 255,427 LF 17,162 LF 272,589 LF (48.38 Miles) (3.25 Miles) (51.63 Miles) While the City has established a priority rating for each sidewalk gap location, the Engineer shall review the City’s current Medium Priority and High Priority sidewalk gap locations identified, as of May 2, 2026, as “Not Considered”, “Not Feasible”, or “Recommended”, and apply planning-level engineering criteria to evaluate the designations of such locations. Based on that evaluation, the Engineer shall provide planning-level feasibility recommendations for the City’s considerations using the following classification terms, consistently throughout this Study: Not Considered, Not Feasible, Feasible, and Recommended. Docusign Envelope ID: 59AAAFD5-CCF1-8E61-8137-E468BBC48473 EXHIBIT A – PROJECT SCOPE (Page 2 of 11) For purposes of this study, the Engineer’s scope shall also include the following four(4) accompanying sidewalk gap locations as identified by the City (highlighted in red) on May 2, 2026. The Engineer shall also provide planning-level feasibility recommendations for the City’s considerations using the following classification terms, consistently throughout this Study: Not Feasible, Feasible, and Recommended. Along Old Alvin Rd and Pearland Pkwy – 3,400 LF Along Business Center Dr - Roughly 530-LF Along Country Club Dr – Roughly 1,500 LF (North of Shadow Creek Pkwy) Along Harrington Drive (Roughly 400-LF) Docusign Envelope ID: 59AAAFD5-CCF1-8E61-8137-E468BBC48473 EXHIBIT A – PROJECT SCOPE (Page 3 of 11) Scope Assumptions and Exclusions: 1. For purposes of this study, the Engineer’s scope is limited to 467 gap locations identified by the City as “high priority” and “medium” priority, on the City’s Public Sidewalk Dashboard, as of May 2, 2026. Table 1.1 and Table 1.2 above are provided for reference only. 2. The Engineer’s scope shall also include the following four (4) accompanying sidewalk gap locations as provided by the City, as of May 2, 2026, along: Harrington Dr, Pearland Parkway, Old Alvin Rd, Country Club Dr, and Business Center Dr (North of Shadow Creek Parkway). The four exhibits above on Page 2 of this Exhibit A - Project Scope, are provided for reference only. 3. This study will take into consideration the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessibility requirements, Texas Accessibility Standards (TAS), and the AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, Texas Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (TMUTCD), City of Pearland’s Engineering Design & Construction Manual, and relevant TxDOT standards and guidelines, as applicable. 4. The Engineer’s scope for this study expressly excludes, and shall not include, the following services:  Evaluating the City’s ‘priority rating’ designations for each sidewalk gap location.  Evaluating any trip hazard locations identified on the City’s Sidewalk Dashboard.  Topographical field surveying,  Title research, deed research, and ROW acquisition,  Environmental and Geotechnical assessments  Traffic studies  Utility coordination/design  Final design, Plans, Specifications, and Estimates (PS&E)  Detailed earthwork calculations, or permitting  Public engagement/coordination. 5. The feasibility determinations by the Engineer are planning-level assessments based on available data and field observations and do not constitute final engineering determinations or construction- ready designs. 6. For purposes of this Study, the Engineer will conduct on-site visits for up to a maximum of 103 gap locations identified by the City as High Priority or Medium Priority and preliminarily identified by the Engineer on the revised Table 1.1 (from Task 2 below) as Feasible or Recommended. If more than 103 locations meet these criteria, the Engineer will prioritize the field visit list using engineering judgment and in coordination with the City. The 103-location quantity is a not-to- exceed limit and not a guaranteed minimum. Additional site visits beyond this limit will be considered Additional Services, and paid for by the City as Additional Services unless otherwise authorized in writing by the City Docusign Envelope ID: 59AAAFD5-CCF1-8E61-8137-E468BBC48473 EXHIBIT A – PROJECT SCOPE (Page 4 of 11) 7. Field measurements and observations will be approximate planning-level only, not survey-grade, and limited to publicly accessible areas only. The Engineer is not responsible for obtaining access to private property. 