Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda_GTAB_03.11.2016Notice of Meeting for the Georgetown Transportation Adv isory Board and the Gov erning Body of the City of Georgetown March 11, 2016 at 10:00 AM at the GMC Building - 300-1 Industrial Av e., Georgetown, TX 78626 The City o f G eo rgeto wn is committed to comp lianc e with the Americans with Dis abilities Ac t (ADA). If yo u req uire as s is tanc e in participating at a p ublic meeting d ue to a disability, as d efined und er the ADA, reas onab le as s is tance, ad ap tatio ns , or acc o mmo d ations will b e provid ed up o n req uest. P leas e c o ntact the City at leas t fo ur (4) d ays prior to the sc heduled meeting d ate, at (512) 930-3652 or City Hall at 113 East 8th Street for ad d itional informatio n; TTY users ro ute thro ugh Relay Texas at 711. Regular Session (This Regular S es s io n may, at any time, b e rec es s ed to convene an Exec utive S es s io n fo r any p urpose authorized b y the Op en Meetings Act, Texas Go vernment Co d e 551.) A Call to Ord er The Board may, at any time, rec es s the R egular S es s io n to convene in Exec utive S es s io n at the reques t of the Chair, a Board Memb er, the City Manager, As s is tant City Manager, G eneral Manager of Utilities, City Co uncil Member, o r legal c o uns el for any p urpos e authorized b y the Op en Meetings Act, Texas Government C o d e Chapter 551, and are s ubjec t to actio n in the Regular Ses s ion that follows . B Introduction of Vis itors C Ind ustry/C AMP O/TXDOT Updates D Dis cus s ion regard ing the Projec t Progres s Reports and Time Lines. – Bill Dryd en, P.E., Transportation Engineer, Mark Miller, Trans p o rtatio n Servic es Manager, Nat Waggoner, PMP ®, Trans p o rtatio n Analys t and Ed ward G. P o las ek, AICP, Transportatio n Services Direc tor. E Dis cus s ion regard ing the Airp o rt Projec t P ro gres s Report and time lines . – Rus s Vo lk, C.M., Airp o rt Manager and Ed ward G. Polasek, AICP, Trans portation S ervic es Director Legislativ e Regular Agenda F No minations and elec tion of Vice-Chair of the GTAB Board. - Jo hn Pettitt – C hair Person for GTAB G No minations and elec tion of Sec retary of the GTAB Bo ard . – Jo hn Pettitt, GTAB Chair Person H Review and p o s s ib le ac tion related to the Day and Time o f GTAB Board Meetings . – Jo hn P ettitt, GTAB Chair Pers o n I Review and p o s s ib le ac tion to approve the minutes from the Regular GTAB Bo ard meeting held on Feb ruary 12, 2016. - Jana Kern – GTAB Bo ard Liais o n J D iscussion an d possible recom m en dation to C oun cil for the approval of an A dvan ced F unding A greem en t (A F A) with T xD O T for en viron m en tal review of Austin A ven ue B ridges proj ect as required by N ation al E n viron m en tal P olicy A ct (N E P A)- N at Waggon er, P M P , T ran sportation A n alyst an d E dward G . P olasek, A .I .C .P ., D irector, T ran sportation S ervices Page 1 of 75 Adjournment CERTIFICATE OF POSTING I, Shelley No wling, C ity S ecretary fo r the C ity of Geo rgeto wn, Texas , d o hereby c ertify that this Notice of Meeting was p o s ted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a p lace read ily acc es s ible to the general p ublic at all times , on the ______ d ay o f __________________, 2016, at __________, and remained so p o s ted fo r at leas t 72 c o ntinuo us ho urs p receding the sc heduled time o f s aid meeting. ____________________________________ S helley No wling, City Sec retary Page 2 of 75 City of Georgetown, Texas Transportation Advisory Board March 11, 2016 SUBJECT: Intro d uc tion o f Vis ito rs ITEM SUMMARY: FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A SUBMITTED BY: Jana Kern Page 3 of 75 City of Georgetown, Texas Transportation Advisory Board March 11, 2016 SUBJECT: Indus try/CAMPO/T XDOT Up d ates ITEM SUMMARY: FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A SUBMITTED BY: Jana Kern Page 4 of 75 City of Georgetown, Texas Transportation Advisory Board March 11, 2016 SUBJECT: Disc ussion regarding the P ro ject P ro gress R ep o rts and Time Lines . – Bill Dryden, P.E., Trans p o rtatio n Engineer, Mark Miller, Transportation Servic es Manager, Nat Waggo ner, PMP®, Transportation Analyst and Edward G . Polas ek, AICP, Trans p o rtation S ervic es Directo r. ITEM SUMMARY: GTAB Projec ts 2nd Street (Aus tin Avenue to College Street) Aus tin Avenue Improvements Projec t CDBG Sidewalk Imp ro vements - MLK/3rd S t (Sc enic Dr. to Aus tin Ave.) - Univers ity Ave. (I 35 to Hart S t.) FM 971 R ealignment at Aus tin Avenue FM 1460 Imp ro vements Projec t Jim Ho gg Drive/Road at Williams Drive Southwes t Bypass Projec t (Leander Road to I 35) Trans portation S ervic es Operatio ns – CIP Maintenance GTEC P ro jec ts Projec t S tatus Report 2015 Ro ad Bond P ro gram Southwes t Byp as s (Leander Dr./R M 2243 to Wo lf Ranc h Parkway Extens io n) and Wo lf Ranc h P arkway Extens io n (SW Byp as s to DB Wood Rd.) FINANCIAL IMPACT: None SUBMITTED BY: Bill Dryden, P.E., Trans portation Engineer ATTACHMENTS: Description Type GTAB Project Progres s Reports Backup Material GTEC Projects Status Report Backup Material 2015 Road Bond Project Progres s Reports Backup Material Page 5 of 75 2nd Street  Austin Avenue to College Street  Project No. 1BU     TIP None  March 2016  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 Work complete!    Construction As of March 2nd, the contractor was finishing punch list and working on completing  curb work on 4th Street. (add alternate)  Other Issues The VFW park reconstruction was bid on Feb. 2nd.  The Parks department is looking  into funding options.    Page 6 of 75 Austin Avenue Bridges Project  (North and South San Gabriel Bridges)  Project No. TBD     TIP Project No. N/A  March 2016  Project  Description  Develop 30% plans for improvements along Austin Ave. between 3rd Street and Morrow  Street.  The project involves several phases and requires participation and support from  various stakeholders– interested citizens, community businesses, professional  consultants, State and regional transportation partners City Staff and Council.  Schedule Phase Activity Completion   1 Public involvement and alternative analyses, evaluating   alternatives for feasibility and costs, etc. Mid 2016  2 Develop geometric layouts and preliminary construction  estimates for two alternatives Mid 2016  3 Selection of alternative by Council End 2016  4 Develop schematic and 30% plans. Mid 2017 Proj. Mgrs Ed Polasek, AICP; Bill Dryden, P.E.; Nat Waggoner, PMP®  Engineer Aguirre & Fields, LP    Element Status/Issues  Public Involvement 1st Public meeting planned for March 31, 2016.  Meetings with Affected Property Owners (MAPO)  held the week of February 22‐26, 2016.  Design Forensic testing completed.   Surveying  Underway  Environmental Underway‐ meeting with TxDOT Environmental  2/4/2016  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     Page 7 of 75 CDBG Sidewalk Improvements Project  MLK/3rd Street (Scenic Dr. to Austin Ave.)  Project No. None    TIP No. None  March 2016  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 Complete  Environmental/  Archeological  Complete  Rights of Way N/A  Utility Relocations N/A  Construction Contract was awarded in February;  NTP has been issued.  Other Issues None.    Page 8 of 75 CDBG Sidewalk Improvements Project  University Avenue (SH 29) (I 35 to Hart St.)  Project No. None    TIP No. None  March 2016  Unchanged  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 Steger Bizzell    Element Status / Issues  Design Design is complete; awaiting TCEQ review and comments.  Environmental/  Archeological  N/A  Rights of Way Existing  Utility Relocations TBD  Construction TBD  Other Issues Engineer is addressing some TCEQ‐raised issues regarding water quality.    Page 9 of 75 FM 971 at Austin Avenue  Realignment Intersection Improvements  Project No. 1BZ     TIP No. AG  March 2016  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 Meeting scheduled with TxDOT on February 5th to discuss the Advance Funding  Agreement.    Page 10 of 75 FM 1460  Quail Valley Drive to University Drive  Project No. 5RB     TIP No. BO & CD  March 2016  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 1 Remaining parcel of original 36 – pending closing documents.  Utility Relocations Ongoing  Construction Construction is underway.  Other Issues Engineer preparing Change Orders for construction contract.    Page 11 of 75 Jim Hogg Drive/Road at Williams Drive  Intersection and Signalization Improvements  Project No. 1DE    TIP No. None  March 2106  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 Complete  Environmental/  Archeological  Complete  Rights of Way Existing  Utility Relocations Included with construction project  Construction NTP has been issued; Contractor has begun work.  Other Issues None    Page 12 of 75 Southwest Bypass Project   (RM 2243 to IH 35)  Project No. 1CA     Project No. BK  March 2016  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 Driveways – Advertisement for this project was approved at the  1/26/16 Commissioners Court Meeting. A Pre‐Bid Meeting was held on 2/10/16 with  an anticipated Bid Opening on 2/24/16.  Southwest Bypass (RM 2243 to IH 35) – A 60% PS&E submittal for turn lanes on  RM 2243 at Southwest Bypass were received 1/28/16 and are under review. A GEC  Constructability review meeting was held on 2/9/16. A project status meeting with  the Commissioner, County staff, HDR, and the GEC was held on 1/8/16.  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 City and WilCo completing the Interlocal Agreement for the Project.    Page 13 of 75 Transportation Services Operations  CIP Maintenance  March 2016  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, LP  Task Status / Issues     Chip Seal  2016 work in design phase.  Bid phase May 2016.  In‐house staff working on  pre‐construction patching and crack sealing. (Council workshop discussing  budget scenarios; single vs. two course chip seal…..)  Engineering packages  and ordering of material waiting for Council direction.    Fog Seal 2015 – Rejuvenation is continuing as the weather allows. Original schedule  was October 19th to November 7th.  The wet weather pattern limits the window  of application time.  As of December 2, the work was 30% complete.  Work  was postponed in mid‐December for the Christmas holidays.  The product is  providing a good coverage and seal.  Crews are proceeding as weather allows.  Heavy traffic in the Sun City neighborhoods makes applications extremely  challenging.  HIPR/overlay 2016 engineering underway.  Bid phase May 2016  Engineering 2016 Work in progress!    Page 14 of 75 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. Engineer is developing alternatives for storm water outfall. Construction tentatively scheduled to begin mid-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 Contractor has begun working on the project; contract time is beginning to accrue. 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. Remaining parcel – pending closing documents. Under Construction Unchanged 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 has submitted 75% plans for City review. Engineer is completing appraisals on remaining 7 parcels. Offers have been made to the 15 parcel owners from Park Lane southward to Williams Drive. We have verbal acceptance on 6 parcels; paperwork is pending. Construction tentatively scheduled to begin mid FY 2018. On Schedule Snead Drive 5QZ Construction is working on street paving.Under Construction On Schedule 825,100 87,000 738,100 825,100 87,000 738,100 GTEC PROJECT UPDATE AND STATUS REPORT March 2016 Project to Date Current Year Budget (13/14) L:\Global\CIP Budgetary Worksheets\GTEC Status Report\2016\GTEC - Project Status - 2016-02.xlsx Page 1 of 3 3/3/2016Page 15 of 75 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 March 2016 Project to Date Current Year Budget (13/14) Mays Street Extension 5RI Design is Complete Engineer has submitted all ROW documents; acquisition has begun with the property owners south of Westinghouse Road. Project will be bid as ROW is acquired. Project will take 12 months to complete (tentatively set for Spring 2017). Interlocal Agreement (ILA) with Round Rock will be going to Council on February 23rd for approval by the City of Georgetown and February 25th for approval by the City of Round Rock. 