Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda_GTAB_03.13.2015Notice of Meeting for the Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board and the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown March 13, 2015 at 10:00 AM at 300-1 Industrial Ave, Georgetown Texas 78626 The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you require assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reasonable assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. Please contact the City at least four (4) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or City Hall at 113 East 8th Street for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711. Regular Session (This Regular Session may, at any time, be recessed to convene an Executive Session for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code 551.) A Call to Order The Board may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene in Executive Session at the request of the Chair, a Board Member, the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, General Manager of Utilities, City Council Member, or legal counsel for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code Chapter 551, and are subject to action in the Regular Session that follows. B Introduction of Visitors C Industry/CAMPO/TXDOT Updates D Discussion regarding the Project Progress Reports and Time Lines. – Bill Dryden, P.E., Transportation Engineer, Mark Miller, Transportation Services Manager, Nat Waggoner, PMP®, Transportation Analyst and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director. E Discussion regarding the Airport Project Progress Report and time lines. – Russ Volk, C.M., Airport Manager and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director Legislative Regular Agenda F Nominations and election of Vice-Chair of the GTAB Board. - Truman Hunt – Chair Person for GTAB G Nominations and election of Secretary of the GTAB Board. – Truman Hunt, GTAB Chair Person H Review and possible action related to the Day and Time of GTAB Board Meetings. – Truman Hunt, GTAB Chair Person I Review and possible action to approve the minutes from the Regular GTAB Board meeting held on February 13, 2015. - Jana Kern – GTAB Board Liaison J Consideration and possible recommendation to approve an Agreement to Terminate Lease with the Apollo Composite Squadron, Texas Wing, Civil Air Patrol—Russ Volk C.M., Airport Manager and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director K Consideration and possible recommendation to GTEC for approval of the 2015/2016 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)– Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director, and Nat Waggoner, PMP®, Transportation Analyst. Adjournment CERTIFICATE OF POSTING I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all times, on the ______ day of __________________, 2015, at __________, and remained so posted for at least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting. ____________________________________ Jessica Brettle, City Secretary City of Georgetown, Texas Transportation Advisory Board March 13, 2015 SUBJECT: Discussion regarding the Project Progress Reports and Time Lines. – Bill Dryden, P.E., Transportation Engineer, Mark Miller, Transportation Services Manager, Nat Waggoner, PMP®, Transportation Analyst and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director. ITEM SUMMARY: GTAB Projects: Austin Avenue Bridge Evaluation and Repairs FM 971 Realignment at Austin Avenue FM 1460 Improvements Project OTP Update Sidewalk Master Plan Southwest Bypass Project (TIP #14C) Transit Study as Requested by City Council Transportation Services Operations – CIP Maintenance GTEC Projects: Project Update and Status Report FINANCIAL IMPACT: None SUBMITTED BY: Bill Dryden, P.E., Transportation Engineeer ATTACHMENTS: Description Type GTAB Projects Updates Exhibit GTEC Project Status Report Exhibit Austin Avenue – Bridge Evaluations  (North and South San Gabriel Rivers)  Project No. TBD     TIP Project No. N/A  March 2015  Unchanged  Project Description Evaluate the repairs necessary to restore full structural capacity to the Austin Avenue  bridges over the North and South San Gabriel Rivers.  The process will involve several  phases – I) determination of testing needed, II) structural testing, analyses and  evaluation of test data to determine/recommend corrective measures and a project  budget, III) develop construction plans, specifications and contract documents,  estimates of probable construction costs and, last, IV) construction administration.  Purpose To extend the structural life of the two bridge and provide long‐term vehicular  capacity and pedestrian safety along Austin Avenue.  Project Manager Bill Dryden, P.E.  Engineer Aguirre & Fields, LP    Element Status / Issues  Design Staff met with Engineer and discussed potential courses of action.  There are four basic  paths to consider:  Do Nothing.  Short Term Temporary Fix.  Medium Term Fix.  Replace  Structure.  Engineer has developed 2 potential conceptual alignments for the proposed  reconstruction of the bridge.  Surveying  TBD  Environmental TBD during Phase II  Rights of Way Prop. ROW from 3rd Street to N. of 2nd; Exist. ROW from N. of 2nd to Morrow Street.  Utility Reloc’ns TBD (future)  Construction TBD  Other Issues Project submitted for CAMPO funding;  Project eligible for TxDOT Off‐System Bridge Replacement Program.   FM 971 at Austin Avenue  Realignment Intersection Improvements  Project No. 1BZ     TIP No. QQ1  March 2015  Unchanged  Project Description Design and preparation of final plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for the widening  and realignment of FM 971 at Austin Avenue, eastward to Gann Street.  Purpose To provide a new alignment consistent with the alignment of the proposed Northwest  Boulevard Bridge over IH 35; to allow a feasible, alternate route from the west side of I 35 to  Austin Avenue, to Georgetown High School, to San Gabriel Park and a more direct route to  SH 130.  Project Managers Bill Dryden, P.E.  Engineer Klotz Associates, Inc.    Element Status / Issues  Design Preliminary Engineering complete;   Engineer working on 60% design submittal  Environmental/  Archeological  10/2015  Rights of Way Complete  Utility Relocations TBD  Construction 10/2016  Other Issues Working with TxDOT to develop an Advance Funding Agreement for plans review  and construction administration.    FM 1460  Quail Valley Drive to University Drive  Project No. 5RB     TIP No. EEa, EEb & EEc  March 2015  Project Description Design and preparation of plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for the widening and  reconstruction of FM 1460.  Project will include review and update to existing Schematic,  Right‐of‐Way Map and Environmental Document and completion of the PS&E for the  remaining existing roadway.  Purpose To keep the currently approved environmental documents active; purchase ROW, effect  utility relocations/clearance and to provide on‐the‐shelf PS&E for TxDOT letting not later  than August 2013, pending available construction funding.  Project Managers Ed Polasek, AICP and Bill Dryden, P.E.  Engineer Brown and Gay Engineers, Inc.      Element Status / Issues  Design Complete  Environmental/  Archeological  Complete  Rights of Way As of October 16th, the City has obtained Possession and  Use Agreements or have closings planned for all the  remaining FM 1460 parcels.  Acquired: 34  Pending: 0  Condemnation: 2  Total: 36  Utility Relocations Ongoing.  Construction Bid opened August 2014  Construction scheduled to commence Spring 2015.  Other Issues None Pending    Overall Transportation Plan Update  March 2015  Project Description The updated OTP is a continuation of the effort that the City completed in 2004  with the adoption of the initial OTP.  That document provided an analysis of  existing conditions and travel characteristics, a refined area‐wide travel demand  model, review of the City’s roadway functional classification system and a revised  Thoroughfare Plan.  Project Managers Ed Polasek, AICP, Bill Dryden, P.E., Nat Waggoner, PMP® and Jordan Maddox,  AICP  Engineer Klotz Associates, Inc.    Element Status / Issues  Key  Accomplishments  DRAFT OTP has been:   Presented to GTAB at its January 9th meeting.   Presented at Council Workshop on January 13th.   Presented to P&Z for review and comments January 20th.   Presented to GTAB on February 13th.   Presented to Council on February 24th for First Reading of the Ordinance fro  adoption.  Upcoming Tasks Staff:  • Will present 2nd Reading of Ordinance adopting the OTP March 10th.  Issues Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) has not yet adopted  the 2040 Regional Transportation Plan nor the 2010 Travel Demand Model  supporting that plan.  When adopted in May 2015, the 2040 plan and model will  provide key data which will allow supporting jurisdictions the opportunity to  update their transportation plans.  Georgetown transportation planning efforts  will benefit from updated modeling data and should pursue funding to update the  2012 data currently informing the OTP.    Sidewalk Master Plan and Public Facility Access Audit March 2015 Purpose The purpose of the City of Georgetown Sidewalk Study and Public Facility Access Audit is to inventory existing public infrastructure within the City of Georgetown City Limits, identify design and compliance deficiencies, evaluate future program requirements, and develop a long term implementation plan. Project Manager Nat Waggoner, PMP® Engineer HDR, Inc. Task Status / Issues Initiation - Completed Planning - Completed Execution - See below Task Name Start End ADA Reporting Criteria for Sidewalk Analysis May-14 Jun-14  Comprehensive Review of Existing Studies, Plans, and Reports May-14 Jun-14  Self-Assessment Survey of Downtown District May-14 Jul-14  Data Collection and Field Inventory Jun-14 Aug-14  City Facilities Survey Jul-14 Sep-14  Sidewalk Implementation Plan and Project Prioritization May-14 Oct-14  Parks and Amenities Survey Nov-14 Feb-14  Government and Public Stakeholder Meetings May-14 Jan-15  Public Meetings and Hearings Periodic thru Mar-15  ADA Transition Plan Update to Council Targeting Apr-15 Ongoing Project Close Out Activities Targeting Mar-15 Ongoing 10 Yr. Recommended Implementation Strategy Funding Needed Priority 1 Projects $10.2 M Operations and Maintenance $5 M Replacement and Retirement (Recommended in 2025) $8 M ADA Outstanding Tasks MAR –Staff input complete APR –Boards, Commissions and Council review MAY –Adoption Issues Implementation of Priority 1 projects and budget requests for operations and maintenance will involve boards and commissions, including GTAB. Guidance Needed At the 1st Reading on February 24th, Councilmember Hesser asked staff to further investigate ownership and maintenance policies for sidewalks. Staff is coordinating with the Planning Department for possible inclusion in the UDC amendment process and is looking for guidance from GTAB as to inclusion in as a regular agenda item. Southwest Bypass Project   (RM 2243 to IH 35)  Project No. 1CA     Project No. 14c  March 2015  Unchanged  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  Design Engineer is in preliminary engineering and schematic design phase of the facility.  Alignment has been presented to staff and management.  Surveying  City stall met with the Surveyor to resolve a conflict in the proposed ROW to be  acquired from Texas Crushed Stone.  Environmental/  Archeological  TBD by preliminary engineering phase.  Rights of Way Conceptually established by the Industrial Agreement; will be refined through the  schematic design phase.  Negotiations ongoing for the remainder of the ROW  Utility Relocations TBD (future)  Construction This project included in the Williamson County 2013 Bond Program to construct 2  lanes of the ultimate roadway.  Other Issues None    Transit Study as Requested by City Council Project No. None Project No. None March 2015 Unchanged Project Description Council Motion: Discussion and possible direction to the City of Georgetown's Transportation Advisory Board (GTAB) to conduct an analysis and make a recommendation to the City Council no later than June 24, 2014 ,regarding the City's potential future participation in State and Regional Transportation Organizations including the benefits, conditions, and justification which would prompt the City's participation in Project Connect, Lone Star Rail and any other relevant State and Regional Transportation Organizations that the City should be involved with -- Steve Fought, Councilmember, District 4 Amended Motion: 1. The City Manager to determine what time and effort staff have available to conduct this type of study over the next year. If it is not in the Transportation Division, Planning Department, Finance Department and/or City Manager’s Office work program, as outlined in the current draft budget, can it be adequately staffed to complete this level of work over the next year? 2. Is the challenge to research Federal, State and Regional transportation organizations or is it transit programs? This direction to staff is assuming it is transit programs. 3. Narrow the specific analysis to programs that are actually authorized to receive Federal formula and discretionary funding programs found within the current Federal Transit Administration. However, that would narrow the field down to three agencies or programs. Capital Metro, Lone Star Rail and the State of Texas through the Texas Department of Transportation. CARTS is only a contractor to Capital Metro and provides certain 5310 transit opportunities to persons outside of the Capital Metro Service Area in our jurisdiction. CAMPO, Project Connect, Project Connect North and My35 are simply planning programs that include staff from Capital Metro, Lone Star Rail District, and TxDOT and representatives from local governments. 4. The analysis should be based on how those planning programs will lead to funding through the project delivery agencies. (Fought amended to include financial risk and benefits to the City) 5. The Council should provide the Board and staff specifics on what type of economic analysis data will lead to an ultimate decision by the City Council. 6. Finally, some people ‘can’t see what the final project would look like’ or ‘can’t see what a Transit Oriented Development would look like.’ Years ago, when the City was looking at transportation options and creating a TOD ordinance, there was a field trip to perform some on the ground research. Members of the City Council, Planning and Zoning, and staff (GTAB was not in existence at the time) went and stayed at a TOD to see for themselves. We should have at least one field trip during this study. Since it has been about 8 years or so since that first and only field trip, it should be extremely informative to do it again and see what a TOD looks like today and how the project has performed over the years. Vote on the original motion as amended: Approved (6-1) (Hesser opposed) Project Manager Ed Polasek, AICP Engineer TBD Project Status Workplan Under Development Transportation Services Operations  CIP Maintenance  March 2015  Project Description 2014‐2015 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, Steger Bizzell, Halff Assoc.  Task Status / Issues  2nd and 6th Street  Engineering  (KPA) 2nd St. to College St. plans are complete. Advertising, bidding and  construction will coincide with Parks and Recreation VFW Field  reconstruction project in approximately June / July minimizing disruption to  baseball season and to residents.    9th Street  (Main to Rock)  (KPA) (Patin Construction)  Austin to Rock portion 98% completed.  Electric  conduit is in place.  Patin is scheduled to return on March 25th and still plans  to complete project on schedule. (Before the end of April / Poppy Festival)  Chip Seal  2015 proposed to be bid April 1st and brought to April 10th GTAB with  construction complete by August 30th.  Fog Seal 2015 Fog sealing will be completed in‐house.  In‐house engineering is being  provided for specified streets.  Engineering under way and fog sealing will be  completed prior to mid‐June or as temperature allow.  Temperatures much  above 80 degrees slows dry time.  Cutler/overlay 2015 proposed Cutler Overlays Proposed to be bid on April 1st and brought to  April 10th GTAB with construction complete by October 1st.  Pavement  Evaluation  KPA Engineering: pavement evaluation/scoring and update of 5 year  (Complete)     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 Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension (SW Bypass to DB Wood Road) #14A 5QW Engineer is completing the fencing plans, its required environmental clearance documents (to determine the fee for WCCF) and the construction PS&E bidding package. ROW has been acquired. On Schedule Unchanged 1,330,000 1,111,233 218,767 283,350 0 283,350 Southwest Bypass (SH29 to RR2243)#14B 5QC Engineer has completed the project PS&E, less construction contract documents and environmental permitting required at time of actual construction. ROW Acquisition process moving to condemnation for the Weir Trust properties. Guy/Knight property – Closing pending Wolf property – Acquisition complete. On Schedule Unchanged 7,756,432 3,225,132 4,531,300 4,539,107 5,787 4,533,320 Northwest Blvd Overpass #QQ 5QX Engineer has presented the Preliminary Engineering Report and has begun final PS&E design efforts. Engineer is developing ROW strip map and 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 Construction scheduled to begin in February 2015. Utility coordination on-going as ROW is acquired. All appraisals are complete. Final offers have been made for all ROW parcels. The paperwork has been filed for all parcels requiring condemnation. As of October 16th, the City has obtained Possession and Use Agreements or have closings planned within the next couple weeks for all the remaining FM 1460 parcels. Utility Relocation Agreements were approved by Council at its October 28th meeting On Schedule 11,788,230 5,348,470 6,439,760 6,727,539 2,315,896 4,411,643 Rivery Boulevard 5RM Surveying and preliminary design underway. On Schedule Snead Drive 5QZ PS&E is complete; Awaiting ROW for water quality pond. On Schedule Unchanged 825,100 87,000 738,100 825,100 87,000 738,100 Mays Street Extension 5RI Engineering has submitted the proposed alignment and is working on the 30%PS&E. On Schedule Unchanged 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 Current Economic Development Projects Project Type Update On Schedule/ Or Behind Project Budget Project Cost Available Current Year Budget Current Year Cost Current Year Available 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) GTEC PROJECT UPDATE AND STATUS REPORT March 2105 Project to Date Current Year Budget (13/14) L:\Global\CIP Agenda Form\GTEC Status Report\2015\GTEC - Project Status - 2015-02.xlsx Page 1 of 1 3/5/2015 City of Georgetown, Texas Transportation Advisory Board March 13, 2015 SUBJECT: Discussion regarding the Airport Project Progress Report and time lines. – Russ Volk, C.M., Airport Manager and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director ITEM SUMMARY: Airport Projects: CIP - Air Field Electrical Improvements Development and Timeline FAA Tower Report Fuel Sales Report Hangar Lease Update Tie-Down Lease Update AirFest Economic Impact Analysis Airport Monthly Financial FINANCIAL IMPACT: NA SUBMITTED BY: Russ Volk ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Airport Project Update Backup Material Tower Report Backup Material Fuel Sales Report Backup Material Hangar Update Backup Material Tie-Down Update Backup Material AirFest EIA Cover Memo Airport Financial Backup Material Airfield Electrical Improvements Project No. 1414GRGTN March 2015 Project Description FY2014 project: Runways / taxiways lighting and signage Purpose Improved safety and reliability of airport lighting Project Manager Russ Volk, Airport Manager Project Engineer Garver Notes: Feb 24 –Started boring under each runway for new electrical conduit and wiring Estimated timeframe - 5 days Mar 1 – Trenching and light replacement on Runway 18/36 Estimated timeframe - 30 to 45 days Georgetown Municipal Airport Contract Tower Program Update March 2015 Project Description Georgetown Tower Update Purpose Tower Monthly Report Project Manager Russ Volk, Airport Manager Operating Statistics Performance/volumetric indicators For the Month of: January 2015 January 2014 Y-T-D January 2015 Y-T-D Variance Take Offs and Landings Day* Night* VFR 3,503 1,468 21,614 20,314 (1,300) -6% IFR 340 130 1,869 2,293 424 23% Total Take Offs/Landings 3,843 1,598 23,483 22,607 (876) -4% * This does not include flyover operations (i.e. handoffs from ABIA approach/departure control to KGTU tower then onto the next ATC.). Georgetown Municipal Airport Fuel Sales Update March 2015 Project Description Georgetown Fuel Sales Update Purpose Fuel Sales Monthly Report Project Manager Russ Volk, Airport Manager Operating Statistics Performance/volumetric indicators Gallons For the Month of: January January 2014 Y-T-D January 2015 Y-T-D Variance Type of Fuel 2014 2015 AVGAS 18,934 23,008 72,695 83,206 10,511 14% JET A 33,848 38,404 137,476 150,282 12,806 9% Total Gallons Sold 52,782 61,412 210,171 233,488 23,317 11% Airport Hangar Lease Update March 2015 Project Description Hangar Lease Agreements Purpose Implement new lease agreements with approved rates Project Manager Russ Volk, Airport Manager Notes Feb 8 –Started contacting existing hangar tenants to verify airplane ownership Feb 15 –Started contacting existing hangar tenants to offer new lease agreement with new rates Feb 15 –Started contacting folks on waiting list to offer new leases on vacant hangars April 1 – Target date for switching to new lease agreements and having all vacant hangars filled Unit Stats Total Hangars – 114 (30 new leases executed) Total Storage Units – 13 Used by Airport Staff – 3 (1 Hangar, 2 Storage) Airport Tie-Down Lease Update March 2015 Project Description Tie-Down Lease Agreements Purpose Implement new lease agreements with approved rates Project Manager Russ Volk, Airport Manager Notes Feb 20 –Obtained new tie-down agreement from City Attorney’s Office Feb 23 – Started contacting existing tie-down tenants April 1 – Target date for switching to new agreements Unit Stats Total Tie-Downs – 43 Available for Long Term Lease - 29 Transient / Overnight Spaces – 14 (7 on concrete, 7 on grass) G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Economic Impact Analysis: AirFest Georgetown, Texas November 8, 2014 Prepared by: Sarah T. Page Consulting, LLC December 2014 G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. 1 List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ 2 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... 3 About AirFest ............................................................................................................................... 3 Total Economic Impact ........................................................................................................... 3 Methodology .............................................................................................................................. 4 Data Provided and Model Assumptions ............................................................................. 6 IMPLAN and Retail Impacts .................................................................................................... 6 Economic Impact Definitions ................................................................................................. 7 Economic Benefits to Georgetown ...................................................................................... 8 AirFest Community Capture Impacts (Local spending) ............................................... 10 About Community Capture Spending .............................................................................. 11 Origin of AirFest Attendees ................................................................................................... 14 Local vs. Non-local Attendee Spending Comparison .................................................. 15 Return on Investment .............................................................................................................. 16 Sales Tax Impact ...................................................................................................................... 17 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 18 Open-Ended Responses – Attendees ................................................................................ 19 IMPLAN and Economic Impact Modeling........................................................................ 31 About Sarah T. Page Consulting, LLC ................................................................................ 31 Appendix 1 – Attendee Survey ............................................................................................ 32 List of Tables Table 1: Summary of Total Economic Impacts ............................................................. 8 Table 2: Summary of Food and Beverage Impacts (Includes restaurants and drinking places) ......................................................................................................... 8 Table 3: Summary of Retail Impacts (Includes general retail, vendors, grocery stores, and other retail) ............................................................................................. 8 Table 4: Summary of Transportation Impacts (Includes purchases made on gasoline and motor oil) ............................................................................................ 8 G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 2 Table 5: Summary of Tourist Attractions Impacts (Includes natural and man- made visitor attractions) ........................................................................................... 8 Table 6: Summary of Total Community Capture Impacts ........................................ 10 Table 7: Summary of Community Capture Food and Beverage Impacts (Includes restaurants and drinking places) .......................................................................... 10 Table 8: Summary of Community Capture Retail Impacts (Includes general retail, vendors, grocery stores, and other retail)............................................................ 10 Table 9: Summary of Community Capture Transportation Impacts (Includes purchases made on gasoline and motor oil) ..................................................... 10 Table 10: Summary of Community Capture Tourist Attraction Impacts (Includes natural and man-made visitor attractions) ......................................................... 11 Table 11: Local vs. Non-local Spending Comparison ............................................... 15 Table 12: What did you like best about AirFest? ........................................................ 20 Table 13: What changes or additions would you like to see at AirFest next year? .................................................................................................................................... 23 Table 14: What other thoughts or comments do you have about AirFest? .......... 26 Table 15: How many times have you visited the Georgetown Municipal Airport? .................................................................................................................................... 28 Table 16: What would bring you back to the Georgetown Municipal Airport? ... 28 List of Figures Figure 1: Impacts by Spending Category ................................................................... 12 Figure 2: Employment Impacts by Spending Category ........................................... 12 Figure 3: Labor Income Impacts by Spending Category ......................................... 13 Figure 4: Average Per Person Per Day Spending by Spending Category ............. 13 Figure 5: Map - Attendees by County ......................................................................... 14 Figure 6: Map - Attendees by Zip Code ...................................................................... 15 Figure 9: How did you hear about AirFest? (Non-Local attendees) ....................... 19 Figure 10: How did you hear about AirFest? (Local attendees) .............................. 20 Figure 11: SurveyMonkey Attendee Email Survey Branding ..................................... 34 Figure 12: SurveyMonkey Attendee Email #1 Preview .............................................. 34 Figure 13: SurveyMonkey Attendee Email #2 Preview .............................................. 35 Figure 14: SurveyMonkey Attendee Email #3 Preview .............................................. 