HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda CC 06.09.2015 WorkshopNotice of Meeting of the
Governing Body of the
City of Georgetown, Texas
JUNE 9, 2015
The Georgetown City Council will meet on JUNE 9, 2015 at 3:00 P.M. at City Council Chambers, 101 E. 7th
St., Georgetown, Texas
The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you
require assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA,
reasonable assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. Please contact the City
Secretary's Office, 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.
Policy Development/Review Workshop -
A Overview of the 2015/2016 Transportation Services Business Plan, Operation and Capital Budgets --
Edward G. Polasek, AICP and Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Director
B Presentation and Discussion of the DRAFT Transit Development Plan with Capital Metro -- Nat
Waggoner, Transportation Analyst and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director
C Presentation and Discussion regarding the Downtown Parking Study and recommendations developed
by Carl Walker, Inc. -- Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager
Executive Session
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.
D Sec. 551.071: Consultation with Attorney
- Advice from attorney about pending or contemplated litigation and other matters on which the
attorney has a duty to advise the City Council, including agenda items
- Fire - Meet and Confer
- Police- Meet and Confer
Sec. 551.072: Deliberations about Real Property
- Albertsons Building
Sec. 551.074: Personnel Matters
- City Manager, City Attorney, City Secretary and Municipal Judge: Consideration of the appointment,
employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal
Adjournment
Certificate of Posting
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2015, at __________, and remained so posted for at least
72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Agenda
June 9, 2015
SUBJECT:
Overview of the 2015/2016 Transportation Services Business Plan, Operation and Capital Budgets -- Edward
G. Polasek, AICP and Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Director
ITEM SUMMARY:
As part of the 2015/16 Budget Process the Transportation Division is providing an overview of progress
related to the 2014/15 Strategic Goals and Transportation Business Plan, as well proposed revisions for the
2015/16 Strategic Goals.
Since so much of the work completed by the Division is so closely associated with the Capital Improvement
Planning Process (CIP), the proposed CIP for Transportation will be included in the presentation.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Part of the 2015/16 Budget Process.
SUBMITTED BY:
Ed Polasek - Transportation Services Director
ATTACHMENTS:
Capital Improvement Plan - Streets, Drainage, Airport 2016
BUDGET - Transportation Presentation
Cover Memo
Item # A
C ITY OF G EORGETOWN, TEXAS
C APITAL I MPROVEMENT P LAN
S TREETS/DRAINAGE/AIRPORT
F ISCAL Y EAR 201 6
Georgetown City Council
May 26, 2015
Attachment number 1 \nPage 1 of 24
Item # A
Table of Contents
Introduction ............................................................................................................. 01
Transportation Division
Streets
Introduction ........................................................................................ 02
Streets Projects ................................................................................. 05
Stormwater
Introduction ........................................................................................ 14
Stormwater Projects .......................................................................... 16
Airport
Introduction ........................................................................................ 20
Airport Projects .................................................................................. 21
Attachment number 1 \nPage 2 of 24
Item # A
Capital Improvement Plan
The City of Georgetown annually updates and adopts a five-year Capital Improvements Plan (CIP)
Schedule as part of the operating budget adoption process. Needed capital improvements are
identified through system models, repair and maintenance records, and growth. The City uses a team
approach to prioritizing capital improvement projects, whereby City staff from all operational areas
provide input and ideas relating to each project and its effect on operations, such as:
Fire and Police Services staff provides insight into a project’s impact on emergency traffic
responses, public lighting issues and other public safety concerns.
Planning & Development staff gives direction regarding new development and the
infrastructure needs relating to this growth.
Other utility departments, such as the Transportation Department, Electric Department and
Water Services Department exchange information regarding each project and coordinated
timing of many of the related projects in an effort to create less inconvenience for the citizens
affected.
The timeline for the CIP planning process is outlined below:
By using this team approach, the City develops cooperation among the departments, identifies
potential problem areas, and prioritizes financing issues.
The Capital Improvements Projects (CIP)
generally consists of infrastructure and
related construction and do not include small
capital items such as furniture, equipment
and vehicles. Significant maintenance
projects, such as street repairs are not
included in the capital project schedules.
These maintenance type projects are not
capitalized as a fixed asset and are always
cash funded; therefore, they are considered
operational in nature and are included in the
departmental operating budget. The CIP
schedules consolidate the capital spending
priorities for all operating activities of the City,
including all governmental and enterprise
activities that provide services to the citizens
of Georgetown.
The CIP Schedules are included as part of
the annual operating budget. The first year of
the list becomes the capital budget for the
approved budget year. The following pages
outline the CIP Schedule for each activity and
include anticipated projects, current year project location and sources of funding.
January
Initial
Department
Meetings
formulating
projects in CIP
February /
March
Division
Meetings to
coordinate
projects in CIP
Finalized
funding plan
May / June
Present CIP to
Boards and City
Council
September
Adopted along
with Annual
Operating Plan
Funding
Operating Revenue 895$
Street Maintenance Sales Tax 2,800
General Fund 875
Certificates of Obligation Bonds 1,009
Grants 275
Total Funding 5,854$
Project Costs
Transportation Division
Streets 3,675$
Stormwater Drainage 1,150
Airport Services 20
Sidewalks 994
Debt Issuance Cost 15
Total Project Cost 5,854$
2016 Capital Improvement Summary
(in thousands)
1
Attachment number 1 \nPage 3 of 24
Item # A
Transportation Services
Introduction
Transportation Services manages, maintains and repairs City streets and right-of-way. Some of the
additional responsibilities of the Street Department include traffic control, emergency response
operations, special events, and assistance in code enforcement. Daily responsibilities include inspection
of roadways for sign repair, pavement management and removal of sight obstructions. Transportation
Services has experienced a growth in demand for maintenance and rehabilitation of the City’s roadway
system.
The Street Department Capital Improvement
Budget includes maintenance and rehabilitation of
the City’s roadway system and support of new
transportation construction projects. Funding for
maintenance and rehabilitation from the City’s
General Fund is approximately $875,000 annually.
Street Maintenance Sales Tax
In November 2002, voters passed a quarter-cent
sales tax increase that became effective April 1,
2003. Proceeds from the new tax can only be used
to make improvements to streets in existence at the time of the election and cannot be used for
construction of new streets. Revenues from this tax equal approximately $2 million per year for
maintenance and rehabilitation of City streets. The tax was reauthorized by voters in November 2014;
the tax will not be brought back to the voters for reauthorization until November 2018. Projects funded by
the tax includes but not limited to; Quail Valley Subdivision, Western Trail and Sun City (north and south
of Del Webb Blvd.).
Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation
In May 2001, voters approved a 4B half-cent sales tax for transportation improvements that provide
economic benefit to the community. The 4B is known as the Georgetown Transportation Enhancement
Corporation (GTEC). GTEC approves projects funded through this sales tax.
Overall Transportation Improvement Plan
The City adopted its Overall Transportation Plan (OTP) to guide the City’s growth and development, a
revision to the OTP is currently underway. It is through this plan that future road construction is projected.
As part of this process, The Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board (GTAB) recommends potential
projects to GTEC and the GTEC board approves its annual Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) which
includes projects identified in the City’s Overall Transportation Plan that meet the GTEC eligibility
requirements. The TIP is a five-year projection and is updated annually with year one being the annual
GTEC budget that is approved by the City Council. The GTEC budget is not included in this CIP
document.
The OTP is reviewed by GTAB which makes recommendations to the City Council. In November 2008,
voters authorized $46 million of General Obligation debt to be issued for road improvements.
2
Attachment number 1 \nPage 4 of 24
Item # A
2008 Voter Approved Transportation Bond Issue
The City continues to work on two projects related to the 2008 Voter Approved Transportation
Improvement Bond program, FM 1460 widening from Quail Valley Drive to University Boulevard and FM
971 Improvements at the intersection of North Austin Avenue.
The City has worked with TxDOT, Williamson County and the City of Round Rock to secure outside
funding to supplement the bond proposal to complete Right of Way (ROW) acquisitions and construction
of the remaining two segments of unimproved two lane rural FM 1460 to a four lane arterial with adequate
ROW for the ultimate six lanes. Project design is complete and let for construction by TxDOT,
construction to start in 2015 after all utilities have been relocated.
FM 971 intersection improvements at North Austin Avenue have been designed to improve access and
mobility around the site. Design is nearing completion and the environmental clearances are being
sought to make the project ready for construction bidding.
Historic Downtown
In the past few years, several rehabilitation and maintenance projects have focused on the Historic
Downtown Square Area. The City will continue efforts to maintain and rehabilitate Historic Georgetown,
as well as keep pace with the growth of our community.
GASB 34 – Modified Approach
The Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement Number 34 allows for an alternative to
depreciation expense for certain infrastructure, termed the modified approach. The following conditions
must be met:
• The government manages the eligible assets using an asset management system to:
o Keep an up-to-date asset inventory,
o Perform condition assessments and report the results on a measurement scale, and
o Estimate the annual amount to maintain and preserve the eligible infrastructure assets at
the condition level established and disclosed by the government
• The government must document that the eligible assets are being preserved approximately at or
above the condition level established and disclosed by the government.
The City completed its inventory and implemented its pavement management information system in
February 2005. The initial assessment rated Georgetown’s street condition as “good” with a 90
Pavement Condition Index (PCI). The Council has directed staff to incorporate a policy to maintain a
minimum average PCI of 85. Current funding should adequately fund that level of PCI within Georgetown
for the near future. The PCI for fiscal year 2011 was 87.7 and the PCI for 2014 was 87.3. Growth factors
in housing and new road construction could impact that condition over time. This system will be
monitored closely and reviewed in detail again in late 2017. The proposed CIP includes funding for an
update of the Pavement Management System in 2018.
3
Attachment number 1 \nPage 5 of 24
Item # A
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total
(Thousands of dollars)
Projected Annual Project Cost 4,669$ 4,386$ 4,559$ 4,643$ 4,766$ 23,023$
Debt Issuance Cost 15 17 18 16 17 83
Sources of Funding
Street Maintenance Sales Tax 2,800 2,400 2,500 2,700 2,800 13,200
General Obligation Bonds 1,009 1,128 1,202 1,084 1,108 5,531
General Fund 875 875 875 875 875 4,375
City of Georgetown, Texas
Transportation Capital Improvement Program
FY 2016 to 2020
The capital budget includes major rehabilitation of the City's roadway systems.In November 2002, voters first approved a quarter cent
sales tax for maintenance of existing City streets.This sales tax revenue provides the majority of funding for street rehabiliation
projects. The quarter cent sales tax must be reauthorized by the voters every four years.It will need to be reauthorized in November
2018.
