HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda CC 04.09.2019 WorkshopN otice of M eeting of the
Governing B ody of the
C ity of Georgetown, Texas
April 9 , 20 19
The Georgetown City Council will meet on April 9, 2019 at 3:00 P M at City Council Chambers, 510
W 9th Street Georgetown, TX 78626
The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (AD A).
If you require assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the
AD A, reasonable assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. P lease
contact the City Secretary's Office, at least three (3) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512)
930-3652 or City Hall at 808 Martin Luther King J r. Street, Georgetown, TX 78626 for additional
information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711.
R E V I S E D A G E N D A
Policy De ve lopme nt/Re vie w Workshop -
A P resentation and discussion on a proposed partnership with the P layful Child Foundation for a
neighborhood park -- Kimberly Garrett, P arks and Recreation Director
B P resentation of accomplishments and challenges to date with the Workday P roject -- Leigh
Wallace, Finance Director and Tadd P hillips, H R Director
C P resentation and discussion on the Solid Waste Master P lan P roject, the Downtown Solid Waste
Services P roject, and the Solid Waste Transfer Station P roject -- Octavio Garza, P ublic Works
Director.
D P resentation and discussion to review and rank candidate projects for the proposed Williamson
County 2019 Bond P rogram -- Octavio Garza, P ublic Works Director
E P resentation, discussion and direction from Council on the P ublic Engagement P rocess for the
P ublic P arking Garage – Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager
Exe cutive Se ssion
In compliance with the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551, Government Code, Vernon's Texas Codes,
Annotated, the items listed below will be discussed in closed session and are subject to action in the
regular session.
F Sec. 551.071: Consul tati on w i th Attorney
Advice from attorney abo ut pending or contemplated litigation and o ther matters on which the
attorney has a duty to advise the City Council, including agenda items
Sec. 551.072: Del i berati ons about Real P roperty
- Sale of P ro perty-Old M unicipal Building, 101 E. 7th St-Travis Baird, Real Estate Services
Manager
- Berry Creek Interceptor- Shell P roperty Acquisition -- Travis Baird, Real Estate Services
Manager
Sec. 551:074: P ersonnel Matters
City M anager, City Attorney, City Secretary and Municipal J udge: Co nside ratio n of the
Page 1 of 123
appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal
- Approval of Appointment of Assistant City Attorney
- City Manager
Adjournme nt
Ce rtificate of Posting
I, R obyn Densmore, C ity S ecretary for the C ity of G eorgetown, Texas, do hereby c ertify that
this Notice of Meeting was pos ted at C ity Hall, 808 Martin Luther King Jr. S treet,
G eorgetown, T X 78626, a plac e readily ac cessible to the general public at all times, on the
_____ day of _________________, 2019, at __________, and remained s o posted for at
leas t 72 c ontinuous hours prec eding the s cheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
R obyn Dens more, C ity S ec retary
Page 2 of 123
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Workshop
April 9, 2019
S UBJEC T:
P resentation and discussion on a proposed partnership with the P layful Child Foundation for a neighborhood park --
Kimberly Garrett, P arks and Recreation Director
I T EM S UMMARY:
The P arks and Recreation Department was approached last year about a possible partnership for building a neighborhood
park. The Damian Family lost their son, Kade, in a tragic accident in their neighborhood last March. Since that time, the
family has created The P layful Child Fo undatio n, which received 501c3 status in December. Their mission is healthier
kids mentally and physically. One of their go als is to raise funds to build a playground in memory of Kade. They have
begun fundraising efforts in hopes of building a neighborhood park where families can gather and make memories. Their
main fo cus is to build a park in their neighborho od for children to play. There is currently not a park in their
neighborhood. In 2003 the City purchased a 6 acre tract along Country Club Road as parkland to extend the hike and bike
and trail to Lake Georgetown. The parkland tract is vacant except for the trail along the North San Gabriel River. The
future plans for this pro pe rty were envisio ned as a trail head with parking and amenitie s for the neighborhood. This
parkland that is mainly undeveloped is in their neighborhood.
In order to make this happen and manage the expectations of both organizatio ns, an agreement needs to be in place. The
Foundation is proposing to raise the mo ne y to build a neighbo rhoo d park, in return the y are asking to have majo r input on
the park design and the ability to name the park in memory of Kade. The naming guidelines would fit within the City’s
P olicy fo r Naming City Facilities, P ublic P ark Lands and P ublic Streets by Reso lutio n No. 11-14-06-U. In addition,
they are proposing to provide continued support fo r park maintenance thro ugh volunteer hours and capital improvements.
The City in return would provide the land for the park, provide maintenance and possibly contribute funds to the park.
The P layful Child Fo undatio n would like to be able to start the design process later this summer. They have been
fundraising but ne e d to insure they have a location and a basic design in place to possibly apply fo r grants or seek large
donations. The actual amount of funding needed fo r park develo pment wo uld be based o n the ele ments in the park. The
P layful Child Foundation estimates that up to $500,000 would be needed for park development.
