Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda CC 02.27.1996
SAN GABRIEL PdVER NUTRIENT STUDY of SEGMENT 1248 SCOPE OF WORK TASK 1: Conduct activities to collect and analyze water quality in the San Gabriel River system. Objectives: Gather and compile available water quality data to enable adequate evaluation and to support the recommendations in the final report. , 1. Identify the current water quality data available through record searches. 2. Identify sampling sites and their accessibility. 3. Identify parameters to be tested. 4. Identify an acceptable algal or macrophyte sampling protocol. 5. Identify volunteer monitoring groups, local university assistance, and consultants for training and testing. 6. Contract with recognized laboratory for data analysis. 7. Compile a Quality Assurance and Quality Control plan consistent with the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission plan. 8. Begin monitoring the watershed for water quality data which includes: a. Monthly monitoring of the established sites for a minimum of 12 months for the water quality parameters, as instructed by the TNRCC; b. Algal and/or aquatic macrophyte monitoring; C. Water quality monitoring for no more than two stormwater events, if funding is available; d. Sediment sampling if needed and if funding is available; and e. Samples delivered to laboratory for analysis. Page 1 R Deliverables: 1. Raw data in electronic format. 2. Quality Assurance Quality Control plan. 3. Summary of historical data. 4. Map of study area with monitoring stations -including latitudes and longitudes. 5. Definition of an algal or macrophyte sampling protocol. 6. Bibliography of literature. Duration: August 1, 1994 - January 1, 1996 Budget: $43,000 TASK 2: Conduct an evaluation and analysis of the water quality data of the San Gabriel River Segment 1248. Objectives: Evaluate historical and monitoring water quality data to enable adequate support for statistical analysis and modeling. Formulate the recommendations to be made in the final report. 1. Request water quality data. 2. Evaluate historical water quality data (TNRCC, USGS). 3. Review data to determine any water quality trends. 4. Request and review data on areas contributing to the San Gabriel River, Segment 1248 (Lake Granger, Lake Georgetown, Berry Creek). 5. Identify land use in the watershed, (existing BMP's and other implemented technologies). 6. Identify contaminants, sources, and impacts to the system. 7. Submit semi-annual status reports and the final report. 8. Perform basic statistics on historical and study data. 9. Perform an evaluation of water quality and nutrient loadings in the study area. 10. Recommend approaches and/or alternatives to reducing nutrients in the study area. Deliverables: 1. Historical water quality data. 2. Land use data. 3. Statistical analysis. 4. Quantification of nutrient loads. 5. Inventory of algae or macrophytes. 6. Evaluation of data to be included in final report. 7. Recommendations for nutrient reduction to be included in final report. Duration: January 1996 - January 1997 Budget: $21,000 Page 3 6 TASK 3: Conduct public meetings and provide information for residents of the City of Georgetown and surrounding areas of the San Gabriel River. Objectives: Provide input from the City of Georgetown, its citizens, and participating entities, and keep the public informed of the status of the study. Public input and responses will assist in determining the recommendations to be made in the final report. Deliverables: 1. Arrange for public meetings before, during, and after the study to assess the public's needs and concerns. 2. Arrange for semi-annual meetings between the Brazos River Authority, the City of Georgetown, and contracted groups. 3. Initiate public education efforts through concerned citizen groups, news releases, local media, and homeowner's associations. 1. Minutes of public and semi-annual meetings. 2. Draft report for review and comment. 3. Final report to be submitted no later than March 1, 1997. Duration: August 1994 - March 1997 Budget: $6,000 NOTICE OF MEETING OF THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS TUESDAY, February 27, 1996 The City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, will meet on Tuesday, February 27, 1996, at 5.00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, located at the northeast corner of Seventh and Main Street in Georgetown, Texas. If you need accommodations for any type of disability, please advise in advance. Detailed explanatory information on the items listed below is compiled in an agenda packet which is distributed to the Mayor and each member of the Council. An agenda packet is also available at the Public Library, for the use of interested citizens. Governance Workshop - Call to order at 5:00 p.m. A Review quality control parameters (approved by TNRCC and BRA) and anticipated outcome in the Nutrient Study of Segment 1248 of the San Gabriel River/Jim Briggs B Retreat Plans • March 2 at Georgetown Training Center • June 6 - 8 at the LCRA Training Facility at Lake Buchanan C Answer questions on Consent Agenda Items listed specifically below under the Regular Session that will begin no sooner than 7:00 p.m. (for questions only, no action to be taken until Regular Session) Regular Session - to convene Executive Session 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. D Sec.551.071 consultation with attorney E Sec.551.072 deliberation on real property F Sec.551.074 personnel matters (Performance evaluation of Municipal Judge and review of City Secretary) Regular Session to begin no earlier than 7:00 p.m. G Action on Executive Session Items Public Hearing H Second Public Hearing regarding the annexation of approximately 80.3 acres in the Nicholas Porter I* and David Wright Surveys, located north of Williams Drive (RM2338) and south of Lakeway Drive/Clyde von Rosenberg and Ed Barry City Council Agenda/February 27, 1996 Page 1 of 4 Pages Mayor, Council, City Manager, and staff comments and reports Citizens wishing to address the Council Consent A eg nda Consent agenda includes non -controversial and routine items that council may act on with one single vote. A councilmember may pull any item from the consent agenda in order that the Council discuss and act upon it individually as part of the regular agenda. Please note that the following items may be discussed with no action taken during the Workshop at 5:00 p.m. K Consideration of approval of meeting minutes --Regular Meeting of February 13,1996/Sandra Lee L Consideration of an award of bid for vehicles to Draeger Motor Company in the amount of $144, 73 5.00/Terry Jones and Susan Morgan M Consideration of approval of a bid award to venders, per attached bid award letter, for underground materials related to the Sun City -Georgetown Project, (Bid No. 96007), in the amount of $15 7, 3 71.00/Jim Briggs N Consideration of approval of a bid award to Odell Geer to construct the West 22nd Street and Leander Street Stormwater Trunk Line in the amount of $4931090.00/Jim Briggs O Consideration of approval of a personal services contract between the City of Georgetown and Smith -Western Engineering, Inc. To provide engineering services related to the Quail Valley Drainage Project in the amount of $33,250.00/Jim Briggs P Consideration of an award of contract to Dorsey Construction in the amount of $44,000.00 to provide construction management services for the City Offices remodeling project/Terry Jones and Hartley Sappington Q Consideration of authorizing staff to negotiate a contract with White, Dolce & Barr for the design of the Sun City Fire Station/Terry Jones and Bill Shanklin R Consideration of authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement for professional grant management services with the Institute for Finance and Economic Development on behalf of Advanced Cable Systems, L.P./Bob Hart S Consideration of approval of a resolution approving funds to the Sertoma Club of Georgetown to purchase fireworks for the 4th of July Picnic in San Gabriel Park/Bob Hart T Consideration of approval of a resolution appointing the presiding election judges for the General Election on May 4, 1996/Sandra Lee City Council Agenda/February 27, 1996 Page 2 of 4 Pages U Consideration of authorizing the City Manager or his designee to participate in a Texas Municipal League Task Force relative to telecommunications and electric deregulation legislative policy issues/Bob Hart V Consideration of a resolution revising the City Fitness for Duty Policy Statement on controlled substances and alcohol use and establishing new testing requirements and procedures/Ben Stafford and Teresa Hersh W Consideration of acceptance of the Quarterly Report on Investments/Susan Morgan X Consideration of the acceptance of a donation of sidewalks from Alamo Concrete Products for Leander Road/Lee Bain and Susan Hoyt Y Consideration of a variance to the Subdivision Regulations for Berry Creek Subdivision, Section Six, Block D, Lot 6, located at 29001 Oakland Hills Drive/Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry Z Consideration of a resolution to authorize an abandonment of a portion of a public utility easement located along the south property line of Lot 6, Block D, Section Six, Berry Creek Subdivision, located at 29001 Oakland Hills Drive/Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry AA Consideration of approval of a final plat of a 76.095 acre tract in the R. T. Jenkins, Mary Ann Lewis and Abner Short Surveys, to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, Neighborhood Nine/Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry BB Consideration of a Concept Plan of a 25.65 acre tract in the Joseph Fish Survey to be known as West Mesa Estates, located along County Road 262 (Russell Park Road)/Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry CC Consideration of approval of a final plat of a 6.079 acre tract in the Joseph Fish Survey to be known as West Mesa Estates, Phase One, located along County Road 262 (Russell Park Road)/Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry DD Consideration of a Revised Concept Plan of a 20.71 acre tract in the Nicholas Porter Survey to be known as River Bend Subdivision, Unit V, located on Booty's Crossing Road/Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry EE Consideration of a resolution to authorize a License to Encroach into the public utility easement located along the south property line of Berry Creek, Section Seven, Phase One, Block C, Lot 15, located at 31009 La Quinta Drive/Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry Repaular A eg_nda Council will individually consider and possibly take action on any or all of the following items: (Council may, at any time, recess the regular session to convene in executive session at the request of the Mayor, a councilmember, or the City Manager.) City Council Agenda/February 27, 1996 Page 3 of 4 Pages FF Consideration of authorizing the Mayor to execute an interlocal agreement with the Brazos River Authority (BRA) for Household Hazardous Waste Collection Day/Hartley Sappington GG Consideration of authorizing the Mayor to execute a contract with CSW Communications, Inc. for the purchase and installation of an Interactive Utility Management System Fixed Wireless Network and SCADA System/Bob Hart HH Consideration of approval of an Agreement Between the City of Georgetown and CSW Communications, Inc. for the Software Support, Operations, and Maintenance of the City's Interactive Utility Management System/Bob Hart II Consideration of approval of an Agreement Between the City of Georgetown and CSW Communications, Inc., Concerning Use of the Fixed Wireless Network, Future Expansion of the City's Utility Management System to Include a Fixed Wire Network, and the Provision of Other Communication -Based Services/Bob Hart JJ Consideration of a rezoning of a 20.71 acre tract in the Nicholas Porter Survey to be known as River Bend Subdivision, Unit V, from A, Agricultural to RS, Residential Single Family and RP, Residential Planned, located on Booty's Crossing Road/Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry KK Final comments and evaluation of meeting process Adjournment CERTIFICATE OF POSTING 1, , City Secretary of the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of Meeting was posted on the day of , 1996, at a.m./p.m. City Council Agenda/February 27, 1996 Page 4 of 4 Pages Council Meeting Date: February 27, 1996 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Council workshop to provide updated information regarding the progress of the Nutrient Study of Segment 1248 of the San Gabriel River. ITEM SU MARY : During the permitting process for the Dove Springs Wastewater Treatment facility, the TNRCC included a provision in the permit which requires the City of Georgetown to cooperate with the Brazos River Authority (BRA), in conducting a nutrient study of Segment 1248 of the San Gabriel River. This segment runs from Lake Georgetown down to the head waters of Lake Granger. Since that time, we have prepared information, with assistance from the BRA to present to the TNRCC, for review and approval to begin a nutrient study along this segment, in compliance with the provision of our permit and the Clean Rivers Act. The final approval of the study itself was authorized in the fall of 1995. Since that time, we have begun conducting the nutrient study along Segment 1248, which will take approximately three years. A Council workshop is needed to provide updated information with regards to the study itself and to answer questions regarding outcomes and results that may be achieved. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: NONE FINANCIAL IMPACT• NONE COMMENTS: NONE i by: Jim Briggs, Director Community Owned Utilities Council meeting February 27, 1996 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBTECT: Public hearing regarding the annexation of approximately 80.3 acres in the Nicholas Porter and David Wright Surveys, located north of Williams Drive (RM2338) and south of Lakeway Drive. ITEM SUMMARY: This is the second of two (2) public hearings required by State law before initiation of annexation can begin. The purpose of the public hearings is to describe and receive comments on the City's plans for providing services to the annexation areas. The service plans for the areas to be annexed are attached (see Exhibit A). State law requires that the proposed service plan be explained at the public hearing. While it may be amended as a result of the public hearings, the provision of any service may not be deleted. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None FINANCIAL IMPACT: Full City services, including police and fire protection, emergency medical services, solid waste collection and disposal, maintenance of water and wastewater facilities, maintenance of road, streets and drainage, street lighting, maintenance of City park and recreation facilities must be provided to the annexed area within sixty (60) days after the effective date of the annexation. Necessary extension of capital improvements, such as water and wastewater systems, must be initiated within two years of annexation and be substantially completed within 4 1/2 years, in accordance with the adopted service plan, except when the annexed area is within the service area of another water or wastewater utility. COMMENTS: A resolution indicating intent to annex the 80.3 acres was approved by the City Council at the January 9, 1996 meeting. Letters informing the property owners of the City's intent to annex, including a copy of the January 9, 1996 resolution, were sent on January 26, 1996. The first public hearing was held on February 13, 1996. ATTACHMENTS: Map and service plan Submitted By: Edward/J. Barry, A�CP - Director Divisioh of Development Services 0a Clyde von Rosenberg, A CP Chief Planner, Long Range Planning EXHIBIT A Page 2 of 3 CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS ANNEXATION SERVICE PLAN APPROXIMATELY 80.3 ACRES IN THE NICHOLAS PORTER SURVEY, LOCATED NORTH OF WILLIAMS DRIVE (RM2338) AND SOUTH OF LAKEWAY BOULEVARD Introduction This service plan has been prepared in accordance with Texas Local Government Code, Chapter 43 - Municipal Annexation. This requires that the service plan provide for the extension of full municipal services to the area to be annexed by any of the methods by which it extends services to any other area of the municipality. Police Protection Regular and routine patrolling of streets, responses to calls, and other police services will be provided upon the effective date of the annexation. Fire Protection and Code Enforcement Fire protection and prevention services are currently being provided to the area through an agreement with Williamson County. These services will continue to be provided to the area upon the effective date of the annexation. Upon the effective date of the annexation, the City Code Enforcement Officer will periodically patrol streets in the area to ensure that all properties are in conformance with City Code. Solid Waste Collection Solid waste collection and disposal services will be provided upon the effective date of the annexation, in accordance with the rates, terms and conditions contained in the City Code. Water Service Water lines will be extended in accordance with City policy. The City has a Utility Expansion and Improvement Policy, which is described in this service plan. Sewer Service Wastewater lines will be extended in accordance with City policy. The City has a Utility Expansion and Improvement Policy, which is described in this service plan. Maintenance of Roads, Streets, and Drainage Roads, streets and drainage facilities dedicated to the public will be maintained according to City Code and policy upon the effective date of the annexation. Street Liizhting Street lighting will be made available upon the effective date of the annexation, upon request of the property owners, in accordance with City Code and policy. Annexation Service Plan, Page 1 of 2 EXHIBIT A Page 3 of 3 Parks and Recreation Parks and recreation facilities dedicated to the public will be maintained according to City Code and policy upon the effective date of the annexation. Recreation services will be provided to all residents in accordance with the rates, terms and conditions contained in the City Code. Planning and Zoning Upon the effective date of the annexation, the planning and zoning jurisdiction of the City will extend to this area. The area will be zoned A (Agricultural), unless otherwise approved through regular procedures. Inspection Services All inspection services, including building, electrical, plumbing, etc., provided by the City will be extended to the area upon the effective date of the annexation. Library Services Library services will be provided to all residents in accordance with the rates, terms, and conditions contained in the City Code upon the effective date of the annexation. Other Services Other services provided by the City, such as animal control, court, and general administration, will be made available upon the effective date of the annexation, in accordance with the City Code and policies. Utility Expansion and Improvement Policy City Ordinance Number 900404, a Utility Expansion and Improvement Policy, guides the planning, design, construction, operation, and maintenance of all utility system improvements, including water, wastewater and electrical service. 0 Annexation Service Plan, Page 2 of 2 Council meeting date: 2-27-96 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Meeting Minutes of Regular City Council Meeting on Tuesday, February 13, 1996. ATTACHMENTS 1. Minutes of Regular City Council Meeting of Tuesday, February 13, 1996 Sandra D. Lee, City Secretary MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS TUESDAY, February 13, 1996 The City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, met in Regular Session on the above date with Mayor Leo Wood presiding. Council Present: Dick Vincent George Arroyos Lee Bain Doris Curl Susan Hoyt Ferd Tonn Shelley Davis Staff Present: Bob Hart, City Manager Marianne Banks, City Attorney Sandra Lee, City Secretary Ed Barry, Dir. of Development Services Jim Briggs, Dir. of Community. Owned Utilities Hartley Sappington, Dir. of Community Svcs. Bill Shanklin, Fire Chief Council Absent: None Terry Jones, Purchasing Agent Hildy Kingma, Chief Planner Bob Stevenson, Water/Wastewater Supt. Don Rundell, City Engineer Tom Leggitt, Fire Marshal Governance Workshop_ - Call to order at 5:00 p.m. A Presentation by Redesign Team/Don Rundell, Bob Stevenson, and John Thomas Hart reminded Council of the activities that have occurred thus far with the focus groups and meetings with facilitator, Linda Goldzimer, to redesign and revamp the steps for development in order to evolve a smooth process. Don Rundell told Council that the overall goal is to preserve and enhance the quality of life in Georgetown. Members of the Redesign Team will be making presentations to eight key organizations in the City, including the GISD Board, the Homebuilders Association and the Chamber of Commerce. Bob Stevenson told Council that the team is working to develop a value-added and seamless process that would meet the needs of the customers. The team has set a goal to have a rough draft of the "ideal process" ready by the middle of June. Questionnaires were given to Council for their input. D Offer of bus from Capital Metro through intergovernmental agreement Hart explained that the acquisition of the bus will require funding for maintenance and operations and that Council needs to designate how it will be used. Bain questioned the timeframe for acceptance and whether the bus would cause a rearrangement of budget priorities. Hart asked Council to determine many of the parameters about the use of the bus. Curl suggested leasing the City Council Agenda/February 13, 1996 Page 1 of 6 Pages bus to WBCO. Mayor Wood suggested accepting the bus now and parking it until all the details can be worked out. Joe Savage, speaking for Bob Brent, Chairman of the Chamber of Commerce, told Council that the Chamber was very much in favor of the community acquiring the bus. Paul Hindelang, Executive Director of the Chamber of Commerce, also told Council that he thought it would be a good idea to acquire the bus and work out the details later. Hart warned Council of the insurance liability of allowing volunteers to serve as drivers. Council spoke of desiring to proceed with the acquisition. C Review of CSW contract points/Bob Hart Hart explained to Council that the process is moving much slower than he had anticipated, mainly because this type of system is so new there are no guidelines to use in getting the program set up. Hart told Council that the first phase will be for the basic system. Hart pointed out again the recent publicity about utility deregulation and explained that the "time of use" rates that would be possible with the system will be very instrumental toward keeping our "heavy load" customers. The contract will allow the City to own 2/3 of the system, and CSW will own 1/3, giving the City exclusive rights for the utility management portion of the system, and shared rights on other services such as home security and fixed wire. B Review of TML Leadership Symposium/George Arroyos, Shelley Davis and Dick Vincent Arroyos said three cities were featured: Georgetown, Plano, and Bryan. He spoke of Vincent and Hart representing Georgetown and commended their presentation. He summarized the sessions he attended. Vincent told of his participation with Hart and of his enjoyment of the other parts of the program. Davis was glad to have been able to compare notes with councilmembers from other cities, and share problem solving techniques as team members through the governance process. E Answer questions on Consent Agenda Items listed specifically below under the Regular Session that will begin no sooner than 7:00 p.m. (for questions only, no action to be taken until Regular Session) This item was abandoned for the sake of time. Repaular Session - to convene Executive Session at 6:53 p.m. 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. F Sec.551.071 consultation with attorney G Sec.551.072 deliberation on real property (Executive Session was recessed at 8:00 p.m. to be continued at the end of the meeting) City Council Agenda/February 13, 1996 Page 2 of 6 Pages Regular Session Public Hearing - Called to Order at 8:03 p.m. H Public Hearing regarding the annexation of approximately 80.3 acres in the Nicholas Porter and David Wright Surveys, located north of Williams Drive (RM2338) and south of Lakeway Boulevard/Clyde von Rosenberg and Ed Barry The Public Hearing was opened at 8.04 p.m. Barry explained that this site was composed of approximately eight tracts, and summarized the services to be provided, as included in the Council packet. He said that the next step in the process were: another public hearing, first reading of the ordinance on March 26, and second reading of the ordinance at the first meeting in April, with the effective date of the annexation being April 24, 1996. Wood asked for comment from the public and the Council. There was no response. The hearing was closed at 8:08 p.m. Mayor, Council, City Manager, and staff comments and reports Curl spoke of the survey soon to be sent to the citizens by the Parks and Recreation Board. Vincent told Council about three upcoming activities for the G.I.V.E. Program. Davis spoke of working with Police Chief Hesser about getting youth involved in organized activities. • Boards and Commissions Dinner, 6:30 p.m. on March 7 at First Baptist Church Hart reminded Council of the Board and Commission Dinner. Hart suggested Council consider scheduling the mid -year Retreat on Saturday, March 2. He distributed to Council a letter on the Texas Leadership Institute sponsored by the LCRA. He told Council that four -member teams were being put together, and asked for volunteers from the Council to participate at each session. J Citizens wishing to address the Council There were no citizens who wished to address Council at this time. Consent A eg nda K Consideration of approval of meeting minutes --Regular Meeting of January 23,1996/Sandra Lee L Consideration of the award of a bid for water plant meter replacement to Texas High Sierra in the amount OF $19,000/Terry Jones and Jim Briggs City Council Agenda/February 13, 1996 Page 3 of 6 Pages M Consideration of approval of a bid award to Griffin -Austin Company, Inc. of Manchaca, Texas, to construct the Berry Creek Water Main Project in the amount of $228,447/Jim Briggs N Consideration of approval of a request for extension of an administration modification to the site plan for Southwestern University/Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry O Pulled. (See Regular Agenda) P Consideration of approval of a variance to the Subdivision Regulations for Stonehedge Subdivision, Section One, Block H, Lots 13 and 14; located at 100 Reinhardt Court and 501 Belmont Drive/Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry Q License agreement for sewer line encroachment/Marianne Banks R -Consideration of a resolution expressing official intent to reimburse costs for the proposed Customer Controlled Load Management project not to exceed $3,700,000 with proceeds from bonds that will be issued at a later time/Susan Morgan and Bob Hart S Consideration of approval of a Personal Services Agreement between the City of Georgetown and Bill Glenn to provide construction inspection services over a twelve (12) month period, for the Community Owned Utilities Division in an amount not to exceed 2% of total projects bid for Street and Drainage Capital Improvement Project (CIP)/Jim Briggs T Consideration of a resolution calling a General Election in Georgetown, Texas, to be held on May 4, 1996; ordering a runoff election, if necessary, and establishing procedures for said elections/Sandra Lee U Consideration of approval of Amendment #24 to the contract between the City of Georgetown and Camp, Dresser & McKee for professional services related to the Lake Water Treatment Plant Capacity Expansion Improvements in the amount of $139,680/Jim Briggs Motion by Tonn, second by Curl to approve the Consent Agenda with the exception of Item O. Approved 7-0. Re_ lar Agenda O Consideration and possible approval of a request for a one (1) year extension of final plat approval for the River Ridge Three Subdivision, Sections C through G/Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry (Pulled by Bain) Bain asked about the difference in the applicant's request for a one-year extension and the staff s recommendation to extend for only six months. Kingma said that these five plats have actually been allowed an extra six months' extension because of a staff oversight. She explained that the reason for this request is a vesting issue, and that if the plat doesn't get recorded for some reason, this would allow for expiration. City Council Agenda/February 13, 1996 Page 4 of 6 Pages Cpm.0. 71 Motion by Bain, second by Vincent to grant a off@ -ye & extension to C and D but sip -ffi_eQl - extension/ for F, F, and,G. Mr. Hudson spoke of not expecting that there would be any changes in the plats, and requested the full -year extension for E, F, and G. Bain stated that he felt the Council needed to be consistent in their decisions. Approved 7-0. V Second Reading of an ordinance to rezone 0.49 acres, a Resubdivision of Hughes Addition, part of Block 5, to be known as the Planned Unit Development of the Wesley Subdivision, from RS Residential Single Family to RP, Residential Planned District with a Detailed Development Plan, and requested waiver of fees/Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry J Kingma read the caption on second reading. Motion by Tonn, second by Bain to approve Ordinance 96-03. Approved 5-0. (Curl and Hoyt abstained) W Second Reading of an ordinance to extend the effective date of the Georgetown Sign Ordinance, also known as Chapter 12.10 of the Georgetown Municipal Code, from the current expiration date of February 24, 1996, to a revised expiration date of August 24, 1996/Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry Kingma read the caption on second reading. Motion by Bain, second by Tonn to approve Ordinance 96-04. Approved 7-0. X Second Reading of an ordinance amending Ordinance 93-42 to reapportion the assessment of the 21.26 acre tract out of the I B. Pulsifer Survey No. 36 and Nicholas Porter Survey No. 26 in Williamson County, Texas, proportionately, by square footage of each proposed lot division identified in the preliminary plat of River Oaks - I.H. 35 Business Park/Marianne Banks Banks read the caption on second reading. Motion by Tonn, second by Davis to approve Ordinance 96-05. Approved 7-0. Y Second Reading of an ordinance amending Ordinance 95-42/Dave Hall/Ed Barry/Marianne Banks Barry read the caption on second reading. Motion by Bain, second by Tonn to approve Ordinance 96-06. Approved 7-0. Z Second Reading of an ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance to include model homes and construction offices as specially permitted and restricted uses/Clyde von Rosenberg and Ed Barry Barry read the caption on second reading. Motion by Tonn, second by Vincent to approve Ordinance 96-07. Approved 7-0. AA Second Reading of an ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance to revise the rules for landscaping, off-street parking and accessory uses and buildings/Clyde von Rosenberg and Ed Barry Barry read the caption on second reading. Motion by Bain, second by Curl to approve Ordinance 96-08. Approved 7-0. City Council Agenda/February 13, 1996 Page 5 of 6 Pages BB Consideration of appointment of one member to the Planning and Zoning Commission/Hartley Sappington Hart explained that the Charter required a one-year residency requirement for members of the Planning and Zoning Commission. One of the recent appointments did not meet that requirement. Wood recommended Robert Brannon. Motion by Vincent, second by Tonn to approve the Mayor's recommendation. Approved 7-0. CC Consideration of approval of Councilmembers' travel to the National League of Cities Winter Conference in Washington, D.C./Bob Hart Arroyos declined to attend due to a busy work schedule. Davis expressed a desire to attend in order to hear John Carver speak on governance. Bain also expressed the desire to attend if Council felt it was feasible. Motion by Davis, second by Arroyos to approve of Davis attending the NLC Conference in D.C. Approved 5-2. (Hoyt and Tonn opposed) Motion by Arroyos, second by Vincent to approve of Bain attending the NLC Conference in D.C. Approved 5-2. (Hoyt and Tonn opposed) Executive Session, (continued) DD Sec.551.074 personnel matters (Performance evaluations of City Attorney and City Manager) Regular Session - Resumed at 10:37 p.m. EE Action on Executive Session items Motion by Hoyt, second by Bain to raise the City Attorney's salary to 3% above market and to raise the City Manager's salary to 5% above market, retroactive to October 1, 1995. Approved 7-0. FF Final comments and evaluation of meeting process There were no final comments. The meeting was adjourned at 10:40 p.m. Approved: Leo Wood, Mayor City Council Agenda/February 13, 1996 Page 6 of 6 Pages Attest: Sandra D. Lee, City Secretary Council Meeting Date: February 27, 1996 Item No. L AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Consider an award of a bid for vehicles to Draeger Motor Company in the amount of $1441735.00. ITEM SUMMARY Bids were received for the purchase of vehicles approved in the 1995/96 Vehicle Internal Service Fund. The staff recommendation is to purchase these vehicles from the only bidder responding, Draeger Motor Co., Inc. of Georgetown. Since the Draeger bid is within five percent of the state contract price, the staff is recommending an award to the local vendor. See the attached comparison of prices. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS none FINANCIAL IMPACT (cost of item, fund and division name, budgeted amt.) Total for this bid is $144,735.00. $159,816.00 was budgeted for this expenditure in account 520-405-5801-00 Vehicle Internal Service Fund of which this amount is included. COMMENTS (from City Attorney, staff, boards and commissions) none ATTACHMENTS (list individually) 1. Bid Tabulation Submitted By: Terry Jones, Purchasing Director Susan Morgan, Director of Finance & Administration 4t DESCRIPTION LOT NO.1 1996 One Ton Diesel Cab and Chasis (Pump Department) LOT NO. If 1996 8-cyl. 3/4 Ton 4-Wheel Drive Pickup (Pump Department) LOT NO. III 1996 6-cyl. 1 /2 Ton Pickup (Animal Services, Parks Department) LOT NO. IV 1996 6-cyl. Ext. Cab Compact Pickup (Development Services) LOT NO. V 1996 Full Size Cargo Van (Finance Department) LOT NO. VI 1996 Small Size Passenger Van - White (Development Services) 1996 Small Size Passenger Van - Black (Police Department) TOTAL * Low Bid No Bid: Ramey Chrysler -Plymouth -Dodge, Inc. Don Hewlett Chevrolet VEHICLES BID NO.96018 DRAEGER QTY DRAEGER TOTAL 1 20990.00 20990.00 1 19670.00 19670.00 2 13950.00 27900.00 2 13925.00 27850.00 1 16525.00 16525.00 1 15900.00 15900.00 1 15900.00 15900.00 144735.00 STATE STATE TOTAL 20010.00 20010.00 18410.00 18410.00 13306.00 26612.00 13653.00 27306.00 15172.00 15172.00 15898.00 15898.00 15898.00 15898.00 139306.00 Council Meeting Date: February 27, 1996 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Council approval of bid award to vendors, per attached bid award letter, for underground materials related to the Sun City Georgetown project (Bid No. 96007), in the amount of $157,371.00. ITEM SUMMARY: On January 31, 1996, sealed bids were received and opened for underground materials, related to the Sun City Georgetown project (Bid No. 96007). These materials were bid in two (2) separate groups for Phase I, Neighborhoods 4, 5A, 5B, 6 and 7, of the Sun City development and an Annual bid for the Electric System Materials for the Sun City project. The engineering firm responsible to handle this bid, McCord Engineering, verified that the bids do conform to the project specifications and has recommended that the bids be awarded as per their attached letter of recommendation. The total dollar amount required for these bids is $299,571.00, with $142,200.00 to be paid by the developer, Del Webb Corporation. The total amount of CIP funds necessary to purchase these materials is $157,371.00. Therefore, staff recommends award of the bids for this project to the recommended bidders, in the amount of $157,371.00. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: NONE FINANCIAL IMPACT• Funds in the amount of $157,371.00 are to be paid from Account Number 661-101-6803. COMMENTS NONE ATTACHMENTS 1.,,,�etter and bid tabulation from McCord Engineering Sub ea . Jim Briggs, Director (/�j Community Owned Utilities 11 McCORD ENGINEERING INC. 7607 Eastmark Drive, Suite 102, P.O. Box 10047 College Station, Texas 77842 (409) 764-8356 — Fax (409) 764-9644 February 19, 1996 Honorable Mayor & City Council City of Georgetown P.O. Box 409 Georgetown, Texas 78627-0409 RE: Electric System Materials Bid No. 96007 Underground Materials for Sun City Georgetown Gentlemen: On January 31, 1996, sealed bids for two (2) separate groups of Electric System materials were opened and publicly read under Bid No. 96007 (Specifications for Electric System Materials for City of Georgetown, Texas for Sun City Georgetown). Included in this bid solicitation were the electric materials as specified by your City for Phase I - Neighbor- hoods 4, 5A, 5B9 69 & 7 of the Sun City Development. Also included in this bid solicitation was an annual bid for the Electric System Materials for the above mentioned project. Attached hereto as Exhibit "A" for your review and consideration are tabulations of the eight (8) bids submitted for this project. We have reviewed and evaluated each of the bids received by combining the initial order and annual bid together, and checked all unit extensions and totals for each of the bid submittals. On the basis of review and evaluation of each of the initial order and annual bid bid proposals received for this project, we recommend the City of Georgetown award the materials requirements for the above stated project to the following low Bidders who submitted satisfacto- ry and conforming group bids for the initial order and annual bid: Material Division Material Description Recommended Bid Award (Initial Order & Annual) Initial Order Bid Award Amount ($) Items A-1 thru A-3 Underground 25 kV Cable Techline, Inc. ("142 200.00 Items A-4 thru A-17 Underground 25 kV Accessories KBS Electrical Distribution (')68,832.00 Group "B" Pad -Mounted Switchgear Ward Electric (48 539.00 Total Recommended Bid Award 2999571.00 (')Assumes the City will store materials from the initial order. City of Georgetown February 19, 1996 Page 2 We would like to call attention, for the City Council's benefit, that the total low bid price recommended for this project does not represent a total new expenditure on the part of your City. The bid includes a sizable amount of materials for which the Developer is responsi- ble. Listed below is a tabulation of the CIP funding to be required for commitment by your City toward the completion of Phase One of the Sun City Georgetown Development. Total Bid Proposal ................ .............. $299,571.00 Less Developer Expenditure .......... . . .. ... ........ .$142,200.00 Total Amount of CIP Funds to be Required for the Project ...... . $157, 371.00 Please do not hesitate to let us know if any questions arise in reference to this bid solicitation and our recommendations made herein. We sincerely appreciate the opportunity to assist your City on this project, and are most thankful for the good assistance and cooperation extended us by your fine City Administration and Staff. Yours very truly, McCORD ENGINEERING, INC. immy D. McCord, P.E. President JDM/mw Enclosures cc: Mr. Bob Hart (w/encl. ) Mr. Jim Briggs (w/encl. ) Mr. John Thomas (w/encl. ) Mr. Terry Jones (w/encl . ) Ms. Marsha Iwers (w/encl. ) McCord Engineering, Inc. P. O. Box 10047 College Station, Texas 77842 February 19, 1996 CITY OF GEORGETOWN ELECTRIC SYSTEM UNDERGROUND MATERIALS FOR SUN CITY GEORGETOWN - PHASE I (NEIGHBORHOODS 4, 5A, 5119 69 & 7) BID EVALUATION SUMMARY Bidder Group A (Items A-1 thru A-3) Base Bid (Initial Order) Total ($) Alternate Bid B (Annual Bid) Total ($) Alternate Bid A (% Adder)* Total Bid Proposal ($) Techline, Inc. 142,200.00 54,225.00 + 1.0 198,389.25 Priester-Mell & Nicholson, Inc. 149,247.00 63,135.00 +4.0 220,877.28 South Way Electric Utility Service, Inc. 146,580.00 55,350.00 + 10.0 222,123.00 Westinghouse Electric Company (1)147,690.00 (1)56,290.50 + 10.0 224,378.55 Temple, Inc. (2)219,234.60 (2)79,730.10 0.0 298,964.70 Cummins Utility Supply (')219,819.00 81,000.00 No Bid 300,819.00 KBS Electrical Distributors, Inc. 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 Ward Electric 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 *Bidder to store material. ("Escalation on metals. (2)Bid price includes a 5% adder on some unit prices due to exception being taken to the Liquidated Damages Clause on specific items McCord Engineering, Inc. P. O. Box 10047 College Station, Texas 77842 February 19, 1996 CITY OF GEORGETOWN ELECTRIC SYSTEM UNDERGROUND MATERIALS FOR SUN CITY GEORGETOWN - PHASE I (NEIGHBORHOODS 4, 5A9 5B9 69 & 7) BID EVALUATION SUMMARY Bidder Group A (Items A-4 thru A-17) Base Bid (Initial Order) Total ($) Alternate Bid B (Annual Bid) Total ($) Alternate Bid A (% Adder)* Total Bid Proposal ($) Ward Electric 67,315.80 (4)17,292.75 0.0 84,608.55 KBS Electrical Distributors, Inc. 68,832.00 18,630.45 0.0 87,462.45 Techline, Inc. (')67,064.68 (',2)20,327.60 + 1.0 88,266.20 Cummins Utility Supply 70,202.99 (2)22,991.38 No Bid 93,194.37 Westinghouse Electric Company 64,479.95 21,876.69 +10.0 94,992.30 South Way Electric Utility Service, Inc. I1176,517.90 I'119,607.85 + 10.0 105,738.33 Priester-Melt & Nicholson, Inc. (',3)4,383.75 ('-3)2,177.94 +4.0 6,824.16 [Temple, Inc. 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 *Bidder to store material. ""Bid price includes a 5% adder on some unit prices due to exception being taken to the Liquidated Damages Clause on specific items. MItem A-13 does not meet specifications. (3)Incomplete bid. "'Items A-13, A-14, and A-15 do not meet specifications. McCord Engineering, Inc. P. O. Box 10047 College Station, Texas 77842 February 19, 1996 CITY OF GEORGETOWN ELECTRIC SYSTEM UNDERGROUND MATERIALS FOR SUN CITY GEORGETOWN - PHASE I (NEIGHBORHOODS 4, 5A9 5B9 69 & 7) BID EVALUATION SUMMARY Bidder Group B Base Bid (Initial Order) Total ($) Alternate Bid B (Annual Bid) 1 Total ($) Alternate Bid A (% Adder)* Total Bid Proposal ($) Techline, Inc. (2)66,620.00 (2)11,760.00 0.0 78,380.00 105,683.00 108,881.00 112,176.00 123,081.28 0.00 0.00 Ward Electric 88,539.00 17,144.00 0.0 Cummins Utility Supply 90,424.00 18,457.00 No Bid KBS Electrical Distributors, Inc. (')92,889.00 (')19,287.00 0.0 Westinghouse Electric Company 92,077.00 17,817.00 + 12.0 Priester-Melt & Nicholson, Inc. 0.00 0.00 0.0 South Way Electric Utility Service, Inc. 0.00 0.00 0.0 Temple, Inc. 0.00 0.00 1 0.0 0.00 *Bidder to store material. "'Bid price includes a 5% adder on some unit prices due to exception being taken to the Liquidated Damages Clause on specific items. (21Does not meet specifications. McCord Engineering, Inc. P. O. Box 10047 College Station, Texas 77842 CITY OF GEORGE' ELECTRIC SYSTEM UNDERGROU SUN CITY GEORGETOWN - PHASE I (NEIGI BID EVA JATI( Group "All (Items A-1 thru A-3) - B., Cummins Utility Supply KBS Electrical Distributors, Inc. Item Qty. Delivery Unit Price Extended Price Delivery Unit Price Extended Price A-1 9,000 8-10 weeks (1A7.364 66,276.00 0.00 A-2 60,000 8-10 weeks (412.177 130,620.00 0.00 A-3 - 9,000 6-8 weeks (42.547 22,923.00 0.00 ToBid ..... . .... ... . % .2 19 81 9. 00... . . .. . .... . . ... . .. .... .... ..... .......... 0.00 Techline, Inc. Temple, Inc. Item Qty. Delivery TL nit Price Extended Price Delivery Unit Price T Extended Price —I — — A-1 91000 12-14 weeks 5.95 53,550.00 14-16 weeks (2'7.469 70,582.50 A-2 60,000 Stock-4 weeks 1.20 72,000.00 10 weeks 12'2.012 126,756.00 A-3 91000 2-4 weeks 1.85 16,650.00 10 weeks (2'2.317 21,896.10 ... To Bid .... ........ ........... ..... ........ 142,200.00 ........ .. ........ . ...... .. 219,234.60 "'Cummins has an alternate bid on this item with the unit price being $6.79 for an extended price of $61,1 io.00. (2)5% was added to the unit price due to exception being taken to the Liquidated Damages Clause for this item. (3) Price firm to February 9, 1996. Escalation on metals. MEscalation on metals. McCord Engineering, Inc. P. O. Box 10047 College Station, Texas 77842 Item Qty. A-1 9,000 A-2 60,000 A-3 9,000 Total Bid Item Qty. A-1 9,000 A-2 60,000 A-3 9,000 Total Bid CITY OF GEORGETOWN ELECTRIC SYSTEM UNDERGROUND MATERIALS FOR SUN CITY GEORGETOWN - PHASE I (NEIGHBORHOODS 4, 5A9 5B9 69 & 7) BID EVALUATION Delivery Cummins Utility Supply Unit Price Extended Price 8-10 weeks (1,07.364 66,276.00_ 8-10 weeks (412.177 130,620.00 6-8 weeks M2.547 22,923.00 ................... .. ............... .. .................. ............... . ........................ ....... ............... ............... ....... ................ 219,819.00 Techline, Inc. Delivery Unit Price ($)_ 1 Extended Price 12-14 weeks 5.95 53,550.00 Stock-4 weeks 1.20 72,000.00 2-4 weeks 1.85 16,650.00 142,200.00 Group "A" (Items A-1 thru A-3) - Base Bid (Initial Order) KBS Electrical Distributors, Inc. Delive ry Unit Price Extended Price 0.00 0.00 0.00 ........... 0.00 Temple, Inc. Delivery I Unit Price Extended Price 14-16 weeks (27.469 70,582.50 10 weeks 12'2.012 126,756.00 10 weeks (2'2.317 21,896.10 ................ . ..... .......... .......... .......... ...... ... ** .......... ................ ........... ............... ................. 219,234.60 "'Cummins has an alternate bid on this item with the unit price being $6.79 for an extended price of $61,110.00. (2)5% was added to the unit price due to exception being taken to the Liquidated Damages Clause for this item. (3) Price firm to February 9, 1996. Escalation on metals. (4) Escalation on metals. Priester-hell & Nicholson, Inc. Delivery Unit Price Extended Price 10 weeks 6.103 54,927.00 7 weeks 1.266 75,960.00 10 weeks 2.040 18,360.00 149,247.00 ............... Ward Electric Delivery Unit Price Extended Price 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 February 19, 1996 South Way Electric Utility Service, Inc. Delivery —Unit Price Extended Price 12 weeks 6.05 54,450.00 2 weeks SPS 1.255 75,300.00 2 weeks SPS 1.87 16,830.00 146,580.00 -- -------- Westinghouse Electric Supply Company Delivery I Unit Price Extended Price 10 weeks 05.011 45,099.00 10 weeks 1.350 81,000.00 10 weeks 2.399 21,591.00 ....... ....... 147,690.00 McCord Engineering, Inc. P. O. Box 10047 College Station, Texas 77842 CITY OF GEORGETOWN ELECTRIC SYSTEM UNDERGROUND MATERIALS FOR SUN CITY GEORGETOWN - PHASE I (NEIGHBORHOODS 4, 5Aq 5B9 69 & 7) BID EVALUATION Group "A" (Items A-1 thru A-3) - Alternate Bid B (Annual Bid) Rem cfty. Cummins Utility Supply Delivery t Unit Price Extended Price KBS Electrical Distributors, Inc. Prie- Delivery Unit Price Extended Price Delivery A-1 4,500 2 days (1'7.89 35,505.00 0.00 10 weeks A-2 9,000 2 days 2..33 20,970.00 0.00 7 weeks A-3 9,000 2 days 2.725 24,525.00 0.00 10 weeks Total Bid 81,000.00 ............. ..... 0.00 Item Qty-- Techline, Inc. Temple, Inc. Delivery Unit Price ($) 1 Extended Price Delivery Unit Price ($) 1 Extended Price Delivery A-1 4,500 12-14 weeks 5.95 26,775.00 14-16 weeks (2)8.216 38,820.60 A-2 9,000 Stock-4 weeks 1.20 10,800.00 10 weeks (2)2.012 19,013.40 A-3 9,000 2-4 weeks 1.85 1 16,650.00 10 weeks (22.317 21,896.10 To Bid ...... 54,225.00 IMEM1. . ..... .. ... .......... ... . X 79,730.10 ...................................... ....................... . ...... ...................... .................... ................... "'Cummins has an alternate bid on this item with the unit price being $7.27 for an extended price of $32,715.00. (2)5% was added to the unit price due to exception being taken to the Liquidated Damages Clause for this item. (3)Price firm to February 9, 19%. Escalation on metals is $1.16/lb. ter -Melt & Nicholson, Inc. Unit Price ($) Extended Price F 6.734 30,303.00 1.397 12,573.00 2.251 20,259.00 63,135.00 Ward Electric Unit Price ($) 1 Extended Price ($) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 February 19, 1996 South Way Electric Utility Service, Inc. Delivery Unit Price Extended Price 12 weeks 6.05 27,225.00 2 weeks SPS 1.255 11,295-00 2 weeks SPS 1.87 16,830.00 55,350.00 Westinghouse Electric Supply Company Delivery T"Unit Price Extended Price As stated (3)5.011 22,549.50 As stated 1.350 12,150.00 As stated 2.399 21,591.00 ................ . . .................................. ...... ...... 56,290.50 ......... .. McCord Engineering, Inc. P. O. Box 10047 College Station, Texas 77842 CITY OF GEORGETOWN ELECTRIC SYSTEM UNDERGROUND MATERIALS FOR SUN CITY GEORGETOWN - PHASE I (NEIGHBORHOODS 4, 5A, 5B9 69 & 7) BID EVALUATION Group "A" (Items A-4 thru A-17) - Base Bid (Initial Order) Item A-4 Qty. 180 Cummins Utility Supply KBS Electrical Distributors, Inc. Prie: Delivery 14-16 weeks Unit Price ($) 197.79 Extended Price ($) 35,602.20 Delivery Unit Price ($) Extended Price ($) Delivery As required 198.00 35,640.00 - A-5 425 2 days 35.79 15,210.75 As required As required As required As required As required As required 2 weeks As required 30.00 30.00 25.30 58.10 114.00 172.00 11.50 145.00 12,750.00 - A-6 95 34-36 weeks 29.87 2,837.65 2,850.00 - A-7 25 2 days 28.69 717.25 632.50 - A-8 25 2 days 54.47 1,361.75 1,452.50 - A-9 30 24-26 weeks 133.74 4,012.20 3,420.00 - A-10 6 24-26 weeks 204.74 1,228.44 1,032.00 -- A-11 520 2-4 weeks 9.08 4,721.60 5,980.00 - A 12 35 2 days 128.89 4,511.15 5,075.00 6-8 weeks A-13 0 - 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 - A-14 0 - 0.00 0.00 ---- 0.00 0.00 - A-15 0 - 0.00 0.00 ---- 0.00 0.00 - A 16 0 - 0.00 0.00 --- 0.00 0.00 - A 17 0 - 0.00 0.00 -- 0.00 0.00.......... - Total Bid ($) 70,202.99 "►5% was added to the unit price due to exception being taken to the Liquidated Damages Clause for this item. (2) Incomplete bid. 68,832.00 ter -Melt & Nicholson, Inc. Unit Price ($) I Extended Price ($) 0.00 - - 0.00 - 0.00 - 0.00 - 0.00 - 0.00 - 0.00 - 0.00 "►125.25 4,383.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (24,383.75 38 3.75 February 19, 1996 Page 1 of 2 South Way Electric Utility Service, Inc. Delivery Unit Price ($)j Extended Price ($) 4-6 weeks 249.65 44,937.00 12,325.00 2,755.00 652.50 11305.00 3,381.00 1,025.40 6,084.00 4,053.00 Stock 29.00 30-32 weeks "►29.00 4-6 weeks 26.10 18-20 weeks "►52.20 14-16 weeks "►112.70 4-6 weeks 170.90 3-4 weeks 11.70 18-20 weeks "►115.80 -- - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 ---- 0.00 -- 0.00 ---- 0.00 761 5 7. 90 ,517.90 McCord Engineering, Inc. P. O. Box 10047 College Station, Texas 77842 CITY OF GEORGETOWN ELECTRIC SYSTEM UNDERGROUND MATERIALS FOR SUN CITY GEORGETOWN - PHASE I (NEIGHBORHOODS 4, 5A9 5B, 69 & 7) BID EVALUATION Group "A" (Items A-4 thru A-17) - Base Bid (Initial Order) February 19, 1996 Page 2 of 2 Item Qty. Techline, Inc. Temple, Inc. Ward Electric Westinghouse Electric Supply Company Delivery Unit Price ($) Extended Price ($) Delivery Unit Price ($) Extended Price ($) Delivery Unit Price ($) Extended Price ($) Delivery Unit Price ($) Extended Price ($) A-4 180 14-16 weeks ")190.00 35,910.00 - - 0.00 2 weeks 200.42 36,075.60 2-3 weeks 198.00 35,640.00 A-5 425 12-14 weeks "128.20 12,584.25 ---- ----- 0.00 4 weeks 30.00 12,750.00 4-5 weeks 29.98 12,741 50 A-6 95 30-36 weeks "029.50 2,942.63 - - 0.00 4 weeks 31.50 2,992.50 4-5 weeks 31.66 3,007.70 A 7 25 1 week 26.00 650.00 - - 0.00 2 weeks 22.53 563.25 2-3 weeks 2-2.05 551.25 A-8 25 10-12 weeks 63.00 1,575.00 - -- 0.00 4 weeks 61.62 1,540.50 4-5 weeks 60.85 1,521.25 A-9 30 24-26 weeks (1)131.00 4,126.50 --- - 0.00 10 weeks 42.79 1,283.70 10 weeks 42.79 1,283.70 A-10 6 24-26 weeks M201.00 1,266.30 - -- 0.00 14 weeks 200.50 1,203.00 24-26 weeks 202.00 1,212.00 A-11 520 1 week 8.00 4,160.00 - - 0.00 2 weeks 8.15 4,238.00 2-4 weeks 8.95 4,654.00 A-12 35 1 week 110.00 3,850.00 - - 0.00 14 weeks 190.55 6,669.25 6-8 weeks 110.53 3,868.55 A 13 0 - 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 A-14 0 ---- 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 A 15 0 ----- 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 A 16 0 - 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 A-17 0 - 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 Total Bid () s 7 os4 s s o.00 67,315.80 5.80 64 47 9.95 "'5% was added to the unit price due to exception being taken to the Liquidated Damages Clause for this item. (2)Incomplete bid. McCord Engineering, Inc. P. O. Box 10047 College Station, Texas 77842 CITY OF GEORGETOWN ELECTRIC SYSTEM UNDERGROUND MATERIALS FOR SUN CITY GEORGETOWN - PHASE I (NEIGHBORHOODS 4, 5A9 5B, 65 & 7) BID EVALUATION Group "A" (Items A-4 thru A-17) - Alternate Bid B (Annual Bid) February 19, 1996 Page 1 of 2 Item oty. Cummins Utility Supply KBS Electrical Distributors, Inc. Priester-Melt & Nicholson, Inc. South Way Electric Utility Service, Inc. FExtended Price ($) 31150.00 590.00 580.00 Delivery Unit Price ($) Extended Price ($) Delivery Unit Price ($) Extended Price ($) Delivery Unit Price ($) Extended Price ($) DeliveryUnit Price ($) A-4 12 2 days 338.44 4,061.28 As required 198.00 2,376.00 - - 0.00 4-6 weeks 262.50 29.50 "►29,00 A 5 20 2 days 35.79 715.80 As required 30.00 600.00 - - 0.00 Stock A-6 20 2 days 35.79 715.80 As required 30.00 600.00 - - 0.00 30-32 weeks A 7 25 2 days 28.69 717.25 As required 25.30 632.50 - -'- 0.00 4-6 weeks 26.10 652.50 A-8 25 2 days 65.47 1,636.75 As required 58.10 1,452.50 - - 0.00 18-20 weeks 11►52.20 1,305.00 A-9 9 2 days 143.75 1,293.75 As required 114.00 1,026.00 --- - 0.00 1416 weeks n► 112.70 170.90 1,014.30 512.70 234.00 A-10 3 2 days 224.46 673.38 As required 172.00 516.00 - -- 0.00 4-6 weeks A 11 20 2 days 9.77 195.40 Stock 11.50 230,00 - - 0.00 3-4 weeks 11.70 A 12 10 2 days 128.89 1,288.90 As required 145.00 1,450.00 6-8 weeks 1"132.45 1,324.50 18-20 weeks c'►115.80 1,158.00 A 13 3 2 days 13►108.64 325.92 369.40 1,108.20 3-4 weeks 1'1284.48 853.44 4-5 weeks 309.75 176.85 929.25 2,652.75 A-14 15 2 days 173.57 2,603.55 As required 130.00 1,950.00 - - 0.00 12-14 weeks -A-15 9 2 days 341.45 3,073.05 As required 245.00 2,205.00 - - 0.00 12-14 weeks 247.15 1'►273.35 2,224.35 4,100.25 A-16 15 2 days 329.73 4,945.95 As required 259.00 3885.00 ' - - 0.00 20-22 weeks A-17 15 2 days 49.64 744.60 As required 39.95 599.25 - - 0.00 4-6 weeks 33.65 504.7 5 Total B ;:::::>::::::::::::::::::::;:>:; :::::•::::::•:::::•::::::.::.>:•::.:.::•:::•:::::::::•::::•:::•::::.: ......... ............ 22 991.38 <•: •:;::;..............>:.:::•::.:::•:.:.::::•:;:-....:::•:::•::.:::•:;;•:>:•: :::::.::::•..:...::::::::•::::::..:._... ......�::::.: ...................... 8 630.45 czc ::.::•::::::..........::•:::::........................::::..... 11►5% was added to the unit price due to ex( (21Incomplete bid. Oboes not meet specifications. McCord Engineering, Inc. P. O. Box 10047 College Station, Texas 77842 CITY OF GEORGETOWN ELECTRIC SYSTEM UNDERGROUND MATERIALS FOR SUN CITY GEORGETOWN - PHASE I (NEIGHBORHOODS 4, 5A, 5B9 6, & 7) BID EVALUATION Group "A" (Items A-4 thru A-17) - Alternate Bid B (Annual Bid) February 19, 1996 Page 2 of 2 Techline, Inc. Temple, Inc. Ward Electric Westinghouse Electric Supply Company Item Qty. Delivery Unit Price ($) Extended Price ($) Delivery Unit Price ($) Extended Price ($) Delivery Unit Price ($) Extended Price ($) Delivery Unit Price ($) Extended Price ($) A-4 12 14-16 weeks "'198.00 2,494.80 - - 0.00 2 weeks 200.42 2,405.04 2-3 weeks 232.94 2,795.28 A-5 20 12-14 weeks "'28.20 592.20 --- ---- 0.00 4 weeks 30.00 600.00 4-5 weeks 35.27 37.25 705.40 745.00 A-6 20 30-36 weeks 0�29.50 619.50 - - 0.00 4 weeks 31.50 630.00 4-5 weeks A-7 25 1 week 26.00 650.00 - ---- 0.00 2 weeks 22.53 563.25 2-3 weeks 25.94 648.50 A-8 25 10-12 weeks 63.00 1,575.00 - - 0.00 4 weeks 61.62 1,540.50 4-5 weeks 10 weeks 71.59 50.34 231.00 12.11 166.32 1,789.75 453.06 693.00 242.20 1,663.20 A-9 9 24-26 weeks 111131.00 1,237.95 - - 0.00 10 weeks 42.79 385.11 A 10 3 24-26 weeks "1201.00 633.15 - - 0.00 14 weeks 200.50 601.50 24-26 weeks A 11 20 1 week 8.00 160.00 ---- - 0.00 2 weeks 8.15 163.00 2-4 weeks 6-8 weeks A-12 A-13 10 3 1 week 2-4 weeks 110.00 (375.00 1,100.00 225.00 - - ---- - 0.00 0.00 14 weeks 8 weeks 190.55 250.00 1,905.50 750.00 14-16 weeks 16-18 weeks 475.00 163.16 321.00 1,425.00 2,447.40 2,889.00 A-14 15 16-18 weeks (1)165.00 2,475.00 - - 0.00 JE 8 weeks 131116.87 1,753.05 A 15 9 26-28 weeks M365.00 3,285.00 --- - 0.00 8 weeks (31172.00 1,548.00 24-26 weeks A 16 15 14-16 weeks '305.00 4,575.00 - - 0.00 8 weeks Q265.00 3,975.00 14-16 weeks 312.00 4,680.00 A-17 15 1 8-10 weeks 47.00 705.00 - - 0.00 4 weeks 31.52 472.80 8-10 weeks 46.66 r- 699.90 Total Bid () 2 0 327.6 0 ....... ...... ... [.:..* 0.00 .". .*." .. .. ..... 17229.75 2 29 .7 5 -- ......... 218 6 69 7 . 8... ('15% was added to the unit price due to except j2'Incomplete bid. (31Does not meet specifications. McCord Engineering, Inc. P. O. Box 10047 College Station, Texas 77842 CITY OF GEORGETOWN ELECTRIC SYSTEM UNDERGROUND MATERIALS FOR SUN CITY GEORGETOWN - PHASE I (NEIGHBORHOODS 4, 5A9 5B9 6, & 7) BED EVALUATION Group "B" - Base Bid (Initial Order) Item Qty. Techline, Inc. Delivery Unit Price ($) Extend.1d Price B-1 17 12-14 weeks 13'2,260.00 38,420.00 B-2 3 14-16 weeks (319 400.00 28,200.00 Total Bid ...... .... ... .... ...... ........ 66,620.00 KBS Electrical Distributors, Inc. Delivery Unit Price Extended Price 2-4 weeks 2,502.00 42,534.00 16-18 weeks (21 16,785.00 50,355.00 ...... .. .... .......... ....... .. ..... .............. XX ............. ...... 92,889.00 .............. ......................... ---------- - Temple, Inc. Delivery Unit PriceExtendedEded Price F 0.00 0.00 ................. .. .......... . . . ............. 0.00 "'Cummins alternate bid on this item does not meet specifications. 1215% was added to the unit price due to exception being taken to the Liquidated Damages Clause for this item. 13'Does not meet specifications. Priester-Mell & Nicholson, Inc. Delivery 1 -T Extended Price M Unit Price ($) February 19, 1996 South Way Electric Utility Service, Inc. Delivery Unit Price M I --PvfAnnAA Dr- It-% 0.00 0.00 Westinghouse Electric Supply Company Delivery Unit Price Extended Price 12 weeks 2,861.00 48,637.00 12 weeks 14,480.00 43,440.00 .......................... ............. . ................ ... ........ ............. "A 92 McCord Engineering, Inc. P. O. Box 10047 College Station, Texas 77842 CITY OF GEORGETOWN ELECTRIC SYSTEM UNDERGROUND MATERIALS FOR SUN CITY GEORGETOWN - PHASE I (NEIGHBORHOODS 4, 5A, 5B9 6, & 7) BID EVALUATION Group "B" - Alternate Bid B (Annual Bid) Cummins Utility Supply KBS Electrical Distributors, Inc. Item oty. Delivery Unit Price ($) Extended Price M Delivery Unit Pricy M F.,+o.,aea n.;-- Imo% B-1 1 2 days (113,130.00 3,130.00 2-4 weeks .. 2,502.00 %_, 2,502.00 B-2 1 2 days "'15,327.00 15,327.00 16-18 weeks (2)16,785.00 16,785.00 . Total Bid 7 1 8,457.00 00 Item Qty. Techline, Inc. Delivery Unit Price ($) Extended Price ($) B-1 1 12-14 weeks 1312,360.00 2,360.00 B-2 1 14-16 weeks (319,400.00 9,400.00 TotalBid d () 11,760.00 60. 00 19,287.00 Temple, Inc. Delivery Unit Price ($) Extended Price ($) 0.00 -- — 0.00 ------ 0.00 "'Cummins alternate bid on this item does not meet specifications. 1215% was added to the unit price due to exception being taken to the Uquidated Damages Clause for this item. O'Does not meet specifications. Priester-hell & Nicholson, Inc. Delivery Unit Price ($) Extended Price ($) 0.00 0.00 ...... 0.00 Delivery Ward Electric Unit Price ($) Extended Price ($) 12 weeks 2,906.00 2,906.00 12 weeks 14,238.00 14,238.00 17,144.00 .00 February 19, 1996 South Way Electric Utility Service, Inc. Delivery Unit Price ($) Extended Price ($) 0.00 0.00 0.0 0 Westinghouse Electric Supply Company Delivery Unit Price ($) FEZded Price ($) 12 weeks 3,011.00 3,011.00 12 weeks 14,806.00 14,806.00 17,817.00 .00 McCord Engineering, Inc. P. O. Box 10047 College Station, Texas 77842 February 19, 1996 CITY OF GEORGETOWN ELECTRIC SYSTEM UNDERGROUND MATERIALS FOR SUN CITY GEORGETO WN - PHASE I (NEIGHBORHOODS 4, 5A, 5119 69 & 7) BID EVALUATION Alternate Bid A - Percent M Adder Bidder Group "A" Group "B" Cummins Utility Supply No Bid No Bid KBS Electrical Distributors, Inc. 0 % 0 % Priester-Mell & Nicholson, Inc. 4 % 0 % South Way Utility Service, Inc. 10 % 0 % Techline, Inc. 1 % 0 % Temple, Inc. 0 % 0 % Ward Electric 0 % 0 % Westinghouse Electric Supply Company 10 % 12 % Council Meeting Date: February 27, 1996 Item No. N AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Council approval of bid award, to Odell Geer, to construct the West 22nd Street and Leander Street Stormwater Trunk Line, in the amount of $493,090.00. ITEM SUMMARY: Sealed bids were received and opened on February 16, 1996 for construction services related to the West 22nd Street and Leander Street Storm Water Trunk Line. The engineering firm responsible to handle this project, David Ham & Associates, has verified that the low bid, from Odell Geer Construction, was the lowest bid and does conform to the project specifications. David Ham recommends award of this bid to Odell Geer Construction. Therefore, staff recommends award of the bid for this project to Odell Geer Construction, in the amount of $493,090.00. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: NONE FINANCIAL IMPACT• Funds in the amount of $493,090.00 are to be paid as follows: Account 4641-101-6104 $442,150.00 Account #641-101-6106 $ 50,940.00 COMMENTS: NONE ATTACHMENTS 1. Recommendation letter from David Ham & Associates Sub Jim Briggs, Director Community Owned Utilities '02/20/96 11:44 `T512 444 6123 RALPH HARRIS SUR IM 002/OG3 DAVID HAM&ASSOCIATES ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS February 20, 1996 Mr. Jim Briggs Director, Community Owned Utilities City of Georgetown P.O. Box 409 Georgetown, Texas 78627 - 0409 Re: February 16, 1996 Bid Letting Vilest 22nd & Leander Street Storm Water Trunk Line & Outfall Line City of Georgetown Dear Mr. Briggs: Bids were let on the above referenced project in the offices of the Community Owned Utilities, City of Georgetown on February 16, 1996. Nine bids were received, opened and read aloud in a public forum. All bids submitted included the required submittals and none had cause for disqualification. The bids have been checked to verify extensions and totals. The bids received are as follows: Contractor Base Bid Alternate Bid Odell Geer Construction $493,050.00 $463,432.00 Garney Companies $495,976.00 $452,263.04 BRH - Garver, Inc. $529,052.00 $470,610.00 Champion Site Prep $575,658.12 $525,338.44 Bay Maintenance $672,368.80 $619,711.10 Reddico Construction $673,863.00 $578,708.00 Griffin - Austin $680, 038.00 $621, 490.00 Borah, Inc. $684,330.00 $611,448.00 Austin Engineering Co. $692,030.00 $631,070.00 The base bid is for reinforced concrete pipe and manholes, the alternate bid is for corrugated metal pipe and manholes. The low bidder for the base bid is Odell Geer Construction, the low bidder for the alternate bid is Garney Companies. Both companies are qualified to complete the work they have proposed on. The Engineer's preference is the installation of the reinforced concrete pipe based on long term durability and potentially lower maintenance cost. If it is within the City's budget, the low Base Bid received from Odell Geer Construction is recommended for award. 1406 Hether Austin. Texas 78704 (512) 444-1781 /r,i')1 ,I"iA- r,I9,:z F4X 02/20/96 11:45 %Y512 444 6123 RALPH HARRIS SUR 191003/003 V� Mr. Jim Briggs Page 2 February 20, 1996 If there are any questions or comments, please feel free to call me. Sincerely, '�; ��� 0 -44� David H. Ham, P.E. Attachments: Bid Tabulations cc: Mr. Don Rundell, P.E. 1 O Council Meeting Date: February 27, 1996 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Council approval of a personal services contract, between the City of Georgetown and Smith -Western Engineering, Inc. to provide engineering services related to the Quail Valley Drainage Project, in the amount of $33,250.00. ITEM SUMMARY Currently, the engineering firms, Contracted with the City of Georgetown for utility projects, are fully committed and are not able to provide services for some of the upcoming projects. Therefore, it is necessary for the City to enlist the services of other engineering firms to handle some of the smaller projects. The engineering firm of Smith -Western Engineering, Inc. is a local engineering firm, with a solid background in street and drainage engineering and design. The City has requested the services of Smith -Western to provide engineering services, including the preliminary engineering phase, final design phase, bidding phase, and construction phase of the Quail Valley Drainage Project for the 1995-1996 budget year. Therefore, staff requests Council approval of the personal services contract, between the City of Georgetown and Smith -Western Engineering, in the amount of $33,250.00. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: NONE FINANCIAL IMPACT: Funds in the Amount of $33,250.00 are to be paid from Account Number 640-101-6105-00. COMMENTS: NONE ATTACHMENTS: 1. Personal Services Contract Su by: Jim Briggs, Director Community Owned Utilities THE STATE OF TEXAS § AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF § GEORGETOWN AND SMITH WESTERN COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON § ENGINEERING, INC. FOR § PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR THE § QUAIL VALLEY DRAINAGE PROJECT This is an agreement by and between the CITY OF GEORGETOWN, a Texas Home Rule Municipal Corporation, ("CITY"), and SMITH -WESTERN ENGINEERING, INC. ("ENGINEER"), whereby ENGINEER agrees to perform professional services and CITY agrees to pay for the services provided. ARTICLE I -- PROJECT DEFINED 1.01 The PROJECT is generally described as the professional services required by the CITY for the planning, development, design and construction of the Quail Valley and Highview/Dunman Drainage Project, and manhole repairs. ENGINEER will provide engineering consultation and surveying services in connection with the PROJECT. The scope of professional services required to be completed as a part of this Agreement are more fully detailed in the attached "Exhibit A". ARTICLE II --INITIATION OF WORK 2.01 CITY shall direct ENGINEER to commence work on the PROJECT by sending to ENGINEER a "letter of authorization" to begin work on the implementation of the contract. 2.02 Upon receipt of authorization to commence planning ENGINEER shall 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 ENGINEER shall determine CITY'S needs with regard to the PROJECT including but not limited to site evaluation, needs surveys, comparisons with other municipal projects, review of budgetary constraints and other preliminary investigations necessary for the PROJECT. 2.04. ENGINEER shall prepare a conceptual design which shall include schematic layouts, surveys, sketches and exhibits demonstrating the considerations involved in the PROJECT. Additionally ENGINEER shall prepare a report to CITY specifying his findings and conclusions with regard to the PROJECT. ENGINEER shall upon CITY'S request meet with the staff and City Council to make a presentation of his report. The preliminary design shall be delivered to the CITY not later than fifteen (15) calendar days after the date of authorization to commence planning. co ntract/sm ith-wt/022196 2.05 ENGINEER shall inquire in writing as to the information he believes CITY may have in its possession that is necessary for ENGINEER'S performance. The ENGINEER shall indicate to the CITY the information needed for rendering of services hereunder. The CITY shall provide to the ENGINEER such information as is available to the CITY and the CITY's consultants and contractors, and the ENGINEER shall be entitled to rely upon the accuracy and completeness thereof. The CITY recognizes that it is impossible for the ENGINEER to assure the accuracy, completeness and sufficiency of such information, either because it is impossible to verify, or because of errors or omissions which may have occurred in assembling the information the CITY is providing. ARTICLE III -- PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING PHASE 3.01 CITY shall direct ENGINEER to commence work on the PROJECT design by sending to ENGINEER a "letter of authorization" to begin work on the PROJECT design pursuant to this agreement. 3.02 Upon receipt of authorization to commence preliminary PROJECT design ENGINEER shall meet with CITY for the purpose of determining the extent of the PROJECT. 3.03 ENGINEER shall design the PROJECT providing the initial design of the PROJECT including but not limited to the preliminary drawings and specifications. ENGINEER shall make a cost determination with regard to the PROJECT and shall submit it to CITY. ENGINEER shall submit preliminary design for CITY'S review within ninety (90) calendar days after receipt of the Letter of Authorization to commence preliminary PROJECT design. In providing opinions of probable construction cost, the CITY understands that the ENGINEER has no control over costs or the price of labor, equipment or materials, or over the Contractor's method of pricing, and that the opinions of probable construction costs provided herein are to be made on the basis of the ENGINEER's qualifications and experience. The ENGINEER makes no warranty, expressed or implied, as to the accuracy of such opinions as compared to bid or actual costs. 3.04 Upon completion of the preliminary design of the PROJECT, ENGINEER shall so notify CITY. Upon request ENGINEER shall meet with the CITY staff and CITY Council to make a presentation of his preliminary design of the PROJECT. ENGINEER shall provide an explanation of the cost estimate. contract/smith-wt/022196 2 ARTICLE IV,--- FINAL DESIGN PHASE 4.01 CITY shall direct ENGINEER to commence work on the final design of the PROJECT by sending to ENGINEER a "letter of authorization " to begin work on the final design phase of the agreement. 4.02 Upon receipt of authorization to proceed with final design of the PROJECT, ENGINEER shall immediately prepare the final design including, but not limited to, the bid documents, contract, drawings, and specifications. ENGINEER shall assemble the agreement documents using CITY'S pre -approved form contract for the contract between CITY and contractor. The agreement documents shall include the design and specifications and other changes as required to fulfill the purpose of the PROJECT. CITY shall designate a representative to act as the contact person on behalf of CITY. 4.03 ENGINEER shall provide CITY with complete agreement documents sufficient to be advertised for bids by CITY. Upon completion of the final design of the PROJECT with the submission of the complete agreement documents, ENGINEER upon request of the CITY, shall meet with the City staff and City Council to make presentation of its final design of the PROJECT. ENGINEER shall provide an explanation of the final cost estimate. ENGINEER shall submit the final design to CITY not later than thirty (30) calendar days after the date of the Letter of Authorization to proceed with final design. The ENGINEER acknowledges the importance to the CITY of the CITY's project schedule and agrees to put forth reasonable efforts in performing the services with due diligence under this Agreement in a manner consistent with that schedule. The CITY understands, however, that the ENGINEER's performance must be governed by sound professional practices. ARTICLE V -- BIDDING PHASE 5.01 Should CITY elect to perform the work or any portion thereof, ENGINEER shall assist CITY in advertising for and obtaining bids or negotiating proposals for the construction of the PROJECT. Upon request ENGINEER shall meet with CITY staff and City Council to make a presentation and recommendation with regard to the bids submitted for the construction of the PROJECT. 5.02 ENGINEER shall review the contractors' bids including subcontractors, suppliers, and other persons required for the completion of the agreement and if requested give his professional opinion of each. 5.03 ENGINEER shall review the bids submitted with CITY, assist in the preparation of the bid tabulation sheet, and make recommendations to CITY with regard to the contractors, bids or proposals submitted. contract/smith-wt/022196 3 5.04 Where substitutions are requested by a contractor, ENGINEER shall review the substitution required and make recommendations for approval or disapproval of such substitutions. ARTICLE VI -- CONSTRUCTION PHASE 6.01 ENGINEER shall consult with CITY and act as its representative. 6.02 ENGINEER shall make visits to the site to observe as an experienced and qualified design professional, the progress and quality of the executed work of contractor and his subcontractors, and to determine if such work is proceeding in accordance with the agreement documents. 6.03 ENGINEER shall keep CITY informed of the progress of the work, shall endeavor to guard CITY against defects and deficiencies in such work, and may disapprove or reject work failing to conform with the agreement documents. 6.04 ENGINEER shall review and approve shop drawings and samples, the results of tests and inspections, and other data which each contractor is required to provide. 6.05 ENGINEER shall determine the acceptability of substitute materials and equipment proposed by contractor, and receive and review maintenance and operating instruction manuals, schedules, guarantees, and certificates of inspection, which are to be assembled by contractor in accordance with the agreement documents. 6.06 ENGINEER shall issue all instructions of CITY to contractor as well as interpretations and clarifications of the agreement documents pertaining to the performance of the work. 6.07 Based upon ENGINEER'S on -site observations and as an experienced and qualified design professional, and upon his review of applications of payment and the accompanying data and schedules, ENGINEER shall review the amounts owing to the contractor and recommend in writing payments to contractor in such amounts. The recommendation of payment by ENGINEER shall constitute a recommendation by ENGINEER to CITY based upon ENGINEER'S review of the progress of the work and that quality of such work is in general accordance with the agreement documents as ENGINEER has observed. 6.08 Upon notification from contractor that the PROJECT is substantially complete, ENGINEER shall observe the construction on the site to determine if the PROJECT is substantially complete. ENGINEER shall prepare a checklist of items which shall be completed prior to final acceptance. contract/smith-wt/022196 4 6.09 Upon notification by contractor that the items designated for completion have been completed, ENGINEER shall observe the PROJECT to verify final completion. 6.10 ENGINEER shall not be responsible for the work of the contractor or any of his subcontractors, except this provision shall not alter the ENGINEER'S duties to CITY arising from the performance of ENGINEER'S obligations. 6.11 ENGINEER shall conduct at least one observation during the warranty period and shall report to CITY as to the continued acceptability of the work. 6.12 ENGINEER shall not execute change orders on behalf of CITY or otherwise alter the financial scope of the PROJECT without the authorization of CITY. ARTICLE VII -- COMPENSATION 7.01 CITY agrees to pay ENGINEER for all professional services rendered under this Agreement. ENGINEER shall be paid a fee based on the rates of compensation as evidence in the attached "Exhibit B". On or before the 30th day of each month, the ENGINEER shall prepare and submit to the CITY for approval or modification, a statement showing as completely as practicable, the total value of the work done by the ENGINEER based on the ENGINEER's estimate of the percentage of completion as approved by the CITY, up to and including the last day of the preceding month. CITY shall then pay ENGINEER on or before the 10th day of the following month the total amount of the statement as approved by CITY. ENGINEER shall submit requests for payment based on work performed. In no event shall CITY pay for services not yet performed. Total cost of the consulting services shall not exceed the total amount specified in the attached Exhibit "B". ARTICLE Vill -- WARRANTY 8.01 ENGINEER warrants the information provided, as an experienced and qualified professional engineer, reflects the current standard, procedures, and performances of the industry for this project. ENGINEER warrants the design preparation of drawings, the designation or selection of materials and equipment, the selection and supervision of personnel and the performance of other services pursuant to the agreement, pursuant to the highest standard of performance in the profession. ARTICLE IX -- INDEMNIFICATION 9.01 The ENGINEER agrees, to the fullest extent permitted by law, to indemnify and hold the CITY harmless from any damage, liability or cost (including reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of defense) to the extent caused by the ENGINEER's negligent acts, errors or omissions in the performance of professional services under this contract/smith-wt/022196 5 Agreement and those of his subconsuitants or anyone for whom the ENGINEER is legally liable. As required by the State, the ENGINEER is not obligated to indemnify the CITY in any manner whatsoever for the CITY's own negligence. ARTICLE X -- INSURANCE 10.01 ENGINEER shall procure and maintain at his sole cost and expense for the duration of the contract 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, representatives, volunteers, or employees. 