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 L:\Global\CIP Budgetary Worksheets\GTEC Status Report\2016\GTEC - Project Status - 2016-02.xlsx Page 2 of 3 3/3/2016Page 16 of 75 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 March 2016 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 Budgetary Worksheets\GTEC Status Report\2016\GTEC - Project Status - 2016-02.xlsx Page 3 of 3 3/3/2016Page 17 of 75 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  March 2016  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.  Remaining Project Schedule  Council for award February 24th Notice to Proceed week of March 7th – 11th  Completion of Construction Summer 2018 Purpose To complete a connection from Leander Road (RM 2243) to University Ave. (SH 29)  Project Manager Bill Dryden, P.E.  Engineer HDR, Inc.    Element Status / Issues  Design Complete  Surveying  Complete  Environmental Complete  Rights of Way ROW acquired.  Utility  Relocations  TBD  Construction Awarded by Council February 2016  NTP scheduled for March 2016.  Other Issues None    Page 18 of 75 City of Georgetown, Texas Transportation Advisory Board March 11, 2016 SUBJECT: Disc ussion regarding the Airport P ro ject Progres s R ep o rt and time lines. – R us s Volk, C.M., Airport Manager and Edward G. P o las ek, AICP, Trans p o rtatio n Services Direc tor ITEM SUMMARY: Airport Projects: Grant 1314GRGTN Up d ate Grant 1514GRGTN Up d ate Grant 16MPGR GT N Update FAA To wer Report Fuel Sales Report Hangar / Tie-Down Lease Update 2016 Ac c o mp lis hments and Projec ts Busines s Management S o ftware Up date Avgas Fuel P rice Comparison Jet A Fuel P rice Comparison Airport Mo nthly F inancial Report FINANCIAL IMPACT: NA SUBMITTED BY: Rus s Vo lk, C.M., Airport Manager ATTACHMENTS: Description Type 1314GRGTN Update Backup Material 1514GRGTN Update Backup Material 16MPGRGTN Update Backup Material Tower Report Backup Material Fuel Sales Backup Material Hangar Report Backup Material 2016 Goals and Accomplis hments Backup Material Bus ines s Management Software Update Backup Material Avgas Price Comparis on Backup Material Jet A Price Comparis on Backup Material Jan Airport Financials Backup Material Page 19 of 75 Airport Improvements Project No. 1314GRGTN Mar 2016 Project Description FY2013 project: Design New Fuel Farm, Parallel Taxiway A, Pavement Maintenance Purpose Improved safety and reliability of airport Project Manager Russ Volk C.M., Airport Manager Project Engineer Garver Notes: Jul 2005 – Airport Master Plan Update identified many of these projects as “Development Goals” May 2013 – Commission Approval of Grant Jul 2013 – Mayor signs Grant Participation Agreement Aug 2013 – Garver Engineering selected as Engineering / Design Firm Page 20 of 75 Project Elements include: Engineering / Design Services Environmental Review Bidding Process Feb 2016 – Review Bid Packet Mar/Apr 2016 – Bid Process Late Apr 2016 – Bid Opening Late May 2016 – Conditional Award Construction phase of project is under Grant 1514GRGTN Page 21 of 75 Airport Improvements Project No. 1514GRGTN Mar 2016 Project Description FY2015 project: Construction of Fuel Storage Tanks, Parallel Taxiway A, Pavement Maintenance Purpose Improved safety and reliability of airport Project Manager Russ Volk C.M., Airport Manager Project Engineer Garver Notes: Oct 2014 - Council Resolution 101414-F – Approval to Debt Fund $870K for project Mar 2015 - Council Resolution 032415-G – Authorization for City to Sell Certificates of Obligation to fund project Jan 28, 2016 – Transportation Commission approval of $8.3M Grant Page 22 of 75 Jan 29, 2016 – City cost share of $830K wire transferred to TxDOT Aviation per payment instructions from TxDOT Late Jun 2016 – Following completion of bidding process being conducted under grant 1314GRGTN, TxDOT will provide Construction Project Participation Agreement for City consideration Page 23 of 75 Airport Improvements Project No. 16MPGRGTN Mar 2016 Project Description FY2016 project: Airport Master Plan Update Purpose Update to 2005 Airport Master Plan Project Manager Russ Volk C.M., Airport Manager Project Estimate $200,000 Project Engineer Unknown Jan 28 – Transportation Commission approval of $200K Grant Feb 19 – Solicitation for Consultant Qualifications Mar 29 – Consultant Qualification Submissions due TxDOT Aviation Apr – Committee to Review Consultant Qualifications • John Pettitt • Donna Courtney • Mike Babin • Jordon Maddox • Russ Volk Page 24 of 75 Georgetown Municipal Airport Contract Tower Program Update For Month of Jan 2016 Project Description Georgetown Tower Monthly Update Purpose Operations Report Project Manager Russ Volk C.M., Airport Manager Operating Statistics Performance/volumetric indicators For the Month of: Jan 2016 Jan 2015 FY-T-D Jan 2016 FY-T-D Variance Take Offs and Landings Day* Night* VFR 7,197 135 20,314 23,971 3,657 15.3% IFR 624 21 2,293 2,115 <178> <7.8>% Total Take Offs/Landings 7,821 156 22,607 26,086 3,479 13.4% Total for Month 7,977 * This does not include flyover operations (i.e. handoffs from ABIA approach/departure control to KGTU tower then onto the next ATC.). Page 25 of 75 Georgetown Municipal Airport Fuel Sales Update For Month of Jan 2016 Project Description Georgetown Fuel Sales Update Purpose Fuel Sales Monthly Report Project Manager Russ Volk C.M., Airport Manager Operating Statistics Performance/volumetric indicators Gallons For the Month of: Jan Jan 2015 FY-T-D Jan 2016 FY-T-D Variance Type of Fuel 2015 2016 AVGAS 23,008 27,429 83,206 94,459 11,235 12% JET A 38,404 48,760 150,282 168,030 17,748 10% Total Gallons Sold 61,412 76,189 233,488 262,489 29,001 9% Page 26 of 75 Airport Hangar / Tie-Down Lease Update Mar 2016 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 • 100 Percent Occupied Page 27 of 75 GTU Airport In-Work Projects Underbrush trimming on north end of airport. 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. Planned Projects Demolition of old Civil Air Patrol building. Obtaining Pesticide Application License to allow for airport staff to spray weed killer. Develop Hangar Routine Maintenance Program. Evaluate possible software solutions for a technology based Pavement Management Program. Evaluate possible software solutions for a technology based Airport Self Inspection Program. Upgrade electrical service to Hangars I and J. Repairs to terminal ramp to reduce FOD issues. Upgrade to bi-fold doors drive motors on Hangars BB and CC. Developing lease agreement for storage locations. Page 28 of 75 Accomplishments 2016 Resealed windows in first four floors of Control Tower Resealed two windows in Terminal Conference Room Accomplished annual maintenance on windsock Painted main entry hallway in Terminal Painted main lobby in Terminal Painted conference room in Terminal Replace gate rollers on south electronic gate. Facility Inspection of Gantt Hangars Facility Appraisal of Gantt Hangars Upgraded electrical service to Hangar H Installed aviation radio in Kubota Crack seal Runway 18/36 Selected new Business Office software – Total Aviation Accomplished Electrical upgrades in CTA hangar Replaced Key Pad at South Gate Entrance Painted reflective tags on Runway Lights Hosted Charity Car / Plane show Page 29 of 75 Page 30 of 75 Airport Project Mar 2016 Project Description Business Operations Software Purpose Software Solution for Airport Business Operations Project Manager Russ Volk C.M., Airport Manager Project Estimate $7,000 Sep 2015 – Request for Proposals from potential vendors Oct 2015 - Demos and evaluation of software products Nov 2015 - Final selection of vendor Dec 2015 – Negotiation of cost and licensing agreement Jan / Feb 2016 – Software modifications for CoG process Feb 24/25 – Initial software training for CoG Business Operations Coordinator Mar 2016 – Integration of Fuel Master with Total Aviation Software Mar /Apr 2016 - Implementation of Phase 1 of project Page 31 of 75 1. Integration of existing process utilizing new software 2016 – Future phases Phase 2 – Switch over management and billing of airport leases into Total Aviation Software Phase 3 – Integration of new fuel farm features into Total Aviation Software Page 32 of 75 Page 33 of 75 Page 34 of 75 Page 35 of 75 Page 36 of 75 Page 37 of 75 Georgetown Municipal Airport Income Statement  1/31/2016 FY2016         Budget Beginning Fund Balance 748,167$        792,318$       44,151$         82,210$         710,108$        Operating Revenues Fuel Sales 2,875,000        692,686           24.09% 759,749            ‐8.83% Lease & Rentals 684,400           229,154           33.48% 187,907           21.95% Interest & Other 41,550             821                  1.98% 1,327                ‐38.13% Total Operating Revenue 3,600,950             922,662         25.62% 948,984          ‐2.77% Operating Expenses Personnel 321,471           95,313             29.65% 104,219            ‐8.55% Operations ‐ Fuel 2,448,882        498,609           20.36% 660,539            ‐24.51% Operations ‐ Non Fuel 659,759           369,466           56.00% 400,456            ‐7.74% Capital 20,000              ‐                   0.00%‐                   0.00% Total Operating Expenses 3,450,112             963,388         27.92% 1,165,215       ‐17.32% Policy Compliance (Rev. ‐ Exp.) 150,838                (40,726)          (216,231)         Nonoperating Nonoperating Revenues 25,000             10,855             43.42%‐                        100.00% Nonoperating Expenses 938,157           837,705           89.29% 57                     99.99% Ending Fund Balance (14,152)                 (75,258)          (134,078)         Reservations      Restricted Bond Proceeds ‐                    (15,171)            ‐                    Available Fund Balance (14,152)$         (90,429)$        (134,078)$       Notes:  A)  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.  