HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda_GTAB_10.09.2015Notice of Meeting for the
Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board and the Governing Body
of the City of Georgetown
October 9, 2015 at 10:00 AM
at City Council Chambers - 101 E. 7th Street, Georgetown, TX 78626
The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
If you require assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the
ADA, reasonable assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. Please
contact the City at least four (4) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or City
Hall at 113 East 8th Street for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711.
Regular Session
(This Regular Session may, at any time, be recessed to convene an Executive Session for any purpose
authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code 551.)
A Call to Order
The Board may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene in Executive Session at the
request of the Chair, a Board Member, the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, General
Manager of Utilities, City Council Member, or legal counsel for any purpose authorized by the
Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code Chapter 551, and are subject to action in the
Regular Session that follows.
B Introduction of Visitors
C Industry/CAMPO/TXDOT Updates
D Discussion regarding the Project Progress Reports and Time Lines. – Bill Dryden, P.E.,
Transportation Engineer; Mark Miller, Transportation Services Manager; Nat Waggoner, PMP®,
Transportation Analyst and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director.
E Discussion regarding the Airport Project Progress Report and time lines. – Russ Volk, C.M.,
Airport Manager and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director.
Legislative Regular Agenda
F Review and possible action to approve the minutes from the Regular GTAB Board meeting held
on September 10, 2015. - Jana Kern – GTAB Board Liaison
G Presentation, discussion and possible recommendation of a DRAFT Ordinance “Illicit Discharge
of pollutants into the MS4 or Conveyances. Edward G. Polasek, Transportation Services Director
and Skye Masson, Asst. City Attorney.
H Discussion and possible recommendation to reorganize the Transportation Services Division to
accommodate MS4 Program Administration, ADA Coordination and other Planning and Program
Management Responsibilities - Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director
I Public Hearing for an Airport Improvement Project involving relocation of a proposed fuel farm
at the Georgetown Municipal Airport. - Russ Volk, C.M., Airport Manager and Edward G.
Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director.
Page 1 of 65
Adjournment
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice
of Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public
at all times, on the ______ day of __________________, 2015, at __________, and remained so
posted for at least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
____________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Page 2 of 65
City of Georgetown, Texas
Transportation Advisory Board
October 9, 2015
SUBJECT:
Call to Order
The Board may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene in Executive Session at the
request of the Chair, a Board Member, the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, General
Manager of Utilities, City Council Member, or legal counsel for any purpose authorized by the
Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code Chapter 551, and are subject to action in the Regular
Session that follows.
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
n/a
SUBMITTED BY:
Jana Kern
Page 3 of 65
City of Georgetown, Texas
Transportation Advisory Board
October 9, 2015
SUBJECT:
Introduction of Visitors
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
n/a
SUBMITTED BY:
Jana Kern
Page 4 of 65
City of Georgetown, Texas
Transportation Advisory Board
October 9, 2015
SUBJECT:
Industry/CAMPO/TXDOT Updates
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
n/a
SUBMITTED BY:
Jana Kern
Page 5 of 65
City of Georgetown, Texas
Transportation Advisory Board
October 9, 2015
SUBJECT:
Discussion regarding the Project Progress Reports and Time Lines. – Bill Dryden, P.E.,
Transportation Engineer; Mark Miller, Transportation Services Manager; Nat Waggoner, PMP®,
Transportation Analyst and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director.
ITEM SUMMARY:
GTAB Projects
2nd Street (Austin Avenue to College Street)
Austin Avenue Bridge Evaluation and Repairs
CAMPO – TAP Money for Sidewalks (FY16-18)
CDBG Sidewalk Improvements
- MLK/3rd St (Scenic Dr. to Austin Ave.)
- University Ave. (I 35 to Hart St.)
FM 971 Realignment at Austin Avenue
FM 1460 Improvements Project
Georgetown and Capital Metro-Transit Work Plan FY16
Jim Hogg Drive/Road at Williams Drive
Southwest Bypass Project (Leander Road to I 35)
Transportation Services Operations – CIP Maintenance
GTEC Projects
Project Status Report
2015 Road Bond Program
Overview
- Southwest Bypass (Leander Dr./RM 2243 to Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension) and Wolf Ranch
Parkway Extension (SW Bypass to DB Wood Rd.)
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None
SUBMITTED BY:
Bill Dryden, P.E., Transportation Engineer
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
GTAB Projects Exhibit
GTEC Projects Exhibit
2015 Road Bond Program Exhibit
Page 6 of 65
2nd Street
Austin Avenue to College Street
Project No. 1BU TIP None
October, 2015
Project Description Design and preparation of plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for the
widening and reconstruction of 2nd Street from Austin Avenue to College Street.
Purpose To provide a safer roadway between Austin Avenue and College Street serving the
citizens of the north portion of “Old Town” and VFW baseball fields. The proposed
project provides improved sidewalk for pedestrian activities along the roadway.
Project Manager Mark Miller and Joel Weaver
Engineer KPA, LP
Element Status / Issues
Design Complete
Environmental/
Archeological
Complete
Rights of Way Existing
Utility Relocations Atmos relocations are on‐going and nearing completion.
As part of the construction contract, electric installations are complete; water and
wastewater improvements are on‐going. First block of 2nd St. (Austin Ave. to
Main St.) is being accelerated to a point of opening to traffic by Dec. first to
provide better access to this business / residential transition area. Completion of
contract is on schedule.
Construction Contractor working on utility relocations
Other Issues
Page 7 of 65
Austin Avenue – Bridge Evaluations
(North and South San Gabriel Rivers)
Project No. TBD TIP Project No. N/A
October 2015
Project
Description
Evaluate the repairs necessary to restore full structural capacity to the Austin Avenue
bridges over the North and South San Gabriel Rivers. The process will involve several
phases – I) determination of testing needed, II) structural testing, analyses and
evaluation of test data to determine/recommend corrective measures and a project
budget, III) develop construction plans, specifications and contract documents,
estimates of probable construction costs and, last, IV) construction administration.
Purpose To extend the structural life of the two bridge and provide long‐term vehicular capacity
and pedestrian safety along Austin Avenue.
Project Manager Bill Dryden, P.E.
Engineer Aguirre & Fields, LP
Element Status / Issues
Design Staff has begun setting up a charrette group to examine various alternatives for
bridge replacement; Engineer is developing a Scope of Services for the proposed
Task Order.
Surveying TBD
Environmental TBD
Rights of Way Exist. ROW from N. of 2nd to Morrow; Additional ROW may be required 3rd to N. of
2nd.
Utility Relocations TBD (future)
Construction TBD
Other Issues Project submitted for CAMPO funding;
Project eligible for TxDOT Off‐System Bridge Replacement Program.
Page 8 of 65
Attachment E: Evaluation Scores and Recommended Awards
ID Sponsor Project Activities Construction Planning Admin Fees Total Fed Share Local Match TDCs
Let Year
(Est.) Score Fund Year
2 City of Austin Pedestrian Safety Improvements Citywide Construction, Planning, and Design $1,856,250 $300,000 $323,438 $2,479,688 $1,983,750 $495,938 0 FY 2017 75 FY 2017
14 City of Round Rock 2014 Sidewalk GAPs Project Construction Only $371,348 $0 $55,702 $427,050 $341,640 $85,410 0 FY 2016 68 FY 2016
25 Williamson County Bagdad Road Sidewalks and Shared Use Path Construction Only $875,000 $0 $131,250 $1,006,250 $603,750 $402,500 0 FY 2016 68 FY 2016
24 Travis County FM 973 Shared Use Path/Elroy Road Sidewalk Projects Construction, Planning, and Design $926,500 $185,300 $166,770 $1,278,570 $1,022,856 $255,714 0 FY 2018 65 -
10 City of Hutto Limmer Loop Sidewalk from FM 1660 to Cottonwood Creek ElementaConstruction, Planning, and Design $696,600 $158,000 $128,190 $982,790 $786,232 $196,558 0 FY 2017 64 FY 2017
4 City of Austin Upper Boggy Creek Trail Construction Only $1,233,532 $0 $185,030 $1,418,562 $1,134,849 $283,712 0 FY 2017 63 FY 2017
6 City of Elgin Elgin Connections Construction, Planning, and Design $808,894 $269,546 $161,766 $1,240,206 $992,165 $77,647 0 FY 2016 61 FY 2017
13 City of Round Rock Southwest Downtown Infrastructure Improvements Phase 5B Construction Only $1,256,705 $0 $188,506 $1,445,211 $1,156,169 $289,042 0 FY 2016 60 FY 2016
18 City of San Marcos Donaldson Street Bike/Ped Project Construction, Planning, and Design $160,000 $12,000 $25,800 $197,800 $59,340 $138,460 0 FY 2018 59 -
3 City of Austin Bike Share Expansion Construction Only $900,000 $100,000 $150,000 $1,150,000 $908,500 $241,500 0 FY 2016 58 FY 2016
26 Williamson County Brushy Creek Regional Trail Phase V Construction Only $1,930,415 $0 $289,562 $2,219,977 $1,331,986 $887,991 0 FY 2017 51 FY 2018
7 City of Georgetown Old Town Northeast Construction, Planning, and Design $800,095 $376,045 $176,421 $1,352,561 $541,024 $811,537 0 FY 2017 50 -
8 City of Georgetown Austin Ave South Construction, Planning, and Design $249,224 $117,094 $54,948 $421,266 $168,506 $252,760 0 FY 2018 50 -
11 City of Lago Vista Lago Vista Middle School Safe Routes to School Project Construction Only $578,101 $0 $86,715 $664,816 $465,371 $199,445 0 FY 2016 49 FY 2018
1 City of Austin Burnet Road at Koenig - Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Construction, Planning, and Design $1,149,800 $350,000 $224,970 $1,724,770 $1,379,816 $344,954 0 FY 2017 48 -
19 City of San Marcos Cape Road bike/ped improvments Construction, Planning, and Design $349,200 $25,000 $56,130 $430,330 $344,264 $86,066 0 FY 2018 47 -
23 Hays County
Rattler Rd. Shared Use Bikeway/Sidewalk (Note 1)Construction, Planning, and Design $428,000 $0 $64,200 $492,200 $455,774 $36,426 0 FY 2016 47 -
17 City of San Marcos Bishop Street Bike/Ped Project Construction, Planning, and Design $198,759 $35,169 $35,089 $269,017 $188,312 $80,705 0 FY 2018 45 -
22 City of Wimberley Ranch Road 12 Sidewalks Construction, Planning, and Design $371,000 $70,000 $66,150 $507,150 $405,720 $101,430 0 FY 2017 45 -
12 City of Leander Leander Station Access Improvements Construction, Planning, and Design $137,000 $31,000 $25,200 $193,200 $162,560 $30,640 0 FY 2017 44 -
5 City of Cedar Park Brushy Creek Regional Trail Connections Construction Only $314,800 $49,300 $54,615 $418,715 $334,972 $83,743 0 FY 2017 40 FY 2017
9 City of Georgetown I 35 SBFR Pedestrian Safety Improvement Construction, Planning, and Design $360,182 $115,949 $71,420 $547,551 $438,041 $109,510 0 FY 2018 40 -
20 City of Wimberley Old Kyle Road Sidewalk Construction, Planning, and Design $157,200 $50,000 $31,080 $238,280 $190,624 $47,656 0 FY 201738 -
16 City of San Marcos Chestnut Sidewalks Construction Only $1,157,600 $450,000 $241,140 $1,848,740 $1,478,992 $369,748 0 FY 2018 29 -
15 City of San Marcos SH 80 Bike/Ped Project Construction Only $1,114,750 $250,000 $204,713 $1,569,463 $1,255,570 $313,893 0 FY 2018 INS -
21 City of Wimberley Oak Drive Sidewalk Construction Only $114,500 $0 $17,175 $131,675 $105,340 $26,335 0 FY 2016 INS -
UTP Fixed Fed INS
$3,890,000 $3,112,000
Con Only $3,010,059
Difference $101,941
$6,940,000 $5,552,000
Con Only $1,469,821
C,P&D $3,762,147
Difference $320,032
$2,030,000 $1,624,000
Con Only $1,797,357
C,P&D $0
Difference -$173,357
Notes
1 Con Only 46.4793%
C,P&D 53.5207%
*FY 2017 funds to be transferred to FY 2018
Application FAQs noted that in-kind contributions for planning would be considered
'Construction, Planning, and Design' projects
Project has
insufficient
information to
ensure
construction in
estimated let year
FY 2016
FY 2017
FY 2018
FY 2017 &
FY 2018
Old Town NortheastCity of Georgetown7 Construction, Planning, and Design $800,095 $376,045 $176,421 $1,352,561 $541,024 $811,537 FY 20170 50 -
Austin Ave SouthCity of Georgetown8 Construction, Planning, and Design $249,224 $117,094 $54,948 $421,266 $168,506 $252,760 FY 20180 50 -
Page 9 of 65
CDBG Sidewalk Improvements Project
MLK/3rd Street (Scenic Dr. to Austin Ave.)