Street Maintenance Sales
Tax
General Obligation Bonds
General Fund
Combined 5 Year Estimated Funding Sources
4
Attachment number 1 \nPage 6 of 24
Item # A
Prior
Project Year 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
(Thousands of dollars)
Current Projects:
Street Rehabilitation 945$ 875$ 875$ 875$ 875$ 875$
Chip Seal 378 1,620 400 400 500 500
Rejuvenate 501 350 400 500 500 600
Cutler Process 1,171 414 800 900 900 900
Point Repair - 416 300 200 300 300
Arterials Reserves
Arterials Reserves 575 - 500 500 500 500
Sidewalks
Sidewalks - 994 1,111 1,184 1,068 1,091
Road Bonds
FM 1460 4,371 - - - - -
Totals 7,941$ 4,669$ 4,386$ 4,559$ 4,643$ 4,766$
Projected
City of Georgetown, Texas
Transportation Capital Improvement Program
FY 2016 to 2020
$0
$2,000
$4,000
$6,000
$8,000
$10,000
$12,000
$14,000
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Th
o
u
s
a
n
d
s
Streets Capital Project Cost
5
Attachment number 1 \nPage 7 of 24
Item # A
R IV E R
B E N D
D R
L O G AN
R A N C H
R D
L
U
N
A
T
R
L
E
XIT
2
60
S
B
NE
I
N
N
E
R
LO
O
P
SE
INNE R
LOO P
CR 110
SH 1
9
5
N
I
H35
FWY
SB
C R1
5
2
LEANDER RD
WOL F
RAN C H
PKW Y
S I
H
3
5
S
B
DBWOODRD
W SH 29
FM971
R
O
C
K
R
I
D
E
L
N
NIH35NB
FM 972
CR262
M
A
P
L
E
S
T
S
H
1
3
0
T
O
L
L
N
B
NIH
35SB
S A M
H O U S T O N
A V E
S
H
1
3
0
T
O
L
L
S
B
CR 143
RM2243
FM3405
CR
234
S
I
H
3
5
F
W
Y
S
B
BIG PROJECTSCHIPSEAL - 1COURSE WITH FOG SEALCHIPSEAL - 2COURSE WITH FOG SEALCUTLERTHINLAY ASPHALT OVERLAY - TOMIN HOUSE PROJECTSCHIP SEAL/POINT REPAIR/CURB & GUTTERREJUVENATOR - COLL AND RES
2015-16 Capital Improvement ProjectsTransportation-Streets Rehabilitation
´
0 6,0003,000
Feet1 inch = 6,000 feet
REJUVENATOR
REJUVENATOR
REJUVENATOR
CHIPSEAL/PR/CG
CHIPSEAL/PR/CG
CHIPSEAL-1C
CHIPSEAL-2C
TOM
TOM
6
Attachment number 1 \nPage 8 of 24
Item # A
Responsible Division: Street Department
Financial Plan (thousands of dollars) :
Prior Budget
Years 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total
945 875 875 875 875 875 5,320
Description :
Funding Sources :
Funded with General Fund
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Pine St & Holly St Rehabilitation 509 - - - -
6th St @ 7th St Improvements 40 175 - - -
W. 11th St - 416 - - -
W. 10th St - 90 - - -
17th St - 75 350 - -
Katherine St - 50 200 - -
Hart St - 50 250 - -
Main St - - 75 225 -
East St Stabilization - - - 450 -
Cutler Process 326 19 - 200 875
Notes:
Subprojects (000):
City of Georgetown, Texas
Capital Improvement Program
Street Rehabilitation
Projected
Streets listed as subprojects under "Rehabilitation" were identified as being in most need of repair or rehabilitation
because of their asphalt and subgrade failures, drainage problems and deteriorating curbs. Subgrade stabilization,
valley gutter installation and curb and gutter addition or replacement are combined with surface treatments to bring the
pavement condition back into the high 90s.
Photo / Map Placeholder
7
Attachment number 1 \nPage 9 of 24
Item # A
Responsible Division: Street Department
Financial Plan (thousands of dollars) :
Prior Budget
Years 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total
378 1,620 400 400 500 500 3,798
Description :
Funding Sources :
Funded with Street Maintenance Sales Tax
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Chip Seal 1,620 400 400 500 500
Notes:
Subprojects (000):
City of Georgetown, Texas
Capital Improvement Program
Chip Seal
Projected
Photo / Map Placeholder
Oil and rock maintenance application to provide a seal and wear protection, sealing current cracks and making a self
healing barrier for new cracks. Current year's areas are expected to include; River Ridge Dr, Inner Loop (Churchill
Farms), DB Wood Rd (Public Safety Operational and Training Center to Georgetown Village), Williams Dr (DB Wood to
Del Webb), NE downtown, North Georgetown Addition, Lakeway Dr, and Serenada Dr (Luna Trail area).
8
Attachment number 1 \nPage 10 of 24
Item # A
Responsible Division: Street Department
Financial Plan (thousands of dollars) :
Prior Budget
Years 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total
501 350 400 500 500 600 2,851
Description :
Funding Sources :
Funded with Street Maintenance Sales Tax
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Rejuvenator 350 400 500 500 600
Notes:
City of Georgetown, Texas
Capital Improvement Program
Rejuvenate
Projected
Subprojects (000):
Application of asphalt pavement to provide ultraviolet protection and seal minute cracks and pavement flaws. Restores
a uniform dark asphalt color to pavement covering the squeegee lines left after crack sealing. This process applied to
pavement in moderately good condition can prolong the need for more costly applications. Current year's proposed
areas include; River Ridge Dr, Berry Creek Dr, Quail Valley Dr, NE downtown, Western Trail, and Sun City.
Photo / Map Placeholder
9
Attachment number 1 \nPage 11 of 24
Item # A
Responsible Division: Street Department
Financial Plan (thousands of dollars) :
Prior Budget
Years 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total
1,171 414 800 900 900 900 5,085
Description :
Funding Sources :
Funded with Street Maintenance Sales Tax
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Cutler Process 414 800 900 900 900
Notes:
Subprojects (000):
Streets listed as subprojects under "Maintenance" were identified as being in most need of surface treatments with only
minor repairs to roadways. Roadways are evaluated by history, condition, age and type of previous treatments
performed. Current year's projects are expected to include; Maple St, Myrtle St, and Church St (University Ave to 2nd
St)
Photo / Map Placeholder
City of Georgetown, Texas
Capital Improvement Program
Cutler Process
Projected
10
Attachment number 1 \nPage 12 of 24
Item # A
Responsible Division: Street Department
Financial Plan (thousands of dollars) :
Prior Budget
Years 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total
- 416 300 200 300 300 1,516
Description :
Funding Sources :
Funded with Street Maintenance Sales Tax
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Point Repair Overlay 416 300 200 300 300
Notes:
Subprojects (000):
City of Georgetown, Texas
Capital Improvement Program
Point Repair
Projected
Pavement has normally reached the end of its life and possibly has at least one overlay. Pavement need to be milled
down to or below original flow line. Grade point repairs will be made and then resurfaced with a one and one half inch
overlay of existing asphalt. This should extend the pavement's life an additional 10 to 15 years. Current year's areas for
thin overlay are expected to include; Texas Dr, Gabriel View Dr, Kathi Ln, Addie Ln, Brandi Ln, and Tiffany Ln.
Photo / Map Placeholder
11
Attachment number 1 \nPage 13 of 24
Item # A
E MORROW STW MORROW ST
L
E
A
N
D
E
R
S
T
W 10TH ST
C
H
A
M
B
E
R
W
A
Y
WA
L
N
U
T
S
T
E 21ST ST
WSPRINGST
A
S
H
ST
H
A
R
T
S
T
E SPRING ST
E 1 7 TH1/2 S T
E 6TH ST
E 18TH ST
BRENDONLEE LN
W 9TH ST
W 18TH S T
W 8TH ST
E
L
M
S
T
E 19TH ST
E 13TH ST
R
U
C
K
E
R
S
T
W 4TH ST
E 3RD ST
E 14THST
W11T H S T
W 13THST
SAN
J
O
S
E
S
T
E
U
B
A
N
K
S
T
E 20TH ST
E 4TH ST
E 10TH ST
S
M
Y
R
T
L
E
S
T
E 5TH ST
E 11TH ST
PA
I
G
E
S
T
W 3RD ST
R
O
C
K
S
T
E VA L L E Y S T
W5THST
E 9 T H
S T
W 15TH S T
F
O
R
E
S
T
S
T
E 17THST
E 19TH
1/2 ST
T
I
M
B
E
R
S
T
W 19THST
C
A
N
D
E
E
S
T
A
L
L
Y
STON ECIR
W16T HST
L O W E R
P
ARK RD
J
O
H
N
C
A
R
T
E
R
D
R
T H O M A S C T
R I V E R O A K S CV
W
A
T
ERS E D GEC
I
R
P
I
N
E
S
T
B
R
I
D
G
E
S
T
E 8TH ST
W
E
S
T
S
T
BL U E HOLE PARK RD
N
A
U
S
T
I
N
AV
E
S
C
O
L
L
E
G
E
S
T
M
A
P
L
E
S
T
RA
I
L
R
O
A
D
AV
E
SCENI
C
D
R
S
M
A
I
N
S
T
W U N IV E R S IT Y AV E
S IH
3
5
F
W
Y
S
B
S IH
3
5
F
W
Y
N
B
E 2ND ST
W7THST
E 7 T HST
W2NDST
E 15THST
W 17TH ST
RIVE
R
Y
BLVD
S
C
H
U
R
C
H
S
T
H
O
L
L
Y
S
T
S
A
U
S
T
I
N
A
V
E
SIH35NB
S IH
3
5
S
B
NCOLLEGEST
Legend
CIP Sidewalk Rehab
2015-16 Capital Improvement ProjectsTransportation-Sidewalk Rehabilitation
´
1 inch = 833 feet
0 580 1,160290
Feet
12
Attachment number 1 \nPage 14 of 24
Item # A
Responsible Division: Street Department
Financial Plan (thousands of dollars) :
Prior Budget
Years 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total
- 994 1,111 1,184 1,068 1,091 5,448
Description :
Funding Sources :
Funded with Transportation Bonds
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
8th St Church St - Myrtle St 43 - - - -
Austin Ave 8th St - University Ave 14 78 - - -
Ph 1 Signal and Curb Ramp Improvements 506 - 253 102 -
7th St 56 - - - -
10th St Main St - Rock St 14 80 - - -
8th St Austin Ave - MLK Dr 15 84 - - -
Church St 8th St - 9th St 123 - - - -
11th St Main St - Rock St 23 128 - - -
Access Route to Government Services 200 - - - -
Other Sidewalks as Determined - 741 931 966 1,091
Notes:
City of Georgetown, Texas
Capital Improvement Program
Sidewalks
Projected
Subprojects (000):
Photo / Map Placeholder
In 2014, the City completed a review of the pedestrian network within the right of way in the City limits, as well as a
comprehensive accessibility review in the downtown district. The study evaluated the condition, presence of pedestrian
infrastructure and need as defined by public input, staff recommendations and legal requirements. The study
recommends $10 million in improvements to the network including $3.6 million in the downtown district. Recommended
improvements support the City's adopted ADA Transition Plan, the Downtown Master Plan, the Parks & Rec Trails
Master Plan, the Overall Transportation Plan and the City's Comprehensive Plan. Transportation Services has worked to
ensure pedestrian improvements are coupled with street and utility improvements to maximize the City's investment.