35 G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 3 Executive Summary The City of Georgetown contracted with Sarah T. Page Consulting, LLC to provide an economic impact analysis on AirFest held on November 8, 2014 at Georgetown Municipal Airport. The project was designed to determine the economic impact of the event on the local economy, the impact of spending by local residents, and return on investment. Sarah T. Page Consulting, LLC evaluated the impacts utilizing IMPLAN, an econometric model designed by the University of Minnesota. The model is used to determine the increased spending associated with new business investment, and with local festivals, events, and tournaments. About AirFest AirFest was held November 8, 2014 at the Georgetown Municipal Airport. The free event included static displays of aircraft, rides in helicopters and other aircraft, radio- controlled plane and helicopter demonstrations, take offs and landings, a fly-over, car show, demonstrations, and food vendors. AirFest is in its 5th year and has grown in popularity and attendance each year. An estimated 7,000 people attended this year’s AirFest. Total Economic Impact Economic impact can be calculated in several different ways. IMPLAN produces an economic impact that is highly accurate, but also dependant on the accuracy of the data that is entered into it. In other words, the economic impacts that come out of the mod el are only as good as the data that goes into it. Thus, we outline several assumptions and the data provided in a section below. The resulting economic impacts from an IMPLAN analysis are an accurate, yet very conservative projection of the impact an event had on a community. The results are Economic Impact Results Our analysis suggests the following key findings: ■ The total economic impact of AirFest on Georgetown was $103,192 - $127,035. ■ The economic impact to local restaurants and drinking places was $57,336, the retail impact was $19,629, the impact to local tourist attractions was $24,262, and the transportation impact was $1,964. There was no impact on local lodging providers. ■ An estimated 1.4 full time equivalent (FTE) jobs were created. ■ There were an estimated 7,000 festival attendees. Of these, 4,480 were non- local and 2,520 were local. ■ The average non-local party size was 4.4 people, and the average length of stay in Georgetown was 1.2 days. ■ The average non-local per person per day spending was $23.63. G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 4 “bankable” – they are not inflated or exaggerated in any way. However, when compared to impacts from other events that tout impacts in the tens of millions of dollars, IMPLAN’s impacts can seem low. For this reason, we are including a range for the total economic impact of AirFest. All the detailed analysis was conducted using IMPLAN. Only the total economic impact figure is stated in a range. IMPLAN’s total economic impact for the event is $103,192. By multiplying the estimated non- local attendance (4,480) by the average number of days spent in Georgetown (1.2 days) and by the per person per day spending figure of $23.63, the high end of the impact range is established at $127,035. Both impacts listed above represent the economic impact of the event. This is the impact of direct spending by visitors to Georgetown as a result of attending AirFest. The impacts do not represent the fiscal impact, which is the tax revenue generated from visitor spending. Fiscal impact was not calculated as a component of this study. Both impacts are correct, but simply use different methods to calculate. Either may be reported with confidence. Methodology A Survey Team consisting of roughly 2 volunteers collected Email addresses so that the survey could be sent electronically using SurveyMonkey. A self-service box was also available for attendees to enter their name and email address. Surveying was conducted throughout the day Saturday from 12 noon until 5pm. Thus, all attendees would have an equal opportunity to be surveyed. Volunteers “intercepted” festival attendees, explained the study process, and asked for an Email address. The Survey Team was asked to collect Email addresses from as many attendees as possible. Following the festival, an Email survey was sent to all who provided a valid email address via the web-based survey tool called SurveyMonkey. A $100 Visa gift card was offered to those who completed the survey to incentivize their participation. Three Emails were sent to participating festival attendees using SurveyMonkey. The first Email was delivered to 229 attendees on November 17, 2014. On November 20, 2014, a reminder Email was sent to those who had not yet responded (135). A final reminder Email was delivered to the remaining non -respondents on November 22, 2014 (106). Out of the 229 total surveys that were delivered, 131 were returned for a 57% response rate. This response rate exceeded industry standards. “My kids rode in a plane for the very first time!” “The joy on people's faces! Seeing the planes, the precision flying team, the music, car show, vendors, and knowing that everyone could afford to attend.” G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 5 The data was tabulated by Sarah T. Page Consulting, LLC, and analyzed using IMPLAN to produce the impacts. IMPLAN, developed Minnesota Implan Group (MIG), calculated the economic impact created by expenditures from non- local attendees. The model uses economic theory combined with historical trends to anticipate changes in direct, indirect and induced employment and income generated due to the presence of a new business or industry. In this case, the new industry is an event. The “community capture” impacts, or impacts of local spending, were also analyzed using IMPLAN. IMPLAN is an input/output model that is based on economic factors attributed to a specific county or region. In this analysis, Williamson County was used as the basis for determining the impacts. The specific methodology is outlined below: 1. Only spending by non-local attendees was used to determine the economic impact. Local participants were identified by zip code and were eliminated from the economic impact analysis. 2. Only spending by local attendees (those from zip codes 78626, 78628, and 78633) was used to calculate the community capture impacts. 3. The non-local sample size of 75 represented 334 attendees, or 64% of the total number of attendees surveyed, and the local sample size of 55 represented 185 attendees, or 36% of the total. These percentages were then applied to the total estimated number of attendees at AirFest (7,000). Thus, an estimated 4,480 non-local and 2,520 local people attended the Georgetown AirFest. 4. Based on data gathered from the surveys, there were 519 total people represented in the data collection, of which 334 were non-local and 185 were local. 5. The per person per day spending figure was determined using the total spending in each spending category and the total number of people in the travel parties. 6. The per person per day spending figure for each spending category was entered into an IMPLAN model built to represent the local inputs and outputs of Williamson County. 7. The IMPLAN model reduces the impact of retail spending because it analyzes impacts on the retail margin rather than the total sale price (see “IMPLAN and Retail Impacts” below for an explanation.) 8. The total number of non-local attendees (4,480) was multiplied by 1.2 (the average number of days stayed in Georgetown according to the survey results) for the total number of attendee days of 5,376. “AirFest is so much fun. The vendors, cars and volunteers are all great!” G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 6 9. The average number of days spent in Georgetown by local residents was 1.1 days. Thus, the total number of local attendee days was 2,772. 10. The total number non-local visitor days of 5,376 was used to determine final economic impacts within the IMPLAN model. Data Provided and Model Assumptions 1. The estimated total attendance at the Georgetown AirFest was 7,000 people. 2. The study used a convenience sample to project the economic impacts. 3. The non-local sample size (75) used to determine the economic impact was too low to fall within the +/- 5% degree of accuracy range for this analysis. A sample of 370 non- local surveys would be needed to achieve a +/- 5% degree of accuracy for a non-local attendance of 7,000. 4. The economic impact results were based on non-local (outside of Georgetown) zip codes only. 5. The spending patterns of the 334 non-local attendees represent the total number of 5,376 (attendee days). IMPLAN and Retail Impacts The IMPLAN software model was updated in 2011, and the data sets (inputs and outputs) were updated in 2012. These revisions included many changes, but one is particularly relevant to economic impact analyses on festivals and events that include retail spending. Very few of the goods purchased by visitors to Williamson County are actually produced there. For most sales, only the retail margin (the difference between final sale price and the wholesale cost of the item) is retained in the city or county. Retail margins can be as low as 20-30 percent of the total sales price for purchases made at general merchandise stores. Previous IMPLAN versions allowed total retail sales to be used when calculating economic impact. This resulted in an over-reporting of the total economic impact. The impact on local retail outlets was inflated as well. The updated version of IMPLAN uses only the retail margin in conducting an economic impact analysis. The results are a more accurate picture of the actual economic impact on the community. “I actually think you should charge an admission to get in or at least parking. Seems odd that such entertainment is free.” G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 7 Thus, it is important to recognize the difference between total retail sales and the impact of that sale on the community. The economic impact is measured on the basis of the retail margin and not the total retail sale. Retail sales and retail impacts are two very different measurements and are not equivalent. Because IMPLAN measures the impacts of retail margins, the resulting retail impacts can seem low. Economic Impact Definitions In order to fully understand the tables on pages 9 and 11 of this report, some definitions of key economic impact terms are provided below. Direct Economic Impact: The total amount of additional spending which can be directly attributed to this event. Total Economic Impact: Total economic impact is a measure of direct economic impact plus the additional spending in the host economy as a result of increased business from this event. It includes indirect and induced impacts (see below). Indirect Impacts: These are the impacts of local industries buying goods and services from other local industries. Induced Impacts: These are the impacts a local economy feels as a result of re- spending of income received while being employed during this event. Output: Output represents the value of industry production. Output is essentially sales/spending. Labor Income: All forms of employment income, including Employee Compensation (wages and benefits) and Proprietor Income. FTEs: Full-time equivalent employment is the number of full-time equivalent jobs, defined as total hours worked divided by average annual hours worked in full-time jobs. Employment: In the tables on the following pages, employment indicates the number of FTEs generated by this event. G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 8 Economic Benefits to Georgetown AirFest Impacts Economic Impact (Impact from non-local spending) Table 1: Summary of Total Economic Impacts Total Economic Impact Direct Economic Impact Total Economic Impact Output $82,313 $103,192 Labor Income $24,271 $32,056 Employment 1.2 1.4 Table 2: Summary of Food and Beverage Impacts (Includes restaurants and drinking places) Food and Beverage & Food Services Economic Impact Direct Economic Impact Total Economic Impact Output $45,427 $57,336 Labor Income $16,679 $21,170 Employment 0.7 0.9 Table 3: Summary of Retail Impacts (Includes general retail, vendors, grocery stores, and other retail) Retail/Shopping Economic Impact Direct Economic Impact Total Economic Impact Output $15,915 $19,629 Labor Income $5,547 $6,904 Employment 0.3 0.3 Table 4: Summary of Transportation Impacts (Includes purchases made on gasoline and motor oil) Transportation Economic Impact Direct Economic Impact Total Economic Impact Output $1,510 $1,964 Labor Income $741 $907 Employment 0 0 Table 5: Summary of Tourist Attractions Impacts (Includes natural and man-made visitor attractions) Tourist Attraction Economic Impact Direct Economic Impact Total Economic Impact Output $19,461 $24,262 Labor Income $1,305 $3,075 Employment 0.2 0.2 G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 9 Note: Indirect and induced impacts, or value-added, are not depicted in the tables above. These secondary impacts result from circulation of the initial spe nding through the local economy. The value-added impacts combined with the direct impacts form the total impact shown in the tables above. G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 10 AirFest Community Capture Impacts (Local spending) Table 6: Summary of Total Community Capture Impacts Total Community Capture Impact Direct Community Capture Total Community Capture Output $30,364 $38,130 Labor Income $10,332 $13,239 Employment 0.5 0.5 Table 7: Summary of Community Capture Food and Beverage Impacts (Includes restaurants and drinking places) Community Capture Food and Beverage Impact Direct Community Capture Total Community Capture Output $21,705 $27,395 Labor Income $7,969 $10,115 Employment 0.4 0.4 Table 8: Summary of Community Capture Retail Impacts (Includes general retail, vendors, grocery stores, and other retail) Community Capture Retail/Shopping Impact Direct Community Capture Total Community Capture Output $5,574 $6,851 Labor Income $1,858 $2,326 Employment 0.1 0.1 Table 9: Summary of Community Capture Transportation Impacts (Includes purchases made on gasoline and motor oil) Community Capture Transportation Impact Direct Community Capture Total Community Capture Output $702 $913 Labor Income $344 $421 Employment 0.0 0.0 G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 11 Table 10: Summary of Community Capture Tourist Attraction Impacts (Includes natural and man-made visitor attractions) Tourist Attraction Economic Impact Direct Economic Impact Total Economic Impact Output $2,384 $2,972 Labor Income $160 $377 Employment 0.0 0.0 About Community Capture Spending Community Capture represents the impacts of local spending related to AirFest. Even though local spending does not create an economic impact, this spending might not have occurred were it not for the event. Because of AirFest, locals bought gas, food, and went shopping. Therefore, AirFest caused locals to spend money in the community – spending that might not have occurred otherwise. G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 12 The following charts detail the economic impacts for total non-local spending, employment, and labor income broken out by each spending category. Figure 1: Impacts by Spending Category Figure 2: Employment Impacts by Spending Category 19% 2% 56% 23% $ Impacts by Spending Category ($103,192 Total Spending Impact) Retail Impact Transportation Impact Food & Beverage Impact Tourist Attraction Impact 22% 0% 64% 14% Employment Impacts by Spending Category (1.4 Total