FY2016          YTD Actual Variance         to Budget FY2015          YTD Actual   FY2015          Variance Page 38 of 75 City of Georgetown, Texas Transportation Advisory Board March 11, 2016 SUBJECT: Nominations and electio n o f Vic e-Chair of the GTAB Bo ard . - John Pettitt – Chair P ers o n fo r GTAB ITEM SUMMARY: Per the Bylaws of the Georgetown Trans portation Advis o ry Bo ard ; “Section 3.1 – Officers. T he Bo ard Offic ers are C hairman, Vice-Chairman and Sec retary. The Chair is ap p o inted by the C ity Co uncil d uring the annual ap p o intment proc es s . The other Bo ard Offic ers are elected by a majority vote of the Members at its firs t meeting after the annual appointment p ro cess.” The Chair of the Bo ard , Mr. Jo hn Pettitt, will take the no minatio ns fro m the floor, fo r positio n o f Vic e- Chair. FINANCIAL IMPACT: n/a SUBMITTED BY: Jana Kern Page 39 of 75 City of Georgetown, Texas Transportation Advisory Board March 11, 2016 SUBJECT: Nominations and electio n o f S ecretary o f the GTAB Board. – John Pettitt, G TAB Chair P ers o n ITEM SUMMARY: Per the Bylaws of the Georgetown Trans p ortation Advis o ry Bo ard ; “Section 3.1 – Officers. T he Bo ard Offic ers are C hairman, Vice-Chairman and Sec retary. The Chair is ap p o inted by the C ity Co uncil d uring the annual ap p o intment proc es s . The other Bo ard Offic ers are elected by a majority vote of the Members at its firs t meeting after the annual appointment p ro cess.” The Chair of the Bo ard , Mr. Jo hn Pettitt, will take the no minatio ns fro m the floor, fo r positio n o f Secretary. FINANCIAL IMPACT: n/a SUBMITTED BY: Jana Kern Page 40 of 75 City of Georgetown, Texas Transportation Advisory Board March 11, 2016 SUBJECT: Review and pos s ible actio n related to the Day and Time of GTAB Bo ard Meetings . – John Pettitt, GTAB Chair Pers o n ITEM SUMMARY: Per the GTAB Bylaws Section 4.1 Time & Date of Regular Meeting. T he Bo ard shall meet once a mo nth o n the s ame week o f the mo nth, the s ame d ay o f the week, at the same time, and at the same p lace. The regular date, time, and p lace o f the Bo ard meeting will b e dec id ed by the Members at the first meeting, o f the Bo ard after the annual appointment proc es s . Currently, the GTAB Bo ard meets on the s ec o nd Friday of each month at 10:00 a.m. FINANCIAL IMPACT: n/a SUBMITTED BY: Jana Kern ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Draft Meeting Dates Cover Memo Page 41 of 75 GEORGETOWN TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY BOARD (GTAB) Meeting Schedule March 2016 – February 2017 All Regular Meetings will be held on the second FRIDAY of every month at 10:00 a.m. except for the December meeting at the Georgetown Municipal Complex, located at 300- 1 Industrial Avenue Please contact Jana Kern @ 512-930-8473 if you have questions regarding meeting dates or times. MARCH 11, 2016 APRIL 08, 2016 MAY 13, 2016 JUNE 10, 2016 JULY 08, 2016 AUGUST 12, 2016 SEPTEMBER 09, 2016 OCTOBER 14, 2016 NOVEMBER 11, 2016 DECEMBER 08, 2016 (Thursday) JANUARY 13, 2017 FEBRUARY 10, 2017 Page 42 of 75 City of Georgetown, Texas Transportation Advisory Board March 11, 2016 SUBJECT: Review and pos s ible actio n to ap p ro ve the minutes fro m the Regular GTAB Board meeting held o n February 12, 2016. - Jana Kern – GTAB Board Liais on ITEM SUMMARY: Bo ard to review and revis e and /or ap p ro ve the minutes fro m the regular meeting held o n February 12, 2016. FINANCIAL IMPACT: n/a SUBMITTED BY: Jana Kern ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Draft Minutes Backup Material Page 43 of 75 Minutes for the Meeting of the Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board and the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas February 12, 2016 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, Chris H’Luz, Scott Rankin, Steve Johnston, Donna Courtney Board Members Absent: Rachel Jonrowe Staff Members: Jim Briggs, Mike Babin, Laurie Brewer, Ed Polasek, Jana Kern, Russ Volk, Bill Dryden, Mark Miller, Nat Waggoner, Wes Wright, Trina Binkford Others Present: Carl Norris, John Milford, Terry Reed, Avis O’Connell – ACC Members, Ron Bindas – Airport User, Jim Wimberly & Ken Mabe – TX Aviation Partners, Paul Hanley - Citizen Steven Widacki – M & S Engineering, Colin McGahey – Poznecks Camarillo, Inc., Gary Boyd – WCCF, M. Borenstin - HDR Regular Session A. Call to Order – Mr. Truman Hunt called the regular GTAB Board meeting at order on Friday, February 12, 2016 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 – TxDOT has new District Engineer – Terry McCoy, Area Office Engineer Bobby Ramthum. CAMPO – Staff has initiated study with CAMPO and a call for proposals for Williams Drive, both the corridor and the centers concept for the Williams Drive Gateway. Proposals are due on February 19, 2016. We are anticipating that the study will begin in April 2016. D. Discussion regarding the Project Progress Reports and Time Lines – Bill Dryden, P. E., Transportation Engineer, Mark Miller, Transportation Services Manager and Jim Briggs, General Manager of Utilities E. Discussion regarding the Airport Project Progress Report and Time Lines. – Russ Volk, Airport Manager and Jim Briggs, General Manager of Utilities Mr. Hugh Norris spoke on this item. His presentation is at the end of these minutes. Page 44 of 75 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 January 8, 2016 – Jana Kern Pettitt stated that Steve Johnston was listed as being present and being absent. Kern stated that Johnston was absent and corrected the minutes. Motion by Armour second by Hesser to approve the amended minutes. Approved unanimously 8-0-1 (Jonrowe absent) G. Consideration and possible recommendation to award a Construction Contract to Westar Construction, Inc., of Georgetown, Texas, for the construction of the CDBG – 3rd Street Sidewalk Improvements Project in the amount of $ $106,154.00. – Bill Dryden, P.E., Transportation Engineer and Jim Briggs, General Manager of Utilities. Dryden explained that the City is a recipient of a Community Development Black Grant to install sidewalk improvements in economically eligible areas within the city. Dryden also stated that the Grant dollars will be spent first. Motion by Johnston second by Courtney to award the construction contract to Westar Construction, Inc., in the amount of $106,154.00. Approved unanimously 8-0-1 (Jonrowe absent) H. Consideration and possible recommendation to award a Construction Contract to Jordan Foster Construction, LLC, of Pflugerville, Texas, for the construction of the Southwest Bypass-Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension Project in the amount of $18,322,089.58. – Bill Dryden, P.E., Transportation Engineer and Jim Briggs, General Manager of Utilities. Dryden stated that the 2015 Road Bond Program included two projects that will be combined into one construction project. This project will connect D. B. Wood Road, between the two churches, with Wolf Ranch Parkway the go west to connect with Southwest Bypass. Motion by Hesser second by Rankin to award a Construction Contract to Jordan Foster Construction, LLC, in the amount of $18,322,089.58. Approved unanimously 8-0-1 (Jonrowe absent) I. Consideration and possible recommendation to award a Participation Agreement with the Williamson County Conservation Foundation in conjunction with the Southwest Bypass-Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension Project in the amount of $317,950.00. – Bill Dryden, P.E., Transportation Engineer and Jim Briggs, General Manager of Utilities. Dryden stated that the project is located in some environmental sensitive areas. We have worked with the Williamson County Conservation Foundation (WCCF), and the Regional Habitat Conservation Plan; there are fees for removing current habitats or future habitats. What this agreement is, is like an insurance policy in case habitats are found during construction. Motion by Courtney second by Armour to award a Participation Agreement with the Williamson County Conservation Foundation in the amount of $317,950.00. Approved unanimously 8-0-1 (Jonrowe absent) J. Consideration and possible recommendation to award a Construction Materials Testing Contract to Terracon Consultants, Inc., of Austin, Texas, for the materials testing and bridge construction inspection services for the Southwest Bypass-Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension Project in the amount of $353,820.00. – Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Page 45 of 75 Engineering Director. Dryden state that this task order is for materials testing and bridge inspection services for the Southwest Bypass – Wolf Ranch Pkwy Extension. Terracon will provide specialized inspection services for earthwork, concrete, reinforcement steel, and asphalt materials. In addition Terracon will provide a full time bridge inspector. Motion by Johnston second by Rankin award a Construction Materials Testing Contract to Terracon Consultants, Inc. in the amount of $353,820.00. Approved unanimously 8-0-1 (Jonrowe absent) K. Consideration and possible recommendation to award an annual Asphalt patching contract to Guerra Underground of Austin, Tx. to make asphalt patches on City streets and parking areas on an as needed basis in an amount not to exceed $275,000.00. – Mark Miller, Transportation Services Manager and Jim Briggs, General Manager of Utilities Miller explained the item to the Board and informed Board that a lot of the patching is done in house. Motion by Hesser second by Courtney to award the annual Asphalt patching contract to Guerra Underground in the amount not to exceed $275,000.00. Approved unanimously 8-0-1 (Jonrowe absent) H’Luz left meeting due to Conflict of interest at 11:23 AM. L. Consideration and possible recommendation for acceptance of the Airport Project Participation Agreement for TxDOT CSJ no. 16MPGRGTN, Airport Master Plan Update with a project cost estimate of $200,000 of which the City cost share is estimated at $20,000. – Russ Volk, C.M., Airport Manager and Jim Briggs, General Manager of Utilities Mr. Milford spoke on this item. His presentation is at the end of these minutes. Volk presented the item. Explained that the City’s cost share is 10%. Motion by Hesser second by Johnston to approve the Airport Project Participation Agreement for TxDOT CSJ no. 16MPGRGTN, Airport Master Plan Update with the City’s cost share estimated at $20,000.00. Approved unanimously 8-0-1 (Jonrowe absent) H’Luz returned at 11:35 AM Adjournment Motion by Hesser second by Johnston to adjourn meeting. Approved unanimously 8-0-1. Meeting adjourned at 11:38 AM. Approved: Attested: _______________________ ______________________ John Pettitt - Chair – Secretary _________________________________ Jana R. Kern – GTAB Board Liaison Page 46 of 75 GTAB STATEMENT FEBRUARY 12, 2016 AGENDA ITEM “E” AIRPORT PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT AND TIME LINES Good morning Mr. Chairman, members of the GTAB board, city staff and ladies and gentlemen. My name is Hugh C. Norris, Jr. I am a member of the Airport Concerned Citizens (ACC). This is the 50th presentation by ACC members to the city council and/or th e GTAB since January 14, 2014. These actions are 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 Policy Act (NEPA). This morning my attention is focused on two attachments of the Airport Manager's presentation packet, No.1, Fuel Farm Project Update and No. 7, Dec Airport Financials. Regarding the Fuel Farm, Mr. Volk should make clear the legitimate council action for the wire transfer of $830,000 to TxDOT AVN and explain why this action was not reviewed and recommended by this board. The Fuel Farm Project Update is totally misleading and a disservice to this board and general public. It, like the Fuel Farm Environmental Assessment (FEA) and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI), focuses only on the Fuel Farm rather than the entire 25 -project 1514GRGTN grant Program of which the Fuel Farm is only one of the proposed projects. The entire Program was provided as an attachment to last month's ACC statement. It's current cost of $8.3 Million will, in ACC opinion, be updated in the future for project management and other authorized costs to reach a $10 Million level. The TxDOT staff totally ignored the adverse impacts of these 25 projects by the expanded aviation fleets and take offs and landings served by these improvements on populations within the city's designated 12.6 square miles sensitive noise and safety area around the airport. On the basis of the improper categorical exclusion for this grant made by bureaucrats forty miles safely away from their decision for evasion of its legitimate NEPA reviews, the ACC will carry our protests to higher federal levels. The December Airport Financials statement is misleading and requires an amended format. Like all past airport financial statements it omits the steadily accumulating debt of the city's share of airport federal grants currently being taxpayer subsidized elsewhere in the city's budget and revenue bonds. These costs must be shown as a debt of the airport whether they are paid as cash from the general fund or included in Electric Fund revenue bonds with their added interest and costs. Currently these costs are being paid for by the many for fun and profit of a few. Note the $830,000 wire transfer for the 25-project, 1514GRGTN grant. We request a new financial statement format starting at the March GTAB with appropriate presentations for future GTAB meetings. Mr Chairman, I welcome any comments. Page 47 of 75 Mr. Milford’s’ comments on Item “L”. Good morning Mr. Chairman, Members of GTAB, city