HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda_GTAB_04.11.2014Notice of Meeting for the
Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board and the Governing Body
of the City of Georgetown
April 11, 2014 at 10:00 AM
at GMC, 300-1 Industrial Ave, Georgetown, TX 78628
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 Citizens wishing to address the Board. The below citizens wish to address the Board on items not on the
agenda:
John Milford
Maria Guevara
Paul White
Patsy Campbell
Hugh Norris, Jr.
Tom Garrett
D Industry/CAMPO/TXDOT Updates
E 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.
F Discussion regarding the Airport Project Progress Report and time lines. – Curtis Benkendorfer, Acting
Airport Manager and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director
Legislative Regular Agenda
G Review and possible action to approve the minutes from the Regular GTAB Board meeting held on
March 14, 2014. - Jana Kern – GTAB Board Liaison
H Consideration and possible recommendation to City Council for approval of Task Order HDR 14-002, to
HDR Inc. of Austin, Texas, for the completion of the 2014 Sidewalk Master Plan and Public Facility
Access Audit in the amount of $188, 175.00– Nat Waggoner, PMP®, Transportation Analyst, Edward G.
Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director and Wesley Wright, P.E, Systems Engineering Director.
I Consideration and possible recommendation to award a Construction Contract to M & C Fonseca
Construction Co., Inc., of Granite Shoals, Texas, for the construction of the North Austin Avenue
Sidewalk Improvements Project (Rec Center to Georgetown High School) in the amount of $404,676.50;
the award is contingent upon written concurrence of the bids and contractor by the Texas Department of
Transportation. – Bill Dryden, P.E., Transportation Engineer and Edward G. Polasek, AICP,
Transportation Services Director.
J Consideration and possible recommendation to award a bid to American Road Maintenance of Itasca, IL
in the amount of $499,112.25 for pavement maintenance (rejuvenator) -- Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems
Engineering Director and Mark Miller, Transportation Services Manager
K Consideration and possible recommendation to award a bid to Cholla Pavement Maintenance of Apache
Junction, AZ in the amount of $779,212.33 for pavement maintenance (chip seal) -- Wesley Wright, P.E.,
Systems Engineering Director and Mark Miller, Transportation Services Manager
L Consideration and possible recommendation to award a bid to Culter Repaving of Lawrence, KS in the
amount of $523,792.75 for pavement maintenance (hot in-place recycling) -- Wesley Wright, P.E.,
Systems Engineering Director and Mark Miller, Transportation Services Manager
M Consideration and possible recommendation to City Council concerning creation of a Bond Committee to
finalize a potential Road Bond Package - Edward G. Polasek, AICP Transportation Services Director and
Micki Rundell, CFO.
N Discussion and presentation of the draft 2014-2015 Capital Improvement Plan -- Wesley Wright, P.E.,
Systems Engineering Director
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 __________________, 2014, 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
SUBJECT:
Call to Order
The Board may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene in Executive Session at the request of
the Chair, a Board Member, the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, General Manager of Utilities,
City Council Member, or legal counsel for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas
Government Code Chapter 551, and are subject to action in the Regular Session that follows.
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
n/a
SUBMITTED BY:
Jana Kern
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Introduction of Visitors
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
n/a
SUBMITTED BY:
Jana Kern
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Citizens wishing to address the Board. The below citizens wish to address the Board on items not on the
agenda:
John Milford
Maria Guevara
Paul White
Patsy Campbell
Hugh Norris, Jr.
Tom Garrett
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
n/a
SUBMITTED BY:
Jana Kern
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Industry/CAMPO/TXDOT Updates
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
n/a
SUBMITTED BY:
Jana Kern
City of Georgetown, Texas
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
N Austin Avenue Sidewalk Improvements
Safe Routes to School - Churchill Farms to Mitchell Elem
Shell Road at Westbury-Bellaire - Signal Improvements
Southeast Inner Loop Corridor Study
Southwest Bypass Project (TIP #14C)
Transit Study as Requested by City Council
Transportation Services Operations – CIP Maintenance
Transportation Services Operations – Sidewalk Master Plan
GTEC Projects:
Project Update and Status Report
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None
SUBMITTED BY:
Bill Dryden, P.E, Transportation Engineer
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
GTAB Projects Updates Exhibit
GTEC Project Summary Exhibit
Austin Avenue – Bridge Evaluations
(North and South San Gabriel Rivers)
Project No. TBD TIP Project No. N/A
April 2014
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
North San Gabriel River Bridge South San Gabriel River Bridge
Element Status / Issues
Design Phase I – determine what testing is needed to properly evaluate the detailed current
status of the two bridges (currently underway).
Surveying N/A (TBD)
Environmental/
Archeological
TBD during Phase II
Rights of Way Existing
Utility
Relocations
TBD (future)
Construction TBD
Other Issues None at this time
FM 971 at Austin Avenue
Realignment Intersection Improvements
Project No. 1BZ TIP No. QQ1
April 2014
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 go IH 35
to Austin Avenue, to Georgetown High School and a more direct route to SH 130.
Project Managers Bill Dryden, P.E.
Engineer Klotz Associates, Inc.
Element Status / Issues
Design Engineer is progressing to the 60% Plan review phase has been authorized to
proceed with the development of construction PS&E.
Engineer is developing PS&E for relocation of Parks facilities out of newly acquired
ROW.
Environmental/
Archeological
TBD
Rights of Way Paperwork for the land swap has been completed. We will be developing a ROW
exchange with TxDOT for the realigned roadway.
Utility Relocations TBD
Construction City and TxDOT need to develop an AFA for construction of the project by TxDOT;
schedule TBD.
Other Issues None at this time.
FM 1460
Quail Valley Drive to University Drive
Project No. 5RB TIP No. EEa, EEb & EEc
April 2014
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 The 90% Submittal Review with TxDOT was held in February; Engineer is
making final revisions for a May submittal of the 100% PS&E.
Environmental/
Archeological
Environmental approved with Project Schematic.
Rights of Way All appraisals are complete. Final offers have been made
for all ROW parcels.
The paperwork has been filed for all parcels requiring
condemnation.
Acquired: 22
Pending: 3
Condemnation: 11
Total: 36
Utility Relocations Ongoing as ROW is being acquired.
Construction Project has been (re‐)scheduled by TxDOT for an August 2014 Letting, with an
anticipated construction start for late fall.
Other Issues None Pending
N Austin Avenue Sidewalk Improvements
Rec Center to Georgetown High School
Project No. 1CV TIP No. None
April 2014
Project Description Design and preparation of final plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for the sidewalk
improvements along N. Austin Avenue between the Georgetown Recreational Center and
Georgetown High School.
Purpose To provide a safe pedestrian route along North Austin avenue.
Project Managers Bill Dryden, P.E.
Engineer URS Corporation
Element Status / Issues
Design Complete
Environmental/
Archeological
Complete
Rights of Way None
Utility Relocations None
Construction Bid opened March 24th; M&C Fonseca was the apparent low bidder; Item on
today’s agenda for recommendation of award.
Other Issues None pending.
Safe Routes to School
Churchill Farms to Mitchell Elementary
Project No. 1CK TIP No. None
April 2014
Project Description Design and preparation of Plans, Specifications and Estimate for the construction of
sidewalk and related safety improvements along Southeast Inner Loop between Belmont
Drive and Mitchell Elementary School, to include grant and construction administration.
Purpose To provide a Safe Route to School between the Churchill Farms Subdivision and Mitchell
Elementary
Project Manager Bill Dryden, P.E.
Engineer Huitt‐Zollars, Inc.
Element Status / Issues
Design Complete
Surveying Complete
Environmental/
Archeological
None
Rights of Way Existing
Utility Relocations None
Construction Project substantially complete
Other Issues None pending.
Shell Road Signal Improvements
Shell Road at Westbury Lane/Bellaire Drive
Project No. N/A TIP No. None
April 2014
Project Description Design and preparation of Plans, Specifications and Estimate for the construction
of signal improvements for the ultimate intersection of Shell Road at Westbury
Lane/Bellaire Drive and to determine future additional rights‐of‐way needs north
of the intersection.
Purpose To better manage traffic movements through and within the intersection.
Project Manager Bill Dryden, P.E.
Engineer Brown and Gay Engineers, Inc.
Element Status / Issues
Design Complete
Surveying TBD
Environmental/
Archeological
TBD
Rights of Way None to be acquired
Utility Relocations None required at this time
Construction Currently being advertised;
Award in May;
NTP in May;
Substantial completion/signal operational by 2nd week of August
Other Issues City ordering longer delivery hardware items in April.
Southeast Inner Loop Corridor Study
(IH 35 to Rockride Lane)
Project No. None Project No. None
April 2014
Project Description Develop a preliminary design schematic, perform preliminary engineering and report
preparation for the Southeast Inner Loop Schematic Design from IH 35 to Rockridge Lane
(CR 110) and Sam Houston Avenue.
Purpose To determine ultimate alignment, interim and ultimate engineer’s estimates of probable
project costs and ROW needs for the future SH 29 Bypass, connecting the westerly route (SH
29 to IH 35) with Southeast Inner Loop and Sam Houston Avenue.
Project Manager Bill Dryden, P.E.
Engineer Kasberg Patrick and Associates
Element Status / Issues
Design Draft Final Report was presented to GTAB in March.
Public meeting is being scheduled.
Draft Final Report will be completed in accordance with all applicable comments
and returned to GTAB before being forwarded to Council with Board
recommendations for acceptance of alignment.
Surveying TBD (future)
Environmental/
Archeological
TBD (future)
Rights of Way To be conceptually established during the preliminary schematic phase and further
refined through the design phase.
Utility Relocations TBD (future)
Construction TBD (future)
Other Issues None at this time.
Southwest Bypass Project
(RM 2243 to IH 35)
Project No. 1CA Project No. 14c
April 2014
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 Bill Dryden, P.E.
Engineer HDR Engineering, 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 at this time
Transit Study
as Requested by City Council
Project No. None Project No. None
April 2014
Unchanged
Project
Description
Council Motion: Discussion and possible direction to the City of Georgetownʹs Transportation
Advisory Board (GTAB) to conduct an analysis and make a recommendation to the City Council
no later than June 24, 2014 ,regarding the Cityʹs potential future participation in State and
Regional Transportation Organizations including the benefits, conditions, and justification which
would prompt the Cityʹs 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
April 2014
Project Description 2012/13‐2014 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
Task Status / Issues
2nd and 6th Street
Engineering
(Halff) 2nd at Austin Avenue intersection improvement along with 6th Street
(Austin Ave. to Rock) engineering is complete (Gas is scheduling to complete
work ahead of construction) and is currently being advertised for bid.
Construction of all of 2nd to Holly will move to 2015 during VFW renovation
9th Street (Main to
Rock)
(KPA) KPA is finalizing plans and preparing to advertise.
We are looking for construction to begin after the Poppy Festival.
Chip Seal The “quick set” product produced by Western Emulsions was applied onto
Sun City Blvd, Summer Crest and Pecan Branch Subdivisions on March 11th,
12th, 13th…
Staff pleased with results. product has been specified on Arterial chip seals for
2014.
Item for 2014 award…
Fog Seal Survey of unfinished sections complete: (Majority of scheduled work
completed) Unfinished streets will be performed in Spring 2014. New product
scheduled for 2014.
Item for 2014 award…
Cutler/overlay Cutler on Williams Drive, Rock Street, 16th Street complete. Additional Streets
completed as a result of chip seal failures (Austin Avenue and Del Webb
Blvd.) extended the schedule in cold weather and the holiday season.
Contractor has indicated their intention is not to return until June 2014 to
complete 2013 work.
Item for 2014 award…
Pavement
Evaluation
KPA for Engineering services related to pavement evaluation/scoring and
update of 5 year CIP reflecting changes and updates.
Pavement data collection currently underway by Fugro.
2013‐14 CIP
Maintenance
Projects
Items for award Chip seal, Fog seal, Cutler (HIPR)
Transportation Services Operations
Sidewalk Master Plan
April 2014
Project Description Inventory existing assets; analyze existing and future requirements including
ADA compliance; develop a multi‐year implementation plan.
