Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda CC 12.10.2003i1rn� h� ib �'i e- yIl(o� 03 C. l) o La ulna q)l(4103 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT THIS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT (this "Agreement") is made and entered into effective this day of December, 2002, by and between WIL LIAMSON COUNTY (the "County") and the CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS (the "City"), political subdivisions of the State of Texas. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, V.T.C.A., Government Code, Chapter 791, the Texas Interlocal Cooperation Act, provides that any one or more public agencies may contract with each other for the performance of governmental functions and for the joint use of facilities or services for the promotion and protection of the health and welfare of the inhabitants of this State and the mutual benefit of the parties; and WHEREAS, Shell Road and the proposed Shell Road re -alignment are an integral section of the Inner Loop and thus serve a county and a city purpose; and WHEREAS, on or about the 19'" day of June, 2001, the parties entered into an Interlocal Agreement, as adopted by the City in Resolution No. 4& /,2 O%-3' 3 (the "Original Interlocal Agreement"); and WHEREAS, because of changed circumstances, the parties wish to replace the Original Interlocal Agreement with this Agreement; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein contained, the undersigned parties agree as follows: I. TERMS AND CONDITIONS 1. The City hereby agrees to perform all necessary and appropriate engineering, traffic signalization (including traffic signalization at the Shell Re-alignment/Williams Drive intersection [the "Williams Drive Traffic Signal']), design and construction of the re -alignment of Shell Road at its intersection with Williams Drive to the southern boundary of Georgetown Village and a connection from this re -alignment to Sequoia Spur Drive (collectively, the "Shell Re -alignment"), as shown on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein. 2. The Shell Re -alignment shall include two-lane roads constructed to city standards, commenced within six (6) months after the amendment of the Original PID (as hereinafter defined) pursuant to Section 4.a below, and completed within thirty-six (36) months after the amendment of the Original PID. 3. As consideration for the expeditious construction of the Shell Re -alignment by the City, the County agrees to remit to the City the sum of EIGHT HUNDRED THIRTY-TWO THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($832,500.00), within fifteen (15) days after the award by the City of a contract to construct the Shell Re -alignment. 4. As further consideration for the expeditious construction by the City of the Shell Re -alignment: a. The Developers (as hereinafter defined) will submit a request to the City to amend the Public Improvement District created on the I lm day of September, 2001 (the "Original PID"), as soon as possible after the approval by the City of the Amended Development Agreement(s) (as hereinafter defined). The Original PID, as amended pursuant to the terms hereof, is sometimes referred to herein as the "Amended PID". As used herein, the term "Developers" means the developers of the property within the Original PID. b. The City and the Developers will pursue the amendment of the Existing Development Agreements (as hereinafter defined) to ensure that such Existing Development Agreements contain the following terms and such other terms, conditions and provisions as are reasonably necessary to reflect the construction by the City, rather than the County, of the Shell Re -alignment: (i) The PID assessment on each tract shall be a pre -determined, fixed amount representing such tract's pro -rata share of the total PID assessment. Each tract's pro -rata share shall be calculated by multiplying the total PID assessment by a fraction, the numerator of which shall be the number of linear feet of Shell Re -alignment (including the linear footage of the connection from the re -aligned Shell Road to Sequoia Spur Drive) adjacent to or contained within such tract, and the denominator of which shall be the total linear footage of the Shell Re -alignment (including the linear footage of the connection from the re -aligned Shell Road to Sequoia Spur Drive). Unless otherwise provided in the Existing Development Agreements, the PID assessment on each tract shall be due at the time the property is platted, at the time of the sale of the property, or seven (7) years after the Shell Re -alignment is completed and open to the public, whichever occurs earlier. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the PID assessment on the tract currently owned by HEB Grocery Company, LP ("HEB") or an affiliated entity shall not be due and owing until the Shell Re -alignment, including the installation of the Williams Drive Traffic Signal and the construction of the Sequoia Spur connection, is completed and open to the public. As used herein, the term "Existing Development Agreements" shall mean those agreements entered into or amended by the City and the Developers in conjunction with the creation of the Original PID. (ii) The PID assessments shall accrue interest at the rate of 7% compounded annually, commencing when the Shell Re -alignment is completed and open to the public. (iii) The Developers shall execute a Possession and Use Agreement at the time of the signing of the amendments to the Existing Development Agreements, and agree to dedicate all necessary right-of-way for Shell Re -alignment within sixty (60) days after the signing of such amendments; provided, however, the parties hereto acknowledge that all such necessary right-of-way may already have been dedicated pursuant to the terms of the Original Interlocal Agreement, the Original PID and/or the Existing Development Agreements. The Possession and Use Agreement and the dedication instruments, if any, shall contain a reversionary clause that requires the property dedicated to revert to the grantor if the Shell Re -alignment is not substantially completed within thirty-six (36) months after the execution of the Amended PID. (iv) The parties agree that City shall have no liability whatsoever regarding the administration of the Amended PID or the collection of revenues on behalf of the Amended PID. Assessment liens shall be assigned to the County after assessments are levied on the property that is the subject of the Amended PID. (v) The total assessments for the Amended PID shall not exceed $832,500.00 (the "Cap"), which Cap shall include the HEB Credit (as hereinafter defined). By way of example only, if the HEB Credit is equal to $100,000.00, then the remaining assessments permitted to be made hereunder shall not exceed $732,500.00). (vi) In consideration of the construction and installation by HEB of the Williams Drive Traffic Signal, the parties agree that HEB shall receive a credit in the amount of $80,000.00 (the "HEB Credit") against HEB's pro rata share of the total PID assessment. H. MISCELLANEOUS The parties agree that in the event any provision of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be in contradiction of any laws of the State or the United States, the parties will immediately rectify the offending portions of this Agreement. The remainder of the Agreement shall be in full force and effect. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties hereto, and supersedes all of their oral and written negotiations, agreements and understandings of every kind with respect to the subject matter hereof, including the Original Interlocal Agreement. The parties understand, agree and declare that no promise, warranty, statement or representation of any kind whatsoever, which is not expressly stated in this Agreement, has been made by any party hereto or its officers, employees or other agents to induce execution of this Agreement. 3. This Agreement shall be performable in Williamson County, Texas. A SANDRA LEE, City Secretary E - NANC RIlkTER, County Clerk COUNTY: C. ' ;I`c� l2 -IB -o2 J HN DOE R ounty Judge Williamson County, Texas CITY: VARY,AELOK Mayor City of Georgetown, Texas X, RGETOWN VILLA (FAULKNER) CAMPBELL `� TRACT 7 GEORGETOWN. TEXAS EXHIBIT A TO THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FAULK7 CAMPBELL TRACT 4 CAMPBELL TRACT 3 SPUR CAMPBELL TRACT 2 HEB - �ntorosm mwtc U INCLUDED IN PID ®NOT INCLUDED IN PID PROPOSED SHELL ROAD 1 ILO.W. I �paucet A Asses tm Inc ym y( I/y yes ]q nmtII AlY Page 2 of 2 DEC 4 '02 10:08 512 930 3622 PAGE.006 Laura Wilkins To: Sandra Lee/City of Georgetown@City of Georgetown 12/03/2002 02:40 PM Subject: Captions for December 10th Council Sandra: These are the items GUS will have for the December 10th agenda. Monday, December 9th: 1. Workshop item Constellation Power (Executive Session) Jim Briggs and Mike Mayben (I will get you a caption when I have one). Tuesday, December 10th: Items Recommended By GUS Board: 2. Consideration and possible action to award the bid, from N.G. Painters, Inc., of Kerrville, Texas, for rehabilitation of the Sequoia Spur Ground Water Storage Tank. Regular Agenda: 3. Speed Zone Ordinance - you got this caption from Terri Calhoun already 4. Interlocal Agreement with the County regarding Completion of Shell Road @ Williams Drive (I will get you a caption as soon as I have one). 