Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda CC 01.24.2006Notice of Meeting of the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas Tuesday, January 24, 2006 The Georgetown City Council will meet on Tuesday, January 24, 2006 at 06:00:00 PM at City Council Chambers, at the northeast corner of Seventh and Main Streets, Georgetown, Texas. If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance. An agenda packet, containing detailed information on the items listed below, is distributed to the Mayor, Councilmembers, and the Georgetown Public Library no later than the Saturday preceding the council meeting. The library's copy is available for public review. Please Note: This City Council Meeting will be video taped live without editing and shown on the local cable channel. Executive Session Regular Session to convene and continue Executive Session, if necessary 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 that follows. A 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 - Consideration and possible action to retain the legal services of Varnum, Riddedng, Schmidt & Howlett, LLP, attorneys at law, to represent the City in discussions related to the transfer and renegotiation of the cable television franchise from Cox to Cebddge. B Sec.551.066 Competitive Matters - Consideration and possible action to renew the contract, between the City of Georgetown and Flowers Construction Company, L.P., for electric system maintenance and construction services and Electric System Construction Trenching and Conduit Installation for FY2006 - Mike Mayben, Energy Services Manager Regular Session - To begin no earlier than 06:00 PM (Council may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene an Executive Session at the request of the Mayor, a Councilmember, or the City Manager for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code Chapter 551.) C Call to Order D Pledge of Allegiance E Comments from the dais - welcome to Audience and Opening Comments — Mayor Gary Nelon - Review of procedure for addressing the City Council F Announcements and Comments from City Manager G Public Wishing to Address Council H Action from Executive Session Statutory Consent Agenda City Council Agenda/January 24, 2006 Page 1 of 4 Pages The Statutory Consent Agenda includes non -controversial and routine items that Council may act on with one single vote. A councilmember may pull any item from the Consent Agenda in order that the council discuss and act upon it individually as part of the Regular Agenda. I Consideration and possible action to approve the minutes of the Council Workshop on Monday, January 9, and the regular Council Meeting on Tuesday, January 10, 2006 -- Sandra D. Lee, City Secretary J Consideration and possible action to approve declaration of used 1989 Pierce Arrow Fire Truck as surplus and authorization for staff to sell to Siddons Fire Apparatus for the estimated revenue of $35,000 — Anthony Lincoln, Fire Chief K Consideration and possible action on a Public Review Final Plat for 66.399 acres in the Burrell Eaves Survey, to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Neighborhood Thirty -Eight, located two miles northeast of the intersection of Del Webb Blvd. and Sun City Blvd. — Melissa McCollum, AICP, Development Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Director Planning and Development L Consideration and possible action on a Public Review Final Plat for 58.8 acres in the Frederick Foy Survey, to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Neighborhood Thirty -One, located two miles northwest of the intersection of Del Webb Blvd. and Sun City Blvd. — Melissa McCollum, AICP, Development Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Director Planning and Development Legislative Regular Agenda Council will individually consider and possibly take action on any or all of the following items: M Consideration and possible action to approve an amendment to the bylaws of the Animal Shelter Advisory Board in order to remove the membership term limits -- Ken Finn, Animal Services Director and David Morgan, Police Chief N Consideration and possible action on an Interlocal Agreement with the Capital Area Council of Governments to purchase digital aerial photography and digital contour data in an amount not to exceed $154,119 — Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Chief Long Range Planner O Forwarded from the Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation (GTEC) Board Consideration and possible action on a contract amendment with Wilbur Smith Associates for Transportation Modeling related to the 2006/07 GTEC TIP Process and ongoing transportation planning Issues in an amount not to exceed $47,000 — Bobby Ray, AICP, Director Planning and Development and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Chief Long Range Planner P Forwarded from the Georgetown Utilty, System (GUS) Board 1. Consideration and possible action for approval of the annual bid for Hot Mix Asphalt to RTI Materials in the estimated annual amount of $341,250.00 — Mark Miller, Transportation Manager, Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations 2. Consideration and possible action for approval for award of bid for three-phase electrical substation transformers to Delta Star, Inc. — Mike Mayben, Energy Services Manager, Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations 3. Consideration and possible action for approval of award of annual bid for wood poles to Texas Electric Cooperative for an estimated $125,813.00 — Mike Mayben, Energy Services Manager, Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations Q Emergency Reading Emergency Reading of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Georgetown. Texas, declaring a disaster resulting from the threat of wildfires due to drought and other weather-related conditions; adopting emergency regulations that take effect immediately upon passage and remain in effect until the State of Disaster is terminated; and finding that an emergency exists authorizing approval of this Ordinance at one reading — Clay Shell, Assistant Fire Chief and Anthony Lincoln, Fire Chief R Second Readings 1. Second reading of an ordinance amending definitions and polices related to new 911 addressing requirements and a adopting a new section related to street name changes in the Street Naming and City Council Agenda/January 24, 2006 Page 2 of 4 Pages Site Addressing Policy codified in Chapter 15.36 of the Georgetown Code of Ordinances --Bobby Ray, AICP, Director Planning and Development and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Chief Long Range Planner 2. Second Reading of an ordinance Rezoning from AG, Agriculture to PUD, Planned Unit Development for 66.399 acres in the Burrell Eaves Survey, to be known as Sun City Neighborhood ThirtyEight, located about two miles northeast of the intersection of Del Webb Blvd. and Sun City Blvd. — Melissa McCollum, AICP, Development Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Director Planning and Development 3. Second Reading of an ordinance Rezoning from AG, Agriculture to PUD, Planned Unit Development for 58.8 Acres in the Frederick Foy Survey, to be known as Sun City Georgetown, Neighborhood Thirty -One, located two miles northwest of the intersection of Del Webb Blvd. and Sun City Blvd. -- Melissa McCollum, AICP, Development Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Director Planning and Development 4. Second Reading of an ordinance Rezoning of a 0.16 -acre portion of Glasscock Addition, Block 4, Lot 4 from OF, Office District to C-2, Downtown Commercial District, located at 912 Rock Street — Rebecca Rowe, Historic District Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Director Planning and Development 5. Second Reading of an Ordinance Rezoning 70 acres out of the David Wright Survey, Abstract No. 13, from AG, Agriculture to RS, Residential Single-family for the property located at Williams Drive Northwest of Serenade Drive — Bobby Ray, AICP, Director Planning and Development 6. Second Reading of an ordinance Rezoning of a 0.43 acre portion and a 0.55 acre portion of the Lost Addition, Block 81 from OF, Office District and RS, Residential Single Family District to C-1, Local Commercial District, located at 1902 and 1904 Austin Avenue — Rebecca Rowe, Historic District Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Director Planning and Development Public Hearings/First Readings 1. First reading of an ordinance adopting the Garey Park Master Plan as an element of the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan -- Randy Morrow, Director of Community Services 2. First Reading of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City Of Georgetown, Texas, accepting approximately 524.332 (+/-) acres of land located in the A. M. Brown Survey, Abstract No. 85; M. Hicks Survey, Abstract No. 287; I. Sauls Survey, Abstract No. 595; B. Manlove Survey, Abstract No. 420; P. Weatherby Survey, Abstract No. 680; 1 & G N Survey, Abstract No. 741; and the J. C. Thaxton Survey, Abstract No. 756; generally located north of FM 2243 and west of the Escalera Subdivision and known locally as the "Garay Ranch," from the Extraterritorial Jurisdiction of the City of Leander Into the Extraterritorial Jurisdiction of the City of Georgetown -- Patricia E. Carls, City Attomey 3. An Ordinance amending the 2005/06 Annual Operating Plan Element (Budget) to allocate excess funds from the 2005 fiscal year toward capital and other projects — Laurie Brewer, Controller and Micki Rundell, Director of Finance and Administration 4. First Reading of an Ordinance to consider a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Intensity Levels 2 and 3 to Intensity Level 4 for 66.47 acres in the William Addison Survey, located at 2505 FM1460 — Bobby Ray, AICP, Director Planning and Development and David Munk, P.E., Development Engineer 5. Public Hearing on a Rezoning 6.07 acres in the John Berry Survey from RS, Residential Single -Family to MF, Multifamily Residential for the site known as Chisholm Park, Section One, Phase One, located on County Road 152 — Bobby Ray, AICP, Director Planning and Development 6. First Reading of an Ordinance Rezoning 6.07 acres in the John Berry Survey from RS, Residential Single -Family to MF, Multifamily Residential for the site known as Chisholm Park, Section One, Phase One, located on County Road 152 -- Bobby Ray, AICP, Director Planning and Development 7. Public Hearing on a Rezoning of 4 acres in the Nicholas Porter Survey, from RS, Residential Single -Family to OF, Office for the Williamson County Law Enforcement Training Center located at 701 College Street — Bobby Ray, AICP, Director Planning and Development 8. First Reading of an Ordinance Rezoning 4 acres in the Nicholas Porter Survey, from RS, Residential Single -Family to OF, Office for the Williamson County Law Enforcement Training Center located at 701 College Street — Bobby Ray, AICP, Director Planning and Developmen. City Council Agenda/January 24, 2006 Page 3 of 4 Pages 9. Public Hearing on the voluntary annexation into the City for 462.88 acres, more or less, in the Frederick Foy Survey, west of Sun City Boulevard, for Sun City Option Tract — Bobby Ray, AICP, Director Planning and Development and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Chief Long Range Planner 10. Public Hearing on the voluntary annexation into the City for 13.95 acres, more or less, in the Lewis J. Dyches Survey, to be known as Pleasant Valley, Section Two — Bobby Ray, AICP, Director Planning and Development and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Chief Long Range Planner Certificate of Posting I, Sandra Lee, 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 , 2006, at , and remained so posted for at least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting. Sandra Lee, City Secretary City Council Agenda/January 24, 2006 Page 4 of 4 Pages Council Meeting Date: January 23, 2006 EXECUTIVE SESSION AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET Item No. CONFIDDina b'uJ7JiSQw: Consideration and possible action to renew the contract, between the City of Georgetown and Flowers Construction Company, L.P., for electric system maintenance and construction services, and Electric system Construction Trenching and Conduit Installation for F.Y. 2006 in the amount of $1,500,000.00 to Flowers Construction Company, of Hillsboro Texas. ITEM SUMMARY: In January 2005 the Georgetown City Council approved the contract for Electric System Maintenance and Construction, and Electric system Construction Trenching and Conduit Installation to be performed by Flowers Construction Company L.P. This contract is a five year contract renewable annually upon the agreement of both the City and Flowers Construction. This year, both the City of Georgetown and Flowers Construction Company L.P. have agreed to renew the contract from February, 2006 through January, 2007. Therefore, staff recommends GUS Board approval of the contract renewal in the amount of $1,500,000. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: NONE GUS BOARD RECOMMENDATION: GUS Board recommends approval to Council at its January 17, 2006 meeting. Approved 6-0 (Eason absent) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends renewal of the Electric System Construction and Maintenance contract and the Annual System Construction Trenching and Conduit Installation contract. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Payments not to exceed $1,500,000.00 will be paid from the Electric Capital Projects budget as appropriate. COMMENTS NONE ATTACHBMNTs: Letter from McCord Engineering By: Mi hae yb n Jim ig En rgy Se anger As a t Manager \ for Utility O �rationa 499 Mr. Mike Mayben Energy Services Manager City of Georgetown P.O. Box 409 Georgetown, Texas 78628 McCORD ENGINEERING, INC. ,. Box 10047 9! 764-8356 January 13, 2006 RE: City of Georgetown Electric System Trenching and Conduit Installation Contract No. Geo -05 -ED -2 Extension No. 1 Flowers Construction Company Requested Price Increase Evaluation In accordance with your request, we have completed the evaluation for the requested price increase for Flowers Construction Company. We evaluated the proposed unit prices with unit totals we estimated in projects we have designed from January, 2005 thru December, 2005 and compared the total cost of construction of the existing unit prices to the proposed unit prices. Enclosed herewith is the evaluation of the proposed unit prices. The proposed unit prices did not increase from the current • contract price of $33,305.30. Flowers Construction Company has been working for the City since 1995, has done satisfactory work, and has worked hard to complete projects in a timely manner. It is our recommendation that the City extend this contract for a twelve (12) month period as allowed in the contract. This contract allows up to a maximum of five (5) one-year extensions at the City's option and consent of the Contractor. This extension would be the first extension for the contract. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions, or need further information. Sincerely McCord ENGINEERING, INC. David Witte Underground Design Div. Mgr. DW/jk Enclosures • cc: Mr. Jim Briggs (w/encl.) Mr. John Thomas (w/encl.) McCord Engineering, Inc. P.O. Box 10047 College Station, Texas 77840 BID SUMMARY for the CITY OF GEORGETOWN ELECTRIC CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE LABOR BID EVALUATION for Contract No. GEO-05-ED-1 2006 Extension No. 1 Bid New Construction Line Changes Tota I 2005 Existing Bid New Construction Line Changes Total % Increase in Contract Extended Labor Price $1,040,965.38 $245,637.09 $1,286,602.47 $1,015,847.83 $185,314.74 $1,201,162.57 TRENCHING AND CONDUIT INSTALLATION LABOR BID EVALUATION for Contract GEO-05-ED-2 2006 Extension No. 1 Bid Total 2005 Existing Bid Total 7.11% Extended Labor Price $33,305.30 $33,305.30 $33,305.30 $33,305.30 % Increase in Contract 0.00% 1/13/2006 Agenda Item Check List .Nwmllou Financial Impact Agenda Item: Contract Renewal Flowers Construction Company Agenda Item Subject: Consideration and possible action related to renewal of Flowers Contract for FY 2006 Is this a Capital Improvement Yes No Project: Council Date: 01/23/2006 link to Agenda database => 40 Need Help? Was it budgeted? Yes _ No Is it within the approved budgeted amount? Yes ' No If not, where is the money coming from? G/L Account Number 611 area Amount Going to Council $ 1,500,000.00 Is there something (budgeted) that won't get Yes No done because you are spending these funds? If so, please explain. Will this have an impact on the next year's Yes No budget? If so, please explain. Does this project have future revenue impact? Year: 2006 and Beyond If so, how? Identify all on-going costs (i.e., insurance, annual maintenance fees, licenses, CIP and New Development Extensions • Yes No Department: Georgetown Utility Systems New electric load operational costs, etc...). Estimated staff hours: Cross -divisional impact: • Yes No If so, what division(s)? Finance and Administration Prepared by: Mike Mayben Date: 01/18/2006 Agenda Item Checklist: Approved on 0111812006 pprovers Title Assigned Notified ieceived Status Changed Status Jim Briggs Assistant City 01/18/2006 01/18/2006 1/18/2006 01/18/2006 Approved Jose Lara Manager 01/16/2006 01/18/2006 1/18/2006 01/18/2006 Approved Utility Financial Analyst Approval Cycle Settings Council Meeting Date: January 24, 2006 Item No. P — 1 AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Consideration and possible action for approval for award of the annual bid for Hot Mix Asphalt to RTI Materials in the estimated annual amount of $341,250.00. ITEM SUMMARY Bids were received to provide the City with Type D and Type A Hot Mix Asphalt for a one year period beginning February 1, 2006. The staff recommendation is to award this bid to the low bidder responding, RTI Materials of Pflugerville. This asphalt will be used in the construction and repair of City streets and is ordered on an as needed basis. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS None GUS BOARD RECOMMENDATION This bid was approved by the GUS Board at the January 17, 2006 meeting. Approved 6-0 (Eason absent) FINANCIAL IMPACT Total estimated amount of this bid is $341,250.00 expenditure in Maintenance -Streets and Overlay-CIP. COMMENTS none ATTACHMENTS 1. Bid Tabulation Submitted By: Mark Miller Transportation Manager Funds were budgeted for this For Utility Operations BID NO. 26002 Hot Mix Asphalt February 1, 2006—January 31, 2007 APPROX ITEM QTY Type D Hot Mix Asphalt 10,000.00 Total Type D Asphalt Type A Hot Mix Asphalt 500.00 Total Type A Asphalt Estimated Total "Low Bid - RTI Hot Mix No response Bridges Asphalt Capitol Aggregates Centex Materials RTI Hot Mix ' Heart of Texas Austin Asphalt, L.P. Price Per Ton Price Per Ton Price Per Ton $32.50 $34.95 $35.50 $325,000.00 $349,500.00 $355,000.00 $32.50 $34.95 $33.00 $16,250.00 $17,475.00 $16,500.00 $341,250.00 " $366,975.00 $371,500.00 Agenda Item Check List rr mmm Financial Impact Agenda Item: Consideration and possible action to award the annual bid for Hot Mix Asphalt to RTI Materials. Agenda Item Subject: Bids were taken for providing type A and D hotmix asphalt to the City for a one year period Beginning February 1, 2006. GUS Advisory Board approved at January 17, meeting. (unanimous) Is this a Capital Improvement • Yes No Project: Council Date: 01/24/2006 link to Agenda database => Need Help? Was it budgeted? 0 Yes 1 No Is it within the approved budgeted amount? 0 Yes No If not, where is the money coming from? G/L Account Number 100-134-5806-00 rehabilitation Amount Going to Council $ 341,250.00 Is there something (budgeted) that won't get Yes • No done because you are spending these funds? If so, please explain. Will this have an impact on the next year's Yes * No budget? If so, please explain. Does this project have future revenue Yes 40 No impact? Year: Department: If so. how? Identify all on-going costs (i.e., insurance, annual maintenance fees, licenses, operational costs, etc...). Estimated staff hours: Cross -divisional impact: Yes 0 No If so, what division(s)? Prepared by: Mark Miller Date: 01/18/2006 Agenda Item Checklist: Approved on 01/19/2006 pprovers ritle Assigned Notified eceived Status Changed Status Jim Briggs Assistant City 01/18/2006 01/18/2006 1/18/2006 01/18/2006 Approved Jose Lara Manager 01/18/2006 01/18/2006 1/19/2006 01/19/2006 Approved Utility Financial Analyst Approval Cycle Settings Council Meeting Date: January24, 2006 AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET Item No. P — a SUBJECT Consideration and possible action for approval for award of bid for three-phase electrical substation transformers to Delta Star, Inc. ITEM SUMMARY Bids were received for the purchase of three-phase electrical substation transformers. The staff recommendation is to award this bid to the low bidder submitting a satisfactory and conforming bid, Delta Star, Inc. of San Carlos, Califomia, as designated on the attached bid tabulation The City will be purchasing a minimum of two (2) units, and if needed, a third unit may be purchased for the shown unit price. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS None GUS BOARD RECOMMENDATION: GUS Board recommended approval at the January 17, 2006 meeting. Approved 6-0 (Eason Absent) STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends approval of this bid. FINANCIAL IMPACT Funds will not exceed the 2005-2006 budget for this line item, and will be paid from the Electric Capital Improvement. COMMENTS None ATTACHMENTS 1. Bid Tat 2. Letter f Submitted By: Mike Mayben` Energy Services Inc. JimB ' gs Assistant City M a For Utility Operations w4elyX9111.1 THREE-PHASE ELECTRICAL SUBSTATION TRANSFORMERS Bidder Manufacturer Transformer Unit Price Cost of Assembly Cost of Engineer Unit Bid Price M Purchase Order Price l$) No -Load Losses Load Losses Evaluated Unit Price Kuhlman Kuhlman 852,239 0 0 852,239 1,704,478 21 8 92,3 1,150,567 Kesler & Associates Waukesha 886,041 22,000 0 908,041 1,816,082 20.6 92.0 1,201,882 WESCO 1 VATECH 610,000, 40,000 34,002 684,000, 1,368�61ilioj 21 11.0, 133 1,002,6, Hu hes I Prolec 667.8001 37,716i 01 705,5161 1,411 , 1 89.41 1.2 988,345 Priester lHyundai 1 720,3201 45,0001 15,4001 780,7201 1,561,4401 23.01 60.01 � 988,333 , Liquidated Damages Penalty (5;%ofpurchase price) z Not to Specifications (Manufacturing Plant outside continental US) McCORD ENGINEERING, INC. -- - = 916 Southwest Parkway East. P.O. Box 10047 College Station, Texas 77842 (979) 764-8356 - Fax (979) 764.9644 December 29, 2005 Honorable Mayor & City Council City of Georgetown P.O. Box 409 Georgetown, Texas 78627-0409 RE: Electric System Materials Bid No. 25032 Proposal For Substation Transformers Ladies & Gentlemen: On December 14, 2005, sealed bids for the above referenced Bid were opened and publicly read under Bid designation No. 25032 (Specifications for Three -Phase Electrical Substation Transformers). Bid price is turn key, installed upon transformer pad in substation. We have reviewed and evaluated each of the bids received. Enclosed herewith as Exhibit "A", for your review and consideration, is our recommendation to your City of the low Bidder who submitted a satisfactory and conforming bid. Please recall this bid was for a minimum of two (2) units, which is the purchase order price shown in Exhibit "A". If desired, a third unit can be added for the shown unit price. Please do not hesitate to let us know if any questions arise in reference to this bid solicitation and our recommendations made herein. We sincerely appreciate the opportunity to assist your City on this project, and are most thankful for the good assistance and cooperation extended us by your fine City Administration and Staff. Yours very truly, McCORD ENGINEERING, INC. 11 Michael Duff, P.E. Engineering Design Div. Mgr. MD/jk Enclosures cc: Mr. Jim Briggs (w/encl.) Mr. Mike Mayben (w/encl.) Ms. Marsha Iwers (w/encl.) Agenda Item Check List EIMMM Financial Impact Agenda Item: Agenda Item Subject: Is this a Capital Improvement Project: Council Date: Was it budgeted? Award of Bid for Substation Transformers Award of Bid for Substation Transformers to Delta Star 0 Yes No 01/24/2006 link to Agenda database => 40 Need Help? Is it within the approved budgeted amount? If not, where is the money coming from? G/L Account Number Amount Going to Council Is there something (budgeted) that won't get done because you are spending these funds? If so, please explain. 9Yes iiNo *Yes _ No 611 area $ 2,240,628.00 Yes 0 No Will this have an impact on the next year's • Yes No budget? If so, please explain. Does this project have future revenue impact? Year: 2007 and beyone If so, how? Identify all on-going costs (i.e., insurance, Serve growing load South and East of Town with Georgetown East and Georgetown South Substations 0 Yes _ No Department: Georgetown Utility Systems New electric loads annual maintenance fees, licenses, operational costs, etc...). Estimated staff hours: Cross -divisional impact: 0 Yes n No If so, what division(s)? Finance and Administration Prepared by: Mike Mayben Date: 01/18/2006 Agenda Item Checklist: Approved on 0111812006 pprovers Title ssigned Notified Received tatus Changed Status Jim Briggs Assistant City 01/18/2006 01/18/2006 1/18/2006 01/18/2006 Approved Jose Lara Manager 01/18/2006 01/18/2006 1/18/2006 01/18/2006 Approved Utility Financial Analyst Approval Cycle Settings ;J a Legend B ve000sM mxc+ n 8 _.L OrHin i;v vNO.ECTs j — EwiNo 4M�^ CRY MTS 29 1Mm n too_. 1 E Y,U, 1 1 t' ��' �'aPIIBn�SLIm992'.�VOG�J"�".�O• 22 Saace.' CAY OfGenpel0en, Gewpemxn fN'M' S,s . 17/300! (2) a statement of the benefits anticipated to result from completion of the project; Georgetown's Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) list identifies project 14 B as the Southwest Bypass SH 29 to FM 2243. By itself, this portion of roadway will provide an alternate north/south route for vehicles to and from the City's largest areas of residential and commercial growth. This alternate route will improve safety by giving heavy truck traffic an opportunity to avoid local schools and neighborhoods while decreasing the counts on the already congested IH 35 intersections. This segment, being a portion of Southwest Bypass, will provide an integral connection between SH 29 and IH 35. The Southwest Bypass will complete a loop of the South side of the City that will provide an alternative east/west route and prevent the need to widen SH 29 through the Historic District. The completion of the Bypass and its connection to D. B. Wood road will provide access from the northwest quadrant of the City directly to both III 35 and SH 130. This route will also divert internal traffic Page 2 of 4 J:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\14B SW Bypass Revision.doc from IH 35, SH 29 and FM 2338 through Georgetown, allowing access to existing and proposed economic development projects within the community. Based on Georgetown's transportation model the future average daily traffic volume in 2010 is expected to be 5500. (3) a description of the local public support for the project and any local public opposition; The City of Georgetown's 4B Corporation has held an advertised public hearing and the only concern regarding this project was from the neighborhoods on Leander Road. They preferred that both sections be constructed at the same time. (14B and /4C) (4) a proposed project development and implementation schedule; If funding is made available, the project will move forward in our Transportation Improvements Planning (TIP) process. (5) a description of the entity's experience in developing highway projects, if the proposer is a public entity; The City of Georgetown is currently developing Southwest Bypass and Southeast Arterial 1 to State and Federal standards, using consultant engineers with extensive _ experience in developing highway projects with the State of Texas Department of Transportation. In addition, City staff has worked on numerous advance funding agreements with Texas Department of Transportation, the purchase of right-of-way for the SH 29 project, and the City of Georgetown's Systems Engineering Manager has experience with State of California Department of Transportation. (6) complete information concerning the experience, expertise, technical competence, and qualifications of the proposer and of each member of the proposer's management team and of other key employees or consultants, including the name, address, and professional designation of each member of the proposer's management team and of other key employees or consultants, and the capability of the proposer to develop the proposed projects, if the proposer is a private entity; This question is not applicable, because the city is not a private entity. (7) if available, a proposed pass-through toll payment schedule; At this time the City of Georgetown does not have a proposed payment schedule. (8) a statement indicating whether the proposer intends for the project to be tolled and, if the proposer intends for a tolled project to be first opened to traffic as a non -tolled highway, the approximate date on which the highway will begin to be tolled; and Page 3 of 4 J:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\14B SW Bypass Revision.doc The City of Georgetown does not intend for the project to be tolled. (9) a statement indicating whether the proposer intends to enter into a comprehensive development agreement, if the proposer is a private entity. (b) If requested, and unless prohibited by law, the department will release to the public a proposal submitted under this section. (c) The private entity and the department may agree to develop a project under a comprehensive development agreement if authorized by other law. Notwithstanding any other provision of this subchapter, Chapter 27, Subchapter A, of this title (relating to Policy, Rules, and Procedures for Private Involvement in Department Turnpike Projects), applies to the solicitation, advertisement, negotiation and execution of a comprehensive development agreement. This question is not applicable because the City is not a private entity. Page 4 of 4 J:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\14B SW Bypass Revision.doc Southwest Bypass F.M. 2243 to IH 35 14C v EST. 1848 GEORGETOWN TEXAS TEXAS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE TITLE 43: TRANSPORTATION PART 1: TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER 5: FINANCE SUBCHAPTER E: PASS-THROUGH TOLLS RULE §5.53 Proposal Rule §5.53 Proposal: (a) A governmental entity authorized to finance, construct, maintain, or operate a state highway or a private entity may submit in writing to the department a proposal for a project, or a series of projects, to be developed under a pass-through toll agreement. The proposal must include: The Georgetown City Council has adopted the overall transportation plan. Funding for these projects will be brought to council for approval. The City of Georgetown has been authorized to finance, construct, maintain, or operate a state highway. (1) a description of the project, including the project limits, connections with other transportation facilities, and a description of the services to be provided by the developer; Proiect Description: The larger project, Southwest Bypass, is a proposed four -lane, divided facility located in the southern portion of the City of Georgetown, Texas. The Southwest Bypass will provide integral connections between SH 29, F.M. 2243 and IH 35. This project will provide a free flow of traffic between these roadways. The completion of the Southwest Bypass and its connection to D.B. Wood Road will ., provide access from the northwest quadrant of the City of Georgetown directly to both IH 35 and SH 130. This route will also divert internal traffic from IH 35 through Georgetown, allowing access to existing and proposed economic development projects within the community. (See attached exhibit). Proiect Limits: Southwest Bypass, beginning at a point on FM 2243 (Leander Road), 2.2 miles west of IH 35 and extending southward and eastward 2 miles to its intersection east of IH 35 at the existing intersection of the Southeast Inner Loop and Blue Springs Boulevard. (2) a statement of the benefits anticipated to result from completion of the project; The completion of the Southwest Bypass is of great significance to the City of Georgetown and Williamson County as a regional roadway. SH 29 currently carries significant east -west traffic through the Georgetown area. Trip counts on SH 29 are anticipated to double once State Highway 130 is open. This project would allow regional traffic a more efficient route around Georgetown. The bypass will provide an alternative to IH 35 for local trips thus reducing congestion on the National Highway System. With completion of the Southwest Bypass project, connectivity will be achieved from F.M. 2338 (Williams Drive) in the northwest quadrant to the southern portion of the City at IH 35 Page 1 of 3 1:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\I4 C SW Bypass Revision.doc tl Lpa nO g ®�-a�csea�cr ,,. �^Hcnrn�nohcs • — wsrwa egos tl 0 025 0.5 m 29 M� Rtl ��gg 55g �d $ b iYev y P,O ��Er•9 � O �tl @9!1!!lff SFEM Ila !i!!!UINNISs 224± sa.n: o+vaCOMMM Goxoetmm Latrsyx tomos (3) a description of the local public support for the project and any local public opposition; The City of Georgetown's 4B Corporation has held an advertised public hearing and no opposition was raised on this project. (4) a proposed project development and implementation schedule; If funding is made available, the project will move forward in our Transportation Improvements Planning (TIP) process. Page 2 of 3 J:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\14 C SW Bypass Revision.doc (5) a description of the entity's experience in developing highway projects, if the proposer is a public entity; The City of Georgetown is currently developing Southwest Bypass and Southeast Arterial 1 to State and Federal standards, using consultant engineers with extensive experience in developing highway projects with the State of Texas Department of Transportation. In addition, City staff has worked on numerous advance funding agreements with the Texas Department of Transportation, the purchase right-of-way for the SH 29 project, and the City of Georgetown's Systems Engineering Manager has experience with State of California Department of Transportation. (6) complete information concerning the experience, expertise, technical competence, and qualifications of the proposer and of each member of the proposer's management team and of other key employees or consultants, including the name, address, and professional designation of each member of the proposefs management team and of other key employees or consultants, and the capability of the proposer to develop the proposed projects, if the proposer is a private entity; This question is not applicable, because the City is not a private entity (7) if available, a proposed pass-through toll payment schedule; At this time, the City of Georgetown does not have a proposed payment schedule. (8) a statement indicating whether the proposer intends for the project to be tolled and, if the proposer intends for a tolled project to be first opened to traffic as a non -tolled highway, the approximate date on which the highway will begin to be tolled; and The City of Georgetown does not intend for the project to be tolled. (9) a statement indicating whether the proposer intends to enter into a comprehensive development agreement, if the proposer is a private entity. (b) If requested, and unless prohibited by law, the department will release to the public a proposal submitted under this section. (c) The private entity and the department may agree to develop a project under a comprehensive development agreement if authorized by other law. Notwithstanding any other provision of this subchapter, Chapter 27, Subchapter A, of this title (relating to Policy, Rules, and Procedures for Private Involvement in Department Turnpike