Purpose To enable comprehensive planning of sidewalk maintenance and
improvements across multiple city agencies and related stakeholders to meet
the needs of city residents and businesses. Final document, though a stand‐
alone product, will be referenced in the OTP.
Project Managers Bill Dryden and Nat Waggoner
Engineer/Engineers HDR Architects
Task Status / Issues
Initiation Scope of Services negotiations completed.
Planning Task Order DRAFT completed and ready for approval by GTAB. Approved
Task Order will be presented for approval to City Council April 22nd.
Execution May – December 2014
Monitoring Multiple public and government meetings are defined Tasks throughout the
project.
Close/Adoption 1st Quarter 2015
Other Issues
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 has completed fencing plans,
inclusive of potential environmental mitigation
issues.
Engineer has completed the project PS&E, less
actual permitting required at time of
construction.
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 has begun; negotiations
on-going for the Weir and Guy properties.
Wolf property – Acquisition complete.
On Schedule
Unchanged
7,756,432 3,219,965 4,536,467 4,539,107 620 4,538,488
Northwest Blvd Overpass #QQ 5QX Engineer has presented the Preliminary Engineering
Report and has begun final PS&E design efforts.
In-process 1,136,178 1,099,076 37,102 571,178 479,588 91,590
NB Frontage Road (2338 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 Final PS&E due to TxDOT March 27th.
Utility coordination on-going as ROW is acquired.
All appraisals are complete. Final offers have been
made for all ROW parcels. We have reached
agreement with the property on several others and
are awaiting completion of the paperwork.
22 of 36 Parcels have been acquired.
On Schedule 11,788,230 5,342,702 6,445,528 6,727,539 2,310,128 4,417,411
Rivery Road 5RF Alignment adopted by Council.
Complete 779,000 29,000 750,000 750,000 0 750,000
Snead Drive 5QZ Engineer working on Construction Plans and
documents.
On Schedule 825,100 87,000 738,100 825,100 87,000 738,100
IH 35/ Hwy 29 Intersection 5RJ 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
15,866,596 3,260,158 12,606,438
Project to Date Current Year Budget (13/14)
GTEC PROJECT UPDATE AND STATUS REPORT
March 2014
Project to Date Current Year Budget (13/14)
L:\Global\CIP Agenda Form\GTEC Status Report\2014\GTEC - Project Status - 2014-04.xlsx Page 1 of 1 04/03/2014
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Discussion regarding the Airport Project Progress Report and time lines. – Curtis Benkendorfer, Acting
Airport Manager and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director
ITEM SUMMARY:
Airport Projects:
Air Field Electrical Improvements
Airport Monthly Financial
Annual Tower Security Inspection
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
n/a
SUBMITTED BY:
Jana Kern for Curtis B.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Air Field Electrical Improvements Backup Material
Tower Backup Material
Airfield Electrical Improvements
Project No. 1314GRGTN
April 2014
Project Description FY2014 project: Runways / taxiways lighting and signage.
Purpose Improved safety and reliability of airport lighting.
Project Manager Curtis Benkendorfer, Acting Airport Manager
Engineer Garver Engineering
Notes: The FY2014 project design package is in the hands of TxDOT. We are waiting their
notification to proceed with bidding services.
The FY2015 project, GARVER is wrapping up the 50% submittal this week and both TxDOT
and AIRPORT STAFF should expect a copy of the 50% plans, specifications, and construction
cost estimate mid next week.
FY2014 and FY2015 projects up to date, on schedule and moving forward.
Georgetown Municipal Airport Contract Tower Program Update
April 2014
Project Description Georgetown Tower Annual Security Committee Meeting
Purpose Annual Security Meeting
Project Manager Curtis Benkendorfer, Acting Airport Manager
Engineer
Notes
Annual Building Security Committee meeting on March 28, 2014.
Key Inventory was conducted. Verified.
Cipher locks changed.
No impact on security from upcoming projects.
Current SECON level reviewed.
Next Security meeting in September 2014
Item ____ Page _____
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Review and possible action to approve the minutes from the Regular GTAB Board meeting held on
March 14, 2014. - Jana Kern – GTAB Board Liaison
ITEM SUMMARY:
Board to review and revise and/or approve the minutes from the regular meeting held on March 14, 2014.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
n/a
SUBMITTED BY:
Jana Kern
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Draft Minutes Backup Material
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Consideration and possible recommendation to City Council for approval of Task Order HDR 14-002, to
HDR Inc. of Austin, Texas, for the completion of the 2014 Sidewalk Master Plan and Public Facility
Access Audit in the amount of $188, 175.00– Nat Waggoner, PMP®, Transportation Analyst, Edward G.
Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director and Wesley Wright, P.E, Systems Engineering Director.
ITEM SUMMARY:
The purpose of the City of Georgetown Sidewalk Master Plan is to inventory existing sidewalk
infrastructure, identify design deficiencies, evaluate future sidewalk requirements and develop an
implementation plan for all sidewalk facilities within the City of Georgetown City Limits. The Sidewalk
Study will be a stand-alone document, serving as the primary sidewalk facility management plan with
regulatory authority conferred by the City of Georgetown Overall Transportation Plan (OTP). The Task
Order will also provide an ADA compliance audit for City of Georgetown public access facilities,
including the Downtown District as well as ADA compliance consulting services for the construction of
an ADA Transition Plan.
Task Order HDR 14-002 project goals and deliverables include:
Goals:
1. Inventory & Analysis of Sidewalks Within City Limits
2. City Government Operated Buildings ADA Inventory & Analysis
3. Downtown Accessibility Analysis
4. Creation of an ADA Transition Plan
Deliverables:
1. Sidewalk Master Plan
2. Government Buildings Accessibility Compliance Report
3. Downtown District Project Priority List and Compliance Plan
4. Consultation Services for an ADA Transition Plan
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of Task Order HDR 14-002 with HDR Inc. of Austin, Texas by GTAB with
recommendation forwarded to City Council at the April 22nd, 2014 regular session.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
See attached Budgetary and Financial Analysis Worksheet
SUBMITTED BY:
Nat Waggoner by jk
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Budget worksheet Backup Material
Task Order Backup Material
PROJECT
No.DATE:
PROJECT NAME:1DC 4/3/2014
Division/Department:Director Approval EGP 4/4/14
Prepared By:Finance Approval La'Ke4/3/14
TOTAL ANNUAL BUDGET 534,300.00
(Current year only)
Actual Cost Agenda Total Spent
Encumbrance Item & Encumbered % Annual
(A) before agenda item (B)(A + B)Budget
Consulting (HDR-14-002)188,175.00 188,175.00 35%
Right of Way 0.00 0%
Construction 0.00 0%
Other Costs 0.00 0%
Total Current Year Costs 0.00 188,175.00 188,175.00
Approved Needed
GENERAL LEDGER ACCOUNT NUMBER CY Budget Budget
100-5-0802-52-101 150,000.00 150,000.00
500-5-0350-51-310 Facilities 184,800.00 30,000.00
262-5-0603-52-009 25,000.00 5,400.00
100-5-0802-51-310 ADA Transition Plan 174,500.00 2,775.00
Total Budget 534,300.00 188,175.00
TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET 534,300.00
(includes all previous yrs.)
Prior Years Current Year Total Project % Total
Spent/Encumbered Costs Costs Budget
Consulting 0.00 188,175.00 188,175.00 35%
Right of Way 0.00 0.00 0.00 0%
Construction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0%
Other Costs 0.00 0.00 0.00 0%
Total Project Costs 0.00 188,175.00 188,175.00
Nat Waggoner, Transportation Analyst
Transportation Services
Sidewalks - Budgetary and Financial Analysis Worksheet
Comments:
Sidewalk Master Plan Update
Transportation Services
Downtown Accessibility
Engineering (PS&E)
TASK ORDER
Task Order
Task Order No. HDR-14-002,
consisting of 16 pages.
In accordance with paragraph 1.01 of the Master Services Agreement between Owner and HDR
Engineering, Inc. ("Engineer") for Professional Services -Task Order Edition, dated March 31, 2011,
("Agreement"), Owner and Engineer agree as follows:
1. Specific Project Data
A. Title: 2014 Sidewalk Master Plan
B. Description: Comprehensive review of existing sidewalk facilities including ADA compliance,
future expenditures and related long term planning documents.
C. City of Georgetown Project Number: 1 DC
D. City of Georgetown General Ledger Account No.: Several
E. City of Georgetown Purchase Order No.: =-34....:...0=-=2=3-=-5..:;..9 ________ _
F. Master Services Agreement, Contract Number: 2011-704-MSA
2. Services of Engineer
Scope of Services defined in Exhibit A.
3. Owner's Responsibilities
Owner shall have those responsibilities set forth in the Agreement subject to the following:
Fee Schedule defined in Exhibit B.
4. Times for Rendering Services
Schedule defined in Exhibit C.
Georgetown-Revised 3.11
EJCDC E-505 Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Engineer Professional Services-Task Order Edition
Copyright «:l2004 National Society of Professional Engineers for EJCDC. All rights reserved.
Attachment 1 -Task Order Form
Page 1 of 4
TASK ORDER
5. Payments to Engineer
A. Owner shall pay Engineer for services rendered as follows:
Category of Services Compensation Method
S tudy and Report Standard Hourly Rates
Lump Sum or Not to
Exceed Amount of
Compensation for
Services
Not to Exceed
$187,745.00
B. The terms of payment are set forth in Article 4 of the Agreement unless modified in this Task
Order.
6. Consultants:
HDR Engineering, Inc.-Prime
Altura Solutions, L.P. -Subconsultant
7. Other Modifications to Agreement:
N/A
8. Attachments:
Exhibit A, Exhibit B, Exhibit C, Exhibit D
9. Documents Incorporated By Reference: The Agreement dated March 31, 2011.
Georgetown-Revised 3.11
EJCDC E-505 Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Engineer Professional Services--Task Order Edition
Copyright Cl2004 National Society of Professional Engineers for EJCDC. All rights reserved.
Attachment 1 -Task Order Form
Page2 of4
TASK ORDER
Terms and Conditions: Execution of this Task Order by Owner and Engineer shall make it subject to the
terms and conditions of the Agreement (as modified above), which Agreement is incorporated by this
reference. Engineer is authorized to begin performance upon its receipt of a copy of this Task Order
signed by Owner.
The Effective Date of this Task Order is----~--' 2014.
OWNER:
By:
Name: George G. Garver
Title: Mayor, City of Georgetown
Date:
ATTEST:
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF TRAVIS
ENGINEER:
By:
Name: Mark Borenstein, P.E.
Title: Vice President, HDR Engineering, Inc.
Engineer License or Finn's
Certificate No.
State of:
Date:
F-754
Texas
APPROVED AS TO FORM ONLY BY CITY
ATTORNEY AND BY CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 8, 2011, AGENDA ITEM "P"
APPROVED AS TO FORM VERIFIED:
Vickie Graff, CPPO, CTPM
Contract Coordinator
} CORPORATE
} ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
On this E-day of ~ fl \ , 2014, Mark Borenstein personally appeared before
me and proved to me through satisfactory evidence of identification to be the person who signed this
document in my presence .
[SEAL]
My Commission Expires: Q!?) )lj dOl]
I
Georgetown -Revised 3.11
EJCDC E-505 Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Engineer Professional Services-Task Order Edition
Copyright \Q2004 National Society of Professional Engineers for EJCDC. All rights reserved.
Attachment 1 -Task Order Form
Page3 of 4
TASK ORDER
DESIGN A TED REPRESENTATIVE FOR
TASK ORDER:
DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE FOR
TASK ORDER:
Name: Nathaniel Waggoner Name: Leslie Pollack, PE, PTOE
Title: Transportation Services Analyst Title: Project Manager
Address: 3 00-1 Industrial Ave. Address: 504 Lavaca #1175
Georgetown, TX 78626 Austin, TX 78701
E-Mail E-Mail
Address: Nathaniel. Waggoner@georgetown. Address: Leslie.Pollack@hdrinc.com
org
Phone: 512-930-8171 Phone: 512-904-3700
Fax: 512-930-3558 Fax: 512-904-3 773
Georgetown-Revised 3.11
EJCDC E-505 Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Engineer Professional Services--Task Order Edition
Copyright ~2004 National Society of Professional Engineers for EJCDC. All rights reserved.
