Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda CC 06.10.2003Notice of Meeting of the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas :L Tuesday, June 10, 2003 The Georgetown City Council will meet on Tuesday, June 10, 2003 at 06:00:00 PM at the San Gabriel Room of the Georgetown Municipal Complex, 300 Industrial Avenue, 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 and made available for broadcast by the local cable company. Regular Session to convene and continue Executive Session, if necessary Executive Session In compliance with the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551, Government Code, Vernon's Texas Codes, Annotated, the items listed below will be discussed in closed session and are subject to action in the regular session that follows Sec.551.071 consultation with attorney - Pending Litigation - Thomas L. Suarez. Jr. vs. city of Georgetown, Texas. City of Georgetown Police Department. Georgetown Police Sgt. ' Kelly Devo/l, Georgetown Police Officer Jack Lacey, Matt Painter, Brian Grubbs, Cause No. 03-113-C368 in the 368th Judicial Distnct Court of Williamson County, Texas - Matthew Painter and Brian Grubbs, Plaintiffs v. David Morgan. Individually and in his Official Capacity as Chief of Police of the Georgetown Police Department, Robert Hernandez, Individually and in his Oficial Capacity as Captain of the Georgetown Police Department., Gary Todd Terbush, Individually and in his Official Capacity as Lieutenant of the • Georgetown Police Department; Georgetown Police Department; and the City of Georgetown, Defendants, Cause No. A03-CA-014JN, In the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, Austin Division. - In the Matter of the Complaint of Oncor Electric Delivery Company Against Certain Cooperatives and Municipal utilities and Petition for Enforcement of Financing Order, Docket No._, before the Public Utility Commission of Texas (2003) Potential Litigation/Settlement Offers - Don L. Dison Complaint to FAA - CTSUD regarding Water Quality Land Application for Proposed Permit No. 14371-001 before the TCEQ Legal Advice Regarding Agenda Items and other Matters - Legal issues related to the proposed SIMON Development Agreement for Wolf Ranch Project Regular Session - To begin no earlier than 6:00 P.M. (The City Council for the City of Georgetown reserves the right to adjourn into executive session at any time during the course of this meeting to discuss any of the matters listed below, as authorized by Texas Government Code Sections 551.071 (Consultation with Attorney), 551.072 (Deliberations about Real Property), 551.073 (Deliberations about Gifts and Donations), 551.074 (Personnel Matters), 551.076 (Deliberations about Security Devices) and 551.086 (Economic Development). B Call to Order C Pledge of Allegiance D Comments from the dais regarding the following items: - Welcome to Audience and Opening Comments — Mayor Gary Nelon - Two vacancies on the Board of Adjustment -- Mayor Gary Nelon - One vacancy on the Main Street Advisory Board — Mayor Gary Nelon E Announcements and Comments from City Manager F Citizens Wishing to Address Council City Council Agenda/June 10, 2003 Page 1 of 3 Pages -A Planning & Development 4. First Reading of an Ordinance to Rezone 1.0818 acres, described as Block B of the South San Gabriel Urban Renewal Tract from MF Multi -Family District to C-1, Local Commercial District located on the south side of West University Avenue (SH29) between Scenic Drive and Railroad Street — Bobby Ray, Chief Development Planner and Amelia Sondgeroth, Director of Planning & Development M Consideration and possible action to appoint Marlene McMichael to the position of Alternate on the Planning and Zoning Commission — Mayor Gary Nelon N Consideration and possible action to approve a resolution approving the Additional Project List as an amendment to the adopted 2002/03 Budget for the Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation (GTEC) in the amount of $1,700,000 — Micki Rundell, Director of Fianance and Administration and Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations h4 0 Consideration and possible action to approve a contract amendment to the existing Professional Services Agreement between the City of Georgetown and HDR Engineering, Inc., to provide professional engineering services related to the Southwest SH29 Bypass — Mark Miller, Transportation Services Manager and Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations P Consideration and possible action to authorize staff to request the FAA to consider changing the traffic pattern for Runway 29 from standard left-hand traffic to non-standard right-hand traffic as a safety and noise mitigation measure -- Travis McLain, Airport Manager and Tom Yantis, Assistant City Manager Q Consideration and possible action to approve the addition of two police officers to the Georgetown Police Department's Traffic Unit to complement the Comprehensive Traffic Management Plan -- David Morgan, Police Chief R Second Readings 1. Second Reading of an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, amending Chapter 6.16 of the Code of Ordinances pertaining to "Peddlers and Solicitors" to prohibit peddling and soliciting in public streets; and adding new Section 9.12.030 to the Code of Ordinances prohibiting panhandling in public streets — Kevin Stofie, Assistant Police Chief and David Morgan, Police Chief 2. Second Reading of an ordinance closing the Public Hearing and levying the assessments for the cost of certain improvements in the Georgetown Village Public Improvement District #1— Patricia E. Carls, City Attorney Certificate of Postina 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 , 2003, 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/June 10, 2003 Page 3 of 3 Pages City Council Meeting Date: June 10, 2003 Item No. T. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Council consideration and possible action to approve a contract amendment to the existing Professional Services Agreement between the City of Georgetown and HDR Engineering, Inc., to provide professional engineering services related to miscellaneous transportation work, not to exceed $24,500. ITEM SUMMARY: This contract will provide City staff with professional engineering, consulting and related services for assistance on transportation projects on an as needed basis. HDR Engineering can provide expertise in many technical areas not available under City resources. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Individual tasks will be charged to various GTEC accounts as they pertain to each specific project. GTEC BOARD RECOMMENDATION: GTEC Board approved this HDR contract, on May 22, 2003, Approved 7-0 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that council approve this contract amendment with HDR Engineering in an amount not to exceed $24,500. COMMENTS: None. ATTACHMENTS: HDR Engineering letter and amendment to contract. Submit Jim Briggs, Assistant Mark Miller, Manager, City Manager for Utilities Transportation Services June 3, 2003 Mr. Jim Briggs Assistant City Manager City of Georgetown 115 East 8s' Street Georgetown, TX 78626 Dear Mr. Briggs; The enclosed Master Services Contract for General Engineering Services for Transportation Projects establishes a basis for periodic, rapid engagement of our services via Task Orders. Total billings cannot exceed $24,500. We anticipate that several Task Orders may be executed to assist you and your staff with Transportation issues confronting the Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation and the City Council. Please return one of the two original copies of the contract when approved. We appreciate the opportunity to work at Georgetown. Sincerely, J&nes K. (Ken) Hane , P.E. Executive Vice President HDR Engineering, Inc21 Sn'.ah IH -35 Phyte: 151219125100 S ... te 300 Fax .151 21 912 81 58 Austn 'X 787=1?&12 w rxlnnc.cem STATE OF TEXAS § MASTER SERVICES CONTRACT FOR § COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON § GENERAL ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS NOT TO EXCEED $24,500 § CITY OF GEORGETOWN § HDR ENGINEERING INC. This is an agreement by and between the CITY OF GEORGETOWN, a Texas Home Rule Municipal Corporation, ("CITY"), and HDR ENGINEERING, INC. ("ENGINEER"), whereby ENGINEER agrees to perform professional services on miscellaneous Transportation projects. WHEREAS, the CITY desires to retain ENGINEER, a professional engineering firm, to provide professional engineering, consulting, and related services for transportation projects in an amount not to exceed $24,500. WHEREAS, ENGINEER desires to perform professional engineering services on such projects as may be requested from time to time by the CITY. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties agree as follows: ARTICLE I -- PROJECT DEFINED 1.01 The term "PROJECT' as used herein shall refer to those specific projects defined from time to time by the City on the PROJECT TASK ORDER FORM attached hereto as "Exhibit A.". ARTICLE II -- INITIATION OF WORK 2.01 ENGINEER shall not commence any work unless and until the CITY issues a duly executed PROJECT TASK ORDER FORM for each project. 2.02 Upon receipt of authorization to commence planning ENGINEER may meet with CITY for the purpose of determining the nature of the PROJECT. CITY shall designate a representative to act as the contact person on behalf of the CITY. 2.03 No TASK ORDER FORM shall be binding or enforceable unless and until it has been duly executed by authorized representatives of the CITY and the ENGINEER. 2.04 CITY shall provide all available criteria and information pertaining to each PROJECT. City of Georgetown and HDR Master Services Contract Page 1 of 10 ARTICLE III -- COMPENSATION 3.01 Compensation for services performed under this Agreement shall be either on a time and materials basis or on a fixed price basis. The particular method of compensation for each PROJECT shall be specified in the TASK ORDER FORM. (a) Time and Materials: Compensation for services performed on a time and materials basis shall be in accordance with the RATE SCHEDULE and terms attached to this Agreement as Exhibit 8, which included the charges for all professional, technical, engineering, and administrative personnel directly charging from time to time on a PROJECT. The RATE SCHEDULE in Exhibit is subject to adjustment upon advance written notice to the CITY and shall be effective only after the CITY agrees in writing to change the RATE SCHEDULE. (b) Compensation for services provided on a lump sum basis shall be as stated in the approved TASK ORDER FORM. 3.02 ENGINEER shall submit monthly invoices and the CITY shall pay within thirty (30) days of approval of the invoice. If the CITY disputes any part of the invoice, it shall pay the non -disputed amounts (if any) and promptly notify ENGINEER of the nature of the dispute to request clarification or correction. ARTICLE IV — STANDARD OF PERFORMANCE 401 ENGINEER represents that the information and services provided underthis Agreement is that of a professional engineer, reflecting the standards, procedures, and performances of the industry for the type of PROJECT performed pursuant to this Agreement in the same location and at the same time, and further represents that the all work and services provided pursuant to this Agreement conform to the professional standard of care in the profession. 4.02 ENGINEER shall be responsible for the accuracy of its work and shall promptly make necessary revisions or corrections to its work product resulting from its errors, omissions, or negligent acts without compensation. ENGINEER will not be relieved of the responsibility for subsequent correction of any such errors or omissions or for clarification of any ambiguities until after a PROJECT has been completed. 4.03 The responsible Engineer shall sign, seal and date all appropriate Engineering submissions to the City in accordance with the Texas Engineering Practice Act and Rules of the State Board of Registration for Professional Engineers. 4.04 ENGINEER's observation or monitoring portions of the work performed under construction contracts shall not relieve the contractor from its responsibility for performing work in accordance with applicable contract documents. ENGINEER shall not control or have charge of, and shall not be responsible for, construction means, methods, techniques, sequences, procedures of construction, health or safety programs or precautions connected with the work and shall not manage, supervise, control or have charge of construction. ENGINEER shall not be responsible for the acts or omissions of City of Georgetown and HDR Master Services contract Page 2 of 10 r the contractor or to other parties on the Project. ENGINEER shall be entitled to review all construction contract documents and ensure that no provisions extent the duties or liabilities of ENGINEER beyond those set forth in this Agreement. 4.05 Any opinions of probable Project cost or probable construction const provided by ENGINEER are made on the basis of information available to ENGINEER and on the basis of ENGINEER's experience and qualifications, and represents its judgment as an experienced and qualified professional engineer. However, since ENGINEER has no control overthe cost of labor, materials, equipment, or services furnished by others, orover the contractor(s') methods of determining prices, or over competitive bidding or market conditions, ENGINEER does not guarantee that proposals, bids, or actual project or construction cost will not vary from opinions or probable cost ENGINEER prepares. ARTICLE V -- INDEMNIFICATION ENGINEER whose work product is the subject of this contract for engineering services agrees to indemnify and hold city, it's elected officials, officers and employees, harmless against any and all claims, lawsuits, judgments, costs, liens, losses, expenses, fees (including attorney's fees and costs of defense), proceedings, actions, demands, causes of action, liability, and suits of any kind and nature, including but not limited to, personal injury (including death), property damage, or other harm for which recovery of damages is sought to the extent arising out of or occasioned or caused by engineer's negligent act, error, or omission of Engineer, any Agent, Officer, Director, Representative, Employee, Consultant, or Subconsultant of Engineer, and their respective Officers. Agents, Employees, Directors, and Representatives for whom ENGINEER is legally liable while in the exercise of performance of the rights or duties under this Contract. The indemnity provided for in this paragraph shall not apply to the extent of any liability resulting from the negligence of CITY, its officers or employees, in instances where such negligence causes personal injury, death, or property damage. In the event Engineer and CITY are found jointly liable by a court of competent jurisdiction, liability shall be apportioned comparatively in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas, without, however, waiving any Governmental immunity available to the City under Texas law and without waiving any defenses of the parties under Texas law. Pursuant to Chapter 271.094 of the Texas Local Government Code or its successor provision, ENGINEER whose work product is the subject of this contract for engineering services, expressively agrees to indemnify and hold CITY, it's Agent and Employees harmless against any and all claims, lawsuits, judgments, costs, liens, losses, expenses, fees (including attorney's fees and costs of defense), proceedings, actions, demands, causes of action, liability, and suits of any kind and nature, for the personal injury, death, or property injury of ENGINEER or the employees of ENGINEER for which recovery of damages is sought that may arise while in the exercise in the performance of the rights or duties under this Contract. It is the express intent of the parties to this CONTRACT that the indemnity provided for in this section is an indemnity extended by ENGINEER to indemnify, protect, and hold harmless, the CITY, its Agents or Employees from the consequences of the negligence of the CITY, its Agents or Employees in instances where such negligence causes personal City of Georgetown and HDR Master Services Contract Page 3 of 10 injury, death, or property damage to ENGINEER or employees of ENGINEER; or any other expense that arises from personal injury, death, or property injury to ENGINEER or employees of ENGINEER. ENGINEER further agrees to defend, at its own expense and on behalf of the CITY and in the name of the CITY, any claim or litigation brought against the CITY in connection with any such injury, death, or property injury for which this indemnity shall apply, as set forth above. ENGINEER shall promptly advise the CITY, in writing, of any claim or demand against the CITY or ENGINEER known to ENGINEER related to or arising out of ENGINEER's activities under this contract. The provisions of this action are solely for the benefit of the parties hereto and not intended to create or grant any rights, contractual, or otherwise, to any other person or entity. ARTICLE VI -- INSURANCE 6.01 ENGINEER shall procure and maintain at its sole cost and expense for the duration of this Agreement insurance against claims for injuries to person or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by ENGINEER, his agents, representatives, volunteers, employees or subcontractors. 