HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda CC 05.10.2016Notice of M eeting of the
Governing B ody of the
City of Georgetown, Texas
M ay 1 0, 2 0 1 6
The Ge orgetown City Council will meet on May 1 0, 2 016 at 6:00 PM at Council Chambers, 101 E. 7th
St., Geo rge to wn, Texas
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, least four (4 ) days prio r to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652
or City Hall at 113 East 8th Street for additional information; TTY users ro ute through Relay Texas at
711.
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
- We lco me and Meeting Procedures
- Pro clamation for National Prese rvation Month
- Pro clamation for Travel and Tourism Week
- Pro clamation for P olice Explore rs
Ci ty Co unci l Regi onal Board Re po r ts
Announcements
- Canvas Meeting & Swearing In Ceremony
- Sunset Mo vie Series
- Strategic P artnerships Community Funding
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
Page 1 of 252
held on Tuesday, April 26, 2016 -- She lley Nowling, City Secretary
C Consideration and possible action to approve the appoi ntment of Me l i nda Marl er to the
G eo r geto w n Vi l l age P ubl i c Impr ovement Di stri ct (G VPID) Advi sory Bo ard for a second
te rm -- Mayo r Dale Ross
D Consideration and possible action to approve a Resolution authori zi ng the Ci ty Manager to
o ve r hi re entry l evel ci vi l servi c e po si ti o ns when a promotional vacancy exists -- Tadd
Phillips, Human Resource Director
E F orw arded from the G eneral G o ve r nment and Fi nance Advi sory B o ard (G G AF):
Consideration and possible action to appro ve the purchase of response g ear from Muni ci pal
Eme rgency Servi ces (MES), which is a so le source for TECGEN brand garments, at a cost not
to exceed $71 ,000.00, for the remainder o f fiscal year 2015-2016 -- Jo hn Sullivan, Fire Chief
Le gislative Re gular Age nda
F P ubl i c Heari ng and Fi rst Readi ng of an Ordinance to Rezone approximately 278.21 acres of
the Isaac Donagan and Joseph Tho mpson Surveys, located at 2951 Hw y 2 9 West, from the
Re sidential Single-Family (RS) District to P lanned Unit Development (P UD) District with a base
zoning district of Residential Single-Family -- Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, P lanning Director (acti on
requi red)
G F orw arded from the G eneral G o ve r nment and Fi nance Advi sory B o ard (G G AF):
Consideration and possible action to approve a proposed plan to expend project savi ngs
reco gnized from the closeout of the P ubl i c Safety Operati ons & Trai ni ng Center project -
- Wayne Nero , P olice Chief
H Se c ond Readi ng of an Ordinance to Rezo ne approximately 178.83 ac r e s in the William Addison
Survey located at 1821 SE Inner Lo op from the Agriculture (AG) and Residential Single-Family
(RS) Districts to the P ublic Facility (PF) District known as Williamson County Georgetown
Anne x -- So fia Nelson, CNU-A, P lanning Director (acti on requi red)
I Se c ond Readi ng of an Ordinance to Rezo ne approximately 54.13 acres of the William Addison
Survey located at 2910 SE Inner Lo op from the Agriculture (AG) District to the P ublic Facility
(PF) District known as Williamson County North Campus-East -- So fia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning
Dire c to r (acti on requi red)
J Se c ond Readi ng of an Ordinance to Rezo ne approximately 63.09 acres of the William Addison
Survey located at 3151 SE Inner Lo op from the Agriculture (AG) District to the P ublic Facility
(PF) District known as Williamson County North Campus -- Sofia Nelso n, CNU-A, P lanning
Dire c to r (acti on requi red)
K Se c ond Readi ng of an Ordinance to Rezo ne 5 .240 acres in the Ephraim Evans Survey, located at
2 11 Westi nghouse Road and kno wn as Geo rgetown Mercedes Benz, from the Residential
Single-family (RS) District to the General Commercial (C-3) District -- So fia Nelson, CNU-A,
Planning Director (acti on requi r e d)
L Se c ond Readi ng of an Ordinance fo r the Vol untary Annexati on o f 11.1 7 acres in the John
Sutherland Survey and adjacent public right-o f-way, located at the interse ction o f Wi l l i ams
Dri ve and Ji m Hogg Road -- So fia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Dire c to r (acti on requi red)
M F orw arded from the G eorgetow n Economi c Devel opment Cor po r ati on (G EDCO):
Se c ond Readi ng of an Ordinance amendi ng the 2016 G eorgetow n Eco no mi c Devel opment
Co r po rati on (“G EDCO”) B udg e t for the maintenance of the Texas Li fe-Sci ences
Co l l abo rati on Center (TLCC) -- Leigh Wallace, Finance Directo r (ac ti on requi red)
N Se c ond Readi ng of an Ordinance amendi ng the 2016 Annual Budget due to an approved Capital
Impro vement Project for the additio n of a si dew al k at IH35 Southbo und F rontage Road that
had not been finalized when the budge t was ado pted, and repealing all o rdinances or parts of
o rdinances in conflict therewith -- Leigh Wallace, Finance Directo r (ac ti on requi red)
O F orw arded from the G eneral G o ve r nment and Fi nance Advi sory B o ard (G G AF):
Se c ond Readi ng of an Ordinance fo rmally ado pti ng the Fi scal and B udg etary Pol i cy to be
use d in preparing the fiscal year 20 17 annual budget and to guide financial operations -- Leigh
Wallace, Finance Director (acti o n requi red)
Page 2 of 252
P Se c ond Readi ng of an Ordinance amendi ng the 2016 Annual Budget due to an approved
allocation o f General Fund Balanc e to the Co unci l Di screti onary Fund as well as an allocation
o f Co uncil Discretionary Funds that had no t been finalized when the budget was adopted, and
repealing all o rdinances or parts of o rdinances in conflict therewith -- Leigh Wallace, Finance
Dire c to r (acti on requi red)
Proje ct Update s
Q Pro ject updates and status reports regarding current and future transportatio n and traffic project;
street, sidewalk, and other infrastructure projects; police, fire and othe r public safety projects;
eco nomic development projects; city facility projects;downtown proje c ts including parking
enhancements,city lease agreements, and possible direction to city staff -- David Morgan, 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
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.
R - 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.
S Se c . 55 1.0 71 : Consul tati on wi th Atto rney
- Advice fro m attorney about pending or co ntemplated litigation and o ther matters on which the
attorney has a duty to advise the City Co uncil, including agenda item
- Sne ed Industrial Agreement
- PUC Docket #45596 - PEC v. GUS
- PUC Docket #45866 - LCRA TSC CNN Application
Se c . 55 1.0 72 : Del i berati on Regardi ng Real Property
- Discussion of the appraised values of real pro perty regarding the Rive ry Blvd. Extension Project
Se c . 55 1.0 74 : Personnel Matter 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
- City Secretary Evaluation
- Municipal Court Judge Evaluatio n
Se c . 55 1.0 87 : Del i berati on Regardi ng Eco nomi c Devel opment Ne go ti ati ons
- Tamiro Plaza Phase 2
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 _________________, 2016, at
__________, and remained so p o s ted for at leas t 72 c o ntinuo us ho urs p receding the
Page 3 of 252
s cheduled time of s aid meeting.
__________________________________
Shelley No wling, City S ecretary
Page 4 of 252
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Regula r Meeting
May 10, 2016
SUBJECT:
Cal l to Order
Invocati on
Pl edge of Al l e gi anc e
Comments fro m the Mayo r
- Welcome and Meeting Pro cedures
- P roclamation fo r Natio nal P reservation Month
- P roclamation fo r Travel and Tourism Week
- P roclamation fo r P olice Explorers
Ci ty Counci l Re gi o nal Bo ard Reports
Announcements
- Canvas Meeting & Swearing In Ceremony
- Sunset Movie Serie s
- Strategic Partne rships Community Funding
Acti on from Executi ve Sessi on
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
NA
SUBMITTED BY:
Page 5 of 252
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Regula r Meeting
May 10, 2016
SUBJECT:
Consideration and possible action to approve the mi nutes o f the Workshop and Re gular Meeting held on Tuesday, April
26, 2016 -- She lle y Nowling, City Secretary
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
NA
SUBMITTED BY:
Shelley Nowling, City Secretary
ATTACHMENT S:
Description
Works hop Meeting Minutes 4.26.2016
Regular Meeting Minutes 4.26.2016
Page 6 of 252
Minutes of a Meeting of the
Governing Body of the
City of Georgetown, Texas
Tuesday, April 26, 2016
The Georgetown City Council will meet on Tuesday, April 26, 2016 at 3:00 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 four (4) 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 3:04 PM. All Councilmembers were in attendance with the exception of
Tommy Gonzalez, District 7, who arrived at 4:28 PM.
Policy Development/Review Workshop – Call to order at 3:04 PM
A. Presentation, Discussion and Possible Direction on the Schematic Design for San Gabriel Park -- Kimberly
Garrett, Parks and Recreation Director, Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager, and Barbara Austin, RVi
Kimberly Garrett, the City’s Director of Parks and Recreation, began the presentation. She spoke on the
schematic design for Stages 1 and 2 of the San Gabriel Park Improvement Project. Garrett explained that
the presentation would include design, process, phasing and costs and the long range schedule.
Barbara Austin, of RVi showed that the process includes:
2008 Parks Master Plan
Site Analysis and Geologic Study
Program with Public Input Meetings
Master Plan – City Council & Parks Boards Presentations in June 2015
Schematic Design Phase 1 & 2 – October 2015 Contract, February 2016 Surveys
Parks Board, April 14, 2016
City Council – This Day
Austin spoke on the Projected Phases of the Master Plan and the proposed schedule for the process of
Phase 1 through completion. Austin explained that RVI will be back in front of Council again in December of
this year to award a contract for the construction of Phase 1. Construction would start right after the first of
the year and see completion in 2017. Austin showed an image of the Master Plan and its projected phases
and an image of the Site Analysis.
Austin spoke on the uniqueness of the two rivers and the City wide overall trail system in the park. She
spoke on the wide variety of uses in the park. She spoke on the unique factor of the springs in the park.
Austin pointed out that the blue line in the image represented the 100 year flood plain, which proposes some
restrictions when planning. Austin explained that the entire plan was to make things more organized without
increasing impervious cover.
Nathan Quiring from Clayton and Little Architects spoke. He provided portraits and spoke on materials and
stone to be used in the proposed project. He spoke on the importance of keeping with the natural elements
of the area and how the look should be appropriate, facilitate and be durable, long lasting and provide low
maintenance. Quiring provided images of the proposed pavilions, restrooms and trails. He spoke on the
springs and showed before and after pictures of the project. Quiring then explained the BBQ Pavilion, Plaza
and Event Lawn. He spoke on rain and sun protection which has been figured into the structures and also
spoke on lighting and views adjacent to trees and open space.
Chris Lalich with RVi spoke next on the overall layout of the park. He said it is important to remember that
people have real connection to their parks. Lalich said they will want to preserve the elements that mean
something to people but provide better organization to the park. Lalich showed the schematic design map
with the trail system and the internal trail system. He showed parking and pavilion proposals and how things
have been better put together to better facilitate. He explained the importance of taking care of the springs
and trees and that there will be no more tree loss. Lalich showed the arena and what it will look like in the
future. He said that structures have been put in place to slow traffic as it enters the park. Lalich explained
Page 7 of 252
that serious runners and walkers will have a great opportunity. He showed before and after images of the
parking area and explained the improvements necessary to improve ADA access. Areas for stretching and
bicycle parking have also been considered. Lalich described the play-scape location and said that it was
focused on adventure and provided an interpretive element, with lots of climbing and rope swinging. Lalich
showed before and after pictures of the springs and showed the bluffs west of the springs. He explained
how pavilions had been oriented in better directions, providing great gathering spots that are more nature
oriented.
Hesser asked if there will be power for fireworks. Lalich said that power will be put on each of the pavilions
instead.
Lalich spoke on a half-court basketball court with the possibility of more in the future. He then spoke
regarding the existing community center. He said since a road runs right through this area, they will need to
remove the current impervious cover and get the area corrected which will help the unhealthy trees currently
being affected. Lalich explained that event space could be placed here. In the future the City could have
much larger events here. It is a center piece for the entire park. Lalich said that, in the future, a splash pad
could be placed here and that the skate park works better closer to the event center or festivals. Lalich then
explained phasing and reviewed phase one. He explained restoration for Phase 1 and said that Phase 2 is
in the balance.
Kimberly Garrett explained the long range schedule for the park improvements. She provided a detailed
estimate of costs for each phase and provided a chart showing the issued debt and tax year impact and its
relationship to the design and construction schedule. Garret said the areas for stage 3 and stage 4 would
still need to be surveyed.
Fought asked when Phase 1 will start. Garrett explained that the City is already in Phase 1 and design
development is starting soon. Fought asked what the original plan was. Garrett said there was no exact
plan in 2008 just the funding discussion. Morgan said this is what was discussed last summer. He said
Phase 1 and Phase 2 have been discussed by the Council and based on Council’s previous feedback,
Phase 3 and Phase 4 schedules are being developed.
Fought asked if there is an advantage to accelerating or stretching it out. Morgan said the City has the
funding and has already established Phase 1, because the timing regarding the show barn. He said the
other phases could be looked at again. Morgan would recommend accelerating Phase 2 and then to go
slow with Phase 3 and 4. He agreed that the impact to park users is a big consideration and that the County
needs to have time to make decisions also.
Gipson asked about Phase 4. He asked if a study has been conducted regarding revenue generating
pieces to the development, such as ball parks. Gipson said it might be smart to move forward with portions
of the project that could be revenue generating.
Ross said it would be wise to look at financial impacts. He said he is not in favor of shutting down the park
and asked if it is reasonable to get everything done by 2020 or 2021. Morgan said staff would accelerate a
master plan and bring it to Council. Morgan said there is a financial impact of Phase 4 with income from ball
fields. Morgan said the City would need to be careful with Garey Park happening at the same time.
Brainard asked how many trees would be lost. The architect confirmed that no trees will be lost. Garrett
said trees will actually be added. Brainard said some of the restrooms need to be destroyed. Garrett
agreed and said only the newest restrooms would remain. Brainard asked if the new pavilions would have
dirt floors. Garret said the floors would be hard surfaced. Brainard said the City needs a full basketball
court. Brainard asked about the rodeo arena. Garrett said the lease will be up in 2017 and they will be
celebrating their 75th year anniversary event in 2018. Garrett said the show barn lease is up 2072 and the
City is working with County on this.
Jonrowe said the five year plan is a good one, as long as there is not too much construction happening at
any one time.
Mayor Ross asked Garret if any Parks and Recreation Advisory Board members were present. Garrett
introduced Mr. Glenn Holzer. Ross thanked Holzer for his time and talent.
Morgan spoke on the fireworks and said staff would specifically look at this for this summer.
Hesser agreed that more basketball courts are needed and also agreed with Gipson on the revenue stream.
B. Garey Park Design Development presentation and update - - Kimberly Garrett, Parks and Recreation
Director, Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager, and Brian Binkowski, Halff Associates
Page 8 of 252
Kimberly Garrett, the City’s Director of Parks and Recreation, began the presentation. She explained how
the Gary Park project had a multitude of people working on it, including Mr. Garey, his son Glen, Parks and
Recreation staff, Parks and Recreation Advisory Board members, Halff Associates, the architects, Populous
for the equestrian and Jim Rogers, the Parks Development Consultant.
Garrett gave an update on the Park Development:
Funding Plan
Development Schedule
Elements of Park Development
Garrett explained the Funding Plan:
City Debt Issued from 2008 Referendum
Spring 2016 - $3 M – Impacts 2017 fiscal year tax rate
Spring 2017 – Amortize bond to impact tax rate over two fiscal years, impacting 2018 and 2019
City funding for construction $8.5 M
Mr. Jack Garey contribution for construction $5 M
Brian Binkowski of Halff Associates spoke on the Garey Park Design Project.
Binkowski showed the development schedule:
March 2016 Design Development presented to the Parks & Recreation Advisory Board
April 2016 Design Development presented to the City Council
July 2016 Complete Construction Documents, Regulatory Permitting, Solicit for Bids
September 2016 Construction Begins
Late 2017 Construction Complete – Park Opens
Binkowski showed an aerial view of active areas. The park entry, play area, dog ranch, trails, equine facility
and covered arena, with tie downs for horses, pavilions, splash pad, host house and maintenance house
were displayed. He explained that the existing Garey house will be the event venue. Binkowski said that
there will be three camping areas: retreat area rentals, group camping (scout troops or larger groups), and
primitive camping sites. The park will be 525 acres. Binkowski said they do not want to upset anything that
is original to the property. Binkowski showed a map of the event center and an image of the Forum
Amphitheater.
Jonrowe asked if this would be used by people who already own horses or could it allow a facilitator who
could provide lessons etc. to those who do own horses. She said she would like to provide the experience
for all.
Ross asked how many cars can park at the covered arenas. Binkowski answered approximately 180
parking spaces are available, with 10 parking spaces directly in front of the arena. He said that there will be
a lot of flexible space there. Ross compared the Rock Arena and said he would like to provide parking for
those type of large events. Binkowski said that special use permit areas would be considered on a case by
case, but there is plenty of parking available.
Binkowski explained an area that will be named “Heritage of Gold” in honor of Mr. Garey’s favorite horse.
This area provides trails down to the San Gabriel River and would be ideal for extreme zip line activities.
He said that the overall playground area is 2 acres and showed a view of the Garey Play Ranch area entry
and a view of the playground area. Binkowski said that the Heritage of Gold Pavilion will have interpretive
plaques with explanations of significant information about the ranch and its history.
Binkowski showed the event area and spoke on the conversion. He likes that it will have a more formal
feeling because of the intended use there. He said that the amphitheater will seat 600 comfortably and is
up on a hill, allowing for larger events. Hesser asked about overflow parking in this area for larger events.
Binkowski said there is plenty of overflow parking and from the house to the amphitheater is 500 feet.
He then showed an image of the existing 5,000 square foot house and spoke on the pool conversion to a
dance floor for wedding events. He said that the vehicular court will be converted to a parking lot.
Binkowski showed how the house will be used, including office space upstairs, a warming kitchen and many
amenities. He said it has been kept as an intimate space.
Jonrowe asked if these pavilions provide function. Binkowski said they are more aesthetic. He said the
architecture fits the look and feel of the Garey house.
Binkowski then showed the group camping area and explained that the pavilion would house a common
shower facility He showed a view of the cabins and gathering space and then showed the retreat cabin
Page 9 of 252
area. Nine cabins are currently programmed, while more could be added at another time. These cabins
accommodate 4 occupants per cabin and are revenue generating.
Binkowski displayed the Opinion of Construction Costs:
Equestrian Facilities
Garey Play Ranch
Garey Dog Ranch
Open Play Area
Event Area/Meadow/Day-use
Retreat Camping
Group Camping
Primitive Camping
Park Entry/Gate House
Maintenance Facility/Host House
Civil Infrastructure (roads, parking, drainage, utilities)
Trails/Wayfinding
Contingency 10%
___________________________________________
Total Design Development (Today’s Dollars): $13.5 M
Jonrowe thanked everyone for the presentation and asked about the pedestrian trails and their level of
difficulty. The architect answered that the pedestrian trails are not difficult and added that there are 5 miles
of equestrian trails. He added that the park has hiking trails but they are not meant to be bike trails.
Binkowski then spoke on the topographic changes. Jonrowe asked if camping options would be expanded
as in the primitive parking and if there were plans for water hook ups. Binkowski said there are no plans for
RV hook ups and the area is intended for day use only.
Gipson asked about the entry and if it is safe. Binkowski said there was a traffic impact analysis conducted
and there will be signal modifications later on – probably 2018. He said that turn lanes were not determined
to be necessary. He said that the discussed signalized intersections are coming soon at nearby
intersections. Gipson asked about the amphitheater and if it would be able to handle local school
graduations, etc. Gipson said there is a big need for this and asked if GISD had been brought into the
conversations. Garrett said they have not heard of this, but she could look into it. Gipson said this could be
another revenue source. Morgan said he would speak to GISD regarding this.
Ross asked about the budgeted amount. Garrett said that $8.5M would come from 2008 bonds and Mr.
Garey would be providing the other $5M.
Eby asked if river access would be provided. The architect said a loop trail is there but there is not river
access currently. He said a future phase could include this and added that the active flow there is extreme.
Eby asked how many Parks and Recreation employees would be stationed here. Garrett said that it was
determined to need 7 employees at the gate house.
Brainard said he is also concerned about the road and safety. He said he would strongly encourage a turn
lane into Garey Park. Brainard asked how many trees will be removed. Binkowski said no heritage trees
are affected by the development.
C. Review of the City’s Fiscal & Budgetary Policy and discussion of recommended changes for FY2017 --
Leigh Wallace, Finance Director
Leigh Wallace, the City’s Finance Director, began the presentation. Provided the annual update and
explained that this will be used to guide the budget process.
Wallace showed the administrative changes:
Order policies according to a logical flow
Simplify language
Updates to match internal procedures
Convert Chief Financial Officer Language to Finance Director
Update fiscal year or calendar year
Correct grammar and spelling
Add table of contents and page numbers
Wallace showed Substantive Changes with included:
Update Employee Compensation Program
Update Reserves for Self-Insurance Fund
Establish Economic Uncertainty Reserve in the General Fund
Page 10 of 252
Enhance requirement for quarterly financial reporting
Add reporting of expenditures
Add list of unfunded liabilities
Remove reporting of minor surplus property sales
Separate reporting of internal audits
Jonrowe asked about the timing of internal audits. Wallace said she would look into this and report back to
Council.
D. Review of the City’s Investment Policy and discussion of recommended changes for FY2017 -- Leigh
Wallace, Finance Director
Leigh Wallace, the City’s Finance Director, began the presentation.
Wallace spoke on the investment policies recommended by Investment Advisors Valley View:
Update training component of investment officers required by state law
Change Chief Financial Officer to Finance Director
Add Bonwick Capital as approved dealer/broker
Wallace provide the Timeline:
Recommended by GGAF to Council – March 30
Preliminary adoption by Council to guide budget process – April 26
Staff updates during budget process – summer 2016
Council formally adopts policies with approved budge September 13
Wallace asked for Council’s direction. Brainard said this is the biggest improvement he has ever seen in all
of his years in the City.
Jonrowe asked what would constitute a surplus property sale. Wallace said it would be pieces of equipment,
vehicles etc.
E. Presentation regarding financial trends relating to property tax, sales tax, development fees, and return on
investment in preparation for the kick-off of the FY2017 Budget Process -- David Morgan, City Manager,
Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager, Leigh Wallace, Finance Director and Paul Diaz, Budget Manager
Paul Diaz, the City’s Budget Manager, began the presentation. He spoke on the Economic Outlooks and
Budget Initiatives. Diaz explained that there are 4 major revenue sources:
Property Tax
Sales Tax
Return on Investment
Fees for Service
Diaz then showed a chart of the assed value of property tax. He explained that WCAD is projecting large
growth and that the growth has been continuing. Diaz provided a pie chart of the property tax and assess
value. He showed that 70% is coming from residential and explained the growth in average home values.
He then showed the Preliminary Values from WCAD and explained how TIRZ values will need to be
determined.
Brainard asked if there is a limit on the portion of property tax growth the City can capture. Diaz said there
is an 8% cap. Diaz then explained effective rate and roll back rate and the proposed tax rate. Brainard
asked if there was a comparison to new construction and residential. Diaz said when coming up with figures
they remove the TIRZ numbers and new construction numbers, so that they can compare apples to apples
each year. Brainard asked what portion of the 8% that the City would consume this year relative to the
amount last year. Diaz said this would be considered the “roll back” rate. Diaz said he does not have an
exact figure but knows that it is below the roll back rate. Brainard asked what portion would be new
property. Diaz said he would estimate $200 to $300 million, some in the TIRZ, but he will budget this out
and provide a full understanding to Council.
Diaz went on to describe sales tax next. He spoke on the process;
Confidential Report from the State
Put sales tax into different sectors and subsectors
Use multiple trend forecasting techniques to build a “consensus in the data”
Monitor all Texas cities, Top Twenty cities, and regions to see macro trends
Georgetown Sales Tax:
Consistency in our “core” sectors
Page 11 of 252
Retail, Food and Information
Recurring in nature
Hedge against volatility in smaller sectors
One time in nature
Diaz displayed a chart on Return on Investment:
Represents about 20% of revenues in the General Fund
Water, Wastewater, Stormwater, Irrigation & Electric
Two components
3% Franchise fee
7% ROI
Allows a capture both base and volume ROI
Increase of 3-5% expected with the tie to growth patterns
Diaz went on to speak on Fees for Service & Other Revenue and Capital Projects
David Morgan, the City Manage, spoke on Key Budget Drivers and Initiatives. He gave a preview of topics
to come and explained the budget workshops.
Morgan explained the Budget Theme:
Response to Issues of growth
Implement Council goals
Continue with Key Initiatives
Morgan provided a growth chart and projected population for the next 5 years, based on historical growth
patterns and census information. He explained that there is a projected growth of 23% by 2023. Morgan
showed 774 new single family starts, 1128 in-City multi-family unit starts, 339 ETJ single family starts and
1070 new platted residential lots.
Morgan showed FY2017 Growth & Key Initiatives:
Transportation Improvements
-2015 Road Bond
Southwest Bypass construction
Sidewalks and intersection improvements
-Austin Avenue Bridges Outreach Process
-Mays Street Extension
-FM 1460 construction
Park Improvements
Garey Park
San Gabriel Park
Facilities
West Side Service Center
Downtown West construction
Transfer Station Master Plan
Fire Station 6
Utility Capital Improvements – Water and Wastewater
Pecan Branch WWTP Expansion
Berry Creek Interceptor
Western District Line Replacements
Evaluate Wastewater rates in FY2017 Budget Process
Morgan then spoke on the Council Goals and presented the background. He spoke on Council Goals and
Strategies. Morgan detailed the calendar and next steps. He then asked the Council if they had any
questions.
Mayor Ross said that there were no questions from Council because it was such a Comprehensive
Presentation that Council is stunned. Brainard asked about wastewater rates. Morgan explained that it has
been proposed to have the rates scheduled more consistently.
Mayor Ross recessed the meeting to Executive Session under Sections 551.071 and 551.074 at 4.55 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.
Page 12 of 252
F. 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
- Meet and Confer Update
- Appointment of temporary/substitute Deputy City Attorney/Court Prosecutor
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
- City Manager Evaluation
Adjournment
Mayor Ross adjourned the meeting at 6:00 PM to open the Regular City Council Meeting.
Approved by the Georgetown City Council on _______________________________________
Date
_____________________________ _____________________________
Dale Ross, Mayor Attest: City Secretary
Page 13 of 252
The Georgetown City Council will meet on Tuesday, April 26, 2016 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 four (4) 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 6:01 PM. All Councilmembers 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
- Welcome and Meeting Procedures
Mayor Ross spoke on the success of this year’s record setting Red Poppy Festival. The festival hosted over
60,000 people. Ross explained that fifteen hundred people took place in the morning bike ride, which was
followed by the parade. Ross went on to say that over 15,000 people attended the nighttime concert on
Saturday night. Mayor Ross said that this success is not by accident. He acknowledged Cari Miller, Marcy
Renneberg and Dini Lewis in CVB and acknowledged the Streets Department, Facilities Department, Parks and
Recreation Department, and the Police and Fire Departments. Ross also acknowledged City Manager, David
Morgan, who passed out breakfast tacos early Saturday morning to all of the volunteers.
- Mr. Jack Garey
Mr. Jack Gary provided a check to the City of Georgetown in the amount of $5 million dollars. A replica six foot
check of Mr. Garey’s generous donation was presented to the City Council. Mr. Garey said that he and his wife,
Camille, began discussions about Garey Park with Kimberly Garrett, the City’s Director of Parks and Recreation,
12 or 13 years ago. The Garey’s desire was to make their property a City or County park. They had decided
that they would leave the property to whichever of the two did the best job in a proposed development plan. A
contest was set up between the County and the City. Mr. Garey explained that whoever set up the best plan
would be awarded the park and $5 million dollars. The City won the decision, Garey explained. Mr. Garey
mentioned that the input from Randy Marrow, the former Parks and Recreation Director and Kimberly Garret was
quite instrumental in their decision. Mr. Garey went on to say that, until last year, the plan was to leave the
property for park development as part of his estate. Garey said that he changed his mind after Camille’s death,
and after seeing the development of the master plan and the approved park bonds. In 2013, Mr. Garey said he
deeded that land to the City to accelerate the plan. Mr. Garey said he decided he was impeding the process and
wanted it to move along so that he could see and experience the developed park. He decided to move out of his
home on the property in order to let the development of Garey Park proceed. He said that he wanted to be a
part of the project.
Pictures were taken of this momentous moment in the City of Georgetown.
- Proclamation for Georgetown, Texas Week of Prayer
- Proclamation for Teen Court Championship
City Council Regional Board Reports
There were no board reports.
Minutes of a Meeting of the
Governing Body of the
City of Georgetown, Texas
Tuesday, April 26, 2016
Page 14 of 252
Announcements
- May 7, 2016 General Election Information
- Strategic Partnerships Community Funding
Action from Executive Session
Motion by Brainard, second by Eby to authorize the appointment of Sean Fifield as Deputy City Attorney to act as
the temporary or backup municipal court prosecutor and that the Municipal Court Prosecutor be authorized to
subcontract with Sean Fifield under such terms as provided in the subcontract.
Approved: 7-0
Motion by Brainard, second by Fought to approve a three (3) percent increase in David Morgan’s annual salary
as City Manager.
Approved: 7-0
Motion by Brainard, second by Fought to approve an amendment to the Employment Agreement with David
Morgan as City Manager and authorizing the Mayor to sign the amendment on behalf of the City.
Approved: 7-0
Statutory Consent Agenda
The Statutory Consent Agenda includes non-controversial 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 approve the minutes of the Workshop and Regular Meeting held on
Tuesday, April 12, 2016 -- Becky Huff, Assistant City Secretary
C. Consideration and possible action to appoint Becky Huff as a Deputy City Secretary -- Shelley Nowling, City
Secretary
D. Consideration and possible action to approve the appointment of Aaron Albright as a Commissioner in
Training to the Planning & Zoning Commission to fill a vacancy – Mayor Dale Ross
E. Consideration and possible action to approve the appointment of Gray Taylor to the Unified Development
Code Advisory Board to fill a vacancy – Mayor Dale Ross
F. Consideration and possible action to approve the appointment of Danelle Houck to the Parks & Recreation
Advisory Board to fill a vacancy – Mayor Dale Ross
G. Consideration and possible action to approve a Resolution recognizing the Police Benevolent Association of
Georgetown (PBAG) as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent for the City Police Officers in accordance
with Texas Local Government Code, Chapter 142, Subchapter B – Tadd Phillips, Human Resource Director,
Charlie McNabb, City Attorney and Shelley Nowling, City Secretary
H. Consideration and possible action to approve the awarded medication disposal grant through the Capital
Area Council of Governments (CAPCOG) for the regional solid waste grant program. The Grant will cover
the purchase of one (1) secure metal medication collection box, to be located at the Public Safety and Training
and Operations Building, and additional ancillary expenses such as advertisement, and medication disposal, all
of which will meet or exceed EPA, TCEQ, and DEA medication destruction requirements – Mike Babin, Deputy
General Manager of Utilities and Jordan Fengel, Solid Waste/Recycling Coordinator
I. Forwarded from Georgetown Utility Systems Advisory Board (GUS):
Consideration and possible action to approve a contract with Prota, Inc. of Austin, Texas, for the construction
of Water System Pressure Reducing Valves Improvements in the amount of $131,000.01 – Wesley Wright,
P.E., Systems Engineering Director and Michael Hallmark, CIP Manager
Motion by Hesser, second by Fought to approve the Consent Agenda in its entirety.
Approved: 7-0
Page 15 of 252
Legislative Regular Agenda
J. Forwarded from the Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board (GTAB):
Consideration and possible action to award a bid to Cutler Repaving of Lawrence, KS in the amount of
$872,512.00 for pavement maintenance (hot in place recycling) -- Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation
Services Director and Mark Miller, Transportation Services Manager
Mark Miller, the City’s Transportation Services Manager, spoke on the item. Miller explained the bid process
and the dimensions of the materials for the project. He then described the schedule and phases of the project.
Miller explained that Cutler was the lowest qualified bidder. He explained the comparison of materials and
bidders and the qualifications needed.
Fought asked about the Cutler Process and if anything has changed from the last time the Council was
informed about street surfacing and the schedule for such. Fought asked if HIPR is Cutler. Miller confirmed
that it was. Fought said he is pleased with the product and the decision.
Motion by Fought, second by Hesser to approve Item J, as submitted.
Brainard asked Miller how citizens disrupted by these processes are notified. Miller said all those to be affected
are notified of the process about a week ahead of the work. They are also notified of the tree cutting process
that takes place prior to the street surfacing process. Citizens are notified mostly by door hangers. Brainard
asked if residents were not permitted to access their property for one week. Miller said it is only 45 minutes that
they are not able to access to their home.
Approved: 7-0
K. Forwarded from the Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board (GTAB):
Consideration and possible action of approval of Task Order SBE 16-002 for Citywide Sidewalk and
Accessibility Improvements to Steger Bizzell of Georgetown, Texas in the amount of $96,672.00 -- Edward
G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Director and Nat Waggoner, Transportation Analyst
Ed Polasek, Director of Transportation Services, spoke on the item. He explained that the item represents
downtown projects carried over from 2015 and some bond projects. Polasek described the locations for the
ADA sidewalk improvement and reconstruction projects. Polasek said that the Georgetown Transportation
Advisory Board (GTAB) has recommend approval.
Motion by Jonrowe, second by Hesser to approve item K.
Jonrowe asked if this was mainly about design. Polasek confirmed. He said that funding comes from the 2015
bond project. Polasek explained that all projects from this item are priority 1 projects.
Approved: 7-0
L. Forwarded from the General Government and Finance Advisory Board (GGAF):
First Reading of an Ordinance formally adopting the Fiscal and Budgetary Policy to be used in preparing
the fiscal year 2017 annual budget and to guide financial operations -- Leigh Wallace, Finance Director (action
required)
Leigh Wallace, the City’s Finance Director, spoke on the item. She explained that the proposed amendments
had been approved by the General Government and Finance Advisory Board (GGAF) and had been presented
to the Council at the workshop meeting earlier in the day. Wallace then read the Ordinance caption.
Motion by Brainard, second by Eby to approve item L.
Fought thanked GGAF and staff for the improved fiscal control and congratulated them on their good work.
Approved: 7-0
M. Forwarded from the General Government and Finance Advisory Board (GGAF):
Consideration and possible action to approve a Resolution formally adopting the City’s Investment Policies --
Leigh Wallace, Finance Director
Leigh Wallace, the City’s Finance Director, spoke on the item. She explained that the Investment advisors had
recommended the proposed amendments to the City’s investment policies. The amendments had been
presented to Council in March. Wallace then read the recommendations.
Motion by Brainard, second by Fought to approve item M.
Jonrowe congratulated Wallace and said she does not know how she does what she does.
Page 16 of 252
Approved: 7-0
N. First Reading of an Ordinance authorizing the Issuance of City of Georgetown, Texas Combination Tax and
Revenue Certificates of Obligation, Series 2016, levying an Ad Valorem Tax and the pledge of certain
revenues in support of the certificates, approving an Official Statement, a Paying Agent/Registrar Agreement
and other agreements related to the sale and issuance of the certificates and authorizing other matters related
to the Issuance of the Certificates – Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager (action required)
Laurie Brewer, the Assistant City Manager, spoke on the item. She explained that the City went to the bond
market that day. Brewer provided the history of the process and the projects. She explained that staff had
brought the debt status to Council in January and received direction from Council. Brewer said that a team was
established. She said that the Financial Advisors used by the City were present at the meeting. Brewer went
on to explain that the City had maintained its AA + Bond Rating on general debt and an AA Bond Rating on
revenue debt, both with stable outlooks. Projects that will be funded through these bonds will include the
Southwest Bypass, Garey Park, the Summit at Rivery Conference Center, the extension of Mays street, ADA
improvements in Parks and Facilities, the I35 frontage road sidewalk, as well as electric, water and wastewater
infrastructure.
Brewer said that Richard Donahue from McCall, Parkhurst is present should there be any legal questions, as
well as Gary Kimble and Jennifer Douglas with Specialized Public Finance. Brewer explained that Kimble and
Douglas were there to discuss the market conditions and the good news on the City’s rates.
Jennifer Douglas passed out the bid information to the Council and spoke on the bond market. She explained
that the City had hit the market at a great time. Douglas explained the process and the rates and figures. She
explained that the savings will be $1.4 million dollars.
Ross asked how projections were so far off. Jennifer said interest rates had moved down.
Brewer read the caption.
Motion by Brainard, second Hesser by to approve item N.
Approved: 7-0
O. First Reading of an Ordinance authorizing the Issuance of City of Georgetown, Texas General Obligation
Bonds, Series 2016, authorizing the levy of an Ad Valorem Tax in support of the Bonds, approving an Official
Statement, a Paying Agent/Registrar Agreement and other related documents, awarding the Sale of the Bonds
and authorizing other matters relating to the bonds – Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager (action required)
Laurie Brewer, the Assistant City Manager, spoke on the item. Brewer spoke on general obligation bonds for
Garey Park and the Southwest Bypass. She explained that nine bids had been received and Fidelity Capital
won the bid. This provides another $1 million in savings. Brewer read the caption.
Motion by Brainard, second Hesser by to approve item O.
Brainard thanked the Bond Council and staff for securing these rates.
Approved: 7-0
P. First Reading of an Ordinance authorizing City of Georgetown, Texas Utility System Revenue Bonds,
Series 2016, authorizing the pledge of certain revenues in support of the bonds, approving a Paying
Agent/Registrar Agreement, an Official Statement and other related documents and authorizing other matters
related to the Issuance of the Bonds – Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager (action required)
Laurie Brewer, the Assistant City Manager, spoke on the item. She explained the Utility System Revenue
Bonds. Brewer said that the winner was again Fidelity Capital Markets. Brewer said that although the interest
rate was slightly higher for these bonds, the City was still received a strong rate.
Brewer read the caption.
Motion by Brainard, second by Hesser to approve item P.
Approved: 7-0
Q. Forwarded from the General Government and Finance Advisory Board (GGAF):
First Reading of an Ordinance authorizing the Issuance of City of Georgetown, Texas General Obligation
Refunding Bonds, Series 2016, authorizing the levy of an Ad Valorem Tax in support of the bonds, approving
an Official Statement, a Paying Agent/Registrar Agreement, a Purchase Agreement and an Escrow Agreement;
Page 17 of 252
establishing procedures for Selling and Delivery of the Bonds and authorizing other matters relating to the
bonds - – Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager (action required)
Laurie Brewer, the Assistant City Manager, spoke on the item. Brewer explained that the General Government
and Finance Advisory Board (GGAF) had recommended approval. Brewer said that this item and the following
item relate to the City’s ability to use lower rates to refinance series 2006 and 2007 bonds. She said the bonds
would result in a $900,000 savings and would not cost anything to refinance. Brewer then read the caption
Motion by Brainard, second Hesser by to approve item Q.