13
Attachment number 1 \nPage 15 of 24
Item # A
Stormwater Drainage Utility
Introduction
The Stormwater Drainage Utility manages and maintains stormwater infrastructure
operations and facilities. Some of the additional responsibilities of the Stormwater
Drainage Utility are assisting other Divisions in City code enforcement. Daily
responsibilities include drainage and flood control when needed, right-of-way mowing
and cleaning, street sign maintenance and street cleaning operations.
The Stormwater Drainage Utility has been focusing on meeting the Environmental
Protection Agency’s (EPA) Phase II regulations and requirements regarding stormwater
control in municipalities. In 2016, the City expects to continue efforts to meet the
stormwater control mandates.
The FY 2016 Five Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) includes projects aimed at
improving stormwater drainage, erosion control and the compilation of stormwater
assets. The Stormwater department completed the buy-out of eight homes in the Smith
Branch area as a mitigation measure against future flood damage.
14
Attachment number 1 \nPage 16 of 24
Item # A
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total
(Thousands of dollars)
Projected Annual Project Cost 1,150$ 600$ 2,750$ 900$ 600$ 6,000$
Debt Issuance Cost - - 18 - - 18
Sources of Funding
Operating Revenue 875 600 600 900 600 3,575
Self Supporting CO's - - 2,168 - - 2,168
Grants 275 - - - - 275
City of Georgetown, Texas
Stormwater Capital Improvement Program
FY 2016 to 2020
The City will be determining a source of revenue to fund the EPA Phase II regulations, the Regional Stormwater Plan, and
other requirements regarding stormwater control within municipalities. The most likely revenue source is through a
combination of stormwater fees and developer fees paid in-lieu of onsite detention.
Operating Revenue
Self Supporting CO's
Grants
Combined 5 Year Estimated Funding Sources
15
Attachment number 1 \nPage 17 of 24
Item # A
Prior
Project Year 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
(Thousands of dollars)
New Projects:
Curb and Gutter Replacements 300$ 500$ 500$ 500$ 800$ 500$
Stormwater Infrastructure Upgrades 100 100 100 100 100 100
Smith Branch Buy-outs 2,215 - - - - -
San Gabriel Flood Study 400 550 - - - -
Serenada Culvert Improvement - - - 500 - -
NW Blvd Drainage - - - 350 - -
Airport Road @ Pecan Branch - - - 1,300 - -
Totals 3,015$ 1,150$ 600$ 2,750$ 900$ 600$
Projected
City of Georgetown, Texas
Stormwater Capital Improvement Program
FY 2016 to 2020
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Th
o
u
s
a
n
d
s
Stormwater Capital Project Cost
16
Attachment number 1 \nPage 18 of 24
Item # A
Responsible Division: Stormwater Drainage
Financial Plan (thousands of dollars) :
Prior Budget
Years 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total
300 500 500 500 800 500 3,100
Description :
Funding Sources :
Funded with cash from Drainage Utility
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Curb and Gutter Replacement 500 500 500 500 500
Main Street Drainage - - - 300 -
Notes:
MAP OR PHOTO
City of Georgetown, Texas
Capital Improvement Program
Curb and Gutter Replacements
Subprojects (000):
Projected
This project will consist of replacing deteriorating stand-up curbs with curb and gutter. Stand-up curbs throughout the
City will be evaulated on their condition and their potential to cause damage to roadways. The curbs identified in areas
with the poorest drainage are most likely to contribute to road damage. These curbs will be targeted for replacement.
These replacements will save the City from having to perform much more costly street rehabilitation.
17
Attachment number 1 \nPage 19 of 24
Item # A
Responsible Division: Stormwater Drainage
Financial Plan (thousands of dollars) :
Prior Budget
Years 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total
100 100 100 100 100 100 600
Description :
Funding Sources :
Funded with cash from Drainage Utility
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Stormwater Infrastructure Upgrade 100 100 100 100 100
Notes:
Subprojects (000):
Rehabilitation of ponds above and beyond monthly mowing and trash or debris removal. Examples may include
dredging of ditches, stormwater boxes or water quality / detention ponds; construction of end treatments, fencing and
alterations of existing storm drain features; and removal and replacement of filtration devices.
City of Georgetown, Texas
Capital Improvement Program
Stormwater Infrastructure Upgrades
Projected
MAP OR PHOTO
18
Attachment number 1 \nPage 20 of 24
Item # A
Responsible Division: Stormwater Drainage
Financial Plan (thousands of dollars) :
Prior Budget
Years 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total
400 550 - - - - - 950
Description :
Funding Sources :
Funded with cash from Drainage Utility and
grants.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
North and South Fork 550 - - - -
Notes:
Subprojects (000):
City of Georgetown, Texas
Capital Improvement Program
San Gabriel Flood Study
Projected
Map of Downtown Ponds
Staff has applied for a Texas Water Development Board grant to study the North and South Forks of the San Gabriel
River. If approved, this will be in partnership with the Cities of Leander and Liberty Hill and with the Counties of
Williamson and Burnett. The grant is a 50/50 share. The State would reimburse $275K and the City would be
responsible for the remainder (including in-kind contributions).
19
Attachment number 1 \nPage 21 of 24
Item # A
Airport Services
Introduction
Airport Services manages, maintains and repairs the City’s airport. Some of the
additional responsibilities of the airport department include traffic control, emergency
response operations and special events. Daily responsibilities include inspection of
runways for sign repair, pavement management and removal of sight obstructions.
Airport Services has experienced a growth in demand for maintenance and
rehabilitation of the City’s runway system.
20
Attachment number 1 \nPage 22 of 24
Item # A
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total
(Thousands of dollars)
Projected Annual Project Cost 20$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 20$
Sources of Funding
Operating Revenues 20 - - - - 20
Prior
Project Year 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
(Thousands of dollars)
Master Plan -$ 20$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Parallel TW-A & MITL 770 - - - - -
Fuel Farm 100 - - - - -
Totals 870$ 20$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Projected
City of Georgetown, Texas
Airport Capital Improvement Program
FY 2016 to 2020
The Airport five year Capital Improvement Program funding comes from a combination of cash contributions and
previous year-end excess funds.
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
$400
20
1
1
20
1
2
20
1
3
20
1
4
20
1
5
20
1
6
20
1
7
20
1
8
20
1
9
20
2
0
Th
o
u
s
a
n
d
s
Capital Project Cost
21
Attachment number 1 \nPage 23 of 24
Item # A
Responsible Division: Airport
Financial Plan (thousands of dollars) :
Prior Budget
Years 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total
- 20 - - - - 20
Description :
Funding Sources:
Airport Fund
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Master Plan 20 - - - -
Notes:
Subprojects :
Projected
Photo / Map Placeholder
Update to the 2005 Airport Master Plan to reaffirm or amend the Century Plan policies, goals and strategies of the plan
to the vision and mission statements of the 2030 Plan, and to update the short, intermediate and long term projects /
actions related to the continued maintenance and development of the airport.
City of Georgetown, Texas
Capital Improvement Projects
Master Plan
22
Attachment number 1 \nPage 24 of 24
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
TRANSPORTATION DIVISION
OVERVIEW AND CIP
2015 Policy Discussion
June 9, 2015
Attachment number 2 \nPage 1 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
2014/15 TRANSPORTATION OVERVIEW
Outline.
1.2014/15 Strategic Goals.
2.2015/16 Transportation Business Plan.
3.Transportation CIP.
Attachment number 2 \nPage 2 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
BUDGET PROCESS
DEBT
OVERVIEW
FOCUS AREA:
SIGNATURE
DEST. & CIP
FIVE YEAR PLAN
UPDATE
COMPENSATION,
BENEFITS, &
SELF INSURANCE
FOCUS AREA:
UTILITY & CIP
BUDGET
PARKING LOT
FOCUS AREA:
TRANSPORTATION
& CIP
FOCUS AREA:
CROSSCUTTING
THEMES
ANNUAL
BUDGET
PRESENTATION
FOCUS AREA:
ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
& CIP
BUDGET
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
FOCUS AREA:
PUBLIC SAFETY
GENERAL
CAPITAL
PROJECTS
BUDGET
ADOPTION
FISCAL &
BUDGETARY POLICY
Attachment number 2 \nPage 3 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
2014/15 STRATEGIC GOALS
1.Conduct and complete a clear and concise
Airport Master Plan.
2.Develop a comprehensive plan for a public
transit plan both locally and regionally.
3.Explore feasibility of a Trolley to Historic
Downtown.
4.Complete the citywide Sidewalk Master Plan.
5.Develop and fund a strategy for Fall 2014 Sales
Tax for Street Maintenance Election.
6.Review the possibility of a Road Bond Election.
Attachment number 2 \nPage 4 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
2014/15 STRATEGIC GOALS
1.Conduct and complete a clear and
concise Airport Master Plan.
•TxDOT Grant Paperwork submitted. TxDOT
awaiting award of funding by
Transportation Commission.
•Staff utilized time to formalize
maintenance and business processes.
Attachment number 2 \nPage 5 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
2014/15 STRATEGIC GOALS
2.Develop a comprehensive plan for a public
transit plan both locally and regionally.
3.Explore feasibility of a Trolley to Historic
Downtown.