The P arks and Recreation Board reviewed this item at their J anuary 11th meeting and voted unanimously to recommend
moving forward with the partnership proposal for a neighborhood park.
The ne xt ste ps wo uld be to receive comments and feedback from City Council and work with the Legal Department to
develop an agreement between the City and the Foundation for this future park.
F I NANC I AL I MPAC T:
N A
S UBMI T T ED BY:
Kimberly Garrett, P arks and Recreation Director
AT TAC HMENT S :
Description
P resentation
Page 3 of 123
Proposed Partnership with the
Playful Child Foundation for a
Neighborhood Park
City Council Workshop
April 9, 2019
City of GeorgetownPage 4 of 123
Agenda
•Background
•The Playful Child Foundation
•Proposed Location
•Partnership/Agreement
•Timeline
•Parks Board Recommendation
•Next Steps
City of GeorgetownPage 5 of 123
Background
•Last March, Kade Damian, was involved in
a very tragic accident in his neighborhood
which took his life.
•Kade loved to play, especially outside –
family had an idea to create a park to
honor and remember Kade and also
provide a place for families to gather and
make memories.
City of GeorgetownPage 6 of 123
Background
•Mrs. Damian approached the Parks and
Recreation Department with the idea of
raising money to build a public park in their
neighborhood.
•Staff was receptive to the idea and started
to explore some options.
•The Playful Child Foundation was created.
City of GeorgetownPage 7 of 123
The Playful Child Foundation
•Established in June 2018, received 501c3
status in December 2018.
•Their mission is healthier kids mentally
and physically.
•One of their goals is to raise funds to build
a playground.
•Working toward raising initial funds to start
the design process.
City of GeorgetownPage 8 of 123
Proposed Location
•Six acres along Country Club Road –
along the North San Gabriel River with
hike and bike trail access
•Area does not have a neighborhood park –
the Parks Master Plan recommends
developing vacant parkland with amenities
and also states residents should have
access to a park within a ¼ to ½ mile
radius
City of GeorgetownPage 9 of 123
Proposed location
City of GeorgetownPage 10 of 123
Partnership/Agreement
•Playful Child Foundation
–Raise funds for park
development ≈ $500K
–Name the park in memory
of Kade
–Major input on design
(with City approval)
–Provide continued support
for park maintenance
(volunteers, funds, etc)
•City of Georgetown
–Provide land for park
–Becomes a City Park
–Provide on going
maintenance
–Parkland dedication
funds available for this
park
City of GeorgetownPage 11 of 123
Timeline
•Playful Foundation has several fundraisers
in process to raise money to start the
design process later this summer
•Possible 3-5 year project depending on
fundraising efforts and actual amenities
designed.
City of GeorgetownPage 12 of 123
Parks Board Recommendation
•The Parks and Recreation Board
considered this item at their January 2019
meeting and there was unanimous support
to move forward with the partnership
proposal for a neighborhood park.
City of GeorgetownPage 13 of 123
Next Steps
•Get your comments and feedback
•Work with Legal to development an
Agreement/MOU between the City and the
Playful Foundation
•Ask for your consideration of a proposed
agreement at a future City Council
Meeting
City of GeorgetownPage 14 of 123
Questions?
City of GeorgetownPage 15 of 123
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Workshop
April 9, 2019
S UBJEC T:
P resentation of accomplishments and challenges to date with the Workday P roject -- Leigh Wallace, Finance Director
and Tadd P hillips, H R Director
I T EM S UMMARY:
Human Resources, Finance and IT will provide an update on the project activities for the first six months, as well as
challenges the team is facing. Staff will describe the current project risk environment and request for additional one-time
project resources. This item related to subsequent action items on the agenda.