Attachment 1 -Task Order Form
Page4of4
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Project Name: City of Georgetown Sidewalk Study and ADA Accessibility Surveys
Project Manager: Leslie D. Pollack, P.E., PTOE
Project Principal: Mark D. Borenstein, P.E.
The purpose of the City of Georgetown Sidewalk Study is to inventory existing sidewalk
infrastructure, identify design deficiencies, evaluate future sidewalk requirements, and develop
an implementation plan for all sidewalk facilities within the City of Georgetown City Limits.
The Sidewalk Study will be a stand-alone document, serving as the primary sidewalk facility
management plan with regulatory authority conferred by the City of Georgetown Overall
Transportation Plan.
Our Scope of Services is presented in ten stages:
Task 1. Project Management
Task 2. Comprehensive Review of Existing Studies, Plans, and Reports
Task 3. Data Collection and Field Inventory
Task 4. Government and Public Stakeholder Meetings
Task 5. Sidewalk Implementation Plan and Project Prioritization
Task 6. Public Meetings and Hearings
Task 7. ADA Reporting Criteria
Task 8. City Facilities Survey
Task 9. Self Assessment Survey of Downtown District
Task 10. ADA Transition Plan Support
Period of Performance:
Task 6.1. To be completed by 10/1/2014
Task 1. Project Management
The management of project activities will ensure the efficient and timely delivery of study
results. The four objectives for the project management program are scope, cost, schedule and
quality control to be completed through the following subtasks:
Task 1.1 Project Scoping-HDR will coordinate with the City of Georgetown staff to finalize the
scope of the proposed Sidewalk Study project. Attendance at two (2) meetings with City staff
will be required in addition to attendance at one (1) City Council Meeting for project approval.
Task 1.2 -Progress Reports -HDR will provide the City with monthly progress status reports.
Monthly progress reports will include a brief summary of items completed during the month,
outstanding issues to be resolved and items to be completed in the following month.
HDR Engineering, Inc. 1 of 12
City of Georgetown Sidewalk Study and Accessibility Surveys
Coordination of project issues with City staff will be conducted as often as needed by either
telephone or email.
Task 1.3-Project Meetings-HDR will meet with City Staff a minimum of three (3) times at key
milestones to discuss project issues or prepare for public meetings or presentations. This is in
addition to the defined stakeholder and public meetings described in Tasks 4 and 6.
1. Preparation of Government Meetings and Open House Events
2. GTAB Workshop
3. Project Closeout
Task 1.4-Invoices/Payment Reguisitions-HDR will prepare and submit monthly invoices in
the format desired by the City.
Deliverables-(electronic format)
• Progress reports including:
• Updated Project Schedule
• Schedule and payment requisitions
Task 2. Comprehensive Review of Existing Studies, Plans, and Reports
This task involves the review and evaluation of current City documents and policies relevant to
sidewalk infrastructure planning.
Task 2.1-Obtain Existing Documents-The following documents will be provided for review
by the City of Georgetown:
• City of Georgetown Unified Development Code
• City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan
• Public Safety Plan
• Housing Plan
• Parks and Trails Master Plan
• Utility Master Plan
• Downtown Master Plan
• Airport Master Plan
• Overall Transportation Plan
• Future Land Use Plan
• Williams Dr. Master Plan
• City of Georgetown ADA Transition Plan
• Georgetown lSD Master Plan
• City of Georgetown GIS Files -Most recent Geographical Information System (GIS)
files from the City and other databases, including aerial mapping and associated data
files that shows the location of property lines, street curbs, street names, sidewalks,
trails, MPO boundary, topography, known environmental features, land use, zoning
and other features
• City of Georgetown Trails Map
HDR Engineering, Inc. 2 of 12
City of Georgetown Sidewalk Study and Accessibility Surveys
• City of Georgetown City Limits Map
• Other previous studies relevant to the project
Task 2.2 -Identify Conflicts and Consistencies -HDR will document the existing and proposed
sidewalk infrastructure within the City limits according to the documents listed above. A list of
conflicts and consistencies will be prepared. HDR will develop a Plan Relationship Matrix that
summarizes the correlations and inconsistencies between the plans. HDR will develop suitable
recommendations and language to affect inconsistencies between documents.
Deliverables-(electronic format)
• Plan Relationship Matrix (Excel)
Task 3. Data Collection and Field Inventory
Task 3.1 Establish Reportin~ Criteria-HDR will establish project analysis and reporting criteria
in accordance with current Americans with Disabilities (ADA) and Texas Accessibility
Standards (TAS), for approval by the City, including the following general descriptors:
• Location
• Width
• ADA/TAS compliance
• Deficiency by type (as defined by ADA/TAS)
Sidewalk connections to marked on-street parking facilities will also be documented during this
process.
Task 3.2 Data Compilation & Collection Phase -HDR will review Google Earth Imagery,
existing City GIS data and imagery, and performing field analysis to develop a complete
Sidewalk Inventory. HDR will designate sidewalks with aforementioned Reporting Criteria
established and approved by Transportation Analyst in Task 3.1.
Task 3.3 -Field Inventory & OC Phase -HDR will conduct field reviews of City sidewalks to
supplement and finalize findings from Task 3.2. ADA/TAS compliance will be reviewed
through visual inspection. Detailed slope calculations and measurements will not be
performed.
Task 3.4 -Sidewalk Inventory & Analysis Phase -HDR will prepare a Sidewalk Inventory;
compiling relevant sidewalk data collected through the document reviews and field inventory.
Deliverables will be prepared in three formats: Excel, GIS and standalone maps. HDR will
develop the format of the deliverables as approved by the City of Georgetown Engineering
Support Services and Information Technology Departments.
Deliverables-(electronic format)
HDR Engineering, Inc . 3 o£12
City of Georgetown Sidewalk Study and Accessibility Surveys
• Sidewalk Inventory (Excel, GIS Layer(s), .mxd Map(s). , metadata including relevant
information (data collection methods, imagery used, etc.))
Task 4. Government and Public Stakeholder Meetings
Task 4.1-Government Participation Plan-HDR will prepare a Government Participation Plan
that includes a detailed work schedule that will allow for the successful engagement of
government entities throughout the development of the Sidewalk Study. HDR will be
responsible for development of meeting schedules, meeting agendas and meeting minutes for
all meetings. HDR will prepare any relevant boards or exhibits for all government meetings.
City of Georgetown will retain all board and exhibits post meeting and open houses.
Task 4.2-Public Participation Plan-HDR will prepare a Public Participation Plan that includes
a detailed work schedule that will allow for the successful engagement of public stakeholders
throughout the development of the Sidewalk Study. HDR will be responsible for development
of meeting schedules, meeting agendas and meeting minutes for all public meetings. HDR will
prepare any relevant boards or exhibits for all public meetings.
Task 4.3-Government Meetings-HDR will meet with the following government entities to
identify needs, desires and responsibilities with respect to the sidewalk planning process:
• City of Georgetown City Staff
• Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board (GTAB) Members
• Georgetown Independent School District Staff
• Georgetown Housing Authority
• Georgetown Long Range Planning Department
• Texas Department of Transportation
• Williamson County
Deliverables-
• Summary of Government meetings
Task 4.4 -Public Open House -HDR will conduct two (2) project open houses for soliciting
public input for the project. HDR will conduct the first open house after completion of the data
collection and field inventory. HDR will coordinate with the City of Georgetown to find an
appropriate location for the Open House. HDR will coordinate with the City's Public
Communications Department to provide details on the Open House
Deliverables -
• Government Participation Plan Exhibit
• Public Participation Plan Exhibit
• Data Collection Exhibit
• Collection Methodology
• Summary of Initial Findings
HDR Engineering, Inc . 4 of 12
City of Georgetown Sidewalk Study and Accessibility Surveys
• Summary of Open House Report
Task 5. Sidewalk Implementation Plan and Project Prioritization
Task 5.1-Sidewalk Implementation Plan-HDR will develop a sidewalk implementation plan
considering stakeholder input, existing conditions, planning documents, and City needs. The
sidewalk implementation plan will identify the following:
• Locations
• Sidewalk Design describing variations/changes from City of Georgetown standard
details
• Opinion of Probable Project Costs
Task 5.2 -Project Prioritization -HDR will prioritize the proposed sidewalk projects
considering stakeholder input, existing conditions, planning documents and City needs. The
following will be considered in the project prioritization process:
• Infrastructure gaps
• ADA compliance/TDLR
• Rehabilitation (conditions)
• Future extensions
Sidewalk project priorities will be summarized in the Prioritized Project matrix. In addition, a
Sidewalk Study report will be prepared to document the project selection and prioritization
process.
Task 5.3-Funding Forecasts-HDR will develop funding forecasts for the proposed projects. A
list of available funding sources for the proposed sidewalk improvements will also be
identified. Funding information will be included in the Prioritized Project Matrix.
Deliverables-(electronic format)
• Updated Plan Relationship Matrix (Excel)
• Prioritized Project Matrix (Excel) (GIS Layer)
• Funding Forecasts
• Sidewalk Study Report-(hard copy format)
Task 6. Public Meetings and Hearings
HDR will present the Sidewalk Study and Prioritized Project Matrix at the following public
meetings for review and input:
Task 6.1-Initial Workshop with GTAB-HDR will provide a summary of project milestones to
date and gather additional guidance for future project work during a regular work session of
theGTAB.
HDR Engineering, Inc. 5 o£12
City of Georgetown Sidewalk Study and Accessibility Surveys
Task 6.1-Public Meetings and Hearings-HDR will attend the following public meetings and
hearings to present the Sidewalk Study and Prioritized Project Matrix:
• Public Open House #2
• City Council (Workshop)
• Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board (Public Hearing)
• City Council (Public Hearing/1st Reading)
• City Council (2"d Reading/ Adoption)
The Plan Relationship Matrix, Prioritized Project Matrix and Sidewalk Study report will be
updated in response to public and government input received in the public meetings and
hearings.
Deliverables-(electronic format)
• Updated Plan Relationship Matrix (Excel)
• Prioritized Project Matrix (Excel) (GIS Layer)
• Funding Forecasts
• Sidewalk Study Report-(hard copy format)
•
•
•
Executive summary
Goals
City of Georgetown Policies and Procedures
HDR Engineering, Inc . 6 of 12
City of Georgetown Sidewalk Study and Accessibility Surveys
The following services will be completed by Altura Solutions, L.P.
Altura Solutions Project Manager: Jesus Lardizabal
Task 7. ADA Reporting Criteria
Task 7 consists of assisting HDR Engineering, Inc. (HDR) with developing survey criteria for
the initial sidewalk analysis. Altura will assist HDR in developing criteria for categorizing
existing conditions of pedestrian elements within the public right-of-way. HDR will perform the
surveys, as described in Task 3.1.
Deliverables -
A recommended list of criteria for the HDR preliminary sidewalk surveys.
Task 8. City Facilities Survey
Task 8 consists of self-assessment surveys of 23 City owned buildings and facilities for
compliance with ADA requirements. The surveys will include building interiors and exterior
site elements. If non-compliant elements are found, the project scope will include:
• Suggestions for alterations to achieve compliance with the current standards.
• Cost estimates for proposed alterations.
• Development of a priority list for alterations.
The scope will include a survey of the following buildings and facilities:
1. Recreation Center
2. Community Center
3. Council Chambers
4. City Hall
5. Art Center
6. Park & Recreation Admin. Building
7. Airport Terminal & Tower
8. GMC Building
9. Police Station
10. Library
11. CVB
12. Grace Center
13. Tennis Center
14. Animal Shelter
15. GCAT Building
16. Fire Station 1
17. Fire Station 2
18. Fire Station 3
19. Fire Station 4
20. Fire Station 5
21. Parking lot at 6th & Main
HDR Engineering, Inc . 7of 12
City of Georgetown Sidewalk Study and Accessibility Surveys
22. Parking lot at 9th & Main
23. Parking lot at 4th & Austin Ave.
Deliverables-
Report of findings for each City building/facility (23 reports) with recommendations for
alterations and cost estimates
Task 9. Self Assessment Survey of Downtown District
Task 9 consists of self-assessment surveys of the Downtown District pedestrian elements for
compliance with ADA requirements. If non-compliant elements are found, the project scope
will include:
• Suggestions for alterations to achieve compliance with the current standards.