6.02 The ENGINEER'S insurance coverage shall be primary insurance with respect to the CITY. its officials. employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by CITY, its officials, employees or volunteers, shall be considered in excess of the ENGINEER'S insurance and shall not contribute to it. 6.03 The ENGINEER shall require all subcontractors to maintain the same insurance as is required by this Agreement. All coverage for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein, including the provision to the City of Certificates of Insurance. 6.04 Certificates of Insurance and endorsements shall be furnished to the CITY and approved by the CITY before work commences. All Certificates of Insurance shall be prepared and executed by the insurance company or its authorized agent. The Certificate of Insurance shall specifically set forth the notice of cancellation ortermination provisions to the City of Georgetown. 6.05 ENGINEER shall use only insurance companies to provide coverage hereunder that meet the following requirements: : 1. The company is licensed and admitted to do business in the State of Texas. 2. The insurances set forth by the insurance company are underwritten on forms which have been approved by the Texas State Board of Insurance or ISO. City of Georgetown and HDR Master Services Contract Page 4 of 10 17 1 In addition, the ENGINEER shall provide information to the City relating to any original endorsements affecting coverage required by this section. 6.06 The following standard insurance policies shall be required: 1. General Liability Policy 2. Automobile Liability Policy 3. Workers Compensation Policy 4. Professional Liability Policy 6.06 The following general requirements are applicable to all policies: A. General Liability, Automobile Liability, and Professional Liability insurance shall be written by a carrier with an A:VIII or better rating in accordance with the current Best Key Rating Guide. B. Only insurance carriers licensed and admitted to do business in the State of Texas will be accepted. C. Deductibles shall be listed on the Certificate of Insurance or separately provided to the CITY by ENGINEER. D. Claims Made Policies will not be accepted, except for Professional Liability Insurance. E. The CITY of Georgetown, its officials, employees, and volunteers, are to be added as "Additional Insured" to the General Liability and the Automobile Liability policies to the extent that ENGINEER's activities under this Agreement are potentially covered by such insurance. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the CITY, its officials, employees, or volunteers. F. A Waiver of Subrogation in favor of the City of Georgetown with respect to Worker's Compensation insurance must be included. G. Each insurance policy shall not be canceled except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City of Georgetown. H. Upon request, certified copies of all insurance policies shall be furnished to the City of Georgetown, and the City shall bear the cost of such copies at a rate not to exceed $0.10 per page. 6.07 The following Commercial General Liability will be required City of Georgetown and HDR Master Services Contract Page 5 of 10 A. Minimum combined Single Limit of $1,000,000.00 per occurrence for Bodily Injury and Property Damage. B. Coverage shall be at least as broad as Insurance Service's Office form number CG 00 01. C. No coverage shall be deleted from the standard policy without notification of individual exclusions being attached for review and acceptance. 6.08 The following Automobile Liability will be required: A. Minimum Combined Single Limit of $1,000,000.00 per occurrence for Bodily Injury and Property Damage. B. The Business Auto Policy must show Symbol 1 in the Covered Autos Portion of the liability section in Item 2 of the declarations page. 6.09 The following Professional Liability will be required: A. Minimum of $1,000,000.00 per claim and $1,000,000.00 aggregate. B. Coverage must be maintained for two (2) years after the termination of this Agreement. 6.10 The following Workers' Compensation will be required: A. Employer's Liability limits of $100,000.00 for each accident is required. B. Texas Waiver of Our Right to Recover From Others Endorsements, W 42 03 04 shall be included in this policy. C. Texas must appear in Item 3A of the Workers' Compensation coverage or Item 3C must contain the following: all States except those listed in Items A and the States of NV, ND, OH, WA, WV, WY. ARTICLE VII -- NON -ASSIGNMENT 7.01 ENGINEER shall not assign, sublet or transfer any rights under or interest in this Agreement without the written consent of the CITY, except to the extent that any assignment, subletting or transfer is mandated by law or the effect of this limitation may be restricted by law. Unless specifically stated to the contrary, in any written consent to an assignment, no agreement will release or discharge the assignor from any duty or responsibility under this agreement. Nothing contained in this paragraph shall prevent the ENGINEER from employing such independent associates and consultants as the ENGINEER may deem appropriate to assist in the performance of services hereunder. ury or oeorgerown ana HUH Master Services Contract Page 6 of 10 7.02 Nothing under this agreement shall be construed to give any rights or benefits in this agreement to anyone other than the CITY and ENGINEER, and all duties and responsibilities undertaken pursuant to this agreement will be for the sole and exclusive benefit of the CITY and ENGINEER and not for the benefit of any other party. ARTICLE VIII – FORCE MAJURE 8.01 No liability shall attach to either party from delay in performance or nonperformance caused by circumstances beyond the control of the party affected, including but not limited to acts of God, war, fire, flood, explosion, action or request of a governmental authority, injunction, labor relations, accidents, delays, or inability to obtain materials, fuel, equipment, or transportation. ARTICLE XI — MISCELLANEOUS 9.01 Termination for convenience. CITY may at any time terminate this Agreement or any PROJECT for convenience. At such time CITY shall notify ENGINEER who shall cease work immediately. ENGINEER shall be compensated for the services performed. 9.02 Governing Law. This agreement has been made under and shall be governed by the laws of the State of Texas. The parties agree that performance and all matters related thereto shall be in Williamson County. Texas. 9.03 Notices. All notices, requests or other communications required or permitted by this agreement shall be in writing and shall be sent by (i) telecopy, with the original delivered by hand or overnight carrier, (ii) by overnight courier or hand delivery, or (iii) certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, and addressed to the parties at the following addresses: CITY: City of Georgetown P.O. Box 409 Georgetown, Texas 78627 Attn: City Manager City Attorney ENGINEER: HDR Engineering, Inc. 2211 S. I1135, Suite 300 Austin, Texas 78741-3842 Attn: James K. (Ken) Haney, P.E. Executive Vice President Addresses and telecopy numbers for notices required under this agreement may be modified as needed by giving notice as required in this paragraph. 9.04 Independent Consultant/Engineer. The parties agree that ENGINEER shall be deemed to be an independent consultant/engineer and not an agent or employee of the CITY with respect to its acts or omissions hereunder. The parties agree that the City of Georgetown and HDR Master Services Contract Page 7 of 10 services and activities performed under this agreement are not and shall not be construed as a joint venture between the parties. 9.05 Confidential Work. Any reports, information, project evaluation, project designs, data, or other documentation developed by ENGINEER hereunder given to or prepared by or assembled by the ENGINEER will not be made available to any individual or organization by the ENGINEER without prior written approval of the CITY, except as required by law, including the rules or ordinances of any governmental entity having jurisdiction over the Project. 9.06 Ownership of Documents. City shall have ownership of all documents, including all reports, drawings, specifications, computer software, or other items prepared or furnished by ENGINEER pursuant to this Agreement. However, the documents are instruments of service with respect to the Project for which they were prepared only. ENGINEER retains ownership of all standard concepts, designs, details, and specifications used in such documents. CITY may retain copies of documents for its information and reference in connection with the Project; however, none of the documents are intended or represented to be suitable for use by CITY or others on extensions of the Project (unless specifically approved by ENGINEER) or for any other work. Any reuse without written verification or adaptation shall be at the CITY's sole risk and without liability or legal exposure to ENGINEER. 9.07 No Oral Modification/Complete Agreement. This agreement and any exhibits thereto constitute the entire agreement between the CITY and ENGINEER and supersedes all prior written or oral understandings. This agreement may only be amended, supplemented, modified or cancelled by a duly executed written instrument. 9.08 Waiver. No waiver by either party hereto of any term or condition of this agreement shall be deemed or construed to be a waiver of any other term or condition or subsequent waiver of the same term or condition. 9.09 Remedies. The rights and remedies of the CITY provided in this agreement shall not be exclusive and are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law and under this agreement including the right of specific performance and offset. Payment made to ENGINEER by the CITY shall not denote acceptance of the work. 9.10 Exhibits. All exhibits attached to this agreement are incorporated by reference and expressly made part of this agreement as if copied verbatim. 9.11 Severability. In case any one or more of the provisions contained in this agreement shall for any reason be held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable in any respect, such invalidity, illegality, or inability to enforce shall not affect any provision thereof, and this agreement shall be considered as if such invalid, illegal, or unenforceable provision had never been contained in this agreement. City of Georgetown and HDR Master Services Contract Page 8 of 10 9.12 Heirs, successors and assigns bound. The CITY and ENGINEER and their heirs, successors, executors, administrators, and assigns are hereby bound to the terms and conditions of this agreement. 9.13. Controlling Agreement. These terms and conditions shall take precedence over any inconsistent or contradictory provisions contained in any proposal, contract, purchase order, requisition, notice -to -proceed, or other like document. 9.13 Signatures warranted. The signatories to this agreement represent and warrant that they have the authority to execute this agreement on behalf of the CITY and HDR ENGINEERING, INC., respectively. Executed to be effective this day of CITY OF GEORGETOWN By: Gary Nelon, Mayor Attest: Attest: Sandra D. Lee, City Secretary Approved as to form: Patricia E. Carls City Attorney STATE OF TEXAS ENGINEER By: / Ja es K. (Ken) Han P.E. Executive Vice President P. E. CORPORATE ACKNOWLEDGMENT COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on this of by , in capacity as . a uty of Georgetown and HDR Master Services Contract Page 9 of 10 day of Notary Public, State of Texas on behalf of said EXHIBIT "A" HDR ENGINEERING INC. PROJECT TASK ORDER FORM Pursuant to the terms and conditions of that certain "Master Services Contract for Engineering Services for Transportation Projects ("Agreement') dated by and between the City of Georgetown, Texas ("City") and HDR Engineering, Inc., ("Engineer") the City and Engineer hereby agree that Engineer shall perform the work described below as provided herein and subject to the terms and conditions of the Agreement: DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: COST: This PROJECT TASK ORDER shall not binding or effective unless and until it is signed by duly authorized representatives of both ENGINEER and the CITY. Executed to be effective on CITY OF GEORGETOWN By: Printed Name: Title: City of Georgetown and HDR Master Services Contract Page 10 of 10 HDR ENGINEERING, INC. By: Printed Name: Date: 200. Exhibit B HDR Engineering, Inc. Austin, Texas Schedule of Estimated Hourly Billing Rates Project Principal Project Manager / Senior Engineer Project Engineer Design Engineer Engineer -in -Training Sr. Design Technician CADD Technician Clerical/Steno $ 250 $ 165 $ 150 $ 115 $ 90 $ 100 $ 80 $ 65 June 2, 2003 Council Meeting Date: June 10, 2003 Item No. ��� AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET An ordinance to revise the City's Water and Wastewater Impact Fees. First Reading. ITEM SUMMARY: Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code requires that the City's Impact Fee for Water and Wastewater Service be reviewed at least every five years. The Impact Fees were last reviewed in 1998. An Impact Fee Advisory Committee reviewed the current land use assumptions, capital improvement plans, and fee calculation methodology used by HDR Engineering and Camp, Dresser & McKee, Inc. for the fee calculation. The Committee issued its Final Report entitled "Update of Water and Wastewater Impact Fees for the City of Georgetown" in April 2003. The Impact Fee Advisory Committee has calculated the maximum fees allowable per service unit to be $4,590 for water, and $1,869 for wastewater. The Committee has recommended the imposition of the lesser amount of $2,295 for water service and $1,869 for wastewater service, for a combined rate of $4,165. The current combined rate is $1,425 for both water and wastewater. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The new fees would only be applicable to lots platted after this ordinance is adopted. All lots currently platted, with be assessed the existing combined impact fee of $1,425, therefore, there will be a timing lag for increased impact fee revenue related to this fee increase Increase in Impact Fees for Water and Wastewater utilities is expected to result in an additional $4 million over the next 5 years to be used for Capital Improvement Projects Only. Currently, less than $500,000 annually is collected in impact fees used to fund W/WW system expansion projects. This increase in fees will redirect system revenue from system expansion projects, to capital repairs and maintenance for both systems. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the approval of the ordinance at the Impact Fee levels recommended by the Impact Fee Advisory Committee. COMMENTS: All required notices and hearings have been held in accordance with Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code. ATTACHMENTS: Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Ordinance. Submitted Jim B gsMicki Rundell, tant anager Finance Director for Utilities ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS AMENDING CHAPTER 13.32 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES RELATING TO IMPACT FEES TO INCLUDE THE UPDATED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN AND THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN; TO REVISE THE AMOUNT OF THE IMPACT FEES AND TO INCLUDE IN THE IMPACT FEE CALCULATION, IF APPLICABLE, A CREDIT FROM UTILITY REVENUES; TO REVISE CREDITS FOR DEVELOPER FUNDED PROJECTS; AND TO UPDATE THE PROVISIONS PERTAINING TO TIME FOR ASSESSMENT AND COLLECTION OF IMPACT FEES TO REFLECT CHANGES IN STATE LAW; INCLUDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; INCLUDING A CONFLICTS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Texas Local Government Code, Chapter 395, known as the "Texas Impact Fee Act" (the "Act") requires a city to update the land use assumptions and capital improvements plan for impact fee purposes at least every five (5) years; and WHEREAS, the City of Georgetown last updated its Impact Fees in 1998; and WHEREAS, the City's water supply system and associated Capital Improvement Plan has recently been updated, and the City has also recently adopted a Future Land Use Plan; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 395.058 of the Act, the City Council appointed an Impact Fee Advisory Committee to advise and assist the City in the manner described in Section 395.058 of the Act; and WHEREAS, the Impact Fee Advisory Committee has completed its study and issued its final report entitled "Update of Water and Wastewater Impact Fees for the City of Georgetown" dated April 2003; and WHEREAS, notice of the hearing on the amendments to the land use assumptions, capital improvements plan, or impact fee was published in the Williamson County Sun on April 30 and May 4, 2003 in accordance with Section 395.055 of the Act; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on June 10, 2003 to discuss the proposed ordinance amending the land use assumptions, capital improvements plan, or impact fee; and WHEREAS, after considering the comments of the Impact Fee Advisory Committee and comments made at the public hearing, the City Council finds that it is in the public interest, and compliant with the Act, to (1) address the requirements of Section 395.014(a)(7) of the Act; (2) amend the time for requiring collection of impact fees to conform to changes in the Act; (3) amend the provisions relating to credits to developers in certain situations; (4) to describe the potential impact fee application area; and (5) revise the amount of the water and wastewater impact fees. WHEREAS, the caption of this ordinance was printed in the tMlliamson County Sun on June 4"', 2002, in compliance with the City Charter of the City of Georgetown; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1. The