Project No. None TIP No. None
October 2015
Project Description Design and preparation of final plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for sidewalk
improvements along MLK/ and 3rd streets from Scenic Drive to Austin Avenue.
Purpose To provide ADA/TDLR compliant sidewalks in the area.
Project Managers Bill Dryden, P.E.
Engineer Steger Bizzell
Element Status / Issues
Design Engineer will be submitting 95% plans for final review October 7th.
Environmental/
Archeological
TBD
Rights of Way N/A
Utility Relocations N/A
Construction NTP tentatively set for last week of January 2016.
Other Issues None.
Page 10 of 65
CDBG Sidewalk Improvements Project
University Avenue (SH 29) (I 35 to Hart St.)
Project No. None TIP No. None
October 2015
Project Description Design and preparation of final plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for sidewalk
improvements along University Avenue (SH 29) from I 35 to Hart Street.
Purpose To provide ADA/TDLR compliant sidewalks in the area.
Project Managers Bill Dryden, P.E.
Engineer
Element Status / Issues
Design Engineer had submitted the 99% plans (couple of minor corrections) and the
Contract Documents for staff review.
Staff is completing the Contract Documents in‐house.
Environmental/
Archeological
N/A
Rights of Way Existing
Utility Relocations TBD
Construction Bid opening TBD; contingent upon completion of the MUA with TxDOT.
Other Issues Project has been submitted to TxDOT for coordination.
Project has been submitted for T.A.S./TDLR compliance review.
The original design firm has closed its doors. Staff will complete the Contract
Documents in‐house and will bid the project.
Council has approved a Multiple Use Agreement with TxDOT to install new
sidewalk within TxDOT ROW; paperwork has been submitted; process will
require approximately 2½ months for TxDOT to complete.
Page 11 of 65
FM 971 at Austin Avenue
Realignment Intersection Improvements
Project No. 1BZ TIP No. AG
October 2015
Unchanged
Project Description Design and preparation of final plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for the widening
and realignment of FM 971 at Austin Avenue, eastward to Gann Street.
Purpose To provide a new alignment consistent with the alignment of the proposed Northwest
Boulevard Bridge over IH 35; to allow a feasible, alternate route from the west side of I 35 to
Austin Avenue, to Georgetown High School, to San Gabriel Park and a more direct route to
SH 130.
Project Managers Bill Dryden, P.E.
Engineer Klotz Associates, Inc.
Element Status / Issues
Design Preliminary Engineering complete;
Engineer working on 60% design submittal
Environmental/
Archeological
10/2015
Rights of Way Complete
Utility Relocations TBD
Construction 10/2016
Other Issues Staff has submitted the paperwork to TxDOT to develop an Advance Funding
Agreement for plans review and construction administration.
Page 12 of 65
FM 1460
Quail Valley Drive to University Drive
Project No. 5RB TIP No. BO & CD
October 2015
Unchanged
Project Description Design and preparation of plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for the widening and
reconstruction of FM 1460. Project will include review and update to existing Schematic,
Right‐of‐Way Map and Environmental Document and completion of the PS&E for the
remaining existing roadway.
Purpose To keep the currently approved environmental documents active; purchase ROW, effect
utility relocations/clearance and to provide on‐the‐shelf PS&E for TxDOT letting not later
than August 2013, pending available construction funding.
Project Managers Ed Polasek, AICP and Bill Dryden, P.E.
Engineer Brown and Gay Engineers, Inc.
Element Status / Issues
Design Complete
Environmental/
Archeological
Complete
Rights of Way As of October 16th, the City has obtained Possession and
Use Agreements or have closings planned for all the
remaining FM 1460 parcels.
Acquired: 34
Pending: 0
Condemnation: 2
Total: 36
Utility Relocations Ongoing
Construction Bid opened August 2014
Contractor has asked TxDOT for an early November 2015 NTP.
Other Issues Two task order amendments were approved by Council April 28th.
Engineer preparing Change Orders for construction contract.
Page 13 of 65
Transit Development Plan
FY16 ILA Work Plan
Schedule Objective(s) Deliverable
1. REFINE TRANSIT SYSTEM THROUGH INTEGRATED PLANNING AND ENGAGEMENT
2. BEGIN CAPITAL ACQUISITION
October 2015 1. Continue Demand Response for FY 16
2. Define/Detail Work Plan for FY 17
3. Service and Finance Discussion
1. Executed ILA
2. DRAFT FY 16 Work Plan
3. Council Workshop 10/27
November 2015 Council Decision on FY 17 Service Budget Boards/Commissions Recommendations
DRAFT ILA for FY 17
3rd Quarter FY 16 1. Stakeholder Input
a. Service Parameters
b. Marketing
2. Create ILA for Operations in FY17
3. Outreach and Marketing Initiated
4. Mid Year - 2016 Budget Review
1. Public Outreach forums
2. Final ILA
3. Marketing Campaign Adopted
4th Quarter FY 16 Finalize Capital Acquisition
Infrastructure Installation
Outreach and Marketing
Bus stops, Buses, Signage
Page 14 of 65
Jim Hogg Drive/Road at Williams Drive
Intersection and Signalization Improvements
Project No. 1DE TIP No. None
October 2015
Project Description Design and preparation of final plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for the
widening of Jim Hogg at the intersection of Williams Drive, inclusive of installation
of a traffic signal.
Purpose To provide a widened 3‐lane section with signal at the intersection of Jim Hogg and
Williams Drive. The proposed improvements will provide improved access for the
residents and the employees of the new City Service Center to Williams Drive.
Project Manager Bill Dryden, P.E.
Engineer Kimley‐Horn and Associates, Inc.
Element Status / Issues
Design Engineer has submitted 95% Plans for final review.
Environmental/
Archeological
Engineer working on the Geologic Assessment and WPAP for submittal to
TCEQ.
Rights of Way Existing
Utility Relocations Included with construction project
Construction First quarter 2016
Other Issues None at this time
Page 15 of 65
Southwest Bypass Project
(RM 2243 to IH 35)
Project No. 1CA Project No. BK
October 2105
Project Description Develop a Design Schematic for the Southwest Bypass from Leander Road (RM 2243) to IH
35 in the ultimate configuration and Construction Plans, Specifications and Estimate (PS&E)
for construction of approximately 1.5 miles of interim 2‐lane roadway from Leander Road
(RM 2243) to its intersection with the existing Inner Loop underpass at IH 35. The portion
from Leander Road to the east property line of Texas Crushed Stone is a GTAB Project; from
the east line to the existing Inner Loop underpass at IH 35 is being funded by GTEC.
Purpose To extend an interim portion of the SH 29 Bypass, filling in between Leander Road (RM
2243) to IH 35 Southbound Frontage Road.
Project Manager Williamson County
City Contact: Ed Polasek, AICP and Bill Dryden, P.E.
Engineer HDR, Inc.
Element Status / Issues
Williamson County
Project Status
(from WilCo’s status
report)
Southwest Bypass (RM 2243 to IH 35) – Driveway permits for driveways at IH 35 SB
frontage road and RM 2243 were submitted to the City of Georgetown on 6/9/15 and
resubmitted on 7/6/15. A project status meeting was held on 6/1/15. A QA/QC plan
submittal was received on 5/27/15 and reviewed.
Rights of Way Special Commissioners have awarded the value for one of the two remaining
parcels; funding has been posted with the Court.
PUA has been obtained for the final parcel of property; condemnation hearing was
scheduled for the end of September 2015, but has been postponed at the request
of property owner.
Other Issues None.
Page 16 of 65
Transportation Services Operations
CIP Maintenance
October, 2015
Project Description 2015‐2016 CIP Maintenance of roadways including, Chip seal, Cutler Overlays,
Fog seal applications and Engineering design of future rehabilitation projects.
Purpose To provide protection and maintain an overall pavement condition index of
85%.
Project Manager Mark Miller
Engineer/Engineers KPA
Task Status / Issues
Chip Seal 2015 Scheduled work complete.
Fog Seal 2015 – Average needed temperatures are approaching. Scheduled to start
Monday, October 19th and completion is expected by November 7th. This is the
postponed work form Spring. The 2016 work will be started following the
completion of the current list. This will lengthen schedule by a couple of
weeks as weather allows. The fog seal program will be postponed through the
holiday season and pick up when weather allows.
HIPR/overlay 2015 – Complete. (2016 waiting for engineering)
Engineering 2016 A Task Order is being prepared for engineering services related to the 2016
Street Maintenance.
Page 17 of 65
Current Capital Improvement Projects TIP
No.
Project
No.
Update On Schedule/
Or Behind
Project
Budget
Project
Cost
Available Current Year
Projected
Current Year
Cost
Current Year
Available
Lakeway Drive Overpass #10 5QL Project Complete.
Complete 2,500,000 2,500,000 0 0 0
Southeast Arterial 1 (Sam Houston Avenue)#12 5QG Project Complete.
Complete 12,995,625 10,478,499 2,517,126 0 0
Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension (SW Bypass to DB
Wood Road)
#14A 5QW Project Complete.
Complete 1,330,000 1,111,233 218,767 283,350 0 283,350
Southwest Bypass (SH29 to RR2243)#14B 5QC Project Complete.
Complete 7,756,432 3,225,132 4,531,300 4,539,107 5,787 4,533,320
Northwest Blvd Overpass #QQ 5QX Engineer is coordinating design with the design for
Rivery Boulevard in moving towards construction
PS&E for both projects to minimize overlap work
between these two projects.
Construction tentatively scheduled to begin early
FY 2019.
In-process
Unchanged
1,136,178 1,099,076 37,102 571,178 479,588 91,590
NB Frontage Road (SS 158 to Lakeway)#QQ 5QY Staff and Engineer has met with TxDOT personnel
at both the local Area Office and District
Environmental Division.
In-process
Unchanged
613,822 613,822 0 382,822 382,822 0
ROW - 1460 #EEa
#EEb
#EEc
5RB TxDOT and the Contractor (OHL USA, Inc.) have
signed the Construction Contract. OHL has
requested “that a Pre‐con be held on October 20th
2015, with an anticipated start date of November
2nd 2015.”
Utility relocations - ongoing.
As of October 16th, the City has obtained PUAs or
have closings completed or planned for all the
remaining FM 1460 parcels.
In-process 11,788,230 5,348,470 6,439,760 6,727,539 2,315,896 4,411,643
TCS/RR Easement 5RD Project Complete.