•Capital Metro partner in planning process
utilizing Federal planning funds to reduce
local cost, including study of Downtown
Trolley System.
•Draft Plan will be presented to GTAB in June.
Attachment number 2 \nPage 6 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
2014/15 STRATEGIC GOALS
4.Complete the citywide Sidewalk Master
Plan.
•Formalized funding strategy approved in
2015 Bond Election.
•Set forth ADA transition planning efforts.
•Began discussion on long-term cost of
ownership.
•Regionally recognized planning effort.
Attachment number 2 \nPage 7 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
2014/15 STRATEGIC GOALS
5.Develop a strategy for Fall 2014 Sales Tax
for Street Maintenance Election.
6.Review the possibility of a Road Bond
Election.
•Two Successful elections in FY 14/15.
•Street Maintenance passed with 84.5% of
vote on November 4, 2014.
•$105 Million Road Bond passed with
75.2% of vote on May 9, 2015.
Attachment number 2 \nPage 8 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
2014/15 STRATEGIC GOALS
•Street Maintenance (cont.).
PCI Completed in 2014 is 87.3, 2012 evaluation
was 87.7.
To keep the OCI (overall condition index) at 85% the
majority of a city’s maintenance funds are planned
to be spent on preventative maintenance.
Life expectancy of Maintenance Programs:
Fog Seal: 2-3 years
Chip Seal: 5-7 years
Two Course Chip Seal: 8-10 years
Thin Overlay Mix: 8-10 years
Mill and Overlay: 10 years
Pavement Rehab (Cutler): 15 years
Attachment number 2 \nPage 9 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
“Pavement Preservation” treatments done at the right
time prolong the service life of the pavement, lessen
inconvenience, and save money.
Attachment number 2 \nPage 10 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
2014/15 STRATEGIC GOALS
•Street Maintenance.
Cost of Maintenance proposed in pavement
management system:
Fog Seal $0.90/sy
Chip Seal* $3.75/sy
Two Course Chip Seal* $6.75/sy
Thin Overlay Mix* $10.00/sy #
Pavement Rehab (Cutler) $12.00/sy
Mill and Overlay $13.00/sy * Includes Fog Seal
# Estimate
Attachment number 2 \nPage 11 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
2014/15 STRATEGIC GOALS
•2015 Road Bond: Draft to GTAB in June
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
AD SWB
Leander to WRP
Design
ROW
Utilities
Construction
AZ1 WRP
Design
ROW
Utilities
Construction
BC Rivery
Design
ROW
Utilities
Construction
AE NW Blvd Bridge
Design
ROW
Utilities
Construction
BJ2 Leander
@ SWB
Design
ROW
Utilities
Construction
AN DBW 29 to Oak Ridge
Design
ROW
Utilities
Construction
BP SW'n Blvd
Design
ROW
Utilities
Construction
AF NBFR
Williams to Lakeway
Design
ROW
Utilities
Construction
SIDEWALKS Design
Construction
INTERSECTIONS Design
Construction
CS Leander Bridge Design
ROW
AJ NEIL FM 971 to Stadium
Design
ROW
Utilities
CQ Stadium
Design
ROW
Utilities
AZ2 SWB
WRP to 29
Design
ROW
AT SH 29
Design
ROW
Utilities
BU SEIL (from 35)
Design
BG SEIL (to 29) Design
AC Williams (Rivery to SBFR) Design
AO I 35 SBFR Design
HH Shell Rd (Williams to Shell Spur) Design
TT DB Wood Oak Ridge to Lake Overlook Design
Attachment number 2 \nPage 12 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
TRANSPORTATION BUSINESS PLAN
2015/16 UPDATE
I. Goal: Implement the Overall Transportation Plan
A. Objective: Continue to maintain a Pavement Condition
Index (PCI) above 85.
1. Street Maintenance Crew to maintain PCI. FY ‘17
2. Street Maintenance Equipment for crew. FY ‘17
3. Attenuator and Pad foot roller. completed
4. Bridge De-Icing Program. FY ‘16.
5.Street Maintenance CIP utilizing Street
Maintenance Sales Tax. ongoing.
6.Staff Development Progression Plan. FY ‘17
Attachment number 2 \nPage 13 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
TRANSPORTATION BUSINESS PLAN
2015/16 UPDATE
I. Goal: Implement the Overall Transportation Plan
B. Identify funding sources for future improvements
1. Develop Bond Program -- completed
2. Develop Sidewalk Gap Program and Plan -- completed
3. Transit to urban service -- ongoing
4. North Austin Avenue Sidewalk Improvements –
completed
5.F.M. 1460 – TxDOT construction letting -- 2015.
6.Austin Avenue Bridges and Downtown Access. FY ’16
Attachment number 2 \nPage 14 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
TRANSPORTATION BUSINESS PLAN
2015/16 UPDATE
I. Goal: Implement the Overall Transportation Plan
B. Identify funding sources for future improvements
7.CAMPO UPWP Planning – Pedestrian Plan, Regulating Plan and
Williams Drive Corridor Study. FY ’16
8.Work with TxDOT, Williamson County and Round Rock to
stretch Bond proceeds, connectivity and bring projects to
construction quicker. FY ’16
•IH-35 Corridor (frontage roads and crossings)
•Leander Road (River Ridge to SW Bypass)
•SE Inner Loop (Maple to Belmont Drive)
•Mays Street (Oakmont/Rabbit Hill Road)
•SH 29 East (Haven Lane to SH 95)
Attachment number 2 \nPage 15 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
TRANSPORTATION BUSINESS PLAN
2015/16 UPDATE
II. Implement Airport Master Plan
A. Airport Business Plan Staffing Options
1. Increase part time positions for maintenance. FY ’16
2.Business Coordinator and Operations Coordinator split not
feasible in current financial model. FY ‘17 or beyond.
3.Office Specialist (GUS Administration). FY ‘18 or beyond.
4.Airport Management Tool (FBO Software). FY ‘16
Attachment number 2 \nPage 16 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
TRANSPORTATION BUSINESS PLAN
2015/16 UPDATE
II. Implement Airport Master Plan
B. Operational increases – to bring maintenance up to standard
1. Foreign Object Debris Removal . FY ’16
2.Pavement Management Funding . FY ‘16
3.Enhanced Maintenance Program. Ongoing
•Budget GL Reorganization to match actual operations.
•Program to track /report TCEQ SWPPP Permit.
•Empty Hanger Inspection/Maintenance Program.
•CPI Adjustments to Land Leases.
•Lease rates for Hangers/Tiedowns.
•Developing Hanger Preventative Maintenance Program.
•Airfield Lighting Upgrade with TxDOT.
Attachment number 2 \nPage 17 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
TRANSPORTATION BUSINESS PLAN
2015/16 UPDATE
II. Implement Airport Master Plan
B. Operational increases – to bring maintenance up to standard
3.(cont.) Enhanced Maintenance Program. Ongoing
•E.I.S. Process for fuel farm relocation and ORC Processes.
•Asphalt repair to taxi lane between B & C Hanger.
•Expanded daily airport inspection criteria.
•Weed abatement program.
•Monthly airfield pavement maintenance inspections.
•Training program for Fuel Attendants.
•Electronic Gate preventative maintenance program.
•Quarterly Inspection program for FBO fuel trucks.
•Implementing Spill Prevention and countermeasures program.
Attachment number 2 \nPage 18 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
TRANSPORTATION BUSINESS PLAN
2015/16 UPDATE
II. Implement Airport Master Plan
C. Capital improvements funding – to continue levels of
maintenance
1. TxDOT Planning Grant for Airport Master Plan to update CIP
in process. FY ’16
2.Pavement management inspections revealed need for
extensive rehab to 18/36 . FY ’17 or beyond
Attachment number 2 \nPage 19 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
TRANSPORTATION BUSINESS PLAN
2015/16 UPDATE
III. Stormwater Program
A. Urban Stormwater Permit Application.
1. MS4 Permit Application Completed, Year 1 in FY ’16.
2. Federal Standards for Georgetown Salamander made permit
requirements part of the Water Quality Management Plan
for USFWS. Applied MS4 to entire Edwards Recharge.
B. Operational increases to address stormwater permit.
1.Program Administrator for Reporting and EAM. FY ’16
2.Mechanical Street Sweeper and Operator. FY ’16
3.Develop Enterprise Asset Management to monitor and
track compliance. FY ‘16
Attachment number 2 \nPage 20 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
TRANSPORTATION BUSINESS PLAN
2015/16 UPDATE
III. Stormwater Program
C.Capital improvements funding – to continue
improvements.
1. Continue Watershed Planning. ongoing
2. CIP Program. FY ’16 and beyond
D. Staff for Stormwater System Maintenance
Improvements
1. Stormwater Maintenance Crew – 2 LEO’s. FY ’17 or beyond
2. Street Sweeper and Operator. FY ‘16
Attachment number 2 \nPage 21 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
TRANSPORTATION DIVISION
OVERVIEW
Questions?
Transportation CIP – Wes Wright
Attachment number 2 \nPage 22 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
Streets/Sidewalks/Drainage/Airport
Capital Improvement Plan
FY 2016
City Council
June 9, 2015
Attachment number 2 \nPage 23 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
Outline
•Capital Improvement Plan process
•Funding summary for the Capital Improvement Plan
•Street projects
•Sidewalk projects
•Stormwater projects
•Airport projects
Attachment number 2 \nPage 24 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
Capital Improvement Plan
•Starts in January
•Includes meetings at department and division level to formulate project lists
–Council priorities
–Funding
–New development
–Operational experience
–Maintenance history
–Regulatory requirements
•Recommendations are presented to boards and the City Council
•The Capital Improvements are included in the Annual Operating Plan
February
Initial Department
Meetings formulating
projects in CIP
March
Division Meetings to
coordinate projects in
CIP
April
Finalize CIP funding
plan and financial
recommendations
May/June
Present CIP to Boards
and City Council
September
Adopted along with
Annual Operating Plan
Attachment number 2 \nPage 25 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
Finance – Summary Sheet Streets
Funding
Operating Revenue 895$
Street Maintenance Sales Tax 2,800
General Fund 875
Certificates of Obligation Bonds 1,009
Grants 275
Total 5,854$
Project Costs
Transportation Services
Streets 3,675$
Stormwater Drainage 1,150
Airport 20
Sidewalks 994
Debt Issuance Cost 15
Total 5,854$
2016 Summary (000s)
Attachment number 2 \nPage 26 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
Finance – 5 Year Sheet Streets
Projects (000s)2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Street Rehabilitation 875 875 875 875 875
Chip Seal 1,620 400 400 500 500
Rejuvenate 350 400 500 500 600
Cutler Process 414 800 900 900 900
Point Repair 416 300 200 300 300
Sidewalks 994 1,111 1,184 1,068 1,091
Arterials Reserves - 500 500 500 500
Totals 4,669 4,386 4,559 4,643 4,766
Transportation
GRAPH
$0
$2,000
$4,000
$6,000
$8,000
$10,000
$12,000
$14,000
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Th
o
u
s
a
n
d
s
Attachment number 2 \nPage 27 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
Transportation Services
•Transportation Services manages, maintains, and repairs City streets,
sidewalks, drainage facilities, and right of ways.