Hesser asked if this included the cost of issue. Brewer confirmed.
Approved: 7-0
R. Forwarded from the General Government and Finance Advisory Board (GGAF):
First Reading of an Ordinance authorizing the Issuance of City of Georgetown, Texas Utility System
Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2016 authorizing the pledge of certain revenues in support of the bonds,
approving a Paying Agent/Registrar Agreement, an Official Statement, an Escrow Agreement and a Purchase
Agreement, establishing procedures for Selling and Delivery of the Bonds and authorizing other matters related
to the Issuance of the Bonds – Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager (action required)
Laurie Brewer, the Assistant City Manager, spoke on the item. She explained that the City is looking to
refinance utility system revenue bonds providing $1 million and 62 thousand dollars in savings over the life of
the bond. She then read the caption.
Motion by Brainard, second by Hesser to approve item R.
Approved: 7-0
S. Forwarded from the Georgetown Economic Development Corporation (GEDCO):
First Reading of an Ordinance amending the 2016 Budget for the Georgetown Economic Development
Corporation (“GEDCO”) for the maintenance of the Texas Life-Sciences Collaboration Center (“TLCC”).
The Performance Agreement between GEDCO and TLCC was approved by City Council on January 12, 2016 –
Leigh Wallace, Finance Director (action required)
Leigh Wallace, the City’s Finance Director, spoke on the item. She explained that this item was a budget
amendment from Council direction. Wallace read the caption.
Motion by Fought, second by Jonrowe to approve item S.
Approved: 7-0
T. First Reading of an Ordinance amending the 2016 Annual Budget due to an approved allocation of General
Fund Balance to the Council Discretionary Fund as well as an allocation of Council Discretionary Funds that
had not been finalized when the budget was adopted – Leigh Wallace, Finance Director and Laurie Brewer,
Assistant City Manager (action required)
Leigh Wallace, the City’s Finance Director, spoke on the item. She explained that this item is an amendment
which will recognize funds into and out of the Council Discretionary Fund. Wallace read the caption.
Motion by Brainard, second Hesser by to approve item T.
Approved: 7-0
U. First Reading of an Ordinance amending the 2016 Annual Budget due to an approved Capital Improvement
Project for the addition of a sidewalk at IH35 Southbound Frontage Road that had not been finalized when
the budget was adopted – Leigh Wallace, Finance Director and Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager (action
required)
Leigh Wallace, the City’s Finance Director, spoke on the item. She explained that this item was for an
amendment for the addition of sidewalks, as described and approved by Council in February 2016.
Motion by Brainard, second by Hesser to approve item U.
Approved: 7-0
V. Public Hearing and First Reading of an Ordinance to Rezone approximately 178.83 acres in the William
Addison Survey located at 1821 SE Inner Loop from the Agriculture (AG) District and Residential Single-Family
(RS) District to the Public Facility (PF) District known as Williamson County Georgetown Annex -- Sofia Nelson,
CNU-A, Planning Director (action required)
Sofia Nelson, the City’s Planning Director, spoke on the item. She explained that the rezoning request comes
from Williamson County for property they own. The property is located on SE Inner Loop between
Page 18 of 252
Southwestern Blvd. and 1460. Nelson said that the Planning & Zoning Commission has recommended
approval.
Mayor Ross opened the Public Hearing at 7:00 PM. No speakers were present. Mayor Ross closed the Public
Hearing at 7.00 PM.
Motion by Jonrowe, second by Fought to approve item V.
Approved: 7-0
W. Public Hearing and First Reading of an Ordinance to Rezone approximately 54.13 acres in the William
Addison Survey located at 2910 SE Inner Loop from the Agriculture (AG) District to the Public Facility (PF)
District known as Williamson County North Campus – East -- Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director (action
required)
Sofia Nelson, the City’s Planning Director, spoke on the item. Nelson showed the future land use map. She
explained that the Planning & Zoning Commission had recommended approval. Nelson then read the caption.
Mayor Ross opened the Public Hearing at 7:04 PM. No speakers were present. Mayor Ross closed the Public
Hearing at 7:04 PM.
Motion by Jonrowe, second by Fought to approve item W.
Approved: 7-0
X. Public Hearing and First Reading of an Ordinance to Rezone approximately 63.09 acres in the William
Addison Survey located at 3151 SE Inner Loop from the Agriculture (AG) District to the Public Facility (PF)
District known as Williamson County North Campus -- Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director (action
required)
Sofia Nelson, the City’s Planning Director, spoke on the item. She showed the location map and explained the
rezone request is from Williamson County. She then showed future land use map. Nelson said that the
Planning & Zoning Commission had recommended approval. She then read the caption
Mayor Ross opened the Public Hearing 7.05 PM. No speakers were present. Mayor Ross closed the Public
Hearing at 7.05 PM.
Motion by Fought, second by Brainard to approve item X.
Approved: 7-0
Y. Public Hearing and First Reading of an Ordinance to Rezone 5.240 acres in the Ephraim Evans Survey,
located at 211 Westinghouse Road, from the Residential Single-family (RS) District to the General
Commercial (C-3) District, known as Mercedes Benz -- Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director (action
required)
Sofia Nelson, the City’s Planning Director, spoke on the item. She explained the rezone request and said that
the site straddles two different land use regulations. Nelson said the site includes a car dealership and retail.
Planning & Zoning Commission has recommended approval. Nelson read the ordinance caption.
Mayor Ross opened the Public Hearing 7:07 PM. No speakers were present. Mayor Ross closed the Public
Hearing at 7:07 PM.
Motion by Brainard, second by Eby to approve item Y.
Approved: 7-0
Z. First Reading of an Ordinance for the Voluntary Annexation of 11.17 acres in the John Sutherland Survey
and a portion of adjacent public right-of-way, located at the intersection of Williams Drive and Jim Hogg Road
-- Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director (action required)
Sofia Nelson, the City’s Planning Director, spoke on the item. She said that the item is for a Voluntary
Annexation proposal and showed proposed annexation site map. Nelson provided an action schedule for the
item and said that staff recommends approval. Nelson then read the caption.
Speakers signed up to speak on Item Z included Abby Brody, Gerald Brody and David Mann. Gerald Brody
donated his 3 minutes of speaking time to Abby Brody, allowing her 6 minutes of speaking time.
Abby Brody spoke and thanked the Council. She explained that she is a resident in the ETJ. Brody said that
the community discussed has several hundred homes that are accessed from Jim Hogg Road and that the City
does not maintain this road. She said that she and her neighbors will be greatly affected. Brody explained that
traffic will be a problem and safety is a problem. She said that Jim Hogg is the only street access to Williams
Drive, with only two lanes and no shoulder. Brody explained that it is problematic if there was an emergency.
Page 19 of 252
She added that the proposed gas station and grocery store will cause yet more problems. Brody said that there
needs to be a traffic study.
David Mann then spoke. Mann said that he had spoken to a County Engineer about the traffic problems and
was told there was no budget for corrections. Mann spoke on fire hazards and emergencies and how
dangerous the area is without another access road. He urged the Council to require the developer to address
the hours of shopping and take care of the impact.
Motion by Fought, second by Hesser to approve item Z.
Approved: 7-0
Hesser said he would like to encourage a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) on this area.
Jonrowe asked if improvements were made here. Nelson said that a street light and been added. City
Manager, David Morgan, said that the City had installed and paid for the traffic light. Jonrowe asked if the
developer would be responsible for future improvements. Morgan said part of this is the construction of the
West Side Service Center. Jim Briggs, the City’s General Manager of Utilities, said the City put in the traffic
signal because of the West Side Service Center site. He explained that turn lanes to the center had also been
added. Briggs said that the signal light will be able to accommodate the full blown intersection in the future and
a full signal, with expanding capabilities is already in place.
Jonrowe asked if a future TIA called for improvements, would the City pay. Briggs said that improvements
would be allocated to traffic improvements and roadway improvements instead of improvements to the signal.
Fought said Williams Drive is going to fill in. He said that it is good to bring retail to the consumer rather than
building more roads to bring the consumer to the retail. Fought said he supports the project but recognizes the
necessity that the City keeps their eye on the ball.
AA. Second Reading of an Ordinance for the Voluntary Annexation of 10.058 acres in the Francis Hudson
Survey, located at 555 Rabbit Hill Road -- Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director (action required)
Sofia Nelson, the City’s Planning Director, spoke on the item. She spoke on the voluntary annexation and said
that staff is recommending approval. Nelson then read the ordinance caption.
Motion by Jonrowe, second by Brainard to approve item Z.
Approved: 7-0
AB. Second Reading of an Ordinance to Rezone 1.00 acre of the L.J. Dyches Survey, located at 1000 FM 1460,
from the Agriculture (AG) District to the Low Density Multifamily (MF-1) District -- Sofia Nelson, CNU-A,
Planning Director (action required)
Sofia Nelson, the City’s Planning Director, spoke on the item. She explained the rezoning request and said that
the Planning & Zoning Commission recommended approval. She then read the caption.
Motion by Brainard, second by Gipson to approve item Z.
Approved: 7-0
AC. Second Reading of an Ordinance for a Special Use Permit at 215 West 3rd Street, bearing the legal
description of City of Georgetown, Block 9, Lot 5-6, 7-8 (W/PTS), for a first floor residential project in the Mixed
Use-Downtown (MU-DT) District -- Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director (action required)
Sofia Nelson, the City’s Planning Director, spoke on the item. She explained the Special Use Permit request.
Nelson said there were 14 units proposed for the site, which would be multifamily with a court yard. The
Planning & Zoning Commission recommends approval. Nelson then read the caption.
Motion by Jonrowe, second by Gipson to approve item Z.
Approved: 7-0
Project Updates
AD. 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 and possible direction to
city staff -- David Morgan, City Manager
Mayor Ross asked David Morgan, the City Manager, if he had any project updates to report to the Council.
Morgan said he did not have updates to report at this time.
Page 20 of 252
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.
AE. - 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.
AF. 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
- Meet and Confer Update
- Appointment of temporary/substitute Deputy City Attorney/Court Prosecutor
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
- City Manager Evaluation
Motion by Fought, second by Gipson to adjourn the meeting. Meeting adjourned at 7.33 PM.
Approved by the Georgetown City Council on _______________________________________
Date
_____________________________ _____________________________
Dale Ross, Mayor Attest: City Secretary
Page 21 of 252
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Regula r Meeting
May 10, 2016
SUBJECT:
Consideration and possible action to approve the appoi ntment of Mel i nda Marl e r to the G eo rgetown Vi l l age P ubl i c
Improvement Di stri ct (G VPID) Advi sory B oar d fo r a second term -- Mayor Dale Ross
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
NA
SUBMITTED BY:
ATTACHMENT S:
Description
Melind a Marler Appointment Cover Sheet
Page 22 of 252
Page 1 of 1
City Council Meeting – May 10, 2016
Subject
Consideration and possible action to approve the appointment of Melinda Marler to the
Georgetown Village Public Improvement District (GVPID) Advisory Board for a second term.
Background
Pursuant to Section 2.115.030 of the City Code, members of the Georgetown Village Public
Improvement District (GVPID) Advisory Board shall serve a term period of two (2) years.
Furthermore, members may be re-appointed once, for a consecutive service period of four (4)
years. Based on previous practices, Ms. Melinda Marler's first full term ended in April 2016.
Consequently, at its April 25, 2016 meeting, the GVPID Advisory Board recommended to City
Council the re-appointment of Ms. Melinda Marler for a second two-year term.
To bring the GVPID Advisory Board member terms consistent with other City Boards and
Commissions (March to February of the following year), should Ms. Melinda Marler be re -
appointed by the City Council, a partial second term would commence and be in place un til
February 2017. Ms. Marler's full second term would extend from March 2017 to February 2019
in accordance with City rules and policies.
Financial Impact
None.
Page 23 of 252
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Regula r Meeting
May 10, 2016
SUBJECT:
Consideration and possible action to approve a Resolution authori zi ng the Ci ty Manag er to overhi re entry l eve l
ci vi l servi ce po si ti o ns when a promotional vacanc y e xists -- Tadd Phillips, Human Re so urce Director
ITEM SUMMARY:
The City Council of the City of Georgetown, has prescribe d by o rdinance, the number of po sitions in each classification
in bo th the Geo rgeto wn Fire Department and Georgetown P olice Department, which is re fe rred to as the “Strength of
Force” ordinance.
In order to pro mo te public safety by e fficiently staffing fire and police pe rso nnel, it is occasionally necessary to hire one
or more entry le vel c andidates when a promotional vac ancy arises due to resignatio n or retirement.
This resolution wo uld authorize the City Manage r to overhire when necessary due to a pro mo tional vacancy, but such an
“overhire” situatio n wo uld no t exceed the total number o f authorized positions in the Po lice or Fire Department
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None.
SUBMITTED BY:
Tadd Phillips, Human Reso urce Director
ATTACHMENT S:
Description
Res o lutio n
Page 24 of 252
Resolution No. Page 1 of 2
Subject: HR – Civil Service Overhire Authorization
Date Approved
RESOLUTION NO. _____________
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
OVERHIRE ENTRY LEVEL CIVIL SERVICE POSITIONS WHEN A
PROMOTIONAL VACANCY EXISTS
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Georgetown, has prescribed by ordinance, the
number of positions in each classification in both the Georgetown Fire Department and
Georgetown Police Department, which is referred to as the “Strength of Force” ordinance; and,
WHEREAS, to promote public safety by efficiently staffing fire and police personnel, it is
occasionally necessary to hire one or more entry level candidates when a promotional vacancy
arise; such an “overhire” situation would not exceed the total number of authorized positions in
the Police or Fire Department.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF GEORGETOWN TEXAS:
SECTION ONE. The facts and recitations contained in the preamble of this Resolution are
hereby found and declared to be true and correct, and are incorporated by reference herein and
expressly made a part hereof, as if copied verbatim.
SECTION TWO. It is hereby resolved that the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas,
hereby authorizes the City Manager to, when the need arises, overhire entry level positions when a
promotional vacancy exists. In no circumstance will an overhire exceed the total number of
authorized positions for the department
SECTION THREE. This Resolution shall become effective on the ___ day of _______________,
2016.
PASSED AND APPROVED on the _______ day of _______________, 2016.
ATTEST: CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS
______________________________ By: _____________________________
Shelley Nowling, City Secretary Dale Ross, Mayor
Page 25 of 252
Resolution No. Page 2 of 2
Subject: HR – Civil Service Overhire Authorization
Date Approved
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________
Charlie McNabb, City Attorney
Page 26 of 252
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Regula r Meeting
May 10, 2016
SUBJECT:
Forwarded fro m the G eneral G overnment and Fi nance Advi sory B oard (G G AF):
Consideration and po ssible action to appro ve the purchase of response gear f r o m Muni ci pal Eme rgency Ser vi c e s
(MES), which is a sole source for TECGEN brand garments, at a cost not to exceed $71 ,00 0.00, for the re mainder of
fiscal year 2015 -20 16 -- Jo hn Sullivan, Fire Chief
ITEM SUMMARY:
The Geo rgeto wn Fire Department provides personal pro tective equipme nt (P P E) for Wildfires and Structural fires. This
P P E is replaced o n a five-year cycle.
Currently, firefighte rs use the Structural P P E for technical rescues and no n-structural fire incidents. This plac e s
unwarranted wear and tear o n the Structural PPE, compromising the inte grity and safety features o f the Structural PPE.
This, in turn, can cause early replacement of the Struc tural PPE, prior to the five-year c ycle.
TECGEN Rescue 80 pro tective gear is exclusively manufactured by Fire-Dex, LLC, which has an exclusive arrangeme nt
with MES. This PPE is dual-certified for both wildland fire (NFPA 1977) and technical rescue (NFPA 1951).
TECGEN Rescue 80 was chose n because of its advance flame-resistant fibe r and durability, along with the new Reflexite
Brilliance refle c tive safety trim.
By reducing the wear and te ar on the Structural PPE, the replacement cycle could be extended fro m a five -year to se ven-
year replacement, yielding co st savings.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Funding is allocated in 20 15 -16 budget. GL 100-5-0 42 2-5 1-7 34.
SUBMITTED BY:
John Sullivan, Fire Chief.
ATTACHMENT S:
Description
Quo te
S o le So urc e Letter
Page 27 of 252
Quote
Date 4/14/2016
Quote #QT1017343
Bill To
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPART...
P.O. BOX 409
GEORGETOWN TX 78627
United States
Ship To
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT
300 Industrial Ave
GEORGETOWN TX 78626
United States
Expires 5/14/2016
Sales Rep Custer, David D
PO #
Shipping Method FedEx Ground
16511 Hedgecroft
Suite 200
Houston, TX 77060
Item
XPMTMD36
TECGEN -
ASHBURN HILL
TECGEN -
ASHBURN HILL
XSUSPV48 SS
TECGEN -
ASHBURN HILL
Alt. Item #
Detachable na...
Suspendors or ...
XJDS01TN - T...
Units Description
TECGEN XTREME PANT MES EXCLUSIVE TAN
MEDIUM x 36
Detachable name plate
Custom TECGEN - ASHBURN HILL - FIRE-DEX
Custom TECGEN - ASHBURN HILL - FIRE-DEX
Suspendors or belt
TECGEN XTREME SUSPENDERS
XJDS01TN - TecGen Rescue 80 with elbow pads
Custom TECGEN - ASHBURN HILL - FIRE-DEX
QTY
105
105
159
105
105
Unit Sales Price
273.90
20.45
1.75
42.50
312.87
Amount
28,759.50
2,147.25
278.25
4,462.50
32,851.35
Subtotal
Shipping Cost (FedEx Ground)
Total
68,498.85
0.00
$68,498.85
Includes 16 letters at no charge
Extended arms are at extra cost
Legs over 38 inseam are extra cost.
QT1017343
This Quotation is subject to any applicable sales tax and shipping & handling charges that may apply. Tax and shipping charges are
considered estimated and will be recalculated at the time of shipment to ensure they take into account the most current local tax
information.
All returns must be processed within 30 days of receipt and require a return authorization number and are subject to a restocking fee.
Custom orders are not returnable. Effective tax rate will be applicable at the time of invoice.
Page 28 of 252
April 22 , 2016
Georgetown Fire Dept
Attn: Chief Clay Shell
Re: Sole Source Confirmation
TECGEN® brand protective clothing is manufactured exclusively by Fire-Dex, LLC. Fire-Dex has an
exclusive arrangement with Municipal Emergency Services, Inc. (“MES”) to sell the following products:
XJMT, XJMB, XPMT, and XPMB. These products are also known by the trade name “TECGEN®
Rescue80™”. These garments utilize an advanced flame resistant fiber and a proprietary, patent pending
fabric which is only manufactured by Fire-Dex and offered through MES. TECGEN® Rescue80™
garments contain features to promote visibility and functionality by utilizing 3" Reflexite® reflective trim
and multiple advanced pockets designed to carry everything from smart phones to radios to extrication
tools. Available in black or tan. Reflexite® reflective trim is exclusive to the “TECGEN® Rescue80™”
which is only offered by Municipal Emergency Services.
If you have any questions, please call Todd Herring at 864-497-6901
INVISTA Ashburn Hill LLC
By: Todd Herring
Name: Todd Herring
Title: Product Specialist, TECGEN® PPE
(a) XJ produts are jackets
(b) XP products are pants
Page 29 of 252
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Regula r Meeting
May 10, 2016
SUBJECT:
Publ i c Heari ng and Fi rst Readi ng of an Ordinanc e to Rezone approximately 27 8.2 1 acres of the Isaac Donagan and
Joseph Thompson Surveys, lo cated at 2951 Hw y 2 9 West, fro m the Residential Single-Family (RS) District to Planne d
Unit Development (P UD) District with a base zo ning district of Residential Single -Family -- Sofia Nelson, CNU-A,
P lanning Director (acti o n requi red)
ITEM SUMMARY:
B ackground:
The Shadow Canyon pro pe rty is located between SH 29 and the South San Gabriel River at the western edge of the city
limits. The applicant has requested a rezoning of the 278 acres to a Planned Unit Deve lo pment (P UD) district with a base
district of RS to de velop a 600 lot residential subdivision in conjunctio n with a Municipal Utility District (MUD), which
is currently under review by the City. The development standards propo sed with the P UD pro vide for varying sizes of
residential product, 83 acres of open space, and 22 acres of parkland along the river, including constructio n of
approximately a mile of public trail.
Publ i c Comment:
As of the date o f this repo rt, no written public co mme nts have been received.
Staff Recommendati o n:
Staff has re vie wed the request, pro vide d comments to the applicant and has wo rked with the applic ant to prepare the PUD
proposal fo r co nsideration. Should the commission recommend approval of the request, staff is recommending the
following conditio ns be added (strike through identifies language to be re mo ved and underline identifies language to be
added):
· Parkland/Trails/Open Space/Amenity Ce nter. The proposed parkland dedication and impro vements identifie d
in this staff report and P UD fulfill the parkland requirements of the pro pe rty sho wn on the develo pment plan. The
applicant is requesting the parkland requirements also fulfill the parkland requirements fo r lo ts that were part o f
the original subdivision of this property but are not subject to this PUD (lots 1 , 2, and 4). Since the additional lo ts
are not part o f this PUD application and the pro perty o wners of the additio nal property are not a party to this P UD
application, refere nc e to this pro perty is no t permitted in this application. Staff is recommending the follo wing
language:
o As illustrated on Exhibit D to the PUD Ordinanc e, Open Space Summary, the Concept Plan requires at
least 22 acres of public parkland/open space to be located along the South San Gabriel River, and for a
public trail (the San Gabriel River Trail) to be located in the parkland. This 2 2 acre public parkland and
asso ciated San Gabriel River Trail, will, when de dicated and constructed, fully satisfy the City’s parkland
de dication require ments for the P roperty, as well as the pro pe rty comprising lots 1, 2 and 4, Block F,
within the Shadow Canyon Preliminary Plat appro ved on Decembe r 15, 2004, as amended. The entirety
of the 2 2 acres of parkland shall be dedicated to the City, along with public right-of-way, no later than the
re c ording of the first Final Plat fo r any po rtion of the Property containing residential lots.
ADA Accessibility of the San Gabrie l Trail . ADA accessibility of all public facilities is regulated by the Texas
Accessibly Standards (TAS). TAS are administered thro ugh the state of Texas and are not standards that can be
waived at the local leve l. TAS do e s allo w variances and alternative co mpliance due to a variety of challe nging
circumstanc e s, howeve r the reviewing agency is the Texas Department of Lice nsing and Regulation not the City of
Georgeto wn. Staff is recommending the follo wing changes:
The trail shall be approximately 5 ,26 6 line ar feet in length constructed alo ng the entire length of the So uth
San Gabriel River as it traverses the P roperty, be ten foot (10 )’ wide, and be made of co ncrete. It must be
located within the dedicated parkland o r the open space in the general lo c atio n sho wn on Exhibit D to the
PUD Ordinance. The trail trailhe ad lo catio ns shall be constructed to meet Texas Accessibility Standards
(TAS).
Timing of Trail. Due to the regional impact of the proposed San Gabriel River trail, staff is recommending trail
construc tion take place all at once rather than “phased segments occurring with the adjacent lot de velopment”. The
Page 30 of 252
overall concern is that if the development of the trail is to take place based on the adjacent lot develo pment, what
occurs when there is not an adjac e nt de velopable lo t or there is a gap in developing a particular lot. Staff is
recomme nding the following changes:
The trail shall be constructed in it's entirety on the earlier of: (a) Prior to final ac c e ptance of any lot in
Parc e l 2 , 6 or 7 sho wn on Exhibit D to the P UD Ordinance, howeve r the trail may be co mpleted in phased
se gments occurring with the adjacent lot development; or (b) 180 days after the City provides written
no tic e via the means stated in the Consent Agreement stating that design or c onstructio n o f any adjac e nt
se c tion o f the trail (on property east or west of the Property) has co mmenced. Final acceptance of any lo t
shall be defined as final acceptance of the subdivision impro vements serving any part parcel 2, 6, or 7
shown on exhibit D. Sho uld fiscal be posted to allow the recordation of the subdivision plat for one of the
above mentio ned parcels the poste d fisc al instrument shall not be re leased until the trail is complete.
Pl anni ng and Zoni ng Commi ssi on Recommendati o n:
At thei r May 3, 20 16 meeti ng, the P l anni ng and Zoni ng Commi ssi on recomme nded to the Ci ty Counci l , by a vote
of 5-0, to appr ove the request w i th the staff r e c ommended condi ti ons (as l i sted abo ve).
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None studied at this time.
SUBMITTED BY:
Valerie Kreger, AICP, P rincipal P lanner, and Sofia Nelso n, CNU-A, P lanning Director
ATTACHMENT S:
Description
S taff Report
Attachment 1 - Lo catio n Map
Attachment 2 - F uture Land Us e Map
Attachment 3 - Zo ning Map
Attachment 4 - Aerial Map
Ordinanc e
Ordinanc e Exhibit A - Field Notes and Property Sketc h
Ordinanc e Exhibit B - P UD Development Plan
Page 31 of 252
Georgetown Planning Department Staff Report
Shadow Canyon PUD – REZ-2016-002 Page 1 of 10
Report Date: April 28, 2016
File No.: REZ-2016-002
Project Planner: Valerie Kreger, AICP, Principal Planner
Item Details
Project Name: Shadow Canyon
Project Address: 2951 Hwy 29 West (see Exhibit 1)
Location: South side of SH 29, at the western edge of the city’s limits
Total Acreage: 278.21 acres
Applicant: Mark Baker, SEC Planning
Property Owner: 278 Georgetown, Inc.
Existing Use: Undeveloped Property
Existing Zoning: Residential Single-Family (RS) District
Proposed Zoning: Planned Unit Development (PUD) District with a base district of RS
Future Land Use: Moderate Density Residential and Open Space
Parks Board action:
Land dedication: 22 acres of public parkland shall be dedicated along the South San Gabriel
River
Approximately 5,266 feet of the San Gabriel River Trail (10’ concrete) shall be constructed
within the parkland
Public parking shall be provided to serve as a trailhead for visitors to access the San Gabriel
River Trail (also will serve as amenity center parking)
Overview of Applicant’s Request
The Shadow Canyon property is located between SH 29 and the South San Gabriel River at the
western edge of the city limits. The applicant has requested a rezoning of the 278 acres to a Planned
Unit Development (PUD) district with a base district of RS to develop a 600 lot residential
subdivision in conjunction with a Municipal Utility District (MUD), which is currently under review
by the City. The development standards proposed with the PUD provide for varying sizes of
residential product, 83 acres of open space, and 22 acres of parkland along the river, including
construction of a mile of public trail.
Site Information
Physical Characteristics:
The land is heavily treed with substantial elevation changes. The southern portion of the property
fronts on the South San Gabriel River with a portion of the property located within the floodplain.
Several environmentally sensitive features exist on the property including a Georgetown salamander
site along the western edge of the property and a karst feature along SH 29.
Page 32 of 252
Planning Department Staff Report
Shadow Canyon PUD – REZ-2016-002 Page 2 of 10
Surrounding Properties:
The subject property is located on the western edge of the city’s limits along SH 29. The surrounding
zoning and land uses are as follows:
Property History
The subject property was annexed into the City of Georgetown in December 2003 (Ordinance #2003-
84) and assigned the default zoning of Agriculture (AG). The original rezoning (Ordinance #2004-
81) and Preliminary Plat of Shadow Canyon were approved by City Council on December 14, 2004.
The zoning was changed from AG to Residential Single-family (RS), Multifamily (MF), and General
Commercial (C-3). The 2004 rezoning and Preliminary Plat included the multifamily and
commercial tracts fronting SH 29 to the north of this property.
Utilities
The property is in the City of Georgetown wastewater service area and City of Georgetown –
Western District water service area. Electric is served by Pedernales Electric Coop (PEC).
Transportation
The subject property has approximately 290 feet of frontage on SH 29. The Overall Transportation
Plan (OTP) identifies a collector roadway extending through the property from the south. The
Unified Development Code (UDC) requires full dedication and construction of thoroughfares
adjacent and/or internal to a property.
2030 Comprehensive Plan
This property is designated as Moderate Density Residential on the 2030 Plan-Future Land Use Map.
This category includes the city’s predominantly single-family neighborhoods that can be
accommodated at a density between 1.1 and 3 dwelling units per gross acre.
In order to stage contiguous, compact, and incremental growth of the city over the next two decades,
the 2030 Comprehensive Plan establishes a tiered growth framework. The subject property is located
in the Tier 1B Growth area. Tier 1B is typically inside the city limits, but is generally under-served
Location Zoning Future Land Use Existing Use
North
High Density Multifamily
(MF-2), General Commercial
(C-3), Local Commercial (C-
1), Outside of the city limits
(across SH 29)
Moderate Density
Residential
Undeveloped, SH 29,
Quarry (across SH 29)
South Outside of the city limits
(across San Gabriel River)
Open Space, Low Density
Residential, Mixed Use
Community
San Gabriel River, Quarry
East Residential Single-family (RS) Moderate Density
Residential Undeveloped (Hillwood)
West Outside of the city limits Low Density Residential Undeveloped, Rural
Residential
Page 33 of 252
Planning Department Staff Report
Shadow Canyon PUD – REZ-2016-002 Page 3 of 10
by infrastructure, and will be needed to meet the City’s growth necessay over the next 10 years as
Tier 1A approaches build-out.
Zoning Districts
Residential Single-Family District (RS)
The Residential Single-family (RS) District is intended for areas of medium density with a minimum
lot size of 5,500 square feet. The RS District contains standards for development that maintain
single-family neighborhood characteristics. The District may be located within proximity of
neighborhood-friendly commercial and public services and protected from incompatible uses.
Planned Unit Development District (PUD)
A PUD is designed to be used in conjunction with a designated base zoning district. An application
for PUD zoning shall specify the base district(s) and the uses proposed. If no base zoning exists, the
base zoning shall be that zoning designation that is most similar to or compatible with the uses
proposed for the PUD. Any uses not permitted in the base district shall be specifically identified. The
standards and requirements of the specified base district shall apply unless specifically superseded by
the standards and requirements of the PUD Development Plan.
Proposed PUD Development Plan Standards:
Development
Standard UDC Standard PUD Standard
Maximum
Units
N/A 600 units
Permitted Uses Single Family Residential attached
and detached
Single-family detached. Single-family
attached units are not permitted.
Minimum Lot
Size
5,500 square feet 5,500 square feet
Minimum Lot
Frontage
45 feet Typical: 45 feet
Corner Lot: 50 feet
Corner Lot adjacent Rd 1/Rd 2: 55 feet
(Maximum 20% of lots may be less than 50 ft
wide. Minimum 30% of lots shall be 60 ft
wide or larger)
Setbacks Front: 20 feet
Side: 6 feet; 10 feet adjacent street; 20
feet for side entry garage
Rear: 10 feet
Front: 15 feet; 20 feet for front entry garage
Side: 5 feet; 10 feet adjacent street; 20 feet
for side entry garage
Rear: 10 feet; 15 feet adjacent Rd 1/Rd 2
Maximum
Height
35 feet 35 feet
Masonry
Requirement
N/A (currently there is not a minimum
requirement for masonry on single
family homes)
Homes not adjacent to Rd 1/Rd 2:
Front, street, and/or park facing elevations:
85% brick, stone, or stucco
Other: 85% brick, stone, or stucco on 1st
floor, and 85% brick, stone, stucco, or
cement based siding on 2nd floor
Homes adjacent to Rd 1/Rd 2:
Page 34 of 252
Planning Department Staff Report
Shadow Canyon PUD – REZ-2016-002 Page 4 of 10
85% brick, stone, or stucco on all
elevations
Front Façade
Enhancement
N/A (there are similarity restrictions
but no individual façade requirements)
Front elevation shall contain at least 2:
2+ wall planes offset 18”+
Covered porch/patio 60+ sf
Side-entry/swing-in garage
Garage set back 4’ from primary façade
Enhanced garage door materials
Shed roof/trellis above garage door
Combination 2+ roof types/planes
2+ masonry finishes
1+ dormers
Driveways On local streets, no driveway closer
to a corner than 50’
Driveways allowed on residential
collector when spaced 125’ apart
On corner, set back at least 50’ from a
local street and 60’ from Rd 1/Rd 2
No driveways allowed on Rd 1/Rd 2
(residential and major collectors)
Driveways allowed on Rd 3 (residential
collector) when spaced 125’ apart
Impervious
Cover
45% of the overall property 60% on individual lots provided the overall
property (excluding major collector ROW)
stays below 45%
Parkland/Trails Land dedication requirement: One
acre of parkland dedication
required for each 50 units:
600 units = minimum land
dedication of 12 acres
Park improvement requirement:
The UDC does not currently have a
park improvement requirement,
however, improvements can be
approved by the parks board to
meet overall parkland dedication
requirement.
Parks Board approval:
Land dedication: 22 acres of public
parkland shall be dedicated along the
South San Gabriel River
Approximately 5,266 feet of the San
Gabriel River Trail (10’ concrete) shall be
constructed within the parkland
Public parking shall be provided to serve
as a trailhead for visitors to access the San
Gabriel River Trail (also will serve as
amenity center parking)
Amenity Center N/A 3-acre residents-only amenity center
Private Open
Space
The subject property is an “occupied
site” consisting of a protected
salamander site, as well as karst and
recharge features. Water quality
requirements require specified buffers
and limitations on land disturbance in
and around the environmentally
sensitive areas.
Approximately 35% of the entire project
acreage (83 acres) must be set aside as open
space area and habitat/karst buffer area
(separate from parkland), consisting of
wildlife habitat, karst buffers, slopes,
landscape buffers and drainage areas, and
must be maintained in their native,
undisturbed condition with the exception of:
Water quality facilities
Trails and trail heads
Underbrush or invasive vegetation
removal
Page 35 of 252
Planning Department Staff Report
Shadow Canyon PUD – REZ-2016-002 Page 5 of 10
Pedestrian
Connectivity
5’ sidewalks on both sides of street Community trail system including nature
trails within the central ravine
Pedestrian linkage between Ph 6 and Ph 2B
8’ and 5’ wide sidewalks along Rd 2
Trailheads/signage at key access points
Tree
Preservation
All Heritage Trees shall be
preserved except as otherwise
approved by the Urban Forester or
City Council
Mitigation for removed Heritage
Tree shall be 3:1 for total inches
removed
Tree Survey is required with a
PUD
176 Heritage Trees have been surveyed
on the property, excluding open spaces
Heritage Trees located within the open
space shall be preserved
Up to 45 Heritage Trees (approx. 25% of
the 176 surveyed) within the non-open
space area may be removed without
Urban Forester or City Council approval
(although review is still required)
Removal of a Heritage Tree beyond the
45 trees allowed for removal will require
approval from the City’s Urban Forester
Heritage Tree mitigation shall meet the
UDC requirements at 3:1 for total inches
removed
Roadway
Dedication,
Design and
Improvement
TIA is required with a PUD
The OTP shows a proposed
collector level roadway extending
internally through this property.
Right-of-way dedication and
construction is required by the
developer for all internal roadways.
Major Collectors
o Must reflect OTP and connect to
another major collector level
road or higher or stub to
adjacent properties
o 73’ of ROW
o 45’ of pavement
o 2 lanes interim and 4 lanes
ultimate
o On-street parking allowed with
2 lanes, no on-street parking
with 4 lanes
o Residential driveways
prohibited
o 5’ sidewalk both sides
o Masonry wall (residential
boundary wall) required
Residential Collectors
o Must connect to another
residential collector level road
or higher or stub to adjacent
A TIA has been completed for this
subdivision. An updated TIA may be
required to determine the development’s
proportional share for the major collector
roadway and determine dedicated lanes at
the entrance of the subdivision.
Residential Collector – Road 1
o Primary entry road extending from
Hwy 29 at the north property line to
Rd 2
o 65’ of ROW
o 30’ of pavement
o 2 lanes with landscape median allowed
(not required) at Hwy 29
o On-street parking prohibited
o Residential driveways prohibited
o 5’ sidewalk both sides
o Masonry wall required against homes
Major Collector – Road 2
o Extends from south property line at
South San Gabriel River to west
property line for future extension in
both directions
o 73’ of ROW
o Ultimate design for 45’ of pavement
o 2 or 4 lanes, depending on TIA
o On-street parking prohibited
Page 36 of 252
Planning Department Staff Report
Shadow Canyon PUD – REZ-2016-002 Page 6 of 10
properties
o 65’ of ROW
o 37’ of pavement (in a housing
diversity development the
pavement may be reduced to 30’
with only one side parking)
o 2 lanes with no median
o On-street parking allowed
o Residential driveways allowed
o 5’ sidewalk both sides
o Masonry wall (residential
boundary wall) not required
Local Streets
o 50’ of ROW
o 28’ of pavement - one side
parking identified by signs at
entrance to subdivision
o 30’ of pavement - two side
parking
o 5’ sidewalks both sides
o Residential driveways prohibited
o 8’ sidewalk on one side with 5’
sidewalk on the other (if 2 lanes)
o Masonry wall required against homes
Residential Collector – Road 3
o Shall meet standard UDC requirements
for residential collectors
Local Streets
o 50’ of ROW
o 28’ of pavement
o On-street parking restricted to one side
with bump-outs at the intersections on
the street side with parking. Signs must
be placed on the non-parking side of
the street at each end of a block and
one in the middle of the block stating
that parking is restricted to one side of
the street.
Street
Connectivity
5 street connection points to
existing or future public roads
6 street connection points to existing or
future public roads
Block Length Maximum 20 lots or 1,320 ft
Exception: Where parks/open
spaces exist with 100’+ of street
frontage (no maximum)
Maximum 20 lots or 1,320 ft
Exception: Where open space, parkland,
habitat/karst buffer or natural barriers
exist, may increase to 60 lots or 3,000 ft
Signage Subdivision entry signs
o Maximum 1 sign
o May not be located off-site
o Limited to monument sign
o Maximum sign face: 40 sf
Maximum height: 6 feet
o Setback: 5 feet from ROW
o Landscape plant bed equal to
twice the sign face required
Directional signs in RS district
o Maximum sign face: 2 sf
Maximum height: 4 feet
o Setback: 2 ft from ROW
Subdivision entry sign
o Primary subdivision entry sign shall be
located at Hwy 29/Rd 1 intersection
o Sign may be allowed off-site within
adjacent commercial lot
o Monument sign
o Maximum overall size: 280 sf
Maximum sign face: 120 sf
Maximum height: 8 feet
o Setbacks: 20 ft from Hwy 29; 10 ft
from Rd 1
o Minimum 1,000 sf of landscape plant
bed shall be provided
o Architectural features such as towers
and walls shall not count against sign
size and shall not exceed 25’ in height
Residential neighborhood signs
o Maximum overall size: 50 sf
Maximum sign face: 25 sf
Maximum height: 6 feet
o Setback: 5 feet from ROW
o Minimum of 100 sf of landscape plant
Page 37 of 252
Planning Department Staff Report
Shadow Canyon PUD – REZ-2016-002 Page 7 of 10
bed shall be provided
Staff Analysis
Section 3.06 of the Unified Development Code (UDC) establishes criteria to consider when
evaluating a zoning change as well as Planned Unit Development District (PUD). Staff’s evaluation
of each approval criteria is identified below in italics.