5. Engineering Contract with Roming Park & Kasberg - related to the Shell Road issue above (I will get you a caption as soon as I have one). 6. POSSIBLY the Engineering contract for engineering of the Sun City Water Storage Tank. not sure if this will go yet or not. Minutes of the Meeting of the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas Tuesday, December 10, 2002 The City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, met in Regular Session on the above date with Mayor Gary Nelon presiding. Council Present: Council Absent: Llorente Navarrette, Gabe Sansing, Doug Smith, All Council Present Jack Noble, Sam Pfiester, Farley Snell, Ken Evans Staff Present: Paul Brandenburg, City Manager; Tom Yantis, Assistant City Manager for Operations; Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations; Patricia E. Carts, City Attorney; Sandra D. Lee, City Secretary; Micki Rundell, Director of Finance and Administration; Anthony Lincoln, Fire Chief; Amelia Sondgeroth, Director of Development Services; Ed Polasek, Chief Long Range Planner; Bobby Ray, Chief Current Planner; Melissa McCollum, Development Planner; Mark Miller, Transportation Services Manager Minutes Policy Development/Review Workshop Regular Session to convene and continue Executive Session, if necessary Executive Session There was no Executive Session held at this meeting. Regular Session C Call to Order Called to order at 6:00 p.m. D Pledge of Allegiance Mayor Nelon led the Council and audience in the Pledge. E Comments from the dais regarding the following items: - Welcome to Audience and Opening Comments -- Mayor Gary Nelon Mayor Nelon welcomed the audience and gave a brief outline of meeting procedure. - Announcement of Vacancy on the Zoning Board of Adjustment -- Mayor Gary Nelon F Announcements and Comments from City Manager Brandenburg clarified a misconception regarding Item R-4 on the Agenda tonight. He said the item refers to notification of the public regarding the Unified Development Code and not to future or current rezonings. He reminded Council that the Association of Mayors, Councilmembers, and Commissioners will be in Austin on February 7-10. He asked that the Council let Shirley or Sandra know by January 10 if they wished to attend. He announced that the Angelo Economics Summit will be January 23 in Austin, and asked that Council notify Shirley or Sandra if they wished to attend. City Council Meeting Minutes/December 10, 2002 Page 1 of 10 Pages G Citizens Wishing to Address Council - Keith Peshak, 800 Oak Crest Lane, regarding missing $150,000 from Airport cash contingency account. Peshak continued his report from last meeting, saying that he thinks all financial documents for the Airport are secret and there are no public postings or accounting for the Airport. He repeated what he had said at previous Council Meetings. H Action from Executive Session on Monday, December 9, 2002 Motion by Smith, second by Noble to direct the City Attorney to extend the deadline for Del Webb to respond to the City's demand letter from December 31, 2002 to March 31, 2002. Approved 7-0. Motion by Smith, second by Pilaster that the City retain the legal services of Kerry Russell to file public comments with the Texas Commission on Enviornmental Quality on Proposed Permit No. 14371-001, and to request a contested case hearing if the comments are not resolved to the City's satisfaction. Approved 7-0. Statutory Consent Agenda I Consideration and possible action to approve the minutes from the Council Workshop on Monday, November 25, and and the Regular Council Meetings on Tuesday, November 26, 2002 -- Sandra Lee, City Secretary J Consideration and possible action to approve a resolution revising the current City of Georgetown Investment Policy -- Laurie Brewer, Controller and Micki Rundell, Director of finance and Administration K Consideration and possible action to accept the City's Quarterly Financial Report, which includes the Investment Report for both the City of Georgetown and the Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation (GTEC) for the quarter ended September 30, 2002 -- Laurie Brewer, Controller and Micki Rundell, Director of Finance and Administration L Consideration and possible action to authorize payment of the City's pro -rata portion of the cost of operation of the Williamson County Appraisal District -- Micki Rundell, Director of Finance and Administration M Consideration and possible action for the approval of the purchase of cellular telephone service from the General Services Commission in the estimated annual amount of $35,000.00 -- Terry Jones, Purchasing Director and Micki Rundell, Director of Finance and Administration Sensing asked if the City has considered phone/radio communication units, like Nextel. Jones responded that the Nextel coverage did not appear to be as good as cellular coverage. N Consideration and possible acceptance of a Grant of $ 60,000.00 from the Federal Emergency Management Agency with a ten percent matching fund of $6,000 from the City of Georgetown to fund two Thermal Imaging Cameras and ten Self -Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) -- Anthony Lincoln, Fire Chief O Consideration and possible action authorizing the purchase of fourteen Self Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) and six spare air cylinders from Casco Industries in the amount of $39,586.00 and the use of funds from the Billing for Services Special Revenue Account to pay for a portion of this equipment -- Anthony Lincoln, Fire Chief P Consideration and possible action declaring 25 sets of Non -National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 1999 Standard approved Personnel Protective Equipment (bunker gear) as Surplus Equipment -- Anthony Lincoln, Fire Chief Q Consideration and possible action authorizing the purchase of thirteen sets of Personnel Protective Equipment (bunker gear) from Ferrara Firefighting Equipment in the amount of $ 18,668.00 and the use of funds from the Billing for Services Special Revenue Account to pay for a portion of this equipment -- Anthony Lincoln, Fire Chief City Council Meeting Minutes/December 10, 2002 Page 2 of 10 Pages Motion by Snell, second by Evans to approve the Consent Agenda in its entirety. Approved 7-0. Legislative Regular Agenda First Readings 1. First reading of an ordinance for a Century Plan Amendment to adopt a new element of the Century Pian - Future Land Use and Thoroughfare Plan: the Williams Drive Corridor Study -- Bobby Ray, Chief Development Planner, Ed Polasek, Chief Long -Range Planner, and Amelia Sondgeroth, Director of Development Services Sondgeroth read only the caption of the ordinance on first reading after having satisfied the requirements of the City Charter. Sondgeroth said Council directed staff last May to study the Williams Drive Corridor specifically and return with a recommendation after having met with the citizens and property owners. She said the Study was initiated in September with the assistance of consultants, Dr. Kent Butler and Dr. Robert Patterson. She said three workshops with property owners were conducted. She said the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation on this item is a consensus from approximately 80 people concerning over 800 parcels on the eight -mile segment of Williams Drive. She noted that staff met with TxDOT regarding proposed locations of signal lights and a sidewalk plan. She recognized the members of the audience that had attended the workshops and thanked the Development Services staff who worked on evenings and weekends in order to finish the work before the end of the year. She read the recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission from their December 3 Meeting, which was: Amend the adopted Century Plan/Future Land Use and Thoroughfare Plan by adopting a new section, the Williams Drive Corridor Study, with the following additional recommendations: 1. Direct P&DS staff to continue their work with TxDOT, the County, and GUS to formulate a Williams Drive Corridor Study Enhancement Program specifically regarding pedestrian improvements. 2. Recommend an ordinance amendment to restrict new signage in the Williams Drive Corridor to low -profile monument signs. 3. Apply adopted tree preservation standards to all sites along Williams Drive. 4. Provide a recommendation in the next fiscal year, for special development and landscape provisions within the Williams Drive Corridor Study area. 5. Submit the Williams Drive Corridor Study as a special planning project application to Envision Central Texas. 