facts and recitations contained in the preamble of this ordinance are hereby found and declared to be true and correct, and are incorporated by reference herein and expressly made a part hereof, as if copied verbatim. The City Council hereby finds that this ordinance implements the following elements of the Century Plan Policy Plan and that the enactment of this ordinance is not inconsistent or in conflict with any other Century Plan Policies, as required by Section 2.03 of the Administrative Chapter the Policy Plan: Policy End 12.00 City owned, sponsored or managed utilities provide safe, adequate and reliable services to all customers. Policy End 14.00 All municipal operations are conducted in an efficient business -like manner and sufficient financial resources for both current and future needs are provided. ' SECTION 2. That the existing Chapter 13.32 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Georgetown is hereby repealed in its entirety. SECTION 3. That there is hereby adopted a new Chapter 13.32 "Water and Wastewater Impact Fees" of the City Code of the City of Georgetown, Texas, which new Chapter 13.32 is attached hereto as Exhibit A," and which exhibit is incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in full SECTION 4. That all ordinances that are in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same are hereby, repealed and all other ordinances of the City not in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 5. If any provision of this ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions, or application thereof, of this ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are hereby declared to be severable. SECTION 6. The Mayor is hereby authorized to sign this ordinance and the City Secretary to attest. This ordinance shall become effective in accordance with the provisions of the Charter of the City of Georgetown. PASSED AND APPROVED on First Reading on the day of .2003. PASSED AND APPROVED on Second Reading on the day of '2003. ATTEST: THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN IN Sandra D. Lee, City Secretary Gary Nelon, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Patricia E. Carls, Brown & Caris, LLP City Attorney CHAPTER 13.32 WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEES Sec. 13.32.010. General provisions. A. Purpose. The purpose of the water and wastewater impact fees are to generate revenue for funding or recouping the cost of capital improvements or facility expansions necessitated by and attributable to new development. B. Applicability. This chapter shall be applicable uniformly to new development which occurs within the water and wastewater service area. For new development which occurs within the boundaries of the city's wholesale customers or other political subdivisions, the applicability and terms for the assessment and collection of the impact fee shall be defined by agreement. C. Authority. This chapter is adopted pursuant to the authority of the Texas Local Government Code Annotated, Chapter 395 (Vernon 1988), hereinafter to be known as the "Texas Impact Fee Act." The provisions of this chapter shall not be construed to limit the power of the city to adopt an impact fee pursuant to any other source of local authority nor to limit the utilization of any other methods or powers otherwise available for accomplishing the purposes set forth herein. D. Development Approval. No application for new development shall be approved by the city without assessment of an impact fee pursuant to this chapter, and no application for tap purchase shall be approved until the applicant has paid the impact fee imposed by and calculated hereunder. E. Definitions. As utilized in this chapter, the following terms shall have the meanings ascribed to them herein below: "Assessment" means a determination of the amount of the impact fee per service unit in effect on the date or occurrence established for same in this chapter and is the maximum amount that can be charged per service unit of development. "Capital improvement" means water supply, treatment and distribution facilities and wastewater collection and treatment facilities owned and operated by or on behalf of the City having a life expectancy of three or more years. ' "Director" means the Director of the City community -owned utilities or his designee. "Economic development project" means a new development project which has been designated an economic development project by the City Council and which has received any one of the following: (a) Federal funds in the form of loans or grants; (b) City funds in the form of fee waivers, tax incentives, discounted costs or rates for City services; or (c) any discount or cost reduction not available without specific action of the City Council. "Existing development" means the expansion of the capacity of an existing facility that serves the same function as an otherwise necessary new capital improvement in order that the existing facility may serve new development. The term does not include the repair, maintenance, modernization or expansion of an existing facility to better serve existing development. "Final subdivision plat" means the map, drawing or chart on which is provided a subdivider's plan of a subdivision which has received final approval by the Planning Commission or City Council and which is recorded with the office of the County Clerk. "Growth -related costs" means capital construction cost of service related to providing additional water and wastewater capacity to new development, either from excess capacity in existing facilities, from facility expansions or from new capital facilities. Growth -related costs do not include: 1. Construction, acquisition or expansion of public facilities or assets other than capital improvements or facilities expansions identified in the capital improvements plan; 2. Repair, operation or maintenance of existing or new capital improvements or facilities expansions; 3. Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to serve existing development in order to meet stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory standards; 4. Upgrading, updating, expanding, or replacing existing capital improvements to provide better service to existing development; 5. Administrative and operating costs of the city; and 6. Principal payments and interest or other finance charges on bonds or other indebtedness except for such payments made with respect to growth -related facilities identified in the impact fee capital improvements plan. "Impact fee" means the water and wastewater impact fee as defined in this section. "Impact fee capital improvements plan" means the plan required by the Texas Impact Fee Act as adopted or amended from time to time by the City Council that identifies the capital improvements or facilities expansions and the associated costs for which impact fees may be assessed. "Impact fees" means a charge imposed upon new development in order to generate revenue for funding or recouping the costs of capital improvements or facility expansions necessitated by or attributable to new development. The term does not include dedication of site -related water distribution or wastewater collection facilities required by other ordinances of the City Code or fees placed in trust funds that may be used for the purpose of reimbursing developers for oversizing or constructing water or sewer mains or lines. "Land use assumptions" means a description of the service area and projections of changes in land uses, densities, intensities and population in the service area over at least a ten-year period as adopted and amended from time to time by the City. "New development" means the subdivision of land; the construction, reconstruction, redevelopment, conversion, structural alteration, relocation, or enlargement of any structure; or any use or extension of the use of land, any of which increases the number of service units for water and wastewater service. "New development" includes the sale of water or wastewater taps resulting from the conversion of an individual well or septic or other individual waste disposal system, to the City's water or wastewater utility. "Service area" means that area within the corporate limits and extraterritorial jurisdiction of the City to be served by the water and wastewater capital improvements or facilities expansions specified in the impact fee capital improvements plan. "Service unit" means a standardized measure of consumption, use, generation or discharge attributable to an individual unit of development calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning standards for a particular category of capital improvements or facility expansions. For water and wastewater facilities, the service unit shall constitute the basis for establishing equivalency within various customer classes based upon the relationship of the continuous duty maximum flow rate in gallons per minute for a water meter of a given size and type compared to the continuous duty maximum flow rate in gallons per minute for a three - fourth -inch diameter simple water meter using American Water Works Association C700 -C703 Standards. "Site -related facility" means an improvement or facility which is for the primary use or benefit of a new development and/or which is for the primary purpose of safe and adequate provision of water and wastewater facilities to serve the new development and which is not included in the impact fee capital improvements plan and for which the developer or property owner is solely responsible under subdivision and other applicable regulations. "Tap purchase" means the filing with the City of a written application for a water or wastewater tap and the acceptance of applicable fees therefore by the City. The term "tap purchase" shall not be applicable to a master water meter or master wastewater connection purchased from the City by a wholesale utility customer. "Wastewater facility" means a capital improvement or facility expansion for providing wastewater service including but not limited to land or easements, treatment facilities, lift stations, and interceptor mains. The term does not include wastewater lines or mains which are constructed by developers, the costs of which are reimbursed from charges paid by subsequent users of facilities and which are maintained in dedicated trusts. The term "wastewater facilities" also does not include dedication of easement or rights-of-way or easements or construction or dedication of on-site wastewater collection facilities required by valid ordinances of the City and necessitated by and attributable to new development. "Water facility" means improvements for providing water service including but not limited to land or easements, water supply facilities, treatment facilities, pumping facilities, storage facilities or transmission mains. The term does not include water lines or mains constructed by developers, the costs of which are reimbursed from charges paid by subsequent users of the facilities maintained in dedicated trusts. The term does not include dedication of rights-of-way or easements or construction or dedication of on-site water distribution facilities required by valid ordinances of the City and necessitated by and attributable to new development. "Wholesale customers" means water or wastewater customers of the City's water and/or wastewater utilities which purchase such utility service at wholesale for resale to their retail customers. (Ord. 96-1 § 2 (Aft. A) (part)) Sec. 13.32.020. Land use assumptions. A. The updated land use assumptions4g9 for the City are dated April, 2003SeptetrlbeF 4988, on record in the office of the City Secretary, are adopted and incorporated by reference. B. Said land use assumptions for the City shall be updated at least every fivethfee years utilizing the amendment procedure set forth in the Texas Impact Fee Act. C. Amendment to the land use assumptions shall incorporate projections of changes in land uses, densities, intensities and population for the service area over at least a ten-year period. (Ord. 98-73 § 2; Ord. 96-1 § 2 (Att. A) (part)) Sec. 13.32.030. Water and wastewater impact fee service area. A. There is established a water and wastewater impact fee service area, the boundaries of which are depicted on the map attached to the ordinance codified in this chapter as Exhibit A on record in the office of the City Secretary and incorporated in this chapter by reference. B. The boundaries of the water and wastewater impact fee service area may be amended from time to time in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Texas Impact Fee Act. (Ord. 98-73 § 3; Ord. 96-1 § 2 (Att. A) (part)) Sec. 13.32.040. Impact fee capital improvements plan for water and wastewater facilities. A. The impact fee capital improvements plan for water and wastewater facilities dated April 2003November on record in the office of the City Secretary, is adopted and incorporated in this chapter by reference. B. The impact fee capital improvements plan for water and wastewater facilities may be amended from time to time pursuant to the procedures set forth in the Texas Impact Fee Act. (Ord. 98-73 § 4; Ord. 96-1 § 2 (Att. A) (part)) Sec. 13.32.050. Determination of service units. A. Conversion Table. The number of service units for both water and wastewater service is determined by the size and type of the water meter purchased for the property in accordance with the following schedule: Meter Size (inch) Type Service Units 518 X 314 Simple 0.667 314 Simple 1.000 1 Simple 1.667 1-1/2 Simple 3.333 expanding or replacing existing capital improvements in order to meet the need for new capital improvements generated by new development; or 5. Administrative and operating costs of the City. (Ord. 96-1 § 2 (Aft. A) (part)) Sec. 13.32.150. Refunds. A. Any impact fee or portion thereof collected pursuant to this chapter which has not been expended within ten years from the date of payment, shall be refunded, upon application, to the record owner of the property at the time the refund is paid, or, if the impact fee was paid by another governmental entity, to such governmental entity, together with interest calculated from the date of collection to the date of refund at the statutory rate as set forth in Tex. Rev. Civ. Stat Ann., Art. 5069-1.03, or any successor statute. B. If a refund is due pursuant to subsection A of this section, the refund of unexpended fee payments, including interest from the date of payment, shall be made to the current record owner or governmental entity. C. Upon completion of all the capital improvements or facilities expansions identified in the capital improvements plan upon which the fee was based, the City shall recalculate the maximum impact fee per service unit using the actual costs for the improvements or expansions. If the maximum impact fee per service unit based on actual cost is less than the impact fee per service unit paid, the city shall refund the difference if such difference exceeds the impact fee paid by more than ten percent. The refund to the record owner or governmental entity shall be calculated by multiplying such difference by the number of service units for the development for which the fee was paid, and interest due shall be calculated upon that amount. D. 1. Upon the request of an owner of the property on which an impact fee has been paid, the City shall refund such fees if: a. Existing service is available and service is denied; or, b. Service was not available when the fee was collected and the city has failed to commence construction of facilities to provide service within two years of fee payment; or, c. Service was not available when the fee was collected and has not subsequently been made available within a reasonable period of time considering the type of capital improvement or facility expansion to be constructed, but in any event no later than five years from the date of the payment. 2. A refund pursuant to this subsection shall also result in cancellation of the tap permit and the refund of all building permit fees and/or connection fees previously collected. 