staff, ladies and gentlemen. My name is John Milford. I am a member of the Airport Concerned Citizens (ACC). This is our 51st presentation by ACC members to the city council and /or GTAB since January 14, 2014. Our actions are in pursuit of the public participation rights of our citizens regarding the use of federal tax funds for development projects at the Georgetown Municipal Airport (GTU) as defined by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). This item was addressed by an ACC member at the October 10, 2014 GTAB meeting 1 and at a city council meeting on October 28, 2014 2 . Those comments are now part of the meeting minutes of both of meetings and can be found on the city web site. Our concerns centered around how the development process for this new 20 year airport master plan would unfold with citizen and community input and involvement. We are also concerned about the potential of a huge cumulative, adverse impact to the city and especially for the populations within the city's designated 12.6 square mile noise sensitive and safety area, that surrounds the airport and that it will remain intact. With the approval of item “K” on October 28th 2014 the city council made it clear that the city had every intention of increasing the original cost for a new Airport Master Plan from $200,000 to $500,000 if need be. That being an amount six times the cost of the current 2005 Master Plan. On December 8th 2015 Mr. Volk asked the city council,3 without going to GTAB, to approve a Master Plan update agreement with TxDOT to limit the city's share of that update to $25,000. This begs the question is the city still willing to spend up to $50,000 if TxDOT comes back at some point and needs more funds to complete the Master Plan update? The current plan has generated about $19 million in new design, planning and construction grants. One can only speculate that this trend will continue with new anticipated accommodation demands for expanded aviation operations in the new master plan. One can only speculate what new cumulative adverse impacts will be heaped upon the city. Especially, those residents who live and work within the city's designated 12.6 square mile noise sensitive and safety area that surrounds the airport. One thing seems certain. The city and TxDot will continue to describe any new generated federal grant projects as safety and maintenance projects in order to secure 90% federal funds. In the past 37 years the city and TxDOT have used that process to allocated over $31 million of taxpayer funds for the planning, design, and construction of development projects at the airport. City officials should admit that all these airport improvements are for the expansion of aviation operations and expansion of the air fleet that can take off and land at the Georgetown Airport. We request that this new master plan development be conducted in the open with public participation in accordance with FAA Advisory Circular 150/5070-6B-Airport Master Plans. This time please do not slip the public hearing for approval of the plan, it's purpose and proposed projects quietly into a city council agenda and allotting two minutes time for public understanding. 1(http://records.georgetown.org/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=431611&dbid=0) 2(http://records.georgetown.org/WebLink8/0/doc/432400/Page1.aspx) 3(http://records.georgetown.org/weblink8/0/doc/451166/Page1.aspx) Page 48 of 75 City of Georgetown, Texas Transportation Advisory Board March 11, 2016 SUBJECT: D iscussion an d possible recom m endation to C oun cil for th e approval of an A dvan ced F un din g A greem en t (A F A) with T xD O T for en viron m en tal review of Austin A ven ue B ridges proj ect as required by N ation al E n viron m ental P olicy A ct (N E P A)- N at Waggon er, P M P , T ran sportation A nalyst and E dward G . P olasek, A .I .C .P ., D irector, T ran sportation S ervices ITEM SUMMARY: In a joint works ho p with City Co uncil and GTAB on July 8, 2014, Staff delivered the find ings and recommend atio ns o f a Cond ition Assessment R ep o rt completed by Aguirre and F ield s . T he Cond ition Assessment R ep o rt d o cumented the cond itio n o f bridge elements and p rovid ed s ho rt, immediate, and lo ng-term repair/maintenance/rep lacement alternatives fo r c o nsideratio n. Bas ed on the works hop d is cus s io n, staff p urs ed o uts id e funding and began b udget p lanning for alternative d evelopment thro ugh the Capital Area Metro p o litan P lanning Organization (C AMP O). In August 2014, CAMPO awarded the c ity o f Georgetown $1.3M in Surfac e Trans p o rtatio n Metropolitan Mo b ility (STP -MM) monies for the Aus tin Ave Bridges . T he fed erally STPMM eligible activities includ e “Rep lacement, rehabilitation, p res ervatio n, p ro tec tion,..includ ing c o nstruc tio n or recons tructio n nec es s ary to acc o mmodate other mo d es ”. The City d es ires to us e the award ed STP-MM to s up p o rt the dec is io n that res ults fro m the range of alternatives c urrently b eing develo p ed through a pub lic invo lvement p ro cess whic h is also a requirement o f the National Environmental P o licy Ac t (NEPA). The City antic ip ates completing the alternatives d evelopment proc es s by December 2016. Alternatives inc lude (1) Do Nothing (2) Alternative Alignment (3) Maintenance (4) R ehabilitation/preservation (5) Replac ement. TxDOT wo rks with the Federal Highway Adminis tratio n (FHWA) and o ther fed eral agenc ies to c o mp ly with the Natio nal Environmental P o licy Ac t (NEPA) and uses the TxDOT environmental c o mp lianc e p ro cess fo r state and loc al projec ts, where TxDOT is the s tate approval authority. In o rd er for TxDOT to s p end fund s or o ther res o urc es on a trans p o rtatio n projec t with a loc al government, b o th parties mus t firs t exec ute a written contrac t. An Advanc e Funding Agreement (AFA) in which TxDOT and the lo cal government alloc ate p artic ip ation is the most freq uently us ed c o ntract for p ro ject development. In January, the projec t team met with TXDOT Aus tin District as well as Capital Area Metropolitan Planning (CAMPO) s taff to outline the terms o f the AFA. The City is seeking ap p ro val o f the AFA in o rd er to fac ilitate TxDOTs enviro nmental review a nd up o n exec utio n will provid e the initial payment to the S tate of $142,000. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: GTAB recommendatio n o f approval to City Counc il during the March 22, 2016 regular meeting. FINANCIAL IMPACT: $142K fund ed b y arterial res erves upon full exec utio n b y T xDOT, likely in late May. Page 49 of 75 SUBMITTED BY: Nat Waggoner, PMP ® ATTACHMENTS: Description Type DRAFT AFA with TxDOT for Aus tin Ave Bridges Project Exhibit CAMPO STP-MM FY15-19 CALl for Projects and Eligibility Standards Backup Material Page 50 of 75 CSJ #0914-05-187 District #14-Austin Code Chart 64 #16000 Project: North & South Austin Avenue Bridges Federal Highway Administration CFDA #20.205 Not Research and Development STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF TRAVIS § ADVANCE FUNDING AGREEMENT For A Surface Transportation Program Metropolitan Mobility Project Off-System THIS AGREEMENT is made by and between the State of Texas, acting by and through the Texas Department of Transportation called the “State”, and the City of Georgetown, acting by and through its duly authorized officials, called the “Local Government.” WITNESSETH WHEREAS, federal law establishes federally funded programs for transportation improvements to implement its public purposes; and WHEREAS, the Texas Transportation Code, Sections 201.103 and 222.052 establish that the State shall design, construct and operate a system of highways in cooperation with local governments; and WHEREAS, federal and state laws require local governments to meet certain contract standards relating to the management and administration of State and federal funds; and WHEREAS, the Texas Transportation Commission passed Minute Order Number 114335, authorizing the State to undertake and complete a highway improvement generally described as reconstruct the North and South Austin Avenue bridges from 2nd Street to Morrow Street, Georgetown, Texas called the “Project”; and, WHEREAS, the Governing Body of the Local Government has approved entering into this agreement by resolution or ordinance dated ______________, 20__, which is attached to and made a part of this agreement as Attachment “A” for the improvement covered by this agreement. A map showing the Project location appears in Attachment “B,” which is attached to and made a part of this agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and of the mutual covenants and agreements of the parties, to be by them respectively kept and performed as set forth in this agreement, it is agreed as follows: AFA-AFA_LongGen Page 1 of 78 Revised 07/22/2015 Page 51 of 75 CSJ #0914-05-187 District #14-Austin Code Chart 64 #16000 Project: North & South Austin Avenue Bridges Federal Highway Administration CFDA #20.205 Not Research and Development AGREEMENT 1. Period of the Agreement This agreement becomes effective when signed by the last party whose signing makes the agreement fully executed. This agreement shall remain in effect until the Project is completed or unless terminated as provided below. 2. Scope of Work Reconstruct the North and South Austin Avenue bridges from 2nd Street to Morrow Street as shown on Attachment B. 3. Local Project Sources and Uses of Funds A. The total estimated cost of the Project is shown in the Project Budget – Attachment “C”, which is attached to and made a part of this agreement. The expected cash contributions from the Federal or State government, the Local Government, or other parties are shown in Attachment “C”. The State will pay for only those project costs that have been approved by the Texas Transportation Commission. The State and the Federal Government will not reimburse the Local Government for any work performed before the federal spending authority is formally obligated to the Project by the Federal Highway Administration. After federal funds have been obligated, the State will send to the Local Government a copy of the formal documentation showing the obligation of funds including federal award information. The Local Government is responsible for 100% of the cost of any work performed under its direction or control before the federal spending authority is formally obligated. B. If the Local Government will perform any work under this contract for which reimbursement will be provided by or through the State, the Local Government must complete training before federal spending authority is obligated. Training is complete when at least one individual who is working actively and directly on the Project successfully completes and receives a certificate for the course entitled Local Government Project Procedures and Qualification for the Texas Department of Transportation. The Local Government shall provide the certificate of qualification to the State. The individual who receives the training certificate may be an employee of the Local Government or an employee of a firm that has been contracted by the Local Government to perform oversight of the Project. The State in its discretion may deny reimbursement if the Local Government has not designated a qualified individual to oversee the Project. C. The Project cost estimate shows how necessary resources for completing the Project will be provided by major cost categories. These categories may include but are not limited to: (1) costs of real property; (2) costs of utility work; (3) costs of environmental assessment and remediation; (4) cost of preliminary engineering and design; (5) cost of construction and construction management; and (6) any other local project costs. D. The State will be responsible for securing the Federal and State share of the funding required for the development and construction of the