Complete 1,500,000 1,503,148 -3,148 0 0
FM 971 / Washam 5RE Project Complete.
Complete 100,000 0 100,000 0 0
Rivery Road 5RF Project Complete.
Complete 779,000 29,000 750,000 750,000 0 750,000
Rivery Boulevard 5RM Engineer is coordinating design with the design for
Northwest Boulevard in
moving towards construction PS&E for both
projects to minimize overlap work
between these two projects.
Property appraisals are being submitted for
City review; once all the appraisals
are in then offers will be extended to the
property owners.
Construction tentatively scheduled to begin mid FY
2018
On Schedule
Snead Drive 5QZ Construction on‐going for the installation of
the sewer line about 50%.
Agreement has been reached for the property
need to install a water quality pond; paperwork
pending.
On Schedule 825,100 87,000 738,100 825,100 87,000 738,100
Mays Street Extension 5RI Engineer is completing the ROW documents
for Mays Street south of Westinghouse Road
and the alignment and ROW documents for
Rabbit Hill Road north of Westinghouse Road.
In Process 196,000 196,000 0 196,000 196,000 0
IH 35/ Hwy 29 Intersection 5RJ TBD 650,000 0 650,000 650,000 0 650,000
GTEC PROJECT UPDATE AND STATUS REPORT
October 2015
Project to Date Current Year Budget (13/14)
L:\Global\CIP Agenda Form\GTEC Status Report\2015\GTEC - Project Status - 2015-09.xlsx Page 1 of 2 10/1/2015Page 18 of 65
Current Capital Improvement Projects TIP
No.
Project
No.
Update On Schedule/
Or Behind
Project
Budget
Project
Cost
Available Current Year
Projected
Current Year
Cost
Current Year
Available
GTEC PROJECT UPDATE AND STATUS REPORT
October 2015
Project to Date Current Year Budget (13/14)
Current Economic Development Projects Project
Type
Project
No.
Update On Schedule/
Or Behind
Project
Budget
Project
Cost
Available Current Year
Budget
Current Year
Cost
Current Year
Available
100 S. Austin Ave Eco Devo
Project
5RA In-process 507,000 507,000 0 0
Williams Drive Gateway 5RC Engineer working on schematic design alternatives
and preliminary cost estimates.
On Schedule 65,000 61720 3,280 0 0
Economic Development Projects 1,137,500 1,137,500 1,137,500 0 1,137,500
16,062,596 3,467,093 12,595,503
Project to Date Current Year Budget (13/14)
L:\Global\CIP Agenda Form\GTEC Status Report\2015\GTEC - Project Status - 2015-09.xlsx Page 2 of 2 10/1/2015Page 19 of 65
2015 Road Bond Program
Program
Overview
In May 2015, voters approved the 2015 Road Bond Program (“the Program”) in the amount of
$105M. Staff has prioritized the projects schedule based on various existing and pending
commitments into which the City has entered through industrial agreements and/or development
agreements, projected bond funding cash flow and travel demand needs of the citizens.
The proposed schedule was developed over the entire 10‐year life of the Program and presented
to GTAB with the caveat that the schedule was firmly established for only the first two years of
project implementation. Future scheduling will be responsive to funding availability, changes in
development patterns and demands, future coordination of our projects with TxDOT and
Williamson County. Further, the Program projects will be included with the annual CIP projects
list.
At its June 2015 meeting, GTAB unanimously adopted the schedule and caveat and unanimously
recommended is adoption by Council. Given that priorities and needs are dynamic and subject to
change, the schedule will be reviewed annually as part of the CIP to assure it continues to meet
the goals and objectives of the City and maintains the terms of the “Contract with the Voters” of
not having greater than 2¢ per year increase to the City’s tax rate not more than 10¢ total increase
in the tax rate over the life of the Program.
Project
Managers
Ed Polasek, AICP
Transportation Services Director
Bill Dryden, P.E.
Transportation Engineer
Wes Wright, P.E.
Systems Engineering Director
Page 20 of 65
2015 Road Bond Program
Southwest Bypass (Leander Rd. to Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension)
Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension (SW Bypass to DB Wood Rd.)
Project No. 1DI OTP Project No. AD & AZ1
October 2015
Project
Description
Construction of Southwest Bypass from Leander Road (RM 2243) to Wolf Ranch
Parkway Extension and Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension from Southwest Bypass to
DB Wood Road.
Purpose To complete a connection from Leander Road (RM 2243) to University Avenue
(SH 29)
Project Manager Bill Dryden, P.E.
Engineer HDR, Inc.
Element Status / Issues
Design Engineer is completing the final design PS&E package.
Surveying Complete
Environmental Engineer is completing the final environmental documents.
Rights of Way ROW through the Weir Trust property is still pending.
Utility
Relocations
TBD
Construction NTP tentatively scheduled for first quarter 2016.
Other Issues Weir ROW still outstanding.
Page 21 of 65
City of Georgetown, Texas
Transportation Advisory Board
October 9, 2015
SUBJECT:
Discussion regarding the Airport Project Progress Report and time lines. – Russ Volk, C.M.,
Airport Manager and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director.
ITEM SUMMARY:
Airport Projects:
FAA Tower Report
Fuel Sales Report
Hangar / Tie-Down Lease Update
2015 Accomplishments and Projects
Airport Monthly Financial Report
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUBMITTED BY:
Russ Volk, C.M., Airport Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Tower Report Backup Material
Fuel Sales Backup Material
Hangar Report Backup Material
Airport Goals and Accomplishments Backup Material
Airport Financial Backup Material
Page 22 of 65
Georgetown Municipal Airport Contract Tower Program Update
Oct 2015
Project Description Georgetown Tower Update
Purpose Tower Monthly Report
Project Manager Russ Volk, Airport Manager
Operating Statistics
Performance/volumetric
indicators
For the Month of:
Aug 2015
Aug
2014
Y-T-D
Aug
2015
Y-T-D
Variance
Take Offs and
Landings Day*
Night*
VFR 7,227
323 61,310 62,658
1,348 2%
IFR 446
16 5,445 5,799
354 6%
Total Take
Offs/Landings 7,227
339 66,755 68,457
1,702 2.5%
Total for Month 8,012
* This does not include flyover operations (i.e. handoffs from ABIA approach/departure
control to KGTU tower then onto the next ATC.).
Page 23 of 65
Georgetown Municipal Airport Fuel Sales Update
Oct 2015
Project Description Georgetown Fuel Sales Update
Purpose Fuel Sales Monthly Report
Project Manager Russ Volk, Airport Manager
Operating Statistics
Performance/volumetric
indicators
Gallons For the Month of:
Aug
Aug 2014
Y-T-D
Aug 2015
Y-T-D
Variance
Type of Fuel 2014 2015
AVGAS 18,952
24,928 189,564 214,545 24,981 12%
JET A 41,898
33,163
403,971 363,368
<40,603> <10>%
Total Gallons Sold 60,850
58,091
593,535 577,913
<15,622> <3>%
Page 24 of 65
Airport Hangar / Tie-Down Lease Update
Oct 2015
Project Description Hangar / Tie-Down Lease Agreements
Purpose Occupancy Rates
Project Manager Russ Volk C.M., Airport Manager
Unit Stats
Total Hangars – 114
• 100 Percent Occupied
Total Storage Units – 7
• 5 Occupied
• 2 Vacant
Total Tie-Downs – 39 Monthly, 14 for Overnight/Transient Parking
• Monthly Tie-Downs 100 Percent Occupied
Page 25 of 65
GTU Airport
In-Work Projects
Replace door seals on Hangars E, F, and G.
Replace bottom door seals on Hangars H, I, and J.
Develop Airport Preventative Maintenance Program.
Updating Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan.
Update to Airport Rules and Regulations and Minimum Standards.
Determining a software solution for the Airport Business Operations area.
Adding additional part-time Airport Maintenance staff.
Obtaining Pesticide Application License to allow for airport staff to spray weed killer.
Developing lease agreement for storage locations.
Planned Projects
Develop Hangar Routine Maintenance Program.
After arrival of equipment, implement an airport Foreign Object Debris removal program.
Evaluate possible software solutions for a technology based Pavement Management Program.
Evaluate possible software solutions for a technology based Airport Self Inspection Program.
Replace existing Tower voice recording system. Old system is no longer supported.
Install aviation radio in Polaris.
Upgrade electrical service to Hangars H, I, and J.
Replace gate rollers on both the north and south electronic gates.
Repairs to terminal ramp to reduce FOD issues.
Page 26 of 65
Upgrade to bi-fold doors drive motors on Hangars BB and CC.
Accomplishments 2015
Installed vehicle mounted aviation radio in airport truck and tractor to improve communication with
tower while out on airfield.
Implemented new lease rates and agreements with existing tenants in city owned T-Hangars.
Implemented new lease rates and agreements with existing tenants in city owned Tie-Downs.
Accomplished CPI adjustments for Land Leases on the airport, generating additional revenue for the
airport fund.
Performed CPI adjustments for both fuel flowage fee and commercial wholesale fuel margin.
As part of the city budget process, conducted an airport financial review of 15 months of expenses and
revenues. Identified potential cost savings. Prepared and submitted airport budget to better breakdown
and track airport expenses for future and continual evaluation.
Airfield lighting upgrade project for Runway 11/29 and 18/36.
Draft Environmental Assessment for new Fuel Storage Facility. Assisted in edits and responses to
public comments.
Repairs to Tower communication consoles.
Asphalt temporary repair to taxilane between hangars B & C.
Review of Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).
Expanded daily airport self-inspection program. Implemented inspection checklist to track inspection
results.
Filled Airport Business Coordinator position with permanent employee.
Accomplished personnel training, annual testing and certification for Underground Storage Tank (UST)
program.
Reviewed Foreign Object Debris program. Currently the airport does not have any equipment to assist
with FOD removal. Identified two possible pieces of equipment which would allow for removal of FOD
from airport surfaces. Submitted request in budget to purchase equipment.
Page 27 of 65
Reviewed Weed Abatement program. Previously, airport contracted with private contractor for twice a
year weed spraying. Airport now has equipment to accomplish weed spraying using airport personnel
and equipment.
Established Pavement Management Program to include required monthly inspections. Inspection results
are used for evaluation of when and what type of pavement maintenance should be programmed.
Established electronic gate preventative maintenance program which involves quarterly gate inspections,
lubrication, testing and adjustments.
Established a vehicle care program for airport operated courtesy cars and truck. Program involves
routine cleaning, inspection, and fuel servicing.
Developed training outline for Airport Fuel Attendant position.
Conducted airport terminal and control tower site survey with city IT personnel to review current and
future equipment requirements for both facilities.
Conducted airport terminal and control tower site survey with city Facilities personnel to review current
condition of facilities and program for future maintenance items.
Accomplished asbestos survey on two old concrete structures near the airport terminal.
Participated in four meetings with citizen groups. Groups included members of the ACC, R-C Modelers
Club of Sun City, Experimental Aircraft Association, and Georgetown Aero Modelers Association.
Added a second On-Call Airport Fuel Attendant.
Painted Storage Location doors on Hangars.
Conducting quarterly inspections for FBO operated fuel trucks.
Reviewed the Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures program to ensure all methods and
equipment are in place to deal with aviation fuel spills.
Demolition of old CAP facility just east of Tower.
Conducting based airplane inventory and updating FAA database.
Developing training program for performing fuel truck inspections.
Accomplished adjustments to fuel margins.
Replaced main breaker panel in BB Hangar.
Hired exterminator to spray around H, I, and J Hangars.
Page 28 of 65
Added a third FBO to the airport.
Added an Airport Maintenance Truck.