3. If the holder of a building permit for property for which a building permit has been obtained relinquishes the building permit for a refund, a canceled building permit must be presented before the refund can be made. E. The city shall refund an appropriate proportion of impact fee payments in the event that a previously purchased but uninstalled water meter for which the impact fee has been paid is replaced with a smaller meter, based on the per service unit differential of the two meter sizes and the fee per service unit at the time of the original fee payment. F. A petition for refund under this section shall be submitted to the Director on a form provided by the City for such purpose. Within one month of the date of receipt of a petition for refund, the Director must provide the petitioner, in writing, with a decision on the refund request, including the reasons for the decision. If a refund is due to the petitioner, the Director shall notify the City Division of Finance and Administration and request that a refund payment be made to the petitioner. (Ord. 96-1 § 2 (Att. A) (part)) Sec. 13.32.160. Updates to plan and revisions of fees. The City shall review the land use assumptions and impact fee capital improvements plan for water and wastewater facilities at least every fivethree years, with the f•c'„tee- five year period to commence from the date of adoption of the impact fee capital improvements plan referenced in this section. The City Council shall accordingly make a determination of whether changes to the land use assumptions, impact fee capital improvements plan or impact fees are needed and shall, in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Texas Impact Fee Act, or any successor statute, either update the fees or make a determination that no update is necessary. (Ord. 96-1 § 2 (Aft. A) (part)) Sec. 13.32.170. Use of other financing mechanisms. A. In addition to the use of impact fees, the City may finance water and wastewater capital improvements or facilities expansions designated in the impact fee capital improvements plan through the issuance of bonds, through the formation of public improvements districts or other assessment districts, or through any other authorized mechanism, in such manner and subject to such limitations as may be provided by law. B. Except as otherwise provided herein, the assessment and collection of a impact fee shall be additional and supplemental to, and not in substitution of, any other tax, fee, charge or assessment which is lawfully imposed on and due against the property. (Ord. 96-1 § 2 (Att. A) (part)) Sec. 13.32.180. Impact fees as additional and supplemental regulation. A. Impact fees established by this chapter are additional and supplemental to, and not in substitution of, any other requirements imposed by the City on the development of land or the issuance of building permits or the sale of water or wastewater taps or the issuance of certificates of occupancy. Such fees are intended to be consistent with and to further the policies of the City's Century Plan, impact fee capital improvements plan, zoning ordinance, subdivision regulations and other City policies, ordinances and resolutions by which the City seeks to ensure the provision of adequate public facilities in conjunction with the development of land. B. This chapter shall not affect, in any manner, the permissible use of property, density of development, design, and improvement standards and requirements, or any other aspect of the development of land or provision of public improvements subject to the zoning and subdivision regulations or other regulations of the City, which shall be operative and remain in full force and effect without limitation with respect to all such development. (Ord. 96-1 § 2 (Aft. A) (part)) Sec. 13.32.190. Relief procedures. A. Any person who has paid an impact fee or an owner of land upon which an impact fee has been paid may petition the Council to determine whether any duty required by this chapter has not been performed within the time so prescribed. The petition shall be in writing and shall state the nature of the unperformed duty and the request that the act be performed within 60 days of the request. If the Council determines that the duty is required pursuant to this chapter and is late in being performed, it shall cause the duty to commence within 60 days of the date of the request and to continue until completion. B. Any person who has been assessed an impact fee under this chapter may appeal that assessment by written application to the Director. The City Council may enforce, reduce or modify the assessment, after providing a public hearing with due notice and opportunity to be heard, if it determines that the assessment is unwarranted or in error. C. For existing developments that are extended municipal water and wastewater service new or an extended payment plan of 1/12 of the assessed fee amounts each month for 12 months DG. The Council may bei oFd'na„Grant a variance or waiver from any requirement of this chapter, upon written request by a developer or owner of property subject to this chapter, following a public hearing, and only upon finding that a strict application of such requirement would, when regarded as a whole, result in extreme hardship to the applicant and that the grant of the waiver or variance is in the best interest of the City. EID. If the Council grants a variance or waiver to the amount of the impact fees due for new development under this section, it shall cause to be appropriated from other City funds the amount of the reduction in the impact fees to the amount in which the fees would have been deposited. (Ord. 96-1 § 2 (Att. A) (part)) EXHIBIT A WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE SERVICE AREA MAP 970 Impact Fee / NN );otential Application Area 2338 2243 1105 1 9721 971 City of Georgetown u0 Potential Impact Fee Application Area EXHIBIT B MAXIMUM WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE PER SERVICE UNIT Maximum Impact Fee per Living Unit ITEM Equivalent (LUE) WATER $ 234 Supply $ 497 Treatment $ 1,819 Pumping $ 115 Ground Storage $ 45 Elevated Storage $ 110 Transmission $ 1,999 Allocated Impact Fee Study Cost $ 4 Total Water $ 4,590 WASTEWATER Treatment $ 1,226 Pumping $ 234 Interceptors $ 405 Allocated Impact Fee Study Cost $ 4 Total Wastewater $ 1,869 TOTAL WATER & WASTEWATER $ 6,459 EXHIBIT C ASSESSED WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE PER SERVICE UNIT Assessed Impact Fee per Living Unit ITEM Equivalent (LUE) WATER Supply $ 249 Treatment $ 910 Pumping $ 58 Ground Storage $ 23 Elevated Storage $ 55 Transmission $ 999 Allocated Impact Fee Study Cost $ 2 Total Water $ 2,295 WASTEWATER Treatment $ 1,226 Pumping $ 234 Interceptors $ 405 Allocated Impact Fee Study Cost $ 4 Total Wastewater $ 1,869 TOTAL WATER & WASTEWATER $ 4,164 Council Meeting Date: June 10. 2003 - Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT A Resolution approving an amendment to the 2002103 Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation budget in the amount of $1,700,000. ITEM SUMMARY State law and the GTEC Bylaws require that GTEC adopt a budget annually, which in tum must be approved by the City Council. Budget amendments must also be approved by City Council. The Northeast Inner Loop project consists of surveying and purchase of right-of-way for two lanes from the proposed Northeast Loop to Industrial Park Circle. The estimated cost for this project is $300,000. The Southwest Bypass project consists of preliminary engineering, surveying, environmental and archaeological studies to determine the route of the two lanes of a four -lane road from State Highway 29 to just east of IH -35. The estimated cost for this project is $1,400,000. COMMENTS GTEC adopts a line item budget. Public hearings are required for amendments related to new transportation projects. Funds for specific projects may not be expended until the 61' day following the date after publication of the hearing notice. FINANCIAL IMPACT: These projects will be funded with GTEC Revenue bonds issued in Fall 2003. A bond reimbursement resolution will be forthcoming before the construction contracts are executed. ATTACHMENTS Proposed resolution Public Hearing notice Submitted By: Director of Finance and Administration FAAGENDA\20071GTECTOCOUNCR.\BA-BYPASS PROJECT-I.AKBWAYDOC I RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, APPROVING THE ADDITIONAL PROJECT LIST AS AN AMENDMENT TO THE ADOPTED 2002/03 BUDGET FOR THE GEORGETOWN TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT CORPORATION; WHEREAS, the City is required by State Law to approve amendments to the proposed project list for the Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation (GTEC), previously established pursuant to Vernon's Rev. Civ. Stat. Ann., Article 5190.6 Section 4(B); and WHEREAS, the GTEC published notice of the projects to be funded by GTEC, in the Williamson County Sun, on June 1, 2003; and WHEREAS, a public hearing on the projects proposed by GTEC, and as shown in the above - referenced publication, was held on June 10, 2003. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1. The facts and recitations contained in the preamble of this resolution are hereby found and declared to be true and correct, and are incorporated by reference herein and expressly made a part hereof, as if copied verbatim. The City Council hereby finds that this ordinance implements the following policy of the Century Plan - Policy Plan Element: 1. Finance Policy End 14.0, which states: "All municipal operations are conducted in an efficient business -like manner and sufficient financial resources for both current and future needs are provided", and further finds that the adoption of this resolution is not inconsistent or in conflict with any other Century Plan Policies, as required by Section 2.03 of the Administrative Chapter of the Policy Plan. SECTION 2. The City Council of the City of Georgetown hereby approves the additional proposed project list for the Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation (GTEC) to be included and adopted as an amendment in the 2002103 budget as required by State Law. SECTION 3. Budgetary expenses, such as administrative and non -project specific expenses may be expended on or after the date of this resolution. Project specific funds may not be expended until the 61" day following the date after publication of the hearing notice, as shown above. RESOLVED this 10th day of June, 2003. GTEC Budget Resolution No. P:V+GENDA\2003NG ECfOCOUNCn.\BA-BYPASS RESOLUTION.DOC Page I of 2 I -y ATTEST: THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: Sandra D. Lee By: Gary Nelon City Secretary Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Patricia Carls, Brown and Carls LLP City Attorney GTEC Budget Resolution No. P:\AGENDA\2003\GTECTOCOUNCIUBA-BYPASS RESOLUTION.DOC Page 2 of 2 GEORGETOWN TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT CORPORATION NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Tuesday, June 10, 2003, 5:00 P.M. Georgetown Municipal Complex Glasscock Conference Room 300 Industrial Avenue - Georgetown, Texas In accordance with Article 5190.6, Vernon's Annotated Texas Civil Statutes, the Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation will hold a public hearing regarding the expenditures of 4B sales taxes for the fiscal year 2002103 proposed transportation improvement plan. rY Zuuwu3: Csumarea Amounr Northeast Loop at Lakeway Intersection project $ 300,000 State Highway 29 Southwest Bypass project $ 1,400,000 S 1,700,000 N Consideration and possible action to approve a resolution approving the Additional Project List as an amendment to the adopted 2002/03 Budget for the Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation (GTEC) in the amount of $1,700,000 — Micki Rundell, Director of Fianance and Administration and Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations Rundell explained the item and noted that a public hearing was held on this item by the Georgetown Transportation and Enhancement Corporation (GTEC), as required by law. Motion by Evans, second by Sansing to approve the resolution approving the amendment to the 2002/03 Budget for the Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation. Snell confirmed that at the point of contract this would come back to the Council. Sensing said he thinks there will be research done to see whether others are willing to participate in the proposed projects. Vote on the motion: Approved 6-0. 0 Consideration and possible action to approve a contract amendment to the existing Professional Services Agreement between the City of Georgetown and HDR Engineering, Inc., to provide professional engineering services related to the Southwest SH29 Bypass — Mark Miller, Transportation Services Manager and Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations This item was pulled from consideration. P Consideration and possible action to authorize staff to request the FAA to consider changing the traffic pattern for Runway 29 from standard left-hand traffic to non-standard right-hand traffic as a safety and noise mitigation measure — Travis McLain, Airport Manager and Tom Yantis, Assistant City Manager Kirby asked that someone speak about the Fly Friendly Program after this item is handled. McLain explained that the Airport Advisory Board is recommending this item as a noise mitigation measure. He introduced Airport Advisory Board Member Don Pfiester who explained the purpose of the item. Pfiester said the Airport Board is trying to shift the location for some of the noise and put more of the air traffic over unpopulated areas. He said the current pattern goes over four schools, and by shifting the pattern to right-hand, the schools can be avoided. He noted that this will be forwarded to the FAA for their approval. Nelon asked Pfiester to explain the Fly Friendly Program. Pfiester said it was begun in 1998 by a prior Airport Board who devised a list of noise mitigation procedures that were printed in a letter from Airport Manager, Travis McLain, combined with a map. He said the Program hasn'tseen much emphasis in the past, and said an Airport Board Subcommittee has suggested some revised proposals and a method of communication. McLain distributed to Council copies of the current brochure and a new map to be used if Council approves. Pfiester said a mail -out will be sent to all registered area pilots, and new signs will be printed to remind pilots to think about noise when they are taking off at the Georgetown Airport. He said the information will be advertised in the newspaper and on the City of Georgetown website as well as in various Flight publications. Penny Burt, 3803 Roble Grande Circle, said she should probably support it because it will help her, but she is concerned about her neighbors to the north. She said there are abatement measures in the Kaufman Report and said it was noted that there would be minimal noise mitigation by changing the traffic pattern. She asked Council to consider this abatement when other abatements are considered. She said, however, if there are safety mitigations created by this plan, then this plan should be approved at this time. Keith Peshak, 800 Oak Crest Lane, said the noise study says there is "no noise" and now the traffic pattern is going to be changed because of the noise. He compared changing the air traffic pattern to passing a law that all trucks and cars should drive on the left side of the road instead of the right. He said when someone who doesn't know that the traffic pattern has been changed collides with someone who is obeying the new traffic pattern the collision will occur above the Ninth Grade Center. Nelon confirmed that if the Council approves this item, it will be forwarded to the FAA for their study. Noble asked and McLain explained that there is a notification process. He said there will always be people who don't know, but the Unicom people at Georgetown Airport will advise them. City Council Meeting Minutes/June 24, 2003 Page 6 of 7 Pages Yt4-u4ft, ayKr City Council Meeting Date: June 10, 2003 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Council consideration and possible action to approve a contract amendment to the existing Professional Services Agreement between the City of Georgetown and HDR Engineering, Inc., to provide professional engineering services related to the Southwest State Highway 29 Bypass. ITEM SUMMARY: The HDR Contract for basic services is for the selection of preferred alternatives and the eventual determination of the final route and location of the Southwest State Highway 29 Bypass for a lump sum amount of $482,252. Included in the contract, is the preliminary engineering for the proposed roadway, right-of-way requirements and Environmental Impact Statement. Ecological resources services would be provided on a time and material basis with a not to exceed amount of $49,500. Total basic services are $531,752. For possible mitigation of environmental and archeological issues identified by the basic services scope of work, additional services will be performed on an hourly basis with a not to exceed amount of $808,710.00. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Award of contract contingent upon approval of a GTEC budget amendment. Mayor to sign contract no earlier than August 1, 2003 (60 days from public hearing publication) FINANCIAL IMPACT: If approved, GTEC budget accounts in the amount of $531,752.00 will be created for basic engineering services and $808,710.00 for additional services as required. GTEC BOARD RECOMMENDATION: Action by the GTEC Board, on May 22, 2003, to initiate the Century Plan process for the Bypass between Leander Road and IH -35. Approved 7-0 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: ' Staff recommends that council approve a contract with HDR Engineering to provide professional engineering services related to the Southwest State Highway 29 Bypass. COMMENTS: None. ATTACHMENTS: HDR Engineering letter and proposed amendment to contract. Cim gdsaL ssistant Mark Miller, Manager v City `•-1P.n97getpl}�or Utilities Transportation Services June 3, 2003 Mr. Jim Briggs Assistant City Manager City of Georgetown 115 East 8`h Street Georgetown, TX 78626 Dear Mr. Briggs; Attached are two (2) copies of the Master Services Contract and Task Order No. 1 for Engineering, Environmental and Surveying Services for the SH 29 Southwest Bypass between SH 29 and IH 35 in Georgetown, Texas. The services provided will include survey, environmental review and preliminary design. These services are separated into Basic and Additional Services. For the Basic Services, the attached contract is to develop a complete preliminary design package for the proposed roadway to allow for Right -of -Way acquisition. These services, excluding the Ecological Resources, are provided on a lump sum basis in the amount of $482,252. The Ecological Resources would be provided on a time plus material basis with a not to exceed amount of $49,500. The total Basic Services would be $531,752. For the Additional Services, we propose that work be performed on an hourly basis with a not to exceed for additional services of $808,710. Please return one executed copy of this contract. We appreciate the opportunity to perform services for the City of Georgetown and look forward to a very successful project. Sincerely, (J/* � Joames K. (Ken) HaneP.E. Executive Vice Presi ent STATE OF TEXAS § MASTER SERVICES CONTRACT FOR COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON § ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE SH 29 SOUTHWEST BYPASS PROJECT CITY OF GEORGETOWN HDR ENGINEERING INC. This is an agreement by and between the CITY OF GEORGETOWN, a Texas Home Rule Municipal Corporation, ("CITY'), and HDR ENGINEERING, INC. ("ENGINEER"), whereby ENGINEER agrees to perform professional services on the SH 29 Southwest Bypass project. WHEREAS, the CITY desires to retain ENGINEER, a professional engineering firm, to provide professional engineering, consulting, and related environmental and schematic design services for the SH 29 Southwest Bypass project in an amount not to exceed $531,752 for Basic Services and an amount not to exceed $808,710 for Additional Services which are in addition to the basic Services costs and which will not be utilized unless further authorized by the City. WHEREAS, ENGINEER desires to perform professional engineering services on such project as may be requested by the CITY. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties agree as follows: ARTICLE I -- PROJECT DEFINED 1.01 The term "PROJECT" as used herein shall refer to the SH 29 Southwest Bypass project defined by the City on the PROJECT TASK ORDER FORM attached hereto as "Exhibit A.". ARTICLE II -- INITIATION OF WORK 2.01 ENGINEER shall not commence any work unless and until the CITY issues a duly executed PROJECT TASK ORDER FORM for the project. 2.02 Upon receipt of authorization to commence services, the ENGINEER may meet with CITY for the purpose of determining the nature of the PROJECT. CITY shall designate a representative to act as the contact person on behalf of the CITY. 2.03 No TASK ORDER FORM shall be binding or enforceable unless and until it has been duly executed by authorized representatives of the CITY and the ENGINEER. i lly of oeorgecown ano Muhl Master Services Contract Page 1 of 9 Fr 2.04 CITY shall provide all available criteria and information pertaining to each PROJECT. ARTICLE III -- COMPENSATION 3.01 Compensation forservices performed under this Agreement shall be eitheron a time and materials basis or on a fixed price basis. The particular method of compensation for the PROJECT shall be specified in the TASK ORDER FORM. (a) Time and Materials: Compensation for services performed on a time and materials basis shall be in accordance with the RATE SCHEDULE and terms attached to this Agreement as Exhibit B, which included the charges for all professional, technical, engineering, and administrative personnel directly charging from time to time on a PROJECT. The RATE SCHEDULE in Exhibit is subiectto adjustment upon advance written notice to the CITY and shall be effective only after the CITY agrees in writing to change the RATE SCHEDULE. (b) Compensation for services provided on a lump sum basis shall be as stated in the approved TASK ORDER FORM. 3.02 ENGINEER shall submit monthly invoices and the CITY shall pay within thirty (30) days of approval of the invoice. If the CITY disputes any part of the invoice, it shall pay the non -disputed amounts (if any) and promptly notify ENGINEER of the nature of the dispute to request clarification or correction. ARTICLE IV — STANDARD OF PERFORMANCE 401 ENGINEER represents that the information and services provided underthis Agreement is that of a professional engineer, reflecting the standards, procedures, and performances of the industry for the type of PROJECT performed pursuant to this Agreement in the same location and at the same time, and further represents that the all work and services provided pursuant to this Agreement conform to the professional standard of care in the profession. 4.02 ENGINEER shall be responsible for the accuracy of its work and shall promptly make necessary revisions or corrections to its work product resulting from its errors, omissions, or negligent acts without compensation. ENGINEER will not be relieved of the responsibility for subsequent correction of any such errors or omissions or for clarification of any ambiguities until after a PROJECT has been completed. 4.03 The responsible Engineer shall sign, seal and date all appropriate Engineering submissions to the City in accordance with the Texas Engineering Practice Act and Rules of the State Board of Registration for Professional Engineers. 4.04 ENGINEER's observation or monitoring portions of the work performed under construction contracts shall not relieve the contractor from its responsibility for performing work in accordance with applicable contract documents. ENGINEER shall not control or City of Georgetown and HDR Master services Contract Page 2 of 9 have charge of, and shall not be responsible for, construction means, methods, techniques, sequences, procedures of construction, health or safety programs or precautions connected with the work and shall not manage, supervise, control or have charge of construction. ENGINEER shall not be responsible for the acts or omissions of the contractor or to other parties on the Project. ENGINEER shall be entitled to review all construction contract documents and ensure that no provisions extent the duties or liabilities of ENGINEER beyond those set forth in this Agreement. 4.05 Any opinions of probable Project cost or probable construction cost provided by ENGINEER are made on the basis of information available to ENGINEER and on the basis of ENGINEER's experience and qualifications, and represents its judgment as an experienced and qualified professional engineer. However, since ENGINEER has no control over the cost of labor, materials, equipment, or services furnished by others, or over the contractor(s') methods of determining prices, or over competitive bidding or market conditions, ENGINEER does not guarantee that proposals, bids, or actual project or construction cost will not vary from opinions or probable cost ENGINEER prepares. ARTICLE V -- INDEMNIFICATION ENGINEER whose work product is the subject of this contract for engineering services agrees to indemnify and hold city, it's elected officials, officers and employees, harmless against any and all claims, lawsuits, judgments, costs, liens, losses, expenses, fees (including attorney's fees and costs of defense), proceedings, actions, demands, causes of action, liability, and suits of any kind and nature, including but not limited to, personal injury (including death), property damage, or other harm for which recovery of damages is sought to the extent arising out of or occasioned or caused by engineer's negligent act, error, or omission of Engineer, any Agent, Officer, Director, Representative, Employee, Consultant, or Subconsultant of Engineer, and their respective Officers, Agents, Employees, Directors, and Representatives for whom ENGINEER is legally liable while in the exercise of performance of the rights or duties under this Contract. The indemnity provided for in this paragraph shall not apply to the extent of any liability resulting from the negligence of CITY, its officers or employees, in instances where such negligence causes personal injury, death, or property damage. In the event Engineer and CITY are found jointly liable by a court of competent jurisdiction, liability shall be apportioned comparatively in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas, without, however, waiving any Governmental immunity available to the City under Texas law and without waiving any defenses of the parties under Texas law. Pursuant to Chapter 271.094 of the Texas Local Govemment Code or its successor provision, ENGINEER whose work product is the subject of this contract for engineering services, expressively agrees to indemnify and hold CITY, it's Agent and Employees harmless against any and all claims, lawsuits, judgments, costs, liens, losses, expenses, fees (including attorney's fees and costs of defense), proceedings, actions, demands, causes of action, liability, and suits of any kind and nature, for the personal injury, death, or property injury of ENGINEER or the employees of ENGINEER for which recovery of damages is sought that may arise while in the exercise in the performance of the rights or duties under this Contract. City of Georgetown and HDR Master Services Contract Page 3 of 9 It is the express intent of the parties to this CONTRACT that the indemnity provided for in this section is an indemnity extended by ENGINEER to indemnify, protect, and hold harmless, the CITY, its Agents or Employees from the consequences of the negligence of the CITY, its Agents or Employees in instances where such negligence causes personal injury, death, or property damage to ENGINEER or employees of ENGINEER; or any other expense that arises from personal injury, death, or property injury to ENGINEER or employees of ENGINEER. ENGINEER further agrees to defend, at its own expense and on behalf of the CITY and in the name of the CITY, any claim or litigation brought against the CITY in connection with any such injury, death, or property injury for which this indemnity shall apply, as set forth above. ENGINEER shall promptly advise the CITY, in writing, of any claim or demand against the CITY or ENGINEER known to ENGINEER related to or arising out of ENGINEER's activities under this contract. The provisions of this action are solely for the benefit of the parties hereto and not intended to create or grant any rights, contractual, or otherwise, to any other person or entity. ARTICLE VI -- INSURANCE 6.01 ENGINEER shall procure and maintain at its sole cost and expense for the duration of this Agreement insurance against claims for injuries to person or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by ENGINEER, his agents, representatives, volunteers, employees or subcontractors. 6.02 The ENGINEER'S insurance coverage shall be primary insurance with respect to the CITY, its officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by CITY, its officials, employees or volunteers, shall be considered in excess of the ENGINEER'S insurance and shall not contribute to it. 6.03 The ENGINEER shall require all subcontractors to maintain the same insurance as is required by this Agreement. All coverage for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein, including the provision to the City of Certificates of Insurance. 6.04 Certificates of Insurance and endorsements shall be furnished to the CITY and approved by the CITY before work commences. All Certificates of Insurance shall be prepared and executed by the insurance company or its authorized agent. The Certificate of Insurance shall specifically set forth the notice of cancellation or termination provisions to the City of Georgetown. 6.05 ENGINEER shall use only insurance companies to provide coverage hereunder that meet the following requirements: : The company is licensed and admitted to do business in the State of Texas. --y — ., �1y=.....,, e„u �m rvmmer cervices i onrrac[ Page 4 of 9 2. The insurances set forth by the insurance company are underwritten on forms which have been approved by the Texas State Board of Insurance or ISO. In addition, the ENGINEER shall provide information to the City relating to any original endorsements affecting coverage required by this section. 6.06 The following standard insurance policies shall be required: 1. General Liability Policy 2. Automobile Liability Policy 3. Workers Compensation Policy 4. Professional Liability Policy 6.06 The following general requirements are applicable to all policies: A. General Liability Automobile Liability, and Professional Liability insurance shall be written by a carrier with an A:VIII or better rating in accordance with the current Best Key Rating Guide. B. Only insurance carriers licensed and admitted to do business in the State of Texas will be accepted. C. Deductibles shall be listed on the Certificate of Insurance or separately provided to the CITY by ENGINEER. D. Claims Made Policies will not be accepted, except for Professional Liability Insurance. E. The CITY of Georgetown, its officials, employees, and volunteers, are to be added as "Additional Insured" to the General Liability and the Automobile Liability policies to the extent that ENGINEER's activities under this Agreement are potentially covered by such insurance. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the CITY, its officials, employees, or volunteers. F. A Waiver of Subrogation in favor of the City of Georgetown with respect to Worker's Compensation insurance must be included. G. Each insurance policy shall not be canceled except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City of Georgetown. H. Upon request, certified copies of all insurance policies shall be furnished to the City of Georgetown, and the City shall bear the cost of such copies at a rate not to exceed $0.10 per page. City of Georgetown and HOR Master Services Contract Page 5 of 9 6.07 The following Commercial General Liability will be required: A. Minimum combined Single Limit of $1,000,000.00 per occurrence for Bodily Injury and Property Damage. B. Coverage shall be at least as broad as Insurance Service's Office form number CG 00 01. C. No coverage shall be deleted from the standard policy without notification of individual exclusions being attached for review and acceptance. 6.08 The following Automobile Liability will be required: A. Minimum Combined Single Limitof $1,000,000.00 per occurrence for Bodily Injury and Property Damage. B. The Business Auto Policy must show Symbol 1 in the Covered Autos Portion of the liability section in Item 2 of the declarations page. 6.09 The following Professional Liability will be required: A. Minimum of $1,000,000.00 per claim and $1,000,000.00 aggregate. B. Coverage must be maintained for two (2) years after the termination of this Agreement. 6.10 The following Workers' Compensation will be required: A. Employer's Liability limits of $100,000.00 for each accident is required. B. Texas Waiver of Our Right to Recover From Others Endorsements, W 42 03 04 shall be included in this policy. C. Texas must appear in Item 3A of the Workers' Compensation coverage or Item 3C must contain the following: all States except those listed in Items A and the States of NV, ND, OH, WA, WV, WY. ARTICLE VII -- NON -ASSIGNMENT 7.01 ENGINEER shall not assign, sublet or transfer any rights under or interest in this Agreement without the written consent of the CITY, except to the extent that any assignment, subletting or transfer is mandated by law or the effect of this limitation may be restricted by law. Unless specifically stated to the contrary, in any written consent to an assignment, no agreement will release or discharge the assignor from any duty or responsibility underthis agreement. Nothing contained in this paragraph shall prevent the City of Georgetown and HDR Master Services Contract Page 6 of 9 ENGINEER from employing such independent associates and consultants as the ENGINEER may deem appropriate to assist in the performance of services hereunder. 7.02 Nothing under this agreement shall be construed to give any rights or benefits in this agreement to anyone other than the CITY and ENGINEER, and all duties and responsibilities undertaken pursuant to this agreement will be for the sole and exclusive benefit of the CITY and ENGINEER and not for the benefit of any other party. ARTICLE VIII – FORCE MAJURE 8.01 No liability shall attach to either party from delay in performance or nonperformance caused by circumstances beyond the control of the party affected, including but not limited to acts of God, war, fire, flood, explosion, action or request of a governmental authority, injunction, labor relations, accidents, delays, or inability to obtain materials, fuel, equipment, or transportation. ARTICLE XI — MISCELLANEOUS 9.01 Termination for convenience. CITY may at any time terminate this Agreement or any PROJECT for convenience. At such time CITY shall notify ENGINEER who shall cease work immediately. ENGINEER shall be compensated for the services performed. 9.02 Goveming Law. This agreement has been made under and shall be governed by the laws of the State of Texas. The parties agree that performance and all matters related thereto shall be in Williamson County, Texas. 9.03 Notices. All notices, requests or other communications required or permitted by this agreement shall be in writing and shall be sent by (i) telecopy, with the original delivered by hand or overnight carrier, (ii) by overnight courier or hand delivery, or (iii) certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, and addressed to the parties at the following addresses: CITY: City of Georgetown P.O. Box 409 Georgetown, Texas 78627 Attn: City Manager City Attorney ENGINEER: HDR Engineering, Inc. 2211 S. IH35, Suite 300 Austin, Texas 78741-3842 Attn: James K. (Ken) Haney, P.E. Executive Vice President Addresses and telecopy numbers for notices required under this agreement may be modified as needed by giving notice as required in this paragraph. „y ya,,,..,1 a, iv nwrt vtasrer services contract Page 7 of 9 9.04 Independent Consultant/Engineer. The parties agree that ENGINEER shall be deemed to be an independent consultant/engineer and not an agent or employee of the CITY with respect to its acts or omissions hereunder. The parties agree that the services and activities performed under this agreement are not and shall not be construed as a joint venture between the parties. 