•Additional responsibilities include:
–Traffic Control, Emergency Response, Special Events, Regional planning, GTEC
•Funding for the street maintenance program comes from the General Fund
and the Street Maintenance Sales Tax (reapproved in Nov-14).
•Funding for capital improvements comes from tax supported bonds (May
election).
Attachment number 2 \nPage 28 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
Transportation Services
•Street Rehabilitation - $549,000
–Pine Street and Holly Street
–Downtown rehabilitation will continue in FY 17 with 10th Street, 11th Street, and various
sidewalk projects
•Traffic Signal
–Austin Avenue & 5th Street
•Pending bond election for funding
•Pending warrant study approval
•Arterial Reserves
–No contribution anticipated for FY 16
Attachment number 2 \nPage 29 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
Transportation Services
•Street Maintenance
–Rejuvenator – $350,000
•Application of oil to seal small cracks, provide UV protection, guard against oxidation, and
restores uniform color after crack sealing
•Work primarily will be done in-house in FY 16
•Areas include Quail Valley, NE Downtown, Western Trail, and Sun City
–Hot-in Place Recycling - $740,000
•Cutler Process
•Single pass, hot in place asphalt recycler
•Myrtle and Church (Hwy 29 – 2nd St.)
•Maple (north of Hwy 29)
Attachment number 2 \nPage 30 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
Transportation Services
•Street Maintenance (continued)
–Chip Seal - $1,620,000
•Oil and rock mixture to provide seal and wear protection
•Currently utilizing both single and double course chip seals
•Also adding light fog seal to lock in rock and reduce noise
•FY 16 areas include:
–River Ridge Subdivision
–Inner Loop (Churchill Farms to Hwy 29)
–DB Wood Road (Public Safety to Georgetown Village)
–Williams Drive (DB Wood to Del Webb)
–NE Downtown
–North Georgetown Addition
–Lakeway Drive
–Serenada (Luna Trail area)
Attachment number 2 \nPage 31 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
Transportation Services
•Street Maintenance (continued)
–Point Repair and Overlay
•Thin Overlay Mix – 1” new asphalt
•FY 16 Streets include:
–Texas Drive
–Gabriel View Drive, Kathi Lane, Addie Lane, Brandi Lane, Tiffany Lane
Attachment number 2 \nPage 32 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
Transportation Services
•Sidewalks
–Projects contingent upon transportation bond election
–Projects for FY 16 include:
•Pedestrian signals and curb ramps at existing intersections
•Church Street (8th-9th, in advance of Cutler repaving)
•8th Street (Church-Myrtle)
•Access/entrance routes to city facilities
–Initiate design for future year projects including:
•Austin Avenue (8th-University)
•8th Street (Austin-MLK)
•10th Street (Main-Rock)
•11th Street (Main-Rock)
Attachment number 2 \nPage 33 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
Finance – 5 Year Sheet Drainage
Projects (000s)2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Curb and Gutter Replacements 500 500 500 800 500
Stormwater Infrastructure Upgrades 100 100 100 100 100
San Gabriel Flood Study 550 - - - -
Serenada Culvert Improvement - - 500 - -
NW Blvd Drainage - - 350 - -
Airport Road @ Pecan Branch - - 1,300 - -
Totals 1,150 600 2,750 900 600
Stormwater
Chart
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Th
o
u
s
a
n
d
s
Attachment number 2 \nPage 34 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
Stormwater Services
•Stormwater Drainage Utility manages and maintains stormwater
infrastructure operations and facilities.
•Daily activities include drainage and flood control, and right of way
maintenance.
•Currently implementing a five-year Stormwater Management Plan in order
to comply with TCEQ MS4 (Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System) and
Georgetown Salamander habitat protection requirements.
Attachment number 2 \nPage 35 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
Stormwater Services
•Curb and Gutter Replacements
–$500,000 annually
–Replace deteriorating stand up curbs with new curb and gutter
–Proposed for FY 16: San Gabriel Blvd., Ridge Oak, Oakland Drive,
Live Oak, Spanish Oaks
Attachment number 2 \nPage 36 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
Stormwater Services
•Infrastructure Improvements - $100,000
–Rehab above and beyond normal maintenance
•Regional Flood Study - $550,000
–North & South Forks – San Gabriel River
–Pending Texas Water Development Board grant
–50 percent reimbursable grant
–In partnership with Liberty Hill, Leander, Williamson County, & Burnet County.
Attachment number 2 \nPage 37 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
Finance – 5 Year Sheet Airport
Projects (000s)2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Master Plan 20 - - - -
Totals 20 - - - -
Airport
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
$400
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Th
o
u
s
a
n
d
s
Attachment number 2 \nPage 38 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
Airport Services
•Manages and repairs the City airport.
–Daily activities include inspection of runways for sign repair, pavement
management and removal of sight obstructions.
–Traffic control, emergency response operations and special events.
•Airport services has experienced a growth in demand for
maintenance and rehabilitation of the City’s runway system.
•All projects are maintenance and rehabilitation in conjunction
with TxDOT.
Attachment number 2 \nPage 39 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
Airport Service
•Master Plan
–$20,000 – City 10% Share
–Remainder funded by TxDOT
Attachment number 2 \nPage 40 of 41
Item # A
FY2016 Annual Budget
Streets/Sidewalks/Drainage/Airport
Capital Improvement Plan
FY 2016
City Council
May 26, 2015
Attachment number 2 \nPage 41 of 41
Item # A
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Agenda
June 9, 2015
SUBJECT:
Presentation and Discussion of the DRAFT Transit Development Plan with Capital Metro -- Nat Waggoner,
Transportation Analyst and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director
ITEM SUMMARY:
The purpose of this study is to develop a local transit plan for the City of Georgetown that serves mobility
needs within the city limits and connects to the growing regional transit network, improves the local
environmental and economic sustainability and slows the increase of congestion on roadways. Capital Metro
and the city have undertaken this study to assist Georgetown in realizing its mobility goals and to help unify
the region transit system.
This report is an assessment of transit needs in the city and provides recommendations for proposed service
routes and schedules, implementation and system financing options.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Part of the Annual Budget Discussion.
SUBMITTED BY:
Nat Waggoner, PMP®
ATTACHMENTS:
Proposed Transit Routing
Cover Memo
Item # B
22
Proposed Transit Plan
•Route 1 –service to high density
housing off Quail Valley to
Southwestern University and downtown
•Route 2 –service from downtown to
HEB, Wolf Ranch and Rivery area
(paired with Route 1)
•Route 3 –service from downtown to
Stonehaven Apartments, St. Davids
Hospital and southwest Georgetown
•Route 4 –service through downtown on
Austin Avenue and west on Williams
(paired with Route 3)
•Tripper service from downtown
Georgetown to meet CARTS buses
to/from Austin
•Sun City Route to Rivery, Wolf Ranch
and downtown
•Special Events Circulator connecting
Rivery and downtown
Attachment number 1 \nPage 1 of 7
Item # B
23
Route 1‐Residential, SU and Downtown
Service
•Service to high density housing off
Quail Valley to Southwestern
University and downtown
•Proposed Stops:
Downtown Transfer Center near 9th
Street and Martin Luther King Street
7th Street and Main Street
Maple Street and Southwestern
Boulevard
Maple Street and Soule Drive
(Southwestern University)
Maple Street and 13th Street
Maple Street and 18th Street
Maple Street and Quail Valley Drive
Smith Branch Boulevard and
Britannia Boulevard
Quail Valley Drive and Texstar Drive
High Tech Drive and Tower Drive
Attachment number 1 \nPage 2 of 7
Item # B
24
Route 2‐Downtown and Retail Centers
Service
•Route 2 – service from downtown
to HEB, Wolf Ranch and Rivery
area (paired with Route 1)
•Proposed Stops:
Downtown Transfer Center near 9th
Street and Martin Luther King Street
Scenic Drive and 10th Street
HEB (near University Avenue and IH
35)
Wolf Ranch Town Center (University
Avenue and Simon Road)
University Avenue and Wolf Ranch
Parkway
Walmart (Rivery Driveway)
Rivery Driveway and Rivery
Boulevard
Rivery Park Conference Center and
Hotel (future)
Attachment number 1 \nPage 3 of 7
Item # B
25
Route 3‐Accessing Services
•Route 3 – service from downtown
to Stonehaven Apartments, St.
Davids Hospital and southwest
Georgetown
•Proposed Stops:
Downtown Transfer Center near 9th
Street and Martin Luther King Street
9th Street and Austin Avenue
Austin Avenue and 17th Street
17th Street and Hart Street
19th Street and Railroad
St. David’s Hospital (Scenic Drive)
Wesleyan at Scenic (Scenic Drive)
Leander Road and Luther Drive
Georgetown Park Apartments (Luther
Drive)
Luther Drive and Rockmoor Drive
Rockmoor Drive and Thousand Oaks
Boulevard
Attachment number 1 \nPage 4 of 7
Item # B
26
Route 4‐Northern Gateway to Downtown
•Route 4 – service from downtown
to Stonehaven Apartments, St.