• Cost estimates for proposed alterations.
• Development of a priority list for alterations.
The scope will include a survey of the pedestrian elements such as sidewalks and curb ramps
along with on-street parking. The survey will be limited to the elements listed above within the
City's public right-of-way and within the downtown district.
Deliverables-
• Report of findings for the Downtown District pedestrian elements (one report) with
recommendations for alterations and cost estimates
• Report of priorities for alterations to identified non-compliant facilities
Task 10. ADA Transition Plan Support
Task 10 consists of accessibility consulting services to support the development of the City's
ADA Transition Plan. The services will include:
•
•
•
Best practices document that outlines accessibility principles when altering or
remodeling existing City facilities, including infrastructure within the public right-of-
way. The document will provide a guide for public and private entity responsibilities
when altering facilities.
An analysis of Parks and Recreation "programs and services" being offered to the
community and how to tie-in the programs with existing facilities.
Attendance at public meetings to include one meeting with City Council, two meetings
with the City's ADA Task Force, and three meetings with City Boards & Commissions.
Deliverables -
• Best practices document for alterations
• Analysis of Parks and Recreation "programs and services"
HDR Engineering, Inc. 8 of 12
City of Georgetown Sidewalk Study and Accessibility Surveys
Exclusions and Assumptions -
• The proposal excludes services to determine compliance with local building code
requirements.
• The proposal excludes a survey of facilities not listed above.
• The proposal assumes that the City will provide as-built drawings and TDLR project
information of the facilities listed above, if the documentation exists.
• The proposal assumes that the City will provide access will be provided to all areas of
the facilities listed above during regular working hours.
• The proposal assumes that the City Parks and Recreation Department will provide a list
of "programs and services" limited to services provided to the public and related to the
use of existing infrastructure.
HDR Engineering, Inc . 9 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
City of Georgetown Sidewalk Study and Accessibility Surveys
EXHIBITB
FEE SCHEDULE
Project Name: City of Georgetown Sidewalk Study and ADA Accessibility Surveys
Project Manager: Leslie D. Pollack, P.E., PTOE
Project Principal: Mark D. Borenstein, P.E.
TASK HOURS LABOR
Project Management 51 7,940.00
Comprehensive Review of Existing Studies, Plans, and Reports 74 10,960.00
Data Collection and Field Inventory 291 35,250.00
Government and Public Stakeholder Meetings 132 19,820 .00
Sidewalk Implementation Plan and Project Prioritization 260 33,620.00
Public Meetings and Hearings 216 28,530.00
Subtotal Labor 136,120.00
EXPENSES EXPENSES
Direct Expenses 9,548.80
CONSULTANT (ALTURA SOLUTIONS) LABOR
ADA Reporting Criteria 1,800.00
City Facilities Survey 27,375.00
Self Assessment Survey of Downtown District 5,400.00
ADA Transition Plan Support 7,500.00
Subtotal Consultants 42,075.00
Contract Total 187,743.80
HDR Engineering, Inc . 10 of 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
6.1
7
8
9
10
City of Georgetown Sidewalk Study and Accessibility Surveys
EXHIBITC
SCHEDULE
Project Name: City of Georgetown Sidewalk Study and ADA Accessibility Surveys
Project Manager: Leslie D. Pollack, P.E., PTOE
Project Principal: Mark D. Borenstein, P.E.
TASK START END
Project Management 05 /14 01/15
Comprehensive Review of Existing Studies, Plans, and Reports 05 /14 06 /14
Data Collection and Field Inventory 05 /14 08/14
Government and Public Stakeholder Meetings 05 /14 01 /15
Sidewalk Implementation Plan and Project Prioritization 05 /14 10/14
Public Meetings and Hearings 05 /14 01/15
Initial Workshop with GT AB 10/14 10114
ADA Reporting Criteria 05 /14 05 /14
City Facilities Survey 05 /14 06 /14
Self Assessment Survey of Downtown District 05 /14 06/14
ADA Transition Plan Support 05 /14 01/15
HDR Engineering, Inc. 11 of 12
City of Georgetown Sidewalk Study and Accessibility Surveys
EXHIBITD
HDR STANDARD LABOR RATES SCHEDULE
Hourly Rates
Principal/Vice President $230.00
Traffic Operations Manager $210.00
Senior Traffic Project Manager $210.00
Senior Traffic Engineer $180 .00
Traffic Project Manager II $180.00
Traffic Project Manager $160.00
Traffic Engineer II $140 .00
Traffic Engineer $130.00
Senior Traffic Engineering Associate $110.00
Traffic Engineering Associate $100.00
Senior CADD Technician $130.00
CADD Technician $90.00
Senior Engineering Technician $100.00
Engineering Technician $70.00
Accounting $110.00
Administrative Assistant $90 .00
Outside Consultant Prevailing Rate
Expenses 100% of cost
Mileage $1.00 per mile
HDR Engineering, Inc . 12 of 12
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Consideration and possible recommendation to award a Construction Contract to M & C Fonseca
Construction Co., Inc., of Granite Shoals, Texas, for the construction of the North Austin Avenue
Sidewalk Improvements Project (Rec Center to Georgetown High School) in the amount of $404,676.50;
the award is contingent upon written concurrence of the bids and contractor by the Texas Department of
Transportation. – Bill Dryden, P.E., Transportation Engineer and Edward G. Polasek, AICP,
Transportation Services Director.
ITEM SUMMARY:
The City of Georgetown received a Surface Transportation Program Metropolitan Mobility (STP-MM)
grant from the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) for the North Austin Avenue
Sidewalk Improvements Project from Williams Drive to the Georgetown High School (GHS). The
Advance Funding Agreement (AFA) with the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) was
approved by Council on November 28, 2011, and executed by TxDOT on January 3, 2012. The AFA set a
total project budget of $257,730.00 for engineering, environmental, construction and construction
contingencies.
The City engaged the firm of URS Corporation, of Austin, for professional services for developing
construction Plans, Specifications and Estimate (PS&E) in compliance with standards and practices of
TxDOT. The PS&E was completed with an Engineer's estimate of probable construction costs of
$298,544.97 based upon TxDOT average bid prices with adjustment on some items due to small
quantities.
The project was publicly advertised and sealed bids were received on March 24, 2014, from four (4)
bidders. The lowest responsive bid for the construction of the North Austin Avenue Sidewalk
Improvements Project was received from M & C Fonseca Construction Co., Inc., of Granite Shoals, Texas
(M&C), in the amount of $ $404,676.50. This bid is approximately 35% above the Engineer's estimate.
M&C has not previously worked for the City of Georgetown, but has successfully and satisfactorily
completed previous projects for TxDOT. Based upon references from TxDOT personnel, the Engineer
recommends award of a construction contract to M & C Fonseca Construction Co., Inc., of Granite
Shoals, Texas, for the construction of the North Austin Avenue Sidewalk Improvements Project (Rec
Center to Georgetown High School) in the amount of $404,676.50. A recommendation to Council for
award is contingent upon written concurrence of the bids and contractor by TxDOT.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff concurs with the Engineer and recommends award of a construction contract to M & C Fonseca
Construction Co., Inc., of Granite Shoals, Texas, for the construction of the North Austin Avenue
Sidewalk Improvements Project (Rec Center to Georgetown High School) in the amount of $404,676.50.
A recommendation to Council for award is contingent upon written concurrence of the bids and contractor
by TxDOT.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The project is partially reimbursable ($130,000.00) through the AFA with TxDOT. Attached is the project
CIP Financial Analysis Worksheet.
SUBMITTED BY:
Bill Dryden, P.E., Transportation Engineer
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Budgetary Worksheet Exhibit
AFA - Attachment "C" Exhibit
Engineer's Analysis Exhibit
Engineer's Letter of Recommendation Exhibit
Bid Tabulations Exhibit
Project
Number DATE:
PROJECT NAME: 1CV 03/31/2014
Division/Department:Director Approval
Prepared By: Bill Dryden Trans. Eng'r Finance Approval
TOTAL ANNUAL BUDGET 410,000.00
(Current year only)
Actual Cost Agenda Total Spent
Encumbrance Item & Encumbered % Annual
(A) before agenda item (B)(A + B) Budget
Consulting 86,000.00 86,000.00 21%
Right of Way 0.00 0%
Construction 404,676.50 404,676.50 99%
Other Costs 0.00 0%
Total Current Year Costs 86,000.00 404,676.50 490,676.50
Approved
GENERAL LEDGER ACCOUNT NUMBER CY Budget
100-5-0846-52-915 255,000.00
100-5-0846-52-801 Sidewalk Repairs 155,000.00
Total Budget 410,000.00
TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET 410,000.00
(includes all previous yrs)
Prior Years Current Year Total Project % Total
Spent/Encumbered Costs Costs Budget
Consulting 77,100.00 8,900.00 86,000.00 21%
Right of Way 0.00 0.00 0.00 0%
Construction 0.00 404,676.50 404,676.50 99%
Other Costs 0.00 0.00 0.00 0%
Total Project Costs 77,100.00 413,576.50 490,676.50
Transportation Services
CIP- Budgetary and Financial Analysis Worksheet
Comments: GL 100‐5‐0846‐52‐915 includes the TxDOT AFA reimbursement of $130,000.
North Austin Avenue
Sidewalk Improvements Project
N Austin Ave Sidewalk
CONSTRUCTION
1
Bill Dryden
From:Jumper, Clint <clint.jumper@urs.com>
Sent:Thursday, March 27, 2014 4:40 PM
To:Bill Dryden
Cc:Hawley, David
Subject:North Austin Avenue Sidewalk Bid Recommendation
Attachments:URS NAAS Recommendation of Award.pdf; N Aus Sidewalk Bid Tabulation
2014-03-25.xlsx
Bill,
I have enclosed a Recommendation Letter for your use. In addition, We offer the following information:
URS prepared the engineer’s estimate based on TxDOT average bid prices with adjustment on some items due to small
quantities. However, the low bid total ($404,676.50) was approximately 35% higher than estimated ($298,544.97). As a
result, URS performed further analysis and offers the following additional information.
URS reviewed bid price trends based on TxDOT average bid prices from September 2013 letting to March 2014 letting.
The average bid prices were used to develop total estimated construction costs for each letting period and to
demonstrate how those costs have changed over the last 7 months. Average bid prices were not available online for the
October 2013 letting period. Some average bid prices were not representative of the project scope and some items had
no price shown for the applicable time period. These unit prices were identified and adjusted or entered as shown in the
attached Unit Price Trends table.
Using the average bid prices as explained above, the overall construction costs appear to have peaked in December and
trend downward thru the March letting period. The total estimate based on December average bid prices is within 1% of
the latest engineer’s estimate. The total estimate based on March average bid prices is approximately 10% lower than
the latest engineer’s estimate. Based on this information, the engineer’s latest estimated construction cost is consistent
with current average bid prices.
URS also reviewed the attached Bid Tabulation to evaluate whether the high bid totals were due to a few specific high
unit prices or consistently high unit prices overall. For this effort, portable CTB items (512) were grouped and striping
items (666 and 677) were grouped. These bid items have relatively low individual impact, but more significant
cumulative impact; and the bid prices were consistently high in these two groups.
The low bidder has 6 items or groups that account for the entire difference between their bid amount and the
engineer’s estimate. All other unit prices for the low bidder are within a modest range above or below the engineer’s
estimate. The other three bidders have major unit price differences on 7 or 8 items or groups; not necessarily the same
ones as the low bidder. These items account for 70% to 90% of the difference between their bid amounts and the
engineer’s estimate. Unit prices for remaining items on each of these bids are generally higher than the engineer’s
estimate (but to a smaller degree than the 7 or 8 major items) and they account for the remaining cost difference.
URS believes the unit prices used in the engineer’s estimate are consistent with current average bid prices, including
modest increases due to small item quantities. Our review findings do not appear to support the significantly higher
than average unit prices in the bids received. We have double‐checked our quantities and believe them to be
representative of the work required. We have also noted item measurement methods (plans quantity vs. field
measured) per TxDOT Specifications in the attached. This may indicate areas susceptible to change order if additional
quantities are needed during construction.