6. Modify the Williams Drive Corridor Study --Draft Land Use Scenario as follows: a. Redesignate the parcel at the southwest comer of Dawn Drive and Lakeway Drive from "Residential" to 'Commercial;' b. Redesignate Lots 4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 and a portion of Lots 12 and 13 of the San Gabriel Estates from "Williams Drive Mixed Use' to "Commercial;" and c. Redesignate the property fronting on the north side of Williams Drive between Jim Hogg Road (west) and Lakewood Drive (east) from "Williams Drive Mixed Use" to "Commercial." Bobby Ray and Ed Polasek reviewed several of the specific points of the Williams Drive Corridor Study. Ray said the two major zoning classifications are RS and C1. Polasek noted that staff had worked with TOOT to place future traffic signals. He explained the new zoning designations contained in the Study. He reported that over 20% of the commercial development in the City would be on Williams Drive. Sensing asked for clarification on the method of creating the predicted trip generations. Polasek explained the report contains total gross numbers including vehicles that don't actually enter the intersections. Smith asked if the Planning and Zoning recommendations are more or less restrictive than in the Unified Development Code. Polasek said the signage would be more restrictive on the Williams Drive Corridor, saying, for example, there could be no more pole signs. Sondgeroth noted that landscaping recommendations would come back to Council with new standards, once a recommendation is received from Envision Central Texas. Victor Yin, 3808 Williams Drive, one of the property owners on Williams Drive, commended staff for getting consensus. City Council Meeting Minutes/December 10, 2002 Page 3 of 10 Pages Archie Schneider, 3800 Williams Drive, asked that Council consider approving the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation and said he appreciated the extra hours spent by the staff. Ercel Brashear, 4204 Verde Vista, told Council he also applauded the staff for their willingness to work with the property owhers and for coming up with a positive plan that is "probably possible," but said he has some concern about the number of trip counts proposed to be generated. Iva Wolf McLaughlin, 520 Wolf Road, landowner on Williams Drive, demonstrated to Council the location of her propery, 120 acres, saying it is one of the largest tracts between the Interstate and Sun City. She suggested that her property be designated as "commercial" instead of "business park" as is to be identified in the Unified Development Code. Nelon asked staff to respond as to why that particular property was designated as "business park." Sondgeroth said they looked at the need for living units to support the "commercial," and an employment base, such as an IBM or another campus -type business park that would provide a high number of employment opportunities. She noted, however, that if a specific proposal comes in for any of the land along the corridor, the land use plan can be amended. Roland Schroeder, 191 Young Ranch Road, property owner on Williams Drive, commended staff for the workshops and recommended that Council approve as staff has recommended. Mamie Ruth Richter, 3720 Williams Drive, San Gabriel Estates, noted that her property has now been zoned "commercial." She asked Council to vote in favor and thanked staff for their help. Renee Hanson, representing Bob Stanton, who was unable to attend due to a funeral, said Stanton would prefer a "commercial" designation on the front section of his 17 acres on Williams Drive, currently zoned as "multi -family." She said he feels it would be too restrictive to have "multi -family" as the only choice. She said he would agree to "mixed use" designation. Snell asked for the reason to change Lots 4-11 from "mixed use" to 'commercial." Sondgeroth said she thinks perhaps because across Williams Drive was already zoned as commercial and if another use is proposed, the applicant could request a different designation. Piaster asked about "Williams Drive Mixed Use." Sondgeroth explained that there is a site plan requirement. She suggested the property might be comprised of commercial in front with multi -family in the rear. She said most property owners feel that commercial is the ideal designation because that is how it has always been zoned. She noted that "mixed use" would allow office, commercial, retail, mult-family, etc., and therefore would be a very flexible designation. Sensing noted that there was a letter received from Bradley Cockrum requesting a change from office/services to commercial. He confirmed with Sondgeroth if there would be an opportunity in the future for Cockrum to apply for that. Smith asked about the wildlife preserve that was requested by Milton Liese. Mr. Liese, speaking from the audience, said he is still favoring and maintaining a wildlife preserve on his property. Motion by Pfiester, second by Snell to accept the recommendations from the staff and Planning and Zoning Commission to amend the Century Plan by adopting the Future Land Use and Thoroughfare Plan with two additional recommendations to those listed on the Agenda Item Cover Sheet, being that on #2 the low -profile monument signs may not be electronic message signs, and on #6, add (d.) to redesignate Bobby Stanton's property to "mixed use." Motion by Navarrette, second by Sensing to amend the motion to grant the requests from Iva McLaughlin and Bradley Cockrum. Vote on the amendment. 2-5 (Evans, Noble, Pilaster, Snell, and Smith opposed). Amendment failed. Vote on original motion: Approved 6-1. (Sensing opposed) 2. First Reading of an ordinance for a Century Plan Amendment to change the Future Land Use Map for 70.32 acres out of the William Roberts and John Berry Surveys from Office/Retail/Commercial to Residential land use, located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Airport Road and Briarcrest Drive -- Ed Polasek, Chief Long -Range Planner and Amelia Sondgeroth, Director of Development Services Polasek read only the caption of the ordinance on first reading after having satisfied the City Council Meeting Minutes/December 10, 2002 Page 4 of 10 Pages requirements of the City Charter. He explained that the Planning and Zoning Commission had approved to change the land use. Snell asked about noise from the airport. Polasek said this area was not included on the noise contour maps, and the developer has been out to the site during the day and has never reported or asked about noise. Motion by Navarrette, second by Sansing to approve the ordinance on first reading. Approved 7-0. 3. First Reading of an ordinance for a Century Plan Amendment to change the Future Land Use Map for 19.50 acres out of the Ephraim Evans Survey from Office/Retail/Commercial to Mixed Use land use, located southeast of the intersection of Page Whitney Parkway and John Hamilton Way -- Ed Polasek, Chief Long -Range Planner and Amelia Sondgeroth, Director of Development Services Polasek read only the caption of the ordinance on first reading after having satisfied the requirements of the City Charter. He explained that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the change. Motion by Sansing, second by Smith to approve the ordinance on first reading. Approved 6-0. (Snell absent from the dais) 4. First Reading of an ordinance prescribing the type of notice to be given of the time and place of a public hearing held jointly by the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission to consider the draft proposed Unified Development Code -- Trish Carts, City Attorney and Amelia Sondgeroth, Director of Development Services Carts read only the caption of the ordinance on first reading after having satisfied the requirements of the City Charter. She explained that there has been some confusion regarding the intent of the ordinance. She said the ordinance is intended to address the notice procedures for the approval process for the Unified Development Code. She said state law provides methods for the City Council to provide notice in a specific manner. She said the proposed ordinance recommends published notice only and Council could change that ordinance if they see fit. She said for timing reasons it was necessary to bring this ordinance to the Council at this point. Terry Irion, an Attorney representing a number of property owners to be effected by the UDC, told Council he thought the property owners should be noticed specifcally on how the UDC effects their property. He suggested that property owners be notified regarding any future rezoning of their property. He said there are some changes to what is allowed now and what will be allowed after the UDC is adopted, as well as some changes in procedure to be followed. He told Council he thinks the proposed ordinance is illegal. Ercel Brashear, 4204 Verde Vista, asked that Council consider notifying individual property owners by mail because there may be property owners that don't read the Williamson