F I NANC I AL I MPAC T:
N/A
S UBMI T T ED BY:
Leigh Wallace, Finance Director
AT TAC HMENT S :
Description
Workday Update
Page 16 of 123
City Council
April 9, 2019
Workday Project Update
1Page 17 of 123
Agenda
Refresher
•Executive Summary
•Project Purpose
•Workday Selection
•Project Costs
New Information
•Phase I Accomplishments
•Phase I Challenges and Action Items
•Resource Request
2Page 18 of 123
Executive Summary
Council and GGAF Reviews
3
ERP needs
assessment
with third
party
Competitive
procurement
and
thorough
selection
process with
third party
Contract
negotiation
and
execution
with
vendors
Phase I
Implement-
ation
Update
Jan –Jun 2017 Jul 2017 –Mar
2018
Apr –Oct 2018 Oct 2018 –Mar
2019
Page 19 of 123
Project Purpose
Address concerns and issues documented in Needs
Assessment:
•Current system lacks modern ERP functionality
•No ‘true’ HR system/module implemented
•Current limitations force use of side systems
•Lack of integration between City systems
&ERP modules
•Chart of Accounts does not meet City needs
•Limited access to real-time data
•Lack of training & system access
•Lack of user-friendly / flexible reporting
4Page 20 of 123
Why Workday
Business Value
•“Business value comes from changes in
business performance and improved business
outcomes.” –Gartner, Inc. 2016
•Yet, 70% of ERP projects fail to derive value:
5
•Must effectively compete with
“Best of Breed” movement
•The system does not meet
business expectations and is not
fully leveraged
•Organizations do not achieve
consensus on the system
Highly ranked and competitive
product in the ERP industry
High user approval
Consensus from diverse
stakeholders
Page 21 of 123
Contract Risk Mitigation
•Schedule and resource risk
Phased implementation to spread workload
Third party project management for expert coordination
3 full-time system analysts hired to support project and
ongoing system
•Data migration and system integration risk
Sub-contract assistance with data ETL for better
coordination
Refined scope of data migration and system integrations
6Page 22 of 123
Contract Risk Mitigation
•Financial Risk / Project Success
Fixed fee services and milestone payments
15% retainage held to Go Live for phases 1 and 2
Cap on time and expense services without additional
planning and approval
Ability to opt out of 7 year subscription term after year 3
Price locks for additional subscription terms
Price discount for early adoption of budget module
Added two months of post-go live support
Added Gold Level customer support
7Page 23 of 123
Ten Year TCO
•Ten Year Total Cost of Ownership
–Final Contracts: $9.7 million
•IT Fund Budget for Annual Subscription and
Service
–Total $501,000
•Capital Projects Budget for One-time costs
–Total $5.2M
•Implementation consultant, data conversion, project
management, delivery assurance, project training, travel
8Page 24 of 123
Project Timeline
9Page 25 of 123
Staff’s
Project
Principles
10Page 26 of 123
Phase I Accomplishments
Modules: Human Capital Management, Payroll, Time Tracking,
Recruiting, Talent/Performance, Compensation, Benefits
Completed tasks to date:
•Business Process Alignment
–23 sessions
–159 alignment opportunities
•Change Management
–Communication plan
–Workday ambassador team
•Foundation tenant build/Data conversion
–Supervisory org, active employees, location, prehires and hires
–Chart of accounts
Page 27 of 123
Phase I Accomplishments
Business Process Alignment Opportunity Examples
•Benefit elections from new hire, open enrollment,
flows through the system for deductions and
elections with carriers.
•Position control
•Employee self-service:
–Open enrollment for benefits
–Direct deposit elections
–Emergency contact information
Page 28 of 123
Phase I Challenges and Actions
1.Staffing resources in the office
2.Staffing resources/experience on the project
13Page 29 of 123
14
Pre-project
Fully staffed
work groups
Example
Page 30 of 123
15
During project
Phase I
HR/Payroll
Page 31 of 123
Phase I Challenges and Actions
1.Staffing resources in the office
–Cross trained staff over the past year for business
continuity during project
•Example: payroll backup
–Held implementation vendor accountable for
efficient use of City staff resources
–Hired temps to answer phone, open mail,
complete regular tasks or special projects
Need to alleviate fatigue and minimize delays in
regular work
16Page 32 of 123
Phase I Challenges and Actions
2. Staffing resources/experience on the project
–3 Business Systems Analysts were hired, fully
dedicated to the project and system support
–1 contracted full-time Project Manager
–Missing a City team member to lead testing
stages
–Missing City team members with extensive ERP
conversion experience and Workday knowledge
Need support for critical testing stage, and overall
deepen the bench on ERP/Workday experience
17Page 33 of 123
Resource Request
Additional One-time Implementation Resources
Contracted Staff
•Testing Lead –manage and conduct all testing
services for Phase I and Phase II (10 months)
•Project Lead –assist the Controller with all
aspects of Phase II (10 months)
•Enterprise Architect –replace vacant Finance
Business Analyst with experienced contractor who
can assist with testing, data conversion, project
management, business process alignment, and
integrations through Phase III (16 months)
18Page 34 of 123
Expected Benefits
•Higher level expertise less time ramping up,
more time getting tasks complete
•More temp help at the office reduce City
and project staff burnout
•More temp help on the project stay on
schedule and avoid cost overruns for delays
19Page 35 of 123
Expense
20
Additional Resource Needs FY2019 FY2020 Total
Backfill Temps HR 25,000 20,000 45,000
Backfill Temps Finance 73,000 25,000 98,000
Staff Aug - Testing Lead 86,400 129,600 216,000
Staff Aug - Project Lead 2 73,213 125,507 198,720
Staff Aug - Enterprise Architect 2 110,720 304,480 415,200
Total 368,333 604,587 972,920
Page 36 of 123
Sources of Funds
Green –reallocation of existing funds
Blue –new request for 2020
21
Potential Sources FY2019 FY2020 Total
Available project contingency 63,318 0 63,318
Vacancy Savings Fin Admin 38,000 76,000 114,000
Risk funding in Fin Admin 72,000 75,000 147,000
IT Fund excess balance 100,000 - 100,000
Vacancy Savings BIP 100,000 - 100,000
Budget Request FY2020 - 500,000 500,000
Total 373,318 651,000 1,024,318
Page 37 of 123
Alternatives
•Hire less experienced staff may take longer
to complete project (increases costs)
•Reduce overlapping phases change order
for new schedule (increases costs)
•Pull resources from other places in the City
delay other work (increases compliance risk)
22Page 38 of 123
Summary
•Project is on schedule
•Phase I business process review demonstrates
transformative value
•Both project staff and back office staff struggle
with adequate time resources, increasing risk
•Action items on agenda recommended from
GGAF (Finance Board) to approve staff
augmentation contracts partially funded by
project contingency
•FY2020 new budget request for remainder of
contracts
23Page 39 of 123
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Workshop
April 9, 2019
S UBJEC T:
P resentation and discussion on the Solid Waste Master P lan P roject, the Downtown Solid Waste Services P roject, and
the Solid Waste Transfer Station P roject -- Octavio Garza, P ublic Works Director.