local Project. If the Local Government is due funds for expenses incurred, these funds will be reimbursed to the Local Government on a cost basis. E. The Local Government will be responsible for all non-federal or non-state participation costs associated with the Project, otherwise provided for in this agreement or approved AFA-AFA_LongGen Page 2 of 78 Revised 07/22/2015 Page 52 of 75 CSJ #0914-05-187 District #14-Austin Code Chart 64 #16000 Project: North & South Austin Avenue Bridges Federal Highway Administration CFDA #20.205 Not Research and Development otherwise in an amendment to this agreement. Where a Special Approval has been signed by the State, the Local Government shall only in that instance be responsible for overruns in excess of the amount to be paid by the Local Government. F. Prior to the performance of any engineering review work by the State, the Local Government will pay to the State the amount specified in Attachment C. At a minimum, this amount shall equal the Local Government’s funding share for the estimated cost of preliminary engineering for the Project. At least sixty (60) days prior to the date set for receipt of the construction bids, the Local Government shall remit its remaining financial share for the State’s estimated construction oversight and construction cost. G. Whenever funds are paid by the Local Government to the State under this agreement, the Local Government shall remit a check or warrant made payable to the “Texas Department of Transportation.” The check or warrant shall be deposited by the State and managed by the State. The funds may only be applied by the State to the Project. H. Upon completion of the Project, the State will perform an audit of the Project costs. Any funds due by the Local Government, the State, or the Federal government will be promptly paid by the owing party. If after final Project accounting any excess funds remain, those funds may be applied by the State to the Local Government’s contractual obligations to the State under another advance funding agreement with approval by appropriate personnel of the Local Government. I. The State will not pay interest on any funds provided by the Local Government. J. If a waiver has been granted, the State will not charge the Local Government for the indirect costs the State incurs on the local Project, unless this agreement is terminated at the request of the Local Government prior to completion of the Project. K. If the Project has been approved for a specified percentage or a “periodic payment” non- standard funding or payment arrangement under 43 TAC §15.52, the budget in Attachment C will clearly state the specified percentage or the periodic payment schedule. L. If the Local government is an Economically Disadvantaged County (EDC) and if the State has approved adjustments to the standard financing arrangement, this agreement reflects those adjustments. M. When a Special Approval has been signed by the State so that the Local Government bears the responsibility for paying cost overruns, the Local Government shall make payment to the State within thirty (30) days from the receipt of the State’s written notification of those amounts. N. The state auditor may conduct an audit or investigation of any entity receiving funds from the State directly under this contract or indirectly through a subcontract under this contract. Acceptance of funds directly under this contract or indirectly through a subcontract under this contract acts as acceptance of the authority of the state auditor, under the direction of the legislative audit committee, to conduct an audit or investigation in connection with those funds. An entity that is the subject of an audit or investigation must provide the state auditor with access to any information the state auditor considers relevant to the investigation or audit. O. Payment under this contract beyond the end of the current fiscal biennium is subject to availability of appropriated funds. If funds are not appropriated, this contract shall be terminated immediately with no liability to either party. AFA-AFA_LongGen Page 3 of 78 Revised 07/22/2015 Page 53 of 75 CSJ #0914-05-187 District #14-Austin Code Chart 64 #16000 Project: North & South Austin Avenue Bridges Federal Highway Administration CFDA #20.205 Not Research and Development P. The Local Government is authorized to submit requests for reimbursement by submitting the original of an itemized invoice in a form and containing all items required by the State no more frequently than monthly, and no later than ninety (90) days after costs are incurred. If the Local Government submits invoices more than ninety (90) days after the costs are incurred, and if federal funding is reduced as a result, the State shall have no responsibility to reimburse the Local Government for those costs. Q. The State will not execute the contract for the construction of the Project until the required funding has been made available by the Local Government in accordance with this agreement. 4. Termination of this Agreement This agreement shall remain in effect until the project is completed and accepted by all parties, unless: A. The agreement is terminated in writing with the mutual consent of the parties; B. The agreement is terminated by one party because of a breach, in which case any cost incurred because of the breach shall be paid by the breaching party; C. The Local Government elects not to provide funding after the completion of preliminary engineering, specifications, and estimates (PS&E) and the Project does not proceed because of insufficient funds, in which case the Local Government agrees to reimburse the State for its reasonable actual costs incurred during the Project; or D. The Project is inactive for thirty-six (36) months or longer and no expenditures have been charged against federal funds, in which case the State may in its discretion terminate this agreement. 5. Ame ndments Amendments to this agreement due to changes in the character of the work, terms of the agreement, or responsibilities of the parties relating to the Project may be enacted through a mutually agreed upon, written amendment. 6. Remedies This agreement shall not be considered as specifying the exclusive remedy for any agreement default, but all remedies existing at law and in equity may be availed of by either party to this agreement and shall be cumulative. 7. Utilities The Local Government shall be responsible for the adjustment, removal, or relocation of utility facilities in accordance with applicable State laws, regulations, rules, policies, and procedures, including any cost to the State of a delay resulting from the Local Government’s failure to ensure that utility facilities are adjusted, removed, or relocated before the scheduled beginning of construction. The Local Government will not be reimbursed with federal or state funds for the cost of required utility work. The Local Government must obtain advance approval for any variance from established procedures. Before a construction contract is let, the Local Government shall provide, at the State’s request, a certification stating that the Local Government has completed the adjustment of all utilities that must be adjusted before construction is completed. AFA-AFA_LongGen Page 4 of 78 Revised 07/22/2015 Page 54 of 75 CSJ #0914-05-187 District #14-Austin Code Chart 64 #16000 Project: North & South Austin Avenue Bridges Federal Highway Administration CFDA #20.205 Not Research and Development 8. Environmental Assessment and Mitigation Development of a transportation project must comply with the National Environmental Policy Act and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, which require environmental clearance of federal-aid projects. A. The Local Government is responsible for the identification and assessment of any environmental problems associated with the development of a local project governed by this agreement. B. The Local Government is responsible for the cost of any environmental problem’s mitigation and remediation. C. The Local Government is responsible for providing any public meetings or public hearings required for development of the environmental assessment. Public hearings will not be held prior to the approval of project schematic. D. The Local Government is responsible for the preparation of the NEPA documents required for the environmental clearance of this Project. E. Before the advertisement for bids, the Local Government shall provide to the State written documentation from the appropriate regulatory agency or agencies that all environmental clearances have been obtained. 9. Compliance with Texas Accessibility Standards and ADA All parties to this agreement shall ensure that the plans for and the construction of all projects subject to this agreement are in compliance with the Texas Accessibility Standards (TAS) issued by the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation, under the Architectural Barriers Act, Article 9102, Texas Civil Statutes. The TAS establishes minimum accessibility requirements to be consistent with minimum accessibility requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (P.L. 101-336) (ADA). 10. Architectural and Engineering Services The Local Government has responsibility for the performance of architectural and engineering services. The engineering plans shall be developed in accordance with the applicable State’s Standard Specifications for Construction and Maintenance of Highways, Streets and Bridges and the special specifications and special provisions related to it. For projects on the state highway system, the design shall, at a minimum conform to applicable State manuals. For projects not on the state highway system, the design shall, at a minimum, conform to applicable American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials design standards. In procuring professional services, the parties to this agreement must comply with federal requirements cited in 23 CFR Part 172 if the project is federally funded and with Texas Government Code 2254, Subchapter A, in all cases. Professional contracts for federally funded projects must conform to federal requirements, specifically including the provision for participation by Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBEs), ADA, and environmental matters. 11. Construction Responsibilities A. The Local Government shall advertise for construction bids, issue bid proposals, receive and tabulate the bids, and award and administer the contract for construction of the Project. Administration of the contract includes the responsibility for construction engineering and for issuance of any change orders, supplemental agreements, AFA-AFA_LongGen Page 5 of 78 Revised 07/22/2015 Page 55 of 75 CSJ #0914-05-187 District #14-Austin Code Chart 64 #16000 Project: North & South Austin Avenue Bridges Federal Highway Administration CFDA #20.205 Not Research and Development amendments, or additional work orders that may become necessary subsequent to the award of the construction contract. In order to ensure federal funding eligibility, projects must be authorized by the State prior to advertising for construction. B. The Local Government will use its approved contract letting and award procedures to let and award the construction contract. C. Upon completion of the Project, the party constructing the Project will issue and sign a “Notification of Completion” acknowledging the Project’s construction completion. D. For federally funded contracts, the parties to this agreement will comply with federal construction requirements cited in 23 CFR Part 635 and with requirements cited in 23 CFR Part 633, and shall include the latest version of Form “FHWA-1273” in the contract bidding documents. If force account work will be performed, a finding of cost effectiveness shall be made in compliance with 23 CFR 635, Subpart B. 12. Project Maintenance The Local Government shall be responsible for maintenance of locally owned roads after completion of the work and the State shall be responsible for maintenance of state highway system after completion of the work if the work was on the state highway system, unless otherwise provided for in existing maintenance agreements with the Local Government. 