FTEs) Retail Impact Transportation Impact Food & Beverage Impact Tourist Attraction Impact * There was no employment impact on the Transportation sector. * G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 13 Figure 3: Labor Income Impacts by Spending Category Figure 4: Average Per Person Per Day Spending by Spending Category 21% 3% 66% 10% Labor Income Impacts by Spending Category ($32,056 Total Labor Income) Retail Impact Transportation Impact Food & Beverage Impact Tourist Attraction Impact $- $1.00 $2.00 $3.00 $4.00 $5.00 Food Vendors Restaurants Shopping Shopping Vendors Lodging Gasoline Grocery Tourist Attractions Other Average Per Person Per Day Spending By Spending Category ($23.63 total) G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 14 Origin of AirFest Attendees This map represents only those attendees who were surveyed. Event attendees came primarily from five counties: Williamson (55%), Travis (34%), Bell (4%), Hays (3%), and Denton (2%). Figure 5: Map - Attendees by County Attendee origins were also analyzed by zip code. The county and zip code segmentation provides useful data that can be used in marketing this (and other) Georgetown events. It can demonstrate whether marketing and outreach efforts were effective, and can also be used to identify potentially lucrative markets that have previously gone untapped. The map on the following page represents only those attendees who were surveyed. It depicts the distribution of attendees by zip code. It shows a detailed look at the zip code origins from the region surrounding the Georgetown area. G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 15 Figure 6: Map - Attendees by Zip Code Local vs. Non-local Attendee Spending Comparison Table 11: Local vs. Non-local Spending Comparison Local vs. Non-local Spending Comparison Non-Local Spending Local Spending Category $ Amount (per person per day) Category $ Amount (per person per day) Food Vendors $4.99 Food Vendors $4.34 Restaurants $3.46 Restaurants $3.49 Shopping $3.23 Shopping $2.43 Shopping Vendors $3.40 Shopping Vendors $1.78 Gas $2.53 Gas $2.28 Grocery $1.27 Grocery $0.89 Tourist Attractions $3.62 Tourist Attractions $0.86 Other $1.12 Other $0.88 TOTAL* $23.63 TOTAL* $16.95 G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 16 On a per person per day basis, out of town attendees out spent their local counterparts in every category except for local restaurants. It is important to note that non-local event attendees are a lucrative market, and measures should be taken to increase their attendance at Georgetown festivals and events in the future. Also consider ways to cross promote restaurant and retail outlets in downtown and at locations near event sites to encourage visitors and locals to spend more money in Georgetown. Local spending does not produce an economic impact. However, were it not for AirFest, Georgetown residents (who attended the festival) might have spent no money in the community that weekend. Return on Investment City of Georgetown staff requested that the return on their investment in AirFest be calculated. Return on investment, or ROI, measures (in this case) the amount of spending generated by local attendees in the city as a result of the money spent hosting the event. ROI is calculated below using total AirFest budget (including labor by city staff) and the marketing budget for local, non-local, and total expenditures. Expenditures by the airport total $9,815.55. The Public Communications department spent $3,910.00 to advertise the event. These two figures combine for a total of $13,725.55. The estimated amount for City of Georgetown staff labor is $8,343.00 (149 hours @ $55.99/hour). By including the hours worked, the grand total for AirFest expenses is $22,068.55. The basic formula for ROI is: (gain from investment - cost of investment) cost of investment NON-LOCAL ROI: The marketing ROI for AirFest is: $103,192 (total economic impact) - $3,910 (total marketing costs) $3,910 The total ROI for AirFest is: $103,192 (total economic impact) - $22,068.55 (total event costs) $22,068.55 ROI = = $25.39 = $3.68 G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 17 LOCAL ROI: The marketing ROI for AirFest is: $38,130 (total community capture) - $3,910 (total marketing costs) $3,910 The total ROI for AirFest is: $38,130 (total community capture) - $22,068.55 (total event costs) $22,068.55 TOTAL ROI: The marketing ROI for AirFest is: $141,322 (sum of community capture & economic impact) - $3,910 (total marketing costs) $3,910 The total ROI for AirFest is: $141,322 (sum of community capture & economic impact) - $22,068.55 (total event costs) $22,068.55 In other words for every dollar the City of Georgetown spent developing and advertising AirFest, it received $5.40 back in spending from Georgetown residents and visitors. Sales Tax Impact Festivals and events can create significant economic impacts in their host communities. Not only do they benefit local businesses like retail shops, restaurants, and hotels, they also benefit the local government through the generation of sales taxes. The City of Georgetown has a sales tax rate of 8.25%, of which the City keeps 2%. It is possible to calculate the sales tax impact on municipal coffers based on the economic impacts realized in taxable spending categories. The spending categories measured in this study include vendors (food and retail), restaurants and bars, retail, gas stations/convenience stores, grocery stores, accommodations, tourist attractions, and miscellaneous retail. There are both taxable and non -taxable items for sale at gas stations/convenience stores and grocery stores. Since this study did not ask participants to = $8.75 = $ .73 = $35.14 = $5.40 G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 18 identify specific purchases, it is not possible to know if the impacts generated were based on taxable or non-taxable items. Additionally, sales taxes are not assessed on accommodations. For these reasons, the spending categories of gas station/convenience stores, grocery stores, and accommodations were eliminated from the sales tax impact calculation. Because of these issues, the final result is likely an underestimate of the sales tax generated. Food and beverage/food services impact = $57,336 (non-local) + $27,395 (local) = $84,731 (includes food vendors, bars, and restaurants) Retail/shopping impact = $17,417 (non-local) + $5,894 (local) = $23,311 (includes local retail shops and retail vendors ** grocery stores were eliminated) Tourist attraction impact = $24,262 (non-local) + $2,972 (local) = $27,234 Total taxable impact = $135,276 * 8.25% Total sales taxes $11,160.27 * 2% (retained by City of Georgetown) Total sales tax impact $223.21 to City of Georgetown Total City of Georgetown $22,068.55 Expenses While not a large impact to the City of Georgetown, sales tax revenues are cumulative. With each and every festival held, spending by visitors and residents generates sales taxes which can be put to use on city projects. Conclusion This economic impact analysis covered the 2014 AirFest only. Any assumptions or conclusions made were based on this year alone. Based on the 2014 data, AirFest definitely draws an out of town market. This presents several opportunities to the event organizers. Since non-local attendees outspend their local counterparts, increase s in marketing and advertising to targeted areas could help to increase their attendance at future events. Because of the data collected, the City of Georgetown now knows the most likely counties and zip codes to target future advertising so that more non -local attendees can be attracted to the event. In addition, the staff is now armed with suggestions from actual attendees on what chang es and additions would entice them to stay longer. These same improvements could also draw in more out of town attendees to the event. Cross promotion of local shopping and dining opportunities will also help spread more spending throughout the city, and will thus add to the economic impact of the event. G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 19 Open-Ended Responses – Attendees The following answers were submitted to the open-ended questions on the survey form by attendee survey participants. How did you hear about AirFest? Attendees were asked to specify how they learned about AirFest. Their responses are below. Figure 7: How did you hear about AirFest? (Non-Local attendees) 11% 2% 0% 35% 31% 21% Non-Local Attendees Newspaper Magazine TV Internet Facebook Other G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 20 Figure 8: How did you hear about AirFest? (Local attendees) What did you like best about AirFest? Respondents were asked to list the things they liked best about the 2014 AirFest. Their responses are listed in the table below. Table 12: What did you like best about AirFest? Non-local Attendees Local Attendees Helicopter & airplanes Airshow, carshow My son getting to touch and see planes. Car show Taking my baby on an airplane for the first time The people. Everyone was nice and accommodating. My husband recently retired from the Army and it was great that everyone acknowledged veterans. The planes. Helicopter ride & formation flight Airplane rides Aircraft displays Planes Kids being able to look inside planes airshow and cars Seeing the police helicopter lift off and turn on its siren. Exhibits The great old planes The economic plane rides! It's just a good time! The plane displays, car display and plane rides. Vintage aircraft and cars The family was able to take a flight for 20 dollars and it was a hit! Cant wait to do it again free event, educational for kids, beautiful weather 21% 16% 5% 23% 12% 23% Local Attendees Newspaper Magazine TV Internet Facebook Other G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 21 Being able to ride in a plane! It was so much fun. It was free ..and you didn't have to pay a arm and a leg got nothing The really cool cars and The bomber. the flyover Hot air balloons. Cars. Airplanes The helicopters very informative and low cost Seeing interesting airplanes. Riding in the air craftsparking Flight demos and C57 rides Diversity of airplanes and old cars car show Airplanes!! Boop! The world war II plane displays The different planes Helicopter ride Free The planes Being able to ride in a helicopter Seeing the unusual planes. Airplanes and old cars So many people allowing my son to sit in their aircraft. military My son loved being able to get in some of the plane and watching them take off My kids rode in a plan for the very first time devil dog and very old fashion yellow aircraft Everything well organized Aircraft Helicopter ride, talking to p51 mustang owners The great music and atmosphere. Cars The various planes, cars and the band Grandkids got to sit in airplane and use controls. Historical plane displays and flights Checking out the planes and cars The planes, classic cars, and kettle corn Felt like a kid looking at the WWE airplanes The number of cars and planes to look at, music, organized parking Everything Having both cars and planes there provided good variety The cars and plane ride Cars and planes` The action of the planes and helicopters flying in and out. The car show and the fact raft some owners allow kids to sit inside the plane! Being able to get up close to look at the planes and cars! hang gliding simulation That it was a free event for families My son loved being able to get inside some of the planes. Helicopter ride Hot Air Balloons, formation flyover, vintage aircraft and cars the food The airshow. Car and aircraft displays. Vendors. The chance for my child to see planes and helicopters up close and hands on flyover Cars, and very organized parking The planes abd free plane rides Old Cars and old planes. Helicopter ride be able get in airplanes G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 22 Planes The joy on people's faces! Seeing the planes, the precision fly team, the music, car show, vendors, and knowing that everyone could afford to attend. The weather! It was well run, getting cars in/out, flow of people in the event. The aircraft Helicopter ride Classic cars Tour very interesting Fly over To see cars and airplane, and the music. looking inside the planes & cars Seeing the helicopters and airplanes take off. Planes flying in formation. Helicopter ride Looking inside the card and planes food, people Display of cars & planes. Our grandson being able to get in some of the aircraft the weather Fly over Tour of the helicopters and a chance to ride in one. Old airplanes and car show Airplanes, Cars....very well organized, especially parking car show and watching the helicopter take off. My 15 year old always wants to go to the georgetown airport just to watch the planes land and take off. He likes watching them put gas in. family friendly event, low cost my 3 year old really enjoyed sitting in the different planes Airplane ride Plane Displays -- The planes Everything except no water at hand washing station seeing cars and planes Hurt helicopter ride rides The flying airplanes show Getting to look at airplanes. The planes and helicopters that my kids were allowed to sit in, etc. Looking at the larger planes and watching the various takeoffs and landings. Loved being able to get in the planes The planes, easy to get to and park Army planes Family atmosphere, boarding planes and helicopters G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 23 The fact that my five year old son got a Huey ride! Way to go! What changes or additions would you like to see at AirFest next year? Survey respondents were asked what changes or additions could be made to AirFest that would bring them back next year. They are listed below. Table 13: What changes or additions would you like to see at AirFest next year? Non-local Attendees Local Attendees More hands-on exhibits. Also, the air show itself felt short (though, understandably) An actual airshow with seating would be great. More vendors, specifically food vendors. We would have spent money, but the lines were long and very slow moving. Cheaper rides in the ford plane None was better than the red poppy car show. More vendors with food that's fresh cooked. Better food vendors. Cheaper airplane rides in the ford plane None More actual air show Less cars more airshow Get rid of the DJ! Band was okay, but the DJ was just noise pollution!!! More food options More food vendors and maybe wine from local winery. Maybe a vintage plane competition or display , a home built plane display and demonstration. War birds. Na n/a A little more room to walk More vendors. more seating to rest upon I think they should add sky dive for $50 a person. Maybe kid rides or more interactive fun No pets. Air show? longer airshow More planes and flight demos