I T EM S UMMARY:
The City of Georgetown permitted a landfill in 1974 that was subsequently closed in 1990 when transfer of solid waste
operations began. The City’s Solid Waste M aster P lan e ffort was undertaken to develop a Comprehensive So lid Waste
Master P lan to meet demand in future years. The ultimate go al of the M aster P lan is to provide systematic guidelines for
the provision of solid waste services to the City of Georgetown. The M aster P lan is proactive document which identifies
and then plans fo r future needs well in advance. This is done to ensure that solid waste operational needs are planned and
funded in advance to experiencing detrimental effects and to keep up with population growth.
City staff also provided an update to C ity C ouncil on N ovember 27, 2018 outlining options in regards to
downtown solid waste services for the 9 block area surrounding the Williamson C ounty Courthouse. D irection was
given to staff to identify a service strategy and possible funding options to provide said services.
City staff pro vided an update to City Council on September 2 5, 2018 outlining optio ns in regards to updating the City’s
Transfer Station for the ne ar and long term future of the City. Guidance was pro vided to design and construct a new
facility on the existing transfer station site with long term capability of managing the city’s solid waste needs for 50 years.
City Council also provided guidance in ensuing the new facility is able to manage landfill trash, recycling, and
composting.
The discussion today is to provide an update on these 3 elements of the City's solid waste service.
F I NANC I AL I MPAC T:
None
S UBMI T T ED BY:
AT TAC HMENT S :
Description
P resentation
Page 40 of 123
Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan
April 9, 2019
Page 41 of 123
2
Purpose
Part 1. Update on the 20-year Comprehensive Solid Waste
Master Plan
Part 2. Update on solid waste services for 9-block Downtown
Square area
Part 3. Update on the Transfer Station Project
Page 42 of 123
3
Part 1. Comprehensive Solid Waste Master Plan
Date Meeting Purpose
Feb. 13, 2018 City Council Workshop Introduction and Draft Guiding
Principles
Apr. 13, 2018 Georgetown Transportation
Advisory Board
Overview & Downtown
strategies
Sep. 25, 2018 City Council Workshop Transfer Station overview &
Downtown update
Oct. 23, 2018 City Council Workshop CSWMP progress summary
Nov. 27, 2018 City Council Workshop Summary of complete Draft
CSWMP
Feb. 5, 2019 Planning & Zoning
Commission
Discussion of proposed
amendment to Comp. Plan
April 2, 2019 Planning & Zoning
Commission
Recommendation on
amendment to SWMP
Page 43 of 123
4
Key Stakeholder Meetings
Date Stakeholder Purpose
Mar. 21, 2018 Downtown Focus Groups 1 & 2 Downtown needs, challenges
Jun. 14, 2018 Georgetown ISD
Entities’ current activities, needs,
challenges, & potential for
partnership with City
Jun. 14, 2018 Southwestern University
Jun. 18, 2018 Multifamily (Hillstone Wolf Ranch)
Jun. 19, 2018 Williamson County
Jun. 25, 2018 City Facilities Current activities, challenges,
and potential for coordination
with ESD
Jun. 25, 2018 City Parks & Recreation
Jun. 26, 2018 Georgetown Public Library
Oct. 2, 2018 Wil. Co. Recycle Center (WCRC)Current & future HHW program
Oct. 30, 2018 Downtown Workshop 1 Presentation of Downtown
options & business feedbackNov. 5, 2018 Downtown Workshop 2
Page 44 of 123
Key Industry Trends
5
•Focus on Waste
Management Hierarchy
•High recycling goals by
Texas cities
Waste Management Hierarchy
Page 45 of 123
Guiding Principles of CSWMP
6
Develop innovative MSW management methods
Services must be convenient and price-competitive
1
Enhance aesthetics and services for the Downtown
Square and City Parks
2
3
Evaluate alternatives to landfill disposal4
Page 46 of 123
7
Plan Summary
1. Establish sector baseline
by participation and
material types
2. Develop KPIs for each
sector. Measure and
compare to baseline
factors such as waste
reduction, reuse, recycling,
& composting
3. Establish specific diversion
goals by sector
4. Measure progress towards
diversion goals
5. Review and update every