10.02 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. 10.03 The ENGINEER shall include all subcontractors as additional insured under his policies or shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor. All coverage for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein. 10.04 Certificates of Insurance and endorsements shall be furnished to the CITY and approved by the CITY before work commences. All Certificates of Insurance shall meet the following requirements. All Certificates of Insurance shall be prepared and executed by the insurance company or its authorized agent, and shall contain provisions warranting the following: The company is licensed and admitted to do business in the State of Texas. 2. The insurance set forth by the insurance company are underwritten on forms which have been approved by the Texas State Board of Insurance or ISO. 3. Sets forth all endorsements and insurance coverage according to requirements and instructions contained herein. 4. Shall specifically set forth the notice of cancellation, termination, or change in coverage provisions to the City of Georgetown. In addition, the Certificates of Insurance shall state any original endorsements affecting coverage required by the section. contract/smith-wt/022196 6 10.05 The following standard insurance policies shall be required: 1. General Liability Policy 2. Automobile Liability Policy 3. Workers Compensation Policy 4. Professional Liability Policy 10.06 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 and are acceptable only on a per claim basis for property damage only. A deductible is acceptable for Professional Liability and the deductible limits shall not exceed Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00). 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. 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 be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, cancelled, or reduced in coverage or in limits 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. 10.07 The following commercial General Liability will be required: contract/smith-wt/022196 7 A. Minimum combined Single Limit of $600,000 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. 10.08 The following Automobile Liability will be required: 1. Minimum Combined Single Limit of $600,000 per occurrence for Bodily Injury and Property Damage. 2. The Business Auto Policy must show Symbol 1 in the Covered Autos Portion of the liability section in Item 2 of the declarations page. 10.09 The following Professional Liability will be required: 1. Minimum of $250,000 per occurrence and $250,000 aggregate. 2. Coverage must be maintained for two (2) years after the termination of this contract 10.10 The following Workers' Compensation will be required: 1. Employer's Liability limits of $100,000 for each accident is required. 2. Texas Waiver of Our Right to Recover From Others Endorsements, W 42 03 04 shall be included in this policy. 3. Texas must appear in Item 3A o 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 XI -- NON -ASSIGNMENT CLAUSE 11.01 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 contract/smith-wt/022196 $ the ENGINEER from employing such independent associates and consultants as the ENGINEER may deem appropriate to assist in the performance of services hereunder. 11.02 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 XII -- MISCELLANEOUS CLAUSES 12.01 Termination for convenience. CITY may at any time terminate the PROJECT for convenience. At such time CITY shall notify ENGINEER who shall cease work immediately. ENGINEER shall be compensated for the services performed. 12.02 Governing Law. This contract 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. 12.03 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: ENGINEER: City of Georgetown P.O. Box 490 Georgetown, TX 78627 Attn: City Manager City Attorney Phone: (512) 930-3652 Fax: (512) 930-3659 Smith -Western Engineering, Inc. 2404 Williams Dr. Georgetown, TX 78628 Phone: (512) 869-1168 Fax: (512) 869-0923 Addresses and telecopy numbers for notices required under this Agreement may be modified as needed by giving notice as required in this paragraph. 12.04 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. contract/smith-wt/022196 9 12.05 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 by the ENGINEER to any individual or organization without prior written approval of the CITY. 12.06 Ownership of Documents. CITY shall have title and ownership of all documents, publications, brochures, reports, data, in any form or media, produced by the ENGINEER pursuant to this project. All such works shall be deemed works -for -hire. CITY shall have sole ownership of all copyright interest in any documents produced by ENGINEER pursuant to this Agreement, to the extent that any such documents may be copyrighted. 12.07 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. 12.08 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. 12.09 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. 12.10 Exhibits. All exhibits attached to this Agreement are incorporated by reference and expressly made part of this Agreement as if copied verbatim. 12.11 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. 12.12 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. 12.13 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 ENGINEER, respectively. Executed this the day of , 1996 contract/smith-wt/022196 10 CITY OF GEORGETOWN A Leo Wood, Mayor Attest: Sandra D. Lee, City Secretary Approved as to form: Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney ENGINEER is Phil Smith, President Attest: Corporate Secretary Approved as to form: Corporate Counsel STATE OF TEXAS ) CORPORATE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of , 1996, by Phil Smith, a person known to me, in his capacity as President of Smith -Western Engineering, Inc., a Texas corporation, on behalf of said corporation. Notary Public in and for the State of TEXAS contract/smith-wt/022196 11 DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES The ENGINEER will serve as the CITY' S professional consultant in those phases of the PROJECT to which this AGREEN E'NT applies, and will give consultation, advice, and recommendations to the CITY during the performance of the ENGINEER'S services. The ENGINEER shall perform his obligations under this contract as follows: 1. Preliminary Design a) Review pertinent project data including, but not be limited to, previous construction plans, topographic map, tax map, drainage report and hydrologic calculations. b) Perform field reconnaissance's to identify existing site conditions. c) Compute 25 and 100 Year peak discharges draining to the point of improvements. This task will include drainage area boundary determination, time of concentration calculations and runoff coefficients development. If the drainage area is larger than 100 acres, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers BEC-1 program or the Soil Conservation Services TR 20 model will be utilized to develop the peak flow data. d) Develop survey requirements for the preliminary study. e) Research existing utilities and depict existing utilities on base maps. i Based on items (c) through (e), develop solution(s) to mitigate the drainage/flooding problems. g) Develop exhibits and figures to depict the overall drainage plan as well as proposed improvements layout and details. h) Prepare preliminary engineering report and the development of probable construction cost. i) Coordinate with City of Georgetown (C.O.G.) staff. This task will also include addressing C.O.G. review comments. 2. Final Design a) Develop survey requirements for the final design phase. b) Develop final construction plans which includes: i) Cover Sheet ii) General and Special Construction Notes iii) Erosion/Sedimentation Control Plan iv) Traffic Control Plan v) and 100 Year Storms Master Drainage Plan vi) Improvement Plan and Profile vii) Construction Details c) Prepare project manual and bid documents. d) Prepare opinion of probable construction cost for the proposed improvements. e) Address review comments by C.O.G. staff 3. Bidding Assistance a) Assist city in advertising for and obtaining bids. b) Review Contractors' bids and provide opinions. c) Assist in preparation of bid tabulations and make recommendations for approval or disapproval. 4. Construction Administration a) Perform periodic construction observations (once every two weeks). b) Consult on construction issues and review shop drawings as necessary. c) Review pay estimates. EXHIBIT "B" FEE SCHEDULE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING PHASE $12,320 FINAL DESIGN PHASE $14,780 BIDDING PHASE $600 CONSTRUCTION PHASE $5,550 TOTAL PROJECT FEE $339250 EXHIBIT "C" SCHEDULE OF CHARGES A. HOURLY RATES PROJECT MANAGER $75.00 DESIGN ENGINEER $75.00 GRADUATE ENGINEER $50.00 SENIOR TECHNICIAN $45.00 TECHNICIAN $30.00 CLERICAL $25.00 SURVEY CREW $70.00 SURVEY OFFICE WORK $45.00 & EXPENSES REPRODUCTION AND MATERIALS COST + 10% TRAVEL .29/MILE Council Meeting Date: February 27, 1996 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Consider the award of a contract to Dorsey Construction in the amount of $44,000.00 to provide construction management services for the City Offices remodeling project. ITEM SUMMARY Staff is requesting authorization to enter into a contract with Dorsey Construction Company of Georgetown to provide construction management services for the City Offices remodeling project. Due to the expertise and time required to manage a project of this type, it was felt that a construction manager would be necessary. A construction manager will represent the City during construction and until final payment to all contractors is due; advise and consult concerning construction progress; oversee, schedule and coordinate the work of contractors; review applications for payment by contractors and make recommendations for payment; work closely with the City's project manager and architect for guidance; and work closely with the City on construction specifications and bidding of the project. Dorsey Construction is recommended as the construction manager for this project for several reasons: they are a local company who employees local workers, they have been in the construction business for fifteen years and have had experience coordinating multi -million dollar projects. Additionally, Dorsey has successfully completed several projects for the City and currently has another project under construction. Based on these considerations the staff felt that Dorsey offered the experience needed while maintaining the City Council's desire to utilize local contractors to the greatest extent possible. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS none FINANCIAL IMPACT (cost of item, fund and division name, budgeted amt.) Total cost for construction management of this project will not exceed $26,000.00. Fees will be paid for this project at a rate of $58.00 per hour. Additional expenses such as required insurance, testing, temporary site facilities and fencing, erosion control, dumpsters, periodic clean-up, final clean- up, temporary barricades, project signs, and blueprint reproduction costs will be reimbursed in an amount not to exceed $18,000.00. Funds were budgeted for this expenditure in account 500-405- 5602-40 Facilities Maintenance Building Construction. COMMENTS (from City Attorney, staff, boards and commissions) none ATTACHMENTS (list individually) 1. Contract Submitted By: Terry Jones, Purchasing Director Hartley Sappington, Director of Community Services THE STATE OF TEXAS § § PERSONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON § WITH DORSEY CONSTRUCTION § COMPANY. INC.. FOR CONSTRUCTION CITY OF GEORGETOWN § MANAGEMENT SERVICES This is an agreement entered into on this the day of February 1996, by and between the CITY OF GEORGETOWN, a Texas Home Rule Municipal Corporation, (hereinafter "CITY"), and Dorsey Construction Company, INC., a Texas Corporation, (hereinafter "DORSEY"), whereby DORSEY agrees to perform and CITY agrees to pay for construction management services related to the remodeling of the City Offices, as provided herein. 1. AGREEMENT The CITY agrees to employ DORSEY to provide professional construction management services for the CITY during the remodeling of the CITY OFFICES, as delineated in this Agreement (hereinafter "CITY OFFICES"). It is the understanding of the parties that the CITY desires to employ the personal services of DORSEY as a recognized construction specialist to provide for the coordination of the remodeling of the CITY OFFICES, as the CITY has insufficient staff to perform this task due to the limited time frame for construction. In order to provide the personal services for the performance of this Agreement, as specified, DORSEY agrees to designate Marvin Dorsey as the person from its firm who will serve as CONSTRUCTION MANAGER for the CITY OFFICES. All references in this Agreement to CONSTRUCTION MANAGER shall be deemed to include DORSEY as well, since CONSTRUCTION MANAGER shall be employed by DORSEY to supply the personal services required by the CITY for the completion of the CITY OFFICES under this agreement. DORSEY agrees that the CONSTRUCTION MANAGER shall be available to perform the required services and that said services shall be performed in a professional manner. 2. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FEES The CITY agrees to pay DORSEY a fee of $58.00 per hour for construction management services rendered in compliance with this Agreement and such fee shall not exceed $26, 000.00. Dorsey Construction Company Agreement Page 1 of 9 3. DIRECT REIMBURSABLE COSTS The CITY agrees to reimburse DORSEY for direct costs such as required insurance, testing, temporary_ site facilities and support, temporary fencing, erosion control, dumpsters, periodic clean-up,final clean-up, temporary barricades, project signs,blueprint reproduction costs, and related direct expenses, in an amount not to exceed $ 18,000.00. Reimbursement shall be made upon presentation of actual expense statements to the CITY, according to the payment terms in this Agreement. 4. DESIGNATION AND DUTIES OF PROJECT MANAGER The City Manager or his designee shall be the PROJECT MANAGER for the CITY. All communications concerning the CITY OFFICES REMODELING shall be directed to the PROJECT MANAGER. The PROJECT MANAGER shall authorize all payments to contractors upon recommendation from the CONSTRUCTION MANAGER, and shall provide any information that the CONSTRUCTION MANAGER needs to perform his duties under this Agreement. 5. AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED The CITY shall direct CONSTRUCTION MANAGER to commence work by sending to CONSTRUCTION MANAGER a written "letter of authorization" to DORSEY to begin work on the CITY OFFICES pursuant to this Agreement. Time is of the essence in this Agreement, due to the CITY's limited time frame for remodeling of the CITY OFFICES. Therefore, once DORSEY is released to perform the construction management duties under this Agreement, DORSEY shall ensure that the CONSTRUCTION MANAGER begins work immediately on the CITY OFFICES and continues to expeditiously perform the duties required under this Agreement, until such time as the CITY OFFICES is completed. The CITY's PROJECT MANAGER shall provide all support necessary for the CONSTRUCTION MANAGER to proceed rapidly as required by this Agreement. 6. DUTIES OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGER 6.1 DORSEY agrees to provide the CONSTRUCTION MANAGER to perform the following specific duties during the remodeling of the CITY OFFICES: a. Represent the CITY during construction and until final payment to all contractors is due; b. Advise and consult with the CITY concerning the construction and progress of the work; C. Oversee, schedule and coordinate the work of contractors; Dorsey Construction Company Agreement Page 2 of 9 d. Review applications for payment by contractors and making final recommendation to the CITY for certification for payment; e. Work closely with the CITY's PROJECT MANAGER and Architect for project guidance; f. Work closely with the City on construction specifications for bidding out to vendors; and g. Such other construction management duties as the CITY's PROJECT MANAGER shall order to be performed related to the remodeling of the CITY OFFICES. 6.2 In performing the duties stated above, CONSTRUCTION MANAGER shall consult with CITY and act as its representative. However, CONSTRUCTION MANAGER shall not be deemed to be an agent of the CITY, but shall operate solely as an independent contractor employed to provide the services described in this Agreement. 6.3 CONSTRUCTION MANAGER shall make visits to the site to observe as an experienced and qualified construction professional, the progress and quality of the executed work of the contractors, and to determine if such work is proceeding in accordance with the contract documents. 6.4 CONSTRUCTION MANAGER shall keep the CITY informed of the progress of the work, shall endeavor to guard the CITY against defects and deficiencies in such work, and may disapprove or reject work failing to conform with the contract documents, in consultation with the CITY's architect and PROJECT MANAGER. 6.5 Based upon CONSTRUCTION MANAGER's on -site observations and as an experienced and qualified construction professional, and upon his review of applications of payment and the accompanying data and schedules, CONSTRUCTION MANAGER shall determine the amounts owing to the contractors and provide written recommendations to the PROJECT MANAGER for payments to the contractors in such amounts. The recommendation of payment by CONSTRUCTION MANAGER shall constitute a recommendation by CONSTRUCTION MANAGER to CITY based upon CONSTRUCTION MANAGER's review of the progress of the work and that quality of such work is in accordance with the contract documents as CONSTRUCTION MANAGER has observed. 6.6 Upon notification from each contractor that their work on the CITY OFFICES is substantially complete, CONSTRUCTION MANAGER shall conduct an inspection of the site to determine if the contractor's work is substantially complete. CONSTRUCTION MANAGER shall prepare a checklist of items which shall be completed prior to final acceptance of that portion of the CITY OFFICES project by the CITY. 6.7 Upon notification from each contractor that the items designated for completion have been completed, CONSTRUCTION MANAGER shall inspect the Dorsey Construction Company Agreement Page 3 of 9 contractor's work to verify final completion. CONSTRUCTION MANAGER shall not be responsible for the work of any of the contractors, except this provision shall not alter the CONSTRUCTION MANAGER's duties to CITY arising from the performance of CONSTRUCTION MANAGER's obligations. 6.8 CONSTRUCTION MANAGER shall not execute change orders on behalf of CITY or otherwise alter the financial scope of the CITY OFFICES PROJECT without the written authorization of CITY. 6.9 CONSTRUCTION MANAGER shall issue all instructions of the CITY to the contractors as well as interpretations and clarifications of the contract documents pertaining to the performance of the work, upon consultation with the Architect and the PROJECT MANAGER. 7. METHOD OF PAYMENT DORSEY shall submit to CITY a statement for construction management services performed by the CONSTRUCTION MANAGER as rendered on a monthly basis, which statement shall be due and payable by CITY thirty (30) days after it is received by CITY. 8. WARRANTY DORSEY warrants the services provided under this Agreement, as an experienced and qualified construction manager, pursuant to the highest standard of performance in the construction industry. 9. INDEMNIFICATION 9.1 DORSEY agrees to and shall indemnify and hold harmless CITY, its officers, agents and employees, from and against any and all claims, losses, damages, causes of action, suits and liability of every kind, including all expenses of litigation, court costs, and attorney's fees, for injury to or death of any person, or for damage to any property, arising out of or in connection with the work done by DORSEY/CONSTRUCTION MANAGER under this contract. Such indemnity is intended by DORSEY to provide protection to the CITY to the maximum extent allowed by law. 9.2 DORSEY assumes full responsibility for the work to be performed hereunder, and hereby releases, relinquishes and discharges CITY, its officers, agents and employees, from all claims, demands, and causes of action of every kind and character including the cost of defense thereof, for any injury to, including death of person (whether they be third persons, contractors, or employees of either of the Dorsey Construction Company Agreement Page 4 of 9 parties hereto) and any loss of or damage to property (whether the same be that either of the parties hereto or of third parties or contractors) caused by or alleged to be caused, arising out of, or in connection with DORSEY'S work to be performed hereunder whether or not said claims, demands and causes of action in whole or in part are covered by insurance. 10. INSURANCE 10.1 DORSEY shall procure and maintain at his sole cost and expense for the duration of the contract 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 DORSEY, its agents, representatives, volunteers, or employees. DORSEY'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 EMBREE'S insurance and shall not contribute to it. Certificates of Insurance and endorsements shall be furnished to the CITY and approved by the CITY before work commences. The following standard insurance policies shall be required: 1. General Liability Policy 2. Automobile Liability Policy 3. Workers Compensation Policy 4. Builder's Risk Policy The following general requirements are applicable to all policies: 1. General Liability, Automobile Liability, and Builder's Risk insurance shall be written by a carver with an A:VIII or better rating in accordance with the current Best Key Rating Guide. 2. Only insurance carriers licensed and admitted to do business in the State of Texas will be accepted. 3. Deductibles shall be listed on the Certificate of Insurance and are acceptable only on a per occurrence basis for property damage only. A deductible is acceptable for Builder's Risk. 4. Claims Made Policies will not be accepted. Dorsey Construction Company Agreement Page 5 of 9 5. The City of Georgetown, its officials, employees, and volunteers, are to be added as "Additional Insureds" to the General Liability, Automobile Liability and Builders Risk policies. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the CITY, its officials, employees, or volunteers. 6. A Waiver of Subrogation in favor of the City of Georgetown with respect to Worker's Compensation insurance must be included. 7. Each insurance policy shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, cancelled, or reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City of Georgetown. 8. Upon request, certified copies of all insurance policies shall be furnished to the City of Georgetown. The following commercial General Liability will be required: 1. Minimum combined Single Limit of $1,000,000 per occurrence for Bodily Injury and Property Damage. 2. Coverage shall be at least as broad as Insurance Service's Office form number CG 00 01. 3. No coverage shall be deleted from the standard policy without notification of individual exclusions being attached for review and acceptance. The following Automobile Liability will be required: 1. Minimum Combined Single Limit of $1,000,000 per occurrence for Bodily Injury and Property Damage. 2. The Business Auto Policy must show Symbol 1 in the Covered Autos Portion of the liability section in Item 2 of the declarations page. The following Workers' Compensation will be required: 1. Employer's Liability limits of $100,000 for each accident is required. 2. Texas Waiver of Our Right to Recover From Others Endorsements, W 42 03 04 shall be included in this policy. Dorsey Construction Company Agreement Page 6 of 9 3. Texas must appear in Item A o the Workers' Compensation coverage or Item C must contain the following: all States except those listed in Items A and the States of NV, ND, OH, WA, WV, WY. The following Builder's Risk Insurance will be required: Minimum of total project cost, with $1,000 per occurrence deductible. 2. Coverage must be maintained for until completion of the project and acceptance by the City. The following Certificates of Insurance will be required: 1. Certificates of Insurance shall be prepared and executed by the insurance company or its authorized agent, and shall contain provisions and warranting he following: a. The company is licensed and admitted to do business in the State of Texas. b. 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. C. Sets forth all endorsements and insurance coverage according to requirements and instructions contained herein. d. Shall specifically set forth the notice of cancellation, termination, or change in coverage provisions to the City of Georgetown. e. Original endorsements affecting coverage required by this section shall be furnished with the certificates of insurance. 11. CHANGES IN WORK If the scope of work of the project is changed and additional work is required of DORCON, DORCON shall be entitled to direct reimbursable costs and an increase in the professional services fee, but in no event can such amount exceed $ Dorsey Construction Company Agreement Page 7 of 9 12. ASSIGNMENT Due to the nature of the personal services to be provided under this Agreement, this Agreement shall not be assignable. If at any time during the term of this Agreement the CITY should be dissatisfied with the performance of the CONSTRUCTION MANAGER, or for whatever reason the CONSTRUCTION MANAGER is unable to fulfill his responsibilities, DORSEY shall either immediately provide another person to perform the duties required under this Agreement that is acceptable to the CITY, or the CITY shall have the option to terminate this Agreement for cause. 13. TERMINATION The CITY may at any time terminate the CITY OFFICES REMODELING PROJECT for convenience. At such time CITY shall notify CONSTRUCTION MANAGER who shall cease work immediately. CONSTRUCTION MANAGER shall be compensated for the services performed prior to the notice to cease work. 14. GOVERNING LAW AND PLACE FOR PERFORMANCE This contract has been made under and shall be governed by the laws of the State of Texas. The parties agree that this Agreement is performable soley in Williamson County, Texas. 15. NOTICES Notices shall be mailed to the addresses designated herein or as may be designated in writing by the parties from time to time. CITY: City Manager City of Georgetown P.O. Box 409 Georgetown, TX 78627 16. WAIVER DORSEY/CONSTRUCTION MANAGER: Marvin Dorsey DORSEY CONSTRUCTION, INC. P.O. Box 314 Georgetown, Texas 78627 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. Dorsey Construction Company Agreement Page 8 of 9 17. AMENDMENT This agreement may only be amended in writing and approved and executed by both parties. SIGNED THIS DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1996. THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN Leo Wood, Mayor ATTEST: Sandra D. Lee, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: Marianne Landers Banks, City Attorney STATE OF TEXAS ) COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON ) DORSEY CONSRUCTION COMPANY Marvin Dorsey, President CORPORATE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of February, 1996, by MARVIN DORSEY, in his capacity as President of DORSEY CONSTRUCTION, INC., a Texas Corporation, on behalf of said corporation. Notary Public in and for the State of T E X A S Dorsey Construction Company Agreement Page 9 of 9 Council Meeting Date: February 27, 1996 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Consider authorizing staff to negotiate a contract with White, Dolce & Barr for the design of the Sun City Fire Station. ITEM SUMMARY A request for an architect firm to design a fire station in the Sun City Georgetown project was formulated. Criteria in the proposal were selected from ideas submitted by fire Department personnel, NFPA standards, sub -division regulations of the City of Georgetown, and the City Detail Development Plan. Staff received six proposals from firms interested in the project. A committee consisting of the Fire Chief, Fire Captain, Building Official, Fire Marshall, Purchasing Director, and the Community Owned Utilities Director evaluated the proposals and determined that all of the firms were qualified to design the building, however three of the firms demonstrated outstanding qualifications. We invited the following companies for interviews and presentations to the committee, White, Dolce & Barr, Opus 3, and RTG Partners. White, Dolce & Barr and Opus 3 have previous experience in fire station design, while RTG Partners, which has no experience designing fire stations, is currently working with the Del Webb Corporation on the Sun City project. After a thorough review of all proposals, the architect selection committee recommendation is to utilize the firm of White, Dolce & Barr for the design of the Sun City fire station. During the interviews and presentations by each firm, they were asked to respond to a series of questions drafted by the committee. These questions were formulated to allow each firm the opportunity to show their expertise in fire station design, information about their respective firms and the commitment their companies would bring with them to the project. The consensus of the committee was that White, Dolce & Barr was the first choice of the firms interviewed. Staff felt that they would give us the personal attention required for a timely and successful design. They are a small firm that appears to be dedicated to maintaining a good reputation and to the satisfaction of their customers. White, Dolce & Ban- was well prepared for the interview, bringing the team which would be working on the project. Every member of the White, Dolce & Barr team took part in the presentation. The committee agreed that the next step should be to make site visits of work completed by White, Dolce & Ban-. A site visit of two fire stations in Austin designed by White, Dolce & Barr was arranged, along with a visit to their offices. Ron Davies of the City of Austin accompanied us during our visits to the two stations. Mr. Davies complimented them on the design process as well as their commitment to the job. He commented that Alan Barr (project manager) maintained constant contact during the design process and construction to ensure the City of Austin received the best product possible. We visited the offices of White, Dolce & Ban- and were able to view plans of the buildings we had inspected. The plans and specifications were well detailed and thorough, showing a dedication to performing a complete job with minimal changes. After the visits we were left with the impression that the architect had a good understanding of the customer's needs as well as the ability to translate those needs into plans and specifications. SPECIAL CONSIDERATION none FINANCIAL IMPACT (cost of item, fund and division name, budgeted amt.) $80,000.00 was appropriated in account 120-000-6700-00 Sun City Fire Station. Expenses for this work will not exceed the amount budgeted. COMMENTS (from City Attorney, staff, boards and commissions) none ATTACHMENTS (list individually) none Submitted By: = i 14erry Jones, Purchasing Director JL-Bill Shanklin, Director of Fire Services Council meeting date: 2-27-96 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Authorization for the Mayor to execute an agreement for professional grant management services with the Institute for Finance and Economic Development on behalf of Advanced Cable Systems, L. P. ITEM SUMMARY As you recall, the City received a Texas Capital Fund Grant under the Real Estate Loan Program for the construction of a building for locally -owned and managed company, Advanced Cable Systems. This program is identical to the process for Sierra Microwave Technology, Inc. This agreement is to permit the Institute for Finance and Economic Development to provide the grant administration services. This firm is recommended following the results of a Request for Proposals. This firm is one of the few firms in the State that specializes in economic development grant programs. The Institute has also provided administrative services for other grant programs here at the City, including: Sierra Microwave, Poly Resource Recycling, and Reedholm. FINANCIAL IMPACT The cost of administrative services will be paid for with the State grant funds. There is no cost to the City. ATTACHMENTS 1. Agreement for Professional Grant Management Services for Advanced Cable Systems, L.P. ubmi Bob Hart, City Manager THE STATE OF TEXAS CITY OF GEORGETOWN COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON ) AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL GRANT CITY OF GEORGETOWN ) MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR ADVANCED CABLE SYSTEMS, L.P. This is an agreement by and between the CITY of Georgetown, a Texas Home Rule Municipal Corporation (hereinafter "CITY") and The Institute for Finance and Economic Development Corporation, a Sub-S Corporation incorporated in the State of Texas (hereinafter "INSTITUTE") for professional grant management services for Advanced Cable Systems, L.P. 1. AGREEMENT A. The CITY agrees to: 1) employ INSTITUTE to provide professional grant management services; 2) provide INSTITUTE with reasonable access to all CITY codes and ordinances; 3) assign the staff accountant of the City's Accounting Department as the designated contact employee for all matters pertaining to this award. B. The INSTITUTE agrees to: 1) provide professional grant management services; 2) become knowledgeable of the City's codes and ordinances prior to performing any services under this Agreement; 3) abide by Title 1 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended and of the corresponding Community Development Block Grant final and all applicable CITY ordinances and State and Federal laws. The INSTITUTE specifically agrees to the items listed in Exhibit B incorporated herein. Exhibit B is not meant to limit INSTITUTE'S responsibility to abide by all federal, state and local laws, regulations or rules. 2. SCOPE OF SERVICES The INSTITUTE will: A. Assist the City to strengthen local capacity building; B. Work one on one (on -site project implementation) with the City's staff, the private business to be assisted, the architect, the engineer, the contractors, the consultants and the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs representatives throughout the contract period to discuss program guidelines and project implementation as provided for in this agreement and as more fully described in the attached Exhibit "A" which is incorporated herein; C. Fill out and file Performance assessment reports in a timely manner; D. Submit close-out documents in accordance with program guidelines; E. Notify the City immediately of any problems that arise during the progress of Institute Agreement for Advanced Cable Systems, L.P. Page 1 of 18 d:\contract\advcable\022 l 96.dft the project; F. Provide suggested solutions to any identified problems that arise during the progress of the project; G. Attach a cover sheet from the City to any document that is sent to the State; H. Coordinate all aspects of the project in a timely manner with the City's designated contact employee; 3. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FEES The CITY agrees to pay INSTITUTE a total of $33,250.00 of the administrative funds from the State of Texas for the services described above. Administrative funds are those identified in the Texas Department of Commerce (hereinafter "TDOC") Contract with the City of Georgetown. Payments shall be made as billed by INSTITUTE. The INSTITUTE understands that the CITY cannot contract for services in excess of a cumulative total of $15,000.00 without the express written approval of the CITY Council, in accordance with the Georgetown City Charter. 4. TERM OF AGREEMENT This Agreement shall be effective January 23, 1996 and shall remain in effect until the closure of the grant by the State. 5. TERMINATION This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon thirty (30) days written notice, delivered to the addresses identified in this Agreement. If the CITY should terminate the Agreement, all work in connection with the performance of this agreement shall be discontinued immediately. INSTITUTE shall submit an invoice and the CITY shall pay the INSTITUTE the fees for all work actually performed under this Agreement, less all payments that have been previously made. If INSTITUTE should terminate the Agreement, INSTITUTE shall remain responsible for performing the services requested by the CITY until the expiration of the thirty -day period, or at some earlier date upon written agreement of the CITY. 6. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR INSTITUTE is an Independent Contractor and shall be responsible for the final product contemplated under this agreement. INSTITUTE shall give personal attention to the faithful prosecution and completion of this agreement and shall keep all records on the project during its progress. Institute Agreement for Advanced Cable Systems, L.P. Page 2 of 18 d:\contract\advcab 16022196. dft 7.. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS CITY shall have exclusive title and ownership of all documents, publications, brochures, reports, data, and any supporting data, in any form or media, produced by the INSTITUTE pursuant to this project. All such works shall be deemed works -for -hire and shall be delivered to the CITY prior to the termination of this agreement. These works may only be used by the INSTITUTE for the performance of the INSTITUTE's services under this agreement. CITY shall have sole ownership of all copyright interest in any documents produced by INSTITUTE pursuant to this Agreement, to the extent that any such documents may be copyrighted. 8. CONFIDENTIAL WORK Any reports, information, project evaluation, project designs, data, or other documentation developed by INSTITUTE hereunder given to or prepared by or assembled by the INSTITUTE will not be made available to any individual or organization by the INSTITUTE without prior written approval of the CITY. 9. CONFLICT OF INTEREST INSTITUTE covenants that during the contract period neither INSTITUTE nor any of its associates or employees, will have any interest or shall not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, which will conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the services to be performed under this contract. INSTITUTE further agrees that none of its paid personnel shall be employees of the CITY or have any contractual relationship with the CITY. All activities, investigations, and other efforts made by INSTITUTE pursuant to this contract shall be conducted by employees, associates, or independent contractors of INSTITUTE. INSTITUTE further understands and agrees that the Charter of the City of Georgetown prohibits any officer or employee of the CITY from having any financial interest, direct or indirect, or any contract with the CITY outside of employment. Any violation of this paragraph with knowledge, expressed or implied, by INSTITUTE shall render this contract voidable by the City Manager of the City of Georgetown or the City Council. 