Parking More flight demos and some historical presentations about the war planes I would love to see Pilots & Paws represented! some sort of seating N\A Sell alcoholic beverages More planes Add activities for kids and young people. We wanna see planes flying in the air. More food (shorter lines), and restrooms. attraction for kids, and for pets Definatly missed having the a patchy helicopter there this year More vendors for souvenir loves go there with my kids Shuttles for those who have to park in the faraway spots. More tables and chairs to rest at; More porta-potties. More aircraft G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 24 Better parking plan,we waited in line for 30 minutes to park, and then again when we departed. Rope off the walkway area between the parking area and the air show entrance (along the runway and businesses located within the airport). Can't think of anything, had a wonderful time.. The time it took to get in and out of the parking area More planes, less cars, more planes in the air Some vendors were rude None more air stuff flying around More activities for children: arts and crafts, pilots talking to them about planes, interactive games More vendors. More air show. maybe a space to watch planes take off and land? more flyovers more planes and airshows military The m.c. was super grating on my ears. A new mc or have him not talk as much. Had to leave Add jets!!! Nothing more opportunities to get inside an airplane, small or large More of everything More vintage aircraft, tours, information sessions Could have used more food vendors. I don't recall seeing any souvenirs being sold. So I'd recommend either a) selling souvenirs; or, if you were selling souvenirs, b) making the souvenir "shop" visible. I also thought some kind of map would've been helpful. The parking could be improved upon-long distance walking for us "oldies" More food vendors the lines were too long due to little variation, of choices. Yes Acrobatics and stunt flying demonstrations and air force team flying. We got almost nothing this year. More hands-on activities for kids more experience with aircraft More food vendors, a couple kids activities (virtual flight or plane making) Make several donation areas. BIG SIGN...CLOWNS to Alert People to the Giving!! Even though the truck and stand were next to the main gate...we guessed that was the drop off. Promote and Celebrate the Giving Part! Have booths on both sides of the Main Entry. A big bucket to toss the money. Think BIG! Kids like to Feed Stuff! "Paint Devil Dog On a Container with his mouth open... Please Feed Me! Air show/stunts More planes G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 25 more of an "air" show. I was really disappointed that there was no trick flying or really much of a show Have some other entertainment for the kids like bounce house or something. I would like to see more for the kids. A corner dedicated to the small children..face painting and balloon making just a few examples more flyovers by old planes Need to work on ingress and egress....only one road in and out.... Better signs for activities a new strategy regarding traffic and parking More aircraft more information on the website, ie no mention of food vendors that would be there. since we were unsure, we packed a picnic. the lines for the vendors were also very long so it was a good thing we brought our own food. more food vendors would be a good idea. More planes you can go on No More food vendors. Air acrobatics, demonstrations, parachute shows, etc.. Would be great to have an actual AirShow also... Just some things that children can do hands on. Some type of activities concerning airplanes and the airport. More arial planes More seating air show more food stalls and kids entertainment More airplanes flying and doing shows Publish cost of plane rides on website. Better Parking organization!! It took forever to get out!! And also, more (competent) food vendors! The lines were entirely too long at the trailers! I spent a fraction of what I would have if the lines weren't so long. More opportunities to interact with planes or learn about them rather than just admiring. Food vendor lines were too long More planes and opportunities to fly in planes n/a Jets if possible I think it was well run, no complaints. What other comments or thoughts do you have about AirFest? This question was intended to elicit comments and suggestions from survey respondents that may not have been covered with the other survey questions. Often, this question can yield very helpful and interesting results. G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 26 Table 14: What other thoughts or comments do you have about AirFest? Non-local Attendees Local Attendees Enjoyed the car show as well Love that it's a family friendly/free event. It's grown the past few years, can't wait to see what next year brings. Consider adding more seating near vendors. Was. Great I loved everything there Well. Organized event. Great family outing Glad to see your doing them. A lot of people walked in without food donations, encourage that more. Keep it free and with free parking. LOved it ! It is a great festival, but the food lines were too long and too slow so we spent no $ on food even though we really wanted to -we stood in a line for a hot dog for 20 minutes and it did not move so we gave up. Overall it was a great time. I attended with two of my friends, one with her two girls and hasband then was later joined up with the others parents. Everyone had a blast and my 2 year old niece had so much fun dancing around to the live music. We also enjoyed the car show! It's a good event, no complaints I hope I win! A fun family event Great activity. I brought a couple cans of food but couldn't find where to drop off. We hung around for 3 hours. Enjoyed the car show but really wanted to see the air show. It kept being delayed 3 times and my son uses a walker and we had to just leave without seeing the show. 3 hours and no place to rest made it impossible to stay any longer. AirFest is so much fun. The vendors, cars and volunteers are all great! Couldn't buy any food from vendors at show because lines were too long. I love this! I have a four year old and it's big enough to hold his attention but not overwhelming. As a single mom, I'm always looking for free educational and fun activities. This is perfect! My boy had a great time and was featured on the front page of the wilco sun. Parking was problematic. Spent 30 minutes trying to leave. Need more restrooms and the the place to wash your has was out if water and towel which was really messy once ur kid has soap all over there hand and can get it off same as above. This is the first time I have attended. I loved it and the grand kids had such a great time... G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 27 Well organized good job!!! Good crowd, more air show Great. Kids loved it It was a lot of fun for the whole family. I enjoyed the organized parking. I feel that it would be helpful to have someone (police, staff) at the intersection of Airport Rd and Lakeway to help with traffic. Thanks for putting it on for the community! It makes for a great afternoon of family time! Had a fun leisure time but has become more for older generation of Georgetown, been noticing the large amount of elders in our community making this community more like a nrsing home I will be back next year for the helicopter ride We love it, perfect time of year and so fun for the kids .. Adults too. Live band was awesome too my little girl danced away! Great time Had a great time. More kid activities please. We had a blast and can't wait for next year! There was not a detailed schedule of events that I could find. I would have liked to see the model airplanes fly. Would have liked information sessions about the aircraft...talks given. liked the car show, it seemed to steal the show I had a lot of fun with my family, but the experience felt kind of chaotic. First time to attend an airshow and I'm pretty impressed with how organised the traffic and parking was. I know most likely there is a reason for the limited aviation action, but if possible it would be nice to have some events to view, but I am from Chicago so maybe my expectations are distorted. Thanks to those plane owners who allowed small children to sit in their planes. That was incredibly generous and giving of them, as the children loved the experience. Very disappointed in aerial demonstrations. Except for old cars and old planes it was not worth my time. Better parking and routes in and out. More flyovers. It was awesome otherwise Keep up good work Enjoyed it. Found back enterance on mapqust -- would take the back entrance and save time getting into the show. Maybe more police directing traffic It's Amazing! Thank you to everyone who made the AirFest possible. God Bless You! Great- very family oriented I definitely think you need something more for the kids to do than just walk around and look at planes and cars. Very interesting and good for kids to lesrn It was fun and bigger than I thought it would be. G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 28 More flying in the skies Having the first commercial passenger plane was great, as was the availability of rides in the helicopter. Nice atmosphere. We had a great time! Me and my kids had a terrific time. Good family environment Overall I thought the festivities were great! Work on parking on the south end we had a really enjoyable family day. thank you! This was a great event. An Airshow would be awesome. Allow people to get better view or landing strip Fix the parking and food issue Nd you guys will get more ppl back next year! n/a I actually think you should charge an admission to get in or at least parking. Seems odd that such entertainment is free. Table 15: How many times have you visited the Georgetown Municipal Airport? How many times have you visited the Georgetown Municipal Airport? Non-local Attendees Local Attendees Never 44 20 1 time 21 20 2-4 times 6 8 5-7 times 1 1 8-10 times 0 1 Greater than 10 times 1 3 Attendees were also asked to explain what businesses, attractions, or events would bring them back to the Georgetown Municipal Airport. Their thoughts are provided below. Table 16: What would bring you back to the Georgetown Municipal Airport? Non-local Attendees Local Attendees Air show Airshow and an other family friendly events The plane rides Car show Shows, but I need to know about them beforehand. More food vendors Airplane rides Advertising cost of plane ride Air show Bbq vendor was good airfest AirFest Air show, Air shows fireworks workshops for kids G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 29 Air shows Family, friends Cheap flights that my kids love Airfest Anything fun and family oriented that I could bring my nieces to. Things kids would enjoy the cool planes Airshows, demonstrations, ride-alongs air fest same thing, Air fest The formation flight I love the flights being offered, both by organizations maintaining vintage aircraft and flights on small aircraft and by Young Eagles. Air/car shows More airshows Plane and the air show Other Air Shows Like their design of aircraft parking and storage Air show Next airfest classic cars Air show Airfest Air Fest Air fest Air shows, Flight lessons Charter plane ride Private planes Classic Car Show, Plane Show, More Food Options, Activities for Children Model airplanes hot air balloon. Helicopters. Planes flying over. Pole cars. More airfest type things. In Round Rock, they recently had "touch a truck" which was where the kids could go see all kinds of trucks and vehicles and climb inside. If we could do something like that with airplanes, trucks, helicopters, etc., that would be fun. If kids could get a tour of the airport, that would also be really fun! Air shows, museum or children's educational opportunities ROT Ralley Air planes, cars, helicopter ride Devil dog! My son would love to see some jets if possible! He wants to be a pilot! Airfest car show and plane show Airfest bring back the plane rides All of the ones that were there. I would enjoy current military and (more) law enforcement planes, autos, and equipment on display. There was something about a kids flying club. I think it would also be great if there were some educational opportunities explaining the different functions of the airport and maybe an aircraft walkaround/tour to explain the various parts and how they work to make the craft fly. G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 30 a real air show The air show itself actually had more aviation events for spectators. It seems it should be the Custom and Antique Auto Show not air show. The automobile was very cool, but in regard to an air show; nothing happening. Air Festival A really good air show. Any fun fest air plane show Car show n air show. Loved the helicopter ride Devil Dog - Airfest Airshow carshow Airfest Airfest/Planes Kettle corn! Events visit music, air show, old planes & cars Helicopter and airplane rides Food Plane rides, air show (possibly longer), Automobiles, Aircraft Air Show More fly overs The blue angels an air show that lasted longer than a few minutes Restaurants, festivals All of them. Activities for children of all ages. Hands on fun. Airplanes, Cars airshows, carshows another festival B25 bomer AirShow More airshoes Air fest airshow and car show, airplane ride, food Another airfest Plane rides. Activities for kids. Planes, air show, car show. Our 3 Year old boy loved if Another airfest, holiday events, other special events n/a The airshow I've been to AirFest before and look forward to coming back. A school field trip for my kids would also bring me back. G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 31 IMPLAN and Economic Impact Modeling This analysis was conducted using the IMPLAN model developed by Minnesota Implan Group (MIG). The model uses economic theory combined with historical trends to anticipate changes in direct, indirect and induced employment and income generated due to the presence of a new business, industry, or event. The results of this analysis are intended for the use by its recipients. Publishing for general viewing is at their discretion. IMPLAN is an input/output model that is based on economic factors attributed to a specific county or region. This analysis reflects the anticipated county impacts. The output and analysis from IMPLAN simulations are theoretical in nature and are contingent on the quality and quantity of data provided as input. About Sarah T. Page Consulting, LLC Sarah T. Page Consulting, LLC is backed by 23+ years of experience of Principal, Sarah Page. Our strengths lie in several diverse areas including:  Economic impact analysis  Social media marketing  Custom training and presentations on tourism and social media  Social media campaign development and execution Our clientele includes public sector entities, non-profits, and associations. G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 32 Appendix 1 – Attendee Survey AirFest Economic Impact Analysis Suggested welcome screen text: Thank you for agreeing to participate in this economic impact study. Your responses will be used to determine the economic impact of AirFest on the City of Georgetown. We know you’re busy, so we’re only asking a few minutes of your time. Please complete the questionnaire on the following page to the best of your recollection. Your answers are very important to the success of this study. By completing this questionnaire and confirming your Email address, you will be entered into a drawing for a $100 Visa gift card. Thank you in advance for your time and assistance. 