2
We have enclosed our Recommendation of Award to M & C Fonseca as the low bidder. Feel free to use that
recommendation or let us know if the information above gives the City reason to consider re‐bidding the project. Please
contact us if you have questions or want to discuss this issue in more detail.
Thanks,
‐Clint
Clint Jumper, PE, PTOE
Sr. Project Manager
URS Corporation
9400 Amberglen Boulevard
Austin, TX 78729
512.419.6279
Clint.Jumper@URS.com
This e-mail and any attachments contain URS Corporation confidential information that may be proprietary or privileged. If you
receive this message in error or are not the intended recipient, you should not retain, distribute, disclose or use any of this
information and you should destroy the e-mail and any attachments or copies.
Click here to report this email as spam.
ITEM DESC
NO. CODE
100 2002 PREPARING ROW STA 27 $1,200.00 $32,400.00 220.00$ 5,940.00$ 320.00$ 8,640.00$ 375.00$ 10,125.00$ 259.07$ 6,994.89$
104 2022 REMOVING CONC (CURB AND GUTTER) LF 12 $10.00 $120.00 10.00$ 120.00$ 25.00$ 300.00$ 25.00$ 300.00$ 60.72$ 728.64$
104 2036 REMOVING CONC (SIDEWALK OR RAMP) SY 12 $20.00 $240.00 30.00$ 360.00$ 50.00$ 600.00$ 25.00$ 300.00$ 77.37$ 928.44$
110 2001 EXCAVATION (ROADWAY) CY 83 $8.00 $664.00 20.00$ 1,660.00$ 85.00$ 7,055.00$ 23.00$ 1,909.00$ 28.09$ 2,331.47$
132 2004 EMBANKMENT (FINAL)(DENS CONT)(TY B) CY 480 $8.00 $3,840.00 16.00$ 7,680.00$ 37.00$ 17,760.00$ 45.00$ 21,600.00$ 46.39$ 22,267.20$
160 2003 FURNISHING AND PLACING TOPSOIL (4") SY 6,452 $1.20 $7,742.40 4.00$ 25,808.00$ 3.80$ 24,517.60$ 4.00$ 25,808.00$ 6.17$ 39,808.84$
164 2003 BROADCAST SEED (PERM) (RURAL) (CLAY) SY 6,452 $0.25 $1,613.00 0.50$ 3,226.00$ 0.17$ 1,096.84$ 0.25$ 1,613.00$ 0.71$ 4,580.92$
164 2009 BROADCAST SEED (TEMP) (WARM) SY 3,226 $0.15 $483.90 0.50$ 1,613.00$ 0.15$ 483.90$ 0.25$ 806.50$ 0.71$ 2,290.46$
164 2011 BROADCAST SEED (TEMP) (COOL) SY 3,226 $0.15 $483.90 0.50$ 1,613.00$ 0.15$ 483.90$ 0.25$ 806.50$ 0.71$ 2,290.46$
168 2001 VEGETATIVE WATERING MG 194 $15.00 $2,910.00 69.50$ 13,483.00$ 140.00$ 27,160.00$ 33.00$ 6,402.00$ 78.91$ 15,308.54$
169 2001 SOIL RETENTION BLANKETS (CL 1) (TY A) SY 1,030 $1.10 $1,133.00 2.85$ 2,935.50$ 1.40$ 1,442.00$ 4.00$ 4,120.00$ 4.64$ 4,779.20$
403 2001 TEMPORARY SPL SHORING SF 1,106 $12.00 $13,272.00 4.00$ 4,424.00$ 28.50$ 31,521.00$ 8.00$ 8,848.00$ 9.73$ 10,761.38$
423 2001 RETAINING WALL (MSE) SF 1,195 $38.00 $45,410.00 30.00$ 35,850.00$ 88.00$ 105,160.00$ 100.00$ 119,500.00$ 48.42$ 57,861.90$
432 2002 RIPRAP (CONC)(5 IN) CY 1 $500.00 $500.00 250.00$ 250.00$ 1,200.00$ 1,200.00$ 1,200.00$ 1,200.00$ 1,110.27$ 1,110.27$
432 2039 RIPRAP (MOW STRIP)(4 IN) CY 10 $350.00 $3,500.00 90.00$ 900.00$ 510.00$ 5,100.00$ 500.00$ 5,000.00$ 407.22$ 4,072.20$
432 2048 RIPRAP (CONC)(FLUME) CY 15 $400.00 $6,000.00 250.00$ 3,750.00$ 430.00$ 6,450.00$ 750.00$ 11,250.00$ 533.27$ 7,999.05$
450 2026 RAIL (TY PR2) LF 252 $75.00 $18,900.00 150.00$ 37,800.00$ 95.00$ 23,940.00$ 130.00$ 32,760.00$ 236.05$ 59,484.60$
462 2001 CONC BOX CULV (3 FT X 2 FT) LF 8 $157.00 $1,256.00 75.00$ 600.00$ 300.00$ 2,400.00$ 350.00$ 2,800.00$ 555.84$ 4,446.72$
462 2002 CONC BOX CULV (3 FT X 3 FT) LF 18 $183.00 $3,294.00 85.00$ 1,530.00$ 325.00$ 5,850.00$ 375.00$ 6,750.00$ 411.86$ 7,413.48$
462 2004 CONC BOX CULV (4 FT X 3 FT) LF 15 $228.00 $3,420.00 95.00$ 1,425.00$ 375.00$ 5,625.00$ 425.00$ 6,375.00$ 483.15$ 7,247.25$
464 2003 RC PIPE (CL III)(18 IN) LF 59 $60.00 $3,540.00 35.00$ 2,065.00$ 62.00$ 3,658.00$ 100.00$ 5,900.00$ 157.55$ 9,295.45$
466 2327 WINGWALL (PW-1)(HW=4 FT) EA 1 $6,000.00 $6,000.00 2,500.00$ 2,500.00$ 10,000.00$ 10,000.00$ 10,000.00$ 10,000.00$ 3,821.80$ 3,821.80$
467 2103 SET (TY I)(S= 3 FT)(HW= 5 FT)(4:1)(C) EA 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 3,000.00$ 3,000.00$ 5,100.00$ 5,100.00$ 9,500.00$ 9,500.00$ 4,469.86$ 4,469.86$
467 2108 SET (TY I)(S= 4 FT)(HW= 4 FT)(4:1)(C) EA 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 3,000.00$ 3,000.00$ 3,400.00$ 3,400.00$ 11,500.00$ 11,500.00$ 6,346.27$ 6,346.27$
467 2286 SET (TY II)(18 IN)(RCP)(6:1)(P) EA 4 $1,000.00 $4,000.00 800.00$ 3,200.00$ 1,700.00$ 6,800.00$ 1,600.00$ 6,400.00$ 2,230.87$ 8,923.48$
496 2005 REMOV STR (WINGWALL) EA 3 $1,000.00 $3,000.00 2,000.00$ 6,000.00$ 1,500.00$ 4,500.00$ 1,100.00$ 3,300.00$ 1,688.93$ 5,066.79$
496 2007 REMOV STR (BOX CULVERT) LF 9 $20.00 $180.00 150.00$ 1,350.00$ 380.00$ 3,420.00$ 100.00$ 900.00$ 627.75$ 5,649.75$
500 2001 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $16,898.77 $16,898.77 15,000.00$ 15,000.00$ 52,000.00$ 52,000.00$ 37,500.00$ 37,500.00$ 29,200.00$ 29,200.00$
502 2001 BARRICADES, SIGNS AND TRAFFIC HANDLING MO 4 $1,200.00 $4,800.00 1,200.00$ 4,800.00$ 2,500.00$ 10,000.00$ 7,500.00$ 30,000.00$ 2,521.95$ 10,087.80$
512 2017 PORT CTB (DES SOURCE) (LOW PROF) (TY 1) LF 240 $8.00 $1,920.00 50.00$ 12,000.00$ 30.00$ 7,200.00$ 10.00$ 2,400.00$ 80.70$ 19,368.00$
512 2018 PORT CTB (DES SOURCE) (LOW PROF) (TY 2) LF 20 $12.00 $240.00 50.00$ 1,000.00$ 20.50$ 410.00$ 20.00$ 400.00$ 80.70$ 1,614.00$
512 2035 PORT CTB (STKPL) (LOW PROF) (TY 1) LF 240 $8.00 $1,920.00 50.00$ 12,000.00$ 32.50$ 7,800.00$ 12.00$ 2,880.00$ 80.70$ 19,368.00$
512 2036 PORT CTB (STKPL) (LOW PROF) (TY 2) LF 20 $12.00 $240.00 50.00$ 1,000.00$ 27.00$ 540.00$ 13.00$ 260.00$ 968.43$ 19,368.60$
530 2010 DRIVEWAYS (CONC) SY 117 $55.00 $6,435.00 90.00$ 10,530.00$ 67.00$ 7,839.00$ 70.00$ 8,190.00$ 97.02$ 11,351.34$
531 2010 CURB RAMPS (TY 7) EA 5 $1,100.00 $5,500.00 3,500.00$ 17,500.00$ 1,100.00$ 5,500.00$ 1,500.00$ 7,500.00$ 1,111.24$ 5,556.20$
531 2024 CONC SIDEWALK (5") SY 1,415 $44.00 $62,260.00 60.00$ 84,900.00$ 53.00$ 74,995.00$ 60.00$ 84,900.00$ 60.41$ 85,480.15$
618 2018 CONDT (PVC)(SCHD 40) (2") LF 135 $8.00 $1,080.00 25.00$ 3,375.00$ 32.00$ 4,320.00$ 35.00$ 4,725.00$ 56.49$ 7,626.15$
620 2011 ELEC CONDR (NO.8) BARE LF 135 $1.50 $202.50 25.00$ 3,375.00$ 4.60$ 621.00$ 10.00$ 1,350.00$ 8.07$ 1,089.45$
666 2042 REFL PAV MARK TY I (W) 12" (SLD) (100 MIL) LF 270 $3.00 $810.00 48.00$ 12,960.00$ 9.00$ 2,430.00$ 10.00$ 2,700.00$ 13.11$ 3,539.70$
666 2048 REFL PAV MARK TY I (W) 24" (SLD) (100 MIL) LF 54 $6.00 $324.00 96.00$ 5,184.00$ 12.00$ 648.00$ 25.00$ 1,350.00$ 24.21$ 1,307.34$
677 2001 ELIM EXT PAVE MRK AND MRKS (4") LF 10 $2.00 $20.00 60.00$ 600.00$ 5.00$ 50.00$ 20.00$ 200.00$ 40.35$ 403.50$
677 2007 ELIM EXT PAVE MRK AND MRKS (24") LF 58 $4.00 $232.00 64.00$ 3,712.00$ 15.00$ 870.00$ 20.00$ 1,160.00$ 20.18$ 1,170.44$
680 2003 INSTALL HWY TRF SIG (SYSTEM) EA 1 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 6,000.00$ 6,000.00$ 3,700.00$ 3,700.00$ 6,200.00$ 6,200.00$ 14,526.41$ 14,526.41$
682 2066 PED SIG SEC (12 IN) LED (COUNTDOWN) EA 2 $300.00 $600.00 1,500.00$ 3,000.00$ 1,000.00$ 2,000.00$ 1,100.00$ 2,200.00$ 907.90$ 1,815.80$
684 2031 TRF SIG CBL (TY A) (14 AWG) ( 5 CONDR) EA 310 $2.00 $620.00 14.00$ 4,340.00$ 5.70$ 1,767.00$ 11.00$ 3,410.00$ 24.16$ 7,489.60$
684 2080 TRF SIG CBL (TY C) (14 AWG) ( 2 CONDR) EA 310 $1.00 $310.00 13.00$ 4,030.00$ 4.60$ 1,426.00$ 11.00$ 3,410.00$ 9.26$ 2,870.60$
687 2001 PED POLE ASSEMBLY EA 2 $1,400.00 $2,800.00 2,000.00$ 4,000.00$ 3,900.00$ 7,800.00$ 5,000.00$ 10,000.00$ 5,043.89$ 10,087.78$
1018 2001 TREE PROTECTION EA 16 $200.00 $3,200.00 100.00$ 1,600.00$ 290.00$ 4,640.00$ 200.00$ 3,200.00$ 171.49$ 2,743.84$
1122 2002 ROCK FILTER DAMS (INSTALL) (TY 2) LF 83 $22.00 $1,826.00 35.00$ 2,905.00$ 23.00$ 1,909.00$ 27.00$ 2,241.00$ 45.40$ 3,768.20$
1122 2009 ROCK FILTER DAMS (REMOVE) LF 83 $6.50 $539.50 18.00$ 1,494.00$ 9.80$ 813.40$ 14.00$ 1,162.00$ 17.15$ 1,423.45$
1122 2037 TEMPORARY SEDIMENT CONTROL FENCE INSTLL LF 2,106 $2.00 $4,212.00 5.00$ 10,530.00$ 2.10$ 4,422.60$ 2.00$ 4,212.00$ 3.73$ 7,855.38$
1122 2057 TEMPORARY SEDIMENT CONTROL FENCE REMOVE LF 2,106 $0.50 $1,053.00 1.50$ 3,159.00$ 0.23$ 484.38$ 0.50$ 1,053.00$ 2.42$ 5,096.52$
8835 2001 ACCESSIBLE PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL UNITS EA 2 $1,300.00 $2,600.00 1,800.00$ 3,600.00$ 2,800.00$ 5,600.00$ 3,500.00$ 7,000.00$ 1,109.66$ 2,219.32$
TOTAL ESTIMATE OF CONSTRUCTION COST $298,544.97 $404,676.50 $523,448.62 $545,376.00 $582,706.88
1. Math error in item 423-2001 2. Math error in item 132-2004
Engineer's Estimate M & C Fonseca Construction
Co., Inc. (LOW BIDDER)
UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST
Westar Construction, Inc.
