Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda_GTAB_04.08.2016Notice of Meeting for the Georgetown Transportation Adv isory Board and the Gov erning Body of the City of Georgetown April 8, 2016 at 10:00 AM at the GMC Building, 300-1 Industrial Av e., Georgetown, TX 78626 The City o f G eo rgeto wn is committed to comp lianc e with the Americans with Dis abilities Ac t (ADA). If yo u req uire as s is tanc e in participating at a p ublic meeting d ue to a disability, as d efined und er the ADA, reas onab le as s is tance, ad ap tatio ns , or acc o mmo d ations will b e provid ed up o n req uest. P leas e c o ntact the City at leas t fo ur (4) d ays prior to the sc heduled meeting d ate, at (512) 930-3652 or City Hall at 113 East 8th Street for ad d itional informatio n; TTY users ro ute thro ugh Relay Texas at 711. Regular Session (This Regular S es s io n may, at any time, b e rec es s ed to convene an Exec utive S es s io n fo r any p urpose authorized b y the Op en Meetings Act, Texas Go vernment Co d e 551.) A Call to Ord er The Board may, at any time, rec es s the R egular S es s io n to convene in Exec utive S es s io n at the reques t of the Chair, a Board Memb er, the City Manager, As s is tant City Manager, G eneral Manager of Utilities, City Co uncil Member, o r legal c o uns el for any p urpos e authorized b y the Op en Meetings Act, Texas Government C o d e Chapter 551, and are s ubjec t to actio n in the Regular Ses s ion that follows . B Introduction of Vis itors C Ind ustry/C AMP O/TXDOT Updates D Dis cus s ion regard ing the Projec t Progres s Reports and Time Lines. – Bill Dryd en, P.E., Transportation Engineer, Mark Miller, Trans p o rtatio n Servic es Manager, Nat Waggoner, PMP ®, Trans p o rtatio n Analys t and Ed ward G. P o las ek, AICP, Transportatio n Services Direc tor. E Dis cus s ion regard ing the Airp o rt Projec t P ro gres s Report and Time Lines . – R us s Volk, C.M., Airport Manager and Ed ward G. Polasek, AICP, Trans portation S ervic es Director Legislativ e Regular Agenda F Review and p o s s ib le ac tion to approve the minutes from the Regular GTAB Bo ard meeting held on Marc h 11, 216. - Jana Kern – GTAB Board Liais o n G Co nsideration and possible recommendatio n to award a bid to Cutler R ep aving o f Lawrence, KS in the amount of $872,512.00 for p avement maintenanc e (ho t in p lace recycling)—Ed ward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportatio n Services Direc tor and Mark Miller, Trans p o rtatio n Servic es Manager. H Review and p o s s ib le rec o mmendatio n of ap p ro val o f Tas k Ord er SBE 16-002 for Citywid e Sid ewalk and Acc es s ibility Imp ro vements to Steger Bizzell o f Georgetown, Texas in the amo unt o f $96,672. - Edward G. Po las ek, A.I.C.P., Trans p o rtatio n Direc to r and Nat Waggoner, Trans p o rtatio n Analys t I Co nsideration and possible ad o p tion of s taff rec o mmendatio n fo r the appointment Troy Hellman to the Williams Drive S teering Committee. - Nat Waggo ner, Trans p o rtatio n Analys t and Ed ward G. Polasek, AICP, Trans p o rtatio n Direc tor Page 1 of 113 Adjournment CERTIFICATE OF POSTING I, Shelley No wling, C ity S ecretary fo r the C ity of Geo rgeto wn, Texas , d o hereby c ertify that this Notice of Meeting was p o s ted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a p lace read ily acc es s ible to the general p ublic at all times , on the ______ d ay o f __________________, 2016, at __________, and remained so p o s ted fo r at leas t 72 c o ntinuo us ho urs p receding the sc heduled time o f s aid meeting. ____________________________________ S helley No wling, City Sec retary Page 2 of 113 City of Georgetown, Texas Transportation Advisory Board April 8, 2016 SUBJECT: Disc ussion regarding the P ro ject P ro gress R ep o rts and Time Lines . – Bill Dryden, P.E., Trans p o rtatio n Engineer, Mark Miller, Transportation Servic es Manager, Nat Waggo ner, PMP®, Transportation Analyst and Edward G . Polas ek, AICP, Trans p o rtation S ervic es Directo r. ITEM SUMMARY: GTAB Projec ts 2nd Street (Aus tin Avenue to College Street) Aus tin Avenue Bridges P ro ject CDBG Sidewalk Imp ro vements - MLK/3rd St (Scenic Dr. to Aus tin Ave.) - University Ave. (I 35 to Hart St.) FM 971 R ealignment at Aus tin Avenue FM 1460 Imp ro vements Projec t Jim Ho gg Drive/Road at Williams Drive Southwes t Bypass Projec t (Leander Road to I 35) Trans portation S ervic es Operatio ns – CIP Maintenance GTEC P ro jec ts Projec t S tatus Report 2015 Ro ad Bond P ro gram Southwes t Byp as s (Leander Dr./R M 2243 to Wo lf Ranc h Parkway Extens io n) and Wo lf Ranc h Parkway Extens ion (S W Byp as s to DB Wo o d Rd .) FINANCIAL IMPACT: None SUBMITTED BY: Bill Dryden, P.E., Trans portation Engineer ATTACHMENTS: Description Type April Project Progres s Reports Backup Material GTEC - Project Status Report Backup Material 2015 Bond Program Project Progres s Reports Backup Material Page 3 of 113 2nd Street  Austin Avenue to College Street  Project No. 1BU     TIP None  April 2016  Unchanged  Project Description Design and preparation of plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for the  widening and reconstruction of 2nd Street from Austin Avenue to College Street.  Purpose To provide a safer roadway between Austin Avenue and College Street serving the  citizens of the north portion of “Old Town” and VFW baseball fields.  The proposed  project provides improved sidewalk for pedestrian activities along the roadway.  Project Manager Mark Miller and Joel Weaver  Engineer KPA, LP      Element Status / Issues  Design Complete  Environmental/  Archeological  Complete  Rights of Way Existing  Utility Relocations Work complete!    Construction As of March 2nd, the contractor was finishing punch list and working on completing  curb work on 4th Street. (add alternate)  Other Issues The VFW park reconstruction was bid on Feb. 2nd.  The Parks department is looking  into funding options.    Page 4 of 113 Austin Avenue Bridges Project (North and South San Gabriel Bridges) Project No. TBD TIP Project No. N/A April 2016 Project Description Develop 30% plans for improvements along Austin Ave. between 3rd Street and Morrow Street. The project involves several phases and requires participation and support from various stakeholders– interested citizens, community businesses, professional consultants, State and regional transportation partners City Staff and Council. Schedule Phase Activity Completion 1 Public involvement and alternative analyses, evaluating alternatives for feasibility and costs, etc. Mid 2016 2 Develop geometric layouts and preliminary construction estimates for two alternatives Mid 2016 3 Selection of alternative by Council End 2016 4 Develop schematic and 30% plans. Mid 2017 Proj. Mgrs Ed Polasek, AICP; Bill Dryden, P.E.; Nat Waggoner, PMP® Engineer Aguirre & Fields, LP Element Status/Issues Public Involvement 1st Public held March 31, 2016. 24 meetings with Affected Property Owners (MAPO) to date. 4/19 Meeting with Village Park Condos HOA. Design TBD Surveying Underway, 8% complete. Environmental Resolution to enter into an Advanced Funding Agreement with TxDOT, authorized by Council 3/22. Rights of Way Exist. ROW from N. of 2nd to Morrow; Additional ROW may be required 3rd to N. of 2nd. Utility Relocations TBD (future) Construction TBD Other Issues Private property owner meeting 3/22, City attended at request of meeting hosts. Page 5 of 113 CDBG Sidewalk Improvements Project  MLK/3rd Street (Scenic Dr. to Austin Ave.)  Project No. None    TIP No. None  April 2016  Project Description Design and preparation of final plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for  sidewalk improvements along MLK/ and 3rd streets from Scenic Drive to Austin  Avenue.  Purpose To provide ADA/TDLR compliant sidewalks in the area.  Project Managers Bill Dryden, P.E.  Engineer Steger Bizzell    Element Status / Issues  Design Complete  Environmental/  Archeological  Complete  Rights of Way N/A  Utility Relocations N/A  Construction NTP has been issued effective April 4th.  Other Issues Construction will be scheduled around the Red Poppy Festival weekend.    Page 6 of 113 CDBG Sidewalk Improvements Project  University Avenue (SH 29) (I 35 to Hart St.)  Project No. None    TIP No. None  April 2016  Unchanged  Project Description Design and preparation of final plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for  sidewalk improvements along University Avenue (SH 29) from I 35 to Hart Street.  Purpose To provide ADA/TDLR compliant sidewalks in the area.  Project Managers Bill Dryden, P.E.  Engineer Steger Bizzell    Element Status / Issues  Design Design is complete; awaiting TCEQ review and comments.  Environmental/  Archeological  N/A  Rights of Way Existing  Utility Relocations TBD  Construction TBD  Other Issues Engineer is addressing some TCEQ‐raised issues regarding water quality.    Page 7 of 113 FM 971 at Austin Avenue  Realignment Intersection Improvements  Project No. 1BZ     TIP No. AG  March 2016  Unchanged  Project Description Design and preparation of final plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for the  widening and realignment of FM 971 at Austin Avenue, eastward to Gann Street.  Purpose To provide a new alignment consistent with the alignment of the proposed  Northwest Boulevard Bridge over IH 35; to allow a feasible, alternate route from  the west side of I 35 to Austin Avenue, to Georgetown High School, to San Gabriel  Park and a more direct route to SH 130.  Project Managers Bill Dryden, P.E.  Engineer Klotz Associates, Inc.    Element Status / Issues  Design Preliminary Engineering complete;   Engineer working on 60% design submittal  Environmental/  Archeological  10/2015  Rights of Way Complete  Utility Relocations TBD  Construction 10/2016  Other Issues Meeting scheduled with TxDOT on February 5th to discuss the Advance Funding  Agreement.    Page 8 of 113 FM 1460  Quail Valley Drive to University Drive  Project No. 5RB     TIP No. BO & CD  April 2016  Unchanged  Project Description Design and preparation of plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for the  widening and reconstruction of FM 1460.  Project will include review and update  to existing Schematic, Right‐of‐Way Map and Environmental Document and  completion of the PS&E for the remaining existing roadway.  Purpose To keep the currently approved environmental documents active; purchase ROW,  effect utility relocations/clearance and to provide on‐the‐shelf PS&E for TxDOT  letting not later than August 2013, pending available construction funding.  Project Managers Ed Polasek, AICP and Bill Dryden, P.E.  Engineer Brown and Gay Engineers, Inc.    Element Status / Issues  Design Complete  Environmental/  Archeological  Complete  Rights of Way 1 Remaining parcel of original 36 – pending closing documents.  Utility Relocations Ongoing  Construction Construction is underway.  Other Issues Engineer preparing Change Orders for construction contract.    Page 9 of 113 Jim Hogg Drive/Road at Williams Drive  Intersection and Signalization Improvements  Project No. 1DE    TIP No. None  April 2106  Project Description Design and preparation of final plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for the  widening of Jim Hogg at the intersection of Williams Drive, inclusive of installation  of a traffic signal.  Purpose To provide a widened 3‐lane section with signal at the intersection of Jim Hogg and  Williams Drive.  The proposed improvements will provide improved access for the  residents and the employees of the new City Service Center to Williams Drive.  Project Manager Bill Dryden, P.E.  Engineer Kimley‐Horn and Associates, Inc.    Element Status / Issues  Design Complete  Environmental/  Archeological  Complete  Rights of Way Existing  Utility Relocations Included with construction project  Construction Construction is on‐going; signal foundations have been installed; Contractor is  working on utility relocations.  Other Issues Waste water line being installed across Jim Hogg Road to proposed development  on west side.    Page 10 of 113 Southwest Bypass Project   (RM 2243 to IH 35)  Project No. 1CA     Project No. BK  April 2016  Project Description Develop PS&E for Southwest Bypass from Leander Road (RM 2243) to IH 35 in the  ultimate configuration 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.  Purpose To extend an interim portion of the SH 29 Bypass, filling in between Leander Road  (RM 2243) to IH 35 Southbound Frontage Road.  Project Manager Williamson County  City Contact: Ed Polasek, AICP and Bill Dryden, P.E.  Engineer HDR, Inc.      Element Status / Issues  Williamson County  Project Status  (from WilCo’s  status  report)  Southwest Bypass Driveways – Award of the construction contract was approved  at 3/8/16 Commissioners Court Meeting. Five (5) bids were received on 2/24/16, with  the apparent low bidder being Smith Contracting with a bid of $289,981.90.  Southwest Bypass (RM 2243 to IH 35) – A meeting with HDR to discuss the WA  Supplemental and project status was held on 3/9/16. A meeting with TxDOT and the  City of Georgetown to discuss the turn lanes on RM 2243 was held on 3/9/16. A  meeting with the City of Georgetown and County staff was held on 2/26/16 to  discuss project status. A 30% PS&E Submittal for the Southwest Bypass Phase 1 was  received on 2/23/16 and is under review. A GEC Constructability review meeting  was held on 3/3/16. An ILA with the City of Georgetown was approved by  Commissioners Court on 2/23/16. Comments were issued 2/18/16 on a 60% PS&E  submittal for turn lanes on RM 2243 at Southwest Bypass.  Rights of Way Complete for the parcels east of the Texas Crushed Stone properties.  Other Issues City and WilCo completing the Interlocal Agreement for the Project.    Page 11 of 113 Transit Development Plan (Fixed Route Bus)  Project No. TBD     TIP Project No. N/A  April 2016  Project  Description  The purpose of this study is to develop a local transit plan for the City of Georgetown that  would serve transit needs within the city limits and connect to existing and future regional  transit options to form a regional  transit  network  that  would  improve  mobility,  improve   the  region’s  environmental  and economic sustainability, and slow the increase of congestion  on roadways.  Schedule Phase Activity Completion  1 Initiation Fall 2014  2 Public Involvement, Existing Conditions, Recommendations Spring 2015  3 Report Completed Summer 206  4 Boards and Commissions Review, Council Summer 2016  5 Consideration by Council Spring 2016 Proj. Mgrs Ed Polasek, AICP; Bill Dryden, P.E.; Nat Waggoner, PMP®  Engineer Aguirre & Fields, LP  Element Status/Issues  Public Involvement 2 Public Meetings  Public Intercept Survey, Online Survey, GYAB Survey,  Multiple Stakeholder Interviews  More than 20 presentations  Design Baseline of routes, service parameters recommended.  Stops locations and designs TBD  Next Step(s) City staff currently negotiating an Interlocal Agreement  (ILA) with the Georgetown Health Foundation  Staff and consultant revising TDP based on events and  guidance provided since 6/2015 completion  Workshop with City Council 5/24 to review ILA,  funding structure and consider adoption of final  Transit Development Plan    Page 12 of 113 Transportation Services Operations  CIP Maintenance  April 2016  Project Description 2015‐2016 CIP Maintenance of roadways including, Chip seal, Cutler Overlays,  Fog seal applications and Engineering design of future rehabilitation projects.  Purpose To provide protection and maintain an overall pavement condition index of  85%.  Project Manager Mark Miller  Engineer/Engineers KPA, LP  Task Status / Issues     Chip Seal  2016 work in design phase.  Bid phase May 2016.  In‐house staff working on  pre‐construction patching and crack sealing. (Council direction from  workshop: “No single chip seals, two course chip seal only while further  evaluation of chip seals is done” “watch how the perform”.  Council will  consider and review implications of this action later this year as part of the  budget process) Half of the roads originally proposed for single chip seal were  moved into the 2017 budget. Engineering packages are being put together  accordingly.   Fog Seal 2015 – Rejuvenation has been discontinued indefinitely!  The product E‐fog  which has been used successfully for the past two years is not performing as it  has in the past.  Application made in March experienced an initial cure  allowing traffic to be released in 1 to 3 hours and then soften on warmer days  to a point of tracking into driveways.  Material testing and discussions with  the manufacturer have not resulted in an explanation.  City crews have been  removing the tracks from driveways with power‐washers.  The product is  believed to be cured at this time but will continue to monitor the roadways  into warm weather.  HIPR/overlay Bids taken on March 30th.  Contract recommendation item today!  Engineering 2016 Work in progress!    Page 13 of 113 Current Capital Improvement Projects TIP No. Project No. Update On Schedule/ Or Behind Project Budget Project Cost Available Current Year Projected Current Year Cost Current Year Available Lakeway Drive Overpass #10 5QL Project Complete. Complete 2,500,000 2,500,000 0 0 0 Southeast Arterial 1 (Sam Houston Avenue)#12 5QG Project Complete. Complete 12,995,625 10,478,499 2,517,126 0 0 Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension (SW Bypass to DB Wood Road) #14A 5QW Project Complete. Complete 1,330,000 1,111,233 218,767 283,350 0 283,350 Southwest Bypass (SH29 to RR2243)#14B 5QC Project Complete. Complete 7,756,432 3,225,132 4,531,300 4,539,107 5,787 4,533,320 Northwest Blvd Overpass #QQ 5QX Engineer is coordinating design with the design for Rivery Boulevard in moving towards construction PS&E for both projects to minimize overlap work between these two projects. Engineer is developing alternatives for storm water outfall. Construction tentatively scheduled to begin mid-FY 2019. In-process Unchanged 1,136,178 1,099,076 37,102 571,178 479,588 91,590 NB Frontage Road (SS 158 to Lakeway)#QQ 5QY We have been informed by TxDOT that it will be doing the Schematic, Environmental, etc., and PS&E for the NB Frontage Road as part of its proposed Williams Drive Bridge project. The City project is on indefinite hold but we will be coordinating with TxDOT on its design project Indefinite Hold 613,822 613,822 0 382,822 382,822 0 ROW - 1460 #EEa #EEb #EEc 5RB Contractor has begun working on the project; contract time is beginning to accrue. Utility relocations - ongoing. As of October 16th, the City has obtained PUAs or have closings completed or planned for all the remaining FM 1460 parcels. Remaining parcel – pending closing documents. Under Construction Unchanged 11,788,230 5,348,470 6,439,760 6,727,539 2,315,896 4,411,643 TCS/RR Easement 5RD Project Complete. Complete 1,500,000 1,503,148 -3,148 0 0 FM 971 / Washam 5RE Project Complete. Complete 100,000 0 100,000 0 0 Rivery Road 5RF Project Complete. Complete 779,000 29,000 750,000 750,000 0 750,000 Rivery Boulevard 5RM Engineer has submitted 75% plans for City review. Appraiser is completing appraisals on remaining 4 parcels which are expected by the end of March. Offers have been made to the 16 parcel owners from Park Lane southward to Williams Drive. Closed on 3 parcels; 3 more in process; 1 pending subject to GTEC/Council approval. Construction tentatively scheduled to begin mid FY 2018. On Schedule GTEC PROJECT UPDATE AND STATUS REPORT April 2016 Project to Date Current Year Budget (13/14) L:\Global\CIP Budgetary Worksheets\GTEC Status Report\2016\GTEC - Project Status - 2016-04.xlsx Page 1 of 3 3/30/2016Page 14 of 113 Current Capital Improvement Projects TIP No. Project No. Update On Schedule/ Or Behind Project Budget Project Cost Available Current Year Projected Current Year Cost Current Year Available GTEC PROJECT UPDATE AND STATUS REPORT April 2016 Project to Date Current Year Budget (13/14) Snead Drive 5QZ Utilities are complete and tested; Contractor is installing drainage items and has begun installation of the road base. Substantial Completion date is April 1st; Final Completion date is May 31st. Under Construction On Schedule 825,100 87,000 738,100 825,100 87,000 738,100 Mays Street Extension 5RI Design is Complete Engineer has submitted all ROW documents; acquisition has begun with the property owners south of Westinghouse Road. Project will be bid as ROW is acquired. Project will take 12 months to complete (tentatively set for Spring 2017). Interlocal Agreement (ILA) with Round Rock has been adopted by Councils of both cities. In Process 196,000 196,000 0 196,000 196,000 0 IH 35/ Hwy 29 Intersection 5RJ TBD 650,000 0 650,000 650,000 0 650,000 L:\Global\CIP Budgetary Worksheets\GTEC Status Report\2016\GTEC - Project Status - 2016-04.xlsx Page 2 of 3 3/30/2016Page 15 of 113 Current Capital Improvement Projects TIP No. Project No. Update On Schedule/ Or Behind Project Budget Project Cost Available Current Year Projected Current Year Cost Current Year Available GTEC PROJECT UPDATE AND STATUS REPORT April 2016 Project to Date Current Year Budget (13/14) Current Economic Development Projects Project Type Project No. Update On Schedule/ Or Behind Project Budget Project Cost Available Current Year Budget Current Year Cost Current Year Available 100 S. Austin Ave Eco Devo Project 5RA In-process 507,000 507,000 0 0 Williams Drive Gateway 5RC Engineer working on schematic design alternatives and preliminary cost estimates. On Schedule 65,000 61720 3,280 0 0 Economic Development Projects 1,137,500 1,137,500 1,137,500 0 1,137,500 16,062,596 3,467,093 12,595,503 Project to Date Current Year Budget (13/14) L:\Global\CIP Budgetary Worksheets\GTEC Status Report\2016\GTEC - Project Status - 2016-04.xlsx Page 3 of 3 3/30/2016Page 16 of 113 2015 Road Bond Program Southwest Bypass (Leander Rd. to Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension)  Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension (SW Bypass to DB Wood Rd.)  