1. Are you an …:  Attendee?  Vendor? 2. What is the zip code at your home address? ____________ 3. How many people were in your group? ______ 4. How many days were you in Georgetown? _______ 5. Could you help out AirFest by telling us approximately how much your group spent in the following categories? Type of Expenditure Amount spent in Georgetown A. Food vendors at AirFest $ ______________________ B. Restaurants $ ______________________ C. Shopping $ ______________________ Retail vendors at AirFest $ ______________________ D. Lodging $ ______________________ E. Gasoline $ ______________________ F. Grocery Stores $ ______________________ G. Tourist attractions or entertainment $ ______________________ H. Any other expenses $ ______________________ Please identify ________________________________________ 6. If you stayed in paid accommodations, where did you stay? ___________________________________________________________________________ 7. How did you hear about AirFest?  Newspaper? Which paper? _____________________ G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 33  Magazine? Which magazine? _____________________  Internet?  Facebook?  TV ? Which station? ______________________  Other ______________________ 8. In the last year, how many times have you visited the Georgetown Municipal Airport?  Greater than 10  7-10 times  5-7 times  3-5 times  1-3 times  Never 9. What attractions, businesses, or events would bring you back to the Georgetown Municipal Airport? __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ 10. What do you like best about AirFest? __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ 11. What changes or additions would you like to see at AirFest next year? __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ 12. Please share with us any comments or thoughts you have about AirFest . ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ Suggested Thank You screen text: Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey. Be assured that any information gathered is for our research only and will not be shared with any outside source. Your help is greatly appreciated. If you are selected as the winner of our drawing for the $100 Visa gift card, you will be notified via the email address you provided within the next three weeks. G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 34 Figure 9: SurveyMonkey Attendee Email Survey Branding The following three photos are the previews of the original invitation and two reminder Emails that were sent to the participants. Figure 10: SurveyMonkey Attendee Email #1 Preview G e o r g e t o w n A i r F e s t E c o n o m i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s Page 35 Figure 11: SurveyMonkey Attendee Email #2 Preview Figure 12: SurveyMonkey Attendee Email #3 Preview Prepared by: LKemp 3/4/2015 Georgetown Municipal Airport As of January 31, 2015 Statement of Operations A - B = C B - D = E A B C D E 2014/2015 1/31/2014 Budget $ YTD Actuals $% Beginning Fund Balance 21,612 (A)79,378 (57,766) 517,632 (438,254) -85% Operating Revenues: Fuel Sales 2,469,900 759,749 1,710,151 805,934 (46,185) -6% Fuel Expense (2,272,600) (660,539) (1,612,061) (721,783) 61,244 -8% Net Fuel Revenues 197,300 99,209 98,091 84,151 15,058 18% (B)Leases & Rentals 641,200 187,907 453,293 192,418 (4,511) -2% (C)Bankruptcy - Georgetown Jet Center - - - 90,452 (90,452) -100% Interest 4,000 14 3,986 172 (158) -92% (D)Other Revenues 39,150 1,313 37,837 1,714 (401) -23% Total Operating Revenues 881,650 288,444 593,206 368,909 (80,464) -22% Operating Expenses: Personnel (350,253) (104,219) (246,034) (108,013) 3,794 -4% Operations (608,072) (380,710) (227,362) (279,686) (101,023) 36% Furniture & Equipment - - (561) 561 #DIV/0! Total Operating Expenses (958,325) (484,929) (473,396) (388,260) (96,668) 25% Total - Net Operating Revenues (Expenses)(76,675) (196,484) 119,809 (19,352) (177,133) 915% Non-Operating Revenues (Expenses): Bond Proceeds 870,000 - 870,000 - - 0% Debt - Principal & Interest (178,612) 2 (178,614) - 2 0% Capital Improvement Program Settlement Revenue - AJS Drainage - - - 110,000 (110,000) -100% Transfer from General Fund - Capital Projects - - - 32,750 (32,750) -100% AJS Draining Improvements - (59) - (87,500) 87,441 -100% Runway 1836 Lights (770,000) - (770,000) - - 0% Fuel Farm (100,000) - (100,000) - - 0% Net Capital Improvement Program (870,000) (59) (870,000) 55,250 (55,309) -100% Total - Net Non-Operating Revenues (Expenses)(178,612) (57) (178,614) 55,250 (55,307) -100% Net Revenues/(Expenses)(255,287) (196,541) (58,805) 35,898 (232,439) 118% Ending Fund Balance (E)(233,675) (117,163) 553,530 NOTES: (A)Preliminary actual beginning fund balance. (B)Leases and Rentals include T-Hangars, ground leases, and tie downs. (C)The City does not expect to receive any more bankruptcy revenue as the lease is now owned by the bank. (D)Other Revenues include Ad Valorem Tax, special events and discounts. Most are received at fiscal year end. (E)The Electric Fund is covering the contingency requirements for Airport to meet City-wide contingency reserves per policy. Reserve decreased to 45 days effective October 1, 2014. 1/31/2015 YTD Actuals Variance Year to Date Variance Budget Balance Sheet Highlights Current Preliminary Actuals 1/31/2015 12/31/2014 11/30/2014 9/30/2014 Assets: Cash & Investments 3,448 10,794 41,391 47,180 Accounts Receivable - Leases & Fuel 52,034 62,316 58,858 111,633 Liabilities: Bond Debt Outstanding 603,847 603,847 603,847 603,847 City of Georgetown, Texas Transportation Advisory Board March 13, 2015 SUBJECT: Nominations and election of Vice-Chair of the GTAB Board. - Truman Hunt – Chair Person for GTAB ITEM SUMMARY: Per the Bylaws of the Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board; “Section 3.1 – Officers. The Board Officers are Chairman, Vice-Chairman and Secretary. The Chair is appointed by the City Council during the annual appointment process. The other Board Officers are elected by a majority vote of the Members at its first meeting after the annual appointment process.” The Chair of the Board, Mr. Truman Hunt, will take the nominations from the floor, for position of Vice-Chair. FINANCIAL IMPACT: n/a SUBMITTED BY: Jana Kern City of Georgetown, Texas Transportation Advisory Board March 13, 2015 SUBJECT: Nominations and election of Secretary of the GTAB Board. – Truman Hunt, GTAB Chair Person ITEM SUMMARY: Per the Bylaws of the Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board; “Section 3.1 – Officers. The Board Officers are Chairman, Vice-Chairman and Secretary. The Chair is appointed by the City Council during the annual appointment process. The other Board Officers are elected by a majority vote of the Members at its first meeting after the annual appointment process.” The Chair of the Board, Mr. Truman Hunt, will take the nominations from the floor, for position of Secretary. FINANCIAL IMPACT: n/a SUBMITTED BY: Jana Kern City of Georgetown, Texas Transportation Advisory Board March 13, 2015 SUBJECT: Review and possible action related to the Day and Time of GTAB Board Meetings. – Truman Hunt, GTAB Chair Person ITEM SUMMARY: Per the GTAB Bylaws Section 4.1 Time & Date of Regular Meeting. The Board shall meet once a month on the same week of the month, the same day of the week, at the same time, and at the same place. The regular date, time, and place of the Board meeting will be decided by the Members at the first meeting, of the Board after the annual appointment process. Currently, the GTAB Board meets on the second Friday of each month at 10:00 a.m. FINANCIAL IMPACT: n/a SUBMITTED BY: Jana Kern ATTACHMENTS: Description Type GTAB Dates Backup Material GEORGETOWN TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY BOARD (GTAB) Meeting Schedule March 2015 – February 2016 All Regular Meetings will be held on the second FRIDAY of every month at 10:00 a.m. at the Georgetown Municipal Complex, located at 300-1 Industrial Avenue Please contact Jana Kern @ 930-8473 if you have questions regarding meeting dates or times. MARCH 13, 2015 APRIL 10, 2015 MAY 08, 2015 JUNE 12, 2015 JULY 10, 2015 AUGUST 14, 2015 SEPTEMBER 11, 2015 OCTOBER 09, 2015 NOVEMBER 13, 2015 DECEMBER 10, 2015 (Thursday) JANUARY 08, 2016 FEBRUARY 12, 2016 City of Georgetown, Texas Transportation Advisory Board March 13, 2015 SUBJECT: Review and possible action to approve the minutes from the Regular GTAB Board meeting held on February 13, 2015. - Jana Kern – GTAB Board Liaison ITEM SUMMARY: Board to review and revise and/or approve the minutes from the regular meeting held on February 13, 2015. FINANCIAL IMPACT: n/a SUBMITTED BY: Jana Kern ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Draft Minutes Backup Material City of Georgetown, Texas Transportation Advisory Board March 13, 2015 SUBJECT: Consideration and possible recommendation to approve an Agreement to Terminate Lease with the Apollo Composite Squadron, Texas Wing, Civil Air Patrol—Russ Volk C.M., Airport Manager and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director ITEM SUMMARY: The City of Georgetown has plans to construct a parking lot just east of the Control Tower at the same location as a Civil Air Patrol (CAP) facility. This parking lot construction is part of the FY2015 TxDOT Airport Improvement Project. Originally, the CAP facility was to be renovated for use as a base of operation at the Georgetown Municipal Airport. CAP is unable to complete the renovations plus the facility needs to be moved or tore down to make room for a planned parking lot. With execution of Agreement To Termination Lease, the City can then make arrangements to move or teardown the facility to make room for the parking lot. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends consideration of the Agreement To Termination Lease with Civil Air Patrol which will result in the City securing possession of the existing facility. FINANCIAL IMPACT: NA SUBMITTED BY: Russ Volk ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Termination Agreement Exhibit Page 1 of 2 AGREEMENT TO TERMINATE LEASE WHEREAS, The City of Georgetown and Texas Society of Aeronautics, Inc. (hereinafter “TSA) entered into a twenty-year Lease Agreement (hereinafter “Lease Agreement”) effective July 1, 1981; WHEREAS, TSA assigned its rights, title, and interest in said Lease Agreement to Apollo Composite Squadron, Texas Wing, Civil Air Patrol dated February 13, 1987; WHEREAS, The City of Georgetown and Apollo Composite Squadron, Texas Wing, Civil Air Patrol (hereinafter “Civil Air Patrol” entered into a twenty-year extension of the Lease Agreement terminating the lease on July 1, 2021 effective July 1, 1998; WHEREAS, The City of Georgetown and Apollo Composite Squadron, Texas Wing, Civil Air Patrol amended the lease to delete one thousand fifty six and .39 square feet, more or less (approximately 8’ x 188’) effective April 1, 1999; WHEREAS, Apollo Composite Squadron, Texas Wing, Civil Air Patrol has been unable to maintain the premises and buildings on the leased land; WHEREAS, the City of Georgetown desires to remove the building from the airport to facilitate improvements at the airport; and NOW THEREFORE the City of Georgetown Civil Air Patrol herein agree to the following: Section 1 The facts and opinions in the opinion are true and correct. Section 2 The parties agree that the lease will be terminated as of the 31st day of March 2015. SIGNED AND AGREED TO on the _____ day of ____________________, 2015 City of Georgetown By________________________________ Dale Ross, Mayor Approved as to Form: ____________________ Bridget Chapman City Attorney Page 2 of 2 SIGNED AND AGREED TO on the _____ day of ____________________, 2015 Apollo Composite Squadron, Texas Wing, Civil Air Patrol By_______________________________ City of Georgetown, Texas Transportation Advisory Board March 13, 2015 SUBJECT: Consideration and possible recommendation to GTEC for approval of the 2015/2016 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)– Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director, and Nat Waggoner, PMP®, Transportation Analyst. ITEM SUMMARY: The Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation (GTEC) by statute must adopt a 5-year Capital Improvement Program. The City of Georgetown GTEC By-laws and Overall Transportation Plan refer to this as a Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The process to complete the TIP requires coordination and submittal of projects from the GTAB Board to GTEC. The GTEC/GTAB TIP reflects the transportation projects that the GTEC (4B) Board have found eligible for funding, and the status of those projects. Staff is aware that revenue and bonding capacity for GTEC will be limited because of the expenditure of GTEC funds for projects in the FY 14/15 TIP. The proposed GTEC TIP is a continuation of development of those projects which staff feel will have the greatest economic and transportation impact for the community. Changes to the GTEC/GTAB TIP are shown in bold in the 2015/16 Draft GTEC/GTAB Transportation Improvement Program Project List. Several projects are related to the proposed. Staff has also included the Summit at Rivery Park TIA Improvements in the Draft GTEC TIP. GTEC approved the TIA in October 2013 and directed staff to begin programming those improvements as recommended. Funding for Year 1 of those improvements was delayed from last year’s TIP awaiting completion of the Economic Development agreements related to the Convention Center and Hotel. The proposed 2015 Bond Program List will be discussed in future GTAB meetings as staff works out a programming and letting schedule. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending approval and submittal of the 5-year GTEC TIP to the GTEC Board and proposed 2008 Bond programming in the draft 2015/16 Budget documents. FINANCIAL IMPACT: n/a SUBMITTED BY: Edward G. Polasek, AICP ATTACHMENTS: Description Type 2014/15 Draft TIP Documents Backup Material 2015 Bond List Backup Material 3/04/2015 Project Spent/ Current 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 Summary Funds Project Detail Description of Transportation Total Encumbered GTEC GTEC GTEC GTEC GTEC GTEC 5 Year Still # Improvement Estimate Funding Funding Funding Funding Funding Funding Funding Total Needed* Projects Submitted to GTEC for their TIP Process AD IH-35/Williams Gateway Access Improvements (Rivery Extension)$8,907,000 $65,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,500,000 $5,907,000 BC Wolf Ranch Parkway (SH 29 (D.B. Wood) to SH 29 Bypass) (tied to bypass)$4,500,000 $1,330,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,170,000 AZ SH 29 Bypass (from RR 2243 to SH29) $18,920,000 $5,390,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $13,530,000 BK SH 29 Bypass (from IH 35 to RR 2243) $20,300,000 $1,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $18,800,000 BL South East Inner Loop (Widening to 4 Lanes (IH 35 to Rock Ride Lane))$19,950,000 $0 $0 $0 $2,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $2,500,000 $17,450,000 BO FM 1460 Widening (Quail Valley south to '1,000 North of CR114 in Round Rock)$44,565,400 $1,500,000 $450,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $42,615,400 XX Airport Road (IH35 to Lakeway)*** $6,700,000 $0 $1,700,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,000,000 VV Airport Road (Lakeway to North of Halmar Cove)*** $7,500,000 $0 $3,030,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,470,000 QQ Airport Road (Berry Creek Drive south to Three Forks) $11,870,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,500,000 $0 $0 $2,500,000 $9,370,000 AE FM971/Northwest Blvd Bridge (Washam over IH35 to Apple Creek)$12,825,000 $425,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,400,000 AG FM 971 (Terminus of NW/971 Bridge (QQ) to Gann St) $4,150,000 $150,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,000,000 AF Construct Northbound Frontage Road (FM 2338 to Lakeway)$12,500,000 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,250,000 $2,500,000 $3,750,000 $9,900,000 CK Mays - Teravista Pkwy To Westinghouse Rd (WH TIRZ)$10,650,000 $300,000 $10,350,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 BZ Mays - Westinghouse Rd to Blue Springs (WH TIRZ) $12,760,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,760,000 CE Blue Ridge Drive (WH TIRZ) $10,910,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,910,000 CJ Westinghouse Rd - Mays Street to FM 1460 (WH TIRZ)$18,530,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $18,530,000 UU Aviation Drive (Airport Road to IH 35) $4,200,000 $300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,900,000 WW Three Forks to Aviation Drive $2,625,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,625,000 AT SH 29 (IH 35 to Haven Lane) HEB TIA $5,000,000 $650,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,350,000 Riv TIA Rivery TIA Improvements $3,250,000 $750,000 $0 $1,400,000 $0 $0 $1,100,000 $0 $2,500,000 $0 Total $240,612,400 $12,460,000 $17,030,000 $2,900,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,350,000 $2,500,000 $12,750,000 $199,687,400 Note: Tentative Schedule still subject to GTEC, GTAB and City Council approval, and bond letting for each fiscal year. These are estimates only and may change up until bond letting/funding each fiscal year. * Funds Still Needed: in some cases this may include Federal/State Funding/Contributions ** Funds requested are for two lane construction only in ultimate ROW *** Pecan Center Economic Development Project Includes partial funding 2015/16 DRAFT GTEC/GTAB TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (TIP) PROJECT LIST Project Complete Ongoing Long Term Notes Total Project Costs Amount Issued3 "Balance" Funds Required to Complete SE 1/Maple √√√√Completed $ 6,000,000 $ 5,180,000 $ 820,000 $ - DB Wood/Williams √√√√Completed $ 1,650,000 $ 1,370,000 $ 280,000 $ - FM 1460 √√√√Under Construction Spring 2015 $ 16,900,000 $ 7,300,000 $ 9,600,000 $ 4,400,000 SH 29 Bypass Routing Study √√√√Ongoing $ 2,500,000 $ 1,250,000 $ 1,250,000 $ - FM 971 √√√√ Partial - Intersection improvements in 2012 and 2014-2016. $ 13,200,000 $ 500,000 $ 12,700,000 $ 4,000,000 Berry Creek Drive √√√√ $ 3,900,000 $ - $ 3,900,000 $ 3,900,000 Total2: 44,150,000$ 15,600,000$ 28,550,000$ 12,300,000$ Anticipated Issuance Costs: 1,850,000$ Project Complete 15/16 16/17 17/18 18/19 Beyond SE 1/Maple √√√√ DB Wood/Williams √√√√ Notes: 1 Total includes issuance costs. 2 Total does not include issuance costs. 3 Funds remaing after project has been completed have been rolled into the FM 1460 project. 2008 Road Bond Programming FY 15/16 and beyond Remaining: 33,955,000$ 2008 Road Bond Summary January 27, 2015 2008 Road Bonds Authorized1: 46,000,000$ Total Issued: 12,045,000$ New Order OTP Roadway Project Construction Project Costs Issuance Net Cost to Complete Cumulative *C 2 AE Northwest Blvd Bridge - Fontana Dr To Austin Ave 7,093,938$ 11,020,000$ 275,500$ 12,397,500$ 12,397,500$ *C 3 AD Rivery Blvd Extension - Williams Dr To Northwest Blvd 5,500,000$ 5,907,000$ 147,675$ 6,645,375$ 19,042,875$ *C 4 AF IH 35 NB Frontage Road - Williams Dr To Lakeway Bridge 5,410,678$ 6,243,000$ 156,075$ 7,023,375$ 26,066,250$ *C 5 AZ1 Southwest Bypass - Wolf Ranch Pkwy To Leander Rd 16,665,000$ 13,530,000$ 338,250$ 15,221,250$ 41,287,500$ *C 6 BC Wolf Ranch Pkwy - DB Wood Dr To Southwest Bypass 2,650,000$ 3,168,000$ 79,200$ 3,564,000$ 44,851,500$ *C 7 -Intersection/Capital Pool 20,000,000$ 5,000,000$ 125,000$ 5,125,000$ 49,976,500$ *D 8 CS Leander Rd Bridge @ IH 35 8,000,000$ 4,500,000$ 112,500$ 4,612,500$ 54,589,000$ *C 9 -Sidewalk, Safety and ADA Accessibility Pool 10,000,000$ 10,000,000$ 250,000$ 10,250,000$ 64,839,000$ *D 14 AJ NE Inner Loop - Stadium Dr To FM 971 3,660,000$ 1,000,000$ 25,000$ 1,025,000$ 65,864,000$ *D 16 CQ Stadium Dr (CR 151) - Austin Ave To NE Inner Loop 2,860,000$ 1,000,000$ 25,000$ 1,025,000$ 66,889,000$ *C 18 BP Southwestern Blvd - Raintree Dr To SE Inner Loop 2,480,000$ 3,723,000$ 93,075$ $ 4,188,375 $ 71,077,375 *D 21 AT SH 29 (Haven Lane to SH130)12,600,000$ 4,000,000$ 100,000$ 4,100,000$ 75,177,375$ *C 10 BJ2 Leander Rd (RM 2243) - 400ft W of SWBypass to River Ridge Dr 3,100,000$ 4,650,000$ 116,250$ 5,231,250$ 80,408,625$ *C 11 AN DB Wood Dr - SH 29 To Oak Ridge Dr 12,500,000$ 16,320,000$ 408,000$ 18,360,000$ 98,768,625$ *D 19 AZ2 Southwest Bypass- Wolf Ranch Pkwy To SH29 3,130,000$ 500,000$ 12,500$ 512,500$ 99,281,125$ *D Preliminary Engineering to begin developing Projects from original Bond List to shovel ready: AC, AO, BU, BG, HH, 5,575,000$ 143,875$ 5,718,875$ 105,000,000$ 105,000,000$ 12 AC Williams Dr - Rivery Blvd. to Frontage Rd 1,406,300$ 13 AO IH 35 SB Frontage Rd - Williams Dr To Rivery Blvd 3,271,875$ 15 BU SE Inner Loop - Southwestern Blvd To IH 35 13,150,000$ 17 BG SE Inner Loop - SH 29 To Southwestern Blvd 8,690,000$ 20 HH Shell Rd - Williams Dr to Shell Spur Rd 14,930,000$ 22 TT DB Wood Dr - Oak Ridge Dr To Lake Overlook Dr.13,904,400$ Phase 1 2015 Bond Program Project List Based on February 10 City Council Resolution * C - Construction D - Design Committed Additional Project List to Address Priority Areas Additional Project List to Address Committee Priorities DeliveryTimeframe (All) Row Labels Pre- Construction Austin Avenue Bridges 2,075,840.00$ DB Wood Dr - Oak Ridge Dr To Lake Overlook Dr.3,476,100.00$ DB Wood Dr - SH 29 To Oak Ridge Dr 1,875,000.00$ IH 35 NB Frontage Road - Williams Dr To Lakeway Bridge 25,000.00$ IH 35 SB Frontage Rd - Williams Dr To Rivery Blvd 817,969.00$ Intersection/Capital Pool -$ Leander Rd (RM 2243) - 400ft W of SWBypass to River Ridge Dr 620,000.00$ Leander Rd Bridge @ IH 35 1,600,000.00$ NE Inner Loop - Stadium Dr To FM 971 732,000.00$ Northwest Blvd Bridge - Fontana Dr To Austin Ave -$ Rivery Blvd Extension - Williams Dr To Northwest Blvd 500,000.00$ SE Inner Loop - SH 29 To Southwestern Blvd 1,738,000.00$ SE Inner Loop - Southwestern Blvd To IH 35 2,630,000.00$ SH 29 (Haven Lane to SH130)2,520,000.00$ Shell Rd - Williams Dr to Shell Spur Rd 2,239,500.00$ Sidewalk, Safety and ADA Accessibility Pool -$ Southwest Bypass - Wolf Ranch Pkwy To Leander Rd 250,000.00$ Southwest Bypass- Wolf Ranch Pkwy To SH29 500,000.00$ Southwestern Blvd - Raintree Dr To SE Inner Loop 496,000.00$ Stadium Dr (CR 151) - Austin Ave To NE Inner Loop 572,000.00$ Williams Dr - Rivery Blvd. to Frontage Rd 281,260.00$ Wolf Ranch Pkwy - DB Wood Dr To Southwest Bypass 425,000.00$ (blank) Grand Total 23,373,669.00$ Row Labels Pre- Construction Austin Avenue Bridges 2,075,840.00$ DB Wood Dr - Oak Ridge Dr To Lake Overlook Dr.3,476,100.00$ DB Wood Dr - SH 29 To Oak Ridge Dr 1,875,000.00$ IH 35 NB Frontage Road - Williams Dr To Lakeway Bridge 25,000.00$ IH 35 SB Frontage Rd - Williams Dr To Rivery Blvd 817,969.00$ Intersection/Capital Pool -$ Leander Rd (RM 2243) - 400ft W of SWBypass to River Ridge Dr 620,000.00$ Leander Rd Bridge @ IH 35 1,600,000.00$ NE Inner Loop - Stadium Dr To FM 971 732,000.00$ Northwest Blvd Bridge - Fontana Dr To Austin Ave -$ Rivery Blvd Extension - Williams Dr To Northwest Blvd 500,000.00$ SE Inner Loop - SH 29 To Southwestern Blvd 1,738,000.00$ SE Inner Loop - Southwestern Blvd To IH 35 2,630,000.00$ SH 29 (Haven Lane to SH130)2,520,000.00$ Shell Rd - Williams Dr to Shell Spur Rd 2,239,500.00$ Sidewalk, Safety and ADA Accessibility Pool -$ Southwest Bypass - Wolf Ranch Pkwy To Leander Rd 250,000.00$ Southwest Bypass- Wolf Ranch Pkwy To SH29 500,000.00$ Southwestern Blvd - Raintree Dr To SE Inner Loop 496,000.00$ Stadium Dr (CR 151) - Austin Ave To NE Inner Loop 572,000.00$ Williams Dr - Rivery Blvd. to Frontage Rd 281,260.00$ Wolf Ranch Pkwy - DB Wood Dr To Southwest Bypass 425,000.00$ (blank) Grand Total 23,373,669.00$ ROW Utility Relocation Construction Admin Construction Preliminary Cost to Complete 112,000.00$ 423,420.00$ 726,550.00$ 10,379,195.00$ 13,717,005.00$ -$ 25,000.00$ 556,176.00$ 13,904,400.00$ 17,970,000.00$ -$ 1,500,000.00$ 437,500.00$ 12,500,000.00$ 16,320,000.00$ 401,000.00$ -$ 405,801.00$ 5,410,678.00$ 6,243,000.00$ -$ 100,000.00$ 245,391.00$ 3,271,875.00$ 4,436,000.00$ -$ -$ -$ 20,000,000.00$ -$ 672,000.00$ 25,000.00$ 232,500.00$ 3,100,000.00$ 4,650,000.00$ 67,200.00$ -$ 600,000.00$ 8,000,000.00$ 10,270,000.00$ 355,188.24$ 100,000.00$ 73,200.00$ 3,660,000.00$ 4,921,000.00$ 3,172,880.00$ 500,000.00$ 248,288.00$ 7,093,938.00$ 11,020,000.00$ 1,613,920.00$ 1,100,000.00$ 192,500.00$ 5,500,000.00$ 8,907,000.00$ 330,000.00$ 75,000.00$ 173,800.00$ 8,690,000.00$ 11,010,000.00$ 10,041,276.96$ 100,000.00$ 460,250.00$ 13,150,000.00$ 26,390,000.00$ 2,648,745.00$ 100,000.00$ 945,000.00$ 12,600,000.00$ 18,820,000.00$ 904,828.32$ 100,000.00$ 298,600.00$ 14,930,000.00$ 18,480,000.00$ -$ -$ -$ 10,000,000.00$ -$ -$ 25,000.00$ 583,275.00$ 16,665,000.00$ 17,530,000.00$ -$ -$ 100,000.00$ 3,130,000.00$ 3,730,000.00$ 176,337.00$ 496,000.00$ 74,400.00$ 2,480,000.00$ 3,723,000.00$ 469,924.00$ 25,000.00$ 57,200.00$ 2,860,000.00$ 3,985,000.00$ -$ 100,000.00$ 105,473.00$ 1,406,300.00$ 1,894,000.00$ -$ -$ 92,750.00$ 2,650,000.00$ 3,168,000.00$ 20,965,299.52$ 4,794,420.00$ 6,608,654.00$ 181,381,386.00$ 207,184,005.00$ ROW Utility Relocation Construction Admin Construction Preliminary Cost to Complete 112,000.00$ 423,420.00$ 726,550.00$ 10,379,195.00$ 13,717,005.00$ -$ 25,000.00$ 556,176.00$ 13,904,400.00$ 17,970,000.00$ -$ 1,500,000.00$ 437,500.00$ 12,500,000.00$ 16,320,000.00$ 401,000.00$ -$ 405,801.00$ 5,410,678.00$ 6,243,000.00$ -$ 100,000.00$ 245,391.00$ 3,271,875.00$ 4,436,000.00$ -$ -$ -$ 20,000,000.00$ -$ 672,000.00$ 25,000.00$ 232,500.00$ 3,100,000.00$ 4,650,000.00$ 67,200.00$ -$ 600,000.00$ 8,000,000.00$ 10,270,000.00$ 355,188.24$ 100,000.00$ 73,200.00$ 3,660,000.00$ 4,921,000.00$ 3,172,880.00$ 500,000.00$ 248,288.00$ 7,093,938.00$ 11,020,000.00$ 1,613,920.00$ 1,100,000.00$ 192,500.00$ 5,500,000.00$ 8,907,000.00$ 330,000.00$ 75,000.00$ 173,800.00$ 8,690,000.00$ 11,010,000.00$ 10,041,276.96$ 100,000.00$ 460,250.00$ 13,150,000.00$ 26,390,000.00$ 2,648,745.00$ 100,000.00$ 945,000.00$ 12,600,000.00$ 18,820,000.00$ 904,828.32$ 100,000.00$ 298,600.00$ 14,930,000.00$ 18,480,000.00$ -$ -$ -$ 10,000,000.00$ -$ -$ 25,000.00$ 583,275.00$ 16,665,000.00$ 17,530,000.00$ -$ -$ 100,000.00$ 3,130,000.00$ 3,730,000.00$ 176,337.00$ 496,000.00$ 74,400.00$ 2,480,000.00$ 3,723,000.00$ 469,924.00$ 25,000.00$ 57,200.00$ 2,860,000.00$ 3,985,000.00$ -$ 100,000.00$ 105,473.00$ 1,406,300.00$ 1,894,000.00$ -$ -$ 92,750.00$ 2,650,000.00$ 3,168,000.00$ 20,965,299.52$ 4,794,420.00$ 6,608,654.00$ 181,381,386.00$ 207,184,005.00$ Potential Outside Funding Net Cost 4,260,000.00$ 9,457,005.00$ 17,970,000.00$ -$ 16,320,000.00$ -$ 6,243,000.00$ 186,929.00$ 4,249,071.00$ -$ 10,000,000.00$ 4,650,000.00$ 6,270,000.00$ 4,000,000.00$ -$ 4,921,000.00$ -$ 11,020,000.00$ 3,000,000.00$ 5,907,000.00$ 11,010,000.00$ -$ 26,390,000.00$ 14,820,000.00$ 4,000,000.00$ -$ 18,480,000.00$ -$ 10,000,000.00$ 4,000,000.00$ 13,530,000.00$ -$ 3,730,000.00$ -$ 3,723,000.00$ -$ 3,985,000.00$ -$ 1,894,000.00$ -$ 3,168,000.00$ 32,536,929.00$ 194,647,076.00$ Potential Outside Funding Net Cost 4,260,000.00$ 9,457,005.00$ 17,970,000.00$ -$ 16,320,000.00$ -$ 6,243,000.00$ 186,929.00$ 4,249,071.00$ -$ 10,000,000.00$ 4,650,000.00$ 6,270,000.00$ 4,000,000.00$ $- $10,000,000.00 $20,000,000.00 $30,000,000.00 $40,000,000.00 $50,000,000.00 $60,000,000.00 $70,000,000.00 $80,000,000.00 $90,000,000.00 -$ 4,921,000.00$ -$ 11,020,000.00$ 3,000,000.00$ 5,907,000.00$ 11,010,000.00$ -$ 26,390,000.00$ 14,820,000.00$ 4,000,000.00$ -$ 18,480,000.00$ -$ 10,000,000.00$ 4,000,000.00$ 13,530,000.00$ -$ 3,730,000.00$ -$ 3,723,000.00$ -$ 3,985,000.00$ -$ 1,894,000.00$ -$ 3,168,000.00$ 32,536,929.00$ 194,647,076.00$ Net Cost Potential Outside Funding Preliminary Cost to Complete Construction Construction Admin Utility Relocation ROW Pre-Construction New Order OTP GTAB Roadway Project Commitment Functional Classification No. of Lanes Project Length (ft) Project Length (Mi) ROW Needed (ft) ROW Needed (acres) ROW Est. $/sq ft Cost/Acre Delivery Timeframe Construction Pre- Construction Utility Relocation Construction Admin ROW Extension Initial Proposed Bond Cost Preliminary Cost to Complete Potential Outside Funding Net Cost to Complete (Bond Package) Cummulative Total Partner Match 1 CT - Austin Avenue Bridges High Minor Arterial 5 1,771 0.34 TBD TBD 7.00$ 304,920$ Short 10,379,195$ 2,075,840$ 423,420$ 726,550$ 112,000$ 13,717,005$ 13,717,005$ 4,260,000$ 9,457,005$ $ 9,457,005 CAMPO 60% 2 AE 28 Northwest Blvd Bridge - Fontana Dr To Austin Ave High Commitment Major Arterial 5 2,333 0.44 136 7.28 10.00$ 435,600$ Short 7,093,938$ -$ 500,000$ 248,288$ 3,172,880$ 11,015,106$ 11,020,000$ 11,020,000$ -$ 11,020,000$ #VALUE! 