Davids Hospital and southwest
Georgetown
•Proposed Stops:
Downtown Transfer Center near 9th
Street and Martin Luther King Street
Austin Avenue and 7th Street
Austin Avenue and 2nd Street
Austin Avenue and Williams Drive
Williams Drive and Rivery Boulevard
Northwest Boulevard and Janis Drive
Northwest Boulevard and River Bend
Drive
Dawn Drive and Golden Oaks Drive
Attachment number 1 \nPage 5 of 7
Item # B
27
Route 5‐Sun City to Retail & Downtown
•Route 5 –Sun City Route to Rivery,
Wolf Ranch and downtown
•Proposed Stops:
Downtown Transfer Center near 9th
Street and Martin Luther King Street
Scenic Drive and 10th Street
HEB (near University Avenue and IH 35)
Wolf Ranch Town Center (University
Avenue and Simon Road)
University Avenue and Wolf Ranch
Parkway
Walmart (Rivery Driveway)
Rivery Boulevard and Williams Drive
Williams Drive and River Bend Drive
Williams Drive and Lakeway Drive
Williams Drive and Estella Crossing
HEB (Williams Drive and Shell Road)
Scott & White Clinic (Williams Drive and
Del Webb Boulevard)
Sun City Activity Center
Attachment number 1 \nPage 6 of 7
Item # B
28
Route 6‐Special Events Circulator
•Route 6 –Special Events Circulator
connecting Rivery and downtown
•Proposed Stops:
Attachment number 1 \nPage 7 of 7
Item # B
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Agenda
June 9, 2015
SUBJECT:
Presentation and Discussion regarding the Downtown Parking Study and recommendations developed by
Carl Walker, Inc. -- Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager
ITEM SUMMARY:
In FY 2013/2014 City Council appropriated funds to complete a comprehensive study and conceptual design
related to downtown parking and a downtown parking structure. An RFQ was issued on September 18, 2014
and closed on October 1st. Five proposals were submitted.
On September 23, 2014 City Council approved the selection committee to review the proposal. Interviews
were held on November 4th and Carl Walker, Inc. was unanimously chosen as the most qualified proposer.
On December 9, 2014, Council approved contracting with Carl Walker, Inc. for Professional Services for a
Comprehensive Parking Study & Conceptual Design of Parking Structure.
Carl Walker has:
· Conducted Online Survey and Stakeholder Outreach
· Confirmed Existing Parking Inventory
· Observed and Documented Existing Parking Occupancies & Turnover during:
o Holiday Season Saturday (December 20th)
o Typical Weekday Daytime (February 4th, 5th)
o First Friday (February 6th)
o Red Poppy Festival (April 24th, 25th)
· Reviewed Existing Parking Policies and Management Practices
During this presentation, Carl Walker, Inc. will provide recommendations on short-term management
solutions. They are also contracted to develop preliminary design concepts for structured parking, which will
be presented at a later date.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None at this time
SUBMITTED BY:
Laurie Brewer/jd
ATTACHMENTS:
Carl Walker, Inc Presentation
March 27 status report
Cover Memo
Item # C
Georgetown
Downtown Parking Study
City Council Workshop Presentation
Tuesday, June 9th 2015
Attachment number 1 \nPage 1 of 62
Item # C
Parking Study Scope of Work
•Conduct Online Survey and Stakeholder Outreach
•Confirm Existing Parking Inventory
•Observe and Document Existing Parking Occupancies & Turnover:
-Holiday Season Saturday (December 20th)
-Typical Weekday Daytime (February 4th, 5th)
-First Friday (February 6th)
-Red Poppy Festival (April 24th, 25th)
•Review Existing Parking Policies and Management Practices
•Provide Recommendations on Short Term Management Solutions
•Develop Preliminary Design Concepts for Structured Parking
Attachment number 1 \nPage 2 of 62
Item # C
Downtown Overlay
District
Core Parking Study Area
Attachment number 1 \nPage 3 of 62
Item # C
Core Study Area
6th Street
10th Street
Attachment number 1 \nPage 4 of 62
Item # C
Stakeholder Outreach
•Conducted Online Parking Survey That Received 561 Completed Surveys
•Survey Data Broken Down by User Category (Customer/Employee/Business Owners)
•Held Open Office Hours on Friday, February 6, 2015
•Met With 14 Different Individuals One-on-One
•Two Developers/Two County Staff/Three Restaurant Owners/Three Retailers/Resident
•Conducted Public Workshop on March 11, 2015
•Reviewed Results of Online Survey
Attachment number 1 \nPage 5 of 62
Item # C
Online Survey Results
What is your interest in downtown?
63%
5%
9%
15%
8%
351
29
50
86
45
561
Completed
Surveys
Attachment number 1 \nPage 6 of 62
Item # C
Online Survey Results
What distance is acceptable to you for walking from your car to your destination?
Customers
Employees Business OwnersLess Than
One Block
One to Two Blocks
Two to
Three Blocks
More Than
Three Blocks 6%
14%
51%
29%
53%
17%
17%
14%
14%
45%
29%
12%
Attachment number 1 \nPage 7 of 62
Item # C
Online Survey Results
Employees Business Owners
When you drive downtown, where do you prefer to park?
52%
40%
5%
3%8%
10%
23%
60%
Attachment number 1 \nPage 8 of 62
Item # C
Do you believe time limits should be more strictly enforced?
•“Shop owners should not park in customer parking on the Square.”
•“The City won’t enforce it anyway! Never have.”
•“During busy times –yes.”
•“Not after 5:00pm.”
•“Yes, during government business hours, not evening entertainment hours.”
•“I don't know how strict it is now, but it should be monitored to keep parking
moving.”
•“Shop downtown often because parking is easy.”
•“I do not see that there is a parking problem to begin with.”
•“Not sure how strictly they are enforced at this time. Would be in favor of
some monitoring and issuing of warnings for those staying between 3 and 5
hours -fines for those over 5 hours in same spot.”
Attachment number 1 \nPage 9 of 62
Item # C
•“A collaborative effort from everyone mentioned would be fair.”
•“Combination of Parking Users/Customers and City Tax Dollars.”
•“To achieve desired density & walkability costs should be shared equitably.”
•“This can be a plan that involves all three groups....all three benefit.”
•“Meters would help pay costs.”
•“ALL OF THE ABOVE.”
•“Combination of tax dollars and business owners.”
•“Business owners, not home owners. Businesses reap the benefits of having
parking that suits prospective customer needs, and therefore are likely to
invest in it.”
Who should pay the cost to build and maintain
parking facilities?
Attachment number 1 \nPage 10 of 62
Item # C
Core Area Existing Surface Parking Lots
Attachment number 1 \nPage 11 of 62
Item # C
Core Area Existing Surface Parking Lots
254
Off-Street
Spaces
815
Off-Street
Spaces
Attachment number 1 \nPage 12 of 62
Item # C
Core Area Off-Street Inventory
Breakdown by Use/Ownership
City of Georgetown
Williamson County
Private Lots
Total Off-Street = 1,069
610
237
222
Attachment number 1 \nPage 13 of 62
Item # C
Core Area On-Street Inventory
Total On-Street
640 Spaces
Attachment number 1 \nPage 14 of 62
Item # C
Core Area Total Parking Inventory
6th Street
10th Street
Total Off-Street = 1,069 Spaces
Total On-Street = 640 Spaces
TOTAL 1,709 Spaces
Attachment number 1 \nPage 15 of 62
Item # C
Observed Peak Off-Street Occupancies
December 20, 2014 Holiday Season Saturday (6:00pm Peak)
Less Than 40%
61% to 85%
86% to 90%
41% to 60%
17%27%
.3%67%
58%
97%
26%
74%
52%
Attachment number 1 \nPage 16 of 62
Item # C
With Observed Peak On-Street Occupancies
December 20, 2014 Holiday Season Saturday (6:00pm Peak)
Less Than 40%
61% to 85%
86% to 90%
41% to 60%
Attachment number 1 \nPage 17 of 62
Item # C
With Observed Peak On-Street Occupancies
December 20, 2014 Holiday Season Saturday (6:00pm Peak)
Less Than 40%
61% to 85%
86% to 90%
41% to 60%
61 16
8
77 Open Off-Street Parking Spaces
Within One Block of the Square
Attachment number 1 \nPage 18 of 62
Item # C
With Observed Peak On-Street Occupancies
December 20, 2014 Holiday Season Saturday (6:00pm Peak)
Less Than 40%
61% to 85%
86% to 90%
41% to 60%
45 79
101
14
33
349 Open Off-Street Parking Spaces
Within Two Blocks of the Square
Attachment number 1 \nPage 19 of 62
Item # C
Observed Off-Street Occupancies
Typical Weekday -Thursday February 5, 2015 (Noon Peak)
Less Than 40%
61% to 85%
86% to 90%
41% to 60%
42%
25%62%
33%
95%
97%
90%
100%
84%
97%
18%
83%
38%
77%76%63%
48%
0%
Attachment number 1 \nPage 20 of 62
Item # C
With Observed On-Street Occupancies
Typical Weekday -Thursday February 5, 2015 (Noon Peak)
Less Than 40%
61% to 85%
86% to 90%
41% to 60%
42%
25%62%
33%
95%
97%
90%
100%
84%
97%
18%
83%
38%
77%76%63%
48%
0%
**9th Street Under Construction**
Attachment number 1 \nPage 21 of 62
Item # C
With Observed On-Street Occupancies
Typical Weekday -Thursday February 5, 2015 (Noon Peak)
42%
25%62%
33%
95%
97%
90%
100%
84%
97%
18%
83%
38%
77%76%63%
48%
0%
Square Area
Effectively Full
at Noon
Bank of America & First
Texas Bank Only Lots With
Remaining Capacity
Attachment number 1 \nPage 22 of 62
Item # C
Observed Off-Street Occupancies
First Friday Event, February 6, 2015 (6:00pm Peak)
Less Than 40%
61% to 85%
86% to 90%
41% to 60%
.6%
.5%12%
0%
60%
46%
33%
91%
70%
70%
0%
0%
97%
3%16%8%
0%
0%
Attachment number 1 \nPage 23 of 62
Item # C
With Observed On-Street Occupancies
First Friday Event, February 6, 2015 (6:00pm Peak)
Less Than 40%
61% to 85%
86% to 90%
41% to 60%
.6%
.5%12%
0%
60%
46%
33%
91%
70%
70%
0%
0%
97%
3%16%8%
0%
0%
Attachment number 1 \nPage 24 of 62
Item # C
With Observed On-Street Occupancies
First Friday Event, February 6, 2015 (6:00pm Peak)
.6%
.5%12%
0%
60%
46%
33%
91%
70%
70%
0%
0%
97%
3%16%8%
0%
0%
On-Street Parking
Around Square
Effectively Full
Parking Available in Grace Church
Lot and City Lot at 9th & Main
Bank of America Lot Wide Open
Attachment number 1 \nPage 25 of 62
Item # C
Observed Parking Occupancies –Draeger Lot (City North Lot)
Peak Occupancy Observed December 20th = 31% (83 Open Spaces)
Peak Occupancy Observed February 5th = 53% (57 Open Spaces)
Peak Occupancy Observed Feb. First Friday = 35% (78 Open Spaces)
Underutilized Public Parking Lot:
Primarily Serves The Monument Café and
Tamiro Place
Attachment number 1 \nPage 26 of 62
Item # C
Summary of Observed Parking Occupancies
•On-Street Parking Around the Square is the Highest Demand Parking
•Daytime Parking During Thursday Noon Peak Hour was the Highest Parking Demand
Period Observed
•South City Lot at 9th & Main Can Get Very Busy Seasonally During Last Week in
December; Last Week in January; First Week in February (County Tax Office)
•Other Than Peak Tax Season, South City Lot Shows Unused Capacity During Typical
Weekdays, Especially During Evening Periods (After 5:00pm)
•North City Lot at 5th & Austin Consistently Underutilized
•Bank of America Private Lot Demonstrates Ample Parking Capacity at All Times
Attachment number 1 \nPage 27 of 62
Item # C
Central Square On-Street Parking Turnover Analysis
Results:
•Sixteen (16) Cars Parked All Day = 7.5%
•Thirteen (13) Cars Parked Over 5 Hours = 6.1%
•Twenty One (21) Cars Parked Over 4 Hours = 9.9%
TOTAL:Fifty (50) Spaces =23.5%
•NOTE:We believe these results may be skewed due
to awareness of our license plate surveys by shop
owners and employees during the data collection
process.