13. Right of Way and Real Property The Local Government is responsible for the provision and acquisition of any needed right of way or real property. 14. Notices All notices to either party shall be delivered personally or sent by certified or U.S. mail, postage prepaid, addressed to that party at the following address: Local Government: Mayor City of Georgetown PO Box 409 Georgetown, Texas 78627 State: Director of Contract Services Office Texas Department of Transportation 125 E. 11th Street Austin, Texas 78701 All notices shall be deemed given on the date delivered in person or deposited in the mail, unless otherwise provided by this agreement. Either party may change the above address by sending written notice of the change to the other party. Either party may request in writing that notices shall be delivered personally or by certified U.S. mail, and that request shall be carried out by the other party. 15. Legal Construction If one or more of the provisions contained in this agreement shall for any reason be held invalid, illegal, or unenforceable in any respect, such invalidity, illegality, or unenforceability AFA-AFA_LongGen Page 6 of 78 Revised 07/22/2015 Page 56 of 75 CSJ #0914-05-187 District #14-Austin Code Chart 64 #16000 Project: North & South Austin Avenue Bridges Federal Highway Administration CFDA #20.205 Not Research and Development shall not affect any other provisions and this agreement shall be construed as if it did not contain the invalid, illegal, or unenforceable provision. 16. Responsibilities of the Parties The State and the Local Government agree that neither party is an agent, servant, or employee of the other party and each party agrees it is responsible for its individual acts and deeds as well as the acts and deeds of its contractors, employees, representatives, and agents. 17. Ownership of Documents Upon completion or termination of this agreement, all documents prepared by the State shall remain the property of the State. All data prepared under this agreement shall be made available to the State without restriction or limitation on their further use. All documents produced or approved or otherwise created by the Local Government shall be transmitted to the State in the form of photocopy reproduction on a monthly basis as required by the State. The originals shall remain the property of the Local Government. At the request of the State, the Local Government shall submit any information required by the State in the format directed by the State. 18. Compliance with Laws The parties shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws, statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations, and the orders and decrees of any courts or administrative bodies or tribunals in any manner affecting the performance of this agreement. When required, the Local Government shall furnish the State with satisfactory proof of this compliance. 19. Sole Agreement This agreement constitutes the sole and only agreement between the parties and supersedes any prior understandings or written or oral agreements respecting the agreement’s subject matter. 20. Cost Principles In order to be reimbursed with federal funds, the parties shall comply with the Cost Principles established in 2 CFR 200 that specify that all reimbursed costs are allowable, reasonable, and allocable to the Project. 21. Procurement and Property Management Standards The parties shall adhere to the procurement standards established in Title 49 CFR §18.36 and with the property management standard established in Title 49 CFR §18.32. 22. Inspection of Books and Records The parties to this agreement shall maintain all books, documents, papers, accounting records, and other documentation relating to costs incurred under this agreement and shall make such materials available to the State, the Local Government, and, if federally funded, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and the U.S. Office of the Inspector General, or their duly authorized representatives for review and inspection at its office during the contract period and for four (4) years from the date of completion of work defined under this contract or until any impending litigation, or claims are resolved. Additionally, the State, the Local AFA-AFA_LongGen Page 7 of 78 Revised 07/22/2015 Page 57 of 75 CSJ #0914-05-187 District #14-Austin Code Chart 64 #16000 Project: North & South Austin Avenue Bridges Federal Highway Administration CFDA #20.205 Not Research and Development Government, and the FHWA and their duly authorized representatives shall have access to all the governmental records that are directly applicable to this agreement for the purpose of making audits, examinations, excerpts, and transcriptions. 23. Civil Rights Compliance The Local Government shall comply with the regulations of the United States Department of Transportation as they relate to non-discrimination (49 CFR Part 21 and 23 CFR Part 200), and Executive Order 11246 titled “Equal Employment Opportunity,” as amended by Executive Order 11375 and supplemented in the Department of Labor Regulations (41 CFR Part 60). 24. Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program Requirements A. The parties shall comply with the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program requirements established in 49 CFR Part 26. B. The Local Government shall adopt, in its totality, the State’s federally approved DBE program. C. The Local Government shall set an appropriate DBE goal consistent with the State’s DBE guidelines and in consideration of the local market, project size, and nature of the goods or services to be acquired. The Local Government shall have final decision-making authority regarding the DBE goal and shall be responsible for documenting its actions. D. The Local Government shall follow all other parts of the State’s DBE program referenced in TxDOT Form 2395, Memorandum of Understanding Regarding the Adoption of the Texas Department of Transportation’s Federally-Approved Disadvantaged Business Enterprise by Entity, and attachments found at web address http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot-info/bop/dbe/mou/mou_attachments.pdf. E. The Local Government shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex in the award and performance of any U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT)- assisted contract or in the administration of its DBE program or the requirements of 49 CFR Part 26. The Local Government shall take all necessary and reasonable steps under 49 CFR Part 26 to ensure non-discrimination in award and administration of DOT-assisted contracts. The State’s DBE program, as required by 49 CFR Part 26 and as approved by DOT, is incorporated by reference in this agreement. Implementation of this program is a legal obligation and failure to carry out its terms shall be treated as a violation of this agreement. Upon notification to the Local Government of its failure to carry out its approved program, the State may impose sanctions as provided for under 49 CFR Part 26 and may, in appropriate cases, refer the matter for enforcement under 18 U.S.C. 1001 and the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986 (31 U.S.C. 3801 et seq.). F. Each contract the Local Government signs with a contractor (and each subcontract the prime contractor signs with a sub-contractor) must include the following assurance: The contractor, sub-recipient, or sub-contractor shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex in the performance of this contract. The contractor shall carry out applicable requirements of 49 CFR Part 26 in the award and administration of DOT- assisted contracts. Failure by the contractor to carry out these requirements is a material breach of this agreement, which may result in the termination of this agreement or such other remedy as the recipient deems appropriate. AFA-AFA_LongGen Page 8 of 78 Revised 07/22/2015 Page 58 of 75 CSJ #0914-05-187 District #14-Austin Code Chart 64 #16000 Project: North & South Austin Avenue Bridges Federal Highway Administration CFDA #20.205 Not Research and Development 25. Debarment Certifications The parties are prohibited from making any award at any tier to any party that is debarred or suspended or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal Assistance Programs under Executive Order 12549, “Debarment and Suspension.” By executing this agreement, the Local Government certifies that it and its principals are not currently debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal Assistance Programs under Executive Order 12549 and further certifies that it will not do business with any party, to include principals, that is currently debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal Assistance Programs under Executive Order 12549. The parties to this contract shall require any party to a subcontract or purchase order awarded under this contract to certify its eligibility to receive federal funds and, when requested by the State, to furnish a copy of the certification. 26. Lobbying Certification In executing this agreement, each signatory certifies to the best of that signatory’s knowledge and belief, that: A. No federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid by or on behalf of the parties to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any federal agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any federal contract, the making of any federal grant, the making of any federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement. B. If any funds other than federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with federal contracts, grants, loans, or cooperative agreements, the signatory for the Local Government shall complete and submit the Federal Standard Form-LLL, “Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying,” in accordance with its instructions. C. The parties shall require that the language of this certification shall be included in the award documents for all sub-awards at all tiers (including subcontracts, subgrants, and contracts under grants, loans, and cooperative agreements) and all sub-recipients shall certify and disclose accordingly. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by Title 31 U.S.C. §1352. Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure. 27. Insurance If this agreement authorizes the Local Government or its contractor to perform any work on State right of way, before beginning work the entity performing the work shall provide the State with a fully executed copy of the State's Form 1560 Certificate of Insurance verifying the existence of coverage in the amounts and types specified on the Certificate of Insurance for all persons and entities working on State right of way. This coverage shall be maintained until all work on the State right of way is complete. If coverage is not maintained, all work on State AFA-AFA_LongGen Page 9 of 78 Revised 07/22/2015 Page 59 of 75 CSJ #0914-05-187 District #14-Austin Code Chart 64 #16000 Project: North & South Austin Avenue Bridges Federal Highway Administration CFDA #20.205 Not Research and Development right of way shall cease immediately, and the State may recover damages and all costs of completing the work. 28. Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Requirements A. Any recipient of funds under this agreement agrees to comply with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) and implementing regulations at 2 CFR Part 170, including Appendix A. This agreement is subject to the following award terms: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-09-14/pdf/2010-22705.pdf and http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-09-14/pdf/2010-22706.pdf. B. The Local Government agrees that it shall: 1. Obtain and provide to the State a System for Award Management (SAM) number (Federal Acquisition Regulation, Part 4, Sub-part 4.11) if this award provides more than $25,000 in Federal funding. The SAM number may be obtained by visiting the SAM website whose address is: https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/ 2. Obtain and provide to the State a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number, a unique nine-character number that allows Federal government to track the distribution of federal money. The DUNS may be requested free of charge for all businesses and entities required to do so by visiting the Dun & Bradstreet (D&B) on-line registration website http://fedgov.dnb.com/webform; and 3. Report the total compensation and names of its top five (5) executives to the State if: i. More than 80% of annual gross revenues are from the Federal government, and those revenues are greater than $25,000,000; and ii. The compensation information is not already available through reporting to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. 29. Single Audit Report A. The parties shall comply with the requirements of the Single Audit Act of 1984, P.L. 98- 502, ensuring that the single audit report includes the coverage stipulated in 2 CFR 200. B. If threshold expenditures are met during the Local Government's fiscal year, the Local Government must submit a Single Audit Report and Management Letter (if applicable) to TxDOT's Audit Office, 125 E. 11th Street, Austin, TX 78701 or contact TxDOT’s Audit Office at http://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/office/audit/contact.html. The expenditure threshold for fiscal years beginning prior to December 31, 2014 is $500,000; the expenditure threshold for fiscal years beginning on or after December 31, 2014 is $750,000. C. If expenditures are less than the threshold during the Local Government's fiscal year, the Local Government must submit a statement to TxDOT's Audit Office as follows: "We did not meet the $______ expenditure threshold and therefore, are not required to have a single audit performed for FY ______." D. For each year the project remains open for federal funding expenditures, the Local Government will be responsible for filing a report or statement as described above. The required annual filing shall extend throughout the life of the agreement, unless otherwise amended or the project has been formally closed out and no charges have been incurred within the current fiscal year. AFA-AFA_LongGen Page 10 of 78 Revised 07/22/2015 Page 60 of 75 CSJ #0914-05-187 District #14-Austin Code Chart 64 #16000 Project: North & South Austin Avenue Bridges Federal Highway Administration CFDA #20.205 Not Research and Development 30. Signatory Warranty Each signatory warrants that the signatory has necessary authority to execute this agreement on behalf of the entity represented. THIS AGREEMENT IS EXECUTED by the State and the Local Government in duplicate. THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT _________________________________ Signature _________________________________ Typed or Printed Name _________________________________ Title _________________________________ Date THE STATE OF TEXAS _________________________________ Kenneth Stewart Director of Contract Services Texas Department of Transportation _________________________________ Date AFA-AFA_LongGen Page 11 of 78 Revised 07/22/2015 Page 61 of 75 CSJ #0914-05-187 District #14-Austin Code Chart 64 #16000 Project: North & South Austin Avenue Bridges Federal Highway Administration CFDA #20.205 Not Research and Development ATTACHMENT A RESOLUTION OR ORDINANCE AFA-AFA_LongGen Page 1 of 1 Attachment A Page 62 of 75 CSJ #0914-05-187 District #14-Austin Code Chart 64 #16000 Project: North & South Austin Avenue Bridges Federal Highway Administration CFDA #20.205 Not Research and Development ATTACHMENT B LOCATION MAP SHOWING PROJECT AFA-AFA_LongGen Page 1 of 1 Attachment B Page 63 of 75 SAN GABRIEL PARK & POO L VFW PARK RIVERY PARK AND TRAIL BLUE HO LE PARK MCMASTER ATHLETIC COMPLEX PARKS AND RECREATION ADMIN RIVERY PARK AND TRAIL CHAUTAUQUA PARK I.O.O .F. CEMETERY I.O.O .F. CEMETERY PICKETT TRAIL BLUE HOLE CEMETERY WINDRIDGE VILLAGE PARK I.O.O .F. CEMETERY EDWARDS PARK FOUNDERS PARK S IH 35 SB S IH 35 NB E L M S T S IH 35 FWY SB AS H S T E 7 T H S T E 1 5 T H S T R O C K S T S M A I N S T SCENIC DR PI N E S T N COLLEGE ST E 1 3 T H S T S A U S TI N AV E H O L L Y S T S M Y R T L E S T MA P L E S T S C H U R C H S T S C O L L E G E S T E 5 T H S T E 4 T H S T E UN I VE R S I T Y AV E W E S T S T E MORROW ST E 2 N D S T E 6 T H S T N AUSTIN AVE W 8 TH ST W 1 0 T H S T W U N I VE R S I T Y A V E RIVERY BLVD W 6 T H S T W 4 TH ST WOLF RANCH PKWY W 1 1 T H S T LO W ER PARK R D F O R E S T S T T H O M A S C T W 7 TH ST W 3 R D S T E 1 0 T H S T E 1 1 T H S T H U T T O R D N IH 35 SB OL I V E S T SOUTHWESTERN BLVD R I V E R H I L L S D R V I N E S T E 1 4 TH S T H A R T S T PARK LN E V A L L E Y S T E 8 T H S T BR I D GE S T W 5 T H S T HINTZ RD N O A K H O L L O W R D S OU L E D R E S P R I N G S T S P R I N G H O L L O W E 3 R D S T W 9 TH S T J A M E S S T PRIVATE RD E 9 T H S T M C K E N Z I E D R T I N B A R N A L Y E 3 R D S T E 1 4 T H S TW E S T S T /1 inch = 1,076.74 feet Legend trails Streets Type Prop osed Street Existing Stre et Downtown Overla y Pa rksThoroughfare Plan - Color Coded CLASS EXIST_CO LLECTO R EXIST_FREEWAY EXIST_MAJ_ARTERIAL EXIST_MIN_ARTERIAL PRO P_COL LECTOR PRO P_FR EEWAY PRO P_MAJ_ARTERIAL PRO P_MIN_ARTERIAL Page 64 of 75 CSJ #0914-05-187 District #14-Austin Code Chart 64 #16000 Project: North & South Austin Avenue Bridges Federal Highway Administration CFDA #20.205 Not Research and Development ATTACHMENT C PROJECT BUDGET Costs will be allocated based on applicable Federal, State, and Local funding until the federal funding reaches the maximum obligated amount. . The Local Government will then be responsible for 100% of the costs. Description Total Estimated Cost Federal Participation State Participation Local Participation Cost Cost Cost Engineering (by Local Government) $347,900 $0 $0 $347,900 Construction (by Local Government) $7,100,000 $1,299,174 $0 $5,800,826 Subtotal $7,447,900 $1,299,174 $0 $6,148,726 Environmental Direct State Costs $71,000 $0 $0 $71,000 Right of Way Direct State Costs $35,500 $0 $0 $35,500 Engineering Direct State Costs $142,000 $0 $0 $142,000 Utility Direct State Costs $35,500 $0 $0 $35,500 Construction Direct State Costs $497,000 $0 $0 $497,000 Indirect State Costs (6.38%) $475,176 $0 $475,176 $0 TOTAL $8,704,076 $1,299,174 $475,176 $6,929,726 Initial payment by the Local Government to the State: $142,000 Payment by the Local Government to the State before construction: $639,000 Estimated total payment by the Local Government to the State: $781,000 The final amount of Local Government participation will be based on actual costs AFA-AFA_LongGen Page 1 of 1 Attachment C Page 65 of 75 1 FYs 2015 – 2019 STP – MM Project Call for Projects Information and Requirements 1. About the STP – MM Call for Projects CAMPO is charged with selecting projects to receive funding in the region under the Federal Highway Administration’s Surface Transportation Program – Metropolitan Mobility (STP – MM). CAMPO is conducting a call for projects to award to allocate this funding to projects throughout the region. This call for projects opens on May 28, 2014 and closes at 5:00 p.m. on June 20, 2014. 2. Available STP – MM Funding: Total Available, Set Asides and Targets STP-MM Funding Available by Year and Distribution 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Total Available $1,128,750 $13,284,236 $19,410,928 $20,750,928 $21,050,928 $75,625,770 Regional Distribution $37,812,885 Local Distribution $37,687,885 Set Asides and Targets Bicycle/Pedestrian Set Aside FYs 2015 - 2019 (15 % of total available) $12,131,365 Bicycle/Pedestrian Set Aside FY 2014 (15 % of $52.12M Obligated by TxDOT for FY 2014)* $7,818,000* Centers Target (50% of total available) $37,687,885 * This total is not confirmed, CAMPO is working with TxDOT to get the official total 3. STP – MM Eligibility and Requirements Who Can Apply State of local governmental authorities including jurisdictions, departments of transportation and transit districts/authorities. Page 66 of 75 2 General Eligibility Requirements  Project must be located in Bastrop, Burnet, Caldwell, Hays, Travis, or Williamson Counties, and must be located in the CAMPO planning area at the time of project funding.  Capital projects, programs, or planning studies must be identified, either individually or as part of a categorical grouping in the CAMPO 2035 Regional Transportation Plan or a Plan and TIP Amendment Form accompanies the Combined Call for Projects Application Form. o The CAMPO Transportation Policy Board (TPB) will consider Plan amendments concurrent with the Combined Project Call. Approval of Plan amendments is at the sole discretion of the TPB.  Project must meet all Federal Project eligibility requirements. Federal Project Eligible Activities STP-MM eligible activities are continued from SAFETEA-LU, with some modifications to the eligible activities made from MAP-21. The eligible activities are described below, with the changes implemented from MAP-21 emphasized in bold:  Construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, resurfacing, restoration, preservation, or operational improvements for highways, including designated routes of the Appalachian Development Highway System (ADHS) and local access roads under 40 USC 14501(Note: 40 USC 14501 does not apply to the CAMPO region as it does not have roadways that are classified as part of the Appalachian Development Highway System).  Replacement, rehabilitation, preservation, protection, and anti-icing/deicing for bridges and tunnels on any public road, including construction or reconstruction necessary to accommodate other modes.  Construction of new bridges and tunnels on a Federal-aid highway.  Inspection and evaluation of bridges, tunnels and other highway assets as well as training for bridge and tunnel inspectors.  Capital costs for transit projects eligible for assistance under chapter 53 of title 49 (http://www.fta.dot.gov/documents/chap53MAP21.pdf), including vehicles and facilities used to provide intercity passenger bus service.  Carpool projects, fringe and corridor parking facilities and programs, including electric and natural gas vehicle charging infrastructure, bicycle transportation and pedestrian walkways, and ADA sidewalk modification.  Highway and transit safety infrastructure improvements and programs, installation of safety barriers and nets on bridges, hazard eliminations, mitigation of hazards caused by wildlife, railway-highway grade crossings.  Highway and transit research, development, technology transfer.  Capital and operating costs for traffic monitoring, management and control facilities and programs, including advanced truck stop electrification.  