9.05 Confidential Work. Any reports, information, project evaluation, project designs, data, or other documentation developed by ENGINEER hereunder given to or prepared by or assembled by the ENGINEER will not be made available to any individual or organization by the ENGINEER without prior written approval of the CITY, except as required by law, including the rules or ordinances of any governmental entity having jurisdiction over the Project. 9.06 Ownership of Documents. City shall have ownership of all documents, including all reports, drawings, specifications, computer software, or other items prepared or furnished by ENGINEER pursuant to this Agreement. However, the documents are instruments of service with respect to the Project for which they were prepared only. ENGINEER retains ownership of all standard concepts, designs, details, and specifications used in such documents. CITY may retain copies of documents for its information and reference in connection with the Project; however, none of the documents are intended or represented to be suitable for use by CITY or others on extensions of the Project (unless specifically approved by ENGINEER) or for any other work. Any reuse without written verification or adaptation shall be at the CITY's sole risk and without liability or legal exposure to ENGINEER. 9.07 No Oral Modification/Complete Agreement. This agreement and any exhibits thereto constitute the entire agreement between the CITY and ENGINEER and supersedes all prior written or oral understandings. This agreement may only be amended, supplemented, modified or cancelled by a duly executed written instrument. 9.08 Waiver. No waiver by either party hereto of any term or condition of this agreement shall be deemed or construed to be a waiver of any other term or condition or subsequent waiver of the same term or condition. 9.09 Remedies. The rights and remedies of the CITY provided in this agreement shall not be exclusive and are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law and under this agreement including the right of specific performance and offset. Payment made to ENGINEER by the CITY shall not denote acceptance of the work. 9.10 Exhibits. All exhibits attached to this agreement are incorporated by reference and expressly made part of this agreement as if copied verbatim. 9.11 Severability. In case any one or more of the provisions contained in this agreement shall for any reason be held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable in any respect, such invalidity, illegality, or inability to enforce shall not affect any provision thereof, and this agreement shall be considered as if such invalid, illegal, or unenforceable provision had never been contained in this agreement. uty or ueorgetown and MDR Master Services Contract Page 8 of 9 9.12 Heirs, successors and assigns bound. The CITY and ENGINEER and their heirs, successors, executors, administrators, and assigns are hereby bound to the terms and conditions of this agreement. 9.13. Controlling Agreement. These terms and conditions shall take precedence over any inconsistent or contradictory provisions contained in any proposal, contract, purchase order, requisition, notice -to -proceed, or other like document. 9.13 Signatures warranted. The signatories to this agreement represent and warrant that they have the authority to execute this agreement on behalf of the CITY and HDR ENGINEERING, INC., respectively. Executed to be effective this day of CITY OF GEORGETOWN M Gary Nelon, Mayor Attest: Sandra D. Lee, City Secretary Approved as to form: Patricia E. Carts City Attorney STATE OF TEXAS ) COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON ) ENG /1 R By: Ja es K. (Ken) Hane , P.E. Executive Vice President Attest: George E.' illett, P.E. CORPORATE ACKNOWLEDGMENT This instrument was acknowledged before me on this of by in capacity as , a "'y ui ueorgetown anc nun master Services Contract Page 9 of 9 day of Notary Public, State of Texas on behalf of said EXHIBIT "A" HDR ENGINEERING INC. PROJECT TASK ORDER No. 1 Pursuant to the terms and conditions of that certain "Master Services Contract for Engineering Services for the SH 29 Southwest Bypass project ("Agreement") dated by and between the City of Georgetown, Texas ("City") and HDR Engineering, Inc., ("Engineer") the City and Engineer hereby agree that Engineer shall perform the work described below as provided herein and subject to the terms and conditions of the Agreement: DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The scope of services for this project shall include wetland delineation, land use, environmental and survey services, route studies and schematic design for a new location of a four lane divided rural roadway connecting SH 29 to IH 35 and the extension of DB Wood/Inner Loop to a Tee intersection with the SH 29 Southwest Bypass. 1. Project Administration HDR Engineering, Inc (The Engineer), in coordination with the City of Georgetown's Contract Manager (hereinafter referred to as Contract Manager), will be responsible for directing and coordinating all activities associated with the SH 29 Southwest Bypass Project (hereinafter referred to as the Project). A) Scheduling The Engineer will develop a detailed, graphic project schedule (in Microsoft Project format) indicating tasks, subtasks, critical dates, milestone events, deliverables, information requested from external agencies and TxDOT review requirements. The project schedule will be in a format that depicts the order and interdependence of the various tasks, subtasks, milestones, and deliverables for each task identified herein. Progress will be reviewed monthly and should these reviews indicate a substantial change in progress, the schedule will then be revised subject to the approval of the Contract Manager. B) Project Client Meetings Up to Five (5) meetings will be held with the City of Georgetown to discuss project issues that arise. The minutes of all meetings will be taken and prepared by the City of Georgetown. The Engineer will staff the meetings with the Project Manager and one Sr. Design Engineer or Sr. Environmental Coordinator. City of Georgetown and HDR Task Order No. 1 Page 1 of 17 K, C) Progress Reports, Invoices and Billings The Engineer will review the schedule and prepare monthly progress reports for review by the Contract Manager over a fourteen (14) month time period. Invoices for all work completed during the period will be submitted monthly for the Engineer and all sub -consultants. Monthly progress reports will include: a. Actual activities performed during the reporting period b. Anticipated activities planned for the next period Deliverables • Monthly Progress Reports (one [11 printed copy with invoice). • Monthly invoices including tabulation of percentage complete by task. D) Project Guide A project management plan will be prepared to identify project organization and responsibilities, coordination and communication procedures, project team meetings, document format, report format, technical memorandum format, graphic production standards, and other important operational information pertaining to the Project E) Close -Out Upon completion, the Engineer will submit all electronic files to the City of Georgetown. Copies of the transmitted materials will be retained by the Engineer for two (2) years after delivery of originals/diskettes to the Contract Manager. Schematic Design A) Route and Design Studies The Alternative Analysis scope of services for the SH 29 Southwest Bypass project is organized into four steps: Step 1 - Develop Initial Set of Alternatives Step 2 - Screening of Initial Set of Alternatives for Fatal Flaws and Selection of Viable Alternatives Step 3 - Analysis, Refinement and Evaluation of Viable Alternatives and Selection of the Preferred Alternative Step 4 - Development of Schematic & Environmental Documentation for the Preferred Alternative B) Technical Methodology Plan Engineer will prepare a Technical Methodology Plan that identifies detailed level alternative evaluation criteria and documents technical methodologies and procedures for alternative analysis evaluation. Included will be quantitative/qualitative measures of effectiveness summarized in a comparative form for each issue. A decision matrix will be developed as the basis for the alternative recommendations. The criteria in this matrix will include avoiding and/or minimizing impacts to the following: City of Georgetown and HDR Task Order No. 1 Page 2 of 17 a. Right -of -Way/ Displacement cost b. Regional Mobility C. Capital cost d. Utility Conflicts e. Social and Economic Impacts f. Environmental Impacts g. Land use h. Farmlands or Ranchlands i. Existing, build year and 20 -year design air quality j. Existing, build year and 20 -year design noise levels k. Water quality I. Wetlands / waters of the U.S. M. Wildlife habitat n. Floodplains o. State or Federally listed threatened or endangered species P. Historic and archaeological assets q. Hazardous waste sites r. Aesthetic and Scenic quality C) Identify Conceptual Alternatives (Up to 10) The Engineer will identify and define, with the assistance of Stakeholders, Interested Public participants, City of Georgetown Staff and previous studies, conceptual alternatives within the project area. The Aerial photo will be provided by the City of Georgetown. a) Using controlled aerial photography along with public input, identify potential alternatives to provide for the development of the SH 29 Bypass including interchange locations and configurations. These alternatives, will be identified considering existing development, past, present and future land use, environmental factors, location and functional characteristics of present and future interchange, geographic features, political issues, traffic volumes and costs. Up to ten (10) potential alignment alternatives will be identified, including those identified by the public. b) Field inspection of the corridor while evaluating the impacts of each potential alternative. D) Fatal Flaw Analysis The Engineer will screen the conceptual alternatives based on fatal flaw qualitative analysis to determine up to three (3) viable alternatives for further evaluation. Deliverables • General alignment and typical sections of all alternatives at appropriate scales so that each alternative can be presented on one 11" by 17" sheet. ■ General environmental constraints map. ■ Completed Decision Matrix uw U' UCOrae1Own anO NUN I a5K Urder No. 1 Page 3 of 17 E) Analysis and Refinement of Viable Alternatives A generalized ROW impact will be developed for the viable alternatives. A horizontal alignment will be developed for critical elements of each alternative as required to substantiate the layout, impacts, structure requirements, and costs of each alternative. These plan view ROW impact drawings are intended to highlight the differences between the alternatives and for selection of the preferred alternative. Based on qualitative analysis and quantitative analyses, input from the stakeholders, the Engineer will develop a preferred alternative. Schematics will be drawn in Microstation, (dgn format). Alignments will be calculated in Geopak application. F) Schematic Design Roadway geometry will be based on the criteria and requirements set forth in TxDOT's Roadway Design Manual — Revised October 2002. The schematic will be prepared in English units within the MicroStation CADD environment. Submittals for the Schematic will be: • Preliminary Schematic: Showing Horizontal Alignment only, for approval and use at 2nd Public Meeting. • Draft Schematic: Showing Draft Horizontal & Vertical Alignment for approval and use at Public Hearing. • Final Schematic: Showing final Horizontal and Vertical Alignment of the preferred alternative and final comments from Public Hearing. 3. Preliminary Design and Railroad Coordination A) Schematic Design will be developed from SH 29 Near DB Wood Road to IH 35 near Inner Loop 1) Attend up to four schematic coordination meetings with the City of Georgetown 2) Coordinate two meetings with the City of Georgetown and Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) and Williamson County. 3) Provide a MicroStation format on compatible archive media containing all graphics files used in developing the schematic and all Geopak (Gpk) alignment files. 4) Collect, review, and evaluate available existing data pertaining to project. B) Utilities Contact area utility companies and perform a visual survey of the project sites. Identify existing utility locations and place utility information on plans. C) Right of Way 1) Determine location of additional right of way. City of Georgetown and HDR Task Order No. 1 Page 4 of 17 2) Determine preliminary right of way requirements by parcel. 3) Develop list of affected property owners. D) Roadway 1) Select roadway geometry and prepare Typical Section. The typical section shall also reflect proposed geometric including pavement cross slopes and lane and shoulder widths. 2) Develop Horizontal and Vertical Alignment. 3) Develop roadway plan view. E) Bridge: 1) Develop bridge typical section. i. Determine superstructure and substructure requirements. ii. Determine location and number of test holes for geotechnical testing. F) Miscellaneous items: 1) Develop preliminary traffic control narrative. 2) Determine preliminary estimate of probable construction cost utilizing City supplied or TxDOT average unit bid item cost. G) Railroad Coordination: 1) Prepare a preliminary Railroad Crossing exhibit for initial discussions with TxDOT and Georgetown Railroad. 2) Attend two meetings with City. 3) Attend two railroad coordination meetings with the Georgetown Railroad Representatives. H) Traffic Operation Analysis: The Engineer will conduct the following: (a) Provide turning movements diagram for both the anticipated opening year and the TxDOT or CAMPO 20 -year projected traffic (b) Use existing and future traffic volume to determine Level of Service (LOS) analysis for mainlanes, interchanges and intersections, as well as analyze traffic data to determine whether traffic signals are warranted at the various intersections. 4. Final Schematic Upon approval of the draft horizontal and vertical geometrics by the Contract Manager, three copies of the draft schematic will be submitted through the City of Georgetown for TxDOT Austin District and TxDOT Design Division for approval, and subsequent coordination with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) where applicable, and shall be the basis for an exhibit at any required public hearing prior to final development of the project. If there are any changes to the draft schematic after the Design Division and FHWA approval and before the public hearing, two copies of the revised draft schematic, as displayed at the hearing, shall be submitted either prior to or accompanying the public hearing r bEO/OetOWn and HUK I ask order No. 1 5 of 17 data. If there are no changes in the schematic as displayed at the hearing, only photographs of the schematic and other displays shall be submitted with the public hearing data. The final schematic will be issued after changes (if any) from the public hearing are incorporated. Deliverables • Three copies (assume 4 rolls each) of the schematic layout • Digital copy of approved schematic. A) Engineering Summary Report Prepare an Engineering report, which will document the Preliminary Engineering of all components of the project. The report includes: 1) Project Summary (description and history) 2) Alternative evaluation 3) A summary of the route study 4) Description of preferred alternative 5) Traffic analysis 6) Level of Service Analysis 7) Typical sections 8) Sequence of construction diagrams and traffic handling narrative 9) ROW and Construction Cost Estimates 10)A preliminary hydraulic analysis B) Value Engineering Study including: Since the project Construction Estimate is currently Slightly under $22,000,000, no Value Engineering Study is included in this scope. If the estimate increases to $25, 000,000 or more, a Value Engineering study will be provided at the beginning of the PS&E phase scope and fee. 5. Public Involvement All public involvement procedures shall be in accordance with 43 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) 2.40-2.51, Code of Federal Regulations Title 23, Part 771 Technical assistance, meeting(s)/hearing(s) preparation, maintenance of contacts lists, exhibit preparation, and other tasks required, shall be provided. The minutes of all meetings will be taken and prepared by the City of Georgetown. The Engineer will staff the stakeholder meetings with the Project Manager and one Sr. Design Engineer. The Engineer will staff the Public Meetings and Public Hearing with the Project Manager, a Sr. Design Engineer, a Design Engineer. A Project Principal will attend one public Meeting and one Public Hearing. One coordination meeting prior to the first Public meeting and the Public hearing is included in the scope and fee. A) The Engineer will maintain contact list and provide notices to TxDOT to mail to individual property owners. B) At project kickoff — to develop range of alternatives — Up to 5 separate meetings will be held with stakeholders. City of Georgetown and HDR Task Order No. 1 Page 6 of 17 C) First Public Meeting will occur during route study for initial route identification. D) After preliminary evaluation of Conceptual Alternatives in order to reach consensus on Viable Alternatives — One meeting will be held with stakeholders. 1. After preliminary evaluation of Viable Alternatives in order to reach consensus on Preferred Alternative — One meeting will be held with stakeholders 2. Second Public Meeting will be to transition from route selection to vertical development of schematic. 