Turnover Analysis Area
213 Total Spaces
Attachment number 1 \nPage 28 of 62
Item # C
Parking Policy and Management Practices
•Reduced Parking Requirements for New Development Within the Downtown
Overlay District is Good Urban Policy
•No Parking Requirements for Land Uses Within the Central Square Area is
Good Urban Policy
However: These planning and development policies shift responsibility
from the private sector to the public sector in creating needed
parking infrastructure to support new development.
Zoning & Planning Policies
Attachment number 1 \nPage 29 of 62
Item # C
Parking Policy and Management Practices
•Customer Survey Responses Show That Customers Want More Than Two
Hours of Parking Time (Demonstrated in Other Recent Downtown Surveys We Performed)
•Free, Time Limited Parking Requires Effective Parking Enforcement to
Prevent Abuse by Owners and Employees
•Manually Chalking Tires is Labor Intensive, Inefficient and Easy to Abuse
•Lack of Computerized Parking Enforcement Technology Hinders Ability to
Perform Efficient Parking Enforcement
Three Hour Time Limit Policy
Attachment number 1 \nPage 30 of 62
Item # C
Parking Policy and Management Practices
•Enforcement Performed by Private Security Firm Under Contract
•New Vendor for FY 2015
•Non-computerized, Paper-based Ticket Writing System
•Limited Budget and Manpower Resources
•Graduated Fine System:1st Offense = Warning
2nd Offense = $20
3rd Offense = $50
4th + =$100
•Manually Tracking Accumulated Ticket Violations Extremely Time Consuming
Parking Enforcement
Attachment number 1 \nPage 31 of 62
Item # C
Parking Enforcement Statistics
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
115
57
129 141
175
33
Total Tickets Issued
$-
$1,000
$2,000
$3,000
$4,000
$5,000
$6,000
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
$4,071
$1,560
$3,565
$4,220
$5,280
$1,248
Total Fines Collected
$-
$5.00
$10.00
$15.00
$20.00
$25.00
$30.00
$35.00
$40.00
$45.00
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
$35.40
$27.37 $27.64 $29.93 $30.17
$37.82
Average Fine Per Ticket
FY 2015 Breakdown to Date:
Warnings = 131
1st Citation =26
2nd Citation = 6
3rd Citation =1
Attachment number 1 \nPage 32 of 62
Item # C
Austin Avenue Pedestrian Issues
Attachment number 1 \nPage 33 of 62
Item # C
Austin Avenue Pedestrian Issues
Attachment number 1 \nPage 34 of 62
Item # C
Rock Street Pedestrian Issues
Attachment number 1 \nPage 35 of 62
Item # C
8th Street Pedestrian Issues
Facing West Facing East These Design Issues
Addressed in the Downtown
Sidewalk Master Plan
With Construction of New
MLK Surface Lot,
8th Street Sidewalk
Improvements Should
Receive Top Priority
Attachment number 1 \nPage 36 of 62
Item # C
North Lot Design Issues
Existing Capacity = 134
Attachment number 1 \nPage 37 of 62
Item # C
North Lot Potential Lot Re-Design
New Capacity = 136
Net Gain +2
Much Better
Functional Layout and
Traffic Flow
Attachment number 1 \nPage 38 of 62
Item # C
Central Lot Design Issues
Attachment number 1 \nPage 39 of 62
Item # C
Central Lot Design Issues
Existing Capacity = 48
Attachment number 1 \nPage 40 of 62
Item # C
Central Lot Potential Lot Re-design
New Capacity = 64
Net Gain +16
Better Functional
Layout and Traffic Flow
Better Serves
Customer Parking
Access from 7th Street
Attachment number 1 \nPage 41 of 62
Item # C
South Lot Design Issues
Existing Capacity = 136
Attachment number 1 \nPage 42 of 62
Item # C
South Lot Potential Lot Re-Design
New Capacity = 139
Net Gain +3
Much Better
Functional Layout and
Traffic Flow
Additional Entrance Off
of Main Street
Attachment number 1 \nPage 43 of 62
Item # C
Branding, Signage & Wayfinding
Attachment number 1 \nPage 44 of 62
Item # C
Branding, Signage & Wayfinding
Attachment number 1 \nPage 45 of 62
Item # C
Maps, Brochures, Communications
Existing Visitor Parking Map
Attachment number 1 \nPage 46 of 62
Item # C
Maps, Brochures, Communications
No Information on Parking?
Attachment number 1 \nPage 47 of 62
Item # C
Maps, Brochures, Communications
Great Information On:
History
Attractions
Lodging
Dining
Shopping
Special Events
BUT…
No Information on Parking?
Attachment number 1 \nPage 48 of 62
Item # C
Red Poppy Festival Parking and Traffic Observations
Attachment number 1 \nPage 49 of 62
Item # C
Red Poppy Festival Parking and Traffic Observations
•CWI Staff Observed Parking and Traffic From Friday Setup Through Sunday
•Alliance Staff Observed Traffic Conditions During Saturday Main Event Day
•Observed Shuttle Lot Operation and Interviewed Transportation Vendor
•Interviewed Individual Vendors, Security Personnel and Event Staff
•Based on Our Observations, Developed List of Potential Enhancements:
Traffic Mitigation & Routing
Active Parking Management Plan
Physical Improvements & Enhancements
Staging, Setup and Logistics
Communications & Messaging
Webpage and Parking Maps
Attachment number 1 \nPage 50 of 62
Item # C
Summary of Primary Observations & Recommendations
•Customers do not Perceive Parking as a Problem as Much as Employees and Business
Owners Do (Based on Online Survey Results)
•Three Hour On-Street Parking Areas Abused by Employees and Shop Owners
•Lack of Effective Parking Enforcement
•Functional Design Issues With Existing Public Lots –Eliminate Dead-end Parking!
•Opportunities for Short-term Management Solutions
•Short-term drop off/pick up spaces on each block face
•Public Valet parking on Friday evenings and special events
•Possible trolley or electric tram during events and peak periods
•Need to Brand and Market Free Lots; Create Better Online and Hand-out Maps
•Consolidation of City Employees Into City Center Should Improve Parking on the Square
•Opportunity for Red Poppy Festival Parking and Traffic Enhancements
Attachment number 1 \nPage 51 of 62
Item # C
Summary of Primary Observations & Recommendations
•Pedestrian Crossings On Austin Avenue Need to be Enhanced and Improved
for Safety and Better Pedestrian Mobility
•Sidewalks Along Rock Street, 7th Street, and 8th Street On West Side of Austin
Avenue Need Pedestrian Enhancements (Sidewalk Master Plan)
•Lighting In General On-Street, and in Surface Lots on West Side of Austin
Inadequate and a Safety Concern
•North City Lot Has Seventeen (17) Burnt-Out Light Fixtures
•County Lots Have No Lighting Installed
•Rock Street Very Dark In General –Lack of Street and/or Pedestrian Lighting
•County Garage Significantly Underutilized, Even During Red Poppy Festival
Attachment number 1 \nPage 52 of 62
Item # C
Specific Short-Term Recommendations
•Seek Cooperation and Approval by Bank of America to Allow Public Parking
at It’s Lot After 5:00pm
•Create a Public Valet Program on the Square for First Fridays and Other
Special Events and Holiday Shopping Season
•Improve Parking Enforcement Through New Computerized Ticket Writing and
Ticket Tracking Technology; and More Dedicated Staffing
•Undertake Enhanced Marketing and Communications Plan, to Include Better
Web-based Maps and Hand-out Maps
•Plan and Implement a Parking and Traffic Management Plan for Next Year’s
Red Poppy Festival
Attachment number 1 \nPage 53 of 62
Item # C
Private Bank Lot Comparison
.6%
97%
Observed First Friday Parking
Occupancy Comparison
February 6, 2015
Attachment number 1 \nPage 54 of 62
Item # C
Potential Public Valet, North Square Option
Valet Drop Off/Pick Up
Attachment number 1 \nPage 55 of 62
Item # C
Potential Public Valet, South Square Option
Valet Drop Off/Pick Up
Attachment number 1 \nPage 56 of 62
Item # C
Potential Public Valet Option
•May Require Minor Revisions to the Current Valet Parking Ordinance
•Costs Should be Shared by DGA and Downtown Businesses
•Should be Led and Managed by Downtown Georgetown Association
(Possible Funding Assistance From CVB or Main Street?)
•Use for First Friday and Other Special Event Days, Holidays, etc.