8. For the purposes of this study, the Engineer’s agency coordination is limited to identification of potential permitting or approval requirements. Direct coordination with outside agencies, agency meetings, permit applications, supporting submittals, and securing approvals are excluded unless authorized in writing as Additional Services. 9. For purposes of this Study, the Engineer will prepare conceptual schematic plan layouts for up to a total maximum of 70 gap locations, with a combined not-to-exceed total of 20,000 linear feet of proposed sidewalk and related amenities, for locations identified by the City as High Priority or Medium Priority and determined by the Engineer under Task 4 to be Feasible, but requiring additional detailed engineering, non-standard treatment, and/or outside agency approval(s), as further described in Task 5 below. If more than 70 such locations, or more than 20,000 linear feet of such improvements, are identified, the specific locations to be advanced for conceptual schematic development shall be prioritized by the Engineer based on engineering judgment and overall study objectives, in consultation with the City. The 70-location and 20,000-linear-foot quantities are not-to-exceed limits and are not guaranteed minimums. Any conceptual schematic development beyond these limits shall constitute Additional Services, and will be paid for by Owner as Additional Services, unless otherwise authorized in writing by the City. 10. The Engineer’s preliminary Opinion of Probable Construction Cost (OPCCs) in this study are planning-level estimates intended solely for comparative evaluation and budgeting purposes and are not suitable for bidding, procurement, or construction. Unless otherwise expressly noted, such estimates exclude right-of-way acquisition, utility relocations, permitting, environmental mitigation, agency-imposed requirements, and cost escalation. 11. The Engineer’s interim ‘key milestones’ outlined below under each task (checklists, matrices, schematics, OPCC tables, etc.) are provided for informational purposes. One (1) consolidated City review cycle is included under Task 6. Any additional reviews, revisions, or review cycles shall constitute Additional Services unless otherwise authorized in writing by the City Docusign Envelope ID: 59AAAFD5-CCF1-8E61-8137-E468BBC48473 EXHIBIT A – PROJECT SCOPE (Page 5 of 11) Task Descriptions Task 1: Project Initiation & Data Collection This task kicks off the project and establishes a foundation for the study. The Engineer will meet with the City to confirm study goals, deliverables, and confirm the Engineer’s field work schedule. The Engineer will gather all existing available information for these locations, including any available GIS data, right-of- way maps, utility and drainage plans, and available elevation data. Relevant design standards and guidelines – such as ADA accessibility requirements, the City of Pearland’s Engineering Design & Construction Manual, and relevant TxDOT roadway design criteria – will be reviewed to define the feasibility criteria (e.g. minimum sidewalk width, maximum slopes, clear width for ADA compliance, etc.). Using GIS tools, the Engineer will prepare base maps for each location by overlaying aerial imagery with available parcel boundary information and available Right of Way (ROW) information. Such mapping is intended solely for planning-level reference and feasibility screening and shall not be relied upon as a survey, legal boundary determination, or title/ROW certification. Subtasks: Kickoff Meeting: Engineer shall meet with City staff to review scope, schedule, and confirm a field work schedule. The Engineer shall meet with the City every two (2)-weeks (via TEAMS conference) to provide study progress. Data Compilation: Obtain and review relevant existing data, including the City’s sidewalk gap location inventory, with current feasibility labels of Not Considered, Not Feasible, and Recommended, together with available GIS base layers such as parcel ownership, street ROW, aerial imagery, drainage features, utility information, back-of-curb data, and related mapping. Standards & Criteria Review: Engineer will gather applicable design criteria and standards (Pearland standards for sidewalk design, ADA/TAS guidelines for accessibility, etc.) and develop a checklist of criteria that each potential sidewalk segment must meet, along with ADA- compliance