Rezoning Criteria:
1. The application is complete and the information contained within the application is sufficient and
correct enough to allow adequate review and final action;
The application is complete and adequate for review.
2. The zoning change is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan;
The PUD application is consistent with the Future Land Use component of the comprehensive
master plan as well as the Overall Transportation Plan.
3. The zoning change promotes the health, safety or general welfare of the City and the safe orderly,
and healthful development of the City;
It appears the PUD application is consistent with this criteria statement. The proposed
development is a greenfield subdivision that is located in a sector of the community that is
largely developing residentially. It does not appear that development will negatively affect the
health, safety, and general welfare of the community.
4. The zoning change is compatible with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property
and with the character of the neighborhood; and
It appears the PUD application is consistent with this criteria statement. The proposed
development backs up to the San Gabriel River (and trail corridor) and is adjacent to a portion
of the Hillwood development.
5. The property to be rezoned is suitable for uses permitted by the district that would be applied by
the proposed amendment.
It appears the PUD application is consistent with the above criteria statement. The property to
be rezoned appears to be suitable for a single family residential development and is consistent
with the future land use designation for the property.
PUD Criteria:
1. A variety of housing types, employment opportunities, or commercial services to achieve a
balanced community;
The proposed PUD is inconsistent with the goal of providing a variety of housing types,
employment opportunities or commercial services. The proposed development is exclusively a
single family development with 3 single family lot sizes. Commercial services have not been
Page 38 of 252
Planning Department Staff Report
Shadow Canyon PUD – REZ-2016-002 Page 8 of 10
proposed as part of this PUD request. However, there is a multi-family and commercial tract
adjacent to this property.
2. An orderly and creative arrangement of all land uses with respect to each other and to the entire
community;
It appears that the proposed PUD is neutral with respect to meeting this criteria statement. The
proposed development is a conventional single family development. The developer is proposing a
maximum of 600 units, 22 acres of parkland, and 83 acres of open space. The current PUD
property does not provide additional land uses.
3. A planned and integrated comprehensive transportation system providing for a separation of
pedestrian and vehicular traffic, to include facilities such as roadways, bicycle ways, and
pedestrian walkways;
It appears that the proposed PUD is consistent with this criteria statement. UDC required
sidewalks along the primary roadway will provide pedestrian connectivity. Additionally, the
subdivision will include internal trails within the open spaces that will connect neighborhoods
within the development.
4. The provisions of cultural or recreational facilities for all segments of the community;
It appears the proposed PUD is consistent with this criteria statement. The Shadow Canyon
PUD Concept Plan illustrates approximately 22 acres of public parkland/open space including a
trail corridor. Trails within the development as well as an amenity center contribute to the
recreational facilities offered.
5. The location of general building envelopes to take maximum advantage of the natural and
manmade environment; and
Building envelopes and grading plan have not been included in the development plan. Staff is
unable to determine if the building envelopes will take maximum advantage of the natural
environment. While efforts have been made in this plan to protect sensitive features, the heritage
tree preservation proposed is less than the current UDC requirements. Due to the size of some of
the proposed lots at 45’ in width and the proposed impervious cover limitations of 60% per lot it
appears a significant amount of grading and tree removal may be necessary.
6. The staging of development in a manner which can be accommodated by the timely provision of
public utilities, facilities, and services.
The phasing plan proposed for the development has not been provided. Parkland dedication
requirements for the property, including roadway access to, are required to be dedicated to the
City no later than the recording of the first final plat for any portion of the property containing
residential lots. The construction phase of the San Gabriel river trail is as stated: “The trail shall
be constructed on the earlier of: (a) Prior to final acceptance of any lot in Parcel 2, 6 or 7 shown
on Exhibit D to the PUD Ordinance, however the trail may be completed in phased segments
occurring with the adjacent lot development; or (b) 180 days after the City provides written
notice via the means stated in the Consent Agreement stating that design or construction of any
adjacent section of the trail (on property east or west of the Property) has commenced”. Due to
the regional connectivity of this trail staff recommends this trail not be constructed in phases.
Page 39 of 252
Planning Department Staff Report
Shadow Canyon PUD – REZ-2016-002 Page 9 of 10
Additionally, defining “final acceptance of any lot” is a recommended condition of approval of
this application.
Staff Recommendation
Staff has reviewed the request, provided comments to the applicant and has worked with the
applicant to prepare the PUD proposal for consideration. Should the commission recommend
approval of the request staff is recommending the following conditions be added (strike through
identifies language to be removed and underline identifies language to be added):
Parkland/Trails/Open Space/Amenity Center. The proposed parkland dedication and
improvements identified in this staff report and PUD full-fill the parkland requirements of
the property shown on the development plan. The applicant is requesting the parkland
requirements also full-fill the parkland requirements for lots that were part of the original
subdivision of this property but are not subject to this PUD (lots 1, 2, and 4). Since the
additional lots are not part of this PUD application and the property owners of the
additional property are not a party to this PUD application, reference to this property is
not permitted in this application. Staff is recommending the following language:
o As illustrated on Exhibit D to the PUD Ordinance, Open Space Summary, the
Concept Plan requires at least 22 acres of public parkland/open space to be located
along the South San Gabriel River, and for a public trail (the San Gabriel River
Trail) to be located in the parkland. This 22 acre public parkland and associated
San Gabriel River Trail, will, when dedicated and constructed, fully satisfy the
City’s parkland dedication requirements for the Property, as well as the property
comprising lots 1, 2 and 4, Block F, within the Shadow Canyon Preliminary Plat
approved on December 15, 2004, as amended. The entirety of the 22 acres of
parkland shall be dedicated to the City, along with public right-of-way, no later
than the recording of the first Final Plat for any portion of the Property containing
residential lots.
ADA Accessibility of the San Gabriel Trail. ADA accessibility of all public facilities is
regulated by the Texas Accessibly Standards (TAS). TAS are administered through the state
of Texas and are not standards that can be waived at the local level. TAS does allow
variances and alternative compliance due to a variety of challenging circumstances, however
the reviewing agency is the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation not the City of
Georgetown. Staff is recommending the following changes:
o The trail shall be approximately 5,266 linear feet in length constructed along the
entire length of the South San Gabriel River as it traverses the Property, be ten foot
(10)’ wide, and be made of concrete. It must be located within the dedicated
parkland or the open space in the general location shown on Exhibit D to the PUD
Ordinance. The trail trailhead locations shall be constructed to meet Texas
Accessibility Standards (TAS).
Timing of Trail. Due to the regional impact of the proposed San Gabriel River trail staff is
recommending trail construction take place all at once rather than “phased segments
occurring with the adjacent lot development”. The overall concern is that if the development
Page 40 of 252
Planning Department Staff Report
Shadow Canyon PUD – REZ-2016-002 Page 10 of 10
of the trail is to take place based on the adjacent lot development, what occurs when there is
not an adjacent developable lot or there is a gap in developing a particular lot. Staff is
recommending the following changes:
o The trail shall be constructed in it’s entirety on the earlier of: (a) Prior to final
acceptance of any lot in Parcel 2, 6 or 7 shown on Exhibit D to the PUD Ordinance,
however the trail may be completed in phased segments occurring with the adjacent
lot development; or (b) 180 days after the City provides written notice via the means
stated in the Consent Agreement stating that design or construction of any adjacent
section of the trail (on property east or west of the Property) has commenced. Final
acceptance of any lot shall be defined as final acceptance of the subdivision
improvements serving any part parcel 2, 6, or 7 shown on exhibit D. Should fiscal be
posted to allow the recordation of the subdivision plat for one of the above mentioned
parcels the posted fiscal instrument shall not be released until the trail is complete.
Public Comments
As required by the Unified Development Code, property owners within a 200-foot radius of the
subject property and within the city limits were notified (5 notices mailed) of the rezoning
application, a legal notice advertising the public hearing was placed in the Sun Newspaper on April
17th, and signs were posted on-site. No written comments in support or against the applicant’s
rezoning proposal have been received by the Planning Department staff.
Attachments
Attachment 1 – Location Map
Attachment 2 – Future Land Use Map
Attachment 3 – Zoning Map
Attachment 4 – Aerial Map
Attachment 5 – PUD Development Plan
Page 41 of 252
W U n i v e r s i t y A v e
¬«29
W U n i v e r s i t y A v e
Wa
t
e
r
O
akPkwy
G
a
b
ri
e
l
F
o
r
e
s
t
CI T Y O F G E O R G E T O W N (R i v e r /S t r e a m )
(R i v e r/Strea m )
Georgetown ETJ
G e o r g e t o w n
E T J
Georg
etown
ETJ
GeorgetownETJ
Georgeto w n E TJ
W S H 2 9
W UNIVERSITY AVE
REZ-2016-002
Exhibit #1
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only 0 0.5 1Miles
¯
Le ge ndSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
Location Map
REZ-2016-002
Page 42 of 252
W U n i v e r s i t y A v e
¬«29
L e a n d e r R d
Leander R d
W U n i v e r s i t y A v e
Wa
t
e
r
OakPkwy
G
a
b
ri
e
l
F
o
r
e
s
t
C
e
d
a
r
H
o
l
l
o
w
R
d
(
Riv e r /S tream)
(River/Strea
m
)
Georgetown ETJ
Georg
etown ETJ
GeorgetownETJ
Georgeto w n E TJ
G e o r g e t o w n E T J
0 0.5 1 Miles
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only ¯
Future Land Use / Overall Transportation Plan
Exhibit #2REZ-2016 -002
LegendSiteParcelsCity Lim itsGeorgetown ETJ
Legend
Thoroughfare
Future Land Use
Institutional
Regional Commercial
Community Commercial
Em ployment Center
Low Density Residential
Mining
Mixed Use Community
Mixed Use Neighborhood Center
Moderate Density Residential
Open Space
Specialty Mixed Use Area
Ag / Rural Residential
Existing Collector
Existing Freeway
Existing Major Arterial
Existing Minor Arterial
Existing Ramp
Proposed Collector
Proposed Freeway
Propsed Frontage Road
Proposed Major Arterial
Proposed Minor Arterial
Proposed Railroad
High Density Residential
REZ-2016-002
Page 43 of 252
W U n i v e r s i t y A v e
¬«29
Wa
t
e
r
O
akPkwy
G
a
b
ri
e
l
F
o
r
e
s
t
CITY OF GEORGETOWN
CITY
O
F
G
E
O
R
G
E
T
O
W
N
C
I
T
Y
O
F
G
E
O
R
G
E
T
O
W
N
(R i v e r /S t r e a m )
(R i ver/Stream)
Zoning InformationREZ-2016-002Exhibit #3
¯
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only
0 0.5 1
Miles
Le ge ndSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
REZ-2016-002
Page 44 of 252
W U n i v e r s i t y A v e
¬«29
Wa
t
e
r
O
akPkwy
G
a
b
ri
e
l
F
o
r
e
s
t
C
e
d
a
r
H
o
l
l
o
w
R
d
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only
¯
0 0.5 1Miles
Exhibit #4REZ-2016-002 Le ge ndSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
REZ-2016-002
Page 45 of 252
Ordinance Number: ___________________ Page 1 of 2
Description: Shadow Canyon PUD Ordinance Case File Number: REZ-2016-002
Date Approved: May 24, 2016 Exhibits A & B Attached
ORDINANCE NO. _____________________
An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas,
amending part of the Official Zoning Map to rezone approximately
278.21 acres of the Isaac Donagan and Joseph Thompson Surveys from
the Residential Single-Family (RS) District to the Planned Unit
Development (PUD) District; 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 amending the
Official Zoning Map, adopted on the 12th day of June, 2012, for the specific Zoning District
classification of the following described real property ("The Property"):
278.21 acres of the Isaac Donagan and Joseph Thompson Surveys, as described in the
attached survey, hereinafter referred to as "The Property"; and
Whereas, the City Council has submitted the proposed amendment to the Official
Zoning Map to the Planning and Zoning Commission for its consideration at a public hearing
and for its recommendation or report; 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 May 3, 2016, held the
required public hearing and submitted a recommendation of approval to the City Council for
the requested rezoning of the Property; and
Whereas, the City Council, at a meeting on May 10, 2016, held an additional public
hearing prior to taking action on the requested rezoning 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.
Page 46 of 252
Ordinance Number: ___________________ Page 2 of 2
Description: Shadow Canyon PUD Ordinance Case File Number: REZ-2016-002
Date Approved: May 24, 2016 Exhibits A & B Attached
Section 2. The Official Zoning Map, as well as the Zoning District classification for the
Property is hereby amended from the Residential Single-Family (RS) district to the Planned Unit
Development (PUD) district with a base zoning district of Residential Single-Family (RS), in
accordance with the attached Exhibit A (Field Notes and Sketch), Exhibit B (PUD Development
Plan) and incorporated herein by reference.
Section 3. All ordinances and resolutions, or parts of ordinances and resolutions, in
conflict with this Ordinance are hereby repealed, and are no longer of any force and effect.
Section 4. If any provision of this Ordinance or application thereof to any person or
circumstance shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions, or
application thereof, of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or
application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby declared to be
severable.
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 10th day of May, 2016.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED on Second Reading on the 24th day of May, 2016.
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: ATTEST:
______________________ _________________________
Dale Ross Shelley Nowling
Mayor City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________
Charlie McNabb
City Attorney
Page 47 of 252
Page 48 of 252
Page 49 of 252
Page 50 of 252
Page 51 of 252
Page 52 of 252
Page 53 of 252
Page 54 of 252
Page 55 of 252
Page 56 of 252
Page 57 of 252
Shadow Canyon
City of Georgetown, Texas
Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Development Plan
January 25, 2016
Revised: March 21, 2016
Revised: April 27, 2016
Applicant: 278 Georgetown, Inc.
4408 Spicewood Springs Road
Austin, Tx 78759
Prepared by: SEC Planning
4201 W. Parmer Lane
Building A, Suite 220
Austin, Tx 78727
Page 58 of 252
Page 1 of 29 Shadow Canyon - Planned Unit Development
Exhibit A to PUD Ordinance
Development Plan
Shadow Canyon Planned Unit Development (the “PUD”)
A. Purpose and Intent
The boundaries of the PUD are the 278.21 acres described in Exhibit B (Field Notes) (the
“Property”), attached to the PUD Ordinance. The development of the Property is as a high
quality, residential community with a variety of lot sizes and preserved open space.
The contents of this Development Plan explain and illustrate the overall appearance and
function desired for the Property.
B. Applicability and Base Zoning
The development of the Property shall comply with the version of the Georgetown Unified
Development Code (UDC) in effect as of October 15, 2015, and other applicable provisions
in the City’s Code of Ordinances, except as modified within this Development Plan or the
Exhibits attached to the PUD Ordinance.
The base zoning district for the Property is RS – Residential Single Family
All neighborhoods within the Property must comply with this Development Plan. If this
Development Plan does not specifically address a development requirement, the
Georgetown Unified Development Code shall apply. In the event of a conflict between
this Development Plan and the base zoning district, this Development Plan shall control.
C. Concept Plan
Exhibit C attached to the PUD Ordinance for the Property is a Concept Plan for the
Property. Because the Property comprises a significant area and its development will occur
in phases over a number of years, modifications to the Concept Plan may become desirable
due to changes in market conditions or other factors. The Property owner may request
modifications to the Concept Plan.
Modifications of the Concept Plan pertaining to (a) roadway and trail alignments; (b)
changes in the density of specific sections or phases shown on the Concept Plan that do not
increase the overall density of development on the Land, and (c) changes of less than twenty
percent (20%) in the size of any section or phase shown on the Concept Plan, shall be
considered “Minor Modifications” over which the City’s Planning Director has final review
and decision-making authority. In addition, the City may request modifications to the
Concept Plan relating to roadway and trail alignments if necessary to due to topography,
Page 59 of 252
Page 2 of 29 Shadow Canyon - Planned Unit Development
terrain, floodplains and floodways, alignment with connections to adjoining portions of
roadways, trails, or utilities on adjacent properties, and similar situations, all of which shall
be considered Minor Modifications over which the City’s Planning Director has final
review and decision-making authority.
All other changes to the Concept Plan that are not Minor Modifications shall be considered
“Major Modifications.” Major Modifications to the Concept Plan must be approved as an
amendment to this Development Plan, PUD Ordinance, and Consent Agreement pertaining
to creation of a municipal utility district on the Property by the City Council. After approval
by the City in accordance with these requirements, all Minor Modifications and Major
Modifications to the Concept Plan shall be recorded by the City at the Property owner’s
expense in the Official Records of Williamson County, and thereafter, all references in this
Development Plan to the Concept Plan shall mean and refer to the then most current
approved and recorded Concept Plan.
Minor Modifications to the Concept Plan allowed by this Development Plan shall not be
deemed to be changes to the Project under Chapter 245 of the Texas Local Government
Code. All Major Modifications to the Concept Plan shall be deemed to be changes to the
Project under Chapter 245 of the Texas Local Government Code, and the provisions of the
UDC and all other applicable laws and regulations in effect at the time of such Major
Modifications shall apply unless the City agrees otherwise.
Approval of this Development Plan does not constitute plat or site plan approval, and all
development related approvals required by the UDC are still required.
D. Allowable / Prohibited Uses
The residential component of uses on the Property must include a mix of various single
family detached products, together with a cohesive network of open spaces, parks, habitat
and karst preserves, greenbelts, water quality areas, trails, and a resident’s amenity center.
The uses within the Property shall comply with the list of allowed and prohibited uses
defined in the Georgetown UDC, Chapter 5 Zoning Use Regulations, except that single-
family attached products are not permitted.
E. Residential Development Standards
The residential areas on the Property shall be developed according to the following
standards as well as the standards listed in Table E.1 below.
The following unit count parameters and design standards have been established:
1. Maximum Number of Residential Units:
The residential unit count on the Property shall not exceed 600 units.
Lot Width:
The minimum lot width shall be 45 feet.
Page 60 of 252
Page 3 of 29 Shadow Canyon - Planned Unit Development
In order to ensure product diversity, the following percentages shall apply to the
Property:
A maximum of 20% of the total lots may have lot widths less than 50 feet
A minimum of 30% of the total lots shall have lot widths of 60 feet or larger
2. Masonry Requirements:
At least 85% of the exterior surface area of all front elevations, all street facing
elevations, and all elevations facing public parkland shall consist of brick, stone or
stucco (exclusive of windows, doors or other openings). The side and rear elevations
not facing a public right-of-way shall consist of at least 85% brick, stone or stucco on
the first floor (exclusive of windows, doors or other openings) and brick, stone, stucco
or cement based siding on the second floor.
Homes that back onto or are adjacent to Road 1 or Road 2 on Exhibit C to the PUD
Ordinance shall consist of 85% brick, stone or stucco on all four elevations (exclusive
of windows, doors or other openings).
3. Front Facade Requirements:
The front elevation of all homes shall contain wall plane articulation. No elevations
shall be a single wall plane across the entire width of the front elevation. Each front
elevation shall contain a minimum of two of the following elements, to be identified
on the architectural plans submitted for building permit:
A minimum of two wall planes on the front elevation, offset a minimum of 18
inches
Covered front porch or patio with a minimum size of 60 square feet
A side-entry or swing-in garage entry (for garage doors that do not face the
front street)
A garage door recessed from the primary front façade a minimum of four feet
(for garage doors that face the front street)
Enhanced garage door materials (wood, ornamental metal, decorative door,
window inserts and hardware, painted or stained to match house)
Shed roof or trellis (at least 18” deep) above garage door for additional
architectural detail
A combination of at least two roof types (e.g., hip and gable) or two different
roof planes of varying height and/or direction
Two or more masonry finishes to compliment the architectural style of the
home
The addition of one or more dormers on the front elevation to compliment the
architectural style of the home
4. Driveways:
Residential driveways on corner lots shall be spaced a minimum of 60 feet from Road
1 and Road 2 shown on Exhibit C to the PUD Ordinance and 50 feet from a local
street, both as measured from the back of curb to the center of the driveway.
Page 61 of 252
Page 4 of 29 Shadow Canyon - Planned Unit Development
Residential driveways are not allowed on Road 1 or Road 2 shown on Exhibit C to
the PUD Ordinance.
Road 3 may have driveways spaced as needed to accommodate the lots fronting onto
Road 3.
5. Additional Development Standards:
The following additional development standards set forth in Table E-1, below, shall
apply to the Property.
Setbacks shall be measured from the outside of the exterior surface of the home.
Eaves and overhangs are permitted to encroach within the setbacks a maximum of 18
inches.
Table E.1 – Development Standards
RESIDENTIAL USES Base District RS
Lot Width
Minimum 45 ft. 1
Exception: Minimum for Corner
Lots 50 ft
Exception: Minimum for Lots with
side lot lines on Road 1 or Road 2 55 feet
Front Setback
Minimum 20 ft.
Exception: Minimum for air-
conditioned living areas, covered
patios or porches or side entry or
swing in garages, IF adequate area
is maintained for planting required
front yard landscaping trees outside
of the 10 foot PUE
15 ft
Side Setback
Minimum 5 ft.
Exception: Minimum for side
setback adjacent to a street 10 ft
Page 62 of 252
Page 5 of 29 Shadow Canyon - Planned Unit Development
Exception: Minimum for garage
accessed from a side street 20 ft.
Rear Setback
Minimum 10 ft.
Exception: Minimum for a lot that
backs to the collector roads labeled
Road 1 or Road 2
15 ft
Building Height
(maximum) 35 ft.
Lot Area
(minimum) 5,500 s.f.
Impervious Cover
Overall Property Maximum (excluding
the Major Collector) 45 %
Individual Residential Lot Up to 60%, provided that 45% overall maximum is not exceeded1.
1 The Final Plat for each phase of development must call out in either a plat note or a
table the specific impervious cover maximum allocated for the lots within the plat.
F. Parkland/Trails/Open Space/Amenity Center
As illustrated on Exhibit D to the PUD Ordinance, Open Space Summary, the Concept
Plan requires at least 22 acres of public parkland/open space to be located along the
South San Gabriel River, and for a public trail (the San Gabriel River Trail) to be
located in the parkland. This 22 acre public parkland and associated San Gabriel River
Trail, will, when dedicated and constructed, fully satisfy the City’s parkland dedication
requirements for the Property, as well as the property comprising lots 1,2 and 4, Block
F, within the Shadow Canyon Preliminary Plat approved on December 15, 2004, as
amended. The entirety of the 22 acres of parkland shall be dedicated to the City, along
with public right-of-way, no later than the recording of the first Final Plat for any
portion of the Property containing residential lots.
In addition to the foregoing public parkland dedication, approximately 83 additional
acres of open space area and habitat/karst buffer area must be maintained on the
Property, consisting of wildlife habitat, karst buffers, slopes, landscape buffers and
drainage areas.
A private, three (3) acre amenity center for residents of the Property must be provided
in close proximity to the dedicated public parkland along the river. The private amenity
center may contain a private residents-only swimming pool, pool building, playground,
Page 63 of 252
Page 6 of 29
and trails. The parking lot shall be a public parking lot and must also serve as a trailhead
parking lot for visitors to access the San Gabriel River Trail.
The San Gabriel River Trail Property shall meet the following specifications:
The trail shall be approximately 5,266 linear feet in length constructed along
the entire length of the South San Gabriel River as it traverses the Property, be
ten foot (10)’ wide, and be made of concrete. It must be located within the
dedicated parkland or the open space in the general location shown on Exhibit
D to the PUD Ordinance. The trailhead locations shall be constructed to meet
Texas Accessibility Standards (TAS).
If topographic constraints restrict any area along the river, the trail shall be
routed internally, as necessary, and in coordination with the Parks Department.
The trail shall be constructed on the earlier of: (a) Prior to final acceptance of
any lot in Parcel 2, 6 or 7 shown on Exhibit D to the PUD Ordinance, however
the trail may be completed in phased segments occurring with the adjacent lot
development; or (b) 180 days after the City provides written notice via the
means stated in the Consent Agreement stating that design or construction of
any adjacent section of the trail (on property east or west of the Property) has
commenced.
Additionally, pedestrian connectivity must be provided throughout the Property as
follows:
Trailheads with signage at key pedestrian access points to the community trail
system, as indicated on Exhibit D to the PUD Ordinance.
A pedestrian connection linking Parcel 2 and Parcel 4.
Site sensitive, mulch or decomposed granite nature trails within the central
ravine as indicated on Exhibit D to the PUD Ordinance.
8-foot and 5-foot wide sidewalks along Road 2 (as described in Section G below
shown on Exhibit G to the PUD Ordinance).
All facilities utilized as “credit” toward the City’s parkland dedication requirements
shall be open to the public. All developer installed facilities as well as open space areas
shall be maintained by a Property Owners Association to the same or better standards
as the City’s standards for similar improvements and areas.
G. Street Design
Roadway circulation and right of way classification must be consistent with the
Concept Plan attached as Exhibit C to the PUD Ordinance. Roadway design standards
shall be governed by the Georgetown UDC, Section 12.03, Streets, unless specifically
modified by this Development Plan.
The primary entry to the Property is via a Residential Collector from Highway 29 on
the northern edge of the Property (shown as “Road 1” on Exhibit C to the PUD
Page 64 of 252
Page 7 of 29
Ordinance). Road 1 shall be a 65’ wide Residential Collector right of way with 30’ of
pavement measured face of curb to face of curb with no parking on either side of the
road. A landscape median may be allowed at the intersection with Highway 29, pending
design approval. Exhibit F to the PUD Ordinance depicts the proposed design of Road
1. A masonry wall must be installed between the roadway and any homes that back or
side onto Road 1.
Road 1 intersects with an internal Major Collector (shown as “Road 2” on Exhibit C to
the PUD Ordinance). Road 2 shall be a 73’ wide right of way with ultimate plans for
45’ of pavement, measured face of curb to face of curb. The ultimate design and
construction of Road 2 shall be in compliance with the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA).
Should the TIA find that two (2) lanes of the ultimate four (4) lanes of Road 2 must be
constructed with 30’ of pavement face of curb to face of curb, the standards and
specifications set forth in Exhibit G to the PUD Ordinance shall be followed.
Additionally, an eight (8)-foot wide sidewalk must be constructed on one side of Road
2 with a five (5) foot wide sidewalk on the other in the event that only 2 lanes are
constructed.
65 feet of right of way for Road 1 and 73 feet of right of way for Road 2 shall be
dedicated to the City, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, at the time of final
plat.
Road 2 must be stubbed out at the Property line for a future connection to the tract west
of the Property and shall continue to the south property line at the South San Gabriel
River. No parking or residential driveways shall be allowed on Road 2. A masonry
wall must be installed between the roadway and any homes that back or side onto Road
2.
Internal Local Streets within the Property shall be designed and constructed having a
50’ wide right of way with 28’ width of pavement measured from face of curb to face
of curb. On-street parking shall be restricted to one side of the street with bump-outs
at the intersections on the street side with parking. Signs must be placed on the non-
parking side of the street at each end of a block and one in the middle of the block
stating that parking is restricted to one (1) side of the street. The final sign language
and locations must be mutually agreed to by the City’s Planning Director and Applicant
prior to installation, and shall be consistent with the sign design and content specified
in the 2012 IFC Section D103.6. Exhibit E to the PUD Ordinance depicts the approved
design of Internal Local Streets
Street Connectivity: A minimum of six (6) access points to adjacent properties or
existing or planned roadways shall be provided and shall be in the locations generally
depicted in Exhibit C to the PUD Ordinance. Additionally, at least two (2) of the six
(6) access points must be completed prior to the submission of a final plat application
for a plat having the 31st residential lot on the Property. One of these access points
must be a permanent roadway meeting the standards referenced above and in Exhibit E
to the PUD Ordinance for internal local streets; the second of these access points may
Page 65 of 252
Page 8 of 29
be a temporary 26-foot emergency all-weather access drive until an alternate permanent
second access point is constructed.
Block Length: Block lengths of up to 3,000 feet or 60 lots are allowed along any open
space, parkland, habitat/karst buffer or where any natural barriers exist as shown on
Exhibit C to the PUD Ordinance.
Landscape Islands: Trees and vegetation shall be planted in medians in public right-
of-ways. A Property Owners Association must be responsible for landscape
maintenance and irrigation within landscape lots and rights of way. Landscape within
the right-of-way shall require a license agreement with the City. Shade trees are not
allowed within a public utility easement or within ten (10) feet of water or wastewater
lines.
H. Tree Protection and Mitigation
Approximately 35% of the entire project acreage must be preserved as open space,
including preservation of the Heritage Trees located within the open space preserves
(see Exhibit D to the PUD Ordinance). The heavily wooded open space preserves must
be maintained in their native, undisturbed condition with the exception of the following:
Water Quality facilities as necessary to serve the Property
Trails and trail heads
Underbrush or remove invasive vegetative species or brush and/or mitigate any
health/safety issues
Due to the restricted amount of unconstrained, upland property, removal of certain
Heritage Trees in the developable uplands may be unavoidable. As such, the following
Heritage Tree Removal and Pruning standards shall apply:
A Tree Preservation Plan, including a survey of all Heritage Trees, must be
provided with all final plat applications and must indicate all Heritage Trees to
be preserved and those Heritage Trees which may not be able to be preserved.
A tree mitigation table must be provided on the Tree Preservation Plan to
illustrate the mitigation requirements based on the number of inches to be
removed. The mitigation table format and content shall be consistent with the
UDC Development Manual.
Applicant shall remove a maximum of 45 Heritage Trees, approximately 25%
of the 176 total Heritage Trees surveyed on the property. Any removal of a
Heritage Tree beyond the 45 trees allowed for removal will require approval
from the City’s Urban Forester.
Any Heritage Tree that is removed shall be mitigated in a method as outlined in
UDC 8.02.040 in place at the time of the City Council’s approval of the PUD
Ordinance (attached as Exhibit H to the PUD Ordinance).
The City’s Urban Forester shall approve all permits for the removal or pruning
of any Heritage Tree up to the maximum 45 total trees. Heritage Tree removal
Page 66 of 252
Page 9 of 29
permits for a maximum of 45 trees will be submitted for the sole purpose of
documenting mitigation for the removed caliper inches and not require
justification for the removal or evaluation of tree condition.
I. Residential Landscaping
Residential landscaping shall be in accordance with UDC Section 8.03 and the City’s
Water Conservation Ordinance codified in Chapter 13.15 of the City Code of
Ordinances.
J. Environmental
A Section 10(a)(1)(B) incidental take permit from the United States Fish and Wildlife
Service currently applies to the Property. The approved Section 10(a)(1)(B) permit
supersedes the Georgetown Water Quality Management Plan and Appendix A, Federal
Environmental Standards for Occupied Sites, as included in the Georgetown UDC.
Eighty-five percent (85%) of total suspended solids for the entire Property must be
removed from storm water run-off through water quality control best management
practices.
K. Signage
Exhibit H to the PUD Ordinance illustrates the location of signage within the Property.
General
These size modifications shall replace the size restrictions described in Chapter 10 of
the Unified Development Code.
Signage shall not be located in the sight-triangle of an intersection.
Subdivision Entry Signs
A Primary subdivision entry monument sign shall be located along Highway 29 at the
Residential Collector road intersection, as illustrated on Exhibit H to the PUD
Ordinance. The sign shall either be located in a sign easement or be located on a
separate lot. The sign may be allowed off-site within the Shadow Canyon Commercial
Section 1 Final Plat recorded in Document 2008045660, subject to the approval of the
property owner of the lot on which the signage will be placed as evidenced by a
perpetual easement in favor of the Property Owners Association recorded in the
Official Public Records of Williamson County.
The sign area including the base and sign face shall not exceed 280 square feet, or 8
feet in height and the sign face encompassing only the surface for the sign letters and
logo shall not exceed 120 square feet. Surrounding architectural features such as
Page 67 of 252
Page 10 of 29
towers and walls shall not count against the sign square footage and shall not exceed
25 feet in height.
The signs shall be located a minimum of 20’ from the right of way of Highway 29 and
10 feet from the residential collector entry road. A license to encroach will be required
for any signage extending into a public utility easement.
A minimum of 1,000 s.f. of landscape plant bed shall be provided around the
Subdivision Entry Sign. Plant material should be of a native and/or adapted species.
Plants should be selected from the booklet titled, Native and Adapted Landscape
Plants, an earthwise guide for Central Texas, 5th Edition, 2013, created by the Texas
Cooperative Extension, Grow Green and the Ladybird Johnson National Wildflower
Center. All signage as well as landscaping area shall be privately maintained by
Property Owners Association.
Residential Neighborhood Monument Signs
Neighborhood signs may be located throughout the Property as noted on Exhibit H to
the PUD Ordinance. The signs shall either be located in a sign easement or be located
on a separate platted lot. Neighborhood signs shall not block sight distances nor be
located in a public utility easement and shall be setback a minimum of 5 feet from
adjacent rights of way. The sign area including the base and sign face shall not exceed
50 square feet, or 6 feet in height and the sign face encompassing only the surface for
the sign letters and logo shall not exceed 25 square feet.
A minimum of 100 square feet of landscape plant bed shall be provided around each
Residential Neighborhood Monument Sign. Plant material should be of a native and/or
adapted species. Plants should be selected from the booklet titled, Native and Adapted
Landscape Plants, an earthwise guide for Central Tex as, 5th Edition, 2013, created by
the Texas Cooperative Extension, Grow Green and the Ladybird Johnson National
Wildflower Center. All signage as well as landscaping area shall be privately
maintained by a Property Owners Association.
K. Miscellaneous Provisions
Amendments: Except as otherwise provided herein, Amendments to this PUD shall
follow the amendment process outlined in the UDC.
Exhibits. All exhibits described herein and attached to the PUD Ordinance are fully
incorporated into this Development Plan by this reference for all purposes.
Page 68 of 252
Page 11 of 29
Exhibit B to PUD Ordinance - Field Notes
Page 69 of 252
Page 12 of 29
Page 70 of 252
Page 13 of 29
Page 71 of 252
Page 14 of 29
Page 72 of 252
Page 15 of 29
Page 73 of 252
Page 16 of 29
Page 74 of 252
Page 17 of 29
Page 75 of 252
Page 18 of 29
Page 76 of 252
Page 19 of 29
Page 77 of 252
Page 20 of 29
Page 78 of 252
Page 21 of 29
EXHIBIT C
Page 79 of 252
Page 22 of 29
EXHIBIT D
Page 80 of 252
Page 23 of 29
EXHIBIT E
Page 81 of 252
Page 24 of 29
EXHIBIT F
Page 82 of 252
Page 25 of 29
EXHIBIT G
Page 83 of 252
Page 26 of 29
EXHIBIT H
Page 84 of 252
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Regula r Meeting
May 10, 2016
SUBJECT:
Forwarded fro m the G eneral G overnment and Fi nance Advi sory B oard (G G AF):
Consideration and possible action to approve a propo sed plan to expend project savi ngs recognized from the close out
of the Publ i c Safe ty Operati ons & Trai ni ng Ce nter project -- Wayne Nero, Police Chief
ITEM SUMMARY:
As the P SOTC project is closed o ut, it is anticipated the re will be approximately $64 7,6 01 .23 in remaining unobligated
funds. There is currently $44 ,219.24 remaining in o bligated FFE funds, which are in the final process of being spent.
This will leave an antic ipated $603,381.99 in remaining and uno bligated funds from the project after closeout. Furthe r,
there is the pote ntial to recognize another $38 ,55 2.5 0 in savings depending upo n reimbursement from the arc hite c t
regarding closing o ut irrigation repairs.
Therefore, the best case in remaining unobligated funds is anticipated to be $6 41 ,93 4.4 9 and the worst case is antic ipated
to be $603,381 .99 .
Chief Ne ro and Chief Sullivan are proposing the attached plan to expend a po rtion of the remaining funds on vario us
projects that were originally unfunded, unanticipated, tabled, o r no w present a viable opportunity to enhance the proje c t in
an approximate amount of $490,488.16
.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
$490,488.16 wo uld be utilized from the re maining $603,381.99 P SOTC Pro ject funds. This would leave approximate ly
$112,893.83 remaining in the project.
SUBMITTED BY:
Wayne Nero
ATTACHMENT S:
Description
P SOTC Clos eout Projec ts Proposal
P SOTC Clos eout Availab le F und s
Page 85 of 252
PSOTC UNOBLIGATED FUNDS
PROJECT PROPOSAL
Prepared for GGAF: February 25, 2016
UPDATED April 27, 2016
Page 86 of 252
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
As the PSOTC project is closed out, it is anticipated there will be approximately $647,601.23 in
remaining funds. There is currently $44,219.24 remaining in obligated FFE funds, which are in the
final process of being spent. This will leave an anticipated $603,381.99 in remaining and
unobligated funds from the project after closeout. Further, there is the potential to recognize
another $38,552.50 in savings depending upon reimbursement from the architect regarding
closing out irrigation repairs. Therefore, the best case in remaining unobligated funds is
anticipated to be $641,934.49 and the worst case is anticipated to be $603,381.99.
Chief Nero and Chief Sullivan are proposing the following plan to expend a portion of the
remaining funds on various projects that were originally unfunded, unanticipated, tabled, or now
present a viable opportunity to enhance the public safety project in an approximate amount of
$490,488.16 as follows:
The requests total $490,488.16.
If all projects were approved, a minimum of $112,893.83 would remain in
savings/unobligated funds.
TOTAL PROJECT REQUESTS $490,488.16
POLICE PROJECTS $389,488.16
Key Card Readers (4) $18,781.98
Additional Cameras $20,777.00
Tactical Bldg Enhancement $23,175.35
LEOPARD/Turf $140,000
Conex Storage Containers (5) $24,000
Relocate Lockers $27,027.73
Fitness/Wellness $47,194.21
EVOC Training Cones $5,173.63
O’Course/Phase I $50,000 (PENDING)*
Additional Tables/Chairs $33,358.26
FIRE PROJECTS $101,000
EOC Enhancements $35,000 (IN PROGRESS)
Flash Over Chamber $56,000 (IN PROGRESS)
PPE Enclosure $10,000
Page 87 of 252
POLICE PROJECTS: TOTAL $389,488.16
1. 4 Additional Key Card Readers $18,781.98
This is at the request of Facilities Superintendent and will add security card readers to
the following locations: IT Office, 2 Mechanical Rooms, and the Facilities Office.
2. Additional Cameras for Front Parking Lot/North Bay TB $20,777.00
There is currently no camera coverage of the front parking lot. The front entrance has
coverage, however, not the parking lot. Given recent events across the country and
our recent public communications making our front parking lot a “Safe Trade”
location, we feel it is very important to cover this area. This also includes the addition
of a camera to the north bay of the Tactical Building interior.
3. Tactical Building Enhancement $23,175.35
This request was work deferred in order to determine unobligated funds at the end of
the project. The work will include the following:
a. Install plywood protective walls along north/northeast walls of the fitness area
(insulation is being damaged due to heavy traffic) ($4,800)
b. Extra movable panels and associated hardware ($16,050)
c. Install WIFI and two IP Phones at North and South end of Tactical Bay.
($2,325.35)
4. LEOPARD Course and Artificial Turf $140,000
This request is to install a artificial turf (approx. $125,000) in the open work
space south of the tactical building (approx. 80’ x 140’) and the
department’s Law Enforcement Officer Performance and Reaction Drill
(LEOPARD; approx. $15,000). The area was designed for both officer and
future K9 physical agility development. This will provide a safe area for
training regardless of weather. The turf is very low maintenance and will
have a 15yr warranty.
a. Install turf in open area south of the Tactical Building $125,000
b. Construct LEOPARD Course (Physical Agility Course) $15,000
5. Police/Fire Conex Storage Containers (5) $24,000
This will provide much needed exterior storage for tactical building panels,
seized/abandoned bicycles, Blue Santa items, and several misc. items. The cost
includes the associated prep work (dirt) for installation and 5 conex boxes (4 - 8’x 40’
and 1 – 8’ x 20’).
6. Additional Fitness Equipment $47,194.21
This request will more adequately support the day to day use of the fitness areas as
we have limited pieces of certain equipment and the demand at certain times has been
Page 88 of 252
greater than expected. This equipment will allow us to more adequately engage in
group fitness, allow for the department to integrate the Texas DPS Fitness Program
into our fitness/wellness program, better support academy (police and fire) fitness
training, and allow the ability to offer more well-rounded fitness offerings at the
PSOTC through the city’s wellness program. The request will add:
a. treadmill (1),
b. elliptical (1),
c. C2 Rower (8),
d. Air Bike (4),
e. Pull up/Dip Assist machine (1),
f. incline/decline benches,
g. additional rubber flooring,
h. assorted Med Balls,
i. assorted kettle bells
j. plyo boxes wood,
k. plyo boxes foam,
l. additional weight plates, and
m. a few misc items (timer, storage, collars, etc)
7. Relocation of Tactical Lockers to Men’s Locker Rm $27,027.73
This request is to relocate the 40 lockers in the SWAT area to the men’s locker room.
Currently, the men’s locker room is nearly full. Associated Costs:
Locker removal/transfer $11,727.73
Electrician $1,800.00
Resurface Floor $13,500
8. EVOC/Motor/Bike Training Cones $5,173.63
This request is for a variety of traffic cones, drums, barricades, and channeling posts
that support a variety of training for emergency vehicle operations, motorcycle
training, and bike patrol training.
9. Phase 1 Obstacle Course $50,000
This request would facilitate the first phase of a longer term project to
establish a relevant obstacle course on the property that could benefit all of
public safety and well as allow for and enhance community engagement
such as partnerships with the GISD ROTC Programs.
Page 89 of 252
FIRE PROJECTS: TOTAL: $101,000
1. Enhance Emergency Operations Center $35,000
This request would provide the necessary equipment to allow for efficient EOC
functioning and would include thin clients for all work stations, copy/printers, and
miscellaneous items. [IN PROGRESS]
2. Fire Behavior/Flash Over Chamber w/Pad $56,000
The flash over chamber will enhance GFD’s capabilities in training
firefighters on fire dynamics and explosions. This component, much
like the training tower, will reduce and/or eliminate the need to travel
to other locations for this type of fire training. [IN PROGRESS]
3. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Enclosure $10,000
This request will provide a safe enclosure for personal protective gear that is stored in
the apparatus bay.
Page 90 of 252
BOND PROCCEDS REMAINING 871,992.04$ LH
TOTAL BC RETAINAGE PENDING 448,127.03$ LK
1,320,119.07$
Bartlett Cocke 429,414.00$ Final - SM
ECM 57,936.20$ Final - SM
Architects Design Group 91,766.64$ Final - SM
American Irrigation Repair 47,594.00$ Estimate - TL
John Malmquist (mailbox)5,400.00$ PO - TL
Brycomm - Cellular Carrier 35,907.00$ PO - CB
Brycomm - DAS System/Roof 4,500.00$ PO - CB
TOTAL OBLIGATED 672,517.84$
TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDS 647,601.23$
Possible reimbursement from ADG for Irrigation
Repairs 38,552.50$ EJ Calc - ?SM
TOTAL POSSIBLE AVAILABLE FUNDS (UP TO)686,153.73$
PO's TO CLOSE
Name Amount PO#
Bartlet Cocke 200,930.45$ 3305579
Terracon Consultant 12,848.00$ 3400457
Terricon Consultant 1,594.00$ 3401413
Furniture for Business 4,886.08$ 3404451
Dell Computer Corporation 3,210.00$ 3501907
PO's TO AMEND
Name Amount PO#Additional $
Architects Design Group 39,194.15$ 3204159 52,572.49$
ECM International 3,698.99$ 3502110 54,237.21$
PUBLIC SAFETY OPERATIONS AND TRAINING FACILITY
1/22/2015
Page 91 of 252
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Regula r Meeting
May 10, 2016
SUBJECT:
Second Readi ng o f an Ordinance to Rezone appro ximately 1 78.83 acres in the William Addison Survey lo cated at 1 82 1
SE Inner Loo p from the Agriculture (AG) and Residential Single-Family (RS) Districts to the Public Facility (P F)
District known as Williamson County Georgetown Annex -- Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director (acti on requi r e d)
ITEM SUMMARY:
B ackground:
The applicant has requested to rezone the subject site fro m the Agriculture (AG) and Reside ntial Single-Family (RS)
Districts to the P ublic Facility (P F) Distric t. The property was annexed in 2 008 and assigned the default AG District. The
P ublic Facilities District (PF) is intended to pro vide a location fo r government and o ther public or quasi-public facility
operations. These may include schools, public parks, ho spitals, airports, go vernment o ffices, c hurches and othe r re lated
uses, but would not include industrial facilities or storage yards. Some uses allowe d in this district might generate heavy
traffic volumes and high-intensity operations. The PF District shall co ntain uses that are allowed in both residential and
non-residential districts and is subject to no n-residential design and landsc aping standards fo r compatibility with ne arby
or adjacent reside ntial uses.
Publ i c Comment:
To date no written o r verbal comments in support o r against the applicant’s proposal have been received by staff.
Pl anni ng and Zoni ng Commi ssi on:
At their April 5, 20 16 meeting, the P lanning and Zoning Co mmissioners recommended appro val (6-0) of the rezo ning
request. One person from the public had concerns with placing buildings on the open space/flood plain area. Staff stated
that buildings were not being proposed in the open space/flood plain area and that a permit fro m FEMA and the City wo uld
be required for future deve lo pment. Nobody fro m the public spo ke in favor or in o ppositio n of the request during the
public hearing.
Ci ty Counci l Fi rst Readi ng
At their April 2 6, 2 01 6 meeting, The City Council approved (7-0) the First Reading o f the Ordinance.
Recommende d Mo ti on:
Approval of the Second Reading of an Ordinance rezoning approximately 178.83 acres in the William Addison Survey
from the AG and RS Districts to the P F District.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
n/a
SUBMITTED BY:
Juan Enriquez, Planner and Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, P lanning Director
ATTACHMENT S:
Description
S taff Report
Exhib it 1 - Loc ation Map
Exhib it 2 - Future Land Use Map
Exhib it 3 - Zoning Map
Ordinanc e
Exhib it A - Loc ation Map
Exhib it B - Legal Des c rip tion
Page 92 of 252
Georgetown Planning Department Staff Report
Wilco Georgetown Annex Rezoning Page 1 of 4
Report Date: March 30, 2016
File No: REZ-2016-005
Project Planner: Juan Enriquez, Planner
Item Details
Project Name: Williamson County Georgetown Annex
Project Address: 1821 SE Inner Loop
Location: SE Inner Loop between Southwestern Blvd and E. University Ave
Total Acreage: Approximately 178 acres
Legal Description: 178 acres of the William Addison Survey
Applicant: Robert B. Daigh, P.E.
Property Owner: Williamson County
Contact: Robert B. Daigh, P.E.
Existing Use: Williamson County Facilities/Vacant & Undeveloped Land
Existing Zoning: Agriculture (AG)
Proposed Zoning: Public Facility (PF)
Future Land Use: Institutional
Growth Tier: Tier 1B (Developing)
Overview of Applicant’s Request
The applicant has requested to rezone the subject site from the Agriculture (AG) District to the
Public Facility (PF) District. The property was annexed in 2008 and assigned the default AG
District. The requested rezoning would place the existing uses into the proper zoning district and
correct their legal non-conforming status.
Site Information
Location:
The property is located on SE Inner Loop between Southwestern Boulevard and FM 1460.
Physical Characteristics:
The property is approximately 178 acres in size and is generally flat with an open space area
along the northern corner of the site. The majority of the property remains undeveloped with the
exception of the Williamson County Juvenile Detention Center, Regional Animal Shelter and
Children’s Advocacy Center. The primary means of access to the site is from SE Inner Loop.
Page 93 of 252
Planning Department Staff Report
Wilco Georgetown Annex Rezoning Page 2 of 4
Surrounding Properties:
Location Zoning Future Land Use Existing Use
North None. ETJ. Open Space Open Space
South AG Mixed Use Community/Specialty Area Mixed
Use
Undeveloped vacant
land
East RS/AG/None.ETJ. Moderate Density Residential/Community
Commercial
Residences/Open
Space/Horse Riding
Stable
West RS Mixed Use Community/Specialty Area Mixed
Use
Undeveloped AG
land/Railroad ROW
Property History
The property was annexed into the City on December 9, 2008 (Annexation Ordinance 2008-84).
The property is mostly undeveloped with the exception of the Williamson County government
services. The property has remained zoned Agriculture (AG) since annexation.
2030 Comprehensive Plan
Future Land Use:
The 2030 Future Land Use category at this location is Institutional. The Institutional category is
described in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan allows for individual or concentrations of government
operations and uses, including government administration offices, libraries, police, fire and EMS
services, airports, correctional facilities, etc. There is a small portion of the site that has an Open
Space category along the north property line. The portion of the site that has this Open Space
category will not be developed.
Growth Tier:
The 2030 Plan Growth Tier Map designation is Tier 1B (Developing). Tier 1B areas are presently
in the City limits in areas that are generally under-served by infrastructure and where such
service and facilities will likely be needed to meet the growth needs of the City once Tier 1A
approaches buildout over the next ten years.
Transportation
The subject site’s inbound and outbound access is on SE Inner Loop. Future development of the
site will continue to have access to SE Inner Loop. A Traffic Impact Analysis may be required
with the submittal of a Site Development Review application to further analyze traffic impact.
Utilities
Water and wastewater are served by the City of Georgetown. Electric service is provided by the
City of Georgetown and ONCOR. It is anticipated that there is adequate capacity to serve this
property either by existing capacity or developer participation in upgrades to infrastructure.
Page 94 of 252
Planning Department Staff Report
Wilco Georgetown Annex Rezoning Page 3 of 4
Zoning District
The existing zoning district for the site is Agriculture (AG). The district is intended to allow large
rural residential development, agricultural and farming uses and may include lands that are
relatively undeveloped. The AG district is also the default district for land newly annexed into
the City but not yet placed in an appropriate zoning classification.
Proposed Zoning District
The Public Facility (PF) District is intended to provide a location for government and other public
or quasi-public facility operations. These may include schools, parks, hospitals, airports,
government offices, churches and other related uses. The PF District may contain uses that are
allowed in both residential and non-residential districts and is subject to non-residential design
and landscaping standards for compatibility with nearby or adjacent residential.
Notable development standards:
Maximum building height 45 feet
Minimum front/street setback 25 feet
Minimum rear setback to residential district 25 feet (0 setback when not next to residential)
Bufferyard required between:
• PF next to AG & RS Districts
• A 10 foot wide planting area. 2 evergreen
ornamental trees and 4 evergreen shrubs per
each 50 linear feet
Staff Analysis
Findings
Based on all the information presented, staff has made the following findings:
1. The subject property is developed with existing government uses and uses that would be
permissible in the proposed PF district, alleviating legal non-conforming status of the
existing uses with the exception of the regional animal shelter.
2. The zoning request of PF is appropriate at this location because it is supported by the
existing Future Land Use of Institutional. Both the PF district and Institutional category
have the same intent of providing government related uses.
3. Comprehensive Plan Section 1.4 (E) Public Safety states that Georgetown strives to be the
standard for public safety through innovative and strategic planning, the utilization of
viable emerging technologies, and the effective and efficient use of staffing, resources, and
facilities. In this case, the rezoning will accomplish this goal by allowing the expansion of
public safety services with the future development of the site.
4. The proposed rezoning promotes the health, safety, or general welfare of the City and
County by providing facilities to ensure that Williamson County officials have access to
adequate government administrative office space and resources.
Page 95 of 252
Planning Department Staff Report
Wilco Georgetown Annex Rezoning Page 4 of 4
5. There is sufficient capacity of City utilities to accommodate the proposed rezoning from AG
to PF District since a government related use was already anticipated with the Future Land
Use of Institutional.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the applicant’s request based on the above-mentioned findings.
Public Comments
As required by the Unified Development Code, all property owners within a 200 foot radius of
the subject property and within City jurisdiction (35 notices mailed) were notified of the rezoning
application, a legal notice advertising the public hearing was placed in the Sun Newspaper and
signs were posted on-site. To date, staff has received two phone calls requesting general
information about the rezoning application. No written or verbal comments in support or against
the applicant’s proposal have been received by staff.
Attachments
Exhibit 1 – Location Map
Exhibit 2 – Future Land Use Map
Exhibit 3 – Zoning Map
Page 96 of 252
CITY OF G E O R G E T O W N
G
e
o
r
g
e
t
o
w
n
E
T
J
S
M
A
IN
S
T
INDUS T R I A L AVE
S AUSTIN AVE
SN
E
A
D
D
R
S E I N N E R L O O P
R
O
C
K
R
I
D
E
L
N
M
A
P
L
E
S
T
S A M H O U S T O N A V E
FM146
0 REZ-2016-005
REZ-2016-005Exhibit #1
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only 0 0.5 1Miles
¯
Le ge ndSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
Location Map
Page 97 of 252
S E I N N E R L O O P
S
O
UT
H
W
E
S
T
E
R
N
B
LVD
BLUE S P RINGS
BLV
D
M
A
P
L
E
S
T
E U N I V E R S I T Y A V E
F M 1 4 6 0
S AUSTIN AVE
H
U
T
T
O
R
D
S
A
U
S
T
I
N
AV
E
SOUTHWESTERN BLVD
G
e
o
r
g
e
t
o
w
n
E
T
J
REZ-2016-005
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only
¯
Future Land Use / Overall Transportation Plan
Exhibit #2
REZ-2016 -005
LegendSiteParcelsCity Lim itsGeorgetown ETJ
Legend
Thoroughfare
Future Land Use
Institutional
Regional Commercial
Community Commercial
Em ployment Center
Low Density Residential
Mining
Mixed Use Community
Mixed Use Neighborhood Center
Moderate Density Residential
Open Space
Specialty Mixed Use Area
Ag / Rural Residential
Existing Collector
Existing Freeway
Existing Major Arterial
Existing Minor Arterial
Existing Ramp
Proposed Collector
Proposed Freeway
Propsed Frontage Road
Proposed Major Arterial
Proposed Minor Arterial
Proposed Railroad
High Density Residential
0 0.5 1Mile
Page 98 of 252
S E I N N E R L O O P
S
O
UT
H
W
E
S
T
E
R
N
B
LVD
BLUE S P RINGS
BLV
D
M
A
P
L
E
S
T
E U N I V E R S I T Y A V E
F M 1 4 6 0
S AUSTIN AVE
H
U
T
T
O
R
D
S
A
U
S
T
I
N
AV
E
SOUTHWESTERN BLVD
C I T Y O F G E O R G E T O W N
C I T Y O F G E O R G E T O W N
CITYOFGEORGETOWN
C
I
T
Y
O
F
G
E
O
R
G
E
TOWN
C
I
T
Y
O
F
G
E
O
R
G
E
T
O
W
N
C I T Y O F G E O R G E T O W N
REZ-2016-005
Zoning InformationREZ-2016-005Exhibit #3
¯
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only
0 0.5 1
Miles
Le ge ndSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
Page 99 of 252
Ordinance Number: ___________________ Page 1 of 2
Description: Rezone 178 acres of the William Addison Survey Case File #: REZ-2016-005
Date Approved: __________________ Exhibits A-B Attached
ORDINANCE NO. _____________________
An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas,
amending part of the Official Zoning Map to rezone approximately 178 acres
of the William Addison Survey from the Agriculture (AG) and Residential
Single-Family (RS) Districts to the Public Facility (PF) District; 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 amending the
Official Zoning Map, adopted on the 12th day of June, 2012, for the specific Zoning District
classification of the following described real property ("The Property"):
178 acres in the William Addison Survey in Williamson County, Georgetown, Texas,
hereinafter referred to as "The Property"; and
Whereas, the City Council has submitted the proposed amendment to the Official
Zoning Map to the Planning and Zoning Commission for its consideration at a public hearing
and for its recommendation or report; 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 April 5, 2016, held the
required public hearing and submitted a recommendation of approval to the City Council for
the requested rezoning of the Property; and
Whereas, the City Council, at a meeting on April 26, 2016, held an additional public
hearing prior to taking action on the requested rezoning 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.
Page 100 of 252
Ordinance Number: ___________________ Page 2 of 2
Description: Rezone 178 acres of the William Addison Survey Case File #: REZ-2016-005
Date Approved: __________________ Exhibits A-B Attached
Section 2. The Official Zoning Map, as well as the Zoning District classification(s) for the
Property is hereby amended from the Agriculture (AG) and Residential Single-Family (RS)
Districts to the Public Facility (PF) District, in accordance with the attached Exhibit A (Location
Map) and Exhibit B (Legal Description) and incorporated herein by reference.
Section 3. All ordinances and resolutions, or parts of ordinances and resolutions, in
conflict with this Ordinance are hereby repealed, and are no longer of any force and effect.
Section 4. If any provision of this Ordinance or application thereof to any person or
circumstance shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions, or
application thereof, of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or
application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby declared to be
severable.
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 26th day of April, 2016.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED on Second Reading on the 10th day of May, 2016.
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: ATTEST:
______________________ _________________________
Dale Ross Shelley Nowling
Mayor City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________
Charlie McNabb
City Attorney
Page 101 of 252
CITY OF G E O R G E T O W N
G
e
o
r
g
e
t
o
w
n
E
T
J
S
M
A
I
N
S
T
INDUS T R I A L AVE
S A
U
S
T
I
N
A
V
E
SN
E
A
D
D
R
SE INNER LO
O
P
R
O
C
K
R
I
D
E
L
N
M
A
P
L
E
S
T
S A M H O U S T O N A V E
FM146
0 REZ-2016-005
REZ-2016-005Exhibit A
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only 0 0.5 1Miles
¯
LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
Location Map
Page 102 of 252
Page 103 of 252
Page 104 of 252
Page 105 of 252
Page 106 of 252
Page 107 of 252
Page 108 of 252
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Regula r Meeting
May 10, 2016
SUBJECT:
Second Readi ng of an Ordinance to Rezone approximately 54 .13 acres of the William Addiso n Survey located at 29 10
SE Inner Loop fro m the Agriculture (AG) District to the Public Facility (PF) District kno wn as Williamson County
North Campus-East -- So fia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Directo r (acti on requi red)
ITEM SUMMARY:
B ackground:
The applicant has requested to rezone the site from the Agriculture (AG) District to the Public Facility (PF) District. The
property was annexed in 2 00 8 and assigned the default AG District. The P ublic Fac ilities District (P F) is intended to
provide a location for go vernment and other public or quasi-public facility operations. These may include schools, public
parks, hospitals, airports, go vernment offices, churches and o ther related uses, but would no t include industrial facilitie s
or storage yards. Some uses allo wed in this district might generate heavy traffic vo lumes and high-intensity operatio ns.
The P F District shall c ontain uses that are allowed in both residential and non-reside ntial districts and is subject to non-
residential design and landsc aping standards for co mpatibility with nearby or adjacent residential uses. No ne w
construction is pro posed on this location at this time.
Publ i c Comment:
To date, no written o r verbal comments in support o r against the applicant’s proposal have been received by staff.
Pl anni ng and Zoni ng Commi ssi on:
At their April 5 , 2 01 6 meeting, the P lanning and Zoning Commissioners recomme nde d appro val (6-0) of the rezo ning
request. Nobody fro m the public spoke in favor o r in o ppositio n of the request at the public hearing.
Ci ty Counci l Fi rst Readi ng:
At their April 2 6, 2 01 6 meeting, the City Council approved (7-0) the First Reading o f the Ordinance.
Recommended Mo ti on:
Approval of the Se cond Reading of an Ordinance rezoning approximately 54.13 acres in the William Addison Survey
from the AG Distric t to the P F District.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUBMITTED BY:
Juan Enriquez, Planner and Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, P lanning Director
ATTACHMENT S:
Description
S taff Report
Exhib it 1 - Loc ation Map
Exhib it 2 - Future Land Use Map
Exhib it 3 - Zoning Map
Ordinanc e
Exhib it A - Loc ation Map
Exhib it B - Legal Des c rip tion
Page 109 of 252
Georgetown Planning Department Staff Report
Wilco North Campus - East Rezoning Page 1 of 4
Report Date: March 31, 2016
File No: REZ-2016-006
Project Planner: Juan Enriquez, Planner
Item Details
Project Name: Williamson County North Campus - East
Project Address: 2910 SE Inner Loop
Location: SE Inner Loop between Southwestern Blvd and E. University Ave
Total Acreage: Approximately 54.13 acres
Legal Description: 54.13 acres of the William Addison Survey
Applicant: Robert B. Daigh, P.E.
Property Owner: Williamson County
Contact: Robert B. Daigh, P.E.
Existing Use: Vacant & Undeveloped Land
Existing Zoning: Agriculture (AG)
Proposed Zoning: Public Facility (PF)
Future Land Use: Mixed Use Community
Growth Tier: Tier 1B (Developing)
Overview of Applicant’s Request
The applicant has requested to rezone the site from the Agriculture (AG) District to the Public
Facility (PF) District. The property was annexed in 2008 and assigned the default AG District.
The requested rezoning would provide the property owner with permitted uses allowed by the
PF District similar to other Williamson County owned properties along SE Inner Loop. No new
construction is proposed on this location at this time.
Site Information
Location:
The subject site is located on SE Inner Loop directly adjacent to Rockridge Lane and Carlson
Cove.
Physical Characteristics:
The subject site is approximately 54.13 acres in size and it is generally flat. The site has
approximately 3,000 feet of street frontage along SE Inner Loop. Current primary inbound and
outbound access is along Carlson Cove.
Page 110 of 252
Planning Department Staff Report
Wilco North Campus – East Rezoning Page 2 of 4
Surrounding Properties:
Location Zoning Future Land Use Existing Use
North RS Moderate Density Residential Residences
South AG/PF Mixed Use Community/Institutional James E. Mitchell
Elementary School
East AG Mixed Use Community Undeveloped AG land
West AG Institutional County Maintenance
Facilities Yard
Property History
The property was annexed into the City on December 9, 2008 (Annexation Ordinance 2008-85).
The property is vacant and undeveloped. The property has remained zoned Agriculture (AG)
since annexation.
2030 Comprehensive Plan
Future Land Use:
The 2030 Future Land Use category for this 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 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.
Growth Tier:
The 2030 Plan Growth Tier Map designation is Tier 1B (Developing). Tier 1B areas are presently
in the City limits in areas that are generally under-served by infrastructure and where such
service and facilities will likely be needed to meet the growth needs of the City once Tier 1A
approaches buildout over the next ten years.
Transportation
The site’s primary inbound and outbound access is on Carlson Cove via Rockridge Lane. A
Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) was not deemed necessary for review of this rezoning since there is
no proposed development on site at this time. Should any new development be proposed in the
future, and a site plan is submitted, trip generation will be reviewed at that time, possibly
triggering the need for a TIA.
Utilities
Water and wastewater are served by the City of Georgetown. Electric service is provided by the
City of Georgetown and ONCOR. It is anticipated that there is adequate capacity to serve this
property either by existing capacity or developer participation in upgrades to infrastructure.
Page 111 of 252
Planning Department Staff Report
Wilco North Campus – East Rezoning Page 3 of 4
Zoning District
The existing zoning district for the site is Agriculture (AG). The district is intended to allow large
rural residential development, agricultural and farming uses and may include lands that are
relatively undeveloped. The AG district is also the default district for land newly annexed into
the City but not yet placed in an appropriate zoning classification.
Proposed Zoning District
The Public Facility (PF) District is intended to provide a location for government and other public
or quasi-public facility operations. These may include schools, parks, hospitals, airports,
government offices, churches and other related uses. The PF District may contain uses that are
allowed in both residential and non-residential districts and is subject to non-residential design
and landscaping standards for compatibility with nearby or adjacent residential.
Notable development standards:
Maximum building height 45 feet
Minimum front/street setback 25 feet
Minimum rear setback to residential district 25 feet (0 setback when not next to residential)
Bufferyard required between:
• PF next to AG & RS Districts
• A 10 foot wide planting area. 2 evergreen
ornamental trees and 4 evergreen shrubs per
each 50 linear feet
Staff Analysis
Findings
Based on all the information presented, staff has made the following findings:
1. The Future Land Use designation of Mixed Use Community supports the PF District at this
location since the future development and consolidation of County owned buildings will be
placed in a central location which will reduce vehicle trips.
2. The rezoning of the property to PF is appropriate at this location as this area of the City
(along SE Inner Loop) already has established Williamson County offices and will create a
cluster of government and other public quasi-public facility operations as intended by the
district.
3. The proposed rezoning promotes the health, safety, or general welfare of the City and
County by providing facilities to ensure that Williamson County officials have access to
adequate government administrative office space and resources.
4. There is sufficient capacity of City utilities to accommodate the proposed rezoning from AG
to PF District.
Page 112 of 252
Planning Department Staff Report
Wilco North Campus – East Rezoning Page 4 of 4
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the applicant’s request based on the above-mentioned findings.
Public Comments
As required by the Unified Development Code, all property owners within a 200 foot radius of
the subject property and within City jurisdiction (17 notices mailed) were notified of the rezoning
application, a legal notice advertising the public hearing was placed in the Sun Newspaper and
signs were posted on-site. To date, staff has received one email from a neighbor requesting
general information about the rezoning application. No written or verbal comments in support
or against the applicant’s proposal have been received by staff.
Attachments
Exhibit 1 – Location Map
Exhibit 2 – Future Land Use Map
Exhibit 3 – Zoning Map
Page 113 of 252
E U n i v e r s i t y A v e
Southw ester
n
B
l
v
d
E U n i v e r s it y A v e
SE Inner Loop
S a m H o u s t o n A ve
¬«130
S E I n n e r L o o p
SamHoustonAve
South
w
e
st
e
r
n
B
l
v
d
")1460
R
o
c
k
ri
d
e
L
n
")1460
REZ-2016-006Exhibit #1
Co ordinate System : Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only
¯
Location Map
0 0.5 1Mi
Le ge ndSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
Page 114 of 252
E U n i v e r s i t y A v e
Southw ester
n
B
l
v
d
E U n i v e r s it y A v e
SE Inner Loop
S a m H o u s t o n A ve
¬«130
S E I n n e r L o o p
SamHoustonAve
South
w
e
st
e
r
n
B
l
v
d
")1460
R
o
c
k
ri
d
e
L
n
")1460
G e o r g e t o w n E T J
REZ-2016-006
Coordinate System: Texas St at e Plane/Centr al Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only
¯
Future Land Use / Overall Transportation Plan
Exhibit #2
REZ-2016-006
LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
Legend
Thoroughfare
Future Land Use
Institutional
Regional Comm ercial
Community Comm ercial
Employm ent Center
Low Density Residential
Mining
Mixed Use Comm unity
Mixed Use Neighborhood Center
Moderate Density Residential
Open Space
Specialty Mixed Use Area
Ag / Rural Residential
Existing Collector
Existing Freeway
Existing Major Arterial
Existing Minor Arterial
Existing Ramp
Proposed Collector
Proposed Freeway
Propsed Frontage Road
Proposed Major Arterial
Proposed Minor Arterial
Proposed Railroad
High Density Residential
0 0.5 1Mile
Page 115 of 252
E U n i v e r s i t y A v e
Southw ester
n
B
l
v
d
E U n i v e r s it y A v e
SE Inner Loop
S a m H o u s t o n A ve
¬«130
S E I n n e r L o o p
SamHoustonAve
South
w
e
st
e
r
n
B
l
v
d
")1460
R
o
c
k
ri
d
e
L
n
")1460
C I T Y O F G E O R G E T OW N
C
I
T
Y
O
F
G
E
O
R
G
E
T
O
W
N
C I T Y O F G E O R G E T O W N
CITYOFGEORGETOWN
C
I
T
Y
O
F
G
E
O
R
G
E
T
O
W
N
CITY O F G E O R G E T O W N
C
I
T
Y
O
F
G
E
O
R
G
E
T
O
W
N
REZ-2016-006
Zoning InformationREZ-2016-006Exhibit #3
Co ordinate System : Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only
Le ge ndSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
0 0.5 1Mile
¯
Page 116 of 252
Ordinance Number: ___________________ Page 1 of 2
Description: Rezone 54.13 acres of the William Addison Survey Case File #: REZ-2016-006
Date Approved: __________________ Exhibits A-B Attached
ORDINANCE NO. _____________________
An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas,
amending part of the Official Zoning Map to rezone approximately 54.13
acres of the William Addison Survey from the Agriculture (AG) District to
the Public Facility (PF) District; 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 amending the
Official Zoning Map, adopted on the 12th day of June, 2012, for the specific Zoning District
classification of the following described real property ("The Property"):
54.13 acres in the William Addison Survey in Williamson County, Georgetown, Texas,
hereinafter referred to as "The Property"; and
Whereas, the City Council has submitted the proposed amendment to the Official
Zoning Map to the Planning and Zoning Commission for its consideration at a public hearing
and for its recommendation or report; 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 April 5, 2016, held the
required public hearing and submitted a recommendation of approval to the City Council for
the requested rezoning of the Property; and
Whereas, the City Council, at a meeting on April 26, 2016, held an additional public
hearing prior to taking action on the requested rezoning 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.
Page 117 of 252
Ordinance Number: ___________________ Page 2 of 2
Description: Rezone 54.13 acres of the William Addison Survey Case File #: REZ-2016-006
Date Approved: __________________ Exhibits A-B Attached
Section 2. The Official Zoning Map, as well as the Zoning District classification(s) for the
Property is hereby amended from the Agriculture (AG) District to the Public Facility (PF)
District, in accordance with the attached Exhibit A (Location Map) and Exhibit B (Legal
Description) and incorporated herein by reference.
Section 3. All ordinances and resolutions, or parts of ordinances and resolutions, in
conflict with this Ordinance are hereby repealed, and are no longer of any force and effect.
Section 4. If any provision of this Ordinance or application thereof to any person or
circumstance shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions, or
application thereof, of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or
application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby declared to be
severable.
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 26th day of April, 2016.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED on Second Reading on the 10th day of May, 2016.
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: ATTEST:
______________________ _________________________
Dale Ross Shelley Nowling
Mayor City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________
Charlie McNabb
City Attorney
Page 118 of 252
E University Ave
Southw ester
n
B
l
v
d
E U n i v e r s it y A v e
SE
I
n
n
e
r
L
o
o
p
S a m H o u s t o n A ve
¬«130
SE Inner Lo
o
p
SamHoustonAve
South
w
e
st
e
r
n
B
l
v
d
")1460
R
o
c
k
r
i
d
e
L
n
")1460
REZ-2016-006Exhibit A
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only
¯
Location Map
0 0.5 1Mi
LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
Page 119 of 252
Page 120 of 252
Page 121 of 252
Page 122 of 252
Page 123 of 252
Page 124 of 252
Page 125 of 252
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Regula r Meeting
May 10, 2016
SUBJECT:
Second Readi ng of an Ordinance to Rezone approximately 63 .09 acres of the William Addiso n Survey located at 31 51
SE Inner Loop fro m the Agriculture (AG) District to the Public Facility (PF) District known as Williamson County
North Campus -- Sofia Nelso n, CNU-A, Planning Director (acti on requi red)
ITEM SUMMARY:
B ackground:
The applicant has requested to rezone the site (four lots) fro m the Agriculture (AG) District to the Public Fac ility (P F)
District. The no rthern three lots we re annexed in 1995 and assigned the default AG District. The remaining
approximately 32 -acre lot was annexed in 2008 and assigned the default AG Distric t. The P ublic Facilities District (P F) is
intended to provide a location for government and o ther public or quasi-public facility operations. These may inc lude
schools, public parks, hospitals, airports, government o ffices, churches and other related uses, but wo uld not inc lude
industrial facilities or sto rage yards. Some uses allowed in this district might ge nerate heavy traffic volumes and high-
intensity o pe ratio ns. The PF District shall co ntain uses that are allowed in bo th residential and non-residential districts
and is subject to non-residential design and landsc aping standards for compatibility with nearby or adjacent residential
uses.
Publ i c Comment:
To date, no written o r verbal comments in support o r against the applicant’s proposal have been received by staff.
Pl anni ng and Zoni ng Commi ssi on:
At their April 5 , 2 01 6 meeting, the P lanning and Zoning Commissioners recomme nde d appro val (6-0) of the rezo ning
request. Nobody fro m the public spoke in favor o r in o ppositio n of the request during the public hearing.
Ci ty Counci l Fi rst Readi ng:
At their April 2 6, 2 01 6 meeting, the City Council approved (7-0) the First Reading o f the Ordinance.
Recommended Mo ti on:
Approval of the Second Reading of an Ordinance re zo ning approximately 63.09 acres of the William Addison Survey
from the AG Distric t to the P F District.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
n/a
SUBMITTED BY:
Juan Enriquez, Planner and Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, P lanning Director
ATTACHMENT S:
Description
S taff Report
Exhib it 1 - Loc ation Map
Exhib it 2 - Future Land Use Map
Exhib it 3 - Zoning Map
Ordinanc e
Exhib it A - Loc ation Map
Exhib it B - Legal Des c rip tion
Page 126 of 252
Georgetown Planning Department Staff Report
Wilco North Campus Rezoning Page 1 of 4
Report Date: March 31, 2016
File No: REZ-2016-007
Project Planner: Juan Enriquez, Planner
Item Details
Project Name: Williamson County North Campus
Project Address: 3151 SE Inner Loop
Location: SE Inner Loop between Southwestern Blvd and E. University Ave
Total Acreage: 63.09 acres (Four lots)
Legal Description: 63.09 acres of the William Addison Survey
Applicant: Robert B. Daigh, P.E.
Property Owner: Williamson County
Contact: Robert B. Daigh, P.E.
Existing Use: Facilities Maintenance Yard/Vacant & Undeveloped Land
Existing Zoning: Agriculture (AG)
Proposed Zoning: Public Facility (PF)
Future Land Use: Institutional (Pending final approval of CPA-2016-001 application)
Growth Tier: Tier 1B
Overview of Applicant’s Request
The applicant has requested to rezone the site (four lots) from the Agriculture (AG) District to the
Public Facility (PF) District. The northern three lots were annexed in 1995 and assigned the
default AG District. The remaining approximately 32-acre lot was annexed in 2008 and assigned
the default AG District. The requested rezoning would place the existing uses into the proper
zoning district and correct their legal non-conforming status.
Site Information
Location:
The subject site is located west of SE Inner Loop, south of E. University Avenue and is comprised
of four separate properties.
Physical Characteristics:
The northern portion of the property is approximately 1,344’ x 948’ with few trees and shrubs. It
is generally flat and devoid of any discernible natural features. The primary means of access to
the subject site is from SE Inner Loop. Additionally there are two residential street stubs along
the north property line (Mottey Street and Tulle Lane) within “Highcrest Meadows” subdivision
that are currently fenced off. The southern portion of the subject site is developed with a facilities
maintenance yard for Williamson County vehicles and ancillary uses.
Page 127 of 252
Planning Department Staff Report
Wilco North Campus Rezoning Page 2 of 4
Surrounding Properties:
Location Zoning Future Land Use Existing Use
North (RS) Single-Family Residential Moderate Density
Residential Single-Family Residences
South (AG) Agriculture Institutional Electrical Substation
East (AG) Agriculture Mixed Use Community Undeveloped land
West (AG) Agriculture Moderate Density
Residential Horse Riding Stables
Property History
The three northern properties were annexed into the City on August 8, 1995 (Annexation
Ordinance 1995-34). The larger southern lot (approximately 32-acres) was annexed into the City
on December 9, 2008 (Annexation Ordinance 2008-86). The properties were zoned AG upon
annexation and remain so to the present day. Several government buildings used by Williamson
County for a facilities maintenance yard and administrative offices for their Road & Bridge
Division built while under the ETJ.
A Comprehensive Plan Amendment application (CAP-2016-001) is being processed concurrently
with this application for the northern three lots (Moderate Density Residential to Institutional).
The northern three lots have received P&Z approval (3-1-16) and City Council First Reading
approval (3-22-16). The City Council Second Reading for the CPA is scheduled for April 12, 2016
for final approval.
2030 Comprehensive Plan
Future Land Use:
Pending City Council Second Reading CPA approval (4-12-16) from MDR to Institutional, the
2030 Future Land Use category for this site is Institutional. The Institutional category as described
in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan anticipates individual or concentrated government operations
and uses, including government administration offices, libraries, police, fire and EMS services,
airports, correctional facilities, etc.
Growth Tier:
The 2030 Plan Growth Tier Map designation is Tier 1B (Developing). Tier 1B areas are presently
in the City limits in areas that are generally under-served by infrastructure and where such
service and facilities will likely be needed to meet the growth needs of the City once Tier 1A
approaches buildout over the next ten years.
Transportation
The subject site’s inbound and outbound access is on SE Inner Loop. There are two residential
street stubs along the north property line (Mottey Street and Tulle Lane). The extension of these
residential street stubs will not be required by the City if the applicant is not required to plat.
Page 128 of 252
Planning Department Staff Report
Wilco North Campus Rezoning Page 3 of 4
SE Inner Loop is identified as an existing minor alterial road. A minor arterial is a road whose
main purpose is to serve as a major route through and between different areas of the City. A
Traffic Impact Analysis may be required with the submittal of a Site Development Review
application to further analyze traffic impact.
Utilities
Water and wastewater are served by the City of Georgetown. Electric service is provided by the
City of Georgetown and ONCOR. 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 existing zoning district for the site is Agriculture (AG). The district is intended to allow large
rural residential development, agricultural and farming uses and may include lands that are
relatively undeveloped. The AG district is also the default district for land newly annexed into
the City but not yet placed in an appropriate zoning classification.
Proposed Zoning District
The Public Facility (PF) District is intended to provide a location for government and other public
or quasi-public facility operations. These may include schools, parks, hospitals, airports,
government offices, churches and other related uses. The PF District may contain uses that are
allowed in both residential and non-residential districts and is subject to non-residential design
and landscaping standards for compatibility with nearby or adjacent residential.
Notable development standards:
Maximum building height 45 feet
Minimum front/street setback 25 feet
Minimum rear setback to residential district 25 feet (0 setback when not next to residential)
Bufferyard required between:
• PF next to AG & RS Districts
• A 10 foot wide planting area. 2 evergreen
ornamental trees and 4 evergreen shrubs per
each 50 linear feet
Staff Analysis
Findings
Based on all the information presented, staff has made the following findings:
1. The property is developed with a facilities maintenance yard and government related uses
that would be permissible in the proposed district, alleviating legal non-conforming status
of the existing uses.
Page 129 of 252
Planning Department Staff Report
Wilco North Campus Rezoning Page 4 of 4
2. The zoning request of Public Facility is appropriate at this location because it is supported
by the existing Future Land Use of Institutional. Both the PF district and Institutional
category have the same intent of providing government related type land uses.
3. Comprehensive Plan Section 1.4 (E) Public Safety states that Georgetown strives to be the
standard for public safety through innovative and strategic planning, the utilization of
viable emerging technologies, and the effective and efficient use of staffing, resources, and
facilities. In this case, the rezoning will accomplish this goal by allowing the expansion of
public safety services with the future development of the site.
4. The proposed rezoning promotes the health, safety, or general welfare of the City and
County by providing facilities to ensure that the County’s EMS and law enforcement
officials have access to adequate training facilities, equipment and resources.
5. There is sufficient capacity of City utilities to accommodate the proposed rezoning from AG
to PF District.
Staff Recommendation
Pending approval of CPA-2016-001, staff recommends approval of the applicant’s request based
on the above-mentioned findings.
Public Comments
As required by the Unified Development Code, all property owners within a 200 foot radius of
the subject property and within City jurisdiction (14 notices mailed) were notified of the rezoning
application, a legal notice advertising the public hearing was placed in the Sun Newspaper and
signs were posted on-site. To date, no written or verbal comments in support or against the
applicant’s proposal have been received by staff.
Attachments
Exhibit 1 – Location Map
Exhibit 2 – Future Land Use Map
Exhibit 3 – Zoning Map
Page 130 of 252
E U n i v e r s i t y Av e
N
Au
st
i
n
Av
e
N
Au
st
i
n
Av
e
Southwester
n
B
l
v
d
E U n i v e r s it y A v e
NE Inner Loop
SE Inner Loop
NColleg e St
N
Au
st
i
n
Av
e
S a m H o u s t o n A ve
¬«130
S E I n n e r L o o p
SamHoustonAve
South
w
e
st
e
r
n
B
l
v
d
")1460
S A
us
ti
n A
ve
R
o
c
k
ri
d
e
L
n
EMorro w St
")1460
REZ-2016-007
G e o r g e t o w n E T J
(River/Stream)
REZ-2016-007Exhibit #1
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only
¯
Le ge ndSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
Location Map
0 0.5 1Mile
Page 131 of 252
E U n i v e r s i t y A v e
N Austin Ave
N A
us
tin Ave
Southw ester
n
B
l
v
d
E U n i v e r s it y A v e
NE Inner Loop
SE Inner Loop
NColleg e St
N Austin Ave
S a m H o u s t o n A ve
¬«130
S E I n n e r L o o p
SamHoustonAve
South
w
e
st
e
r
n
B
l
v
d
")1460
S Au
sti
n
Ave
R
o
c
k
ri
d
e
L
n
EMorro w St
")1460
REZ-2016-007
(River/Stream)
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only
¯
Future Land Use / Overall Transportation Plan
Exhibit #2
REZ-2016-007
LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
Legend
Thoroughfare
Future Land Use
Institutional
Regional Commercial
Community Commercial
Employment Center
Low Density Residential
Mining
Mixed Use Community
Mixed Use Neighborhood Center
Moderate Density Residential
Open Space
Specialty Mixed Use Area
Ag / Rural Residential
Existing Collector
Existing Freeway
Existing Major Arterial
Existing Minor Arterial
Existing Ramp
Proposed Collector
Proposed Freeway
Propsed Frontage Road
Proposed Major Arterial
Proposed Minor Arterial
Proposed Railroad
High Density Residential
0 0.5 1Mile
Page 132 of 252
E U n i v e r s i t y Av e
N
Au
st
i
n
Av
e
N
Au
st
i
n
Av
e
Southwester
n
B
l
v
d
E U n i v e r s it y A v e
NE Inner Loop
SE Inner Loop
NColleg e St
N
Au
st
i
n
Av
e
S a m H o u s t o n A ve
¬«130
S E I n n e r L o o p
SamHoustonAve
South
w
e
st
e
r
n
B
l
v
d
")1460
S A
us
ti
n A
ve
R
o
c
k
ri
d
e
L
n
EMorro w St
")1460
(River/Stream)
REZ-2016-007
Zoning InformationREZ-2016-007Exhibit #3
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only
Le ge ndSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
0 0.5 1Mile
¯
Page 133 of 252
Ordinance Number: ___________________ Page 1 of 2
Description: Rezone 63.09 acres of the William Addison Survey Case File #: REZ-2016-007
Date Approved: __________________ Exhibits A-B Attached
ORDINANCE NO. _____________________
An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas,
amending part of the Official Zoning Map to rezone approximately 63.09
acres of the William Addison Survey from the Agriculture (AG) District to
the Public Facility (PF) District; 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 amending the
Official Zoning Map, adopted on the 12th day of June, 2012, for the specific Zoning District
classification of the following described real property ("The Property"):
63.09 acres in the William Addison Survey in Williamson County, Georgetown, Texas,
hereinafter referred to as "The Property"; and
Whereas, the City Council has submitted the proposed amendment to the Official
Zoning Map to the Planning and Zoning Commission for its consideration at a public hearing
and for its recommendation or report; 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 April 5, 2016, held the
required public hearing and submitted a recommendation of approval to the City Council for
the requested rezoning of the Property; and
Whereas, the City Council, at a meeting on April 26, 2016, held an additional public
hearing prior to taking action on the requested rezoning 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.
Page 134 of 252
Ordinance Number: ___________________ Page 2 of 2
Description: Rezone 63.09 acres of the William Addison Survey Case File #: REZ-2016-007
Date Approved: __________________ Exhibits A-B Attached
Section 2. The Official Zoning Map, as well as the Zoning District classification(s) for the
Property is hereby amended from the Agriculture (AG) District to the Public Facility (PF)
District, in accordance with the attached Exhibit A (Location Map) and Exhibit B (Legal
Description) and incorporated herein by reference.
Section 3. All ordinances and resolutions, or parts of ordinances and resolutions, in
conflict with this Ordinance are hereby repealed, and are no longer of any force and effect.
Section 4. If any provision of this Ordinance or application thereof to any person or
circumstance shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions, or
application thereof, of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or
application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby declared to be
severable.
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 26th day of April, 2016.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED on Second Reading on the 10th day of May, 2016.
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: ATTEST:
______________________ _________________________
Dale Ross Shelley Nowling
Mayor City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________
Charlie McNabb
City Attorney
Page 135 of 252
E University Ave
N
A
u
s
t
i
n
A
v
e
N
A
u
s
t
i
n
A
v
e
Southwester
n
B
l
v
d
E U n i v e r s it y A v e
E
I
n
n
e
r
L
o
o
p
SE
I
n
n
e
r
L
o
o
p
NColleg e St
N
A
u
s
t
i
n
A
v
e
S a m H o u s t o n A ve
¬«130
SE Inner Lo
o
p
SamHoustonAve
South
w
e
st
e
r
n
B
l
v
d
")1460
S
A
u
s
t
i
n
A
v
e
R
o
c
k
r
i
d
e
L
n
EMorro w St
")1460
REZ-2016-007
Georgetown ETJ
(River/Stream)
REZ-2016-007Exhibit
N
A
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only
¯
LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
Location Map
0 0.5 1Mile
Page 136 of 252
Page 137 of 252
Page 138 of 252
Page 139 of 252
Page 140 of 252
Page 141 of 252
Page 142 of 252
Page 143 of 252
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Regula r Meeting
May 10, 2016
SUBJECT:
Second Readi ng of an Ordinance to Rezone 5.24 0 acres in the Ephraim Evans Survey, lo cated at 211 Westi nghouse
Road and known as Georgetown Mercedes Benz, fro m the Residential Single-family (RS) District to the General
Commercial (C-3 ) District -- Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director (acti on re qui r e d)
ITEM SUMMARY:
B ackground:
The applicant has requested a rezoning of 5.24 acres from the Residential Single -family (RS) District, to the General
Commercial (C-3 ) District. The applicant states that the purpo se of the request is to allo w auto motive services.
Publ i c Comments:
To date, two written comments in support of the applicant’s rezo ning proposal have been received by the Planning
Department staff.
Pl anni ng and Zoni ng Commi ssi on:
At their April 5, 2016 meeting, the P lanning and Zoning Co mmission reco mmended approval (unanimous vote) o f the
rezoning reque st. There were no speakers at the meeting.
Ci ty Counci l :
At the April 26, 2 016 meeting, the City Council vote d unanimo usly to approve the rezoning request. There we re no
speakers at the me e ting.
Recommended Mo ti on:
Approval of the Ordinance to rezone 5.240 acres from Residential Single-family (RS) to General Commercial (C-3).
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUBMITTED BY:
Carolyn Horne r, AICP, and So fia Nelson, CNU-A, Director
ATTACHMENT S:
Description
S taff Report
Lo catio n Map
F uture Land Us e
Zo ning Map
P ublic Co mment
Ordinanc e
Exhib it A
Exhib it B
Page 144 of 252
Georgetown Planning Department Staff Report
Northeast Corner Westinghouse Rd. and Kelley Dr.
Rezoning from RS to C‐3 Page 1 of 5
Report Date: March 25, 2016
File No: REZ‐2016‐009
Project Planner: Carolyn Horner, AICP, Planner
Item Details
Project Name: Georgetown Mercedes Benz
Location: 211 Westinghouse Road
Total Acreage: 5.240 acres
Legal Description: 5.240 acres of land in the Ephraim Evans Survey, Abstract No. 212 and
the John Powell Survey, Abstract No. 491
Applicant: Dynamic Engineering
Property Owner: W.D. Kelley Foundation
Contact: Kyle Flaming, Dynamic Engineering
Overview of Applicant’s Request
The applicant has requested a rezoning 5.24 acres from the Residential Single‐family (RS)
District, to the General Commercial (C‐3) District. The applicant states that the purpose of the
request is to allow automotive services.
Site Information
Location: The subject property is located at the northeast corner of Westinghouse Road and
Kelley Drive. Please see Exhibit 1 for details.
Physical Characteristics:
The property is currently undeveloped. The land is relatively flat with few small trees.
Surrounding Properties:
The surrounding properties include:
Location Zoning Future Land Use Existing Use
North General
Commercial C‐3 Employment Center Car dealership/repair
South General
Commercial C‐3 Employment Center Undeveloped
East Residential
Single‐family RS Employment Center Undeveloped
West General
Commercial C‐3 Regional Commercial Car dealerships
Page 145 of 252
Planning Department Staff Report
Northeast Corner Westinghouse Rd. and Kelley Dr.
Rezoning from RS to C‐3 Page 2 of 5
Page 146 of 252
Planning Department Staff Report
Northeast Corner Westinghouse Rd. and Kelley Dr.
Rezoning from RS to C‐3 Page 3 of 5
Property History
The subject property was annexed into the City of Georgetown in 1986. At the time of
annexation, Residential Single‐family (RS) zoning was placed on the property.
Utilities/Transportation
Electrical service, water and wastewater are provided by the City of Georgetown. The City’s
Development Engineer finds that the existing services are adequate to meet the site’s needs.
The corner site can take access on Westinghouse Road, a major arterial on the Overall
Transportation Plan (OTP). An additional access point may be located on Kelley Drive.
Page 147 of 252
Planning Department Staff Report
Northeast Corner Westinghouse Rd. and Kelley Dr.
Rezoning from RS to C‐3 Page 4 of 5
2030 Comprehensive Plan
The 2030 Plan designates this site as Employment Center. This designation is intended for
tracts of undeveloped land located at strategic locations, designated for well planned, larger
scale employment and business activities, as well as supporting uses such as retail, services,
hotels, and high density residential development (as a conditional use). Uses including offices,
technology research and development, and environmentally friendly manufacturing should
be encouraged.
A node of Regional Commercial is located adjacent to the Employment Center area, covering
the western half of the intersection of Westinghouse Road and Kelley Drive. Regional
Commercial applies to large concentrations of commercial uses that serve a regional market,
such as major shopping centers, stand‐alone big‐box retail, tourist attractions and automobile‐
oriented commercial uses that rely on convenient access from major transportation routes.
The 2030 Plan Growth Tier Map designation for this project is Tier 2 of the City’s Growth Tier
Plan. Tier 2 is the area likely to be needed to serve the city’s growth needs over the next 10‐20
years.
Proposed Zoning District
The applicant has requested General Commercial (C‐3) District zoning. The C‐3 zoning district
is intended to provide a location for general commercial and retail activities that serve the
entire community and its visitors. Uses may be large in scale and generate substantial traffic,
making the C‐3 district only appropriate along freeways and major arterials.
The adjacent Westinghouse Road is a major arterial on the City’s OTP, which provides access
to nearby Interstate 35. Kelley Drive provides secondary access to the subject property, and to
the General Commercial districts with automobile uses to the north of this property.
Staff Analysis
1. The Future Land Use Plan designation of Employment Center, with a Regional
Commercial node, supports the General Commercial (C‐3) District. Automotive uses
within the C‐3 District include limited repair, fuel sales, and accessories or parts sales,
all of which are uses that are compatible with the Employment Center/Regional Node
designation. Additional related uses could be developed on the adjacent undeveloped
properties.
2. The zoning change is compatible with the present zoning of nearby property. The
surrounding property is zoned for and developed with automotive uses on two sides,
and is undeveloped on the remaining sides. The property to the south is owned by an
automotive company, which could provide additional compatible uses to the subject
property; and
Page 148 of 252
Planning Department Staff Report
Northeast Corner Westinghouse Rd. and Kelley Dr.
Rezoning from RS to C‐3 Page 5 of 5
3. The proposed General Commercial (C‐3) District provides a location for general
commercial and retail activities. The property to be rezoned is suitable for uses such as
retail, large scale employment and business activities, and services permitted by the
zoning district, including some automotive uses.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the request rezoning for the following reasons:
A. The application is complete and the information contained within the application is
sufficient and correct enough to allow adequate review and final action;
B. The zoning change is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan;
C. The zoning change promotes the health, safety or general welfare of the City and
the safe orderly, and healthful development of the City;
D. The zoning change is compatible with the present zoning and conforming uses of
nearby property and with the character of the neighborhood; and
E. The property to be rezoned is suitable for uses permitted by the District that would
be applied by the proposed amendment.
Public Comments
As required by the Unified Development Code, all property owners within a 200‐foot radius
of the subject property and within the city limits were notified (12 notices mailed) of the
rezoning application, a legal notice advertising the public hearing was placed in the Sun
Newspaper and signs were posted on‐site. These notices included the public hearing
scheduled for City Council on April 26, 2016.
As of the date of this report, two written comments in support of the applicant’s rezoning
proposal has been received by the Planning Department staff.
Attachments
Exhibit 1 – Location Map
Exhibit 2 – Future Land Use Map
Exhibit 3 – Zoning Map
Exhibit 4 – Public Comment
Page 149 of 252
S
I
H
3
5
S
B
S IH
35
N
B
WE S T I N G H O U S E R D
K
E
L
L
E
Y
D
R
S
I
H
3
5
F
W
Y
S
B
S
I
H
3
5
F
W
Y
N
B
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
EXIT 259A NB
S IH 35 FRN
IH
35
F
R
EXIT 257 SB
S
I
H
3
5
F
W
Y
N
IH
3
5
FW
Y
H
E
W
L
E
T
T
L
O
O
P
REZ-2011-003
VAR-2015-004
SUP-2013-003
PFP-2012-003
SWP-2015-014
SUP-2014-001
REZ-2014-006
REZ-2016-009
FP-2013-015
Georgetown ETJ
REZ-2016-009Exhibit #1
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only
¯
Le ge ndSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
Location Map
0 500 1,000Feet
Page 150 of 252
S
I
H
3
5
S
B
S IH
35
N
B
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
3
5
F
W
Y
S
B
S
I
H
3
5
F
W
Y
N
B
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
EXIT 259A NB
S IH 35 FRN
IH
3
5
F
R
EXIT 257 SB
S
I
H
3
5
F
W
Y
N
IH
3
5
FW
Y
HEWL E T T L O OP
REZ-2016-009
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only
¯
Future Land Use / Overall Transportation Plan
Exhibit #2
REZ-2016 -009
LegendSiteParcelsCity Lim itsGeorgetown ETJ
Legend
Thoroughfare
Future Land Use
Institutional
Regional Commercial
Community Commercial
Em ployment Center
Low Density Residential
Mining
Mixed Use Community
Mixed Use Neighborhood Center
Moderate Density Residential
Open Space
Specialty Mixed Use Area
Ag / Rural Residential
Existing Collector
Existing Freeway
Existing Major Arterial
Existing Minor Arterial
Existing Ramp
Proposed Collector
Proposed Freeway
Propsed Frontage Road
Proposed Major Arterial
Proposed Minor Arterial
Proposed Railroad
High Density Residential
0 500 1,000Feet
Page 151 of 252
S
I
H
3
5
S
B
S IH
3
5
N
B
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
3
5
F
W
Y
S
B
S
I
H
3
5
F
W
Y
N
B
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
EXIT 259A NB
S IH 35 FRN
IH
35
F
R
EXIT 257 SB
S
I
H
3
5
F
W
Y
N
I
H
3
5
F
W
Y
HEWL E T T L O OP
REZ-2016-009
Zoning InformationREZ-2016-009Exhibit #3
Co ordinate System : Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only
Le ge ndSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
0 500 1,000Feet
¯
Page 152 of 252
Page 153 of 252
Page 154 of 252
Ordinance Number: ___________________ Page 1 of 2
Description: 5.240 acres from RS to C-3 Case File Number: REZ-2016-009
Date Approved: __________________ Exhibits A-B Attached
ORDINANCE NO. _____________________
An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas,
amending part of the Official Zoning Map to rezone 5.240 acres out of the
Ephraim Evans Survey, Abstract No. 212 from the Residential Single‐family
(RS) District to the General Commercial (C‐3) District, to be known as
Georgetown Mercedes Benz; 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 amending the
Official Zoning Map, adopted on the 12th day of June, 2012, for the specific Zoning District
classification of the following described real property (ʺThe Propertyʺ):
5.240 acres of the Ehpraim Evans Survey, as recorded in Document No. 2002001129
and Document No. 2004065777 of the Official Public Records of Williamson County,
Texas, hereinafter referred to as ʺThe Propertyʺ; and
Whereas, the City Council has submitted the proposed amendment to the Official
Zoning Map to the Planning and Zoning Commission for its consideration at a public hearing
and for its recommendation or report; 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 April 5, 2016, held the
required public hearing and submitted a recommendation of approval to the City Council for
the requested rezoning of the Property; and
Whereas, the City Council, at a meeting on April 26, 2016, held an additional public
hearing prior to taking action on the requested rezoning 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.
Page 155 of 252
Ordinance Number: ___________________ Page 2 of 2
Description: 5.240 acres from RS to C-3 Case File Number: REZ-2016-009
Date Approved: __________________ Exhibits A-B Attached
Section 2. The Official Zoning Map, as well as the Zoning District classification(s) for the
Property is hereby amended from the Residential Single‐family District (RS) to the General
Commercial District C‐3), in accordance with the attached Exhibit A (Location Map) and
Exhibit B (Legal Description) and incorporated herein by reference.
Section 3. All ordinances and resolutions, or parts of ordinances and resolutions, in
conflict with this Ordinance are hereby repealed, and are no longer of any force and effect.
Section 4. If any provision of this Ordinance or application thereof to any person or
circumstance shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions, or
application thereof, of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or
application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby declared to be
severable.
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 26nd day of April, 2016.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED on Second Reading on the 10th day of May, 2016.
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: ATTEST:
______________________ _________________________
Dale Ross Shelley Nowling
Mayor City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________
Charlie McNabb
City Attorney
Page 156 of 252
S
I
H
3
5
S
B
S IH
35
N
B
WE S T I N G H O U S E R D
K
E
L
L
E
Y
D
R
S
I
H
3
5
F
W
Y
S
B
S
I
H
3
5
F
W
Y
N
B
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
EXIT 259A NB
S IH 35 FRN
IH
35
F
R
EXIT 257 SB
S
I
H
3
5
F
W
Y
N
IH
3
5
FW
Y
H
E
W
L
E
T
T
L
O
O
P
REZ-2011-003
VAR-2015-004
SUP-2013-003
PFP-2012-003
SWP-2015-014
SUP-2014-001
REZ-2014-006
REZ-2016-009
FP-2013-015
Georgetown ETJ
REZ-2016-009Exhibit #1
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only
¯
Le ge ndSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
Location Map
0 500 1,000Feet
Page 157 of 252
Page 158 of 252
Page 159 of 252
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Regula r Meeting
May 10, 2016
SUBJECT:
Second Readi ng of an Ordinance for the Vol untary Annexati on of 11.17 acres in the Jo hn Sutherland Survey and
adjacent public right-o f-way, located at the interse c tion o f Wi l l i ams Dri ve and Ji m Ho gg Road -- Sofia Nelson, CNU-
A, Planning Dire c to r (acti on requi red)
ITEM SUMMARY:
The 11 -acre pro perty included in this petition for vo luntary annexatio n sits at the southwest corner o f Williams Drive and
Jim Hogg Road and has access to both ro adways. The City Counc il recently approved a clean-up annexation for Williams
Drive that allowed this property to become c ontiguo us to the pre sent city limits. The future land use anticipated for this
property is currently designated as mixed-use neighbo rhoo d center, which projects neighbo rhoo d-serving retail and
commercial uses. The owner o f the land is working with a po tential buyer to move forward in the zo ning process to
prepare the land fo r commercial development.
Staff is also recommending along with the 11 acres that portions of the right-of-way of Jim Hogg Road and Williams
Drive be included in the annexatio n actio n. This action is c onsistent with recent legislation requiring adjacent co unty
rights-of-way to be included in an ordinance anne xing private property.
This anne xatio n is being processed under a Local Go vernment Code provision that does not require public he arings and is
an expedited timeline.
Annexation Schedule :
March 22 - Reso lutio n
April 26 - First Reading o f Ordinance
May 10 - Second Re ading of Ordinance
Recommended Motio n:
Approval of the ordinance for the anne xatio n of 11 acres and adjac e nt public right-of-way of Jim Hogg Ro ad and Williams
Drive
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The developer will be responsible for utility exte nsions and upgrades, as needed, to serve a future development. Upon
annexation, public safety services would immediately serve the property. Transportation will assume the future
maintenance of the additional right-of-way of Jim Ho gg Ro ad and Williams Drive. Full financial impact is uncertain until
the ultimate de velopment o ccurs, which is likely to be a commercial use.
SUBMITTED BY:
Jordan Maddox, AICP, Principal Planner
ATTACHMENT S:
Description
Ordinanc e - Oak Meadows Co rner
Exhib it A - Loc ation
Exhib it B - P ro p erty S urvey
Exhib it C - Site and R OW
Exhib it D - Servic e Plan
Ap p licant Letter of Intent\
Res o lutio n
Page 160 of 252
Ordinance No. _____________________ Page 1 of 2
Oak Meadows Corner 11.17 acres ANX-2016-001
Date Approved: 5.10.2016 Exhibit A,B,C attached
Ordinance No. __________________
An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, providing
for the extension of certain boundary limits of the City of Georgetown, Texas,
and the annexation of certain territory consisting of 11.17 acres, more or less, in
the Sutherland Survey and portions of right-of-way on Jim Hogg Road and
Williams Drive, as described herein; providing for service plans; repealing
conflicting ordinances and resolutions; including a severability clause; and
establishing an effective date.
Whereas, the owners of the area proposed for annexation submitted a petition in writing
requesting annexation of the area, pursuant to Local Government Code Section 43.028; and
Whereas, the Section 4.03.010 of the Unified Development Code creates procedures for
initial zoning of newly annexed territory; and
Whereas, the Georgetown City Council approved a resolution granting the petition on
March 22, 2016; and
Whereas, all of the herein-described property lies within the extraterritorial jurisdiction
of the City of Georgetown, Texas; and
Whereas, the herein-described property lies adjacent and contiguous to the City of
Georgetown, Texas; and
Whereas, all prerequisites of state law and the City Charter have been complied with;
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 and is not inconsistent or in conflict with any 2030 Comprehensive Plan Vision
Statements, Goals and Policies.
Section 2. The City Council of the City of Georgetown hereby annexes into the city limits
11.17 acres in the Sutherland Survey, as shown in “Exhibit A” and Exhibit “C” of this ordinance,
and as described in “Exhibit B” of this ordinance. “Exhibit D” contains the service plan.
Section 3. The 11.17 acres, as described in “Exhibit B” and depicted in “Exhibit C” of this
ordinance, is included in City Council District 3, as it is adjacent to Council District 3 and no other
City Council Districts.
Page 161 of 252
Ordinance No. _____________________ Page 2 of 2
Oak Meadows Corner 11.17 acres ANX-2016-001
Date Approved: 5.10.2016 Exhibit A,B,C attached
Section 4. All ordinances and resolutions, or parts of ordinances and resolutions, in
conflict with this Ordinance are hereby repealed, and are no longer of any force and effect.
Section 5. The Mayor is hereby authorized to sign this ordinance and the City Secretary
to attest. This ordinance shall become effective and be in full force and effect in accordance with
the City Charter.
Passed and Approved on First Reading on the 26th day of April, 2016.
Passed and Approved on Second Reading on the 10th day of May, 2016.
Attest: The City of Georgetown:
_________________________________ _________________________________
Shelley Nowling Dale Ross
City Secretary Mayor
Approved as to form:
_________________________________
Charlie McNabb
City Attorney
Page 162 of 252
")2338
D el W e b b B l v d
D el WebbBlvd
WilliamsDr
WilliamsDr
Shell
Rd
ShellRd
")3405
Sun
City
B
lv
d
")262 Jim H o g g Rd
N L a k e w o o d s D r
")262
S e d r o T rl
")2338
(River/Stream)
ANX-2016-001Exhibit A
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only
¯
Location Map
0 0.6 1.2Mi
LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
Page 163 of 252
Exhibit B
Page 164 of 252
Exhibit B
Page 165 of 252
Proposed Annexation Site
Proposed ROW annexation
Proposed ROW annexation Proposed ROW annexation
Proposed ROW annexation
JIM
H
O
G
G
D
R
JIM H
O
G
G
R
D
FO
U
N
T
A
I
N
W
O
O
D
D
R
FO
U
N
T
A
I
N
W
O
O
D
D
R
HIGH
L
A
N
D
S
P
I
N
G
L
N
ALL
E
N
C
I
R
WILLI
A
M
S
D
R
±0 40 80 120 16020Feet
1 inch = 167 feet
Exhibit C
Page 166 of 252
Annexation Service Plan Oak Meadows Corner
Page 1 of 11
Exhibit D
CITY OF GEORGETOWN
ANNEXATION SERVICE PLAN
AREA: OAK MEADOWS CORNER
COUNCIL DISTRICT NO. 3
DATE: MAY 10, 2016
I. INTRODUCTION
This Service Plan (the Plan) is made by the City of Georgetown, Texas (City) pursuant to Sections
43.056(b)-(o); 43.062, and 43.052(h)(1) of the Texas Local Government Code (LGC). This Plan relates to
the annexation into the City of the land shown on Exhibit “A” “B” and “C” to this Service Plan, which
has sometimes been referred to as “Oak Meadows Corner.”
NOTE: This annexation was initiated by the petition or request of the owners of land in the annexed
area. As stated in Section 43.056(e) of the Texas Local Government Code, the requirement that
construction of capital improvements must be substantially completed within the period provided in
this service plan does not apply to a development project or proposed development project within an
area annexed at the request or on the petition of the landowner.
II. TERM OF SERVICE PLAN
Pursuant to Section 43.056(l) of the LGC, this Plan shall be in effect for a ten-year period commencing
on the effective date of the ordinance approving the annexation. Renewal of the Plan shall be at the
discretion of the City Council and must be accomplished by Ordinance.
III. INTENT
It is the intent of the City that municipal services under this Plan shall provide municipal services in
accordance with the timetables required by the LGC. The City reserves the rights guaranteed to it by
the LGC to amend this Plan if the City Council determines that changed conditions, subsequent
occurrences, or any other legally sufficient circumstances exist under the LGC or other Texas laws that
make this Plan unworkable, obsolete, or unlawful.
IV. CATEGORIZATION OF MUNICIPAL SERVICES
The municipal services described herein are categorized by those services which are (1) available to the
annexed area immediately upon annexation; (2) those services which will be available to the annexed
area within 2½ years from the effective date of the annexation; and (3) those services for which capital
improvements are needed and which will be available within 4½ years from the effective date of the
annexation based upon a schedule for construction of such improvements as set forth herein.
For the purposes of this Plan, “provision of services” includes having services provided by any method
or means by which the City provides municipal services to any other areas of the City, and may include
Page 167 of 252
Annexation Service Plan Oak Meadows Corner
Page 2 of 11
causing or allowing private utilities, governmental entities and other public service organizations to
provide such services by contract, in whole or in part, and may include duties on the part of a private
landowner with regard to such services.
In addition, in accordance with Section 43.056(g) of the LGC, if before annexation the annexed area had
a lower level of services, infrastructure, and infrastructure maintenance than the same being provided
by the City to other areas within the City limits, this Plan shall be construed to allow for the provision
to the annexed area of a level of services, infrastructure, and infrastructure maintenance that is
comparable to the level of services, infrastructure, and infrastructure maintenance in other parts of the
City with topography, land use, and population density similar to those reasonably contemplated or
projected in the annexed area.
V. SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED UPON ANNEXATION
1. Police Protection –Upon annexation, the Georgetown Police Department will extend regular
and routine patrols to the area.
2. Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services– Upon annexation, in the areas where the
City has jurisdiction over fire protection and emergency medical services or a contract under
which the City provides such services, the City of Georgetown Fire Department will provide
response services in the annexed area consisting of: fire suppression and rescue; emergency
response to 9-1-1 calls; fire prevention education efforts, and other duties and services
provided by the Georgetown Fire Department to areas within the City limits.
3. Solid Waste Collection – Upon annexation, for occupied structures, the City will provide
solid waste collection services to the annexed area in accordance with City ordinances and
policies in effect on the date of the annexation. However, per the terms of Sections 43.056(n)
and (o) of the LGC, if a property owner chooses to continue to use the services of a privately
owned solid waste management provider, the City is prevented from providing solid waste
services for 2 years.
4. Operation and Maintenance of Water and Wastewater Facilities in the Annexed Area that
Are Not Within the Area of Another Water or Wastewater Utility – City-owned water and
wastewater facilities that exist in the annexed area will be maintained upon annexation and
such maintenance shall be governed by the City’s ordinances, standards, policies and
procedures. Per the provisions of Section 13.01. 020 of the Unified Development Code
(“UDC”), for unplatted tracts in the annexed area, the City shall not repair, maintain, install
or provide any public utilities or services in any subdivision for which a Final Plat has not
been approved and filed for record, nor in which the standards contained in the UDC or
referred to therein have not been complied with in full.
5. Operation and Maintenance of Streets, Roads, and Street Lighting – The City will provide
preventative maintenance of the existing public streets and roads in the annexed area over
which it has jurisdiction through maintenance and preventative maintenance services such
as emergency pavement repair; ice and snow monitoring; crack seal, sealcoat, slurry seal,
Page 168 of 252
Annexation Service Plan Oak Meadows Corner
Page 3 of 11
and PM overlay; and other routine repair. The City shall not maintain private roads in the
annexed area. Preventative maintenance projects are prioritized on a City-wide basis and
scheduled based on a variety of factors, including surface condition, rideability, age, traffic
volume, functional classification, and available funding. As new streets are dedicated and
accepted for maintenance they will be included in the City’s preventative maintenance
program. Per the provisions of Section 13.01.020 of the UDC, for unplatted tracts in the
annexed area, the City shall not repair, maintain, install or provide any streets or street
lighting to any subdivision for which a Final Plat has not been approved and filed for record,
nor in which the standards contained in the UDC or referred to therein have not been
complied with in full. With regard to street lighting, it is the policy of the City of Georgetown
that adequate street lighting for the protection of the public and property be installed in all
new subdivisions. Installation procedures and acceptable standards for street lights shall be
governed by the utility standards of the City in effect at the time of subdivision construction
or addition thereto.
6. Operation and Maintenance of Public Parks, Playgrounds, and Swimming Pools - Upon
annexation, publicly owned parks, playgrounds, and swimming pools in the annexed area
(if any) will be operated and maintained by the City in accordance with the Section 12.20 of
the City Code of Ordinances, and other applicable ordinances, policies, and procedures in
effect at the time of annexation for other areas in the City limits. Privately owned parks,
playgrounds, and pools will be unaffected by the annexation and shall not be maintained by
the City.
7. Operation and Maintenance of Publicly Owned Buildings, Facilities, and Services –
Should the City acquire any buildings, facilities or services necessary for municipal services
in the annexed area, an appropriate City department will operate and maintain them.
8. Library – Upon annexation, library privileges will be available to anyone residing in the
annexed area.
9. Planning and Development; Building Permits and Inspections - Upon annexation, the
City’s Unified Development Code and Title 15 of the City Code of Ordinances will apply in
the area. These services include: site plan review, zoning approvals, Building Code and
other standard Code inspection services and City Code enforcement; sign regulations and
permits; and Stormwater Permit services. For a full description of these services, see the
City’s Unified Development Code and Title 15 of the City Code of Ordinances.
10. Animal Control Services – The provisions of Chapter 7 of the City Code of Ordinances
relating to animal control services shall apply in the annexed area.
11. Business Licenses and Regulations – The provisions of Chapter 6 of the City Code of
Ordinances relating to business licenses and regulations (Carnivals Circuses and Other
Exhibitions; Electrician’s Licenses; Gross Receipts Charge or Street Rental; Peddlers and
Solicitors; Taxicabs, Buses and Other Vehicles for Hire; Horse Drawn Carriages and other
Page 169 of 252
Annexation Service Plan Oak Meadows Corner
Page 4 of 11
Non-Motorized Vehicles for Hire; Sexually Oriented Businesses; and Alcoholic Beverages)
shall apply in the annexed area.
12. Health and Safety Regulations – The provisions of Chapter 8 of the City Code of Ordinance
relating to health and safety regulations (Fire Prevention Code; Fireworks; Food Sanitation;
Noise Control; Nuisances; Junked Motor Vehicles; and Smoking in Public Places) shall apply
in the annexed area.
13. Regulations Pertaining to Peace, Morals and Welfare -- The provisions of Chapter 9 of the
City Code of Ordinance relating to peace, morals and welfare (Housing Discrimination;
Weapons; and Enforcement of Other Miscellaneous Violations) shall apply in the annexed
area.
VI. SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED WITHIN 4½ YEARS OF ANNEXATION; CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM
1. In General – The City will initiate the construction of capital improvements necessary for
providing municipal services for the annexation area as necessary for services that are provided
directly by the City.
2. Water and Wastewater Services– Water and wastewater services are only provided to occupied
lots that have been legally subdivided and platted or are otherwise a legal lot, and that are
located within the boundaries of the City’s authorized service areas. Further, existing residences
in the annexed area that were served by a functioning onsite sewer system (septic system) shall
continue to use such private system for wastewater services in conformance with the provisions
of Section 13.20 of the City Code of Ordinances. Existing non-residential establishments in the
annexed area may continue to use an onsite sewer system (septic system) for sewage disposal in
conformance with the provisions of Section 13.20 of the City Code of Ordinances. Upon the
Development of any property in the annexed area, the provisions of Chapter 13 of the UDC shall
apply. The City shall have no obligation to extend water or wastewater service to any part of
the annexed area that is within the service area of another water or wastewater utility. For
annexed areas located within the City’s authorized service areas, the City shall, subject to the
terms and conditions of this Plan, extend water and wastewater service in accordance with the
service extension ordinances, policies, and standards that are summarized in Section X of this
Plan, which may require that the property owner or developer of a newly developed tract install
water and wastewater lines. The extension of water and wastewater services will be provided
in accordance with any applicable construction and design standards manuals adopted by the
City.
3. Water and Wastewater Capital Improvements Schedule – Per the Utility Agreement
4. Roads and Streets – No road or street related capital improvements are necessary at this time.
Future extension of roads or streets and installation of traffic control devices will be governed
by the City’s Comprehensive Plan, the City’s Overall Transportation Plan, the City’s Capital
Improvements Plan; the City’s regular or non-impact fee Capital Improvements Program, and
any applicable City ordinances, policies, and procedures, which may require that the property
Page 170 of 252
Annexation Service Plan Oak Meadows Corner
Page 5 of 11
owner or developer install roads and streets at the property owner’s or developer’s expense. It
is anticipated that the developer of new subdivisions in the area will install street lighting in
accordance with the City’s standard policies and procedures. Provision of street lighting will be
in accordance with the City’s street lighting policies.
5. Capital Improvements for Other Municipal Services – No capital improvements are necessary
at this time to provide municipal Police; Fire Protection; Emergency Medical Services; Solid
Waste Collection; Public Parks, Playgrounds, or Swimming Pools; Public Buildings or Facilities;
or Library Services. The annexed area will be included in the City’s future planning for new or
expanded capital improvements and evaluated on the same basis and in accordance with the
same standards as similarly situated areas of the City.
VII. FORCE MAJEURE AND SCHEDULE EXTENSIONS
1. Certain events, described as Force Majeure Events in this Plan, are those over which the City has
no control. Force Majeure Events shall include, but not be limited to, acts of God; terrorism or
acts of a public enemy; war; blockages; riots; strikes; epidemics; forces of nature including
landslides, lightening, earthquakes, fires, storms, floods, washouts, droughts, tornadoes,
hurricanes; arrest and restraint of government; explosions; collisions, and all other inabilities of
the City, whether similar to those enumerated or otherwise, which are not within the control of
the City. Any deadlines or other provisions of this Plan that are affected by a Force Majeure
Event shall be automatically extended to account for delays caused by such Force Majeure Event.
2. In accordance with Section 43.056(e) of the LGC, this Plan and the schedules for capital
improvements necessary to provide full municipal services to the annexed area may be amended
by the City to extend the period for construction if the construction is proceeding with all
deliberate speed. The construction of the improvements shall be accomplished in a continuous
process and shall be completed as soon as reasonably possible, consistent with generally
accepted local engineering and architectural standards and practices. However, the City does
not violate this Plan if the construction process is interrupted for any reason by circumstances
beyond the direct control of the City.
VIII. AMENDMENTS
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 43.056(k) of the LGC, on approval by the City Council, the Plan is
a contractual obligation that is not subject to amendment or repeal except as provided by state law.
Section 43.056(k) of the LGC provides that if the City Council determines, after public hearings, that
changed conditions or subsequent occurrences make the Plan unworkable or obsolete, the City Council
may amend the Plan to conform to the changed conditions or subsequent occurrences. An amended
Plan must provide for services that are comparable to or better than those established in the Plan before
amendment. Before any Plan amendments are adopted, the City Council must provide an opportunity
for interested persons to be heard at public hearings called and held in the manner provided by Section
43.0561 of the LGC.
IX. FEES
Page 171 of 252
Annexation Service Plan Oak Meadows Corner
Page 6 of 11
The City may impose a fee for any municipal service in the area annexed if the same type of fee is
imposed within the corporate boundaries of the City. All City fees are subject to revision from time to
time by the City in its sole discretion.
X. SUMMARY OF CURRENT WATER AND WASTEWATER SERVICE EXTENSION POLICIES
Per the requirements of Section 43.056(e) of the LGC, the following summary is provided regarding the
City’s current service extension policies for water and wastewater service. However, this is a summary
of the current policies, and the policies and regulations related to water and wastewater utility
extensions that are included in the City Code of Ordinances, the Unified Development Code, the City’s
Construction and Specifications Manual; Drainage Manual, and other published policies and technical
manuals, as the same may be amended from time to time, shall control the extension of water and
wastewater services to the annexed area. In addition, these policies and ordinances are set by City
Council and can be amended in the future:
1. In General -- The provisions of Chapter 13 of the City’s Unified Development Code (“UDC”)
shall apply in the annexed area and Chapter 13 of the City Code of Ordinances. Portions of the
current Chapter 13 of the UDC and the current Chapter 13 of the Code of Ordinances are
summarized below. Note that these provisions are established by ordinance of the City Council
and are subject to change from time to time.
A. The City shall not repair, maintain, install or provide any water services, wastewater service,
gas, electricity or any other public utilities or services to any property that has not been
legally subdivided or is a non-legal lot.
B. For property that is required by the City’s UDC or other City regulations to construct water
or wastewater facilities, funding and construction of those facilities are the responsibility of
the property owner or developer (the “subdivider”).
C. Subdividers shall be responsible for providing an approved public water supply system for
fire protection and domestic/ commercial/ industrial usage consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan. Where an approved public water supply or distribution main is within
reasonable distance of the subdivision, but in no case less than one-quarter mile away, and
connection to the system is both possible and permissible (including adequate system
capacity), the subdivider shall be required to bear the cost of connecting the subdivision to
such existing water supply. The subdivider shall, consistent with all existing ordinances,
make a pro-rata contribution to funding of needed storage facilities, treatment facilities, and
specific distribution lines as determined necessary by the City.
D. Subdividers shall be responsible for providing an approved public sanitary sewer system,
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, throughout the entire subdivision such that all lots,
parcels, or tracts of land will be capable of connecting to the sanitary sewer system except as
otherwise provided herein. Where an approved public sanitary sewer collection main or
outfall line is in no case less than one-half mile away, and connection to the system is both
Page 172 of 252
Annexation Service Plan Oak Meadows Corner
Page 7 of 11
possible and permissible (including adequate system capacity), the subdivider shall be
required to bear the cost of connecting the subdivision to such existing sanitary sewer
system. Where an approved public wastewater collection main or outfall line is more than
one-half mile away from the property boundary, and where extension of a sanitary sewer
collection main or outfall line is scheduled in the City’s Capital Improvements Plan to be
completed to a point within one-half mile of the property boundary within five (5) years
from the date of the Preliminary Plat approval, the subdivider shall be required to install a
public wastewater collection system. The design and construction of a public sanitary sewer
system shall comply with regulations covering extension of public sanitary sewer systems
adopted by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.
E. All infrastructure and public improvements must be designed and installed in accordance
with all of the elements of the Comprehensive Plan and shall meet the minimum
requirements established by the UDC, the City's Construction Standards and Specifications
for Roads, Streets, Structures and Utilities, and any other adopted City design or technical
criteria. No main water line extension shall be less than eight inches. All new public sanitary
sewer systems shall be designed and constructed to conform with the City’s Construction
Standards and Specifications and to operate on a gravity flow basis by taking advantage of
natural topographic conditions and thereby reducing the need for lift stations and force
mains.
2. If the specific undeveloped property does not have City water or wastewater facilities and
capacity fronting the property – the owner may make an application for an extension of service
to the property. If the Assistant City Manager for Utilities determines in writing that adequate
water or wastewater capacity is available, or will be available, and if the project does not include
City cost participation or reimbursement, if the proposed facilities are depicted on the City’s
Water and Wastewater Master Plans, and the requested service otherwise meets the City’s
requirements, the extension size, capacity, and routing may be approved by the Assistant City
Manager for Utilities for construction by the developer at the developer’s cost and expense.
3. If the specific undeveloped property does have adequate City water or wastewater facilities
and capacity fronting the property – the owner may receive water or wastewater service from
the City by applying for a tap permit and paying the required fees.
4. If any property in the annexed area is using a septic system – the property owner remains
responsible for the operation and maintenance of the septic system. If the property is in a Rural
Residential Subdivision as defined in Chapter 13 of the UDC, or is a legal lot greater than one
acre in size and used for single family residential purposes, the property shall continue the use
of a septic system after annexation until such time that the use of the property changes, the
property is further subdivided or developed, or a public sanitary sewer line has been extended
to within 200 feet of the property boundary and the property owner has received notification
from the City of the City’s desire for the property to be connected to the public sanitary sewer
line. If the septic system fails before the City’s centralized wastewater service is extended to
within 200 feet of the property and the City determines that the provision of centralized
wastewater service is not feasible or practical at that time, then the property owner must either
Page 173 of 252
Annexation Service Plan Oak Meadows Corner
Page 8 of 11
repair or replace the septic system in accordance with the provisions of Section 13.20 of the City
Code of Ordinances. Properties using a septic system that are not in a Rural Residential
Subdivision , or are not legal lots greater than one acre in size and used for single family
residential purposes at the time of annexation, but that are designated as either residential, open
space or agricultural on the City’s Future Land Use Plan shall continue the use of a septic system
until such time that the use of the property changes, the property is further subdivided or
developed, or a public sanitary sewer line has been extended to within 200 feet of the property
boundary and the property owner has received notification from the City of the City’s desire for
the property to be connected to the public sanitary sewer line.
5. Reimbursement and cost participation by the City – Pursuant to Section 13.09.030 of the UDC,
the City, in its sole discretion and with City Council approval, may participate with a property
owner or developer in the cost of oversized facilities or line extensions. The actual calculation
of the cost participation and reimbursement amounts, including limits and schedules for the
payments, are set forth in the UDC.
6. City Code of Ordinances: (The following provisions are set by the City Council and can be
amended in the future by ordinance.)
Chapter 13.10 of the City Code of Ordinances currently provides as follows:
Section 13.10.010 Policy established.
This policy shall apply to improvements to the City's utility systems, including system upgrades, system
expansion, and plant capacity additions. In this Section, the term “utility system” shall mean the City’s water
system, wastewater system, reuse irrigation system, and stormwater drainage system.
Section 13.10.020 System Planning.
The City shall maintain and periodically update system plans for each utility so that system improvements are
implemented to maintain adequate capacity for growth while maintaining proper service levels to existing
customers.
Section 13.10.030 Project Timing.
A. Projects designed to expand or upgrade a utility system must be completed and ready for operations
such that capacity requirements by state regulatory agencies and City system plans are met.
B. When possible, the City should coordinate the construction of system improvements in a particular
location with the expansion or maintenance of other utility infrastructure to minimize the future
impact on each utility.
C. Projects should begin the design phase when existing demand at a specific location exceeds 75% of
current capacity and future demand is expected to exceed the current total capacity.
D. Projects should begin the construction phase when existing demand at a specific location exceeds
90% of current capacity and future demand is expected to exceed the current total capacity.
Page 174 of 252
Annexation Service Plan Oak Meadows Corner
Page 9 of 11
E. Projects required to facilitate the development of a specific tract shall be done in accordance with the
Unified Development Code.
F. Projects required as a result of an annexation service plan shall be provided as stated in the approved
Service Plan for such annexed tracts.
Section 13.10.040 Project Financing.
A. Projects required to facilitate the subdivision of a specific tract shall be paid by the subdivider in
accordance with the Unified Development Code, unless otherwise authorized in writing and
approved by the City Council in accordance with the terms of Section 13.09 of the Unified
Development Code or other applicable law.
B. When utility expansion is requested within a portion of the City’s utility service area, but the City is
not otherwise required to provide service or planning to provide service as reflected in the City’s
Capital Improvements Plan, the City may nonetheless, at the City’s sole option, facilitate the design
and construction of the required utility extensions or upgrades by managing the project with the cost
of such extensions to be shared and fully paid by the requesting landowners or subdividers prior to
commencement of the project.
C. When utility expansion is requested within a portion of the City’s utility service area, the City shall
evaluate degree to which the project 1) facilitates contiguous growth, 2) maximizes the provision of
service to the service area, 3) enhances economic development, 4) improves system operations, 5)
contributes to conservation or other environmental concern, and 6) facilitates the completion of the
utility master plan.
D. At the City’s sole option, the City may also facilitate the installation of utility expansion requests
through 1) financial cost contribution, 2) financing of the improvement using individual contracts
between the City and each landowner for a proportionate share of the project cost to be paid out over
a specified period of time at a specified rate of interest, 3) Impact Fee or connection fee reduction or
waiver.
Chapter 13.20 of the City Code of Ordinances currently provides as follows:
Sec. 13.20.010. General.
A. It is unlawful for any owner or lessee, tenant or other person in possession of any premises where
any person lives or works, or occupies the same, to establish, maintain or use any water closet,
bathtub, lavatory or sink except by one of the following means and consistent with the other terms,
conditions and requirements of this Chapter and with the City’s Unified Development Code:
1. Connection to an approved Onsite Sewage Facility that is constructed and maintained
in accordance with the rules and regulations of all appropriate state and local agencies
having jurisdiction over such facilities; or
2. Connection to a public centralized wastewater collection main with all wastewater
discharged to a centralized public wastewater collection system.
B. Upon the “Development” of property, the provisions of Chapter 13 of the Unified Development
Code (pertaining to Infrastructure and Public Improvements) shall govern the provision of
wastewater service to the property. For the purposes of this section, the term “Development” shall
have the same meaning as in Section 16.05 of the City’s Unified Development Code.
Page 175 of 252
Annexation Service Plan Oak Meadows Corner
Page 10 of 11
C. It is the duty of each such person referenced in subsection (A), above, to connect such fixtures to an
approved wastewater system, and to maintain the same.
Sec. 13.20.020. On Site Sewage Facilities.
A. General. All On Site Sewage Facilities must be constructed and maintained in accordance with the
rules and regulations of the appropriate state and local agencies having jurisdiction over such
facilities.
B. Availability of a Public Centralized Wastewater Collection Main. If a public centralized wastewater
collection main is located within 200 feet of a property line, and the wastewater collection main has
adequate capacity to receive and transport the wastewater flow produced by the property, then
property owner shall connect that property to said utility line at the earliest to occur of either of the
following events: failure of the On Site Sewage Facility servicing the property, or the date that is
five (5) years after receipt of notice of the availability of a wastewater collection main within 200-
feet of the property line.
C. Failure of On Site Sewage Facility. When an Onsite Sewage Facility fails, the following provisions
shall apply:
a. If a public centralized wastewater collection main is located within 200 feet of the property
boundary, and the wastewater collection main has adequate capacity to receive and transport the
wastewater flow produced by the property, then the property must be connected to said utility
line by the property owner;
b. If no public centralized wastewater collection main is located within 200 feet of the property
boundary, the City shall evaluate the feasibility of providing centralized wastewater collection
services to the property via a gravity or low pressure system. Where the provision of gravity
sewer service or low pressure system is technically feasible, utility system improvements may be
made in accordance with Chapters 13.10;
c. If the City determines that the provision of wastewater service via a centralized wastewater
collection main is not necessary due to existing or future land use, then the On Site Sewage
Facility may be repaired or replaced.
(Prior code § 12-101)
Sec. 13.20.030. Privies prohibited.
It is unlawful for any owner or lessee, tenant or other person in possession of any premises in the City to
establish or maintain any privy or dry closet.
Sec.13.20.040 Low Pressure Sewer Systems
A. A “Low Pressure Sewer System” is an individual lift station located at each utility customer or
property owner location having a private force main connecting to a public force main or gravity
main located in a public utility easement or public right-of-way.
B. Each property owner and utility customer shall be responsible for the cost of installation and
maintenance of the individual lift station and private force main.
Section 13.20.050. Prohibited Discharges into Sewer System
No person shall discharge, cause to be discharged, or permit to be discharged, either directly or indirectly into the
public sewer system, waste or wastewater from any of the following sources unless allowed by the City
Manager, or his/her designee:
Page 176 of 252
Annexation Service Plan Oak Meadows Corner
Page 11 of 11
A. Any wastes or wastewater that does not meet the limitations imposed by Section 13.24 of the Code
of Ordinances.
B. Any stormwater, groundwater, rainwater, street drainage, subsurface drainage, or yard drainage;
C. Any unpolluted water, including , but not limited to, cooling water, process water or blow-down
water from cooling towers or evaporative coolers;
D.
E. Any wastes or wastewater, or any object, material, or other substance directly into a manhole or
other opening into the sewer facilities other than wastes or wastewater through an approved service
connection.
F. Any holding tank waste, provided, that such waste may be placed into facilities designed to receive
such wastes and approved by the City Manager, or his/her designee.
Section 13.20.060 Sewer System Maintenance
A. For properties with gravity wastewater service, the property owner and utility customer shall be
responsible for the proper operation, maintenance, and repairs of the sewer system in the building
and the service lateral between the building and the point of connection into the public sewer main.
B. For properties with low pressure service, the property owner and utility customer shall be
responsible for the proper operation, maintenance, and repairs of the sewer system in the building
and the service lateral, lift station (grinder pump) and force main between the building and the point
of connection into the public sewer main.
C. When, as a part of sewer system testing, the City identifies a flaw in a private service lateral or force
main where a repair is necessary to prevent infiltration or inflow, the property owner and utility
customer shall be responsible to cause the repairs to be made within one (1) year of the date of
notification by the City.
D. If repairs are not complete within one year of notification by the City, City may engage the services
of a contractor to make the necessary repairs with the costs for such repairs to be paid by the City
and subsequently charged to property owner and utility customer.
Page 177 of 252
Page 178 of 252
Page 179 of 252
Page 180 of 252
Page 181 of 252
Page 182 of 252
Page 183 of 252
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Regula r Meeting
May 10, 2016
SUBJECT:
Forwarded fro m the G eo rgetown Economi c Devel o pment Corporati on (GEDCO):
Second Readi ng of an Ordinance amendi ng the 2016 G eorgeto w n Eco no mi c Devel opment Corporati o n
(“G EDCO”) B udg e t for the maintenance of the Te xas Li fe-Sci ences Co l l abo rati on Center (TLCC) -- Leigh Wallace,
Finance Director (acti o n requi red)
ITEM SUMMARY:
City Co uncil approved the Perfo rmance Agreement betwe e n GEDCO and TLCC on January 12 , 2 01 6. This agreeme nt
requires GEDCO to pay to TLCC a cash grant of $1 00 ,00 0, referred to as the “Financial Incentive.” Therefore, this
proposed budget amendment includes the additional expense o f $100,00 0 to Texas Life-Sciences Collaboration Ce nter
and reduces total expenses for Eco nomic Develo pment P rojects by $10 0,0 00 . The net financial impact of this budge t
amendment is $0.
The above item was unkno wn at the time the 2 01 6 GEDCO budget was adopte d. The detailed distribution of the
amendment is inc luded in Exhibit A.
The Performance Agreement between GEDCO and TLCC was approved by City Council o n January 12, 2016.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
NA
SUBMITTED BY:
Leigh Wallace, Finance Director -- kj
ATTACHMENT S:
Description
GEDCO Budget Amendment Ord inance
GEDCO Budget Amendment Exhibit A
Page 184 of 252
Ordinance Number:____________ Page 1 of 2
Description: Reorganization Budget Amendment
Date Approved: May 10, 2016
ORDINANCE NO. __________________
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2016 GEORGETOWN ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ANNUAL BUDGET DUE TO APPROVED
SPENDING OF AVAILABLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
FUNDS FOR THE TEXAS LIFE SCIENCES COLLABORATION CENTER
THAT HAD NOT BEEN FINALIZED WHEN THE BUDGET WAS ADOPTED,
AND REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES IN
CONFLICT THEREWITH.
WHEREAS, the Georgetown Economic Development Corporation is funded through
a portion of sales taxes in the City of Georgetown; and
WHEREAS, the Georgetown Economic Development Corporation fiscal year 2016
operating budget includes $4,159,774 of funding available for Economic Development
Projects; and
WHEREAS, the changes were unknown and unforeseeable at the time the fiscal
year 2016 budget was approved; and
WHEREAS, the City Charter allows for changes in the Annual Operating Plan by a
Council majority plus one in emergency situations;
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.
SECTION 2.
The amendment to the 2016 Georgetown Economic Development Corporation Budget
expenses of conducting the affairs thereof, is in all things adopted and approved as an addition
to the previously approved budget of the current revenues and expenses as well as fixed
charges against said City for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2015, and ending September
30, 2016. A copy of the amendment is attached hereto as Exhibit “A” incorporated by reference
herein.
SECTION 3.
The total of $100,000 is hereby appropriated for payments to the Texas Life Sciences
Collaboration Center and included in the Exhibit “A”.
Page 185 of 252
Ordinance Number:____________ Page 2 of 2
Description: Reorganization Budget Amendment
Date Approved: May 10, 2016
SECTION 4
All ordinances and resolutions, or parts of ordinances and resolutions, in conflict with this
Ordinance are hereby repealed, and are no longer of any force and effect. This ordinance
complies with the vision statement of the Georgetown 2030 Plan.
SECTION 5.
If any provision of this ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall
be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions, or application thereof, of this
ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end
the provisions of this ordinance are hereby declared to be severable.
SECTION 6.
The Mayor is hereby authorized to sign this ordinance and the City Secretary to attest.
This ordinance shall become effective upon adoption of its second and final reading by the City
Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas.
PASSED AND APPROVED on First Reading on the 26h day of April, 2016.
PASSED AND APPROVED on Second Reading on the 10th day of May, 2016.
ATTEST: THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN:
______________________ ______________________
Shelley Nowling By: Dale Ross
City Secretary Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________
Charlie McNabb
City Attorney
Page 186 of 252
Georgetown Economic Development Corporation
2016 Approved
Budget
Impact of
This Action
2016 Amended
Budget
Beginning Fund Balance 5,370,479$ -$ 5,370,479
Revenues
Total Revenues 4,500,813 - 4,500,813
Expenses
Economic Development Projects 4,159,774 (100,000) 4,059,774
Texas Life Sciences - 100,000 100,000
All Other Expenses 5,375,190 5,375,190
Total Expenses 9,534,964 - 9,534,964
Contingency Reserves 336,328 - 336,328
Available Ending Fund Balance -$ -$ -$
Total Increase in Expenditures -$
Net Decrease in Fund Balance -$
EXHIBIT A
2016 GEDCO Budget Amendment
Proposed budget amendments include an increase in expenditures for Texas Life-Sciences Collaboration Center due
to an agreement that was finalized in January 2016 and a reduction to the Economic Development Projects
expenses.
Page 187 of 252
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Regula r Meeting
May 10, 2016
SUBJECT:
Second Readi ng of an Ordinance amendi ng the 20 16 Annual Budget due to an approved Capital Improvement Pro ject
for the addition of a si dew al k at IH35 Southbound F rontage Road that had not be e n finalized when the budget was
adopted, and repealing all o rdinances or parts of o rdinances in conflict therewith -- Leigh Wallace, Finance Director
(acti on requi red)
ITEM SUMMARY:
In February 2016, the City Co unc il reviewed and approved an additional Capital Improvement P roject to add a side walk at
IH35 So uthbo und Frontage Road. The anticipated c ost of this pro ject is $600,000 and it will be funded thro ugh Bond
P roceeds.
The above item was unknown at the time the 2016 budget was adopted. The detailed distribution of the ame ndment is
included in the attachments to the ordinance.
Speci al Consi derati o ns
The City Charter requires that a majority plus one must approve an amendment to the approved budget. The City charter
allows fo r budget amendments in e mergency situations and when the issues and ne e ds were unknown at the time the
budget was adopte d.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The proposed budget amendment increases Bond Pro c eeds Revenue by $600,000 and Streets CIP Expenditures by
$600,000. The net impact to ending fund balance fo r the General Capital Projects fund is $0 .
SUBMITTED BY:
Leigh Wallace, Finance Director, Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager -- kj
ATTACHMENT S:
Description
Bud get Amendment Sidewalk Ord inance
Bud get Amendment Sidewalks Exhibit A
Page 188 of 252
Ordinance Number:____________ Page 1 of 2
Description: Sidewalks Budget Amendment
Date Approved: May 10, 2016
ORDINANCE NO. __________________
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2016 ANNUAL BUDGET DUE TO AN
APPROVED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FOR THE ADDITION OF
A SIDEWALK AT IH35 SOUTHBOUND FRONTAGE ROAD THAT HAD
NOT BEEN FINALIZED WHEN THE BUDGET WAS ADOPTED, AND
REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES IN
CONFLICT THEREWITH.
WHEREAS, the Council approved the addition of a Capital Improvement Project to
add a sidewalk at IH35 Southbound Frontage Road on February 9, 2016; and
WHEREAS, the changes were unknown and unforeseeable at the time the fiscal
year 2016 budget was approved; and
WHEREAS, the City Charter allows for changes in the Annual Operating Plan by a
Council majority plus one in emergency situations;
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.
SECTION 2.
The amendment to the 2016 Annual Budget of the revenues of the City of Georgetown and
expenses of conducting the affairs thereof, is in all things adopted and approved as an addition
to the previously approved budget of the current revenues and expenses as well as fixed
charges against said City for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2015, and ending September
30, 2016. A copy of the amendment is attached hereto as Exhibit “A” incorporated by reference
herein.
SECTION 3.
The total of $600,000 is hereby appropriated for payments of expenditures and payments
of the funds and included in the Exhibit “A”.
SECTION 4
All ordinances and resolutions, or parts of ordinances and resolutions, in conflict with this
Ordinance are hereby repealed, and are no longer of any force and effect. This ordinance
complies with the vision statement of the Georgetown 2030 Plan.
Page 189 of 252
Ordinance Number:____________ Page 2 of 2
Description: Sidewalks Budget Amendment
Date Approved: May 10, 2016
SECTION 5.
If any provision of this ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall
be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions, or application thereof, of this
ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end
the provisions of this ordinance are hereby declared to be severable.
SECTION 6.
The Mayor is hereby authorized to sign this ordinance and the City Secretary to attest.
This ordinance shall become effective upon adoption of its second and final reading by the City
Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas.
PASSED AND APPROVED on First Reading on the 26h day of April, 2016.
PASSED AND APPROVED on Second Reading on the 10th day of May, 2016.
ATTEST: THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN:
______________________ ______________________
Shelley Nowling By: Dale Ross
City Secretary Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________
Charlie McNabb
City Attorney
Page 190 of 252
General Capital Projects Fund
2016 Approved
Budget
Impact of
This Action
2016 Amended
Budget
Beginning Fund Balance 14,858,811$ -$ 14,858,811$
Revenues
Bond Proceeds 29,850,000 600,000 30,450,000
All Other Revenues 5,161,899 - 5,161,899
Total Revenues 35,011,899 600,000 35,611,899
Expenditures
Streets CIP 20,675,000 600,000 21,275,000
All Other Expenditures 26,380,549 - 26,380,549
Total Expenditures 47,055,549 600,000 47,655,549
Ending Fund Balance 2,815,161$ -$ 2,815,161$
Total Increase in Expenditures 600,000$
Net Decrease in Fund Balance -$
EXHIBIT A
2016 Budget Amendment - Sidewalks
Proposed budget amendments include a $600,000 increase in Bond Proceeds (revenue) and Streets CIP
(expenditures) for the addition of the IH35 Southbound Frontage Road sidewalk.
Page 191 of 252
Page 192 of 252
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Regula r Meeting
May 10, 2016
SUBJECT:
Forwarded fro m the G eneral G overnment and Fi nance Advi sory B oard (G G AF):
Second Readi ng of an Ordinance formally adopti ng the Fi scal and B udgetary P o l i c y to be used in preparing the fisc al
year 2017 annual budget and to guide financial operations -- Leigh Wallace, Financ e Director (acti on requi red)
ITEM SUMMARY:
This item is to ado pt the proposed changes to the Fiscal and Budgetary Po licy fo r the upco ming budget. The propo sed
amendments were discussed and reviewed by the General Go vernment and Finance Advisory Board on March 30, 2 01 6,
and presented to Co uncil during the April 26, 201 6 workshop.
The purpose of the Fiscal and Budgetary Policy (P olicy) is to pro vide the framewo rk for financial operations of the City
and to ensure prudent stewardship, financial planning and acco untability.
Each year the Policy is administrative ly amended to reco gnize date and amount c hanges within the text; and to address any
new financial or regulato ry requirement that may need to be added. Other amendments may be recommended in o rder to
clarify wording o r to further granulate a particular P olicy Area.
P otential change s fo r consideration and discussion by Council are noted by section and page numbers in the overvie w
presentation pro vide d during workshop. The full ve rsion o f the policies with tracke d c hanges is also provided.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
NA
SUBMITTED BY:
Leigh Wallace, Finance Director -- kj
ATTACHMENT S:
Description
F is cal and Bud getary Polic y Ord inance
F is cal and Bud getary Polic y
Page 193 of 252
Ordinance Number: ___________________ Page 1 of 2
Fiscal and Budgetary Policy Amendment
Date Approved: ______________________
ORDINANCE NO. _______________________
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
GEORGETOWN, TEXAS FORMAL LY ADOPTING THE FISCAL
AND BUDGETARY POLICY; REPEALING CONFLICTING
ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS; PROVIDING A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND ESTABLISHING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City Council developed a Fiscal and Budgetary Policy and was
adopted by City Council action in 2001; and
WHEREAS, the Fiscal and Budgetary Policy has been reviewed and adopted each
year since 2001 by such Council action; and
WHEREAS, this Policy is used to guide the City’s financial operations; and
WHEREAS, the City’s Annual Budget is prepared in accordance with this policy;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and approved the amended Fiscal and
Budgetary Policy for Fiscal Year 2017; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has deemed this Policy to be in effect.
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 complies with the Vision Statement of the City of Georgetown
2030 Comprehensive Plan.
SECTION 2. The City Council approves the Fiscal and Budgetary Policy as
illustrated in Exhibit A.
SECTION 3. In the event any section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase,
provision sentence or part of this ordinance or the application of same to any person or
circumstance shall for any reason be adjudged invalid or held unconstitutional, by a court
of competent jurisdiction, it shall not affect, impair, or invalidate the remainder of this
ordinance which shall be given full force and effect.
Page 194 of 252
Ordinance Number: ___________________ Page 2 of 2
Fiscal and Budgetary Policy Amendment
Date Approved: ______________________
SECTION 4: In the future, City Council may choose to adopt the Fiscal and
Budgetary Policy by Resolution in which case this Ordinance shall automatically expire
and shall no longer be of force and effect.
SECTION 5: The Mayor is hereby authorized to sign this Ordinance and the City
Secretary to attest.
PASSED AND APPROVED on First Reading on the 26th day of April, 2016.
PASSED AND APPROVED on Second Reading on the 10th day of May, 2016.
ATTEST:
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN:
Shelley Nowling, City Secretary By: Dale Ross, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________
Charles McNabb, City Attorney
Page 195 of 252
1
FY2017 Annual Budget
Fiscal and Budgetary Policy
Adopted: April 26, 2016
Contents
I. PURPOSE............................................................................................................................................ 2
II. FUND STRUCTURE AND BASIS OF BUDGETING ....................................................................................... 2
III. OPERATING BUDGET ........................................................................................................................... 3
IV. REVENUE MANAGEMENT .................................................................................................................... 6
V. EXPENDITURE MANAGEMENT ............................................................................................................ 10
VI. STAFFING AND COMPENSATION ......................................................................................................... 15
VII. FUND BALANCE POLICIES ................................................................................................................... 16
VIII. LONG‐TERM LIABILITY RESERVES ........................................................................................................ 16
IX. BUDGET CONTINGENCY PLAN ............................................................................................................ 17
X. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) BUDGET ............................................................................... 17
XI. CAPITAL MAINTENANCE AND REPLACEMENT ....................................................................................... 19
XII. ACCOUNTING, AUDITING AND FINANCIAL REPORTING .......................................................................... 21
XIII. ASSET MANAGEMENT ....................................................................................................................... 21
XIV. DEBT MANAGEMENT ........................................................................................................................ 23
XV. OTHER FUNDING ALTERNATIVES ........................................................................................................ 27
XVI. FINANCIAL CONDITIONS, RESERVES, AND STABILITY RATIOS .................................................................. 27
XVII. INTERNAL CONTROLS ........................................................................................................................ 30
Page 196 of 252
2
FY2017 Annual Budget
I. PURPOSE
The City of Georgetown is committed to financial management through integrity, prudent stewardship, planning,
accountability, full disclosure and communication. The broad purpose of the Fiscal and Budgetary Policies is to
enable the City and its related component units, including the Georgetown Transportation Enhancement
Corporation (GTEC) and the Georgetown Economic Development Corporation (GEDCO), to achieve and maintain
a long‐term stable and positive financial condition, and provide guidelines for the day‐to‐day planning and
operations of the City’s financial affairs.
Policy scope generally spans areas of accounting, operational and capital budgeting, revenue and expenditure
management, financial reporting, internal controls, investment and asset management, debt management and
forecasting. This is done in order to:
A. Demonstrate to the citizens of Georgetown, the investment community, and the bond rating agencies that
the City is committed to a strong fiscal operation;
B. Provide precedents for future policy‐makers and financial managers on common financial goals and
strategies;
C. Fairly present and fully disclose the financial position of the City in conformity to generally accepted
accounting principles (GAAP); and
D. Demonstrate compliance with finance‐related legal and contractual issues in accordance with the Texas Local
Government Code and other legal mandates.
These policies will be reviewed and updated annually as part of the budget preparation process.
II. FUND STRUCTURE AND BASIS OF BUDGETING
The budgeted funds for the City of Georgetown include:
Governmental Funds: General Fund which accounts for all financial resources except those required to
be accounted for in another fund, and include basic governmental services, such
as Street Maintenance, Planning and Development, Police, Fire and Parks, as
well as solid waste management.
Special Revenue Funds (SRF) account for specific revenues that are legally
restricted for specified purposes. The City currently budgets 26 SRF Funds and
includes Tourism, Parkland Dedication, Library Donations, Animal Services
Donations, and Street Maintenance Sales Tax.
Debt Service Fund is used to account for the payment of general long‐term debt
principal and interest.
Capital Project Funds are used to account for the acquisition or construction of
major capital facilities other than those financed by enterprise activities.
Page 197 of 252
3
FY2017 Annual Budget
Proprietary Funds: Internal Service Funds account for good or services provided by one internal
department to another. The City uses this system to recognize cost for fleet
replacement and maintenance, facility maintenance, computer replacement
and maintenance and employee health insurance costs.
Enterprise Funds include the City’s “business like” activities including all the
utility funds and the airport.
Basis of Accounting and Basis of Budgeting
The City accounts and budgets for all Governmental Funds using the modified accrual basis of accounting.
This basis means that revenue is recognized in the accounting period in which it becomes available and
measurable, while expenditures are recognized in the accounting period in which they are incurred. Because
the appropriated budget is used as the basis for control and comparison of budgeted and actual amounts,
the basis for preparing the budget is the same as the basis of accounting. Exceptions to the modified accrual
basis of accounting include:
Encumbrances, which are treated as expenditures in the year they are encumbered, not when expended
Grants, which are considered revenue when awarded, not received
Principal and interest on long‐term debt, which are recognized when paid.
General government funds include the General Fund, special revenue funds, debt service fund and general
capital project funds.
Proprietary Funds, which include the enterprise and internal service funds are accounted and budgeted using
the full‐accrual basis of accounting. Under this method, revenues are recognized when they are earned and
measurable, while expenses are recognized when they are incurred regardless of timing or related cash
flows. The basis for preparing the budget is the same as the basis of accounting except for principal payments
on long‐term debt and capital outlay which are treated as budgeted expenses. Exceptions include:
Depreciation which is not budgeted
Non‐budgeted accruals such as compensated absences.
III. OPERATING BUDGET
Budgeting is an essential element of the financial planning, control and evaluation process of municipal
government. The operating budget is the City’s annual financial operating plan. The annual budget includes all
of the operating departments of the General Fund, proprietary funds, debt service funds, special revenue funds,
and capital improvement funds of the City.
A. Form of Government – The Charter (Section 1.03) established a “Council‐Manager Government” wherein the
City vests power in the City Council to “enact legislation, adopt budgets, determine policies, and appoint the
City Manager who shall execute the laws and administer the government of the City.”
B. Comprehensive Plan – The Charter (Section 1.08) requires that the City Council “establish comprehensive
planning as a continuous and ongoing governmental function in order to promote and strengthen the existing
role, processes and powers of the City of Georgetown.” The current comprehensive plan is the 2030 Plan
Page 198 of 252
4
FY2017 Annual Budget
adopted in 2006. The 2030 Plan is written from a perspective of some twenty years into the future. It
expresses what we envision and desire our community to be in the year 2030, and it reflects on all that we
have accomplished since we launched the revision of our Comprehensive Plan in 2006. The Plan utilizes a
Vision Statement to guide the desired outcomes for the community.
C. Council Vision – The Council has further defined the City’s Comprehensive Plan by defining its vision to
become the City of Excellence. This vision is to be accomplished through five (5) focus areas. These focus
areas become the City’s strategic goals through development and implementation of defined Business
Plans for each focus area.
1. Economic Development
2. Signature Destination
3. Public Safety
4. Transportation
5. Utility Services
C. Five‐Year City of Excellence Business Plan – A “dashboard” plan will be developed that links the 2030 Plan
with the City Council’s City of Excellence vision and five focus areas (strategic goals) that further the
implementation of the Vision. From those strategic goals an implementation plan for each of the 5 focus
areas will be created.
1. A Five‐Year Financial Forecast will be created and updated annually that will identify potential tax
impacts, rate adjustments and other factors that will impede the implementation of the City of
Excellence Business Plan.
2. Year‐One of this Business Plan is the basis for the Annual Budget.
D.C. Preparation – The Charter (Section 6.02) requires “a proposed budget prepared by the City Manager and
submitted to the City Council at least thirty days prior to the end of the fiscal year. The budget shall be
adopted not later than the twenty‐seventh day of the last month of the fiscal year. No budget will be adopted
or appropriations made unless the total estimated revenues, income and funds available shall be equal to or
in excess of such budget or appropriations, except otherwise provided.” Therefore, the budget will be
presented to the City Council no later than the 1st day of August to provide the City Council time to adopt the
budget in the required time frame.
1. Proposed Budget – A proposed budget shall be prepared by the City Manager with participation of
all of the City’s Directors within the provision of the Charter and the 2030 Plan and the City of
Excellence Vision.
a. The budget shall include four basic segments for review and evaluation:
Revenue
Personnel Costs
Operations and Maintenance Costs
Capital and other non‐project Costs
b. The budget review process will include City Council participation in the development of each
segment and allow for resident participation in the process, and will allow for sufficient time to
address policy and fiscal issues by the City Council.
Page 199 of 252
5
FY2017 Annual Budget
c. A copy of the proposed and approved budgets will be filed with the City Secretary when it is
submitted to the City Council and will be available on the City’s website. A copy will also be
available at the Georgetown Public Library for citizen review.
2. Adoption – Upon finalization of the budget appropriations, the City Council will hold a public hearing,
and subsequently adopt by Ordinance the final budget as amended. The budget will be effective for
the fiscal year beginning October 1st.
The Annual Budget document will be submitted annually to the Government Finance Officers
Association (GFOA) for evaluation and consideration for the Distinguished Budget Presentation
Award.
E. Balanced Budget – The goal of the City is to adopt and maintain a balanced operating budget using sustainable
funding sources that are expected to continue to be available in subsequent fiscal years. Excess balances in
operating funds from previous fiscal years shall remain in the fund in which they were appropriated until
either such excess balances are proposed and adopted pursuant to Section III. C. Preparation of this policy;
until they are used to reduce outstanding debt obligations of the City; or both.
The Charter (Section 6.04) requires that an operating deficit created in any fiscal year shall be paid off and
discharged during the following year. In practice, deficit has been interpreted to mean City funds as a whole.
The City Council may choose from time to time to allow individual funds to have a negative balance as long
as Operating Reserve requirements for the City as a whole are maintained.
F. Planning – The budget process will be coordinated so that major policy issues are identified prior to the
budget approval date. This will allow City Council adequate time for consideration of appropriate decisions
and analysis of financial impacts.
G. Reporting – Summary financial reports will be presented to the City Council quarterly. These reports will be
in a format appropriate to enable the City Council to understand the overall budget and financial status.
H. Control and Accountability – Each Director, appointed by the City Manager, will be responsible for the
administration of his/her departmental budget. This includes accomplishing the Goals and Objectives
adopted as part of the budget and monitoring each department budget for compliance with spending
limitations. Directors may transfer funds up to $20,000 within the operations and maintenance or capital
line items within a departmental budget category without additional approval. All transfers within the
Personnel line items require approval of the Chief Financial OfficerFinance Director and City Manager. All
other transfers of appropriation or budget amendments require either City Council or City Manager approval
as outlined in Section III.I Budget Amendments and Section V.C.4 Use of Excess Salary Savings.
I. Budget Amendments – The Charter (Section 6.04) provides a method to amend for budget amendments and
emergency appropriations. The City Council may authorize with a majority plus one vote, an emergency
expenditure as an amendment to the original budget. This may be done in cases of grave public necessity to
meet an unusual and unforeseen condition that was not known at the time the budget was adopted. In
practice, this has been interpreted to include revenue‐related expenses within the enterprise funds and
timing differences on capital improvement projects. The following criteria will be used in evaluation of
budget amendments:
Is the request necessary?
Why was the item not budgeted in the normal budget process?
Page 200 of 252
6
FY2017 Annual Budget
Why can't a transfer be done within the Division to remedy the condition?
The Chief Financial OfficerFinance Director must certify availability of revenues or funding sources prior to
adoption.
The City will amend the budget at year end, if needed, for revenue based expenditures that exceeded
budgeted amounts due to increased revenue and recognize any grant funded expenditures for grants
received after the budget was adopted or last amended. The City will also amend the budget if necessary
for any capital project timing adjustments from prior year, as well as, any other known adjustments needed
and approved at that time.
J. Contingency Appropriations – The budget may include contingency appropriations within designated
operating department budgets. These funds are used to offset expenditures for unexpected maintenance
or other unanticipated expenses that might occur during the year. Currently, the City maintains contingency
appropriations for insurance deductibles, unexpected legal expenses and equipment repairs.
K. Council Discretionary Account – The budget may contain appropriated funds to be used at the discretion of
the City Council. Actual expenditure of these funds is specifically approved by the City Council on an item by
item basis. The Council Discretionary Account for 2016 is $10,000 included in the General Fund.
L. Use of Unanticipated and Unappropriated General Fund Balances – Within 90 days after fiscal year end, staff
will report the projected General Fund balance to Council. In the event that unexpected, unbudgeted
amounts are determined to be available in the General Fund after year end, these funds may be used for any
of the following purposes, as approved by the City Council:
1. to fund capital projects;
2. to fund equipment purchases in lieu of issuing debt;
3. to reduce outstanding City debt, including bonded indebtedness and unfunded pension liabilities;
4. to fund contingent liabilities such as the benefit payout reserve, cemetery trust fund, and similar
obligations of the City;
5. to take other steps to reduce property tax rates or mitigate any future increases;
6. to hold those funds in reserve for future commitments or contingencies that may be pending,
and/or;
7. to fund an Economic Uncertainty Reserve of up to three (3) percent of annual General Fund
operating expenditures according to Section XVI, A, 2, b, Economic Uncertainty Reserve.
IV. REVENUE MANAGEMENT
A. Characteristics – The City will strive for the following optimum characteristics in its revenue system:
1. Simplicity – The City, where possible and without sacrificing accuracy, will strive to keep the revenue
system simple in order to reduce compliance costs for the taxpayer or service recipient.
Page 201 of 252
7
FY2017 Annual Budget
2. Certainty – A knowledge and understanding of revenue sources increases the reliability of the
revenue system. The City will understand its revenue sources and enact consistent collection policies
to provide assurances that the revenue base will materialize according to budget.
3. Equity – The City shall make every effort to maintain equity in its revenue system; i.e., the City should
seek to minimize or eliminate all forms of subsidization between entities, funds, services, utilities,
and customer classes, and ensure an on‐going return on investment for the City.
a. The City will make every effort to recognize the benefit that City tax payers contribute to City
programs and services.
b. The annual Parks and Recreation residential membership rates are established at 75% of non‐
residential rates plus or minus 10% at the discretion of the Parks and Recreation Director in
keeping with the targeted market cost recovery.
4. Revenue Adequacy – The City should require there be a balance in the revenue system; i.e., the
revenue base will have the characteristics of fairness and neutrality as it applies to cost of service,
willingness to pay, and ability to pay.
Overall Operational Cost Recovery for Parks and Recreation for the Recreation and Tennis Centers is
targeted to be between 50 – 60%, with some variance in individual programs.
5. Realistic and Conservative Estimates – Revenues will be estimated realistically, and conservatively,
taking into account the volatile nature of various revenue streams.
6. Administration – The benefits of a revenue source should exceed the cost of levying and collecting
that revenue.
7. Diversification and Stability – A diversified revenue system with a stable source of income shall be
maintained. This will help avoid instabilities in two particular revenue sources due to factors such as
fluctuations in the economy and variations in the weather.
B. Other Considerations – The following considerations and issues will guide the City in its revenue policies
concerning specific sources of funds:
1. Cost/Benefit of Incentives for Economic Development – The City will use due caution in the analysis
of any incentives that are used to encourage development. A cost/benefit (fiscal impact) analysis
will be performed as part of the evaluation.
2. Non‐Recurring Revenues – One‐time or non‐recurring revenues should not be used to finance
current ongoing operations.
3. Sustainable Revenues – “Sustainable" means revenue that is consistently available year after year,
and includes revenues realized subsequent to adopted projections.
4. Property Tax Revenues – All real and business personal property located within the City will be valued
at 100% of the fair market value for any given year based on the current appraisal supplied by the
Williamson Central Appraisal District.
Page 202 of 252
8
FY2017 Annual Budget
Conservative budgeted revenue estimates result in a projected ninety‐eight percent (98%) budgeted
collection rate for current ad valorem taxes. Two percent (2%) of the current ad valorem taxes will
be projected as the budget for delinquent ad valorem tax collection. For budgeting purposes, the
City will forecast the proposed property tax rate using the effective maintenance & operations
(M&O) rate plus the interest & sinking (I&S) rate needed to fund tax supported debt service.
Increases to the M&O rate will be deliberated and determined by the City Council. Proposed tax
revenue will be budgeted at a 98% collection rate.
5. Interest Income – Interest earned from investments will be distributed to the funds in accordance
with the equity balance of the fund from which the monies were provided to be invested.
6. User‐Based Fees and Service Charges – For services associated with a user fee or charge, the direct
or indirect costs of that service will be offset by a fee where possible. The City will review fees and
charges no less than once every two years to ensure that fees provide adequate coverage for the
cost of services. The City Council will determine how much of the cost of a service should be
recovered by fees and charges.
7. Enterprise Fund Rates – The City will review and adopt utility rates as needed to generate revenues
required to fully cover operating expenses, meet the legal requirements of all applicable bond
covenants, and provide for an adequate level of working capital. Utility rates will be reviewed
annually as part of the budget process. A rate study will be conducted every 3 years to review rate
methodology and ensure revenues will meet future needs. All utility rates will be based on
standardized “cost of service” methodologies,
Water Rates will recognize at least 75% of the “fixed” cost of service, including debt
payments and ROI costs, within the monthly “base charge” determined by meter size.
“Volumetric charge” will recognize the balance of fixed costs not included in the base rate,
plus all variable costs associated with procuring and treating water.
.
Wastewater Rates are “flat and equal” for all residential customers based on the cost of
providing services. Commercial customer rates are varied depending on size and
specifications of each commercial customer.
Electric Rates include 100% of fixed costs within the base rate, with all variable costs included
in the kWh rate.
Stormwater Drainage Fees are based a mathematical calculation based on impervious cover
and applied in compliance with State Law.
A restricted Power Contract Credit Reserve has been established to provide financial assurances to
the City’s wholesale power contract providers as fiscal surety against any potential risk on the City’s
behalf and will be maintained as “restricted” fund balance on the City’s financial statements.
A Rate Stabilization Reserve (RSR) Account has been established in the Electric Fund to offset and
mitigate potential impacts to customer rates due to increased fuel costs or other external factors
that may negatively impact Electric Rates. The Rate Stabilization Reserve (RSR) may provide funding
for:
Page 203 of 252
9
FY2017 Annual Budget
Deferring or minimizing the rate impact of future cost increases
Costs associated with providing additional power supply
Filling contractual obligations
Balancing of annual power costs
RSR funds will be monitored monthly to ensure the electric rate is being managed per the Policy.
Increases to RSR are made through the Power Cost Adjustment rate as determined by the fund, at
the recommendation of the General Manager for Utilities.
8. Internal Cost Recovery Fees ‐ Additionally, enterprise activity rates will include transfers to and
receive credits from other funds as follows:
a. General and Administrative Charges – Administrative costs should be charged to all funds for
services of general overhead, such as administration, finance, customer billing, legal and other
costs as appropriate. These charges will be determined through an indirect cost allocation
following accepted practices and procedures and reviewed annually by the City’s external
auditors.
b. Payment for Return on Investment – The intent of this transfer is to provide a benefit to the
citizens for the ownership of the various utility operations they own. For all utilities except for
Electric:
In‐Lieu‐of‐Franchise‐Fee. This transfer, currently 3% of operating revenues generated inside
the City, is consistent with the franchise rates charged to investor owned utilities franchised
to operate within the City.
Return on Investment. The return on investment (ROI) transfer for In‐City utility customers
is currently calculated at 7% of operating revenues for all utilities. ROI for water and sewer
customers outside the City is 10% of operating revenues. There is no ROI calculated on solid
waste revenues.
The Franchise and Return on Investment for the Electric Utility is derived from the base rate and
based on kWh sold. The base rate revenue is multiplied by 7% for all customers. For customers
inside the City, a $0.0102 charge per kWh, equivalent to the 3% and 7% paid by other utility
customers, will be included in the cost per kWh. For customers outside the City, a $0.007253
charge per kWh, equivalent to the 7% ROI paid by utilities, will be included in the cost.
9. Intergovernmental Revenues – All potential grants will be examined for matching requirements and
must be approved by the City Council prior to making application of the grant. It must be clearly
understood that operational requirements (on‐going costs) set up as a result of a grant program
could be discontinued once the term and conditions of the program have been completed.
10. Revenue Monitoring – Revenues as they are received will be regularly compared to budgeted
revenues and variances will be investigated, and any abnormalities will be included in the quarterly
report to the City Council.
Page 204 of 252
10
FY2017 Annual Budget
V. EXPENDITURE MANAGEMENT
A. Appropriations – The point of budget control is at the department level budget for all funds. The Charter
(Section 6.03) provides that any transfer of appropriation between funds must be approved by the City
Council and that the City Manager, without City Council approval, is authorized to transfer appropriations
among departments, within the same operational division and fund. The City Manager may also authorize
transfer of salary adjustment monies between funds that are budgeted in a citywide account.
B. Expenditure Monitoring – Expenditures and encumbrances will be regularly compared to budget, variances
will be investigated, and any abnormalities will be included in the quarterly report to the City Council.
Projected year‐end expenditures will be reported in the annual budget.
B.C. Personnel Costs – Costs related to salaries and benefits are budgeted at 100% total costs, assuming open
positions are filled throughout the fiscal year. New positions that are added during the budget process may
have staggered hire dates with appropriate costs reflected in the budget.
1. Vacancy Factor – General Fund appropriations will include a vacancy factor equal to 1% of total
General Fund salaries and related benefits to offset salary savings within the budget. The vacancy
factor will be budgeted as a negative expense within the General Government Department of the
General Fund. For 2016, the Vacancy Factor equals $456,212. This factor will be reduced throughout
the year as vacant positions are recognized within the department budget.
2. Benefit Payout Reserve – The City will establish a benefit payout reserve equal to 15% of the accrued
benefit liability for employees who are currently eligible to retire. Only terminating employee benefit
expenses may be paid from this reserve. This reserve shall be funded as an offset to the vacancy
factor. For 2016, $30,000 is budgeted for this reserve.
3. Position Control – The annual budget includes a set number of positions within departments when
approved and adopted by City Council. Additional positions cannot be added without approval of
the City Council. The City Manager may approve the transfer of authorized positions between
departments if funds are available within the department.
4. Use of Excess Salary Savings – Departmental savings generated due to open positions or other salary
line item savings cannot be spent by the department unless previously approved by the City Manager
and validated by Finance as “excess funds.”
C.D. Special Purpose Funding – In order to support community assistance programs, the City designates specific
funding for special purposes, including Social Services, Children’s Programs, and Public Art. The City reserves
the ability to cap this special purpose funding when necessitated by budget contingency or compliance
issues, such as revenue shortfalls, or other reasons as determined by City Council.
1. Strategic Partnerships for Community Services – The City of Georgetown values partnerships with
organizations that are committed to addressing our communities’ greatest public challenges and has
identified key priorities in the following areas:
Public Safety
Transportation
Housing
Page 205 of 252
11
FY2017 Annual Budget
Parks & Recreation
Veteran Services, and
Safety Net
The City has targeted funding for these programs to be $5.00 per capita, which may be adjusted to
offset the effects of general inflation based upon Consumer Price Index. If previous funding levels
are higher than the targeted amount, and to avoid significant reductions in levels of funding, the City
Council shall seek to attain this target chiefly through population growth. These funds will be
allocated and paid according to the City Council’s guidelines for such programs.
The funding level for 2016 is $400,049 for these type of initiatives and is the same as in the previous
year.
2. Public Art Funding – The City will annually allocate funding for Public Art on a year to year basis
depending on the availability of funds in an amount to be determined at the discretion of the City
Manager. Funding priority will be given to projects that include a matching donation, including
contributions from local organizations and sponsors. Any unspent funds will accumulate and be
reallocated in the following budget year. Disbursement of these funds will be determined by the
City Council at the recommendation of the City’s Arts & Culture Advisory Board.
Every effort will be made to include public art funding in future City facilities whose primary purpose
is for public use. These projects will include a reasonable allowance for public art that fits the scope
and purpose of the building so long that it does not negatively impact the project cost beyond the
original budget. In the event there is cost savings in the construction of City Facilities, the City Council
may consider utilizing that savings on the purchase of public art for the facility.
E. Purchasing – The City will maintain and regularly review a written Purchasing Policy. All City purchases of
goods or services will be made in accordance with the City’s current Purchasing Policy and with State law.
Page 206 of 252
12
FY2017 Annual Budget
The following table shows a summary of approval requirements for purchases of goods and services.
Dollar Limits: Procurements: Requirements:
Under
$3,000
Under the small purchase
limit
No competitive bids and City credit
cards may be used.
$3,000
up to
$49,99950,000
Within informal bid limit A minimum of three informal
competitive bids required unless
exempted: Historically Underutilized
Business (HUB) requirements apply in
accordance with state law.
$50,000
and above
In excess of the informal bid
limit
Formal solicitations, which includes
public notices, required unless
exempted. Advisory board review and
recommendation may be
required. Council approval required.
Common exemptions to the formal solicitation process include the procurement of professional services, the
purchase of goods or services from a sole source provider, and purchases for public health emergencies.
In addition to the above, all purchases must be approved according to preapproved limits within each
department as directed and approved by the City Manager.
F. Contracts and Change Orders – Contracts and related change orders must follow the City Purchasing Policies
and State Law. In accordance with State Law, change orders are limited to 25% of the total contract amount.
Change orders greater than $50,000 require the same advisory board review and Council approvals as the original
contracts.
G. Prompt Payment – All invoices approved for payment by the proper City authorities shall be paid within thirty
(30) calendar days of receipt of goods or services or invoice date, whichever is later in accordance with State law.
The City will take advantage of all purchase discounts, when possible.
H. Risk Management – The City will pursue every opportunity to provide for the Public’s and City employees’
safety and to manage its risks. The goal shall be to minimize the risk of loss of resources through liability claims
with an emphasis on safety programs.
I. Retirement Benefits – Proposals to revise benefits administered and provided by the Texas Municipal
Retirement System shall include a written description, and, detailed and summary numerical assessments of the
changes that would result from the proposed benefit revision.
1. The numerical assessments shall include the following:
a. The estimated change to the TMRS contribution rate that would result from the proposed
change in benefits, expressed as a percentage of employee pay and as an annual dollar amount
to the General Fund and to each City fund.
a.b. The estimated change to the City’s unfunded pension liability, expressed as a dollar amount.
Page 207 of 252
13
FY2017 Annual Budget
b.c. The estimated change to the City’s actuarial funding ratio.
2. The description and numerical assessments must be provided to the City Council at least 72
hours prior to consideration and approval, and must be read aloud to the Council prior to Council
consideration.
3. The estimated changes to the City’s contribution rate and the unfunded pension liability
presented pursuant to the section must be based on information provided by the TMRS actuary
or by professional actuary authorized by the TMRS to provide such information.
4. Proposals to revise TMRS benefits must be voted on individually as part of the City Council’s
legislative agenda.
5. The City will amortize any unfunded actuarial liability (UAAL) over a period not to exceed the
amortization period used by the TMRS actuary. The City may amortize its UAAL more quickly by
making contributions to TMRS in excess of the rate specified by TMRS. The City has established
80% as the minimum funding goal for the City’s unfunded pension liability. The City’s funded
pension liability is 81.3% as of December 31, 2013, as disclosed by TMRS. The City’s ultimate
goal is 100%, but will be achieved reasonably over time.
6. The City may elect to make an annual 1‐time payment prior to further fund the City’s unfunded
pension liability. Such payment will be approved and authorized by the City Council prior to
December 31 in order to be recognized in the following year’s TMRS employer contribution rate
calculation.
G. Retirement Cost‐of‐Living Adjustment
1. Within 60 days of when the TMRS annual funding update becomes available each year, staff will
review and prepare a summary of costs and options for potential cost‐of‐living adjustment (COLA)
for City of Georgetown retirees.
2. Consistent with state statutes governing the Texas Municipal Retirement System, the City may
provide an automatic COLA for members of the TMRS who are retired from the City of Georgetown
and receiving a monthly retirement benefit from the TMRS.
3. The City Council may adjust the COLA provided to city retirees based upon the funding level of the
City’s pension plan, as calculated by the TMRS, as follows:
When the funding level of the City’s
pension plan is
The COLA
should be
Less than 70.0%
Zero
70.0% to 79.9%
0.3% of CPI
80.0% to 89.9%
0.5% of CPI
90.0% and greater
0.7% of CPI
Page 208 of 252
14
FY2017 Annual Budget
4. Adjustments made pursuant to subsection b. should reflect the effect of the prospective change in
the COLA on the funding level of the City’s pension plan.
H. Deferred Compensation Benefits – In addition to the retirement benefit administered by the TMRS, the
City will sponsor a Deferred Compensation 457 plan, which is a supplementary individual retirement
savings plan. The City will encourage employee participation in this plan.
XIII. STAFFING AND COMPENSATION
Realizing the importance and contribution of employee’s in achieving and maintaining the City of Excellence, the
City’s goal as an employer is to attract and retain quality employees who provide excellent, friendly services to
our community in an effective and efficient manner.
A. Adequate Staffing – Staffing levels will be adequate for the fiscal functions of the City to operate effectively.
Workload allocation alternatives will be explored before adding additional staff.
B. Competitive Compensation – In order to maintain a competitive pay scale, the City is implementing a
Competitive Employee Compensation Maintenance Policy to address competitive market factors and other
issues impacting compensation. The program consists of:
1. Cost of Living Adjustment ‐ (COLA) – To protect City employees from the effects of general inflation,
every odd numbered year, the City may fund a COLA adjustment for all regular employees not
included in a defined pay plan. The COLA will be based on a three‐year rolling average of the
Consumer Price Index (CPI) reported by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics for Southern cities
pertinent to Georgetown’s population.
2. Pay Scale Review – To ensure the City’s pay system is accurate and competitive within the market,
every even numbered year, the City will review its pay plan for any potential market adjustments
necessary to maintain the City’s pay scale.
3. Pay for Performance – Each year the City will fund pay adjustments to aid in retaining quality
employees while recognizing increased job experience and rewarding quality performance.
Adjustments are based on the previous year’s annual performance evaluation. The percentage adjustments
are determined by the employee’s position within their pay grade, including merit adjustments for
productivity and quality performance during the previous fiscal year.
In addition, the City may also choose to fund a one‐time on performance that exceeds expectations during
the review period.
C. Self‐Insurance Program – The City is committed to providing quality healthcare insurance that offers the most
flexibility in health benefits and options to its employees. In order to provide the most cost effective solution,
the City has determined that establishing a self‐funded health insurance plan offers the greatest opportunity
to mitigate future cost increases while offering quality health care services to its employees. The City has
Page 209 of 252
15
FY2017 Annual Budget
established a mechanism to manage the accounts and payments associated with this program. Per GASB
Statement No. 66, such funding should be accounted for as an Internal Service Fund (ISF).
1. Employee Health Insurance ISF ‐ includes premium contributions from employees and budgeted
health insurance contributions included in the City’s annual budget process.
2. Self‐Insurance Reserve ‐ will be included and maintained within the Employee Self‐Insurance Internal
Service Fund to provide stabilization for employee health insurance premiums. The amount of the
reserve will be determined by the actuarially determined “maximum” amount risk related to the
potential claims to the plan in one year. Initially, the reserve is targeted to be $1,000,000 by fiscal
year 2017/18.
3.1. Employee Premiums – Annual premiums will be recommended to City Council through a
collaborative process between the City’s Employee Benefit Committee and external consultants
using historical data and other analytic analysis.
VI. STAFFING AND COMPENSATION
City Council and Management recognize the importance of attracting, hiring, developing, and retaining the best
people, and compensating them for the value they create. Our outstanding and innovative City employees work
diligently to bring the Vision of Council to life and deliver exceptional services to our customers while
exemplifying our Core Values. The following programs are subject to available funding in the annual operating
budget.
A. Adequate Staffing – Staffing levels will be adequate for the fiscal functions of the City to operate effectively.
Workload allocation alternatives will be explored before adding additional staff.
B. Competitive Compensation – In order to maintain a competitive pay scale, the City has implemented a
Competitive Employee Compensation Maintenance Program to address competitive market factors and other
issues impacting compensation. The program consists of:
1. Annual Pay Plan Review – To ensure the City’s pay system is accurate and competitive within the
market, the City will review its pay plans annually for any potential market adjustments necessary
to maintain the City’s competitive pay plans.
2. Pay for Performance – Each year the City will fund performance based pay adjustments for regular
non‐public safety personnel. This merit‐based program aids in retaining quality employees by
rewarding their performance. Pay for Performance adjustments are based on the employee’s most
recently completed performance evaluation.
3. Public Safety Steps – Each year the City will fund anniversary step increases for public safety sworn
personnel consistent with public safety pay scale design.
C. Self‐Insurance Program – The City is committed to providing quality healthcare insurance that offers the most
flexibility in health benefits and options to its employees. In order to provide the most cost effective solution,
the City has determined that establishing a self‐funded health insurance plan offers the greatest opportunity
to mitigate future cost increases while offering quality health care services to its employees. The City has
Page 210 of 252
16
FY2017 Annual Budget
established a mechanism to manage the accounts and payments associated with this program. Per GASB
Statement No. 66, such funding should be accounted for as an Internal Service Fund (ISF).
1. Employee Health Insurance ISF – This fund contains premium contributions from employees and
budgeted health insurance contributions included in the City’s annual budget process.
2. Self‐Insurance Reserve – Annually through the budget process, staff and the City’s Health Benefit
Consultant firm will evaluate and recommend to Council the appropriate funding levels for both a
rate stabilization reserve as well as an incurred but not reported (IBNR) reserve.
3. Employee Premiums – Annual premiums will be recommended to City Council through a
collaborative process between the City’s Employee Benefit Committee and external Health Benefits
consulting firm using historical data and other analytic analysis.
VI.VII. FUND BALANCE POLICIES
The City’s Fund Balance is the accumulated difference between assets and liabilities within governmental funds,
and it allows the City to meet its contractual obligations, fund disaster or emergency costs, provide cash flow for
timing purposes and fund non‐recurring expenses appropriated by City Council. This policy establishes limitations
on the purposes for which Fund Balances can be used in accordance with Governmental Accounting Standards
Board (GASB) Statement Number 54.
The City’s Fund Balance will report up to five components:
A. Non‐spendable Fund Balance – includes inherently non‐spendable assets that will never convert to cash, as
well as assets that will not convert to cash soon enough to affect the current financial period. Assets included
in this category are prepaid items, inventory and non‐financial assets held for resale.
B. Restricted Fund Balance – represents the portion of fund balance that is subject to legal restrictions, such as
grants or hotel/motel tax and bond proceeds.
C. Committed Fund Balance – describes the portion of fund balance that is constrained by limitations that the
City Council has imposed upon itself, and remains binding unless the City Council removes the limitation.
D. Assigned Fund Balance – is that portion of fund balance that reflects the City’s intended use of the resource
and is established in a less formal method by the City for that designated purpose.
E. Unassigned Fund Balance – represents funds that cannot be properly classified in one of the other four
categories.
VII.VIII. LONG‐TERM LIABILITY RESERVES
The City of Georgetown recognizes certain long‐term unfunded commitments and contingencies that will require
substantial funding at some point in the future. The City is committed to addressing these commitments in a
fiscally prudent method by acknowledging their future financial impacts and developing strategies and
designated reserve funds to mitigate those future impacts.
Cemetery Reserve will be established for the purpose of funding continued maintenance for City owned
cemetery properties
A. The Finance Director will maintain a list of unfunded liabilities. The list will be included in the quarterly financial
report to Council.
Page 211 of 252
17
FY2017 Annual Budget
VIII.IX. BUDGET CONTINGENCY PLAN
This policy is designed to establish general guidelines for managing revenue shortfalls resulting from local and
national economic downturns that adversely affect the City's revenue streams.
A. Immediate Action – Once a budgetary shortfall is projected, the City Manager will take the necessary actions
to offset any revenue shortfall with a reduction in current expenses. The City Manager may:
Freeze all new hire and vacant positions except those deemed to be a necessity.
Review all planned capital expenditures.
Delay all "non‐essential" spending or equipment replacement purchases.
The City Manager shall report in a timely manner to the City Council the projected shortfall and the
actions taken to resolve it.
B. Further Action – If the actions identified in subsection A are insufficient to offset the projected revenue deficit
for the current fiscal year, the City Council may approve the following actions, in the order listed:
1. Apply unspent, unobligated surplus funds from prior fiscal years to fund one‐time costs in the current
fiscal year budget.
1.2. Authorize the use of the General Fund Economic Uncertainty Reserve pursuant to Section XVI.A.2.b.
Economic Uncertainty Reserve.
2.3. Notwithstanding Section XVI.A.2.ab. Base Level Reserve Budget Stabilization Reserve of this policy,
authorize a reduction in the unobligated fund balance in the General Fund, pursuant to Section
XVI.A.2.ab. Budget Stabilization Base Level Reserve of this policy, from 90 to 75 days.
3.4. Direct other reductions in services, including workforce reductions.
C. Replenish Fund Balance – As soon as practical practicable, without placing undue strain on City services, the
City Council shall increase the unobligated fund balance in the General Fund, up to the 90‐day amount
required in Section XVI.A.2.ab. Budget Stabilization ReserveBase Level Reserve of this policy and shall restore
the General Fund Economic Uncertainty Reserve as required in Section XVI.A.2.b of this policy.
IX.X. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) BUDGET
The City’s goal is to maintain City facilities and infrastructure in order to provide excellent services to the
customers within the community, meet growth related needs, and comply with all state and federal regulations.
A. Preparation – The City annually updates and adopts a five‐year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) schedule
as part of the operating budget adoption process. The plan is reviewed and adjusted annually as needed, and
year one is adopted as the current year capital budget. The capital budget will include all capital projects,
capital resources, and estimated operational impacts.
Page 212 of 252
18
FY2017 Annual Budget
Needed capital improvements are identified through system models, repair and maintenance
records and growth demands.
Economic development projects that have capital infrastructure needs must be reviewed and
approved for funding by the City no later than March 1 to be included in the annual CIP process. Any
economic development project approved for funding after March 1 will be included in the following
year CIP process unless otherwise authorized by City Council.
A team approach will be used to prioritize CIP projects, whereby City staff from all operational areas
provide input and ideas relating to each project and its effect on operations.
Citizen involvement and participation will be solicited in formulating the capital budget through
neighborhood meetings, public hearings and other forums.
Capital infrastructure necessary to meet the requirements of the City’s Annexation Plan will be
identified separately within the CIP plan, so that funding alternatives can be developed if needed.
Prior to Council adoption, the following Advisory Boards will review the Capital Projects budget:
Georgetown Utility
Systems Advisory
Board
(GUS)
Georgetown
Transportation Advisory
Board (GTAB)
General Government and
Finance
Advisory Board
(GGAF)
Parks Advisory
Board
Electric
Water
Wastewater
Streets
Stormwater Drainage
Airport
Facilities
Other General
Government Capital
Parks and
Recreation
B. Control – All capital project expenditures must be appropriated in the capital budget. Availability of
resources must be identified and then reviewed by the Finance Division before any CIP contract is presented
to the City Council for approval.
Prior to presentation to Council, the following Advisory Boards will review:
Georgetown Utility Systems
Advisory Board
(GUS)
Georgetown Transportation
Advisory Board
(GTAB)
General Government and
Finance
Advisory Board (GGAF)
All utility contracts and
other utility expenses
greater than $50,000
All Transportation,
Stormwater Drainage and
Airport expenditures and
contracts greater than
$50,000
All General Government
non‐routine contracts and
expenditures greater than
$50,000
Page 213 of 252
19
FY2017 Annual Budget
C. Financing Programs – Where applicable, assessments, impact fees, pro rata charges, or other fees should be
used to fund capital projects which have a primary benefit to specific identifiable property owners.
Recognizing that long‐term debt is usually a more expensive financing method, alternative‐financing sources
will be explored before debt is issued. When debt is issued, it will be used to acquire major assets with
expected lives equal or exceeding the average life of the debt issue.
Short‐term financing including Capital Leasing and other tax‐supported obligations can be used to fund
vehicles, computers and other operating equipment provided the impact to the tax rate is minimal.
Caution should be used in replacing assets with short‐term, tax‐supported obligations due to the repetitive
nature of the replacements. The total amount of I & S (interest and sinking) portion of the tax rate dedicated
to fund short‐term debt for equipment replacement will not exceed $0.04.
X.XI. CAPITAL MAINTENANCE AND REPLACEMENT
The City recognizes that deferred maintenance increases future capital costs. Therefore, a portion of all
individual funds with infrastructure should be budgeted each year to maintain the quality within each system.
A. Infrastructure Maintenance ‐ On‐going maintenance and major repair costs are included as capital expense
within the departmental operating budgets. These costs are generally considered system repairs and are
not capitalized for accounting purposes. They include such items as park and recreation facility repairs, street
seal coat, water line repairs and other general system maintenance.
B. Modified Approach ‐ Pavement Condition Index (PCI) ‐ Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement
# 34 provides for an alternative approach to depreciation for measuring the value of infrastructure assets
and the related costs incurred to maintain their service life at a locally established minimum standard. The
City has elected to implement this modified approach in maintaining its non‐enterprise fund infrastructure
assets. In order to adopt this alternative method, the City has implemented an asset management system
that determines if the minimum standards are being maintained. This measurement system will be updated
at least every 3 years. The City has elected to use this alternative method for reporting its street
infrastructure assets.
The City uses the CarteGraph PavementView Pavement Management Information System to track the
condition levels of each of the street sections. The condition of the pavement is based on the following factors:
Type of Distress
Amount of Distress
Severity of Distress
Deduct Values (function of first three)
The Pavement Condition Index (PCI) is a measurement scale is based upon a condition index ranging from
zero for a failed pavement to 100 for pavement with perfect condition. The condition index is used to
classify pavement in the following conditions:
Page 214 of 252
20
FY2017 Annual Budget
The City’s administrative policy is to achieve an average PCI level of 85. An 85 PCI is considered maintaining
the streets in a “good” condition. Staff will prepare a street maintenance budget that meets this target for
Council’s consideration during the budget process. The PCI level as of 2014 was 87.30.
C. Internal Service Funds Capital Maintenance & Replacement – The City currently utilizes internal service funds
to maintain and replace existing assets. Assessments are made to the using funds for the use of equipment
currently in use and to be purchased during the year. In this way, suitable funds are available for the purchase
of operational assets without the issuance of debt.
1. Fleet Maintenance and Replacement – The City has a major investment in its fleet of cars, trucks,
tractors, and other equipment. The City will anticipate replacing existing equipment, as necessary
and will establish charges that are assigned to the using departments to account for the cost of that
replacement. Vehicle maintenance is also allocated in this manner.
2. Technology – It is the policy of the City to plan and fund the maintenance and replacement of its
computer network and other technology systems. The City currently uses a four‐year replacement
cycle for all desktop computers. A reserve will be established within the ISF for replacement of major
systems and will be funded over time through excess revenues within the Fund. Funding for major
systems assumes that 50% of the replacement cost will be debt funded.
3. Facilities Maintenance – The City has established an on‐going maintenance program, which includes
major repairs, equipment, as well as contracts for maintaining City facilities. The City has anticipated
a useful life of such equipment and established a means of charging those costs to the various
departments in order to recognize the City’s continuing costs of maintaining its facilities.
Determination for facility repairs is based on useful life of the various elements of each facility. A
proportional cost for each element is expensed within the budget for capital replacement. An
additional unscheduled repair reserve equal to 10% value of annual internal service funding is also
budgeted. The estimate reserve for 2016 equals $30,000.
D. Departmental Capital Maintenance & Replacement – The City also utilizes department capital maintenance
and replacement schedules for specialized assets and equipment necessary to provide services.
1. Parks and Recreation – As part of the City’s on‐going maintenance program, the City also
recognizes the need to regularly maintain and replace grounds, equipment and facilities that are
part of the City’s Parks and Recreation system. Separate replacement and maintenance schedules
will be maintained for these items including, but not limited to, playground equipment, buildings,
sport courts, trees and grounds, and restroom facilities. The City’s goal is to provide level on‐going
funding to ensure safe, well‐maintained facilities for its citizens.
2. Public Safety Equipment – As part of the City’s on‐going maintenance program, the City also
recognizes the need to regularly maintain and replace specialized equipment in Police and Fire.
Separate replacement and maintenance schedules will be maintained for these items including but
PCI Rating
100 – 85 Good
85 – 45 Fair
45 – 0 Poor
Page 215 of 252
21
FY2017 Annual Budget
not limited to for Fire: SCBA’s and other firefighting equipment and protective gear; and for Police:
bullet proof vests, armaments and other tactical equipment. The City’s goal is to provide level on‐
going funding to ensure proper protection for employees and citizens.
E. Surplus Property
1. From time to time it is necessary to dispose of certain vehicles or equipment that have been procured
with City funds and used in City services. Individual surplus property items with expected sales value
in excess of $50,000$10,000 must be approved by the City Council prior to disposition.
2. City staff will maintain reports and records of all surplus property dispositions in accordance with
good internal controls. A report of all disposed items in excess of $1,000 will be included with the
quarterly financial reports provided to City Council.
XI.XII. ACCOUNTING, AUDITING AND FINANCIAL REPORTING
A. Accounting – The City is solely responsible for the recording and reporting of its financial affairs, both
internally and externally. The Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Finance Director is responsible for establishing
the structure for the City’s Chart of Accounts and for assuring that procedures are in place to properly record
financial transactions and report the City’s financial position.
B. General Government and Finance Advisory Board (GGAF) – The City may establish a subcommittee consisting
of at least 2 (3) City Council members and not more than 3 (2) citizens that may meet monthly to provide
additional oversight to the City’s Finance operations. This subcommittee will also review general government
items that are not reviewed by another City advisory board before being presented to City Council. The City’s
CFO Finance Director will be the liaison for this subcommittee.
C. Audit of Accounts – In accordance with the Charter, an independent audit of the City accounts will be
performed every year. The auditor is retained by and is accountable directly to the City Council. The auditing
firm will serve for up to 5 years, at which time, the City will re‐bid these services and changing firms if deemed
necessary by GGAF and City Council.
D. External Reporting – Upon completion and acceptance of the annual audit by the City’s auditors, the City
shall prepare a written Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) which shall be presented to the City
Council within 180 calendar days of the City’s fiscal year end. The CAFR shall be prepared in accordance with
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and shall be presented annually to the Government
Finance Officer Association (GFOA) for evaluation and consideration for the Certificate of Achievement in
Financial Reporting.
E. Internal Reporting – The Finance Department will prepare internal financial reports, sufficient to plan,
monitor and control the City’s financial affairs.
XII.XIII. ASSET MANAGEMENT
A. Cash Management and Investments – The City Council has formally approved a separate Investment Policy
for the City of Georgetown that meets the requirements of the Public Funds Investment Act (PFIA), Section
Page 216 of 252
22
FY2017 Annual Budget
2256 of the Texas Local Government Code. This policy is reviewed annually by the City Council and applies
to all financial assets held by the City and applies to all entities (component units) included in the City’s
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and/or managed by the City.
1. Statement of Cash Management Philosophy – The City shall maintain a comprehensive cash
management program to include the effective collection of all accounts receivable, the prompt
deposit of receipts to the City’s depository, the payment of obligations, and the prudent investment
of idle funds in accordance with this policy.
2. Objectives – The City’s investment program will be conducted as to accomplish the following listed
in priority order:
Safety of the principal invested
Liquidity and availability of cash to pay obligations when due
Ensure public trust through responsible actions as custodians of public funds.
Maximize earnings (yield) to the greatest extent possible consistent with the City’s investment
policy.
3. Safekeeping and Custody – Investments may only be purchased through brokers/dealers who meet
the criteria detailed in the investment policy, which also addresses internal controls related to
investments.
4. Standard of Care and Reporting – Investment will be made with judgment and care, always
considering the safety of principal to be invested and the probable income to be derived. The Chief
Financial OfficerFinance Director is responsible for the overall management of the City’s investment
program and ensures all investments are made in compliance with the investment policy. An
investment report, providing both summary and detailed information, will be presented to the City
Council quarterly.
5. Authorized Investments – The City can currently invest in the following:
Certificates of Deposit
U.S. Treasury and Agency securities
Investment Pools that meet the requirements of the PFIA
No‐load Money Market Mutual Funds
Fully collateralized Repurchase Agreements
Obligations of Municipal Issuers in Texas rated not less than A or its equivalent
Other investments as approved by City Council and not prohibited by law.
B. Fixed Assets – These assets will be reasonably safeguarded and properly accounted for, and prudently
insured.
1. Capitalization Criteria – For purposes of budgeting and accounting classification, the following
criteria must be capitalized:
The asset owned by the City
Page 217 of 252
23
FY2017 Annual Budget
The expected useful life of the asset must be longer than one year, or extend the life of an
identifiable existing asset by more than one year
The original cost of the asset must be at least $5,000
The asset must be tangible
On‐going repairs and general maintenance are not capitalized.
2. New Purchases – All costs associated with bringing the asset into working order will be capitalized
as part of the asset cost. This will include startup costs, engineering or consultant type fees as part
of the asset cost once the decision or commitment to purchase the asset is made. The cost of
land acquired should include all related costs associated with its purchase.
3. Improvements and Replacement – Improvements will be capitalized when they extend the original
life of an asset or when they make the asset more valuable than it was originally. The replacement
of assets components will normally be expensed unless they are a significant nature and meet all the
capitalization criteria.
4. Contributed Capital – Infrastructure assets received from developers or as a result of annexation will
be recorded as equity contributions when they are received.
5. Distributions Systems – All costs associated with public domain assets, such as streets and utility
distribution lines will be capitalized in accordance with the capitalization policy. Costs should include
engineering, construction and other related costs including right of way acquisition.
6. Reporting and Inventory – The Finance Division will maintain the permanent records of the City’s
fixed assets, including description, cost, department of responsibility, date of acquisition,
depreciation and expected useful life. Periodically, random sampling at the department level will be
performed to inventory fixed assets assigned to that department. Responsibility for safeguarding
the City’s fixed assets lies with the department supervisor or manager whose department has been
assigned the asset.