County Sun. Carts noted that the chart comparing the existing zoning designations and the proposed changes is already a part of the UDC and the City could include that chart in the notification to the property owners. Scoff Hall, 603 San Gabriel Overlook, from the audience reiterated what was already said about notifying the property owners by mail and yielded the remainder of his time. Mark Allen, 5012 Fountainwood Cove, cautioned Council to be careful in handling this notice, so that the document will not be 'looked down upon" such as the handling of the "emergency water quality issue" back in July of 2001. Pfiester asked and Sondgeroth responded that approximately 75% of the property owners in Georgetown are currently zoned as RS and will not be affected by the change unless they want to rezone, subdivide or have a non -conforming use. She was asked and responded that the City of Austin in 1989 published notice for their land Development Code. Pfiester asked and Sondgeroth responded that in the last year there have been 16 public hearings, workshops, townhall meetings, joint Council and Planning and Zoning Commission meetings on the UDC and many in the previous year. When asked if this process is illegal, Carts said she is not aware of any case law on 211.007.d. Evans said because of all the time and money that has been spent on development of this Unified Development Code, he believes the City should do what is adequate, legal notification. City Council Meeting Minutes/December 10, 2002 Page 5 of 10 Pages Sensing said KLBJ Radion Station was talking about the City of Georgetown "operating in secret again." He said he recommends that a mailed notice be done. He estimated that it would cost $8700 to mail an 81/2" x 11" notice to all property owners in Georgetown, and suggested that be done. Motion by Sensing, second by Evans to authorize notification via mail for the Joint Public Hearing regarding the proposed adoption of the Unified Development Code. Motion by Pfiester, second by Navarrette that Council adopts the ordinance as is and that mailed notices be sent as well as publication in the Williamson County Sun in every Wednesday and Sunday paper between now and then, and that this would be paid for from the Council Contingency Fund. Snell confirmed that the vote on this item will require a super majority. Sensing suggested that his motion be altered to include Pfiester•s amendment. Evans agreed to second the amended motion. Navarrette said he thought it should be noted that Council had not decided anything prior to this meeting, and he appreciates Council "going the extra mile" to remove any opinion that the Council is operating "in secret." Smith said he is in favor of doing double notification, but thinks the property owners will not understand why they are receiving the mailed notice. He said he thinks there should be a phone number included on the notice so the property owner can call and ask about it. Noble said he thinks it is imperative that all the bases are covered and all misunderstandings are cleared up. Vote on motion: Approved 7-0. 5. First Reading of an ordinance amending the 2001/02 Annual Operating Plan Element ( budget) to offset variances in various fund budgets for increases in expenditures that are tied to service requests, revenue collection rates and project timing -- Laurie Brewer, Controller and Micki Rundell, Director of Finanace and Administration Brewer read only the caption of the oridnance on first reading after having satisfied the requirements of the City Charter. She explained the reasons for the amendments to the budget. Motion by Pilaster, second by Noble to approve the ordinance on first reading. Approved 7-0. 6. First Reading of an ordinance to establish an Animal Shelter Advisory Board -- Tom Yantis, Assistant City Manager Yantis noted that this ordinance is being done in anticipation of a major move of the Animal Shelter to a new facility in order to streamline and improve the operations of the Animal Shelter prior to the move. He said in researching some of the regulations and laws pertaining to the Animal Shelter, he and Animal Services Supervisor Ken Finn recently became aware of the fact that the State Health and Safety Code requires the establishment of an Advisory Board. He recommended that the membership of the Board be selected in conjunction with the City board renewal process in February and begin meeting in March, 2003. He read only the caption of the ordinance on first reading after having satisfied the requirements of the City Charter and noted that the State is very specific regarding the membership of the Board, saying, at a minimum, the Board must consist of one licensed veterinarian, one county or municipal official, one person whose duties include the daily operation of an animal shelter, and one representative from an animal welfare organization. He noted that the ordinance contains those four positions, and if the Council wishes, they could add additional members. Kimberly Espinoza, 4405 S. IH35, said she used to work for the Animal Services Department. She commended Yantis for establishing the Board. She suggested that there be more than four people on the Board to enhance voting actions, including a citizen at large. She also suggested that the vetemarian representative must practice within the City Limits of Georgetown. There was discussion as to the proposed size of the membership of the Board. Motion by Navarrette, second by Sensing to adopt this ordinance and add three citizens at large, and include that the veterinarian practice in Georgetown. There was further discussion as to amending the ordinance regarding the membership of the Board, including discussion regarding whether the requirement should be that the veterinarian practice in Georgetown or in the extra -territorial jurisdiction. Carls suggested that the ordinance governing appointments to boards and commissions in general could be reviewed. Motion approved 7-0. First Reading of an ordinance amending Section 10.12.090(B.)(9.) of the Code of Ordinances to amend the existing 20 -mph school speed zone on 8th Street and to establish a 20 -mph school speed zone on portions of Walnut Street, 9th Street and 10th Street -- Mark Miller, Transportation Services Manager and Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations City Council Meeting Minutes/December 10, 2002 Page 6 of 10 Pages Miller read only the caption of the ordinance on first reading after having satisfied the requirements of the City Charter. He noted that residents surrounding Williams Elementary on University Avenue had complained about the increase of traffic on Walnut Street when parents bring their children to school. He said meetings were held with the residents, police department, school principal and City staff and it was determined that the additional school speed zones were needed for safety. Motion by Evans, second by Sensing to approve the ordinance on first reading. Approved 6-0. (Snell absent from the dais.) S Second Readings 1. Second Reading of an ordinance amending, Section 8.12.040 (A) Application and Fees of Chapter 8.12 Food and Sanitation the Georgetown Code of Ordinances -- Tom Yantis, Assistant City Manager Yantis read only the caption of the ordinance on second reading. Motion by Pfiester, second by Smith to approve Ordinance No. 2002-74. Approved 7-0. 2. Second Reading of an Ordinance rezoning a total of 40.521 acres, out of the Burrell Eaves Survey, to be known as Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, Neighborhood Thirteen -B, from RP, Residential Planned to RP, Residential Planned Revised, or more restrictive district, located on Sun City Boulevard — Melissa McCollum, Development Planner and Amelia Sondgeroth, Director of Planning and Development Services McCollum noted that this item and Item U are related and read the caption only of the ordinance on second reading. Motion by Noble, second by Sensing to approve Ordinance No. 2002-75. Approved 7-0. T Consideration and possible action on a Public Review Final Plat of a resubdivision of 75.387 acres, being Lot 2, and 25.241 acres of Lot 3 and a 2.582 acre portion of Rivery Boulevard of the Rivery Subdivision, to be known as The Rivery Park II, located on Rivery Boulevard between IH -35 and the San Gabriel River -- Bobby Ray, Current Planner and Amelia Sondgeroth, Director of Planning and Development Services Sondgeroth explained the item and gave the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission. She said the City does recommend the variances and approval of the plat in accordance with the settlement agreement and said that notes on the plat reflect how traffic, trees, and roadway adequacy are to be addressed. Motion by Pfiester, second by Sansing to approve the Public Review Final Plat. Approved 7-0. Consideration and possible action on a Replat of Planned Unit Development of Sun City Texas, Phase 2, Neighborhood Thirteen, being Block 1, Lots 4 to 24; Block 2, Lots 25 to 27 and