requirements. The latest versions of all applicable standards will be used. Base Mapping: For each location, the Engineer will create an aerial base map from available desktop information showing the existing roadway, approximate ROW and adjacent property lines, and other known or observable constraints such as utilities, signal poles, culverts, and trees. Any ROW, parcel, or property line information shown on the base maps is approximate and developed for the Engineer’s internal planning-level reference only and shall not be relied upon as a survey, boundary determination, or title verification. These base maps will serve as a reference for the Engineer’s internal field verifications (See: Tasks 2 & 3), and subsequent feasibility assessments (See: Task 4), and applicable conceptual schematic development (See: Tasks 5) Docusign Envelope ID: 59AAAFD5-CCF1-8E61-8137-E468BBC48473 EXHIBIT A – PROJECT SCOPE (Page 6 of 11) Key Milestones: ► Kickoff Meeting Notes ► Preliminary Criteria Checklist Task 2: Desktop Preliminary Assessment of Existing Conditions In this task, the Engineer will perform a desktop analysis of each City identified “high priority” and “medium priority” gap location (up to 467 locations, as well as the 4 accompanying locations identified on page 2 above) using the compiled data and base maps. The goal is to preemptively verify, identify potential issues, and plan field investigations effectively. Using desktop GIS analysis and other available desktop information, the Engineer will estimate available widths and distances to preliminarily identify potential right-of-way constraints, possible franchise easements, and connectivity to existing pedestrian facilities (nearby sidewalks, crosswalks, or trails) solely for planning-level feasibility screening. Aerial imagery and Google Street View will be reviewed for visible features such as open drainage ditches, utility poles, trees, special landscaping, fire hydrants, mailboxes, driveways, traffic signal equipment at intersections, or any other obstructions that might affect sidewalk construction. Such desktop review is intended to support preliminary assessment only and shall not be relied upon as a survey, legal determination, or final design verification. Locations with significant apparent challenges (for example, the likely need for a bridge or culvert, extremely limited apparent space, or steep terrain) will be preliminarily classified by the Engineer as Not Feasible or identified for closer field evaluation to determine whether they should remain under further consideration as Feasible or Recommended. Subtasks: GIS Measurements: For each site, use GIS tools to estimate available lateral space within the public ROW for a sidewalk. Identify segments where ROW width may be insufficient or encroachments exist (e.g. private fences or landscaping within the ROW). Connectivity Review: Check each location’s connection to the broader pedestrian network – sidewalks, crosswalks, intersections, and trails. Google Street/Aerial Review: Virtually inspect each site for visible features and constraints: the presence of drainage ditches along the roadway, utility poles, traffic control boxes, large mature trees or landscaping, fences, driveways and ramps, traffic signals, road signage, and luminaires. Mark these on the base map. Preliminary Constraint Flags / Matrix: For any location where desktop data indicates major issues (for example, a necessary sidewalk crossing over a drainage channel or along a narrow bridge, culvert needed, extremely limited space, or steep terrains), the Engineer will document these concerns. The Engineer will determine if additional coordination (for example, with drainage authorities, management districts, neighborhood associations, or TxDOT for state road crossings) may be required for developing detailed Plans Specifications and Estimates (PS&E) or permitting prior to construction. The goal of this subtask is to complete initial high-level screening and prepare an Engineer-developed preliminary internal working version of Table 1.1 reflecting the Docusign Envelope ID: 59AAAFD5-CCF1-8E61-8137-E468BBC48473 EXHIBIT A – PROJECT SCOPE (Page 7 of 11) Engineer’s preliminary feasibility observations and classification recommendations for use in planning subsequent field investigations. This working table is for study development purposes only and shall not constitute a final City designation or formal