Projects), applies to the solicitation, advertisement, negotiation and execution of a comprehensive development agreement. This question is not applicable because the City is not a private entity. Page 3 of 3 1:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\I4 C SW Bypass Revision.doc Southeast Arterial One Southeast Inner Loop to State Highway 130 v EST. 1848 GEORGETOWN TEXAS TEXAS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE TITLE 43: TRANSPORTATION PART 1: TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER 5: FINANCE SUBCHAPTER E: PASS-THROUGH TOLLS RULE §5.53 Proposal Rule §5.53 Proposal: (a) A governmental entity authorized to finance, construct, maintain, or operate a state highway or a private entity may submit in writing to the department a proposal for a project, or a series of projects, to be developed under a pass-through toll agreement. The proposal must include: The Georgetown City Council has adopted the overall transportation plan. Funding for these projects will be brought to council for approval. The City of Georgetown has been authorized to finance, construct, maintain, or operate a state highway. (1) a description of the project, including the project limits, connections with other transportation facilities, and a description of the services to be provided by the developer; Proiect Description: Southeast Arterial One (SE 1) project will consist of a four lane divided facility connecting SH 130 at CR 104 overpass to Southeast Inner Loop at CR 110 with grade separation at CR 110 south of Inner Loop and a fly -over at Inner Loop to allow continuous east/west movement. The City of Georgetown proposes a turnkey project including; Engineering (preliminary and final), environmental and archeological clearances, right-of-way acquisition and construction. Once completed, the City will assume maintenance of this facility. Project Limits: Southeast Arterial I will travel west from the intersection of State Highway 130 and County Road 104, to connect with the Georgetown Inner Loop at its intersection with County Road 110. (2) a statement of the benefits anticipated to result from completion of the project; Georgetown's Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) project list identifies Project (12) as Arterial SE One from Inner Loop to SH 130. The SH 130 preliminary engineering projections indicated that the SH 19 overpass would need to be six lanes to accommodate the future traffic counts. This project will provide an alternative eastAvest route between SH 130 and IH 35 eliminating the need to widen SH 29 to six lanes through Georgetown and its historic district. The completion of this arterial along with the Southwest Bypass projects will divert internal traffic from SH 29, IH 35 and Business 35 through Georgetown. Base on the Georgetown Transportation Model the future average traffic volume in 2010 is expected to be 8000. Page 1 of 3 1:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\12 SE -I Revision.doc r M \\* Legend \\\ vaorosm m n.m cs ROAU \\\ uxucrs 1 T 0 0.25 05 t� r 29 ft r t tip\ FU 190 ;,�nosra�vroanaaaannn�aa�-'W ` � $ NlBNin� �x r Sa' Gry rows. C-nVe .. OW, Sy"" f (3) a description of the local public support for the project and any local public opposition; The City of Georgetown's 4B Corporation has held an advertised public hearing and no opposition was raised on this project. (4) a proposed project development and implementation schedule; If funding is made available the project will move forward in our Transportation Improvements Planning (TIP) process. (5) a description of the entity's experience in developing highway projects, if the proposer is a public entity; Page 2 of 3 J:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\12 SE -1 Revision.doc The City of Georgetown is currently developing Southwest Bypass and Southeast Arterial 1 to State and Federal standards using consultant engineers with extensive experience in developing highway projects with the State of Texas Department of Transportation. In addition, City staff' has work on numerous advance funding agreements with the Texas Department of Transportation, the purchase of right-of- way for the SH 29 project, and the City of Georgetown's Systems Engineering Manager has experience with State of California Department of Transportation. (6) complete information concerning the experience, expertise, technical competence, and qualifications of the proposer and of each member of the proposer's management team and of other key employees or consultants, including the name, address, and professional designation of each member of the proposer's management team and of other key employees or consultants, and the capability of the proposer to develop the proposed projects, if the proposer is a private entity; This question is not applicable, because the city is not a private entity. (7) if available, a proposed pass-through toll payment schedule; At this time the City of Georgetown does not have a proposed payment schedule. (8) a statement indicating whether the proposer intends for the project to be tolled and, if the proposer intends for a tolled project to be first opened to traffic as a non -tolled highway, the approximate date on which the highway will begin to be tolled; and The project does not intend to be tolled. (9) a statement indicating whether the proposer intends to enter into a comprehensive development agreement, if the proposer is a private entity. (b) If requested, and unless prohibited by law, the department will release to the public a proposal submitted under this section. (c) The private entity and the department may agree to develop a project under a comprehensive development agreement if authorized by other law. Notwithstanding any other provision of this subchapter, Chapter 27, Subchapter A, of this title (relating to Policy, Rules, and Procedures for Private Involvement in Department Turnpike Projects), applies to the solicitation, advertisement, negotiation, and execution of a comprehensive development agreement. This question is not applicable because the city is not a private entity. Page 3 of 3 J:\SystemsEngineering`,Transportation\Pass-through-financing\I2 SE -I Revision.doc Northbound Frontage Road FM 2338 to Lakeway Drive V EST. 1848 GEORGETOWN TEXAS TEXAS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE TITLE 43: TRANSPORTATION PART 1: TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER 5: FINANCE SUBCHAPTER E: PASS-THROUGH TOLLS RULE §5.53 Proposal Rule §5.53 Proposal: (a) A governmental entity authorized to finance, construct, maintain, or operate a state highway or a private entity may submit in writing to the department a proposal for a project, or a series of projects, to be developed under a pass-through toll agreement. The proposal must include: The Georgetown City Council has adopted the overall transportation plan. Funding for these projects will be brought to council for approval. The City of Georgetown has been authorized to finance, construct, maintain, or operate a state highway. (1) a description of the project, including the project limits, connections with other transportation facilities, and a description of the services to be provided by the developer; Northbound Frontage Road (FM 2338 to Lakeway Drive) Georgetown's Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) list identifies this project as 24, section 3. This project will consist of a one-way, northbound, two-lane facility connecting FM 2338 to the Lakeway Drive overpass. (2) a statement of the benefits anticipated to result from completion of the project; This project will provide connectivity and mobility to the City of Georgetown by connecting FM 2338 to Lakeway Drive. Lakeway Drive overpass is presently under design by the Texas Department of Transportation for a widening project. The Northeast Inner Loop has recently been extended to tie in at the Lakeway overpass. The new frontage road will provide better access to the Inner Loop and increase mobility to the citizens of Georgetown. This project will decrease traffic along Business 35 (Austin Avenue) and FM 971 within the City. The FM 2338 and Business 35 (Austin Avenue) intersection has serious congestion issues and will benefit from the addition of this alternative route. This frontage road will create the possibility of an additional overpass at Northwest Boulevard and will provide for better connectivity and access to Austin Avenue and FM 971. (3) a description of the local public support for the project and any local public opposition; The City of Georgetown's 4B Corporation has held an advertised public hearing and no opposition was raised on this project. Page 1 of 3 J:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\24.3 NB Frontage FM 2238 to Lakeway Revision.doc PROPOSES �f. PROJECT • s���i own. NEM mom (4) a proposed project development and implementation schedule; If funding is made available the project will move forward in our Transportation Improvements Planning (77P) process. (5) a description of the entity's experience in developing highway projects, if the proposer is a public entity; The City of Georgetown is currently developing Southwest Bypass and Southeast Arterial l to State and Federal standards using consultant engineers with extensive experience in developing highway projects with the State of Texas Department of Transportation. In addition, City staff has worked on numerous advance funding agreements with the Texas Department of Transportation, the purchasing of right - Page 2 of 3 J:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\24.3 NB Frontage FM 2238 to Lakeway Revision.doc of -way for the SH 29 project, and the City of Georgetown's Systems Engineering Manager has experience with State of California Department of Transportation. (6) complete information concerning the experience, expertise, technical competence, and qualifications of the proposer and of each member of the proposer's management team and of other key employees or consultants, including the name, address, and professional designation of each member of the proposer's management team and of other key employees or consultants, and the capability of the proposer to develop the proposed projects, if the proposer is a private entity; This question is not applicable, because the city is not a private entity. (7) if available, a proposed pass-through toll payment schedule; At this time the City of Georgetown does not have a proposed payment schedule. (8) a statement indicating whether the proposer intends for the project to be tolled and, if the proposer intends for a tolled project to be first opened to traffic as a non -tolled highway, the approximate date on which the highway will begin to be tolled; and The City of Georgetown does not intend for this project to be tolled. (9) a statement indicating whether the proposer intends to enter into a comprehensive development agreement, if the proposer is a private entity. r (b) If requested, and unless prohibited by law, the department will release to the public a proposal submitted under this section. (c) The private entity and the department may agree to develop a project under a comprehensive development agreement if authorized by other law. Notwithstanding any other provision of this subchapter, Chapter 27, Subchapter A, of this title (relating to Policy, Rules, and Procedures for Private Involvement in Department Turnpike Projects), applies to the solicitation, advertisement, negotiation, and execution of a comprehensive development agreement. This question is not applicable because the city is not a private entity. Page 3 of 3 J:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Fass-through-financing\24.3 NB Frontage FM 2238 to Lakeway Revision.doc Northbound Frontage Road and Bridge FM 2243 to State Highway 29 v EST. 1848 GEORGETOWN TEXAS TEXAS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE TITLE 43: TRANSPORTATION PART 1: TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER 5: FINANCE SUBCHAPTER E: PASS-THROUGH TOLLS RULE §5.53 Proposal Rule §5.53 Proposal: (a) A governmental entity authorized to finance, construct, maintain, or operate a state highway or a private entity may submit in writing to the department a proposal for a project, or a series of projects, to be developed under a pass-through toll agreement. The proposal must include: The Georgetown City Council has adopted the overall transportation plan. Funding for these projects will be brought to council for approval. The City of Georgetown has been authorized to finance, construct, maintain, or operate a state highway. (1) a description of the project, including the project limits, connections with other transportation facilities, and a description of the services to be provided by the developer; Project Description: Northbound Frontage Road and Bridge (FM 2243 to SH 29) The City of Georgetown's Transportation Improvement Project (TIP) list identifies this Project as 24, Section 2. This project will consist of a one-way northbound two-lane facility connecting FM 2243 to SH 29, including a bridge structure over the South San Gabriel River. The City of Georgetown proposes a turnkey project including; engineering, (preliminary and final), environmental and archeological clearances, right-of-way acquisition and construction. (2) a statement of the benefits anticipated to result from completion of the project; This project will provide connectivity and mobility to the City of Georgetown by connecting FM 2243 to SH 19. The proposed roadway ties to existing plans Williamson County has for adding a northbound frontage road between Inner Loop and FM 1243. Safety will be enhanced by eliminating the clover leaf style northbound entrance ramp. Another safety enhancement will come from providing possible additional access points to the Georgetown Hospital and U.S. Post Office on the south side of the South San Gabriel River. The possibility of purchasing access rights along new frontage road will promote economic development on the undeveloped land north of the South San Gabriel River. The frontage road will also help accommodate a U-turn structure that will be needed in the near future. The Georgetown Transportation Model estimates the future average daily volume for the frontage road from Southeast Inner Loop to Lakeway Drive to be 4600 in 2010. Pagel of 3 1:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\24.2 NB Frontage FM 2243 to SH 29 Revision.doc 11 SPAN PROPOSED '� `������,•� PROJECT15 ����•� (3) a description of the local public support for the project and any local public opposition; The City of Georgetown's 4B Corporation has held an advertised public hearing and no opposition was raised on this project. (4) a proposed project development and implementation schedule; If funding is made available the project will move forward in our transportation improvements planning (TIP) process. Page 2 of 3 J:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-ftnancing\24.2 NB Frontage FM 2243 to SH 29 Revision.doc (S) a description of the entity's experience in developing highway projects, if the proposer is a public entity; The City of Georgetown is currently developing Southwest Bypass and Southeast Arterial I to State and Federal standards using consultant engineers with extensive experience in developing highway projects with the State of Texas Department of Transportation. In addition, City staff has worked on numerous advance funding agreements with Texas Department of Transportation, the purchasing of right-of- way for the SH 29 project, and the City of Georgetown's Systems Engineering Manager has experience with State of California Department of Transportation. (6) complete information concerning the experience, expertise, technical competence, and qualifications of the proposer and of each member of the proposer's management team and of other key employees or consultants, including the name, address, and professional designation of each member of the proposer's management team and of other key employees or consultants, and the capability of the proposer to develop the proposed projects, if the proposer is a private entity; This question is not applicable, because the city is not a private entity. (7) if available, a proposed pass-through toll payment schedule; At this time the City of Georgetown does not have a proposed payment schedule. (8) a statement indicating whether the proposer intends for the project to be tolled and, if the proposer intends for a tolled project to be first opened to traffic as a non -tolled highway, the approximate date on which the highway will begin to be tolled; and The project is not intended to be tolled. (9) a statement indicating whether the proposer intends to enter into a comprehensive development agreement, if the proposer is a private entity. (b) If requested, and unless prohibited by law, the department will release to the public a proposal submitted under this section. (c) The private entity and the department may agree to develop a project under a comprehensive development agreement if authorized by other law. Notwithstanding any other provision of this subchapter, Chapter 27, Subchapter A, of this title (relating to Policy, Rules, and Procedures for Private Involvement in Department Turnpike Projects), applies to the solicitation, advertisement, negotiation, and execution of a comprehensive development agreement. This question is not applicable because the City is not a private entity. Page 3 of 3 J:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\24.2 NB Frontage FM 2243 to SH 29 Revision.doc Southeast Inner Loop Blue Springs Boulevard to Southeast Arterial 1 V EST. 1848 GEORGETOWN TEXAS TEXAS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE TITLE 43: TRANSPORTATION PART 1: TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER 5: FINANCE SUBCHAPTER E: PASS-THROUGH TOLLS RULE §5.53 Proposal Rule §5.53 Proposal: (a) A governmental entity authorized to finance, construct, maintain, or operate a state highway or a private entity may submit in writing to the department a proposal for a project, or a series of projects, to be developed under a pass-through toll agreement. The proposal must include: The Georgetown City Council has adopted the overall transportation plan, funding for these projects will be brought to council for approval. The City of Georgetown has been authorized to finance, construct, maintain, or operate a state highway. (1) a description of the project, including the project limits, connections with other transportation facilities, and a description of the services to be provided by the developer; Proiect Description: Southeast Inner Loop widening to 4 Lanes (Blue Springs Boulevard to SE Arterial 1) Georgetown's Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) list identifies this project as 19A. This project will consist of widening and _ upgrading the existing section of Inner Loop between Blue Springs Boulevard and Southeast Arterial 1 to a four -lane, divided facility with grade separation at Maple Street, FM 1460 and Blue Springs Boulevard. The City of Georgetown proposes a turnkey project including: engineering (preliminary and final), environmental and archeological clearances, right-of-way acquisition and construction. Once completed, the City will assume maintenance of this facility. (2) a statement of the benefits anticipated to result from completion of the project; Georgetown's Southeast Inner Loop provides an alternative route to through traffic using SH 19, Austin Avenue, FM 1460 and other roads throughout the City. The additional lanes and grade separation will be needed to accommodate the additional capacity that will be added due to the opening of SH 130 in 1007 and the development presently taking place along this section of the loop. The improvements will also accommodate the terminal of a proposed commuter rail being place on the old MKT right-of-way. (3) a description of the local public support for the project and any local public opposition; The City of Georgetown's 4B Corporation has held an advertised public hearing and no opposition was raised on this project. Page 1 of 3 1:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-rtnancing\Southeast Innerloop Bluesprings to SEI Revision.doc W TOM •,,4 Lagend r .