Project No. 1DI       OTP Project No. AD & AZ1  April 2016  Project  Description  Construction of Southwest Bypass from Leander Road (RM 2243) to Wolf Ranch  Parkway Extension and Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension from Southwest Bypass to  DB Wood Road.  Remaining Project Schedule  Council for award February 24th Notice to Proceed 2nd Quarter 2016  Completion of Construction Summer 2018 Purpose To complete a connection from Leander Road (RM 2243) to University Ave. (SH 29)  Project Manager Bill Dryden, P.E.  Engineer HDR, Inc.    Element Status / Issues  Design Complete  Surveying  Complete  Environmental Complete  Rights of Way ROW acquired.  Utility  Relocations  TBD  Construction NTP pending resolution of final TCEQ comments and Permit.  Other Issues Pending resolution of TCEQ Permit.    Page 17 of 113 City of Georgetown, Texas Transportation Advisory Board April 8, 2016 SUBJECT: Disc ussion regarding the Airport P ro ject Progres s R ep o rt and Time Lines . – Rus s Vo lk, C.M., Airp o rt Manager and Edward G. P o las ek, AICP, Trans p o rtatio n Services Direc tor ITEM SUMMARY: Airport Projects: Grant 1314GRGTN Update Grant 1514GRGTN Update Grant 16MPGRGTN Up d ate FAA To wer Report F uel Sales Report Hangar / Tie-Down Leas e Up d ate 2016 Acc o mp lis hments and P ro jects Bus iness Office Software Up d ate Avgas Fuel P rice Comparis o n Jet A Fuel P rice Comparis o n Airp o rt Mo nthly Financial R ep o rt FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A SUBMITTED BY: Rus s Vo lk, C.M., Airport Manager ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Grant 1314GRGTN Update Backup Material Grant 1514GRGTN Update Backup Material Grant 16MPGRGTN Update Backup Material FAA Tower Report Backup Material Feb Fuel Sales Report Backup Material Hangar/Tie-Down Report Backup Material 2016 Goals and Accomplis hments Backup Material Bus ines s Software Update Backup Material Avgas Prices Backup Material Jet A Prices Backup Material Feb Airport Financials Backup Material Feb Detailed Airport Financials Backup Material Page 18 of 113 Airport Improvements Project No. 1314GRGTN Apr 2016 Project Description FY2013 project: Design New Fuel Farm, Parallel Taxiway A, Pavement Maintenance Purpose Improved safety and reliability of airport Project Manager Russ Volk C.M., Airport Manager Project Engineer Garver Notes: Jul 2005 – Airport Master Plan Update identified many of these projects as “Development Goals” May 2013 – Commission Approval of Grant Jul 2013 – Mayor signs Grant Participation Agreement Aug 2013 – Garver Engineering selected as Engineering / Design Firm Page 19 of 113 Project Elements include: Engineering / Design Services Environmental Review Bidding Process Feb 2016 – Review Bid Packet Mar/Apr 2016 – Bid Process Apr 12 2016 – Bid Opening Late May 2016 – Conditional Award Construction phase of project is under Grant 1514GRGTN Page 20 of 113 Airport Improvements Project No. 1514GRGTN Apr 2016 Project Description FY2015 project: Construction of Fuel Storage Tanks, Parallel Taxiway A, Pavement Maintenance Purpose Improved safety and reliability of airport Project Manager Russ Volk C.M., Airport Manager Project Engineer Garver Notes: Oct 2014 - Council Resolution 101414-F – Approval to Debt Fund $870K for project Mar 2015 - Council Resolution 032415-G – Authorization for City to Sell Certificates of Obligation to fund project Jan 28, 2016 – Transportation Commission approval of $8.3M Grant Page 21 of 113 Jan 29, 2016 – City cost share of $830K wire transferred to TxDOT Aviation per payment instructions from TxDOT Late Jun 2016 – Following completion of bidding process being conducted under grant 1314GRGTN, TxDOT will provide Construction Project Participation Agreement for City consideration Page 22 of 113 Airport Improvements Project No. 16MPGRGTN Apr 2016 Project Description FY2016 project: Airport Master Plan Update Purpose Update to 2005 Airport Master Plan Project Manager Russ Volk C.M., Airport Manager Project Estimate $200,000 Project Engineer Unknown Jan 28 – Transportation Commission approval of $200K Grant Feb 19 – Solicitation for Consultant Qualifications Mar 29 – Consultant Qualification Submissions due TxDOT Aviation Apr – Committee to Review Consultant Qualifications • John Pettitt • Donna Courtney • Mike Babin • Jordon Maddox • Russ Volk Page 23 of 113 Georgetown Municipal Airport Contract Tower Program Update For Month of Feb 2016 Project Description Georgetown Tower Monthly Update Purpose Operations Report Project Manager Russ Volk C.M., Airport Manager Operating Statistics Performance/Volumetric Indicators For the Month of: Feb 2016 Feb 2015 FY-T-D Feb 2016 FY-T-D Variance Take Offs and Landings Day* Night* VFR 6,391 165 25,081 30,527 5,446 18% IFR 733 21 2,816 2,869 53 2% Total Take Offs/Landings 7,124 186 27,897 33,396 5,499 16.5% Total for Month 7,310 * This does not include flyover operations (i.e. handoffs from ABIA approach/departure control to KGTU tower then onto the next ATC.). Page 24 of 113 Georgetown Municipal Airport Fuel Sales Update For Month of Feb 2016 Project Description Georgetown Fuel Sales Update Purpose Fuel Sales Monthly Report Project Manager Russ Volk C.M., Airport Manager Operating Statistics Performance/volumetric indicators Gallons For the Month of: Feb Feb 2015 FY-T-D Feb 2016 FY-T-D Variance Type of Fuel 2015 2016 AVGAS 17,791 26,935 100,997 121,394 20,397 17% JET A 34,946 32,592 185,228 200,622 15,394 8% Total Gallons Sold 52,737 59,527 286,225 322,016 35,791 11% Page 25 of 113 Airport Hangar / Tie-Down Lease Update Apr 2016 Project Description Hangar / Tie-Down Lease Agreements Purpose Occupancy Rates Project Manager Russ Volk C.M., Airport Manager Unit Stats Total Hangars – 114 • 100 Percent Occupied Total Storage Units – 7 • 5 Occupied • 2 Vacant Total Tie-Downs – 39 Monthly, 14 for Overnight/Transient Parking • 100 Percent Occupied Page 26 of 113 GTU Airport In-Work Projects Underbrush trimming on north end of airport. Replace door seals on Hangars E, F, and G. Replace bottom door seals on Hangars H, I, and J. Develop Airport Preventative Maintenance Program. Updating Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. Update to Airport Rules and Regulations and Minimum Standards. Planned Projects Demolition of old Civil Air Patrol building. Obtaining Pesticide Application License to allow for airport staff to spray weed killer. Develop Hangar Routine Maintenance Program. Evaluate possible software solutions for a technology based Pavement Management Program. Evaluate possible software solutions for a technology based Airport Self Inspection Program. Upgrade electrical service to Hangars I and J. Repairs to terminal ramp to reduce FOD issues. Upgrade to bi-fold doors drive motors on Hangars BB and CC. Developing lease agreement for storage locations. Page 27 of 113 Accomplishments 2016 Resealed windows in first four floors of Control Tower Resealed two windows in Terminal Conference Room Accomplished annual maintenance on windsock Painted main entry hallway in Terminal Painted main lobby in Terminal Painted conference room in Terminal Replace gate rollers on south electronic gate. Facility Inspection of Gantt Hangars Facility Appraisal of Gantt Hangars Upgraded electrical service to Hangar H Installed aviation radio in Kubota Crack seal Runway 18/36 Selected new Business Office software – Total Aviation Accomplished Electrical upgrades in CTA hangar Replaced Key Pad at South Gate Entrance Painted reflective tags on Runway Lights Accomplished repairs on Hangar D in preparation for new tenant. Vegetation spraying around signage and taxiway cracks Quarterly gate maintenance on all electronic gates Replaced gate entrance key pad on south gate Obtained Facility Inspection Report on Gantt Hangar Page 28 of 113 Obtained Appraisal on Gantt Hangar Quarterly Maintenance on RWY 18 PAPI system Rotating Beacon maintenance Accomplished Asbestos Survey on old Civil Airport Patrol building Page 29 of 113 Airport Project Apr 2016 Project Description Business Operations Software Purpose Software Solution for Airport Business Operations Project Manager Russ Volk C.M., Airport Manager Project Estimate $7,000 Sep 2015 – Request for Proposals from potential vendors Oct 2015 - Demos and evaluation of software products Nov 2015 - Final selection of vendor Dec 2015 – Negotiation of cost and licensing agreement Jan / Feb 2016 – Software modifications for CoG process Feb 24/25 – Initial software training for CoG Business Operations Coordinator Mar 2016 – Integration of Fuel Master with Total Aviation Software Mar /Apr 2016 - Implementation of Phase 1 of project Page 30 of 113 1. Integration of existing process utilizing new software 2016 – Future phases Phase 2 – Switch over management and billing of airport leases into Total Aviation Software Phase 3 – Integration of new fuel farm features into Total Aviation Software Page 31 of 113 Page 32 of 113 Page 33 of 113 Page 34 of 113 Page 35 of 113 Page 36 of 113 Georgetown Municipal Airport Income Statement  2/29/2016 FY2016         Budget Beginning Fund Balance 748,167$        792,318$       44,151$         82,210$         710,108$        Operating Revenues Fuel Sales 2,875,000        837,671           29.14% 902,858            ‐7.22% Lease & Rentals 684,400           288,730           42.19% 235,033           22.85% Interest & Other 41,550             1,233               2.97% 1,411                ‐12.64% Total Operating Revenue 3,600,950             1,127,633      31.31% 1,139,302       ‐1.02% Operating Expenses Personnel 321,471           119,544           37.19% 126,906            ‐5.80% Operations ‐ Fuel 2,448,882        612,974           25.03% 783,644            ‐21.78% Operations ‐ Non Fuel 659,759           407,236           61.72% 433,814            ‐6.13% Capital 20,000              ‐                   0.00%‐                   0.00% Total Operating Expenses 3,450,112             1,139,753      33.04% 1,344,364       ‐15.22% Policy Compliance (Rev. ‐ Exp.) 150,838                (12,120)          (205,062)         Nonoperating Nonoperating Revenues 25,000             20,107             80.43%‐                        100.00% Nonoperating Expenses 938,157           864,094           92.11% 13,979             98.38% Ending Fund Balance (14,152)                 (63,789)          (136,830)         Reservations      Restricted Bond Proceeds ‐                     ‐                    ‐                    Available Fund Balance (14,152)$         (63,789)$        (136,830)$       Notes:  A)  The Electric Fund is covering the contingency requirements for Airport to meet  City‐wide contingency reserves per policy.  Airport reserve was decreased to 45 days effective October 1, 2014.  FY2016          YTD Actual Variance         to Budget FY2015          YTD Actual   FY2015          Variance Page 37 of 113 Page 38 of 113 Page 39 of 113 Page 40 of 113 Page 41 of 113 Page 42 of 113 City of Georgetown, Texas Transportation Advisory Board April 8, 2016 SUBJECT: Review and pos s ible actio n to ap p ro ve the minutes fro m the Regular GTAB Board meeting held o n March 11, 216. - Jana Kern – GTAB Bo ard Liais on ITEM SUMMARY: Bo ard to review and revis e and /or ap p ro ve the minutes fro m the regular meeting held o n March 11, 2016. FINANCIAL IMPACT: n/a SUBMITTED BY: Jana Kern ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Draft Minutes Backup Material Page 43 of 113 Minutes for the Meeting of the Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board and the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas March 11, 2016 The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you require assistance in participation at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reasonable assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. Please contact the City at least four (4) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512)930-3652 or City Hall at 113 East 8th Street for additional information: TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711. Board Members : John Pettitt – Chair, John Hesser, Scott Rankin, Steve Johnston, Donna Courtney, Ronald Bindas, Troy Hellman, Doug Noble, Peter Behrman arrived 10:08 Board Members Absent: Staff Present: Jim Briggs, Jana Kern, Ed Polasek, Bill Dryden, Mark Miller, Nat Waggoner, Mike Weisner Others Present: Tom Crawford – GTEC, Carl Norris, John Milford, Dennis Hegebarth – ACC, Colin McGahey - PCI Regular Session A, Call to Order Mr. John Pettitt call the Regular GTAB Board Meeting to order on Friday, March 11, 2016 at 10:01 AM Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene an Executive Session at the request of the Chair, a Board Member, The City Manager, Assistant City Manager, General Manager of Utilities, City Council Member, or legal counsel for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code Chapter 551, and are subject to action in the Regular Session that follows. B. Introduction of Visitors C. Industry/CAMPO/TxDOT Updates: there is an aesthetics committee, for the I35 corridor program, that is working with individual communities on color palate and landscaping. The committee original told everyone that the City of Austin has adopted aesthetics guidelines for all of our bridges and treatments, and what we will do in our right of way. And this will be supplied to the region. Well, the committee has been getting a lot of push back, so now they are going to each individual community and talking about aesthetics on projects and right of way. Staff will bring you a draft in a couple of months so we can discuss it. We will also want to know what our community would like. CAMPO will be meeting on March 21, 2016. At this meeting they will be discussing the Williams Drive Corridor Study which includes CAMPO project with TxDOT and the City of Georgetown. That is our corridor analyses, looking at everything from land use to economic development to transportation improvements along that corridor. Ongoing discussion with Williamson County concerning the adoption of a through fare plan for the county. Page 44 of 113 D. Discussion regarding the Project Progress Reports and Time Lines – Bill Dryden, P. E., Transportation Engineer, Mark Miller, Transportation Services Manager and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director. E. Discussion regarding the Airport Project Progress Report and Time Lines. – Russ Volk, Airport Manager and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director. Mr. Hugh Norris spoke on this item. His presentation is at the end of these minutes Legislative Regular Agenda The Board will individually consider and possibly take action on any or all of the following items: F. Nominations and election of Vice-Chair of the GTAB Board. – John Pettitt, GTAB Chair Person Motion by Hellmann second by Courtney to nominate John Hesser as Vice Chair of the GTAB Board, Approved 9-0 G. Nominations and election of Secretary of the GTAB Board. – John Pettitt, GTAB Chair Person Motion by Hesser second by Courtney to nominate Ron Bindas as Secretary of the GTAB Board. Approved 9-0 H. Review and possible action related to the Day and Time of GTAB Board Meetings. – John Pettitt, GTAB Chair Person Motion by Bindas second by Hellmann to keep the GTAB Board meeting on the second Friday at 10:00 AM except for the December meeting which will be on Thursday Dec 8th. Approve 9-0 I. Review and possible action to approve the minutes from the Regular GTAB Board meeting held on February 12, 2016 – Jana Kern, GTAB Board Liaison Motion by Johnston second by Hesser to approve the minutes as presented. Approved 9-0 J. Presentation, discussion and possible recommendation to Council for execution of an Advanced Funding Agreement (AFA) with TxDOT for the Austin Avenue Bridges project. – Nat Waggoner, Transportation Analyst and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director Waggoner gave an overview of the AFA to the Board. Motion by Noble second by Johnston to approve the Advance Funding Agreement with TxDOT for environmental review of the Austin Ave. Bridges project as required by NEPA. Approved 9-0 Adjournment Motion by Hesser second by Johnston to adjourn meeting. Meeting adjourned at 11:11 AM Approved 9-0 Approved: Attested: _______________________ ______________________ John Pettitt - Chair Ron Bindas– Secretary _________________________________ Jana R. Kern – GTAB Board Liaison Page 45 of 113 GTAB STATEMENT MARCH 11, 2016 AGENDA ITEM “E” AIRPORT PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT AND TIME LINES Good morning Mr. Chairman, members of the GTAB board, city staff and ladies and gentlemen. My name is Hugh C. Norris, Jr. I am a member of the Airport Concerned Citizens (ACC). This is the 53rd presentation by ACC members to the city council and/or the GTAB since January 14, 2014. These actions are in pursuit of the public participation rights of our citizens regarding use of our federal tax funds for the Georgetown Municipal Airport (GTU) as provided by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). We note with irony that Item “J” on today's agenda regards recommendations to City Council for an action involving compliance with the NEPA for bridges and necessity of consideration of a range of alternatives developed through a public participation proce ss. Such NEPA compliance has never been provided for airport grants. On behalf of the ACC, we welcome the four new