3-5 years
Page 47 of 123
Current Status
8
1.Planning and Zoning Commission support on April 2,
2019 to amend the 2030 Comprehensive Plan and
incorporate the SWMP
2.First Public Hearing April 23rd on ordinance at regular
session
Page 48 of 123
9
Part 2. Update on solid waste
services for 9-block Downtown
Square area
Purpose: Update Council on
progress and process
Page 49 of 123
10
Downtown MSW Services
County
Courthouse
Page 50 of 123
11
Review Current Downtown MSW Services
Solving Downtown Solid Waste Challenges
•Limited Space
•Overflowing dumpsters
•Illegal and improper disposal
•Litter
•Trash Stash
•Health & Cleanliness
•Service pricing equity
11Page 51 of 123
12
1.Carts and Shared Dumpsters (today)
2.Shared Dumpsters Only
3.Shared Compactors Only
4.Concierge Service
* All include review of pricing equity
Service Options Presented 11/20/2018
12Page 52 of 123
13
Downtown MSW Services
Equity Pricing:
1.Current pricing has created
inequity in pricing of like business
types, e.g., restaurants
2.Customers not accurately billed
for services provided and in
some cases, not billed
3.Materials are being deposited in
9 block area by non -customers
Page 53 of 123
14
Proposing 4 step process to resolve the
inequity:
Step 1 -Create master list of customers in 9 block
area
Step 2 -Perform Volumetric Study and Waste Audit
Step 3 -Quantify illegal/improper disposal
Step 4 -Develop services pricing formula
Page 54 of 123
Downtown Service Options & Costs (Nov 27, 2018)
1. CARTS & SHARED DUMPSTERS 2. SHARED DUMPSTERS
3. SHARED COMPACTORS 4. CONCIERGE SERVICE
ANNUAL COST
$300,000
ANNUAL COST
$276,000
ANNUAL COST
$274,000
ANNUAL COST
Current: $120,000
Future: $150,000
•Current system
•Development of new rate structure
•No impact on operational challenges
•Removes carts on sidewalks and streets
•Allows for 3-stream system in future
•More dumpster locations are challenging…
leasing/purchasing of private property
•No impact on overflow, litter illegal
dumping
•Removes carts & dumpsters on
sidewalks, streets, parking spaces
•Allows for 3-stream system in future
•Siting of 2-3 compactors is challenging
•Customers must transport material offsite
•Minimal impact on overflow, litter, illegal
dumping
•All containers removed, space constraints
eliminated
•Prevents illegal dumping and overflow
•Allows for 3-stream system immediately
•Convenient for businesses
•Requires close coordination between
businesses & City
•Most viable for
future growth
15
Page 55 of 123
16
Propose further review of pricing equity using 4
strategic elements:
Step 1
Create master list of customers in 9 block area
•Business Name
•Business Billing Information
•NAICS Code (Business Type)
•Square Footage
•Hours of Operation
•Current Service Level
•Materials Produced
•Material Disposition Location(s)
Downtown MSW Services
Page 56 of 123
17
Step 2
Perform Volumetric Study and Waste Audit
Downtown MSW Services
•Volumetric Study:
Amount of material
discarded
•Waste Audit:
Type of material
discarded
Page 57 of 123
18
Step 3
Quantify illegal/improper disposal
Downtown MSW Services
Page 58 of 123
19
Develop Services Pricing Formula
Example 1: Comparable Business Formula:
1.Same NAICS code and similar service
2.Calculate disposal rate/per hour of operation
Example 2: Business Model Formula:
1.Base fee for similar NAICS code
2.Add square foot multiplier
3.Add hours of operation
Step 4
Page 59 of 123
20
1.Report findings of pricing review August 2019
2.Inform customers in 9 block area of pricing
change
3.Fix and implement corrected pricing at
existing rate for customers in 9 block area
September 2019
4.Recommend funding strategy for moving
forward with Concierge Service October 2019
Next Steps
Page 60 of 123
21
Part 3. Update on the Transfer
Station Project
Purpose: Update Council on progress
Page 61 of 123
Why do we have a Transfer Station?
•Materials must be direct-hauled in
the collection vehicle or long-
hauled using transfer trailers
•Factors that affect financial
feasibility include:
–Collection cost
–Disposal cost
–Distance/travel time to landfill
–Fuel costs
–Annual tonnage hauled
–Payload of transfer trailers vs.