amendment to the City’s existing dashboard classifications. Task 3: Field Investigation & Site Documentation For purposes of this Study, the Engineer will conduct on-site visits for up to a total maximum of 103 gap locations identified by the City as High Priority or Medium Priority and preliminarily classified by the Engineer under Task 2 as Feasible or Recommended. If more than 103 such locations are preliminarily identified, the specific locations to be visited in the field shall be prioritized by the Engineer based on engineering judgment and overall study objectives, in consultation with the City. The 103-location quantity is a not-to-exceed limit and not a guaranteed minimum. Any additional site visits beyond this limit shall constitute Additional Services, to be paid for by City as an Additional Service, unless otherwise authorized by the City. When potential critical conflicts are observed in the field, the Engineer shall obtain and document the physical conditions including approximate planning-level measurements, as necessary, of available space from curb to apparent property line and/or visible key obstructions, pavement edges, shoulder conditions, and adverse grade changes affecting ADA considerations. At a minimum, the Engineer will photograph each visited site to document observable constraints and support refinement of the preliminary Feasible or Recommended classifications identified in Task 2. Such field documentation is intended to inform the Engineer’s subsequent study evaluation and does not, by itself, constitute a final feasibility designation. Any traffic signals or crosswalks at nearby intersections will be assessed for pedestrian signal heads, pushbuttons, or other modifications needs to accommodate proposed sidewalk connections. The presence of drainage features (ditches, culverts, storm inlets) will be noted based on field observations, and any relevant dimensions will be approximate, non-survey, planning-level estimates only, prepared solely to support feasibility screening and not for final design, hydraulic analysis, or boundary determination. The Engineer will then integrate the desktop and field data results into a Preliminary Feasibility Matrix, all while updating the Engineer’s Table 1.1 feasibility labels. Subtasks: Photographic Documentation: For the 103 gap locations the Engineer shall take above ground site photos capturing observable constraints to validate constraints identified in Task 2. The engineers will gather and compile geotagged photographic evidence. Site Walks and Measurements: For those sites flagged as “Feasible” or “Recommended” on the Engineer’s revised Table 1.1 (from Task 2 above), and present critical potential conflicts or constraints, the Engineer will obtain the following approximate non-survey, planning-level ‘typical’ horizontal field measurements, as applicable: Docusign Envelope ID: 59AAAFD5-CCF1-8E61-8137-E468BBC48473 EXHIBIT A – PROJECT SCOPE (Page 8 of 11) o Street edge to inside and outside edges of potential sidewalk connections. o Street edge to adjacent ramp landings and pedestrian push-button, as applicable. o Street edge to apparent ROW, visible easement indicators, or fence lines. o Street edge to existing utility poles, fire hydrants, electrical cabinet or ground box. o Street edge to existing trees and/or special landscaping. o Measure the approximate caliper (diameter) of any ‘critical’ identified trees. o Street edge to perceived roadside ditch high-bank and flowline. o Street edge to inside and outside edges of any relevant existing D/W Culverts, Cross Culverts, SET or Headwall. Field Condition Notes: Use the criteria checklist on-site to systematically evaluate each location for further refinement of the Preliminary Feasibility Matrix. Document any issues such as barriers in path, required traffic control modifications for safe crossings, or presence of environmental or ponding constraints. The goal of this subtask is for the Engineer to further refine the locations identified under the City’s ‘feasibility labels’ in Table 1.1 and help inform Engineer for the next Task. Key Milestones: ► Geotagged Photo Log ► Preliminary Feasibility Matrix Results Task 4: Detailed Feasibility Assessment The Engineer will rigorously evaluate each sidewalk gap preliminarily classified as Feasible or Recommended in the Preliminary Feasibility Matrix developed under Task 3. For purposes of this Study, a