members of the GTAB. Your work on this board is vitally important as the board is to be the gateway to the general public for full examin ation of all perspectives and best considerations of any given transportation recommendation to the City Council. GTAB recommendations must not be limited to single undisputed staff points of view. To promote citizen involvement in board decisions involving the NEPA and other airport issues the ACC has repeatedly requested GTAB workshops with the general public for free and open discussions with the board and city staff on a variety of issues. Such workshops are needed to allow citizens to freely express comments and questions without being limited to three minute sound bites and being gagged thereafter. Likewise such workshops would provide board members and staff open public communications to defend favored positions. Airport issues are only one type of transportation issues involved. It is clear to the ACC that only opinions and recommendations of city staff are considered by this board and such limitation of viewpoints is not in the best interest of the board or for our city. As an example of open workshop discussions that should be provided is the issue of financial self sustained funding of the airport. Mr. Hesser is commended for his commitment to this issue. However, in spite of past ACC requests, this board has not provided the type financial disclosures important for public information. For example, we have requested that GTAB monthly financial reports clearly show all expenses including debt of the airport due to city matching share of grant agreement costs. Prior verbal staff presentations have described that these costs are borne by cash outlays from the General Fund and Bonds. We believe that Certificates of Obligation and Commercial Paper may also be used. We note that airport debt is being underwritten and absorbed by Electric Fund revenue bonds with added interest and charges. Why are these airport grant costs not being tracked and shown on the GTAB monthly financial reports for future airport fund reimbursements? TxDOT documents the city's share of airport federal grant costs to be $2,148,613. This does not include the recent $830,000 wire transferred to TxDOT for the 25-project, 1514GRGTN Program. That revises the total to $2,978,613. The presentation of the city's debt program by Laurie Brewer, Asst. City Manager, at the City Council Workshop on January 26, 2016 showed an Airport bond debt of $1,333,595. The recent completed financial audit of the airport was silent on how this total debt has been reduced. Page 46 of 113 Part of the city's recently promoted “Airport Education Program” i s a “Citizen FAQ's” currently consisting of 15 questions and answers used as a utility bill stuffer with no response site for a “point - counter point” for opposition viewpoints. The ACC takes issue with every statement provided in this FAQ. An example under the question, “What is the financial health of the Airport?”, is the statement, “fuel sales cover 100 percent of expenses such as matching shares for TxDOT grants, airport staffing, and operations and maintenance”. That statement is totally false. It is clear that matching share costs are borne by electrical customers and other means. It certainly does not apply to the Air Traffic Control Tower operated by contractor and subsidized by FAA. A potential cost for the tower is in excess of $1 Million per year which means that since it's initial operation its cost has exceed over $10 Million and counting. The city's general position is that all airport costs will be paid for by fuel sales and hanger rentals. If that is true, then the city must vastly expand the number of serviced air fleets with expanded take offs and landings. And that challenges the city's position of “We're not expanding anything at the airport. We're only doing a little safety and maintenance for the users.” Mr. Chairman, all future GTAB airport Monthly Financial Reports are requested to be amended to address the above ACC concerns. Mr. Chairman, I welcome any comments or questions. Page 47 of 113 City of Georgetown, Texas Transportation Advisory Board April 8, 2016 SUBJECT: Cons id eration and p o s s ib le rec o mmendation to award a b id to Cutler Repaving of Lawrenc e, KS in the amo unt o f $872,512.00 fo r pavement maintenanc e (hot in plac e rec yc ling)—Edward G. P o las ek, AICP, Trans p o rtation S ervic es Directo r and Mark Miller, Transportation Servic es Manager. ITEM SUMMARY: This p ro ject was b id on Marc h 30th, 2016 fo r the ab o ve referenc ed projec t. One (1) c o mp etitive b id was received and a detailed bid tabulation is inc lud ed . The HIPR projec t cons is ts of furnis hing, ins talling and p ro viding all lab o r and materials required for c o ns truc tion of ap p ro ximately 58,000 s q uare yards o f HIPR, 16,600 square yards o f thin overlay mix (TOM) as p halt, 52,000 linear feet o f milling, adjus tment o f water valves and manho les , tree p runing, traffic c ontrol, and misc ellaneous strip ing. T he p ro cess heats up , s carifies, rejuvenates and sc reed s exis ting as phalt while a ¾ -inch of new as p halt is p laced o n top and ro lled simultaneous ly creating a s trong thermal mo nolithic bond The lo catio ns of the HIPR projec t are listed b elo w: HIP R Projec t Lo c atio ns : Part A: Williams Drive from Riverb end Drive to Lakeway Dr. Part B: Maple Street from 7th S treet to Quail Valley Drive; Part C: Kathi Lane, Brandy Lane, Addie Lane, Gab riel View Drive, and Tiffany Lane; TOM Pro ject Loc ations : Part D: Texas Drive from Del Web b Boulevard to Sun C ity Boulevard; Part E: Whispering Wind Drive from Dell Web b Boulevard to Blue S ky Co urt. Cutler Repaving o f Lawrence, KS had the lo wes t qualified bid fo r parts A thru E in the amount of $872,512.00. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Cutler has s atis fac to rily p erfo rmed this s ame p ro c es s o n Geo rgeto wn streets for the past 9 years . Staff and KPA Engineers rec o mmend awarding a total bid (p arts A thru E) to Cutler R ep aving o f Lawrence, KS in the amount o f $872,512.00. FINANCIAL IMPACT: See Financ ial d etail s heet SUBMITTED BY: Jana Kern o n behalf of Mark Miller ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Bid Tab Backup Material Engineer Letter Backup Material Location Map Backup Material FINANCIAL WORKSHEET Backup Material Page 48 of 113 Page 49 of 113 Page 50 of 113 Page 51 of 113 Page 52 of 113 H U T T O R O A D SHEL L R O A D 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 WO L F R A N C H RIV E R Y B L V D 15TH D.B . W O O D S D R I V E SER E N A D A D R . SHEETS R-01 THRU R-02 SHEETS R-07 THRU R-10 SHEETS R-03 THRU R-04 SHEETS R-05 THRU R-06 SHEETS R-11 THRU R-18 0 HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET 2000 4000 N O R T H Plot Date: 3/23/2016 3:48:56 PM Plotted By: SILIFFFI L E : P: \ G e o r g e t o w n \ 2 0 1 6 \ 2 0 1 6 - 1 0 6 s t r e e t m a i n t e n a n c e \ C A D \ H I P R \ P l a n s \ w o r k i n g p l a n s e t \ G E N E R A L \ 1 6 - 1 0 6 s t r r e h a b - H I P R - g e n s h e e t s . d w g L A S T S A V E D : 3/ 1 1 / 2 0 1 6 5 : 1 7 : 4 5 P M LA Y O U T : G- 0 3 L O C A T I O N M A P SHEET NO. G-03 OF 07 SHEETS APPROVED BY DESIGNED BY DRAWN BY PROJECT NO. DATE Alvin R. Sutton, III 2016-106 Bruce Richardson GEORGETOWN, TEXAS 2016 Street Maintenance ProjectKASBERG, PATRICK & ASSOCIATES, LP CONSULTING ENGINEERS GEORGETOWN, TEXAS 78626© 2016 Kasberg, Patrick & Associates, LP KPA Firm Registration Number F-510 BYREVISIONDATENO.DESIGN SET LEGEND GEORGETOWN CITY LIMITS GEORGETOWN ETJ HOT IN PLACE RECYCLING THIN OVERLAY MIX (TOM) GENERAL SHEETS PROPOSED STREET SURFACE TREATMENT - HIPR LOCATION MAP Page 53 of 113 DATE: PROJECT NAME:4/30/2015 Division/Department:Director Approval Prepared By:Mark Miller Finance Approval TOTAL ANNUAL BUDGET 1,000,000.00 (Current year only) Actual Cost Agenda Total Spent Encumbrance Item & Encumbered % Annual (A) before agenda item (B)(A + B)Budget Consulting 90,000.00 90,000.00 9% Right of Way 0.00 0% Construction 872,512.00 872,512.00 87% Other Costs 0.00 0% Total Current Year Costs 90,000.00 962,512.00 Approved GENERAL LEDGER ACCOUNT NUMBER CY Budget 203-9-0880-90-075 1,000,000.00 Total Budget 1,000,000.00 TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET 1,000,000.00 (includes all previous yrs) Prior Years Current Year Total Project % Total Spent/Encumbered Costs Costs Budget Consulting 90,000.00 90,000.00 9% Right of Way 0.00 0.00 0% Construction 872,512.00 872,512.00 87% Other Costs 0.00 0.00 0% Total Project Costs 0.00 962,512.00 962,512.00 Comments:Balance is currently 1,264,368.00 remainder to go to chip seal $414,463.50 Transportation / Streets Cutler Repaving # 1CU CIP- Budgetary and Financial Analysis Worksheet Page 54 of 113 City of Georgetown, Texas Transportation Advisory Board April 8, 2016 SUBJECT: Review and pos s ible recommend ation of approval of Task Order SBE 16-002 fo r C itywide Sidewalk and Ac cessibility Improvements to S teger Bizzell of Geo rgeto wn, Texas in the amount of $96,672. - Ed ward G. Polasek, A.I.C .P., Transportation Director and Nat Waggo ner, Trans p ortation Analyst ITEM SUMMARY: The City o f G eo rgeto wn Transportation Servic es Department initiated the S id ewalk Master P lan in 2014 as an update to the 2001 City o f Georgetown S id ewalk S tud y. T he p urpose of the C ity of Geo rgeto wn Sidewalk Mas ter P lan, heretofore referred to as the Mas ter Plan, is to invento ry exis ting pedestrian infrastruc ture, identify design d eficiencies, evaluate future s id ewalk requirements and d evelop an imp lementatio n p lan fo r all p ed es trian fac ilities within the City of Geo rgetown c ity limits. Among the majo r c o ns ideratio ns fo r the p rioritization of s id ewalk fac ilities were s takeho ld er inp ut, p ublic input, residential demograp hic s , p ed es trian s afety and exis ting s id ewalk c ond itions . Go vernment and s takeholder meetings were c o nducted to obtain a lis t o f key s id ewalk projec ts c o ns idered imp o rtant to the functio nality of that agency. In general, stakeholders id entified c ritic al routes , mis s ing sidewalk s egments and s afety c onc erns . T he firs t p ublic open hous e fac ilitated similar input from the pub lic o n key sidewalk p ro jects as well as p referred pedestrian attrac tors . This qualitative d ata was c o mb ined with a quantitative analys is of pedes trian s afety and demographic s within the City o f Georgeto wn. Res ults fro m this p ublic o utreach were inc luded in the prioritization p ro c es s . The imp lementatio n p lan is utilized b y City s taff to as s ist in the p rio ritization of future p ed es trian infrastruc ture imp ro vements. The Master Plan is a s tand-alone doc ument, s erving as the p rimary s id ewalk facility management p lan with regulatory authority conferred by the City o f Geo rgeto wn Overall Trans p o rtation P lan (OT P). This P lan als o serves as an addend um to the City o f Georgetown Americ ans with Disabilities Ac t (ADA) Transitio n Plan b y p ro viding a projec t lis t fo r ADA-c o mp lianc e improvements within the City. The attached Tas k Order will facilitate the des ign and c o nstruc tion adminis tration for acc es s ib ility imp ro vements at eight intersec tions c itywide and three s id ewalk, curb ramp and c ro s s walk loc ations within the Do wntown Dis tric t. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Rec o mmend approval of Task Order SBE 16-002 fo r Citywide Sidewalk and Ac ces s ibility Imp ro vements to Steger Bizzell o f Georgetown, Texas in the amo unt o f $96,672. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Projec ts funded thro ugh Downto wn and Community Services FY15 Bud get and 2015 Ro ad Bond SUBMITTED BY: Nat Waggoner, PMP ® Page 55 of 113 ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Tas k Order SBE-16-002 Partially Executed Exhibit Budget Works heet Exhibit Page 56 of 113 TASK ORDER 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 Page 1 of 4 Task Order In accordance with paragraph 1.01 of the Master Services Agreement between Owner and Steger Bizzell (“Engineer”) for Professional Services – Task Order Edition, dated April 11, 2011 ("Agreement"), Owner and Engineer agree as follows: 1. Specific Project Data A. Title: Citywide Sidewalk Improvement (2016) B. Description: The proposed project encompasses sidewalk improvements at various locations within the City of Georgetown. Improvements may include curb ramps, crosswalks, pedestrian- actuated signal infrastructure (“ped heads”), and sidewalk extensions/reconstructions. C. City of Georgetown Project Number: Multiple D. City of Georgetown General Ledger Account No.: 120-9-0880-90-097 120-9-0280-90-047 E. City of Georgetown Purchase Order No.: F. Master Services Agreement, Contract Number: 2011-711-MSA 2. Services of Engineer See the attached Scope of Services for a detailed description of services to be provided to Owner by Engineer. 3. Owner's Responsibilities Owner shall have those responsibilities set forth in the Agreement subject to the following: • Provide timely review comments to plan reviews and project scope changes. • Provide Agent Authorization to submit agency documentation, if required. • Estimated third-party fees for this project are listed below, and are included in the compensation amount detailed in Section 5. The City shall be responsible for any permitting and third-party review fees not listed below, or in excess of those listed below. o Geologic Assessment Subconsultant ($3,500) o TCEQ Recharge Zone Exception Request Fee ($500) o TDLR RAS Fees: Registration ($175); Review ($550); Inspection ($675) 4. Times for Rendering Services Engineer shall perform the work stated above according to the schedule below. Durations are from the date of Notice to Proceed from Owner, or the previous phase, as appropriate. Durations may be concurrent or partially concurrent. Durations are expected to be sequential, but unforeseen factors (e.g. delays due to extended third-party reviews, delays due to Board or Council action, etc.) may suspend time accruement. See the Scope of Services for more information. Task Order No. SBE-16-002, consisting of 13 pages. Page 57 of 113 TASK ORDER 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 Page 2 of 4 Phase Completion Date Survey Phase Four (4) Weeks Design & TCEQ Coordination Phase Eighteen (18) Weeks Bidding Phase Eight (8) Weeks Construction Phase Twelve (12) Weeks 5. Payments to Engineer A. Owner shall pay Engineer for services rendered as follows: Category of Services Compensation Method Lump Sum or Not to Exceed Amount of Compensation for Services Survey, Design, TCEQ Coordination, Bidding Phase, & Construction Phase Administration Lump Sum $96,672.00 B. The terms of payment are set forth in Article 4 of the Agreement unless modified in this Task Order. 6. Consultants: Prime consultant is Steger Bizzell. Subconsultant for TDLR compliance will be Altura Solutions. 7. Other Modifications to Agreement: None. 8. Attachments: Attachment "A" – Project Location Map Attachment "B" – Scope of Services Attachment "C" – Estimated Fee Schedule Attachment "D" – Rate Schedule 9. Documents Incorporated By Reference: The Agreement, effective April 11, 2011. Page 58 of 113 Page 59 of 113 TASK ORDER 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 Page 4 of 4 DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE FOR TASK ORDER: DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE FOR TASK ORDER: Name: Nat Waggoner Name: Curtis Steger, PE Title: Transportation Analyst Title: Principal Address: 300-1 Industrial Ave. Georgetown, TX 78626 Address: 1978 S. Austin Ave. Georgetown, TX 78626 E-Mail Address: nathaniel.wagoner@georgetown.org E-Mail Address: curtis.steger@stegerbizzell.com Phone: 512-930-8171 Phone: 512-930-9412 Fax: 512-930-3559 Fax: n/a Page 60 of 113 At t a c h m e n t A 1 Pr o p o s e d I n t e r s e c t i o n P r o j e c t s 2 m i N➤➤N © 2 0 1 6 G o o g l e © 2 0 1 6 G o o g l e © 2 0 1 6 G o o g l e Page 61 of 113 At t a c h m e n t A 2 Pr o p o s e d S i d e w a l k P r o j e c t s 80 0 f t N➤➤N © 2 0 1 6 G o o g l e © 2 0 1 6 G o o g l e © 2 0 1 6 G o o g l e Page 62 of 113 Prepared by: March 11, 2016 1/4 Attachment B Scope of Services Task Order No. SBE-16-002 2015 Road Bond-Funded Sidewalk Improvements (2016) 1. General Description of Project: The proposed project encompasses sidewalk improvements at various locations within the City of Georgetown. This project will fill in gaps in the existing sidewalk system including projects within signalized intersections and reconstruct TDLR non-compliant facilities across varying topographical features. Improvements may include curb ramps, crosswalks, pedestrian-actuated signal infrastructure (“ped heads”), and sidewalk extensions/reconstructions. Construction of the improvements is intended to be contracted through the Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) method. The intersections to be addressed under this Task Order are: • Williams Drive at Lakeway Drive • Williams Drive at River Bend Drive • Williams Drive at Shell Road/DB Wood Road • N. Austin Avenue at W. Morrow Street • N. Austin Avenue at San Gabriel Village Blvd • Del Webb Blvd at Whispering Wind Drive • Williams Drive at Wildwood Drive • Williams Drive at Woodlake Drive The sidewalk extensions/reconstruction to be addressed under this Task Order are: • Northside of 8th Street from Martin Luther King Street to Rock Street • Northside of 8th Street from Church Street to Myrtle Street • Westside of Church Street from 9th Street to 8th Street This scope of services generally includes surveying, design, preparation of construction plans and contract documents, TCEQ coordination, bidding phase services, and construction phase administration services. 