collection vehicles
Source: U.S. EPA’s Waste Transfer Stations: A Manual for
Decision Making
Current landfill is approximately 90 miles round-trip 22Page 62 of 123
•The City committed to the Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to make certain improvements
at the transfer station
–Improvements include covering areas where waste is
exposed and better storm water management
–The existing facility was originally opened in 1984 and
improvements made in 2006-2009
–Prior to investing in improvements to the existing facility,
City Council provided guidance to compare that option to
building a new facility at the same location
Background
23Page 63 of 123
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
To
n
s
p
e
r
H
o
u
r
Current vs 2028 Projection
Hourly Capacity
24
= Current
= 2028 Projection
Page 64 of 123
Council Direction on April 24, 2018
25
Transfer –New Facility
1.30-plus year service life
2.Better separation of customer drop off and collection vehicles
3.Increase operational efficiency
Reduce wait time to unload vehicle
Less downtime to process multiple streams
4.Provide for 3 waste streams (trash, recycle, and compost)
5.Require new TCEQ permit
Page 65 of 123
Conceptual Rendering –New Facility (April 24, 2018)
Room for
Expansion
Transfer Station
Building
Optional Transfer
Entrance
Driver Parking
Scales
Main
Entrance
Scale House /
Office
Self-Haul
Entrance
Drop-off
26
Construction Estimate -$8.5 millionPage 66 of 123
Conceptual Rendering Update –April 9, 2019
Drainage and Access Improvements
Room for
Expansion
Transfer Station
Building
Optional Transfer
Entrance
Driver Parking
Scales
Main
Entrance
Scale House /
Office
Self-Haul
Entrance
Drop-off
27Page 67 of 123
28
Improve connection to
roadway network
Page 68 of 123
29
Revised Construction Estimate -$9.5 million
Page 69 of 123
Transfer Station
Design
30Page 70 of 123
Transfer Station Evaluation Background
•4/24/2018 –CSWMP Update and Transfer Station
Evaluation Presentation by Burns McDonnell
•10/12/2018 –Release RFQ to vendors
•11/07/2018 –Received four SOQs
Scoring committee consisted of representatives from
Public Works, Environmental Services, Streets, and
CIP. The committee individually and unanimously
scored Burns McDonnell Engineering Company as
their top pick for the design of the Transfer Station.
31Page 71 of 123
Scope and Fees
•Scope
–Programming
–Schematic Design
–Design Development
–Construction Documents
•Architectural/Landscape/Irrigation/Civil/Structural/MEP
–Bid Phase
–Construction Administration
•$896,400 –Fixed Fee
32Page 72 of 123
•Award Design Contract
•Schedule:
–Schematic Design –Fall 2019
–Construction Documents –early 2020
–Award construction contract –Spring 2020
–Construction –12-14 months
–Completion –Spring 2021
33Page 73 of 123
34
1.City Council consideration during regular
session of award of a professional
services contract to begin design of the
new facility
Next Steps
Page 74 of 123
Questions / Comments
Thank you!
Page 75 of 123
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Workshop
April 9, 2019
S UBJEC T:
P resentation and discussion to review and rank candidate projects for the proposed Williamson County 2019 Bond
P rogram -- Octavio Garza, P ublic Works Director
I T EM S UMMARY:
The Williamson County Co mmissioner ’s Court is considering holding a transportation and park bond e lectio n in
November 2 01 9 and has requested the City of Georgetown submit the top three transpo rtation projects and any regional
trail connectivity projects for Co unty consideration in funding. According to the County’s letter, pro jects will be
evaluated, in part, by the percentage of local cost partic ipation, status o f the proje c t, anticipated c ompletio n schedule, and
how the proposed project compliments the implementatio n of the County’s Long-Range Transpo rtation P lan and the
County’s Comprehensive P arks Master P lan.
The completed project submission forms are due April 12, 2019.
F I NANC I AL I MPAC T:
None
S UBMI T T ED BY:
Ray Miller, Transportation P lanning Coordinator
AT TAC HMENT S :
Description
Williamson C ounty Letter
P rojec t R equest F orm
P resentation
Page 76 of 123
Page 77 of 123
Part A. General Project Information
Project Information - Please fill in the following information.
Project Sponsor(s)
Project Category Roadway/Drainage
Park/Trail
Project Name
Project Limits/Location
Project Length (in miles)
Project Description
Who will manage the project? (County, Sponsor, etc)
Who will be responsible for maintenance?
of
Project Justification - Describe at a minimum, the transportation issue(s) the project will address, the
proposed solution(s), the desired outcome, and how the project will help implement Williamson County's
Long Range Transportation Plan or Trail Master Plan.
Project Map - provide a map of the project in electronic format (pdf or jpg)
Project Priority - indicate the projects priority if submitting more than one
project application for Transportation or Parks
Williamson County Proposed Bond
Project Request Form
3/4/2019 Page 1 of 2
Page 78 of 123
Part B. Project Status and Schedule
Anticipated Project Schedule
Planning/Design/Environmental Clearance
Right-of-Way Acquisition
Utility Relocation
Construction
Part C. Local Cost Participation
Estimated Costs
Planning/Design/Environmental Clearance
Right-of-Way Acquisition
Utility Relocation
Construction
Total Project Cost
Sponsor's Cash Contribution
In-kind Contribution - list type (services, ROW, grant, etc) below
Total Amount of Funds Committed by Sponsor
County Funds Requested
Sponsor Cost Participation Percentage
Part D. Applicant Contact Information
Name
Title
Mailing Address
Phone
Email
Project Status - describe work accomplished to date
Start Date Finish Date
Local cost participation is strongly encouraged. Projects will be evaluated in part by the percentage of
local cost participation.