Page 29 of 65
Georgetown Municipal Airport Income Statement
8/31/2015
FY2015 Budget
FY2015 Year End
Projections Actual 8/31 YTD to Projections FY2014 YTD Actual FY2014 Variance
Beginning Fund Balance 21,612 82,210 82,210 - 363,339 (281,129)
Operating Revenues
Fuel Sales 2,469,900 2,122,405 1,806,123 85.10%2,306,329 -21.69%
Lease & Rentals 641,200 623,950 570,831 91.49%530,348 7.63%
Interest & Other 43,150 40,010 32,706 81.74%101,634 -67.82%
Grants - 16,186 25,235 155.91%- -
Total Operating Revenue 3,154,250 2,802,551 2,434,895 86.88%2,938,311 -17.13%
Operating Expenses
Personnel 350,253 345,561 296,325 85.75%254,382 16.49%
Operations - Fuel 2,272,600 1,775,000 1,532,102 86.32%2,037,845 -24.82%
Operations - Non Fuel 608,072 692,565 630,984 91.11%661,298 -4.58%
Capital - - - 561 -
Total Operating Expenses 3,230,925 2,813,126 2,459,411 87.43%2,954,086 -16.75%
Policy Compliance (Rev. - Exp.)(76,675) (10,575) (24,516) (15,775)
Non Operating
Non Operating Revenues 870,000 870,000 865,000 99.43%241,000
Non Operating Expenses 1,048,612 193,468 184,298 95.26%529,511
Ending Fund Balance (233,675) 748,167 738,396 59,053
Reservation
Restricted Bond Proceeds (855,144) (852,876) -
Available Fund Balance (106,977) (114,480) 59,053
Notes: 1) The City received $98,801 relating to the Georgetown Jet Center Bankruptcy. The City does not expect to receive additional revenue. 2) The Electric Fund is covering
the contingency requirements for Airport to meet City-wide contingency reserves per policy. Airport reserve was decreased to 45 days effective October 1, 2014.
Page 30 of 65
City of Georgetown, Texas
Transportation Advisory Board
October 9, 2015
SUBJECT:
Review and possible action to approve the minutes from the Regular GTAB Board meeting held
on September 10, 2015. - Jana Kern – GTAB Board Liaison
ITEM SUMMARY:
Board to review and revise and/or approve the minutes from the regular meeting held on
September 10, 2015.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
n/a
SUBMITTED BY:
Jana Kern
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Draft Minutes Backup Material
Page 31 of 65
Notice of Meeting of the
Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board and the
Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas
September 10, 2015
SPECIAL MEETING
The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If
you require assistance in participation at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA,
reasonable assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. Please contact the
City at least four (4) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512)930-3652 or City Hall at 113 East 8th
Street for additional information: TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711.
Board Members Truman Hunt – Chair, John Pettitt – Vice Chair, Ray Armour - Secretary, John Hesser,
Rachel Jonrowe, H’Luz, Steve Johnston, Scott Rankin – arrived at 10:27 am
Board Members Absent: Donna Courtney
Staff Present: Chapman, Wilkins, Dryden, Babin, Waggoner, Volk
Others Present: ACC MEMBERS: (Carl Norris, John Milford, Richard Ballentine, Nancy Zenner ), Ken
Mabe – Tx Aviation Partners, Jim Wimberley – Tx Aviation Partners, Tom Crawford - GTEC Board
Member, Keith Peshak - citizen
Regular Session
A. Call to Order – Mr. Truman Hunt Called the Special Meeting to order on Thursday,
September 10, 2015 at 10:00 AM
Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board may, at any time, recess the Regular
Session to convene an Executive Session at the request of the Chair, a Board Member,
The City Manager, Assistant City Manager, General Manager of Utilities, City Council
Member, or legal counsel for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas
Government Code Chapter 551, and are subject to action in the Regular Session that
follows.
B. Introduction of Visitors
C. Industry/CAMPO/TxDOT Updates
Waggoner gave CAMPO updates. TAP – Alternative Transportation Projects (Federal
Project) – Georgetown asking for $1.15 mil for pedestrian projects. Trying to reduce
number of members of the technical committee (to about 18) this will be good for us.
Williams Drive Corridor Study – comprehensive study - proposal. American Planning
Association giving award to City on the 16th – Bastrop. SH 29 Corridor Study Open
House held by TxDOT on 9/1/15. Hesser – timing on CAMPO Williams Drive Study –
answered by Waggoner - plans available October 1.
D. Discussion regarding the Project Progress Reports and Time Lines – Bill Dryden, P. E.,
Transportation Engineer, Mark Miller, Transportation Services Manager and Edward G.
Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director. Presented by Dryden. Added Jim
Hogg/Williams Drive Intersection related to Westside Service Center. Bond program –
moving along. Turn dirt first quarter of 2016. Jonrowe – timeline for MLK 3rd Street
Sidewalk Project? Dryden – not yet. Armour - Austin Avenue Bridges - timeline?
Dryden – have not heard back from either of those sources.
Page 32 of 65
E. Discussion regarding the Airport Project Progress Report and Time Lines. – Russ Volk,
Airport Manager and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director.
Citizens Wishing to Speak to the Board registered. Mr. John Milford, ACC and Mr. Carl
Norris, ACC (Mr. Norris donated his 3 minutes to Mr. Milford). Mr. Milford’s statement
is at the end of these minutes.
Airport Update presented by Volk. Question - what is the turnaround on grant checks?
Answered by Volk as soon as two weeks. So far we have received around $30,000
reimbursed. Question from Hesser - If we get a grant – on participation piece how do
we pay for the participation piece do we set aside the funds immediately or go through
a process to accumulate the funds? Answered by Volk – will check into that with
Finance. Various discussion.
Legislative Regular Agenda
The Board will individually consider and possibly take action on any or all of the following
items:
F. Review and possible action to approve the minutes from the Regular GTAB Board
meeting held on August 14, 2015 – Jana Kern
MOTION by Jonrowe, 2nd by Pettitt to approve as prepared. APPROVED 7-0-2
(Courtney and Rankin absent)
Rankin arrived at 10:27 am
G. Consideration and possible recommendation to renew the current contact with Avfuel
Corporation to supply aviation fuel (Jet-A and 100LL/Avgas) and services to the
Georgetown Municipal Airport, City of Georgetown, in the amount estimated annual
amount of $2,300,000.00. - Russ Volk, C.M., Airport Manager and Edward G. Polasek,
AICP, Transportation Services Director.
Item presented by Volk. This is the last option year so exercise this last option year.
Working with purchasing now to prepare new bid packets for March/April time frame
next year in tie to meet the schedule for next year. Hesser - Will changing vendors make
a difference? Volk - not from what we see. There were a few shortages this year – but
that was across the board with multiple vendors. Hesser – where are we on the pumps?
Public hearing next month and 30 day public comment period then we go from there.
Various discussion and questions.
MOTION by Jonrowe to recommend renewal of the contract with AvFfuel Corporation
in the amount of $2.6 Million. 2nd by Hesser APPROVED 8-0-1 (Courtney absent)
Page 33 of 65
H. Consideration and possible recommendation to approve application for Texas Aviation
Partners to operate as a General Fixed Base Operator (GFBO) at the Georgetown
Municipal Airport. – Russ Volk, C.M., Airport Manager and Edward G. Polasek, AICP,
Transportation Services Director.
Citizens Wishing to Speak to the Board registered - Mr. Jim Wimberley, Texas Aviation
Partners. Happy to answer any questions that anyone may have. Item presented by
Volk – various questions and discussion.
MOTION by Pettitt, 2nd by Rankin to approve without exception for Texas Aviation
partners to operate General Fixed Base Operator (GFBO) at Georgetown Airport.
APPROVED 8-0-1 (Courtney absent)
I. Consideration and possible recommendation on a Texas Water Development Board
Flood Protection Planning contract to study the North and South Forks of the San
Gabriel River – Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Director and Edward G.
Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director. Item presented by Dryden. Hesser
asked what do you get out of a flood study besides when it rains hard what happens.
Dryden – any development that comes in will not raise the flood level. We get study
maps to show the flood stages – then when developments come in we can determine
where and how they can be structured to not raise the flood level and require
development to develop so as not to raise flood level. Various discussion. Hesser
would rather clean up the creeks to make certain they run clean and don’t add to the
flooding problem with junk and trash.
MOTION by Jonrowe, 2nd by Johnston to recommend approval of the Texas Water
Development Board Flood Protection Planning contract. APPROVED 7-1-1 (Armour
opposed, Courtney absent)
J. Consideration and possible action on Task Order CPE-15-002 for professional
engineering services with Chan and Partners, LLC of Austin, Texas in the amount of
$685,000 for flood protection planning - - Wesley Wright, P.E. Systems Engineering
Director and Ed Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director. Item presented by
Dryden.
MOTION by Jonrowe, 2nd by Pettitt to recommend approval of Task Order CPE-15-002 with
Chan and partners, LLP of Austin, Texas for flood protection planning in the amount of $685,000.
APPROVED 7-1-1 (Armour opposed, Courtney absent)
Adjournment
MOTION TO ADJOURN by Pettitt, second by Johnston. APPROVED 8-0-1 (Courtney absent)
Meeting Adjourned at 11:18 am
Approved: Attested:
_______________________ ______________________
Truman Hunt - Chair Ray Armour – Secretary
_________________________________
Jana R. Kern – GTAB Board Liaison
Page 34 of 65
GTAB STATEMENT
SEPTEMBER 10, 2015
AGENDA ITEM “E”
AIRPORT PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT AND TIME LINES
Good morning Mr. Chairman, members of the GTAB, city staff and ladies and
gentlemen. My name is John Milford I am a member of the Airport Concerned Citizens
(ACC).
This is the 47 th presentation by members of ACC to the city council and/or the GTAB
since January 14, 2014. These actions have been in pursuit of the public participation
rights of our citizens regarding use of our federal tax funds for the Georgetown
Municipal Airport (GTU) as provided by the National Environmental Po licy Act (NEPA).
The GTAB is charged to advise and assist the City Council on transportation issues
including the Georgetown Airport (GTU). This responsibility includes being the
information gateway between the city government and the general public con cerning
Georgetown Airport issues and recommendations to the city council.
Nineteen months ago, the ACC began its requests for a hold on all federal funds for GTU
improvements pending public participation, and compliance from the city, TxDOT and
FAA, with NEPA. GTAB and city staff, should recall that on multiple occasions, in various
public statements, ACC has requested open GTAB workshops following regular monthly
meetings. These meetings would be for the purpose of open and free discussions
between the GTAB, city staff and the general public focused on city plans and grants for
airport improvements. Recent events, regarding such improvements, have again made
the need for these workshops absolutely essential for public information and
participation.
I focus this morning on the need for such workshops on the latest three issues that
demand full and complete public vetting not only for the public, but also for this board.
These issues are:
1. The GTU 2015 Capital Improvement Plan(CIP) ,
2. The proposed $500,000, 20 year (2025-2045) Airport Master Plan, and
3. The recent city request for federal finding assistance for $3.475 Million for repair
of the two GTU runways and upgrade of RW 18/36 to accommodate a whole new
fleet of larger, heavier and noisier aircraft. I will focus this morning on the GTU
2015 CIP.
The GTU 2015 CIP, is another of the several construction improvements programs that
originated out of the current Airport Master Plan by GRW-Willis, Inc.. The initial request
for federal funding consisted of eleven components, including the new fuel farm. As
described in the Airport Financial Study by CH2MHill, Inc. and TxDOT's Airport
Development Worksheet dated October 10, 2012 all these project components
together had an estimated cost of $5,738,000. Page 35 of 65
With time, this program has expanded to the most recent description shown on TxDOT's
May 12, 2015 Aviation CIP. It now has 25 components, including the new fuel farm and
it's cost has expanded to an estimated cost of $8,252,640. That sum, does not include
construction management and other potential eligible federal costs which could easily
increase the total, by 20%, to approximately $10 Million. The city has committed to p ay
10% of the total cost, or about $1 Million. This obligation will be in addition to the
current airport financial deficit and is not the only such added cost which the city is
obligated to pay for current and proposed federal grants.