3. One public hearing to be held at the location designated by the Contract Manager once the schematic has been approved 4. Engineer will prepare up to three (3) editions of a newsletter to keep the public informed of project progress and the dates, times, and locations of public meetings. Newsletters will incorporate text and graphics. 300 copies of each newsletter will be published. The Engineer will provide a synopsis of the outcome of the public meetings, which include attendance record, copy of comments received, type of questions posed, general disposition of the public to the proposal, new issues which may have surfaced, for each of the public meetings. Deliverables • Public meeting summaries for two public meetings (One original each), and for one Public Hearing (One Original). 6. ROW AND UTILITY ADJUSTMENT: A) ROW Maps and Legal The ENGINEER shall provide preliminary ROW (including drainage easements) acquisition lines as soon as they are identifiable. The Engineer shall provide X&Y coordinates and/or Station & Offsets to the City of Georgetown. B) Easements: The Engineer shall be responsible for delineating easements in areas ROW for purposes of proposed construction or future maintenance. (Engineer will be responsible for preparing the necessary legal instruments.) 7. DRAINAGE: A) Hydrologic Studies, Discharges: 1. The Engineer will identify major drainage areas and based on ultimate land use and zoning maps, determine ultimate design year and 50 and 100- year "Qr' for probable bridge class drainage structures. The Engineer will also obtain existing floodway data hydrologic models for regulated floodways and verify these drainage areas and "Q's". Additionally, the Engineer will use UtY of Georoer--,n ,,,rr. HDR Task Order No. 1 Page 7 of 17 approved hydraulic models to size probable bridge class structures to satisfy FEMA requirements. The Engineer shall investigate the need for drainage easements for cross drainage sites. Standard hydrologic analysis methodologies found in the TxDOT drainage manual will be appropriate for the analysis. Non-standard analysis techniques will not be required. The analysis will be limited to "major" drainage channels and structures that will either have an impact on Right -of -Way requirements or encompass significant cost considerations. All hydraulic design shall be in accordance with TxDOT's Hydraulic Manual, except where variances are permitted in writing by TxDOT. Use 1 inch=2000 feet scale area drainage maps. Deliverables: 1. Drainage area maps showing existing conditions and proposed improvements. 2. Hydrologic data/discharge determination 3. Stage -discharge information B) Hydraulic Drainage Study and Documentation* 1. Hydraulic computation a. For non -bridge class structures, the Engineer will compare existing structures with structures upstream and downstream of the roadway to determine preliminary structure size. b. Bridge class drainage crossings will be analyzed. Tailwater elevations will be determined assuming normal depth in a single downstream cross-section. C. Preliminary channel design will be based on a normal depth analysis using Manning's equation. Backwater analysis for channel design will not be performed. *This work will include the use of any hydrologic or hydraulics computer programs which may be required, such as Texas Hydraulic System (THYSYS), Federal Highway Administration Hydraulic Engineering Circulars and other TxDOT Hydraulic Section publications. 8. Revise Century Plan Attend up to four meetings. The Engineer shall prepare two exhibits with the assistance from the City Staff to identify the general location of the road extending to the west from the SH 29 Bypass intersection with the Inner Loop for modification to the century plan. City of Georgetown and HDR Task Order No. 1 Page 8 of 17 9. Environmental Services (To Be Performed by Blanton & Associates) The Environmental Assessment (EA) and permitting process consists of several planning phases. Initial phases include coordination with affected entities and the identification of issues that pose potential constraints to the development of the proposed project. These phases are followed by the incorporation of pertinent design and environmental data that provide a framework for issue resolution and the selection of a preferred alternative. Finally, an EA will be prepared to document the planning and permitting phases of the project. The following outlines this process. A. Prepare Environmental Constraints Report The Engineer will prepare an environmental constraints report in support of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to identify any known environmental constraints and/or fatal flaws associated with the proposed project. The report will follow a systematic, interdisciplinary approach to evaluate and characterize up to three alternative corridors. The findings of this report will help project planners and engineers determine potential constraints when determining roadway alignments. B. Prepare Draft Environmental Assessment The EA document will comply with NEPA and the guidelines of the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) for preparing environmental documents. The analysis will address the adverse and beneficial impacts of project construction and operation. The impacts analysis will be organized to facilitate equivalent comparisons of alternatives. Mitigation options will be emphasized where adverse impacts may potentially occur. Environmental professionals with specialized technical training and experience in their respective disciplines will perform the baseline and impacts analyses for various disciplines. C. Public Involvement The Engineer will participate in all public involvement activities necessary to achieve public support and consensus, but this scope assumes the Project Engineer will be responsible for all logistical activities (i.e., meeting places, attendees, meeting summaries). The primary responsibility of the Engineer for this task will be to provide environmental technical support and graphics depicting environmental constraints. This scope includes the Engineer's attendance at the following meetings: 1) Two public meetings 2) One public hearing 3) Meetings with affected property owners (up to five) CL of Georgetown and HDR Task Order No. 1 Page 9 of 17 D. Agency Coordination As part of the proposed effort, the Engineer intends to collect information and informally coordinate with local, state, and federal agencies and organizations regarding project compliance with applicable environmental regulations and associated approvals, including the 18 regulatory programs listed in Section 2-204 of the Texas Department of Transportation Operations and Procedures Manual Part IIB, and Section 2 of the TxDOT Environmental Manual. These entities may include: • Local, county, and municipal government agencies • U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) regarding Endangered Species Act (ESA) compliance • Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and local flood management agency regarding National Flood Insurance Program compliance • Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) regarding area parks, wildlife refuges, state -listed endangered species, and compliance with TxDOT/TPWD Memorandum of Understanding regarding non- regulated vegetation impacts • Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) • Natural Resources Conservation Service regarding Prime Farmland Protection Act compliance All correspondence and telephone or in-person discussions with agency officials will be logged as part of the project file. E. Purpose and Need for Action This task, which includes preparation of the project description, will be based on information provided primarily by the Project Engineer. The Engineer will work closely with engineers from the City of Georgetown, HDR Engineering, Inc., and TxDOT to develop the project description and purpose and need sections for the EA. F. Description of Alternatives The Engineer's role in this task is to provide and analyze constraints information as related to NEPA alternatives to assist in the selection of a preferred alternative. G. Affected Environment and Consequences For each of the categories listed below, the Engineer and the Project Engineer (where appropriate) will perform pertinent literature and background searches and field reconnaissance to gather data necessary for completion of env of beoraeT0wn wO HUH I a5K Urder No. 1 Page 10 of 17 an EA and to support the permitting process. Data will be provided both on a regional scale and specific to the alternatives that received primary consideration during the planning process. This information will be graphically depicted and verbally characterized in sufficient detail so that their comparative merits can be evaluated. The results of this effort will be utilized in the EA but will also be useful during the alternatives analysis and public involvement phases. The existing environment and potential impacts of the proposed projects will be described for each discipline below. H. Land Use and Economic Impacts The Project Engineer will be responsible for determining the effects of proposed project improvements in light of land -use trends, plans, and policies within the study area. This effort will entail coordination with local officials and will include an analysis of potential secondary effects of the proposed improvements. The assessment will address potential economic effects upon adjacent businesses due to diversion of traffic during and after construction. Particular attention will be paid to the existence of underground and above- ground pipelines servicing the oil and gas industry. The Engineer will be responsible for reviewing the applicability of Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act and Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act. If 4(f) or 6(f) evaluations are required, they will be conducted under a separate scope and budget. The Engineer will assess impacts to prime farmland soil units by mapping, quantifying, and coordinating with the Natural Resources Conservation Service. Resolution of this issue will be documented in the text of the EA. I. Social Impacts and Environmental Justice As applicable, this task will address potential effects of the project on local neighborhoods or communities, travel patterns, access, and public safety, particularly as those changes may differentially affect various social groups and minorities. The assessment will conform to FHWA guidance for compliance with Executive Order 12898 Environmental Justice. J. Air Quality Impacts The proposed project area will be evaluated for National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) status. The air quality assessment will focus on the changes in roadway -related carbon monoxide (CO) and other criteria emissions that may result from the proposed improvements. Using existing literature, an analysis will be prepared of the study area's existing meteorological dispersion and air-quality characteristics. �nv or OeordeTQv and HUK Task Order No. 1 Page 11 of 17 K. Noise The project noise assessment will consist of an inventory of potential noise - sensitive receptors in order to establish the project area's existing noise level range. In accordance with TOOT noise assessment guidelines, the roadway alignment for the design year will be computer simulated, and future noise levels will be predicted at each of the sensitive receptors using the FHWA/TxDOT approved Traffic Noise Model. L. Ecological Resources (To be performed under time and material portion of contract with a not -to -exceed of $49,500.00) The Project Engineer will conduct evaluations of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, in all areas potentially affected by the proposed project, and a "jurisdictional waters finding" will be provided if necessary. As part of the environmental phase of the project, the Project Engineer will notify the district if it is believed that a Section 404 or Section 9 permit is required and will provide the technical data to the district for application to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and/or the U.S. Coast Guard. Any Section 404 permitting that requires direct coordination with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is scheduled to occur during the design phase and will require an additional scope and budget. The Engineer will characterize remaining ecological resources including existing vegetation attributes and wildlife habitat. Ecologically sensitive resources, if identified, will be mapped and described in order to assess potential effects of project construction and operation. This will include the appropriate literature and aerial photography review and field verification. The Engineer will also perform a literature review, habitat assessment(s), and USFWS coordination to identify and address threatened/endangered species issues in order to ensure compliance with the ESA. The assessment will focus on federally listed species of potential occurrence. This scope and budget also includes a geologic assessment survey to identify candidate karst features within the project area. The proposed right-of-way and a 500 ft buffer on either side of the proposed right-of-way will be surveyed to identify these features. The EA will also address compliance issues under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act relative to the proposed project. M. Hazardous Materials Contamination The Project Engineer will perform an Environmental Site Assessment for potential hazardous materials impacts in accordance with the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) 1528.93 (Transaction Screen Process). It will be undertaken as a combination of data search and site investigation for the preferred route (corridor). The hazardous material criterion will be used in determining mitigative measures for the preferred route—not necessarily for route selection. Notwithstanding, the Project City of Georgetown and HDR Task Order No. 1 Page 12 of 17 Engineer will identify significant appurtenances that may conflict with the various routes during the route selection phase. This information will be used for revising alignment and/or selecting the preferred route. The Project Engineer will conduct database searches for up to three alternative routes for the Inner Loop project. Up to five separate investigations will be conducted: leaking petrochemical tanks (underground), state/federal superfund sites, municipal solid waste sites, storage disposal facilities, and industrial and hazardous waste sites. Field verification will be completed for the preferred route. Separate Support Documentation Where applicable, separate letter reports documenting results of historic, threatened and endangered species, noise, wetlands, and environmental justice investigations will be prepared for regulatory overview. 10. Survey Services (To Be Performed by Diamond Surveying, Inc,) A) Provide Client with electronic cadd file and plotted map showing road right-of- way lines and property lines based on record deed information and preliminary pin search for use in preliminary route determination. B) Obtain right of entry to properties that require field crew entry. C) Establish and stake baseline control and furnish listing of horizontal alignment and coordinates for baseline control. This baseline shall not be on centerline stationing. D) Establish benchmark circuit throughout the project and project control data. Provide Client with benchmark list. E) Collect void information to supplement Digital Terrain Model (DTM) of the roadway and site for use in the GEOPAK Roadway geometry modeling system. F) Establish x, y and z coordinates of power lines, manholes and valves of various utilities and flowlines of existing sanitary sewer and storm sewer lines. Utility locations shall be based on One -call services. G) Provide temporary signs, traffic control, flags, safety equipment, etc. H) Ties to existing bridges, bridge foundations and culverts. 