3/4/2019 Page 2 of 2
Page 79 of 123
Williamson County
2019 Proposed Bond Program
City Council Meeting
April 9, 2019
Page 80 of 123
Today’s Presentation Purpose
•Provide an overview of the Proposed 2019 Williamson County
(Wilco) Bond program
•To provide Council with Staff’s recommended projects
•Receive feedback from City Council on recommended projects
and guidance on moving forward
Page 81 of 123
Wilco 2019 Bond Program
•Call for Projects was sent out March 8, 2019
•Williamson County is requesting that the City of Georgetown
provide its top 3 transportation projects and any regional trail
connectivity projects that the County should consider
•Deadline to submit is April 12, 2019
•Local participation is strongly encouraged
Page 82 of 123
Wilco 2019 Bond Program
•Projects will be evaluated by:
‒Percentage of local participation
‒Status of the project
‒Anticipated completion schedule
‒How the proposed projects complements the implementation
of the County’s Long Range Transportation Plan and
Comprehensive Parks Master Plan
Page 83 of 123
Wilco 2019 Bond Program
Staff’s Proposed Road Projects:
‒Based on remaining road projects from 2015 City Bond
Program
‒Pressure points in transportation based on growth and
development since the 2015 City Bond Program
Page 84 of 123
Wilco 2019 Bond Program
Proposed Road
Projects
Page 85 of 123
Wilco 2019 Bond Program
Southwest By-Pass to SH-29 = $3,700,000
‒Extension of the Southwest By-Pass north to SH-29
‒Provide full at-grade intersection at SH-29
‒Project is approximately .52 miles
Page 86 of 123
Southwest By-Pass
Extension
Page 87 of 123
Wilco 2019 Bond Program
Southwest By-Pass to SH-29
‒Completes Southwest By-Pass to SH-29 and provides
connection to SE Inner Loop.
‒Provides drivers an alternate route
‒City just initiated a contract for design
‒A top priority with Williamson County
Page 88 of 123
Wilco 2019 Bond Program
Westinghouse Road
‒From FM 1460 to SH-130
o FM 1460 to Rock Ride
o Rock Ride to SH-130
Page 89 of 123
Westinghouse from FM
1460 to SH 130
Page 90 of 123
Wilco 2019 Bond Program
Westinghouse from FM 1460 to SH 130 = $34,190,000
(to Rock Ride = $13.59 million, to SH-130 =$20.60 million)
‒2015 Bond Program Project List
‒Provides needed East-West Arterial
‒Area of high growth –road needs to be improved for current
and future growth
Page 91 of 123
Wilco 2019 Bond Program
Shell Road
‒From Williams Drive to Shell Spur
Page 92 of 123
Shell Road from Williams
Drive to Shell Spur
Page 93 of 123
Wilco 2019 Bond Program
Shell Road from Williams Drive to Shell Spur = $27,200,000
‒2015 Bond Program Project List
‒Provides needed North-South Arterial
‒Area of high growth –road needs to be improved for current
and future growth
‒Needed circulation
Page 94 of 123
Wilco 2019 Bond Program
DB Woods
‒From Oak Ridge Drive to Lake Overlook Drive
Page 95 of 123
DB Woods from Oak Ridge Drive
to Lake Overlook Drive
Page 96 of 123
Wilco 2019 Bond Program
DB Woods from Oak Ridge Drive to Lake Overlook Drive = $15,500,000
‒2015 Bond Program Project List
‒Provides needed North-South Arterial
‒Area of high growth –road needs to be improved for current
and future growth
‒Needed circulation
Page 97 of 123
Wilco 2019 Bond Program
SH-29 &IH-35
Page 98 of 123
SH-29 & IH-35
Page 99 of 123
Wilco 2019 Bond Program
SH-29 & IH-35 = $70,000,000
‒One of the Mobility 35 projects
‒Intersection needs to be reconstructed to provide improved
vehicular movements and capacity
‒Area of high growth
‒Regional Arterial
‒Funding would elevate priority of project
Page 100 of 123
Wilco 2019 Bond Program
Sam Houston Triangle
‒Sam Houston
‒SE Inner Loop
‒Maple Street
Page 101 of 123
Sam Houston
Triangle
Page 102 of 123
Wilco 2019 Bond Program
Sam Houston Triangle
‒Needed realignment of the intersections of Sam Houston,
Maple and SE Inner Loop
‒Potential Overpass(es) needed for possible extension of SE
Inner Loop to east SH-29. Completes connection of SE Inner
Loop to Southwest By-Pass
‒Area of high growth
‒Regional Arterial
Page 103 of 123
Wilco 2019 Bond Program
SE Inner Loop Extension (SW By-Pass)
‒Froom the current terminus of Sam Houston east to SH 29
(just before San Gabriel River Bridge)
Page 104 of 123
SE Inner Loop
Extension
Page 105 of 123
Wilco 2019 Bond Program
SE Inner Loop Extension (SW By-Pass)
‒Needed extension of SE Inner Loop
‒Would create a full by-pass for SH-29
‒Provides an alternate east-west route
‒Would help with current truck traffic on SH-29
‒Area of high growth
‒Regional Arterial
Page 106 of 123
1.Southwest By-Pass Extension
2.Westinghouse from FM 1460 to SH-130
3.Shell Road from Williams Drive to Shell Spur
4.DB Woods from Oak Ridge Drive to Lake Overlook Drive
5.SH-29 & IH-35
6.Sam Houston Triangle
7.SE Inner Loop Extension (SW By-Pass)
Summary of Projects
Page 107 of 123
Wilco 2019 Bond Program
Regional Trail
Project
Page 108 of 123
Wilco 2019 Bond Program
South San Gabriel River Trail
‒From W. University Avenue just west of IH-35
‒10’ wide concrete multi-use trail
‒Approximately 4,000 linear feet
‒Total cost $1,275,000 (includes design of $175,000)
Page 109 of 123
South San Gabriel
River Trail
Page 110 of 123
Today’s Presentation Purpose
South San Gabriel River Trail
‒Provides a vital connection to County’s Regional Trail System
‒Connects City’s hike / Bike trail to Wolf Ranch Regional Trail
‒Trail will eventually connect with the City of Leander Trail
systems on to River Ranch
Page 111 of 123
Questions?