10. INDEMNIFICATION INSTITUTE agrees to and shall indemnify and hold harmless CITY, its officers, agents and employees, from and against any and all claims, losses, damages, causes of action, suites and liability of every kind, including all expenses of litigation, court costs, and attorney's fees, for injury to or death of any person or for damage to any property, arising out of or in connection with the work done by INSTITUTE under this agreement, such indemnity shall apply whether the claims, losses, damages, causes of action, suites of liability arise in whole or in part from the negligence of CITY. Institute Agreement for Advanced Cable Systems, L.P. Page 3 of 18 d:\contract\advcab 16022196. dft INSTITUTE assumes full responsibility for the work to be performed hereunder, and hereby releases, relinquishes and discharges CITY, its officers, agents and employees, from all claims, demands, and causes of action of every kind and character including the cost of defense thereof, for any injury to, including death of, person (whether they be third persons, contractor, or employees of either of the parties hereto) and any loss of or damage to property (whether the same be that either of the parties hereto or of third parties) caused by or alleged to be caused by, arising out of, or in connection with INSTITUTES' work to be performed hereunder whether or not said claims, demands and causes of action in whole or in part are covered by insurance regardless of whether such loss, damage, or injury was caused by CITY. CITY, by this agreement does not give consent to litigation. 11. WARRANTY INSTITUTE, its employees, agents and associates warrant that its performance under this Agreement shall be of the highest quality and standards for the industry. Approval of the City should not be, constitute, or be deemed a release of the responsibility and liability of the INSTITUTE, its employees, agents, or associates, for the exercise of skill and diligence to promote the accuracy and competency of the INSTITUTE's work on this project, nor shall approval be deemed to be the assumption of such responsibility by the CITY with respect to any defect or error in the INSTITUTE's work. 12. NOTICE Notice as required by this contract shall be delivered in writing to the parties at the following locations: CITY: INSTITUTE: Laurie Brewer Linda Dane Division of Finance The Institute for Finance & Economic Development P.O. Box 409 Corporation Georgetown, Texas 78627 16226 Remuda Trail Buda, TX 78610 13. AMENDMENTS This agreement contains the entire understanding of the parties. No amendment will be effective except as evidenced in writing and signed by all parties. 14. PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT The parties agree that all acts required to be performed under this Agreement are performable solely in Williamson County, Texas. Institute Agreement for Advanced Cable Systems, L.P. Page 4 of 18 d Acontract\advcable\022196.dft SIGNED THIS day of , 1996. CITY OF GEORGETOWN THE INSTITUTE FOR FINANCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION Leo Wood, Mayor Attest: Sandra D. Lee, City Secretary Approved: Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON Linda Dane, President § ACKNOWLEDGMENT This instrument was acknowledged before me on the day of , 19961, by Linda Dane in her capacity as President of The Institute for Finance and Economic Development Corporation, a Texas corporation. Notary Public in and for the State of Texas Institute Agreement for Advanced Cable Systems, L.P. Page 5 of 18 d Acontract\advcab1e\022196.dft EXHIBIT A ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES In addition to the responsibilities delineated in the attached agreement, the Institute agrees to the following scope of work: 1. General Requirements a) Provide all documents as needed by the City's designated contact person in a timely manner. b) Notify City's designated contact person well in advance of time, nature and purpose of meeting with state agency or consultants. c) Timely submit all documents as needed for the City Attorney to prepare loan agreements, lease agreements, construction documents required by the City, State or Federal law. 2. Project Management a) Establish a records maintenance and retention system, which will be maintained by INSTITUTE, including at least the files listed below. These files may be maintained off -site; however, INSTITUTE shall deliver files to the City within 24 hours of request. 1) Job creation/retention file which also document low and moderate income beneficiaries. 2) Environmental Assessment file. 3) Property management file. 4) Acquisition file including Uniform Act documentation. 5) Equal Opportunity file. 6) Contracts/Procurement file for consultant, accounting firm, contractor, independent appraiser. 7) Labor Standards file. 8) Monitoring file. Institute Agreement for Advanced Cable Systems, L.P. Page 6 of 18 d : \contract\advcab1e\022196. dft 9) Correspondence file. 10) Quarterly reports file. 11) Financial Management file. b) Adequately protect all files from theft, fire, etc. c) Only remove files once they have been signed out with the City. d) Provide status of grant on weekly basis, including pertinent meetings with contractors, consultants and state agencies. e) Establish and maintain a file related to benefit of low/moderate income persons from contract activities. f) Review all sections of the Texas Department of Commerce (hereinafter TDOC) contract for accuracy. g) Address and clear all applicable TDOC contract special conditions. h) Review the City's designated depository/authorization signature form and submit to the City for their review, execution and submission to TDOC. i) Prepare and maintain all project reporting requirements, including but not limited to: 1) Quarterly Progress Reports 2) Financial Reports 3) Compliance Reports (MBE, Labor Compliance, etc.) j) Assist the City with preparation of Budget/Program Amendments and determine the effects of amendments on previously completed required documents. k) Assist City in complying with Uniform Act requirements 3. Financial Management a) Establish and maintain financial records consisting of registers, journals, and ledgers. Institute Agreement for Advanced Cable Systems, L.P. Page 7 of 18 d Acontract\advcable\022196. dit b) Organize and maintain financial files. c) Maintain the City's TDOC accounting operations. 1) Prepare draw down requests for execution by the City in a timely manner. At no time shall the Institute hold a reimbursement request of greater than $10,000 for more than 30 days unless authorized to do so by the City. Copies of draw down requests shall be submitted to City contact person immediately upon submission to State. 2) Review invoices for payment and file backup documentation and submit to the City for review. 3) Enter transactions in bookkeeping records. 4) Reconcile banks statements, if separate bank account for project is maintained. 5) Prepare financial reports. d) Maintain property management and control records. e) Assist the City with establishing procedures to handle the use of TDOC program income, if applicable. f) Make certain all funds are received and disbursed according to State and Federal guidelines. 4. Environmental Review a) Establish and maintain environmental review file records (Section 20 of the TDOC contract). b) Review for compliance environmental assessment done by Environmental Certifying Officer. c) Coordinate activities with those of any other federal or state agency responsible for implementing applicable environmental laws. d) Maintain documentation, at a minimum, of the survey, legal description, recording and transfer of title for each parcel of real property acquired. e) Maintain appropriate acquisition records for each parcel acquired. Institute Agreement for Advanced Cable Systems, L.P. Page 8 of 18 d: \con tract\ad v c ab 1 e\02 2196. d ft 5. Acquisition a) Determine what category/type of acquisition is required for the TDOC project. b) Maintain documentation of ownership on file for the City owned property and/or rights -of -way. c) Maintain a separate acquisition file for each parcel of real property acquired. d) Maintain documentation, at a minimum, of the survey, legal description, recording and transfer of title for each parcel of real property acquired. e) Maintain appropriate acquisition records for each parcel acquired. f) If acquisition requires donation procedures and the uniform act is applicable, the following will be accomplished: 1) Prepare for distribution and document file with the preliminary acquisition notices. 2) Document file regarding evidence of receipt of the notices. 3) Assist the City with the procurement services of a qualified independent appraiser to prepare appraisal which establishes fair market value and document file. 4) Invite owner to accompany the appraiser and document file unless the owner of the property has released the City from obtaining an appraisal. 5) Review the appraisal report format if an appraisal is required. 6) Prepare notice to the property owner in writing to establish just compensation for donated property prior to the actual donation. 7) Prepare a release for all property owners who voluntarily donated property to the City, a signed waiver of uniform act rights and benefits. 8) Prepare for purchase and payment, including provision of the purchase and receipt of payment, proof of recording of deed, provision of owner with statement of his/her rights under the uniform act, and preparation and distribution of written notices and determinations not to purchase if Institute Agreement for Advanced Cable Systems, L.P. Page 9 of 18 d: \contract\ ad v cab 1 e\022196. d R the City determines not to acquire the property. 9) Address and document file all appeals related to acquisition matters, if applicable. (g) If acquisition requires donation procedures and involves the use of a internal valuation process, the following will be accomplished: 1) Establish a straightforward written method for an internal valuation process that can be applied fairly, equitable and consistently to all portions of property needed for the TCDP project that establishes fair market value of all affected properties. 2) Obtain information for each property needed from the appropriate tax appraisal district regarding the most recent valuation of same. 3) Prepare letters inviting donations of permanent easements and rights -of - way from property owners which included a description of the need for the property, a clear statement regarding benefits of the project to the individual and the City, and accurate drawn rendering, and statement to appraise property at fair market value and to offer just compensation at the owner's request, statement that the property owner is not obligated to donate the property. 4) Provide for provisions for appropriate and documented responses of property owners. 5) Prepare release to donate the property for the property owner and a waiver of rights concerning the property via the execution of agreement to donate real property to a public agency. h) If acquisition requires voluntary procedures, the following must be accomplished: 1) Prepare for publication a public solicitation notice prior to any voluntary acquisition activities which explains that unless the City and property owner reach mutually agreeable terms and conditions on the sale, the City could not otherwise acquire such Property. 2) Assist the City in negotiation with property owners that voluntarily propose to sell such property to reach mutually acceptable terms and conditions of sale. Institute Agreement for Advanced Cable Systems, L.P. Page 10 of 18 d: \contract\advcable\022196. dft 6. EqualOpportuni1y a) Assist the City with compliance with applicable federal and state laws, orders and regulations related to fair housing and equal employment opportunity. b) Assist the City with incorporating, implementing and documenting activities which ensure that the City is affirmatively furthering fair housing. c) Assist the City with incorporating, implementing and documenting compliance with applicable equal employment opportunity provisions. 1) Personnel policies and practices; 2) Affirmative Action Plan/Section 3; 3) Complaint procedures. d) Monitor the business to be assisted with TCDP funds to ensure that required non-discriminatory and equal opportunity regulations have been followed. e) Monitor the construction contractor to ensure that required non-discriminatory and equal opportunity regulations have been followed. 1) Check for inclusion of all applicable equal opportunity provisions and certifications in bid packet; 2) Section 3 Plan/Affirmative Action Plan; 3) Monthly Utilization Report. f) Maintain central records and compliance with reporting requirements. 1) Monthly Utilization Report (if construction completed using force account labor). 2) Minority Business Enterprise Report. 3) Record of all final project beneficiaries by ethnicity and gender. 4) Private Business Employment Report. Institute Agreement for Advanced Cable Systems, L.P. Page 11 of 18 d:\contract\advcab1e\022196.dft 7. Contracts/Procurement a) Establish, maintain general procurement procedures that satisfy the objectives contained in OMB Circular A-1025 Attachment O. 1) Maintain record keeping/compliance documentation; 2) Assist the City with establishing contract administrative procedures to verify financial contractual and programmatic compliance. 8. Labor Standards Project Construction through the Bid/Contract Process a) Accomplish remaining environmental clearance requirements and assist the City or the engineer with clearance of all other special contract conditions. b) Assist the City with the appointment of local labor standards compliance officer and submit copy of same to TDOC and perform those duties, if so designated. c) Completion of all acquisition of real property; easements; rights -of -way needed for the project. d) Prepare notice of contract award and pre -construction conference. e) Hold pre -construction conference and prepare copy of report/minutes, submittal of same to TDOC. f) Submittal or reports of additional classification and rates (if applicable). g) Accomplish review of weekly payroll records and statements of compliance, including enforcement of compliance activities. h) Review and processing of progress payments. i) Review certificate of construction completion and issuance of clear lien certificate and document files. 9. Job Creation/Retention a) Provide the business to be assisted with TCDP funds with documents to facilitate job reporting to the City. Institute Agreement for Advanced Cable Systems, L.P. Page 12 of 18 d:\contract\advcab1e\022196.dft b) Contact the business to be assisted with TCDP funds to obtain data to prepare quarterly Private Business Employment Reports to TDOC. c) Prepare quarterly TDOC Private Business Employment Reports. d) Submittal of quarterly Private Business Employment Reports to TDOC. e) Monitor Corporation's progress for compliance with its hiring plan and goals. f) Obtain documents from Corporations to monitor Corporation's Commitment to the Jobs Training and Partnership Act (JTPA), if any. 10. Audit/Close-out Procedures a) Prepare the final project completion report, including description of all TCDP contract activities, LMI beneficiaries documented, and a final MBE report and a summary monthly employment utilization report. b) Prepare the City's responses to any monitoring fundings to TDOC that relate to this project. c) Prepare the Certificate of Completion and submit to the City for review and submission to TDOC. d) If applicable, assist the City with resolving any third -party claims against the project. e) If applicable, prepare a revised Certificate of Completion and submit to the City for review and submission to TDOC following the resolution of any third - party claims. f) Assist the City with a notice to TDOC within 30 days of the contract end date of the City's intent to secure audit services. g) Assist the City in the procurement of the services of a qualified and independent auditor, if necessary. h) Provide the auditor with copies of TCDP audit guidelines. i) Discuss with the auditor the obtaining of a Federal Cognizant Agency. j) Make all records available to the auditor. . Institute Agreement for Advanced Cable Systems, L.P. Page 13 of 18 d: \contract\ad v cab 1 e\022196. d ft k) Submit three copies of the audit report to TDOC, within 30 days of completion of the audit. 1) Resolve all audit findings, if applicable. m) Prepare for processing final payment/draw downs. n) Return all project files to the City in a timely manner. Institute Agreement for Advanced Cable Systems, L.P. Page 14 of 18 d: \con tract\ad v cab 1 e\022196. d ft EXHIBIT B FEDERAL LAWS The Institute agrees to but is not limited to the following: SECTION ONE Equal Employment Opportunity. During the performance of this Agreement, The Institute agrees as follows: a) The Institute will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, creed, sex, color or national origin. b) The Institute will, in all solicitation or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf of The Institute, state that all qualified applicants will received consideration for employment without regard to race, creed, color, sex, or national origin. c) The Institute will cause the foregoing provisions to be inserted in all subcontracts for any work covered by this Agreement so that such provisions will be binding upon each subcontractor, provided that the foregoing provisions shall not apply to contract or subcontracts for standard commercial supplies or raw materials. d) The Institute will comply with all provisions of Executive Order 11245 of September 24, 1965, and of the rules, regulations and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor. e) The Institute will furnish all information and reports required by Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and by the rules, regulations and order of the Secretary of Labor, or pursuant thereto, and will permit access to its books, records, and accounts by the City's auditor and the Secretary of Labor for purposes of investigation to ascertain compliance with such rules, regulations and orders. f) In the event of The Institute's non-compliance with the non-compliance clauses of this Agreement or with any of such rules, regulations or orders, this Agreement may be canceled, terminated, or suspended in whole or in part and The Institute may be declared ineligible for further government contracts in accordance with procedures authorized in Executive Order 1124 of September 24, 1965, and such other sanctions may be imposed and remedies invoked as provided in Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, or by rule, regulation, or order of the Secretary of Labor, or as other wise provided by Institute Agreement for Advanced Cable Systems, L.P. Page 15 of 18 d: \contract\advcab l e\022 l 96. d ft law. g) The Institute will include the provisions of the paragraphs (a) through (g) in every subcontract or purchase order unless exempted by rules, regulations or orders of the Secretary of Labor issued pursuant to Section 204 of Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, so that such provisions will be binding upon each subcontractor or vendor. The Institute will take such action with respect to any subcontract or purchase order as the City may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions including sanctions for non-compliance: Provided, however, that in the event The Institute becomes involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a subcontractor or vendor as a result of such direction by the City, The Institute may request the United States to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the United States. SECTION TWO Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Institute agrees to abide by the following: Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, no person shall, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, be excluded form participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. SECTION THREE Section 109 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974. The Institute agrees to abide by the following: No person in the United States shall on the grounds of race, color, national origin, or sex be excluded from participating in, be denied the benefits or, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity funded in whole or in part with funds made available under this title. SECTION FOUR "Section 3" Compliance in the Provision of Training Employment and Business Opportunities. The Institute agrees to abide by the following: (a) The work to be performed under this Agreement is on a project assisted under a program providing direct Federal financial assistance form the Department of Housing and Urban Development and is subject to the requirements of Section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968, as amended, 12 U.S.C. 171 u. Section 3 requires that to the greatest extent feasible opportunities for training and employment be given lower income residents of the project area and contract for work in connection with the project be awarded to business concerns which are located in, or owned in substantial part by persons residing in the area of the project. Institute Agreement for Advanced Cable Systems, L.P. is Page 16 of 18 d: \contract\advcab1e\022196. dft (b) The parties to this Agreement will comply with the provision of said Section 3 and the regulations issued pursuant thereto by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development set forth is 24 C.F.R. 235, and all applicable rules and orders of the Department issued thereunder prior to the execution of this Agreement. The parties to this Agreement certify and agree that they are under no contractual or other disability which would prevent them from complying with these requirements. (c) The Institute will send to each labor organization or representative of workers with which it has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding, if any, a notice advising the said labor organization or workers' representative of its commitments under this Section 3 clause and shall post copies of the notice in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment or training. (d) The Institute will include this Section 3 clause in every subcontract for work in connection with the project and will, at the direction of the City or recipient of Federal financial assistance, take appropriate action pursuant to the subcontract upon a finding that the subcontractor is in violation of regulations issued by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, 24 C.F.R. Part 135. The Institute will not subcontract with any subcontractor where is has notice or knowledge that the latter has been found in violation of regulations under 24 C.F.R. Part 135 and will not let any subcontract unless the subcontractor has first provided it with a preliminary statement of ability to comply with the requirements of these regulations. (e) Compliance with the provisions of Section 3, the regulations set forth in 24 C.F.R. Part 135, and all applicable rules and orders of the Department issued hereunder prior to the execution of the Agreement, shall be a condition of the federal financial assistance provided to the project, binding upon the applicant or recipient for such assistance, its successors and assigns. Failure to fulfill these requirements shall subject the applicant or recipient, its contractors and subcontractors, its successors and assigns to those sanctions specified by the grant or loan agreement or contract through which federal assistance is provided, and to such sanctions as are specified by 24 C.F.R. Part 135. SECTION FIVE Section 503 Handicapped (if $2 500 or Over) Affirmative Action for Handicapped Workers. (a) The Institute will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of physical or mental handicap in regard to any position Institute Agreement for Advanced Cable Systems, L.P. Page 17 of 18 d:\contract\advcab1e\022196.dft for which the employee or applicant for employment is qualified. The Institute agrees to take affirmative action to employ, advance in employment and otherwise treat qualified handicapped individuals without discriminations based upon their physical or mental handicap in all employment practices such as the following: Employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer, recruitment, advertising layoff or terminations, rates of pay or other forms of compensation, and selection for training, including apprenticeship. (b) The Institute agrees to comply with the rules, regulations, and relevant orders of the Secretary of labor issued pursuant to the Act. (c) In the event of the Institute's non-compliance with the requirements of this clause, actions for non-compliance may be taken . in accordance with the rules, regulations, and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor issues pursuant to the Act. (d) The Institute agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices in a form to be prescribed by the Director, provided by or through the contracting officer. Such notices shall state the Institute's obligation under the law to take affirmative action to employ and advance in employment qualified handicapped employees and applicants for employment, and the rights of applicants and employees. (e) The Institute will notify each labor union or representative of workers with which it has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract understanding, that the Institute is bound by the terms of Section 503 of Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and is committed to take affirmative action to employ and advance in employment physically and mentally handicapped individuals. (f) The Institute will include the provisions of this clause in every subcontract or purchase order of $2,500 or more unless exempted by rules, regulations, or orders of the Secretary issued pursuant to Section 503 or the act, so that such provisions will be binding upon each subcontractor with respect to any subcontract or purchase order as the Director of the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs may direct to enforce such provisions, including action for non-compliance. Institute Agreement for Advanced Cable Systems, L.P. Page 18 of 18 d Acontract\advcable\022196.dft Council Meeting Date: 02/27/96 Item No. S - AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT A resolution approving funds to the Sertoma Club of Georgetown to purchase fireworks for the 4th of July Picnic in San Gabriel Park. ITEM SUMMARY These funds will provide support to the Sertoma Club to provide a fireworks display at the 4th of July Picnic, sponsored by the Sertoma Club. The fireworks company would provide a liability policy on the fireworks display. Each year, approximately 15,000 people view this display. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS Under this agreement, the Sertoma Club of Georgetown will spend up to $4,000.00 if they cannot raise these funds through other sources. FINANCIAL IMPACT $4,000.00 was budgeted for this item in Account No. 100-205-5303-00 General Government Contracts. COMMENTS None ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution 2. Funding Agreement 3. Letter of Request Submitted By: Bob Hart, City Manager RESOLUTION No. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY SECRETARY TO ATTEST A FUNDING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN AND SERTOMA CLUB OF GEORGETOWN FOR FIREWORKS ON THE FOURTH OF JULY. WHEREAS, the City of Georgetown, hereinafter known as City, agrees to enter into a Funding Agreement with the Georgetown Sertoma Club, hereinafter known as Sertoma, by and through its president under the following terms and conditions set forth herein. WHEREAS, the purpose of this funding agreement is to underwrite fireworks for the Georgetown Sertoma Club Fourth of July Family Festival in San Gabriel Park. WHEREAS,the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas finds that the display of fireworks is a public purpose for the benefit of the entertainment and enjoyment of the citizens of Georgetown; and, WHEREAS,the parties agree that in recognition of the mutual benefits afforded each by the display of fireworks, the parties wish to enter into an agreement to accomplish the purposes set forth in these recitals; and, 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 finds that this resolution implements Recreation and Cultural Affairs Policy # 1 of the Century Plan -Policy Plan Element, which states, "The City shall encourage all citizens to actively participate in community -wide social, cultural, and recreational activities", 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 Mayor is hereby authorized to execute, and the City Secretary to attest thereto a contract with the Georgetown Sertoma Club in an amount not to exceed four thousand two hundred dollars ($4,200.00) on behalf of the City of Georgetown. SECTION 3. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption. Resolution No. 1996 SERTOMA CLUB FIREWORKS DISPLAY Page 1 of 2 RESOLVED this 27`h day of February, 1996. ATTEST: Sandra Lee, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: Marianne Landers Banks, City Attorney Resolution No. 1996 SERTOMA CLUB FIREWORKS DISPLAY Page 2 of 2 THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: Leo Wood, Mayor COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON § FUNDING AGREEMENT BETWEEN § THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN AND STATE OF TEXAS § THE GEORGETOWN SERTOMA CLUB FUNDING AGREEMENT WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the City of Georgetown, hereinafter known as City, agrees to enter into a Funding Agreement with the Georgetown Sertoma Club, hereinafter known as Sertoma, by and through its president, Joe Smith, under the following terms and conditions and Sertoma agrees to be subject to the terms and conditions as set forth herein. WHEREAS, the purpose of this funding agreement is to underwrite fireworks for the Georgetown Sertoma Club 4th of July Family Festival in San Gabriel Park. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, finds that the display of fireworks is a public purpose for the benefit of the entertainment and enjoyment of the citizens of Georgetown; and, WHEREAS, the Georgetown Sertoma Club has provided this fireworks display since 1985, with an excess of 15,000 participants; and, WHEREAS,the parties agree that in recognition of the mutual benefits afforded each by the display of fireworks, the parties wish to enter into an agreement to accomplish the purposes set forth in these recitals. I. TERM The period of this contract shall be from June 15, 1996, to August 1, 1996. H. PARTIES The parties of this Agreement are the City of Georgetown and the Georgetown Sertoma Club. III. AMOUNT OF FUNDS/PROYISIONS FOR REFUND The total amount of funds to be expended by the City under this Agreement to Sertoma shall not exceed four thousand dollars ($4,000.00). Sertoma agrees it will spend funds allocated by the City only on a contract for a fireworks show on July 4, 1996, or an alternate date due to cancellation of July 4th date. 1996 SERTOMA FUNDING AGREEMENT 4" of July Fireworks Show in San Gabriel Park Page 1 of 3 IV. COVENANTS AND CONDITIONS City's providing funds under this Agreement to Sertoma is subject to the following covenants and conditions: Sertoma agrees to engage a qualified provider who shall file with the City proof of liability insurance coverage in force for a fireworks display to be conducted in conjunction with their 4th of July event. 2. Sertoma agrees it shall comply with all applicable state statutes and local ordinances in conducting the 4th of July event. No Agreement funds shall be distributed by the City, unless requests for funds are accompanied with documentation of paid invoice or substantiated invoice which requires payment by Sertoma and no other funds are available to pay for the invoice. 4. Sertoma agrees to pledge profits from donations, booth rentals, concession stands, and other revenue generated at the 4th of July event toward the cost of the fireworks show. 5. Sertoma covenants and agrees to maintain accurate and complete records of all transactions pertaining to operation and expenditures on the 4th of July event. City, upon request, has the right to review all records of Sertoma to assure the funds under the Contract were expended as proposed. 6. Sertoma agrees to indemnify City, its officers, agents, and employees for all claims, suits, and causes of action for damages arising from the intentional or negligent acts or omissions of Sertoma, its agents, representatives, employees in the operation and performance of the activities of the 4th of July event and any contracts, oral or written, entered into by Sertoma with third persons for the 4th of July event. 7. The parties agree that Sertoma shall be deemed to be an independent contractor of the City 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. 8. Requests for the underwriting funds to cover invoiced unfunded costs of the fireworks show shall be submitted to the City by August 1, 1996. V. CANCELLATION Either parry may cancel this Agreement with seven (7) days written notice by certified mail to the other party- 1996 SERTOMA FUNDING AGREEMENT 4" of July Fireworks Show in San Gabriel Park Page 2 of 3 VI. NOTICE Notice, as required by this Agreement, shall be in writing to the following: CITY OF GEORGETOWN GEORGETOWN SERTOMA CLUB Bob Hart, City Manager Mike Leese, President P. O. Box 409 P. O. Box 853 Georgetown, TX 78627-0409 Georgetown, TX 78627 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed on the day of , 1996. CITY OF GEORGETOWN Leo Wood, Mayor ATTEST: Sandra Lee, City Secretary STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON § GEORGETOWN SERTOMA CLUB Mike Leese, President APPROVED AS TO FORM: Marianne Landers Banks, City Attorney This instrument was acknowledged before me on this the day of , 1996, by SEAL Notary Public for the State of Texas 1996 SERTOMA FUNDING AGREEMENT 4`h of July Fireworks Show in San Gabriel Park Page 3 of 3 Georgetown Sertoma Club Fourth of July Committee F. O. Box 194 Georgetown, `texas 7/8627 512-863-7579 February 7, 1996 Mr. Bob Hart City mm-kiger City of Georgetown Georgetouni; Texas 7562 6 Re: Fourth of July. 1996 Dear Mr. Hart; The Sertoma Club of Georgetown has begun its planning of this years festivities of the Fourth of July. We would like to request the City Com ' *I to consider several issues to help us provide another great celebration. * The Sertoma Club request for monetary support as its the past. t,We continue to solicit donations from the business community and nia_ior sponsors) * The pernussion to allow the coop off vendors to spend the tught of the third c Wednesday) ui the park. Provide Police patrol iu the park during die day of die festivities. * Pro%nde a crew to pick up trash durizr, day and follow up inanitenance if needed. * Install extra power pole for extra outlets for food and oilier vendors prier to the festival. # Help with the cost of sec:unty for the carnival (Ifthere is one this year'). We are in. Ct)iilact with the same fireworks cc)mpany as last gear to provide the same quality if not enhanced show. We will be contactuig the Parks mid Rec Dept for other needs that the: city lias provided ill the bast such as barricades, tapes and checking the plugs now located in the park. We treat we will teed it) acqu fe a parade pen -nit for call of the activities" that will De tak ittg platy on the Ft.:►Lirth and we also know that we will need w-i inspection by d.te f-u-e ma.rshall for the ct,. ival and prior to the fireworks. If there is wrything else that we need to work cm or if there are kany or the ab vv that the citti- can hell) tl- with, please let m lalow_ We thank you ui advaijee for N%GAI Sur,-pw;rt id attention 111to tlus matter. SillcerIv I Steve AID-jgwgt Chaiman Fourth of July Conunmee Gerotietow-t1 Senorn►a Club Council meeting date: 2-27-96 Item No. -T AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT A resolution appointing election officials for the General Election to be held on May 4, 1996 ITEM SUNUvLkRY We are fortunate to have reliable, qualified citizens to serve as election officials. The Election Day voting at the Library (Precinct "A") will again be handled by Mary Hererra. Pat Atkins has agreed to serve as the Alternate Judge. They have also agreed to serve as the Judge and Alternate Judge of the Early Voting Ballot Board. Election Day voting at the GISD Ad Building (Precinct "B") will again be handled by Kathleen Leedy. Fritz Daehne will serve as the Alternate Judge. The proposed resolution serves as the written order of the governing body officially appointing them to serve. Mard Herrick of GISD had spoken to me earlier about seeking preclearance from the Justice Department to conduct School Board Early Voting here at City Hall. I am hoping we will be able to exchange duties at each location. Ken and Sue Jones have agreed to handle Early Voting for the City at the GISD Ad Building. However, I am hopeful that we may be able to have an agreement with the School District so that their staff person can be cross -trained to handle the City early voters at the Ad Building, and Ken and Sue Jones (working as a tandem team) will handle both the City and School Early Voting here at City Hall. ATTACHMENTS S Proposed resolution by: Sandra Lee, City Secretary RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPOINTING ELECTION OFFICIALS FOR THE GENERAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON SATURDAY, MAY 4, 1996. WHEREAS, there will be held a General Election on Saturday, May 4, 1996, to elect Councilmembers for City of Georgetown Single -Member Districts 2, 6, and 7; and Mayor, elected at large; and WHEREAS, the laws of the State of Texas provide that the governing body of a political subdivision other than a county shall appoint the election judges, and that appointment shall be made by written order; and WHEREAS, certain eligibility requirements must be met by the persons appointed to serve as election judges. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED 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. SECTION 2 The City Council has found that this action implements Governmental Affairs Policy 2 of the Century Plan - Policy Plan Element, which states: "All citizens actively participate in governmental functions."; and has found that this action 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 3 Having met the eligibility requirements, the following persons have been found to be qualified to serve as Election Judges in the May 4, 1996, General Election. Serving as Presiding Judge for City of Georgetown Voting Precinct "A" at the Georgetown Public Library, will be Mrs. Mary Herrera of 1503 Long Branch Drive, Georgetown, Texas. Serving as Alternate Presiding Judge will be Mrs. Pat Atkins of 1510 Olive Street, Georgetown, Texas. Serviing as Presidiing Judge for City of Georgetown Voting Precinct "B" at the Georgetown Independent School District Administration Building, will be Ms. Kathleen Leedy of 137 Canyon Road. Serving as Alternate Election Officials Resolution No. Page 1 of 2 Pages Presiding Judge will be Mr. Fritz Daehne. The clerks for the Election shall be chosen by the Presiding Judges. Ballots from Early Voting shall be canvassed by an Early Voting Ballot Board. Ms. Mary Herrera shall serve as Presiding Judge and Mrs. Pat Atkins shall serve as Alternate Presiding Judge of the Early Voting Ballot Board for the General Election. SECTION 4 Election officials shall be compensated at a rate of $6.00 per hour. Officials who deliver the ballots and election supplies to City Hall after the closing of the polls on Election Day shall be compensated an additional flat fee of $25.00 over the hourly rate for their service. SECTION 5 This resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption. RESOLVED this 27th day of February, 1996. Attest: Sandra D. Lee City Secretary Approved as to form: Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney Election Officials Resolution No. Page 2 of 2 Pages THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN- By: LEO WOOD Mayor Council meeting date: 2-27-96 Item No.y AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Authorize the City Manager or his designee to participate in a Texas Municipal League Task Force relative to telecommunications and electric deregulation legislative policy issues. ITEM SUMMARY A group of cities, spearheaded primarily by Arlington and Abilene, have persuaded the Texas Municipal League to create a task force to monitor the impact to cities of the telecommunications legislative changes and the anticipated legislative changes for electric deregulation and their potential impact on the cities' control of right of way and collection of franchise fees. These meetings will be conducted on a regular basis through the spring and summer and are intended to compliment the legislative policy committees that are currently underway. As a city, we have the opportunity to participate in this effort, and this has been placed on the agenda to permit us to monitor and participate in this process as I would deem necessary. ATTACHMENTS None Submitte by: ,,-N Bob Hart, City Manager Council Meeting Date: Item No. V AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT A resolution revising a fitness for duty policy statement on controlled substances and alcohol use and establishing new testing requirements and procedures. ITEM SUMMARY This proposed policy will help prevent accidents and injuries resulting from the misuse of alcohol or use of controlled substances by City employees. In order to comply with the Texas Workers' Compensation Act and the Federal Highway Administration, Department of Transportation (DOT), Use and Testing Regulations (49 CFR Part 40, 382, 390, 392, & 395) the City's Fitness for Duty Policy Statement must include DOT controlled substances and alcohol testing requirements for certain positions. City employees whose duties require a commercial drivers license (CDL) and perform a safety -sensitive function are subject to: re-employment. Random, Reasonable Suspicion, Post -accident, Return to Duly, and Follow-up Testing. All DOT requirements are extended to Fire Services employees whose job description requires a class A or B drivers license. The City has extended DOT Post -accident testing requirements to include: All City vehicle operators and employees who operate a private vehicle on City business. The Fitness for Duty Policy continues to require pre -employment controlled substances testing of all job applicants who have been made a conditional job offer with the City. All employees are subject to Reasonable Suspicion Alcohol and Controlled Substances Testing. FINANCIAL IMPACT Estimated annual costs for testing and consultations is $7,000. Drug screens for approximately 100 new employees annually at $40 per test will cost $4,000. Random testing of approximately 35 CDL holders for controlled substances will cost $40 per test, and randomly testing 17 CDL holders for alcohol will cost $25 per test. There will also be various costs for required Post - accident and Reasonable Suspicion Testing. In addition, there will be costs for Return -to -duty and Follow-up Testing required by DOT. Funds were appropriated this Fiscal Year to cover this year's cost. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution and Exhibit "A" (Fitness for Duty Policy Statement on Controlled Substances and Alcohol Use and Testing). Submitted / Ben Stafford, Safety Coordinat Teresa Hersh, Director of Employee and Organizational Services �t RESOLUTION No. A RESOLUTION REVISING THE CURRENT FITNESS FOR DUTY POLICY STATEMENT ON CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES AND ALCOHOL USE AND ESTABLISHING NEW TESTING REQUIREMENTS AND PROCEDURES. WHEREAS, the City Council desires to establish programs designed to help prevent accidents and injuries resulting from the misuse of alcohol or use of controlled substances by City employees; improving productivity, and promoting the health and welfare of citizens, visitors, and employees; and WHEREAS, the Texas Workers' Compensation Act requires the adoption of a drug abuse policy by each employer with 15 or more employees; and WHEREAS, the Federal Highway Administration, Department of Transportation, requires the adoption of a controlled substances and alcohol use testing program by employers who have at least one employee who is required to have a commercial driver's license and performs safety sensitive functions (49 CFR Part 40, 382, 390, 3922 &395); and, WHEREAS, the Federal Government requires recipients of federal grants to comply with the provisions of the Drug Free Workplace Act; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to adopt a policy in compliance with State and Federal law. 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 finds that this resolution implements Finance Policy #1, which states," All municipal operations are conducted in an efficient business -like manner"; and Governmental Affairs Policy #1 of the Century Plan -Policy Plan Element, which states, "The City cooperates with all other entities which provide services in the community"; 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. 1996 FITNESS FOR DUTY POLICY Resolution No. Page 1 of 2 ILI SECTION 2. The attached Exhibit "A", relating to "Fitness for Duty Policy Statement on Controlled Substances and Alcohol Use and Testing" is hereby approved by the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas. SECTION 3. The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute, and the City Secretary to attest thereto. SECTION 4. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption. RESOLVED this 27th day of February, 1996. ATTEST: THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: Sandra Lee, City Secretary Leo Wood, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Marianne Landers Banks, City Attorney 1996 FITNESS FOR DUTY POLICY Resolution No. Page 2 of 2 EXHIBIT "A" CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS FITNESS FOR DUTY POLICY STATEMENT ON CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES AND ALCOHOL USE AND TESTING In accordance with Department of Transportation Controlled Substances and Alcohol Use and Testing Regulations (49 CFR Part 40, 382, 390,392, & 395) A. PURPOSE To establish programs designed to help prevent accidents and injuries resulting from the misuse of alcohol or use of controlled substances by City employees. This policy also complies with the Federal Highway Administration, Department of Transportation, Controlled Substances and Alcohol Use and Testing Regulations. B. DEFINITIONS 1. Accident An incident involving a City vehicle or equipment, or a private vehicle being used on City business, in which there is either a fatality, an injury treated at or away from the scene, or a vehicle is required to be towed from the scene, due to disabling damage. 2. Controlled Substances Controlled substances as tested for in a drug screening test (a chemical analysis test) include, but are not limited to, detection of drugs from the following drug classes (these include both legal prescription and illegal drugs): 2.1 Amphetamine (e.g., Methamphetamine, Speed, Crystal) 2.2 Cocaine metabolites 2.3 Opiate metabolites (e.g., Codeine, Heroin, Morphine, Hydromorphone, Hydrocodone) 2.4 Phencyclidine (PCP) 2.5 Marijuana metabolites (Cannabinoids/THC) 3. Breath Alcohol Technician (BAT) An individual who instructs and assists individuals in the alcohol testing process and operates an evidential breath testing device (EBT). Fitness for Duty Policy Pg 1 of 19 Rcv. 2/22/96 B. DEFINITIONS (cont.) 4. Evidential Breath Testing Device (EBT) A device approved by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) for the evidential testing of breath and placed on NHTSXs "Conforming Products List (CPL) of Evidential Breath Measurement Devices" and identified on the CPL as conforming with the model specifications available from NHTSA. 5. Alcohol Concentration (or Content) The alcohol in a volume of breath expressed in terms of grams of alcohol per 210 liters of breath as indicated by an evidential breath test; for blood tests, which is grams of alcohol per 100 milliliters of blood. G. Alcohol Use The consumption of any beverage, mixture or preparation, including any medication, containing alcohol. 7. Commercial Motor Vehicle A motor vehicle or combination of motor vehicles used in commerce to transport passengers or property if the motor vehicle: 7.1 Has a gross combination weight of 26,001 or more pounds inclusive of a towed unit with a gross vehicle weight rating of more than 10,000-pounds; or 7.2 Has a gross vehicle weight rating of 26,001 or more pounds; or 7.3 Is designed to transport 16 or more passengers, including the driver, or 7.4 Is of any size and is used in the transportation of hazardous materials requiring placards, under Hazardous Materials Regulations (49 CFR part 172 subpart F). (See Appendix I for a list of typical City commercial vehicles and departments affected by DOT regulations). 8. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) The United States Department of Health and Human Services or any designee of the Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services. 9. Department of Transportation (DOT) Agency An agency of the United States Department of Transportation administering regulations related to drug or alcohol testing. Fitness for Duty Policy Pg2of19 Rev. 2/22196 2 B. DEFINITIONS (cont.) 10. CDL Holder Any employee who, as part of his or her job description or assigned job duties, is required to hold a Commercial Drivers License (CDL). This includes, but is not limited to: any person who operates a commercial motor vehicle; full time, regularly employed commercial drivers; casual intermittent or occasional commercial drivers. Leased drivers and independent, owner - operated contractors who are either directly employed by or under lease to the City or who operate a commercial motor vehicle at the direction of or with the .consent of the City must also be in compliance with DOT regarding CDL holders. For the purposes of pre -duty testing, the term CDL holder includes current employees who transfer to a position that requires a commercial driver's license or performs a safety -sensitive function. City Personnel Policies and Procedures extends the DOT testing requirements to include all regular and volunteer Fire Division personnel whose job description requires a Class A or B drivers license. 11. Driver Includes all City CDL holders and all City employees who operate a City vehicle, or private vehicle on City business. 12. Screening Test (aka: Initial Test) In alcohol testing, an analytical procedure to determine whether an employee may have a prohibited concentration of alcohol in his or her system. In controlled substances testing, an immunoassay screen to eliminate "negative" urine specimens from further consideration. _ 13. Confirmation Test For alcohol testing, a second test, following a screening test with a result of 0.02 or greater. A confirmation test shall be performed more than 15 but less than 30 minutes following the screening test. For controlled substances testing, a second analytical procedure to identify the presence of a specific drug or metabolite which is independent of the screen test and which uses a different technique and chemical principle from that of the screening test in order to ensure reliability and accuracy. 14. Final Results If the screening and confirmation test results are not identical, the confirmation test result is deemed to be the final result. Fitness for Duty Policy Pg 3 of 19 Rev. 2/22/96 B. DEFINITIONS (cont.) 15. Medical Review Officer (MRO) A licensed physician (Medical Doctor or Doctor of Osteopathy) responsible for receiving laboratory results generated by the City's drug testing program who has knowledge of substance abuse disorders, and has appropriate medical training to interpret and evaluate an individual's verified positive test results together with his or her medical history and any other relevant biomedical information. 16. Substance Abuse Professional (SAP) A licensed Physician (Medical Doctor or Doctor of Osteopathy), or a licensed or certified Psychologist, or Social Worker, or Employee Assistance Professional, or addiction counselor with knowledge of and clinical experience in the diagnosis and treatment of alcohol and controlled substances -related disorders. 17. On -duty Time Means all time from the time an employee begins to work or is required to be in readiness to work, until the time he or she has been relieved from work and all responsibility for performing work including time performing safety -sensitive functions. 18. Safety -sensitive Function The following functions are defined as safety -sensitive by DOT when performed by CDL holders: 18.1 All time spent at a carrier or shipper plant, terminal, facility, or other property or on any public property, waiting to be dispatched, unless the CDL holder has been relieved from duty by the supervisor, 18.2 All time spent inspecting, servicing, or conditioning any commercial motor vehicle at any time; 18.3 All time spent at the driving controls of a commercial motor vehicle in operation; 18.4 All time spent, other than driving time, on or in a commercial motor vehicle except time spent resting in a sleeper berth; 18.5 All time spent loading or unloading a commensal motor vehicle, supervising, or assisting in the loading or unloading, attending a vehicle being loaded or unloaded, remaining in readiness to operate the vehicle, or in giving or receiving receipts for shipments loaded or unloaded; 18.6 All time spent repairing, obtaining assistance, or remaining in attendance upon a disabled commercial motor vehicle. Fitness for Duty Policy Pg4of19 Rev. 2/22196 4 B. DEFINITIONS (cont.) 19. Performing a Safety -sensitive Function A CDL holder is considered to be performing a safety -sensitive function during any period in which the CDL holder is actually performing, ready to perform, or immediately able to perform any safety -sensitive functions. 20. Refusal to Submit (Alcohol or Controlled Substances Test) 20.1 When an employee fails to provide adequate breath for alcohol testing without a valid medical explanation after he or she has received notice of the requirement for breath testing; 20.2 When an employee fails to provide adequate urine for controlled substances testing without a valid medical explanation after he or she has received notice of the requirement for urine testing; or 20.3 When an employee engages in conduct that clearly obstructs the testing process, including, but not limited to, a refusal to sign the breath alcohol testing form certification when requested, after step 2 of the testing procedure. If the employee refuses to sign the certification after step 4 of the testing procedure, it shall not be regarded as a refusal to test. The BAT shall note the employee's failure to sign in the "Remarks" section. C. PROHIBITIONS 1. The following prohibitions apply to all City of Georgetown employees: (Any violation is subject to disciplinary action, up to and including termination, in accordance with Personnel Policies and Procedures or other action as prescribed by DOT for commercial drivers). 1.1 An employee shall not use, possess, sell or provide alcohol or controlled substances to any other employee or to any person while such an employee is on duty or on call unless the employee is required as a part of his or her job to legally possess alcohol or controlled substances. 1.2 A supervisor having actual knowledge that an employee is using, possessing, selling or providing alcohol or controlled substances to any other employee or to any person while such an employee is on duty or on call unless the employee is required as a part of his or her job to legally possess alcohol or controlled substances shall not permit the employee to perform or continue to perform any duties. The supervisor shall coordinate with Human Resources regarding further actions. 1.3 An employee shall not report for duty or remain on duty while having an alcohol concentration of 0.02 or greater. Fitnew for Duty Policy Pg5of19 Rev. 2/22/96 5 C. PROHIBITIONS (cont.) 1.4 A supervisor having actual knowledge that an employee has an alcohol concentration of 0.02 or greater shall not permit the employee to perform or continue to perform any duties. The supervisor shall coordinate with Human Resources regarding further actions. 1.5 An employee shall not use alcohol within 4 hours prior to coming on duty. 1.6 A supervisor having actual knowledge that an employee has used alcohol within 4 hours prior to coming on duty shall no permit the employee to perform or continue to perform any duties. The supervisor shall coordinate with Human Resources regarding further actions. 1.7 A City driver who is required to take a post -accident alcohol test shall not use alcohol for 8 hours or until undergoing a required post -accident alcohol test, whichever occurs first, in accordance with DOT requirements and/or Personnel Policies and Procedures. 1.8 The supervisor of a City driver who is required to take a post -accident alcohol test shall inform that employee not to use alcohol for 8 hours following the accident or until undergoing a required post -accident alcohol test, whichever occurs first. The supervisor shall not permit the employee to perform or continue to perform any duties until the employee receives a verified negative test result. 1.9 A City driver shall not refuse to submit to an alcohol or controlled substances test when required by DOT regulations and/or Personnel Policies and Procedures. A refusal is considered a positive test. 1.10 A supervisor shall not permit an employee who refuses to submit to an alcohol or controlled substances test to perform or continue to perform any duties. The supervisor shall coordinate with Human Resources regarding further actions. 1.11 An employee shall no report for duty, or remain on duty, when using or testing positive for any controlled substance (except under instructions of a physician who has advised the employee that the substance does not adversely affect the employee's ability to perform his or her job safely). 1.12 A supervisor having actual knowledge that an employee has used a controlled substance and/or has a verified positive test for a controlled substance shall not permit the employee to perform or continue to perform any duties. The supervisor shall coordinate with Human Resources regarding further actions. Fitness for Duty Policy is Pg6of19 Rev. 2/22/96 2 D. SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS 1. Confidentiality of Controlled Substances and Alcohol Testing Records The City shall maintain records required to be kept by these regulations in a secure manner that assures that disclosure to unauthorized persons does not occur. The City will not release information contained in these records except under one of the following circumstances: 1.1 An employee is entitled to obtain copies of records pertaining to his or her use of alcohol or controlled substances. 1.2 The City must make records available upon request, to DOT or other regulatory agency having jurisdiction over the City or the CDL holder. 1.3 Records must be made available to a subsequent employer upon receipt of a written request from the employee. 1.4 The City may release information to a judge or other decision maker in a lawsuit, grievance, or other proceeding initiated by or on behalf of the employee and arising from the results of an alcohol and/or controlled substances test. 1.5 The City must release information to an identified person upon the receipt of written consent of the employee. 2. Supervisor Training Supervisors must complete at least one hour of training on alcohol misuse and one hour of training on controlled substances use including how to determine whether reasonable suspicion exists to require alcohol and controlled substances testing. The training shall cover the physical, behavioral, speech, and performance indicators of probable alcohol misuse and use of controlled substances. 3. Employee Training All employees must receive at least one hour training on the policies and procedures of the alcohol and controlled substances testing program. Fitness for Duty Policy Pg 7 of 19 Rev. 2/22/96 D. SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS (cont.) 4. Educational Material The City shall provide educational material that explains the requirements of the program and the City's Policies and Procedures with respect to meeting these requirements. Each employee is required to sign for receipt of the material. 5. Notification Prior to Testing Before performing an alcohol or controlled substance test, the supervisor must give an employee oral and written notification that the test is required by law and/or City Personnel Policies and Procedures. E. TYPES OF DRUG AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE TESTS 1. Pre -employment Testing 1.1 All applicants who have received a conditional offer of employment are required to take a pre -employment controlled substances screening test. An employee shall not be hired prior to a verified negative controlled substances test result. 1.2 Prior to the first time a CDL holder performs safety -sensitive functions for the City, the CDL holder shall undergo pre -duty testing for controlled substances in accordance with DOT regulations. The City shall not allow a CDL holder to perform a safety -sensitive function unless the CDL holder has received a verified negative controlled substances test result from the Medical Review Officer. 1.3 Current employees transferring to a position requiring a commercial driver's license must be tested in accordance with DOT regulations for controlled substances and obtain a verified negative test result before performing a safety -sensitive function. 2. Post -accident Testing Process 2.1 As soon as practical following an accident involving a City vehicle, or a private vehicle on City business, the City shall test for alcohol and controlled substances each surviving City driver when: 2.1 a A vehicle accident involves loss of any human life (regardless of who appears to have been at fault); and/or 2.1 b The City driver receives a citation for a moving traffic violation arising from an accident involving injuries and/or towed vehicles. Fitness for Duty Policy Pg8of19 Rev. 2/22/96 8 E. TYPES OF DRUG AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE TESTS 2. Post -accident testing process (cont.) 2.2 City Driver's Responsibilities: 2.2a A City driver who is subject to post -accident testing is considered to have refused to submit to testing when: He or she unnecessarily leaves the scene of an accident before a required test is administered or fails to remain readily available for testing. (This is not intended to delay necessary medical attention for injured people following an accident or to prohibit a City driver from leaving the scene of an accident for the period necessary to obtain assistance in responding to the accident, or to obtain necessary emergency medical care). 2.2b The City driver subject to post -accident alcohol testing must refrain from consuming alcohol for 8 hours following the accident, or until he or she submits to a post - accident alcohol test, whichever comes first. 2.2c A City driver who is required to take a post -accident controlled substances and/or alcohol test will, at the City's discretion, either be assigned to a non safety -sensitive function, or placed on non -disciplinary leave with pay, while awaiting the post - accident test results. 2.3 Supervisor's Responsibilities: 2.3a Supervisors shall provide all City drivers with necessary post -accident information procedures and instructions, prior to the drivers operating a City vehicle. 2.3b Supervisors are responsible for ensuring that City drivers are transported to the testing facility within a reasonable time. J 2.3c A post -accident alcohol test is required to be administered within 2 hours of the accident. If not, the supervisor shall prepare a record stating the reasons for not administering the test, then forward the record to Human Resources. 2.3d A post -accident alcohol test is required to be administered within 8 hours of the accident reasonable suspicion. In addition to the record required under part E2.3c, if the post -accident alcohol,test is not administered within hours of the accident, the supervisor shall prepare a second record stating the reasons for not administering the test, then forward the record to Human Resources. The City shall cease attempts to administer an alcohol test after 8 hours. . Fitnew for Duty Policy Pg9of19 Rcv. 2/22/96 r� E. TYPES OF DRUG AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE TESTS 2. Post -accident testing process 2.3 Supervisor's Responsibilities (cont.) 2.3e If a controlled substances test is required, the test must be done within 32 hours of the accident; if not, the supervisor shall prepare a record stating the reasons for not administering the test, then forward the record to Human Resources. The City shall cease attempts to test after 32 hours. 2.4 The results of a breath or blood test for the use of alcohol,or a urine test for the use of controlled substances, conducted by Federal, State, or local officials having independent authority for the test, shall be considered to meet the requirements of this section provided such tests conform to applicable Federal, State or local requirements, and that the results of the tests are obtained by the supervisor. 3. Random Testing The City will randomly test only CDL holders. The City shall randomly select a number of CDL holders for testing at least four times per calendar year to ensure that CDL holders performing safety -sensitive functions are not impaired. The random testing for alcohol and controlled substances shall be performed in accordance with the following procedures: 3.1 The tests will be unannounced with the dates spread reasonably throughout the calendar year. The selection of drivers for random alcohol and controlled substance testing shall be made by a scientifically valid method which ensures that each CDL holder shall have an equal chance of being tested each time selections are made by the City's contracted testing agency. 3.2 For alcohol testing, a minimum annual percentage rate of 25 percent of the City' s CDL holders will be selected for testing. 3.3 For controlled substances testing, a minimum annual percentage rate of 50 percent of the City's CDL holders will be selected for testing. 3.4 Human Resources will provide the supervisors with the names of the CDL holders from their department that have been randomly selected by the City's contracted testing agency. The selection will remain confidential from the CDL holder until the supervisor notifies the CDL holder in accordance with DOT requirements. 3.5 In the event that a CDL holder, who is selected for a random test, is on vacation or an extended medical absence, the City can either notify the contracted testing agency to select another CDL holder for testing or keep the original selection confidential and wait until the CDL holder returns. Fitness for Duty Policy Pg10of19 Rev. 2/22/96 10 E. TYPES OF DRUG AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE TESTS 3. Random (cont.) 3.6 The supervisor must give the CDL holder both oral and written notification of selection for random testing and obtain written acknowledgment of notification from the CDL holder. (see Appendix II for notification form). 3.7 The supervisor shall notify each selected CDL holder for random alcohol testing just before, during or just after he or she is performing a safety -sensitive function (see definition #181 pg. 4, Fitness for Duty Policy). If the CDL holder is in the process of performing a safety -sensitive function, the supervisor shall ensure that the CDL holder ceases to perform the safety -sensitive function and proceeds to the testing facility immediately. The supervisor is responsible for ensuring that the employee is quickly transported to allow for testing within 2 hours of employee notification. 3.8 The supervisor shall notify each CDL holder selected for random controlled substances tests anytime the CDL holder is on duty. If the CDL holder is in the process of performing a safety -sensitive function, the supervisor shall ensure that the CDL holder ceases to perform the safety -sensitive function and proceeds to the testing site immediately. 4. Reasonable Suspicion Testing All City employees are subject to reasonable suspicion testing for controlled substances and alcohol abuse based on objective facts and/or observable on -duty behavior sufficient to lead a trained, reasonably prudent supervisor to suspect that an employee is under the influence of controlled substances and/or alcohol so that an employee's ability to perform the functions of the job is impaired or so that the employee's ability to perform his or her job safely is reduced. Employees engaged in activities prohibited by part C of this policy are also subject to testing. 4.1 The determination that reasonable suspicion exists to require the employee to undergo an alcohol or controlled substances test must be based on specific, contemporaneous, articulable observations concerning appearance, behavior, speech or body odor. The observations may include indications of the chronic and withdrawal effects of controlled substances. 4.2 The observations must be made by a supervisor or official who is trained in determining if reasonable suspicion of controlled substance or alcohol misuse exists. Managers and supervisors will receive ongoing training in identifying substance abuse and all employees will participate in substance abuse awareness sessions. An alcohol test will be administered if the observations are made while the employee is on - duty. If a CDL holder is directed by the supervisor to undergo reasonable suspicion testing while performing, just about to perform, or just after performing safety -sensitive functions, then DOT reporting requirements must be met. Fitness for Duty Policy Pg 11 of 19 Rev. 2=96 11 02/20/96 11:45 V512 444 6123 RALPH HARRIS SUR 10 003/003 Mr. Jim Briggs Page 2 February 20, 1996 If there are any questions or comments, please feel free to call me. Sincerely, 0 - 1�65ZN--- David H. Ham, P.E. Attachments: Bid Tabulations cc: Mr. Don Rundell, P.E. E. TYPES OF DRUG AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE TESTS 4. Reasonable Suspicion (cont.) 4.3 Any supervisor requesting an employee to submit to a reasonable suspicion controlled substances and/or alcohol test will document, in writing, the facts constituting reasonable suspicion that the employee in question is under the influence of a controlled substance and/or alcohol, and what triggered the event - including date, time and location (see form Appendix III). 4.4 The supervisor will meet with the employee, explain reasons for requesting the controlled substances and/or alcohol test then coordinate with Human Resources during normal business hours. If after hours, the supervisor coordinates directly with the contracted agency for testing. The supervisor is responsible for ensuring that the employee is quickly transported to the testing facility to allow for testing within 2 hours of employee notification. 4.5 An alcohol test required by this section must administered within hours following the determination of reasonable suspicion. If an alcohol test required by this section is not administered within 2 hours following the determination of reasonable suspicion the supervisor shall prepare a record stating the reasons the alcohol test was not promptly administered, then forward the record to Human Resources. 4.6 In addition to the record required under part E4.5, if an alcohol test required by this section is not administered within 8 hours following the determination of reasonable suspicion, the supervisor shall prepare a second record stating the reasons for not administering the test then forward the record to Human Resources. The City shall cease attempts to administer an alcohol test after 8 hours. 4.7 If a controlled substances test is required, the test must be done within 32 hours following determination of reasonable suspicion; if. not, the supervisor shall prepare record stating the reasons for not administering the test, then forward the record to Human Resources. The City shall cease attempts to test after 32 hours. 4.8 A-wdtten record shall be made of the observations leading to a controlled substances reasonable suspicion test, and signed by the supervisor or manager who made the observations, within 24 hours of the observed behavior or before the results of the controlled substances test are released, whichever is earlier (see form Appendix III). 4.9 The supervisor must forward records relating to reasonable suspicion for controlled substance use testing to Human Resources within 36 hours of observations. 4.10 A City employee who is required to take a reasonable suspicion controlled substances and/or alcohol test will, at the City's discretion, either be assigned to a non -driving, non safety -sensitive function, or placed on non -disciplinary leave with pay, while awaiting the test results. • Fitness for Duty Policy Pg 12 of 19 Rev. 2/22/96 12 E. TYPES OF DRUG AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE TESTS (cont.) 5. Procedures Following Positive Alcohol and/or Controlled Substances Test Results 5.1 Prior to verifying a positive result for alcohol a confirmation test will be conducted. 5.2 Prior to verifying a positive result for a controlled substance(s), the MRO shall make every reasonable effort to contact the employee (confidentially), and afford him or her the opportunity to discuss the test results. If after making all reasonable efforts and documenting them, the MRO is unable to reach the employee directly, the MRO shall contact Human Resources, who shall direct the employee to contact the MRO within 24 hours. 5.3 An employee whose controlled substance test result is verified positive may request (at his or her own expense) that the MRO direct that the specimen be reanalyzed, or if a split sample method was used, that the split specimen be tested in a different DHHS-certified laboratory for presence of the drug(s) for which a positive result was obtained in the test of the primary specimen. The MRO shall honor such a request if it is made within 72 hours of the employee having been notified of a verified positive test result. 5.4 An employee with a verified positive test result for alcohol or a controlled substance is subject to disciplinary action up to and including termination in accordance with Personnel Policies and Procedures, see Appendices IV and V. 5.5 Laboratory reports or test results shall not appear in an employee's general personnel folder. Information of this nature shall be contained in a separate confidential medical folder that will be securely kept under the control of the Human Resources Department. S. Return to Duty 6.1 Before an employee is permitted to return to duty, the following must exist: An employee who tested with a result of an alcohol concentration of 0.02 or greater but less than 0.04 is not permitted to return to duty for at least 24 hours and may be subject to disciplinary action, up to and including termination, in accordance with Personnel Policies and Procedures, see Appendix IV. Any duty time missed during this particular time will be charged against accrued leave. When accrued leave is exhausted the employee will be placed on unpaid leave. Fitness for Duty Policy Pg 13 of 19 Rev. 2/22/96 13 E. TYPES OF DRUG AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE TESTS 6. Return to Duty (cont.) 6.2 If the alcohol test result indicates a concentration of 0.04 or greater or if a controlled substances test indicates a verified positive result, the employee may be subject to disciplinary action, up to and including termination, in accordance with Personnel Policies and Procedures, see Appendices IV and V. In addition, the employee may not return to duty until: 6.2a The employee undergoes evaluation by an SAP and, where necessary, treatment. Any duty time missed during this particular time will be charged against accrued leave. When accrued leave is exhausted the employee will be placed on unpaid leave; 6.2b An SAP determines that the employee has successfully complied with any recommended course of treatment; and 6.2c A return to duty alcohol test indicates employee's alcohol concentration is less than 0.02 or negative on a controlled substances test. 7. Follow -Up Testing When an employee is cleared to return to duty by the SAP: 7.1 The SAP may determine that an employee is in need of assistance in resolving problems associated with alcohol and/or controlled substances misuse. The SAP will direct unannounced follow-up testing, as deemed necessary, upon the employee's return to duty under the following conditions: 7.1 a Testing frequency shall be a minimum of 6 tests in the first 12 months; 7.1 b Testing shall not exceed 60 months; and 7.1 c Testing may be terminated at any time by the SAP following the initial 6 tests. 