1) Provide hydraulic cross-sections for hydraulic analysis. J) Locate geotechnical bore holes and provide location report to client. City of Georgetown and HDR Task Order No. 1 Page 13 of 17 K) Perform management tasks related to the surveying services listed above. These tasks shall include such items as coordinating work to be performed, attending meetings, telephone discussions with the Client, progress reports, etc. 11. Work not included at this time • Right of way mapping or parcel plats. • Meets and bounds for parcel legal descriptions. • Pavement Design. • Utility conflict design and plan preparation. • Roadway, Railway or Bridge design. • Final PS & E and Bid Document preparation. • Traffic analysis for project or century plan. 12. Items to be provided by the City • Any cultural resource work (i.e., archaeological investigations/historical investigations). The City or its selected consultant will provide the required cultural resource findings/reports necessary for state and federal approvals. This information will be made available to the Engineer for inclusion in the Environmental Assessment. • A court reporter or other source for recording meeting minutes at the public meetings and the public hearing. • Minutes of all public meetings/hearing. • Background data including construction drawings, site plans, plats, survey information, survey datum, property ownerships, land use drawings, 13. Additional Services There are work items associated with this project which are dependent upon findings from the basic services scope of work. These items may be required in their entirety, may be partly required or may not be required at all. In order to more efficiently work these items into the project, the effort required to complete them will be determined at a later date when the project corridor becomes more definite. Therefore, the items and their associated costs as outlined below are estimated and will be further defined as the project develops. Items included in the additional services are: A. Environmental Services Agency Coordination TxDOT generally conducts formal coordination activities with resource and regulatory agencies when the draft EA is provided to their office. Due to the uncertainty of TxDOT's involvement, it may be necessary for the Engineer to conduct formal coordination with resource and regulatory agencies. The C t',-Ot Georgetewr. ono_HDR Task Order No. 1 Page 14 of 17 Engineer would perform any required formal coordination to obtain approvals if TxDOT is not involved with the proposed project. • Formal coordination and meeting activities: $9,000 Archaeology The cultural resources task will include a background review of historical and archaeological sources, including an inventory of recorded sites from the Texas Archeological Research Laboratory, to evaluate the potential for occurrence of sites which may be eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. This scope includes a 100 percent pedestrian survey of the preferred alignment as required for compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the Texas Antiquities Code. This scope does not include any activities associated with the testing or mitigation phases of Section 106 compliance. If testing and/or mitigation are deemed necessary, additional funds would be needed to complete these activities. This scope also includes a TOOT Historical Resources Survey of buildings and structures up to 1,300 ft beyond the proposed right-of-way for the preferred alignment. • Estimated cost to conduct archaeological studies: $12,250 • Estimated cost to conduct historic studies: $12,250 • Additional cost would be required if the initial archaeological survey determines that a site or sites require testing and/or mitigation. Mitigation of an archaeological site may require additional work in order to comply with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the Texas Antiquities Code. • Testing of archeological site(s) depends on size and significance: $25,000 to $125,000 (per site) • Mitigation of archaeological site(s): $50,000-500,000 (per site) For budgeting purposes, it is assumed that a single site may be identified requiring testing and mitigation, which would cost approximately $250,000. Endangered Species Presence/absences surveys for the threatened and endangered species may require additional efforts if habitat is present. For example, USFWS protocol may require three years of survey data for the golden-cheeked warbler to resolve issues. If significant karst features are identified, a biological assessment of habitat quality would be required. Efforts associated with significant karst features may require mapping of significant caves to achieve clearance. Additionally if impacts to endangered song birds occur, a biological assessment would be required. • Additional surveys: $20,000 • Additional karst work: $100,000 • Biological assessments: $30,000 • Mitigation Planning: $50,000 City of Georgetown and HDR Task Order No. 1 Page 15 of 17 Noise Impacts If noise modeling indicates that noise abatement is feasible and reasonable, a noise workshop would be scheduled for the affected property owners. The intent of the noise workshop would be to gather a consensus from the affected property owners concerning the location and type of noise wall(s) that could be constructed. • Noise workshop: $5,000 Section 4(f)/6(f) Evaluations Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 helps protect publicly owned lands such as parks, recreational areas, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and significant historic sites from impacts due to highway construction. Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act requires that recreational facilities receiving U.S. Department of Interior funding from the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act as allocated by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) may not be converted to non -recreational use unless approval is received from TPWD and the National Park Service. Impacts to Section 4(f) and/or 6(f) lands would require additional documentation to achieve environmental clearance. • Section 4(f) evaluation: $10,000 (per location) • Programmatic 4(f) evaluation: $15,000 (per location) • Section 6(f) evaluation: $15,000 (per location) For the purposes of this correspondence, a total cost of $25,000 is assumed for 4(f) and 6(f) concerns. Prepare Environmental Impact Statement If potential significant unavoidable impacts to the human or natural environment are determined during the development of the EA, an Environmental Impact Statement resulting in a Record of Decision would be required. Additional Cost for Environmental Impact Statement: $90,000 B. Survey 1. Locate roadway right of way and parcel line locations based on actual on -the -ground survey and relate to project control upon determination of final alignment. Provide City with electronic CADD file and plotted strip map. 2. Provide coordination with Utility companies based on One -call notification service. 3. Prepare individual metes and bounds descriptions with seven (7) parcels to be acquired for right-of-way and five (5) parcels to be acquired for City of Georaetown and HDR Task Order No. 1 Page 16 of 17 easements. These numbers are estimated based on information available at this time. 4. Stake centerline stationing of final alignment for use during construction phase. 14. PAYMENT Fees associated with the Basic Services portion of the contract, excluding the Ecological Resources, will be invoiced on a lump sum basis in the amount of $482,252. The Ecological Resources will be invoiced on the basis of hourly costs plus expenses with a maximum not to exceed amount of $49,500. The total for Basic Services is $531,752. Additional Services, if required and approved, will be invoiced on the basis of hourly costs plus expenses with a maximum not to exceed amount of $808,710. A breakdown of the costs for this project is attached, Exhibit C, to this task order. 15. SCHEDULE A detailed project schedule will be provided shortly after Notice to Proceed is received. Development of the environmental documentation and schematic design comprising the Basic Services of this contract will be completed with fourteen (14) months of written authorization to proceed. This PROJECT TASK ORDER shall not bind or effective unless and until it is signed by duly authorized representatives of both ENGINEER and the CITY. Executed to be effective on CITY OF GEORGETOWN Printed Name: UtV of Georgetown and HDR Task Order No 1 Page 17 of 17 2003. HDR ENGINEERING, INC. By:/ Printed ame: James K. (ken) Haney, P.E. Title: Executive Vice President Date: 1,13103 EXHIBIT "B" HDR ENGINEERING, INC. AUSTIN, TEXAS SCHEDULE OF ESTIMATED HOURLY BILLING RATES Project Principal $ 250 Project Manager/Senior Engineer $ 165 Project Engineer $ 150 Design Engineer $ 115 Engineer -in -Training $ 90 Sr. Design Technician $ 100 CADD Technician $ 80 Clerical/Steno $ 65 BLANTON & ASSOCIATES, INC. AUSTIN, TEXAS Project Principal $ 155 Senior Project Manager $ 125 Project Manager $ 105 Sr. Scientist $ 100 Scientist II $ 85 Scientist 1 $ 70 Technician II $ 65 Technician 1 $ 55 Cartography $ 85 Project Administrator $ 60 Clerical $ 55 EXHIBIT "C" Fee Summary - Basic Services Project Name: SH 29 Southwest Bypass S32,591 TOTAL HDR BASIC SERVICES FEE Consultant: HDR Engineering, Inc. SUBCONSULTANTS BASIC SERVICES Diamond Surveying Cost Component, Hours Schematic Environ. RR Project Total $ 650 Baseline Control Coor. Admin. Hours Project Principal 60 0 2 20 82 Project Manager/Senior Engineer. Utility Survey 416 58 38 108 620 Design Engineer 850 512 8 14 44 578 Engineer -in -Training $ 264 104 16 0 384 Sr. Design Technician 264 0 0 0 264 CADD Technician Blanton & Associates (Excluding Ecological Resources) 496 24 24 0 544 Clerical/Steno Public Involvement 72 17 0 68 157 Total Hours 5,000 2084 211 94 240 2629 Cost Component, Dollars Rate 3.000 Land Use 8 Economic Impacts $ 5.000 Project Principal $250 $15,000 $0 $500 $5,000 $20,500 Project Manager/Senior Engineer. $165 $68,640 $9.570 $6,270 $17,820 $102,300 Design Engineer $115 $58,880 $920 $1,610 $5,060 $66,470 Engineer -in -Training $90 $23,760 $9,360 $1,440 $0 $34,560 Sr. Design Technician $100 $26,400 $0 $0 $0 $26,400 CADD Technician $80 $39,680 $1,920 $1,920 $0 $43,520 Clerical/Steno $65 $4,680 $1,105 $0 $4,420 $10205 Labor Dollars $237,040 $22,875 $11,740 $32,300 $303,955 TOTAL EXPENSES W/ 10% markup S32,591 TOTAL HDR BASIC SERVICES FEE $336,546 SUBCONSULTANTS BASIC SERVICES Diamond Surveying Right-of-way Map w/Electronic File $ 5,080 Obtain Right of Entry $ 650 Baseline Control S 13,900 Benchmark Circuit $ 9,580 Digital Terrain Model $ 16,400 Utility Survey $ 12,600 Traffic control & Safety $ 850 Ties to hydraulic structures $ 6,300 Hydraulic Cross Sections $ 6,950 Geotechnical Boring Locations $ 3,650 Administration, meetings, coord., etc. $ 6,0D0 Subtotal Diamond Surveying $81,960 Blanton & Associates (Excluding Ecological Resources) Environmental Constraints Report $ 18,000 Public Involvement $ 5,000 Agency Coordination $ 5,000 Purpose & Need for Action $ 1,000 Akemative Descriptions $ 3.000 Land Use 8 Economic Impacts $ 5.000 Social Impacts $ ,500 Air Quality Impacts $ 4 4,500 Noise Assessment $ 7,500 Subtotal Blanton & Assoc. $50,500 Subconsultant Administration & Coordination 10% $13,246 TOTAL BASIC SERVICES LUMP SUM FEE $482,252 Blanton 8 Associates (Ecological Resources) TOTAL HOURLY NOT TO EXCEED FEE $49,500 TOTAL BASIC SERVICES FEES $531,752 Manhour Summary Project Name: Southwest SH 29 Bypass Consultant: HDR Engineering, Inc. Tasks Hours for the Classifications Total Project Principal PM / Senior Eng/Sr. Env Design Eng/ Env II Engineer in Training/Env Sr. Design Technician CADD Technician Steno / Clerical Project Administration 20 108 44 68 240 Schematic Preparation 60 416 512 264 264 496 72 2084 Environmental 0 58 8 104 0 24 17 211 Georgetown RR Coordination 1 2 38 1 14 16 0 24 0 94 Total Hours 82 620 1 578 384 264 544 157 2629 Project Name Southwest SH 29 Bypass ............................................................... Consultant: HDR Engineering, Inc. No. of Sheets Schematic Preparation from SH 29 to IH 35 Hours for the Classifications Total Project Principal PM / Seniol Eng/Sr. Enq Design Eng/ Env II Engineer in Training/Env Sr. Design Technician CADD Technician Steno/- Clerical Preliminary Design Kick off + 4 project Meetings 20 20 16 56 Compile and assess existing data 8 16 8 32 Identify and Analyze Conceptual Analysis 8 8 24 40 Analyze and Refine Viable Alternatives 16 40 24 24 104 Design Criteria Selection 4 8 12 Location maps & Typical Sections 2 4 16 22 Plan View Layout & Alignments 8 24 40 80 40 192 Vertical Profiles & Cross Sections 8 24 40 80 40 192 Annotation - Schematic 24 40 120 40 224 Project Exhibits / Newsletters 48 56 80 40 224 Stakeholder Coordination (7) meetings 70 8 78 Create Exhibits from initial Stakeholder (3) meetings 4 12 32 48 Public Meetings/ Hearing 12 48 24 24 108 Hydrology and Floodplain maps 4 24 40 20 40 16 144 Preliminary Hydraulic Anaylsis 8 24 64 60 40 16 212 Utility identification and conflict assessment 4 8 8 20 Develop Prelim. Construction Cost Estimates 4 16 40 60 Bridge Sizing & Typical Section (Concrete) 16 20 16 8 40 100 Compling report and deliverables 8 16 40 24 40 128 Century Plan Meetings 8 16 16 40 Century Plan Exhibits 4 12 32 48 Total Hours and Sheets 60 416 1 512 F 264 264 496 72 2084 Project Name Southwest SH 29 Bypass Consultant: HDR Engineering, Inc. Additional Services (Design Phase, Costs not included) HDR Section 404 permitting (To be conducted in Final Design Phase) HDR Section 401 permitting (To be conducted in Final Design Phase) HDR Sect. 402 TPDES Stormwater Permitting (To be conducted in Final Design) Wetlands, Land Use, & HazMat Project Principal PM / Senior Design Eng/Sr. Env Eng/ Env II Engineer in raining/Env Sr. Design Technician CADD Technician Steno / Clerical Total HIM Land Use/ Economic Im cts/Rclocutions 8 8 16 8 2 42 HDR Waters of the U.SJWetiands/Flood tains 12 20 8 2 42 HDR Hazardous Materials (NEPA Write -Up) 2 8 4 1 15 Hoa Field Investigation (preferred alignment only) 8 8 16 EE! Site Assessment Re n 8 20 4 2 34 Res nse to Public Comments 8 12 4 24 HDR !Regulatory Agency NEPA Pre-Appi Correspondence (COE, TCEQ) 12 20 6 38 Total Hours 0 58 8 1 104 0 24 17 211 Additional Services (Design Phase, Costs not included) HDR Section 404 permitting (To be conducted in Final Design Phase) HDR Section 401 permitting (To be conducted in Final Design Phase) HDR Sect. 402 TPDES Stormwater Permitting (To be conducted in Final Design) Project Name Southwest SH 29 Bypass Consultant: HDR Engineering, Inc. -••--•-•.......................................•--........-•----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- - -- ---- -- --- --- -- No. No. of Sheets Georgetown RR Coordination Hours for the Classifications Total Project Principal PM / Senior Eng/Sr. Env Design Eng/ Env II Engineer in raining/Env Sr. Design Technician CADD Technician Steno I Clerical 0 Attend two conceptual meetings with City 6 6 12 0 Attend two meeetin s with Georgetown RR 8 8 16 0 Conceptual Layout for RR 2 24 16 24 66 Total Hours and Sheets 2 38 14 16 0 24 0 94 Fee Summary - Additional Services Project Name: SH 29 Southwest Bypass Consultant: HDR Engineering, Inc. Cost Component, Hours Project Principal Project Manager/Senior Engineer. Design Engineer Engineer -in -Training Sr. Design Technician CADD Technician Clerical/Steno Total Hours Cost Component, Dollars Project Principal Project Manager/Senior Engineer Design Engineer Engineer -in -Training Sr. Design Technician CADD Technician Clerical/Steno Labor Dollars TOTAL EXPENSES W/ 1001. markup TOTAL HDR ADDITIONAL SERVICES FEE SUBCONSULTANTS ADDITIONAL SERVICES $9,730 $134,190 Diamond Surveying Survey Roadway and Parcel Lines $17,800 Coordinate with Utility Companies $3,450 Prepare Metes & Bounds Descriptions (12 Q $1200/parcel) $14,400 Stake Project Centerline $7,550 Subtotal Diamond Surveying $43,200 Blanton & Associates Archaeology $250,000 Endangered Species $200,000 Noise Impacts $5,000 Section 4(f) & 6(f) Evaluations $25,000 Environmental Impact Statement $90,000 Subtotal Diamond Surveying $570,000 Subconsultant Administration & Coordination 10% $61,320 TOTAL ADDITIONAL SERVICES FEE $808,710 Additional Additional Total Services Project Admin. Hours 32 8 40 174 48 222 294 8 302 180 0 180 117 0 117 138 0 138 40 24 64 975 88 1063 Rate $250 $8,000 $2,000 $10,000 $165 $28,710 $7,920 $36,630 $115 $33,810 $920 $34,730 $90 $16,200 $0 $16,200 $100 $11,700 $0 $11,700 $80 $11,040 $0 $11,040 $65 $2,600 $1,560 $4,160 $112,060 $12,400 $124,460 SUBCONSULTANTS ADDITIONAL SERVICES $9,730 $134,190 Diamond Surveying Survey Roadway and Parcel Lines $17,800 Coordinate with Utility Companies $3,450 Prepare Metes & Bounds Descriptions (12 Q $1200/parcel) $14,400 Stake Project Centerline $7,550 Subtotal Diamond Surveying $43,200 Blanton & Associates Archaeology $250,000 Endangered Species $200,000 Noise Impacts $5,000 Section 4(f) & 6(f) Evaluations $25,000 Environmental Impact Statement $90,000 Subtotal Diamond Surveying $570,000 Subconsultant Administration & Coordination 10% $61,320 TOTAL ADDITIONAL SERVICES FEE $808,710 Project Name: Consultant: Fee Summary - Additional Services SH 29 Southwest Bypass HDR Engineering, Inc. Cost Component, Hours Project Principal Project Manager/Senior Engineer. Design Engineer Engineer -in -Training Sr. Design Technician CADD Technician Clerical/Steno Total Hours Cost Component, Dollars Project Principal Project Manager/Senior Engineer Design Engineer Engineer -in -Training Sr. Design Technician CADD Technician Clerical/Steno Labor Dollars TOTAL EXPENSES W/ 10% markup TOTAL HDR ADDITIONAL SERVICES FEE $9,730 $134,190 Additional Additional Total Services Project Admin. Hours 32 8 40 174 48 222 294 8 302 180 0 180 117 0 117 138 0 138 40 24 64 975 88 1063 Rate $250 $8,000 $2,000 $10,000 $165 $28,710 $7,920 $36,630 $115 $33,810 $920 $34,730 $90 $16,200 $0 $16,200 $100 $11,700 $0 $11,700 $80 $11,040 $0 $11,040 $65 $2,600 $1,560 $4,160 $112,060 $12,400 $124,460 $9,730 $134,190 Project Name. Southwest SH 29 Bypass -------------------------------- Consultant: HDR Engineering, Inc. - -------------....... --------.... --- ------..---..................------------ .------------------.-----------•--------------------------------- No. of Sheets Additional Services Schematic Preparation from SH 29 to IH 35 Hours for the Classifications Total Project Principal PM / Senior Engineer Design En ineer Engineer in Training Sr. Design Technician CADD Technician Steno / Clerical Preliminary Design Redesign meetings 6 6 6 18 Modify Plan View Layout & Alignments 4 16 24 60 32 136 Modify Vertical Profiles & Cross Sections 4 16 24 60 32 136 Annotation - Schematic 8 12 45 16 81 Revise Hydrology and Floodplain maps 4 16 24 12 24 12 92 Revise Preliminary Hydraulic Anaylsis 4 16 40 24 24 12 120 Revise Prelim. Construction Cost Estimates 4 12 16 32 Revise Bridge Sizing & Typical Section 4 12 16 16 48 Revise report and deliverables 4 16 24 12 16 72 Additional bridge sizing for steel girders@ IH 4 48 80 8 140 Additional Crossing Hydraulics and Hydrolog 4 16 32 24 24 100 Total Hours and Sheets 32 174 294 180 117 138 40 975