Lots 233 to 240; Block 3, Lots 78 to 96 and Lots 228 to 229; Block 4, Lots 100 to 110, Lots 117 to 127, Lot 168 and Lots 230 to 232; Block 7, Lots 132 to 147 and Lots 224 to 227; and Block 8, Lots 161 to 167, being 40.521 acres in the Burrell Eaves Survey to be known as Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, Neighborhood Thirteen -B, located on Sun City Boulevard — Melissa McCollum, Development Planner and Amelia Sondgeroth, Director of Planning and Development Services McCollum explained the item and noted that this item is in conjunction with the second reading from Item S-2. Motion by Noble, second by Navarrette to approve the replat. Approved 7-0. V Consideration and possible action to authorize the City to enter into a lease contract with Gateway Computer Corporation for the City's desktop personal computers in the amount of $313,736.76 -- Dennis Schoenborn, Director of Information Services and Micki Rundell, Director of Finance & Administration Schoenborn explained the item and noted that Council approved in October to change from a 4 -year to a 3 -year cycle for replacement of personal computers, involving leasing. He said Gateway would save the City $45,000 over the next vendor over a period of three years. Navarrette said he thought the City should go with Dell in order to do business locally. Brandenburg noted that the bid process has been followed and is complete. Keith Peshak, 800 Oak Crest Lane, said he bought a Gateway machine instead of a Dell. He said he received a lower quality computer, and has had difficulty dealing with Gateway. City Council Meeting Minutes/December 10, 2002 Page 7 of 10 Pages • Motion by Snell, second by Smith to authorize the contract with Gateway. Approved 4-3. (Navarrette, Noble and Sensing opposed) W Awards of Bid 1. Consideration and possible action for an award of the annual bid for hot mix asphalt to Austin Asphalt in the estimated annual amount of $230,500.00 -- Terry Jones, Purchasing Director and Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations Jones explained the item. Evans said he knows someone who lives in Georgetown who owns an asphalt company and asked if a Georgetown owner was included in the bid process. Jones said bids were solicited from all known suppliers. Briggs noted that Austin Asphalt is located on Leander Road, just outside the city limits. Sensing said he highly encourages staff to seek as many bids as possible. Motion by Navarrette, second by Evans to approve the award of bid. Approved 7-0. Jones noted that State law now provides for a 3% local purchase and the City ordinance allows for 5% local preference for less than $15,000. 2. Consideration and possible action for the award of a bid for police vehicles to Philpott Ford in the amount of $385,486.00 -- Terry Jones, Purchasing Director and Mich Rundell, Director of Finance and Administration Jones explained that the vehicles were bid fully equipped and street ready. When asked by Evans, Jones noted Ford is the only manufacturer of rear -wheel drive police vehicles and that Philpott Ford has the state contract and the HGAC contract. He said Mac Haik Dealership in Georgetown chose not to bid this year because they cannot install the equipment. Motion by Evans, second by Sensing to approve the award of bid to Philpott Ford. Approved 7-0. 3. Forwarded to Council from the Georgetown Utility System Advisory Board Consideration and possible action to award the bid of $225,000 to N.G. Painting, Inc., of Kerrville and to approve the budget for the rehabilitation of the Sequoia Spur Ground Water Storage Tank -- Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations Briggs explained the item, saying the GUS Board and staff recommend approval. Motion by Evans, second by Pfiester to approve the award of bid to N. G. Painting, Inc. Approved 7-0. Consideration and possible action regarding acceptance of the Fiscal Year 2001-02 Year -End Project Status Reports -- Tom Yantis Yantis offered to answer any questions, saying this is the first time the City has provided this list to Council at mid -year as well as year-end. He noted there was no Council action required. Y Consideration and possible action to approve the assignment of the Banner Aircraft Airport Lease to Capital Aero, Inc. on the new lease form, with certain requested modifications, and approval of assignment by Capital Aero, Inc. to a lender for purposes of financing or refinancing -- Tom Yantis, Assistant City Manager Carts explained the item and noted some changes to the standard lease document. Kathryn Heidemann, 407 Golden Oaks, said she has no particular objection to this lease, but suggested if there is a way to remediate the noise that might come from this lease, that the City look into that. Nelon noted that this lease would be for non -aviation use. Keith Peshak, 800 Oak Crest Lane, said he used to keep a plane at Capital Aero and that they are a magnet for big jets and big jet operations. Yantis said the request in the lease is to sub -lease to some non -aviation operations. McLain said this is not the same Capital Aero, Inc. that Peshak is referencing. Snell asekd about being able to do noise remediation in the middle of a lease contract. Carts said the language would need to be created for this lease to include noise remediation. There was further discussion regarding noise remediation in subleases. Yantis said the proposed use by Capital Aero is primarily storage. Motion by Snell, second by Sensing to approve the lease assignment. Approved 7-0. City Council Meeting Minutes/December 10, 2002 Page 8 of 10 Pages ....• ....•, �ti„a„,OU r„d nmu dnu reaa me resolution. Motion by Snell, second by Evans to approve the resolution. Approved 7-0. CC Contracts and Agreements 1. Consideration and possible action to approve an Interlocal Agreement between the City of Georgetown and Williamson County regarding the realignment of Shell Road at Williams Drive -- Mark Miller, Transportation Services Manager and Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations Briggs explained that the County is requesting that the City take over the construction management of the realignment of Shell Road at Williams Drive. He said the County is heavily involved in other road projects, such as the bridge over the San Gabriel on D. B. Wood Road. He said the County will give the City the available funds for the construction of the project, saying those funds will be available fifteen days after the award of bid to a contractor. He said the next Rem approves a contract to do the engineering, saying the City will expend the funds and be reimbursed in the same fiscal year. Pilaster asked and Ercel Brashear responded that the Shell Road Public Improvement District doesn't care whether the City or the County builds the road. He said the City would have the first lien on the property. Carts said that there are a couple of other steps that Council will need to approve at a later date, such as a development agreement, and amending the PID to reflect the landowners' consent to the change. Motion by Pfiester, second by Sensing to approve the Interlocal Agreement. Approved 7-0. 2. Consideration and possible action to approve a contract amendment to the existing Professional . arvi Aar ement between the Citv of Georgetown and Romin , Parker & Kasber , L.L.P., in 0 Council Meeting Date: December 10, 2002 Item No. W , AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Consideration of an award of the annual bid for Hot Mix Asphalt to Austin Asphalt in the estimated annual amount of $230,500.00. ITEM SUMMARY Bids were received to provide the City with Type D and Type A Hot Mix Asphalt for a one year period beginning January 1, 2003. The staff recommendation is to award this bid to the low bidder responding, Austin Asphalt. This asphalt will be used in the construction and repair of City streets. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS none FINANCIAL IMPACT (cost of item, fund and division name, budgeted amt.) Total estimated amount of this bid is $230,500.00. Funds were budgeted for this expenditure in Maintenance -Streets and Overlay-CIP. (from City Attorney, staff, boards and commissions) none ATTACHMENTS (list individually) 1. Bid Tabulation Submitted By: Terry Jones, Support Services Director Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utilities FA •i+ r I City Council Meeting Date: December 10, 2002 Item No. W AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to award the bid to N G Painting, Inc. of Kerrville, Texas and to approve the budget for the rehabilitation of the Sequoia Spur Ground Storage Tank. ITEM SUMMARY: The City has started the rehabilitation of its water tanks based upon recommendations of Dunham Engineering following the annual inspections conducted in 2001. Sealed bids were received and opened on November 25, 2002 for the rehabilitation of the Sequoia Spur Ground Storage Tank. The bids were presented in the form of a base bid with two potential adders, one to clean the interior of the tank and another to replace the tank roof if its condition was such that a repair was not feasible. The engineering firm responsible to review the bids, Dunham Engineering, has recommended that the bid be awarded to the low bidder, N G Painting, Inc. of Kerrville, Texas. Additionally, Dunham Engineering has recommended that the City award the bid with the adder for the roof replacement based upon the pricing received. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: FINANCIAL IMPACT: This project will be funded out of the Water Capital Fund 661-103- 6607-00. 1614 *i Tij\;i�7 The GUS Board recommends to Council the award of the bid to N.G. Painters, Inc. for rehabilitation of the Sequoia Spur Ground Water Storage Tank as requested by staff in the amount of $225,000. Approved 4-0 - December 2, 2002 (Gavurnik, and Pfiester absent - Brown not present for this item) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends awarding the bid to N G Painting, Inc Kerrville, Texas in the amount of $225,000. COMMENTS: NONE ATTACHMENTS: 1. Bid Tabulation is , Assistant Glenn Dishong ar for Utilities Water Services DUNHAM ENGINEERING Water Tank Consultants 13141 Hill Rd. • College Station, TX 77845 • (979) 690-6555 • Mobile (979) 820-1648 • FAX (979) 690-7034 www. DunhamEngineering.00m November 25, 2002 City of Georgetown Box 409 Georgetown, Texas 78627-0409 Attn: Glen Dishong, Water Services Manager Ref: Sequoia Spur Water Tank Rehabilitation Project The purpose of this letter is to recommend the low bidder, N.G. Painting, Inc. for award of the ref. project. A total of thirteen (13) contractors submitted proposals. See Bid Tabulation attached. N. G. Painting, Inc. is an established water tank painting contractor from Kerrville, Texas that specializes in water tank rehabilitation projects. They have done several similar projects for my firm over the past ten years and have accomplished all work in a timely and professional manner. The proposal by N. G. Painting, Inc. is lower than the engineer cost estimate and is within the City budget for this work. We highly recommended the low bidder, N. G. Painting, Inc., for award of the ref. contract. Additionally, we recommend awarding the base bid (itemized structural repairs and replacement of protective coating systems) plus additive bid item #2 (replacement of the roof and roof support system). Sincerely, n Jimmy D. Dunham, P.E. 0 Council Meeting Date: December 10, 2002 AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET Item No. C C.k SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to approve an Inter -local Agreement, between the City of Georgetown and Williamson County, regarding the realignment of Shell Road at Williams Drive. ITEM SUMMARY: This agreement will replace the original agreement, approved by Council on May 21, 2001. Williamson County because of their construction schedule and time lines of their current bond election projects, has requested that the City of Georgetown consider taking over the completion of the Shell road Re -alignment. This project to which Williamson County had previously committed to complete, could be delayed because of the work schedule of Williamson County. Georgetown could take this project over, complete the project and meet the time line of having the northern realignment completed in conjunction with the completion of the DB Wood extension and bridge over the San Gabriel River to the south. This would make a four-way intersection at the current intersection of Williams Drive and Cedar Breaks Road. Staff has asked the Engineering consulting firm, of Roming, Parker and Kasberg to evaluate the possibility of completing the project within a reasonable time frame to meet the construction schedule of the southern completion along DB Wood. The results of that have been relayed to staff that the budget of $832,500.00 is adequate to fund completion of the Sell Road Re -alignment. The time schedule for completion of the project if Council approves the agreement tonight, will approximately March or April of 2004. According to the agreement funds in the amount of $832,500.00 would be transferred to the City of Georgetown, upon execution of a construction contract. Reimbursement of these funds to Williamson County would be paid back through the existing Public Improvement District (PID) that exists on the property. Due to the current construction schedule and traffic conditions along northern Williams Drive, staff concurs that we will be able to meet a successful time of completion on this project (of Spring, 2004). This cooperative effort will allow us to meet the completion schedule of the County's project to the south, therby ensuring that a smooth transition of traffic flow within this area is conducted at one time rather than on separate occasions. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the Inter -local agreement as well as proceeding forward with engineering design of this project as soon as possible. SPECIAL CONSIDERA None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: COD41ENTS : None. • Map of location showing improvements Inter -local Agreement. Liam nriggs, Assistant City Manager for Utilities er Transportation Services Manager INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT THIS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT (this "Agreement") is made and entered into effective this day of December, 2002, by and between WILLIAMSON COUNTY (the "County") and the CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS (the "City"), political subdivisions of the State of Texas. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, V.T.C.A., Government Code, Chapter 791, the Texas Interlocal Cooperation Act, provides that any one or more public agencies may contract with each other for the performance of governmental functions and for the joint use of facilities or services for the promotion and protection of the health and welfare of the inhabitants of this State and the mutual benefit of the parties; and WHEREAS, Shell Road and the proposed Shell Road re -alignment are an integral section of the Inner Loop and thus serve a county and a city purpose; and WHEREAS, on or about the 19`s day of June, 2001, the parties entered into an Interlocal Agreement, as adopted by the City in Resolution No. (the "Original Interlocal Agreement"); and WHEREAS, because of changed circumstances, the parties wish to replace the Original Interlocal Agreement with this Agreement; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein contained, the undersigned parties agree as follows: r -IL I. TERMS AND CONDITIONS 1. The City hereby agrees to perform all necessary and appropriate engineering, traffic signalization (including traffic signalization at the Shell Re-alignment/Williams Drive intersection [the "Williams Drive Traffic Signal']), design and construction of the re -alignment of Shell Road at its intersection with Williams Drive to the southern boundary of Georgetown Village and a connection from this re -alignment to Sequoia Spur Drive (collectively, the "Shell Re -alignment"), as shown on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein. 2. The Shell Re -alignment shall include two-lane roads constructed to city standards, commenced within six (6) months after the amendment of the Original PID (as hereinafter defined) pursuant to Section 4.a below, and completed within thirty-six (36) months after the amendment of the Original PID. 3. As consideration for the expeditious construction of the Shell Re -alignment by the City, the County agrees to remit to the City the sum of EIGHT HUNDRED THIRTY-TWO THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED AND N0/100 DOLLARS ($832,500.00), within fifteen (15) days after the award by the City of a contract to construct the Shell Re -alignment. 4. As further consideration for the expeditious construction by the City of the Shell Re -alignment: a. The Developers (as hereinafter defined) will submit a request to the City to amend the Public Improvement District created on the I Id, day of September, 2001 (the "Original PID"), as soon as possible after the approval by the City of the Amended • Development Agreement(s) (as hereinafter defined). The Original PID, as amended pursuant to the terms hereof, is sometimes referred to herein as the "Amended PID". (iii) The Developers shall execute a Possession and Use Agreement at the time of the signing of the amendments to the Existing Development Agreements, and agree to dedicate all necessary right-of-way for Shell Re -alignment within sixty (60) days after the signing of such amendments; provided, however, the parties hereto acknowledge that all such necessary right-of-way may already have been dedicated pursuant to the terms of the Original Interlocal Agreement, the Original PID and/or the Existing Development Agreements. The Possession and Use Agreement and the dedication instruments, if any, shall contain a reversionary clause that requires the property dedicated to revert to the grantor if the Shell Re -alignment is not substantially completed within thirty-six (36) months after the execution of the Amended PID. (iv) The parties agree that City shall have no liability whatsoever regarding the administration of the Amended PID or the collection of revenues on behalf of the Amended PID. Assessment liens shall be assigned to the County after assessments are levied on the property that is the subject of the Amended PID. (v) The total assessments for the Amended PID shall not exceed $832,500.00 (the "Cap"), which Cap shall include the HEB Credit (as hereinafter defined). By way of example only, if the HEB Credit is equal to $100,000.00, then the remaining assessments permitted to be made hereunder shall not exceed $732,500.00). (vi) In consideration of the construction and installation by HEB of the Williams Drive Traffic Signal, the parties agree that HEB shall receive a credit in the amount of $80,000.00 (the "HEB Credit") against NEB's pro rata share of the total • PID assessment. I• DE8-04-02 WED 05:10 PM 0 0 G LEGAL i IIZCEOP VIwCE (FAULKNER) /I/ z CAMPBELL '*--- TRACT 7 FAX N0. 