Thank you!
Page 112 of 123
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Workshop
April 9, 2019
S UBJEC T:
P resentation, discussion and direction from Council on the P ublic Engagement P rocess for the P ublic P arking Garage –
Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager
I T EM S UMMARY:
The 2015 P arking study identified various options for short and mid-term so lutio ns for downtown parking, but increased
intensity and deve lo pment within the past few years has presented an oppo rtunity for a smaller garage to meet the mid-
term needs. The current location is designed for 210 spac e s, 4 levels and 3 sto ries and will serve the 9 block square. The
$5 million budget would be ½ funded by dedicated TIR Z revenues.
P ublic input is necessary on the exterio r de sign, and this item’s purpo se is to get input from Council on public input,
including a possible stakeholder committee to drive the design process. We will hold public meetings to help educate and
receive input on the design during April/M ay, and design o ptions for Council will be presented in the J une/J uly time
frame, with construction to begin later in the year.
F I NANC I AL I MPAC T:
The $5 million budget would be ½ funded by dedicated TIR Z revenues.
S UBMI T T ED BY:
LAU R IE BRE W E R, ASSISTAN T CITY M AN AG ER
AT TAC HMENT S :
Description
P ublic Engagement P rocess - P arking G arage
Page 113 of 123
Downtown Parking Garage-
City Council Workshop
April 9, 2019
Page 114 of 123
Purpose
•Provide background on parking garage status
•Seek Council direction for public engagement process
Page 115 of 123
2019 Parking Garage
•2015 Parking study studied various options, but indicated
short term and mid term solutions to be implemented and
long term, a garage would be needed
•Implemented short term solutions
–Added surface parking
–Enhanced parking enforcement
–Improved signage/advertising
Page 116 of 123
2019 Parking Garage
•Increased intensity and development of last few years
•Opportunity for a smaller garage for mid term needs
•Location is prime to serve the 9 block square
•Consistent with Downtown Master Plan
Page 117 of 123
2019 Parking Garage
•Budget -$5 million
–½ funded by dedicated TIRZ revenues
•Feasibility work done –shared with Council 1/22/19
–Utilities evaluated/being relocated
–Design for 219 spaces
–4 levels; 3 stories
Page 118 of 123
2019 Parking Garage
•Working with Wantman Group, Inc. (WGI) (previously Carl Walker)
•Schematic and programming
•Evaluation of utilities and access
•Limited design work
Page 119 of 123
Garage Design –Public Input Process
•Public input needed on exterior design
–Public meetings to help educate and receive input on design
–Potential stakeholder committee to drive design process
–HARC Review
–Council approval of design and construction contracts
Page 120 of 123
Council input/direction
•Stakeholder committee for input on design process
–Supported by staff
–Take input from public meetings to incorporate into design
process
Page 121 of 123
Timeline -Tentative
•Steering committee to identify options April -May
•Public meeting May
•Design options for Council June/July
•Construction Plans Aug -Dec
•Bid/Begin construction work with adjacent project
Page 122 of 123
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Workshop
April 9, 2019
S UBJEC T:
Sec. 551.071: Consul tati on w i th Attorney
Advice fro m attorney about pending or co ntemplated litigation and other matters on which the attorney has a duty to
advise the City Council, including agenda items
Sec. 551.072: Del i berati ons about Real P roperty
- Sale of P roperty-Old Municipal Building, 101 E. 7th St-Travis Baird, Real Estate Services Manager
- Berry Creek Interceptor- Shell P roperty Acquisition -- Travis Baird, Real Estate Services Manager
Sec. 551:074: P ersonnel Matters
City Manager, City Atto rne y, City Secretary and M unicipal J udge: Consideration of the appointment, employment,
evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal
- Approval of Appointment of Assistant City Attorney
- City Manager
I T EM S UMMARY:
F I NANC I AL I MPAC T:
N A
S UBMI T T ED BY:
Page 123 of 123