location classified as Feasible is one that appears capable of technical implementation based on planning-level engineering review, whereas a location classified as Recommended is one that is not only technically Feasible, but is also judged by the Engineer to warrant advancement as a preferred implementation candidate based on constructability, cost, connectivity, and overall study objectives. The Engineer will re-verify that the sidewalk can be constructed to meet all previously identified criteria (from Task 1) or if it requires a custom schematic solution, and document supporting evidence. For each location determined to be Feasible, the Engineer will prepare a preliminary Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Construction Cost (OPCC) estimate. For each location determined to be “Not Feasible”, the Engineer will outline the specific causes of infeasibility. The Engineer will create and compile a comprehensive matrix summarizing the feasibility recommendations for each site. Docusign Envelope ID: 59AAAFD5-CCF1-8E61-8137-E468BBC48473 EXHIBIT A – PROJECT SCOPE (Page 9 of 11) Subtasks: Engineering Criteria Evaluation: Apply the checklist of feasibility criteria to each site’s data. Confirm measurements against ADA standards and against City/TxDOT standards. Feasible Segment Validation: For segments deemed feasible, verify no criterion is failed. Identify if any minor design accommodations are needed. OPCC of the Feasible Segments: For segments finally deemed by the Engineer as technically feasible, prepare preliminary Engineer’s OPCC based on the conceptual design to construct the sidewalk within the existing right-of-way limits where possible. Not feasible Segment Diagnosis: For segments finally deemed “not feasible”, analyze each against the criteria to pinpoint why. List all factors for each site, referencing field observations and/or standards limits. Matrix & Review: The Engineer will compile a matrix or spreadsheet summarizing each evaluated location, including, at a minimum, the City’s priority rating, the initial City feasibility label, the Engineer’s post-study feasibility classification (Not Considered, Not Feasible, Feasible, or Recommended), key constraints or issues identified, the primary basis for the Engineer’s classification, and the recommended next action. The recommended action will identify from the City’s Medium Priority and High Priority locations: 1. The “Feasible” gap locations which the City’s designated On-call Contractor may proceed to construction using standard drawings (i.e., without detailed engineering or PS&E) and minimal-to-no outside agency approval(s). 2. The “Feasible” gap locations that will require detailed engineering and/or significant approvals prior to commencing construction. 3. The “Not Feasible” gap locations, including specific causes of infeasibility; and 4. The “Recommended” gap locations, defined as a subset of Feasible locations identified by the Engineer as preferred candidates for implementation based on constructability, relative cost, connectivity, and overall study objectives. Key Milestones: ► Feasibility Assessment Matrix using Feasibility Criteria Checklist ► Draft preliminary Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Construction Cost (OPCC) Table Docusign Envelope ID: 59AAAFD5-CCF1-8E61-8137-E468BBC48473 EXHIBIT A – PROJECT SCOPE (Page 10 of 11) Task 5: Conceptual Schematic Development While some “Feasible” locations can be built using City of Pearland standard drawings, other locations may need custom solutions or a more detailed level of planning and engineering for other agency approvals. The Engineer will prepare conceptual schematic layouts for only those sidewalk gaps determined by the Engineer to be technically Feasible and identified as requiring additional engineering, non-standard treatment, and/or outside agency approval(s), subject to a not-to-exceed limit of 70 locations and a combined total of 20,000 linear feet of proposed sidewalk and related amenities. Conceptual schematic layouts are planning-level representations intended to illustrate potential approaches and shall not be relied upon for final design, permitting, or construction. Subtasks: Develop Concept Layouts: Create planning level, non-PS&E, conceptual plan view schematic layouts for each selected site requiring special treatment. Incorporate a typical cross-section, as applicable, if it helps illustrate