A Greater Austin
Development Concrete
Construction, LLC
UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST
BID TABULATION - Bids Opened 3/24/2014
March 25, 2014
N Austin Ave Sidewalk Improvements
URS Corporation
DESCRIPTION UNIT EST. QTY. UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST
Myers Concrete Construction,
LP
UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST
1
1 2
2
L:\Division\Gus\TRANSPORTATION SERVICES\CURRENT PROJECTS\2012 STP-MM N Austin Ave Sidewalks\Bidding and Award\[Bid Tabulation - N Austin Ave Sidewalks (2014-03-25).xlsx]Bid Tabulation Page 1 of 1 Printed: 04/02/2014 2:28 PM
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Consideration and possible recommendation to award a bid to American Road Maintenance of Itasca, IL
in the amount of $499,112.25 for pavement maintenance (rejuvenator) -- Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems
Engineering Director and Mark Miller, Transportation Services Manager
ITEM SUMMARY:
This project will apply a thin coat of asphalt emulsion to various residential streets. The emulsion will seal
minor cracks preventing moisture intrusion into the subgrade, extend the lift of the existing pavement, and
provide uniform color to the pavement. Additionally, a light sand application will be included with the
asphalt emulsion to provide traction. Please see attached map for detailed location of included streets.
Two bids were received on Tuesday, March 25, 2014. Due to low bidder not meeting the minimum
required experience, the design engineer has recommended awarding this contract to American Road
Maintenance. American Road Maintenance exceeds the required experience level specified and has
performed multiple projects of similar or larger scope nationwide. The bids were extremely competitive
with American Road Maintenance's bid only $8,645.72 higher than the low bidder.
Given their substantial experience with this type of application, Staff agrees with the design engineer and
recommends award to American Road Maintenance.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The total proposed contract is $499,112.25. Funds are included in the 2014 Budget as part of the
Transportation Capital Improvement Plan. Annual funding comes from a quarter-cent sales tax revenue
dedicated to Street Maintenance. Please see attached Budget Worksheet.
SUBMITTED BY:
Wesley Wright
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Bid Tabs Backup Material
Engineer's Recommendation Backup Material
Location Map Backup Material
Budget Worksheet Cover Memo
K
E
L
L
Y
D
R
SHEL
L
R
O
A
D
AU
S
T
I
N
A
V
E
.
A
I
R
P
O
R
T
R
O
A
D
W UNIVERSITY AVE.
LAK
E
W
A
Y
D
R
.
W
I
L
L
I
A
M
S
D
R
I
V
E
NE
I
N
N
E
R
L
O
O
P
SE
I
N
N
E
R
L
O
O
P
LEAND
E
R
R
O
A
D
BLUE SP
R
I
N
G
S
WO
L
F
R
A
N
C
H
RIV
E
R
Y
B
L
V
D
15TH
FI
L
E
:
P:
\
G
e
o
r
g
e
t
o
w
n
\
2
0
1
4
\
1
4
-
1
0
4
s
t
r
e
e
t
m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
\
C
A
D
\
E
x
h
i
b
i
t
\
1
4
-
1
0
4
s
t
r
e
e
t
m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
-
r
e
j
u
v
e
n
a
t
o
r
e
x
h
i
b
i
t
.
d
w
g
L
A
S
T
S
A
V
E
D
:
4/
1
/
2
0
1
4
3
:
1
8
:
4
8
P
M
LA
Y
O
U
T
:
RE
J
U
V
E
N
A
T
O
R
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
M
A
P
0
HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET
2000 4000
N
O
R
T
H
KASBERG, PATRICK & ASSOCIATES, LP
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
GEORGETOWN, TEXAS 78626
FIRM REGISTRATION NUMBER F-510
2014 STREET MAINTENANCE AND
REHABILITATION PROJECT
EXHIBIT A
DATE:
PROJECT NAME:2-Apr-14
Division/Department:Director Approval
Prepared By:Mark Miller Finance Approval La'Ke 4/2/14
TOTAL ANNUAL BUDGET 499,112.25
(Current year only)
Actual Cost Agenda Total Spent
Encumbrance Item & Encumbered % Annual
(A) before agenda item (B)(A + B) Budget
Consulting 0.00 0%
Right of Way 0.00 0%
Construction 499,112.25 499,112.25 100%
Other Costs 0.00 0%
Total Current Year Costs 0.00 499,112.25
Approved
GENERAL LEDGER ACCOUNT NUMBER CY Budget
203-9-0880-90-072 Rejuvenator 53,111.91
* need transfer of arterial funds 446,000.34
Total Budget 499,112.25
TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET 499,112.25 *
(includes all previous yrs)
Prior Years Current Year Total Project % Total
Spent/Encumbered Costs Costs Budget
Consulting 0.00 0.00 0%
Right of Way 0.00 0.00 0%
Construction 499,112.25 499,112.25 100%
Other Costs 0.00 0.00 0%
Total Project Costs 0.00 499,112.25 499,112.25
Comments:* Requesting mid-year transfer of $446,000.34 from Arterial Reserves
only 1.1 of 2.163 million dollars was budgeted. Remainder in (Arterial Reserves)
Transportation Serivces
Rejuvenator 2014 project # 1CN
CIP- Budgetary and Financial Analysis Worksheet
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Consideration and possible recommendation to award a bid to Cholla Pavement Maintenance of Apache
Junction, AZ in the amount of $779,212.33 for pavement maintenance (chip seal) -- Wesley Wright, P.E.,
Systems Engineering Director and Mark Miller, Transportation Services Manager
ITEM SUMMARY:
This project will provide a chip seal (a mixture of adhesive polymer and aggregate) to various arterial and
collector roadways. Chip seals are designed to seal small cracks to prevent moisture entrance into the
subgrade and provide additional traction for vehicles.
Two bids were received on Tuesday, March 25, 2014 consisting of a Base Bid and seven (7) Alternates.
Staff is not recommending Part B of the Base Bid (single course chip seal on various arterial roadways).
The recommended Alternate A provides a far superior wearing surface and seal for high/heavy traffic
arterials. Also, Alternate D (upgraded polymer) is not recommended as it would be applied to a Part B of
the Base Bid (single course arterial treatment).
Staff and the design engineer recommend awarding the following:
Part A (Base Bid ) - single course chip seal on various collector roadways
Alternate A - two course chip seal on various arterial roadways
Alternate B - fog seal over two course chip seal on various arterial roadways to lock in aggregate
and quiet road noise
Alternate C - upgraded polymer designed for better aggregate adhesion on collector roadways
Alternate E - upgraded polymer designed for better aggregate adhesion on arterial roadways
Alternate F - portable message boards for public notification
Alternate G - ADA ramp installation and repair at affected intersections.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The total proposed contract is $779,212.33. Funds are included in the 2014 Budget as part of the
Transportation Capital Improvement Plan. Annual funding comes from a quarter-cent sales tax revenue
dedicated to Street Maintenance. Please see attached Budget Worksheet.
SUBMITTED BY:
Wesley Wright, P.E.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Bid Tabs Backup Material
Engineer's Recommendation Backup Material
Chip Seal Location Map Backup Material
Budget Worksheet Backup Material
K
E
L
L
Y
D
R
SHEL
L
R
O
A
D
AU
S
T
I
N
A
V
E
.
A
I
R
P
O
R
T
R
O
A
D
W UNIVERSITY AVE.
LAK
E
W
A
Y
D
R
.
W
I
L
L
I
A
M
S
D
R
I
V
E
NE
I
N
N
E
R
L
O
O
P
SE
I
N
N
E
R
L
O
O
P
LEAND
E
R
R
O
A
D
BLUE SP
R
I
N
G
S
WO
L
F
R
A
N
C
H
RIV
E
R
Y
B
L
V
D
15TH
FI
L
E
:
P:
\
G
e
o
r
g
e
t
o
w
n
\
2
0
1
4
\
1
4
-
1
0
4
s
t
r
e
e
t
m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
\
C
A
D
\
E
x
h
i
b
i
t
\
1
4
-
1
0
4
s
t
r
e
e
t
m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
-
C
H
I
P
S
E
A
L
e
x
h
i
b
i
t
.
d
w
g
L
A
S
T
S
A
V
E
D
:
4/
1
/
2
0
1
4
3
:
3
0
:
2
5
P
M
LA
Y
O
U
T
:
CH
I
P
S
E
A
L
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
M
A
P
0
HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET
2000 4000
N
O
R
T
H
KASBERG, PATRICK & ASSOCIATES, LP
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
GEORGETOWN, TEXAS 78626
FIRM REGISTRATION NUMBER F-510
2014 STREET MAINTENANCE AND
REHABILITATION PROJECT
EXHIBIT A
DATE:
PROJECT NAME:1-Apr-14
Division/Department:Director Approval
Prepared By:Mark Miler Finance Approval La'Ke 4/2/14
TOTAL ANNUAL BUDGET 779,212.33
(Current year only)
Actual Cost Agenda Total Spent
Encumbrance Item & Encumbered % Annual
(A) before agenda item (B)(A + B) Budget
Consulting 0.00 0%
Right of Way 0.00 0%
Construction 779,212.33 779,212.33 100%
Other Costs 0.00 0%
Total Current Year Costs 0.00 779,212.33
Approved
GENERAL LEDGER ACCOUNT NUMBER CY Budget
203-9-0880-90-076 chip seal 298,960.00
* need transfer of arterial funds 480,252.33
Total Budget 779,212.33
TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET 779,212.33 *
(includes all previous yrs)
Prior Years Current Year Total Project % Total
Spent/Encumbered Costs Costs Budget
Consulting 0.00 0.00 0%
Right of Way 0.00 0.00 0%
Construction 779,212.33 779,212.33 100%
Other Costs 0.00 0.00 0%
Total Project Costs 0.00 779,212.33 779,212.33
Comments:* project needs transfer from (Arterial Reserves)
Only 1.1 of 2.163 million was budgeted. Remainder in Arterial Reserves
Transportation Services
2014 Chip Seal project # 1CF
CIP- Budgetary and Financial Analysis Worksheet
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Consideration and possible recommendation to award a bid to Culter Repaving of Lawrence, KS in the
amount of $523,792.75 for pavement maintenance (hot in-place recycling) -- Wesley Wright, P.E.,
Systems Engineering Director and Mark Miller, Transportation Services Manager
ITEM SUMMARY:
This project was bid on Tuesday, March 25, 2014 with only one responsive bidder, Cutler Repaving.