We have repeatedly requested a full vetting of this program by staff. This board has
repeatedly ignored our requests. As local, state and federal taxpayers, we have the
right to know and understand the justification of why this program has been expanded
in size (number of components) and cost.
Who approved such an expansion without a GTAB review?
With exception of the fuel farm, on what basis or rationale is this program being
granted a Categorical Exclusion (CATEX) for its other 24 components?
Why have our city leaders and the general public not been officially informed of
this categorical exclusion tactic and intent to evade a full NEPA review of the
program?
Mr. Chairman we request a focused workshop chaired, board represented, with a time
length determined by you. Mr. Chairman, we request a workshop for a free and open
discussion by staff and the general public in this conference room. A workshop that will
follow Roberts Rules of Order to properly vet this program and provide the described
information to the public and members of this board. We request that this first
workshop be approved by a board action that would immediately follow adjournment of
this meeting.
I am happy to take any questions and or comments the board may have. Thank you all
for your attention.
Page 36 of 65
City of Georgetown, Texas
Transportation Advisory Board
October 9, 2015
SUBJECT:
Presentation, discussion and possible recommendation of a DRAFT Ordinance “Illicit Discharge
of pollutants into the MS4 or Conveyances. Edward G. Polasek, Transportation Services Director
and Skye Masson, Asst. City Attorney.
ITEM SUMMARY:
On December 11, 2013, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) adopted rules
for newly regulated MS4s based on the 2010 Census designation of Urbanized Areas In order to
comply with permit requirements, the City of Georgetown submitted a Storm Water Management
Plan (SWMP) to on June 11, 2014. The TCEQ approved SWMP outlines key activities and
programming the City of Georgetown will take over the course of 5 years in order to comply with
the general permit. One key activity is the review of existing ordinances prohibiting illicit
discharges. City staff, through consultation with adjacent permit holders, has reviewed existing
ordinances and has drafted a new ordinance in line with TCEQ standards. City Council will review
the DRAFT ordinance and the DRAFT Year 1 report during a workshop on November 10, 2015.
Signature authority for the permit is regulated by the 30 Texas Administrative Code §305.44(a)(3).
According to the Provision, only a ranking elected official or principal executive officer may sign
an application form.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends approval of the DRAFT Ordinance to City Council during their November 24th
regular meeting.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A.
SUBMITTED BY:
Nat Waggoner, PMP®
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
DRAFT Illicit Discharge Ordinance Presentation (MS4) - GTAB
(09OCT15)
Presentation
DRAFT Illicit Discharge Ordinance Ordinance
Page 37 of 65
Transit Development Plan
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer (MS4)
Illicit Discharge Ordinance
GTAB Presentation
October 9th, 2015
Page 38 of 65
Transit Development Plan
Agenda
●History of Permit
●YR 1 Activities
●Illicit Discharge Ordinance
●Next Steps
Page 39 of 65
Transit Development Plan
History of Permit
●Instantiation of the Clean Water Act, delegated to the
TCEQ
●Georgetown notified of permit requirements in Dec 2013
●City Council Adopts Stormwater Management Plan
(SWMP)
●SWMP Submitted to TCEQ June 2014
●SWMP Approved by TCEQ in Nov 2014
●5 Year Implementation Period
●Reporting aligned with Fiscal Year
Page 40 of 65
Transit Development Plan
Year 1
Activities Related to Illicit Discharge
(6/14 – 9/ 15)
●Review Ordinances and Citizen Reporting/
Complaint Systems and Procedures
●Asses data needs
●Develop municipal training
●Investigate illicit discharges
●Continue municipal system maintenance
Page 41 of 65
Transit Development Plan
DRAFT Illicit Discharge Ordinance
●Empowers the General Manager of the Utility
●The ordinance is based on five guidelines:
1.City of Round Rock’s existing ordinance
2.City of Fort Worth’s existing ordinance
3.EPA’s MS4 Ordinance Recommendations
4.TCEQ Sample Ordinance
5.Texas Water Code, Section 26.173(a) for Right of
Entry
Page 42 of 65
Transit Development Plan
DRAFT Illicit Discharge Ordinance (cont.)
●Developed in coordination with:
City of Georgetown Staff
Chief Building Official
Code Enforcement
Legal
Systems Engineering
Plan review
Inspection Services
Page 43 of 65
Transit Development Plan
Next Steps
●Seek your recommendation of approval
●November 10th Workshop with City Council
●Review of DRAFT YR 1 Report to TCEQ
●Requires Mayor’s signature
●November 24th 1st Reading of Ordinance
●December 8th 2nd Reading and Adoption
Page 44 of 65
Transit Development Plan
Questions and Concerns
Page 45 of 65
Page 1
CHAPTER 13.30. - ILLICIT DISCHARGES OF POLLUTANTS INTO THE MS4 OR
CONVEYANCES
Sec. 13.30.010 - Applicability.
This chapter shall be applicable to any and all dischargers (as herein defined) within the city
limits and extraterritorial jurisdiction of the city.
Sec. 13.30.020 - Definitions.
The following words and phrases, when used in this chapter, shall have the meanings
respectively ascribed to them in this definitions section, except when the context otherwise
requires. Whenever any words and phrases used herein are not defined herein but are defined in
the federal and state laws regulating illicit discharge, any such definition therein shall be deemed
to apply to such words and phrases used herein, except when the context otherwise requires.
Calendar day. When the term "day" is used herein, unless specifically defined otherwise, the
term shall mean any day of the week, including Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays, with no
days being excepted.
General Manager means the city employee fulfilling the duties of and holding the title of
General Manager of Utilities, or similar subsequent title designation, or designee.
City staff means employees of the City, authorized to act on the City's behalf by the General
Manager.
Construction activity means soil disturbance, including clearing, grading, and excavating;
and not including routine maintenance that is performed to maintain the original line and grade,
hydraulic capacity, or original purpose of the site (e.g., the routine grading of existing dirt roads,
asphalt overlays of existing roads, the routine clearing of existing right -of-ways, and similar
maintenance activities). Regulated construction activity is defined in terms of small and large
construction activity.
Conveyance means any of the following, by way of illustration and not limitation: Stream,
channel, drainage way, drainage/dry well, ephemeral stream, floodplain, karst feature, storm
drainage system, drainage system appurtenance, waterbody, watercourse or waterway, curbs,
gutters, man-made channels and ditches, drains, pipes, and other constructed features designed or
used for flood control or to otherwise transport stormwater runoff.
Discharge means any addition or introduction of any pollutant, storm-water, or any other
substance whatsoever into the municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) or conveyances.
Discharger means any person who causes, allows, permits, or is otherwise responsible for a
discharge, including, without limitation, any operator of a construction site or industrial facility.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) means the United States Environmental Protection
Agency, the regional office thereof, any federal department, agency, or commission that may
Page 46 of 65
Page 2
succeed to the authority of EPA, and any duly authorized official of EPA or such successor
agency.
Facility means any building, structure, installation, or activity from which there is or may be
a discharge of a pollutant.
Fire department means the Fire Department of the City of Georgetown, Texas, and any other
fire departments with which the City of Georgetown has mutual assistance or mutual aid
agreements.
Fire protection water means any water, and any substances or materials contained therein,
used by any person other than the fire department to control or extinguish a fire.
Garbage means putrescible animal and vegetable waste materials from the handling,
preparation, cooking, or consumption of food, including waste materials from markets, storage
facilities, and the handling and sale of produce and other food products.
Harmful quantity means the amount of any substance due to volume or concentration that
will cause pollution.
Hazardous material means any material (including any substance, waste, or combination
thereof) which, because of its quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical, or infectious
characteristics, may cause or significantly contribute to a substantial present or potential hazard
to human health, safety, property, or the environment when improperly treated, stored,
transported, disposed of, or otherwise managed. This term shall include household hazardous
wastes as classified under 40 CFR 261, hazardous substances as listed in table 302.4 of 40 CFR
302, and hazardous wastes identified or listed by the EPA pursuant to 40 CFR 261.
Illicit connection means any connection to the MS4 or conveyances that allows for an illicit
discharge.
Illicit discharge means any discharge to a municipal separate storm sewer that is not entirely
composed of storm-water, except discharges pursuant to this general permit or a separate
authorization and discharges resulting from emergency fire-fighting activities.
Industrial activity means any activity at an industrial facility described by the TPDES Multi
Sector General Permit, TXR050000, or by any other TCEQ or TPDES permit including any of
the following, by way of illustration and not of limitation: manufacturing, processing, materials
storage, and waste materials disposal.
Industrial waste means any waterborne liquid or solid substance that result from any process
of industry, manufacturing, mining, production, trade or business.
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) means the storm drainage system operated
and maintained by the city which is comprised of the following: the system of conveyances
(including roads with drainage systems, municipal streets, catch-basins, curbs, gutters, ditches,
manmade channels, or storm drains) owned and operated by the city and designed or used for
collecting or conveying storm-water, and which is not used for collecting or conveying sewage.
Oil means any kind of oil in any form, including but not limited to petroleum, fuel oil, crude
oil or any fraction thereof which is liquid at standard conditions of temperature and pressure,
sludge, oil refuse, and oil mixed with waste. This term shall include used oil that has become
unsuitable for its original purpose because of impurities or the loss of original properties but that
may be suitable for further use and is recyclable in compliance with state and federal law.
Operator means the person or persons who, either individually or taken together, meet the
following two criteria:
Page 47 of 65
Page 3
(1) He has operational control over the facility specifications (including the ability to make
modifications in specifications); and
(2) He has the day-to-day operational control over those activities at the facility necessary
to ensure compliance with pollution prevention requirements and any permit conditions.
Owner means the person who owns a facility or part of a facility.
Outfall means point source at the point where a small MS4 discharges to waters of the U.S.
and does not include open conveyances connecting two municipal separate storm sewers, or
pipes, tunnels, or other conveyances that connect segments of the same stream or other waters of
the U.S. and are used to convey waters of the U.S. For the purpose of this permit, sheet flow
leaving a linear transportation system without channelization is not considered an outfall. Point
sources such as curb cuts; traffic or right-or-way barriers with drainage slots that drain into open
culverts, open swales or an adjacent property, or otherwise not actually discharging into waters
of the U.S. are not considered an outfall.
Person means any individual, partnership, co-partnership, firm, company, corporation,
association, joint-stock company, trust, estate, governmental entity, or any other legal entity, or
their legal representatives, agents, lessees, or assigns. This term shall also include all federal,
state, and local governmental entities.
Petroleum storage tank (PST) means any one or a combination of aboveground or
underground storage tanks or connecting underground pipes that contain petroleum products that
are obtained from distilling and processing crude oil and that are capable of being used as a fuel.
Pollutant means a substance, the entrance of which causes or contributes to a violation of
applicable water quality standards as defined by the Clean Water Act. This term includes but is
not limited to paints, varnishes, solvents, oil and other automotive fluids, yard wastes, trash,
sediments, household chemicals, detergents, pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, hazardous
materials, sewage, animal wastes, dredged spoil, solid waste, incinerator residue, garbage,
sewage sludge, munitions, chemical waste, biological materials, radioactive materials, wrecked
or discarded equipment, rock, sand, cellar dirt, and industrial, municipal, and agricultural waste
discharged into water, and other materials exposed to storm-water as a result of construction
activity.
Pollution means the alteration of the physical, thermal, chemical, or biological quality of, or
the contamination of, any water in the state that renders the water harmful, detrimental, or
injurious to humans, animal life, vegetation, or property, or to the public health, safety, or
welfare, or impairs the usefulness or the public enjoyment of the water for any lawful or
reasonable purpose.