2. Survey & Design Services: This phase of the project will commence after the Owner has signed and executed this Task Order. The basic services for this phase include: a. Identify and collect relevant plans, data, and reports pertinent to this project. b. Submit a Texas 811 (“One-Call”) utility locate request for the project areas listed above. c. Perform a topographic field survey of the project areas (See Attachment A), identifying existing pavement and curbs, above-ground utilities, relevant vegetation (i.e., hardwoods greater than 6” diameter), fences, signs, signal equipment, drainage structures, and other features relevant to the project. i. Two site benchmarks will be set to assist in surveying and construction. Page 63 of 113 Prepared by: March 11, 2016 2/4 ii. Survey will be based on the Texas State Plane Coordinate System, Central Zone (4203), North American Datum of 1983 (2011 Adjustment), North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (GEOID12A), unless specified otherwise. d. Create an existing CAD base map based on the survey data that depicts surveyed elements. e. Steger Bizzell will visit each site and make a recommendation on actual limits of work for each project area (e.g. tie-in locations to existing sidewalks, compliant areas to remain, etc.) f. Prepare conceptual plans that show recent aerial imagery, identified constraints, and limits of proposed sidewalk & crosswalk improvements. Review conceptual plans with City staff. g. Prepare draft construction plans and submit to City for review. h. Prepare final construction plans based on City comments. i. Perform quantity take-offs and prepare an opinion of construction cost. j. Prepare construction contract documents and technical specifications for review and approval by the Owner. The most recent version of the City's standard construction contract documents and technical specifications shall be used. k. Coordination of a Geologic Assessment consistent with the City of Georgetown's Water Quality Regulations. i. Based on similar projects, the Geologic Assessment fee is anticipated to be $3,500. This amount is included in the attached Fee Schedule. l. Send a copy of the final construction plans to Atmos Energy, Georgetown Electric Services, and Georgetown Water & Wastewater Services. m. Prepare and submit project registration information to TDLR. Altura Solutions will perform the responsibilities of RAS and review the final construction plans for compliance with the TAS. 3. TCEQ Coordination Services: This phase of the project will commence after the Owner has signed and executed this Task Order. The basic services for this phase include: a. Prepare and submit to TCEQ an Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone (EARZ) Water Pollution Abatement Plan (WPAP) Exception Request, consisting of an Application Cover Page, General Information Form, Geologic Assessment Form, Recharge and Transition Zone Exception Request Form, Temporary Stormwater Section, Permanent Stormwater Section, Agent Authorization Form, Application Fee Form, Core Data Form, and supporting attachments. i. The WPAP Exception Request Fee of $500 is included in the attached Fee Schedule. ii. This Task Order assumes that the design of structural treatment methods (e.g. sand filter pond, Stormceptor, AquaLogic, etc.) is not required. Page 64 of 113 Prepared by: March 11, 2016 3/4 4. Bidding Phase Services: This phase of the project will commence after the Owner has completed final review and approval of the construction plans, specifications, and contract documents. The basic services for this phase include: a. Assist Owner in advertising for and obtaining bids for the construction contract and responding to questions from prospective Bidders. Issue addenda as appropriate to interpret, clarify, or expand the bidding documents. b. Attend and conduct one pre-bid meeting and one bid opening meeting. Compile and tabulate bid results. c. Provide a recommendation of contract award to Owner after careful consideration and research of responsible and responsive bidders. d. Assist Owner with bid award procedures (i.e., providing hard copies of the contract documents to contractor for signatures and bond, and ensuring completeness before forwarding to City staff for final execution). e. Attend the GTAB and Council meetings where the construction contract is considered to assist in answering any questions regarding the Engineer’s recommendation. 5. Construction Phase Administration Services: This phase of the project will commence after the Owner has awarded and executed a construction contract. The basic services for this phase include: a. Attend and conduct one pre-construction conference. b. Conduct a brief training meeting with the contractor and City Inspectors regarding common TAS compliance issues and possible resolutions. c. Review shop drawings and submittals turned in by the contractor for compliance with design concepts. Review field materials testing and laboratory reports for compliance with design. Review contractor pay requests and provide concurrence for City review and payment. d. Issue necessary interpretation and clarifications of the contract documents, prepare change orders and make recommendations to the acceptability of the work, as required. This scope is limited to three (3) change orders. e. Conduct site visits periodically during construction and at the request of the City. This scope is limited to 44 hours (approximately 4 hours per site). f. Perform a post-construction inspection with Altura to confirm compliance with TAS. g. Conduct final walk-through and prepare punch-list items to be addressed/corrected by Contractor. h. Prepare record drawings based on information provided by the contractor, by utilizing Adobe Acrobat or similar software to digitize markups "on top" of approved plans. 6. Exclusions: The following services are specifically excluded from this Task Order. Steger Bizzell would be pleased to provide an additional fee estimate to provide these services. a. Utility coordination beyond supplying plans to owners Page 65 of 113 Prepared by: March 11, 2016 4/4 b. Utility extension design c. Right-of-entry authorization (no private property access is anticipated) d. Locating property boundaries/public right-of-way, or deed research e. Design or permitting of structural BMP water quality facilities (e.g. sand filter) f. Daily Construction/Field Inspection (will be provided by City) g. Coordination of materials testing services (typically provided by Contractor) h. Construction staking i. Right-of-way or easement acquisition, including preparation of field notes and legal descriptions j. Geotechnical investigation 7. Reimbursables: Any reimbursable expenses beyond the amount shown on Attachment C are not included in the stated compensation amount and will be billed to Client at Engineer’s cost. Reimbursable expenses may include, but are not limited to: postage or other delivery charges, document reproductions, third-party contractors or consultants (if applicable), and third-party fees listed above that are greater than anticipated. Page 66 of 113 Pr e p a r e d b y At t a c h m e n t C Ta s k O r d e r S B E - 1 6 - 0 0 2 20 1 5 R o a d B o n d - F u n d e d S i d e w a l k I m p r o v e m e n t s ( 2 0 1 6 ) Pr i n t e d : 3 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 6 Es t i m a t e d F e e S c h e d u l e Ta s k a n d D e s c r i p t i o n Se n i o r En g i n e e r En g i n e e r (P E ) Re g i s t e r e d Su r v e y o r En g i n e e r in T r a i n i n g Cl e r i c a l CA D D Te c h . 2- M a n Su r v e y Al t u r a Su b s , M i s c . Fe e s , e t c . To t a l Es t i m a t e Ho u r l y R a t e : 21 6 1 6 1 1 3 4 1 3 3 7 2 1 0 0 1 6 0 1 5 0 Su r v e y & D e s i g n S e r v i c e s 1. C o l l e c t p l a n s , d a t a , r e p o r t s 2 4 7 2 2 2. R e q u e s t u t i l i t y l o c a t e s 2 26 6 3. F i e l d s u r v e y i n g 8 6 4 1 1 , 3 1 2 4. C r e a t e C A D b a s e m a p 24 4 8 8 , 0 1 6 5. I n i t i a l s i t e v i s i t s 88 2, 3 5 2 6. P r e p a r e c o n c e p t u a l p l a n s & r e v i e w w i t h s t a f f 41 6 4 0 8, 7 6 0 7. P r e p a r e d r a f t c o n s t r u c t i o n p l a n s 16 4 0 7, 8 9 6 8. P r e p a r e f i n a l c o n s t r u c t i o n p l a n s 28 1 6 3, 8 4 8 9. Q u a n t i t y t a k e - o f f s a n d o p i n i o n o f p r o b a b l e c o s t 48 1, 7 0 8 10 . P r e p a r e c o n t r a c t d o c u m e n t s a n d t e c h n i c a l s p e c s 88 2, 3 5 2 11 . C o o r d i n a t e G e o l o g i c A s s e s s m e n t 2 3, 5 0 0 3 , 8 2 2 12 . S u b m i t s k e t c h e s t o u t i l i t y o w n e r s 44 1, 1 7 6 13 . P r e p a r e & s u b m i t T D L R p r o j e c t r e g i s t r a t i o n 2 2 7 2 5 1 , 3 1 3 Su b t o t a l H o u r s : 6 7 0 3 2 1 2 8 0 5 2 6 4 0 3 5 2 Su b t o t a l F e e s : $ 1 , 2 9 6 $ 1 1 , 2 7 0 $ 4 , 2 8 8 $ 1 7 , 0 2 4 $ 0 $ 5 , 2 0 0 $ 1 0 , 2 4 0 $ 0 $ 4 , 2 2 5 $ 5 3 , 5 4 3 TC E Q C o o r d i n a t i o n S e r v i c e s 1. P r e p a r e E A R Z W P A P E x c e p t i o n R e q u e s t 1 1 2 2 0 4 4 5 , 4 9 6 a . T C E Q W P A P E X P F e e 50 0 5 0 0 Su b t o t a l H o u r s : 1 1 2 0 2 0 44 0 0 4 1 Su b t o t a l F e e s : $ 2 1 6 $ 1 , 9 3 2 $ 0 $ 2 , 6 6 0 $ 2 8 8 $ 4 0 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 5 0 0 $ 5 , 9 9 6 Bi d d i n g P h a s e S e r v i c e s 1. B i d a d v e r t i s e m e n t a n d m a n a g e m e n t 4 8 1 6 2 4 , 4 2 4 2. P r e - b i d m e e t i n g , b i d o p e n i n g , a n d b i d t a b u l a t i o n 3 4 2 1 , 1 5 9 3. B i d d e r r e s e a r c h a n d a w a r d r e c o m m e n d a t i o n 12 53 8 4. A s s i s t w i t h a w a r d p r o c e d u r e s 14 69 3 5. A t t e n d G T A B & C o u n c i l 4 64 4 Su b t o t a l H o u r s : 5 1 8 0 2 4 40 0 0 5 1 Su b t o t a l F e e s : $ 1 , 0 8 0 $ 2 , 8 9 8 $ 0 $ 3 , 1 9 2 $ 2 8 8 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 7 , 4 5 8 Pa g e 1 o f 2 Page 67 of 113 Pr e p a r e d b y At t a c h m e n t C Ta s k O r d e r S B E - 1 6 - 0 0 2 20 1 5 R o a d B o n d - F u n d e d S i d e w a l k I m p r o v e m e n t s ( 2 0 1 6 ) Pr i n t e d : 3 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 6 Es t i m a t e d F e e S c h e d u l e Ta s k a n d D e s c r i p t i o n Se n i o r En g i n e e r En g i n e e r (P E ) Re g i s t e r e d Su r v e y o r En g i n e e r in T r a i n i n g Cl e r i c a l CA D D Te c h . 2- M a n Su r v e y Al t u r a Su b s , M i s c . Fe e s , e t c . To t a l Es t i m a t e Ho u r l y R a t e : 21 6 1 6 1 1 3 4 1 3 3 7 2 1 0 0 1 6 0 1 5 0 Co n s t r u c t i o n P h a s e A d m i n . S e r v i c e s 1. P r e - c o n s t r u c t i o n c o n f e r e n c e 44 4 2, 0 4 0 2. T A S t r a i n i n g f o r c o n t r a c t o r 4 6 0 0 3. R e v i e w p a y r e q u e s t s , R F I s , & s u b m i t t a l s 2 8 1 6 1 3 , 9 2 0 4. P r e p a r e c h a n g e o r d e r s , a s n e c e s s a r y 8 1 6 1 3 , 4 8 8 5. P e r i o d i c a n d o n - c a l l s i t e v i s i t s 82 2 2 2 8, 1 9 6 6. P e r f o r m T D L R p o s t - c o n s t r u c t i o n i n s p e c t i o n 6 6 6 7 5 2 , 4 3 9 7. C o n d u c t f i n a l w a l k - t h r o u g h 8 8 8 3 , 5 5 2 8. P r e p a r e r e c o r d d r a w i n g s 4 1 2 3 2 5 , 4 4 0 Su b t o t a l H o u r s : 1 4 6 0 0 8 4 2 3 2 0 1 2 2 0 4 Su b t o t a l F e e s : $ 3 , 0 2 4 $ 9 , 6 6 0 $ 0 $ 1 1 , 1 7 2 $ 1 4 4 $ 3 , 2 0 0 $ 0 $ 1 , 8 0 0 $ 6 7 5 $ 2 9 , 6 7 5 TO T A L H O U R S : 2 6 1 6 0 3 2 2 5 6 1 0 8 8 6 4 1 2 6 4 8 TO T A L F E E S : $ 5 , 6 1 6 $ 2 5 , 7 6 0 $ 4 , 2 8 8 $ 3 4 , 0 4 8 $ 7 2 0 $ 8 , 8 0 0 $ 1 0 , 2 4 0 $ 1 , 8 0 0 $ 5 , 4 0 0 $ 9 6 , 6 7 2 To t a l L u m p S u m C o m p e n s a t i o n : $ 9 6 , 6 7 2 Pa g e 2 o f 2 Page 68 of 113 Rate Schedule Effective June 26, 2014 (All Rates Per Hour) Engineer (Principal) $233.00 Senior Engineer $216.00 Engineer (P.E.) $161.00 Project Manager $216.00 Engineer in Training (EIT) $133.00 Graduate Engineer $128.00 Senior Technician $128.00 GIS Technician $105.00 Design Technician $105.00 CADD Technician/ Draftsman $100.00 Survey Technician/ Draftsman $100.00 Registered Surveyor $134.00 Surveyor in Training (SIT) $105.00 1 Man Survey $145.00 2 Man Survey Party $160.00 3 Man Survey Party $175.00 Field Inspector $ 90.00 Clerical $ 72.00 Student Technician $ 33.00 Mileage Current IRS Rate Note: Expert Witness Fees are billed at 1.5 times the hourly rate. Page 69 of 113 PROJECT No.DATE: PROJECT NAME:1DP 3/29/2016 Division/Department:Director Approval EGP 3/29/16 Prepared By:Finance Approval La'Ke 3/30/16 TOTAL ANNUAL BUDGET 96,672.00 (Current year only) Actual Cost Agenda Total Spent Encumbrance Item & Encumbered % Annual (A) before agenda item (B)(A + B)Budget Consulting (SBE-16-002)*66,997.00 0% Right of Way 0.00 0% Construction 29,675.00 0% Other Costs 0.00 0% Total Current Year Costs 0.00 96,672.00 0.00 Approved CY Budget Construction GENERAL LEDGER ACCOUNT NUMBER Design Construction Admin 8th Street (MLK - Rock)8,262.96$ 3,659.92$ 8th Street (Church-Myrtle)8,262.96$ 3,659.92$ Phase 1 Signal and Curb Ramp 42,208.11$ 18,695.25$ Church Street (8th-9th)8,262.96$ 3,659.92$ Total Budget 66,997.00 29,675.00 TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET 96,672.00 (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 0.00 0% Construction 0.00 0.00 0% Other Costs 0.00 0.00 0.00 0% Total Project Costs 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sidewalk Master Plan - Budgetary and Financial Analysis Worksheet Comments: CDBG Grant being supplemented by Streets - Sidewalk Repair Budget 2016 Accessibility Impr. Proj. 120-9-0280-90-047 120-9-0880-90-097 120-9-0280-90-047 120-9-0280-90-047 Design and Construction Admin Citywide Nat Waggoner, Transportation Analyst Transportation Services Page 70 of 113 City of Georgetown, Texas Transportation Advisory Board April 8, 2016 SUBJECT: Cons id eration and p o s s ib le adoptio n o f staff rec ommend ation for the appo intment Tro y Hellman to the Williams Drive Steering Co mmittee. - Nat Waggoner, Transportation Analys t and Edward G. P o las ek, AICP, Trans portation Directo r ITEM SUMMARY: The Capital Area Metro p o litan P lanning Organization (CAMP O) and the City of Geo rgeto wn have s elected q ualified cons ultant to cond uc t a study and d evelop a plan for the Williams Corridor, s tretching from Aus tin Ave to Jim Ho gg Rd . T he Plan will further the go als of CAMPO’s P latinum Planning Program and the City of Georgetown’s 2030 Co mp rehens ive P lan, includ ing the Overall Trans portation P lan (OTP) and Future Land Us e Map, as well as address the immed iate and future mo b ility is s ues that s tem fro m p o p ulatio n gro wth and d evelopment p res s ures . T he Plan will rec o mmend projec ts and imp lementation p lans that enhanc e multi-mo d al transportation s afety, mobility and connec tivity, enhanc e ec o nomic d evelopment potential, and es tablish the area as a p remier gateway into Geo rgeto wn. As p art o f the P lan, a Steering Co mmittee will b e es tab lis hed b y CAMPO and the City o f Georgetown to guid e the s tudy. T his committee will have rep res entation from CAMPO, City o f Georgetown, TxDOT, and o ther stakeholders . P rio r to eac h p ro ject meeting o r ac tivity, the Cons ultant s hall p rep are agenda and agend a sup port materials for the next up coming S teering Committee meeting. T he CAMPO Projec t Manager and City o f Georgetown rep res entative will review and approve all meeting materials prior to their d elivery to the S teering Committee memb ers . Projec t s taff believes that c reation, ad o p tion and imp lementation of the final Plan will require sup p o rt fro m the City’s trans p o rtatio n and land use p lanning b o d ies as well as regio nal projec t p artners such as TxDOT and CAMPO. Geo rgeto wn staff is s eeking no minatio n o f ind ividuals from Georgetown Trans p o rtatio n Advis o ry Board (GTAB) and the P lanning and Zoning Co mmis s io n (P&Z). Staff has agreed that Troy Hellman, with a bac kgro und in loc al go vernment and real estate d evelopment is a good cand idate that will be ab le to effec tively repres ent GTAB p lanning c ons id erations to the community as well as the tec hnical p ro ject team and is s eeking c o nc urrence fro m the Board. FINANCIAL IMPACT: n/a SUBMITTED BY: Nat Waggoner, PMP ® ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Scope of Work Cover Memo Inter-Local Agreement with CAMPO (Executed)Cover Memo Page 71 of 113 SCOPE OF WORK CAMPO Platinum Planning Project Name: Georgetown, TX Williams Drive Study CAMPO is seeking services from a qualified consultant to conduct a study and develop a plan to further the goals of CAMPO’s Platinum Planning Program and the City of Georgetown’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan, including the Overall Transportation Plan (OTP) and Future Land Use Map, as well as address the immediate and future mobility issues that stem from population growth and development pressures. The Consultant will develop a plan that applies the elements of the Platinum Planning Program to the study area, and recommends projects and implementation plans that enhance multi- modal transportation safety, mobility and connectivity, enhance economic development potential, and establish the area as a premier gateway into Georgetown. CAMPO’s Platinum Planning Program seeks to generate comprehensive and detailed multimodal transportation planning at the local level that will generate regionally significant benefits through projects and policies. The program aligns local and regional planning through a progressive, integrated, and inclusive process. Plans completed as part of this program meet shared goals and are inclusive of state of the practice elements consistent with CAMPO’s 2040 Regional Transportation Plan goals. Specifically, these plans will outline synergies between transportation, land use, and other planning areas to better understand how the system performs. Recommendations from plans completed through this program will inform future iterations of the Regional Transportation Plan and be eligible for future Federal funding allocated by CAMPO. The Platinum Planning Program includes three spatial areas: Subregions, Corridors, and Centers. Georgetown, Texas, is a rapidly growing community about 30 miles north of Austin. The city has a population of over 50,000 people and serves as the county seat for Williamson County. Georgetown is known for its walkable, historic downtown, family oriented neighborhoods, and as a retirement destination. The city also serves as the northern gateway for the Capital Area. This study seeks to help Georgetown and the region manage its growth challenges by creating environments that provide for an efficient, effective and reliable system for moving people and goods through multiple travel options, enhance economic development and housing options near high-quality transportation investments, and position Williams Drive to become a premier gateway for the City of Georgetown and the Austin region. Williams Drive is a four-lane roadway with continuous center turn lanes. More than 29,000 cars access this major arterial daily, and the trend is expected to grow with the City’s expanding population. The City of Georgetown and TxDOT have identified projects and committed funding within the corridor before 2025 that will inform and impact development and mobility patterns as part of the recently approved 2015 Transportation Bond program. Key projects that will be completed in the area as a result of the 2015 Bond include: 1 Page 72 of 113 • The Northwest Boulevard Bridge extension; • The Rivery Boulevard extension; • Improvements to the Interstate 35 southbound service road including the addition of a dedicated right-turn lane from Williams Drive; and • Improvements to the Interstate 35 northbound service road from Williams Drive to Lakeway Drive. The City envisions a transportation bond election in 2025 that may include recommendations from this study. In addition, the City accepted a Master Redevelopment Plan for a portion of the Corridor in 2006, and established a special taxing district designed to further the development within the district limits in accordance with this plan. To further this effort, the City also designated this area with a Specialty Mixed Use Future Land Use designation, as well as created a new zoning district, the Mixed-Use district, with the intent of drafting and adopting a mixed-use Regulating Plan for the area. CAMPO has identified a portion of the Corridor as a Growth Center in its 2040 Plan. The Williams Drive Study will recommend policy, programming, projects and an implementation plan for the study area that address and enhance mobility, safety, and livability. The Williams Drive Plan includes two Platinum Planning spatial area types: 1. Corridor Plan – Development of a context-sensitive corridor plan for several miles on Williams Drive, which addresses access management strategies, multi-modal transportation elements, safety and operational improvements, and recommendations for a private realm built-form that supports different modes of transportation and a sense of place. 2. Centers Plan – Development of a plan for a vibrant mixed-use center and gateway along Williams Drive from an area south of Austin Avenue to Lakeway Drive, consistent with the City’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan and special taxing district and land use overlays. This includes development concepts for a mixed- use catalytic project on the Georgetown ISD site. In order to better respect the context of the City of Georgetown, key words used in this scope are defined as below: 1. Multimodal – design and policy that ensures the safe, efficient, effective, reliable and comfortable accommodation of various modes of travel including cars, pedestrians, cyclists, and where/if appropriate, transit. 