Cutler has completed hot in-place asphalt recycling for the City for the past 7 years. This process heats up
and scarifies existing asphalt while heat-welding approximately 3/4"-inch of new asphalt to the surface.
The process has proven extremely successful on multiple projects in the City.
The roadways included with this bid are as follows:
Hutto Road (University Drive to Quail Valley Drive)
River Bend (Williams Drive to Dawn Trail)
24th Street (Austin Avenue to Highland Drive)
Highland Drive (24th Street to Dead End)
Parkview Estates
Parkview Drive (FM 971 to Austin Avenue)
Parque Vista (FM 971 to Parkview Drive)
Gann Street (FM 971 to Parkview Drive)
Staff and KPA Engineers recommend awarding a bid to Culter Repaving of Lawrence, KS in the amount
of $523,792.75 for asphalt repair (hot in-place recycling).
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The total proposed contract is $523,792.75. Funds are included in the 2014 Budget as part of the
Transportation Capital Improvement Plan. Annual funding comes from a quarter-cent sales tax revenue
dedicated to Street Maintenance. Please see attached Budget Worksheet.
SUBMITTED BY:
Wesley Wright, P.E.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Bid Tabs Cover Memo
Engineer's Recommendation Cover Memo
Hot In-Place Recycling Location Map Cover Memo
Budget Worksheet Cover Memo
K
E
L
L
Y
D
R
SHEL
L
R
O
A
D
AU
S
T
I
N
A
V
E
.
A
I
R
P
O
R
T
R
O
A
D
W UNIVERSITY AVE.
LAK
E
W
A
Y
D
R
.
W
I
L
L
I
A
M
S
D
R
I
V
E
NE
I
N
N
E
R
L
O
O
P
SE
I
N
N
E
R
L
O
O
P
LEAND
E
R
R
O
A
D
BLUE SP
R
I
N
G
S
WO
L
F
R
A
N
C
H
RIV
E
R
Y
B
L
V
D
15TH
FI
L
E
:
P:
\
G
e
o
r
g
e
t
o
w
n
\
2
0
1
4
\
1
4
-
1
0
4
s
t
r
e
e
t
m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
\
C
A
D
\
E
x
h
i
b
i
t
\
1
4
-
1
0
4
s
t
r
e
e
t
m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
-
H
O
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
R
E
C
Y
C
L
I
N
G
e
x
h
i
b
i
t
.
d
w
g
L
A
S
T
S
A
V
E
D
:
4/
1
/
2
0
1
4
3
:
2
3
:
4
3
P
M
LA
Y
O
U
T
:
HI
P
R
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
M
A
P
0
HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET
2000 4000
N
O
R
T
H
KASBERG, PATRICK & ASSOCIATES, LP
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
GEORGETOWN, TEXAS 78626
FIRM REGISTRATION NUMBER F-510
2014 STREET MAINTENANCE AND
REHABILITATION PROJECT
EXHIBIT A
DATE:
PROJECT NAME:2-Apr-14
Division/Department:Director Approval
Prepared By:Mark Miller Finance Approval La'Ke 4/2/14
TOTAL ANNUAL BUDGET 538,960.00
(Current year only)
Actual Cost Agenda Total Spent
Encumbrance Item & Encumbered % Annual
(A) before agenda item (B)(A + B) Budget
Consulting 0.00 0%
Right of Way 0.00 0%
Construction 523,792.75 523,792.75 97%
Other Costs 0.00 0%
Total Current Year Costs 0.00 523,792.75
Approved
GENERAL LEDGER ACCOUNT NUMBER CY Budget
203-9-0880-90-075 Cutler 538,960.00
Total Budget 538,960.00
TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET 538,960.00
(includes all previous yrs)
Prior Years Current Year Total Project % Total
Spent/Encumbered Costs Costs Budget
Consulting 0.00 0.00 0%
Right of Way 0.00 0.00 0%
Construction 523,792.75 523,792.75 97%
Other Costs 0.00 0.00 0%
Total Project Costs 0.00 523,792.75 523,792.75
Comments:
Transportation Services
Cutler 2014 project #1CU
CIP- Budgetary and Financial Analysis Worksheet
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Consideration and possible recommendation to City Council concerning creation of a Bond Committee to finalize a
potential Road Bond Package - Edward G. Polasek, AICP Transportation Services Director and Micki Rundell,
CFO.
ITEM SUMMARY:
At the February 11, 2014, City Council Workshop staff presented the GTAB approved bond list that totaled
$150,000,000. Staff also presented two alternative lists, the comlete package which totaled $411,000,000 and a
modified GTAB alternative that totaled $72,000,000. City Council directed the bond discussion back to GTAB for
the following considerations:
We need to finalize a proposal for a May 2015 Bond Election. In the November 2014 election City efforts
should be focused on the maintenance sales tax issue, May 2015 provides the next opportunity to finalize an
election item.
The final project list should be vetted by the GTAB Board and a Bond Committee working together to
analyze the projects based on needs, financing and tax rate implications. Council's desire was for the project
list to be somewhere between the $72 and $150 million dollar proposal.
The Council did not specify the membership or meeting schedule of the Bond Committee, other than it should be
able to meet as often as necessary and should include representation from each Council District.
It is staff's recommendations that the Bond Committee be made up of membership from the GTAB Board as well as
appointee's from each City Council District. We would recommend all non-City Council members on GTAB and
one appointee from each City Council District and the Mayor. That would create a 15 member Bond Committee.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend to City Council creation of a 15 member Bond Committee, consisting of the 7 non-Council members
from the GTAB Board and one member each appointed by City Council members and the Mayor.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Bond Committee will work with staff to develop the financing model and tax rate implications of a proposed bond
program ranging from $72 million to $150 million.
SUBMITTED BY:
Edward G. Polasek, AICP
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Bond Presentation to City Council Backup Material
Bond Map Backup Material
Bond List Backup Material
Potential
2014 City Road Bond
Referendum
February 11, 2014
Council Workshop
City
of
Excellence
History – Road/Transportation Funding
•Growing demands
–Increased population growth causes traffic
congestion
•One of the fasted growing areas in the nation
– Geographic location creates issues
•San Gabriel Rivers
•Never enough funding…
–Limited if any available state & federal funds
•Local source needed for state matching fund if even
available
2008 Road Bond Authorization
Voters approved $46M
•Specific project list included FM 1460 & 971
–TxDOT impacting project timing & match funding
–To date issued $10.8M to fund:
•DB Wood Intersection improvements
•FM 971 intersection improvements & ROW acquisition
thru San Gabriel Park
•FM 1460 – included in funding package
–Additional bonds to be issued for construction
FM1460 & FM971 intersection improvements
•In excess of $30M not issued
–Could be years before viability of projects
Proposed 2014 Bond Referendum
•Needs analysis reviewed - GTAB Jan 2014
–Forwarded recommendation to City Council
–Potential project inclusion > $150M
•2008 Project List originally over $125M
–Reviewed project categories including:
•City commitments
•High priority
•Signalization/intersection improvements
•Sidewalks
•Other needed projects
Projects include:
•City Commitments to Build - $26M
–NW Blvd Bridge
–Southwest Bypass
•High Priority to improve congestion &
mobility - $26M
–IH35 Frontage Northbound (NW Blvd Bridge)
–Rivery extension to NW Blvd
–Leander Road Bridge @ IH35 widening
–All of which have Economic Development
related impacts & opportunities
Projects include:
•TBD Signalization, intersection &
maintenance improvements - $10M
–Ease traffic congestion on existing roadways
–Can delay need major improvements
•Other Needs:
–Airport Road (to Berry Creek Dr) - $12M
–DB Wood Rd expansion/bridge repairs - $17M
•Includes $6M in bridge repairs
–Shell Road expansion - $20M
–Leander Road improvements in conjunction
with TxDOT - $15M
Projects include:
•Sidewalks - $10M
–Complete “gaps” in existing sidewalk network
–Repair & ADA compliance
•TOTAL “NEEDS” = $150M
–Includes estimated issuance costs
2014 Road Bond Plan
•Present to the voters in November 2014
•15 to 20 year implementation plan
•Tax impacts
–Determined by timing
•Possible contribution of funds from other sources
•Economic development opportunities
–Growth in tax base
•Added growth spreads costs over larger basis
–“Contract with the Voters”
•Limitations on tax rate impacts
Contract with the Voters
•Binding agreement
–Not included on ballot
–Included in presentation materials
•Voters aware of self-imposed restrictions
•Restricts issuance of bonds due to impact
on property tax rate at time of issuance
–“Property Tax Rate increase no greater
than…”
•Amount annually
•Amount cumulatively
Reality Check….
•$150MM program may not be financially
feasible
–Maximum estimated tax increase = $0.20
–Average estimated tax increase = $0.10 thru
2054
–Largest increase in any 1 year = $0.03
Staff Alternative:
•Include only City of Excellence critical projects
–City Commitments to Build - $26M
•NW Blvd Bridge
•Southwest Bypass
–High Priority for congestion & mobility - $18M
•IH35 Frontage Northbound (NW Blvd Bridge)
•Rivery extension to NW Blvd
–TBD Signalization, intersection & maintenance
improvements - $10M
–Other Needs – DB Wood Bridge - $6M
–Sidewalks - $5M
Staff Alternative:
•Total Bond Package = $72M
•10 to 15 year program
–Depending on growth
•Property tax impacts
–Maximum estimated tax increase = $0.10
–Average estimated tax increase = $0.05 thru
2050
–Largest increase in any 1 year = $0.025
Next Steps:
Determine IF & WHEN bond propositions
should be presented to voters
•Determine election date
Provide direction to staff to:
•Determine size/scope of bond proposal
•Calculate tax impacts/contract with voters
Begin election process
•Ballot language
•Election planning
•Voter education planning
Questions?