Release means any spilling, leaking, pumping, pouring, emitting, emptying, discharging,
injecting, escaping, leaching, dumping, or disposing into the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer
System (MS4) or conveyances.
Sanitary sewer or sewer means the system of pipes, conduits, and other conveyances which
carry industrial waste and domestic sewage from residential dwellings, commercial buildings,
industrial and manufacturing facilities, and institutions, whether treated or untreated, to the city
sewage treatment plant (and to which storm-water, surface water, and groundwater are not
intentionally admitted).
Page 48 of 65
Page 4
Service station means any retail establishment engaged in the business of selling fuel for
motor vehicles that is dispensed from stationary storage tanks.
Site means the land or water area where any facility or activity is physically located or
conducted, including adjacent land used in connection with the facility or activity.
Solid waste means any garbage, trash, refuse, sludge from a waste treatment plant, water
supply treatment plant, or air pollution control facility, and other discarded material, including
solid, liquid, semi-solid, or contained gaseous material resulting from industrial, municipal,
commercial, mining, and agricultural operations, and from community and institutional
activities.
Storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) means a plan required by either the
construction general permit or the industrial general permit and which describes and ensures the
implementation of practices that are to be used to reduce the pollutants in storm-water discharges
associated with construction or other industrial activity at the facility.
Storm-water means any surface flow, storm-water runoff, snow melt runoff, and surface
runoff and drainage consisting entirely of water from any form of natural precipitation.
TCEQ means the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, or any duly authorized
official of said agency.
Texas Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (TPDES) means the program delegated to the
State of Texas by EPA pursuant to 33 USC 1342(b).
Trash means non-putrescible solid waste, excluding ashes that consist of:
(1) Combustible waste materials, including paper, rags, cartons, wood, excelsior, furniture,
rubber, plastics, yard trimmings, leaves, and similar materials; and
(2) Noncombustible waste materials, including glass, crockery, tin cans, aluminum cans,
metal objects, and similar materials that do not burn at ordinary incinerator
temperatures (1600 to 1800 degrees Fahrenheit).
Uncontaminated means not containing a harmful quantity of any substance.
Wash-water means any water containing pollutants from the act of cleaning parking lots,
vehicles, or building exteriors.
Wastewater means human excrement, gray water (from home clothes washing, bathing,
showering, dishwashing, and food preparation), other wastewater that is free from industrial
waste including from household drains, and waterborne waste normally discharged from the
sanitary conveniences of dwellings (including apartment houses and hotels), office buildings,
factories, and institutions.
Water quality standard means the designation of a body or segment of surface water in the
state for desirable uses and the narrative and numerical criteria deemed by the state to be
necessary to protect those uses, as specified in 31 Tex. Admin. Code Ch. 307.
Wetland means an area that is inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a
frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances does support,
a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands
generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.
Yard waste means leaves, grass clippings, yard and garden debris, and brush that results
from landscaping maintenance and land-clearing operations.
Page 49 of 65
Page 5
Sec. 13.30.030 - Minimum standards.
The standards set forth in this chapter are minimum standards; therefore, no inference is
intended that compliance with this chapter will ensure that there will be no contamination,
pollution, or unauthorized discharge of pollutants. Additionally, no inference is intended that
compliance with this chapter will serve to extend any deadline established by a state or federal
standard or requirement, nor is any inference intended that compliance with this chapter will
relieve a discharger of liability for any violation or continuing violation.
Sec. 13.30.040 - Compliance obligations.
(a) Any person subject to an industrial or construction activity TPDES storm-water discharge
permit shall comply with all provisions of such permit or any other state or federal
regulations. Prior to the city allowing discharges to the MS4 or conveyances, the city may
require proof of such compliance in a form acceptable to the city.
(b) Every person owning property through which a conveyance passes shall have the obligation
to keep and maintain that part of the conveyance within that property free of pollutants.
Sec. 13.30.050 - General prohibition; affirmative defenses.
(a) General prohibition. No person within the city limits and extraterritorial jurisdiction of the
city shall introduce, cause to be introduced, discharge, or cause to be discharged into the
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) or any conveyances any discharge that is
not composed entirely of storm-water. Such prohibition includes commencement of any
illicit discharge into the MS4 or any conveyances, and continuation of any illicit discharge
into the MS4 or any conveyances.
(b) Affirmative defenses. It is an affirmative defense to any enforcement action for violation of
subsection (a) of this section that the discharge was composed entirely of one or more of the
following categories of discharges:
(1) A discharge specified in writing by the city as necessary to protect public health and
safety.
(2) A discharge authorized by a TPDES permit, waiver, or waste discharge order issued to
the discharger and administered under authority of the TCEQ or USEPA, provided that
the discharger is in full compliance with all requirements of the permit, waiver, order,
and other applicable laws and regulations.
(3) A discharge resulting from firefighting/fire suppression activities.
(4) A discharge of fire protection water from standard municipal operations and training
that does not contain oil or hazardous substances or materials that are required to be
contained and treated prior to discharge, in which case treatment adequate to remove
harmful quantities of pollutants must have occurred prior to discharge.
(5) A discharge resulting from the standard municipal operations of street sweeping and
street washing activities, which discharge is not contaminated with any soap, detergent,
degreaser, solvent, emulsifier, dispersant, or any other harmful cleaning substance.
Page 50 of 65
Page 6
(6) A discharge from water line flushing, but not including a discharge from water line
disinfection by super-chlorination or other means unless the total residual chlorine
(TRC) has been reduced to less than one ppm (part per million) and it contains no
harmful quantity of chlorine or any other chemical used in line disinfection.
(7) A discharge from a potable water source not containing any harmful quantity of a
substance or material from the cleaning or draining of a storage tank or other container.
(8) A discharge from individual residential car washing.
(9) A discharge from air conditioning condensation that is unmixed with water from a
cooling tower, emissions scrubber, emissions filter, or any other source of pollutant.
(10) Swimming pool water that has been dechlorinated so that total residual chlorine (TRC)
is less than one ppm (part per million) and that contains no harmful quantity of chlorine,
muriatic acid or other chemical used in the treatment or disinfection of the swimming
pool water or in pool cleaning.
(11) Storm-water runoff from a roof that is not contaminated by any runoff or discharge
from an emissions scrubber or filter or any other source of pollutant.
(12) A discharge or flow from a diverted stream flow or natural spring.
(13) A discharge or flow from uncontaminated pumped groundwater, rising groundwater, or
groundwater infiltration to storm drains.
(14) Uncontaminated groundwater infiltration, as defined by 40 CFR 35.2005(20), to the
MS4.
(15) Uncontaminated discharge from a foundation or footing drain (excluding active
groundwater dewatering systems), crawl space pump, or sump pump.
(c) No affirmative defense shall be available under this chapter if the discharge in question has
been previously determined by the city to be a source of a pollutant to the MS4 or any
conveyances, and written notice of such determination has been provided to the discharger.
The city's determination that a discharge is a source of a pollutant may be reviewed in any
administrative or judicial enforcement proceeding.
Sec. 13.30.060 - Specific prohibitions.
(a) The specific prohibitions and requirements in this section are not inclusive of all the
discharges prohibited by the general prohibition in section 13.30.050.
(b) No person shall introduce, cause to be introduced, discharge, or cause to be discharged into
the MS4 or conveyances any discharge that causes or contributes to causing the city to
violate a water quality standard, the city's TPDES permit, or any state -issued discharge
permit for discharges from its MS4.
(c) No person shall dump, spill, leak, pump, pour, emit, empty, discharge, leach, dispose, or
otherwise introduce or cause, allow, or permit to be introduced any of the following
substances into the MS4 or conveyances:
(1) Any motor oil, antifreeze, or any other motor vehicle fluid.
(2) Any industrial waste.
(3) Any hazardous material, including household hazardous waste, hazardous substances,
and hazardous waste.
(4) Any wastewater or septic tank waste, grease trap waste, or grit trap waste.
Page 51 of 65
Page 7
(5) Any garbage, trash, or yard waste, specifically including but not limited to pressure-
treated wood, painted wood, painted wood pallets, laminated wood, insulation, and
particle board.
(6) Any discharge from a carwash facility; from any vehicle washing, cleaning, or
maintenance at any new or used automobile or other vehicle dealership, rental agency,
body shop, repair shop, or maintenance facility; or from any washing, cleaning, or
maintenance of any vehicle, including a truck, bus, or heavy equipment, by a business
or public entity that operates more than four such vehicles.
(7) Any discharge from the cleaning of a building exterior that contains any soap,
detergent, degreaser, solvent, or any other harmful cleaning substance.
(8) Any discharge from commercial floor, rug, or carpet cleaning.
(9) Any discharge from the wash-down or other cleaning of pavement that contains any
harmful quantity of soap, detergent, solvent, degreaser, emulsifier, dispersant, or any
other harmful cleaning substance; or any discharge from the wash-down or other
cleaning of any pavement where any spill, leak, or other release of oil, motor fuel, or
other petroleum or hazardous substance has occurred, unless all harmful quantities of
such released material have been previously removed.
(10) Any effluent from a cooling tower, condenser, compressor, emissions scrubber,
emissions filter, or the blowdown from a boiler.
(11) Any ready-mixed concrete, mortar, ceramic, or asphalt base material or hydro-mulch
material, or material from the cleaning of vehicles or equipment containing, or used in
transporting or applying, such materials.
(12) Any runoff or wash-down water from concentrated animal feeding operations as
defined in 40 CFR 122.23 or discharges from concentrated aquatic animal production
facilities as defined in 40 CFR 122.24.
(13) Any swimming pool, fountain, or spa water, including backwash water, containing total
residual chlorine (TRC) of one ppm (part per million) or more or containing any
harmful quantity of chlorine, muriatic acid or other chemical used in the treatment or
disinfection of the swimming pool water or in pool cleaning.
(14) Any discharge from water line disinfection by super-chlorination or other means if the
total residual chlorine (TRC) is at one ppm (part per million) or more or if it contains
any harmful quantity of chlorine or any other chemical used in line disinfection.
(15) Any fire protection water containing oil or hazardous materials that are required to be
contained and treated prior to discharge, unless treatment adequate to remove pollutants
occurs prior to discharge. This prohibition does not apply to discharges or flow from
firefighting/fire suppression activities.
(16) Any contaminated runoff from a vehicle salvage yard or storage yard.
(17) Any substance or material that will damage the MS4.
(18) Any release from a petroleum storage tank (PST), or any leachate or runoff from soil
contaminated by a leaking PST, or any discharge from the remediation of any such PST
release, unless the discharge satisfies all of the following criteria:
a. Compliance with all state and federal standards and requirements; and
b. No discharge containing a harmful quantity of any pollutant.
Page 52 of 65
Page 8
(19) Any harmful quantity of sediment, silt, earth, soil, or other material which is associated
with clearing, grading, excavation or other such construction activities, or which is
associated with landfilling or other placement or disposal of soil, rock, or other earth
materials.
(20) Any pavement wash-water from a service station unless such wash-water has passed
through a properly functioning and maintained grease, oil, and sand separator before
discharge into the MS4 or conveyances.
(21) Any introduction of oil into the environment, specifically including but not limited to
oil applied to a road or land for dust suppression, weed abatement, or other similar use;
any introduction of oil commingled or mixed with solid waste that is to be disposed of
in a landfill; any introduction of oil by direct disposal on land or in a landfill; or any
introduction of oil into the MS4 or conveyances, or into any septic tank.
Sec. 13.30.070 - Prohibition of illicit connections and tampering with the MS4.