�. .� 35 • U. J+++!'J�,_ ilk' 1 aN as ��,♦ !r PROPOSED J/ PROJECT 1 35 i Ell . (4) a proposed project development and implementation schedule; If funding is made available the project will move forward in our Transportation Improvements Planning (TIP) process. (5) a description of the entity's experience in developing highway projects, if the proposer is a public entity; The City of Georgetown is currently developing Southwest Bypass and Southeast Arterial I to State and Federal standards using consultant engineers with extensive experience in developing highway projects with the State of Texas Department of Transportation. In addition, City staff has worked on numerous advance funding agreements with the Texas Department of Transportation, the purchasing of right- of-way for the SH 29 project, and the City of Georgetown's Systems Engineering Manager has experience with State of California Department of Transportation. Page 2 of 3 J:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\Southeast Innerloop Bluesprings to SEI Revision.doc Page 3 of 3 1:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\Southeast Innerloop Bluesprings to SEI Revision.doc CITY OF GEORGETOWN PROPOSAL FOR PASS- THROUGH - FINANCING/TOLLING Project Description and Limits Project Estimate Southwest B ass SH 29 to F.M. 2243 $ 51,400,000 Southwest Bypass FM 2243 to IH 35 $ 60,200,000 Southeast Arterial One Southeast Inner Loop to SH 130 $ 12,400,000 Northbound Frontage Road FM 2238 to Lakewa Drive $ 9,500,000 Northbound Frontage Road FM 2243 to SH 29 $ 10,000,000 Southeast Innerloo Blue Springs Blvd. to Southeast Arterial One $ 10,000,000 Lakeway Drive Overpass Reconstruction I $ 6,000,000 Total I $ 15955009000 Council Meeting Date: January 24, 2006 AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET Item No. 1 — S SUBJECT Consideration and possible action for approval of award of the annual bid for wood poles to Texas Electric Cooperative for an estimated $125,813.00. ITEM SUMMARY Bids were received for the purchase of wood poles for a one-year period beginning February 1, 2006. The staff recommendation is to award this bid to the low bidder responding, Texas Electric Cooperative, as designated on the attached bid tabulation These poles are stocked in the City warehouse and are used primarily for new projects and for replacement of existing poles. Material will be ordered on an as needed basis. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS None GUS BOARD RECOMMENDATION: GUS Board recommended approval at the January 17, 2006 meeting. Approved 6-0 (Eason absent) STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends approval of this bid. FINANCIAL IMPACT Funds will not exceed the 2005-2006 budget for this line item, and will be paid from the Electric Capital Improvement and Maintenance accounts. Estimated expenditures are $125,813.00. This amount is based on prior year usage. None ATTACHMENTS 1. Bid Tabl) as Manager giant City'Mar For Utility Operations Page 1 of 1 Page 3. Consideration and possible action for an award of annual bid for heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) maintenance and replacement services to Aspen Air in the estimated annual amount of of $91,173.00 - Terry Jones, Support Services Director and Micki Rundell, Director of Finance and Administration 4. Discussion and possible action regarding Pass -Through Tolling/Financing Projects (presented to TxDOT on December 22, 2005) for possible funding - Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations and Micki Rundell, Director of Finance & Administration Second Readings 1. Second Reading of an ordinance on a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change Future Land Use from Residential to Office/Retail/Commercial for 0.55 acres out of Block 81 of Lost Addition, located at 1902 and 1904 Austin Avenue -- Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Chief Long Range Planner 2. Second Reading of an ordinance on a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change Intensity Level from Level 3 to Level 5 for 16.22 acres out of the 86.153 acre tract in the David Wright Survey, and Future Land Use from Office/Service, Multi -family and Residential to Mixed Use and Residential for 86.153 acres in the David Wright Survey, located at 4015 Williams Drive -- Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Chief Long Range Planner Public Hearings/First Readings 1. Public Hearing and possible action on a Rezoning of 70 acres out of the David Wright Survey, Abstract No. 13, from AG, Agriculture to RS, Residential Single-family for the property located at Williams Drive Northwest of Serenada Drive - Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development 2. First Reading of an Ordinance Rezoning of 70 acres out of the David Wright Survey, Abstract No. 13, from AG, Agriculture to RS, Residential Single-family for the property located at Williams Drive Northwest of Serenada Drive - Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development 3. Public Hearing and possible action on a Rezoning of a 0.14 acre tract In Lost Addition, Block 63, from RS, Residential Single Family District to OF, Office District located at 1006 South Rock Street. - Rebecca Rowe, Historic District Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development 4. First Reading of an ordinance Rezoning of a 0.14 acre tract in Lost Addition, Block 63, from RS, Residential Single Family District to OF, Office District located at 1006 South Rock Street. - Rebecca Rowe, Historic District Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development 5. Public Hearing to consider a Rezoning from AG, Agriculture to PUD, Planned Unit Development for 66.399 acres in the Burrell Eaves Survey, to be known as Sun City Neighborhood Thirty -Eight, located about two miles northeast of the intersection of Del Webb Blvd. and Sun City Blvd. - Melissa McCollum, AICP, Development Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development 6. First Reading of an ordinance Rezoning from AG. Agriculture to PUD, Planned Unit Development for 66.399 acres in the Burrell Eaves Survey, to be known as Sun City Neighborhood Thirty -Eight, located about two miles northeast of the intersection of Del Webb Blvd. and Sun City Blvd. -- Melissa McCollum, AICP, Development Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development 7. Public Hearing to consider a Rezoning from AG, Agriculture to PUD, Planned Unit Development for 58.8 Acres in the Frederick Foy Survey, to be known as Sun City Georgetown, Neighborhood Thirty -One, located two miles northwest of the intersection of Del Webb Blvd. and Sun City Blvd. - Mclissa McCollum, AICP, Development Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development B. First Reading of an ordinance Rezoning from AG, Agriculture to PUD, Planned Unit Development for 58.8 Acres in the Frederick Foy Survey, to be known as Sun City Georgetown, Neighborhood Thirty -One, located two miles northwest of the intersection of Del Webb Blvd. and Sun City Blvd. - Mclissa McCollum, AICP, Development Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development 9. Public Hearing on a Rezoning of a 0.16 -acre portion of Glasscock Addition, Block 4, Lot 4 from OF, Office District to G2, Downtown Commercial District, located at 912 Rock Street. - Rebecca Rowe, Historic District Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development 10. First Reading of an ordinance Rezoning of a 0.16 -acre portion of Glasscock Addition, Block 4, Lot City Council Agenda/January 10, 2006 Page 3 of 4 Pages 4 from OF, Office District to C-2, Downtown Commercial District, located at 912 Rock Street. – Rebecca C Rowe, Historic District Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development 11. Public Hearing on a Rezoning of a 0.43 acre portion and a 0.55 acre portion of the Lost Addition, Block 81 from OF, Office District and RS, Residential Single Family District to C-1, Local Commercial District, located at 1902 and 1904 Austin Avenue. – Rebecca Rowe, Historic District Planner & Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning & Development 12. First Reading of an ordinance Rezoning of a 0.43 acre portion and a 0.55 acre portion of the Lost Addition, Block 81 from OF, Office District and RS, Residential Single Family District to C-1, Local Commercial District, located at 1902 and 1904 Austin Avenue. – Rebecca Rowe, Historic District Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development 13. First reading of an ordinance amending definitions and polices related to new 911 addressing requirements and a adopting a new section related to street name changes in the Street Naming and Site Addressing Policy codified in Chapter 15.36 of the Georgetown Code of Ordinances – Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Chief Long Range Planner 14. Public Hearing on the voluntary annexation into the City for 462.88 acres, more or less, in the Frederick Foy Survey, west of Sun City Boulevard, for Sun City Option Tract -- Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Chief Long Range Planner 15. Public Hearing on the voluntary annexation into the City for 13.95 acres, more or less, in the Lewis J. Dyches Survey, to be known as Pleasant Valley, Section Two – Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Chief Long Range Planner Certificate of Posting I, Sandra Lee, 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 , 2006, at , and remained so posted for at least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting. Sandra Lee, City Secretary City Council Agenda/January 10, 2006 Page 4 of 4 Pages --� —ccG I r.v. aox vuv i ueorgetown,'1'exas 78627-0409 1 (512)930-3652 (512) 930-3622 (fax) www.georgetown.org 1 ms@georgetowntx.org Southwest Bypass State Highway 29 to F.M. 2243 W EST. 1848 GEORGETOWN TEXAS TEXAS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE TITLE 43: TRANSPORTATION PART 1: TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER 5: FINANCE SUBCHAPTER E: PASS-THROUGH TOLLS RULE §5.53 Proposal Rule §5.53 Proposal: (a) A governmental entity authorized to finance, construct, maintain, or operate a state highway, or a private entity may submit in writing to the department a proposal for a project, or a series of projects, to be developed under a pass-through toll agreement. The proposal must include: The Georgetown City Council has adopted the overall transportation plan. Funding for these projects will be brought to council for approval. The City of Georgetown has been authorized to finance, construct, maintain, or operate a state highway. (1) a description of the project, including the project limits, connections with other transportation facilities, and a description of the services to be provided by the developer; Proiect Description • The larger project, Southwest Bypass, is a proposed four -lane, divided facility located in the southern portion of the City of Georgetown, Texas. The Southwest Bypass will provide integral connections between SH 19, F.M. 2243 and IFI 35. This project will provide a free flow of traffic between these roadways. The completion of the Southwest Bypass and its connection to D.B. Wood Road will provide access from the northwest quadrant of the City of Georgetown directly to both IFI 35 and SH 130. This route will also divert internal traffic from IH 35, FM 2338, FM 2243, and SH 29 through Georgetown, allowing access to existing and proposed economic development projects within the community. Project Limits: Southwest Bypass, beginning at a point on FM 2243 (Leander Road), 2.2 miles west oflH 35, and extending northward 2.3 miles to its intersection with SH 29, approximately 2 miles west of IH 35. An additional project is to be constructed by the City of Georgetown to provide connectivity from the Southwest Bypass allowing direct access from D.B. Wood Road which connects northwest Georgetown/Williams Drive West with the Southwest Bypass. (See attached exhibit) The City of Georgetown proposes a turnkey project including; Engineering (preliminary and final), environmental and archeological clearances, right-of-way acquisition and construction. Once completed, the City will assume maintenance of this facility. Page 1 of 4 1:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\14B SW Bypass Revision.doc Memo To: MC/City Council Members Fronr Jim Briggs-�� Date: February6, 2006 Re: SE 1 ROW Acquisition The following email from Tem Calhoun generally capsulizes the conversations that are beginning with regards to ROW for the SE1 project. We have concluded our final discussions with ROCK in order to determine preliminary cost of property acquisition and relocation to be extensive. As a result, the centerline of the roadway was shifted 450' to the South of the ROCK after evaluating multiple options. The final option selected, as updated to GTEC at the last meeting, was actually a cost neutral or cost reduction from the original alignment through the ROCK. Someone was going to be directly impacted no matter which route was selected. There will be multiple indirect impacts from the alignment as well. When our ROW group starts serious negotiations with landowners for Rights of Entry, surveys and appraisals each property owner is going to start moving to contact me, Paul and You with concerns and "Not in my Backyard" arguments. We are open and flexible as we can be to listen and take the concerns into account but must stay on course with the bigger picture for the larger community. So when and if you are contacted regarding SE1, or any other ROW issue, please contact the staff beginning with Terri Calhoun in order that we maintain a central point of contact for all information. Outside negotiations would impact our case if we were to enter condemnation proceedings and diminish the case on behalf of the City. We all must be careful to remember that even casual conversations regarding ROW acquisition can be taken as deliberations and negotiations by the landowner. If you have questions, or if you are contacted and not sure what you should do, please contact Tem with those concerns. We want to make sure she is informed and can get back to you with a recommended course of action that has been verified through our attorneys as appropriate. Jim, As we discussed earlier today, right-of-way negotiations for the SE1 project are underway. Our Right -of -Way Agent, George Schlemeyer, has contacted the additional property owners affected by the final "Route B" alignment in an attempt to obtain voluntary rights of entry. Things are going well with the exception of the Molnars (property south of R.O.C.K.), who are quite upset about the route and are refusing to work with George at this point. Mark Molnar called me this morning and we had a long conversation. By the time, we were done, he seemed to be in a more cooperative frame of mind, but his biggest complaint is that he feels the City chose the final alignment based on the influence of his "neighbors" and although he didn't expressly state it, I assume he means R.O.C.K. He indicated that he might be calling City officials about it. Just wanted to give you a heads up that you, the GTEC Board members, and/or Council members might be hearing from him. Since we are now involved in right-of-way negotiations, please refer his calls to either me or George Schlemeyer (345-6518) and urge City officials to refrain from engaging in open negotiations or "road engineering" discussions with the landowners, to the extent possible ... to extent possible. Terri Glasby Calhoun, Paralegal Notice of Meeting of the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas Tuesday, January 10, 2006 The Georgetown City Council will meet on Tuesday, January 10, 2006 at 06:00:00 PM at City Council Chambers, at the northeast corner of Seventh and Main Streets, Georgetown, Texas. If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance. An