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
¬«9
¬«8
¬«7
¬«6
¬«5
¬«4
¬«3
¬«2
¬«1
¬«4b
¬«3 0
¬«2 3 A
¬«3 8
¬«2 1
¬«3 7
¬«19
¬«2
7
¬«17
¬«
1
6
¬«
3
2
¬«2 6
¬«24B
¬«
35
¬«20
¬«31
¬«3
3
¬«23B
¬«1 4
¬«3 6
¬«10¬«18
¬«3
4
¬«22
¬«
13
¬«1 1
¬«25
¬«1 2
C
R
1
4
1
C R 1 1 2
C R 1 4 9
C
R
1
4
0
CR 14
8
CR175 CR 1 7 6
CR 245
N IH 35 FWY SB
R M 2 243
C R 2 4 7
G R O V E L N
SH 195
C R 1 8 9
C
R
1
1
0
CR 234
P
V
R
9
0
0
C R 1 5 3
C R 1 6 6
P
V
R
9
0
8
C
R
1
0
3
P V R 9 4 5
C R 1 7 7
S
H 1
3
0 T
O
LL N
B
C
R
2
6
1
B O N N E T L N
P
V
R91 6
C R 1 8 6
E S H 2 9
W
EIR
R
A
NCHRD
B
E
R
R
Y
L
N
E
N
T
R
4
1
9
N
B
RUSK
L
N
F M 9 7 2
CR 262
C R 1 9 4
C R 1 5 5
C R 162
D E E R T R L
F
A
M
I
L
Y
C
I
R
W
O
L
F
R
D
CROCKETTGARDENSRD
C R O S S C R E E K L N
S
I
H
3
5
F
W
Y
S
B
E
A
S
T
V
I
E
W
D
R
L
O
S
T
R
I
V
E
R
R
D
N IH 35 FWY NB
C R 1 5 0
B U C K B N D
CE
D
ARHO
LL
O
W
R
D
B U S B Y X I N G
SH 130 TOLL SB
S
H
1
3
0
N
BDEER D R A W
H Y V I E W L N
F
A
U
B
I
O
N
D
R
RM 2338
W H I S P E R L N
C
H
A
P
A
R
R
A
L
R
D
F A W N R I D G E
FM 3405
W
I
C
H
I
T
A
T
R
L
FM 1460
RED BIR
D TRL
M E S A D R
G
A
B
R
I
E
L
F
O
R
E
S
T
SIL V E R A D O D R
P
V
R
9
3
1
T B D 6
L
I
Z
L
N
M
I
L
L
E
R
H
I
L
L
R
D
IN
DIG
O L
N
C
R
O
S
S
C
R
E
E
K
R
D
L O G A N R A N C H R DSUNSET RD
RIVER R
D
K
A
T
Y
L
N
C
R
1
0
6
C
R
1
0
0
S
H
1
3
0
S
B
S IH 35 FWY NB
T B D 2 2
H E R O W A Y
B A S S S T
W SH 29
S
I
H
3
5
N
B
C R 1 4 3
N
E
I
N
N
E
R
L
O
O
P
CR152
C R 1 0 5
F
M
1
1
0
5
C R 1 9 6
S E D R O T R L
NIH35SB
N
I
H
3
5
F
R
C
R
1
2
0
F M 9 7 1
SERE N A D A D R
L I G H T N I N G R A N C H R D
R U S SE LL PA R K R D
D O E R U N
P
V
R
9
3
4
C
R
1
1
8
P
A
T
R
I
O
T
W
A
Y
U N I V E R S I T Y B L V D
D
R
V
W
S IH 35 SB
M
A
P
L
E S
T
C R 1 0 7
WILLIA
MS DR
CAVU RD
P
A
T
R
I
C
I
A
R
D
N IH 35 NB
I N D I A N S P R I N G S R D
RM 2243
F M 3405
SH 195
S
H
1
3
0
T
O
LLSB
C R 1 2 0
C
R
1
0
3
CR175
C
R
1
0
0
SH
195
F M 9 7 2
FM971
C R 1 9 4
F
M
1
1
0
5
SH 195
C
R
1
4
0
C
R
2
6
1
C R 1 7 6
C R 1 9 4
F M 971
C R 1 4 9
C R 1 1 2
C R 1 5 0
S
H 195
C R 1 0 7
E S H 2 9
CR 175
W SH 29
F M 9 7 1
WOLF RD
F M 9 7 1
C
R
1
1
0
W SH 29
F
M
1
4
6
0
C R 1 5 2
C
R
1
4
0
U N I V E R S ITY B L V D
C R 1 0 3
C R 1 5 0
CR
175
CR17 7
RM2338
F
M
1
1
0
5
C
R
2
6
2
C
R
1
2
0
RM 2338
C R 1 5 0 CR150
F M 1105
RM 2338
F M 9 7 2
CR 1 06
C R 1 0 7
C
R
2
4
5
CR100
C
R
1
1
0
F M 9 7 1
¬«24A ¬«28
¬«
15
¬«2 9
0 7,4003,700 Feet
1 inch = 6,213 feetE
This product is for informational purposes and may not have been prepared for or be suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. It does not represent an on-the-ground survey and represents only the approximate relative location of property boundaries.
L:\Division\Gus\GIS-CAD\GTAB\2014 Bond Priority Exhibit35X42.mxd
Intersection
Priority
!(HIGH BOND
!(HIGH
!(MEDIUM
!(LONG BOND
Widening
Priority
HIGH COMMITMENT
HIGH BOND
HIGH
MEDIUM COMMITMENT B
MEDIUM COMMITMENT
MEDIUM BOND
MEDIUM
MEDIUM GTEC
LONG TERM BOND
LONG TERM
road
City Limits
ETJ
L:\Division\Gus\TRANSPORTATION SERVICES\CURRENT PROJECTS\2014 Bond Program.pdf
ID Roadway Projects Priority10NE INNER LOOP - ST ADIUM DR TO FM 971 HIGH11STADIUM DR (CR 151) - AUST IN AVE T O NE INNER LOOP MEDIUM12CR 152 - ST ADIUM DR (CR 151) T O CIT Y LIMITS LONG TERM13SOUTHWESTERN B LVD - RAINT REE DR T O SE INNER LOOP MEDIUM14WOLF RANCH PKWY - DB WOOD DR T O SOUT HWEST BYPASS MEDIUM COMMIT MENT15WILLIAMS DR - FRONT AGE RD T O RIVERY B LVD MEDIUM16DB WOOD DR - SH 29 T O OAK RIDGE DR MEDIUM17DB WOOD DR - OAK RIDGE DR TO WILLIAMS DR LONG TERM18AIRPORT RD - IH 35 T O LAKEWAY DR LONG TERM19AIRPORT RD - LAKEWAY DR T O B ERRY CREEK DR MEDIUM20SE INNER LOOP - SH 29 T O SOUT HWESTERN B LVD HIGH B OND21SE INNER LOOP - SOUT HWEST ERN B LVD T O IH 35 MEDIUM22IH 35 SB FRONT AGE RD - WILLIAMS DR T O RIVERY BLVD LONG TERM23SHELL RD - WILLIAMS DR T O R323598 (SHELL PROPERT Y LINE)LONG TERM23bSHELL RD - R323598(SHELL PROPERTY LINE) T O SH 195 LONG TERM24IH 35 NB FRONT AGE ROAD - WILLIAMS DR TO NB FRONT AGE RD HIGH24bIH 35 NB FRONT AGE ROAD - NB FRONTAGE RD T O SH 130 HIGH25RIVERY B LVD EXTENSION - WILLIAMS DR TO NORTHWEST B LVD HIGH26SOUTHWEST B Y PASS - LEANDER RD T O IH 35 MEDIUM COMMIT MENT B27SOUTHWEST B Y PASS - SH 29 T O LEANDER RD MEDIUM COMMIT MENT28NORTHWEST B LVD BRIDGE - FONT ANA DR TO AUSTIN AVE HIGH COMMIT MENT30LEANDER RD (RM 2243) - GARY PARK T O RIVER RIDGE DR MEDIUM31RABBIT HILL RD - T ERAVIST A PKWY T O WEST INGHOUSE RD HIGH32RABBIT HILL RD - B LUE SPRINGS B LVD T O WEST INGHOUSE RD LONG TERM33ROCKRIDE LN - SAM HOUSTON AVE T O WESTINGHOUSE RD MEDIUM34ROCKRIDE LN - WEST INGHOUSE RD T O ET J LONG TERM35SOUTHWESTERN B LVD - SAM HOUST ON AVE T O ROCKRIDE LN LONG TERM36WESTINGHOUSE RD - FM 1460 TO ROCKRIDE LN MEDIUM B OND37WESTINGHOUSE RD - ROCKRIDE LN T O SH 130 LONG TERM B OND38WESTINGHOUSE RD - IH 35 T O FM 1460 LONG TERM
ID Intersection Projects Priority1DB WOOD RD @ SH 29 (Pavement & Signal)HIGH B OND2LAKEWAY DR @ NORT HWEST B LVD MEDIUM3LAKEWAY RD @ AIRPORT RD HIGH4aWILLIAMS DR @ RIVERY B LVD (High)HIGH4bWILLIAMS DR @ RIVERY B LVD (Long T erm)LONG5LEANDER RD (RM 2243) - LEANDER RD @ IH 35 HIGH6LEANDER RD @ ESCALERA PKWY LONG B OND7DB WOOD RD - B RIDGE @ MIDDLEFORK OF SG MEDIUM8WILLIAMS DR @ JIM HOGG RD (Signal)HIGH9WESTBURY LN/B ELLAIRE@ SHELL RD HIGH
ID
Roadway
Projects Priority Total Package Potential Projects Staff Alternative
10 NE Inner Loop - Stadium Dr To FM 971 High $6,000,000
11 Stadium Dr (CR 151) - Austin Ave To NE Inner Loop Medium $4,800,000
12 CR 152 - Stadium Dr (CR 151) To City Limits Long Term $5,000,000
13 Southwestern Blvd - Raintree Dr To SE Inner Loop Medium $5,000,000
14 Wolf Ranch Pkwy - DB Wood Dr To Southwest Bypass Medium Commitment $3,500,000 $3,500,000 $3,500,000
15 Williams Dr - Frontage Rd To Rivery Blvd Medium $750,000
16 DB Wood Dr - SH 29 To Oak Ridge Dr Medium $16,400,000 $16,400,000 $6,000,000
17 DB Wood Dr - Oak Ridge Dr To Williams Dr Long Term $15,350,000
18 Airport Rd - IH 35 To Lakeway Dr Long Term $4,650,000
19 Airport Rd - Lakeway Dr To Berry Creek Dr Medium $17,680,000 $17,680,000
20 SE Inner Loop - SH 29 To Southwestern Blvd High Bond $12,300,000
21 SE Inner Loop - Southwestern Blvd To IH 35 Medium $19,690,000
22 IH 35 SB Frontage Rd - Williams Dr To Rivery Blvd Long Term $4,970,000
23 Shell Rd - Williams Dr To R323598 (Shell Property Line)Long Term $27,200,000 $20,000,000
23b Shell Rd - R323598(Shell Property Line) To SH 195 Long Term $7,520,000
24 IH 35 NB Frontage Road - Williams Dr To NB Frontage RdHigh $3,230,000 $6,000,000 $6,000,000
24b IH 35 NB Frontage Road - NB Frontage Rd To SH 130 High $15,330,000
25 Rivery Blvd Extension - Williams Dr To Northwest BlvdHigh $5,500,000 $5,500,000 $5,500,000
26 Southwest Bypass - Leander Rd To IH 35 Medium Commitment B $16,200,000
27 Southwest Bypass - SH 29 To Leander Rd Medium Commitment $18,200,000 $18,200,000 $18,200,000
28 Northwest Blvd Bridge - Fontana Dr To Austin Ave High Commitment $8,820,000 $8,820,000 $8,820,000
30 Leander Rd (RM 2243) - Gary Park To River Ridge Dr Medium $41,440,000 $15,000,000
31 Rabbit Hill Rd - Teravista Pkwy To Westinghouse Rd High $9,020,000 TIRZ TIRZ
32 Rabbit Hill Rd - Blue Springs Blvd To Westinghouse RdLong Term $11,430,000 TIRZ TIRZ
33 Rockride Ln - Sam Houston Ave To Westinghouse Rd Medium $7,560,000
34 Rockride Ln - Westinghouse Rd To ETJ Long Term $1,000,000
35 Southwestern Blvd - Sam Houston Ave To Rockride LnLong Term $9,510,000
36 Westinghouse Rd - FM 1460 To Rockride Ln Medium Bond $13,590,000
37 Westinghouse Rd - Rockride Ln To SH 130 Long Term Bond $20,600,000
38 Westinghouse Rd - IH 35 To FM 1460 Long Term $18,740,000 TIRZ TIRZ
39 Intersection/Safety/Capital Pool $20,000,000 $10,000,000 $10,000,000
39a #5 Leander Rd Bridge @ IH 35 $8,000,000
40 Sidewalk Pool $10,000,000 $10,000,000 $5,000,000
$380,980,000 $139,100,000 $63,020,000
Assumptions Issuance Cost added $411,000,000 $150,000,000 $72,000,000
*ESTIMATES MADE IN 2014 DOLLAR VALUES
Notes
23b SHELL RD - R323598 TO SH 195
24b IH 35 NB FRONTAGE ROAD - NB FRONTAGE RD TO SH 130
29 WOLF RANCH PKWY - RIVERY BLVD TO WOODLAWN AVE
Scheduling Priority
ID
Intersection
Projects Priority
1 DB Wood Rd @ SH 29 High Bond
2 Lakeway Dr @ Northwest Blvd Medium
3 Lakeway Rd @ Airport Rd High
4 Williams Dr @ Rivery Blvd High
5 Leander Rd (Rm 2243) - Leander Rd @ IH 35 High
6 Leander Rd @ Escalera Pkwy Long Bond
7 DB Wood Rd - Bridge @ Middlefork Of SG Medium
8 Williams Dr @ Jim Hogg Rd High
9 Westbury Ln/Bellaire@ Shell Rd High
10 Rock Ride Ln @ SE Inner Loop
Assumptions
$8M/mile for new construction
2014 Bond Candidate List
Scheduling Priority
High Medium Long
$2,900,000
-$ -$ -$
2014 Bond Candidate List
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Discussion and presentation of the draft 2014-2015 Capital Improvement Plan -- Wesley Wright, P.E.,
Systems Engineering Director
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
n/a
SUBMITTED BY:
Wes Wright by JK
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
n/a
SUBMITTED BY: