Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda CC 02.13.2018Notice of M eeting of the Governing B ody of the City of Georgetown, Texas February 1 3, 2 01 8 The Ge orgetown City Council will meet on February 13, 2018 at 6:00 PM at Council Chambers - 101 East 7th Street The City o f Georgetown is committed to co mpliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you re quire assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reasonable assistance, adaptations, or ac c ommo datio ns will be provided upo n request. P lease contact the City Se c retary's Office, at least three (3 ) days prio r to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930- 3652 o r City Hall at 113 East 8th Street fo r additional information; TTY use rs ro ute through Relay Texas at 7 11. REVISE D AGENDA Re gular Se ssion (This Regular Sessio n may, at any time, be re cessed to convene an Executive Se ssio n for any purpose authorize d by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Go vernment Code 551.) A Cal l to Order Invocati o n P l e dg e of Al l egi ance Co mments from the Mayor - Mark Miller Proclamation - CVB 20 17 Stella Award - SWAT Team Recognition Ci ty Co unci l Regi onal Board Re po rts Announcements Ac ti on fro m Executi ve Sessi on Statutory Conse nt Age nda The Statuto ry Co nsent Agenda includes no n-c ontroversial and routine items that may be acted upon with one single vote. An item may be pulled from the Consent Agenda in order that it be discussed and acted upon individually as part of the Regular Agenda. B Consideration and possible action to appro ve the mi nutes of the Wo rksho p and Regular Meeting held on Tuesday, January 23, 2018 -- Shelley Nowling, City Secretary C Consideration and possible action to appoi nt members to the Ci ty of G eorg etow n Advi sory Page 1 of 173 B o ar ds -- Mayor Dale Ross D Consideration and possible action to appoi nt members to the Georg e tow n Housi ng Authori ty -- Mayo r Dale Ross E Consideration and possible action to appoi nt Ci ty Counci l members to the Ci ty of G eo r geto w n Advi sory Boards -- Mayo r Dale Ross F Consideration and possible action to appoi nt B oard Chai rs to the Ci ty of G eorgetow n Advi sory Bo ards -- Mayor Dale Ro ss G Consideration and possible action to appoi nt members and chai rs to the Wi l l i ams Dri ve Tax Inc re ment Reinvestment Zone (TIRZ) B o ard, Downtow n George tow n TIRZ Board, Ri very P ar k TIRZ Board, and South G eo r geto w n TIRZ B oard -- Mayo r Dale Ro ss H F orw arded from the P arks and Recreati o n Advi sory B oard: Consideration and possible action to appro ve a Revocabl e Li cense Agreement with the Sun Ci ty Texas Communi ty Associ ati o n regarding w al ki ng and hi ki ng tr ai l s and authorizing the Mayo r to execute the Revocable License Agreement -- Kimberly Garrett, Parks and Recreation Dire c to r I F orw arded from the P arks and Recreati o n Advi sory B oard: Consideration and possible action to appro ve a Parkl and Mai ntenanc e Agreement with the Sun Ci ty Texas Communi ty Associ ati o n regarding w al ki ng and hi ki ng tr ai l s -- Kimberly Garrett, Parks and Recreation Director Le gislative Re gular Age nda J P ubl i c Heari ng and Fi rst Readi ng of an Ordinance granting a Speci al Use Permi t to allow an i ndo or sel f-storage faci l i ty within the Local Commerci al (C-1) zoni ng di stri ct on the pro pe rty located at 1050 Westi ng ho use -- So fia Nelson, CNU-A, P lanning Director (acti on requi red) K Consideration and possible action to appro ve a contract with Brow n Reynol ds Watford Ar c hi tects, of Col l ege Stati on, Texas in the amount of $478,400.00 for Archi tectural and Eng i neeri ng Desi gn Servi ces fo r Fi re Stati on No. 7 -- Eric Johnso n, CIP Manager and Laurie Bre wer, Assistant City Manager. L F orw arded from the G eorgetow n Transpo rtati on Enhancement Corporati on (G TEC): Consideration and possible action to appro ve Task Order KHA-18-0 01 with Ki ml ey-Horn and Associ ates, Inc. of Austin, Texas, for pro fessi onal servi ces related to the study of traffi c si gnal and dri vew ay access on SH 29 east o f IH 35, in the amount o f $4 3,3 52 .81 -- Edward G. Po lasek, AICP, Transportation Planning Coo rdinator Proje ct Update s M Pro ject updates and status reports re garding current and future transpo rtation and traffic project; street, sidewalk, and other infrastructure projects; police, fire and other public safety projects; eco nomic developme nt projects; city facility projects; and do wntown pro jects including parking enhancements, city lease agreements, sanitatio n services, and possible direction to c ity staff -- David Mo rgan, City Manager Public Wishing to Addre ss Council On a subje c t that is posted on this agenda: Ple ase fill out a speaker registratio n form which can be found on the table at the entrance to the Council Chamber. Clearly print your name and the letter of the item on whic h you wish to speak and present it to the City Secretary on the dais, preferably prior to the start of the me e ting. You will be called forward to speak when the Council conside rs that item. On a subje c t no t po sted on the agenda: P e rso ns may add an item to a future City Co uncil agenda by contac ting the City Secretary no later than noo n on the Wednesday prior to the Tuesday meeting, with Page 2 of 173 the subje c t matter o f the topic they would like to address and their name. The City Secretary can be reache d at 51 2/93 0-3651. N - At the time of posting, no persons had signed up to address the City Council Exe cutive Se ssion In compliance with the Open Meetings Ac t, Chapter 551, Government Co de , Verno n's Texas Codes, Annotate d, the items listed below will be discussed in closed session and are subject to action in the regular se ssio n. O Se c . 55 1.0 71 : Consul tati on wi th Atto rney Advic e from attorney about pending o r contemplated litigation and othe r matters on which the attorney has a duty to advise the City Co uncil, including agenda items -Briefing related to PUCT Docket #4 58 66 Se c . 55 1:0 74 : Personnel Matte r s City Manager, City Attorney, City Se c retary and Municipal Judge: Consideration of the appointment, employment, evaluatio n, reassignment, duties, discipline, o r dismissal - Evaluatio n P rocess for Direct Re ports o f the City Council - Tadd P hillips, Human Resources Dire c to r - City Attorney Evaluation - Update fro m the City Attorney to the City Council Adjournme nt Ce rtificate of Posting I, Shelley No wling, City S ecretary for the C ity of Geo rgeto wn, Texas , do hereby c ertify that this Notic e o f Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a p lac e read ily acc es s ib le to the general pub lic at all times , o n the _____ day of _________________, 2018, at __________, and remained so p o s ted for at leas t 72 c o ntinuo us ho urs p receding the s cheduled time of s aid meeting. __________________________________ Shelley No wling, City S ecretary Page 3 of 173 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting February 13, 2018 SUBJECT: Cal l to Order Invocati on Pl edge of Al l e gi ance Comments fro m the Mayo r - Mark Miller Pro c lamation - CVB 2017 Ste lla Award - SWAT Team Reco gnitio n Ci ty Counci l Re gi o nal Bo ard Reports Announcements Acti on from Executi ve Sessi on ITEM SUMMARY: FINANCIAL IMPACT: NA SUBMITTED BY: Shelley Nowling, City Secretary Page 4 of 173 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting February 13, 2018 SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to approve the mi nutes o f the Workshop and Re gular Meeting held on Tuesday, January 23, 2018 -- She lle y Nowling, City Secretary ITEM SUMMARY: FINANCIAL IMPACT: NA SUBMITTED BY: Shelley Nowling, City Secretary ATTACHMENT S: Description Works hop Meeting Minutes 1.23.2018 Regular Meeting Minutes 1.23.2018 Page 5 of 173 Notice of Meeting of the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas Tuesday, January 23, 2018 The Georgetown City Council will meet on Tuesday, January 23, 2018 at 3:30 PM at the Council Chambers, at 101 E. 7th St., Georgetown, Texas The city of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you require assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reasonable assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. Please contact the City Secretary’s Office, at least three (3) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or City Hall at 113 East 8th Street for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711. Mayor Ross called the meeting to order at 3:30 PM. All Councilmembers were in attendance, with the exception of Ty Gipson, Councilmember District 5. Mayor Dale Ross, Anna Eby, Councilmember District 1, Valerie Nicholson, Councilmember District 2, John Hesser, Councilmember District 3, Steve Fought, Councilmember District 4, , Rachael Jonrowe, Councilmember District 6, and Tommy Gonzalez, Councilmember District 7 were in attendance. Policy Development/Review Workshop – Call to order at 3:30 PM A. Overview and discussion regarding the creation of an In-City Municipal Utility District (MUD) for the proposed Berry Creek Highlands Development – Wayne Reed, Assistant City Manager Wayne Reed, Assistant City Manager, spoke on a possible In-City MUD for the Berry Creek Highlands Development. Reed provided handouts to the Council on the Evaluation of Compliance with Interim MUD Policy and a map of the Berry Creek Highlands Development. He provided an 11 x 17 image of the Developers Concept Plan. Reed explained that these were provided for easier viewing for the Council, but are also included in the agenda packet. He said he will be seeking Council direction for the development. Reed introduced the applicant Pete Dwyer, representing Avanti Strategic Land Investors VIII, LLLC (Avanti). Reed described the purpose of the presentation and said that staff is seeking Council feedback and direction on a request to create a new In-City Municipal Utility District (MUD) and would be asking the following: • Is the use of an In-City MUD suitable in the proposed location? • If there is a desire to proceed with the proposed In-City MUD, are there specific elements or focus areas the Council would like staff to negotiate? Reed provided a location map, a Concept Plan Map, a Future Land Use Plan map, and a map of the Berry Creek Wastewater Interceptor. He described the location as south of 195 and west of Shell Road. Reed said this is presently not in city limits, but annexation has been requested. He said the proposed use would be predominantly mixed use. Reed said the proposed property includes 2.5 acres set aside for a fire station and an elementary school site for the Jarrell ISD. He explained that if this is not utilized, it would be developed as residential. Reed provided a map of the Georgetown MUDs 2004-2017. He explained that there are 10 approved MUDs and staff is working on 4 applicants interested in forming new special districts – Bluffview, PID, Shell Road PID, Homestead PID and the Avanti MUD. He said that one applicant is interested in a significant expansion of an existing MUD. • Teravista – 2004 - ETJ • Water Oak – 2006 – ETJ mostly • Oaks at San Gabriel – 2007 – ETJ • Cimarron Hills – 2012 – ETJ • Crescent Bluff – 2014 – ETJ • Hillwood – 2014 – In-City • Parmer Ranch – 2015 – Out of city • Saddlecreek – 2015 – In-City Page 6 of 173 • Kasper – 2015 – In-City • Shadow Canyon – 2016 – In-City Reed spoke on an Interim MUD Policy Evaluation. He described each of the eleven Criteria to be met and explained if the policy number generally met the policy or did not meet the policy. Page 7 of 173 Page 8 of 173 Page 9 of 173 Councilmember Jonrowe asked about workforce housing. Reed said that Pete Dwyer could address this as it would be a developer issue. Dwyer said the developer has submitted a market study and has highlighted the price range of the proposed housing. Dwyer said there is a crisis of affordability in Central Texas and this will be part of the consideration in this development. Reed read from the policy. Jonrowe asked about the difference of addressing home ownership compared to rental properties. She said this limits the scope. City Manager, David Morgan, said a prior workshop on MUD policy addressed this and staff will be coming back the Council with more information about this. Reed noted the benefits of Parkland and Trails and fully funded construction of Shell Spur Road by the developer. He explained that the Intersection of 195 and Shell Spur will also be fully funded by the developer. Proposed Finance Terms were provided. • Bonds to be issued (Maximum amount) - $30,150,000 • Bond Maturity (Maximum) – 25 years from date of issue • Bond Issuance Period (from first to last) – 10 years • District Only Tax Rate (Maximum) - $0.55/$100 AV • City Tax Rate (FY18) - $0.4200 • Total Maximum Tax Rate, City and District (based upon FY18) - $0.97 Reed reviewed the Council Feedback and Direction being sought: • Is the use of on In-City MUD suitable in the proposed location? • If there is a desire to proceed with the proposed In-City MUD, are there specific elements of focus areas the Council would like staff to negotiate? Councilmember Fought said this was a good presentation and asked about connectivity to Sun City. He said he would want this considered. He said he is pleased with all, but would like to look at a bigger map and be able to discuss this. Fought said, fundamentally, it looks very good. Mayor Ross asked if there is a sense of urgency with this project. Reed said today’s workshop is just to get Council feedback. Ross asked if any Councilmembers felt this was inappropriate for the area. No one did. Councilmember Hesser asked about the workforce housing. He said he would like to see specific distribution of the price ranges, rather than an average. He said he would like to know how many homes are Page 10 of 173 added at each economic level. Hesser said, other than wanting this information, he thinks the proposal is a well done In-City MUD. Pete Dwyer, the representative for the Developer said this information is shown in the market study. He said that 57% of the proposed pricing will be from $230,000 to $280,000 and 43% will be from $260,000 to $310,000. Councilmember Gonzalez asked about the 2 areas on 195, and why this is proposed as residential instead of commercial. Dwyer said this is because TXDOT wanted a 90% intersection and that is why it was needed to be set up in this way. He explained that a reasonable amount of commercial and residential will be good planning tax wise. Gonzalez said all of this is short term and the City needs to also look at the long term impact of land that will no longer be available. Reed said he will bring back a MUD Agreement to the Council in the future. B. Overview presentation and discussion of the City’s Debt Program -- Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager Assistant City Manager, Laurie Brewer provided a presentation on the City’s Debt Program. She said the presentation would mostly be a refresher, with a few new things that have become clear recently. Brewer noted that the plan has been refined just slightly. Brewer described Debt Planning • Budget development includes capital plan and debt plan • 2018 Budget include proposed debt with tax estimated tax impacts (for the following year) o Refine 2018 debt plan as project timing and costs are updated She then described Debt Policies • Provide debt update annually • Balance needs of the City between pay as you go and debt financing o Stability of tax rate • Explore all funding options for a capital item • Finance a capital item over its useful life • Method of sale – competitive Brewer spoke on the Types of Debt • General Obligation Bonds o Used for large project o Approved by the voters o Repaid with property taxes over long terms • Certificates of Obligation o Used for required or routine items o Public notice required o Repaid with property taxes or other revenue o Term over the life of the asset • Revenue Bonds o Used for large electric and water projects o Repaid with utility revenue over the life of the asset Brewer explained that a bond rating is an independent review of the City’s management and financial condition to determine credit worthiness. She noted that the rating impacts interest rate. Brewer said that the City’s Standard & Poor’s 2017 Rating was AA+ for General Obligation Bonds and AA for Revenue Bonds. She said these excellent scores reflect the City’s strong economy in the region, excellent financial management and cash reserves for both the general fund and the utilities. Brewer provided a slide depicting the Current Tax Rate and described the Debt Coverage Ratio. Page 11 of 173 Brewer showed the Current Tax Obligations with a Pie Chart and spoke on current obligations and debt history. She explained that, under tax supported debt, City facilities and public safety make up the bulk, then street projects and park and recreation projects. Brewer explained that tax supported debt has increased over the last 5 years. She noted that the significant increase is due to debt issues for the Southwest Bypass, Garey Park and San Gabriel Park Renovations. She said the numbers will be updated in future presentations. Page 12 of 173 Councilmember Gonzalez asked, of the $132 Million in already issued bonds, how much has been approved but not yet been issued. Brewer said she does have those numbers but not in this presentation. She said she will be happy to provide the numbers to the Council. Gonzalez asked that the numbers be provided so that the Council can look at a full picture. He said he would also like a list of the outstanding bonds that have not been diffused, but most likely will never be issued. Mayor Ross said this will be taken up during the budget process. Page 13 of 173 Brewer provided a chart of the Current Enterprise Obligations next. She explained that enterprise debt includes debt from revenue bonds and from self-supporting CO’s. Brewer said that the revenue obligations are primarily water and wastewater projects, such as treatment plants, towers and underground pipes. She noted that electric is about 1/3 and there is a small portion for stormwater and irrigation. Brewer spoke on the 5 Year Enterprise Debt, including Self-Supported Debt, Debt per Capita, Debt Per Customer, Historic Asset Net of Debt and the Five Year CIP. She explained that the City’s assets to debt is steadily increasing. Page 14 of 173 Page 15 of 173 Brewer provided the FY 2018 Proposed Debt. Page 16 of 173 City Manager, David Morgan, asked Brewer to go back to a prior slide and he then spoke on the downtown parking expansion. He said that the City is working with the County on expanding the current lease with the County and taking the EMS space. He explained that if these elements are possible, staff may have to bring this back to Council, if the numbers shift. Paul Diaz, the City’s Budget Manager, spoke on the anticipated tax impact over a 5 year CIP plan. He described the Tax Impact Analysis and how the Model Works. Page 17 of 173 Tax Impact Analysis • Developed in FY2016, the Five Year Debt Model is a tool to better understand the impacts of issuing debt. • Allows for scenario testing and the adjustment of multiple variables including assessed value, sales tax, tax rate distribution, and debt service requirements. Page 18 of 173 Diaz explained that expenditure and revenue projections can be seen and the model calculates how many cents would need to be increased in taxes to close up the gap. Diaz provided a forecast with two Scenarios. He explained that Scenario 1 is conservative but realistic. He noted that there would be little to no impact on the tax rate if the growth stays the same. Scenario 2 shows less growth in the out years. Diaz provided the Tax Rate Projected Impact in Cents. Page 19 of 173 Mayor Ross asked about the new state laws. Diaz said this has been shown with the current state laws. Councilmember Gonzalez said this indicates the need to be more efficient in paying off the debt and keeping pace with a fast growing tax rate. Diaz said this is evaluated throughout the budget project. Diaz explained that every penny of tax rate = $450,000 of debt service. Ross said construction costs are not going to get any cheaper. He said the City cannot delay when there is a need for infrastructure. Councilmember Hesser said he would also like to look at this in reference. He said one must ask what would have to be done, in spending, to keep the same tax rate. City Manager, David Morgan, said this will be proposed through the budgeting process and Council will be shown the differences. Hesser said it is crucial to look at it from both directions. Brewer said the City can feel good about maintaining its contract with the voters. She spoke on the 2017 Refunding and Early Defeasance in December 2017. She noted that the details to follow do not include the numbers from the refunding and defeasance that happened in December, which saved the City $1.3 million dollars. Brewer provided the Takeaways. • City debt has increased over the past decade • Correlates to population growth and voter approved projects to improve services and quality of life • Excellent credit ratings • Economic conditions and fiscal management ensure ability to pay debt • Current debt estimated to impact FY19 at .23 cents • Current economic forecast and CIP plan shows drives need for increased rate of 3.4 cents to 6.2 cents over the next four years with continued growth The Next Steps were discussed. • February 27 Council Agenda o Authorize Financial Advisors to proceed with bond sale schedule and documents o Approve Notice of Intent to issue Certificates of Obligation • March 2018 o Offering Statements reviewed by staff o Staff meet with the bond rating agency • April 24 Council Meeting o Approve results of competitive sale • May 17 o Closing and receive proceeds Mayor Ross asked if anyone disagrees. All Councilmembers agreed. C. Overview presentation of Water Resource Utilization for the 2017 fiscal year -- Leticia Zavala, Customer Care Director Leticia Zavala, the City’s Customer Care Director, provided a presentation on Water Resource Utilization for fiscal year 2017. She began with an Agenda of the Presentation. Agenda • Water Resources & Production • Conservation Goals • Annual Conservation Efforts • Rebate Program • Drought Survivability (Agrilife) Project with Texas A&M • Brazos River Authority – Stage 1 Watch • 2014 Conservation Plan Update • Questions Zavala spoke on the City’s Water Resources Page 20 of 173 Zavala provided a Comparison of Water Production. • 2016 o Total Production – 6.2B gallons o Average Daily – 17.2M o Peak – 36M • 2017 o Total – 7.2B gallons o Average Daily – 19.9M o Peak – 38M Page 21 of 173 Zavala detailed the City’s Water Conservation Goals and the Overall Conservation Goals. Page 22 of 173 Year Round Effort for Water Conservation were detailed next. Page 23 of 173 Zavala described the Irrigation Rebate Program in detail. Zavala spoke on the Drought Survivability Study and the Agrilife Project. She noted that she had provided a handout on the program to the Council at their seats on the dais. Page 24 of 173 Zavala explained the Brazos River Authority Stage 1 Drought Watch. Page 25 of 173 Zavala described the 2014 Water Conservation Plan, updates in subsequent years, and then detailed the 2019 Conservation Plan Update. Page 26 of 173 Page 27 of 173 Zavala ended the presentation with an explanation of the Water Rate & Fee Review. She explained that this had not been updated since the 90s, which was 20 years ago. Councilmember Fought asked the Council to give a round of applause for the great presentation and extremely well run program. Councilmember Nicholson asked how the Council could help. Zavala said getting the word out is helpful. She suggested emphasizing never watering on Mondays, only watering twice per week, and turning off Page 28 of 173 irrigation systems in the winter. Zavala noted that the City can help individuals with landscaping plans and watering schedules. Mayor Ross recessed the meeting to Executive Session under Section 551.071, Section 551.074, Section 551.086 and Section 551.087 at 4.50 PM. Executive Session In compliance with the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551, Government Code, Vernon’s Texas Codes, Annotated, the items listed below will be discussed in closed session and are subject to action in the regular session. D. Sec. 551.071: Consultation with Attorney Advice from attorney about pending or contemplated litigation and other matters on which the attorney has a duty to advise the City Council, including agenda items - Update on pending litigation styled Amanda Phillips v. City of Georgetown Sec. 551:074: Personnel Matters City Manager, City Attorney, City Secretary and Municipal Judge: Consideration of the appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal Sec. 551.086: Certain Public Power Utilities: Competitive Matters - Purchase Power Update – Jim Briggs, General Manager of Utilities Sec. 551.087: Deliberation Regarding Economic Development Negotiations - Project Legacy Adjournment Mayor Ross adjourned the meeting at 6:00 PM to begin the Regular City Council meeting. __________________________________________________________________________________________________ Approved by the Georgetown City Council on _____________________________ Date _____________________________ _____________________________ Dale Ross, Mayor Attest: City Secretary Page 29 of 173 Notice of Meeting of the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas Tuesday, January 23, 2018 The Georgetown City Council will meet on Tuesday, January 23, 2018 at 6:00 PM at the Council Chambers at 101 E. 7th St., Georgetown, Texas The city of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you require assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reasonable assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. Please contact the City Secretary’s Office, at least three (3) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or City Hall at 113 East 8th Street for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711. Mayor Ross called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM. All Councilmembers were in attendance, with the exception of Ty Gipson, Councilmember District 5. Mayor Dale Ross, Anna Eby, Councilmember District 1, Valerie Nicholson, Councilmember District 2, John Hesser, Councilmember District 3, Steve Fought, Councilmember District 4, Rachael Jonrowe, Councilmember District 6, and Tommy Gonzalez, Councilmember District 7 were in attendance. Regular Session (This Regular session may, at any time, be recessed to convene an Executive Session for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code 551.) A. Call to Order Invocation Pledge of Allegiance Comments from the Mayor - Presentation of Police Department Awards - Council Meeting Procedures and Guidelines Mayor Ross said that he believed this to be an appropriate time to review with Council and the audience the governance policies of the Georgetown City Council. He said nothing he would share this night is new or a change. He explained that these policies were developed via the City Charter, the Governance Policy approved by the Council on July 10, 2012, and an update of the rules of engagement developed by the Council last November. Ross noted that the Mayor is responsible for the integrity of the Council’s process and for the dissemination of ongoing information on Council procedures, current agenda items and meetings. Ross said that a Council meeting is where democracy occurs in Georgetown and the Mayor will ensure all attendees are treated with respect, courtesy and dignity at these meetings. Ross spoke on the agenda process. He said that the agenda is finalized at 5 PM on the Tuesday before the next Tuesday’s Council meeting. Ross said that, generally, the City Manager, Mayor, City Attorney and City Secretary conduct a final review at noon on the Tuesday before the next Tuesday, Council meeting. Mayor Ross noted that the City Charter allows an individual Councilmember to place an item on the agenda, provided the cover sheet, including the financial impact amount, and supporting documents, are provided to the City Secretary no later than 5 PM on the Tuesday before the Council meeting. Ross explained that once staff has introduced an agenda item and a motion and second have occurred, the Mayor allows anyone who has signed up to speak on that item 3 minutes to speak, or 6 minutes if another individual donates their 3 minutes. He said once all of the speakers have been heard, each Councilmember will be given 3 minutes to ask questions or provide comments. He said on the second round of questions and comments, each Councilmember will be allowed 1 minute of time. Page 30 of 173 Mayor Ross said that Councilmembers are expected to be prepared for meetings and discussion of the agenda according to the Governance Policy. He noted that, for a more effective process, it would be helpful if Council would provide the City Manager with any questions they may have, which may require research, by 5 PM on the Friday before the Tuesday Council meeting. Ross explained that this is necessary in order to get answers to the Council and provide all of the information necessary to make the best possible decisions. Ross said when City Council is questioning the staff, each staff member is to be treated with respect, dignity and courtesy. He added that staff will be allowed time to answer questions without being interrupted by a Councilmember. Ross said that Councilmembers will not be allowed to make personal attacks from the dais regarding any speakers or attendees. He said this unseemly behavior not only reflects negatively on a Councilmember, but also reflects negatively on the City Council as an elected body. Ross said the role of the City’s Boards, Commissions and Committees is to perform the specific functions in state statutes, City Ordinances, Resolutions, etc. Ross noted that a Councilmember, attending a meeting of a board, commission or committee, shall not take part in the meeting, nor address the board in any manner, whether by questions or statements. He explained that a Councilmember shall not attempt to influence the decisions of boards, commissions or committees about their actions unless at a City Council Meeting. Ross noted that this does not apply to a Councilmember who is participating as a duly appointed member of a board, commission or committee. Ross thanked the audience and said he hoped this information was helpful. Mayor Ross shared a video of what is in store for the City of Georgetown in 2018 – A Look Ahead. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39KPC692KBY City Council Regional Board Reports No board reports were given. Announcements - Cupids Chase Action from Executive Session No action was taken from Executive Session. Statutory Consent Agenda The Statutory Consent Agenda includes non-controversial and routine that may be acted upon with one single vote. An item may be pulled from the Consent Agenda in order that it be discussed and acted upon individually as part of the Regular Agenda. Councilmember Eby asked that Item B be moved from the Statutory Consent Agenda to the Legislative Agenda for discussion. Mayor Ross later announced later that Item K had been pulled from the agenda. B. Consideration and possible action to approve the minutes of the Workshop and Regular Meeting held on Tuesday, January 9, 2018 and a Special Meetings held on January 12, 2018 -- Shelley Nowling, City Secretary Item B was moved to the Legislative agenda for discussion by Councilmember Eby. C. Consideration and possible action to approve a Resolution ordering a General Election to be held May 5, 2018 for City Council Members for District 1 and District 5 -- Shelley Nowling, City Secretary D. Consideration and possible action to approve a Resolution confirming the appointment of Luis Zamot to the Fire Fighters and Police Officers' Civil Service Commission for a 3 year term -- Elliott Harper, Human Resources Generalist and David Morgan, City Manager E. Consideration and possible action to approve a new permit volume package for 2018 related to the City’s Interlocal Agreement for licensing South Central Planning and Development Commission (SCPDC) for MyPermitNow software -- Glen Holcomb, Chief Building Official Page 31 of 173 F. Consideration and possible action to approve the purchase of nineteen (19) replacement ruggedized laptops and associated vehicle docks for emergency service vehicles from Ingram Technologies LLC for an amount of $79,695.16 -- Chris Bryce, IT Director G. Consideration and possible action to approve an Assignment and Assumption Agreement with Westin Technology Solutions, LLC (WTS) to allow WTS to assume the obligation of the existing consulting services contract previously made between the City of Georgetown and Westin Engineering, Inc. -- Leticia Zavala, Customer Care Director H. Consideration and possible action to notify the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) that Georgetown requests not to be noticed on the pending application of Alamo Concrete Products related to Certificate of Adjudication 12-3737 and 12-3739 -- Jim Briggs, General Manager of Utilities I. Consideration and possible action to vacate and abandon multiple public utility easements (PUEs) across Lots A & B, Block A, Resubdivision of Lot 1, Block A, Amended Plat of Lots 1,2,3, Block A, Four-T Ranch Section One, as recorded in Cabinet W, Lot 166 of the Plat Records of Williamson County, Texas; and to authorize the Mayor to execute a quitclaim deed --Travis Baird, Real Estate Services Coordinator J. Consideration and possible action to approve the vacation and abandonment of a 40 foot right-of-way easement for channel improvements across Lot 2, Dicotec Subdivision, recorded in Cabinet L, Slide 143, and being a portion of that same easement dedicated in Volume 416, Page 2 of the Official Public Records of Williamson County, Texas; and to authorize the Mayor to execute a quitclaim deed -- Travis Baird, Real Estate Services Coordinator K. Consideration and possible action on a Traffic Improvement Agreement with Cedar Breaks West -- Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Director Item K was pulled from the agenda. L. Forwarded from Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board (GTAB): Consideration and possible action to award a contract to Choice Builders, LLC of Temple, Texas for curb and gutter installation at various locations in the City, in the amount of $362,684.50 -- Wesley Wright, P.E. Systems Engineering Director M. Forwarded from Georgetown Utility Systems Advisory Board (GUS): Consideration and possible action to approve a contract with Leopold, a subsidiary of Xylem, Inc., from Zelienople, PA for the replacement of the Lake Water Treatment Plant filter number two in the approximate amount of $138,500.00 -- Glenn W. Dishong, Utility Director N. Forwarded from Georgetown Utility Systems Advisory Board (GUS): Consideration and possible action to approve the following bid award for Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant chemical (Sodium Hypochlorite) to Brenntag Southwest, Inc. -- Glenn W. Dishong, Utility Director Motion by Eby, second by Fought, to approve the Statutory Consent Agenda in its entirety, with the exception of Item B and Item K. Approved: 6-0 (Gipson absent) Legislative Regular Agenda B. Consideration and possible action to approve the minutes of the Workshop and Regular Meeting held on Tuesday, January 9, 2018 and a Special Meetings held on January 12, 2018 -- Shelley Nowling, City Secretary Councilmember Eby asked that Item B be moved from the Statutory Consent Agenda to the Legislative Regular Agenda for discussion. She said that the word “not” had been omitted prior to the word “comfortable” on page 34 of 35, Item R, on the draft minutes for the regular meeting on January 9, 2018. She explained that the sentence should read that Councilmember Eby is “not comfortable” with kicking the issue down the road. Page 32 of 173 Motion by Eby, second by Hesser, to approve the minutes with this change. Approved: 6-0 (Gipson absent) Mayor Ross announced that Item K had been pulled from the Statutory Consent agenda. O. Consideration and possible action to approve and ratify an Agreement for purchase with Elster Solutions LLC to provide Energy Axis AMI water modules and related items for the Advance Metering Infrastructure system and previous expenditures for similar purchases from Elster Solutions LLC in a total amount not to exceed $415,000.00 -- Glenn Dishong, Utility Director and Rosemary Ledesma, Purchasing Manager Glenn Dishong, the City’s Utility Director, spoke on a possible purchase agreement with Elster Solutions for energy axis AMI water nodules and related items needed for the Advance Metering Infrastructure System. Dishong explained that these purchases are necessary for the warehouse storage of spare parts. Dishong read the caption. Motion by Fought, second by Gonzalez, to approve Item O. Approved: 6-0 (Gipson absent) P. Second Reading of an Ordinance of the City of Georgetown amending the Code of Ordinances of the City of Georgetown by adding Chapter 12.02 Entitled “Network Nodes in the Public Right-Of-Way,” relating to the deployment of network nodes and node support poles in the Right-Of-Way by network providers in accordance with Texas Local Government Code Chapter 284; repealing conflicting ordinances and resolutions; providing a severability clause; providing for publication and setting an effective date -- Glenn W. Dishong, Utilities Director (action required) Utilities Director, Glenn Dishong, provided a second reading description of an ordinance for Network Nodes in the Public Right of Way. Dishong noted that, after the first reading, the design manual had been slightly updated and included in the agenda packet, but that the ordinance had remained the same. He noted the financial analysis that had been requested was attached to the agenda packet also. Dishong read the caption. Motion by Gonzalez, second by Nicholson, to approve Item P. Approved: 6-0 (Gipson absent) Q. Second Reading of an Ordinance rezoning approximately 72 acres in the Low BC Survey, located at 250 Westinghouse Drive from Business Park (BP) District to a Planned Unit Development (PUD) District -- Sofia Nelson, CNU-A Planning Director (action required) Planning Director, Sofia Nelson, spoke on the second reading of a rezoning request for a PUD at 250 Westinghouse Drive. Nelson described the property and provided a location map, a future land use designation map and a zoning map. Nelson showed a chart of the various zones in the PUD Development Proposal and described each and its uses, followed by a chart of the PUD Development Proposal showing the Development Density. Page 33 of 173 Nelson said that the Planning and Zoning Commission had recommended approval unanimously. Nelson read the caption Motion by Nicholson, second by Eby, to approve Item Q. Councilmember Jonrowe asked if the residential properties adjacent to this property were outside of the city limits. Nelson confirmed. Jonrowe asked Nelson to confirm that these residents were not sent notifications of this development. Nelson confirmed and added that signage notification had been posted at the property on Mays Street. Jonrowe asked which sections would be allowed to go up to 100 feet in height. Nelson said the maximum height would be 80 feet, allowed for Zones C and D. Jonrowe said she likes the overall concept of the development but has an issue with allowing that type of height without any input from the people with houses directly adjacent. Jonrowe said she would not be supporting this at this time and going forward she will be putting forward suggestions for how the City can expand the notification process and make it work better for the citizens and to be able to get more community involvement, even providing better communication to neighbors in the ETJ. Approved: 5-1 (Jonrowe opposed, Gipson absent) R. Second Reading of an Ordinance rezoning approximately 31.94 acres in the following subdivisions: Brownstone at the Summit Phase 1, Brownstone at Summit Phase 2 -4, Brownstone at Summit Phase 5-6, a portion of lot 4 block "A" lots 1,2,3,5,6 in the Rivery Park Subdivision II and Lot 2 Block "A" in the Rivery Park Subdivision, located at 1500 Rivery Blvd to amend the Summit at Rivery Park Planned Unit Development (PUD) District -- Sofia Nelson, CNU-A Planning Director (action required) Sofia Nelson, Planning Director, spoke on the second reading of a rezoning request for 1500 Rivery Blvd, amending the Summit at Rivery Park PUD District. She said that the applicant was seeking two types of amendments. She said that first amendment relates to the area in Zone B and the plan would be to develop an urban residential and retail mixed use first floor. She explained that this amendments would allow 30 units of residential on the first floor and a maximum of 90% of the building space for residential. Nelson said the second amendment relates to signage requirements. She said the monument signs, long-proposed for Page 34 of 173 the development, are a stone structure that exceeds the 8 foot limitation previously approved for the project. She explained that the development has matured and now would be the time to provide cohesive architectural branding elements to the site. Nelson described one exception to the stone site elements as a blade sign on two of the monuments for the Sheraton Hotel and Conference Center, which will need identification on Rivery Blvd. when the Zone B Building is erected and the view of the hotel from Rivery is blocked. Nelson provided a location map, future land use map and zoning map. She then spoke on the Project History. • 1986: The project was annexed into the City limits and was part of the original Rivery Concept Plan and was later included in the Rivery Park Development agreement executed in 2002. • 2007: The property was rezoned from C3 to PUD • 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2016: The PUD was amended Nelson spoke on the Project History – PUD Components • The PUD applies to 31.94 acres • The PUD contains development standards for the following: o 3 development zones (Design Standards & Allowable Uses) o Signage o Storm Water o Roadway Infrastructure o Internal Pedestrian and Vehicular Circulation o Site Requirements (Parking, Landscaping) Nelson provided images of the Zones and detailed descriptions of each. She spoke on the development request for signage and provided images. Page 35 of 173 Nelson noted that the Planning & Zoning Commission had unanimously recommended approval of the request. Nelson read the caption. Motion by Nicholson, second by Eby, to approve Item R. Approved: 6-0 (Gipson absent) S. Second Reading of an Ordinance restricting vehicular traffic and closing the intersection of West Majestic Oak Lane and Apache Mountain Lane in the Sun City Subdivision, in the City of Georgetown, Texas – Rachael Jonrowe, Councilmember District 6 (action required) Mayor Ross announced that Councilmember Jonrowe had emailed him earlier in the day, wanting to pull this item. Ross said he does not have a problem with the item being pulled but since the Item has already been voted on by Council, not an individual, Council owns the item. He said he would be fine if Council wants to delay the decision, but that the Mayor does not feel comfortable making that decision on his own. Jonrowe said her point of view is different. She said she had sent an email to the Mayor that afternoon asking to pull Item S from the agenda for a variety of reasons, not least of which was to allow more time for public input and research. Jonrowe said her reasons are actually beside the point, because she has seen items pulled on numerous occasions by staff, applicants, developers, and other Councilmembers for reasons that have never been questioned because it has been deemed the prerogative of the applicant to pull their own item if they make such a request before a meeting. Jonrowe said that, today, history and precedent have been ignored and a potentially harmful precedent has been set instead. She said that because she was told that her request would not be honored and she would be required to do what no applicant has been asked to do before, she is being subjected to disparate, unequal and prejudicial treatment and so over her strenuous and heartfelt objections she will make a motion that she hopes someone will second and that everyone will seek to vote on in the affirmative to demonstrate to the community that the Council cares about the history of how Council meetings are conducted. Motion by Jonrowe, second by Eby to pull Item S from the legislative agenda in the form of postponing it until the February 13, 2018 meeting. Page 36 of 173 Mayor Ross said this was a good opportunity for him to comment and read the email that Jonrowe had sent to him that afternoon, which stated that Jonrowe was informing him that she was pulling Item S. Ross read that Jonrowe had stated that she will inform him and the City Secretary office when she is ready to post it again in the future. Mayor Ross said that there was no explanation given of why this Item needed to be pulled. He said that on January 2nd, at the very last minute, Councilmember Jonrowe put this item on the January 9th agenda for a first reading of an ordinance. Ross said, on the 9th, the agenda item was voted on and approved by Council. He said that Council now owns the item. Mayor Ross said that when talking about prior history, no second reading item has ever been pulled from an agenda while he has been Mayor. He explained that items in which an applicant and city staff have agreed upon, have been pulled. Councilmember Fought said he also believes that this item deserves to be postponed. Amended motion by Fought, second by Hesser to postpone a vote on this until August 2018 to give the staff time to construct and bring back policy options on the measurable conditions and procedures for closing a road in the City. Fought said if this got a second, he would like the privilege of speaking briefly to it. Mayor Ross noted the many people who had come to the meeting to speak on this item and said the people deserve to be heard. Ross said that while it is important to hear people, what they have signed up to speak about is not the motion before Council at this time, as the motion is to delay the item. Ross said not giving the people the chance to speak would not be the way to go. Councilmember Fought agreed and thanked everyone for engaging. Fought said the masthead to his newsletter reads “Earnest, open, informed debate leads to good public policy.” Fought said that he is prepared to proceed with a vote but that he takes considerable exception to the way that Council got here. He explained that this should have begun with a workshop, which would have given the Council an opportunity to consider the question of closing a road, and to give staff guidance to develop a policy. Fought said that there should have been time for public input and for the Councilmembers to consider those comments. He said that there should have also been time for staff to give a considered response to whatever questions came up. Fought said, instead, it was rushed into a first reading, with those in support of the proposal being well prepared, and those opposed, but also impacted, being caught unaware and therefore unprepared to participate in the discussion at the first reading. Fought said that, in his opinion, this was a foul and not the way the Council should deal with policy issues, the public, or each other. He said this is not the way we do business in Georgetown. Fought said it is only at the second reading that Council is able to hear the opposition, either in person or via email, and these new participants raised some serious questions. Fought said he would like to highlight some of the issues. • No firm understanding of the cost • No accommodations made for non-conventional emergencies • What are the spillover effects if cars are rerouted • What would be the effect of a precedent set • Need to do an evaluation of alternatives Fought said, because this has been rushed, he believes Council should go back to the beginning and do it right. He said Council should ask staff to make recommendations on the circumstances and procedures for closing City roads and have staff present this to the Council in a workshop, as is the normal practice. Councilmember Jonrowe asked City Attorney, Charlie McNabb, about the amended motion to delay until August. She asked how Council is supposed to counter or argue points made throughout the discussion, if they are supposed to limit their conversation to the motion, at hand, of delaying the item until August. She asked if would be out of order to discuss other points brought up. McNabb said that Council can debate the motion to postpone, or an amendment to postpone, although it is not clear. Councilmember Hesser said he agrees with Councilmember Fought’s points. Hesser said there is not a policy in place for closing roads and the City must have a well thought out policy and procedure. He explained that there are unintended consequences that must be reviewed properly. Hesser said he would like to leave the road open now until a policy is developed that can be applied evenly and fairly to any future requests. Page 37 of 173 Jonrowe said she is not in favor of continuing to dither. She said the City needs to alleviate people’s safety concerns now and if there are policy issues that need to be put in place Council needs to provide more guidance to staff and the public. She said things such as how a road was engineered, what type of traffic expectations are present, congestions issues and sidewalk infrastructure need to be examined. Jonrowe said there needs to be clear parameters, but while figuring that out, citizens have had their quality of life severely curtailed and the City needs to take serious measures to fix that because the City created this problem. Fought reread his amended motion for review. Amended motion by Fought, second by Hesser to postpone a vote on the item until August 2018 to give the staff time to develop and bring back policy to bring back policy options on the measurable conditions and procedures for closing a road in the City. Jonrowe said by amending in this way, and taking away her ability to pull this item, her item has been hijacked. She said if the majority votes in favor of postponing until August, it means the process has been circumvented, and has taken away her agenda item, and Council and staff would be choosing when it comes back instead of that being her choice. Mayor Ross said when Council passes an item, as in the first reading of this item, it becomes owned by Council as a whole. Mayor Ross said democracy is better when you have the entire Council making a decision instead of the Mayor. Jonrowe said, with that logic, Councilmember Gipson should be present. Mayor Ross said the Council has operated consistently when people have been absent. He said people who are present get to vote, and those that are not do not vote. Vote taken on Councilmember Fought’s amended motion. Failed: 2-4 (Eby, Hesser, Jonrowe, Gonzalez opposed, Gipson absent) Jonrowe read the original motion to pull Item S. Motion by Jonrowe, second by Eby to pull Item S from the legislative agenda in the form of postponing it until the February 13, 2018 meeting. Vote taken on the Original motion. Failed: 2-4 (Nicholson, Hesser, Fought, Gonzales opposed) Discussion followed about whether discussion of the item could continue without a motion. City Attorney, McNabb, said citizen comments have previously been received by Council in two ways. Comments have been heard after a motion has been made, as well as comments heard prior to a motion. City Attorney, McNabb, said that since there is no motion, there would not be a reason for public comment, and the item does not pass. He said this item only passed on first reading, so there is no action, but he believes that it can be brought back. McNabb said there is still an item to be discussed. Councilmember Jonrowe asked McNabb if he needed a short recess to research this. Mayor Ross recessed the meeting until 7 PM. McNabb said he had looked up to see if the limitation on reconsideration applies to this matter, and it does not apply when there is no action at all. He explained that if an item is not acted on tonight, it can be brought back and put on the agenda of a future date. Motion by Gonzales, second by Fought to deny closing Majestic Oak Lane and Apache Mountain Lane until there is a specific policy in place that it abides by, by June 15, 2018. Councilmember Eby said she did not understand the motion. Gonzalez said the motion was to deny closing the road until there is a policy in place and those policies and procedures are met. He said he was giving the staff until June 15th to come up with the policies and procedures. Mayor Ross said the thought would be to have a workshop when the policies and procedures are ready, for the Council to review and approve the policy. Gonzalez confirmed. He said he did not want to wait until August. McNabb explained that by denying the closure, it would be voting down the closure and the item could be postponed until June 15th - but if it acted upon, now, then it is done. Page 38 of 173 Gonzalez corrected his motion to be to postpone until June 15th so that a policy and procedure will be in place that all roads can be compared to and decisions can be made if they qualify or do not qualify for closure, based on those standards. Fought removed his second from Gonzalez’s first motion. Gonzalez repeated his corrected motion. Motion by Gonzalez, second by Fought, to postpone, until June 15th, any action on this road until staff comes up with a policy and procedure that can be applied to all roads in the City of Georgetown. Jonrowe asked if the second reading is postponed until June 15th, if it would be permitted to be voted on by a different Council. McNabb explained that Council is Council, and a continuing body, and would not be thought of as a “different” Council. He said, even though members may change, the Council is the Council and is a continuing body perpetually. Hesser asked McNabb to describe the difference of denying the closure now instead of postponing the item until June. McNabb said the denial would be turning down the ordinance to close the road. McNabb said the first motion was to deny the closing, not to take no action on the closing. He explained that if you take no action on the closing, and postpone it, then the item would be brought back June 15th and the situation would be where it is right now. He said if the Council denies it now, it is voting against the closure of the ordinance on the second reading and this ordinance process is ended. He said that another ordinance could be brought back Gonzalez said his purpose of postponement is to try to give staff the time to form a policy. Gonzalez said he does not want to deny the citizens the right to speak, but that they will be able to weigh in when the policy is discussed. Hesser said the people are looking for disposition of some sort and if they were to come back after a policy is established, they will be able to get fair treatment like everyone else. Mayor Ross said the citizens will get to weigh in on the policy. Mayor Ross said the motion is to keep road the open until a policy is established, no later than June 15, 2018. Failed: 2-4 (Eby, Nicholson, Hesser, Jonrowe opposed) Motion by Gonzalez, second by Hesser, to deny the closing of the road, as a permanent denial with no timeline. Mayor Ross said the Council would now hear from the public. Persons signed up to speak on Item S included: Peter Rauch, Frank Townsend, Cheryl Sicola, Ralph Ameral, Dwight Rinier, Ira Grierson, Lori Kedroski, Donna Betts, Chuck Betts, Tom Giallonardo, Mary Ann Sauls, Karen Arnold, Jaella Nauman, Richard Giddings, Ann B. Thomas, John Ryan, Carol Ryan, Jim Wolcott, Cheryl Thompson, Robert Sauls, Terry Reider, Dave Stockwell, Jean Ann Reider, Jim Wolcott, Thersa Wolcott, Terri Eppinger, Lynn Rollins, Tina Klingemann, Joann Stockwell, Debbie Einem, Brian Polk, Marc Rothschild, Bernie May, John May, Scott Maul, WM Tradnzy, Irby Connery, Toni Briggs, Mike Triggs, Allison Wolfe, Joseph Turio, Jeff Itkin, Rich Barbee, Susan Barbee, Kathy Powers, Dan Adler. Comments and concerns voiced included: 875 Signed a Petition to keep Majestic Oaks access open 1400 homes adversely affected by the closure Commissioner Covey wants it open City Transportation wants it open 2 City Council members whose district is effected want it open Georgetown PD and Williamson County Sherriff have not mentioned safety issues Roads are meant to be built and utilized not closed Stop, step back, take a breath and reconsider if this is unsafe Lots of streets are busy Make a vote on facts Pedernales did a poll to keep it open Jim Briggs said under the City overall transportation plan, not unsafe Intersection deemed to be not dangerous Page 39 of 173 Most vehicles travel less than 30 miles per hour Public streets cannot be gated Hesser said 3 people want it open vs. 1 wanting it closed 875 want the road to be open Many roads will want to be closed, if this gets closed It would cost nearly $100,000 to close - not how they want tax dollars spent This is a true and real irritant for 70 people and creates an irritant for 1400 if closed Serve the greater good Must recognize the decision of Council. What changed that made council reverse a decision? Same comments were presented as before Council needs to seek specific information from the Police Dept. and Sheriff Decision to close a road when having so much growth is wrong. Police Department should be THE voice Closing a road is not insignificant Road less safe does not mean unsafe Our municipality needs to be fair and reasonable Traffic is a problem on many roads Subjective input cannot determine This is no more dangerous than other roads Some speakers said others had already expressed their view and they would not need to speak In every plat and map of Apache Mountain and Majestic Oak were shown as connectors. Can’t close a road because it gets used, just make it safer No accidents or incidents have been recorded 15,000 people might need to evacuate – eliminating an exit is more dangerous How is it safer to funnel traffic to 245, which is twice the distance, no shoulders, speed limits or traffic lights Dangerous precedent to set Council is not prepared to make the best decision This road has two development agreements that would need to be amended To do this is a lot of work Traffic counts and traffic reports would be needed Maybe an environmental impact study Intersection was planned cut and curbed This is a public street that already exists Closing a connection will create a private gated community No documented accidents Growth has created increased traffic everywhere Has to drive 12 to 15 minutes to get out of Sun City – in emergency would be a disaster Did anyone notice that Council reps for the area, voted against it being closed Councilmember bringing forward does not have affected constituents Taxpayers paying for closure and maintenance Sun City Freeway Once a week, or better, see the stops sign run Safety is an issue Almost hit twice Definite safety issue Need a firm policy in place that everyone understands and is published Need a long term solution Many roads are much busier Daughter bitten by snake needed access out or it would have been a life or death situation Traffic analysis needs to be done What is the cost? Seconds can mean life and death One way sign could be done from Majestic to Pedernales Communication war – text messages, email, etc. Can’t make decision on the loudest voice Laws made for the care and safety for senior citizens Asked Council to do the right thing Do not listen to the bullies and protestors David vs. Goliath situation Buyers won’t buy because of the excessive traffic Homes on market 2 to 3 times longer Cut through has become a political issue Page 40 of 173 Only saves one minute to get to Randalls Editorial in Sun – Tough Thoughtful Decision – Read portions Last week Council decision was fair Traffic issues are ripe for pedestrian vehicle accident Traffic continues to increase Challenge to get the mail Backing out of driveway can take over 2 minutes This issue is political Can’t walk dog safely because of other neighborhoods Leaders fear losing votes more than lives Leaders are needed that vote for public safety UDC code said residential street should have less than 800 cars, this has 1666 Whispering Wind and Texas Drive are collector roads not residential neighborhood streets Apache Mountain is a residential street UDC sanctioned capacity should be followed Thanked 4 City Council members who restored safety at the last meeting Provided quoted for gates and fencing Showed City of Georgetown analysis – sliding style gate Spoke on examples of gates and costs of such Martin Luther King quote – one must take a position because of conscience Traffic increased over 300% Sun City Developers chose to ignore and council allowed Gate installation would save the City money, bringing neighborhood 51 to safety codes Traffic got worse when Randalls opened Waited for 10 cars to get into her driveway 10th car stopped to let her in GPS gives the route as the shorter route Rocky Hollow exit only takes one more minute Closing the 40 feet of Majestic Oak Lane will accomplish emergency access, safety Ignoring warning signs can be disastrous – examples given Cut through was a dotted proposed road, Pedernales was to be extended Previous Council let Pulte get away with changing it to Majestic Oak Goes against the published UDC code on the City website Connector roads are built differently – straight and well- lit for heavier traffic County road 245 is a county road and cannot be compared to this residential street GPS mapping needs to get corrected Taking just one minute to drive to a safer route is not too much to ask Pulte paid for the street, not the taxpayers Emergency vehicles can travel on 245, Rocky Hollow and Pedernales faster than the residential route Sun City residents do not travel through Woodland Park at excessive speeds or receive DUIs Can’t stop traffic Children are not supposed to walk in the street Was nearly hit by a car that rolled through the stop sign Saw a near accident where a car almost hit a walker and a dog Safety has to trump convenience Has counted traffic counts three times, 3 hours each time Sun City residents tried to intimidate her Saw 225 cars in one hour and ten minutes the day that Randalls opened Husband has had to dive into yards five different times Politics must be put aside Financial gain is what they want the closure for Police Chief said 85% of the vehicles are under the speed limit Closing roads is not a solution Mayor Ross asked Councilmember Gonzalez to refresh his motion. Motion by Gonzalez, second by Fought, to leave the road open permanently. Fought asked Morgan about the 800 vs 1600 count. Morgan asked Jim Briggs, General Manager of Utilities, to clarify. Briggs spoke on the UDC guidelines and the Overall Transportation Plan and how they are utilized in a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA). Briggs explained that the engineering staff and consultants were asked for clarity, because of the confusion relative to the numbers. Briggs noted that the UDC does call for 800 to 1000 vehicles per day for local streets. He said that this is a conservative level of traffic control used Page 41 of 173 for planning purposes for development. Briggs explained the overall transportation plan of the City that models transportation network impacts and recommends improvements for the Council. He noted that the Overall Transportation Plan that is adopted by Council, uses a standard of less than 2500 vehicles per day for local streets. He said it prevents construction of excessive arterial road capacity or major collectors or really wide roads. Briggs said the accepted national standard, under the National Highway Capacity Manual, used by engineers, is less than 9000 vehicles per day on a local street before it falls below Level C. He explained that there must be a Level C, as the minimum benchmark level, before changing a roadway or making capacity improvements. Fought said 800 is a planning factor, and the 1660 count does not cross a threshold that deems it to be unsafe because of volume, and the 2500 is well below the national standard of 9,000. Fought asked Briggs to clarify that, in Georgetown, other improvements to the road would be looked at when the 2500 benchmark was reached, depending on the service level. Briggs said the 2500 in the Overall Transportation Plan only looks at major collectors or arterial roads. Fought said the count of 1600 cars per day, would not, in and of itself, deem this to be a safety factor. Briggs confirmed. Fought asked if emergency vehicles will know the available route if the street was taken off the GPS. Briggs said education and training for apparatus drivers would be given. Fought said this could be a problem and there are safety and convenience issues on both sides. He said he is very concerned that emergency vehicles would need to depend and training and not the usual GPS assistance. Jonrowe asked Briggs where and how it is determined how many accidents have to happen for a road to be considered unsafe. Briggs said it is determined by what is called warrants, which look at citations, accidents, speed and a multiple of factors including congestion and traffic stacking. Jonrowe asked if near misses were ever documented or considered. Briggs said only public record information would be considered. Jonrowe asked if non-stopping at stop signs would be considered. Briggs said no, unless while an engineer was conducting a traffic impact analysis and actually observed this. Jonrowe asked if email or notifications from citizens are taken into consideration. Briggs said it would not be considered unless observed by staff or the engineer. Jonrowe asked Briggs if that seemed fair to him. Jonrowe asked how many years the connection has been open. Briggs said it was approved in the development agreement in approximately 2005 or 2006. Jonrowe said that the City has not developed safety standards in those four years. Briggs asked Jonrowe to elaborate on safety standards. Jonrowe said it would be about coming up with concrete triggers that would make staff come back to Council to reconsider safety improvements to a roadway because it meets our own local standards for unsafe conditions. Briggs said the City uses traffic impact analysis and legally acceptable criteria such as warrants to determine a safety risk. Jonrowe asked about the counts. She asked about a proposal from staff that Council consider 1,000 as the threshold at which staff would come back with a report for Council to reconsider closing that intersection. Briggs said that when negotiating with the neighborhood, it was to be brought back to Council or be taken care of by other measures. Jonrowe asked if any counts were below 1000. Briggs said no. Nicholson said she is uncomfortable with this situation on many levels and feels that this happens when Council is forced to come to a decision as reactive instead of proactive. Nicholson said the role of Council it to be strategic. Nicholson asked Morgan how long it would take staff to advice on policy in this matter. Morgan said it would take at least three months for staff to be able to present options, factors and alternatives of a the policy to the Council. He said it would likely take a few workshops for Council to be able to adequately review and evaluate all of the material, so in total, it would be six months, because of the complexity of this type of policy. Nicholson said she prefers to equip and enable staff to actually bring a guiding document for the Council to make decisions, but also clearly articulate this to the stakeholders. She said she would feel more comfortable with amending the existing motion to the time frame that staff has now given. Hesser said his position has always been that there are two sides and no way to make everyone happy. He said that Council has compassion for the position this places people in. He said he prefers to leave the street open and in six months come back with a policy and procedure. Hesser said he would like to possibly present an amended motion to bring this to the July 10, 2018 meeting. Gonzalez withdrew his earlier motion. Fought withdrew his second to the earlier motion. Page 42 of 173 Motion by Fought to postpone this vote, leaving the street open, until July. Hesser clarified that Fought’s motion, made in response to Hesser’s comment, was not what Hesser intended. Hesser said he wanted the street to remain open with them being able to make an application under the new policy, but not to detain the vote. Hesser then made a clarifying motion as follows: Motion by Hesser, second by Gonzalez, that West Majestic Oaks would not be closed and would remain open and staff is to prepare a policy for the Council to consider by July 10, 2018. Jonrowe spoke on the precedent and legality of closing a road and asked Morgan what this will mean in a policy and what would be the likelihood of closing the road. Morgan said staff will present various options for the Council to review. He said if closure is an option in the criteria, decided by Council, then the closure will be the direction of Council. He said that staff will give the Council different factors to consider and different steps to be taken prior to making a decision. He provided the example of identifying where the traffic goes, if a road is closed. He emphasized the importance of realizing the totality of the decisions. Councilmember Eby asked to speak to the proposed amendment. She said it sounds like there is an expectation to end up with a policy that would give some sort of check list and a need to check off the boxes. She said it is important to have the policy discussion but that this particular issue is a unique situation for a variety of reasons. Eby said she does not believe that Council needs to have a whole sale policy discussion to make change or have a check list before dealing with this situation. She said she raised a concern previously regarding setting precedent and if it is decided to restrict access what effect does that have. Eby said that in this situation there are so many unique factors that it might not have an effect at all. She said her concern is that there will be a bigger problem created by giving people a check list on how to close a road. Mayor Ross said there needs to be something that triggers a review if a street should be closed. Ross said there are smart people as citizens and smart people on staff. Perhaps there is no way to completely satisfy both parties, but there will be ways to mitigate. Ross said it is time to review and come up with a much better process. He said the process on this has been a disaster. He said the primary roles of Council are policy development and approving and providing oversite for the budget. Ross said that City Manager, David Morgan, and team, does the operations management. Ross said he believes there should be policy that can trigger a review at any time and then staff can make that decision or if it is complicated, bring it to the City Council for final review. Ross said this can be make better and safer. Gonzalez said having a policy will be unbiased and no one can claim preference of one neighborhood over another. He explained that it will be fair to all and needs to be objective not subjective. He said it is necessary to follow policy instead of perception. Jonrowe thanked the speakers. She spoke of her family and grandparents and putting herself in position to have compassion for how people are feeling. She noted that safety should always be a number one priority, and is a responsibility of the Council. She said she hopes that they find a resolution for this and do right by one another and treat each other with the respect and dignity that they all deserve. Jonrowe said she will always talk to anyone with safety concerns. Mayor Ross thanked the speakers and emailers. He then took the vote for the Councilmember Hesser motion: Motion by Hesser, second by Gonzalez, that West Majestic Oaks would not be closed and would remain open and staff is to prepare a policy for the Council to consider by July 10, 2018. Approved: 4-2 (Eby, Jonrowe opposed, Gipson absent) Project Updates T. Project updates and status reports regarding current and future transportation and traffic project; street, sidewalk, and other infrastructure projects; police, fire and other public safety projects; economic development projects; city facility projects; and downtown projects including parking enhancements, city lease agreements, sanitation services, and possible direction to city staff -- David Morgan, City Manager Page 43 of 173 Mayor Ross asked City Manager, David Morgan, if he had any project updates to speak about. Morgan said he did not at this time. Public Wishing to Address Council On a subject that is posted on this agenda: Please fill out a speaker registration form which can be found on the table at the entrance to the Council Chamber. Clearly print your name and the letter of the item on which you wish to speak and present it to the City Secretary on the dais, preferably prior to the start of the meeting. You will be called forward to speak when the Council considers that item. On a subject not posted on the agenda: Persons may add an item to a future City Council agenda by contacting the City Secretary no later than noon on the Wednesday prior to the Tuesday meeting, with the subject matter of the topic they would like to address and their name. The City Secretary can be reached at 512/930-3651. U. At the time of posting, no persons had signed up to address the City Council 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. V. Sec. 551.071: Consultation with Attorney Advice from attorney about pending or contemplated litigation and other matters on which the attorney has a duty to advise the City Council, including agenda items - Update on pending litigation styled Amanda Phillips v. City of Georgetown Sec. 551:074: Personnel Matters City Manager, City Attorney, City Secretary and Municipal Judge: Consideration of the appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal Sec. 551.086: Certain Public Power Utilities: Competitive Matters - Purchase Power Update – Jim Briggs, General Manager of Utilities Sec. 551.087: Deliberation Regarding Economic Development Negotiations - Project Legacy Adjournment Motion by Fought, second by Nicholson, to adjourn the meeting. Mayor Ross adjourned the meeting at 9.30 PM. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Approved by the Georgetown City Council on _____________________________ Date ____________________________ __________________________ Dale Ross, Mayor Attest: City Secretary Page 44 of 173 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting February 13, 2018 SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to appoi nt me mbers to the Ci ty of G eorgetow n Advi so ry B oards -- Mayor Dale Ross ITEM SUMMARY: The City Council has recently appointed an Ethics Ad Hoc Committee to review and make reco mmendations to the Council regarding the City's Ethics Ordinance and Ethics Commission. The terms o f the members of this subcommitte e remain in effect until the subcommittee makes the ir reco mmendations to the Council. Any Ethics Commission membe rs will not be appointed unless and until the Council re c onstitutes the Ethics Commission. FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A SUBMITTED BY: Robyn Densmo re on behalf o f Mayor Ross ATTACHMENT S: Description Mayo r Ro s s 2018 B&C Rec o mmendatio ns Page 45 of 173 Erin Curra-Spurger New Appointment Willam Laing New Appointment Barbara Bender New Appointment Marily Liddel New Appointment Cynthia Eisman New Appointment Penny Evans Reappointment John Oliver New Appointment Gary Newman Reappointment Norma Baker Reappointment Sarah Flott New Appointment Cara McKinney Reappointment Nika Gill New Appointment Laura Klein Plunkett New Appointment Amanda Parr New Appointment Keith Fruge Reappointment Kevin Roberts New Appointment Terri Asendorf Hyde Reappointment Timothy Fleming Reappointment Catherine Morales Reappointment Laura Sewell Reappointment Lawrence Ramero Reappointment Carol Watson Reappointment Linda Wilde Reappointment Nathaniel Bonner New Appointment Mary Calixtro New Appointment Lauren Carberry New Appointment Jennyce Hume New Appointment Morris Greenbergy New Appointment Nikki Brennan Reappointment Ronald Moore New Appointment Jon Carey Reappointment Michael Kelly New Appointment Lindsay Cooper Reappointment Sharon Covey New Appointment John Hudson Reappointment Dennis Dalrymple Reappointment Thomas Sinwell Reappointment Tiffany Enos Reappointment Virginia Hahn Reappointment Aaron Adams New Appointment Virginia Lazenby Reappointment Kate Hill New Appointment Shelley Rodocker New Appointment Rachel Cummings New Appointment Karen Curry Reappointment Jim Wilson New Appointment Stephanie Blanck Reappointment Gary Newman New Appointment Rita Healy Reappointment Ben Stewart New Appointment Kaylah McCord New Appointment Thomas Menke New Appointment Tim Bargainer Reappointment Steve Bohnekamp New Appointment Kevin Pitts Reappointment Kevin Kelly Reappointment Robert "Travis" Perthius Reappointment James Bralski Reappointment Jame Houghnon Reappointment Stuart McLennan Reappointment Katherine Kainer Reappointment Scott Macmurdo Reappointment Lynn Williams New Appointment Michael Simpson Reappointment Dan Jones New Appointment Ronald Bindas Reappointment Natalia Ornelas New Appointment Troy Hellman Reappointment Jerry Haecker New Appointment Doug Noble Reappointment Alexia Griffin Reappointment Bob Whetsell New Appointment Tracy Duback New Appointment Colin McGahey Reappointment Jason Wirth New Appointment Jay Warren Reappointment John Philpott Reappointment Ed Pastor New Appointment Angel Alexander Zambrano New Appointment John Copelan Reappointment David Zambrano New Appointment David Maserang Reappointment Alvin Gusman Reappointment Edward Wiley Reappointment Tate Nicholson Reappointment Ed Whitmore New Appointment Alex Fuller Reappointment John Marler Reappointment Kaylah McCord Reappointment Robert "Travis" Perthius Reappointment Kevin Pitts Reappointment Zoning Board of Adjustments Total Number of Appointments = 97 Total Number of Applicants = 146 Main Street Advisory Board Planning and Zoning Commission Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Strategic Partnerships for Community Services Unified Development Code Advisory Board Youth Advisory Board Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation Georgetown Utility Systems Advisory Board Georgetown Village Public Improvement District Board Historic Architectural Review Commission Housing Advisory Board Library Advisory Board Commission on Aging Convention and Visitor's Bureau Advisory Board Georgetown Economic Development Corporation General Government and Finanace Committee Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board 2018 Boards and Commissions Appointments Americans with Disabilities Act Advisory Board Animal Shelter Advisory Board Arts and Culture Advisory Board Building Standards Commission Page 46 of 173 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting February 13, 2018 SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to appoi nt me mbers to the G eorgetown Housi ng Autho ri ty -- Mayor Dale Ross ITEM SUMMARY: FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A SUBMITTED BY: Robyn Densmo re on behalf o f Mayor Ross ATTACHMENT S: Description B&C Hous ing Authority Rec o mmendatio ns Page 47 of 173 John Gavurnik Reappointment Maureen Poisson Reappointment Larry Raper Reappointment Tim Tood Reappointment 2018 Georgetown Housing Authority Appointments Georgetown Housing Authority Total Number of Appointments = 4 Page 48 of 173 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting February 13, 2018 SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to appoi nt Ci ty Counci l members to the Ci ty o f G eo rgeto w n Advi sory Boards -- Mayor Dale Ro ss ITEM SUMMARY: FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A SUBMITTED BY: Robyn Densmo re on behalf o f Mayor Ross ATTACHMENT S: Description B&C Counc ilmember Rec o mmendatio ns Page 49 of 173 Anna Eby Valerie Nicholson Steve Fought Ty Gipson Tommy Gonzalez John Hesser Rachael Jonrowe John Hesser Steve Fought Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board Total Number of Appointments = 9 2018 Council Representative Appointments Animal Shelter Advisory Board Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation Georgetown Economic Development Corporation Georgetown Utility Systems Advisory Board General Government and Finance Advisory Board Page 50 of 173 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting February 13, 2018 SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to appoi nt Board Chai rs to the Ci ty of Georg e tow n Advi sory B oards -- Mayo r Dale Ross ITEM SUMMARY: FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A SUBMITTED BY: Robyn Densmo re on behalf o f Mayor Ross ATTACHMENT S: Description B&C Chair Rec o mmendatio ns Page 51 of 173 Jonathan Dade Nika Gill Jane Estes Bill Stump Gene Jantzen Georgene Richaud Tommy Gonzalez Larry Raper John Marler Michael Cunningham Melinda Marler Shawn Hood Lou Sneed Pete Rose Taylor Kidd Josh Schroeder Jame Hougnon Jaquita Wilson Tim Haynie Alvin Gusman Josh Schroeder Total Number of Appointments = 21 Georgetown Housing Authority Board Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board Unified Development Code Advisory Board Youth Advisory Board Zoning Board of Adjustments Georgetown Utility Systems Advisory Board Planning and Zoning Commission Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Strategic Partnerships for Community Services General Government and Finanace Committee Housing Advisory Board Building Standards Commission Library Advisory Board Commission on Aging Main Street Advisory Board Convention and Visitor's Bureau Advisory Board 2018 Boards and Commissions Chair Appointments Americans with Disabilities Act Advisory Board Georgetown Village Public Improvement District Board Animal Shelter Advisory Board Historic Architectural Review Commission Arts and Culture Advisory Board Page 52 of 173 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting February 13, 2018 SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to appoi nt me mbers and chai rs to the Wi l l i ams Dr i ve Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone (TIRZ) B oard, Dow ntow n G eorgetow n TIRZ B oard, Ri very Park TIRZ B o ar d, and South G eorgetow n TIRZ B oard -- Mayo r Dale Ro ss ITEM SUMMARY: FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A SUBMITTED BY: Robyn Densmo re on behalf o f Mayor Ross ATTACHMENT S: Description B&C TIRZ Ap p o intments Page 53 of 173 Dale Ross Chair David Morgan Steve West Valerie Nicholson Brad Curlee Dale Ross Chair Rachael Jonrowe Rusty Winkstern Karen Soeffker Taylor Kidd Dale Ross Chair Valerie Nicholson Leigh Wallace Laurie Brewer Jeff Novak Ronald Swain Valerie Covey Marsha Farney Charles Schwertner Dale Ross Chair David Morgan Glenn Dishong Sofia Nelson Michael Cunningham Anna Eby Jay Warren South Georgetown TIRZ Total Number of Appointments = 26 2018 Boards and Commissions Appointments Williams Drive TIRZ Downtown Georgetown TIRZ Rivery Park TIRZ Page 54 of 173 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting February 13, 2018 SUBJECT: Forwarded fro m the P arks and Recreati on Advi so ry B oard: Consideration and possible action to approve a Re vocabl e Li cense Agreement with the Sun Ci ty Texas Communi ty Associ ati on re garding w al ki ng and hi ki ng trai l s and authorizing the Mayo r to execute the Revocable Lic e nse Agreement -- Kimbe rly Garrett, P arks and Recreation Directo r ITEM SUMMARY: This Revo cable License Agreement will permit the Sun City Texas Community Asso ciation the use of an unimproved trail on park property. The Parks and Recreation staff have been working ve ry close ly with the Sun City Hiking Club within the Sun City Texas Community Association to allow pedestrian access through parkland to help connect nature trails within Sun City. The parkland that will be utilized for the nature trail is unde veloped and adjace nt to the future westside park. There are no immediate plans for this parkland and the area the y are requesting to use is also not easily accessible fro m the future westside park due to Berry Creek. The licensed area is appro ximately 1,3 00 feet in length and approximate ly 4-5 feet wide. The trails proposed are nature trails with no improvements. Additio nal restrictions in this lic e nse agreement include non-mo to rized use only except in the event of an eme rge ncy and that the pro perty may only be accessed from dawn to dusk. Maintenance of the unimproved trail will be the responsibility of the Sun City Texas Community Asso c iation. This agreement is effective for one year and shall auto matically renew for additional o ne year terms. This item was appro ved by the P arks and Recreation Advisory Board on January 11 , 20 18 . FINANCIAL IMPACT: NA SUBMITTED BY: Kimberly Garrett, Parks and Recreation Director ATTACHMENT S: Description Revoc ab le Lic enc e Agreement Page 55 of 173 {00009598 / v2 / CMCNABB / PARKS / 00015 / 10/26/2017} Sun City Trail License Agreement - Page 1 of 5 REVOCABLE LICENSE AGREEMENT THE STATE OF TEXAS * * KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON * This is a Revocable License Agreement by and between the City of Georgetown, a Texas home-rule municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "LICENSOR" or “CITY"), and Sun City Texas Community Association, Inc., a Texas non-profit corporation, whose address is 2 Texas Drive, Building A, Georgetown, TX 78633 (hereinafter referred to as "LICENSEE"), owner of certain park property located adjacent to Stetson Trail, such park property further described as Williamson County Appraisal District property identifier number R350211 (hereinafter referred to as the “PROPERTY”), Georgetown, Williamson County, Texas. LICENSOR hereby grants a license to the said LICENSEE to permit the use of an unimproved trail in the PROPERTY, as shown on Exhibit "A” attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference for all purposes (hereinafter referred to as Licensed Area), owned and occupied by the City of Georgetown, Williamson County, Texas, subject to the following terms and conditions: Use of the Licensed Area is for non-motorized, passive recreational trail purposes, such as walking and hiking. Trail location in red and/or noted with identifying arrows as per Exhibit A attached. Property may be accessed from dawn to dusk. Motor vehicles shall be prohibited, except vehicles in use for health and safety emergencies. Maintenance is the sole responsibility of LICENSEE which includes trash pick-up and permitted resource management such as removal of vegetation to keep trail area usable. LICENSEE may clear as needed vegetation from the trail as reasonably necessary to allow a 4-5’ wide natural walking path along the trail. Unless otherwise mutually agreed, no improvements shall be installed (no crushed granite, trail borders, or any other improvements), rather, the trail is simply a path created on the natural terrain solely through clearing of vegetation, and no other portions of the underlying tract on which the trail sits may be altered. All costs and expenses associated with Trail are to be borne by LICENSEE. The granting of the license does not constitute an abandonment by LICENSOR of its property, easement or easements, or any other rights in and to the above-described property. LICENSEE is expressly stipulating and agreeing by LICENSEE's acceptance of this license that LICENSEE neither asserts nor claims any interest or right of any type or nature whatsoever, legal, equitable or otherwise in or to Licensed Area. LICENSEE hereby expressly covenants, stipulates and agrees, without limitation, to indemnify and defend the LICENSOR and hold it harmless from any and all liability, claim, cause of action, and cost, including attorneys' fees, and including any acts or omissions of the LICENSOR, its officers, agents, and employees, which may grow out of or be attributable to the granting by the LICENSOR of said license. A. The CITY shall have the right at any and all times upon 30 days written notice to the LICENSEE, its representatives, successors or assigns, to take possession of and use all or any part of the Licensed Area, and to terminate the revocable license as to that portion of the Licensed Area so designated and required by the CITY. B. The LICENSEE shall have the right at any time upon 30 days written notice to the CITY, to relinquish the use and possession of all or any part of the Licensed Area and to terminate the revocable license as to that portion of the Licensed Area so relinquished. Page 56 of 173 {00009598 / v2 / CMCNABB / PARKS / 00015 / 10/26/2017} Sun City Trail License Agreement - Page 2 of 5 C. Upon the lawful termination of a revocable license issued hereunder, in whatsoever manner such termination may be made, LICENSEE, assigns, successors and representatives, bind and obligate themselves to restore the Licensed Area to the original condition as it existed prior for the restoration of the Licensed Area which may be acceptable to the CITY, and should the LICENSEE, assigns, successors, or representatives fail or refuse to do so within 90 days after such termination then in that event the CITY may do or have done the work necessary for such purpose at the sole cost, risk, liability and expense of LICENSEE, their assigns, successors and representatives. Notwithstanding, provided LICENSEE has made no improvements to the Licensed Area (other than vegetation clearing). LICENSEE shall have no affirmative obligation hereunder in the event of termination; rather, the trail area vegetation shall simply be allowed to return to its natural state. To the extent any improvements have been installed by LICENSEE pursuant to this agreement, LICENSEE shall remove such improvements upon request of LICENSOR. D. No transfer or assignment of any revocable license granted under the terms and provisions of this Chapter shall be effective without written approval from the CITY. E. The breach or violation of any one of the terms, provisions, or conditions set forth in this agreement shall be sufficient to constitute grounds for the cancellation and forfeiture of this revocable license. Any such cancellation and forfeiture may be exercised upon 20 days written notice by the CITY to the LICENSEE, a representative or successor, unless, at the expiration of such time, any such violation or breach has ceased or the LICENSEE is proceeding with all diligence and good faith to remedy any such violation or breach and thereafter continues without delay with such remedial work or correction until such violation or breach has been completely remedied in the sole opinion of the CITY. F. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this License Agreement or the Maintenance Agreement covering the Licensed Area (collectively the “Agreements”), a breach or default by the LICENSEE of any covenant or other term or condition contained in either Agreement, after the passage of all applicable notice and cure or grace periods, shall, at the opinion of the CITY, be considered a default under this Agreement. G. All damage, if any, to said trail use, maintenance and operation by LICENSEE shall be repaired by and at the cost and expense of the LICENSEE. In the event LICENSEE fails or refuses to proceed with diligence with the performance of any work in connection with the replacement, rebuilding or resurfacing of streets and sidewalks within 30 days after receiving written notice from the Director, the CITY may do such work or cause same to be done, all at the sole risk, cost, liability and expense of LICENSEE. This license shall be effective for one year from the last signature hereto, and shall automatically renew for additional one-year terms, unless otherwise terminated in accordance herewith. Termination of this Agreement shall automatically result in termination of the Parkland Maintenance Agreement of even date between the parties hereto. This license shall be effective upon the acceptance of the terms hereof by the LICENSEE, as indicated by the signature of LICENSEE and the approval thereof by the CITY. The license shall be filed of record in the Official Records of Williamson County, Texas. SIGNED and Agreed to on this ______ day of ________________, 20__. Page 57 of 173 {00009598 / v2 / CMCNABB / PARKS / 00015 / 10/26/2017} Sun City Trail License Agreement - Page 3 of 5 LICENSOR: LICENSEE: City of Georgetown, Sun City Texas Community Association, Inc., a Texas home-rule municipal corporation a Texas non-profit corporation By: By: Dale Ross Name: Mayor Title: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ________________________ Charlie McNabb, City Attorney STATE OF TEXAS ) ) ACKNOWLEDGMENT COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on the _____ day of _______________, 20__, by Dale Ross, in his official capacity as Mayor for the City of Georgetown, a Texas home- rule municipal corporation, on behalf of said corporation. ________________________________ Notary Public, State of Texas Page 58 of 173 {00009598 / v2 / CMCNABB / PARKS / 00015 / 10/26/2017} Sun City Trail License Agreement - Page 4 of 5 STATE OF TEXAS ) ) ACKNOWLEDGMENT COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on the _____ day of _______________, 20__, by _______________ in his/her official capacity as ________________ for the Sun City Texas Community Association, Inc., a Texas non-profit corporation, on behalf of said corporation. ________________________________ Notary Public, State of Texas Page 59 of 173 {00009598 / v2 / CMCNABB / PARKS / 00015 / 10/26/2017} Sun City Trail License Agreement - Page 5 of 5 EXHIBIT A (To Be Attached) Page 60 of 173 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting February 13, 2018 SUBJECT: Forwarded fro m the P arks and Recreati on Advi so ry B oard: Consideration and possible action to approve a P arkl and Mai ntenance Agreement with the Sun Ci ty Texas Communi ty Associ ati o n regarding w al ki ng and hi ki ng trai l s -- Kimberly Garre tt, P arks and Recreation Director ITEM SUMMARY: This P arkland Maintenance agreement will allow the Sun City Hiking Club within the Sun City Te xas Community Association to pro vide ge ne ral routine maintenance for the 1,300 foot walking path including regular trash collection and removal of vege tation. This walking path is natural path with no improvements. This agreement is effective for one year and shall auto matically renew for additional o ne year terms. This item was appro ved by the P arks and Recreation Advisory Board on January 11 , 20 18 . FINANCIAL IMPACT: NA SUBMITTED BY: Kimberly Garrett, Parks and Recreation Director ATTACHMENT S: Description P arkland Maintenance Agreement Page 61 of 173 {00009587 / v2 / CMCNABB / PARKS / 00015 / 10/20/2017} 1 PUBLIC PARKLAND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT (SUN CITY – STETSON TRAIL PARK) STATE OF TEXAS § § COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON § This Public Parkland Maintenance agreement (this "Agreement") is made effective as of this ____ day of ________________, 2018 (the “Effective Date”) by and between the CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, a home-rule city located in Williamson County, Texas (the “CITY”), and Sun City Texas Community Association, Inc. a Texas non-profit corporation located in Williamson County, Texas (the “ASSOCIATION”) (collectively, the “PARTIES”), and is as follows: RECITALS: WHEREAS, the ASSOCIATION herein is authorized to maintain the 1,300 foot walking path within Stetson Trail Park; such park property further described as Williamson County Appraisal District property identifier number R350211, and such walking path further identified in Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the ASSOCIATION acknowledges and agrees that the CITY has exclusive jurisdiction and control of the Public Parkland. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises; in furtherance of the mutual benefits to be derived by the general public and the residents and members of the ASSOCIATION; and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the CITY and the ASSOCIATION agree as follows: 1. RECITALS ADOPTED 1.1. The recitals set out above in this instrument are hereby adopted in whole as though each were set out herein. 2. PUBLIC PARKLAND 2.1. Maintenance by ASSOCIATION. The CITY authorizes the ASSOCIATION, at the sole cost and expense of the ASSOCIATION, to provide general routine maintenance for the 1,300 foot walking path, including, but not limited to, regular trash collection and removal of vegetation. Page 62 of 173 {00009587 / v2 / CMCNABB / PARKS / 00015 / 10/20/2017} 2 3. CITY RIGHTS TO PUBLIC PARKLAND 3.1 This Agreement is expressly subject and subordinate to the present and future right of the CITY, its successors, assigns, lessees, grantees, and licensees, to construct, install, establish, maintain, use, operate, and renew any public utility facilities, or franchised public utilities, beneath or above the surface of the Public Parkland. 3.2 Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to limit in any way the power of the CITY to alter or improve the Public Parkland pursuant to official action by the CITY or its successors. The CITY shall endeavor to provide the ASSOCIATION with notice of proposed improvements, but shall be under no obligation to do so prior to commencement of work on such improvements. 4. INSURANCE 4.1 Prior to the commencement of any work under this Agreement, the ASSOCIATION shall furnish copies of all required endorsements and an original completed Certificate(s) of Insurance to the CITY's City Manager, which shall be clearly labeled with the legal name of the Sun City Public Parks project in the Description of Operations block of the Certificate. The Certificate(s) shall be completed by an agent and signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The CITY will not accept Memorandum of Insurance or Binders as proof of insurance. The Certificate(s) or form must have the agent's signature, including the signer's company affiliation, title and phone number, and be mailed, with copies of all applicable endorsements, directly from the insurer's authorized representative to the CITY. The CITY shall have no duty to perform under this Agreement until such Certificate and endorsements have been received and approved by the CITY s City Manager. No officer or employee, other than the CITY's City Manager, shall have authority to waive this requirement. 4.2 Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 4.3 below, the CITY reserves the right to review the insurance requirements of this Article during the effective period of this Agreement and any extension or renewal hereof and to modify insurance coverages and their limits when deemed necessary and prudent by CITY's City Manager based upon changes in statutory law, court decisions, or circumstances surrounding this Agreement. In no instance will the CITY allow modification at the request of the ASSOCIATION whereupon the CITY may incur increased risk. 4.3 ASSOCIATION’s financial integrity is of interest to the CITY; therefore, subject to the ASSOCIATION's right to maintain reasonable deductibles, the ASSOCIATION shall obtain and maintain in full force and effect for the duration of this Agreement, and any extension hereof, at the ASSOCIATION 's sole expense, insurance coverage written on an occurrence basis, by companies authorized and admitted to do business in the State of Texas and with an A.M. Best's rating of no less than A- (VII), in the following types and for an amount not less than the amount listed: Page 63 of 173 {00009587 / v2 / CMCNABB / PARKS / 00015 / 10/20/2017} 3 TYPE AMOUNTS 1. Workers' Compensation 2. Employers' Liability 3. Commercial General Liability Insurance to include coverage for the following: a. Premises operations *b. Independent Contractors c. Products/completed operations d. Personal Injury e. Contractual Liability *f. Environmental Impairment/Impact - sufficiently broad to cover disposal liability. *g. Broad form property damage, to include fire legal liability 4. Business Automobile Liability a. Owned/leased vehicle b. Non-owned vehicle c. Hired Vehicles Statutory $1,000,000 I $1,000,000 I $1,000,000 For Bodily Injury and Property Damage of $1,000,000 per occurrence; $2,000,000 General Aggregate, or its equivalent in Umbrella or Excess Liability Coverage Combined Single Limit for Bodily Injury and Property Damage of $1,000,000 per occurrence *May be waived by the City Manager if not applicable to activities performed by Licensee. 4.4 The CITY shall be entitled, upon request and without expense, to receive copies of the policies, declaration page and all endorsements thereto as they apply to the limits required by the CITY as may be required to comply with the terms of this Agreement. The ASSOCIATION shall be required to comply with any such requests and shall submit a copy of the replacement Certificate of insurance to the CITY at the address provided below within 30 days of the requested change. The ASSOCIATION shall pay any costs incurred resulting from said changes. City of Georgetown Attn.: City Manager P.O. Box 409 Georgetown, TX 78627 4.5 The ASSOCIATION agrees that with respect to the above required insurance, all insurance policies are to contain or be endorsed to contain the following provisions: Page 64 of 173 {00009587 / v2 / CMCNABB / PARKS / 00015 / 10/20/2017} 4 • Name the CITY, its officers, officials, employees, volunteers, and elected representatives as additional insured's by endorsement, as respects operations and activities of, or on behalf of, the named insured performed under contract with the CITY, with the exception of the workers' compensation and professional liability policies; • Provide for an endorsement that the “other insurance” clause shall not apply to the CITY when the CITY is an additional insured shown on the policy; • Workers’ compensation and employers’ liability policies will provide a waiver of subrogation in favor of the CITY. 4.6 The ASSOCIATION agrees to give the CITY written notice of any suspension, cancellation, non-renewal or material change in coverage of any of the insurance policies required to be obtained and maintained by the ASSOCIATION under the terms of this Agreement. Within five (5) calendar days of a suspension, cancellation or non-renewal of coverage, the ASSOCIATION shall provide a replacement Certificate of Insurance and applicable endorsements to the CITY. The CITY shall have the option to suspend the ASSOCIATION’s authorization and liability under this Agreement should there be a lapse in coverage at any time during this Agreement. Failure to provide and to maintain the required insurance shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement. 4.7 Nothing herein contained shall be construed as limiting in any way the extent to which the ASSOCIATION may be held responsible for payments of damages to persons or property resulting from the ASSOCIATION’s performance of the work covered under this Agreement. 4.8 It is agreed that the ASSOCIATION's insurance shall be deemed primary and non- contributory with respect to any insurance or self-insurance carried by the CITY for liability arising out of operations under this Agreement. 4.9 It is understood and agreed that the insurance required is in addition to and separate from any other obligation contained in this Agreement. 5. INDEMNIFICATION 5.1 ASSOCIATION INDEMNIFIES THE CITY ONLY FOR CLAIMS ATTRIBUTED TO ASSOCIATION AND ASSOCIATION ASSUMES ENTIRE RESPONSIBILITY AND LIABILITY FOR ANY CLAIM OR ACTIONS BASED ON OR ARISING OUT OF INJURIES, INCLUDING DEATH, TO PERSONS OR DAMAGES TO OR DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY, SUSTAINED OR ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN SUSTAINED IN CONNECTION WITH OR TO HAVE ARISEN OUT OF OR INCIDENTAL TO THE PERFORMANCE OF THE MAINTENANCE SERVICES DESCRIBED IN PARAGRAPH 2.1 BY THE ASSOCIATION, ITS AGENTS AND EMPLOYEES, AND ITS SUBCONTRACTORS, THEIR AGENTS AND EMPLOYEES. Page 65 of 173 {00009587 / v2 / CMCNABB / PARKS / 00015 / 10/20/2017} 5 6. TERMINATION 6.1 Termination by the ASSOCIATION. This Agreement may be terminated by the ASSOCIATION no sooner than one (1) year after the effective date of this Agreement by delivering written notice of termination to the CITY not later than 30 days before the effective date of termination. 6.2 Termination by the CITY. This Agreement may be terminated by the CITY no sooner than one (1) year after the effective date of this Agreement by delivering written notice of termination to the ASSOCIATION not later than 30 days before the effective date of termination. 7. ASSIGNMENT 7.1 The ASSOCIATION shall not assign, sublet or transfer its interest in this Agreement without the prior written consent of the CITY, which may be withheld for any reason. If such consent is granted, its shall then be the duty of the ASSOCIATION, its successors and assigns, to give prompt written notice to the CITY of any assignment or transfer of any of the ASSOCIATION's rights in this Agreement. 8. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 8.1 Laws Observance. The ASSOCIATION shall not do, nor suffer to be done, anything on the Public Parkland during the term of this Agreement in violation of the laws of the United States, the State of Texas, or any of the ordinances of the CITY. 8.2 No Waiver. No waiver by the CITY of any default or breach of any covenant, condition, or stipulation herein contained shall be treated as a waiver of any subsequent default or breach of the same or any other covenant, condition, or stipulation hereof. 8.3 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 unenforceability shall not affect any other provision thereof, and this Agreement shall be considered as if such invalid, illegal, or unenforceable provision had never been contained herein. 8.4 Notice. Any notices required or appropriate under this Agreement shall be given in writing to the A SSOCIATION at the address shown below, and to the CITY at City of Georgetown; Attn.: City Manager; P.O. Box 409; Georgetown, TX 78627. 8.5 Headings. The paragraph headings contained herein are for convenience of reference and are not intended to define, extend, or limit any provisions of this Agreement. 8.6 Jurisdiction and Venue. This Agreement will be interpreted according to the Constitution and laws of the State of Texas. Venue of any court action brought directly or indirectly by reason of this Agreement shall be in Williamson County, Texas. This Agreement is Page 66 of 173 {00009587 / v2 / CMCNABB / PARKS / 00015 / 10/20/2017} 6 made and is to be performed in Williamson County, Texas, and is governed by the laws of the State of Texas. 8.7 Authorization. The signers of this Agreement each hereby represents that he or she has full authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the party for which he or she is acting. 8.8 Entire Agreement. This Agreement and addenda contain the final and entire agreement between the PARTIES hereto and contains all of the terms and conditions agreed upon, and supersedes all other agreements, oral or otherwise, regarding the maintenance of the Public Parkland, none of which shall hereafter be deemed to exist or to bind the PARTIES hereto; it being the intent of the PARTIES that neither shall be bound by any term, condition, or representation not herein written. 8.9 Term. This Agreement shall be effective for one year from the last signature hereto, and shall automatically renew for additional one-year terms, unless otherwise terminated in accordance herewith. Termination of this Agreement shall automatically result in termination of the Revocable License Agreement of even date entered into between the parties hereto. EXECUTED effective as of the date of final signature below. THE ASSOCIATION: SUN CITY TEXAS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, INC., a Texas non-profit corporation By: Its: ____________________________________ THE STATE OF TEXAS § § COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON § This instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of ________________, 2018 by _________________, __________________ of Sun City Texas Community Association, Inc. a Texas non-profit corporation on behalf of said corporation. My Commission Expires: NOTARY PUBLIC, STATE OF TEXAS Page 67 of 173 {00009587 / v2 / CMCNABB / PARKS / 00015 / 10/20/2017} 7 THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, a Texas home-rule city By: Dale Ross, Mayor ATTEST __________________________________________ Shelley Nowling, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM __________________________________________ Charlie McNabb, City Attorney THE STATE OF TEXAS § § COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON § This instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of ________________, 2018 by Dale Ross, Mayor of the City of Georgetown, Texas, a home-rule city, on behalf of the CITY. My Commission Expires: NOTARY PUBLIC, STATE OF TEXAS Page 68 of 173 {00009587 / v2 / CMCNABB / PARKS / 00015 / 10/20/2017} 8 EXHIBIT A (To Be Attached) Page 69 of 173 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting February 13, 2018 SUBJECT: Publ i c Heari ng and Fi rst Readi ng of an Ordinanc e granting a Speci al Use P ermi t to allow an i ndoor sel f-storage faci l i ty within the Local Co mmerci al (C-1) zoni ng di stri ct on the property located at 1 05 0 Westi nghouse -- So fia Nelson, CNU-A, P lanning Director (acti on requi red) ITEM SUMMARY: B ackground: The applicant has requested consideration of a Special Use P ermit (SUP ) to allow an indoor self-storage facility within the Local Co mmercial (C-1) district on the property lo c ated at 10 50 Westinghouse Ro ad. Per Table 5 .04 .01 0 o f the UDC, an indoor self-storage facility may be permitte d in the C-1 district subject to approval of a Special Use Permit by the City Council. Publ i c Comment: As of the date o f this repo rt, no written public co mme nts have been received. Pl anni ng and Zoni ng Commi ssi on Recommendati o n: At their January 16, 20 18 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended to the City Council approval (7- 0) of the SUP re que st. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. The applic ant has paid the required applicatio n fees. SUBMITTED BY: Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, P lanning Director ATTACHMENT S: Description S taff Report Attachment 1 - Lo catio n Attachment 2 - F uture Land Us e Attachment 3 - Zo ning Attachment 4 - Letter of Intent Attachment 5 - C o nc ep tual P lan Ordinanc e Exhib it A - Loc ation Map Exhib it B - C o nc ep tual P lan Page 70 of 173 Georgetown Planning Department Staff Report Indoor Self-Storage at Vista Pointe Special Use Permit SUP-2017-009 Page 1 of 9 Report Date: January 12, 2018 File No: SUP-2017-009 Project Planner: S. Nathan Jones-Meyer, Planner Item Details Project Name: Indoor Self-Storage at Vista Pointe Project Address: 1050 Westinghouse Road Total Acreage: 2.7 acres Legal Description: 2.7 acres of the Barney C. Low Survey Existing Zoning: Local Commercial (C-1) Applicant: Tom Groll Engineering, c/o Tom Groll, P.E. Developer: Spiegel Development Inc., c/o David Spiegel Property Owner: Austin Land Investments, LLC Overview of Applicant’s Request The applicant requests consideration of a Special Use Permit (SUP) to allow an indoor self- storage facility located behind a row of retail store fronts as permitted within the Local Commercial (C-1) zoning district on the property located at 1050 Westinghouse Road. Per Table 5.04.010 of the UDC, an indoor self-storage facility may be permitted in the C-1 district subject to approval of a SUP by the City Council. Page 71 of 173 Planning Department Staff Report Indoor Self-Storage at Vista Pointe Special Use Permit SUP-2017-009 Page 2 of 9 Site Information Location: The subject site is located along Westinghouse Road, approximately 1,300 feet east of the intersection of Westinghouse Road and North Mays Street. It is located on the north end of a planned residential subdivision that will include both single family and multi-family housing types known as Vista Pointe. Physical Characteristics: The subject site has approximately 310 feet of frontage along Westinghouse Road. The property is square in shape and is generally flat. Until recently, much of the area was undeveloped ranch and farm land. However, as physical improvements of Westinghouse Road have begun, much of the area has been developing and it is transitioning into a diverse set of land uses, including both residential, civic, commercial and industrial uses. Surrounding Properties: Location Zoning Future Land Use Existing Use North Industrial (IN) and Business Park (BP) Employment Center Industrial Park South Low-Density Multi-family (MF- 1) Mixed Use Community Under Construction as a Residential Development East Local Commercial (C-1) Mixed Use Community Undeveloped land West Local Commercial (C-1) Employment Center Undeveloped land Page 72 of 173 Planning Department Staff Report Indoor Self-Storage at Vista Pointe Special Use Permit SUP-2017-009 Page 3 of 9 Aerial Image of the Subject Site Page 73 of 173 Planning Department Staff Report Indoor Self-Storage at Vista Pointe Special Use Permit SUP-2017-009 Page 4 of 9 Conceptual Overall Site Layout Page 74 of 173 Planning Department Staff Report Indoor Self-Storage at Vista Pointe Special Use Permit SUP-2017-009 Page 5 of 9 Conceptual Site Elevations to Facing Westinghouse Property History The subject site was annexed into the City in 2011 (Ord. 2011-55) as part of a larger tract. In 2014, the property was rezoned to its current zoning designation, Local Commercial (C-1) (Ord. 2014- 63). If approved, the proposed project would require the following applications:  Final Plat to be approved by the Planning Director  Site Development Plan to be approved by the Planning Director  Building Permits to be approved by the Building Official 2030 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use: The 2030 Future Land Use category for the subject site is Mixed Use Community. The Mixed Use Community category is described in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan as appropriate for larger scale, creatively planned communities, where a mix of residential types and densities Page 75 of 173 Planning Department Staff Report Indoor Self-Storage at Vista Pointe Special Use Permit SUP-2017-009 Page 6 of 9 are complemented by supporting retail and small to medium scale office development. This category also encourages more compact, sustainable development patterns that reduce auto trips, increase connectivity and encourage walking and use of transit. Transportation The subject site’s inbound and outbound access is on Westinghouse Road. Westinghouse Road is identified as an existing major arterial road, a street designed to carry large volumes of traffic into or out of the city that provide for efficient vehicular movement between distant locations. Utilities The subject site is located within the City’s service area for water, wastewater, and electric. It is anticipated that there is adequate capacity to serve this property either by existing capacity or developer participation in upgrades to infrastructure. Zoning District The C-1 zoning district is intended to provide areas for commercial and retail activities that primarily serve residential areas. Uses within the C-1 zoning district should have pedestrian access to adjacent and nearby residential areas, but are not appropriate along residential streets or residential collectors. The C-1 zoning district is more appropriate along major and minor thoroughfares and corridors. Typical uses in this district include general retail, office, restaurants, and general office. Certain land uses, including indoor self-storage require approval of a Special Use Permit (SUP). The purpose for requiring a SUP is to allow for City Council to review the location, design, and intensity of certain land uses on an individual basis to determine if the specific use is appropriate at the proposed location. Additionally, it provides the City Council the option to establish conditions for the specific use within the zoning district to help mitigate and reduce the impact that the use may have on the adjacent properties and vicinity. Staff Analysis Staff has reviewed the applicant’s request to establish an indoor self-storage facility on the site located at 1050 Westinghouse Road. The applicant is proposing that approval of this SUP be made with the condition that the indoor self-storage facility be located completely behind the portion of the site dedicated to retail and commercial space as permitted by right in the C-1 zoning district (Attachment 4, Letter of Intent), with the exception of the leasing office space. Staff has conducted its review of the request based on this condition. The UDC, in Section 3.07.030.C, states that the City Council may approve an application for an SUP where it reasonably determines that there will be no significant negative impact upon residents of surrounding property or upon the general public. The City Council shall consider the following criteria in its review: Page 76 of 173 Planning Department Staff Report Indoor Self-Storage at Vista Pointe Special Use Permit SUP-2017-009 Page 7 of 9 1. The proposed special use is not detrimental to the health, welfare, and safety of the surrounding neighborhood or its occupants. Findings Complies It does not appear that the proposed indoor self-storage will be directly injurious or detrimental to the public health, welfare or safety of the neighborhood. The proposed use is compatible with the surrounding land uses particularly when located behind the proposed commercial and retail center along the street frontage. By placing the proposed indoor self- storage completely behind commercial and retail uses, the subject property will maintain a commercial frontage as envisioned for this corridor . If approved the proposed use would need to comply with the development standards required in the C-1 district. 2. The proposed conceptual site layout, circulation plan, and design are harmonious with the character of the surrounding area. Findings Complies with Conditions The conceptual layout has been reviewed by staff in order to determine (on a preliminary basis) if the proposed site plan would be in conformance with City codes, including the additional standards outlined in UDC Section 5.04.020.Q for indoor self-storage facilities. The proposed Conceptual Plan (Attachment 5) shows store fronts facing Westinghouse Road with the self- storage facility located behind the storefront, near the rear of the lot. Access to the site would come from Vista View Drive; however, the City continues to work with the applicant to determine if another access point may be located along Westinghouse Road. The proposed site layout is in conformance with City standards and will be formalized during the review of the site development plan. The surrounding uses include low density multi-family and training facility for the Department of Public Safety. The site layout, circulation plan, and design fit in well with these surrounding uses. The self-storage facility, and, importantly, the retail uses, will serve an important role in continuing to transform Westinghouse Road into a commercial corridor with supporting residential uses. 3. The proposed use does not negatively impact existing uses in the area and in the City through impacts on public infrastructure such as roads, parking facilities, and water and sewer systems and on public services such as police and fire protection and solid waste collection and the ability of existing infrastructure and services to adequately provide services. Findings Complies Page 77 of 173 Planning Department Staff Report Indoor Self-Storage at Vista Pointe Special Use Permit SUP-2017-009 Page 8 of 9 The proposed use would not negatively impact existing uses in the area and in the City through impacts on public infrastructure such as roads, parking facilities, and water and sewer systems and on public services such as police and fire protection and solid waste collection and the ability of existing infrastructure and services to adequately provide services. The proposed project will have frontage on Westinghouse Road (a major arterial) and Vista View Drive (a residential collector). In addition, any public improvements that may be required to provide the necessary water and wastewater utilities for the site will be the responsibility of the developer as a part of the subdivision plat approval process. 4. The proposed use does not negatively impact existing uses in the area and in the City through the creation of noise, glare, fumes, dust, smoke, vibration, fire hazard or other injurious or noxious impact. Findings Complies The proposed use would not negatively impact existing uses in the area through the creation of noise, glare, fumes, dust, smoke, vibration, fire hazard or other injurious or noxious impact. Westinghouse Road is in the process of redeveloping from a primarily industrial and agricultural corridor to a commercial one with supporting residential uses. There are still many industrial uses in the immediate area of the subject property that create a more intense impact than the indoor self-storage facility. Additionally, the inclusion of retail and commercial store fronts facing Westinghouse Road will reduce any negative impacts associated with the self- storage facility by adding a mix of uses to the subject site. General Findings Based on all the information presented, staff has found that the requested SUP for an indoor self- storage facility promotes the following goals established in the Comprehensive Plan: 1.A – Encourage a balanced mix of residential, commercial, and employment uses at varying densities and intensities, to reflect a gradual transition from urban to suburban to rural development. The proposed indoor self-storage facility is to be developed behind a retail component that will further the establishment of a commercial and retail corridor along Westinghouse Road and will serve the residential neighborhoods located to the south of the subject site . In addition, this facility will serve a unique purpose in the area by incorporating a mixed-use element to the design. This design element will differentiate the project from other nearby indoor self-storage facilities that do not include a mix of uses. 1.A.2 – Reserve and rezone land ideally suited for long-termed commercial and employment uses and prevent its use for residential subdivisions. Page 78 of 173 Planning Department Staff Report Indoor Self-Storage at Vista Pointe Special Use Permit SUP-2017-009 Page 9 of 9 The proposed indoor self-storage facility, with the additional store fronts along the street frontage, will further the development of a retail and commercial corridor along Westinghouse road. Staff finds that the requested SUP complies with conditions the four (4) preceding factors for granting an SUP. Should the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval with conditions the SUP request (as proposed by the applicant), the following conditions should be made part of the SUP Ordinance: 1. The indoor self-storage facility shall be located completely behind (south) of a building that houses other land uses permitted by right under the Local Commercial (C-1) zoning district as depicted in the attached Conceptual Plan. 2. Approval of the site development plan for the subject site must include the proposed indoor self-storage facility and retail or commercial store fronts as shown in the attached Conceptual Plan. Public Comments As required by the Unified Development Code, all property owners within a 200 foot radius of the subject property that are located within City limits were notified of the SUP application (4 notices mailed), a legal notice advertising the public hearing was placed in the Sun Newspaper (December 24, 2017) and signs were posted on-site. To date, staff has received no written comments. Attachments Attachment 1 – Location Map Attachment 2 – Future Land Use Map Attachment 3 – Zoning Map Attachment 4 – Letter of Intent Attachment 5 – Conceptual Plan Page 79 of 173 W E S T I N G H O U S E R D §¨¦35 S IH 35 NB S IH 35 SB S I H 3 5 FW Y S B S I H 3 5 F W Y N B N M A Y S S T R A B B I T H I L L R D S C E N IC LA KEDR TERA V I S T A C LUB D R F M 1 4 6 0 W E S T I N G H O U S E R D K E L L E Y D R S I H 35 FR S I H 3 5 FW YN I H 3 5 F W Y N IH 35 F R CERVINIADR BLUEAG A V E LN T E R A V I S T A X I N G RIDGEBENDDR MONT E R O S A L N WESTM EADOWTRL C E N T E R B R O O K P L FAIRMEADOW DR GREENSIDE D R C L E A R V I E W D R GREATVIEW DR D A Y LIL Y L O O P BRIAR P A R K D R P A R K VISTATRL HEWL E T T LOOP SACHEN ST C O M M E R C E B L V D P A R K C E N T R A L B L V D CROSSVI N E T R L W IN DING C REEKPL WOODVISTA PL R O C K M I L L L N S A N S O N E D R W OOD H A V E N T R L S U M M E R A Z U RES T C H E R O K E E R O S E C I R WOODLEDGE PL WIN D B E R R Y C T LILY TU RF C V CALDW E L L P A L M CIR GATEWAY DR K E M P W O O D C T N M A Y S S T TE R A V I S T A C L U B DR C L E A R V I E W D R SUP-2017-009Exhibit #1 Coordi nate System : Texas State Plane/Centr al Zone/N AD 83/U S FeetCartographic Data For G eneral Plann ing Pu rpo ses Only ¯ Location Map LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ 0 0.25 0.5Mi Page 80 of 173 W E S T I N G H O U S E R D R A B B I T H I L L R D N M A Y S S T P A R K C E N T R A L B L V D C O M M E R C E B L V D N M A Y S S T Coord inate System: Texas Sta te Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Plan ning Pu rposes Only ¯ Future Land Use / Over all Transportation Plan Exhibit #2 SUP -201 7-009 Leg en d Thoroughfare Future Land Use Institutional Regional Com mercial Com munity Commercial Emp loym ent Center Low Density Residential Min ing Mixed Use Comm unity Mixed Use Neighborhood Center Mode rate Density Residential Op en Space Specialty Mixed Use Area Ag / Rural Residential Existing Collector Existing F reeway Existing Major Arterial Existing Minor Arterial Existing Ramp Pro p osed Collector Pro p osed Freeway Pro p sed Frontage Road Pro p osed M ajor Arterial Pro p osed M inor Arterial Pro p osed Railroad Hig h Density Residential Legend Sit eParce lsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ 0 250 500Ft Page 81 of 173 W E S T I N G H O U S E R D R A B B I T H I L L R D N M A Y S S T P A R K C E N T R A L B L V D C O M M E R C E B L V D N M A Y S S T Zoning InformationSUP-2017-009Exhibit #3 Co o rdi nate System : Texas State Plane/Central Zo ne/N A D 83/US FeetCartographic D ata For Gener al Plann ing Pu rposes Only LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ ¯ 0 250 500FtPage 82 of 173 November 8, 2017 To: Georgetown Planning Department From: Austin Land Investments LLC Please consider issuing a Special Use Permit for our easterly 2.5 acre commerical site for a mixed use mini storage and retail project. Currently and in the forceable future there is not and will not be adequate traffic counts for a pure retail development. It is our belief that Westinghouse Road will never be a truly viable retail corridor with the amount of large scale retail, the new frontage road (Mayes), within two miles and the tremendous synergy they currently have. We feel we will never be able to fill a all retail space development and make it economically viable for us or the city. With the approved land use to our east which is currently under construction, vehicle and truck registration and testing will hurt our property and any prospect of pure retail. There will also be a issue with ingress and egress that will hinder pure retail, but would be acceptable to storage use. With all the new apartments and housing in the immediate area storage makes sense. Having a mixed use project with retail and storage gives us the economic viability, added security and higher probability of success. Furthermore, after a discussion with planning staff we will agree to build the storage in a manner that will allow it to be converted to a office building in the event storage ever becomes not viable. Thank you for your consideration. Page 83 of 173 # SCHEMATIC ONLY Page 84 of 173 A2.1 SCHEMATIC ONLY K.DRAHCIR O T K C OTS N 2 8617 DERETSIGER T C E T I H CRA S T A TE O F SAXET RETAIL SIGNAGE RETAIL SIGNAGE RETAIL SIGNAGE RETAIL SIGNAGE RETAIL SIGNAGE RETAIL SIGNAGE RETAIL SIGNAGE RETAIL SIGNAGE Page 85 of 173 Ordinance Number: ___________________ Page 1 of 2 Description: SUP for an indoor self-storage facility Case File Number: SUP-2017-009 Date Approved: __________________ Exhibits A-B Attached ORDINANCE NO. _____________________ An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, granting a Special Use Permit for an indoor self-storage facility in the Local Commercial (C-1) zoning district for 2.760 acres out of the Barney C. Low Survey located at 1050 Westinghouse Road; repealing conflicting ordinances and resolutions; including a severability clause; and establishing an effective date. Whereas, an application has been made to the City for the purpose of allowing a special use of the following described real property ("The Property"): 2.760 acres out of the Barney C. Low Survey, as recorded in Document Number 2015007981 of the Official Public Records of Williamson County, Texas, hereinafter referred to as "The Property"; and Whereas, public notice of such hearing was accomplished in accordance with State Law and the City’s Unified Development Code through newspaper publication, signs posted on the Property, and mailed notice to nearby property owners; and Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission, at a meeting on January 16, 2018, held the required public hearing and submitted a recommendation of approval to the City Council for the requested special use of the Property; and Whereas, the City Council, at a meeting on February 13, 2018, held an additional public hearing prior to taking action on the requested special use of the Property. 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 vision, goals, and policies of the Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan and further finds that the enactment of this Ordinance is not inconsistent or in conflict with any other policies or provisions of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan and the City’s Unified Development Code. Section 2. The Zoning District for the Property shall remain Local Commercial (C-1) zoning district and the Ordinance allowing for the special use of an indoor self-storage facility on the property is hereby adopted, in accordance with the attached Exhibit A (Location Map) and Exhibit B (Conceptual Site Plan). 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. Page 86 of 173 Ordinance Number: ___________________ Page 2 of 2 Description: SUP for an indoor self-storage facility Case File Number: SUP-2017-009 Date Approved: __________________ Exhibits A-B Attached 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. Section 5. The Mayor is hereby authorized to sign this ordinance and the City Secretary to attest. This ordinance shall become effective in accordance with the provisions of state law and the City Charter of the City of Georgetown. APPROVED on First Reading on the 13th day of February, 2018. APPROVED AND ADOPTED on Second Reading on the 27th day of February, 2018. THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: ATTEST: ______________________ _________________________ Dale Ross Shelley Nowling Mayor City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: ______________________ Charlie McNabb City Attorney Page 87 of 173 W E S T I N G H O U S E R D §¨¦35 S IH 35 NB S IH 35 SB S I H 3 5 FW Y S B S I H 3 5 F W Y N B N M A Y S S T R A B B I T H I L L R D S C E N IC LA KEDR TERA V I S T A C LUB D R F M 1 4 6 0 W E S T I N G H O U S E R D K E L L E Y D R S I H 35 FR S I H 3 5 FW YN I H 3 5 F W Y N IH 35 F R CERVINIADR BLUEAG A V E LN T E R A V I S T A X I N G RIDGEBENDDR MONT E R O S A L N WESTM EADOWTRL C E N T E R B R O O K P L FAIRMEADOW DR GREENSIDE D R C L E A R V I E W D R GREATVIEW DR D A Y LIL Y L O O P BRIAR P A R K D R P A R K VISTATRL HEWL E T T LOOP SACHEN ST C O M M E R C E B L V D P A R K C E N T R A L B L V D CROSSVI N E T R L W IN DING C REEKPL WOODVISTA PL R O C K M I L L L N S A N S O N E D R W OOD H A V E N T R L S U M M E R A Z U RES T C H E R O K E E R O S E C I R WOODLEDGE PL WIN D B E R R Y C T LILY TU RF C V CALDW E L L P A L M CIR GATEWAY DR K E M P W O O D C T N M A Y S S T TE R A V I S T A C L U B DR C L E A R V I E W D R SUP-2017-009Exhibit #1 Coordi nate System : Texas State Plane/Centr al Zone/N AD 83/U S FeetCartographic Data For G eneral Plann ing Pu rpo ses Only ¯ Location Map LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ 0 0.25 0.5Mi Page 88 of 173 # SCHEMATIC ONLY Page 89 of 173 A2.1 SCHEMATIC ONLY K.DRAHCIR O T K C OTS N 2 8617 DERETSIGER T C E T I H CRA S T A TE O F SAXET RETAIL SIGNAGE RETAIL SIGNAGE RETAIL SIGNAGE RETAIL SIGNAGE RETAIL SIGNAGE RETAIL SIGNAGE RETAIL SIGNAGE RETAIL SIGNAGE Page 90 of 173 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting February 13, 2018 SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to approve a contr act with Brown Reynol ds Watfo r d Archi tects , of Col l ege Stati on, Texas in the amount of $478,400.00 for Archi tectural and Engi neeri ng De si g n Servi ces for Fi re Stati o n No. 7 -- Eric Jo hnso n, CIP Manager and Laurie Brewe r, Assistant City Manager. ITEM SUMMARY: The contract includes a compre hensive pro graming phase, encompassing e xternal and internal stakeholder input and buy- in. The next portio n o f the contract is comprehe nsive design, construction oversight, co mmissioning, and proje c t assessment for Fire Station No. 7. This includes tying design to pro gramming, developing schematic design, deve lo ping 100% architectural drawings, mo nitoring construc tion, systems commissioning and pro ject assessment and keeping staff appraised of changes in budget throughout the process. Staff will return to Council for approval of the Schematic Design. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The design co ntract for Fire Station No.7 is a fixed fee contract of $478,400 , funded through certific ates of obligation, approved in the FY 2 01 8 budget that will be issued Spring 2 01 8. SUBMITTED BY: Eric Johnson, CIP Manager and Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager ATTACHMENT S: Description F ire Statio n 7 Des ign Page 91 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND PROJECT ARCHITECT This Agreement is made as of , 20____ (the “Effective Date”) By and between The Owner: City of Georgetown 113 E. 8th Street Georgetown, Texas 78626 and Project Architect: Brown Reynolds Watford Architects 2700 Earl Rudder FWY South Suite 4000 College Station, Texas 77845 (979) 694-1791 for the following Project: Architectural and Engineering Design Services for Fire Station #7 (RFQ# 201805) Project Delivery Method: Construction Manager at Risk The Owner and the Project Architect agree as follows: Page 92 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 2 - TABLE OF CONTENTS ARTICLE 1 PROJECT ARCHITECT’S SERVICES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 1.1 Basic Services 1.2 Programming Services Phase 1.3 Schematic Design Phase 1.4 Design Development Phase 1.5 Construction Document Phase 1.6 Bidding and Proposal Phase 1.7 Construction Phase – Administration of the Construction Contract 1.8 Additional Services 1.9 Time 2 OWNER’S RESPONSIBILITIES 3 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES 4 BASIS OF COMPENSATION 4.1 Basic Services Fee 4.2 Fees for Change Order Services 4.3 Reimbursable Expenses 4.5 Additional Services 5 PAYMENTS TO THE PROJECT ARCHITECT 6 PROJECT ARCHITECT ACCOUNTING RECORDS 7 OWNERSHIP AND USE OF DOCUMENTS 8 TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT 8.1 Termination for Cause 8.2 Termination for Convenience 8.3 Compensation 9 SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS 10 EXTENT OF AGREEMENT 11 INDIMNIFICATION 11.1 General Obligation to Indemnify and Defend 11.2 Intellectual Property 12 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 12.1 Captions 12.2 Governing Law 12.3 Waivers 12.4 Severability 12.5 Independent Contractor 12.6 Proprietary Interests 12.7 Appointment 12.8 Dispute Resolution 12.9 Notices 12.10 Authority to Act 12.11 Counterparts 12.12 179 D Benefit Allocation 12.13 Disclosure of Interested Parties LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit A Project Description Exhibit B Project Milestone Schedule Exhibit C Personnel Titles and Hourly Rates Exhibit D Program Document Table of Contents Exhibit E Certificate of Insurance Page 93 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E Article 1 Project Architect’s Services and Responsibilities The Project Architect shall provide the usual and customary Basic Services necessary and reasonably inferable to complete the Project and each phase of the project described as Basic Services in Paragraphs 1.3 through 1.7, below, along with any Additional Services requested by the Owner. 1.1 Basic Services 1.1.1 Basic Services. The Project Architect’s Basic Services include all disciplines identified below and all related usual and customary design, consultant, and other services necessary and reasonably inferable to complete the Project, or any phase of the Project, in accordance with the Owner’s requirements and the terms of this Agreement. Basic Services shall include the following disciplines: a) Architectural Services b) Landscape Architectural Services c) Civil Engineering Services d) Structural Engineering Services e) Mechanical Engineering Services f) Electrical Engineering Services g) Plumbing Engineering Services h) Acoustic Engineering i) Audio Visual/Data & Telecommunications Engineering j) Security Planning Services 1.1.2 The Project Description, attached as Exhibit A, describes the intended project scope and character along with the anticipated Project Schedule and the Preliminary Project Cost. It is the Project Architect’s responsibility to review and understand the requirements of the Programming Document and to perform his professional services so as to achieve those objectives. 1.1.3 The Fixed Fee for this Project is specified in Article 4. The Project Architect is responsible for managing the design of the Project so that its construction does not exceed the Construction Cost Limitation. 1.1.4 The Project Architect shall manage the design of the Project to achieve the Programming Document objectives of scope and cost through completion and acceptance of Construction Documents phase. The Project Architect shall advise the Owner of any adjustments to the scope or quality of the Project necessary to comply with the Construction Cost Limitation during design development as part of Basic Services. 1.1.5 The Project Architect shall submit the names of all consultants, persons, or firms, which the Project Architect proposes to use in the execution of its services. The Project Architect is responsible for coordinating the work of all of its consultants to assure that their services are appropriate for and adequately incorporated into the design of the Project. The Owner reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to reject the employment by Architect of any consultant for the Project to which Owner has a reasonable objection. Architect, however, shall not be required to contract with any consultant to which it has a reasonable objection. 1.1.6 The Project Architect shall pay for its consultants’ services out of its fees. The Owner is not responsible for any consultant fees or costs unless expressly agreed to in writing. Page 94 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 4 - 1.1.7 The Project Architect, as part of Basic Services, shall provide Construction Cost Estimates of the Project in a form acceptable to the Owner following the Programming Phase, the Schematic Design Phase, and at the completion of the Design Development phase. If the Construction Cost Estimate exceeds the Construction Cost Limitation at any time, the Owner will determine whether to increase the Construction Cost Limitation or require the Project Architect to revise the Project scope or quality to comply with the Construction Cost Limitation at no additional cost to Owner. Reductions in Project scope or quality are subject to Owner’s review and approval. If the Construction Cost Estimate is below the Construction Cost Limitation, the Owner and Project Architect shall mutually agree on changes to the project scope or the Construction Cost Limitation. 1.1.8 The Project Architect shall submit documents to the Owner for review at completion of the Programming, Schematic Design and Design Development phases and at the 50%, 75%, and 100% stages of completion of the Construction Documents. The Project Architect shall incorporate into the documents such corrections and amendments as the Owner requests, unless the Architect objects in writing and receives the Owner’s consent not to make the changes. The Project Architect will be responsible for any damages incurred by the Owner that are caused by Project Architect’s failure to incorporate requested corrections and amendments to the documents. 1.1.9 Project Architect shall provide a review and comment form acceptable to the Owner for Owner’s use during document review. Owner will provide its review comments to Project Architect on the form and the Project Architect shall provide a detailed written response to each of the Owner’s review comments indicating where and how they have been addressed in the design documents. At each required document submittal stage, the Project Architect shall include the completed comment form from the preceding submittal along with a cover letter signed by a firm principal affirming that the previous review comments have been fully addressed in the current submittal. Failure to respond to the previous comments or to provide the written affirmation may result in reduction or rejection of the Project Architect’s then current Statement for Architectural/Engineering Services. Owner’s approval of the revised drawing shall not be deemed to be an approval of any unlisted changes, and any costs or expense for any Project Architect’s additional services subsequently incurred for such unlisted changes shall be borne or reimbursed by Project Architect. 1.1.10 Project Architect agrees and acknowledges that Owner is entering into this Agreement in reliance on Project Architect’s represented professional abilities with respect to performing Project Architect’s services, duties, and obligations under this Agreement. Project Architect agrees to use Project Architect’s best professional efforts, skill, judgment, and abilities in performing Project Architect’s services. Project Architect shall perform its Services diligently and shall endeavor to further the interest of the Owner in accordance with Owner’s requirements and procedures. Project Architect agrees to use its best efforts to perform it services (i) in accordance with the usual and customary professional standards of care, skill and diligence consistent with good architectural practices for architectural firms in Texas that provide professional design services for projects that are similar in size, scope, and budget to the Project, and (ii) in compliance with all applicable national, federal, state, municipal, and State of Texas laws, regulations, codes, ordinances, orders and with those of any other body having jurisdiction. There are no obligations, commitments, or impediments of any kind known to the Project Architect that will limit or prevent performance by Project Architect of its services. Project Architect hereby agrees to correct, at its own cost, any of its Services, and the services of its consultants, that do not meet the standard of care. 1.1.11 Project Architect shall take reasonable precautions to verify the accuracy and suitability of any drawings, plans, sketches, instructions, information, requirements, procedures, requests for action, and other data supplied to Project Architect (by Owner or any other party) that Project Architect uses for the Project. Project Architect shall identify to the Owner in writing any such documents or data which, in Page 95 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 5 - Project Architect's professional opinion, are unsuitable, improper, or inaccurate in connection with the purposes for which such documents or data are furnished. Owner does not warrant for the accuracy or suitability of such documents or data as are furnished unless Project Architect advises Owner in writing that in Project Architect's professional opinion such documents or data are unsuitable, improper, or inaccurate and Owner confirms in writing that it wishes Project Architect to proceed in accordance with the documents or data as originally given. 1.1.12 Project Architect’s services shall be reasonably accurate and free from any material errors or omissions. Neither acceptance nor approval of Project Architect’s services by the Owner shall relieve Project Architect of any of its professional duties or release it from any liability, it being understood that Owner is, at all times, relying upon Project Architect for its skill and knowledge in performing Project Architect’s services. Owner shall have the right to reject any of Project Architect’s services because of any fault or defect in the Project due to any material errors or omissions in the plans, drawings, specifications, and other materials prepared by Project Architect or its consultants. Upon notice of any such errors or omissions, Project Architect shall promptly provide any and all services necessary to correct or remedy them at no additional cost to the Owner. Project Architect’s obligation to correct its errors and omissions is in addition to, and not in substitution for, any other remedy for defective services which Owner may have at law or in equity, or both. 1.1.13 The Project Architect shall not proceed to any phase of design not expressly authorized by the Owner, except at the Project Architect’s own financial risk. 1.1.14 Project Architect agrees to furnish efficient business administration and superintendence and to use Project Architect’s best efforts to design the Project in an expeditious and economical manner consistent with the interest of Owner and Project Architect’s professional skill and care. 1.1.15 Project Architect shall allocate adequate time, personnel and resources as necessary to perform its services. Project Architect’s Senior Principal(s) responsible for managing the Project is identified in Exhibit C and shall not be changed without the prior approval of the Owner. The day-to-day Project team will be led by the Senior Principal(s) unless otherwise directed by Owner or prevented by factors beyond the control of Project Architect. The Senior Principal(s) shall act on behalf of Project Architect with respect to all phases of Project Architect’s Services and shall be available as required for the benefit of the Project and Owner. 1.1.16 Project Architect shall make reasonable efforts to investigate any documents provided by the Owner and the visible existing conditions at the Project site to identify existing systems and construction which must be modified to accommodate the Project Architect’s design for the Project and the construction of the Project. The Project Architect shall identify to Owner any discrepancies between the documents and visible conditions, and shall consult with the Owner on any special measures, services or further investigations required for Project Architect to perform its services free from material errors and omissions and to properly coordinate with existing systems and construction. This investigation shall be accomplished by registered, professional architects and engineers, as appropriate. 1.1.17 The Project Architect, when requested by the Owner, shall coordinate the purchase of additional reprographic materials for bidding or proposal purposes or when additional review sets, in excess of those required by Article 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6. is required by the Owner. The Project Architect shall present a Tax Exemption Certificate to the vendor and coordinate the Owner’s requirements for type, quantity and invoice billing. When requested, the Project Architect will account to the Owner for all additional materials ordered by the Owner through the A/E as the Owner’s agent and shall distinguish between those materials ordered on behalf of the Owner without sales tax and any other copies thereof that Project Architect, or others, may order and pay for which includes sales tax, on its own Page 96 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 6 - or their behalf. Forward to the Owner the original vendor’s invoice for materials purchased by the Owner and delivered to the A/E as the Owner’s agent. 1.1.18 When the project is subject to Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) regulations, Project Architect shall coordinate all related design efforts, including the civil engineer and landscape architect, so that consideration of site design and Best Management Practices (BMP’s) are integrated. 1.1.19 Insurance Coverage. The Project Architect shall carry professional liability/errors and omissions insurance, covering the services provided under this Agreement and other coverages as required below with companies authorized to do business in the State of Texas or an eligible surplus lines insurer operating in accordance with the Texas Insurance Code, having an A.M. Best Rating of A-:VII or better, and in amounts as further described, acceptable to and approved by the Owner. The costs of such insurance will be at the expense of the Project Architect. The insurance policy shall remain in force for a period of two (2) years beyond the final completion date. Each request for payment by the Architect shall include the expiration date of the insurance. Project Architect shall deliver to Owner replacement certificates not less than thirty (30) days after the expiration of any such insurance. a) Professional Liability (Errors & Omissions) Insurance with limits of not less than $1,000,000 each occurrence, $2,000,000 aggregate. Such insurance shall cover all professional services rendered by or on behalf of the Project Architect and its consultants under the Agreement. Renewal policies written on Claims-Made basis will maintain the same retroactive date as is in effect at the inception of this Agreement. If coverage is written on a claims-made basis, Project Architect agrees to purchase an Extended Reporting Period Endorsement, effective for two (2) full years after the expiration or cancellation of this policy. No professional liability policy written on an occurrence form will include a sunset or similar clause that limits coverage unless such clause provides coverage for at least two years after the expiration or cancellation of this policy. b) On Site Insurance: For services performed on Owner's premises, the Project Architect shall furnish to Owner Certificates of Insurance as set forth below prior to the performance of any work hereunder and shall maintain such coverage during the full term of the Agreement. Worker's Compensation Statutory Limits Employer's Liability Bodily Injury by Accident Bodily Injury by Disease Bodily Injury by Disease $1,000,000 each accident $1,000,000 each employee $1,000,000 policy limit Commercial General Liability $1,000,000 each occurrence $2,000,000 aggregate Business Auto Liability Single Limit $1,000,000 each occurrence c) Notice of Cancellation: Required insurance shall not be cancelable without thirty (30) days’ prior written notice to Owner. Page 97 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 7 - 1.1.20 Evidence of insurance on a Texas Department of Insurance approved certificate form verifying the existence of all insurance before the execution and delivery of this Agreement and prior to the performance of any services by Project Architect under this Agreement. Additional evidence of insurance will be provided on a Texas Department of Insurance approved certificate form verifying the continued existence of all required insurance no later than 30 days after each annual insurance policy renewal. All insurance policies, with the exception of worker’s compensation, employer’s liability and professional liability will be endorsed and name Owner as Additional Insured for activities arising out of this contract on an ISO (CG 20 10 0704) or equivalent form. Workers compensation insurance policies will be endorsed to provide a waiver of subrogation in favor of Owner. Commercial General Liability and Business Auto Liability insurance policies will be endorsed to provide primary and non-contributory coverage. 1.1.21 Project Architect is responsible for any self-insured retentions, or deductibles that apply to any policy limit required herein. 1.1.22 Certificates of Insurance. Approved Texas Department of Insurance certificates will be mailed or emailed to the following contact. Contact: City of Georgetown Purchasing Address: 300-1 Industrial Ave. Georgetown, TX 78626 1.1.23 The insurance policies required in this Agreement will be kept in force for the periods specified below: a) Required coverages will be kept in force until receipt of Final Payment to Project Architect; b) Workers’ Compensation Insurance and Employer’s Liability insurance will be kept in force until the Work has been fully performed and accepted in writing. 1.1.24 The Owner has or intends to appoint a Construction Manager for this project (the “Construction Manager” or “Contractor”), and the Project Architect shall coordinate its Services (Basic and Additional) hereunder with the Construction Manager. The Owner may direct the Project Architect to recognize the Construction Manager as its representative for the performance of various duties hereunder which are otherwise defined as the responsibility of the Owner hereunder. 1.1.25 The Project Architect shall participate in the development and review of the Construction Managers GMP Proposal. This GMP Proposal will included the qualifications, assumptions, exclusions, value engineering and all other requirements identified in the Agreement between the Owner and the Construction Manager at Risk. Following Owner’s Approval of the GMP Proposal, the Project Architect shall be responsible for completing the Construction Documents, incorporating the aforementioned requirements contained in the GMP Proposal. Furthermore, the Project Architect shall participate in the documentation of the Construction Manager’s GMP Proposal so as to adequately understand the contents of the Proposal and ultimately confirm that the Construction Documents, when complete, reflect all qualifications, clarifications and assumptions contained within the GMP Proposal. The Project Architect and the Construction Manager shall jointly provide a monthly status report stating the progress of the incorporation of the GMP qualifications, clarifications, assumptions, exclusions and value engineering and all other requirements into the Construction Documents. Page 98 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 8 - 1.2 Programming Services Phase 1.2.1 Project Architect shall complete a comprehensive Programming Phase, which includes external and internal stakeholder input and buy-in for the entirety of the project. Stakeholders include, but are not limited to, Owner, City Council, City Staff, the citizens of Georgetown, and business and property owners nearby, with one focus being adjacent property owners. The Programming Phase will drive the plan development for the entire project. 1.2.2 Before proceeding into the Schematic Design Phase, the Project Architect and his entire consultant team, including Civil Engineer, shall prepare a comprehensive Programming Document for the project. The anticipated program table of contents are summarized in an attached Exhibit D. 1.2.3 Project Architect shall work closely with Owner in preparation of Programming Document and shall specifically conform to Owner’s requirements for space, storage and aesthetics. 1.2.4 The Project Architect shall plan to meet with representatives of the Owner as required during the development of the Programming Document and shall revise the Programming Document as necessary to achieve approval of the Owner. 1.2.5 The Project Architect shall furnish and deliver to the Owner three (3) complete printed sets of the Programming Documents as well as a digital copy. 1.2.6 If requested, the Project Architect shall provide the Owner with a written itemized fixed cost proposal to provide the designated programming services. Such compensation shall be in addition to the percentage based fee for Basic Services and billed as Additional Services pursuant to this Agreement. 1.3 Schematic Design Phase 1.3.1 Based on the mutually agreed upon Programming Document, Construction Cost Limitation and the Project Schedule, the Project Architect shall prepare sufficient alternative approaches to design and construction of the Project to satisfy Owner’s requirements and shall, at completion of this phase, submit Schematic Design Documents. The Project Architect shall review alternative approaches to design and construction for the Project and the Schematic Design Documents as they are being prepared at intervals appropriate to the progress of the Project with the Owner and Construction Manager at the Project location. The Project Architect shall provide the Construction Manager with copies of the Project Architect’s documents to assist the Construction Manager in fulfilling its responsibilities to the Owner. Project Architect shall provide all services necessary to perform the services of this Phase (preparation of Schematic Design Documents). 1.3.2 Project Architect shall work closely with Owner in preparation of schematic drawings and shall specifically conform to Owner’s requirements regarding aesthetic design issues. 1.3.3 The Project Architect shall furnish and deliver to the Owner three (3) complete printed sets of Schematic Design documents as well as a digital copy. 1.3.4 The Project Architect shall direct the preparation of a detailed construction cost estimate as described in Sub-paragraph 1.1.7 to confirm compliance with the Construction Cost Limitation and include it with the completed Schematic Design Documents. The Project Architect shall review its construction cost estimate in comparison with the construction cost estimate prepared by the Construction Manager, and shall reconcile any differences between the two construction cost estimates in coordination Page 99 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 9 - with the Construction Manager. If the Project Architect is unable to reconcile all differences between the two construction cost estimates with the Construction Manager, then the Project Architect shall provide a detailed explanation of the differences to the Owner. 1.3.5 The Project Architect shall participate in a final review of the Schematic Design Documents with the Owner and Construction Manager at the Project location. Prior to the Owner’s approval of the Schematic Design Documents, the Project Architect shall incorporate such changes as are necessary to satisfy the Owner’s review comments, any of which may be appealed for good cause. 1.4 Design Development Phase 1.4.1 Based on the approved Schematic Design Documents and any adjustments to the Programming Document or Construction Cost Limitation authorized by the Owner, the Project Architect shall prepare, for approval by the Owner and review by the Construction Manager, Design Development Documents. The Project Architect shall review the Design Development Documents as they are being prepared at intervals appropriate to the progress of the Project with the Owner and Construction Manager at the Project location. The Project Architect shall provide the Construction Manager with copies of the Project Architect’s documents to assist the Construction Manager in fulfilling its responsibilities to the Owner. 1.4.2 The Project Architect shall furnish and deliver to the Owner three (3) complete printed sets of Design Development documents, as well as a digital copy. 1.4.3 The Project Architect shall direct the preparation of a detailed construction cost estimate as described in Sub-paragraph 1.1.7 to confirm compliance with the Construction Cost Limitation and include it with the completed Design Development Documents. The Project Architect shall review its construction cost estimate in comparison with the construction cost estimate prepared by the Construction Manager, and shall reconcile any differences between the two construction cost estimates in coordination with the Construction Manager. If the Project Architect is unable to reconcile all differences between the two construction cost estimates with the Construction Manager, then the Project Architect shall provide a detailed explanation of the differences to the Owner. 1.4.4 Before proceeding into the Construction Document Phase, the Project Architect shall obtain Owner’s written acceptance of the Design Development documents and approval of the mutually established Construction Cost Limitation and schedule. 1.4.5 The Project Architect shall prepare presentation materials at completion of Design Development and if so requested shall present same to the Owner’s governing body at a regular meeting. 1.4.6 The Project Architect shall prepare preliminary recommended furniture layouts for all spaces where it is deemed important to substantiate the fulfillment of program space requirements, or to coordinate with specific architectural, mechanical and electrical elements. 1.5 Construction Document Phase 1.5.1 Based on the approved Design Development Documents and any further adjustments in the scope or quality of the Project or in the Project Construction Cost Limitation authorized by the Owner, the Project Architect shall prepare, for approval by the Owner and review by the Construction Manager, Construction Documents consisting of Drawings and Specifications in accordance with Owner’s written requirements setting forth in detail the requirements for construction of the Project. The plans, drawings and specifications for the entire Project shall be so prepared that same will call for the Page 100 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 10 - construction of the building and related facilities, together with its built-in permanent fixtures and equipment which will cost not more than the Guaranteed Maximum Price accepted by Owner, or the Construction Cost Limitation established by Owner if no Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal has been accepted by Owner. The Project Architect will be responsible for managing the design to stay within such Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal or Construction Cost Limitation. The Project Architect shall review the Construction Documents as they are being prepared at intervals appropriate to the progress of the Project with the Owner and Construction Manager at the Project location. The Project Architect shall provide the Construction Manager with copies of the Project Architect’s documents to assist the Construction Manager in fulfilling its responsibilities to the Owner. 1.5.2 The Project Architect shall advise the Owner and Construction Manager on matters such as construction phasing and scheduling, bid or proposal alternates, special cash allowances, liquidated damages, the construction contract time period, and other construction issues appropriate for the Project The Project Architect shall assist the Owner and Construction Manager in the preparation of the necessary bidding information, bidding forms, RFP information, and RFP forms, and the Conditions of the Contract for each trade and/or subcontractor in accordance with statutory requirements. 1.5.3 The Project Architect shall assist the Owner in connection with the Owner’s responsibility and procedures for obtaining approval of all authorities having jurisdiction over the Project. 1.5.4 The Project Architect shall ensure coordination and inclusion of sequence of operations for all operable systems in the facility. 1.5.5 The Project Architect shall furnish and deliver to the Owner three (3) complete printed sets of 75% Construction Documents, as well as a digital copy for final review. All printed Final Construction Documents requested by the owner shall be considered reimbursable as outlined in Article 3. One (1) digital copy of the Final Construction Documents shall be provided to the Owner as part of Basic Services. 1.5.6 The Project Architect, at the Project Architect’s expense, at each stage of review described, shall furnish and deliver to the Owner the number of complete printed copies of all plans, drawings and specifications of every character made or furnished in connection with the Work, which copies shall become the property of the Owner. The Project Architect shall incorporate into the plans, drawings and specifications such changes as are necessary to satisfy the Owner’s written review comments or published meeting minutes, any of which may be appealed in writing for good cause. 1.5.7 The Project Architect shall pay for the reproduction of all plans, specifications and other documents for use by the Project Architect and its consultants and all documents reproduced for the various completion stage reviews by the Owner prior to the reproduction of bidding or proposal documents. All other reproduction costs shall be borne by the Owner, provided that all invoices for such reproduction work are invoiced as a Reimbursable Expense. However, addenda documents issued after the bid documents are reproduced, except for changes generated by Owner, shall be supplied at the Project Architect’s expense. 1.5.8 The Project Architect shall direct the preparation of a detailed construction cost estimate as described in Sub-paragraph 1.1.7 to confirm compliance with the Construction Cost Limitation and include it with the completed Construction Documents. The Project Architect shall review its construction cost estimate in comparison with the construction cost estimate prepared by the Construction Manager, and shall reconcile any differences between the two construction cost estimates in coordination with the Construction Manager. If the Project Architect is unable to reconcile all differences between the two Page 101 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 11 - construction cost estimates with the Construction Manager, then the Project Architect shall provide a detailed explanation of the differences to the Owner. 1.5.9 Construction document drawings shall be produced on a CADD system AND PDF as part of Basic Services. The Owner will define the CADD drawing requirements and the final media for the CADD data. 1.5.10 The Project Architect shall participate in a final review of the Construction Documents with the Owner and Construction Manager at the Project location. Prior to the Owner’s approval of the Construction Documents, the Project Architect shall incorporate such changes as are necessary to satisfy the Owner’s review comments. 1.5.11 Before proceeding into the Bidding and Proposal Phase, the Project Architect shall obtain Owner’s written acceptance of the Construction Documents and approval of the mutually established Final Construction Cost Limitation. 1.6 Bidding and Proposal Phase 1.6.1 In conjunction with the development of the Guaranteed Maximum Price and at other times as appropriate to the Project, the Project Architect shall assist the Owner and Construction Manager by receiving and recording requests for Bid and Request for Proposal (“RFP”) Documents, issuing Bid and RFP Documents, and accounting for Bid and RFP Documents issued; receiving and resolving questions about Bid and RFP Documents; preparing addenda, issuing addenda, and accounting for addenda issued; attending pre-bid and pre-proposal conferences and HUB meetings; obtaining and evaluating bids and proposals; and assisting in preparing and awarding multiple contracts for construction, including trades and/or subcontractors. Project Architect shall answer inquiries from bidders and proposers at Owner’s request, and shall prepare and issue any necessary addenda to the bidding or proposal documents. 1.6.2 At the completion of the Design Development Phase, or such other time as Owner may specify to Project Architect, at Owner’s sole option and discretion, Owner will furnish Project Architect with a Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal prepared by Construction Manager based upon the Design Development Documents prepared by the Project Architect and approved by the Owner. The Project Architect shall assist the Owner and further and advocate the Owner’s interests in Owner’s negotiations with the Construction Manager in an effort to develop a Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal acceptable to Owner, in Owner’s sole option and discretion. If the Owner does not accept the Construction Manager’s Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal, the Project Architect shall participate with the Owner and Construction Manager in constructability reviews and shall revise the documents as necessary in order to reach an agreement. If Construction Manager’s Guaranteed Price proposal exceeds the cost quantity survey furnished to Owner by Project Architect, and Owner directs Project Architect to revise the documents, then Project Architect shall revise the documents at its own expense so that the Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal for constructing the Project shall not exceed the Owner’s Construction Cost limitation and any previously approved construction cost estimate. If it is determined to be in the Owner’s best interest, instead of requiring the Project Architect to revise the drawings and specifications, the Owner reserves the right to accept a Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal that exceeds the stipulated Construction Cost Limitation. The Project Architect shall analyze the final Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal document, together with its supporting assumptions, clarifications, and contingencies, and shall submit a detailed written analysis of the document to the Owner. Such analysis shall include, without limitation, reference to and explanation of any inaccurate or improper assumptions and clarifications. 1.6.3 After the Guaranteed Maximum Price has been accepted, the Project Architect shall incorporate into the Design Development Documents and/or Construction Documents any revisions which Page 102 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 12 - are necessary due to inaccurate assumptions and clarifications made in the development of the Guaranteed Maximum Price. 1.7 Construction Phase—Administration of the Construction Contract 1.7.1 The Construction Phase shall commence with the acceptance of the Construction Manager’s Guaranteed Maximum Price (or acceptance of a partial Guaranteed Maximum Price for a stage or phase) and issuance of (i) a Notice to Commence On-Site Work or (ii) a Notice to Proceed with Construction Services and terminate sixty (60) days after Final Payment to the Contractor is made, or when all of Project Architect’s services, including during the Warranty period have been satisfactorily performed, whichever occurs later. 1.7.2 Project Architect shall provide administration of the Contract for Construction as set forth below. a) The Project Architect shall coordinate with the Contractor to establish and maintain a numbering and tracking system for all Project records, including changes, requests for information, submittals, and supplementary instructions and shall provide updated records at each Owner’s monthly meeting and when requested. The Project Architect shall manage and execute all Change Orders. b) The Project Architect shall chair all meetings scheduled by the Owner or Project Architect and shall promptly provide summary notes to all parties. The Project Architect shall attend Contractor’s regularly scheduled planning meetings when requested. c) The Project Architect shall assist the Owner in making arrangements for a Pre-Construction Conference and a Partnering Workshop and shall assist in preparation of an administration booklet for the Pre-Construction Conference and shall distribute copies of the bound booklet to all parties. The Project Architect and its consultants shall participate in the project Partnering process including attendance at all Partnering Workshops. 1.7.3 The Project Architect shall review the Contractor’s list of proposed subcontractors for the work, initial administrative submittals for Project Schedule, Schedule of Values, Submittal Schedule, and Equipment Matrix to establish appropriate bases for construction monitoring, payment processing, and system commissioning. The Project Architect shall identify necessary revisions to the documents in writing to the Contractor and recommend acceptance of the documents by the Owner when appropriate. The Project Architect shall review periodic updates of all schedules with Owner and Contractor to evaluate appropriateness. 1.7.4 The Project Architect and its consultants shall prepare appropriate materials for and conduct a Pre-Construction Conference at the site prior to commencement of construction by the Contractor. 1.7.5 Site Visits. The Project Architect shall visit the site at least once each month during the entire construction period to observe the progress and quality of the Work and to determine in general if the Work is proceeding in accordance with the Contract Documents. Each of Project Architect’s consultants shall visit the site at least once each week during construction activities related to the consultant’s discipline to observe the progress and quality of the Work and to determine in general if the Work is proceeding in accordance with the Contract Documents. Project Architect and its consultants shall submit written reports of their site visits and meetings. The Project Architect shall not be required to make exhaustive or continuous onsite visits to inspect the quality or quantity of the Work. a) On the basis of the onsite observations, the Project Architect shall keep the Owner informed of the progress and quality of the Work, and shall endeavor to guard the Owner Page 103 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 13 - against defects and deficiencies in the Work of the Contractor. Project Architect shall notify Owner and the Contractor in writing of any portions of the work which Project Architect has observed as not being in conformity with the Construction Documents and make recommendations as to correction of the deficiencies or defects. Project Architect shall make its site representative available and shall consult with Owner and the Contractor on the occasion of all circumstances arising during the course of construction which would make such consultation in Owner’s interests. b) In addition to site visits for general inspection and observation, the Project Architect and its consultants shall visit the site for specific purposes related to certification of progress payments, start-up or mock-up reviews for significant work activities and for formal inspections of the Work. The Project Architect and its consultants shall provide written reports of all site visits to the Owner and Contractor. 1.7.6 The Project Architect shall prepare an agenda for, and conduct monthly project meetings for attendance by representatives of the Contractor, major subcontractors, the Project Architect and the Owner, and prepare and distribute minutes of the meetings. 1.7.7 The Project Architect shall not have control or charge of and shall not be responsible for construction means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, or for safety precautions and programs in connection with the Work, for the acts or omissions of the Contractor, Subcontractors or any other persons performing any of the Work, or for the failure of any of them to carry out the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents. 1.7.8 The Project Architect shall at all times have access to the Work wherever it is in preparation or progress. 1.7.9 The Project Architect shall determine the amounts owing to the Contractor based on observations of Work placed at the site and on evaluations of the Contractor’s Application for Payment, and shall coordinate its review and evaluation with the Owner’s representatives, and shall certify Contractor’s Application for Payment in an appropriate amount. 1.7.10 The certification of a Contractor’s Application for Payment shall constitute a representation by the Project Architect to the Owner, based on the Project Architect’s observations at the site and on the data comprising the Contractor’s Application for Payment, that the Work has progressed to the point indicated; that, to the best of the Project Architect’s knowledge, information and belief, the quality of the work is in accordance with the Contract Documents (subject to an evaluation of the Work for conformance with the Contract Documents upon Substantial Completion, to the results of any subsequent tests required by or performed under the Contract Documents, to minor deviations from the Contract Documents correctable prior to completion, and to any specific qualifications stated in the Contractor’s Application for Payment); and that the Contractor is entitled to payment in the amount certified. However, the approval of a Contractor’s Application for Payment shall not be a representation that the Project Architect has made any examination to ascertain how and for what purpose the Contractor has used the monies paid on account of the Contract Sum. 1.7.11 The Project Architect shall be the interpreter of the technical requirements of the Contract Documents and the judge of the performance of the work of the Contractor. The Project Architect shall render interpretations necessary for the proper execution or progress of the Work with reasonable promptness on written request of either the Owner or the Contractor, and shall render written recommendations within a reasonable time, on all claims, disputes and other matters in question between the Owner and the Contractor relating to the execution or progress of the Work or the interpretation of the Contract Documents. Page 104 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 14 - 1.7.12 Interpretations and recommendations of the Project Architect shall be consistent with the intent of and reasonably inferable from the Contract Documents and shall be in written or graphic form. 1.7.13 Subject to approval of the Owner, the Project Architect’s decisions in matters relating to artistic effect shall be final if consistent with and reasonably inferable from the intent of the Contract Documents. If requested, the Project Architect shall review interior designs and/or furniture selections proposed by the Owner and advise the Owner on their aesthetic compatibility with the Project Architect’s design. 1.7.14 The Project Architect shall have the responsibility and the authority, with appropriate notification to the parties, to reject Work which does not conform to the Contract Documents. Whenever, in the Project Architect’s reasonable opinion, it is necessary or advisable for the implementation of the intent of the Contract Documents, the Project Architect will have authority to require special inspection or testing of the Work in accordance with the provisions of the Contract Documents, whether or not such Work will then be fabricated, installed or completed. The Project Architect shall review construction materials testing and any special testing required and shall provide recommendations for retesting, actions, or any appropriate corrective measures as may be necessary or appropriate based on the results of such tests. 1.7.15 The Project Architect and its consultants shall review and approve or take other appropriate action upon the Contractor’s submittals such as Shop Drawings, Product Data and Samples, but only for conformance with the design concept of the Work set forth in the Contract Documents, and shall respond to Contractor’s inquiries and questions and provide supplemental information as appropriate. Action on submittals shall be taken with reasonable promptness so as to cause no delay to the Contractor’s scheduled progress, but in any event no more than fourteen (14) business days after receipt. The Project Architect’s approval of a specific item shall not indicate approval of an assembly of which the item is a component. The Project Architect’s review shall not constitute approval of any construction means or methods. 1.7.16 Project Architect shall clarify and interpret the intent and scope of the Construction Documents and, if necessary or appropriate, issue supplemental documents to amplify or explain portions of the Construction Documents. 1.7.17 Project Architect shall provide assistance in the review of the Contractor’s requests for change orders or claims for additional time or costs, and make recommendations to Owner as to such requests or claims. 1.7.18 The Project Architect shall prepare Change Orders for the Owner’s approval and execution in accordance with the Contract Documents, and shall have authority to order minor changes in the Work not involving an adjustment in the Contract Sum or an extension of the Contract Time which are not inconsistent with the intent of the Contract Documents. In conjunction with each Change, the Project Architect shall prepare an independent cost and time estimate for comparison with the Contractor’s proposal and recommend to the Owner whether the proposal is acceptable. 1.7.19 Project Architect shall prepare revised Contract Drawings, where appropriate, to illustrate and document the work required by approved Change Orders. All proposed changes to drawings plans and specifications, regardless of how initiated, shall be totally defined in the document depicting them as to scope of work added, removed, or changed. The original copies of the Construction Documents may be revised to show such changes, provided that all such revisions shall be separately recorded on the media acceptable to Owner, including, without limitation, CADD. Such revisions shall be clearly indicated and a current revision date shall be included on the reproducible copy. Changes to the specifications shall be made by consecutively numbered and dated addenda or change orders. All changes to design documents or specifications will be identified with date of change, revision number and other customary identification Page 105 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 15 - references. Areas changed on drawings will be “clouded” to show each change. Clouds designating previous changes will be removed so that only the most recent changes will be clouded. 1.7.20 Project Architect and its consultants shall conduct and participate in concealed space observations, systems start-up observations, systems integration/operational demonstrations, Substantial Completion or pre-Final work observations to determine the Dates of Substantial Completion, and Final work observation. In association with each observation, Project Architect and its consultants shall prepare a list of items which Project Architect and its consultants have observed as deficiencies in the Work, requiring remedial work or replacement, assemble and distribute the official punch(s) to all affected parties, and thereafter review the corrected and/or replaced work and assist in verification of correction of all items. 1.7.21 Project Architect shall review, for conformance with the Contract Documents, Contractor’s submission of guarantees and warranties. 1.7.22 The Project Architect and its consultants shall assist the Owner in checking as-built drawings during the course of the Work in association with certifying progress payments and shall review as-built documents for completeness and compliance with Contract requirements at Substantial Completion and at Final Completion of the Project. 1.7.23 Project Architect shall receive and review Contractor’s submission of record drawings, operating and maintenance instructions, and all manuals, brochures, drawings, and other close-out documentation furnished by the Contractor, shall require necessary revisions to same, and when acceptable under the terms of the Contract between Owner and Contractor, shall forward to Owner. The Project Architect shall certify final payment to the Contractor when the requirements of the Contract between Owner and Contractor have been met. 1.7.24 Project Architect shall monitor the Contractor’s schedule for the construction phase work and assist the Owner in reviewing all relevant activities and advise the Owner of the Contractor’s scheduled progress. 1.7.25 Project Architect shall provide a milestone schedule that is acceptable to the Owner and shall be submitted on a monthly basis prior to submission of construction payment application, in conformance with the project milestone schedule, so that the desired development and construction schedule for the Project shall be maintained. 1.7.26 The Project Architect shall be available after final payment to advise the Owner regarding Warranty items and to inspect Warranty work during the Warranty period. Project Architect shall participate in the Project’s one year warranty review. 1.8 Additional Services 1.8.1 Additional Services are those services which shall be provided if authorized or confirmed in writing by the Owner and for which compensation will be provided as described in this Agreement in addition to Basic Compensation. Prior to commencing any Additional Service, Project Architect shall prepare for acceptance by the Owner an Additional Services Proposal, which shall describe in detail the nature or scope of the Additional Services, the basis upon which Project Architect has determined that such service are Additional Services, and which shall set forth the maximum amount of fees and reimbursable expenses for which Project Architect is prepared to perform such Additional Services, together with a proposed schedule for the performances of such Additional Service. Project Architect shall proceed only after written acceptance by Owner of the Additional Services Proposal. Page 106 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 16 - 1.8.2 Upon acceptance by Owner, each Additional Services Proposal and the services performed by Project Architect pursuant to such Additional Services Proposal shall become part of this Agreement and shall be subject to all terms and conditions of this Agreement, as fully and completely as though the same had been included in this Agreement as a Basic Service at the original execution of this Agreement. 1.8.3 Providing services to make detailed investigations of existing conditions or facilities or to make measured drawings of them is an Additional Service except as reasonably necessary to verify the accuracy and completeness of drawings or other information furnished by the Owner and to the extent necessary for the Project Architect to complete its responsibilities hereunder free of material errors and omissions. Project Architect shall not be required to perform any destructive testing or to hire the services of a surveyor unless agreed to as an Additional Service. 1.9 Time 1.9.1 Project Architect shall perform all of Project Architect’s services described herein as expeditiously as is consistent with (1) Project Architect’s best professional efforts, skill and care, (2) the orderly progress of such services, and (3) in conformance with the project milestone schedules so that the desired development and construction schedule for the Project shall be maintained. Project Architect shall at all times provide sufficient personnel to accomplish Project Architect’s services within the time limits set forth in the schedules described herein. 1.9.2 Project Architect shall develop a schedule in the form attached hereto as Exhibit B containing a schedule for completion of each of the phases of services to be performed by Project Architecture pursuant to this Agreement. The project schedule shall contain milestone dates which have been established in the Request for Qualifications previously issued or may be modified by the Owner to reflect current conditions. Supplemental activities shown on the schedule, and any associated dates not yet defined, shall be determined at the completion of the Programming Services Phase or at such time when both parties mutually agree that the project is sufficiently developed and documented. The Project Architect shall coordinate with the Construction Manager in the preparation and maintenance of the schedule for performance of the professional services for the Project, including the Project Architect’s services. Changes in this schedule may be made only with the written approval of Owner. Project Architect shall perform all of its services in accordance with the then-current schedule approved by Owner. Article 2 Owner’s Responsibilities 2.1 The Owner shall provide the Architect with a full description of the requirements of the Project. 2.2 The Owner shall furnish surveys, geotechnical reports or other special investigations of the Project site as requested by the Architect and as reasonably necessary for the completion of Architect’s Services. The Owner shall furnish structural, mechanical, chemical and other laboratory tests as reasonably required. 2.3 The Owner will review the Architect's drawings, specifications and other documents of service produced by Architect in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement (collectively the “Design Documents”) as required. Owner will notify Architect of any design fault or defect in Architect’s Services or Design Documents of which Owner becomes aware. 2.4 The Owner shall furnish required information and services and shall render approvals and decisions as expeditiously as necessary for the orderly progress of Architect's Services. Page 107 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 17 - 2.5 The Owner designates City of Georgetown CIP Manager as its representative authorized to act in the Owner's behalf with respect to the Project. Article 3 Reimbursable Expenses 3.1 Reimbursable Expenses are in addition to Compensation for Architect’s Services and include actual and reasonable expenses incurred by the Architect, its employees and sub-consultants solely and directly in connection with the performance of Architect’s Services for the following: 3.1.1. Expense of transportation (including coach class air travel) and living expenses in connection with out-of-state travel as directed and approved in advance by the Owner. Transportation and living expenses incurred within the State of Texas are not reimbursable unless expressly approved by the Owner in advance. 3.1.2. Fees paid for securing approval of authorities having jurisdiction over the Project. 3.1.3. Professional models and renderings if requested by the Owner. 3.1.4. Reproductions, printing, binding, collating and handling of reports, and drawings and specifications or other project-related work product, other than that used solely in-house for Architect and sub-consultants. 3.1.5. Shipping or mailing of all reports, drawings, specifications, and other items in connection with the Project except for: correspondence between the Project Architect and the Owner; Project Architect’s in-house work or correspondence; or work or correspondence exchanged between the Project Architect and its consultants. 3.2 Expenses not allowed for reimbursement include the cost of review documents required to be provided to the Owner under Article 1, telephone charges, FAX service, alcoholic beverages, laundry, valet service, entertainment or any non-project related items. All tips must be included within the per diem allowances. 3.3 Owner shall pay a mark-up not to exceed ten percent (10%) on those reimbursables identified in 3.1.1 through 3.1.5 above. A mark-up shall not be paid on lodging, meals or travel expenses. Architect shall submit receipts for all reimbursable expenses along with any reimbursement request. Article 4 Basis of Compensation The Owner shall compensate the Project Architect for the services provided in accordance with Article 4. Payments to the Project Architect, and other terms and conditions of this Agreement, as follows: 4.1. Basic Services Fee 4.1.1 In consideration for the services provided under the contract, the Project Architect shall be paid a fixed fee not to exceed amount of $478,400.00 in accordance with this Contract. Payment for services provided shall be made monthly and in accordance with the Milestone Phase Schedule inserted below, following acceptance (or Final Acceptance) of the Services by the City. Reimbursable expenses shall be in addition to the fixed fee amount and as approved by City. Milestone Phase Amount (%) Schematic Design 20% Design Development 15% Construction Documents 40% Page 108 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 18 - Bidding/Negotiation Services 5% Construction Administration 20% 4.2. Fees for Change Order Services If revised construction documents are required due to material changes ordered by the Owner and not due to errors and omissions on the part of the Project Architect, the fee for the additional Basic Services required will be calculated using the same percentage fee used to establish the Basic Services Fee times the lowest bona fide bid or negotiated proposal for the changes to the Work or, if no bid or proposal is received, an up-to-date detailed Construction Cost Estimate for the changes to the Work, but only to the extent that services for the changes to the Work are required. 4.3. Reimbursable Expenses For reimbursable expenses, as described in Article 3, the Project Architect’s reimbursement shall be calculated as an amount not to exceed 1.10 times the amounts actually expended by the Project Architect, the Project Architect’s employees and consultants in the interest of the Project. 4.5 Additional Services 4.5.1 Fees for Additional Services, are in addition to the Basic Services Fee described above. 4.5.2 For additional services of the Project Architect that are not Basic Services or additional Basic Services due to changes in Project scope, the Project Architect’s fee shall be calculated as follows. 4.5.3 The fees for Additional Services will be negotiated by the Owner and the Project Architect as the scope of the Additional Services is defined and shall be calculated in one of the following ways: a) A pre-established lump sum amount; or b) An agreed percentage of the Final Construction Cost of the Work resulting from the service being provided. 4.5.4 In the absence of an agreement between the Owner and the Project Architect, the fees for Additional Services shall be calculated on an hourly basis. Article 5 Payments to the Project Architect 5.1 Architect shall present monthly Applications for Payment to the Owner detailing the Architect’s Services and approved Additional Services performed and the approved Reimbursable Expenses incurred for the Project in the previous month. With each application for payment, Architect shall submit payroll information, receipts, invoices and any other evidence of payment which Owner shall deem necessary to support the amount requested. 5.2 Owner shall promptly review the Application for Payment and notify Architect whether the Application is approved or disapproved, in whole or in part. Owner shall promptly pay Architect for all approved services and expenses. For purposes of Texas Government Code 2251, the date performance of services is completed is the date when the Owner approves the Application for Payment. Architect shall pay all sub-consultants and other expenses incurred under this Agreement in accordance with Texas Government Code Chapter 2251. Page 109 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 19 - 5.3 Owner shall have the right to withhold from payments due Architect such sums as are necessary to protect Owner against any loss or damage which may result from negligence by Architect or failure of Architect to perform its obligations under this Agreement. Article 6 Project Architect Accounting Records 6.1 Records of Project Architect costs, reimbursable expenses pertaining to the Project and payments shall be available to Owner or its authorized representative during business hours and shall be retained for three years after final Payment or abandonment of the Project, unless Owner otherwise instructs Consultant in writing. Article 7 Ownership and Use of Documents 7.1 The Owner shall have the title to and ownership of all documents produced or developed by Architect and any sub-consultant in connection with this Agreement whether the Project is completed or not. Documents include publications, plans drawings, designs, specifications, photographs, studies, reports schedules, computer programs, and other data and work product, in any form or media. Owner shall have sole ownership of all copyright interest in all documents to the extent that documents may be copyrighted. Architect shall deliver all documents to the Owner at completion of the Project, termination of Services, or upon Owner’s request. Architect may retain copies of its work product. 7.2 The Architect shall furnish to the Owner one set of digital files representing the final record drawings, in both CADD format and PDF. Article 8 Termination of Agreement 8.1 Termination for Cause. This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon ten (10) days written notice should the other party fail substantially to perform in accordance with its terms through no fault of the terminating party and such failure is not fully cured prior to the expiration of the notice period. If a termination for cause under this section is later determined to be improper, the termination shall automatically convert to a termination for convenience and Architect’s recovery for termination shall be strictly limited as provided below. 8.2 Termination for Convenience. This agreement may be terminated for convenience by the Owner in whole or in part, upon at least ten (10) days written notice to the Architect. 8.3 Compensation. In the event of termination not the fault of the Architect, the Architect shall be entitled to compensation for all services satisfactorily performed to the termination date, together with approved Reimbursable Expenses then due, provided Architect delivers to Owner statements, accounts, reports and other materials as required for payment along with all reports, documents and other materials prepared by Architect prior to termination. Article 9 Successors and Assigns The Owner and the Project Architect, respectively, bind themselves, their partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives to the other party to this Agreement and to the partners, permitted succes- sors, assigns and legal representatives of such other party with respect to all covenants of this Agreement. This Agreement is a personal service contract for the services of Project Architect, and Project Architect’s interest in this Agreement, duties hereunder and/or fees due hereunder may not be assigned or delegated to a third party. The benefits and burdens of this Agreement are, however, assignable by Owner. Page 110 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 20 - Article 10 Extent of Agreement This Agreement supersedes all prior agreements, written or oral, between Project Architect and Owner and shall constitute the entire Agreement and understanding between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. This Agreement and each of its provisions shall be binding upon the parties and may not be waived, modified, amended or altered except by a writing signed by Owner and Project Architect. Article 11 Indemnity 11.1 General Obligation to Indemnify and Defend. TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, ARCHITECT AGREES TO INDEMNIFY AND HOLD HARMLESS THE OWNER, ITS ELECTED OFFICIALS, OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, AGENTS, EMPLOYEES, REPRESENTATIVES AND VOLUNTEERS OF AND FROM DAMAGES, INJURIES (INCLUDING DEATH), CLAIMS, PROPERTY DAMAGES (INCLUDING LOSS OF USE), LOSSES, DEMANDS, FORFEITURES, PENALTIES, FINES, COSTS, LAWSUITS, LIABILITIES, ACTIONS, AND CAUSES OF ACTION, OF EVERY KIND WHATSOEVER, AND EXPENSES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO FEES AND CHARGES OF ARCHITECTS, ATTORNEYS, AND OTHER PROFESSIONALS, AND COURT, ARBITRATION, OR OTHER DISPUTE RESOLUTION COSTS, AND EXPENSES AND COSTS OF INVESTIGATION, ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT, ANY TASK ORDER, OR ANY SPECIFIC PROJECT, TO THE EXTENT CAUSED BY 1) THE NEGLIGENT ACT OR OMISSION OR WILLFUL ACTS OF ARCHITECT OR ARCHITECT’S OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, PARTNERS, AGENTS, EMPLOYEES, OR CONSULTANTS OR 2) MATERIAL BREACH OF THIS AGREEMENT OR TASK ORDER. ARCHITECT FURTHER AGREES TO DEFEND, AT ITS OWN EXPENSE, ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER AND IN THE NAME OF THE OWNER, SUITS AND PROCEEDINGS INSTITUTED AGAINST OWNER TO WHICH THE INDEMNITY OBLIGATION APPLIES, AND PAY AWARDS OF DAMAGES ASSESSED WHICH RESULT FROM ANY SUCH CLAIM, SUIT OR PROCEEDING, INCLUDING ASSOCIATED EXPENSES, ATTORNEY FEES, COSTS OF INVESTIGATION, ARBITRATION AND/OR LITIGATION. 11.2 Intellectual Property 11.2.1 ARCHITECT AGREES TO INDEMNIFY AND HOLD HARMLESS THE OWNER, ITS ELECTED OFFICIALS, OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, AGENTS, EMPLOYEES, REPRESENTATIVES AND VOLUNTEERS OF AND FROM DAMAGES, CLAIMS, LOSSES, DEMANDS, FORFEITURES, PENALTIES, FINES, COSTS, LAWSUITS, LIABILITIES, ACTIONS, CAUSES OF ACTION OF EVERY KIND WHATSOEVER, AND EXPENSES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO FEES AND CHARGES OF ARCHITECTS, ATTORNEYS, AND OTHER PROFESSIONALS, AND COURT, ARBITRATION, OR OTHER DISPUTE RESOLUTION COSTS, AND EXPENSES AND COSTS OF INVESTIGATION, TO THE EXTENT CAUSED BY ALLEGED INFRINGEMENT OF PATENT OR COPYRIGHT OF THE UNITED STATES OR OF ANY TRADEMARK OR TRADE SECRET PROTECTED BY EITHER FEDERAL OR STATE LAW BY ARCHITECT OR ARCHITECT’S OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, PARTNERS, AGENTS, EMPLOYEES, OR CONSULTANTS. ARCHITECT SHALL, AT ITS OWN EXPENSE, DEFEND SUITS OR PROCEEDINGS INSTITUTED AGAINST OWNER, AND PAY AWARDS OF DAMAGES ASSESSED WHICH RESULT FROM ANY SUCH CLAIM, SUIT OR PROCEEDING, INCLUDING ASSOCIATED EXPENSES, ATTORNEY FEES, COSTS OF INVESTIGATION, ARBITRATION AND/OR LITIGATION, AND SHALL ABIDE BY RESULTING DECREES AND COMPROMISES. Page 111 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 21 - 11.2.2 IF A RESTRAINING ORDER OR TEMPORARY INJUNCTION IS GRANTED, ARCHITECT SHALL MAKE EVERY REASONABLE EFFORT, BY GIVING A SATISFACTORY BOND OR OTHERWISE, TO SECURE THE SUSPENSION OF ANY SUCH RESTRAINING ORDER OR TEMPORARY INJUNCTION. IF THE SERVICES ARE HELD TO CONSTITUTE AN INFRINGEMENT, AND PERMANENTLY ENJOINED, ARCHITECT SHALL MAKE EVERY REASONABLE EFFORT TO SECURE FOR OWNER A LICENSE AT ARCHITECT’S EXPENSE AUTHORIZING THE CONTINUED USE OF THE ALLEGED INFRINGING PORTION OF THE SERVICES. IF ARCHITECT IS UNABLE TO SECURE SUCH LICENSE WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME, ARCHITECT SHALL, AT ITS OWN EXPENSE AND WITHOUT IMPAIRING PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS, EITHER PROVIDE NON-INFRINGING REPLACEMENT OR MODIFY THE SERVICES TO ELIMINATE THE INFRINGEMENT. IN ADDITION TO INDEMNIFYING AND SAVING OWNER HARMLESS, ARCHITECT SHALL REIMBURSE OWNER FOR ANY COSTS INCURRED AS A RESULT OF THE UNAVAILABILITY OF THE INFRINGING ITEM OR ITS NONINFRINGING REPLACEMENT. 11.3 Architect’s indemnity obligations are independent covenants and shall survive completion of or termination of the Agreement or any claimed breach of the Agreement. 11.4 Owner shall promptly notify Architect, in writing, of receipt of notice of the commencement or threatened commencement of any civil, administrative or investigative action or proceeding involving a claim for which Owner seeks indemnification. No failure to so notify Architect shall relieve Architect of its obligations under this Agreement except to the extent that Architect can demonstrate damages attributable to such failure. Within fifteen (15) days following receipt of written notice from the Owner, but no later than ten (10) days before the date on which any response to a complaint or summons is due, Architect shall assume control of the defense and/or resolution of the claim. 11.5 Architect assumes full responsibility for the Services to be performed and releases, relinquishes, and discharges the Owner, its elected officials, officers, directors, agents, employees, representatives and volunteers from all claims, demands, and causes of action of every kind and character, including the cost of defense, for any injury to or death of any person (whether employees of either Party or other third parties) and any loss of or damage to any property that is caused by or alleged to be caused by, arising out of, or in connection with Services performed under this Agreement or a Task Order. This release shall apply regardless of whether the claims, demands and/or causes of action are covered in whole or in part by insurance, and in the event of injury, death, property damage, or loss suffered by the Architect, any Consultant, or any person or organization directly or indirectly employed by any of them to perform or furnish Services under this Agreement. Article 12 Miscellaneous Provisions 12.1 Captions. The captions of paragraphs in this Agreement are for convenience only and shall not be considered or referred to in resolving questions of interpretation or construction. 12.2 Governing Law. This Agreement and all of the rights and obligations of the parties hereto and all of the terms and conditions hereof shall be construed, interpreted and applied in accordance with and governed by and enforced under the laws of the State of Texas, without giving effect to principles of conflicts of laws. The Owner and the Project Architect each submit to exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of Williamson County, Texas. Owner does not waive the defense of sovereign immunity. 12.3 Waivers. No delay or omission by either of the parties hereto in exercising any right or power accruing upon the non-compliance or failure of performance by the other party hereto of any of the Page 112 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 22 - provisions of this Agreement shall impair any such right or power or be construed to be a waiver thereof. A waiver by either of the parties hereto of any of the covenants, conditions or agreements hereof to be performed by the other party hereto shall not be construed to be a waiver of any subsequent breach thereof or of any other covenant, condition or agreement herein contained. 12.4 Severability. In case any provision hereof shall, for any reason, be held invalid or unenforceable in any respect, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect any other provision hereof, and this Agreement shall be construed as if such invalid or unenforceable provision had not been included herein. 12.5 Independent Contractor. Project Architect acknowledges that it is engaged as an independent Contractor and that Owner has no responsibility to provide Project Architect or its employees with transportation, insurance or other fringe benefits normally associated with employee status. Project Architect is not, and will not claim to be, an officer, partner, employee or agent of Owner and shall not make any claim, demand or application to or for any right or privilege applicable to an officer, partner, employee or agent of Owner, including, but not limited to, unemployment insurance benefits, social security coverage or retirement benefits. Project Architect hereby agrees to make Project Architect’s own arrangements for any of such benefits as Project Architect may desire and agrees that Project Architect is responsible for all income taxes required by applicable law. 12.6 Proprietary Interests. All information owned, possessed or used by Owner which is communicated to, learned, developed or otherwise acquired by Project Architect in the performance of services for Owner, which is not generally known to the public, shall be confidential. Project Architect shall not, beginning on the date of first association or communication between Owner and Project Architect and continuing through the term of this Agreement and any time thereafter, disclose, communicate or divulge, or permit disclosure, communication or divulgence, to another or use for Project Architect’s own benefit or the benefit of another, any such confidential information, unless required by law. Except when defined as part of the Work, Project Architect shall not make any press releases, public statements, or advertisement referring to the Project or the engagement of Project Architect as an independent Contractor of Owner in connection with the Project, or release any information relative to the Project for publications, advertisement or any other purpose without the prior written approval of Owner. Project Architect shall obtain assurances similar to those contained in this Subparagraph from persons, vendors and consultants retained by Project Architect. Project Architect acknowledges and agrees that a breach by Project Architect of the provisions hereof will cause Owner irreparable injury and damage. Project Architect, therefore, expressly agrees that Owner shall be entitled to injunctive and/or other equitable relief in any court of competent jurisdiction to prevent or otherwise restrain a breach of this Agreement. 12.7 Appointment. Owner hereby expressly reserves the right from time to time to designate by notice to Project Architect a representative to act partially or wholly for Owner in connection with the performance of Owner’s obligations hereunder. Project Architect shall act only upon instructions from such representative unless otherwise specifically notified to the contrary. 12.8 Dispute Resolution. 12.8.1 If a dispute arises under this Agreement, Owner and Architect agree to negotiate the dispute between them in good faith for a period of 30 days from the date of written notice of the dispute. 12.8.2 If the Owner and Architect fail to resolve a dispute through negotiation, then Owner and Architect agree that they shall submit any and all unsettled claims, counterclaims, and other matters in question between them arising out of or relating to this Agreement to mediation. Page 113 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 23 - 12.8.3 If mediation is unsuccessful in resolving a dispute, then any and all unsettled claims, counterclaims, and other matters in question between Owner and Architect arising out of or relating to this Agreement (a) may be submitted to binding arbitration by written agreement, or (b) may be filed by either Owner or Architect in a court of competent jurisdiction. 12.8.4 Upon Owner’s request, Architect shall proceed with performance of Services pending final resolution of a dispute arising under this Agreement. 12.9 Notices. All notices, consents, approvals, demands, requests or other communications provided for or permitted to be given under any of the provisions of this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given or served when delivered by hand delivery or when deposited in the U.S. mail by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, and addressed as follows: If to Owner: City of Georgetown 300-1 Industrial Ave. Georgetown, Texas 78626 Attention: Purchasing With Copies to: N/A If to Project Architect: Brown Reynolds Watford Architects 2700 Earl Rudder FWY South Suite 4000 College Station, Texas 77845 Attention: Ray Holliday or to such other person or address as may be given in writing by either party to the other in accordance with the aforesaid. 12.10 Authority to Act. Project Architect warrants, represents, and agrees that (1) it is a duly organized and validly existing legal entity in good standing under the laws of the state of its incorporation or organization; (2) it is duly authorized and in good standing to conduct business in the State of Texas; (3) it has all necessary power and has received all necessary approvals to execute and deliver this Agreement; and (4) the individual executing this Agreement on behalf of Project Architect has been duly authorized to act for and bind Project Architect. 12.11 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be deemed, construed and considered to be an original, but all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. 12.12 179 D Benefit Allocation. Owner may decide to seek the allocation of certain tax benefits pursuant to Section 179D of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, (the “Code”) through this Agreement with Project Architect. 12.12.1 If the Owner and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) determine that the Project Architect is eligible to receive the 179D deduction allocation as a “Designer” for the purposes of Section 179D of the Code or that Project Architect could otherwise profit financially from the monetization of the benefit (separately and collectively, the “Rebate”), Project Architect hereby agrees to allocate to the Owner a portion of the Rebate in an amount to be determined and contracted for on mutually agreeable terms when Page 114 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 24 - the value of the Rebate becomes ascertainable, net of associated costs realized by the Owner and Project Architect. At its sole discretion, the Owner shall determine whether to receive its portion of the Rebate in cash, discounted Project Architect fees or both. 12.12.2 Owner reserves the right to retain a third party consultant (the “Consultant”) to manage and administer the process of obtaining and monetizing the Rebate derived from the Project(s). 12.12.3 Project Architect agrees to cooperate in all reasonable respects with the Consultant's efforts to obtain and monetize any such Rebates derived from the Project(s) on behalf of the Owner. Certification of eligibility and negotiation of the Rebates should be facilitated by the Owner’s 179D Consultant. 12.13 Disclosure of Interested Parties. By signature hereon, Project Architect certifies that, if the value of this agreement exceeds $1 Million, it has complied with Section 2252.908 of the Texas Government Code and Part 1 Texas Administrative Code Section 46.1 through 46.3 as implemented by the Texas Ethics Commission (TEC), if applicable, and has provided the Owner with a fully executed TEC Form 1295, certified by the TEC and signed and notarized by the Project Architect. [SIGNATURES PROVIDED ON FOLLOWING PAGE] Page 115 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 25 - IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement effective as of the day and year first written above. CITY OF GEORGETOWN By: _______________________________ ATTEST: ___________________________________ City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: ____________________________ City Attorney THE STATE OF TEXAS § § COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON § This instrument was acknowledged before me on the _____ day of ____________, _____, by _________________, Mayor of the City of Georgetown, on behalf of the City. _______________________________________ Notary Public – State of Texas Project Architect _________________________________________ Printed Name: ___________________________ Title: __________________________ Architect License or Firm’s Certificate No: __________________ State of Texas THE STATE OF TEXAS § § COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON § This instrument was acknowledged before me on the _____ day of ____________, _____, by ______________ on behalf of _____________________. _______________________________________ Notary Public – State of Texas Page 116 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 26 - The following Exhibits are fully incorporated into this Agreement by reference: EXHIBITS Exhibit A Project Description Exhibit B Project Milestone Schedule Exhibit C Personnel Titles and Hourly Rates Exhibit D Program Document Table of Contents Exhibit E Certificate of Insurance Page 117 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 27 - EXHIBIT A PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1.0 Background 1.1 City of Georgetown The City of Georgetown has a population of 60,000, is located on Interstate 35, and is the northern most “gateway” to the gently rolling hills of Central Texas. While Georgetown is one of the fastest growing Cities, over 50,000, in the Nation, it offers the amenities and charm of a small community, and is strategically and centrally located in the middle of the four major metropolitan areas of Texas. Austin is 30 minutes south of Georgetown, Dallas is two hours north, Houston is three hours southeast and San Antonio is just one-and a-half hours south, placing Georgetown in a very advantageous position for cultural and economic development. 1.2 Fire Department The City of Georgetown Fire Department currently services a population of nearly 90,000 (within City and ETJ) and has approximately 110 employees. We currently have five Fire Stations, plus one in design, ranging in size from 1,300 square feet to 11,200 square feet. Three of the current stations have three truck bays and the smallest station has two bays. They are required to cover 138 square miles of service area and a large portion of this territory is located in the City’s extra-territorial jurisdiction (ETJ) which is served through a contractual relationship with Emergency Services District #8. Fire Station #7 is the second of several new Fire Stations planned over the course of the next few years to keep up with the rapid expansion of the City. 1.3 Location As part of our commitment to provide the most reliable emergency response possible, the City of Georgetown, seeks to provide an additional Fire Station at a location that will reduce response times and decrease demand on other stations. Through coverage maps, call volume, and route planning, the City has identified Hwy 29 and Inner Loop to be the most efficient location for the next Fire Station. The City is in the process of acquiring several acres of land at that location for the construction of Fire Station #7. 2.0 Project Elements 2.1 New Fire Station #7 The City of Georgetown is planning the design and construction of a new, minimum 12,000 square- foot, state of the art fire station on a City owned property, possibly utilizing a Construction Manager at Risk. Successful completion of this project will provide the City of Georgetown with adequate space for their existing staff; improved operational efficiency; improved security for staff; efficient operational and maintenance expenses (through the incorporation of energy efficient / sustainable design elements); adequate parking for staff and visitors; improved response times and service; flexibility; and direction to accommodate future growth. 2.2 Design Scope 2.2.1 The successful Project Architect will be involved for the full duration of the programming, design development, preparation of construction and bidding documents, and construction administration phases of the project. 2.2.2 Pay special attention to design and building use and must give consideration to abutting the existing residential area, to be compatible with the future development of that area; 2.2.3 Development of a pedestrian core to promote walkability throughout the project and provide an example for future development in the area to connect with other improvements; 2.2.4 Involve substantive stakeholder and community input; Page 118 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 28 - 2.2.5 Provide a home environment to the fire fighters who will live at this fire station during 24-hour shifts, as well as the ability to expand, to meet future needs. The City is a desirable place to live and appeals to a variety of people (seniors, families and young professionals), the City is experiencing significant population growth and expects to double in population by 2030 (from 52,700 to 101,700) and City facilities and services are anticipated to grow accordingly; 2.2.6 Anticipate and prepare for the requirements of future development; 2.2.7 Assess the current and future department needs, evaluating the facility design so that it is the most cost-effective way to address their needs utilizing the available budget and site; 2.2.8 Design a facility that utilizes the latest in energy efficient materials and equipment; 2.2.9 Provide options for acceleration of the design and construction process; 2.2.10 Comply with all design standards established in the City’s Unified Development Code; 2.2.11 Develop budget estimates for the facility construction; and 2.2.12 Make presentations to the Owner’s governing body explaining their cost estimates and provide a virtual tour of proposed design. 2.3 Owner Provided Services 2.3.1 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 2.3.2 Surveys 2.3.3 Geotechnical Reports 2.3.4 Material Testing 2.3.5 Purchase of Audio Visual equipment and installation (design is included in Basic Services) 2.3.6 Purchase of Data Cabling (design is included in Basic Services) 2.3.7 Purchase of Security equipment and installation (design is included in Basic Services) 2.3.8 Purchase of Furniture, Fixtures and Equipment 2.3.9 Purchase of Tempset Controls equipment and installation (HVAC monitoring) Page 119 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 29 - EXHIBIT B PROJECT MILESTONE SCHEDULE The activities shown in bold below must have the associated dates identified and included with this agreement and represent services to be performed by the Project Architect pursuant to this Agreement. Supplemental activities shown on the schedule below, which dates are not yet defined, shall be determined at the completion of the Program Phase or at such time when both parties mutually agree that the project is sufficiently developed and documented. Activity: Date Completed: Owner Approves Facility Program Phase ________ Selection of the Contractor (or CM) __________ Schematic Design Phase Authorize A/E Start __________ Submit for Owner Review __________ Joint Review for Owner Comments __________ Owner Approves Schematic Design ________ Design Development Phase Authorize A/E Start __________ FPCC Meeting Project Submission Deadline __________ Submit for Owner Review, AE 95% __________ Joint Review for Owner Comments __________ FPCC Meeting Approval __________ Approve TPC & Design Development __________ Owner Approves DD Documents ________ Permit Approval Phase Submit Construction Application __________ Approve Construction Application __________ Owner Approves Guaranteed Maximum Price Phase (for CM Projects) ________ Construction Documents Phase Authorize AE to Start __________ A/E Submit 50% CD’s for Owner Review __________ Joint Review for Owner Comments __________ A/E Submit 95% CD’s for Review __________ Joint Review for Owner Comments __________ A/E Submit 100% CD’s for Review __________ Joint Review for Owner Comments __________ Owner Approves 100% Construction Documents ________ Owner advertises for Competitive Sealed Proposals (if applicable) ________ Construction Phase Activities NTP for Construction ________ Project Substantial Completion ________ Page 120 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 30 - EXHIBIT C PERSONNEL TITLES AND HOURLY RATES NAMES OF SENIOR PRINCIPAL AND PROJECT TEAM MANAGER Ray Holliday, AIA, ASLA, LI Daniel Pesek, AIA, LEED AP BD+C Marcus Gibbon, Assoc. AIA Thomas E. Gessner, P.E. Kendy Guillaume, LEED AP Robert D. Schmidt, P.E., R.P.L.S. Architect shall complete this information and must state the hourly rate Identify all staff: Personnel Title/Position Hourly Rate Multiplier Hourly Billing Rate Principal $210.00 Director $200.00 Senior Project Manager $185.00 Project Manager $165.00 Project Architect $130.00 Architect $125.00 Architectural Intern I $105.00 Architectural Intern II $85.00 Administrative Staff $70.00 Page 121 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 31 - EXHIBIT D PROGRAM DOCUMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS The format below represents or proposed Table of Contents for this Building Program. 1. Sign Offs and Acknowledgements This section contains the required signatures for approval of the program. It also acknowledges the people involved with the project. 2. Executive Summary This chapter is a brief overview of the entire project including a summary of location, spatial requirements, non-building related requirements, cost and schedule. 3. Project Goals & Objectives This chapter describes why the project is necessary and affirms that it is in keeping with the stated direction of the City of Georgetown Master Plan, Design Guidelines and other applicable standards. 4. Space & Adjacency Requirements This chapter deals with the space requirements and functional relationships for all areas within the project. An itemized Program of Spaces Spreadsheet will be included in this section. 5. Supporting Requirements This chapter deals with project requirement that affect the design of the building other than those listed in Chapter 7. Consultant Narratives for each discipline will be included in this section. 6. Site Studies This chapter is an analysis of the proposed site for the project. 7. Existing Facilities Studies (if needed) This chapter deals with the renovation of existing facilities and contains available existing drawing information and building studies and/or surveys. 8. Design Parameters This chapter lists the standards and constraints that will control the project, including applicable codes, ordinance, and regulations. A brief Code Summary for the project will be included. 9. Preliminary Cost Summary This chapter outlines the preliminary cost for the project. 10. Project Schedule This chapter describes the factors that affect the project schedule and presents a preliminary project schedule. 11. Project Implementation This chapter deals with the project execution. 12. Project Delivery Method This chapter provides a brief explanation of the method for project delivery, and why it was chosen for this project. Page 122 of 173 {00009600 / v / / CIP / FIRE7 / 18-0026-A/E - 32 - EXHIBIT E CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE Page 123 of 173 SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. INSURER(S) AFFORDING COVERAGE INSURER F : INSURER E : INSURER D : INSURER C : INSURER B : INSURER A : NAIC # NAME:CONTACT (A/C, No):FAX E-MAILADDRESS: PRODUCER (A/C, No, Ext):PHONE INSURED REVISION NUMBER:CERTIFICATE NUMBER:COVERAGES IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must have ADDITIONAL INSURED provisions or be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. OTHER: (Per accident) (Ea accident) $ $ N / A SUBR WVD ADDL INSD THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. $ $ $ $PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY (Per accident) BODILY INJURY (Per person) COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT AUTOS ONLY AUTOSAUTOS ONLY NON-OWNED SCHEDULEDOWNED ANY AUTO AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY Y / N WORKERS COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED? (Mandatory in NH) DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below If yes, describe under ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE $ $ $ E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYEE E.L. EACH ACCIDENT EROTH-STATUTEPER LIMITS(MM/DD/YYYY)POLICY EXP(MM/DD/YYYY)POLICY EFFPOLICY NUMBERTYPE OF INSURANCELTRINSR DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES (ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, may be attached if more space is required) EXCESS LIAB UMBRELLA LIAB $EACH OCCURRENCE $AGGREGATE $ OCCUR CLAIMS-MADE DED RETENTION $ $PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG $GENERAL AGGREGATE $PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $MED EXP (Any one person) $EACH OCCURRENCE DAMAGE TO RENTED $PREMISES (Ea occurrence) COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY CLAIMS-MADE OCCUR GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: POLICY PRO-JECT LOC CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE (MM/DD/YYYY) CANCELLATION AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ACORD 25 (2016/03) © 1988-2015 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. CERTIFICATE HOLDER The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD HIRED AUTOS ONLY 1/18/2018 McLaughlin Brunson A Risk Strategies Company 12801 N CENTRAL EXPY, STE 1710 Dallas, TX 75243 (214) 503-1212 (214) 503-8899 Joe Bryant Joe Bryant certificate@mclaughlinbrunson.com Brown Reynolds & Watford Architects, Inc. 3535 Travis, #250 LB 102 Dallas TX 75204 39947105 3 3 33 3 3 3 3 to a deductible. Thirty (30) day notice of cancellation in favor of certificate holder on all policies. City of Georgetown Purchasing is named A waiver of subrogation is shown in favor of the additional insured on all policies as required by written contract. City of Georgetown Purchasing 300-1 Industrial Ave. Georgetown TX 78626 The claims made professional liability coverage is the total aggregate limit for all claims presented within the annual policy period and is subject additional insured on the general, auto and umbrella liability coverage as required by written contract. A 2,000,0006805H63247212/20/2017 12/20/2018 1,000,000 3 10,000 3 2,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,0003 D BA2A266690 12/20/2017 12/20/2018 1,000,000 3 3 3 B CUP3616T685 12/20/2017 12/20/2018 5,000,00033 5,000,000 3 10,000 3 C Professional Liability DP 9921147 1/22/2018 1/22/2019 Per Claim $2,000,000 Annual Aggregate $4,000,000 Travelers Indemnity Co of America 25666 Travelers Indemnity Company 25658 XL Specialty Insurance Company 37885 Travelers Indemnity Company of CT 25682 39947105 | 17/18 GL/AL/UL/PL $2m/$4m - NEW DEFAULT - Use this | Jessica Dishman | 1/18/2018 3:49:16 PM (EST) | Page 1 of 1 Page 124 of 173 See below 1/18/2018 12619855 SOI6583 (This certificate replaces certificate# 12619589 issued on 1/18/2018) City of Georgetown 300-1 Industrial Avenue Georgetown, TX 78626 F/W/L Brown Reynolds Watford Architects Charlotte, NC 28224 Strategic Outsourcing, Inc. PO Box 241448 Indemnity Insurance Company of North America 43575 2601 South Bayshore Drive, Suite 1600 Coconut Grove, FL 33133 Commercial Lines USI Insurance Services National, Inc. 888-572-2412 certs@trinet.com 1,000,000 1,000,000 A WLRC64309742 1,000,000 03/01/2017 03/01/2018 XX N RE:. Georgetown Fire Station #7 . Workers' Compensation is limited to worksite employees of Brown Reynolds Watford Architects through a co-employment contract with Strategic Outsourcing, Inc. A Waiver of Subrogation applies in favor of the Certificate Holder as required by written contract. Page 125 of 173 A 30 day notice of cancellation is endorsed to the policy for the Certificate Holder. (Except for 10 days for non-payment of premium) CID: SOI6583 SID: 12619855 Page 126 of 173 City of Georgetown 300-1 Industrial Avenue Georgetown, TX 78626 F/W/L Brown Reynolds Watford Architects Charlotte, NC 28224 PO Box 241448 Strategic Outsourcing, Inc. 03/01/2017 03/01/201703/01/2018 WLRC64309742 . Georgetown Fire Station #7 Page 127 of 173 City of Georgetown 300-1 Industrial Avenue Georgetown, TX 78626 Page 128 of 173 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting February 13, 2018 SUBJECT: Forwarded fro m the G eo rgetown Transportati on Enhancement Corporati on (G TEC): Consideration and possible action to approve Task Order KHA-1 8-0 01 with Ki ml e y-Ho rn and Associ ates, Inc . of Austin, Texas, fo r pro fessi o nal servi ces related to the study o f traffi c si gnal and dr i vew ay access on SH 29 east of IH 35, in the amount o f $4 3,3 52 .81 -- Edward G. Po lasek, AICP, Transportation Planning Coo rdinator ITEM SUMMARY: The Texas Department of Transportatio n will no t have funding for the design of Mo bility 35 interse c tion improvements at SH 29 until FY 20 19 , with anticipated constructio n in FY 20 21 . The City o f Georgetown currently has a development propo sal fo r the southeast corner of SH 29 and IH 35 interse c tion. The Wo lf Crossing develo pment will require improvements to intersections on SH 2 9 and po ssible relocation o f the HEB traffic signal. In order to advance improve ments and remain consistent future Mobility 3 5 intersection improvements and HEB parcel redevelopme nt, the City and GTEC Bo ard are being asked to c onduct a study to develop recommendatio ns regarding the traffic co ntro l alternatives that benefit mo bility while improving access to existing and future developme nt East of IH-35. Kimley Horn has c ompleted multiple traffic studies, intersection analysis and design projects for the City and completing the conceptual layouts called for this tasks order are will within the capabilities and e xpertise o f the firm. Staff recommends approval of the proposed Task Order. Develo pment proposals are moving fo rward aggressively and staff is hoping to design alternatives that may be approved through TxDOT to help coo rdinate access and traffic improvements in the area. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The cost of the traffic study is $43,352.81, and available in GTEC roll-over funding fo r the SH 29 intersection improvements. SUBMITTED BY: Edward G. Polasek, AICP ATTACHMENT S: Description Tas k Ord er Page 129 of 173 TASK ORDER Georgetown – Revised 3.11 EJCDC E-505 Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Engineer Professional Services—Task Order Edition Copyright ©2004 National Society of Professional Engineers for EJCDC. All rights reserved. Attachment 1 – Task Order Form Page 1 of 3 Task Order In accordance with paragraph 1.01 of the Master Services Agreement between Owner and Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (“Engineer”) for Professional Services – Task Order Edition, dated November 21, 2016 ("Agreement"), Owner and Engineer agree as follows: 1.Specific Project Data A.Title: Traffic Study for SH 29 at HEB Driveway B.Description: Study of traffic operations as the intersection of HEB driveway traffic signal on SH 29 just ease of IH-35. Conceptual layout of possible median and signal locations. C. City of Georgetown Project Number: 5RJ D. City of Georgetown General Ledger Account No.: 400-9-0980-90-059 E. City of Georgetown Purchase Order No.: __________________________________________ F. Master Services Agreement, Contract Number: 2017-743-MSA 2.Services of Engineer See Exhibit B – Scope of Services 3.Owner's Responsibilities Owner shall have those responsibilities set forth in the Agreement subject to the following: See Exhibit C – Services to be Provided By The City 4.Times for Rendering Services See Exhibit E – Project Schedule Task Order No. KHA-18-001, consisting of _10__ pages. Page 130 of 173 TASK ORDER Georgetown – Revised 3.11 EJCDC E-505 Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Engineer Professional Services—Task Order Edition Copyright ©2004 National Society of Professional Engineers for EJCDC. All rights reserved. Attachment 1 – Task Order Form Page 2 of 3 5.Payments to Engineer A.Owner shall pay Engineer for services rendered as follows: Category of Services Compensation Method Lump Sum or Not to Exceed Amount of Compensation for Services Basic Services Study and Report Lump Sum See Attached Fee Schedule $ 43,077.71 Mileage $0.56 per mile $ 268.80 Additional Services Standard Hourly Rates B. The terms of payment are set forth in Article 4 of the Agreement unless modified in this Task Order. 6.Consultants:None 7.Other Modifications to Agreement: 8.Attachments: Exhibit A – Location Map Exhibit B – Scope of Services Exhibit C – Services to Be Provided By The City Exhibit D –Man Hours and Fees Exhibit E – Project Schedule 9.Documents Incorporated By Reference:The Agreement effective November 21, 2016. Page 131 of 173 TASK ORDER Georgetown – Revised 3.11 EJCDC E-505 Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Engineer Professional Services—Task Order Edition Copyright ©2004 National Society of Professional Engineers for EJCDC. All rights reserved. Attachment 1 – Task Order Form Page 3 of 3 Terms and Conditions: Execution of this Task Order by Owner and Engineer shall make it subject to the terms and conditions of the Agreement (as modified above), which Agreement is incorporated by this reference. Engineer is authorized to begin performance upon its receipt of a copy of this Task Order signed by Owner. The Effective Date of this Task Order is , 2018. OWNER: ENGINEER: By: By: Name:Laurie Brewer Name:Scott R. Arnold Title:Assistant City Manager Title:Assistant Secretary Date:____________________ Engineer License or Firm’s Certificate No.F-928 State of:Texas Date January 3, 2018 APPROVED AS TO FORM ONLY BY CITY ATTORNEY AND BY CITY COUNCIL MARCH 8, 2011, AGENDA ITEM “P” APPROVED AS TO FORM VERIFIED: _________________________________________ Deborah Knutson, CPPB Senior Buyer DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE FOR TASK ORDER: DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE FOR TASK ORDER: Name:Ed Polasek Name:Brian Van De Walle, P.E., PTOE Title:Transportation Planning Coordinator Title:Associate Address: 300-1 Industrial Ave. Georgetown, TX 78626 Address: 10814 Jollyville Rd. Campus 4, Suite 300 Austin, TX 78759 E-Mail Address: Ed.Polasek@georgetown.org E-Mail Address: Brian.vandewalle@kimley-horn.com Phone: 512-930-2544 Phone: 512-418-1771 Fax:512-930-3559 Fax:512-418-1791 Page 132 of 173 Exhibit A January 3, 2018 kimley-horn.com 10814 Jollyville Road, Building IV, Suite 300, Austin, TX 78759 512 418 1771 Exhibit A – Location Map Traffic Study for SH 29 at HEB Driveway Page 133 of 173 December 21, 2017 kimley-horn.com 10814 Jollyville Road, Avallon IV, Suite 300, Austin, TX 78759 512 418 1771 EXHIBIT B Scope of Services Traffic Study for SH 29 at HEB Driveway SCOPE OF WORK OVERVIEW This project will provide an alternatives analysis for traffic operations on SH 29 between IH 35 and Scenic Drive in Georgetown, Texas. It will study the impacts of moving the HEB traffic signal to the east HEB driveway and the potential for implementing access management through the construction of a raised median. Traffic volumes from the Wolff Crossing Traffic Impact Analysis will be used to study baseline conditions. Future conditions (Year 2030) will be analyzed to determine the impacts of proposed TxDOT plans to widen the SH 29 bridge as part of the Mobility 35 plan. Three alternatives are to be studied, as listed below: l Existing configuration l Relocation of the HEB traffic signal, and l Adding a raised median between IH 35 and the HEB east driveway. TASK 1.0 PROJECT ADMINISTRATION Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (K-H) will perform typical project management duties to meet the schedule discussed in subsequent sections. Project management duties will include coordination and communication with the Client and accounting activities related to the performance of the study. TASK 2. DATA COLLECTION 2.1 Bridge / Intersection Data – K-H will collect existing lane geometries, traffic control, and speed limits within the study area. 2.2 Turning Movement Data – K-H will obtain projected traffic volume data from the Wolff Crossing TIA and use that information to develop weekday peak period turning movement projections for analysis. 2.3 Daily Traffic Volumes – K-H will obtain 24-hour traffic data for the years 2015 and 2030 from the CAMPO travel demand models. 2.4 Signal Timing Plans –K-H will obtain existing signal timing plans from TxDOT. 2.5 Future Bridge – K-H will obtain the future bridge cross section and lane geometries from the latest published Mobility 35 implementation plan. Page 134 of 173 Exhibit B January 3, 2018 Page 2 kimley-horn.com 10814 Jollyville Road, Building IV, Suite 300, Austin, TX 78759 512 418 1771 TASK 3. SYNCHRO MODEL ANALYSIS K-H will develop Synchro models for the three alternatives to determine operating Levels of Service and delays during the weekday morning and afternoon peak hours. The scenarios will include analysis of existing (Year 2017) and future (Year 2030) traffic projections. Future year traffic will be calculated using a 3% annual growth rate. TASK 4. CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT OF MEDIAN AND TRAFFIC SIGNALS K-H will use the survey and schematic design files provided by the City to develop a base map of existing roadway conditions. K-H will conduct field reconnaissance to determine existing lane widths, traffic control, speed limit, etc. K-H will develop a conceptual layout of a median island along SH 29 from the IH 35 northbound frontage road to approximately 500 feet east of the easternmost driveway into the HEB grocery store. This layout will include the relocation of the existing HEB traffic signal to the eastern driveway. The median will be continuous across the western HEB driveway, creating right-in / right-out driveways on the north and south side of SH 29. TASK 5. TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM K-H will prepare a technical memorandum detailing the results of the study and describing recommendations. Draft copies of the memorandum will be provided to the City for review in PDF format. Within five (5) business days of receiving review comments, K-H will finalize the technical memorandum and provide four (4) copies to the City. All reports will be signed and sealed by an engineer licensed to practice in the State of Texas. TASK 6. MEETINGS K-H will prepare for and attend project meetings with the City as required. For the purpose of this proposal, it is assumed that up to five (5) such meetings will be held. K-H’s involvement in any additional meetings will be billed on an hourly basis in accordance with the attached rate schedule. Page 135 of 173 Exhibit B January 3, 2018 Page 3 kimley-horn.com 10814 Jollyville Road, Building IV, Suite 300, Austin, TX 78759 512 418 1771 ADDITIONAL SERVICES Any services not specifically provided for in the above scope will be considered additional services and can be performed at our then current hourly rates. Additional services we can provide include, but are not limited to, the following: l Analyses of additional intersections; l Analysis of additional alternatives or study years; l Surveying or SUE Surveying l PS&E services including, but not limited to, roadway design, signal design, and pavement design; l Cost estimating; l Additional analyses or major re-works required as a result of City comments that are inconsistent with K-H’s original direction from the City. Page 136 of 173 Exhibit C January 3, 2018 kimley-horn.com 10814 Jollyville Road, Building IV, Suite 300, Austin, TX 78759 512 418 1771 EXHIBIT C Services To Be Performed By The City Traffic Study for SH 29 at HEB Driveway SCOPE OF WORK OVERVIEW Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (K-H) will conduct operational analyses to develop recommendations regarding traffic control alternatives along SH 29 from IH 35 to Scenic Brook in Georgetown, Texas. SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY THE CITY A.Provide a project coordinator to work with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (KHA) during the development of the project. B.Provide traffic projections for the study area from the Wolf Crossing Traffic Impact Analysis. C. Coordinate meetings with local stakeholders and TxDOT. D. Provide timely review of submittals. E.Obtain Microstation survey and schematic design files that TxDOT developed for the Mobility 35 project on SH 29 and provide them to K- H. Page 137 of 173 HE B S i g n a l o n S H 2 9 Fe e Se n i o r Pr o j e c t En g i n e e r Pr o j Cl e r i c a l To t a l Di r e c t Ty p e DE S C R I P T I O N O F W O R K T A S K En g r En g i n e e r i n T r a i n i n g Ac c t Ad m i n La b o r La b o r Mi l e a g e To t a l $2 4 7 . 7 6 $1 5 5 . 0 0 $1 2 5 . 0 0 $1 0 1 . 1 2 $7 5 . 8 4 Ho u r s Co s t Co s t a Pr o j e c t S e t u p 1. 0 1. 0 1. 0 3. 0 $4 2 4 . 7 2 $4 2 4 . 7 2 b Mo n t h l y R e p o r t i n g / I n v o i c i n g 2. 0 2. 0 4. 0 $6 9 7 . 7 6 $6 9 7 . 7 6 3. 0 3. 0 1. 0 7. 0 $1 , 1 2 2 . 4 8 $1 , 1 2 2 . 4 8 a Br i d g e / I n t e r s e c t i o n D a t a 3. 0 3. 0 $3 7 5 . 0 0 $3 3 . 6 0 $4 0 8 . 6 0 b Tu r n i n g M o v e m e n t D a t a 1. 0 1. 0 $1 5 5 . 0 0 $1 5 5 . 0 0 c Da i l y T r a f f i c V o l u m e s 1. 0 5. 0 6. 0 $1 , 0 2 2 . 7 6 $1 , 0 2 2 . 7 6 d Si g n a l T i m i n g P l a n s 2. 0 2. 0 $3 1 0 . 0 0 $3 1 0 . 0 0 e Fu t u r e B r i d g e 1. 5 1. 5 $3 7 1 . 6 3 $3 7 1 . 6 3 2. 5 8. 0 3. 0 13 . 5 $2 , 2 3 4 . 3 9 $3 3 . 6 0 $2 , 2 6 7 . 9 9 a 8. 0 16 . 0 32 . 0 56 . 0 $8 , 4 6 2 . 0 4 $8 , 4 6 2 . 0 4 b 8. 0 16 . 0 32 . 0 56 . 0 $8 , 4 6 2 . 0 4 $8 , 4 6 2 . 0 4 16 . 0 32 . 0 64 . 0 11 2 . 0 $1 6 , 9 2 4 . 0 9 $1 6 , 9 2 4 . 0 9 a 2. 0 2. 0 4. 0 $7 4 5 . 5 1 $3 3 . 6 0 $7 7 9 . 1 1 b 2. 0 2. 0 4. 0 $5 6 0 . 0 0 $3 3 . 6 0 $5 9 3 . 6 0 c 2. 0 8. 0 40 . 0 50 . 0 $6 , 7 3 5 . 5 1 $6 , 7 3 5 . 5 1 4. 0 10 . 0 44 . 0 58 . 0 $8 , 0 4 1 . 0 2 $6 7 . 2 0 $8 , 1 0 8 . 2 2 a 3. 0 12 . 0 8. 0 23 . 0 $3 , 6 0 3 . 2 7 $3 , 6 0 8 . 6 7 b 1. 0 2. 0 2. 0 4. 0 9. 0 $1 , 1 1 1 . 1 3 $1 , 1 1 2 . 0 3 4. 0 14 . 0 10 . 0 4. 0 32 . 0 $4 , 7 1 4 . 4 0 $4 , 7 2 0 . 7 0 a 6. 0 6. 0 16 . 0 28 . 0 $4 , 4 1 6 . 5 3 $6 7 . 2 0 $4 , 4 8 3 . 7 3 b 9. 0 9. 0 16 . 0 34 . 0 $5 , 6 2 4 . 8 0 $1 0 0 . 8 0 $5 , 7 2 5 . 6 0 15 . 0 15 . 0 32 . 0 62 . 0 $1 0 , 0 4 1 . 3 3 $1 6 8 . 0 0 $1 0 , 2 0 9 . 3 3 44 . 5 79 . 0 15 3 . 0 3. 0 5. 0 28 4 . 5 $4 3 , 0 7 7 . 7 1 $2 6 8 . 8 0 $4 3 , 3 5 2 . 8 1 Lu m p Su m IV C o n c e p t u a l L a y o u t 20 1 7 M o d e l s ( A M & P M - 3 A l t e r n a t i v e s ) 20 3 0 M o d e l s ( A M & P M , - 3 A l t e r n a t i v e s ) Fi n a l M e m o La y o u t Lu m p Su m Lu m p Su m VI P r e p F o r a n d A t t e n d M e e t i n g s Fi e l d R e c o n II I S y n c h r o M o d e l A n a l y s i s Dr a f t M e m o Lu m p Su m E X H I B I T D Ma n H o u r s a n d F e e E s t i m a t e Su b t o t a l Su b t o t a l Tr a f f i c O p e r a t i o n s A n a l y s i s f o r : Lu m p Su m Lu m p Su m II . D a t a C o l l e c t i o n I. P R O J E C T M A N A G E M E N T FE E T O T A L S Su b t o t a l Su b t o t a l Su b t o t a l Ci t y S t a f f ( 2 ) St a k e h o l d e r s ( 3 ) HO U R S T O T A L S Ob t a i n S u r v e y a n d D e s i g n D a t a f r o m C i t y V. T e c h n i c a l M e m o r a n d u m Su b t o t a l Pa g e 1 o f 1 1/ 3 / 2 0 1 8 Ex h i b i t D - M a n H o u r s a n d F e e E s t i m a t e Ki m l e y - H o r n a n d A s s o c i a t e s , I n c . Page 138 of 173 28 - 2 5- 9 12 - 1 6 1 9 - 2 3 2 6 - 2 8 5- 9 1 2 - 1 6 Pr o j e c t T i m e l i n e 6. 5 we e k s 1. P r o j e c t K i c k o f f 1 da y 2. D a t a C o l l e c t i o n 7 d a y s Br i d g e D a t a 1 d a y Tu r n i n g M o v e m e n t D a t a 1 d a y Da i l y T r a f f i c V o l u m e s 1 d a y Si g n a l T i m i n g P l a n s 7 d a y s Fu t u r e B r i d g e 1 da y 3. S y n c h r o M o d e l A n a l y s i s 7 d a y s 20 1 7 M o d e l ( A M / P M , - 3 A l t e r n a t i v e s ) 7 d a y s 20 3 0 M o d e l s ( A M / P M - 3 A l t e r n a t i v e s ) 7 da y s 4. C o n c e p t u a l L a y o u t o f M e d i a n a n d S i g n a l s 14 da y s Ob t a i n S u r v e y a n d D e s i g n F i l e s F r o m t h e C i t y 7 da y s Co n c e p t u a l L a y o u t 14 da y s 10 da y s Dr a f t M e m o 7 da y s Ci t y R e v i e w 2 da y s Fi n a l M e m o 1 da y s 10 da y s Ci t y S t a f f 7 da y s Me e t W i t h S t a k e h o l d e r s / T x D O T 3 da y s LE G E N D : Pr o j e c t M i l e s t o n e Wo r k B y O t h e r s Wo r k P r o g r e s s Ta s k P r o g r e s s Ja n - F e b Ma r Ex h i b i t E GE O R G E T O W N T R A F F I C S I G N A L S Y N C H R O N I Z A T I O N P R O J E C T Tr a f f i c O p e r a t i o n s A n a l y s i s f o r : H E B S i g n a l o n S H 2 9 20 1 8 Ta s k Du r a t i o n 1- 2 6. T e c h n i c a l M e m o 5. T e c h n i c a l M e m o Pa g e 1 o f 1 1/ 3 / 2 0 1 8 Ex h i b i t E - S c h e d u l e Ki m l e y - H o r n a n d A s s o c i a t e s , I n c . Page 139 of 173 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting February 13, 2018 SUBJECT: P roject updates and status reports regarding current and future transportation and traffic project; street, sidewalk, and other infrastructure pro jects; police, fire and other public safety pro jects; econo mic development projects; city facility projects; and downtown pro jects inc luding parking enhancements, city lease agreements, sanitation services, and possible direction to city staff -- David Morgan, City Manager ITEM SUMMARY: The City Council has requested regular updates regarding the status of projects, as well as the ability to discuss the se projects as a collective. FINANCIAL IMPACT: This is a Council Update Item. SUBMITTED BY: Shirley J. Rinn o n be half of David Morgan, City Manager ATTACHMENT S: Description GTAB Co vers heet GTAB Rep ort GTEC Covers heet GTEC Covers heet GEDCO Projec t Update Page 140 of 173 February 2018 Cover Sheet Austin Avenue Bridges Project - N & S San Gabriel Rivers: 106 Consultation process is closing, Next process is Texas Historical commission and TxDOT evaluation of alternatives. Under TxDOT environmental review. Flood Study: Study ongoing. Preliminary flood study results are complete. Mitigation efforts are current summer 2017. Final report due end of 2017. Draft has been sent to the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) for review. Final Public meeting is tentatively set for March 1st 2018. FM 971 - Realignment at Austin Avenue: Engineer’s plans submitted to City for the 60% design, received the fully executed AFA 10-20-17 plans will now be submitted to TxDOT for review. Scheduled engineering completion early 2018. FM 1460: Construction is on-going; administered by TxDOT. Utility relocation complete. Expected completion late 2018. Southwest Bypass (RM 2243 to IH 35) Phase 1: Clearing complete, Pilot bores complete for bridge columns, fill started between the frontage road and the Rail, also West of RR. Drainage improvements underway, spread footing excavation started 11-21-17. 2 Spread footings remain to be poured, work started on retaining walls and abutment East of GTRR. Southwest Bypass (RM 2243 to IH 35) Phase 2: County let preliminary construction project for phase 2 which includes the construction of ramps into and out of the Quarry, complete. Surveying and staking of phase 2 ongoing. Southwest Bypass (Leander Rd. to Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension)/Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension (SW Bypass to DB Wood Rd.) Construction is approximately 90% complete project wide. South San Gabriel Bridge is 95% complete. Second bridge south of the Gabriel, beam set, with panel placement and deck pour begins 1-25-18. Base course installed along with first course Asphalt on the entire project excluding the area between the bridges. 2015 Road Bond Program, Citywide Sidewalk Improvements Project Construction of initial work substantially complete. New work added to the contract 75% complete. Transportation Services Operations CIP Maintenance 2017 Curb and Gutter Replacement Project – KPA Letter of Recommendation for Choice Builders has been received. GTAB approved on 1/12/18. City Council approved on 1/23/2018 Currently working with Steger and Bizzell on task order for the following: o Drainage study at 18th and Hutto is complete. o Construction for 20th and College, WPAP is approved. Bid opening held 1/10/2018. GTAB will consider on 2/9/2018 o Design for 2nd and Rock Street detention pond upgrade. Working on WPAP modification for TCEQ. o Serenada drainage design is complete. Bid Opening held 1/10/2018. GTAB will consider on 2/9/2018 Page 141 of 173 2017 CDBG Scenic Drive Sidewalk Contract Awarded to Patin Construction. NTP issued for 2/1/2018. Old Town “Northeast” Sidewalk TO awarded by Council on 7/25/17. Surveying is complete. Preliminary alignment complete, adjustment and design continues Page 142 of 173 February 2018 Cover Sheet Austin Avenue Bridges Project - N & S San Gabriel Rivers: 106 Consultation process is closing, Next process is Texas Historical commission and TxDOT evaluation of alternatives. Under TxDOT environmental review. Flood Study: Study ongoing. Preliminary flood study results are complete. Mitigation efforts are current summer 2017. Final report due end of 2017. Draft has been sent to the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) for review. Final Public meeting is tentatively set for March 1st 2018. FM 971 - Realignment at Austin Avenue: Engineer’s plans submitted to City for the 60% design, received the fully executed AFA 10-20-17 plans will now be submitted to TxDOT for review. Scheduled engineering completion early 2018. FM 1460: Construction is on-going; administered by TxDOT. Utility relocation complete. Expected completion late 2018. Southwest Bypass (RM 2243 to IH 35) Phase 1: Clearing complete, Pilot bores complete for bridge columns, fill started between the frontage road and the Rail, also West of RR. Drainage improvements underway, spread footing excavation started 11-21-17. 2 Spread footings remain to be poured, work started on retaining walls and abutment East of GTRR. Southwest Bypass (RM 2243 to IH 35) Phase 2: County let preliminary construction project for phase 2 which includes the construction of ramps into and out of the Quarry, complete. Surveying and staking of phase 2 ongoing. Southwest Bypass (Leander Rd. to Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension)/Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension (SW Bypass to DB Wood Rd.) Construction is approximately 90% complete project wide. South San Gabriel bridge is 95% complete. Second bridge south of the Gabriel, beam set, with panel placement and deck pour begins 1-25-18. Base course installed along with first course Asphalt on the entire project excluding the area between the bridges. 2015 Road Bond Program, Citywide Sidewalk Improvements Project Construction of initial work substantially complete. New work added to the contract 75% complete. Transportation Services Operations CIP Maintenance 2017 Curb and Gutter Replacement Project – KPA Letter of Recommendation for Choice Builders has been received. GTAB approved on 1/12/18. City Council approved on 1/23/2018 Currently working with Steger and Bizzell on task order for the following: o Drainage study at 18th and Hutto is complete. o Construction for 20th and College, WPAP is approved. Bid opening held 1/10/2018. GTAB will consider on 2/9/2018 o Design for 2nd and Rock Street detention pond upgrade. Working on WPAP modification for TCEQ. o Serenada drainage design is complete. Bid Opening held 1/10/2018. GTAB will consider on 2/9/2018 Page 143 of 173 2017 CDBG Scenic Drive Sidewalk Contract Awarded to Patin Construction. NTP issued for 2/1/2018. Old Town “Northeast” Sidewalk TO awarded by Council on 7/25/17. Surveying is complete. Preliminary alignment complete, adjustment and design continues Page 144 of 173 Austin Avenue Bridges Project (North and South San Gabriel Bridges) Project No. TBD TIP Project No. N/A February 2018 Updated Project Description Develop 30% plans for improvements along Austin Ave. between 3rd Street and Morrow Street. The project involves several phases and requires participation and support from various stakeholders and interested citizens, community businesses, professional consultants, State and regional transportation partners City Staff and Council. Schedule Phase Activity Completion 1 Public involvement and alternative analyses, evaluating alternatives for feasibility and costs, etc. Early 2017 2 Develop geometric layouts and preliminary construction estimates for primary alternatives Early 2017 3 Review of primary alternative by Council TBD 4 Develop schematic and 30% plans TBD Proj. Mgrs Ed Polasek, AICP Engineer Aguirre & Fields, LP Element Status/Issues Public Involvement 3rd Public Meeting held 5/11, 4-7pm at the GTAC - 510 W. 9th St., Georgetown, TX 78626. Design 8 alternatives with 4 derivatives, working to narrow to 3-5 prudent and feasible options. Surveying Complete. Environmental Team completing Historic Resources Survey Report, 106 Consultation process is closing, Next process is Texas Historical commission and TxDOT evaluation of alternatives. Under TxDOT environmental review. Rights of Way TBD Utility Relocations TBD Construction Estimates for 8 alternatives provided as part of public meeting #3. Page 145 of 173 Flood Study February 2018 Project Description Updated Flood Study for all the City’s major drainage basis – Pecan Branch, Mankins Branch, Smith Branch, Berry Creek, and all three forks of the San Gabriel River – being completed in partnership with the Texas Water Development Board through a 50% matching grant. Purpose To identify the current and future developed 100 year floodplain (1% change storm event) and to recommend possible flood mitigation measures. Project Managers Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Director Engineer Doucet & Associates (formerly Chan & Partners) Element Status / Issues Design Study ongoing. Preliminary flood study results are complete. Mitigation efforts are current summer 2017. Final report due end of 2017. Draft has been sent to the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) for review. Final Public meeting is tentatively set for March 1st 2018. Environmental/ Archeological N/A Rights of Way N/A Utility Relocations N/A Construction N/A Other Issues N/A Page 146 of 173 FM 971 at Austin Avenue Realignment Intersection Improvements Project No. 1BZ TIP No. AG February 2018 Project Description Design and preparation of final plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for the widening and realignment of FM 971 at Austin Avenue, eastward to Gann Street. Purpose To provide a new alignment consistent with the alignment of the proposed Northwest Boulevard Bridge over IH 35; to allow a feasible, alternate route from the west side of I 35 to Austin Avenue, to Georgetown High School, to San Gabriel Park and a more direct route to SH 130. Project Managers Joel Weaver Engineer Klotz Associates, Inc. Element Status / Issues Design Engineer’s plans submitted to City for the 60% design, received the fully executed AFA 10-20-17 plans submitted to TxDOT for review. Scheduled engineering completion early 2018 Environmental/ Archeological TBD Rights of Way Pursuing two remaining parcels on NE end of project. Utility Relocations TBD Construction Estimated late fiscal year 18-19 Other Issues AFA with TxDOT complete. Page 147 of 173 FM 1460 Quail Valley Drive to University Drive Project No. 5RB TIP No. BO & CD February 2018 Unchanged Project Description Design and preparation of plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for the widening and reconstruction of FM 1460. Project will include review and update to existing Schematic, Right-of-Way Map and Environmental Document and completion of the PS&E for the remaining existing roadway. Purpose To keep the currently approved environmental documents active; purchase ROW, effect utility relocations/clearance and to provide on-the-shelf PS&E for TxDOT letting not later than August 2013, pending available construction funding. Project Managers TxDOT Engineer Brown and Gay Engineers, Inc. Element Status / Issues Design Complete Environmental/ Archeological Complete Rights of Way Complete Utility Relocations Complete Construction Construction is on-going; administered by TxDOT. Expected completion by the end of 2018. Other Issues Engineer and Staff continue to monitor change orders to construction contract. Page 148 of 173 Southwest Bypass Project (RM 2243 to IH 35) Project No. 1CA Project No. BK February 2018 Project Description Develop PS&E for Southwest Bypass from Leander Road (RM 2243) to IH 35 in the ultimate configuration for construction of approximately 1.5 miles of interim 2-lane roadway from Leander Road (RM 2243) to its intersection with the existing Inner Loop underpass at IH 35. Purpose To extend an interim portion of the SH 29 Bypass, filling in between Leander Road (RM 2243) to IH 35 Southbound Frontage Road. Project Manager Williamson County City Contact: Ed Polasek, AICP Engineer HDR, Inc. Element Status / Issues Williamson County Project Status (from WilCo’s status report) Southwest Bypass Driveways – The GEC has received the pay estimate from the Contractor and will prepare the balancing Change Order. (Southwest Bypass (RM 2243 to IH 35) Phase 1 – WPAP for phase 1 approved. On site tasks: Phase 1 Clearing complete, Pilot bores complete for bridge columns, fill started between the frontage road and the Rail, also West of RR. Drainage improvements underway, spread footing excavation started 11-21-17. 2 Spread footings remain to be poured, work started on retaining walls and abutment East of GTRR. Southwest Bypass (RM 2243 to IH 35) Phase 2 – County let preliminary construction project for phase 2 which includes the construction of ramps into and out of the Quarry, complete. Surveying and staking of phase 2 ongoing. Rights of Way Complete for the parcels east of the Texas Crushed Stone properties. Other Issues City and WilCo coordinating the design and funding details of the Project. Page 149 of 173 Southwest Bypass (Leander Rd. to Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension) Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension (SW Bypass to DB Wood Rd.) Project No. 1DI OTP Project No. AD & AZ1 February 2018 Project Description Construction of Southwest Bypass from Leander Road (RM 2243) to Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension and Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension from Southwest Bypass to DB Wood Road. Remaining Project Schedule Notice to Proceed Issued Completion of Construction Late-Spring 2018 Purpose To complete a connection from Leander Road (RM 2243) to University Ave. (SH 29) Project Manager Joel Weaver (Construction) Engineer HDR, Inc. Element Status / Issues Design Complete Surveying Complete Environmental Complete Rights of Way ROW/PUA acquired. Utility Relocations Complete or part of Construction Construction Construction is approximately 90% complete project wide. South San Gabriel bridge is 95% complete. Second bridge south of the Gabriel, beam set, with panel placement and deck pour begins 1-25-18. Base course installed along with first course Asphalt on the entire project excluding the area between the bridges. Other Issues Page 150 of 173 2015 Road Bond Program Citywide Sidewalk Improvements Project 2015 Sidewalk Master Plan Project No. None TIP No. None February 2018 Project Description The proposed project encompasses sidewalk improvements at various locations within the City of Georgetown. Improvements include curb ramps, crosswalks, pedestrian-actuated signal infrastructure (“ped heads”), and sidewalk extensions/reconstructions. Purpose To provide ADA/TDLR compliant sidewalks and ramps identified in the 2015 Sidewalk Master Plan. Project Managers Joel Weaver Engineer Steger Bizzell Element Status / Issues Design Complete. Environmental/ Archeological Aug-Oct 2016 Rights of Way June 2016 – Survey completed Utility Relocations TBD Construction Construction of initial work substantially complete. New work added to the contract 75% complete. Other Issues Page 151 of 173 Transportation Services Operations CIP Maintenance February 2018 Project Description 2017 CIP Maintenance of roadways including, Chip seal, Cutler Overlays, Fog seal applications, Curb and gutter and Engineering design of future rehabilitation projects. Purpose To provide protection and maintain an overall pavement condition index of 85%. Project Manager Mark Miller Engineer/Engineers KPA, LP Task Status / Issues Pavement Maintenance study and review Part one of presentation 4/14/17. CIP Streets engineering KPA working on Curb and gutter design, Cutler, limited in-house chip seals and point repairs. CIP Drainage engineering Currently working with Steger and Bizzell on task order for the following Drainage study at 18th and Hutto is complete. Construction for 20th and College, WPAP is approved. Bid opening held 1/10/2018. GTAB will consider on 2/9/2018 Design for 2nd and Rock Street detention pond upgrade. Working on WPAP modification for DOD and Design. Serenada drainage design is complete. Bid Opening held 1/10/2018. GTAB will consider on 2/9/2018. Curb and Gutter 2017 Curb and Gutter Replacement Project – KPA Letter of Recommendation for Choice Builders has been received. GTAB approved on 1/12/18. City Council approved on 1/23/2018 Page 152 of 173 2017 CDBG Scenic Drive Sidewalk (6th to 10th and 6th from Scenic to MLK) Project No. 9AY TIP No. None February 2018 Project Description Design and preparation of final plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) and construction administration for sidewalk improvements along Scenic Dr. from 10th St. to 6th st. This includes sidewalk along 6th from Scenic to MLK Purpose To provide ADA/TDLR compliant sidewalks and increase mobility along Scenic and 6th St. Project Managers Michael Hallmark, Chris Pousson Engineer KPA Element Status / Issues Design 100% Complete. Environmental/ Archeological N/A Rights of Way 2 sidewalk easements have been obtained Utility Relocations Relocate 1 secondary power pole is complete. 1 fire hydrant relocation will be completed in house as project starts. Bid Phase Bids have been received. KPA LOR received for Patin Construction. GTAB approved on 11/10/17. Goes to Council for consideration on 11/28/17 Construction Contract Awarded to Patin Construction. NTP issued for 2/1/2018. Other Issues Page 153 of 173 Citywide Sidewalk Improvements Project Old Town Northeast Sidewalks Project No. 1EF TIP No. None February 2018 Project Description The proposed project consists of the rehabilitation and installation of pedestrian facilities along several streets in northeast “Old Town”. Various methods of rehabilitating existing non-compliant sidewalks will be considered. This project requires coordination with TCEQ and TDLR and all proposed pedestrian elements will be ADA compliant with the Texas Accessibility Standards (TAS). Purpose To provide ADA/TDLR compliant sidewalks and ramps identified in the 2015 Sidewalk Master Plan. Project Managers Nat Waggoner, AICP, PMP®, Chris Pousson Engineer Steger Bizzell Element Status / Issues Design TO awarded by Council on 7/25/17. Surveying is complete. Preliminary alignment complete, adjustment and design continues. Environmental/ Archeological TBD Rights of Way TBD Utility Relocations TBD Construction Other Issues Page 154 of 173 January 2018 Cover Sheet Airport Road: Engineering design 100% +: addressing storm water/water quality, performing environmental investigations for clearances. Row docs ready with ROW procurement underway. WPAP approved. Awaiting final 2 parcels to begin letting process. FM 1460 ROW & Utility Relocations: All water/wastewater utility relocates have been completed and are in service Three Utility companies have submitted invoices for reimbursement – Atmos Energy, ONCOR and Seminole Pipeline Northwest Boulevard: Engineering underway: 60% plans submitted for review, received the fully executed AFA 10-20-17 plans submitted to TxDOT for review. Engineering completion scheduled 1-18, Environmental Clearance 2-18/ NEPA Clearance 3-18 Ready to Let 3-18. Rabbit Hill Road Improvements: Task Order awarded by Council August 9, 2016. CP&Y surveying and identifying utility conflicts along route with Final Design Plans for review early fall of 2017. ROW to be procured late 2017 early 2018 Rivery Boulevard - TIA Improvements: Engineering 100% complete. Slight modification is being made to length of added lane to fit with existing features. Modifications are also being made to Williams’s dr turn lane to eliminate the need for ROW at this location. TCEQ written WPAP approval is complete for Hintz, Williams and Wolf Ranch Pkwy turn lanes. Advertising to begin on December 31st 2017. Rivery Boulevard Extension: Plans at 100%. WPAP approved. Demolition contract for structures in the ROW to be bid 1-25-18. Project letting process begins first quarter 2018. Offers have been made on 22 parcels. Closed on 20 parcels. Environmental assessment complete on 11 parcels. Condemnation proceedings have been requested on 2 parcels. Aggressive efforts continue to close all outstanding parcels in FY 2017. Page 155 of 173 January 2018 Cover Sheet Austin Avenue Bridges Project - N & S San Gabriel Rivers: Under TxDOT environmental review. Flood Study: Study ongoing. Preliminary flood study results are complete. Mitigation efforts are current summer 2017. Final report due end of 2017. Projects will be proposed as part of the 2019 budget process. FM 971 - Realignment at Austin Avenue: Engineer’s plans submitted to City for the 60% design, received the fully executed AFA 10-20-17 plans will now be submitted to TxDOT for review. Scheduled engineering completion early 2018. FM 1460: Construction is on-going; administered by TxDOT. Utility relocation complete. Expected completion late 2018. I 35 SB FR Sidewalk Improvements Project (University Ave to Leander Rd): Open for Public use, Need final paperwork. 12-04-2017 Punch list complete. Southwest Bypass (RM 2243 to IH 35) Phase 1: Clearing complete, Pilot bores complete for bridge columns, fill started between the frontage road and the Rail, also West of RR. Drainage improvements underway, spread footing excavation starts 11-21-17. 2 Spread footings poured with 2 more set first of January. Southwest Bypass (RM 2243 to IH 35) Phase 2: County let preliminary construction project for phase 2 which includes the construction of ramps into and out of the Quarry, complete. Surveying and staking of phase 2 ongoing. Southwest Bypass (Leander Rd. to Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension)/Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension (SW Bypass to DB Wood Rd.) Construction is approximately 90% complete project wide. South San Gabriel Bridge is 95% complete. Second bridge south of the Gabriel, beam set, with panel placement and deck complete. Base course installed along with first course Asphalt on the entire project excluding the area between the bridges. 2015 Road Bond Program, Citywide Sidewalk Improvements Project Construction started May 1, 2017. Construction of initial work substantially complete. New work added to the contract will be constructed after 1-1-18 Transportation Services Operations CIP Maintenance Letter of Recommendation has been received for Choice Builders, GTAB will consider awarding project on 1/12/18. Currently working with Steger and Bizzell on task order for the following: o Drainage study at 18th and Hutto is complete. o Construction administration for 20th and Hogg, WPAP is approved. Advertising has begun, bid opening scheduled for 1/10/2018 o Design for 2nd and Rock Street detention pond upgrade. Working on WPAP modification for TCEQ. o Serenada drainage design is complete. Advertising has begun, bid opening scheduled for 1/10/2018 Page 156 of 173 2017 CDBG Scenic Drive Sidewalk Contract Awarded to Patin Construction. NTP to be issued. Pre-construction meeting was held on 12-21-17 Old Town “Northeast” Sidewalk TO awarded by Council on 7/25/17. Surveying is complete. Preliminary alignment complete, adjustment and design continues Page 157 of 173 Austin Avenue Bridges Project (North and South San Gabriel Bridges) Project No. TBD TIP Project No. N/A January 2018 Updated Project Description Develop 30% plans for improvements along Austin Ave. between 3rd Street and Morrow Street. The project involves several phases and requires participation and support from various stakeholders and interested citizens, community businesses, professional consultants, State and regional transportation partners City Staff and Council. Schedule Phase Activity Completion 1 Public involvement and alternative analyses, evaluating alternatives for feasibility and costs, etc. Early 2017 2 Develop geometric layouts and preliminary construction estimates for primary alternatives Early 2017 3 Review of primary alternative by Council TBD 4 Develop schematic and 30% plans TBD Proj. Mgrs Ed Polasek, AICP Engineer Aguirre & Fields, LP Element Status/Issues Public Involvement 3rd Public Meeting held 5/11, 4-7pm at the GTAC - 510 W. 9th St., Georgetown, TX 78626. Design 8 alternatives with 4 derivatives, working to narrow to 3-5 prudent and feasible options. Surveying Complete. Environmental Team completing Historic Resources Survey Report, next step is 106 Consultation. Under TxDOT environmental review. Rights of Way TBD Utility Relocations TBD Construction Estimates for 8 alternatives provided as part of public meeting #3. Page 158 of 173 Flood Study January 2018 Project Description Updated Flood Study for all the City’s major drainage basis – Pecan Branch, Mankins Branch, Smith Branch, Berry Creek, and all three forks of the San Gabriel River – being completed in partnership with the Texas Water Development Board through a 50% matching grant. Purpose To identify the current and future developed 100 year floodplain (1% change storm event) and to recommend possible flood mitigation measures. Project Managers Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Director Engineer Doucet & Associates (formerly Chan & Partners) Element Status / Issues Design Study ongoing. Preliminary flood study results are complete. Mitigation efforts are current summer 2017. Final report due end of 2017. Environmental/ Archeological N/A Rights of Way N/A Utility Relocations N/A Construction N/A Other Issues N/A Page 159 of 173 FM 971 at Austin Avenue Realignment Intersection Improvements Project No. 1BZ TIP No. AG January 2018 Project Description Design and preparation of final plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for the widening and realignment of FM 971 at Austin Avenue, eastward to Gann Street. Purpose To provide a new alignment consistent with the alignment of the proposed Northwest Boulevard Bridge over IH 35; to allow a feasible, alternate route from the west side of I 35 to Austin Avenue, to Georgetown High School, to San Gabriel Park and a more direct route to SH 130. Project Managers Joel Weaver Engineer Klotz Associates, Inc. Element Status / Issues Design Engineer’s plans submitted to City for the 60% design, received the fully executed AFA 10-20-17 plans submitted to TxDOT for review. Scheduled engineering completion early 2018 Environmental/ Archeological TBD Rights of Way Pursuing two remaining parcels on NE end of project. Utility Relocations TBD Construction Estimated late fiscal year 18-19 Other Issues AFA with TxDOT complete. Page 160 of 173 FM 1460 Quail Valley Drive to University Drive Project No. 5RB TIP No. BO & CD January 2018 Unchanged Project Description Design and preparation of plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for the widening and reconstruction of FM 1460. Project will include review and update to existing Schematic, Right-of-Way Map and Environmental Document and completion of the PS&E for the remaining existing roadway. Purpose To keep the currently approved environmental documents active; purchase ROW, effect utility relocations/clearance and to provide on-the-shelf PS&E for TxDOT letting not later than August 2013, pending available construction funding. Project Managers TxDOT Engineer Brown and Gay Engineers, Inc. Element Status / Issues Design Complete Environmental/ Archeological Complete Rights of Way Complete Utility Relocations Complete Construction Construction is on-going; administered by TxDOT. Expected completion by the end of 2018. Other Issues Engineer and Staff continue to monitor change orders to construction contract. Page 161 of 173 I 35 SB FR Sidewalk Improvements Project (University Avenue to Leander Rd) Project No. None TIP No. None January 2018 Project Description Design and preparation of final plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) and construction administration for sidewalk improvements along I 35 from University Ave. to Leander Rd. Purpose To provide ADA/TDLR compliant sidewalks along the I 35 SB FR. Project Managers Joel Weaver Engineer KCI Element Status / Issues Design Council approved in March. Environmental/ Archeological Rights of Way Complete. Multiple Use Agreement received from TxDOT. Utility Relocations None anticipated. Construction Open for Public use, Need final paperwork. 12-04-2017 Punch list complete. Other Issues Final alignment in yellow. Page 162 of 173 Southwest Bypass Project (RM 2243 to IH 35) Project No. 1CA Project No. BK January 2018 Project Description Develop PS&E for Southwest Bypass from Leander Road (RM 2243) to IH 35 in the ultimate configuration for construction of approximately 1.5 miles of interim 2-lane roadway from Leander Road (RM 2243) to its intersection with the existing Inner Loop underpass at IH 35. Purpose To extend an interim portion of the SH 29 Bypass, filling in between Leander Road (RM 2243) to IH 35 Southbound Frontage Road. Project Manager Williamson County City Contact: Ed Polasek, AICP Engineer HDR, Inc. Element Status / Issues Williamson County Project Status (from WilCo’s status report) Southwest Bypass Driveways – The GEC has received the pay estimate from the Contractor and will prepare the balancing Change Order. (Southwest Bypass (RM 2243 to IH 35) Phase 1 – WPAP for phase 1 approved. On site tasks: Phase 1 Clearing complete, Pilot bores complete for bridge columns, fill started between the frontage road and the Rail, also West of RR. Drainage improvements underway, spread footing excavation starts 11-21-17. 2 Spread footings poured with 2 more set first of January. Southwest Bypass (RM 2243 to IH 35) Phase 2 – County let preliminary construction project for phase 2 which includes the construction of ramps into and out of the Quarry, complete. Surveying and staking of phase 2 ongoing. Rights of Way Complete for the parcels east of the Texas Crushed Stone properties. Other Issues City and WilCo coordinating the design and funding details of the Project. Page 163 of 173 Southwest Bypass (Leander Rd. to Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension) Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension (SW Bypass to DB Wood Rd.) Project No. 1DI OTP Project No. AD & AZ1 January 2018 Project Description Construction of Southwest Bypass from Leander Road (RM 2243) to Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension and Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension from Southwest Bypass to DB Wood Road. Remaining Project Schedule Notice to Proceed Issued Completion of Construction Late-Spring 2018 Purpose To complete a connection from Leander Road (RM 2243) to University Ave. (SH 29) Project Manager Joel Weaver (Construction) Engineer HDR, Inc. Element Status / Issues Design Complete Surveying Complete Environmental Complete Rights of Way ROW/PUA acquired. Utility Relocations Complete or part of Construction Construction Construction is approximately 90% complete project wide. South San Gabriel bridge is 95% complete. Second bridge south of the Gabriel, beam set, with panel placement and deck complete. Base course installed along with first course Asphalt on the entire project excluding the area between the bridges. Other Issues Page 164 of 173 2015 Road Bond Program Citywide Sidewalk Improvements Project 2015 Sidewalk Master Plan Project No. None TIP No. None January 2018 Project Description The proposed project encompasses sidewalk improvements at various locations within the City of Georgetown. Improvements include curb ramps, crosswalks, pedestrian-actuated signal infrastructure (“ped heads”), and sidewalk extensions/reconstructions. Purpose To provide ADA/TDLR compliant sidewalks and ramps identified in the 2015 Sidewalk Master Plan. Project Managers Joel Weaver Engineer Steger Bizzell Element Status / Issues Design Complete. Environmental/ Archeological Aug-Oct 2016 Rights of Way June 2016 – Survey completed Utility Relocations TBD Construction Construction of initial work substantially complete. New work added to the contract will be constructed after 1-1-18 Other Issues Page 165 of 173 Transportation Services Operations CIP Maintenance January 2018 Project Description 2017 CIP Maintenance of roadways including, Chip seal, Cutler Overlays, Fog seal applications, Curb and gutter and Engineering design of future rehabilitation projects. Purpose To provide protection and maintain an overall pavement condition index of 85%. Project Manager Mark Miller Engineer/Engineers KPA, LP Task Status / Issues Pavement Maintenance study and review Part one of presentation 4/14/17. CIP Streets engineering KPA working on Curb and gutter design, Cutler, limited in-house chip seals and point repairs. CIP Drainage engineering Currently working with Steger and Bizzell on task order for the following Drainage study at 18th and Hutto is complete. Construction for 20th and Hogg, WPAP is approved. Advertising has begun, Bid opening scheduled for 1/10/2018 Design for 2nd and Rock Street detention pond upgrade. Working on WPAP modification for DOD and Design. Serenada drainage design is complete. Advertising has begun, Bid Opening scheduled for 1/10/2018 Curb and Gutter Notice to proceed given in late October. Construction ongoing. Streets southwest of Williams Drive wrapping up in April. Crews moving to Streets north of 2243 this month. 2017 Curb and Gutter Replacement Project – Letter of Recommendation for Choice Builders has been received. GTAB will consider on 1/12/18. Page 166 of 173 2017 CDBG Scenic Drive Sidewalk (6th to 10th and 6th from Scenic to MLK) Project No. 9AY TIP No. None January 2018 Project Description Design and preparation of final plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) and construction administration for sidewalk improvements along Scenic Dr. from 10th St. to 6th st. This includes sidewalk along 6th from Scenic to MLK Purpose To provide ADA/TDLR compliant sidewalks and increase mobility along Scenic and 6th St. Project Managers Michael Hallmark, Chris Pousson Engineer KPA Element Status / Issues Design 100% Complete. Environmental/ Archeological N/A Rights of Way 2 sidewalk easements have been obtained Utility Relocations Relocate 1 secondary power pole is complete. 1 fire hydrant relocation will be completed in house as project starts. Bid Phase Bids have been received. KPA LOR received for Patin Construction. GTAB approved on 11/10/17. Goes to Council for consideration on 11/28/17 Construction Contract Awarded to Patin Construction. NTP to be issued. Pre-construction meeting was held on 12-21-17 Other Issues Page 167 of 173 Citywide Sidewalk Improvements Project Old Town Northeast Sidewalks Project No. 1EF TIP No. None January 2018 Project Description The proposed project consists of the rehabilitation and installation of pedestrian facilities along several streets in northeast “Old Town”. Various methods of rehabilitating existing non-compliant sidewalks will be considered. This project requires coordination with TCEQ and TDLR and all proposed pedestrian elements will be ADA compliant with the Texas Accessibility Standards (TAS). Purpose To provide ADA/TDLR compliant sidewalks and ramps identified in the 2015 Sidewalk Master Plan. Project Managers Nat Waggoner, AICP, PMP®, Chris Pousson Engineer Steger Bizzell Element Status / Issues Design TO awarded by Council on 7/25/17. Surveying is complete. Preliminary alignment complete, adjustment and design continues Environmental/ Archeological TBD Rights of Way TBD Utility Relocations TBD Construction Other Issues Page 168 of 173 Name Description Start Date (Council Approved)End Date $ Encumbered $ Expended Citigroup Grant for wastewater infrastructure for construction of datacenter. 12/12/2006 12/31/2018 $ 1,300,000 $ 1,300,000 DisperSol Grant for job creation related to expansion of manufacturing facilities.10/16/2014 2/15/2019 250,000$ $ 80,000 Grape Creek Grant for reimbursement of Qualified Expenditures for the lease/purchase and future site improvements at 101 E. 7th Street and 614 Main Street for the operation of a winery on the Downtown Square. 8/23/2011 3/1/2018 280,000$ 280,000$ Grape Creek GEDCO purchase of building. GCV currently under lease/purchase agreement with right to exercise purchase at end of PA for $447K.8/23/2011 3/1/2018 447,000$ 447,000$ Lone Star Circle of Care Grant for Qualified Expenditures for future site improvements at 205 East University Avenue, Georgetown, Texas. Loan Agreement and Promissory Note have been executed. Closed out in compliance with the terms of the agreement 11/30/17.6/28/2011 11/30/2017 387,000$ $ 387,000 Radiation Detection Corporation Grant for Qualified Expenditures and job creation related to the relocation of the corporate offices to Georgetown. 7/23/2013 12/31/2021 320,000$ 320,000$ Radix BioSolutions, Ltd. Provided grant to assist with the work and future plans of Radix BioSolutions at the TLCC. Radix paid back $47K on 3/15/15. Radix paid back $50K 3/10/16. Radix paid back $50K on 3/10/2017 .3/9/2010 3/31/2018 250,000$ $ 103,000 GEDCO - ACTIVE PERFORMANCE AGREEMENTS STATUS REPORT January 16, 2018 Over Page 169 of 173 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting February 13, 2018 SUBJECT: - At the time of po sting, no persons had signed up to address the City Council ITEM SUMMARY: FINANCIAL IMPACT: NA SUBMITTED BY: Page 170 of 173 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting February 13, 2018 SUBJECT: Sec. 551.071: Consul tati on w i th Attorney Advice from attorney abo ut pending or co ntemplated litigation and o ther matters on which the attorney has a duty to advise the City Council, including agenda items -Briefing related to PUCT Docket #45866 Sec. 551:074: Personnel Matters City Manager, City Attorney, City Secretary and Municipal Judge: Consideration of the appointment, employme nt, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal - Evaluation Process fo r Direct Reports of the City Co uncil - Tadd Phillips, Human Re so urces Director - City Attorney Evaluatio n - Update from the City Atto rney to the City Council ITEM SUMMARY: FINANCIAL IMPACT: NA SUBMITTED BY: Shelley Nowling, City Secretary ATTACHMENT S: Description Current Volume & Rate S heet 2014 Permit Volume & Rates Page 171 of 173 Page 172 of 173 Page 173 of 173