agenda packet, containing detailed information on the items listed below, is distributed to the Mayor, Councilmembers, and the Georgetown Public Library no later than the Saturday preceding the council meeting. The library's copy is available for public review. Please Note: This City Council Meeting will be video taped live without editing and shown on the local cable channel. Executive Session Regular Session to convene and continue Executive Session, if necessary 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 that follows. A 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 - Discussion and possible action regarding the "Application of the City of Leander to Amend Water Certificate of Convenience and Necessity (CCN) No. 10302 and Sewer CCN No. 20626 in Williamson and Travis Counties, Application Nos. 34789-C and 34790-C," SOAH Docket No. 582-05-7095; TCEQ Docket No. 2005-0864-UCR - Discussion and possible action regarding legal issues related to the "Development Agreement with Forrestville Associate, a Maryland General Partnership, Regarding the Development of Wolf Ranch.' - Discussion and possible action regarding the audit of the franchise agreement with Cox Communications, Inc. and regarding the possible assignment to Cequel III (Cebndge Connections). B Sec.551.072: Deliberations Regarding Real Property - Consideration and possible action concerning the acquisition of right-of-way and easement(s) in connection with the widening of SH 29 West. -- Patricia E. Cans, City Attorney and Kent Alan Sick, Attorney for City of Georgetown - Consideration and possible action concerning the acquisition of 3.83 acres from W.D. Kelley Foundation for construction of an electric substation — Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations Regular Session - To begin no earlier than 06:00 PM (Council may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene an Executive Session at the request of the Mayor, a Councilmember, or the City Manager for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code Chapter 551.) C Call to Order D Pledge of Allegiance E Comments from the dais - Welcome to Audience and Opening Comments — Mayor Gary Nelon - Review of procedure for addressing the City Council - Announcement of extension of deadline to Friday, January 13, for applications for Boards and Commissions F Announcements and Comments from City Manager G Public Wishing to Address Council City Council Agenda/January 10, 2006 Page 1 of 4 Pages • Sandra Taylor from Pedernales Elecric regarding an update on the Cooperative's activities in the Georgetown area. H Action from Executive Session Statutory Consent Agenda The Statutory Consent Agenda includes non -controversial and routine items that Council may act on with one single vote. A councilmember may pull any item from the Consent Agenda in order that the council discuss and act upon it individually as part of the Regular Agenda. I Consideration and possible action to approve the minutes of the Council Workshop on Monday, December 12, the regular Council Meeting on Tuesday, December 13, Special Session of Friday, December 23, 2005 and corrections to the minutes of the regular Council Meeting on Tuesday, September 13, 2005 — Sandra D. Lee, City Secretary J Consideration and possible action to approve a Resolution approving the Bylaws of the Georgetown Economic Development Corporation (GEDCO) — Paul E. Brandenburg, City Manager K Consideration and possible action to approve an inter -local operating contract between the City of Georgetown and Georgetown Economic Development Corporation (GEDCO) for the 2005/06 fiscal year — Micki Rundell, Director of Finance & Administration L Consideration and possible action to approve payment to First Southwest Asset Management, Inc. for arbitrage calculations in the amount of $18,865.00 — Micki Rundell, Director of Finance and Administration and Laurie Brewer, Controller. M Consideration and possible action on a Final Plat of a Resubdivision of Lot 1, Block C & Lot 4, Block D, Shady Oaks Estates Section Three and 0.45 acres out of the Burrell Eaves Survey, located on Buena Vista Drive — Melissa McCollum, AICP, Development Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development N Consideration of a resolution granting a petition and setting public hearing dates for the annexation into the City of 462.88 acres, more or less, in the Frederick Foy Survey, west of Sun City Boulevard, for Sun City Option Tract -- Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Chief Long Range Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development Legislative Regular Agenda Council will individually consider and possibly take action on any or all of the following items: O Presentation of the 2006 Official Visitors Guide to Georgetown — Carl Miller, CVB Coordinator; Shelly Hargrove, Tourism Director & Main Street Manager; Randy Morrow, Director of Community Services; and Kent Huntsman, CVB Board Chair P Consideration and possible action to designate the Hill Country Wine and Food Festival as a City -Sponsored Special Event and to authorize staff to negotiate a contract with the festival organizers -- Tom Yantis, Assistant City Manager Q Consideration and possible action to approve payment in an estimated annual amount of $150,000 for professional services provided by Labor Finders — Kevin Russell, Human Resources Director and Paul Brandenburg, City Manager R Leases, Agreements, Contracts 1. Consideration and possible action to approve a resolution from the Arts and Culture Board recommending that the City of Georgetown negotiate an agreement with Williamson County about decorating the construction containment wall around the Williamson County Courthouse with the work of local artists; and that once the agreement is reached, the Arts and Culture Board of the City of Georgetown be delegated to be in charge of the manner and timing of such decoration — Eric Lashley, Library Director; Paul Gaffney, Chair of the Arts and Culture Board; and Randy Morrow, Director of Community Services 2. Consideration and possible action to amend the development agreement with 400 Main Street, LP to extend the construction commencement date of the Phase I I Project — Tom Yantis, Assistant City Manager City Council Agenda/January 10, 2006 Page 2 of 4 Pages 3. Consideration and possible action for an award of annual bid for heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) maintenance and replacement services to Aspen Air in the estimated annual amount of of $91,173.00 — Terry Jones, Support Services Director and Micki Rundell, Director of Finance and Administration 4. Discussion and possible action regarding Pass -Through Tolling/Financing Projects (presented to TxDOT on December 22, 2005) for possible funding — Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations and Micki Rundell, Director of Finance 8 Administration Second Readings 1. Second Reading of an ordinance on a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change Future Land Use from Residential to Office/Retail/Commercial for 0.55 acres out of Block 81 of Lost Addition, located at 1902 and 1904 Austin Avenue — Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Chief Long Range Planner 2. Second Reading of an ordinance on a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change Intensity Level from Level 3 to Level 5 for 16.22 acres out of the 86.153 acre tract in the David Wright Survey, and Future Land Use from Office/Service, Multi -family and Residential to Mixed Use and Residential for 86.153 acres in the David Wright Survey, located at 4015 Williams Drive — Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Chief Long Range Planner Public Hearings/First Readings 1. Public Hearing and possible action on a Rezoning of 70 acres out of the David Wright Survey, Abstract No. 13, from AG, Agriculture to RS, Residential Single-family for the property located at Williams Drive Northwest of Serenade Drive — Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development 2. First Reading of an Ordinance Rezoning of 70 acres out of the David Wright Survey, Abstract No. 13, from AG, Agriculture to RS, Residential Single-family for the property located at Williams Drive Northwest of Serenada Drive — Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development 3. Public Hearing and possible action on a Rezoning of a 0.14 acre tract in Lost Addition, Block 63, from RS, Residential Single Family District to OF, Office District located at 1006 South Rock Street. — Rebecca Rowe, Historic District Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development 4. First Reading of an ordinance Rezoning of a 0.14 acre tract In Lost Addition, Block 63, from RS, Residential Single Family District to OF, Office District located at 1006 South Rock Street. — Rebecca Rowe, Historic District Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development 5. Public Hearing to consider a Rezoning from AG, Agriculture to PUD, Planned Unit Development for 66.399 acres in the Burrell Eaves Survey, to be known as Sun City Neighborhood Thirty -Eight, located about two miles northeast of the intersection of Del Webb Blvd. and Sun City Blvd. — Melissa McCollum, AICP, Development Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development 6. First Reading of an ordinance Rezoning from AG, Agriculture to PUD, Planned Unit Development for 66.399 acres in the Burrell Eaves Survey, to be known as Sun City Neighborhood ThirtyLEight, located about two miles northeast of the intersection of Del Webb Blvd. and Sun City Blvd. -- Melissa McCollum, AICP, Development Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development 7. Public Hearing to consider a Rezoning from AG, Agriculture to PUD, Planned Unit Development for 58.8 Acres in the Frederick Foy Survey, to be known as Sun City Georgetown, Neighborhood Thirty -One, located two miles northwest of the intersection of Del Webb Blvd. and Sun City Blvd. — Mclissa McCollum, AICP, Development Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development 8. First Reading of an ordinance Rezoning from AG, Agriculture to PUD, Planned Unit Development for 58.8 Acres in the Frederick Foy Survey, to be known as Sun City Georgetown, Neighborhood Thirty -One, located two miles northwest of the intersection of Del Webb Blvd. and Sun City Blvd. -- Melissa McCollum, AICP, Development Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development 9. Public Hearing on a Rezoning of a 0.16 -acre portion of Glasscock Addition, Block 4, Lot 4 from OF, Office District to C•2, Downtown Commercial District, located at 912 Rock Street. — Rebecca Rowe, Historic District Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development 10. First Reading of an ordinance Rezoning of a 0.16 -acre portion of Glasscock Addition, Block 4, Lot City Council Agenda/January 10, 2006 Page 3 of 4 Pages 4 from OF, Office District to C-2, Downtown Commercial District, located at 912 Rock Street. — Rebecca Rowe, Historic District Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development 11. Public Hearing on a Rezoning of a 0.43 acre portion and a 0.55 acre portion of the Lost Addition, Block 81 from OF, Office District and RS, Residential Single Family District to C-1, Local Commercial District, located at 1902 and 1904 Austin Avenue. — Rebecca Rowe, Historic District Planner & Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning & Development 12. First Reading of an ordinance Rezoning of a 0.43 acre portion and a 0.55 acre portion of the Lost Addition, Block 81 from OF, Office District and RS, Residential Single Family District to G1, Local Commercial District, located at 1902 and 1904 Austin Avenue. — Rebecca Rowe, Historic District Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development 13. First reading of an ordinance amending definitions and polices related to new 911 addressing requirements and a adopting a new section related to street name changes in the Street Naming and Site Addressing Policy codified in Chapter 15.36 of the Georgetown Code of Ordinances — Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Chief Long Range Planner 14. Public Hearing on the voluntary annexation into the City for 462.88 acres, more or less, in the Frederick Foy Survey, west of Sun City Boulevard, for Sun City Option Tract — Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Chief Long Range Planner 15. Public Hearing on the voluntary annexation into the City for 13.95 acres, more or less, in the Lewis J. Dyches Survey, to be known as Pleasant Valley, Section Two -- Bobby Ray, AICP, Acting Director Planning and Development and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Chief Long Range Planner Certificate of Posting_ I, Sandra Lee, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of Meeting was posted at City Hail, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all times, on the_ day of , 2006, at , and remained so posted for at least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting. Sandra Lee, City Secretary City Council Agenda/January 10, 2006 Page 4 of 4 Pages Council meeting date: January 9, 2006 Item No.: EXECUTIVE SESSION AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET CONE IDEWIAL SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action concerning the acquisition of right-of-way and easemen(s)t in connection with the widening of SH 29 West. ITEM SUMMARY: Update by Kent Sick re status of acquisition of SH 29 ROW Parcels 3 and 14 from Lloyd D. Trainer (Georgetown Farm Supply). Memo attached. Update to Council re conveyance of SH 29 ROW tracts to State of Texas per Advanced Funding Agreement between the City and the Texas Department of Transportation dated October 17, 2003. CONMENTIAL, ATTACHMENTS: Memo from Kent Sick re Trainer acquisition Su CONFIDn"M J'm Brig sistant City Manager for Utility Operations * * * * * PRIVILIGED ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATIONS * * * * * TO: Georgetown City Council, Trish Carls FROM: Kent A. Sick DATE: January 5, 2006 RE: Trainer settlement offer The City has received the attached settlement proposal from Trainer's counsel Dan Foster. I thought it would be helpful prior to the next Council meeting to provide you with this overview of Trainer's proposal and the status of the case; I will be present next Monday evening to discuss the City's options for final resolution of this last SH29 matter. Case status. As you know, the City and Trainer have exchanged numerous settlement proposals since the acquisition process began in June 2004. The City's original offer to Trainer, based on a Jimmy Vick appraisal, was $118,478 ($7.25/SF). Trainer countered at $167,500 plus a number of significant non-cash considerations, including most significantly the swap of an almost equivalent amount of ROW. In response, the City had the "swap" tract appraised, and that appraisal amount was $10.25/SF, or a total of $83,670. Based upon that appraisal, Council authorized a total settlement to Trainer of $98,860 (valuation of all land, fee simple, easement, and swap, at $10.25/SF, plus a total of $37,150 for cure items such as driveway reconfigurations, wastewater line connection costs, and the like). Trainer declined the swap proposal. Due to a subsequent design change, the swap tract is no longer available for use in resolving the case. Trainer gave the City a Possession and Use Agreement, under which the City tendered to Trainer its original offer amount of $118,478. Having reached no agreement, the City proceeded to Commissioner's Hearing this past July (after having postponed once at Trainer's request). Trainer did not appear, and the Commissioners entered Mr. Vick's appraised amount as the Award. I sent discovery requests to Trainer in August; he has yet to respond. The case is not yet set for trial. To my knowledge Trainer has not retained any potential trial experts other than Steger and Bizzell, who have performed engineering work for Trainer as outlined in his settlement proposal. Trainer's current offer. Trainer currently proposes to settle for $305,357. That amount is comprised of $13.50/SF for the land and easement, and a total of $113,881 for costs to cure, as detailed in Foster's proposal. Land value. Since the City had the adjacent swap tract appraised at $10.25/SF, I think it likely that any reappraisal of Trainer's property for trial purposes would total at least that amount. Thus, the City's likely "upside" for compensation for just the land and easements would total $145,380. Foster claims market evidence exists to support $15/SF, such that if the City and Trainer go to trial the range of difference in positions on this part of the compensation would be approximately $145,380 to $212,751. The City has had two seriously contested hearings on this project (San Gabriel Storage Systems and A -Tex); in neither did the Commissioners award any more than $10/SF. Cost to cure. The original cost to cure figure utilized by both the City and Trainer was $37,150. Adding that number to $10.25/SF for the land would indicate total compensation. of $182,530. Without having seen Steger and Bizzell's plans or having 2 had our own estimates of the reconstruction work performed, however, it is not possible to accurately assess a range of difference in positions for the cost to cure. Trainer's new cure estimate of $113,881, some three times higher than originally thought by all, probably merits the City's hiring of its own expert to estimate the cost to cure. I look forward to discussing these issues with you in more detail during Monday's meeting. 11/23/2006 11:37 FAX 6124798884 WDMACx MCCLI59 0002/006 WOMACK, MCCLISH, WALL A FOSTER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1801 LAVACA, SUirE 120 JOHN MCCUSH • SUE WAUL DAN Fosnp WNRNEYELEOGE - AUSM, TEXAs 78701 PHONE (512) 474.9875 FAcsn+n�LE(512) 474-9894 F, -MNL WMCLM1&kCKMCCLISH.COM CHRISTIAN BROOKS BMDD CEMIIIN M CML TMAL N CML Ar 1L uw ar m, Tws BD DrL B�fcNW/T�D.+ November 22, 2005 FOR SETTLEMENT PURPOSES ONLY Via Facsimile (5121478-1906) Mr. Kent A. Sick LAW OFFICES of KENT ALLEN SICK 2705 Bee Caves Road Suite 240 Austin, Texas 78746 Re: City of Georgetown's acquisition of Parcel 3, 3E and 14 Doug Trainer Dear Kent: I am writing to propose a settlement of the above referenced matter. We appreciate the time necessary to complete the proposal and are optimistic that we may finally resolve all the issues surrounding this acquisition. As you know, Mr. Trainer has been working with City staff to complete a revised site plan which will attempt to address the issues created by the City's acquisition. It seems to me that compensation in this matter can be divided into two distinct parts - compensation for the land acquired and compensation for the costs Mr. Trainer has and will continue to incur in order to cure the problems created by the City's acquisition. LAND VALUE Your last offer on March 1, 2005, was based on a $10.25 PSF value for a fee simple acquisition of 10,629 SF and a 4,443 SF utility easement. Given the intensity of commercial activity In the immediate vicinity of the subject property, it is difficult to imagine the property is worth less than Mr. Trainer's original demand of $13.50. In fact, recent sales in the immediate vicinity indicate a value in excess of $15.00 PSF. However, in an effort to resolve this matter, Mr. Trainer will still accept the compensation based on 11/23/2005 11:37 PAA 5124740804 WOMACit MCCLISN 1&003/006 Mr. Kent A. Sick November 23, 2005 Page �2- $13.50 PSF. This equates to $143,491 for the area acquired in fee and $47,984 for the easement area. COST OF CURE Mr. Trainer has incurred significant costs associated with the preparation and submission of a revised site plan which addresses the problems created by the City's taking. it is apparent that his tract will never again function as well as it did prior to this project given the relocation of his driveways. Nonetheless, for settlement purposes we ask only that Mr. Trainer be reimbursed for his actual out of pocket expenses in reconfiguring the property. Those can be broken down into planning and construction. Planning: To date, Mr. Trainer has incurred $16,177. As you know, the City has yet to approve his proposed site plan submitted by Steger & Bizzell. Construction: Based on estimates provided by Steger & Bizzell and other contractors, it anticipated that construction cost for reconfiguring the property will total $82,067. These cost are as follows: Hard Costs - Construction Driveway Prepare Grade $2.000 Driveway Construction $42,624 Existing Driveway Repair $9,600 Remove Existlng Driveways $2,000 Subtotal Utility Movement $56,224 Move Fire Hydrant $1,000 Move Water Meter $1,000 Move Power Connection $1,000 Subtotal $3,000 11/23/2005 11:38 FAX 5124749894 WOMACK MCCLISH 16004/906 Mr, Kent A. Sick November 23, 2005 n., e_q. As previously agreed by the City, drainage from the property must be routed to a regional facility located in the Simon Property. As part of construction of the proposed facilities, the retention pond and filtration system have been removed from the subject remainder. The filled pond must be regraded so that drainage will flow into the new underground system. This area must also be revegetated to prevent future erosion. The existing sidewalk, which was destroyed by the construction has been replaced in accordance with City criteria. The existing sign is currently being moved by the City's contractor. TOTAL COMPENSATION As previously mentioned, we believe there is ample market evidence to support compensation in excess of $15.00 PSF. At that amount, Mr. Trainer is due compensation of $326,632, a significant portion of which is attributable to actual cost of cure. In an effort to resolve this matter without necessity of trial, Mr. Trainer will accept compensation of $305,357. 11/23/2006 11:38 FAIL 5124749894 WOMACK HCCLISH Mr. Kent A. Sick November 23, 2005 Page - 4 - 0005/006 Compensation Summery City's Offer Justified Compensation Settlement Offer Part Taken Fee $108,947 (10,629 SF @ $10.25 PSF) $159,435 (10,629 SF @ $15.00 PSF) $149,492 (10,629 SF @ $13.50 PSF) Easement $36,433 (4,443 V SF @ $10.25 PSF 80%) $53,316 (4,443 SF @ $15.00 PSF 80%) $13.50PSF * 4 (4,443 F @ 96) Cost of Cure Hard Costs $37,150 $82,067 $82,067 Soft Costs* $16,177 $16,177 Entrepreneurial Profit $15,637 $15,637 Total Compensation $182,530 $326,632 $305,357 71 • Planning, Engineering and Permit Fees If actual cost of cure were used in place of the estimates used in the City's last settlement correspondence, .the "City's Offer" above would actually increase from $182,530 to $259,261 resulting in a difference between the City's offer and Mr. Trainer's settlement proposal of only $46,096. In essence, the only arguable settlement difference we have is based on the price per square foot to be paid for the land. As you probably know, there are recent sales almost directly across Highway 29 at $20 PSF. Again, it is difficult to imagine that Mr. Trainer's property is worth less than $15.00 PSF and it seems that settlement at $13.50 PSF constitutes a significant concession. Mr. Trainer is interested in completing this matter as quickly and reasonably as possible. To the extent the City is able to complete any of the construction projects detailed above as part of Its project and at its expense, he Is willing to do that. We will execute a temporary construction easement detailing the itemswhich will be undertaken by the City's contractor. Hopefully this will expedite the process and save the City some money. ii/p/`2005 11:38 FAX 5124748804 WOMACK MCCLISH f?1006/006 Mr. Kent A. Sick November 23, 2005 Page •5- Again, we appreciate the time necessary to present this offer and look forward to your reply. 5i rel(L lyyj,l `0 Dan Foster DF/br cc: Mr. Doug Trainer I:\0501-A05=5ettlement proposal Council Meeting Date: January 10, 2006 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET B T: Discussion and possible action regarding Pass-Through Tolling/Financing Projects (presented to TxDOT on December 22, 2005) for possible funding. ITEM SUMMARY: The City of Georgetown has been looking into possible options to finance transportation improvement projects needed in our area. Staff has reviewed and evaluated a program that is under Title 43 of the Texas Administrative Code, Chapter 5, Subchapter E: Pass -Through Tolls. This Code will allow the City of Georgetown and the Transportation Commission to enter into a contract for financing of our most needed transportation projects. Through this agreement, the City of Georgetown will pay for the initial cost of the projects and the State will reimburse the City, at a rate determined by the volume of traffic that uses the roadway improvements, over a period of up to twenty years. The participation of local governments in these agreements has typically been twenty percent (20%). The funding for these projects is distributed on a first- come, first-served basis and is limited to the funds available in Fund 6 (the State Highway Fund). At TxDOT's request, staff presented a list of projects to the District Engineer for consideration of funding and asked that he recommend to the State Transportation Commission that he be given authorization to negotiate a contract with Georgetown for financing of these improvements. Staff requests approval to formulate a funding plan and negotiate a contract with the State for financing of these improvements. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The preliminary estimate for the list of projects is approximately $160,000,000.00. The City would finance the full amount and be reimbursed for 80% of the total over a negotiated period. Full financial impact and analysis would be completed prior to City Council consideration of the contract execution. GUS BOARD RECOMMENDATION: The Transportation Advisory Board met on January 9, 2006 at 1:00 p.m.. Staff will present the Board's recommendation to Council on January 10, 2006. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval to formulate a funding plan and negotiate a contract with the State for financing of these improvements. COMMENTS: None. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Letter to District Engineer 2. List of projects sent to District Engineer 3. Estimated costs of projects Submitted By: For Utility Operations Micki Rundell Director, Finance and Administration CITY HALL CITY OF GEORGETOWN E5T. 1848 G EORGETOWN TEXAS December 22, 2005 Mr. Bob Daigh District Engineer Texas Department of Transportation P.O. Drawer 15426-NESA Austin, TX 78761 Dear Bob: The City of Georgetown has been working for several months in order to come up with an acceptable strategy with regards to financing the construction of area transportation projects within the City of Georgetown and surrounding area. Georgetown has evaluated additional congressional funding, toll options for roadway construction, pass-through financing and direct bond options in cooperative efforts with Williamson County. The City of Georgetown is faced with some tremendous transportation challenges in the next five to fifteen years. A majority is being generated by local growth but also by the increase in traffic flow around the Austin metroplex/Central Texas area. As a result all entities, TxDOT, Williamson County, and cities are faced with the same challenges. In order to effectively respond to the needs for new transportation projects, Georgetown has evaluated the opportunity and potential to finance construction of certain transportation projects through a program under Title 43 of the Texas Administrative Code, Chapter 5, Subchapter E: Pass -Through tolls. In reading this information, it is clear that this is a tool to be used to effectively finance the construction of certain transportation improvement projects. We have taken the time to place a number of transportation projects into a package for consideration within the Georgetown area. These projects include known transportation projects within the Central Texas area, such as the Southwest Bypass. However, also included are frontage roads along IH -35 on the Federal system. 113 E. 8"' Street I P.O. Box 409 1 Georgetown, Texas 78627-0409 1 (512)930-3652 (512) 930-3622 (fax) www.georgetown.org 1 ms@georgetowntx.oro Mr. Bob Daigh December 22, 2005 Page 2 We think that this particular package meets the short and long-term transportation goals of the community and the state-wide traveling public in this area. We sincerely hope that you will give this proposal strong consideration with regards to funding and construction of these projects by recommending to the State Transportation Commission that you be given authorization to negotiate a contract with Georgetown for the financing of these particular projects through the pass-through toll initiative under the Texas Administrative Code. We think that this proposal is a win for Georgetown, Williamson County and the State of Texas. We sincerely hope that we will be able to move forward with these projects collectively to meet the transportation needs of Central Texas and Texans in general. Sincerely, JHB/iw Utility Operations Cc: Paul Brandenburg, City Manager Gary Nelon, Mayor Henry Carr, GTEC President Jack Noble, GTAB Chairman Tom Benz, System Engineering Manager Mark Miller, Transportation Services Manager / [STV ` 184fi GEOW� TEXAS Southwest Bypass State Highway 29 to F.M. 2243 am Gv EST 1848 EORGETOWN TEXAS TEXAS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE TITLE 43: TRANSPORTATION PART 1: TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER 5: FINANCE SUBCHAPTER E: PASS-THROUGH TOLLS RULE §5.53 Proposal Rule §5.53 Proposal: -------------------- (a) A governmental entity authorized to finance, construct, maintain, or operate a state highway, or a private entity may submit in writing to the department a proposal for a project, or a series of projects, to be developed under a pass-through toll agreement. The proposal must include: The Georgetown City Council has adopted the overall transportation plan. Funding for these projects will be brought to council for approval. The City of Georgetown has been authorized to finance, construct, maintain, or operate a state highway. (1) a description of the project, including the project limits, connections with other transportation facilities, and a description of the services to be provided by the developer; Project Description • The larger project, Southwest Bypass, is a proposed four -lane, divided facility located in the southern portion of the City of Georgetown, Texas. The Southwest Bypass will provide integral connections between SH 29, F.M. 2243 and IH 35. This project will provide a free flow of traffic between these roadways. The completion of the Southwest Bypass and its connection to D.B. Wood Road will provide access from the northwest quadrant of the City of Georgetown directly to both IH 35 and SH 130. This route will also divert internal traffic from IH 35, FM 2338, FM 2243, and SH 29 through Georgetown, allowing access to existing and proposed economic development projects within the community. Proiect Limits .• Southwest Bypass, beginning at a point on FM 2243 (Leander Road), 2.2 miles west of IH 35, and extending northward 2.3 miles to its intersection with SH 29, approximately 2 miles west of IH 35. An additional project is to be constructed by the City of Georgetown to provide connectivity from the Southwest Bypass allowing direct access from D.B. Wood Road which connects northwest Georgetown/Williams Drive West with the Southwest Bypass. (See attached exhibit) The City of Georgetown proposes a turnkey project including; Engineering (preliminary and final), environmental and archeological clearances, right-of-way acquisition and construction. Once completed, the City will assume maintenance of this facility. Page l of 4 J:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\14B SW Bypass Revision.doc Leprid PRA^OS'cO PROJEC* -J_ OTHER TIP PROJECr? 1(1 7) � E%44TTMti ROA(6 CnLVJIT$ 29 �� �� uaaa n(4 rs P •w t i� is O to ri ` �Xc"�*uon®a�g�yn emsnwsmara�arM®WOg�9'O 22 so— ar ara-Vft a, a—V— uasry syr rvmm (2) a statement of the benefits anticipated to result from completion of the project; Georgetown's Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) list identifies project 14 B as the Southwest Bypass SH 29 to FM 2243. By itself, this portion of roadway will provide an alternate north/south route for vehicles to and from the City's largest areas of residential and commercial growth. This alternate route will improve safety by giving heavy truck traffic an opportunity to avoid local schools and neighborhoods while decreasing the counts on the already congested IH 35 intersections. This segment, being a portion of Southwest Bypass, will provide an integral connection between SH 29 and 1H 35. The Southwest Bypass will complete a loop of the South side of the City that will provide an alternative east/west route and prevent the need to widen SH 29 through the Historic District. The completion of the Bypass and its connection to D.B. Wood road will provide access from the northwest quadrant of the City directly to both IH 35 and SH 130. This route will also divert internal traffic Page 2 of 4 1:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\148 SW Bypass Revision.doc from IH 35, SH 29 and FM 2338 through Georgetown, allowing access to existing and proposed economic development projects within the community. Based on Georgetown's transportation model the future average daily traffic volume in 2010 is expected to be 5500. (3) a description of the local public support for the project and any local public opposition; The City of Georgetown's 4B Corporation has held an advertised public hearing and the only concern regarding this project was from the neighborhoods on Leander Road. They preferred that both sections be constructed at the same time. (14B and 14C) (4) a proposed project development and implementation schedule; If funding is made available, the project will move forward in our Transportation Improvements Planning (TIP) process. (5) a description of the entity's experience in developing highway projects, if the proposer is a public entity; The City of Georgetown is currently developing Southwest Bypass and Southeast Arterial 1 to State and Federal standards, using consultant engineers with extensive experience in developing highway projects with the State of Texas Department of Transportation. In addition, City staff has worked on numerous advance funding agreements with Texas Department of Transportation, the purchase of right-of-way for the SH 29 project, and the City of Georgetown's Systems Engineering Manager has experience with State of California Department of Transportation. (6) complete information concerning the experience, expertise, technical competence, and qualifications of the proposer and of each member of the proposer's management team and of other key employees or consultants, including the name, address, and professional designation of each member of the proposer's management team and of other key employees or consultants, and the capability of the proposer to develop the proposed projects, if the proposer is a private entity; This question is not applicable, because the city is not a private entity. (7) if available, a proposed pass-through toll payment schedule; At this time the City of Georgetown does not have a proposed payment schedule. (8) a statement indicating whether the proposer intends for the project to be tolled and, if the proposer intends for a tolled project to be first opened to traffic as a non -tolled highway, the approximate date on which the highway will begin to be tolled; and Page 3 of 4 1:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\I4B SW Bypass Revision.doc The City of Georgetown does not intend for the project to be tolled. (9) a statement indicating whether the proposer intends to enter into a comprehensive development agreement, if the proposer is a private entity. (b) If requested, and unless prohibited by law, the department will release to the public a proposal submitted under this section. (c) The private entity and the department may agree to develop a project under a comprehensive development agreement if authorized by other law. Notwithstanding any other provision of this subchapter, Chapter 27, Subchapter A, of this title (relating to Policy, Rules, and Procedures for Private Involvement in Department Turnpike Projects), applies to the solicitation, advertisement, negotiation and execution of a comprehensive development agreement. This question is not applicable because the City is not a private entity. Page 4 of 4 1:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\IQ SW Bypass Revision.doc Southwest Bypass F.M. 2243 to IH 35 14C EST. 1848 GEORGETOWN TEXAS TEXAS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE TITLE 43: TRANSPORTATION PART 1: TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER 5: FINANCE SUBCHAPTER E: PASS-THROUGH TOLLS RULE §5.53 Proposal Rule §5.53 Proposal: (a) A governmental entity authorized to finance, construct, maintain, or operate a state highway or a private entity may submit in writing to the department a proposal for a project, or a series of projects, to be developed under a pass-through toll agreement. The proposal must include: The Georgetown City Council has adopted the overall transportation plan. Funding for these projects will be brought to council for approval. The City of Georgetown has been authorized to finance, construct, maintain, or operate a state highway. (1) a description of the project, including the project limits, connections with other transportation facilities, and a description of the services to be provided by the developer; Proiect Description • The larger project, Southwest Bypass, is a proposed four -lane, divided facility located in the southern portion of the City of Georgetown, Texas. The Southwest Bypass will provide integral connections between SH 29, F.M. 2243 and IH 35. This project will provide a free flow of traffic between these roadways. The completion of the Southwest Bypass and its connection to D.B. Wood Road will provide access from the northwest quadrant of the City of Georgetown directly to both IH 35 and SH 130. This route will also divert internal traffic from IH 35 through Georgetown, allowing access to existing and proposed economic development projects within the community. (See attached exhibit). Project Limits: Southwest Bypass, beginning at a point on FM 2243 (Leander Road), 2.2 miles west of IH 35 and extending southward and eastward 2 miles to its intersection east of IH 35 at the existing intersection of the Southeast Inner Loop and Blue Springs Boulevard. (2) a statement of the benefits anticipated to result from completion of the project; The completion of the Southwest Bypass is of great significance to the City of Georgetown and Williamson County as a regional roadway. SH 29 currently carries significant east -west traffic through the Georgetown area. Trip counts on SH 29 are anticipated to double once State Highway 130 is open. This project would allow regional traffic a more efficient route around Georgetown. The bypass will provide an alternative to IH 35 for local trips thus reducing congestion on the National Highway System. With completion of the Southwest Bypass project, connectivity will be achieved from F.M. 2338 (Williams Drive) in the northwest quadrant to the southern portion of the City at IH 35 Page 1 of 3 J:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\I4 C SW Bypass Revision.doc Legend 6 ® PRWOSEDPRNECT a C`SfFA'W PRDJEC a Q9 —crasnrw PWDS - D 02E J.E. Q. 29 �o g k4lab Eu �a a moo e, moo o 0 A' f e �9@tt IDt®t�tE68tID®ttttt@9ttlt16f�,i sown: cePdcsortetan, 6Natxben LtlgsSdwn. Y2RtD5 (3) a description of the local public support for the project and any local public opposition; The City of Georgetown's 4B Corporation has held an advertised public hearing and no opposition was raised on this project. (4) a proposed project development and implementation schedule; If funding is made available, the project will move forward in our Transportation Improvements Planning (TIP) process. Page 2 of 3 J:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\I4 C SW Bypass Revision.doc (5) a description of the entity's experience in developing highway projects, if the proposer is a public entity; The City of Georgetown is currently developing Southwest Bypass and Southeast Arterial I to State and Federal standards, using consultant engineers with extensive experience in developing highway projects with the State of Texas Department of Transportation. In addition, City staff' has worked on numerous advance funding agreements with the Texas Department of Transportation, the purchase right-of-way for the SH 29 project, and the City of Georgetown's Systems Engineering Manager has experience with State of California Department of Transportation. (6) complete information concerning the experience, expertise, technical competence, and qualifications of the proposer and of each member of the proposer's management team and of other key employees or consultants, including the name, address, and professional designation of each member of the proposer's management team and of other key employees or consultants, and the capability of the proposer to develop the proposed projects, if the proposer is a private entity; This question is not applicable, because the City is not a private entity. (7) if available, a proposed pass-through toll payment schedule; At this time, the City of Georgetown does not have a proposed payment schedule. (8) a statement indicating whether the proposer intends for the project to be tolled and, if the proposer intends for a tolled project to be first opened to traffic as a non -tolled highway, the approximate date on which the highway will begin to be tolled; and The City of Georgetown does not intend for the project to be tolled. (9) a statement indicating whether the proposer intends to enter into a comprehensive development agreement, if the proposer is a private entity. (b) If requested, and unless prohibited by law, the department will release to the public a proposal submitted under this section. (c) The private entity and the department may agree to develop a project under a comprehensive development agreement if authorized by other law. Notwithstanding any other provision of this subchapter, Chapter 27, Subchapter A, of this title (relating to Policy, Rules, and Procedures for Private Involvement in Department Turnpike Projects), applies to the solicitation, advertisement, negotiation and execution of a comprehensive development agreement. This question is not applicable because the City is not a private entity. Page 3 of 3 1:\SystemsEngineering\Transportauon\Pass-through-financing\14 C SW Bypass Revision.doc Southeast Arterial One Southeast Inner Loop to State Highway 130 v EST. 1848 GEORGETOWN TEXAS TEXAS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE TITLE 43: TRANSPORTATION PART 1: TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER 5: FINANCE SUBCHAPTER E: PASS-THROUGH TOLLS RULE §5.53 Proposal Rule §5.53 Proposal: (a) A governmental entity authorized to finance, construct, maintain, or operate a state highway or a private entity may submit in writing to the department a proposal for a project, or a series of projects, to be developed under a pass-through toll agreement. The proposal must include: The Georgetown City Council has adopted the overall transportation plan. Funding for these projects will be brought to council for approval. The City of Georgetown has been authorized to finance, construct, maintain, or operate a state highway. (1) a description of the project, including the project limits, connections with other transportation facilities, and a description of the services to be provided by the developer; Proiect Description: Southeast Arterial One (SE 1) project will consist of a four lane divided facility connecting SH 130 at CR 104 overpass to Southeast Inner Loop at CR 110 with grade separation at CR 110 south of Inner Loop and a fly -over at Inner Loop to allow continuous east/west movement. The City of Georgetown proposes a turnkey project including; Engineering (preliminary and final), environmental and archeological clearances, right-of-way acquisition and construction. Once completed, the City will assume maintenance of this facility. Proiect Limits: Southeast Arterial 1 will travel west from the intersection of State Highway 130 and County Road 104, to connect with the Georgetown Inner Loop at its intersection with County Road 110. (2) a statement of the benefits anticipated to result from completion of the project; Georgetown's Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) project list identifies Project (12) as Arterial SE One from Inner Loop to SH 130. The SH 130 preliminary engineering projections indicated that the SH 29 overpass would need to be six lanes to accommodate the future traffic counts. This project will provide an alternative east/west route between SH 130 and IH 35 eliminating the need to widen SH 29 to six lanes through Georgetown and its historic district. The completion of this arterial along with the Southwest Bypass projects will divert internal traffic from SH 29, IH 35 and Business 35 through Georgetown. Base on the Georgetown Transportation Model the future average traffic volume in 2010 is expected to be 8000. Page 1 of 3 J:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\I2 SE -1 Revision.doc N \\+ Legend \\\\ raorusacnrc:' %\\\ --oris nv rearm — -(CHID ROADS \\` :M L TS \\ 9_=5 \� W" r 29 y lot 1 1 1( ` tv \ M FUT 130 er ® i �� ��Otla�i01E iyb` 8°"m"Ciry UMIY S)We 1 (3) a description of the local public support for the project and any local public opposition; The City of Georgetown's 4B Corporation has held an advertised public hearing and no opposition was raised on this project. (4) a proposed project development and implementation schedule; If funding is made available the project will move forward in our Transportation Improvements Planning (TIP) process. (5) a description of the entity's experience in developing highway projects, if the proposer is a public entity; Page 2 of 3 J:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\I2 SE -I Revision.doc The City of Georgetown is currently developing Southwest Bypass and Southeast Arterial 1 to State and Federal standards using consultant engineers with extensive experience in developing highway projects with the State of Texas Department of Transportation. In addition, City staff has work on numerous advance funding agreements with the Texas Department of Transportation, the purchase of right-of- way for the SH 29 project, and the City of Georgetown's Systems Engineering Manager has experience with State of California Department of Transportation. (6) complete information concerning the experience, expertise, technical competence, and qualifications of the proposer and of each member of the proposer's management team and of other key employees or consultants, including the name, address, and professional designation of each member of the proposer's management team and of other key employees or consultants, and the capability of the proposer to develop the proposed projects, if the proposer is a private entity; This question is not applicable, because the city is not a private entity. (7) if available, a proposed pass-through toll payment schedule; At this time the City of Georgetown does not have a proposed payment schedule. (8) a statement indicating whether the proposer intends for the project to be tolled and, if the proposer intends for a tolled project to be first opened to traffic as a non -tolled highway, the approximate date on which the highway will begin to be tolled; and The project does not intend to be tolled. (9) a statement indicating whether the proposer intends to enter into a comprehensive development agreement, if the proposer is a private entity. (b) If requested, and unless prohibited by law, the department will release to the public a proposal submitted under this section. (c) The private entity and the department may agree to develop a project under a comprehensive development agreement if authorized by other law. Notwithstanding any other provision of this subchapter, Chapter 27, Subchapter A, of this title (relating to Policy, Rules, and Procedures for Private Involvement in Department Turnpike Projects), applies to the solicitation, advertisement, negotiation, and execution of a comprehensive development agreement. This question is not applicable because the city is not a private entity. Page 3 of 3 J:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\I2 SE -I Revision.doc Northbound Frontage Road FM 2338 to Lakeway Drive V EST. 1848 GEORGETOWN TEXAS TEXAS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE TITLE 43: TRANSPORTATION PART 1: TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER 5: FINANCE SUBCHAPTER E: PASS-THROUGH TOLLS RULE §5.53 Proposal Rule §5.53 Proposal: (a) A governmental entity authorized to finance, construct, maintain, or operate a state highway or a private entity may submit in writing to the department a proposal for a project, or a series of projects, to be developed under a pass-through toll agreement. The proposal must include: The Georgetown City Council has adopted the overall transportation plan. Funding for these projects will be brought to council for approval. The City of Georgetown has been authorized to finance, construct, maintain, or operate a state highway. (1) a description of the project, including the project limits, connections with other transportation facilities, and a description of the services to be provided by the developer; Northbound Frontage Road (FM 2338 to Lakeway Drive) Georgetown's Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) list identifies this project as 24, section 3. This project will consist of a one-way, northbound, two-lane facility connecting FM 2338 to the Lakeway Drive overpass. (2) a statement of the benefits anticipated to result from completion of the project; This project will provide connectivity and mobility to the City of Georgetown by connecting FM 2338 to Lakeway Drive. Lakeway Drive overpass is presently under design by the Texas Department of Transportation for a widening project. The Northeast Inner Loop has recently been extended to tie in at the Lakeway overpass. The new frontage road will provide better access to the Inner Loop and increase mobility to the citizens of Georgetown. This project will decrease traffic along Business 35 (Austin Avenue) and FM 971 within the City. The FM 2338 and Business 35 (Austin Avenue) intersection has serious congestion issues and will benefit from the addition of this alternative route. This frontage road will create the possibility of an additional overpass at Northwest Boulevard and will provide for better connectivity and access to Austin Avenue and FM 971. (3) a description of the local public support for the project and any local public opposition; The City of Georgetown's 4B Corporation has held an advertised public hearing and no opposition was raised on this project. Page 1 of 3 1:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\24.3 NB Frontage FM 2238 to Lakeway Revision.doc (4) a proposed project development and implementation schedule; If funding is made available the project will move forward in our Transportation Improvements Planning (TIP) process. (5) a description of the entity's experience in developing highway projects, if the proposer is a public entity; The City of Georgetown is currently developing Southwest Bypass and Southeast Arterial I to State and Federal standards using consultant engineers with extensive experience in developing highway projects with the State of Texas Department of Transportation. In addition, City staff has worked on numerous advance funding agreements with the Texas Department of Transportation, the purchasing of right - Page 2 of 3 1:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\24.3 NB Frontage FM 2238 to Lakeway Revision.doc e f, 35 PROPOSES PROJECT �1�i`�\rr i9N1 (4) a proposed project development and implementation schedule; If funding is made available the project will move forward in our Transportation Improvements Planning (TIP) process. (5) a description of the entity's experience in developing highway projects, if the proposer is a public entity; The City of Georgetown is currently developing Southwest Bypass and Southeast Arterial I to State and Federal standards using consultant engineers with extensive experience in developing highway projects with the State of Texas Department of Transportation. In addition, City staff has worked on numerous advance funding agreements with the Texas Department of Transportation, the purchasing of right - Page 2 of 3 1:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\24.3 NB Frontage FM 2238 to Lakeway Revision.doc of -way for the SH 29 project, and the City of Georgetown's Systems Engineering Manager has experience with State of California Department of Transportation. (6) complete information concerning the experience, expertise, technical competence, and qualifications of the proposer and of each member of the proposer's management team and of other key employees or consultants, including the name, address, and professional designation of each member of the proposer's management team and of other key employees or consultants, and the capability of the proposer to develop the proposed projects, if the proposer is a private entity; This question is not applicable, because the city is not a private entity. (7) if available, a proposed pass-through toll payment schedule; At this time the City of Georgetown does not have a proposed payment schedule. (8) a statement indicating whether the proposer intends for the project to be tolled and, if the proposer intends for a tolled project to be first opened to traffic as a non -tolled highway, the approximate date on which the highway will begin to be tolled; and The City of Georgetown does not intend for this project to be tolled. (9) a statement indicating whether the proposer intends to enter into a