•Start as Pilot Program to Test Success and Buy-in
•Must Properly Promote the Program and Give it Time to Succeed
•Need to Enter Into Agreement With Bank of America Property Owners to Use Private
Parking Lot: Liability Insurance / Housekeeping & Maintenance
•Stuart, FL and Plymouth, MI Two Recent Examples
Attachment number 1 \nPage 57 of 62
Item # C
Specific Short-Term Recommendations
•Revise Parking Violation Code to Reduce Fine Amounts, But Continue Graduated Fine
Structure:
1st Ticket = Warning
2nd Ticket = $10 Fine
3rd –5th = $20 Fine
6th + = $50 Fine
•Create 15 Minute Short-Term Pick-up and Drop-off Parking Spaces at Key Locations on All
Block Faces Surrounding the Square (To Include 8th Street East of Church)
•Consider Making Grace Church Lot and Central City Lot Three Hour Customer Parking
•Work With Williamson County to Encourage Better Utilization of the County Garage During
Special Events (Signage/Communications/Jury Call Instructions)
•Plan and Implement Enhanced Parking and Traffic Management Plan for 2016 Red Poppy
Festival (Specific Recommendations Included in Final Report Document)
Attachment number 1 \nPage 58 of 62
Item # C
Specific Mid-Term Recommendations
•Consider Physical Re-design of City Lots to Make Them More Functional and
Customer Friendly
•Improve Lighting On-Street and Off-Street West of Austin Avenue
(Replace Burnt-Out Light Fixtures at North Lot Immediately)
•Improve Pedestrian Walkways and Sidewalks Along Rock Street, 7th Street
and 8th Street West of Austin (Implement Phased Sidewalk Master Plan)
•Continue to Consolidate City Employees Out of the Square Area and Into
Renovated City Center Buildings West of Austin Ave.
•Explore Feasibility of Using an Electric Tram or Trolley to Provide Access to
West Side Lots and County Garage During Special Events
Attachment number 1 \nPage 59 of 62
Item # C
Specific Mid-Term Recommendations
•Work With Williamson County to Encourage Physical Improvements to
Existing County Surface Lots (Lighting/Paving/Signage)
•Once the New Lot at MLK St. Is Completed, Focus on Sidewalk Improvements
on North Side of 8th Street From New City Lot to Austin Ave.
•Brand City Owned Lots and Install Site Identification & Wayfinding Signage
•Identify Prime Sites for Future Structured Parking (Not Just City-Owned Sites)
•Identify City Responsible Staff Person to Spearhead Parking Management
Implementation Plan
Attachment number 1 \nPage 60 of 62
Item # C
Long-Term Recommendations
•Work With Williamson County to Understand the County’s Long-Term
Downtown Land Use Plan
•Continue to Consolidate City Employment to City Center Area and Out of the
Central Square
•Continue With Concept Plan(s) for Future Structured Parking
•Consider Migrating to a Paid Permit-Based System for City Surface Lots
•Pursue Mixed-Use Redevelopment Plans for Both the North and South City
Lots (Both Lots Should be Considered as Future Development Sites)
Attachment number 1 \nPage 61 of 62
Item # C
Thank You!
Open Discussion
Attachment number 1 \nPage 62 of 62
Item # C
Project Status Report
5136 Lovers Lane, Suite 200, Kalamazoo, MI 49002
Tel: 269.381.2222 Fax: 269.349.4656 | carlwalker.com
Project: City of Georgetown Downtown Parking Study
Location: Georgetown, TX
CWI Project #: N1-2014-135
Date: 3/26/2015
Prepared By: Andy Miller, AICP
Carl Walker, Inc. (CWI)
This Project Status Report provides an update on the progress made to date on the downtown
parking study effort and a summary of areas of focus that will continue to be analyzed further
based upon our preliminary observations:
Initial Holiday Season Field Observation Trip
Prior to the “official” start of the project, CWI staff were initially on-site to perform field observations
of existing parking inventory and utilization levels on Saturday, December 20, 2014 during the prime
holiday shopping and dining season. During this trip parking occupancies were observed and
recorded for the primary on-street and off-street parking facilities serving the Town Square area.
This inventory and occupancy information will be summarized in table and graphic form and
included in the final report presentation and the final written report document.
Project Kickoff and Initial Field Observation Site Visit
Day One
Our primary field observation site visit occurred during the first week of February, 2015. During that
week, CWI staff conducted a project kickoff meeting with key City staff on Tuesday morning,
February 3rd. The balance of day one included meetings with key staff from the following
departments and downtown organizations: Planning; Arts and Culture; Inspections and Permitting;
Utilities; Transportation and Facilities; Main Street; Convention and Visitors Bureau.
Day Two
Day two of the initial site visit consisted of field observations to confirm parking inventories and to
observe parking turnover on-street in the Town Square area. Parking turnover analyses were
performed on-street in the three-hour time zone area surrounding the Town Square. As part of this
process, field technicians performed license plate inventories every hour on the hour from 8:00am
through 4:00pm to record length of stay and parking space turnover rates. The results of the
turnover analysis will be discussed and included in the fin al report presentation and final report
document.
Day Three
Field observation on day three focused on occupancy count surveys that were conducted every
two hours from 8:00am to 4:00pm. Field technicians recorded parking occupancies on-street in
the three-hour parking zone surrounding the Square. Occupancy counts were also performed at
all off-street parking facilities in the study area to include City public lots, County lots, and private
off-street facilities. The results of the parking occupancy and utilization surveys will be included in
the final presentation and final report document in the form of “heat map s” that graphically
demonstrate parking utilization levels by facility.
Attachment number 2 \nPage 1 of 3
Item # C
Georgetown Parking Study Status Report
March 26, 2015
Page 2 of 3
Project Kickoff and Initial Field Observation Site Visit (Cont.)
Day Four
Our final day on the ground during the initial site visit included a day of “Office Hours” where
interested Stakeholders were scheduled for one-on-one meetings with the consultants. (A
summary of individual stakeholders interviewed is included below). Day four concluded with CWI
field technicians performing an additional round of parking occupancy counts during the evening
hours from 5:00pm to 9:00pm during the First Friday event on the Square. The results of the First
Friday parking occupancy and ut ilization counts will also be developed into a heat map in the
final report to graphically demonstrate the peak parking conditions observed.
Stakeholder Outreach
Stakeholder outreach is an important element of all downtown parking studies we perform. With
the assistance of City staff setting up individual meetings, we were able to sit down one -on-one
with a number of downtown stakeholders to include downtown business and restaurant owners,
Williamson County senior staff, prospective developers and area residents. The final report
document will include a section summarizing the results of our stakeholder sessions. The detailed
list of stakeholders interviewed includes the following individuals/businesses :
Francisco Choi – Tamiro Plaza Sam Pfiester – Developer
Chris Damon – Gumbo’s Restaurant Gary Wilson – County Facilities Director
Susan Ditmar – Inspiration Glass Larry Geddes – County Tax Assessor’s Office
Rusty Winkstern – Monument Café Erland Schulze – Hummingbird Hollow
Larry Olson – Old Town Resident Justin Bohls – The Union on 8th
Kay Briggs – Pink Poppy/DGA President Len Lester – The Escape/Downtown TIF Board
John Montgomery – Roberts Printing Marissa Austin – Palace Theatre
Online Parking Survey
Part of our overall stakeholder outreach efforts included an online parking survey hosted by
“Survey Monkey”. The online survey was completed by a total of 561 respondents, which is a very
high response rate for a downtown the size of Georgetown. Out of the total 561 completed
surveys, we were able to “filter” the responses into four separate categories based upon people
who identified themselves as “Customers”; “Business Owners”; “Employees”; and “Residents”. One
of the most interesting (and somewhat alarming) results of the parking survey was that 60% of
business owners and 52% of employees indicated that they typically park on -street in prime
customer parking areas, instead of parking in off-street public lots. The results of the parking survey
were presented in a public workshop held on March 11th at the Georgetown Public Library. Further
analysis of the survey results and summary reports for each of the survey respondent sub-groups
will be included in the final report document.
Public Workshop Presentation
Our second site visit to Georgetown occurred on March 10th through March 13th. The primary
purpose of this second site visit was to conduct a public workshop to present the findings of the
online survey, and to draw out additional public comments regarding downtown parking issues .
The workshop meeting was well attended by a cross section of interested downtown stakeholders.
Additional public feedback was obtained and ideas generated that will be summarized and
included in the final report document.
Attachment number 2 \nPage 2 of 3
Item # C
Georgetown Parking Study Status Report
March 26, 2015
Page 3 of 3
Review of Existing Parking Enforcement Program
In addition to the public workshop meeting, o ur March site visit focused on the downtown parking
enforcement program. CWI staff met with the new parking enforcement vendor for a face-to-
face meeting to discuss the parking enforcement contract and to discuss details on how the
enforcement program is conducted. Effective parking enforcement is a fundamental element of
any successful downtown parking management program, particularly in areas where free, time
limited parking is offered. Our preliminary findings indicate that the current parking enforcement
program is not as robust as it should be. Parking enforcement will be an area of specific focus in
our final report and primary recommendations.
Review of Existing Public Parking Lots and Proposed New Library Overflow Lot
One thing that CWI staff noticed early in the study process relates to the physical design and
layout of the City’s existing public parking lots. We believe the City lot at 9 th & Main and the
Municipal Court lot at 6th & Main could both be improved in their physical design to make them
function better in terms of public access, ADA compliance and internal traffic flow. We were also
able to review the current design concept for the proposed Library Overflow lot at 8 th Street and
MLK and believe design changes should be made to make that lot function better than currently
configured. Our recommendations for physical design improvements are currently being
developed and will be included in the final report document.
Next Steps
Red Poppy Festival
Our next site visit is scheduled for April 23rd through the 25th and is specifically intended for CWI
staff to observe the Red Poppy Festival special event. We will be on -hand to observe the parking
and traffic conditions at the Red Poppy Festival and attempt to develop possible operational
improvements based upon what we observe on the ground.
Draft Report
We will develop a draft report to present for staff review by mid-May. While the date has not yet
been confirmed, we anticipate presenting our final findings and recommendations to City Council
at the June 9th meeting.
Final Report
We expect to submit our final report document within two weeks after our last site visit, which will
incorporate any recommendations and feedback we receive from the final public
presentation(s).
Respectfully submitted,
CARL WALKER, INC.
ANDREW W. MILLER, AICP
Attachment number 2 \nPage 3 of 3
Item # C
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Agenda
June 9, 2015
SUBJECT:
Sec. 551.071: Consultation with Attorney
- Advice from attorney about pending or contemplated litigation and other matters on which the attorney has
a duty to advise the City Council, including agenda items
- Fire - Meet and Confer
- Police- Meet and Confer
Sec. 551.072: Deliberations about Real Property
- Albertsons Building
Sec. 551.074: Personnel Matters
- City Manager, City Attorney, City Secretary and Municipal Judge: Consideration of the appointment,
employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUBMITTED BY:
Cover Memo
Item # D