7.2 Each supervisor shall ensure that an employee, who is subject to unannounced follow-up alcohol and/or controlled substances testing as directed by the SAP, reports for testing in accordance with DOT regulations and Personnel Policies and Procedures. . Fitness for Duty Policy Pg 14 of 19 Rev. 2/22/96 14 The following positions will need to meet the full DOT testing requirements: Electric Department Electric Superintendent Line Foreman -Electric Line Worker III - Electric Line Worker II - Electric Line Worker I - Electric Electric Groundsman Pumps Department Pump Supervisor Pump Mechanic III Pump Mechanic II Pump Mechanic I Water/Wastewater Department W&WW Superintendent W&WW Supervisor W&WW Maintenance Worker I W&WW Maintenance Worker II W&WW Maintenance Worker III Streets Department Streets Superintendent Heavy Equipment Operator/Crewleader Heavy Equipment Operator Light Equipment Operator Streets Crew Foreman Streets Maintenance Worker (P.T.) Streets Sweeper Operator (P.T.) Fire Services Fire Captain Fire Lieutenants Firefighters All Fire Division personnel whose job description requires a Class A or B Drivers License. City Shop Lead Mechanic Mechanic Vehicle Services Collection Station Sanitation Worker • Collection Station Attendant Fitness for Duty Policy Appendix Rev. 2/22/96 Appendix I 15 Typical City vehicles with GVW of 26,001 or over include: Electric Department Bucket Truck Boom Truck Digger Truck Pumps Department Dump Truck Water Department Dump Truck Wastewater Department Sewer Truck Dump Truck Storm Water Sweeper Streets Department Dump Truck Distributor Fire Services Fire Trucks Appendix II Random Controlled Substance and/or Alcohol Testing Notification You have been randomly selected to participate in a controlled substances and/or alcohol test. This test is required by the U.S. Department of Transportation under the Controlled Substances and Alcohol Misuse Prevention Program, 49 CFR Part 40 for commercial drivers (CDL holders). City Personnel Policies and Procedures extends the DOT requirements to include all regular and volunteer Fire Division personnel whose job description requires a Class A or B driver's license. This requires you to cease performing any safety -sensitive function and prepare to be transported immediately to the testing site. Because of the time requirements for these tests, a notification time of am/pm is hereby recorded. We thank you for your cooperation. Notifying Supervisor (please print) Notifying Supervisor's Signature Employee (please print) Date Fitness for Duty Policy Appendix Rev. 2/22/96 Employee's Signature Division/Department 16 Appendix III REASONABLE SUSPICION ALCOHOL and/or CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES TESTING REPORT Name of Employee: Employee Title: Appearance Body/Breath: Clothing: Color of Face: Eyes: Pupils: Speech: Behavior: Unusual Actions: Attitude: Body Control: •Unauthorized Possession at a work location: Alcohol Odor of Alcohol Odor of Alcohol Controlled Substance Controlled Substance Pale Flushed Other Bloodshot Watery Glassy Contracted Dilated Not Equal Size Not Understandable Mumbled Slurred Mush Mouthed Thick Tongued Confused Hiccoughing Crying Belching Vomiting Fighting Laughing Mood Swings Agitated Hilarious Talkative Carefree Indifferent Sleepy Combative Insulting Cocky Staggering Repeatedly trying to perform task Excessive Sniffing Unable to control bodily functions Controlled Substance List any other reasons for suspicion (e.g. chronic or withdrawal effects [382.307(b) pg. 14]): Time employee was observed: Location: a.m./p.m. Date: Employee Interview Results: Referred to Alcohol Testing [ ] Controlled Substances Testing [ ] Physician [ ] Comments: Time employee was tested: a.m./p.m. Date: If not tested within 2 hours of observations for alcohol, check box & attach explanation [ ] If not tested within 8 hours of observations for alcohol, check box & attach explanation [ J If not tested within 32 hours of observations for controlled substances, check box & attach explanation [ J Name & Title of Supervisor (who observed behavior): Supervisor's Signature: Witness' Name (if available): Witness' Signature: For reasonable suspicion alcohol testing, complete and sign before testing. Return this form to Human Resources no later than the next business day following testing. For reasonable suspicion controlled substances testing, this form must be completed and signed within 24 hours of the observed behavior or before controlled substances test results are released, whichever is earlier. Return form to Human Resources within 36 hours. FiUms for Duty Policy Appendix Rev. 2r22/96 17 r ei • 1 0 a f REASONABLE SUSPICION 382.307 All employees are subject to testing. Observed conduct must be documented by a supervisor or manager who has received at leest am tax of training on alcohol misuse. EMPLOYEE SHOULD BE TESTED WITHIN 2 HOURS BUT NO LATER THAN 8 HOURS FROM TIME EMPLOYEE IS NOTIFIED. POST ACCIDENT 382.303 All COL holders and all employees who, while operating a City vehicle or a private vehicle on City business, are involved in a fatal accident or having received a citation for a moving traffic violation in an accident involving injuries and/or a disabled vehicle must be tested. EMPLOYEES SHOULD BE TESTED WITHIN H2 OURS BUT NO LATER THAN 8 HOURS FOLLOWING THE ACCIDENT. RANDOM TESTING 382.305 Selection by a scientifically valid method. Tests are unannounced All COL holders must have equal chance to be tested with each selection. Tests must be reasonably spread throughout the year at a 25% rate of average driver positions. NOTE: CDL holders may only be tested while they are about to perform, performing, or just finished performing a safety -sensitive function Supervisors shall notify selected CDL holders and instruct h nvlw to report for testing immediately. APPENDIX IV ALCOHOL TESTING LRetumto GATIVE lar duty. rform as function. VERIFIED POSITIVE Result its .04 or above FIRST OFFENSE The City has the option of referring an employee to a Substance Abuse Professional (SAP) and/or taldng disciplinary action up to and including termination. A CDL hokfer cannot be used in any safety -sensitive position until he/she is Geared to do so by the SAP. 01 VERIFIED POSITIVE Result Is .04 or above SECOND OFFENSE Termination EVALUATION BY SAP 382.503 <> 382.605 The SAP may require FOLLOW-UP TESTING and may refer to a rehabilitation oroararrm RETURN TO TO DUTY DUTY TESTING TESTING 382.309 382309 LRETURN VERIFIED VERIFIED POSITIVE NEGATIVE, Temynation Return to FOLLOW-UP TESTING 382311 SAP may require follow up testing after referral. Sbr tests in first 12 months, not longer than 60 months. Fitness for Duty Policy Appendix Rev. 2=96 18 VERIFIED POSITIVE Result is .02 to .039 FIRST OFFENSE An employee may not return to duty for 24 hours. Employee may be subject to disciplinary action up to and including termination. No further testing required in order to return to duty. VERIFIED POSITIVE Result Is .02 to .039 SECOND OFFENSE The City has the option of referring an employee to a Substance Abuse Professional (SAP) and/or taking disciplinary action up to and inducting termination. A COL holder cannot be used in any safety -sensitive position until he/she is cleared to do so by the SAP. VERIFIED POSITIVE Resuk is .02 to .039 THIRD OFFENSE Termination EVALUATION BY SAP 382503 <> 382.605 The SAP may require FOLLOW-UP TESTING and may refer to a rehabilitation program RETURN TO DUTY TESTING 382.309 VERIFIED POSITIVE Termination. RETURN TO DUTY TESTING 382309 VERIFIED NEGATIVE. Return to duty. FOLLOW-UP TESTING 382.311 SAP may require follow up testing after referral. Six tests in first 12 months, not longer than 60 months. ' APPENDIX V CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES TESTING PRE -EMPLOYMENT 382301 New hires and employees transferring to a safety -sensitive position must be tested REASONABLE SUSPICION 382307 All employees are subject to testing. Observed conduct must be documented by a supervisor or manager who has received at least one hour of training on controlled substance abuse. EMPLOYEES SHOULD BE TESTED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE BUT NO LATER THAN 32 HOURS AFTER THE EMPLOYEE IS NOTIFIED. POST ACCIDENT 382303 All CDL holders and all employees who, while operating a City vehicle or a private vehicle on City business, are involved in a fatal accident or have received a citation for a moving traffic violation in an accident involving injuries and/or a disabled vehicle must be tested EMPLOYEES SHOULD BE TESTED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE BUT NO LATER THAN 32 HOURS FOLLOWING THE ACCIDENT. RANDOM TESTING 382.305 Selection by a scientifically valid method. Tests are unannounced. CDL holders must have equal chance to be tested with each selection Tests must be reasonably spread throughout the year at a 50% rate of average driver positions. NOTE: CDL holders may be tested any time while they are on duty. Supervisors shall notify selected CDL holders and instruct hinuber to report to the testing site immediately. New Hire and Current Employee VERIFIED NEGATIVE Cleared to hire; cleared for transfer, may perform a safely -sensitive function New Hire VERIFIED POSITIVE Not eligible for VERIFIRED POSITIVE SECOND OFFENSE Termination Cufrent Employee VERIFIED POSITIVE Not eligible for transfer to a safety -sensitive postion, subject to discipliinary action VERIFIED NEGATIVE Return to regular duty. Cleared to perform safety -sensitive functions. -- - -------------------- - - ------ I i VERIFIED POSITIVE FIRST OFFENSE The City has the option of referring an employee to a Substance Abuse Professional (SAP) and/or taldng disciplinary action up to and including termination A CDL holder cannot be used in any safety -sensitive position until he/she is cleared to do so by the SAP. RETURN TO DUTY TESTING 382.309 VERIFIED POSITIVE Fitness for Duty Policy Appendix Rev. 2=96 19 Termination EVALUATION BY SAP 382.503 <> 382.605 The SAP may require FOLLOW-UP TESTING and may refer to a rehabilitation program RETURN TO DUTY TESTING 382.309 VERIFIED NEGATIVE. Cleared for return to duty. and to perform safety -sensitive functions . FOLLOW UP TESTING 382.311 SAP may require follow up testing after referral. Sur tests in first 12 mortths, not longer than 60 months. Council Meeting Date: _ Februa1,27. 1996 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Quarterly Report on Investments. ITEM SUMMARY The attached schedules show (1) the investments outstanding as of 12/31/95 and their market value at that date; (2) the investment purchases and maturities for the quarter and (3) the Texpool and FGIC balances. Activity during the quarter: The City received the proceeds of the last bond issue in late September 1995. Since that time we have reimbursed our operating reserves for the capital projects expenditures paid prior to the bond issue. These operating reserves have been invested as shown in the transaction listing. There have been no significant changes in the City's portfolio and no actual gains or losses on securities. Staff anticipates that interest rates will continue to decline slowly through the next several months. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS The investment activity and strategies described in this report are in compliance with the City's Investment Policy and state law. FINANCIAL IMPACT n/a COMMENTS This report is presented to comply with new quarterly reporting requirements of the Public Funds Investment Act. ATTACHMENTS Report on Investments Outstanding as of December 31, 1995 Transaction Listing for the Quarter Ended December 31, 1995 Submi Micki Rundell, Accounting Director Susan L. Morgan, Director of Finance and Administration CITY OF GEORGETOWN INVESTMENTS OUTSTANDING AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1995 Purchase Coupon Purchase Investment Ma:rketVa[ue Unrealized D_ Description Maturity Y_ Cost Yield 2 i195.::::: GAIN/LOSS 03/08/94 U. S. Treasury Note 05/15/96 4.25% $986,093.75 4.93% $9919QQ0. 9,996.25 Source: Debt Reserves 05/23/94 U. S. Treasury Note 04/30/96 5.50% $994,296.88 5.81 % ::::: i14 ................................ 6,323.12 Source: Operating Funds (long-term reserves) 08/31/95 Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) Note 02/21/96 6.91% $598,207.42 5.73% >< 51 `B (3,028.92) Source: 94 CO Proceeds 08/31/95 Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) Note 02/21/96 6.91% $296,590.23 5.73% $295 Q8$ 50 (1,501.73) Source: Debt Reserves 09/22/95 U. S. Treasury Note 10/31/96 6.88% $679,212.50 5.57% $678 375 W (837.50) Source: Debt Reserves 10/23/95 Federal National Morgage Association (FNMA) Note 06/28/96 5.63% $999,375.00 5.71% '$1FOOQ300:00 925.00 Source: Operating Reserves 11/03/95 Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) Note 08/26/96 7.70`Yo $1,016,875.00 5.54% $1D1125000 (5,625.00) Source: Operating Reserves 11/03/95 Federal Farm Credit (FFC) Note 01/02/96 7.21% $300,643.26 5.75% s'.$300.00Q00. (643.26) Source: Operating Reserves . 12/15/95 Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) Note 11/25/96 8.25% $901,862.50 5.51% $.903.9.1$4b` 2,055.90 Source: Operating Reserves 12/15/95 Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp (FHLMC) Note 01/17/97 7.86% $348,234.38 5.52% $4734400 (890.38) Source: Operating Reserves 12/15/95 Federal National Mortgage Assoc (FNMA) Note 01/27/97 7.68% $409,187.50 5.52% $408 5QO Oi (687.50) Source: Operating Reserves TOTAL INVESTMENT SECURITIES $7,530,578.42 #X53&$844:Q $6,085.98 10/26/95 (t) HARTLAND ESCROW CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT 04/22/96 4.55% $1,053,031.64 ;;;:05303164 FGIC 12/31/95 5.27% $1,339,671.451;;339;671;45? TEXPOOL 12/31/95 5.74% $7,263,623.00 $I;Zd641 .............................. .............I.................. .............................. ................................ ............................... ................................ ...................... ................................ 1,024.17 TOTAL INVESTMENT BALANCES $17,186,904.51 $1719401d66 $7,110.15 (2) CITY DEPOSITORY (HARTLAND) 12/31/95 5.00% $443,356.05 TOTAL CASH AND INVESTMENT BALANCES 12/31/95 $17,630,260.56 Balances and rates as of 12/31/95 (1) Restricted Investment of'95 Series Revenue Bond (TWDB) proceeds (2) Funding of outstanding checks Issued, interest earned netted against bank service changes CITY OF GEORGETOWN QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT - DECEMBER 31, 1995 TRANSACTION LISTING - SECURITIES Purchase Discount / Purchase Investment Market Value Date Description Maturity Coupon Cost Yield 12/31/95 Comments PU .HAS :.::.::. ;..::::.::> 23-Oct-95 Federal National Morgage Association (FNMA) Note 28-Jun-96 5.63% $999,375 5.71% $1,000,300 Source: Operating Reserves 26-Oct-95 HARTLAND ESCROW CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT 22-Apr-95 N/A $1,053,032 4.55% $1,053,032 Restricted Series 95 Bond (TWDB) proceeds 03-Nov-95 Federal Farm Credit (FFC) Note 02-Jan-96 7.21 % $300,643 5.75% $300,000 Source: Operating Reserves 03-Nov-95 Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) Note 26-Aug-96 7.70% $1,016,875 5.54% $1,011,250 Source: Operating Reserves 15-Dec-95 Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) Note 25-Nov-96 8.25% $901,863 5.51 % $903,918 Source: Operating Reserves 15-Dec-95 Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp (FHLMC) Note 17-Jan-97 7.86% $348,234 5.52% $347,344 Source: Operating Reserves 15-Dec-95 Federal National Mortgage Assoc (FNMA) Note 27-Jan-97 7.68% $409,188 5.52% $408,500 Source: Operating Reserves MATU R (TIES 05-Sep-95 Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) Note 05-Dec-95 6.20% $500,469 5.82% Called Proceeds reinvested Source: Operating Funds ALL SECURITIES REDEEMED AT MATURITY, THEREFORE NO GAIN OR LOSS WAS REALIZED (Any changes In market value during year are within minimun guidelines unless noted) CITY OF GEORGETOWN QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT - DECEMBER 31, 1995 Balance Description 09/30/95 TRANSACTION LISTING - INVESTMENT POOLS Texpool $9,492,194 FGIC $2,310,173 TRANSACTION LISTING - ESCROW ACCOUNT Balance 12/31 /95 ......................... ........................ ....................... ...................... ..................... ...................... $7,263,623 $T26446 ...................... .. ............... ................ ....................... ................... $1,339,671 Restricted investment of '95 Series Revenue Bond Proceeds (TWDB) purchased Certificate of Deposit at Hartland Bank on 10/26/95 for increased yield on investment Council meeting date: 2-27-96 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Acceptance of donated sidewalks on Leander Road by Alamo Concrete Products ITEM SUMMARY The Governance Policies adopted by the Council regarding the placement of an item on the agenda requires the sponsorship of at least two councilmembers. Councilmembers Hoyt and Bain have requested that the acceptance of the sidewalks be placed on this agenda. Alamo Products has offered to continue the construction of sidewalks along Leander Road to help facilitate the safety of the school children and access to the City Swimming Pool near South Ridge Circle. The construction of the sidewalk will be about 3/10 mile and would extend from South Ridge Circle west to River View or the westerly -most portion of Georgetown. Under this proposal, the construction is to take place in mid- to late -May or early June. The City has expended funds over the past several years to extend sidewalks from I1435, past the junior high, to the swimming pool. FINANCIAL EWPACT There will be no cost to the City for this construction. ATTACHMENTS None Bob Hart, City Manager Council meeting February 27, 1996 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Consideration of a Variance to the Subdivision Regulations for Berry Creek Subdivision, Section Six, Block D. Lot 6, located at 29001 Oakland Hills Drive ITEM SUMMARY: This request is for a variance to Table 34020 of the Subdivision Regulations, which establishes the design standards of lots, including a 25 foot front yard setback for single family dwellings. The applicant's dwelling is situated on an irregular shaped lot at the corner of Oakland Hills Drive and La Quinta Drive. Oakland Hills Drive arcs slightly to the west and the 25 foot front yard setback and Public Utility Easement (PUE) were platted to reflect this arc. The contractor for the residence under construction on this lot, however, overlooked the platted 25 foot arc setback, and thus, the front corners of the structure overlap the setback between 5 inches and 1 foot 11 inches. In the Berry Creek subdivision, the Building Inspection Department requires compliance with the City's setback requirements, although it is the contractor's responsibility to prove that the structure being built complies with the City's setback requirements. In this case, the contractor notified the City in December 1995 that the front corners of the structure overlapped the platted 25 foot arc setback. A variance is requested to establish a linear setback of 25 feet which would accommodate the structure under construction. Because the platted 25 foot arc setback is also a PUE, an abandonment must be considered with this variance. The Community Owned Utilities Division and other utility providers support an abandonment of the PUE only between the front corners of the structure which encroach into the platted 25 foot arc setback, as described above. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. COMMENTS: At their regular meeting of February 6, 1996, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the requested variance to Table 34020 of the Subdivision Regulations, thereby allowing a linear setback of 25 feet to accommodate the structure under construction, after making the required findings of fact, and subject to approval of an abandonment of two (2) feet of the Public Utility Easement where the structure encroaches. RECOMMENDED MOTION: If this item is approved by the City Council, it will be consistent with the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, unless stated otherwise. ATTACHMENTS: Staff report and attached exhibits. Submitted By: Edward arry, AICP - Director Division of Development Services s` Hildy L. Ki gma, AICP Chief Planner VARIANCE FROM THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS FOR BERRY CREEK SUBDIVISION, SECTION SIX, BLOCK D, LOT 6, LOCATED AT 29001 OAKLAND HILLS DRIVE OWNER/AGENT: Mr. Danny Swafford, Jr. Heritage Properties 3003 Dawn Drive, Suite #107 Georgetown, Texas 78628 863-7194 FAX 863-0586 REQUEST: Variance from the Subdivision Regulations for Berry Creek Subdivision, Section Six, Block D, Lot 6 as recorded in Cabinet K, Slides 271-272, of the Official Plat Records of Williamson County, Texas. FACTS: Location: 29001 Oakland Hills Drive. SEE EXHIBIT A Existing Site: Single family residential lot. Existing Zoning: This property is located outside the City limits, so zoning does not apply. Proposed Use: Single family residence. Surrounding Uses: Single family residences. Notification: The notification requirements have been completed. HISTORY: On December 14, 1993, the City Council approved an abandonment of the drainage easement located along the east side of this lot. SEE EXHIBIT B ANALYSIS: This request is for a variance to Table 34020 of the Subdivision Regulations for Berry Creek Subdivision, Block D, Lot 6. Table 34020 establishes the design standards for lots, including a 25 foot front setback for single family dwellings. The Variance - Berry Creek, Sec. Six, Blk D, Lot 6 February 15, 1996 VR 96-01/ File: BYCK6-D6.VAR Page 1 CM/WW applicant's dwelling is situated on an irregular shaped lot at the corner of Oakland Hills Drive and La Quinta Drive. Oakland Hills Drive arcs slightly to the west and the 25 foot building line and Public Utility Easement (PUE) were platted to reflect this arc. SEE EXHIBIT C The contractor for the one (1) story brick and wood house under construction on this lot, however, did not recognize the platted 25 foot are setback, and thus, the front corners of the structure overlap the setback between 5 inches to 1 foot 11 inches. In the Berry Creek subdivision, the Building Inspection Department requires compliance with the City's setback requirements. In particular, Building Inspection requires the builder to set string lines from property pin to property pin, then uses these lines to check for compliance with the building setback requirements. It is the contractor's responsibility to prove that the structure being built complies with the City's setback requirements. In this case, the contractor notified the City in December 1995 that the string line had not been set to reflect the arc in the platted front yard setback. Therefore, when the Building Inspector had checked the setbacks it was based on an incorrect position. A variance is requested to establish a linear setback of 25 feet which would accommodate the structure under construction. Because the platted 25 foot arc setback is also a PUE, a license to encroach will have to be considered by the City Council when they consider this variance. The Community Owned Utilities Division supports a License to Encroach only between the front corners of the structure which encroach into the platted 25 foot arc setback, as described above. VARIANCE: After listening to the testimony presented at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, and reading the documentation provided by the applicant and the staff's recommendation, the Commission makes the following finds of fact as required by the Subdivision Regulations: 1. The public convenience and welfare will be substantially served; and Variance - Berry Creek, Sec. Six, Blk D, Lot 6 February 15, 1996 VR 96-011 File: BYCK6-D6.VAR page 2 CM/WW 2. The appropriate use of surrounding property will not be substantially or permanently impaired or diminished; and 3. The applicant has not created the hardship from which relief is sought; and 4. The variance will not confer upon the applicant a special right or privilege not commonly shared or available to the owners of similar and surrounding property; and 5. The hardship from which relief is sought is not solely of an economic nature. " 6. The variance is not contrary to the public interest; and 7. Due to special conditions, the literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in an unnecessary hardship; and 8. In granting the variance the spirit of the ordinance is observed and substantial justice is done." The applicant's Documentation for Basis of Requested Variance form is attached. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the requested variance to Table 34020 of the Subdivision Regulations, thereby allowing a linear setback of 25 feet to accommodate the structure under construction, after making the required findings of fact, and subject to approval of a License to Encroach into the Public Utility Easement. P&Z ACTION: Approval of the requested variance to Table 34020 of the Subdivision Regulations, thereby allowing a linear setback of 25 feet to accommodate the structure under construction, after making the required findings of fact, and subject to approval of an abandonment of two (2) feet of the Public Utility Easement where the structure encroaches. Variance - Berry Creek, Sec. Six, Blk D, Lot 6 VR 96-01/ File: BYCK6-D6.VAR CM/WW February 15, 1996 Page 3 >r - cr cr b-L 1.1 1.1 O ►t 1c f Tn 7n %` tC ►i '� [ z t► bL r Ala�:� ►► ` (\ 1\\ Is ► i 1 I 1 / � JJ>► 1C1 �c Lo \ ti Ync� 7 -- U_Iu1i3Y''ZC it :' ►t ICl of N Z I •2 li •, t ' bi cc c c ZZ J �_. _IC•\ \ OZ rt il- r\ t C1 101 cr hCIC._IC CZ I d r Xr'� 9r t' CI '• d0 91 •1 \y✓' �O Ct 01 11 i1`�1���� •1 s: tt 9c • 93COT t� �' �6 T �1 s[ z 1 \�0�� ° � •1 t tr s� i. 1 1 01 • �% 17 cZ tZ Z c ► C7 > tr 11 p, `►1 c :1 S1 CC rr Or ° 1 - � 6 ° 9 ° > J► YI ft O Z• 6 tZ 9; h.. J Z 1 CI rr / � c t 1 ' i 07 •1 S tr ►Z � 1 'r 2 91 1 it C ►� C Z t(7 / 1 W I rZ ZZ z 11 2 Y cIi Q` + / 9 1 •1 '— °z it co al Y 67 ,� OZ 1 i ►Z ct O rr ^' 9 6+ S i -r 9r 4 9 13 .) 1 J li 2 ° 12 CZ� \ ►r \ Z• rr �\ 6 , 0Z �� r �z.• �`i _ c _.>, . �, 1a� • 1NOY' yi cr tt � � — :i �rcc cil ► o, •I Of _ _ t ►9o/rnz (! I ICI ✓ [ ty3�llrt� c a^ " 91 Cv£ If 8 �.c.. 9 � ►1 CI 91 •1 N G, 91 Cf 91 O£ zl o 6Z II Zi �/ 1 / Ir ",r nz ►r cl 11 li DI a-liaiHx3 29001 Oakland Hills Drive EXHIBIT B i�`N7 l/ L- •./ 2022 Al Abandon Drainage a ement V. \ 26 n o ' / \ -\ �'\ EXHIBIT C gyp' \NNI*- i J Q/ Ic m� rn vi c I \�% 4 EWCROAQHM�I T �% N % - li �A mv VARIANCE TO ALLOW ENCROACHMENT INTO 25' BUILDING LINE AND P.U.E. DOCUMI NTA'I JON OF BASIS FOR REQULSTEU) VARIANCE Date: 12/19/95 _ _ Applicait: Heritage _ Properties _ This re(luest is fur a variance from (lie literal clif C(:Il]Clll UI SCCIIUII(S) of the Subdivision Regulations. Give a brief (lescril)tlon of the variance rc(Illcstc(I: Reduce the frontage setback of 25' building line to 23' on Oakland Hills Drive YOU have rcqueste(I it vari<t ICC to the desigi slan(lalds of the. Sul)(livisiorl Regulations. In order to be able to recor11111eid and approve such it variance, Section 60070 R. of the Regulations, requires that the PImmiig mid Zoiiig Comrnissloi aid City Council nlUst be aIWC (o "ensure that the v�II KIIlee is 11()( t() the public interest alld, (tic to spcciCII Conditiulis, a literal cifc)rcemcrll of the ordiiallc:e %VOLIld resUl( in uiieccssary hardship." The Commission and Council are directed to meet these requiremci(s by making specific frndings of fact. In order to assist the Cc►ntmissiui aild ('MIIICIl in cort(iucling (heir delll)eratl(MS regar(ling your requested variance, pleasecoill)lete this iurrll to d0CLIIIICIIt how this request %tall impact the issues described l)eluW. These issuers relate directly to the eight (8) findings of fact that must be (riled by the Commission and Council when rec:uitmending approval of any variance. You inay attach an a(lditloial sheet, OF suI)nlit this information in the (urns of a letter. In whal manner %ill the public coivemence and welfare be sul)staitially served') Accommodate similar structure improvement to subdivision. Will the ilpprupl-late IISC UI SUrrULIMIlllg PIOI)ert}' be sul)staitlall� or permanently Impaired or (111111111shed m any 111aiier•l Provide reasons why you t)eliev(-, your aiw,cr to be sul)I)vrlabIC. Setback variance will not impair surrounding property. The current setback is based on an arc measurement and does not accommodate the current structure. A linear set back crn►tinuinf, Lhe 25' set back of surrounding property would equate to a 23' arc set back, �. 11�h 11 .I1c the h,Ir dsllil►` 111� (11�'ecl l lc►w «e1 e III(►s( hat dtihll�s r <Iled .' I lc►�� arc lII(�tie 11,11Osltil►s d111e1c1II boil those ,11Iccliig the rc.,l (d the plIMIc ld cd w 1t11 (hc cifol- cllleit (►f this ti,tric f►r(►vi`ic►i ? Nulc (h Il the (ciriilissic►i .111d ('()11IIcil caiic►( <i \ "-It Idllce f()r %k Inch the h<Ilclshil) cl,tiiled is solcly of all ccui()nlic nature. The structure designed for this lot utilizes the maximum building area allowed and is consistent with the general architecture in this subdivision. Due to the arc set back on Oakland Hills Drive, the structure, as designed, overlaps the current setback and the front corners by 1'-11" to 5". A linear .�•1St��Iv��tq 25' would accommodate the structure as designed on an arc set back of 23'. 4. if the requested variance if approved, will it confer upon the applicant special right or privilege not commonly shared or available to the owners of similar and surrounding property? Provide reasons wiry you believe your answer to be supportable. No. Due to various lot designs of Berry Greek plats, many properties do not accommodate maximum building capacity due to (arc) curved streets and corner lots. Variances of this nature have been approved previously within the subdivision. 5. How is the puWic interest ai(Mcd? Not applicable. 6. List the special conditions that affect this properly and justify the approval of the \-ariance. This lot is on au irregular shaped corner lot. The corner was platted as a "filler lot" to accommodate surrounding properties symmetrical designs. Due to the street configuration, the designed structure is difficult to plat and enhance the value of the property, 7. flow will the spirit of the ordinance be observed if' this request is granted? A linear set back measurement of 25' accommodates the structure. X. How, will suhstaimal justice tie done if this request is granted'? Allows compliance with set back regulations once variance is approved. Conformity with surrounding set back areas. IZcvisc d 1 211)11 wf [E(9�1EDWE I Jw z 9 ins I CITY OF GEORGETOWN NOTICE TO SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS OF A PUBLIC MEETING Notice is hereby given that the City of Georgetown will hold its regular public meeting of the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. This meeting will be held on the 6th day of February-, 1996, at 6:00 p.m. at its regular meeting place in the Council Chambers, 101 East 7th Street, Georgetown, Texas to consider the proposed: Variance to the Subdivision Regulations for Berry Creek, Section Six, Block D, Lot 6, located on Oakland Hills Drive at La Quinta Drive. As one of the owners of adjacent property you are invited to be present at such meeting if you desire to discuss the proposed plan. See attached Exhibit A for more detail. Date: 1/21/96 City of Georgetown A copy of the planning report related to this item will be available at the Division of Development Services and the Georgetown Public Library no later than the Friday prior to the meeting described above. For further information phone the Development Services Division at 930-3575. PROPERTY OWNER'S COMMENTS Project Name: Variance - Berry Creek Sec Six, Block D, Lot 6 Name of Respondent: 00/6 Address of Respondent: 3 D I am in favor: D I object: If you wish to submit written comment, please respond by 1 /31 /96, it will be provided to the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. Please reply to: City of Georgetown Development Services Division P. O. Box 409 Georgetown, Texas 78627 Council meeting February 27, 1996 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET Z SUBJECT: Consideration of a Resolution to authorize an Abandonment of a portion of a Public Utility Easement located along the south property line of Lot 6, Block D, Section Six, Berry Creek Subdivision, located at 29001 Oakland Hills Drive ITEM SUMMARY: The Director of Community Owned Utilities has agreed to allow an Abandonment of a two (2) foot wide portion of the 25 foot wide Public Utility Easement (PUE) where the structure encroaches, located along Oakland Hills Drive, as illustrated in Exhibit A. This request is being made to allow the front corners of the structure to overlap the platted 25 foot PUE. As a separate agenda item, a variance is also being requested to establish a linear setback of 25 feet along Oakland Hills Drive which would accommodate the structure under construction. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Unless otherwise stated, the City Council's action on this item will approve the requested Abandonment of a Public Utility Easement in accordance with the recommendation of the Director of Community Owned Utilities. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A Resolution Submitted By: Edward J1 Barry, AP - Director Division bf Developknent Services Hildy L. ngma, AICP Chief Planner RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A QUIT CLAIM DEED TO VACATE AND ABANDON A PORTION OF A PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED ALONG THE FRONT (SOUTH) LOT LINE OF LOT 6, BLOCK D, SECTION SIX, BERRY CREEK SUBDIVISION, AS RECORDED IN THE PLAT RECORDS CABINET K, SLIDES 271-272 OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS, AND LOCATED AT 29001 OAKLAND HILLS DRIVE. WHEREAS, the City of Georgetown has received an Application for the Vacation of a two (2) foot wide portion of the 25-foot wide Public Utility Easement where the structure encroaches, located along the front (south) lot line of Lot 6, Block D, Section Six, Berry Creek Subdivision, as recorded in Cabinet K, Slides 271-272 of the Plat Records of Williamson County, Texas, and located at 29001 Oakland Hills Drive; and WHEREAS, upon considering the Application and additional information pertaining to the Application, the City Council now finds that there are no utilities existing in the easements and that the utility companies serving the area including and surrounding the easements have determined that there exists no present or foreseeable need for the easements. 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 finds that this action implements the following policies of the Century Plan - Policy Plan: 1. Growth and Physical Development Policy 1, which states "The City will ensure that future land use patterns provide economic, cultural, and social activities to all residents, businesses and organizations; and 2. Utilities/Energy Policy 2, which states "The City will establish Utility policies which take into consideration the needs of all citizens of the community and take necessary precautions to prevent harmful ecological impact on the environment. " The City Council has found that this action 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 Mayor is hereby authorized to execute, on behalf of the City of Georgetown, a Quit Claim Deed abandoning a two (2) foot wide portion of the 25-foot wide Public Utility Easement where the structure encroaches, located along the front (south) lot line of Lot 6, Block D, Section Six, Berry Creek Subdivision, as recorded in Cabinet K, Slides 271- 272 of the Plat Records of Williamson County, Texas, and located at 29001 Oakland Hills Drive, and the City Secretary to attest thereto on behalf of the City of Georgetown. SECTION 3. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption. RESOLVED this ATTEST: day of 1996. THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: Sandra D. Lee By: Leo Wood City Secretary Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney Lot 6, Block D, Section Six, Berry Creek Resolution No. Page 2 of 2 --------—--------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ rC�2I19/1996 12:57 5122449508 CRICHTOt4 & ASSOCIATE PAGE 02 CRIC.HTON AND ASSOCIATES LAND SURVEYORS 1.07 NORTH LAMPASAS ROUND ROCK, TEXAS 78664 ' 51.2-244-3395 EXHIBIT "A" PARTIAL VACA f10N F.CELD NO11S FIELD NOTFS FOR A 0.0112 ACRE (490 SQ. FT.) TRACT' OUT OF AND A PORTION OF TAT 6 BLOCK D RESUBDIVISIOROF BERRY CREEK SECTION SIX A SUBDIVISION KEGORDED IN CABINET K S 1.l T F,S 271-273 PLAT RECORDS OF W9J.IA.MSON COUNTY, TEXAS SAID TRACT BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED BY MF-TES AND BOUNDS AS FOLLOWS: Cornmencing at a 1/2" pin found on the curving North R.O.W. of'Daklands Drive and at the Southeast corner of I-tt 5 Block D also being the Southwest corner of Lot 6 Block D. T141=N(—F. with said curve to the right whose elements are Delta = 14' 15' 46", R = 325.00', L = 80.90' and whose Chard hears S 74' 38' 32" W, 80.69 feet to a 1/2" pin found. THEW-F. N 27' 47' 47" W through the interior of said Lot 6 a distance of 26.09 feet to a point at the Southeast corner of a house for the POINT OF BEGINNING. NG. TNFNCF-, continuing through the interior of said Lot 6 the following four (4) courses. 1) S TV :32' 38" W with a wall of said house 24.30 feet to a paint at the Wr cr of said house. 21) N 15" 27' 22" W with a wall of said house 1-93 feet to a point on the wall of said house where the curving 2.5' building line intersects said wall. 3) Through said house and with said curving building line to the right whose elements are Delta = 03° 59' 15", R = 350.00', L = 24.36' and whose Chord bears N 78° 20' 35" E. 24.3S feet to a paint on the East wall of said house. 4) S 15" 27' 22" E with the East wall of said house 0.31 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and containing 0.0122 acres (490 sq- ft.) more or less. I hereby certify that the foregoing field notes were prepared from a survey on the ground, under my supervision and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Witness my hand and sea] this the 19th day of Feburary, 1996. erman Crichton, R.P.L.S. 4046 F,} It 4046 ••• ,`. �Oti EXHIBIT A 29001 OAKLAND HILLS DRIVE m ry `oh too b ,p O G `'ENE PN Council meeting February 27 1996 Item No. A A AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Consider approval of a Final Plat of a 76.095 acre tract in the R. T. Jenkins, Mary Ann Lewis and Abner Short Surveys, to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, Neighborhood Nine. ITEM SUMMARY: The subject Final Plat.is consistent with the approved Preliminary Plat for Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2. The Preliminary Plat of Phase 2 was approved by the City Council on December 12, 1995. All design and information requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. COMMENTS: At its February 2, 1996, meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to approve the requested Final Plat for the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, Neighborhood Nine provided the construction plans are submitted prior to February 12, 1996. The construction plans have been submitted to the City and are currently being reviewed by the staff. RECOIIMENDED MOTION: If this item is approved by the City Council, it will be consistent with the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, unless stated otherwise. ATTACHMENTS: Staff report and Final Plat. Submitted By: Edward . Barry, A P - Director Divisio of Develo ment Services C Hildy L. Kingma, AIC Chief Planner FINAL PLAT OF A 76.095 ACRE TRACT IN THE R. T. JENKINS, MARY ANN LEWIS AND ABNER SHORT SURVEYS, TO BE KNOWN AS THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, PHASE 2, NEIGHBORHOOD NINE, LOCATED SOUTHEAST OF DEL WEBB BOULEVARD OWNERS/APPLICANT: Mr. Robert Eck II, P.E. Director, Land Development Del Webb Development Company 203 South IH-35, Suite 100 Georgetown, Texas 78628 931-6900 FAX: 930-6776 AGENT: Mr. Scott Smiley, P.E. Turner, Collie & Braden, Inc. 5000 Plaza On The Lake, Suite 150 Austin, Texas 78746 329-5002 FAX: 329-0802 REQUEST: Final Plat of a 76.095 acre tract in the R. T. Jenkins, Mary Ann Lewis and Abner Short Surveys, to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, Neighborhood Nine as recorded in Volume 1898, Page 597 of the Official Deed Records of Williamson County, Texas. Existing Zoning: Currently unzoned. A rezoning to RP, Residential Planned was approved on First Reading. Second Reading of the rezoning ordinance for the area of Neighborhood Nine will occur after the Final Plat is recorded. Proposed Use: 202 single family residential lots and nine (9) open space tracts. HISTORY: The Preliminary Plat of Phase 2 was approved by the City Council on December 12, 1995. ANALYSIS: The subject Final Plat is consistent with the approved Preliminary Plat for Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2. All design and information requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. SEE EXHIBIT C Final Plat - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, Neighborhood Nine February 21, 1996 #FP96-04/File:SCG_9.FP Page 1 CM/CS The City has not yet received construction plans for the public improvements within Neighborhood Nine. The process for plat approval requires that the subdivision construction plans be . submitted and approved before the final plat is considered for approval. In order to avoid the potential for changes to the final plat, and therefore a second review of it, the construction plans were required to be submitted prior to Commission consideration of the plat. They still have not been submitted. Unless the construction plans are submitted by February 12, 1996, staff recommends that this application be forwarded to the Council with a recommendation for denial. Further, if the plans are submitted by that date, the plat will not be forwarded to the City Council until the City staff has had the opportunity to review the plans sufficiently to ensure that they are consistent with the approved Preliminary Plat. The staff review period for construction plans is 30 days. Therefore, given the late submittal of the plans, it may become necessary for the applicant to concur with a delay to the City Council's consideration of the plat in order to provide for sufficient review of the plans. Otherwise, the plat will be forwarded to the City Council with a recommendation for denial. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of a Final Plat for the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, Neighborhood Nine provided the construction plans are submitted prior to February 12, 1996. P & Z ACTION: At its February 2, 1996, meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to approve the requested Final Plat for the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, Neighborhood Nine provided the construction plans are submitted prior to February 12, 1996. Final Plat - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, Neighborhood Nine JIFP96-04/File:SCG_9. FP CM/CS February 21, 1996 Page 2 SUN CITY GEORGETOWN - PHASE 2 Neighborhood Nine m y,. EXHIBIT B DETERMINATION OF PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT GIVEN A MIXED LAND USE PROPOSAL 1. 'DATE': September 13, 1995 'PROJECT NAME': Sun City Georgetown - Revised Concept Plan (Second) 2. 'GIVEN': acres of Intensity Level 1 5314 acres of Intensity Level 2 acres of Intensity Level 3 acres of Intensity Level 4 acres of Intensity Level 5 acres of Intensity Level 6 5,314.00 TOTAL ACRES 3. ALLOWABLE DEMAND: INTENSITY WATER WASTEWATER TRANSPORTATION LEVEL Peak GPD Average GPD ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Peak Trip Ends 1 0 0 -- 0 2 12.753,600 3,454,100 21,256 3 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 6 0 0 ----------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------• 0 -- 4. TOTAL ALLOWABLE DEMAND: Maximum GPD Water Capacity: 12,753.600 Maximum GPD Wastewater Capacity: 3,454,100 Maximum Trip Ends: 21,256 5. EFFECTIVE ALLOWABLE SYSTEM INTENSITIES: GPD/Acre Water: 2,400 GPD/Acre Wastewater: 650 Trip Ends/Acre Traffic., 4 6. PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT BASED ON GIVEN MIX OF LAND USES: (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (a) TOTAL ALLOWABLE DEMAND (1) POTENTIAL UNITS BY UTILITY MAXIMUM PER DEV DEVELOPMENT LAND USES `ACRES' I WATER -----------------------------------I ------------------ ----------------------------------------- WASTEWATEF TRANSP I WATER WASTEWATEF TRANSP I UNITS I REGS I ALLOWED/UNIT (2) Detached SF Large Lot Average Lot Zero Lot Line Attached SF Multifamily Mobile Home Lodging Institutional Church -with day care -w/o day care Medical Office General Office Retail, Mixed Retail, Restaurant Retail, Store Employment Centers Warehouse Mini -Warehouse Greenbelt Sub -Total Road Right -of -Way TOTAL 3,163.00 0 7,591,200 0 2,055,950 I 0 1 12,652 I -------------------------------------------I 0 0 7.606 8.224 -------------------•I I 0 1 14,280 I ------------•I I 0 1 7,606 I --------------------------------- I 0 1 22,963 I 0 housing units 7,606 housing units 517 0 1,240,800 0 336,050 0 1 2,068 I 0 0 1,909 1,920 0 1 1,902 I 0 I 1,902 I 0 I 7.507 I 0 housing units 1,902 housing units 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 (5)1 (5) housing units 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 I I 0 housing units 29.15 69,960 18,948 117 I I 204 206 139 I 138,644 I I 0 rooms 138,644 square feet 0 0 0 1 0 0 I 0 1 I 0 1 I 1 0 square feet 80.75 193,800 52,488 323 ( 466 469 100 I 100,0903 I I 1 0 square feel 100,093 square feet 16.00 1508.1 38,400 3,619,440 10,400 980,265 64 I 6,032 I 105 114 5,568 6,014 25 365 I 25,098 365,202 I I 25,098 square feet 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 I 0 1 I I 365,202 square feet 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 o l I 0 square feet 0 square feet 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 I I 0 square feet 0 0 0 1 0 0 I 0 1 I 0 1 I 0 square feet I I I I I 0 square feet -- 5,314.00 - --- (units in this section should be multiplied by 1000) 5,314.00 \ ' `Xmf I,y. PAC[ 397 1� SUN CITr CrORCETO°N i NEIGHBORHOOD ONE \ / CABINET N. SLIDES 95-I16 lSJ PLO/ rj, W.CPR \ ,EeOc l / / `b#',Si^ \ S. > 4 ^ \ \ \ R ED TRACT L1' \ y ��! \� \/�a• \ / SUN C/Tr C£ORcMwN .\ \ / F 3 Ell, S N CIT, NEIGHBORHOOD ONE ORCEf07N / CABINET Y, SLIDES 95-I,6 ►.CPR I /Nf/CHBORH000 ONE 9� \!1�y CEBINET \ I / 9 CAL. A 93 g MAC -C SLIDES 96-116 TR.CT •E ° COIF COURSE AMU D.C. / rR.CT 'C' I.CP.R GOLF COURSE 9, (ZONED RP) A D.L 90 (ZONED RP) to;' — / CEDA1, El J ®\ 'Rtt \ '\fr ) �UM !r D FEN\ b °7 4 9 ° \ r •,j,E1CNBOlUfOO\ �/ � p' � \ W O9 /\ \f� Z y. \/d� C}� 1` DvD.r 3 T, / 10zf. \/ ° — — — — \ 'r -a A.� Y \ \ ..d so�lr slw.er. .-»� ft eg t�' \ 1 1p2 'OQ \ I ,,\ TRAi OF TK — \ >'J �/ / \ \ /lnl ,b , •w,t, \ C//%d g, 'Oj ,19 120 '6z 'M �, / 7 /y / Is, \ e° aD'i'ywDDia +7 I 72, '6r 12, Ise DE\DLTO•N eJ ')F"1\ �� Q� / / // I e9 CITY RNOOO TEN. tir RS / , / / J0 '7e a / 1yg "O IS,/ t \ \ \! �+• Ye. +. 1 ' J 1..� -I— / \ y/ 'J7 C)Rq, oot I- T - T - T� � i4 \ a/ / / 1 \ \ /b 1© , � 41 1gy \ �� a lid do e) i \ IJ"J J � "s ao? �, za Dvri��i Appct'( nr r s \ - - - DN[D "RPl TRAL OF THE FLOWERS SCALE: 1"=300- yE — clrr uNlrs urr cro CrrOrN �.S 1g I I cRr UYlT6 LINT I cITr I I I aJ az I I zj I /9 1 / L / TRACE 'C' 'w. TRACT •& / rna f.Otf COURSE Anp D.0 L � (ZONED (TOME➢ RP) / / e0 e, \ \ 39 44 1, MALT •C DP[� \\ SUN C/Tr C£ORC3/'p£N \ m \ l P.CCD.E (ZONED PR) NEICHBOR/IOOD rro \ CABINET Y. SLIDES llr-rsy F.CP.R W P J 30 OOIDE.49 F100 NAY / JOY ♦3 ♦g // 9OLUA/r I t? .J I Yt .' Ob / / ' '°' / ➢RCM SRRCL. D1. r — �"'..,; _ / ig \ NMlECW NAY \ ?° JD J7 J7 it LIN` I I tJRJ ORE. YRCG OX cz SUN CITY GEORGETOWN - NEIGHBORHOOD 9 Council meeting February 27, 1996 Item No. -BB AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Consideration of a Concept Plan of a 25.65 acre tract in the Joseph Fish Survey to be known as West Mesa Estates, located along County Road 262 (Russell Park Road) ITEM SUMMARY: The subject parcel is currently developed with one (1) residence and is surrounded by agricultural land. The applicant proposes to develop the property in two (2) phases. Four (4) single family lots, each approximately 1.5 acres in size, are proposed for Phase One. Phase Two consists of the applicant's residence and existing agricultural land, which he intends to maintain until an unknown future date. The proposed layout of access points to this subdivision warrants two (2) points of discussion. The intersection of County Road 262 and Abrams Street. does not meet the 90 degree intersection requirement outlined in Section 33030 0.1. of the Subdivision Regulations. The applicant has dedicated additional right-of-way at this corner which will enable the intersection of County Road 262 and Abrams Street to be straightened in the future. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. COMMENTS: At their regular meeting of February 6, 1996, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of a Concept Plan of West Mesa Estates. RECOMMENDED MOTION: If this item is approved by the City Council, it will be consistent with the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, unless stated otherwise. ATTACHMENTS: Staff report, attached exhibits, and Concept Plan / Short Form Final Plat. Submitted By: Edward J/. Barry, AIC - Director Division of Develop ent Services Hildy L. 16ngma, AICP Chief Planner CONCEPT PLAN OF A 25.65 ACRE TRACT IN THE JOSEPH FISH SURVEY TO BE KNOWN AS WEST MESA ESTATES, LOCATED ALONG COUNTY ROAD 262 (RUSSELL PARK ROAD) OWNER/APPLICANT: Mr. Paul G. Abrams Ms. Margaret A. Abrams Route 5, Box 300 Georgetown, Texas 78628 863-0449 REQUEST: Concept Plan of 25.65 acres in the Joseph Fish Survey to be known as West Mesa Estates, and recorded in Volume 437, Page 91 of the Official Deed Records of Williamson County, Texas. Location: Located at 1901 County Road 262 (Russell Park Road). SEE EXHIBIT A Existing Site: Agricultural tract with one (1) residence. Existing Zoning: This property is located outside the City limits so zoning does not apply. Proposed Use: Single family residential. Surrounding Uses and Zoning: North: Lake Georgetown Estates, Waterwood Section, single family residential (out of City) South: Army Corps of Engineers Lake Georgetown (out of City) East: Unplatted land (out of City) West: Unplatted land (out of City) Century Plan: The Century Plan -Development Plan designates this development as Intensity Level 2. The proposed development is within the intensity limits for this acreage. SEE EXHIBIT B Concept Plan - West Mesa Estates February IS, 1996 CP-96-02 / File:WESTMESA.CCP Page 1 CM/WW Notification: The notification requirements have been completed. ANALYSIS: The subject parcel is currently developed with one (1) residence and is surrounded by agricultural land. The applicant proposes to develop the property in two (2) phases. EXHIBIT C delineates the entire Concept Plan area and includes Phase One, which is also under consideration as a Final Plat. Four (4) single family residential lots, each approximately 1.5 acres in size, are proposed for Phase One. Phase Two consists of the applicant's residence and existing agricultural land, which he intends to maintain until an unknown future date. Concept Plan - West Mesa Estates CP-96-02 / Filo:WESTMESA.CCP CMJWW The Concept Plan submittal conforms to the informational requirements of the Subdivision Regulations. Section 23060 states "approval of a concept plan constitutes acceptance of the type, density and intensity of land use indicated on the plan; the classification and arrangement of streets indicated; the proposed phasing plan; and the nature of utility service proposed." Water service for West Mesa Estates will be provided by the Chisholm Trail Special Utility District. On -site septic tank systems will provide wastewater service for this subdivision. The Chisholm Trail Special Utility District has indicated the fire flow pressure within one -quarter mile of the proposed West Mesa Estates is 650 gallons per minute (gpm) with a 20 pound residual pressure. This flow exceeds the fire flow requirement of 500 gpm for scattered residential areas as outlined in Section 35012 of the Subdivision Regulations. The Concept Plan submittal meets the intensity and density requirements of the Century Plan. The proposed layout of access points to this subdivision warrants two points of discussion. The intersection of County Road 262 and Abrams Street is a 69 degree 54 minute angle, which does not meet the 90 degree intersection requirement outlined in Section 33030 0.1. of the Subdivision Regulations. The applicant has dedicated 0.044 acre as additional right-of-way at this corner which will enable the intersection of County Road 262 and February 15, 1996 Page 2 Abrams Street to be straightened in the future. The Police Services Division also recommends installation of a stop sign or street sign at this intersection for traffic safety purposes. The Development Review Committee initially recommended establishing a 60 foot right-of-way easement between Lots 2 and 3 to provide sufficient access to any future development of Phase Two. The applicant, however, maintains that access to Phase Two can be accommodated from the existing Abrams Street and then by widening the existing dirt road located on his property between the east property line of Lot 1 and his existing residence. One merit of eliminating this right-of-way easement between Lots 2 and 3 is that only one (1) street would access County Road 262. Staff notes that without the recommended 60 foot right-of-way easement between Lots 2 and 3, future development of Phase Two may be constrained. Should the existing dirt road need to be widened to accommodate future development, the applicant's residence may have to be relocated (the residence is a mobile home). The rolling topography may also restrict the number of roadway configuration options. The applicant recognizes the potential for future development constraints of Phase Two, which are created by this Concept Plan and Final Plat, without the 60 foot right-of-way easement from County Road 262. Despite the issues raised, the County and City engineers concurred that the additional right-of-way is not needed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of a Concept Plan of West Mesa Estates. P&Z ACTION: Approval of the Concept Plan of West Mesa Estates. Concept Plan - West Mesa Estates CP-96-02 / Filo:WESTMESA.CCP CM/WW February 15, 1996 Page 3 EXHIBIT A GLAZER W VE ST �aC MT]. U I A (960 77AC) zo 6 A AC GLAZER lmycsrcwT is Z3 24 00, a.zle" Z.O. / -IS, 95 AC UNITEO STATES OF ApERr, 12 33 .0 AKA r n') �A 1 L 3a 39 19 le 37 dyE 40 10 41 43 C &RL J CC.E.Roo 956 /801 rz R f QLANN JA 11 JOYCE GR,fmE*T u I A RUSSELL PARK I �10 9 0 \ CAof A/C EXHIBIT 8' DETERMINATION OF PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT GIVEN A SINGLE LAND USE 1. 'DATE': January 9, 1996 'PROJECT NAME': West Mesa Estates 2. 'GIVEN' 6.08 acres of Intensity Level 1 acres of Intensity Level 2 acres of Intensity Level 3 acres of Intensity Level 4 acres of Intensity Level 5 acres of Intensity Level 6 6.08 TOTAL ACRES 3. ALLOWABLE DEMAND: INTENSITY WATER WASTEWATER TRANSPORTATION LEVEL Peak GPD Average GPD Peak Trip Ends ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 6,383 1,824 12 2 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 6 0 0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0 4. TOTAL ALLOWABLE DEMAND. - Maximum GPD Water Capacity: 6,383 Maximum GPD Wastewater Capacity: 1.824 Maximum Trip Ends: 12 5. PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT: (a) (b) (c) (d) POTENTIAL UNITS BY UTILITY MAXIMUM PER DEV DEVELOPMENT LAND USES WATER ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WASTEWATER TRANSPORTATION UNITS REGS ALLOWED/UNIT Detached SF -------------------- ----------------- ------------------------------------------- Large Lot 6 6 20 6 12 6 housing units Average Lot 6 7 14 6 44 6 housing units Zero Lot Line 6 7 14 6 59 6 housing units Attached SF 10 10 11 10 88 10 housing units Multifamily 12 12 5 5 175 5 housing units Mobile Home 10 9 14 9 9 housing units Lodging 33 30 9 9 9 rooms Institutional 18,609 19,823 14,457 14,457 14.457 square feet Church -with day care 20,724 21,972 781 781 781 square feet -w/o day care 34,317 36,474 16,886 16,886 16,886 square feet Medical Office 15,344 16,283 3,768 3,768 3.768 square feet General Office 17,536 20,041 4,768 4,768 4,768 square feet Retail, Mixed 9,820 11,188 736 736 736 square feet Retail, Restaurant 4,092 3,799 1,069 1•,069 1,069 square feet Retail, Store 19,640 20,724 2,532 j 2,532 2,532 square feet Employment Centers 17.536 20,041 2,657 2,657 2,657 square feet Warehouse 111,982 130,264 20,263 20,263 20,263 square feet Mini -Warehouse 1,595.738 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1,823,700 46,762 -------------------- 46,762 ----------------- ------------------------------------------- 46,762 square feet EXHIBIT C WEST MESA ESTATES CONCEPT PLAN b L O C N A- Lake Ge Of9e10M, IW j I Lot 12 I Lot II ww 43 tee der Ia- v7r 28E 69 8 i �8`►¢).Nt71S/Z 87.44, o ker.l BLOCK e1B° T/ic S °�.�: o� G. Bledsoe Suave ,q_ i (Qer�� r f Ltl.AS I r �- gems i✓(9°E Z450 >< t•'/C ^13 �E 28.¢)) r1j.4 ABRAMS ST, I R r. N to'S4 !s/ 6el 57 " 7;Jyy`> �'. 296.29(2eco�e •r69°l4E) (fierce o( n68° SS'E 644 44 � 6, 2 N_<!9"-54=E r n-• <— f //6o.,r Qer.� I � 1 (1 AC. Existing Qo Oj Residentiol f use 1 1.624 AC. is 1 ap r" tl 0.044 AG. (easement ) r , ( 18 57 AC. Existing Agricultural Use ) c �' ..' 1.580 AC. .. = t I 0 0 ;5 W' a _ Z7-i.�Z3B.�g g4 RZ S 30 1 7- _26; ,s _ _ PHASE TWO 39 79 75r' 19.57 AC + 9 rc I 75 Re serve of 25 65 AC 9 ;8. 30 �' O POUI G. ADrOms v N I 1 498 AC. et � � m � ux IQ Y `^ NI`6079 ACPHASE NE ti 956 /803 A O NI , or, i � c 1 AC Y r° s -- - — 12 o_ i J n J ?, j 3 In o l O M D^ I h 1 498 AC h \ ¢ N N � O J N I I 3c v ti — t0 z 6/ - - � S�trs> c .. � I Q i ¢ �1 OI 1.459 AC m r rU I N � I S 65 °i5 %✓ " 0 I ... 35 li/ 1Z9.1/ 864 ao 33 '. ,. fi S 65° 3° G/ 390 7/ � - I•��e°�rA b o1 F0 LOCATION MAP Nc .e�F K U S. A (Russell Pork LEGEND PIN SET PIN $Ci - - - O+G FENCE LNG POWER LINE -- t. -- C LMUTY E.aSEMFM -P.U.E. —W _ — — 7Dm 20 r D used 6" water I-e )oDm 20( D ) *i, tlr7 n+ 0 �q� �190W� JAN 3 01996 CITY OF GEORGETOWN NOTICE TO SURROUNDING PROPERTY O OF A PUBLIC MEETING Notice is hereby given that the City of Georgetown will hold its regular public meeting of the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. This meeting will be held on the 6th day of February , 1996, at 6:00 p.m. at its regular meeting place in the Council Chambers, 101 East 7th Street, Georgetown, Texas to consider the proposed: Concept Plan and Final Plat of a 25.65 acre tract in the Joseph Fish Survey, to be known as West Mesa Estates, with variances to the Subdivision Regulations, located on County Road 262 (Russell Park Road). As one of the owners of adjacent property you are invited to be present at such meeting if you desire to discuss the proposed plan. See attached Exhibit A for more detail. Date:1 /21 /96 City of Georgetown A copy of the planning report related to this item will be available at the Division of Development Services and the Georgetown Public Library no later than the Friday prior to the meeting described above. For further information phone the Development Services Division at 930-3575. PROPERTY OWNER'S COMMENTS Project Name: West Mesa. Estates - Concept Plan and Final Plat awi.ok�2 04-� LciS qZ RND * y3 Name of Respondent: a0"A� -D A. Vpt p_S c N 5 �''4KEGEa�2EE7bv�.:. ES%ATES� ��Cc,�c a Address of Respondent: -6'7 06 6-2EVS7VN E- AP_. Akc.s"F, tj, , X 7 So 3 i - I So Tam i T n h" P i t: If you wish to submit written comment, please respond by 1 /31 /96, it will be provided to.the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. Please reply to: City of Georgetown Development Services Division P. O. Box 409 Georgetown, Texas 78627 PROPERTY OWNER'S COMMENTS Project Name: West Mesa Estates - Concept Plan and Final Plat r Name of Respondent: 1 v ae-/ Address of Respondent: �� I am in favor: 1116 61d % cV 0 Yl I object: If you wish to submit written comment, please respond by 1 /31 /96, it will be provided tocthe Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. Please reply to: City of Georgetown Development Services Division P. O. Box 409 Georgetown, Texas 78627 [�6C�ONJC� � FS 5 9% pl� Council meeting February 27, 1996 Item No. (2 C AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUB 1ECT: Consideration of a Final Plat of a 6.079 acre tract in the Joseph Fish Survey to be known as West Mesa Estates, Phase One, located along County Road 262 (Russell Park Road) ITEM SUMMARY: The subject parcel is currently developed with one (1) residence and is surrounded by agricultural land. The applicant proposes to develop the property in two (2) phases. Four (4) single family lots, each approximately 1.5 acres in size, are proposed for Phase One. The applicant has requested two (2) variances to the Subdivision Regulations. The first variance is requested to Section 36050 C. which states that all lots in rural subdivisions shall be designed to take access from a local street and in no case shall access be permitted from a numbered County roadway. Lots 2, 3 and 4 are designed to take access from County Road 262. The applicant has submitted a variance request to this requirement and proposes to reduce the number of driveway cuts onto County Road 262 from three (3) to two (2) by developing a shared driveway between Lots 3 and 4. As proposed, Lot 2 will have its own driveway access to County Road 262. The applicant also requests a variance to Section 41030 which requires water improvements to be extended to the perimeter of the subdivision. The applicant proposes to extend the existing six (6) inch water line located at Block A, of Lake Georgetown Estates on County Road 262 north of West Mesa Estates to Lot 4 and properly stub out the line with a flush valve. Given that the property to the south of Lot 4 is all part of the Army Corps of Engineers' Lake Georgetown, it is not likely to develop. Therefore, the extension of the six (6) inch water line to the perimeter of the subject development is an unnecessary expense and is not needed to provide fire protection. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. COMMENTS: At their regular meeting of February 6, 1996, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of a Final Plat for West Mesa Estates, Phase One, and the requested variances to Section 36050 C. of the Subdivision Regulations, thereby allowing Lots 2, 3 and 4 to have driveway access to County Road 262 as shown on the plat, and to Section 41030, thereby allowing the extension of the six (6) inch water line to Lot 4 and properly stubbing out with a flush valve, after making the required findings of fact, and provided the Technical Issues are addressed prior to City Council consideration. All of the Technical Issues noted in the staff report have been addressed. RECOMMENDED MOTION: If this item is approved by the City Council, it will be consistent with the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, unless stated otherwise. ATTACHMENTS: Staff report, attached exhibits, and Concept Plan / Final Plat. Submitted By: Edwar J. 43arry, AI - Director Divisio of Developrent Services Hildy L. leingma, AIC Chief Planner FINAL PLAT OF A 6.079 ACRE TRACT IN THE JOSEPH FISH SURVEY TO BE KNOWN AS WEST MESA ESTATES, PHASE ONE, WITH VARIANCES TO THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, LOCATED ALONG COUNTY ROAD 262 (RUSSELL PARK ROAD) OWNER/APPLICANT: Mr. Paul G. Abrams Ms. Margaret A. Abrams Route 5, Box 300 Georgetown, Texas 78628 863-0449 REQUEST: Final Plat of 6.079 acres in the Joseph Fish Survey to be known as West Mesa Estates, Phase One, with variances to the Subdivision Regulations. Location: Located at 1901 County Road 262 (Russell Park Road). SEE EXHIBIT A Existing Site: Agricultural tract. Proposed Use: Four (4) single family residential lots. Notification: The notification requirements have been completed. ANALYSIS: The subject parcel is currently developed with one (1) residence and is surrounded by agricultural land. The applicant proposes to develop the property in two (2) phases. Four (4) single family residential lots, each approximately 1.5 acres in size, are proposed for Phase One. SEE EXHIBIT C Phase Two consists of the applicant's residence and existing agricultural land, which he intends to maintain until an unknown future date. The Chisholm Trail Special Utility District has indicated the fire flow pressure within one -quarter mile of the proposed West Mesa Estates is 650 gallons per minute (gpm) with a 20 pound residual pressure (see attached letter). This flow exceeds the fire flow requirement of 500 gpm for scattered residential areas as outlined in Section 35012 of the Subdivision Regulations. Final Plat - West Mesa Estates, Phase One FP-96-03 / File:WESTMESA.FP CM/WW February 15, 1996 Page 1 VARIANCES: Section 36050 C. Lots in Rural Subdivisions The four (4) lots comprising Phase One front along County Road 262. Lot 1 is located at the southeast corner of Abrams Street and County Road 262 and a plat note restricts its driveway access to Abrams Street. Lots 2, 3 and 4, however, are designed to take access from County Road 262. This layout conflicts with Section 36050 C. of the Subdivision Regulations which states that all lots in rural subdivisions shall be designed so that all access is provided from a local street and in no case shall access be permitted from a numbered County roadway. The applicant has submitted a variance request to this requirement and proposes to reduce the number of driveway cuts onto County Road 262 from three (3) to two (2) by developing a shared driveway between Lots 3 and 4. As proposed, Lot 2 will have its own driveway access to County Road 262. Section 41030 Continuity of Improvements The applicant will be required to extend the existing six (6) inch water line located at Block A, Lot 12 of Lake Georgetown Estates on County Road 262 north of West Mesa Estates to Lot 4 of the applicant's property. A variance is requested to Section 41030 of the Subdivision Regulations which requires water improvements to be extended to the perimeter of a subdivision. There is a four (4) inch water line located on County Road 262, approximately 70 feet south of the property line dividing Lots 3 and 4 which is currently used by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. A variance to Section 41030 would allow the applicant to connect his six (6) inch water line to the existing four (4) inch line. This would remove the need for the applicant to extend his water line to the perimeter of Lot 4. Given that the property to the south is all part of the Army Corps of Engineers' Lake Georgetown, it is not likely to develop. Therefore, the extension of the six (6) inch water line to the perimeter of the subject development is an unnecessary expense and is not needed to provide fire protection. The Development Review Committee recommended establishing a 60 foot right-of-way easement between Lots 2 and 3 to provide sufficient access to any future development of Phase Final Plat - West Mesa Estates, Phase One FP-96-03 / File:WESTMESA.FP 10 CM/WW February 15, 1996 Page 2 Two. Another merit of this right-of-way easement between Lots 2 and 3 is that only one (1) street would access County Road 262, with its centerline located approximately 500 feet between Abrams Street and the Corps of Engineers' property. The applicant, however, maintains that access to Phase Two can be accommodated by widening the existing dirt road located between the east property line of Lot 1 and his existing residence. Staff notes that without the recommended 60 foot right-of-way easement between Lots 2 and 3, future development of Phase Two may be constrained. Should the existing dirt road need to be widened to accommodate future development, the applicant's residence may have to be relocated (the residence is a mobile home) . The rolling topography may also restrict the number of roadway configuration options. The applicant recognizes the potential for future development constraints of Phase Two, which are created by this Concept Plan and Final Plat, without the 60 foot right- of -way easement from County Road 262. After listening to the testimony presented at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, and reading the documentation provided by the applicant and the staff s recommendation, the Commission makes the following finds of fact as required by the Subdivision Regulations: 1. The public convenience and welfare will be substantially served; and 2. The appropriate use of surrounding property will not be substantially or permanently impaired or diminished; and 3. The applicant has not created the hardship from which relief is sought; and 4. The variance will not confer upon the applicant a special right or privilege not commonly shared or available to the owners of similar and surrounding property; and 5. The hardship from which relief is sought is not solely of an economic nature. " 6. The variance is not contrary to the public interest; and 7. Due to special conditions, the literal enforcement of the Final Plat - West Mesa Estates, Phase One 0 FP-96-03 / File:WESTMESA.FP CMIWW February 15, 1996 Page 3 ordinance would result in an unnecessary hardship; and 8. In granting the variance the spirit of the ordinance is observed and substantial justice is done." The applicant's Documentation for Basis of Requested Variance forms are attached. Technical Issues: The Subdivision Regulations require that the following Technical Issues are addressed prior to Planning and Zoning Commission consideration of this application. In order to assist the applicant, however, this application has been forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Commission prior to the completion of the Technical Issues. Therefore, these items must be addressed by March 1, or the application will be forwarded to the Council with a recommendation for denial. Alternatively, the applicant has the opportunity to request a delay to the City Council's consideration of the application in order to complete the technical issues. 1. All construction of street, drainage, water, wastewater and electrical improvements for this development will be in accordance with the City of Georgetown's Construction Standards and Specifications. 2. The Construction Plans shall include the current City Construction Details. 3. The applicant may be required to change the wording of Plat Note 17 to reflect the variance approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. 4. The name of the Planning and Zoning Commission Chairperson will need to be changed in the signature block to reflect the name of the chairperson to be elected at the February 6 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Prior to Filing: 1. The required water pollution abatement plan must be approved by TNRCC before this plat can be recorded. 2. Payment in -lieu of park land dedication shall be paid to the City before this plat can be recorded. Final Plat - West Mesa Estates, Phase One February 15, 1996 FP-96-03 / File:WESTMESA.FP Page 4 I* CM/WW STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the Final Plat for West Mesa Estates, Phase One, and the requested variances to Section 36050 C. of the Subdivision Regulations, thereby allowing Lots 2, 3 and 4 to have driveway access to County Road 262 as shown on the plat, and to Section 41030, thereby allowing the six (6) inch water line to connect to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers four (4) inch water line on Lot 4, after making the required findings of fact, and provided the Technical Issues are addressed prior to City Council consideration. P&Z ACTION: Approval of the Final Plat for West Mesa Estates, Phase One, and the requested variances to Section 36050 C. of the Subdivision Regulations, thereby allowing Lots 2, 3 and 4 to have driveway access to County Road 262 as shown on the plat, and to Section 41030, thereby allowing the extension of the six (6) inch water line to Lot 4 and properly stubbing out with a flush valve, after making the required findings of fact, and provided the Technical Issues are addressed prior to City Council consideration. Final Plat - West Mesa Estates, Phase One FP-96-03 / File:WESTMESA.FP CM/WW February 15, 1996 Page 5 EXHIBIT A _..'. GLAZER wvESTMCHTJ• / \ ,..•� i .090 r�y-. •� 1 79. Je Ac 1 \\\ / 2 2 U. S. 4 < 1 (960 2��c1 . ° CavF i 20 �� �• OLAVER INVESTb ENTS 1.6 91 Ac c • 10 81Ac `• ` 19 23 .b 07 za L le DON N. a KEVOALL R. 81ZZELL "7 ?.0a / 2117 a 795 A[ I7 TJ '� \ UNITED STATES OF AwERV-A 6 B _ 13 14 i2\ 28 ,r. •, I I M�MtE� a �� 70, r• J1 3, b, A / 1— D O AKA L se / 39 19 �6 36 ,B• � , b 0 37 �C 40 ° C •. / / / 16 rl /fin 9 �a►� �., s./ . i p b Q �° t• G ~ t3 CARL J ECKENROD 13 II .:r� 9J6 /807 r � 1 l • , ' \ - r Z. s f.AL ��•• 4 Asbj 'b eh' i s <d +� � . ,_ J � I J . _ 2 � I � ` .i H � 1 _ l � , �a�� "�+i � tt,��'r.e° .� . h %✓[r � / • - F x. VIA./ �.•� RUREN 6 JOTCE GRIEN RT - R''"` 'C 6 1 e 19 / e2'S �. 76 WMI / '.ate.`-- ., c 3a`�, 3`.•A;. / e - � •/ � "a \ ate. z _. } U 1 c RUSSELL PARK �4 s .o NC i �l EXHIBIT C WEST MESA ESTATES FINAL PLAT PHASE ONE b L 0 C n A' I Loke Georgetawt IW� I Lot 12 I LOI 1 I W W 43 \� RA, 111. e . Cee $ct I o4 I D 1.3C ,v 7 r 2 8 E Z .vc7°S/'E 87.44• G9.Bc 6 3N kt,.l BLOCK °,B' The 5 �°i.t� n� G. B/tr/Soe SuwP /�- 'szL1.615 gta -s 4- 5 0 f 13E28.47") 476-4, ABRAM5 ST. I Per 41e0'54 Lt/ 60 j 71.9 ;. ;256.29(F.eco-s W.,9°rot` � �� (Re-C .{ N680 SSE 644 44 (1 AC. Existing 1 c1 O _Residential I 01 Use00 ) O. 044_AC. (easement ) 1.580 AC. _ ( 18 57 AC. Existing Agricultural Use ) 1 z7 f=1239.7y' 3 T 94, k= 6io /o I a ER st,,s I7 .re-e- S• 30 I 7 i z6PHASE TWO 3a' 79.7 27 w i 4" I 19.57 AC. _ ? fC' I 75 )1•/5'w; Reserve of 25.65 AC 9 N :g 3o h hl O Paul G Aar ams O N 1 498 AC. e I ux o< N PHASE ONE N s s s i so s A l 0 ` N I: 6.079 AC 1 R 1 > , AC, a, r01 -571 -- - -- ---- 12 a W T S I C O 3 N M \ O;in 1 498 AC o h N N N 13C N cp N I 4crrss —2 6 / c Al a � Q a� I o of I 4 to O 1-459 AC Q` 0 fa \4 �U 1^ m M 1 NI N Z /' - ' D 5 65 °35 t✓ S4S° 35 li/ Iz9.// L 864. ¢a 56 S' 3 5 c✓ 390 7/ F LOCATION MAP ! c-� E'! .rFPrS U S A (Russell Pork 1 ``t FLN Mum rW SET tNC POWER LJN[ - � F. -- C ILMUTY FASLMFT(T - -P.U.E. .� ; ,• _ - SITE .nq 6" Water lint -- - - •,'��T'-_! �� � _ � Qrm 20 r D) _— )sed 6' Woter line )gDm 20r D nyargnt ` o -p \\ C.n iI e"406-* ?)Md SAe&aZ ftY40# Z)&Otea P. O. BOX 249 FLORENCE, TEXAS 76527 (817) 793-3103 January 5, 1996 Paul Abrams Rt 5 Box 300 Georgetown, Texas 78626 RE: West Mesa Estates Subdivision Dear Mr. Abrams: In reviewing the drawings for the above referenced subdivision, Chisholm Trail Special Utility District is willing and able to serve the four lots noted. A fire flow pressure check was made within the one quarter mile requirement as stated in the Georgetown rural subdivision design standards. The flow recorded was 650 gpm with 20 psi residual. The water services provided at this location is ample to provide protection to this proposed subdivision. Sincerely, WireGand General Manager EG:pr DOCUMENTATION OF BASIS FOR REQUESTED VARIANCE 1 Date: 2- � �0 Applicant: [,LQ�tA Abi-?kVV-)5 This request is for a variance from the literal enforcement of Section(s) of the Subdivision Regulations. Give a brief description of the variance requested: Vebf V 3VL, 1 c�1'1 b -C �� �a) VXA- 4, W o.j-o' -I V iwe� edq� o You have requested a variance to the design standards of the Subdivision Regulations. In order to be able to recommend and approve such a variance, Section 60070 B. of the Regulations, requires that the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council must be able to "ensure that the variance is not contrary to the public interest and, due to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship." The Commission and Council are directed to meet these requirements by making specific findings of fact. In order to assist the Commission and Council in conducting their deliberations regarding your requested variance, please complete this form to document how this request will impact the issues described below. These issues relate directly to the eight (8) findings of fact that must be cited by the Commission and Council when recommending approval of any variance. You may attach an additional sheet, or submit this information in the form of a letter. 1. In what manner will the public convenience and welfare be substantially served? 2. Will the appropriate use of surrounding property be substantially or permanently impaired or diminished in any manner? Provide reasons why you believe your answer to be supportable. PO w are I- �S L1,61> 3. What are the hardships involved? How were those hardships crcatec19 How are those hardships different from those affecting the rest of the public faced with the enforcement of this same provision? Note that the Commission and Council cannot approve a variance for which the hardship claimed is solely of an economic nature. Revised 12/94 4. If the requested variance if approved, will it confer upon the applicant a special right or privilege not commonly shared or available to the owners of similar and surrounding property? Provide reasons why you believe your answer to be supportable. (j ! j J� (/ r L U o il�v l' �� L Scz vE� , �� N �- 7 5. How is the public interest affected? j T / -s /j° / 6. List the special conditions that affect this property and justify the approval of the variance. k A 5 l /-G� / 1A-) /- /luF 7. How will the spirit of the ordinance be observed if this request is granted) 8. How will substantial justice be done if this request is granted? p'A I* Revised 12/94 DOCUMENTATION OF BASIS FOR REQUESTED VARIANCE Date: ZO Applicant: This request is for a variance from the literal enforcement of Section(s) 3G 0.5-0 C . of the Subdivision Regulations. Give a brief description of the variance requested: GNAT L DT (� 0 2-& ?