(a) The construction of, use of, maintenance of, or continued use of a new or existing illicit
connection to the MS4 or any conveyances is prohibited. This prohibition expressly includes
any illicit connection made before passage of the ordinance codified in this chapter,
regardless of whether such connection was permissible under law or practices applicable or
prevailing at the time of connection. A person is deemed to be in violation of this chapter if
the person connects a line conveying wastewater or industrial waste to the MS4 or any
conveyances, or allows such a connection to continue.
(b) It is unlawful to injure or in any way tamper with any part of the MS4, including willfully or
negligently clogging any sewer drain.
Sec. 13.30.080 - Compliance monitoring.
(a) Right of entry; inspection and sampling. City staff, or appointed representative shall have
the right to enter any facility or site, including industrial and construction facilities or sites,
which are discharging to the MS4 or any conveyances to determine if the discharger is
complying with all requirements of this chapter pursuant to this Section and state law
including Section 26.173(a) of the Texas Water Code. Dischargers shall allow city staff, or
appointed representative immediate access to all parts of the premises for the purposes of
inspection, sampling, records examination, and copying, and for the performance of any
additional inspections or duties. Dischargers shall make available to city staff, or appointed
representative, upon request, any SWPPPs (storm water pollution prevention plans),
modifications thereto, self-inspection reports, monitoring records, compliance evaluations,
notices of intent, and any other records, reports, and other documents related to compliance
with this chapter and with any state or federal discharge permit.
(1) Where a discharger has security measures in force which require proper identification
and clearance before entry onto its premises, the discharger shall make necessary
arrangements with its security guards so that, upon presentation of suitable
identification, city staff, or appointed representative will be permitted to enter without
delay for the purposes of performing the city's responsibilities.
Page 53 of 65
Page 9
(2) City staff, or appointed representative shall have the right to set up on the discharger's
property, or require installation on the discharger's property, of such devices as city staff
deem necessary to conduct sampling and/or metering of the discharger's operations.
(3) City staff, or appointed representative may require any discharger to the MS4 or any
conveyances to conduct specified sampling, testing, analysis, and other monitoring of
its storm-water discharges at the discharger's expense, and ma y specify the frequency
and parameters of any such required monitoring.
(4) City staff, or appointed representative may require the discharger to install monitoring
equipment as necessary at the discharger's expense. The facility's sampling and
monitoring equipment shall be maintained at all times in a safe and proper operating
condition by the discharger at its own expense. All devices used to measure storm water
flow and quality shall be calibrated to ensure accuracy.
(5) Any temporary or permanent obstruction to safe and easy access to the facility to be
inspected and/or sampled shall be promptly removed by the discharger at the written or
verbal request of city staff and shall not be replaced. The costs of clearing such access
shall be borne by the discharger.
(6) Unreasonable delays in allowing city staff access to the discharger's premises shall be
deemed a violation of this chapter.
(b) Search warrant. If city staff, or appointed representative f has been refused access to any
part of the premises from which storm-water is discharged, and the city is able to
demonstrate probable cause to believe that there may be a violation of this chapter, or that
there is a need to inspect and/or sample as part of a routine inspection and sampling program
of the city designed to verify compliance with this chapter or any order issued hereunder, or
to protect the overall public health, safety, and welfare of the community, then the city may
seek issuance of a search warrant from any court of competent jurisdiction.
Sec. 13.30.090 - Requirement for notification of spills.
(a) Discovery, containment and cleanup procedure. Notwithstanding other requirements of law,
as soon as any discharger or operator of a facility or operation, or person responsible for
emergency response for a facility or operation, has information of any known or suspected
release of materials which are resulting or may result in an illicit discharge, such person
shall take all necessary steps to ensure the discovery, containment and cleanup of such
discharge.
(1) Hazardous materials spill. In the event of discharge of hazardous materials, the
discharger shall immediately notify emergency response agencies. Once the immediate
threat has been properly contained, the discharger shall notify the City’s Utility
Customer Care Center.
(2) Nonhazardous materials spill. In the event of a release of nonhazardous materials, the
discharger shall notify the City’s Utility Customer Care Center, in person or by
telephone no later than the next day. Notifications in person or by telephone shall be
confirmed by written notice addressed and mailed to the General Manager within three
business days of the telephone notice.
Page 54 of 65
Page 10
(b) Record of discharge from commercial or industrial establishment. If the discharge of
prohibited materials emanates from a commercial or industrial establishment, the owner or
operator of such establishment shall also retain on site a written record of the discharge and
the actions taken to prevent its recurrence. Such records shall be retained for a minimum of
three years.
Sec. 13.30.100 - Enforcement options.
(a) When the General Manager determines that a violation of this chapter has occurred or is
occurring, the following remedies are available to such General Manager or their designee.
The remedies provided for in this section or elsewhere in this chapter are not exclusive. The
General Manager or their designee may take any, all or any combination of these actions
against a violator, consecutively or concurrently:
(1) Issuance of a warning notice;
(2) Issuance of one or more applications for complaints;
(3) Issuance of a notice of violation;
(4) Execution of a consent order;
(5) Issuance of a compliance order;
(6) A show cause hearing;
(7) A stop work order;
(8) Nuisance abatement, if applicable;
(9) Permit suspension or revocation proceedings, if applicable;
(10) Suspension of utility service or MS4 access as provided in 13.30.180;
(11) Request the city attorney to institute suit for civil remedies as provided by this chapter,
or state or federal law; or
(12) Any other remedy provided in this chapter.
Sec. 13.30.110 - Application for Complaint
The General Manager is authorized to issue an application for complaint for violations of
this Chapter. The General Manager is also authorized to issue an application for complaint for
violations of state environmental laws which are punishable only by a fine not to exceed the
jurisdictional limits of the Georgetown municipal court, unless such authority is denied under
state law.
Sec. 13.30.120 - Notice of Violation
(a) When the General Manager finds that any person has violated, or continues to violate, this
chapter or any permit or order issued hereunder, the General Manager may issue to such
person a written notice of violation.
(b) No later than the tenth day after receipt of the notice, the v iolator shall submit to the issuing
General Manager or their designee an explanation of the violation and a plan for the
Page 55 of 65
Page 11
satisfactory correction and prevention of a reoccurrence of the violation. Such plan shall
include specific actions to be taken by the violator.
(c) If the violator denies that any violation occurred, or contends that no corrective action is
necessary, he or she shall submit to the General Manager no later than the tenth day after
receipt of the notice, a written explanation of the basis of any such denial or contention.
(d) Submission of an explanation and/or plan in no way relieves a violator of liability for any
violations occurring before or after receipt of the notice of violation.
(e) Issuance of a notice of violation shall not be a bar against, nor a prerequisite for, taking any
other action against a violator.
Sec. 13.30.130 - Consent Order
(a) The General Manager may enter into a consent order, assurance of voluntary compliance, or
similar agreement with any person responsible for noncompliance with any provision of this
chapter or any permit or order issued hereunder.
(b) Such agreement may include specific action to be taken by the violator to correct the
noncompliance within a time period specified by the agreement.
(c) Such agreements have the same force and effect of compliance orders and remediation,
abatement and restoration orders, and shall be judicially enforceable.
Sec. 13.30.140 - Compliance Order
(a) When the General Manager finds that any person has violated, or continues to violate, any
provision of this chapter, or any permit or order issued hereunder, such General Manager or
their designee may issue a compliance order to the violator, directing the violator to come
into compliance within a specified time limit.
(b) Compliance orders may contain other requirements to address noncompliance, including
additional management practices and self-monitoring to minimize the amount of pollutants
discharged.
(c) A compliance order may not extend the deadline for compliance established by a state or
federal standard or requirement.
(d) A compliance order shall not relieve a violator of liability for any violation, including any
continuing violation.
(e) A person receiving a compliance order may file a written notice of appeal with the General
Manager, no later than the tenth day after receipt of the order. Such notice of appeal shall
include an explanation as to why the person believes the enforcement action should not be
taken.
(f) Issuance of a compliance order shall not be a bar against, nor a prerequisite for, taking any
other action against a violator.
Page 56 of 65
Page 12
Sec. 13.30.150 - Show Cause Hearing
(a) The General Manager may order any person who has violated or who continues to violate
any provision of this chapter or any permit or order issued hereunder, to appear and show
cause why a proposed enforcement action should not be taken.
(b) A hearing shall not be a bar against, or a prerequisite for, taking any other action against the
violator.
Sec. 13.30.160 - Stop Work Order
(a) Whenever the General Manager finds that any operator of a construction site has violated, or
continues to violate, any provision of this chapter, or any permit or order issued thereunder,
such General Manager or their designee may order that a stop work order be issued to the
operator, posted at the construction site, and distributed to all city departments and divisions
whose decisions affect any activity at the site.
(b) Unless express written exception is made by such General Manager or their designee, the
stop work order shall prohibit any further construction activity at the site and shall bar any
further inspection or approval by the city associated with a building permit, grading permit,
subdivision plat approval, site development plan approval, or any other city approval
necessary to commence or continue construction or to assume occupancy at the site.
(c) A person receiving an order under this section may file a written notice of appeal with the
General Manager who issued it, no later than the tenth day after receipt of the order. Such
notice shall include an explanation as to why the person believes the enforcement action
should not be taken.
(d) Issuance of a stop work order shall not be a bar against, or a prerequisite for, taking any
other action against the violator.
Sec. 13.30.170 - Nuisance Abatement
(a) Unless specifically stated otherwise, any nuisance as defined within this chapter is hereby
declared a nuisance if it exists within the corporate limits of the city or within 5,000 feet of
such limits.
(b) The General Manager may give notice to cease, abate, remove or otherwise remedy a
nuisance immediately to:
(1) The owner of property upon which a nuisance is located or from which a nuisance
originated or is emanating. If the person creating, allowing or maintaining the nuisance
is not the owner of the property, notice shall also be given to such person; and
(2) Any person creating, allowing or maintaining a nuisance.
(c) The notice must be given:
Page 57 of 65
Page 13
(1) Personally to the owner/person in writing; or
(2) By letter addressed to the owner/person at the owner’s/person’s post office address and
sent certified mail, return receipt requested. However, if personal or certified mail
service cannot be obtained or the owner’s/person’s post office address is unknown,
notice may be given:
a. By publication in the official newspaper of the city at least twice within ten
consecutive days;
b. By posting the notice on or near the front door of each building on the property to
which the nuisance relates; or
c. By posting the notice on a placard attached to a stake driven into the ground on the
property to which the nuisance relates, if the property contains no buildings.
(d) The notice may order the owner/person to undertake and implement any appropriate action:
(1) To remediate and/or abate any adverse effects of the nuisance upon the MS4, the waters
of the state, the waters of the United States or any other aspect of the environment;
and/or
(2) To restore any part of the MS4, the waters of the state, the waters of the United States,
or any other aspect of the environment that has been harmed.
(e) Such remedial, abatement and restoration action may include, but not be limited to:
(1) Monitoring, assessment and evaluation of the adverse effects and determination of the
appropriate remedial, abatement and/or restoration action;
(2) Confinement, removal, cleanup, treatment and disposal of any discharged or released
pollution or contamination;
(3) Prevention, minimization and/or mitigation of any damage to the public health, welfare
or the environment that may result from the nuisance; and
(4) Restoration or replacement of city property or natural resources damaged by the
nuisance.
(f) The notice may direct that the remediation, abatement and/or restoration be accomplished on
a specified compliance schedule and/or be completed within a specified period of time. An
order issued under this section does not relieve the violator of liability for any violation,
including any continuing violation.
(g) If the owner/person does not comply with the notice within ten days of service, the General
Manager may enter any public or private property containing the nuisance and do any work
necessary to abate the nuisance, except the demolition of buildings.