3 AD 25 Rivery Blvd Extension - Williams Dr To Northwest Blvd High Commitment Collector 4 2,620 0.50 112 6.74 5.50$ 239,580$ Short 5,500,000$ 500,000$ 1,100,000$ 192,500$ 1,613,920$ 8,906,420$ 8,907,000$ 8,907,000$ 3,000,000$ 5,907,000$ #VALUE! 4 AF 24 IH 35 NB Frontage Road - Williams Dr To Lakeway Bridge High Commitment Frontage 2 10,025 1.90 4 0.92 10.00$ 435,600$ Short 5,410,678$ 25,000$ -$ 405,801$ 401,000$ 6,242,479$ 6,243,000$ 6,243,000$ -$ 6,243,000$ #VALUE! TxDOT 0% 5 AZ1 27 Southwest Bypass - Wolf Ranch Pkwy To Leander Rd Medium Commitment Freeway 6 7,026 1.33 200 32.26 Existing Existing Medium 16,665,000$ 250,000$ 25,000$ 583,275$ Existing 17,523,275$ 17,530,000$ 17,530,000$ 4,000,000$ 13,530,000$ #VALUE! 6 BC 14 Wolf Ranch Pkwy - DB Wood Dr To Southwest Bypass Medium Commitment Minor Arterial 5 5,561 1.05 112 14.30 Existing Existing Medium 2,650,000$ 425,000$ -$ 92,750$ Existing 3,167,750$ 3,168,000$ 3,168,000$ -$ 3,168,000$ #VALUE! TxDOT 0% 7 -39 Intersection/Capital Pool High - NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Short 20,000,000$ NA NA NA NA NA NA NA -$ 10,000,000$ #VALUE! 8 CS CS Leander Rd Bridge @ IH 35 High - NA 560 0.27 20 0.26 6.00$ 261,360$ Short 8,000,000$ 1,600,000$ -$ 600,000$ 67,200$ 10,267,200$ 10,270,000$ 10,270,000$ 6,270,000$ 4,000,000$ #VALUE!TxDOT 40% 9 -Sidewalk, Safety and ADA Accessibility Pool High - NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Short 10,000,000$ NA NA NA NA NA NA NA -$ 10,000,000$ #VALUE! 10 BJ2 Leander Rd (RM 2243) - 400ft W of SWBypass to River Ridge DrMedium Major Arterial 5 2,800 0.53 120 7.71 2.00$ 87,120.00$ Medium 3,100,000$ 620,000$ 25,000$ 232,500$ 672,000$ 4,649,500$ 4,650,000$ 4,650,000$ 4,650,000$ #VALUE! TxDOT 0% 11 AN 16 DB Wood Dr - SH 29 To Oak Ridge Dr Medium Minor Arterial 5 7,699 1.46 0 0.00 Existing Existing Medium 12,500,000$ 1,875,000$ 1,500,000$ 437,500$ Existing 16,312,500$ 16,320,000$ 16,320,000$ -$ 16,320,000$ #VALUE! 12 AC 15 Williams Dr - Rivery Blvd. to Frontage Rd Medium Major Arterial 5 2,009 0.38 0 0.00 9.00$ 392,040$ Medium 1,406,300$ 281,260$ 100,000$ 105,473$ Existing 1,893,033$ 1,894,000$ 1,894,000$ -$ 1,894,000$ #VALUE! 13 AO 22 IH 35 SB Frontage Rd - Williams Dr To Rivery Blvd Long Term Frontage 2 2,862 0.54 0 0.00 10.00$ 435,600$ Long 3,271,875$ 817,969$ 100,000$ 245,391$ Existing 4,435,235$ 4,436,000$ 4,436,000$ 186,929$ 4,249,071$ #VALUE! 14 AJ 10 NE Inner Loop - Stadium Dr To FM 971 High Major Arterial 5 3,302 0.63 varies 2.72 3.00$ 130,680$ Short 3,660,000$ 732,000$ 100,000$ 73,200$ 355,188$ 4,920,388$ 4,921,000$ 4,921,000$ -$ 4,921,000$ #VALUE! 15 BU 21 SE Inner Loop - Southwestern Blvd To IH 35 Medium Freeway 6 13,052 2.47 0 57.63 4.00$ 174,240$ Medium 13,150,000$ 2,630,000$ 100,000$ 460,250$ 10,041,277$ 26,381,527$ 26,390,000$ 26,390,000$ -$ 26,390,000$ #VALUE! 16 CQ 11 Stadium Dr (CR 151) - Austin Ave To NE Inner Loop Medium Minor Arterial 5 2,582 0.49 52 3.08 3.50$ 152,460$ Medium 2,860,000$ 572,000$ 25,000$ 57,200$ 469,924$ 3,984,124$ 3,985,000$ 3,985,000$ -$ 3,985,000$ #VALUE! 17 BG 20 SE Inner Loop - SH 29 To Southwestern Blvd High Bond Minor Arterial 5 7,839 1.48 55 1.89 4 174240 Short 8,690,000$ 1,738,000$ 75,000$ 173,800$ 330,000$ 11,006,800$ 11,010,000$ 11,010,000$ 11,010,000$ #VALUE! 18 BP 13 Southwestern Blvd - Raintree Dr To SE Inner Loop Medium Collector 4 2,799 0.53 18 1.16 3.50$ 152,460$ Medium 2,480,000$ 496,000$ 496,000$ 74,400$ 176,337$ 3,722,737$ 3,723,000$ 3,723,000$ -$ 3,723,000$ #VALUE! 19 AZ2 - Southwest Bypass- Wolf Ranch Pkwy To SH29 Freeway 6 2,825 0.54 200 12.97 Existing Existing Medium 3,130,000$ 500,000$ -$ 100,000$ Existing 3,730,000$ 3,730,000$ 3,730,000$ -$ 3,730,000$ #VALUE! 20 HH 23 Shell Rd - Williams Dr to Shell Spur Rd Long Term Major Arterial 5 12,936 2.45 varies 3.46 6 261360 Long 14,930,000$ 2,239,500$ 100,000$ 298,600$ 904,828$ 18,472,928$ 18,480,000$ 18,480,000$ -$ 18,480,000$ #VALUE! 21 AT 41 SH 29 (Haven Lane to SH130)Medium Major Arterial 5 10,702 2.03 45 11.06 5.50$ 239,580$ Medium 12,600,000$ 2,520,000$ 100,000$ 945,000$ 2,648,745$ 18,813,745$ 18,820,000$ 18,820,000$ 14,820,000$ 4,000,000$ #VALUE!TxDOT 20% 22 TT 17 DB Wood Dr - Oak Ridge Dr To Lake Overlook Dr. Long Term Major Arterial 5 9,300 1.76 0 0.00 4 174240 Long 13,904,400$ 3,476,100$ 25,000$ 556,176$ Existing 17,961,676$ 17,970,000$ 17,970,000$ 17,970,000$ #VALUE! -$ 181,381,386$ 194,647,076$ 1 BZ 32 Rabbit Hill Rd - Blue Springs Blvd To Westinghouse Rd Long Term Collector 5 7,831 1.48 32 5.75 5.50$ 239,580$ Long 8,680,000$ 1,736,000$ 100,000$ 260,400$ 1,378,256$ 12,154,656$ 12,160,000$ 12,160,000$ 12,160,000$ 12,160,000$ 2 QQ 19 Airport Rd - Lakeway Dr To Berry Creek Dr Medium Minor Arterial 5 11,691 2.21 57 15.30 5.00$ 217,800$ Medium 12,950,000$ 2,590,000$ 100,000$ 388,500$ 3,331,935$ 19,360,435$ 19,370,000$ 19,370,000$ -$ 19,370,000$ 31,530,000$ 3 BJ1 30 Leander Rd (RM 2243) - Gary Park To 400' West of SW BypassMedium Major Arterial 5 24,881 4.71 120 68.54 2.00$ 87,120$ Medium 27,570,000$ 5,514,000$ 25,000$ 2,067,750$ 5,971,440$ 41,148,190$ 41,150,000$ 41,150,000$ 41,150,000$ 72,680,000$ TxDOT 4 AF2 24b IH 35 NB Frontage Road - Lakeway Bridge To SH 130 Long Term Frontage 2 4,661 0.88 7 0.75 8.00$ 348,480$ Long 2,070,000$ 414,000$ 25,000$ 155,250$ 261,016$ 2,925,266$ 2,926,000$ 2,926,000$ 2,926,000$ 75,606,000$ TxDOT 5 BV 35 Southwestern Blvd - Sam Houston Ave To Westinghouse RdLong Term Major Arterial 5 6,456 1.22 67 9.93 2.50$ 108,900$ Long 7,150,000$ 1,430,000$ 100,000$ 143,000$ 1,081,380$ 9,904,380$ 9,905,000$ 9,905,000$ -$ 9,905,000$ 85,511,000$ 6 CP 33 Rockride Ln - SE Inner Loop To Southwestern Blvd Medium Collector 4 8,350 1.58 24 5.04 2.50$ 108,900$ Medium 7,400,000$ 1,480,000$ 25,000$ 222,000$ 548,875$ 9,675,875$ 9,676,000$ 9,676,000$ 9,676,000$ 95,187,000$ 7 XX 18 Airport Rd - IH 35 To Lakeway Dr Long Term Minor Arterial 5 3,073 0.58 57 4.02 5.00$ 217,800$ Long 3,400,000$ 680,000$ 700,000$ 102,000$ 875,805$ 5,757,805$ 5,758,000$ 5,758,000$ 5,758,000$ 100,945,000$ 8 JJ 23b Shell Rd - Shell Spur To SH 195 Long Term Major Arterial 5 8,448 1.60 54 10.47 5 217800 Long 13,528,000$ 2,705,600$ -$ 473,480$ 2,280,960$ 18,988,040$ 18,990,000$ 18,990,000$ 18,990,000$ 119,935,000$ 9 CR 12 CR 152 - Stadium Dr (CR 151) To City Limits Long Term Collector 4 4,050 0.77 15 1.39 5.00$ 217,800$ Long 5,000,000$ 1,000,000$ 25,000$ 150,000$ 303,750$ 6,478,750$ 6,479,000$ 6,479,000$ 6,479,000$ 126,414,000$ 10 CN 34 Southwestern Blvd - Westinghouse Rd To ETJ Long Term Major Arterial 5 2,885 0.55 0 0.00 2.50$ 108,900$ Long 3,200,000$ 640,000$ 200,000$ 96,000$ Existing 4,136,000$ 4,136,000$ 4,136,000$ 4,136,000$ 4,136,000$ 130,550,000$ 82,268,000$ 325,197,076$ 1 CK 31 Mays - Teravista Pkwy To Westinghouse Rd High Minor Arterial 5 8,829 1.67 40 8.11 10.00$ 435,600$ Short 9,020,000$ 1,804,000$ 25,000$ 270,600$ 3,531,600$ 14,651,200$ 14,660,000$ 14,660,000$ 14,660,000$ 145,210,000$ TIRZ 2 CJ 38 Westinghouse Rd - IH 35 To FM 1460 Long Term Major Arterial 6 11,314 2.14 0 0.00 8.00$ 348,480$ Long 15,040,000$ 3,008,000$ 50,000$ 451,200$ Existing 18,549,200$ 18,550,000$ 18,550,000$ 18,550,000$ 163,760,000$ TIRZ 3 CL 36 Westinghouse Rd - FM 1460 To Southwestern Blvd Medium Bond Major Arterial 5 9,649 1.83 67 14.84 2.50$ 108,900$ Medium 10,690,000$ 2,138,000$ 1,069,000$ 320,700$ 1,616,208$ 15,833,908$ 15,840,000$ 15,840,000$ 15,840,000$ 179,600,000$ WilCo 4 BK 26 Southwest Bypass - Leander Rd To I 35 Medium Bond Freeway 2 9,335 1.77 0 0 0 Medium 16,200,000$ -$ 25,000$ 50,000$ Existing 16,275,000$ 16,280,000$ 16,280,000$ 16,200,000$ 80,000$ 179,680,000$ WilCo 5 CM 37 Westinghouse Rd - Southwestern Blvd To SH 130 Long Term Bond Major Arterial 5 12,113 2.29 136 37.82 2.50$ 108,900$ Long 13,420,000$ 2,684,000$ 50,000$ 402,600$ 4,118,420$ 20,675,020$ 20,680,000$ 20,680,000$ 20,680,000$ 200,360,000$ WilCo $64,370,000 $395,007,076 New Order OTP Roadway Project Commitment Functional Classification No. of Lanes Project Length (ft) Project Length (Mi) ROW Needed (ft) ROW Needed (acres) ROW Est. $/sq ft Cost/Acre Delivery Timeframe Construction Pre- Construction Utility Relocation Construction Admin ROW Extension Initial Proposed Bond Cost Preliminary Cost to Complete Potential Outside Funding Project Costs Contigency Issuance Net Cost to Complete Cumulative Partner Match 1 CT Austin Avenue Bridges High Minor Arterial 5 1,771 0.34 TBD TBD 7.00$ 304,920$ Short 10,379,195$ 2,075,840$ 423,420$ 726,550$ 112,000$ 13,717,005$ 13,717,005$ 1,000,000$ 12,717,005$ 1,271,701$ 317,925$ $ 14,306,631 $ 14,306,631 CAMPO 60% 2 AE Northwest Blvd Bridge - Fontana Dr To Austin Ave High Commitment Major Arterial 5 2,333 0.44 136 7.28 10.00$ 435,600$ Short 7,093,938$ -$ 500,000$ 248,288$ 3,172,880$ 11,015,106$ 11,020,000$ 11,020,000$ -$ 11,020,000$ 1,102,000$ 275,500$ $ 12,397,500 $ 26,704,131 3 AD Rivery Blvd Extension - Williams Dr To Northwest Blvd High Commitment Collector 4 2,620 0.50 112 6.74 5.50$ 239,580$ Short 5,500,000$ 500,000$ 1,100,000$ 192,500$ 1,613,920$ 8,906,420$ 8,907,000$ 8,907,000$ 3,000,000$ 5,907,000$ 590,700$ 147,675$ $ 6,645,375 $ 33,349,506 4 AF IH 35 NB Frontage Road - Williams Dr To Lakeway Bridge High Commitment Frontage 2 10,025 1.90 4 0.92 10.00$ 435,600$ Short 5,410,678$ 25,000$ -$ 405,801$ 401,000$ 6,242,479$ 6,243,000$ 6,243,000$ -$ 6,243,000$ 624,300$ 156,075$ $ 7,023,375 $ 40,372,881 TxDOT 0% 5 AZ1 Southwest Bypass - Wolf Ranch Pkwy To Leander Rd Medium Commitment Freeway 6 7,026 1.33 200 32.26 Existing Existing Medium 16,665,000$ 250,000$ 25,000$ 583,275$ -$ 17,523,275$ 17,530,000$ 17,530,000$ 4,000,000$ 13,530,000$ 1,353,000$ 338,250$ $ 15,221,250 $ 55,594,131 TxDOT -$ 6 BC Wolf Ranch Pkwy - DB Wood Dr To Southwest Bypass Medium Commitment Minor Arterial 5 5,561 1.05 112 14.30 Existing Existing Medium 2,650,000$ 425,000$ -$ 92,750$ -$ 3,167,750$ 3,168,000$ 3,168,000$ -$ 3,168,000$ 316,800$ 79,200$ $ 3,564,000 $ 59,158,131 7 -Intersection/Capital Pool High - NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Short 20,000,000$ NA NA NA -$ NA NA NA -$ 10,000,000$ -$ 250,000$ $ 10,250,000 $ 69,408,131 8 CS Leander Rd Bridge @ IH 35 High - NA 560 0.27 20 0.26 6.00$ 261,360$ Short 8,000,000$ 1,600,000$ -$ 600,000$ 67,200$ 10,267,200$ 10,270,000$ 10,270,000$ 6,270,000$ 4,000,000$ 400,000$ 100,000$ $ 4,500,000 $ 73,908,131 TxDOT 0% 9 -Sidewalk, Safety and ADA Accessibility Pool High - NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Medium 10,000,000$ NA NA NA -$ NA NA NA -$ 10,000,000$ -$ 250,000$ $ 10,250,000 $ 84,158,131 10 BJ2 Leander Rd (RM 2243) - 400ft W of SWBypass to River Ridge DrMedium Major Arterial 5 2,800 0.53 120 7.71 2.00$ 87,120.00$ Medium 3,100,000$ 620,000$ 25,000$ 232,500$ 672,000$ 4,649,500$ 4,650,000$ 4,650,000$ 4,650,000$ 465,000$ 116,250$ $ 5,231,250 $ 89,389,381 11 AN DB Wood Dr - SH 29 To Oak Ridge Dr Medium Minor Arterial 5 7,699 1.46 0 0.00 Existing Existing Medium 12,500,000$ 1,875,000$ 1,500,000$ 437,500$ -$ 16,312,500$ 16,320,000$ 16,320,000$ -$ 16,320,000$ 1,632,000$ 408,000$ $ 18,360,000 $ 107,749,381 12 AC Williams Dr - Rivery Blvd. to Frontage Rd Medium Major Arterial 5 2,009 0.38 0 0.00 9.00$ 392,040$ Medium 1,406,300$ 281,260$ 100,000$ 105,473$ -$ 1,893,033$ 1,894,000$ 1,894,000$ -$ 1,894,000$ 189,400$ 47,350$ $ 2,130,750 $ 109,880,131 13 AO IH 35 SB Frontage Rd - Williams Dr To Rivery Blvd Long Term Frontage 2 2,862 0.54 0 0.00 10.00$ 435,600$ Long 3,271,875$ 817,969$ 100,000$ 245,391$ -$ 4,435,235$ 4,436,000$ 4,436,000$ 186,929$ 4,249,071$ 424,907$ 106,227$ $ 4,780,205 $ 114,660,336 14 AJ NE Inner Loop - Stadium Dr To FM 971 High Major Arterial 5 3,302 0.63 varies 2.72 3.00$ 130,680$ Short 3,660,000$ 732,000$ 100,000$ 73,200$ 355,188$ 4,920,388$ 4,921,000$ 4,921,000$ -$ 4,921,000$ 492,100$ 123,025$ $ 5,536,125 $ 120,196,461 TxDOT 0$ 15 BU SE Inner Loop - Southwestern Blvd To IH 35 Medium Freeway 6 13,052 2.47 0 57.63 4.00$ 174,240$ Medium 13,150,000$ 2,630,000$ 100,000$ 460,250$ 10,041,277$ 26,381,527$ 26,390,000$ 26,390,000$ -$ 26,390,000$ 2,639,000$ 659,750$ $ 29,688,750 $ 149,885,211 16 CQ Stadium Dr (CR 151) - Austin Ave To NE Inner Loop Medium Minor Arterial 5 2,582 0.49 52 3.08 3.50$ 152,460$ Medium 2,860,000$ 572,000$ 25,000$ 57,200$ 469,924$ 3,984,124$ 3,985,000$ 3,985,000$ -$ 3,985,000$ 398,500$ 99,625$ $ 4,483,125 $ 154,368,336 17 BG SE Inner Loop - SH 29 To Southwestern Blvd High Bond Minor Arterial 5 7,839 1.48 55 1.89 4 174240 Short 8,690,000$ 1,738,000$ 75,000$ 173,800$ 330,000$ 11,006,800$ 11,010,000$ 11,010,000$ 11,010,000$ 1,101,000$ 275,250$ $ 12,386,250 $ 166,754,586 18 BP Southwestern Blvd - Raintree Dr To SE Inner Loop Medium Collector 4 2,799 0.53 18 1.16 3.50$ 152,460$ Medium 2,480,000$ 496,000$ 496,000$ 74,400$ 176,337$ 3,722,737$ 3,723,000$ 3,723,000$ -$ 3,723,000$ 372,300$ 93,075$ $ 4,188,375 $ 170,942,961 19 AZ2 Southwest Bypass- Wolf Ranch Pkwy To SH29 Freeway 6 2,825 0.54 200 12.97 Existing Existing Medium 3,130,000$ 500,000$ -$ 100,000$ -$ 3,730,000$ 3,730,000$ 3,730,000$ -$ 3,730,000$ 373,000$ 93,250$ $ 4,196,250 $ 175,139,211 20 HH Shell Rd - Williams Dr to Shell Spur Rd Long Term Major Arterial 5 12,936 2.45 varies 3.46 6 261360 Long 14,930,000$ 2,239,500$ 100,000$ 298,600$ 904,828$ 18,472,928$ 18,480,000$ 18,480,000$ -$ 18,480,000$ 1,848,000$ 462,000$ $ 20,790,000 $ 195,929,211 TxDOT 0$ 21 AT SH 29 (Haven Lane to SH130)Medium Major Arterial 5 10,702 2.03 45 11.06 5.50$ 239,580$ Medium 12,600,000$ 2,520,000$ 100,000$ 945,000$ 2,648,745$ 18,813,745$ 18,820,000$ 18,820,000$ 14,820,000$ 4,000,000$ 400,000$ 100,000$ $ 4,500,000 $ 200,429,211 22 TT DB Wood Dr - Oak Ridge Dr To Lake Overlook Dr. Long Term Major Arterial 5 9,300 1.76 0 0.00 4 174240 Long 13,904,400$ 3,476,100$ 25,000$ 556,176$ -$ 17,961,676$ 17,970,000$ 17,970,000$ 17,970,000$ 1,797,000$ 449,250$ $ 20,216,250 $ 220,645,461 181,381,386$ 197,907,076$ Southwest Bypass- Wolf Rancj Rivery Blvd Construction Time Calc Modified Const Time Preconstruction Time CalcModified Precon Time ROW ROW time after PreCon Northwest Blvd Bridge Assume $400,000/month Assume $50,000/month Begins 1/2 thru design Austin Avenue Bridges 26 18 42 18 6 0 Northwest Blvd Bridge - Fontana Dr To Austin Ave 18 18 0 18 18 9 Rivery Blvd Extension - Williams Dr To Northwest Blvd 14 12 10 10 18 13 IH 35 NB Frontage Road - Williams Dr To Lakeway Bridge 14 12 1 18 6 0 Southwest Bypass - Wolf Ranch Pkwy To Leander Rd 42 5 0 0 Wolf Ranch Pkwy - DB Wood Dr To Southwest Bypass 7 20 9 18 0 0 Intersection/Capital Pool 50 12 #VALUE!12 0 0 Leander Rd Bridge @ IH 35 20 22 32 12 6 0 Sidewalk, Safety and ADA Accessibility Pool 25 #VALUE!0 0 Leander Rd (RM 2243) - 400ft W of SWBypass to River Ridge Dr 8 24 12 6 12 9 DB Wood Dr - SH 29 To Oak Ridge Dr 31 9 38 6 0 0 Williams Dr - Rivery Blvd. to Frontage Rd 4 8 6 9 0 0 IH 35 SB Frontage Rd - Williams Dr To Rivery Blvd 8 30 16 16 0 0 NE Inner Loop - Stadium Dr To FM 971 9 6 15 6 6 3