- . You have requested a variance to the design standards of the Subdivision Regulations. In order to be able to recommend and approve such a variance, Section 60070 B. of the Regulations, requires that the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council must be able to "-.nsure t"at the variance is not contrary to the public interest and, due to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship." The Commission and Council are directed to meet these requirements by making specific findings of fact. In order to assist the Commission and Council in conducting their deliberations regarding your requested variance, please complete this form to document how this request will impact the issues described below. These issues relate directly to the eight (8) findings of fact that must be cited by the Commission and Council when recommending approval of any variance. You may attach an additional sheet, or submit this information in the form of a letter. In. what manner will the public convenience and welfare be substantially served? VvQ► 1Q 2. Will the appropriate use of surrounding property be substantially or permanently impaired or diminished in any manner? Provide reasons why you believe your answer to be supportable. t?,! ��/—�ZfI ✓ �' _'�3 ; .t/ C. l?� . i4 7 .S T �4 E Pi—OFr4,-T-1 l ` 1746 To T7L- fA O-k- ' 3. What are the hardships involved`.' How were those hardships created`' How are those hardships different from those affecting the rest of the public faced with the enforcement of this same provision? Note that the Commission and Council cannot appro%,e a variance for which the hardship claimed is solely of an economic nature. y WP, y To � � ��-b n� r P12-0 f2F121-( Revised 12/94 4. If the requested variance if approved, will it confer upon the applicant a special right or privilege not commonly shared or available to the owners of similar and surrounding property? Provide reasons why you believe your answer to be supportable. o S ��--! p. Z. (�-� r 1 5 I N✓ o Lt..)J= 0- P P'A-t-:7Y-k �`' j (IJ e�� � P .S ; - I�, G. o N � �ti m x ,� �N 712,AL j a � �/ t 5. How is the public interest affected? /-/ o A FF EI'. � 6. List the special conditions that affect this property and justify the approval of the variance. pjo pT?4;5�12 7. How will the spirit of the ordinance be observed if this request is granted? 8. How will substantial justice be done if this request is granted? yc s I* Revised 12/94 Council meeting February 27, 1996 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Consideration of a Revised Concept Plan of a 20.71 acre tract in the Nicholas Porter Survey to be known as River.Bend Subdivision, Unit V, located on Booty's Crossing Road ITEM SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to rezone the land to the RS, Residential Single Family and the RP, Residential Planned zoning districts and develop a total of 67 single family residential lots, two (2) open space lots and one (1) drainage easement / detention basin lot in three (3) phases. The first phase consists of 20 standard size residential lots located along Kathi Lane and an unnamed cul-de-sac. A Planned Unit Development (PUD) is proposed for Phase Two which will consist of 23 smaller residential lots and two (2) open space lots along an unnamed cul-de-sac extending east from Kathi Lane. Phase Three consists of 24 standard size residential lots and one (1) detention basin / drainage easement lot located along Patti Drive and Parker Drive. The subject site is designated Intensity Level 3 by the Century Plan - Development Plan. Including Phases One and Two of the River Bend Subdivision, Unit V, and the Village of River Bend, the proposed Revised Concept Plan for the remaining portion of River Bend Subdivision, Unit V, is within the permitted development allowed by Intensity Level 3. The Revised Concept Plan generally conforms with the informational and design requirements of the Subdivision Regulations, although a variance will need to be requested to the length of the unnamed cul-de-sac serving the PUD at the time the Preliminary Plat is submitted to permit this design. This subdivision will use City of Georgetown water, wastewater and electric services. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. COMMENTS: At their regular meeting of February 6, 1996, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the Revised Concept Plan of River Bend Subdivision, Unit V. RECOMMENDED MOTION: If this item is approved by the City Council, it will be consistent with the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, unless stated otherwise. ATTACHMENTS: Staff report, attached exhibits and Revised Concept Plan. Submitted By: Edward Y. Barry, AICP - irector Divisio of Developmen Services Hildy L. K ngma, AICP Chief Planner REVISED CONCEPT PLAN OF A 20.61 ACRE TRACT IN RIVER BEND SUBDIVISION, UNIT V, LOCATED ON WOWS CROSSING ROAD OWNER/APPLICANT: Mr. Donald Parker Parker Development Co. 2950 Williams Drive Georgetown, Texas 78628 930-5904 AGENT: Mr. Don H. Bizzell, P. E. , R. P. L. S . Steger and Bizzell Engineering, Inc. P. O. Box 858 Georgetown, Texas 78627 863-4521 FAX: 863-4523 REQUEST: Revised Concept Plan of a 20.61 acre tract in River Bend Subdivision, Unit V. Location: Located along the south side of Booty's Crossing Road, east of Gabriel View Drive and west of Williamsburg Village. SEE EXHIBIT A Proposed Use: Single family residential Notification: The notification requirements have been completed. HISTORY: The original Concept Plan for River Bend Subdivision, Section V, was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission in July 1992 and by City Council in August 1992. Phases One and Two, which included 33 and 29 single family residential lots, respectively, have been constructed. An Amended Concept Plan for this acreage was approved by City Council in April 1994. That plan included 126 standard single family residential lots and 38 small single family residential lots (Village of River Bend), for a total of 164 dwelling units. SEE EXHIBIT D The Village of River Bend is currently under construction. ANALYSIS: The subject parcel of land is presently zoned A, Agricultural. Revised Concept Plan - River Bend V February 15, 1996 CP 96-03 / File: RV-BD52.RCP Page 1 CM/WW The applicant proposes to rezone the land to RS, Residential Single Family and RP, Residential Planned and develop a total of 67 single family residences in three (3) phases. SEE EXHIBIT E The first phase consists of 20 standard lots located along Kathi Lane and an unnamed cul-de-sac. A Planned Unit Development (PUD) is proposed for Phase Two which will consist of 23 smaller lots and two (2) open space lots along an unnamed cul-de-sac extending southeast from Kathi Lane. The purpose of a PUD is to create development flexibility by allowing smaller lot sizes and reduced building setbacks. Phase Three consists of twenty-four (24) standard lots and one (1) detention basin / drainage easement lot located along Patti Drive and Parker Drive. The subject site is designated Intensity Level 3 by the Century Plan. Including Phases One and Two of the River Bend Subdivision, Unit V, and the Village of River Bend (62 standard lots and 38 zero lot line lots combined), the proposed Revised Concept Plan for the remaining portion of River Bend Subdivision, Unit V, (44 standard lots and 23 PUD lots), is within the permitted development allowed by Intensity Level 3. The Revised Concept Plan submitted along with this application generally conforms with the informational requirements of the Subdivision Regulations. Section 23060 states "approval of a concept plan constitutes acceptance of the type, density and intensity of land use indicated on the plan; the classification and arrangement of streets indicated; the proposed phasing plan; and the nature of utility service proposed." This subdivision will use City of Georgetown water, wastewater and electric services. The street layout on the submittal generally meets the Subdivision Regulation design requirements, although a variance will need to be requested to the length of the unnamed cul de sac serving the PUD at the time the preliminary plat is submitted to permit this design. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the Revised Concept Plan of River Bend Revised Concept Plan - River Bend V CP 96-03 / File: RV-BD12.RCP CM/WW February 15, 1996 Page 2 Subdivision, Unit V. P&Z ACTION: Approval of the Revised Concept Plan of River Bend Subdivision, Unit V. Revised Concept Plan - River Bend V CP 96-03 / File: RV-BD52.RCP CM/WW February 15, 1996 Page 3 RIVER. BEND UNIT 'V EXHIBIT D _- .��� � 'jPGui � C�ti:�;;)Sltl;:—ROAD) L JA i P A� cn zaaJ�r'Uw'l"<1011wnIll � 1\ H;A ,4 11 co nil � I \ ' /Xr+� eow { wi n PROJEcr. - S1 TE AMENDED CONCEPT PLAN APPROVED APRIL, 1994 LOCATION MAP AMENDED CONCEPT PLAN APPROVED APRIL, 1994 LOCATION MAP EXHIBIT'E RIVER BEND ,SECTION V REVISED CONCEPT PLAN _ -- =mot ��� ,_'r`w' r' u �: r \. /�• °J ; `., �ry I I i� �` \tee t� ` Ic - q•� �� ; '4 ,4 ,�i N r '7 ` I P e .T I yam- 71 jam_/sp / /\00'� \ y1 `F• d - A B �►r_�, QO(µ� _yI ,�,, •,,'-% \ '- ,_ �` '��._ ..r�% op �j_,�• ry / �--- n-- 4 \ ,• �r� �� A� pro % �.� t r� _ N _ - ,1 -' a--_ .* a � \ N \ � • = ' fn •rfo '' ^r•� 'l/ �\ m • � 10 A. Q 1 ter° '_•' Q � •'+ - ♦ .I � �o Jp� �"- 'd' — �� �.r �'°'• °s �`)°Sy _�- •,/r'Y 3Uol -- -�� Mdg-;4. ^ _ �r° ���(i `P' - . -R: y O� ^s. •Y �\O ��• pX\ '_"_'__-_- -S rrr .N.•a, �.° j c• s � tr r � �_\-�� AC Y./ ��- n �P • I .L•. .s - - '° .r .vorr.� 40 •� t /' ,�.f . OG \ / // n OG`h \ I i; � '•a, � 1 1 L � �'4 /+ � �� • ter( •`� \ % 2>j o \,� _ `n +:4?t -- •fib _ r, 4' V, � _./ i'. `/ \\ \j / �( '� ' cam' �� �' n `i �` r � //�%-�\�\� •\iC.•/. � /; / \ d.r.•.,� +'� `loe5 ,'' iy /� i � �. a / \ � \Il� it -� 0/8 Al— p. 0 t `o \ Council meeting February 27, 1996 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET EE SUBJECT: Consideration of a resolution to authorize a License to Encroach into the public utility easement located along the south property line of Berry Creek, Section Seven, Phase One, Block C, Lot 15, located at 31009 La Quinta Drive. ITEM SUNMARY: All utility providers, including the Director of the Community Owned Utilities Division have agreed to allow a License to Encroach into the public utility easement for a driveway that accesses a side entry garage as illustrated in Exhibit A. Although the driveway also encroaches upon a building line, the Subdivision Regulations now permit such encroachment. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. COMMENTS: None. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A Resolution Submitted By: B:(Cward/J( Barry, AICP Director Divisiob of Developme t Services Hildy L. Kingma, AICP Chief Planner RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS OF FACT AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN AND BOB AND GAIL BRUNER, PERTAINING TO THE ENCROACHMENT OF A DRIVEWAY INTO THE PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED ON THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE OF LOT 15 OF BERRY CREEK, SECTION SEVEN, PHAE ONE, BLOCK C, AS RECORDED IN CABINET L, SLIDES 315-316 OF THE PLAT RECORDS OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS AND LOCATED AT 31009 LA QUINTA DRIVE; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Georgetown has received an application for a license to encroach into the public utility easement; and WHEREAS, the City of Georgetown has enacted Ordinance No. 1645 regulating, controlling, and governing encroachments; and WHEREAS, in order for a license to be granted by the City Council of the City of Georgetown, the Council must make certain findings of fact; and WHEREAS, after hearing the application of Bob and Gail Bruner to encroach into the public utility easement, the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, finds the following facts: 1. That there are no utilities which would be interfered with by the utilization of the property in the proposed manner. 2. That there are no utilities which would interfere with the utilization of the property in the proposed manner. 3. That the proposed structure is in such a manner that it would not be feasible to relocate it outside the public utility easement. 4. That the land use in the neighborhood appears to be stable and the use to which this property is being put is not likely to change within the foreseeable future and is compatible with other uses in the neighborhood; and WHEREAS, the City Council after hearing the application and finding the specific facts as stated above now concludes and finds that: Lot 15, Berry Creek, Section Seven, Block C License Resolution No. Page 1 of 3 1. The fact that the proposed structure is in such a manner that it would not be feasible to relocate it outside the public utility easement constitutes special circumstances and conditions affecting the property which if not taken into consideration would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of their property. 2. The fact that the land use is not likely to change within the foreseeable future and that it is not economically feasible to remove the part of the proposed structure that encroaches into the public utility easement does provide a basis for granting the license necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of the substantial property rights of the applicant. 3. The fact that the use of the easement area by the property owner does not interfere with the utilities or access to the utilities and is not detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or injurious to the property in the area; and WHEREAS, the applicant agrees to accept the terms of the license agreement as presented to them. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETO WN, 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 resolution implements the following policies of the Century Plan - Development Plan Element: 1. Growth and Physical Development Policy 1, which states: "The City will ensure that future land use patterns provide economic, cultural, and social activities to all residents, businesses and organizations;" and 2. Utilities/Energy Policy 2, which states: "The City will establish utility policies which take into consideration the needs of all citizens of the community and take necessary precautions to prevent harmful ecological impact to the environment;" 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 Mayor is hereby authorized to execute, and the City Secretary to attest thereto on behalf of the City of Georgetown a License Agreement with Bob and Gail Bruner, pertaining to the encroachment of a proposed driveway located on Lot 15 of Berry Creek, Section Seven, Phase One, Block C, commonly known as 31009 La Quinta Drive, into the public utility easement on the south property line. Lot 15, Berry Creek, Section Seven, Block C License Resolution No. Page 2 of 3 SECTION 3. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption. RESOLVED this day of , 1996. ATTEST: THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: Sandra D. Lee By: LEO WOOD City Secretary Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney Lot 15, Berry Creek, Section Seven, Block C License Resolution No. Page 3 of 3 Council Meeting Date: 02/27/96 Item No.f"' AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Authorize the Mayor to sign an interlocal agreement with the Brazos River Authority (BRA) for Household Hazardous Waste Collection Day. ITEM SUMMARY The City of Georgetown, in conjunction with Williamson County, BRA, City of Round Rock, City of Cedar Park, and the MUDs of Anderson Mill and Brushy Creek are jointly sponsoring a Household Hazardous Waste Collection Day on March 23, 1996, at the Westinghouse Plant Parking Lot. This interlocal agreement authorizes the City of Georgetown to pay its $5,000.00 local share in the funding out this project and authorizes BRA to coordinate the event. This Collection Day is also being supported by Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission (TNRCC) grant funds in the amount or $757000.00. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS None FINANCIAL IMPACT Funds for this project were budgeted in the Sanitation Fund in the current budget year. COMMENTS None ATTACHMENTS 1. Interlocal Agreement Submitted By: Hartley Sappington, Director of Community Services § INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN STATE OF TEXAS § THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN AND § THE BRAZOS RIVER AUTHORITY FOR COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON § PARTICIPATION IN AND FUNDING OF § THE WILLIAMSON COUNTY CITY OF GEORGETOWN § HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE § COLLECTION DAY THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the CITY OF GEORGETOWN, a Texas Home Rule Municipal Corporation (hereinafter "City") and the BRAZOS RIVER AUTHORITY (hereinafter "Authority"), all being either a local government or a river authority duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Texas acting herein by and through their respective officers duly authorized to so act. The purpose of this agreement is to fund and conduct a Williamson County Household Hazardous Waste Collection Day. 1. TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AGREEMENT The "City" agrees to participate as a local sponsor in the Williamson County Household Hazardous Waste Collection Day to be coordinated by the "Authority". The "City" further agrees to pay $5,00.00 as a local share of the Collection Day cost within 30 days of receiving a copy of an invoice from the "Authority". The "Authority" agrees to be the entity responsible for taking all actions necessary to cause the Collection Day to be conducted, for the preparation and distribution of a post -event report, and will use its best efforts to complete the Collection Day and report by June 30, 1996. The obligations of the "City" and the "Authority" under this Agreement are contingent upon the "Authority": (1) being able to enter into a contract with Laidlaw Environmental Services (TES), Inc., for the collection, packaging, transportation, and disposal of household hazardous wastes related to the Collection Day; (ii) being able to receive appropriate approvals from the Collection Day from the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC); and, (iii) being able to enter into agreements for support and funding similar to this Agreement with other local sponsors listed below: Williamson County City of Georgetown Anderson Mill MUD City of Cedar Park City of Round Rock Brushy Creek MUD In the event the Collection Day is not held by June 30, 1996, both parties agree that this Agreement is to be considered null and void. INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE COLLECTION DAY February 27, 1997 Page 1 II. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. The parties shall observe and comply with all Federal, State, and City laws, rules, ordinances and regulations in any manner affecting the conduct of the services herein provided and performance of all obligations undertaken by this Agreement. III. MISCELLANEOUS. A. Attorney Fees: In any action brought by either party in which a judgement is awarded in favor of the party instituting the action for the enforcement of the obligations and conditions of this Agreement that party shall be entitled to recover all costs from the other party, including attorney's fees, incurred in the enforcement of this Agreement. B. Severabilit - If any provision hereof shall be finally declared void or illegal by any curt or administrative agency having jurisdiction, the entire Agreement shall not be void; but the remaining provisions shall continue in effect as nearly as possible in accordance with the original intent of the parties. C. Notice: Any notice given by one party to the other in connection with this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, with postage and certified fees prepaid. CITY AUTHORITY Bob Hart, City Manager Roy A. Roberts, P. E., General Manager City of Georgetown Brazos River Authority P. O. Box 409 P. O. Box 7555 Georgetown, TX 78627-0409 Waco, TX 76714-7555 Notices shall be deemed to have been received on the date of receipt as shown on the return receipt. D. Entire Agreement: This Agreement, and any exhibits attached is the complete and entire Agreement between the parties. Any modification or amendment shall not be effective unless signed in writing by both parties. Signed this day of 1996. IN I ERLOCAL AGREEMENT HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE COLLECTION DAY February 27, 1997 Page 2 CITY OF GEORGETOWN By: Leo Wood Mayor ATTEST: Sandra Lee City Secretary BRAZOS RIVER AUTHORITY mm Roy A. Roberts, P. E. General Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney IN I LKLOCAL AGREEMENT HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE COLLECTION DAY February 27, 1997 Page 3 Council meeting date: 2-27-96 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Consideration of authorizing the Mayor to execute a contract with CSW Communications, Inc. for the purchase and installation of an Interactive Utility Management System Fixed Wireless Network and SCADA System ITEM SUMMARY This is one part of three separate contracts with CSW Communications for the purchase and installation of the fixed wireless network. The draft agreements are near completion by the staff, and have been forwarded to CSW for their review and comments. I anticipate placing draft contracts in your box late on Friday, February 23 or most probably, on Monday afternoon, February 26. Assuming that we have captured accurately the understandings between the City and CSW, consistent with the direction you have provided, these items will be ready for your discussion and possible action at the meeting. ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft agreement to be provided at a later date. Submi Bob Hart, City Manager Council meeting date: 2-27-96 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Consideration of approval of an Agreement Between the City of Georgetown and CSW Communications, Inc. for the Software Support, Operations, and Maintenance of the City's Interactive Utility Management System ITEM SUMMARY This is one part of three separate contracts with CSW Communications for the purchase and installation of the fixed wireless network. The draft agreements are near completion by the staff, and have been forwarded to CSW for their review and comments. I anticipate placing draft contracts in your box late on Friday, February 23 or most probably, on Monday afternoon, February 26. Assuming that we have captured accurately the understandings between the City and CSW, consistent with the direction you have provided, these items will be ready for your discussion and possible action at the meeting. ATTACHMENTS Draft agreement to be provided at a later date. Sub ed by: a£, Bob Hart, City Manager Council meeting date: 2-27-96 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Consideration of approval of an Agreement Between the City of Georgetown and CSW Communications, Inc., Concerning Use of the Fixed Wireless Network, Future Expansion of the City's Utility Management System to Include a Fixed Wire Network, and the Provision of Other Communication -Based Services ITEM SUMMARY This is one part of three separate contracts with CSW Communications for the purchase and installation of the fixed wireless network. The draft agreements are near completion by the staff, and have been forwarded to CSW for their review and comments. I anticipate placing draft contracts in your box late on Friday, February 23 or most probably, on Monday afternoon, February 26. Assuming that we have captured accurately the understandings between the City and CSW, consistent with the direction you have provided, these items will be ready for your discussion and possible action at the meeting. ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft agreement to be provided at a later date. d by: �i Bob Hart, City Manager er Council meeting February 27, 1996 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET Sj SUBJECT: Consideration of a Rezoning of a 20.71 acre tract in the Nicholas Porter Survey to be known as River Bend Subdivision, Unit V, from A, Agricultural to RS, Residential Single Family and RP, Residential Planned, located on Booty's Crossing Road ITEM SUMMARY: The subject parcel of land is presently zoned A, Agricultural and its use is restricted to low intensity agricultural uses. The applicant proposes to develop a total of 67 single family residences, two (2) open space lots and one (1) drainage easement / detention basin lot in three (3) phases on this property. The first and the third phases of this development would consist of standard single family residences, while Phase Two would accommodate more compact single family residential lots in a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The purpose of a PUD is to create development flexibility by allowing smaller lot sizes and reduced building setbacks. Prior to any development approvals, however, the land covering Phases One and Three will need to be rezoned to the RS, Residential Single Family zoning district and Phase Two will need to be rezoned to the RP, Residential Planned zoning district. Thus, rezoning this property from the Agricultural zoning district to the Residential Single Family and the Residential Planned zoning districts will accurately reflect the nature of the proposed development. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: The second reading will be held until the final plats are recorded, unless a metes and bounds description is submitted. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. COMMENTS: At their regular meeting of February 6, 1996, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the rezoning of the remaining 20.61 acre tract of River Bend Subdivision, Unit V, from the A, Agricultural zoning district to the RS, Residential Single Family and the RP, Residential Planned zoning districts. RECOMMENDED MOTION: If this item is approved by the City Council, it will be consistent with the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, unless stated otherwise_ ATTACHMENTS: Staff report and attached exhibits. Submitted By: Edward J flarry, AIC - Director Division of Developriytnt Services Hildy L. ingma, AICP Chief Planner REZONING OF A 20.61 ACRE TRACT IN THE NICHOLAS PORTER SURVEY TO BE KNOWN AS RIVER BEND SUBDIVISION, UNIT V, FROM A, AGRICULTURAL TO RS, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY AND RP, RESIDENTIAL PLANNED, LOCATED ON BOOTY'S CROSSING ROAD OWNER/APPLICANT: Mr. Donald Parker Parker Development Co. 2950 Williams Drive Georgetown, Texas 78628 930-5904 AGENT: Mr. Don H. Bizzell, P.E. , R. P. L. S . Steger and Bizzell Engineering, Inc. P. O. Box 858 Georgetown, Texas 78627 863-4521 FAX: 863-4523 REQUEST: Rezoning of a 20.61 acre tract in the Nicholas Porter Survey, to be known as River Bend Subdivision, Unit V, as recorded in Volume 2134, Page 335 of the Official Deed Records of Williamson County, Texas. FACTS: Location: Located along the south side of Booty's Crossing Road, east of Gabriel View Drive and west of Williamsburg Village. SEE EXHIBIT A Existing Site: A Concept Plan was approved for this acreage by City Council in August, 1992. A Revised Concept Plan is being considered as a separate agenda item. Existing Zoning: This property was zoned A, Agricultural upon annexation in 1991. Proposed Use: Single family residential and a planned unit development (PUD) of small lot single family residential. Rezoning - River Bend V February 15, 1996 96-02 / File: RV-BD52.RZ Page 1 CM/WW Surrounding Uses and Zoning: North: Unplatted single family residences (out of City and RS), Village of River Bend (RP) South: Quail Meadow Subdivision, Units IV and V, single family and multifamily residences (RM-1) , River Bend Subdivision, single family residences (RS) East: Williamsburg Village Commercial Center (C-2B), Parco Home Center (C-2A) West: River Bend Subdivision, single family residences (RS) Century Plan: The Century Plan -Development Plan designates this location as Intensity Level 3. The 5.05 acre PUD has a slightly higher density than allowed by Intensity Level 3, but the remaining area within the Concept Plan is slightly lower. Therefore, the overall development is within the intensity limits for this acreage. SEE EXHIBIT B Notification: The notification requirements have been completed. HISTORY: The original Concept Plan for River Bend Subdivision, Unit V, was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission on July 7, 1992, and by City Council on August 11, 1992. A Final Plat for Phase I, with 33 single family lots, was approved by City Council on October 27, 1992, and Phase II, with 29 single family lots, was approved by City Council on May 24, 1994. The Village of River Bend, with 39 single family lots, was approved by City Council on March 25, 1995. Phases I, II and the Village of River Bend have completed the construction stage. ANALYSIS: Rezoning - River Bend V 96-02 / File: RV-BD52.RZ CM/WW The Preliminary Plat/Final Plat for River Bend, Phase I, was approved by City Council on October 27, 1992. River Bend, Phase II, was rezoned to RS, Residential Single Family by City Council on November 22, 1994. The Village of River Bend was rezoned to RP, Residential Planned District by City Council on June 13, 1995. The subject parcel of land is presently zoned A, Agricultural and its use is restricted to low intensity agricultural uses. SEE February 15, 1996 Page 2 EXHIBIT C The applicant proposes to develop a total of 70 single family residences in three (3) phases on this property. The first and third phases of this development would consist of standard single family residential lots, while Phase Two would accommodate more compact single family residential lots in a Planned Unit Development (PUD) . The purpose of a PUD is to create development flexibility by allowing smaller lot sizes and reduced building setbacks. The Village of River Bend, located directly northwest of this project, is an example of a PUD. Prior to any development approvals, however, the land covering Phases One and Three will need to be rezoned to RS, Residential Single Family and Phase Two will need to be rezoned to RP, Residential Planned. Thus, rezoning this property from Agricultural to Residential Single Family and Residential Planned will accurately reflect the nature of the proposed development. This item will proceed to City Council for first reading of the rezoning ordinance. However, the second reading of the ordinance will be held until a plat is recorded for the property, unless the applicant submits a metes and bounds description of each phase. Technical Issue: 1. A $250 fee required as part of the Application for Rezoning must be paid before this application proceeds to City Council. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the rezoning for the remaining 20.61 acre tract of River Bend Subdivision, Unit V, from A, Agricultural to RS, Residential Single Family and RP, Residential Planned. P&Z ACTION: Approval of the rezoning of the remaining 20.61 acre tract of River Bend Subdivision, Unit V, from A, Agricultural to the RS, Residential Single Family and the RP, Residential Planned zoning districts. Rezoning - River Bend V 96-02 / File: RV-BD52.RZ CM/WW February 15, 1996 Page 3 11 EXHIBIT B DETERMINATION OF PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT GIVEN A MIXED LAND USE PROPOSAL 1. 'DATE': January 9, 1996 'PROJECT NAME': River Bend Revised Concept Plan 2. 'GIVEN*: acres of Intensity Level 1 acres of Intensity Level 2 52.49 acres of Intensity Level 3 acres of Intensity Level 4 acres of Intensity Level 5 acres of Intensity Level 6 52.49 TOTAL ACRES 3. ALLOWABLE DEMAND: INTENSITY WATER WASTEWATER TRANSPORTATION LEVEL Peak GPD Average GPD ----------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------• Peak Trip Ends 1 0 0 -- 0 2 0 0 0 3 197.362 56,689 525 4 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 6 0 0 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• 0 -- 4. TOTAL ALLOWABLE DEMAND: Maximum GPD Water Capacity: 197,362 Maximum GPD Wastewater Capacity: 56,689 Maximum Trip Ends: 525 5. EFFECTIVE ALLOWABLE SYSTEM INTENSITIES: GPD/Acre Water: 3,760 GPD/Acre Wastewater: 1.080 Trip Ends/Acre Traffic: i0 6. PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT BASED ON GIVEN MIX OF LAND USES: (b) (a) TOTAL ALLOWABLE DEMAND (1) LAND USES 'ACRES' (c) POTENTIAL UNITS BY UTILITY - I WATER WASTEWATEF TRANSP I - I --------------------------------------- WATER WASTEWATEF TRANSP — Detached SF I - - - - -- I ---------- - ---------------------------------- -• Large Lot I 0 Average Lot I 29.00 109,040 0 31,320 0 290 I 0 109 0 125 0 Zero Lot Line I 23.49 88,322 Attached SF 25,369 235 I 88 101 327 265 Multifamily 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Mobile Home I 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Lodging I 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Institutional I 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Church -with day care 0 0 I 0 -w/o day care 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Medical Office I 0 0 0 0 General Office I 0 0 01 0 0 OI Retail, Mixed I 0 0 1 0 0 0 Retail, Restaurant I 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Retail, Store I 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 1 Employment Centers I 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Warehouse I 0 0 0 l 0 0 0 1 Mini -Warehouse I 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Greenbelt I ---------------------------------- 0 0 l 1 0 0 0 ub-Total 52.49 I Road Right -of -Way (units in this section should TOTAL 52.49 be multiplied by 1000) (d) MAXIMUM UNITS ----------------- 109 88 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0� 0� 0 01 01 OI OI 01 (e) (f) PER DEV DEVELOPMENT REGS I ------------•I ------- ALLOWED/UNIT (2) ----------------------------- 0 ! 0 housing units 211 I 109 housing units 227 I 88 housing units 0 ( 0 housing units (2)1 (2) housing units 0 housing units I 0 rooms I 0 square feet I 0 square feel 0 square feet I 0 square feet 0 square feet I 0 square feet 0 square feet I 0 square feet 0 square feel I 0 squ:-,, a feet ---------------------------------------- 0 square feet It ■ ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE PASSED AND ADOPTED ON THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 1968, AND AMENDING PART OF THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP OF THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE, TO CHANGE PROPERTY OWNED BY DONALD PARKER, A 20.61 ACRE TRACT IN THE NICHOLAS PORTER SURVEY AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 2134, PAGE 335 OF THE OFFICIAL DEED RECORDS OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS, FROM THE A, AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION TO RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY ZONING CLASSIFICATION; REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS; INCLUDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, an application has been made to the City Council for the purpose of changing the zoning district classification of the following described real property ("the property"): PROPERTY OWNED BY DONALD PARKER, A 20.61 ACRE TRACT IN THE NICHOLAS PORTER SURVEY AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 2134, PAGE 335 OF THE OFFICIAL DEED RECORDS OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS, hereinafter referred to as "the property"; WHEREAS, the City Council has submitted the proposed change in the Base Ordinance to the Planning and Zoning Commission for its consideration in a public hearing and for its recommendation or report; and WHEREAS, notice of such hearing was published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City; which stated the time and place of hearing, which time was not earlier than fifteen (15) days for the first day of such publication; and WHEREAS, written notice was given not less than fifteen (15) days before the date set for the meeting before the Planning and Zoning Commission to all the owners of the lots within two hundred feet of the property, as required by law; and WHEREAS, the applicant for such zoning change placed on the property such sign(s) as required by law for advertising the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing, not less than fifteen (15) days before the date set for such hearing; and WHEREAS, the City Planning and Zoning Commission in a meeting held on February 6, 1996, recommended changing said zoning district classification of the above described River Bend, Unit V Rezoning Ordinance No. Page 1 of 3 property from the A, Agricultural district zoning classification to RS, Residential Single Family district zoning classification, in accordance with Exhibit "A". 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 Policies of the Century Plan - Policy Plan Element: 1. Growth and Physical Development Policy 1, which states: "The City will ensure that future land use patterns provide economic, cultural, and social activities to all residents, businesses and organizations"; and 2. Growth and Physical Development Policy 2, which states: "The City's regulatory actions will efficiently and effectively implement the Policy Statements and provide the opportunity to seek change with reasonable effort and expense"; and 3. Growth and Physical Development Policy 4, which states: "The City will encourage new development and infill redevelopment in the community"; and 4. Environmental and Resource Conservation Policy 1, which states: "The City will take the steps necessary to protect the physical attributes that make Georgetown attractive"; and further finds 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 of the Policy Plan. SECTION 2. The Base Ordinance and the Zoning Map of the City, as well as the Zoning District for the Property shall be and the same is hereby changed from the A, AGRICULTURAL district to RS, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY district, in accordance with Exhibit "A", which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein, is hereby adopted by the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas. SECTION 3. All ordinances and resolutions, or parts of ordinances and resolutions, in conflict with this Ordinance are hereby repealed, and are no longer of any force and effect. SECTION 4. 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. River Bend, Unit V Rezoning Ordinance No. Page 2 of 3 SECTION 5. The Mayor is hereby authorized to sign this Ordinance and the City Secretary to attest. This Ordinance shall become effective and be in full force and effect in (10) ten days on and after publication in accordance with the provisions of the Charter of the City of Georgetown. PASSED AND APPROVED on First Reading on the day of February, 1996. PASSED AND APPROVED on Second Reading on the day of , 1996. ATTEST: THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: Sandra D. Lee City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney River Bend, Unit V Rezoning Ordinance No. Page 3 of 3 By: LEO WOOD Mayor ML—,;: ail. � Emma m a a a ! -