Surface transportation planning. Page 67 of 75 3  Transportation alternatives --newly defined, includes most transportation enhancement eligibilities. Eligible activities under the Transportation Alternatives program include: o Construction, planning and design of on-road and off-road trail facilities for pedestrians, bicyclists and other nonmotorized forms of transportation. o Construction, planning and design of infrastructure-related projects and systems that will provide sage routes for non-drivers, including children, older adults and individuals with disabilities to access daily needs. o Conversion and use of abandoned railroad corridors for trails for pedestrians, bicyclists, or other nonmotorized transportation users. o Construction of turnouts, overlooks and viewing areas. o Community improvement activities, including –  Inventory, control or removal of outdoor advertising  Historic preservation and rehabilitation of historic transportation facilities  Vegetation management practices in transportation rights-of-way to improve roadway safety, prevent against invasive species and provide erosion control; and  Archaeological activities relating to impacts from implementation of a transportation project eligible under 23 USC (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/legsregs/title23.pdf). o Any environmental mitigation activity, including pollution prevention and pollution abatement activities and mitigation to –  Address stormwater management, control and water pollution prevention or abatement related to highway construction or due to highway runoff; or  Reduce vehicle-caused wildlife mortality or to restore and maintain connectivity among terrestrial or aquatic habitats. o In addition to defined Transportation Alternative, as described above, the following are also eligible under the Transportation Alternative Program  The recreational trails program under 23 USC 206 (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/granule/USCODE-2011-title23/USCODE- 2011-title23-chap2-sec206/content-detail.html).  The safe routes to school project under §1404 of SAFETEA–LU (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/safe_routes_to_school/overvie w/legislation.cfm).  Planning, designing, or constructing boulevards and other roadways largely in the right-of-way of former Interstate System routes or other divided highways  Workforce development, training and educational activities  Transportation control measures.  Development and establishment of management systems.  Environmental mitigation efforts (as under National Highway Performance Program).  Intersections with high accident rates or levels of congestion.  Infrastructure-based ITS capital improvements. Page 68 of 75 4  Environmental restoration and pollution abatement.  Control of noxious weeds and establishment of native species.  Congestion pricing projects and strategies, including electric toll collection and travel demand management strategies and programs.  Recreational trails projects.  Construction of ferry boats and terminals.  Border infrastructure projects.  Truck parking facilities.  Development and implementation of State asset management plan for the NHS, and similar activities related to the development and implementation of a performance based management program for other public roads.  Surface transportation infrastructure modifications within port terminal boundaries, only if necessary to facilitate direct intermodal interchange, transfer, and access into and out of the port.  Construction and operational improvements for a minor collector in the same corridor and in proximity to an NHS route if the improvement is more cost-effective (as determined by a benefit-cost analysis) than an NHS improvement and will enhance NHS level of service and regional traffic flow.  Workforce development, training and education activities Sources: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/map21/factsheets/stp.cfm and http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/map21/factsheets/tap.cfm Page 69 of 75 5 Regional/Local Project Determination Use the table below to determine if you project qualifies as a regional or a local project. Each project must chose regional or local, it cannot be considered as both. Regional Projects Definition Roadway Projects*  Freeways and toll facilities  Grade-separated interchange projects on regionally significant roadways where no access existed previously  Regionally Significant Arterials, as defined by the following criteria: Criteria Explanation FFCS Principal Roadways identified as principal arterials in the Federal Functional Classification System (FFCS) NHS/Intermodal Roadways and intermodal connectors included in the federally- adopted National Highway System (NHS) Public Transportation Projects**  Rail transit lines and facilities  Fixed guideway bus rapid transit and bus rapid transit utilizing managed lanes  Express Bus  Transit centers and park and ride facilities, located in CAMPO Centers Others Types of Projects  Multi-county projects (projects that are taking place in more than one county) Local Projects Definition Roadways Projects*  Regionally Significant Arterials, as defined by the following criteria: Criteria Explanation Community Connection On-System (TxDOT) roadways that provide direct, continuously- signed connections between nearby or adjacent census-defined urbanized areas, urban clusters, and population centers with more than 5,000 people. Activity Center Roadways that serve as primary regional connector to an otherwise unserved regional activity center. Staged Facilities Roadways built to serve as the frontage roads for proposed limited access facilities Gap Completion Extension of Regionally Significant Arterials with non-connecting termini to a nearby junction with a Regionally Significant Roadway, where feasible. Public Transportation Projects **  Fixed-Route Bus (Local and Regional)  Transit centers and park and ride facilities, not located in CAMPO Centers Others Types of Projects**  All other projects that are eligible to receive STP – MM funding but are not defined as “Regional” or included in the “Local” definition Page 70 of 75 6 Additional STP – MM Centers 50% Target Eligibility Requirements CAMPO 2035 Regional Transportation Plan Policy 3 (http://www.campotexas.org/wp- content/uploads/2013/10/CAMPO_2035_Plan_Adopted_May_242010wMods.pdf , Page 109) specifies that a target of 50% of available STP – MM funding should be go to projects that support the development of mixed-use activity centers indicated on the approved 2040 Centers Map. To be eligible for funding under the CAMPO Center 50% Target the project must meet one of the following additional eligibility requirements:  Project is located within a Center  Project connects two or more Centers  For Plans, Programs or Studies: o Design, engineering or study for facilities planned for a Center or connecting more than one Center Additional STP – MM Bicycle and Pedestrian 15% Set Aside Requirements CAMPO 2035 Plan Policy 4 (http://www.campotexas.org/wp- content/uploads/2013/10/CAMPO_2035_Plan_Adopted_May_242010wMods.pdf , Page 109) requires that at least 15% of available STP – MM funding must support bicycle and pedestrian projects. Please note that a project may address both the Centers Target and the Bicycle/Pedestrian Set Aside. To be eligible for funding under CAMPO’s Bicycle and Pedestrian 15% Set Aside the project must meet one of the following eligibility requirements:  For Capital Projects: o The project facility type must be listed in either the AASHTO, ITE (http://www.ite.org/bookstore/RP036.pdf), or NACTO (http://nacto.org/cities- for-cycling/design-guide/) guides  For Plans, Programs or Studies: o Design, engineering or study for a facility planned to meet the Bicycle and Pedestrian Capital Project requirements o Start-up funding (up to two years) for a bicycle or pedestrian program or a bicycle commuting service providing bicycle sharing, secure parking, showers, maintenance or information STP – MM Funding and Administration Requirements The Texas Department of Transportation serves as the fiscal agent for the STP MM funding that comes to the region. Successful applicants will enter into a funding agreement with TxDOT. The funding agreement will provide for additional requirements related to project administration and reporting, and may specify additional deadlines for expenditure of the funds in order to ensure that timely progress is made. Page 71 of 75 7  Reimbursement and Local Share o The project sponsor must have sufficient funds to carry out the project. Payments are issued as a reimbursement for eligible expenses and project deliverables. The program requires a local, non-federal match in funding. The applicant is required to identify the non-federal source of a minimum of 20% of the total funding awarded. In-kind match is typically not allowed under this program.  Administrative Fees o TxDOT charges a sliding scale administrative fee for Estimated Direct State Costs for each funding agreement that should be factored into the overall costs of off- system projects, plans, programs and studies.  Award Total o The award total reflects the maximum CAMPO awarded contribution to the project, plan, program or study. The sponsor is responsible for any and all additional costs above and beyond the award total.  Additional Requirements o Besides project eligibility, there are numerous state and federal requirements that projects must to comply with in order to receive their STP – MM funding. The requirements vary depending on the type of project, plan, program or study that the sponsor proposes. Because federal requirements may impact the scope and cost of a project, sponsors are encouraged to familiarize themselves with the requirements that apply to their projects. Links to the FHWA and TxDOT requirements can be found Page 72 of 75 8 4. STP – MM Scoring System The tables below illustrate the scoring systems for Regional and Local Capital Projects and Plans, Programs and Studies. Project Evaluation Total Points per Criteria, Regional Projects Criteria Capital Projects Plans, Programs and Studies Base Points Weight Total Available Points Base Points Weight Total Available Points 1 Congestion, Current 10 3 30 9 3 27 2 TDM/TSM 10 2 20 9 2 18 3 Crash Frequency 10 3 30 9 3 27 4 Strategic Highway Safety 10 2 20 9 2 18 5 Connectivity 10 3 30 9 3 27 6 System Preservation 10 1 10 9 1 9 7 Freight Mobility 10 1 10 9 1 9 8 Centers Mobility 10 2 20 9 2 18 9 Environmental Sensitivity 10 1 10 9 1 9 10 Environmental Justice 10 2 20 9 2 18 TOTALS 100 200 90 180 Project Evaluation Total Points per Criteria, Local Projects Criteria Local: Capital Projects Local: Plans, Programs and Studies Base Points Weight Total Available Points Base Points Weight Total Available Points 1 Congestion, Current 10 3 30 9 3 27 2 TDM/TSM 10 1 10 9 1 9 3 Crash Frequency 10 3 30 9 3 27 4 Strategic Highway Safety 10 1 10 9 1 9 5 Connectivity 10 3 30 9 3 27 6 System Preservation 10 1 10 9 1 9 7 Local Project Priority 10 3 30 9 3 27 TOTALS 70 150 63 135 Page 73 of 75 9 5. STP – MM Call for Projects Timeline FYs 2015 - 2019 STP - MM Call for Projects Timeline May 28, 2014 Call for Projects issued June 20, 2014 Applications due at 5:00 p.m. June 23 - July 18, 2014 Application Review and Evaluation July 30, 2014 Technical Advisory Committee meeting August 11, 2014 Finance Committee/Transportation Policy Board Work Session August 11, 2014 Transportation Policy Board Allocation of Funding 6. Application Checklist  Signed Cover Letter from Agency Serving as Primary Sponsor  Project Information Section, Including Project Locator Map  Correct Project Application (Select Regional or Local and Capital Projects or Plans, Programs and Studies) 7. Submission Instructions What Needs to Be Submitted? All applicants are required to submit either one (1) digital, online based application (preferred submittal format) or one (1) hard copy to CAMPO by 5:00 p.m. on June 20, 2014. Applications received after this time will not be considered for funding under this Call for Projects. Digital Application and Cover Letter (Preferred Submittal Format) To submit the digital, online based application click ‘Submit’ on last page of the application titled “Self-Certification and Cover Letter”. Hard Copies of the Application, Cover Letter and Map Hard copies of the application, cover letter and map may either be hand delivered or mailed to CAMPO. Hand delivered hard copies of the application, cover letter and map must be dropped off at the CAMPO offices, located at: CAMPO 505 Barton Springs Road, Suite 700 Austin, Texas 78704 Page 74 of 75 10 Mailed hard copies of the application, cover letter and map mailed to CAMPO must be addressed to: Dan Dargevics CAMPO PO Box 1088 Austin, TX 78767 All application materials must be submitted to CAMPO by 5:00 p.m. on June 20, 2014. Page 75 of 75