512 930 3622 P.06 CAMPBELL TRACT 4 CAMPBELL TRACT 3 CAMPBELL TRACT 2 C lSTNC TRAFFIC SY-� U INCLUDED IN PID ® NOT INCLUDED IN PID GEORGETOWN. TEXAS PROPOSED SHELL ROAD EXHIBIT A R.O.W. TO THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT DEC 4 102 18:08 Page 2 of 2 SPUR ChDoum 3 ASS0 te5. Inc IQIFGw�wI Sa .A .vm�1 ABY I1V�: Jal fnf.tY Lb}!sl 512 930 3622 PAGE.006 Council Meeting Date: December 10, 2002 AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Item No. C.C. 2. Consideration and possible action to approve a contract amendment to the existing Professional Services Agreement between the City of Georgetown and Roming, Parker & Kasberg, L.L.P., to provide professional engineering services related to the Shell Road Realignment Project. ITEM SUMMARY: This Amendment, dated October 9, 2002, to the contract between the City and Roming, Parker and Kasberg consists of engineering services to complete the design and provide construction phase services for the realignment and construction of Shell Road at 2338. The realignment of Shell Road is being done in conjunction with an Inter -local Agreement with Williamson County to realign Shell Road at the intersection of Williams Drive meeting with Cedar Breaks Road. Therefore, staff recommends that Council approve this amendment, dated October 9, 2002, to the Roming, Parker and Kasberg, L.L.P. contract in the amount of $102,000.00. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None FINANCIAL IMPACT: $102,000.00 will be funded by an $832,500.00 remittance from Williamson County as part of the engineering, signalization, design and construction of the Shell Road Realignment. COMMENTS: None ATTACHMENTS: Proposed contract amendment, summary of charges and area map. �✓l��I.=QPe Submitted By: Jim Briggs, Mark Miller, Assistant City Manager Manager of Transportation for Utilities Services E ROMING, PARKER & KASBERG, L.L.P. CONSULTING ENGINEERS One South Main Temple, Texas 76501 (254) 773-3731 Fax (254) 773-6667 mail®rpkengineen.com WM. MACK PARKER, P.E. RICK N. KASBERG, P.E. R. DAVID PATRICK, P.E. October 9, 2002 Mr. Jim Briggs Assistant City Manager City of Georgetown 1101 N. College P. O. Box 409 Georgetown, Texas 78627-0409 Re: City of Georgetown Proposal for Street and Drainage Improvements Georgetown, Texas Dear Mr. Briggs: W. CLAY ROMING, P.E. Parmer Emeritus This letter proposal is in response to your request for basic and special engineering services required to provide construction drawings for street and drainage improvements for: Shell Road Relocation and Improvements The charges for this work are shown on Attachment "A" of this letter. We have priced the work according to the facts that we know about the project as of this date. Lump Sum charges are shown and will not change unless the scope of work is expanded, at which time we will meet with you and plan accordingly. For your convenience, we have attached to this letter a location map, opinion of probable cost and a project schedule for review. The following are tasks that we have included in the work schedule: PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING PHASE. This phase involves determination of project scope and economic and technical evaluation of feasible alternatives. Services during this phase include: 1. Reviewing available data and consulting with the City to clarify and define the CITY's • requirements for the project. 2. Advising the CITY as to the necessity of providing or obtaining from others additional data or services. These additional services may be include photogrammetry, investigations and consultations, compilation of hydrological data, traffic studies, materials engineering, assembly of zoning, deed, and other restrictive land use information, and environmental assessments and impact statements. Mr. Jim Briggs October 9, 2002 Page Two 3. Identifying and analyzing requirements of governmental authorities having jurisdiction to approve the design of the project, and participating in consultations with such authorities. 4. Providing analyses of the CITY's needs, planning surveys, and comparative evaluations of prospective sites and solutions. 5. Providing a general economic analysis of the CITY's requirements applicable to various alternatives. 6. Consulting with the CITY, reviewing preliminary reports, clarifying and defining the project requirements, reviewing available data, and discussing general scheduling. Conferences may also be required with approving and regulatory governmental agencies and affected utilities. 7. Advising the CITY as to whether additional data or services are required, and assisting the CITY in obtaining such data and services. FINAL DESIGN PHASE. This phase of project development is undertaken only after the CITY has approved the preliminary engineering phase material. The basic services for the final design phase includes: 1. Preparing construction drawings and specifications showing the character and extent of the project based on the accepted preliminary engineering documents. 2. Preparing and furnishing to the CITY a revised opinion of probable costs based on the final drawings and specifications. 3. Furnishing the necessary engineering data required to apply for regulatory permits from local, state, or federal authorities. This is distinguished from and does not include detailed applications and supporting documents for government grant-in-aid or planning grants that would be furnished as additional services. Fees for any local, state or federal construction permit applications are not included as part of the professional fee charges. These will be paid by the CITY. 4. Preparing basic documents related to construction contracts for review and approval • by the CITY (and the CITY's legal and other advisors). These may include contract agreement forms, general conditions and supplementary conditions, invitations to bid, instructions to bidders, insurance and bonding requirements, and preparation of other contract -related documents. 5. Furnishing to the CITY the specified number of copies of drawings, specifications, and other contract documents. Mr. Jim Brigs October 9, 2002 Page Three BIDDING PHASE. (If Required) Services under this phase include: 1. Assisting the CITY in advertising for and obtaining bids for each separate prime construction contract, maintaining a record of prospective bidders to whom bidding documents have been issued, attending pre-bid conferences, and receiving and processing fees for bidding documents. 2. Issuing addenda as appropriate to interpret, clarify or expand the bidding documents. 3. Assisting the CITY in determining the qualifications and acceptability of prospective constructors, subcontractors and suppliers. 4. When substitution prior to the award of contracts is allowed by the bidding documents, consultation with and advising the CITY as to the acceptability of alternate materials and equipment proposed by the prospective constructors. 5. Attending the bid openings, preparing bid tabulation sheets and providing assistance to the CITY in evaluating bids or proposals and in assembling and awarding contracts for construction, materials, equipment and services. CONSTRUCTION PHASE. Services under this phase involve consulting with and advising the CITY during construction and are limited to those services associated with performing as the CITY's representative. Such services comprise: I. Preparing for and conducting a pre -construction conference and issuing a Notice to Proceed on behalf of the CITY. 2. Reviewing shop and erection drawings submitted by the constructors for compliance with design concept. 3. Reviewing laboratory, shop and mill test reports on materials and equipment. 