the vertical aspect. The schematics layout will reference applicable standards, and will include the following features: o Aerial based drawings (horizontal scale 1”=50’ dbl bnk on 11”x17” PDF Size) o Street / Sidewalks centerline, as applicable. o Interfacing pavement, driveways, geometrics of connection ramps and/or sidewalks. o Proposed sidewalk edges, curb / wall locations, horizontal widths, radii and, and bends. o Perceived property lines, ROW, and easement areas for illustrative purposes only. o Existing known utilities and structures callouts (i.e. driveways, drainage features etc.) o Identify and callout key ADA/TAS compliance items, as applicable. Update preliminary OPCC Table: Update the preliminary Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Construction Cost based on any custom features or special alignment considerations. QA/QC Check: The Engineer will review each concept for practicality, feasibility, and safety. Confirm that concepts solve the identified problems without introducing new issues (for example, ensure drainage is accounted for if a ditch is enclosed, and that any new retaining structure is conceptually feasible). Key Milestones: ► Concept Schematic Layouts ► Typical Cross-Section Illustrations (where applicable) ► Updated preliminary OPCC Table ► Design Assumptions Documentation Docusign Envelope ID: 59AAAFD5-CCF1-8E61-8137-E468BBC48473 EXHIBIT A – PROJECT SCOPE (Page 11 of 11) Task 6: Reporting & Recommendations The final task is to document the study process and results and compile the Engineer’s findings, feasibility classifications, and support analyses into a structured report with defined deliverables for City review. The Report will compile the information from all previous tasks, focusing on delivering an executive- friendly summary of findings for each sidewalk segment. Recommendations will be provided for feasible sites. Subtasks: Draft Report Preparation: Develop the draft report, including introduction, methodology (brief description of tasks completed), and results. City Review and Feedback: The Engineer will submit a draft report for City review and incorporate one (1) consolidated set of City comments. No public or stakeholder engagement, meetings, or coordination are included in this scope, consistent with the stated exclusions. Final Report: Revise the report based on City feedback and produce the final deliverable, including completion of internal QA/QC review. Final Deliverables to the City: ► Sidewalk Feasibility Study Report, including feasibility findings (Draft and Final versions) ► Compiled photo logs, and related exhibits and appendices. Docusign Envelope ID: 59AAAFD5-CCF1-8E61-8137-E468BBC48473 EXHIBIT A – PROJECT SCOPE (Page 12 of 11) Proposed Study Schedule Tasks shown below may overlap and proceed concurrently unless otherwise directed by the City in writing. #Title Sub Tasks Start Date End Date Duration, Business Days 1 Project Initiation and Data Collection  Kickoff  Data gathering  Base mapping  Standards review 06/01/2026 06/12/2026 10 2 Desktop Assessment  GIS analysis  Aerial review  Constraint flagging 06/15/2026 06/26/2026 10 3 Field Investigation and Site Documentation  Site visits  Measurements  Photos,  Field notes 06/29/2026 07/17/2026 15 4 Feasibility Assessment  Criteria evaluation  Feasibility matrix,  Mitigation options 07/06/2026 07/31/2026 20 5 Conceptual Schematic Development  Concept layouts  Typical cross-sections  QA/QC 07/20/2026 08/21/2026 25 6 Reporting and Recommendations  Draft report  City review  Final report 07/27/2026 08/28/2026 25 Docusign Envelope ID: 59AAAFD5-CCF1-8E61-8137-E468BBC48473 PRIME PROVIDER: STV INCORPORATED CLIENT: CITY OF PEARLAND PROJECT NAME: SIDEWALK GAPS FEASIBILITY STUDY EXHIBIT B FEE SCHEDULE METHOD PAYMENT LUMP SUM Date: 5/6/2026 Loaded Hourly Rates 300$ 200$ 180$ 165$ 150$ 135$ 90$ Task / Subtask Project Manager Project Engineer Right of Way Specialist Civil Engineer Engineer-In- Training CADD Technician Admin/ Clerical Row Total Task Aggregated Cost Task 1: Project Initiation & Data Collection 4 32 8 22 28 12 0 106 18,490$ – Kickoff Meeting 4 4 4 12 – Data Compilation 0 6 2 6 10 24 – Standards & Criteria Review 0 6 2 6 4 18 – Base Mapping 0 16 4 10 10 12 52 Task 2: Desktop Assessment 4 24 24 32 16 0 0 100 18,000$ – GIS Measurements 1 6 6 8 4 25 – Connectivity Review 1 6 6 8 4 25 – Google Street/Aerial Review 1 6 6 8 4 25 – Preliminary Constraint