2. Mixed-use – the appropriate combination and mixture of land uses and density that can produce a feasible amount of origins, destinations, and trip generators (jobs, housing, services) that allow communities and the region gain the biggest benefits/use from multi-modal transportation investments. Mixed-use may include uses mixed vertically, or complimentary single uses adjacent to one another. Section 500 – Scope of Work Page 73 of 113 3. Equity – Ensuring robust engagement of all segments of the population, minimizing any adverse impacts of plan recommendations, and increasing access to opportunity for all members of the community. The consultant should have experience and knowledge in planning for implementation consistent with the Platinum Planning Program elements: 1. Multimodal and Mixed-Use – Create connections to housing, jobs, and services through the establishment of dynamic mixed-use environments, well-connected street grids, high-quality transit options, as well as safe and useful pedestrian/bicycle accommodations. 2. Housing – Develop a mix of housing types and price points appropriate for the study area context that provides living options that can accommodate a variety of incomes, abilities, and familial types. 3. Environment – Create a healthy environment that proactively protects and enhances air, water, land, and people. 4. Economic Development – Promote the economic competitiveness of the study area to yield positive impacts on the local tax base, high-quality jobs, and community services. 5. Equity – Create positive social, economic, and environmental outcomes for all residents and stakeholders in the study areas while minimizing adverse impacts. Section 500 – Scope of Work Page 74 of 113 Study Area (See below for the study area maps) The focus of the Williams Drive study is inclusive of the corridor from an area east of Austin Avenue, just north of downtown, to the Georgetown City Limits. As stated previously, this study includes two areas of focus: • Corridor Plan Focus Area - Williams Drive from Lakeway Drive on the south, to the Georgetown City Limits on the north. This area of Williams Drive is four lanes with a center turn lane, discontinuous sidewalks, and a lack of streetscaping. Land use along this section of the corridor includes mostly strip malls, retail power centers at major nodes, some multi-family uses, and an overall auto- centric low-density built form. Corridor Plan Focus Area Map Section 500 – Scope of Work Page 75 of 113 • Centers Plan Focus Area - San Gabriel River on the south and east, Rivery Boulevard, Oak Lane and Mesquite Lane on the West, and San Gabriel Park, Apple Creek Drive, Northwest Boulevard and Lakeway Drive on the north. This area includes some low-density commercial uses, single-family homes, and a new mixed use area off Rivery Boulevard. The area is also bisected by Interstate 35, and includes a mix of a disjointed traditional street grid on the southern portion, and a curvilinear suburban street system in the northern portion. Downtown Georgetown Centers Plan Focus Area Map Section 500 – Scope of Work Page 76 of 113 Schedule Work is to begin upon the execution of a Notice to Proceed from CAMPO and is expected to take nine (9) months to complete. CAMPO reserves the right to extend this timeline, subject to the approval of the Transportation Policy Board. Our Scope of Services is presented in five stages (Tasks 0– 4): Task 0. Public and Stakeholder Engagement Task 1. Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Task 2. Concept Plan Task 3. Draft Project, Policy Recommendations, Implementation Plan and Project Prioritization Task 4. Final Report Project Budget The budget for the project is not to exceed $250,000.00. Project Management CAMPO’s Long-Range Planning Manager, or his designee, will serve as the CAMPO Project Manager, and the City of Georgetown will serve as the local partner for this study. The consulting firm's Project Manager will serve as the primary point of contact for all communication between CAMPO and the consulting team. The CAMPO Project Manager will serve as the liaison between the local partners and the consultant team. The consulting team may not change team membership or organizational structure without the written approval of the CAMPO Executive Director. Effective two-way communication is essential on a project of this complexity and importance. The Consultant will schedule bi-weekly (or more frequent, if directed by CAMPO) meetings with CAMPO staff and local partners with ad hoc meetings as needed. On-line conference calls will be scheduled with screen sharing, as needed or as directed by CAMPO, to go over issues and maintain communication in the most efficient way. Progress Reports and Invoices The Consultant will prepare and submit detailed narrative progress reports and itemized invoices to the Project Manager. Invoices will include all work performed during the reporting period only. Detailed narrative progress reports shall include: • A brief description of work accomplished for each task. • The percentage of completion of the overall work project and each task. • Changes in the estimated value (budget) of each work task. • Special problems or delays encountered or anticipated. • The anticipated work activities for the next work period. • Log of communication associated with study that includes the person and entity contacted, reason, date, and time (includes phone calls, emails, etc.) • Additional information as directed by the CAMPO Project Manager. Section 500 – Scope of Work Page 77 of 113 The progress reports must include work performed by all sub-consultants associated with the consultant team. The Consultant will be required to submit to the CAMPO Project Manager one consolidated progress report for review, accompanied by supporting documentation for each reimbursement request. Sub-Consultant Management and Meetings The consultant will prepare contracts for any sub-consultant(s), monitor sub-consultant staff activities, ensure sub-consultant(s) adherence to the project schedule, and review and recommend approval of sub-consultant invoices. Quality Assurance and Quality Control: The Consultant will provide continuous quality assurance and quality control throughout the life of the study. CAMPO may refuse to process invoices for payment until work, deliverables and related project management tasks are completed to CAMPO’s satisfaction. Consultant shall deliver to CAMPO: • Copies of sub-consultant contracts, within 30 days of contract execution. • Monthly invoices and detailed narrative progress reports (including travel related expense receipts, and any equipment purchase receipts, time-sheets and other direct expense receipts). All receipts and documentation shall be maintained at the billing site for contract monitoring/audit purposes. The consultant is also required to submit a project schedule and timeline which includes important tasks and milestones for review and approval by the CAMPO project manager. TASK 0. Public and Stakeholder Engagement The Consultant will work with CAMPO staff and the City of Georgetown to develop a robust and inclusive public participation plan that will lead to meaningful participation of various stakeholders. The stakeholder participation plan shall include but is not limited to the following subtasks: 0.1- Steering Committee Meetings (Minimum of Three) A Steering Committee will be established by CAMPO and the City of Georgetown to guide the study. This committee will have representation from CAMPO, City of Georgetown, TxDOT, and other stakeholders. Prior to each project meeting or activity, the Consultant shall prepare agenda and agenda support materials for the next upcoming Steering Committee meeting. The CAMPO Project Manager and City of Georgetown representative will review and approve all meeting materials prior to their delivery to the Steering Committee members. At least one public meeting shall be held as part of each task (1-4) in the planning process. A project kick-off meeting shall be held with the CAMPO and the City of Georgetown to develop draft study goals that are consistent with both the City’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan and CAMPO’s Platinum Planning Program elements. Section 500 – Scope of Work Page 78 of 113 0.2 - Public Meetings (Minimum of Three) Public meetings will be held at integral points during the study pursuant to a schedule proposed by the Consultant within 10 business days of contract execution and approved by the CAMPO Project Manager. The purpose of the public meetings is to gain the perspective of local residents, key Homeowner Associations, Business Leaders, Community Leaders, and other entities or specific groups recommended by the Steering Committee. This planning process shall be conducted in close coordination with CAMPO and the City of Georgetown. Through the public outreach processes, people will have the opportunity to comment on the plan and planning efforts via email, social media, post mail, or in person at meetings. The Consultant team shall collaborate with CAMPO’s Public Outreach Group and Georgetown Project Team to broaden the channels of communications with the public. The Consultant shall facilitate and provide support personnel and exhibits for the outreach meetings. The Consultant shall collaborate with the CAMPO Public Outreach personnel and Georgetown Project Team to coordinate necessary logistics for the meetings. The public meeting schedule shall be revised, to include scheduling additional public meetings, as directed by the CAMPO Project Manager. Throughout the project, if CAMPO and the City of Georgetown determines there is a need for public outreach materials to be advertised or produced in a language other than English, the consultant shall produce print and generate electronic materials in multiple languages (prevalent in the study area) as directed by the CAMPO Project Manager. 0.3 - Project Web Site and Other Methods CAMPO will develop and host a project web site throughout the duration of the study effort. The Consultant shall be responsible for submitting deliverables and other content as directed by the CAMPO Project Manager for posting to the project web site. As part of Task 0, the consultant may suggest to CAMPO, and upon approval, develop additional outreach methods relevant to the study area; such as through social media, online town hall meetings, apps, webinars, focus groups, etc. Consultant shall deliver to CAMPO: 1. Public Participation Plan, including a proposed public meeting schedule. 2. Surveys, questionnaires, or comment cards for public meeting participants to fill out, including an electronic version to post on the CAMPO study website. 3. Meeting materials including, but not limited to, informational hand-outs, written materials, sign-in sheets, the printing of meeting hand-outs, and the preparation and production of meeting display boards in high resolution color. 4. Documentation of the meetings shall include: photographs of each event, copies of informational displays, the number of people in attendance at each meeting, copies of handouts and questionnaires distributed at the meetings, comment cards and letters received, attendance sheets from Section 500 – Scope of Work Page 79 of 113 each meeting, and the contact information used in mailings. 5. Meeting summaries of each meeting in Microsoft Word format within 10 business days of the meeting date. 6. An appropriate range of exhibits and displays for all meetings. The Consultant shall produce additional exhibits and displays for any and all meetings as directed by the CAMPO Project Manager. The quality and content of exhibits and displays shall be subject to review and approval as required by the CAMPO Project Manager. The CAMPO Project Manager may direct edits and revisions to exhibits and displays for any scheduled public meeting. The Consultant shall be responsible for submitting content and deliverables to the CAMPO Project Manager for posting on the project website. Task 1. Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment 1.1 - Comprehensive Review of Existing Studies, Plans, and Reports This task involves the review and evaluation of current local, state, and regional documents and policies relevant to transportation and supportive land use planning. The following documents will be provided for review by the City of Georgetown:  City of Georgetown Williams Drive Corridor Study (2003)  City of Georgetown Williams Drive Gateway Redevelopment Plan (2006)  City of Georgetown Travel Demand Model (TDM)  City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan  Overall Transportation Plan including the approved 2015 Road Bond  Public Safety Plan  Housing Plan  Parks and Trails Master Plan  Utility Master Plan  Downtown Master Plan  Airport Master Plan  Future Land Use Plan  My35 Plans and Projects List  Sidewalk Master Plan  City of Georgetown Unified Development Code  City of Georgetown ADA Transition Plan  City of Georgetown Data Files – Most recent Geographic Information System (GIS) files from the City and other databases, including aerial mapping and associated data files that shows the location of City limits property lines, street curbs, street names, sidewalks, trails, MPO boundary, topography, known environmental features, land use, zoning and other features  Traffic Counts  Signal Timing Plans  City of Georgetown Trails Map  Central Texas Greenprint for Growth  Other previous studies relevant to the project Section 500 – Scope of Work Page 80 of 113 1.2 - Existing conditions The Consultant shall collect any other data necessary to evaluate existing transportation, demographic, market, and land use conditions relevant to the Platinum Planning Program elements within the corridor and center areas. This effort shall include, at a minimum, an evaluation of the existing street network and connectivity (specifically across Interstate 35 and connections to Williams Drive from adjacent areas); access management, mode split, and any impediments to the use of alternative modes of transportation; an inventory of existing land uses and a supportive built environment; and any other data requested by the CAMPO Project Manager. The data collection will pay particular attention to the use of various multimodal transportation related items such as pedestrian and bicycle facilities, streetscapes and street sections, and branding and wayfinding/signage traffic operations, parking, safety, and land use related items such as market trends, existing built form and building types, infill development, adaptive reuse, public spaces and the opportunities for economic development, and housing. Specific tasks that shall be examined as part of both the Centers and Corridor components of this study include, but shall not be limited to: • Parking analysis • Traffic counts and operations analysis • Driveway and access assessment • Street grid connectivity and barriers analysis • Vehicle, pedestrian and bicycle safety analysis • Traffic signal analysis • Intersection analysis • Roadway design and loading • Sidewalk inventory • Pedestrian and bicycle safety analysis • Fiscal impact analysis • Land suitability analysis • Land use susceptibility to change analysis • Public health Impacts • Additional tasks for examination deemed necessary by the CAMPO Project Manager The Consultant shall complete a housing and retail market conditions analysis as part of the centers component of the study. 1.3 – Revision of Goals and Objectives The Consultant shall work with CAMPO, City of Georgetown and the Steering Committee to revise the study goals and objectives as needed. Consultant to Deliver to CAMPO: • Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Report Section 500 – Scope of Work Page 81 of 113 Task 2: Develop Concept Plan The Consultant shall prepare draft conceptual plans that are specific for both the corridor and centers components of the study based on the existing conditions and needs assessment. Although the study has two components, the concepts for both component shall be complimentary. This concept plan shall identify relevant projects and policies to improve the transportation network and supportive land uses that, if implemented, will enhance mobility, connectivity, safety, and various multimodal travel options; support economic development in the area with minimal impact on the environment; provide for a housing mix that meets the needs of the community; and enhance a sense of place. Specifically, the study shall provide an analysis of the current and potential system network and future land use mix within the study area. This analysis should propose specific improvements to transportation infrastructure that will improve multimodal transportation safety, connectivity and access. The analysis shall also identify possible investment strategies and policies to leverage the desired land use and housing mix, and development types in accordance with the City’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan, as well as analyze the market feasibility of the improvements. 