Page 58 of 65
Page 14
(h) If the immediate abatement of the nuisance is deemed necessary by The General Manager to
protect the environment or the public health, safety or welfare from an imminent and
substantial endangerment, such General Manager or their designee may, without complying
with the notice provisions of this section or without waiting the ten-day period, enter the
subject property and do or cause to be done any work necessary to abate the nuisance and
remediate and restore the environment.
(i) After abating the nuisance, the General Manager may inform the owner/person in a notice
sent certified mail, return receipt requested, that if the owner/person commits another
violation of the same kind or nature that poses a danger to the environment or to the public
health and safety on or before the first anniversary date of the original notice, the city may
without further notice correct the violation at the owner’s expense and assess the expense
against the owner’s property.
(j) All costs incurred by the city to abate a nuisance and remediate and restore the environment,
including the cost of giving notice as required, shall be initially paid by the city and charged
to the owner of the property.
(k) To obtain a lien against the property, the General Manager causing the abatement shall file a
statement of expenses with the county clerk for the county in which the property is located.
The lien statement shall state the name of the owner, if known, and the legal description of
the property. The lien shall be security for the costs incurred and interest accruing at the rate
of 10% on the amount due from the date of payment by the city.
(l) The lien is inferior only to:
(1) Tax liens; and
(2) Liens for street improvements.
(m) A lien may not be filed against real estate protected by the homestead provisions of the
Texas Constitution.
Sec. 13.30.180 - Disconnection from MS4.
(a) Any discharger in violation of this chapter may have its/their MS4 connection terminated by
city staff, if such disconnection would abate or reduce an illicit discharge. The city has the
right to require the violator to disconnect from the MS4 at the violator's expense, or require
the discharger to take corrective action to eliminate the source of the illicit discharge. A
discharger commits an offense if it reinstates an MS4 connection previously terminated
pursuant to this chapter, without the prior written approval of the city.
(b) Without any prior notice, city staff may terminate a discharger's MS4 connection when such
action is necessary to stop an actual or threatened discharge which presents or may present
imminent and substantial danger to the environment, or to the health or welfare of persons,
or to the MS4 or any conveyances. If the discharger fails to comply with any order issued in
such an emergency, the city may take such steps as it deems necessary to prevent or
minimize damage to the MS4 or any conveyances, and to minimize danger to persons.
Page 59 of 65
Page 15
Sec. 13.30.190 - Right to reconsideration of enforcement provision.
(a) Any discharger subject to an order under section 13.30.140 may petition the city's General
Manager to reconsider the basis for the order within seven days of the affected person's
notice of issuance of such an order.
(b) After the General Manager has reviewed relevant documents and evidence, he shall:
(1) Grant the petition;
(2) Deny the petition; or
(3) Grant the petition in part and deny it in part.
The General Manager may modify the order as is appropriate based upon all the documents
and evidence. Further orders and directives as are necessary and appropriate may be issued. The
decision of the General Manager shall be final and shall be non-appealable.
Sec. 13.30.200 - Violation deemed public nuisance.
Any condition caused or permitted to exist in violation of any of the provisions of this
chapter is a threat to public health, safety, and welfare, and is therefore declared and deemed a
public nuisance, and may be summarily abated or restored at the violator's expense, and/or a civil
action to abate, enjoin, or otherwise compel the cessation of such nuisance may be taken by the
city.
Sec. 13.30.210 - Criminal penalties.
(a) A discharger that violates any provision of this chapter, or any order issued hereunder,
commits an offense punishable by a fine not to exceed $500.00 per violation, per day, or any
greater fine authorized by state statute. Proof of a culpable mental state is not required for
conviction of an offense under this subsection.
(b) A discharger that violates any provision of this chapter, or any order issued hereunder,
intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence commits an offense
punishable by a fine not to exceed $2,000.00 per violation, per day, or any greater fine
authorized by state statute.
(c) Any discharger who has knowingly made any false statement, representation, or certification
in any application, record, report, plan, or other documentation filed, or required to be
maintained, pursuant to this chapter, or any order issued hereunder, or who has falsified,
tampered with, or knowingly rendered inaccurate any monitoring device or method required
under this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, be subject to a
fine of not more than $2,000.00 per violation, per day, or any greater fine authorized by state
statute.
(d) In determining the amount of any fine imposed hereunder, the court shall take into account
all relevant circumstances, including but not limited to the extent of harm caused by the
violation, the magnitude and duration of the violation, any economic benefit gained t hrough
the violation, corrective actions by the violator, the compliance history of the violator, the
Page 60 of 65
Page 16
knowledge, intent, negligence, or other state of mind of the violator, and any other factor as
justice requires.
(e) The remedies provided for in this chapter are not exclusive of any other remedies that the
city may have under state or federal law or other city ordinances. The city may take any, all,
or any combination of these actions against a violator. The city is empowered to take more
than one enforcement action against any violator, and these actions may be taken
concurrently.
Page 61 of 65
City of Georgetown, Texas
Transportation Advisory Board
October 9, 2015
SUBJECT:
Discussion and possible recommendation to reorganize the Transportation Services Division to
accommodate MS4 Program Administration, ADA Coordination and other Planning and Program
Management Responsibilities - Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director
ITEM SUMMARY:
In the approved 2016 Budget, City Council approved two new positions in the Transportation
Division. Those positions are an MS 4 Program Administrator and an additional Street
Sweeper/Inlet Maintenance Specialist in the Stormwater Utility. The Street Sweeper position is an
existing position in the Drainage Department and can easily be added to the staff.
The MS4 Program Administrator position is a new position that will require re-organization. Most
of the day to day duties of the MS 4 program are now being handled by the Transportation
Analyst, and not all duties of the position require a Manager. Staff is recommending we split the
responsibilities of the MS4 Program administration between the existing Transportation Analyst
position and a new Transportation Planning/Program Manager position.
The Transportation Planning/Program Manager fills a void in the Transportation Division in
several capacities beyond the MS 4 Program. The City will need a Manager level position to
coordinate ADA implementation once the Transition Plan is adopted by City Council. The
Transportation Division serves on various regional Boards and Commissions (CAMPO TAC,
MY35 Mobility Steering Committee, LSTAR Rail EIS Coordination Committee to name a few)
that require management level decision making and input. The Transportation Engineer’s focus
over the next few years will be 2015 Road Bond Implementation, other management duties in
planning and programming can be shifted to the Transportation Planning/Program Manager.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend reorganization plan to City Council to implement 2015/16 Budget Priorities in the
Transportation Division.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
No financial impact beyond currently approved 2015/16 Budget.
SUBMITTED BY:
Edward G. Polasek, AICP
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Existing Organization Chart Backup Material
Proposed Organization Chart Backup Material
Page 62 of 65
Transportation Services Division
Organization Chart
January 2015
* Traffic Operations Department in 5 year Business Plan for Transportation Services. Currently two
Sign & Signal Tech positions (2 FTE) funded and supervised one each from Streets (Light Equipment
Operator position) and Drainage (Sign & Signal Tech).
** Airport Business Operations Coordinator funded in Finance: Customer Care.
Transportation Services Director
Transportation Engineer
Transportation Services
Manager
Airport Maintenance
Coordinator
Airport Business
Operations Coordinator
Airport Maintenance
Worker (PT)
(frozen position)
Drainage/Mowing Crew
(750 hours from Drainage)
Airport Clerk (PT)
(frozen position)
Fuel Attendants (PT)
2.5 FTE/1.0 TPT
Office Specialist
(frozen position in GUS
Administration)
Airport Manager
Transportation Analyst
Traffic Operations
Department
(2 FTE: S&S Tech)*
Streets/Drainage
Superintendent
Streets Foreman Drainage Foreman
(Stormwater)
Heavy Equipment
Operator (2 FTE) Street Sweeper/LEO
Light Equipment
Operator (2 FTE)
Heavy Equipment
Operator (1 FTE)
Light Equipment
Operator (5 FTE)
Sign & Signal Tech*
(1 FTE)
Heavy Equipment
Operator (1 FTE)
Light Equipment
Operator (2 FTE)
Street Maintenance
Worker (P/T) (.75 FTE)
Sign & Signal Tech*
(1 FTE)
Crewman (P/T) (.50 FTE)
Paving Foreman Concrete Foreman
Heavy Equipment
Operator (1 FTE)
Light Equipment
Operator (2 FTE)
Page 63 of 65
Transportation Services Division
Proposed Organization Chart
October 2015
* Traffic Operations Department in 5 year Business Plan for Transportation Services. Currently two
Sign & Signal Tech positions (2 FTE) funded and supervised one each from Streets (Light Equipment
Operator position) and Drainage (Sign & Signal Tech).
** Airport Business Operations Coordinator funded in Finance: Customer Care.
*** New position created from the Stormwater Utility MS4 Program Administrator Pay Grade 25.
**** One street sweeper position added to cover MS4 requirements.
Transportation Services Director
Transportation Planning
Manager***
Transportation Services
Manager
Airport Maintenance
Coordinator
Airport Business
Operations Coordinator
Airport Maintenance
Worker (PT)
(frozen position)
Drainage/Mowing Crew
(750 hours from Drainage)
Airport Clerk (PT)
(frozen position)
Fuel Attendants (PT)
2.5 FTE/1.0 TPT
Office Specialist
(frozen position in GUS
Administration)
Airport Manager
Transportation Analyst
Traffic Operations
Department
(2 FTE: S&S Tech)*
Streets/Drainage
Superintendent
Streets Foreman Drainage Foreman
(Stormwater)
Heavy Equipment
Operator (2 FTE)
Street Sweeper/LEO
(2 FTE)****
Light Equipment
Operator (2 FTE)
Heavy Equipment
Operator (1 FTE)
Light Equipment
Operator (5 FTE)
Sign & Signal Tech*
(1 FTE)
Heavy Equipment
Operator (1 FTE)
Light Equipment
Operator (2 FTE)
Street Maintenance
Worker (P/T) (.75 FTE)
Sign & Signal Tech*
(1 FTE)
Crewman (P/T) (.50 FTE)
Paving Foreman Concrete Foreman
Heavy Equipment
Operator (1 FTE)
Light Equipment
Operator (2 FTE)
Transportation Engineer
Page 64 of 65
City of Georgetown, Texas
Transportation Advisory Board
October 9, 2015
SUBJECT:
Public Hearing for an Airport Improvement Project involving relocation of a proposed fuel farm
at the Georgetown Municipal Airport. - Russ Volk, C.M., Airport Manager and Edward G.
Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director.
ITEM SUMMARY:
TxDOT and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) recommended the City hold a public
hearing on the Fuel Farm relocation (the “Project) at the Georgetown Municipal Airport. The
rational seems to be the Airport CIP Public Hearing did not specifically identify the Fuel Farm
CIP item and it falls under different Federal Requirements for an environmental clearance process.
Public Hearing Procedures:
1. The Chairman Open the Public Hearing.
a. Request anyone wishing to speak fill out a speaker card and turn in to Jana.
b. Each speaker will have 3 minutes.
c. Speaker may have 3 additional minutes donated to them by someone in attendance who will not
utilize their 3 minutes.
d. Speakers will be asked to come to the dias and speak into the microphone so their comments
can be recorded.
2. Airport Manager will present an overview of the Project
3. Notice to Public “Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other
personal identifying information in your comment, be advised that your entire comment –
including your personal identifying information – may be made publicly available at any
time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold from public review your personal
identifying information, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.”
4. Public then called to speak to the item
5. When all those present who have signed up to speak have finished, Close the Public Hearing.
6. There will be no staff or Board follow-up unless Board members wish to ask staff specific
questions about the Project.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
No financial impact beyond additional cost to ask non-city staff to attend the meeting.
SUBMITTED BY:
Edward G. Polasek
Page 65 of 65