Flags 1 6 6 8 4 25 Task 3: Field Investigation 8 24 0 58 58 0 0 148 25,470$ – Photographic Documentation 8 20 20 48 – Site Walks and Measurements 8 8 30 30 76 – Field Condition Notes 8 8 8 24 Task 4: Feasibility Assessment 14 34 0 54 46 0 0 148 26,810$ – Engineering Criteria Evaluation 2 6 10 10 28 – Feasible Segment Validation 2 8 12 8 30 – Preliminary OPCC 6 6 10 10 32 – Not feasible Segment Diagnosis 2 8 12 8 30 – Matrix & Review 2 6 10 10 28 Task 5: Schematic Concept Development 8 20 0 44 44 80 0 196 31,060$ – Develop Concept Layouts 2 8 20 20 80 130 – Updated OPCC 2 4 8 24 38 – QA/QC Check 4 8 16 28 Task 6: Reporting & Recommendations 8 44 2 24 32 8 0 118 21,400$ – Draft Report Preparation 4 24 2 12 12 8 62 – Adress City Review and Feedback 0 8 8 16 – Final Report & final QA/QC 4 12 12 12 40 Project Mgmnt - Admin/Meetings/Team Cord.36 36 18 8 98 21,690$ Labor Subtotal 82 214 34 252 224 100 8 914 162,920$ ODE - Fuel (@ $0.725/mile)600 Miles 435$ ODE - Printing and Misc. (@ LS)435$ ODE Subtotal 870$ STUDY GRAND TOTAL (LUMP SUM)163,790$ STV Incorporated Labor Fee Estimate (for Desktop Evaluation of 467 Gap Locations City designated as "High" & "Medium" Priority, with On-Site Visits for up to 103 Locations) Docusign Envelope ID: 59AAAFD5-CCF1-8E61-8137-E468BBC48473 INSR ADDL SUBR LTR INSR WVD DATE (MM/DD/YYYY) PRODUCER CONTACT NAME: FAXPHONE (A/C, No):(A/C, No, Ext): E-MAIL ADDRESS: INSURER A : INSURED INSURER B : INSURER C : INSURER D : INSURER E : INSURER F : POLICY NUMBER POLICY EFF POLICY EXPTYPE OF INSURANCE LIMITS(MM/DD/YYYY)(MM/DD/YYYY) COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY UMBRELLA LIAB EXCESS LIAB WORKERS COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES (ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, may be attached if more space is required) AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE INSURER(S) AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC # Y / N N / A (Mandatory in NH) ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED? EACH OCCURRENCE $ DAMAGE TO RENTED $PREMISES (Ea occurrence)CLAIMS-MADE OCCUR MED EXP (Any one person)$ PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $ GENERAL AGGREGATE $GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG $ $ PRO- OTHER: LOCJECT COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT $(Ea accident) BODILY INJURY (Per person)$ANY AUTO OWNED SCHEDULED BODILY INJURY (Per accident)$AUTOS ONLY AUTOS AUTOS ONLY HIRED PROPERTY DAMAGE $AUTOS ONLY (Per accident) $ OCCUR EACH OCCURRENCE $ CLAIMS-MADE AGGREGATE $ DED RETENTION $$ PER OTH- STATUTE ER E.L. EACH ACCIDENT $ E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYEE $ If yes, describe under E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT $DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below POLICY NON-OWNED SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must have ADDITIONAL INSURED provisions or be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer any rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER:REVISION NUMBER: CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION © 1988-2015 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORDACORD 25 (2016/03) ACORDTM CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE Underwriters at Lloyds National Union Fire Insurance Co. Starr Indemnity & Liability Company New Hampshire Ins. Co. 4/24/2026 Conner Strong & Buckelew PO Box 99106 Camden, NJ 08101 877 861-3220 Bradley Crowe 856-552-4764 bcrowe@connerstrong.com STV Incorporated 11200 Broadway St, Suite 2743 Pearland, TX 77584 32727 19445 38318 23841 A X X X X X B1976S261496 04/01/2026 04/01/2027 2,000,000 100,000 Excluded 2,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000 10,000,000Project Agg. B X X X X X CA4489616 (AOS) $250 COMP DED $500 COLL DED 04/01/2026 04/01/2027 2,000,000 Med Expense 5,000 C X X X X 1001261607261 04/01/2026 04/01/2027 5,000,000 5,000,000 D B N X 072113383 (AOS) 072113382 (CA) 04/01/2026 04/01/2026 04/01/2027 04/01/2027 X 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 The captioned General Liability is comprised of the following carriers: Underwriters at Lloyds and The Marine Insurance Company Limited (See Attached Descriptions) City Of Pearland 3519 Liberty Drive Mardin, TX 77581 1 of 3 #S6291335/M6263553 STVGROUPClient#: 350843 B4C 1 of 3 #S6291335/M6263553 Docusign Envelope ID: 59AAAFD5-CCF1-8E61-8137-E468BBC48473