2.1A - Concept Plan for the Corridor Component • Corridor Performance – Develop concepts that will improve and optimize the transportation network’s performance and safety in the corridor through an efficient, effective and reliable system. This includes development of access management concepts, traffic signal timing plans, intersection improvements, roadway cross-sections and streetscaping concepts that balance the needs of a variety of users/modes (pedestrians, cyclist, and cars), and enhance traffic flow, environmental quality and economic development. • Land Use, Private Realm, and the Transect – Develop land use and built form recommendations that are supportive and complementary to an effective transportation corridor. This should include concepts for development pattern intensities that may change and transition along Williams Drive from the centers area on the south end to the more suburban areas on the north end. All concepts shall include recommendations that will be conducive to and promote mobility, as well as address the placement and supply of parking. In addition, recommendations shall include strategies on how the corridor should develop and redevelop to become an effective multimodal transportation corridor and iconic gateway into Georgetown over time. Development of a specific transect for this corridor shall be included. • Connections to Subdivisions – Develop concepts that identify ways to better connect the subdivisions along Williams Drive to the corridor and one another. Section 500 – Scope of Work Page 82 of 113 2.1B - The Concept Plan for the Centers Component shall include: • Circulation and Connectivity - Develop a multimodal connectivity plan. The concept shall address: o Identifying transportation opportunities and specific needs for all modes of transportation in the corridor and center. The potential for multimodal transportation connections between the study area and Downtown Georgetown, the Rivery Park Development, San Gabriel Park, and adjacent neighborhoods. Specific attention shall be given to connectivity across Interstate 35 and the San Gabriel River, as well as the intersection of Austin Avenue, Williams Drive and Interstate 35. o Strategies for parking management, including on-street, shared parking (public and private), and other arrangements. o Improvements to the pedestrian and bicycle realm, appropriate sidewalks and bikeways, streetscapes, pedestrian crossings, intersection improvements signals and other supportive infrastructure. o Identifying opportunities and specific needs for transit in the area, where and if appropriate. o Other strategies that will help balance the needs of users traveling thru the centers area, as well as those destined to the centers. Addressing street grid connections and redundancy, as well as mode shift will be crucial in this analysis. • Economic and Urban Development - Identify opportunities for context sensitive, mixed-use infill, grayfield/brownfield redevelopment, and new greenfield development (both vertical and horizontal) that creates a multimodal, safe, comfortable, and vibrant environment, destination, and investment opportunity. o Concept shall include provisions for additional retail, services, entertainment and other amenities that will enhance the neighborhoods; make the area attractive and provide basic services for its residents and a unique experience for visitors; complimenting services and amenities offered in the downtown district; complimenting and ancillary services for the City’s and Capital Area’s business/employment centers. o A catalytic project concept should be developed to examine the redevelopment of the Georgetown ISD site that is conducive to multi- modal transportation investment. This may include mixed-use or housing components. Pro formas, maps, renderings, and other pertinent information, shall be developed as part each case study project. o Potential opportunities for public/private partnerships should be explored as part of this task. • Housing - Identify concepts and strategies for inclusion of an appropriate mix of housing types (including price points and typology) that serves the needs of the community and properly utilizes and leverages the local and regional transportation investments in the area. Section 500 – Scope of Work Page 83 of 113 • Environment and Place o Infrastructure Design – Develop concepts for infrastructure design that minimize impacts to the natural environment, including construction materials, storm water infrastructure, water quality, landscaping, scenic roadway design, etc. o Public and Green Space – Concept should identify the areas of opportunity for high-quality public/gathering spaces, green space, and areas that should be considered for preservation or limited development. o Place-making – Develop concepts and visuals that demonstrate elements of high-quality aesthetics in both the public and private realm through streetscaping, greenery, public art, architecture, and view sheds. The place-making concept shall include provisions for wayfinding and branding of the area. o Environmental Justice - Provide guidance on policies and projects that will benefit and minimize adverse impacts to vulnerable populations. Consultant shall deliver to CAMPO: 1. Completed concept plan report narrative with graphics and methodology inclusive of parking and connectivity strategies. 2. Catalytic project case study narrative, maps, pro formas, and rendering. 3. Corridor Transect for Williams Drive TASK 3: DRAFT RECCOMENDATIONS, IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES, AND PRIORITIZATION 3.1 - Recommendations The consultant shall create near-, short-, medium - and long-term projects, and policy recommendations that are tailored to the needs of the stakeholder/implementing entities in the study area. Timeframes for the recommendations and implementation strategies are defined as: • Near-Term – 1 Year or Less • Short - Term – 2 to 4 years • Medium-Term – 5 – 10 years • Long-Term – 11 years or more Recommendations and strategies shall include, but shall not be limited to: • Maps, renderings, and drawings of proposed improvements and concepts • Recommended roadway sections/schematics • Recommended mobility management solutions to include traffic flow, signal timing, access management • Proposed changes or additions to the infrastructure design criteria • Cost Estimates and funding sources for proposed improvements (separated by implementer(s)) • Draft final fiscal impact analysis • Description of tools and partnerships needed for housing economic development concepts Section 500 – Scope of Work Page 84 of 113 • Proposed Unified Development Code language or zoning map changes, this should include recommendations on parking, consistent with the City’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map. • Proposed changes to local and regional thoroughfare maps • Proposed economic development agreement and partnership language (as needed) 3.2 - Evaluation Categories and Measures of Effectiveness The Consultant shall develop a set of criteria to assist in evaluating each improvement concept. The broad categories of transportation efficacy, safety, VMT, travel times, right-of-way, socio-economic impacts, urban design, health impacts, environmental impacts, and pedestrian/bicyclist impacts and cost effectiveness will be further defined into evaluation criteria. These criteria shall be written so that it may be included in the CAMPO Transportation Improvement Program and Regional Transportation Plan project selection criteria, if so desired. 3.3 - Evaluation of Cost-Effectiveness, Impacts, and Priorities The Consultant shall evaluate cost-effectiveness to determine if the improvements cause sufficient user benefits to justify the investment. The Consultant shall evaluate cost effectiveness by determining the monetary benefits associated with the reduction in vehicle delay due to short- term improvements, as well as compare the benefit to the implementation cost. Benefits shall be determined using the results of the peak hour model and converting the hourly delay values to estimated daily and annual delays, which will then be multiplied by an average cost per hour of delay to achieve annual benefits (dollar-value). Projects and policies shall also be evaluated based on the metrics outlined in Task 3.2. The consultant shall develop a prioritized list of projects and policies based on the outcomes of the evaluation. Consultant shall deliver to CAMPO: 1. A summary of current and planned transportation projects and near, short, medium, and long-term project recommendations that will impact the study area. 2. Proposed cost estimates, funding sources, policy changes or additions, and partnership(s) needed to implement study recommendations. 3. Draft catalytic project and centers implementation strategy and marketing brief (not to exceed two pages). 4. Prioritized list of projects and policies. 5. Draft environmental justice analysis. 6. Draft health impact assessment. 7. Draft final fiscal impact analysis. 8. Draft ordinance and design manual changes or amendments. 9. Draft interlocal and economic development agreement language. 10. Traffic modeling data and analysis Section 500 – Scope of Work Page 85 of 113 TASK 4: FINAL REPORT WITH RECOMMENDATIONS The Consultant shall prepare and deliver a final report at the conclusion of the study. The report will be reviewed by CAMPO staff, City of Georgetown and the Steering Committee. The report, executive summary, and visuals must be approved by CAMPO before going to print. The report shall include: • Documentation of public and stakeholder input across all project stages, overview of the planning process, existing conditions report, concept plan, and final recommendations/implementation report; • Discussion of any concepts considered but eliminated for not addressing the study goals and objectives; • Description of the study effort associated with identification, definition, development, and refinement of urban design and multimodal transportation improvement concepts; • Explanation of methodology and evaluation criteria used; • Summary of recommended transportation and land use projects along with project descriptions, costs, benefits, and potential funding sources for each of the implementing entities; • Catalytic project and centers implementation strategy and marketing document; • Corridor Transect that includes concepts for both the public and private realm; • Complete fiscal impact analysis for the concept plan methodology; • Narrative on air quality benefits; • List of recommended projects prioritized in cooperation with the Steering Committee and the stakeholders; • Narrative on impacts and benefits to Environmental Justice populations; • Health impact assessment; • Sample ordinances, design manual, and agreement language needed for implementation, as applicable (include in appendix); • GISD Catalytic project proformas (include in appendix); • Any additional content deemed necessary by the CAMPO Project Manager. Consultant shall deliver to CAMPO: 1. Recommended concept for future development with integrated transportation concepts. 2. A minimum of five ground level and/or bird's eye level artistic renderings and/or computer generated photo simulations of (transportation) improvement concepts to help the public visualize recommended improvements of significance. 3. Suggested strategies to influence development toward achieving the concept plan. 4. Recommended near-, short-, medium - and long-term transportation projects to improve mobility in the study area. 5. Benefit cost analysis for each recommended project. 6. Identify potential funding sources for each project recommended. 7. Base maps showing the location, layout, and typical sections for each concept Section 500 – Scope of Work Page 86 of 113 considered (one high resolution, reproducible digital copy). 8. Executive Summary of the study report with its high resolution, reproducible digital copy, not to exceed five pages. (Word and PDF format). 9. Catalytic project and centers implementation marketing brief with its high resolution, reproducible digital copy, not to exceed two pages (Word and PDF format) for use in private realm development efforts. 10. All associated supporting documents located in the appendices. 11. Twenty-five (25) Hard Color Copies of the Final Report, Fifty (50) Hard Color Copies of the Executive Summary and Ten (10) Hard Color Copies Appendices. Final Report should be in 8.5’ X 11’ format. 12. All GIS, Photoshop, InDesign, Illustrator, MSWord, MS Excel, photo, graphics and other associated files. Section 500 – Scope of Work Page 87 of 113 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN CAPITAL AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION (CAMPO) AND CITY OF GEORGETOWN FOR WILLIAMS DRIVE STUDY TillS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made by and between the CAPITAL AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION, a metropolitan planning organization, ("CAMPO") and the CITY OF GEORGETOWN, a Texas Home Rule Municipal Corporation in Williamson County, ("the City") pursuant to the authority granted and in compliance with the provisions of the Interlocal Cooperation Act, Chapter 791, Texas Government Code. WHEREAS, the Texas Interlocal Cooperation Act, Texas Government Code Chapter 791 (the "Act"), provides that any one or more public agencies may contract with each other for the performance of governmental functions or services for the promotion and protection of the health and welfare of the inhabitants of this State and for the mutual benefit of the parties; and WHEREAS, the Governor of the State of Texas has designated CAMPO (formerly the Austin Transportation Study), acting through its Transportation Policy Board, to be the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the Austin urbanized area(s), and the lead agency for the region's Metropolitan Planning process; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Planning process addresses requirements under state and Federal law that promote efficient system management and operation; and WHEREAS, CAMPO's Platinum Planning Program seeks to generate comprehensive and detailed multimodal planning at the local level that will generate regionally significant benefits through projects and policies; and WHEREAS, CAMPO's Platinum Planning Program translates federal and state transportation guidelines into actions that are consistent and appropriate for our region's and local communities' context; and WHEREAS, Williams Drive is one of the City's major arterials with more than 29,000 vehicles accessing it daily, a figure which is expected to grow with the City's expanding population, and mobility issues that impede the potential growth and further development of this corridor as planned in the City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to partner with CAMPO to complete a study of Williams Drive, in accordance with CAMPO's Platinum Planning Program, to address the historic and emerging mobility and economic development issues along this corridor, and recommend projects and implementation plans that enhance multi-modal transportation, safety, mobility and connectivity, enhance economic development potential, and establishes the area as a premier Georgetown Williams Drive Study Page 88 of 113 gateway into Georgetown and the Region ("Williams Drive Study"), as further described in the Scope of Work (Attachment NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration covenants promises made by the and the City hereby agree as follows: I. PAYMENT CAMPO's and the payment are payable and from funds aotlrotmated by the City Council the of Georgetown and the CA1\1PO Transportation Policy Board, respectively ("Appropriated funds") and the purpose purchase. The absence of appropriated funds-orother lawfully available funds-sha:H-render-this-Agreement,------ null void to the extent are not appropriated or Within days adoption of budget or CA1\1PO's Unified Planning Work applicable party shall provide the other party failure of the party's ..... ..,.,,,.,.,,,,a body to make appropriation any fiscal to pay the amounts due under this Agreement, or of any appropriation to an amount to permit the applicable party to obligation under this Agreement ll. OBLIGATIONS OF CAMPO A. CAMPO shall support the inclusion City's Comprehensive the Transportation Plan and Future Land Use as part of the Williams Drive Study. B. CAMPO agrees to actively work the development of the Williams Drive with Atltaclrun~ent C. CAMPO will form a steering committee that includes other stakeholders to guide planning process of the Williams D. CAMPO will manage all phases of and administration of a consultant contract, mcJlUOJ:ng, but not limited procurement, contract review and approval of deliverables, contract terms and conditions, payment of invoices, contract mose-t:mt. CAMPO will and partner the City throughout the process to ensure that the the needs of the goals of the City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan, CAMPO will coordinate the City of Georgetown on any proposed and/or necessary changes to the Schedule, Public Plan, other related prior to <>n .. ,,.,...,""' F. CAMPO pay an amount not to exceed $200,000 or 80% of the total p:roiect costs of $250,000 to cover planning services described under in Attachment A -Scope of Services. Georgetown Williams Drive Study Page 89 of 113 G. CAMPO shall include all required deliverables identified in Attachment A-Scope of Work in the executed agreement with the consultant hired to complete the Williams Drive Study: H. CAMPO will submit the completed Williams Drive Study for possible acceptance by the Transportation Policy Board. ID. OBLIGATIONS OF THE CITY A. The City supports the inclusion of CAMPO's Platinum Planning Program elements as part of the Williams Drive Study as detailed in Attachment B. B. The City will actively work with CAMPO in the development of the Williams Drive Study consistent with Attachment A -Scope of Work. C. The City will remit to CAMPO $50,000, or 20% of the $250,000 total project cost as the local match for this study, within thirty (30) days of the effective date of this Agreement or the date CAMPO executes the Advanced Funding Agreement with the Texas Department of · Transportation for the Williams Drive Study. D. The City will participate in the consultant selection process and the planning process of the Williams Drive Study. E. The City will present the Williams Drive Study to its local decision making bodies for review and possible adoption and implementation. F. Upon completion of the Williams Drive Study, the City will track and report to CAMPO on plan implementation activity such as transportation investments, new development projects, public and private dollars invested, new policies established or amended, etc. IV. TERM AND TERMINATION A. This Agreement is effective on the date of the last party to sign, provided that the obligations of the Parties shall be subject to CAMPO executing the Advanced Funding Agreement with the Texas Department of Transportation for the Williams Drive Study. The Agreement terminates on March 31,2017, unless otherwise terminated pursuant to this Agreement. B. If either party defaults in the performance of any terms or conditions of this Agreement the defaulting party shall have 30 days after receipt of written notice of such default within which to cure such default. If such default is not cured within such period of time then the offended party shall have the right without further notice to terminate this Agreement. C. This Agreement may be terminated, in whole or in part, by either party whenever such termination is found to be in the best interest of either party. Either party shall provide written notification to the other party at least thirty (30) days in advance of the effective date Georgetown Williams Drive Study Page 90 of 113 of the termination. AU notices pursuant to this Agreement shall be deemed given when either delivered in person or deposited the United States mail, postage prepaid, mail, return receipt requested, addressed to the appropriate at the following address: IftoCAMPO: Ashby Johnson Executive CAMPO Post Office Box 1088 Austin, Texas 78767 a copy to: Kelly ----------------------~smr~tirrrodru~tmm~----------~------------------------ CAMPO Post Office Box 1088 Austin, Texas 78767 the City: Ed Transportation Services City of Georgetown 300-1 Industrial with a copy to: Nat Waggoner Transportation Services City of Georgetown 300-1 Industrial Ave Gec,rge~toVIm Texas 78626 V. RESTRICTION ON LOBBYING In accordance with 31 USC Section CAMPO and the hereby certify no Federal aptlfOJ)ria.ted funds have been or paid by or on behalf CAMPO and/or the to any uu,, ... .., •• .., ... "" or attempting to influence an or employee any agency, a member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress connection with the awarding of Federal contract, making of any grant or the entering into agreement, and the extension, continuation, amendment, or modification of Federal contract, grant, loan or cooperative agreement. If any funds Federal funds have been paid or will be any person for influencing or to influence an n'IT''"""r employee of any agency, a of Congress, an officer or of '-''""''A"'-L""" corme1ctxcln with this grant, loan, or cooperative CAMPO and/or the shaH complete submit "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying", in accordance it instructions. CAMPO and/or the City shall that the language this certification be included the all sub-awards at all tiers and that Georgetown Williams Drive Study Page 91 of 113 subcontractors shall certify and disclose accordingly. CAMPO and its subcontractors shall require that the language of this certification be included in any subcontract exceeding $100,000 by any tier in that any such subcontractor shall certify and disclose accordingly. VI. INSPECTION OF WORK AND RETENTION OF DOCUMENTS A. CAMPO when federal funds are involved, shall grant the U.S. Department of Transportation, the Texas Department of Transportation and any authorized representative thereof, the right at .all reasonable times to inspect or otherwise evaluate the work performed or being performed hereunder and the premises in which it is being performed. B. All records or materials required by or produced under this Agreement, including records produced by any subcontractor to CAMPO and/or the City, shall be maintained for at least four ( 4) years after CAMPO and/or the City payment under this Agreement or the termination or expiration of this Agreement. VII. PROCURE:MENT In accordance with the Interlocal Cooperation Act, it is mutually agreed that all parties hereto shall conduct all procurements and award all contracts necessary to this Agreement in accordance with federal and state laws and regulations, including Federal Transit Administration Circular 4220.1D, if federal funds are used to execute procurement and award of services. No officer, employee, independent consultant, or elected official of either party who is involved in the development, evaluation, or decision-making process of the performance of any procurement related to this Agreement shall have a financial interest, direct or indirect, in the Agreement resulting from the procurement. VIII. LEGAL CONSTRUCTION If any of the prov1s1ons contained in this Agreement are for any reason held to be unconstitutional, void, or invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect, such unconstitutionality, invalidity, illegality or unenforceability shall not affect the remaining portions of the Agreement; and this Agreement shall be construed as if such unconstitutional, void, or invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision had never been contained herein. IX. LAW AND VENUE The laws of the State of Texas govern all matters arising out ofthis Agreement, and venue shall lie in the state courts of Travis County, Texas. The parties acknowledge and agree that each party shall be responsible for any attorney's fees incurred by that party relating to this Agreement X. NON-DISCRIMINATION It is mutually agreed that all parties hereto are bound by the provisions of Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 21, which was promulgated to effectuate Title VI of the Civil Rights Georgetown Williams Drive Study Page 92 of 113 of Federal Regulations, 710.40S(b), and Executive Order 11246 Employment as amended Executive 11375 · as u...,~~~"'~'u"'lllL<;iu in Department of Labor Regulations CFR Part 60). XI. INTERPRETATION OF LAWS AND AUTHORITIES CAMPO is responsible for the settlement of all and administrative issues arising out of procurement into in support of the contract work. XII. ALTERATION, AMENDMENT, OR MODIFICATION alterations, amendments, or modifications must B. Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between CAMPO and the City. No other agreement, statement or promise relating to the subject matter of that is not contained the Agreement is valid or binding CITY OF GEORGETOWN Dale Ross, Mayor Date: o, /O?to ('do lv ATTEST: -~~0~ Title:___..,.,.....!....l...!oo.-~~...::L-~~::.L..:-+-- Approved as to form Georgetown Williams Drive Study Ashby Johnson, Executive uu~ect1or Page 93 of 113 Georgetown Williams Drive Study ATTACHMENT A SCOPE OF WORK Page 94 of 113 Georgetown Williams Drive Study Page 95 of 113 SCOPE OF WORK CAMPO Platinum Planning Project Name: Georgetown, TX Williams Drive Study CAMPO is seeking services from a qualified consultant to conduct a study and develop a plan to further the goals of CAMPO's Platinum Planning Program and the City of Georgetown's 2030 Comprehensive Plan, including the Overall Transportation Plan (OTP) and Future Land Use Map, as well as address the immediate and future mobility issues that stem from population growth and development pressures. The Consultant will develop a plan that applies the elements of the Platinum Planning Program to the study area, and recommends projects and implementation plans that enhance multi- modal transportation safety, mobility and connectivity, enhance economic development potential, and establish the area as a premier gateway into Georgetown. CAMPO's Platinum Planning Program seeks to generate comprehensive and detailed multimodal transportation planning at the local level that will generate regionally significant benefits through projects and policies. The program aligns local and regional planning through a progressive, integrated, and inclusive process. Plans completed as part of this program meet shared goals and are inclusive of state of the practice elements consistent with CAMPO's 2040 Regional Transportation Plan goals. Specifically, these plans will outline synergies between transportation, land use, and other planning areas to better understand how the system performs. Recommendations from plans completed through this program will inform future iterations of the Regional Transportation Plan and be eligible for future Federal funding allocated by CAMPO. The Platinum Planning Program includes three spatial areas: Subregions, Corridors, and Centers. Georgetown, Texas, is a rapidly growing community about 30 miles north of Austin. The city has a population of over 50,000 people and serves as the county seat for Williamson County. Georgetown is known for its walkable, historic downtown, family oriented neighborhoods, and as a retirement destination. The city also serves as the northern gateway for the Capital Area. This study seeks to help Georgetown and the region manage its growth challenges by creating environments that provide for an efficient, effective and reliable system for moving people and goods through multiple travel qptions, enhance economic development and housing options near high-quality transportation investments, and position Williams Drive to become a premier gateway for the City of Georgetown and the Austin region. Williams Drive is a four-lane roadway with continuous center turn lanes. More than 29,000 cars access this major arterial daily, and the trend is expected to grow with the City's expanding population. ·The City of Georgetown and TxDOT have identified projects and committed funding within the corridor before 2025 that will inform and impact development and mobility patterns as part of the recently approved 2015 Transportation Bond program. Key projects that will be completed in the area as a result of the 2015 Bond include: 1 Page 96 of 113 • Northwest Boulevard Bridge extension; • Rivery Boulevard ov1·"'""''"''"'''"'" • Improvements to the Interstate southbound service road including the addition of a dedicated right-tum lane Williams and • to the Interstate 35 northbound service road from Williams Drive to Lakeway Drive. The a transportation bond election 2025 that may include recommendations from In City accepted a Master Redevelopment Plan for a portion of Corridor 2006, and established a special taxing district designed further development within the district limits in accordance with this plan. To further this City also this area a Specialty Mixed Use Future Land Use designation, as well as a new district, the ----Mixed=tlse-district;-with the intent of drafting and adopting-a-mixed-tlse-Regtrlating-Pian~---­ for the area. CAMPO has identified a portion the Corridor as a Growth Center 2040 Plan. The Williams Study will recommend projects and an implementation the study area address and enhance safety, and livability. The Williams Drive Plan includes Platinum Planning spatial area types: 1. Corridor Plan -Development of a context-sensitive corridor for several on Williams Drive, which access management strategies, multi-modal transportation elements, safety and operational improvements, and recommendations for a realm built-form that supports different modes transportation and a sense of ~,~,Q"'"'· Centers -Development a plan for a mixed-use and gateway along Williams Drive an area south Austin Avenue to Lakeway Drive, consistent the City's 2030 Comprehensive special taxing district and land use This includes development concepts a mixed- use catalytic project on Georgetown In order to better respect scope are defined as neuow: context the City Georgetown, key words used in this 1. Multimodal -design policy that ensures 2. comfortable accommodation of various cyclists, and lllln.cr&>rn that can produce a feasible (jobs, that multi-modal transportation or complimentary Section 500-Scope safe, efficient, effective, of including Page 97 of 113 3. Equity -Ensuring robust engagement of all segments of the population, minimizing any adverse impacts of plan recommendations, and increasing access to opportunity for all members ofthe community. The consultant should have experience and knowledge in planning for implementation consistent with the Platinum Planning Program elements: 1. Multimodal and Mixed-Use -Create connections to housing, jobs, and services through the establishment of dynamic mixed-use environments, well-connected street grids, high-quality transit options, as well as safe and useful pedestrian/bicycle accommodations. 2. Housing -Develop a mix of housing types and price points appropriate for the study area context that provides living options that can accommodate a variety of incomes, abilities, and familial types. 3. Environment-Create a healthy environment that proactively protects and enhances air, water, land, and people. 4. Economic Development -Promote the economic competitiveness of the study area to yield positive impacts on the local tax base, high-quality jobs, and community services. 5. Equity -Create positive social, economic, and environmental outcomes for all residents and stakeholders in the study areas while minimizing adverse impacts. Section 500-Scope of Work Page 98 of 113 Study Area (See below for the study area maps) focus of the Williams study is inclusive of the corridor from an area east of Austin Avenue, just north downtown, to the Georgetown Limits. As stated previously, this study includes areas of focus: • Corridor Plan Focus Area -Williams Drive from south, to the City Limits on the north. This area of Williams four lanes a center tum lane, discontinuous a lack streetscaping. use this section the corridor includes mostly strip malls, retail power centers at major nodes, some multi-family uses, and an overall l"'on•Trrl"' low-density built form. Section 500-Scope of Work Page 99 of 113 • Centers Plan Focus Area -San Gabriel River on the south and east, Rivery Boulevard, Oak Lane and Mesquite Lane on the West, and San Gabriel Park, Apple Creek Drive, Northwest Boulevard and Lakeway Drive on the north. This area includes some low-density commercial uses, single-family homes, and a new mixed use area off Rivery Boulevard. The area is also bisected by Interstate 35, and includes a mix of a disjointed traditional street grid on the southern portion, and a curvilinear suburban street system in the northern portion. Centers Plan focus Area Map Section 500-Scope of Work Page 100 of 113 Schedule Work is to begin upon the execution of a Notice Proceed from CAMPO and is expected to nine months to complete. CAMPO reserves the right to extend this timeline, subject to the approval of the Transportation Policy ~-o~ ..... .,. .. r~ Our Scope of Services is presented in five stages (Tasks 0-4): Task Public and Stakeholder Engagement Task 1. Existing Conditions and Needs As!sessment Concept Plan Task Draft Project, Recommendations, Implementation Plan and Project Prioritization Task 4. Final Report Project Budget The budget for the project is not to exceed $250.000.00. Project Management CAMPO's Long-Range Planning Manager, or his designee, will serve as Project Manager, and the City of Georgetown will serve as local .... .,.r'l' ... ., study. The consulting firm's Manager serve as. the primary contact all between and The CAMPO Manager will serve as liaison between the local and the team. The consulting team may not change membership or organizational structure without the approval of the CAMPO ~.-"'"''""uu Effective two-way communication is essential on a project of this complexity and importance. will schedule bi-weekly (or more frequent, if by CAMPO) meetings with CAMPO staff and local partners with ad meetings as needed. On-line conference calls will be scheduled screen as needed or as directed by CAMPO, over and communication in the most way. Progress Reports and Invoices The Consultant will prepare and submit detailed progress reports and itemized •nu, .... ,,...c)C! to the Project Manager. will include work performed during reporting period only. Detailed narrative progress reports shall include: • A brief description of work accomplished for each task. • The percentage of completion overall work and each task. • Changes in estimated value (budget) of each work task. • Special problems or delays encountered or anticipated. • anticipated work activities for the next work period. • Log of communication associated with study that includes the person and entity contacted, reason, date, and (includes phone calls, emails, etc.) • Additional information as directed by the CAMPO Project Manager. Section -Scope ofWork Page 101 of 113 The progress reports must include work performed by ali sub-consultants associated with the consultant team. The Consultant will be required to submit to the CAMPO Project Manager one consolidated progress report for review, accompanied by supporting documentation for each reimbursement request. Sub-Consultant Management and Meetings The consultant will prepare contracts for any sub-consultant(s), monitor sub-consultant staff activities, ensure sub-consultant(s) adherence to the project schedule, and review and recommend approval of sub-consultant invoices. Quality Assurance and Quality Control: The Consultant will provide continuous quality assurance and quality control throughout the life of the study. CAMPO may refuse to process invoices for payment until work, deliverables and related project management tasks are completed to CAMPO's satisfaction. · Consultant shall deliver to CAMPO: • Copies of sub-consultant contracts, within 30 days of contract execution. • Monthly invoices and detailed narrative progress reports (including travel related expense receipts, and any equipment purchase receipts, time-sheets and other direct expense receipts). All receipts and documentation shall be maintained at the billing site for contract monitoring/audit purposes. The consultant is also required to submit a project schedule and timeline which includes important tasks and milestones for review and approval by the CAMPO project manager. TASK 0. Public and Stakeholder Engagement The Consultant will work with CAMPO staff and the City of Georgetown to develop a robust and inclusive public participation plan that will lead to meaningful participation of various stakeholders. The stakeholder participation plan shall include but is not limited to the following subtasks: 0.1-Steering Committee Meetings (Minimum of Three) A Steering Committee will be established by CAMPO and the City of Georgetown to guide the study. This committee will have representation from CAMPO, City of Georgetown, TxDOT, and other stakeholders. Prior to each project meeting or activity, the Consultant shall prepare agenda and agenda support materials for the next upcoming Steering Committee meeting. The CAMPO Project Manager and City of Georgetown representative will review and approve all meeting materials prior to their delivery to the Steering Committee members. At least one public meeting shall be held as part of each task (1-4) in the planning process. A project kick-off meeting shall be held with the CAMPO and the City of Georgetown to develop draft study goals that are consistent with both the City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan and CAMPO's Platinum Planning Program elements. Section 500-Scope of Work Page 102 of 113 0.2 -Public Meetings (Minimum of Three) Public meetings will be held at integral points during study pursuant a schedule proposed by Consultant within 1 0 business days of contract execution and approved by the CAMPO Project Manager. The purpose of the public meetings is to gain perspective of local residents, key Homeowner Associations, Business Community Leaders, and other entities or specific groups recommended by the Steering Committee. This planning process shall be conducted close coordination with CAMPO and the City of Georgetown. Through the public outreach processes, people will have the opportunity to comment on the plan and planning efforts via email, social media, post mail, or in person at meetings. Consultant team shall collaborate with CAMPO's Public Outreach Group ----and-Georgetow~ject-=ream-to-broaden-the-channeiS-OLcomm•anications_wwithW-Uth_u;;e._ __ _ Consultant shall facilitate and provide support and for the outreach The Consultant collaborate with the CAMPO Outreach personnel Georgetown Project to coordinate necessary logistics for the meetings. The meeting schedule shall be revised, to include scheduling additional public meetings, as directed by the CAMPO Project Manager. Throughout the project, if CAMPO and the City Georgetown determines there a need for public outreach materials to be advertised or produced in a language other than English, consultant shall produce and generate electronic materials multiple languages (prevalent in the study as directed by the CAMPO Manager. · -Project Web Site and Other Methods CAMPO will develop and host a project web site throughout the duration study The Consultant shall be responsible submitting deliverables and other as directed by the CAMPO Project Manager for posting to project web As part of Task the consultant may suggest to CAMPO, and approval, additional outreach methods relevant to the study area; such as online hail meetings, apps, webinars, focus groups, etc. Consultant shall deliver to CAMPO: Public Plan, including a proposed meeting schedule. Surveys, questionnaires, or comment cards for public meeting participants to fill out, including an version to post on CAMPO study website. Meeting materials including, but not limited to, informational hand-outs, written materials, sign-in sheets, the printing of meeting hand-outs, the preparation and production of meeting display boards in high color. 4. Documentation of the meetings shall include: photographs of each event, copies informational displays, number of people in attendance at each meeting, copies of and questionnaires distributed at the comment cards and received, attendance sheets from Section 500-Scope of Work Page 103 of 113 each meeting, and the contact information used in mailings. 5. Meeting summaries of each meeting in Microsoft Word format within 1 0 business days of the meeting date. 6. An appropriate range of exhibits and displays for all meetings. The Consultant shall produce additional exhibits and displays for any and all meetings as directed by the CAMPO Project Manager. The quality and content of exhibits and displays shall be subject to review and approval as required by the CAMPO Project Manager. The CAMPO Project Manager may direct edits and revisions to exhibits and displays for any scheduled public meeting. The Consultant shall be responsible for submitting content and deliverables to the CAMPO Project Manager for posting on the project website. Task 1. Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment 1.1 • Comprehensive Review of Existing Studies, Plans, and Reports This task involves the review and evaluation of current local, state, and reg{onal documents and policies relevant to transportation and supportive land use planning. The following documents will be provided for review by the City of Georgetown: 111 City of Georgetown Williams Drive Corridor Study (2003) 111 City of Georgetown Williams Drive Gateway Redevelopment Plan (2006) 111 City of Georgetown Travel Demand Model (TOM) • City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan • Overall Transportation Plan including the approved 2015 Road Bond • Public Safety Plan 111 Housing Plan • Parks and Trails Master Plan 11 Utility Master Plan 111 Downtown Master Plan • Airport Master Plan 111 Future Land Use Plan • My35 Plans and Projects List • Sidewalk Master Plan • City of Georgetown Unified Development Code 111 City of Georgetown ADA Transition Plan • City of Georgetown Data Files-Most recent Geographic Information System (GIS) files from the City and other databases, including aerial mapping and associated data files that shows the location of City limits property lines, street curbs, street names, sidewalks, trails, MPO boundary, topography, known environmental features, land use, zoning and other features • Traffic Counts • Signal Timing Plans 11 City of Georgetown Trails Map • Central Texas Greenprint for Growth 111 Other previous studies relevant to the project Section 500-Scope of Work Page 104 of 113 1.2 -Existing conditions Consultant shall collect any other data necessary to evaluate existing transportation, demographic, market, land use conditions relevant Program elements within the corridor and center areas. effort shall include, at a minimum, an evaluation of existing street network and connectivity (specifically across Interstate and connections to Williams Drive from adjacent areas); access management, mode split, and any impediments to the use alternative modes of transportation; an inventory of existing land uses and a supportive built environment; and any other data requested by CAMPO Project Manager. -----Ihe-data-collectiOO-WiU pay particular-attention-tO-the use of various multimad .... a._l ___ _ transportation related items such as pedestrian and bicycle facilities, streetscapes and street sections, and branding and wayfinding/signage traffic operations, parking, safety, and land use such as market trends, existing built and building types, development, adaptive reuse, public spaces and the opportunities for development, and housing. tasks that shall be examined as part of both Centers and Corridor components of this study include, but shall not be limited to: • Parking analysis • Traffic counts and operations analysis • Driveway and access assessment • grid and barriers analysis • Vehicle, pedestrian and bicycle analysis • signal analysis • Intersection analysis • Roadway. design and loading • Sidewalk inventory • Pedestrian and bicycle safety analysis • impact analysis • land suitability analysis • land use susceptibility to change analysis • Public health Impacts • Additional tasks for examination deemed necessary by the CAMPO Project Manager Consultant shall complete a housing and market analysis as part of component of the study. 1 -Revision of Goals and Objectives The Consultant shall work with CAMPO, City of Georgetown and the Steering Committee to revise the study goals and objectives as needed. Consultant to Deliver to CAMPO: • Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Section 500-Scope Work Page 105 of 113 Task 2: Develop Concept Plan The Consultant shall prepare draft conceptual plans that are specific for both the corridor and centers components of the study based on the existing conditions and needs assessment. Although the study has two components, the concepts for both component shall be complimentary. This concept plan shall identify relevant projects and policies to improve the transportation network and supportive land uses that, if implemented, will enhance mobility, connectivity, safety, and various multimodal travel options; support economic development in the area with minimal impact on the environment; provide for a housing mix that meets the needs of the community; and enhance a sense of place. Specifically, the study shall provide an analysis of the current and potential system network and future land use mix within the study area. This analysis should propose specific improvements to transportation infrastructure that will improve multimodal transportation safety, connectivity and access. The analysis shall also identify possible investment strategies and policies to leverage the desired land use and housing mix, and development types in accordance with the City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan, as well as analyze the market feasibility of the improvements. 2.1A -Concept Plan for the Corridor Component • Corridor Performance -Develop concepts that will improve and optimize the transportation network's performance and safety . in the corridor through an efficient, effective and reliable system. This includes development of access management concepts, traffic signal timing plans, .intersection improvements, roadway cross-sections and streetscaping concepts that balance the needs of a variety of users/modes (pedestrians, cyclist, and cars), and enhance traffic flow, environmental quality and economic development • Land Use, Private Realm, and the Transect -Develop land use and built form recommendations that are supportive and complementary to an effective transportation corridor. This should include concepts for development pattern intensities that may change and transition along Williams Drive from the centers area on the south end to the more suburban areas on the north end. All concepts shall include recommendations that will be conducive to and promote mobility, as well as address the placement and supply of parking. In addition, recommendations shall include strategies on how the corridor should develop and redevelop to become an effective multimodal transportation corridor and iconic gateway into Georgetown over time. Development of a specific transect for this corridor shall be included. • Connections to Subdivisions -Develop concepts that identify ways to better connect the subdivisions along Williams Drive to the corridor and one another. Section 500-Scope of Work Page 106 of 113 2.1 B -The Concept Plan for the Centers Component shall include: • Circulation and Connectivity -Develop a multimodal connectivity plan. concept shall address: o Identifying transportation opportunities and specific needs for all modes of transportation in the corridor and center. The potential for multimodal connections between the study area Downtown Georgetown, the Rivery Park Development, San Gabriel Park, and adjacent neighborhoods. attention shall be to connectivity across Interstate 35 the San Gabriel River, as well as the intersection of Austin Avenue, Williams Drive and Interstate o Strategies for parking management, including on-street, shared parking (public and private), and other arrangements. --------e--~:!mprovements-ro-the-pedesmaA-and-bicycle-reatm,appropf-iatasidewalk,..,_ __ _ bikeways, streetscapes, pedestrian crossings, improvements signals and other supportive infrastructure. o Identifying opportunities and specific needs for transit in the where and if appropriate. o Other strategies that will help balance the needs users traveling the area, as well as those destined the centers. Addressing street connections and redundancy, as well as mode shift will be crucial in this analysis. • Economic and Urban Development -Identify opportunities context sensitive, mixed-use infill, grayfield/brownfield redevelopment, and new greenfield development vertical and horizontal) creates a multimodal, safe, and vibrant environment, destination, and investment opportunity. o Concept shall include provisions for additional services, entertainment other amenities that will enhance the neighborhoods; make the area attractive and provide basic services for its and a unique experience for visitors; complimenting services and amenities offered in the downtown district; complimenting and ancillary services for the and Capital Area's business/employment centers. o A catalytic project concept should be developed to examine the redevelopment of the Georgetown lSD site that is conducive to multi- modal transportation investment. This include mixed-use or housing components. formas, maps, renderings, and other pertinent information, be developed as part each case project. o opportunities public/private partnerships should be explored as part of this task. • Housing -concepts and strategies an appropriate mix of housing types (including price points and typology) that serves needs of the community and properly utilizes and leverages the local and transportation investments the area. 500 Scope of Work Page 107 of 113 • Environment and Place o Infrastructure Design -Develop concepts for infrastructure design that minimize impacts to the natural environment, including construction materials, storm water infrastructure, water quality, landscaping, scenic roadway design, etc. o Public and Green Space -Concept should identify the areas of opportunity for high-quality public/gathering spaces, green space, and areas that should be considered for preservation or limited development. o Place-making -Develop concepts and visuals that demonstrate elements of high-quality aesthetics in both the public and private realm through streetscaping, greenery, public art, architecture, and view sheds. The place-making concept shall include provisions for wayfinding and branding of the area. o Environmental Justice -Provide guidance on policies and projects that will benefit and minimize adverse impacts to vulnerable populations. Consultant shall deliver to CAMPO: 1. Completed concept plan report narrative with graphics and methodology inclusive of parking and connectivity strategies. 2. Catalytic project case study narrative, maps, pro formas, and rendering. 3. Corridor Transect for Williams Drive TASK 3: DRAFT RECCOMENDATIONS, IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES, AND PRIORITIZATION 3.1 -Recommendations . The consultant shall create near-, short-, medium -and long-term projects, and policy recommendations that are tailored to the needs of the stakeholder/implementing entities in the study area. Timeframes for the recommendations and implementation strategies are defined as: • Near-Term -1 Year or Less • Short -Term - 2 to 4 years • Medium-Term--5-10 years • Long-Term -11 years or more Recommendations and strategies shall include, but shall not be limited to: • Maps, renderings, and drawings of proposed improvements and concepts • Recommended roadway sections/schematics • Recommended mobility management solutions to include traffic flow, signal timing, access management • Proposed changes or additions to the infrastructure design criteria • Cost Estimates and funding sources for proposed improvements (separated by implementer(s)) • Draft final fiscal impact analysis • Description of tools and partnerships needed for housing economic development concepts Section 500-Scope of Work Page 108 of 113 • Proposed Unified Development Code language or zoning should include recommendations on parking, consistent Comprehensive and Future Land Use Map. .. Proposed changes to local and thoroughfare maps • Proposed economic development agreement and needed) 3.2 -Evaluation Categories and Measures Effectiveness changes, this City's 2030 language (as The Consultant shall develop a set of criteria to assist in evaluating each improvement concept. The broad categories transportation efficacy, safety, VMT, travel right-of-way, socio-economic impacts, urban design, health impacts, environmental impacts, and pedestrian/bicyclist impacts and effectiveness will further defined ____ _..in, .... t.uo_..e .... v.cualuafion criteria. These criteria shallbe written so that it may be included in the CAMPO Transportation Improvement Program and Regional Transportation Plan project selection criteria, if so desired. 3.3 -Evaluation Cost-Effectiveness, Impacts, and The shall evaluate cost-effectiveness to determine if improvements cause sufficient user benefits to justify the investment. The Consultant shall cost effectiveness by determining benefits associated with the reduction in vehicle delay due to short-term improvements, as well as compare the benefit to the implementation cost. Benefits shall determined using the results of the peak hour model and converting the hourly delay values to estimated daily and annual delays, will then be multiplied by an cost per hour of delay to achieve annual benefits (dollar-value). Projects and policies shall also be evaluated based on the metrics outlined in Task The consultant shall develop a prioritized list of projects and policies based on the outcomes of evaluation. Consultant shall deliver to CAMPO: 1. A summary of current and planned transportation projects and near, short, medium, and long-term recommendations that will impact the study area. Proposed cost estimates, funding sources, policy changes or additions, and partnership(s) needed implement study recommendations. 3. Draft catalytic project and centers implementation strategy and marketing (not exceed two pages). Prioritized list of policies. 5. Draft environmental justice analysis. 6. Draft health impact assessment. Draft final fiscal impact analysis. 8. Draft ordinance and design manual changes or amendments. 9. interlocal and economic development agreement language. 1 0. Traffic modeling data and analysis Section 500-Scope of Work Page 109 of 113 TASK 4: FINAl REPORT WITH RECOMMENDATIONS The Consultant shall prepare and deliver a final report at the conclusion of the study. The report will be reviewed by CAMPO staff, City of Georgetown and the Steering Committee. The report, executive summary, and visuals must be approved by CAMPO before going to print. · The report shall include: .. Documentation of public and stakeholder input across all project stages, overview of the planning process, existing conditions report, concept plan, and final recommendations/implementation report; • Discussion of any concepts considered but eliminated for not addressing the study goals and objectives; • Description of the study effort associated with identification, definition, development, and refinement of urban design and multimodal transportation improvement concepts; .. Explanation of methodology and evaluation criteria used; .. Summary of recommended transportation and land use projects along with project descriptions, costs, benefits, and potential funding sources for each of the implementing entities; .. Catalytic project and centers implementation strategy and marketing document; • Corridor Transect that includes concepts for both the public and private realm; .. Complete fiscal impact analysis for the concept plan methodology; .. Narrative on air quality benefits; .. List of recommended projects prioritized in cooperation with the Steering Committee and the stakeholders; • Narrative on impacts and benefits to Environmental Justice populations; .. Health impact assessment; .. Sample ordinances, design manual, and agreement language needed for implementation, as applicable (include in appendix); .. GISD Catalytic project proformas (include in appendix); .. Any additional content deemed necessary by the CAMPO Project Manager. Consultant shall deliver to CAMPO: 1. Recommended concept for future development with integrated transportation concepts. 2. A minimum of five ground level and/or bird's eye level artistic renderings and/or computer generated photo simulations of (transportation) improvement concepts to help the public visualize recommended improvements of significance. 3. Suggested strategies to influence development toward achieving the concept plan. 4. Recommended near-, short-, medium -and long-term transportation projects to improve mobility in the study area. 5. Benefit cost analysis for each recommended project. 6. Identify potential funding sources for each project recol'!lmended. 7. Base maps showing the location, layout, and typical sections for each concept Section 500-Scope of Work Page 110 of 113 high resolution, reproducible digital copy). 8. Summary of the study report with its high resolution, reproducible not to exceed five pages. (Word and format). 9. Catalytic project implementation brief with its high resolution, reproducible digital copy, not to exceed two pages (Word and for use in private realm development efforts. All associated supporting documents located in the appendices. Twenty-five (25) Hard Color Copies of the Final Fifty (50) Hard ·Color Copies of the Executive Summary and Ten 0) Color Copies Appendices. Report should 8.5' 11' format. 12. All Photoshop, lnDesign, Illustrator, MSWord, MS Excel, photo, graphics and other associated 500-Scope Work Page 111 of 113 ATTACHMENTB PLATINUM PLANNING ELEMENTS The Platinum Planning Program provides an organized structure for CAMPO's Long-Range Planning work. The program seeks to generate comprehensive and detailed multimodal planning at the local level that will generate regionally significant benefits through projects and policies. The program aligns local and regional planning through a progressive, integrated, and inclusive process. Plans completed as part of this program meet shared goals and are inclusive of state of the practice elements consistent with 2040 Regional Transportation Plan goals. Specifically, these plans will outline synergies between transportation, land use, and other planning areas to better understand how the system performs. Recommendations from plans completed through . this program will inform future iterations of the Regional Transportation Plan. The Platinum Planning Program includes three spatial areas: Subregions-Focuses on large areas across jurisdictional boundaries and travel sheds. These plans will emphasize development of land use and transportation network scenarios that yield to a shared vision across communities in the study area. Subregional efforts will also be inclusive of analysis and recommendations for multiple corridors and centers (as described below), as well as other interstitial areas. Corridors-Focuses on mostly linear corridors and facilities across jurisdictional boundaries. These plans will focus on projects specific to a principle corridor but also take into account adjacent and intersecting facilities. Corridor planning will consider not only the context, form, and function of the corridor but also how each corridor should perform as part of the larger system; specifically its effectiveness at providing safe and efficient multimodal mobility between and access with-in centers. Centers -Focuses on districts and areas of typically one square mile or less, but may also include elements of corridor planning, particularly as corridors connect nodes. Centers plans will provide clear guidance on how to develop vibrant mixed-use environments that possess the density, diversity and design attributes that produce lower VMT, and support transit, bicycling, and walking .. Platinum Planning seeks to integrate: 1. Multi-modal and Mixed-use -Create connections to housing, jobs, and services through, the establishment of dynamic mixed-use environments, well-connected street grids, high-quality transit options, as well as safe and useful pedestrian/bicycle accommodations. 2. Housing -Develop a mix of housing types and price points appropriate for the study area context that provides living options that can accommodate a variety of incomes, abilities, and familial types. 3. Environment-Create a healthy environment that proactively protect and enhance air, water, land and people. 4. Economic Development -Promote the economic competitiveness of the study area to yield positive impacts on the local tax base, high-quality jobs, and community services. 5. Equity -Create positive social, economic, and environmental outcomes for. all residents and stakeholders in the study areas while minimizing adverse impacts. Georgetown Williams Drive Study Page 112 of 113 Page 113 of 113