comprehensive development agreement, if the proposer is a private entity. (b) If requested, and unless prohibited by law, the department will release to the public a proposal submitted under this section. (c) The private entity and the department may agree to develop a project under a comprehensive development agreement if authorized by other law. Notwithstanding any other provision of this subchapter, Chapter 27, Subchapter A, of this title (relating to Policy, Rules, and Procedures for Private Involvement in Department Turnpike Projects), applies to the solicitation, advertisement, negotiation, and execution of a comprehensive development agreement. This question is not applicable because the city is not a private entity. Page 3 of 3 1:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\24.3 KB Frontage FM 2238 to Lakeway Revision.doc Northbound Frontage Road and Bridge FM 2243 to State Highway 29 v EST. 1848 GEORGETOWN TEXAS TEXAS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE TITLE 43: TRANSPORTATION PART 1: TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER 5: FINANCE SUBCHAPTER E: PASS-THROUGH TOLLS RULE §5.53 Proposal Rule §5.53 Proposal: (a) A governmental entity authorized to finance, construct, maintain, or operate a state highway or a private entity may submit in writing to the department a proposal for a project, or a series of projects, to be developed under a pass-through toll agreement. The proposal must include: The Georgetown City Council has adopted the overall transportation plan. Funding for these projects will be brought to council for approval. The City of Georgetown has been authorized to finance, construct, maintain, or operate a state highway. (1) a description of the project, including the project limits, connections with other transportation facilities, and a description of the services to be provided by the developer; Project Description: Northbound Frontage Road and Bridge (FM 2243 to SH 19) The City of Georgetown's Transportation Improvement Project (TIP) list identifies this project as 24, Section 2. This project will consist of a one-way northbound two-lane facility connecting FM 2243 to SH 29, including a bridge structure over the South San Gabriel River. The City of Georgetown proposes a turnkey project including; engineering, (preliminary and final), environmental and archeological clearances, right-of-way acquisition and construction. (2) a statement of the benefits anticipated to result from completion of the project; This project will provide connectivity and mobility to the City of Georgetown by connecting FM 2243 to SH 29. The proposed roadway ties to existing plans Williamson County has for adding a northbound frontage road between Inner Loop and FM 2243. Safety will be enhanced by eliminating the clover leaf style northbound entrance ramp. Another safety enhancement will come f om providing possible additional access points to the Georgetown Hospital and U.S. Post office on the south side of the South San Gabriel River. The possibility of purchasing access rights along new f outage road will promote economic development on the undeveloped land north of the South San Gabriel River. The frontage road will also help accommodate a U-turn structure that will be needed in the near future. The Georgetown Transportation Model estimates the future average daily volume for the frontage road from Southeast Inner Loop to Lakeway Drive to be 4600 in 2010. Page 1 of 3 J:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\24.2 NB Frontage FM 2243 to SH 29 Revision.doc (3) a description of the local public support for the project and any local public opposition; The City of Georgetown's 4B Corporation has held an advertised public hearing and no opposition was raised on this project. (4) a proposed project development and implementation schedule; If funding is made available the project will move forward in our transportation improvements planning (TIP) process. Page 2 of 3 J:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-finmcing\24.2 NB Frontage FM 2243 to SH 29 Revision.doc (5) a description of the entity's experience in developing highway projects, if the proposer is a public entity; The City of Georgetown is currently developing Southwest Bypass and Southeast Arterial 1 to State and Federal standards using consultant engineers with extensive experience in developing highway projects with the State of Texas Department of Transportation. In addition, City staff has worked on numerous advance funding agreements with Texas Department of Transportation, the purchasing of right-of- way for the SH 29 project, and the City of Georgetown's Systems Engineering Manager has experience with State of California Department of Transportation. (6) complete information concerning the experience, expertise, technical competence, and qualifications of the proposer and of each member of the proposer's management team and of other key employees or consultants, including the name, address, and professional designation of each member of the proposer's management team and of other key employees or consultants, and the capability of the proposer to develop the proposed projects, if the proposer is a private entity; This question is not applicable, because the city is not a private entity. (7) if available, a proposed pass-through toll payment schedule; At this time the City of Georgetown does not have a proposed payment schedule. (8) a statement indicating whether the proposer intends for the project to be tolled and, if the proposer intends for a tolled project to be first opened to traffic as a non -tolled highway, the approximate date on which the highway will begin to be tolled; and The project is not intended to be tolled. (9) a statement indicating whether the proposer intends to enter into a comprehensive development agreement, if the proposer is a private entity. (b) If requested, and unless prohibited by law, the department will release to the public a proposal submitted under this section. (c) The private entity and the department may agree to develop a project under a comprehensive development agreement if authorized by other law. Notwithstanding any other provision of this subchapter, Chapter 27, Subchapter A, of this title (relating to Policy, Rules, and Procedures for Private Involvement in Department Turnpike Projects), applies to the solicitation, advertisement, negotiation, and execution of a comprehensive development agreement. This question is not applicable because the City is not a private entity. Page 3 of 3 1:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\24.2 NB Frontage FM 2243 to SH 29 Revision.doc Southeast Inner Loop Blue Springs Boulevard to Southeast Arterial 1 V EST1848 GEORGETOWN TEXAS TEXAS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE TITLE 43: TRANSPORTATION PART 1: TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER 5: FINANCE SUBCHAPTER E: PASS-THROUGH TOLLS RULE §5.53 Proposal Rule §5.53 Proposal: (a) A governmental entity authorized to finance, construct, maintain, or operate a state highway or a private entity may submit in writing to the department a proposal for a project, or a series of projects, to be developed under a pass-through toll agreement. The proposal must include: The Georgetown City Council has adopted the overall transportation plan, funding for these projects will be brought to council for approval. The City of Georgetown has been authorized to finance, construct, maintain, or operate a state highway. (1) a description of the project, including the project limits, connections with other transportation facilities, and a description of the services to be provided by the developer; Proiect Description: Southeast Inner Loop widening to 4 Lanes (Blue Springs Boulevard to SE Arterial 1) Georgetown's Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) list identifies this project as 19A. This project will consist of widening and upgrading the existing section of Inner Loop between Blue Springs Boulevard and Southeast Arterial I to a four -lane, divided facility with grade separation at Maple Street, FM 1460 and Blue Springs Boulevard. The City of Georgetown proposes a turnkey project including: engineering (preliminary and final), environmental and archeological clearances, right-of-way acquisition and construction. Once completed, the City will assume maintenance of this facility. (2) a statement of the benefits anticipated to result from completion of the project; Georgetown's Southeast Inner Loop provides an alternative route to through traffic using SH 29, Austin Avenue, FM 1460 and other roads throughout the City. The additional lanes and grade separation will be needed to accommodate the additional capacity that will be added due to the opening of SH 130 in 2007 and the development presently taking place along this section of the loop. The improvements will also accommodate the terminal of a proposed commuter rail being place on the old MKT right-of-way. (3) a description of the local public support for the project and any local public opposition; The City of Georgetown's 4B Corporation has held an advertised public hearing and no opposition was raised on this project. Page 1 of 3 J:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\Southeast Innerloop Bluesprings to SEI Revision.doc (4) a proposed project development and implementation schedule; If funding is made available the project will move forward in our Transportation Improvements Planning (TIP) process. (5) a description of the entity's experience in developing highway projects, if the proposer is a public entity; The City of Georgetown is currently developing Southwest Bypass and Southeast Arterial to State and Federal standards using consultant engineers with extensive experience in developing highway projects with the State of Texas Department of Transportation. In addition, City staff has worked on numerous advance funding agreements with the Texas Department of Transportation, the purchasing of right- of-way for the SH 29 project, and the City of Georgetown's Systems Engineering Manager has experience with State of California Department of Transportation. Page 2 of 3 J:\SystemsEngineering\Transpottation\Pass-through-financing\Southeast Innerloop Bluesprings to SEI Revision.doc (6) complete information concerning the experience, expertise, technical competence, and qualifications of the proposer and of each member of the proposer's management team and of other key employees or consultants, including the name, address, and professional designation of each member of the proposer's management team and of other key employees or consultants, and the capability of the proposer to develop the proposed projects, if the proposer is a private entity; This question is not applicable, because the city is not a private entity. (7) if available, a proposed pass-through toll payment schedule; At this time the City of Georgetown does not have a proposed payment schedule. (8) a statement indicating whether the proposer intends for the project to be tolled and, if the proposer intends for a tolled project to be first opened to traffic as a non -tolled highway, the approximate date on which the highway will begin to be tolled; and The project does not intend to be tolled. (9) a statement indicating whether the proposer intends to enter into a comprehensive development agreement, if the proposer is a private entity. (b) If requested, and unless prohibited by law, the department will release to the public a proposal submitted under this section. (c) The private entity and the department may agree to develop a project under a comprehensive development agreement if authorized by other law. Notwithstanding any other provision of this subchapter, Chapter 27, Subchapter A, of this title (relating to Policy, Rules, and Procedures for Private Involvement in Department Turnpike Projects), applies to the solicitation, advertisement, negotiation and execution of a comprehensive development agreement. This question is not applicable because the City is not a private entity. Page 3 of 3 J:\SystemsEngineering\Transportation\Pass-through-financing\Southeast Innerloop Bluesprings to SEI Revision.doc Lakeway Drive and Overpass EST. 11141 GEORGETOWN TEXAS TEXAS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE TITLE 43: TRANSPORTATION PART 1: TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER 5: FINANCE SUBCHAPTER E: PASS-THROUGH TOLLS RULE §5.53 Proposal Rule §5.53 Proposal: (a) A governmental entity authorized to finance, construct, maintain, or operate a state highway or a private entity may submit in writing to the department a proposal for a project, or a series of projects, to be developed under a pass-through toll agreement. The proposal must include: The Georgetown City Council has adopted the overall transportation plan. Funding for these projects will be brought to council for approval. The City of Georgetown has been authorized to finance, construct, maintain, or operate a state highway. (1) a description of the project, including the project limits, connections with other transportation facilities, and a description of the services to be provided by the developer; Project Description: The project consists of the realignment of Lakeway Drive and the reconstruction of the overpass as a five -lane facility between Airport Road and Business 35. Proiect Limits: Lakeway Drive and Overpass Reconstruction (Airport Road to Business 35) Georgetown's Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) list identifies this project as 10 (Northeast Inner Loop/Lakeway Bridge over IH 35, from Austin Avenue to Airport (2) a statement of the benefits anticipated to result from completion of the project; This project will provide connectivity and mobility to the City of Georgetown by making the Inner Loop a more attractive route. The intersection of Lakeway Drive and Business 35 has had a history of serious accidents and congestion. The Bridge structure and alignment improvements will improve traffic flow and offer relief to the heavily congested intersection. Safety will be enhanced with the signalization and realignment of this intersection. Extending this project to Airport Road allows signals to be timed for maximum traffic flows. These improvements also benefit future plans of completing the northbound frontage road between FM 2338 and Lakeway Drive. Page 1 of 3 1:\System Engineering\Transportation\Pass-through-6nancing\Lakeway Drive and Overpws.doc (3) a description of the local public support for the project and any local public opposition; The City of Georgetown's 4B corporation has held an advertised public hearing and no opposition was raised on this project. (4) a proposed project development and implementation schedule; Iffunding is made available the project will move forward in our Transportation Improvements Planning (TIP) process. Page 2 of 3 1:\System Engincering\TransportafionTus-thmugh-financing\Lakeway Drive and Ovetpass.doc (5) a description of the entity's experience in developing highway projects, if the proposer is a public entity; The City of Georgetown is currently developing Southwest Bypass and Southeast Arterial I to State and Federal standards using consultant engineers with extensive experience with developing highway projects with the State of Texas Department of Transportation. In addition, City staff has worked on numerous advance funding agreements with the Texas Department of Transportation, the purchasing of right- of-way for the SH 29 project, and the City of Georgetown's Systems Engineering Manager has experience with State of California Department of Transportation. (6) complete information concerning the experience, expertise, technical competence, and qualifications of the proposer and of each member of the proposer's management team and of other key employees or consultants, including the name, address, and professional designation of each member of the proposer's management team and of other key employees or consultants, and the capability of the proposer to develop the proposed projects, if the proposer is a private entity; This question is not applicable, because the city is not a private entity. (7) if available, a proposed pass-through toll payment schedule; At this time the City of Georgetown does not have a proposed payment schedule. (8) a statement indicating whether the proposer intends for the project to be tolled and, if the proposer intends for a tolled project to be first opened to traffic as a non -tolled highway, the approximate date on which the highway will begin to be tolled; and The City of Georgetown does not intend for this project to be tolled. (9) a statement indicating whether the proposer intends to enter into a comprehensive development agreement, if the proposer is a private entity. (b) If requested, and unless prohibited by law, the department will release to the public a proposal submitted under this section. (c) The private entity and the department may agree to develop a project under a comprehensive development agreement if authorized by other law. Notwithstanding any other provision of this subchapter, Chapter 27, Subchapter A, of this title (relating to Policy, Rules, and Procedures for Private Involvement in Department Turnpike Projects), applies to the solicitation, advertisement, negotiation, and execution of a comprehensive development agreement. This question is not applicable because the City is not a private entity. Page 3 of 3 ]:\System Engineering\Transponeuon\Pass.through-financing\Lakmay Drive and Overpass.doc CITY OF GEORGETOWN PROPOSAL FOR PASS- THROUGH - FINANCING/TOLLING Project Description and Limits Project Estimate Southwest Bypass SH 29 to F.M. 2243 $ 51,400,000 Southwest Bypass FM 2243 to IH 35 $ 60,200,000 Southeast Arterial One Southeast Inner Loop to SH 130 $ 12,400,000 Northbound Frontage Road FM 2238 to Lakewa Drive $ 9,500,000 Northbound Frontage Road FM 2243 to SH 29 $ 10,000,000 Southeast Innerloo Blue Springs Blvd. to Southeast Arterial One $ 10,000,000 Lakeway Drive Overpass Reconstruction $ 6,000,000 Total $ 159,500,000