4. Visiting the project site monthly as construction proceeds to observe and report on the progress and the quality of the executed work. 5. Issuing necessary interpretations and clarifications of contract documents, preparing change orders requiring special inspections and testing of the work, and making • recommendations as to the acceptability of the work. 6. Preparing sketches required to resolve problems due to actual field conditions encountered. 7. Preparing record drawings from information submitted by the CONTRACTOR. Mr. Jim Briggs May 20, 2002 Page Four 8. Making a final inspection and reporting on completion of the project, including recommendations concerning final payment to constructors and release of retained percentages. 9. Providing construction off -set staking on a one-time basis for rough cut, on a one-time basis for back or curb construction, and on a one-time basis for drainage improvements. SPECIFIC INFRASTRUCTURE DESIGN FEATURES FOR THE PROJECT • Best Management Practices Design for the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone • Connection with FM 2338 (Williams Drive) • Horizontal and vertical alignment of the proposed roadway with consideration for future expansion • Roadway section design to suit the traffic loading and the geology of the area • Drainage analysis and design with consideration for future expansion • Contract Documents and Specifications • Project to be bid and contracted. GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION. Geotechnical investigations will be provided by RPK under this contract. If this proposal is agreeable, please return tow executed originals to our office. Sincerely, �% R. David Patrick, P.E. RDP/crc 11 ATTACHMENT A SUMMARY OF CHARGES FOR SERVICES 2001 — 2002 CAPITAL 1WROVEMENTS PROJECT FOR STREET AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS GEORGETOWN, TEXAS * Establishment of existing rights-of-way are included in these costs subject to discovery of adequate recoverable monuments. Additional funds may be requested if this is not found to be the case. 0 TASK Shell Road Relocation and Improvements I. BASIC SERVICES A. Design Phase $ 47,000.00 B. Bid Phase $ 3,500.00 C. Construction Administration $ 16,500.00 TOTAL BASIC SERVICES $ 67,000.00 II. SPECIAL SERVICES A. WPAP Design and Submittal $ 4,000.00 B. Archeological Surveys $ 3,000.00 C. Geotechnical Investigations $ 4,000.00 D. Design Surveys $ 12,000.00 E. Construction Staking $ 12,000.00 TOTAL SPECIAL SERVICES $ 35,000.00 * Establishment of existing rights-of-way are included in these costs subject to discovery of adequate recoverable monuments. Additional funds may be requested if this is not found to be the case. 0 AMENDMENT DATED OCTOBER 9, 2002 TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN AND ROMING, PARKER & KASBERG, L.L.P. FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO DESIGN STREET AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE SHELL ROAD RELOCATION AND IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT The General Services Agreement between the CITY OF GEORGETOWN (City) and Roming, Parker & Kasberg, L.L.P., (Engineer) last authorized on March 14, 1995, is hereby amended as follows: The scope and cost of the anticipated services are set forth in the attached Exhibit A. The charges for the work in Amendment Dated October 9, 2002 are to be paid on a lump sum basis unless additional work due to change in scope is authorized. Your signatures below will constitute your acceptance of Amendment Dated October 9, 2002. Executed in duplicate original this day of , 2002 at Georgetown, Texas, where this contract is performable and enforceable. Approved as to form: Party of the First Part: CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS Patricia E. Carls City Attorney Gary Nelon Mayor Attest: Sandra D. Lee Party of the Second Part: City Secretary ROMING, PARKER & KASBERG, L.L.P. /G, G,.Ia By: R. David Patrick, P.E. Principal Engineer STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF BELL This instrument as acknowledged before me on this the 014h day of Oc,+vlAce- • 2002. Notary Public • •„E DORIS M. WALTERS • Notary Public, State of Texas My Cor=isslon Expires December 27, 2005 Printed name: 'DORts M. %JAL --MOMS, Commission Expires: 12-2-1-05 Exhibit A (Updated October 9, 2002) This updated Exhibit A to the original General Services Agreement between the City of Georgetown and Roming, Parker & Kasberg, L.L.P., dated March 14, 1995, provides for the scope of basic and special services required for developing construction plans, specifications and contract documents for the Street and Drainage Improvements for the Shell Road Relocation and Improvements Project. The attached letter details the services and associated charges for the proposed work. 0 Subtotal Cost CITY OF GEORGETOWN 657,002.50 Contingencies (10%) $ 65,700.25 SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION Shell Road Relocation and Improvements 722,702.75 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST TO USE $ 725,000.00 Engineering Design, Contract Documents and Specifications Preliminary Opinion of Probable Cost 47,000.00 Bidding $ 3,500.00 Item Descr tion Quantity Unit Unit Cost $ Total Cost 1 Mobilization. Bonds and Insurance 1 LS$28,000.00 Archaelogical Surveys 1 $ 28,000.00 2 IPreparation of Right of Way 24 1 STA $ 1,750.00 $ 42,000.00 3 1 Traffic Control Plan for Vehicular Traffic 1 LS $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500.00 4 Barricades and Traffic Control Implementation 1 LS $10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 5 Trench Safety Plan 1 LS $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 6 Trench Safety Implementation 450 LF $ 1.00 $ 450.00 7 Unclassified Excavation 15000 CY $ 2.75 $ 41,250.00 8 Com acted Fill 8000 CY $ 2.75 $ 22,000.00 9 Com acted Select Fill 3500 CY $ 10.00 $ 35,000.00 10 10" Crushed Limestone Base Material 12850 SY $ 6.50 $ 83,525.00 11 Sin le Course Penetration Surface Treatment 12850 SY $ 2.75 $ 35,337.50 12 3" Crushed Limestone Base Material 12050 SY $ 2.75 $ 33,137.50 13 3" Type D HMAC 12050 SY $ 5.00 $ 60,250.00 14 HMAC T e D Patch 100 TN $ 100.00 $ 10,000.00 156" Valle Gutter —110S7— $ 45.00 -$7-- 4,950.00 16 Concrete Curb and Gutter 1700 LF $ 10.00 $ 17,000.00 17 Concrete Ribbon Curb 3100 LF -$-8 00 $ 24,800.00 18 18" - 36" RCP 1500 LF $ 75.00 $ 112,500.00 19 4" Broken White Pavement Striping 225 LF $ 0.50 $ 112.50 20 4" Wide Solid White Pavement Striping 3280 LF $ 0.50 $ 1,640.00 21 4" Wide Double Yellow Solid Pavement Striping 1000 LF $ 1.00 $ 1,000.00 22 Gore Striping 750 LF $ 10.00 $ 7,500.00 23 24" Stop Bar 50 LF $ 20.00 $ 1,000.00 24 Loamin , Seeding and Erosion Control 10500 SY $ 0.60 $ 6,300.00 25 Furnish, Install and Remove Rock Berm 200 LF $ 30.00 $ 6,000.00 26 Furnish, Install and Remove Silt Fence 1000 LF $ 3.25 $ 3,250.00 Furnish, Install and Remove Stabilized Construction Entrance 2 EA $ 5,000.00 $ 10.000.00 Concrete Ri ra 200 SY $ 50.00 $ 10,000.00 E29 Class "A" Concrete 50 CY $ 150.00 $ 7,500.00 Abandon Existin Roadwa 1 LS $20,000.00 $ 20,000.00Items Requested by the Owner 1 LS $20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 Subtotal Cost $ 657,002.50 Contingencies (10%) $ 65,700.25 SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION $ 722,702.75 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST TO USE $ 725,000.00 Engineering Design, Contract Documents and Specifications $ 47,000.00 Bidding $ 3,500.00 Construction Administration $ 16,500.00 SUBTOTAL ENGINEERING $ 67,000.00 WPAP Submittal $ 4,000.00 Archaelogical Surveys $ 3,000.00 Geotechnical Investigations $ 4,000.00 Design Surveys $ 12,000.00 Construction Staking $ 12,000.00 SUBTOTAL SPECIAL SERVICES $ 35,000.00 TOTAL COST $ 827,000.00 E City Council Meeting Date: December 9, 2002 Item No. GG 3 EXECUTIVE SESSION AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to approve the power supply contract with Constellation Power Source for calendar year 2003. ITEM SUMMARY: Council will consider the approval of a power supply contract with Constellation Power Source, in addition to the existing power supply contract with Lower Colorado River Authority as a part of executive session. This item will be Council approval and authorization for the Mayor to execute a contract with Constellation Power Source for provision of energy supplies to the City of Georgetown for calendar year 2003. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: NONE GUS BOARD RECOMMENDATION: Board recommends to Council to provide notice to LCRA that the Council intends to execute its 10% Market Pricing Option Plus with LCRA and authorize staff to proceed forward in bringing back final negotiations from a reputable energy supplier and including proposals for managing and forecasting services. Approved 5-0 (Brown and Bland absent) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the contract with Constellation Power Source for provision of energy supplies to the City of Georgetown for calendar year 2003. COMMENTS: NONE ATTACHMENTS: None Submitted by: im rig Assistant Michael W. Mayben i Man for Utilities Energy Services M 0