XIII.XIV. DEBT MANAGEMENT
The City of Georgetown recognizes the primary purpose of capital facilities is to provide services to the
community. Using debt financing to meet the capital needs of the community must be evaluated according to
efficiency and equity. Efficiency must be evaluated to determine the highest rate of return for a given investment
of resources. Equity is resolved by determining who should pay for the cost of capital improvements. In meeting
demand for additional services, the City will strive to balance the needs between debt financing and “pay as you
go” methods. The City realizes that failure to meet the demands of growth may inhibit its continued economic
viability, but also realizes that too much debt may have detrimental effects on the City’s long‐range financial
condition.
The City will issue debt only for the purpose of acquiring or constructing capital assets for the general benefit of
its citizens and to allow it to fulfill its various purposes as a city.
A Debt Condition Update report will be provided annually.
Page 218 of 252
24
FY2017 Annual Budget
A. Usage of Debt – Long‐term debt financing will be considered for non‐continuous capital improvements of
which future citizens will be benefited. Alternatives for financing will be explored prior to debt issuance and
include, but not limited to:
Grants
Use of Reserve Funds
Use of Current Revenues
Contributions from developers and others
Leases
Impact Fees.
When the City utilizes long‐term financing, it will ensure that the debt is soundly financed by
conservatively projecting revenue sources that will be used to pay the debt. It will not finance the
improvement over a period greater than the useful life of the improvement and it will determine that
the cost benefit of the improvement, including interest costs, is positive to the community.
The City may utilize the benefits of short‐term debt financing to purchase operating equipment provided
the debt doesn’t extend past the useful life of the asset and the potential impact to the tax rate is within
policy guidelines. The I & S (interest and sinking) portion of the tax rate cannot exceed $0.04 for short‐
term debt (3‐10 years).
B. Types of Debt
1. General Obligation Bonds (GO’s) – General obligation bonds must be authorized by a vote of the
citizens of Georgetown. They are used only to fund capital assets of the general government and
are not to be used to fund operating needs of the City. The City’s ad valorem taxing authority backs
general obligation bonds. Conditions for issuance of general obligation debt include:
When the project will have a significant impact on the tax rate;
When the project may be controversial even through it is routine in nature; or
When the project falls outside the normal bounds of projects the City has typically done.
For debt programs that include multiple projects that will be issued over multiple years at the
discretion of the City Council, the City may approve a Contract with the Voters to manage future
property tax rate impacts. The Contract with the Voters will be included in educational information
for all applicable GO Bond elections, and will include a maximum annual tax rate increase and a
cumulative total per bond authorization maximum tax rate increase. The City will include these
impacts in its annual Debt Condition report.
The City Council will carefully manage the unissued GO Bond authorization through annual review of
related projects to ensure full disclosure on future timing of projects included in the bond package.
Timing of authorized projects and related bond issuance will be included in the Annual Budget and
published on the City’s website. Any changes to this schedule require specific Council authorization.
2. Revenue Bonds – Revenue bonds will be issued to provide for the capital needs of any activities
where the capital requirements are necessary for the continuation or expansion of a service. The
Page 219 of 252
25
FY2017 Annual Budget
improved activity shall produce a revenue stream to fund the debt service requirements of the
necessary improvement to provide service expansion. The average life of the obligation should not
exceed the useful life of the asset(s) to be funded by the bond issue, and will generally be limited to
no more than twenty (20) years. An exception can be made for plant expansions or related system
expansions whose useful life is in excess of 30 years. A cost benefit analysis will be done to fully
disclose the impacts of extending debt beyond 20 years.
3. Certificates of Obligation, Contract Obligations (CO’s) – Certificates of obligation or contract
obligations may be used to fund capital requirements that are not otherwise funded by general
obligation or revenue bonds. Debt service for CO’s may be either from general revenues (tax‐
supported) or supported by a specific revenue stream(s) or a combination of both. Typically, the City
may issue CO’s when the following conditions are met:
When the proposed debt will have minimal impact on future effective property tax rates;
When the projects to be funded are within the normal bounds of City capital requirements, such
as for roads, parks, various infrastructure and City facilities and equipment; and
When the average life of the obligation does not exceed the useful life of the asset(s) to be
funded by the issue.
Certificates of obligation will be the least preferred method of financing and will be used with
prudent care and judgment by the City Council. Every effort will be made to ensure public
participation in decisions relating to debt financing.
4. Self‐supporting General Obligation Debt – Refers to certificates of obligation issued for a specific
purpose and repaid through dedicated revenues other than ad valorem taxes. The annual debt
requirements are not included in the property tax calculation. Both the Airport and Stormwater
Drainage funds will issue this type of debt, In addition, the Electric and Water Services Funds can
utilize this method of funding non‐system capital assets. The City also issues debt on behalf of the
Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation (GTEC) whom then pledges 4B sales tax
revenue for the repayment of that debt.
5. Internal borrowing between City Funds – The City can authorize use of existing long‐term reserves
as “loans” between funds. The borrowing fund will repay the loan at a rate consistent with current
market conditions. The loan will be repaid within ten (10) years. The loan will be considered an
investment of working capital reserves by the lending fund.
6. Other Short‐term Borrowing – The City may authorize the issuance of Public Property Finance
Contractual Obligations (PPFCO) which is short‐term obligations for the acquisition of personal public
property, such as equipment. PPFCOs are payable from either ad valorem taxes or another dedicated
revenue stream. Each issuance will be assessed to ensure cost effectiveness and the repayment
schedule will not exceed the useful life of the asset. Multiple equipment acquisitions can be grouped
in a single PPFCO issue in order to develop economies of scale.
C. Method of Sale – The City will use a competitive bidding process in the sale of bonds unless conditions in the
bond market or the nature of the issue warrant a negotiated bid. In such situations, the City will publicly
present the reasons for the negotiated sale. The City will rely on the recommendation of the financial advisor
in the selection of the underwriter or direct purchaser. The financial advisor must meet all licensing
Page 220 of 252
26
FY2017 Annual Budget
requirements and comply with all Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB) regulations. The City’s
financial advisor will not act as the underwriter on any City bond issue.
D. Disclosure – Full disclosure of operating costs along with capital costs will be made to the bond rating
agencies and other users of financial information. The City staff, with assistance of the financial advisor and
bond counsel, will prepare the necessary materials for presentation to the rating agencies and will aid in the
production of the Preliminary Official Statements. The City will take responsibility for the accuracy of all
financial information released.
E. Federal Requirements – The City will maintain written procedures to follow post issuance compliance rules,
arbitrage rebate and other Federal requirements.
Post issuance tax compliance rules will include records retention, arbitrage rebate, use of
proceeds, and
Continuing disclosure requirements under SEC Rule 15c2‐12, MSRB standards, or as may be
required by bond covenants or related agreements.
F. Debt Structuring – The City will issue bonds with an average life of twenty (20) years or less, not to exceed
the useful life of the asset acquired. The structure should approximate level debt service unless operational
matters dictate otherwise. Market factors, such as the effects of tax‐exempt designations, the cost of early
redemption options and the like, will be given consideration during the structuring of long term debt
instruments. Exceptions to the 20 year average life include debt issues for major system expansions, such as
water, sewer or electric plants, in which case the City may issue debt greater than 20 years since the average
life of the asset exceeds 30 years. A cost benefit analysis indicating the impacts of extending debt beyond
20 years will be completed.
G. Debt Coverage Ratio – Refers to the number of times the current combined debt service requirements or
payments would be covered by the current operating revenues net of on‐going operating expenses of the
City’s combined utilities (Electric, Water, and Wastewater). The City will maintain a minimum debt service
coverage ratio of 1.5 times for these utilities as a whole. The bond ordinances allow the City to forego a debt
reserve fund for its utility debt if the coverage is maintained at 1.35 times or better. Debt coverage for 2016
is budgeted at 3.67 times coverage. A coverage ratio of 1.5 times will also be required for all funds issuing
self‐supporting debt.
H. Bond Reimbursement Resolutions – The City may utilize bond reimbursements as a tool to manage its debt
issues, due to arbitrage requirements and project timing. In so doing, the City uses its capital reserve "cash"
to delay bond issues until such time when issuance is favorable and beneficial to the City.
The City Council may authorize a bond reimbursement resolution for General Capital projects that have a
direct impact on the City's ad valorem tax rate when the bonds will be issued within the term of the existing
City Council. In the event of unexpected circumstances that delay the timing of projects, or market
conditions that prohibit financially sound debt issuance, the approved project can be postponed and
considered by a future council until circumstantial issues can be resolved.
The City Council may also authorize revenue bond reimbursements for approved utility and other self‐
supporting capital projects within legislative limits. Currently revenue bonds must be issued within 18
months after an eligible bond funded project is begun.
Page 221 of 252
27
FY2017 Annual Budget
The total outstanding bond reimbursements may not exceed the total amount of the City’s reserve funds.
XIV.XV. OTHER FUNDING ALTERNATIVES
When at all possible, the City will research alternative funding opportunities prior to issuing debt or
increasing user‐related fees.
A. Grants – All potential grants will be examined for any matching requirements and the source of those
requirements identified. A grant funding worksheet, reviewed by Finance, that clearly identifies funding
sources, outcomes and other relevant information will be presented and approved by the City Council prior
to any grant application being submitted. It must be clearly understood that any resulting operation
requirements of the grant could be discontinued once the term and conditions of the project have been
terminated. The City Council must authorize acceptance of any grant funding.
B. Use of Reserve Funds – The City may authorize the use of reserve funds to potentially delay or eliminate a
proposed bond issue. This may occur due to higher than anticipated fund balances in prior years, thus
eliminating or reducing the need for debt proceeds, or postpone a bond issue until market conditions are
more beneficial or timing of the related capital improvements does not correspond with the planned bond
issue. Reserve funds used in this manner are replenished upon issuance of the proposed debt.
C. Developer Contributions – The City will require developers who negatively impact the City's utility capital
plans offset those impacts. These policies are further defined within the City's utility line extension policy
and other development regulations.
D. Leases – The City may authorize the use of lease financing for certain operating equipment when it is
determined that the cost benefit of such an arrangement is advantageous to the City.
E. Impact Fees – The City will impose impact fees as allowable under state law for both water and wastewater
services. These fees will be calculated in accordance with statute and reviewed at least every three years.
All fees collected will fund projects identified within the Fee study and as required by state laws.
XV.XVI. FINANCIAL CONDITIONS, RESERVES, AND STABILITY RATIOS
The City of Georgetown will maintain budgeted minimum reserves in the ending working capital/fund balances
to provide a secure, healthy financial base for the City in the event of a natural disaster or other emergency,
allow stability of City operations should revenues fall short of budgeted projections and provide available
resources to implement budgeted expenditures without regard to actual timing of cash flows into the City.
A. Operational Coverage – The City’s goal is to maintain operations coverage of 1.0 (one), such that operating
revenues will at least equal or exceed current operating expenditures. Deferrals, short‐term loans, or one‐
time sources will be avoided as budget balancing techniques. Reserves will be used only for emergencies or
non‐recurring expenditures, except when balances can be reduced because their levels exceed guideline
minimums as stated below.
1. Operating Reserves – The City will maintain reserves at a minimum of seventy‐five (75) days (20.83%)
of net budgeted operating expenditures. Net budgeted operating expenditure is defined as total
budgeted expenditures less interfund transfers and charges, general debt service (tax supported),
direct cost for purchased power and payments from third party grant monies. Total reserves for 2016
are $22,330,000 million. The amount of these funds are allocated within the following operating
Page 222 of 252
28
FY2017 Annual Budget
funds and using the following guidelines to maintain the fund balance, working capital and retained
earnings (reserves) of the various operating funds at levels sufficient to protect the City’s
creditworthiness, as well as, its financial position from unforeseeable emergencies.
2. General Fund – The fund balance reserve in the General Fund should equal ninety (90) days or 25%
of annual budgeted General Fund operating expenditures. 2016 reserves are $7,925,000 million and
are allocated as follows:
a. Base Level Reserve – will equal ninety (90) sixty (60) days of current year budgeted operating
expenditures which will be designated for emergency use only. If the Base Level Reserve is used
during the fiscal year, the balance must return to the ninety (90) day requirement within the
following fiscal year’s adopted budget.
b. Budget Stabilization Reserve – will equal thirty (30) days of current year budgeted operating
expenditures and will be designated to protect the City against short term operating deficits.
The funds will be available for the following purposes:
i. Defer short term tax increases
ii. Cover revenue shortfalls
iii. Fund unanticipated expenditures
If the Budget Stabilization Reserve is depleted during the fiscal year, the balance must return to
the 30 day requirement within the following year’s adopted budget.
c.b. Economic Uncertainty Reserve – will equal up to 6% of current year budgeted operating
expenditures. The reserve will be designated to temporarily offset a decline in any General Fund
revenue source during the current fiscal year or in planning the future budget year. The reserve
may be used when growth in any General Fund revenue source from one fiscal year to the next
is below zero. The reserve will be available to support only existing programs approved in a prior
fiscal year. Used funds shall be restored up to the 6% reserve as soon as practical.
3. Tourism Fund – A minimum sixty days (60) or 16.67% of operating expenditures will be reserved
within the fund balance. These funds are designated to be used to offset any potential revenue
shortfall that occurs during the fiscal year and should be replenished in the following fiscal year’s
budget.
4. Water Services Fund – Working capital reserves in should be 25% or ninety (90) days of operating
expenses, net debt service and long‐term water contract costs. These reserves are designated to be
used to offset potential revenue shortfalls or fund unexpected or emergency expenses that occur
during the fiscal year. These reserves should be replenished in the following budget cycle.
5. Stormwater Drainage Fund – $250,000 for unforeseen emergencies or other potential revenue
shortfalls.
6. Electric Fund – The remaining balance to meet the citywide requirement of seventy‐five (75) days of
reserve funds will be maintained within this fund. It can be used for unforeseen emergencies and
expenditures. The Rate Stabilization Account and the Power Contract Credit Reserve are not
included in this Contingency Reserve.
Page 223 of 252
29
FY2017 Annual Budget
For all other non‐enterprise funds, the fund balance is an indication of the balance of each particular fund at
a specific time. The ultimate goal of each such fund is to have expended the fund balance at the conclusion
of the activity for which the fund was established.
Reserve requirements will be calculated as part of the annual budget process and any additional required
funds to be added to the reserve balances will be appropriated within the budget.
Funds in excess of the minimum reserves within each fund may be expended for City purposes at the will of
the City Council once it has been determined that use of the excess will not endanger reserve requirements
in future years. This action requires an amendment to the City’s Annual Budget and is outlined in Section III.
L. Use of Unanticipated and Unappropriated General Fund Balances.
B. Liabilities and Receivables – Procedures will be followed to maximize discounts and reduce penalties offered
by creditors. Current liabilities will be paid within 30 days of receiving the invoice. Accounts Receivable
procedures will target collection for a maximum of 30 days of service. The Chief Financial Officer Finance
Director is authorized to write‐off non‐collectible, non‐utility accounts that are delinquent for more than 180
days, and utility accounts delinquent more than 180 days, provided proper delinquency procedures have
been followed, and include this information in the annual report to the City Council.
C. Capital Project Funds – Every effort will be made for all monies within the Capital Project Funds to be
expended in a timely manner preferably within thirty‐six (36) months of receipt. The fund balance will be
invested and income generated will offset increases in construction costs or other costs associated with the
project. Capital project funds are intended to be expended totally, with any unexpected excess to be
transferred to the Debt Service fund to service project‐related debt service.
D. General Debt Service Funds – Revenues within this fund are stable, based on property tax revenues. Balances
are maintained to meet contingencies and to make certain that the next year’s debt service payments may
be met in a timely manner. Fund balance should not fall below 45 days annual debt service requirements, in
accordance with IRS guidelines.
E. Investment of Reserve Funds – The reserve funds will be invested in accordance with the City’s investment
policy. Existing non‐cash investment would be exempt through retirement of the investment.
F. Ratios/Trend Analysis – Ratios and significant balances will be incorporated into both the mid‐year and annual
reports to the City Council. This information will provide users with meaningful data to identify major trends
of the City's financial condition through analytical procedures. The following ratios/balances will be used as
key financial indicators:
Fund Balance/Equity: Assets ‐ liabilities
FB/E AL (Acceptable level) minimum reserve requirement
Working Capital: Current assets less current liabilities
CA ‐ CL AL minimum reserve requirement
Current Ratio: Current assets divided by current liabilities
CA/CL AL > 1.00
Quick Ratio: "Liquid" current assets divided by current liabilities
Liquid CA/CL AL > 1.00
Page 224 of 252
30
FY2017 Annual Budget
Debt/Assessed AV Taxes : Debt divided by assessed Ad Valorem value
D/AV AL < 5
Debt Ratio: Current liabilities plus long‐term liabilities divided by total
assets
CL +LTL/TA AL < 1
Enterprise Operating Coverage: Operating revenue divided by operating expense
OR/OE AL > 1.25
Times Coverage Ratio: Operating revenue less operating expense divided by
annual debt service
(OR‐OE)/DSV AL > 1.5
The City will be to develop minimum/maximum levels for the above ratios/balances through analyzing
of City historical trends and future projections. These ratios will also be compared to other similar or
regional municipalities for further analysis.
XVI.XVII.INTERNAL CONTROLS
A. Written Procedures – Wherever possible, written procedures will be established and maintained by the Chief
Financial OfficerFinance Director for all functions involving cash handling and/or accounting throughout the
City. These procedures will embrace the general concepts of fiscal responsibility set forth in this policy
statement.
B. Internal Audit Program – An internal audit program will be maintained by the Chief Financial OfficerFinance
Director to ensure compliance with City policies and procedures and to prevent the potential for fraud.
1. Departmental Audits – departmental processes will be reviewed to ensure dual control of City assets
and identify the opportunity for fraud potential, as well as, to ensure that departmental internal
procedures are documented and updated as needed.
2. Employees or Transaction Review – Programs to be audited include Petty Cash, City Credit Card
accounts, time entry, and travel. All discrepancies will be identified, and the employee’s Director
will be notified. The City Manager will also be notified depending on the seriousness of the
infraction.
3. The Finance Director and City Manager will present an annual audit plan to the General Government
and Finance board. Results of all internal audits will be provided to the GGAF and City Council at
year‐end. on a quarterly basis
B.C. Directors Responsibility – Each Director is responsible for ensuring that good internal controls are followed
throughout their department, that all Finance Division directives are implemented and that all independent
auditor internal control recommendations are addressed. Departments will develop and periodically update
written internal control procedures.
Page 225 of 252
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Regula r Meeting
May 10, 2016
SUBJECT:
Second Readi ng of an Ordinance amendi ng the 20 16 Annual Budget due to an approved allo cation of General Fund
Balance to the Counci l Di screti onary Fund as we ll as an allocation of Council Discretio nary Funds that had not be e n
finalized when the budget was adopted, and repealing all o rdinances or parts of ordinanc es in conflict therewith -- Leigh
Wallace, Finance Directo r (acti on requi red)
ITEM SUMMARY:
In Nove mber 2015, the City Council revie wed and discussed the General Fund 2015 pre liminary year-end fund balance.
The General Fund 2015 fund balance increased in December 201 5 (preliminary year-e nd) and was finalized at year-end in
January 20 16. This budget amendme nt includes the transfer from the General Fund to the Council Discretionary Fund as
follows:
Council SRF (est. during budget process)$51 5,7 14 20 16 Budgeted Amount
Additional at preliminary Year-End (Dec 2015) 18 9,4 29 Current Budget Amendment
Additional at final Year-End (January 2016) 37 9,9 02 Current Budget Amendment
Total Available 1 ,08 5,0 45
On March 8, 20 16 , Co uncil approved the following items fo r funding out of the Co unc il Discretionary Fund:
Economic Unc e rtainty Reserve $500,00 0 Current Budget Amendment
Personnel Related Impacts 250,00 0 Current Budget Amendment
Grace Heritage Center - P hase I Repairs 150,00 0 Current Budget Amendment
Total Allocated $900,00 0
Balance Remaining $185,04 5
The above items were unknown at the time the 2 01 6 budget was adopted. The de taile d distribution of the amendment is
included in the attachment to the ordinance.
Speci al Consi derati o ns
The City Charter requ ires that a majority p lu s one must approve an amen dmen t to th e approved budget. The City
charter allows for bu dget amendments in emergency situatio ns an d when the issues and needs were unknown at the
time the budget wa s a do pted.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The proposed budget amendment transfers approve d funds o f $569,331 from the General Fund to the Council
Discretionary Fund. Additio nally, it transfers $50 0,0 00 from the Council Discretionary Fund to the General Fund for the
Economic Uncertainty Reserve, $250,000 from the Council Discretionary Fund to the Jo int Services Fund for personnel
related impacts, and $1 50 ,00 0 from the Council Discretio nary Fund to the General Capital P rojects Fund for the Grace
Heritage Cente r P hase I Repairs. The increase in total budgeted expenditures for 20 16 is $1 ,86 9,331, and the net
decrease in Fund Balance is $400,000. The increase is funded through inter-fund transfers and fund balances available at
the end of fiscal year 20 15 .
SUBMITTED BY:
Leigh Wallace, Finance Director, Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager -- kj
ATTACHMENT S:
Description
Bud get Amendment Counc il Dis cretio nary O rd inance
Page 226 of 252
Ordinance Number:____________ Page 1 of 2
Description: Reorganization Budget Amendment
Date Approved: May 10, 2016
ORDINANCE NO. __________________
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2016 ANNUAL BUDGET DUE TO AN
APPROVED ALLOCATION OF GENERAL FUND BALANCE TO THE
COUNCIL DISCRETIONARY FUND AS WELL AS AN ALLOCATION OF
COUNCIL DISCRETIONARY FUNDS THAT HAD NOT BEEN FINALIZED
WHEN THE BUDGET WAS ADOPTED, AND REPEALING ALL
ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT THEREWITH.
WHEREAS, the City had a greater than anticipated ending Fund Balance in the
General Fund for Fiscal Year 2015; and
WHEREAS, the Council approved the transfer of this excess Fund Balance to the
Council Discretionary Fund and identified items for funding that were approved on March 8,
2016; and
WHEREAS, the changes were unknown and unforeseeable at the time the fiscal
year 2016 budget was approved; and
WHEREAS, the City Charter allows for changes in the Annual Operating Plan by a
Council majority plus one in emergency situations;
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.
SECTION 2.
The amendment to the 2016 Annual Budget of the revenues of the City of Georgetown and
expenses of conducting the affairs thereof, is in all things adopted and approved as an addition
to the previously approved budget of the current revenues and expenses as well as fixed
charges against said City for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2015, and ending September
30, 2016. A copy of the amendment is attached hereto as Exhibit “A” incorporated by reference
herein.
SECTION 3.
The total of $1,869,331 is hereby appropriated for payments of expenditures and payments
of the funds and included in the Exhibit “A”.
SECTION 4
Page 227 of 252
Ordinance Number:____________ Page 2 of 2
Description: Reorganization Budget Amendment
Date Approved: May 10, 2016
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. This ordinance
complies with the vision statement of the Georgetown 2030 Plan.
SECTION 5.
If any provision of this ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall
be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions, or application thereof, of this
ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end
the provisions of this ordinance are hereby declared to be severable.
SECTION 6.
The Mayor is hereby authorized to sign this ordinance and the City Secretary to attest.
This ordinance shall become effective upon adoption of its second and final reading by the City
Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas.
PASSED AND APPROVED on First Reading on the 26h day of April, 2016.
PASSED AND APPROVED on Second Reading on the 10th day of May, 2016.
ATTEST: THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN:
______________________ ______________________
Shelley Nowling By: Dale Ross
City Secretary Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________
Charlie McNabb
City Attorney
Page 228 of 252
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Regula r Meeting
May 10, 2016
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;downtown projects including parking enhanceme nts,c ity lease agreements, 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.
ATTACHMENTS
1. GEDCO P roject Update
2. GTEC Pro ject Repo rt and Status Update
3. GTAB Pro ject Update
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
This is an Council Update Item.
SUBMITTED BY:
Shirley J. Rinn o n be half of David S. Morgan, City Manager
ATTACHMENT S:
Description
GEDCO Projec t Update
GTEC Projec t R ep o rts
GTEC Projec t S tatus
GTAB Pro jec t Updates
Page 229 of 252
Project Project Description
Approved by
Council Funded Monitoring Compliance Closed
Citigroup
$1.3 Million Grant for wastewater infrastructure disbursed in April
2008. 12/12/2006 Funded April 2008
Yes, Final compliance
date is Dec. 2018 No
Radix BioSolutions, Ltd.
Provided grant to assist with the work and future plans of Radix
BioSolutions at the TLCC. Agreement approved by GEDCO on
February 9, 2010 and Council approved the Agreement at its March
9, 2010 Meeting. Radix paid back $47K on 3/15/15. Radix paid
back $50K 3/10/16.3/9/2010 Funded May 13, 2010
Yes, Final compliance
date is March 2018 No
Lone Star Circle of Care
Provided a grant not to exceed $387,000 for Qualified Expenditures
for future site improvements at 205 East University Avenue,
Georgetown, Texas. Loan Agreement and Promissory Note have
not been executed. Agreement approved by GEDCO on June 23,
2011 and Council approved the Agreement at its June 28, 2011
Meeting. 6/28/2011
Funded November and
December 2011
Yes, Final Compliance
Date is July 28, 2016 No.
Grape Creek
Provide a grant not to exceed $447,000 for 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 in Georgetown Agreement approved by GEDCO
on July 25, 2011 and Council approved the Agreement at its August
23, 2011 Meeting. Fourth Amended Performance Agreement, Lease
Agreement, and Promissory Note was approved by GEDCO on
August 20, 2012 and by the City Council on August 28, 2012. TIRZ
Agreement for $60,000 approved by City Council on 9-11-12. 8/23/2011 Funded
Yes, Final Compliance is
March 2018.No
Georgetown Winery
Provide a grant not to exceed $70,000 for Qualified Expenditures
described as equipment for wine production and an agreement to
maintain and operate the existing winery in Georgetown. Agreement
approved by GEDCO on July 25, 2011 and Council approved the
Agreement at its August 23, 2011 Meeting. 8/23/2011 Funded
Yes, Final Compliance
Date is June 30, 2016 No
DiFusion Technologies (2)
Provide an extension of time for Difusion to retain unlimited access
to the ICP Spectrometor (equipment) under a lease agreement with
the TLCC for a year. At the end of the Agreement, Difusion will
purchase the Spectometor from GEDCO for $112,000.00.
Agreement Approved by GEDCO on December 21, 2015 and
Council on January 12, 2016.1/12/2016 No funding involved
Yes, Final Compliance
September 30, 2017 No
GEDCO PROJECT UPDATE AND STATUS REPORT
March 21, 2016
Page 230 of 252
Project Project Description
Approved by
Council Funded Monitoring Compliance Closed
GEDCO PROJECT UPDATE AND STATUS REPORT
March 21, 2016
Georgetown Indpendent School District
Provided a grant not to exceed $200,560 for the purchase of
qualified expenditures related to the equipment for the Engineering
Program and Laboratories at Georgetown and East View High
Schools. GISD will offer the MSSC Certifications, implement a Job
Placement Program, provide and annual report and annual tour of
the facilities to the GEDCO Board. Agreement was approved by
GEDCO on September 17, 2012 and the City Council on September
25, 2012. The GEDCO Board approved the GISD request to amend
the Performance Agreement to allow the purchase different
equipment than outlined in the original agreement on November 18,
2013. 9/17/2012 Partially Funded.
Yes. Final Compliance
based on life of
equipment. No
Texas Life Sciences Collaboration Center
(4)
Provide a grant of $100,000 for the maintenance of the TLCC.
Performance Agreement approved by GEDCO on 12/21/15. New
one-year agreement.1/12/2016 Funded February 2016
Yes. Final Compliance
October 31, 2016 No.
The Rivery at Summit Conference Center
Provide a grant not to exceed $4.5 Million for Public Infrastructure
Improvements. Approved by the GEDCO Board on November 18,
2013. Approved by the City Council on December 10, 2013. 12/10/2013 Not Funded
Yes.Construction
Deadline is
June 30, 2016. No.
TASUS Texas Corporation
Provide a grant of $67,500 for job creation related to expansion of
manufacturing facilities. Approved by the City Council on February
25, 2014 and approved by the GEDCO Board on February 17, 2014 2/25/2014 Not Funded
Yes. Final Compliance
May 31, 2017 No.
Radiation Detection Corporation
Provide a grant of $320,000 for job creation related to the relocation
of the corporate offices to Georgetown. Approved by City Council
and GEDCO on July 23, 2013. 7/23/2013 Funded
Yes. Final Compliance
December 31, 2021 No
DisperSol
Provide a grant of $250,000 for job creation related to expansion of
manufacturing facilities. Approved by the GEDCO Board on August
18, 2014. Company earned $50K (= 10 eligible positions at
$10/job). Check delivered 4/17/15 to company. 10/16/2014 Partially Funded
Yes. Final Compliance
February 15, 2019 No.
Page 231 of 252
FM 1460
(Quail Valley Drive to University Drive)
Project No. 5RB TIP No. BO & CD
Rights‐of‐Way Acquisition and Utility Relocation
April 2016
Unchanged
Project Description Acquisition of ROW and relocation of utilities for the FM 1460 Project (Quail Valley
Drive to University Drive).
Purpose To have all ROWs cleared and utilities prior to TxDOT letting the project for
construction.
Project Managers Ed Polasek, AICP, and Bill Dryden, P.E.
Engineer Brown and Gay Engineers, Inc.
Element Status / Issues
Design Complete
Environmental/
Archeological
Complete
Rights of Way
One (1) remaining parcel – pending closing
documents.
Section: North South
Acquired: 35 8
Pending: 1 ‐
Condemnation: 0 ‐
Total: 36 8
Utility Relocations Ongoing
Construction Under Construction.
Other Issues Engineer preparing Change Orders for construction contract.
Page 232 of 252
Mays Street Extension
(Teravista Parkway in Round Rock to the intersection with Westinghouse Road)
Project No. 5RI TIP No. CK
April 2016
Project Description Extend Mays Street northward from Teravista Parkway to the existing intersection
with Westinghouse Road at Rabbit Hill Road. The widening along Westinghouse
Road and Rabbit Hill Road will also be included in the schematic for additional
turning lanes to/from Westinghouse Road. Preliminary layouts for future signals
and roadway illumination will also be included. The project length along the
anticipated alignment is approximately 1.2 miles.
Purpose To develop final PS&E and complete construction of the project.
Project Managers Bill Dryden, P.E.
Engineer CP&Y, Inc.
Element Status / Issues
Design Complete
Environmental/
Archeological
TBD
Rights of Way Engineer has submitted all ROW documents; acquisition is
on‐going
Total Parcels: 6
Acquired: 1
Pending: 5
Utility Relocations TBD
Construction Project will be bid as ROW is acquired.
Project will take 12 months to complete (tentatively set for Spring 2017)
Other Issues
Page 233 of 252
NB Frontage Road
(SS 158 to Lakeway Drive)
Project No. 5QX TIP No. AF
April 2016
Unchanged
Project Description Design and construct a portion of an IH‐35 NB Frontage Road from Williams Drive
to Northwest Boulevard Bridge of a proposed NB FR which would ultimately
extend to Lakeway Drive.
Purpose To relieve congestion in the Williams Drive/Austin Avenue intersection by
providing a NB alternate, interim route to FM 971 and Georgetown High School.
This project is the only remaining portion of IH 35 in Central Texas without a
frontage road existing, under construction or being designed.
Project Manager Bill Dryden
Engineer Klotz Associates
Element Status / Issues
Design We have been informed by TxDOT that it will be doing the Schematic,
Environmental, etc., and PS&E for the NB Frontage Road as part of its proposed
Williams Drive Bridge project.
The City project is on indefinite hold but we will continue coordination with
TxDOT on its design of the project.
Environmental/
Archeology
TBD – By TxDOT
Rights of Way None identified
Utility Relocations TBD
Construction TBD
Other Issues None at this time.
Page 234 of 252
Northwest Boulevard Overpass
(Fontana Drive to Austin Avenue)
Project No. 5QX TIP No. AF
April 2016
Unchanged
Project Description Construction of overpass and surface roads to connect Northwest Boulevard with
Austin Avenue and FM 971.
Purpose This project will relieve congestion at the Austin Avenue/Williams Drive
intersection and provide a more direct access from the west side of IH 35 corridor to
Georgetown High School and SH 130 via FM 971.
Project Manager Bill Dryden, P.E.
Engineer Klotz Associates
Element Status / Issues
Design Engineer is coordinating design with the design for Rivery Boulevard in moving
towards construction PS&E for both projects to minimize overlap work between
these two projects.
Engineer has developed alternatives for stormwater outfall northward from NW
Blvd.
Environmental/
Archeological
Concurrent with preliminary engineering and schematic design.
Rights of Way ROW Documents are being finalized. Part of the ROW for this project is being
required to complete the Rivery Boulevard Extension project.
Utility Relocations TBD
Construction Tentatively scheduled to begin mid‐FY 2019.
Other Issues Paper work has been submitted to TxDOT to create an AFA for design and
environmental reviews of the bridge over I 35.
Page 235 of 252
Rivery Boulevard Extension
(Williams Drive to Northwest Boulevard @ Fontana Drive)
Project No. 5RM TIP No. AD
April 2016
Unchanged
Project
Description
Develop the Rights‐of‐Way Map, acquire ROW, address potential environmental issues
and complete construction plans specifications and estimate (PS&E) for the extension of
Rivery Boulevard from Williams Drive to Northwest Boulevard at Fontana Drive in
anticipation of future funding availability.
Purpose To provide a route between Williams Drive and Northwest Boulevard serving the
Gateway area, providing an alternate route from Williams Drive to the future
Northwest Boulevard Bridge over IH 35, to provide a route between the hotels in the
Gateway area and the proposed Conference Center near Rivery Boulevard and Wolf
Ranch Parkway.
Project Manager Bill Dryden, P.E.
Engineer Kasberg Patrick and Associates
Element Status / Issues
Design Engineer has submitted 75% plans for City’s review.
Environmental/
Archeology
Complete
Rights of Way Appraiser is completing appraisals on remaining 4
parcels which are expected by the end of March.
Offers have been made to the 16 parcel owners from
Park Lane southward to Williams Drive. Closed on 3
parcels; 3 more in process; 1 pending subject to
GTEC/Council approval.
Total Parcels: 22
Appraised: 18
Offers: 16
Acquired: 3
Pending: 4
Condemnation: 0
Utility Relocations TBD
Construction Tentatively scheduled to begin mid‐FY 2018.
Other Issues TBD
Page 236 of 252
Snead Drive Project
(SE Inner Loop to Airborn Circle)
Project No. 5QZ TIP No. BM
April 2016
Project Description Develop Construction Plans Specifications and Estimate (PS&E) for the widening
of Snead Drive from S.E. Inner Loop to 600 feet north of Cooperative Way,
including appurtenant waste water improvements.
Purpose This project has been identified as GTEC eligible project and will provide
necessary infrastructure for ongoing economic development in the area.
Project Manager Bill Dryden, P.E.
Engineer Steger Bizzell
Element Status / Issues
Design Complete
Environmental/
Archeological
Complete
Rights of Way Easement has been acquired for water quality pond.
Utility Relocations Utility relocations either complete or are part of the construction contract.
Construction Contractor is completing the installation of drainage items and has begun
installation of the road base.
Substantial Completion date is mid‐May; Final Completion date is mid‐July.
Other Issues None
Page 237 of 252
Current Capital Improvement Projects TIP
No.
Project
No.
Update On Schedule/
Or Behind
Project
Budget
Project
Cost
Available Current Year
Projected
Current Year
Cost
Current Year
Available
Lakeway Drive Overpass #10 5QL Project Complete.
Complete 2,500,000 2,500,000 0 0 0
Southeast Arterial 1 (Sam Houston Avenue)#12 5QG Project Complete.
Complete 12,995,625 10,478,499 2,517,126 0 0
Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension (SW Bypass to DB
Wood Road)
#14A 5QW Project Complete.
Complete 1,330,000 1,111,233 218,767 283,350 0 283,350
Southwest Bypass (SH29 to RR2243)#14B 5QC Project Complete.
Complete 7,756,432 3,225,132 4,531,300 4,539,107 5,787 4,533,320
Northwest Blvd Overpass #QQ 5QX Engineer is coordinating design with the design for
Rivery Boulevard in moving towards construction
PS&E for both projects to minimize overlap work
between these two projects.
Engineer is developing alternatives for storm water
outfall.
Construction tentatively scheduled to begin mid-FY
2019.
In-process
Unchanged
1,136,178 1,099,076 37,102 571,178 479,588 91,590
NB Frontage Road (SS 158 to Lakeway)#QQ 5QY We have been informed by TxDOT that it will
be doing the Schematic,
Environmental, etc., and PS&E for the NB
Frontage Road as part of its proposed
Williams Drive Bridge project.
The City project is on indefinite hold but we
will be coordinating with TxDOT
on its design project
Indefinite Hold 613,822 613,822 0 382,822 382,822 0
ROW - 1460 #EEa
#EEb
#EEc
5RB Contractor has begun working on the project;
contract time is beginning to accrue.
Utility relocations - ongoing.
As of October 16th, the City has obtained PUAs or
have closings completed or planned for all the
remaining FM 1460 parcels.
Remaining parcel – pending closing
documents.
Under
Construction
Unchanged
11,788,230 5,348,470 6,439,760 6,727,539 2,315,896 4,411,643
TCS/RR Easement 5RD Project Complete.
Complete 1,500,000 1,503,148 -3,148 0 0
FM 971 / Washam 5RE Project Complete.
Complete 100,000 0 100,000 0 0
Rivery Road 5RF Project Complete.
Complete 779,000 29,000 750,000 750,000 0 750,000
Rivery Boulevard 5RM Engineer has submitted 75% plans for City review.
Appraiser is completing appraisals on
remaining 4 parcels which are expected by the
end of March. Offers have been made to the
16 parcel owners from Park Lane southward to
Williams Drive. Closed on 3 parcels; 3 more in
process; 1 pending subject to GTEC/Council
approval.
Construction tentatively scheduled to begin mid FY
2018.
On Schedule
GTEC PROJECT UPDATE AND STATUS REPORT
April 2016
Project to Date Current Year Budget (13/14)
L:\Global\CIP Budgetary Worksheets\GTEC Status Report\2016\GTEC - Project Status - 2016-04.xlsx Page 1 of 3 3/30/2016Page 238 of 252
Current Capital Improvement Projects TIP
No.
Project
No.
Update On Schedule/
Or Behind
Project
Budget
Project
Cost
Available Current Year
Projected
Current Year
Cost
Current Year
Available
GTEC PROJECT UPDATE AND STATUS REPORT
April 2016
Project to Date Current Year Budget (13/14)
Snead Drive 5QZ Utilities are complete and tested; Contractor is
installing drainage items and has
begun installation of the road base.
Substantial Completion date is April 1st; Final
Completion date is May 31st.
Under
Construction
On Schedule
825,100 87,000 738,100 825,100 87,000 738,100
Mays Street Extension 5RI Design is Complete
Engineer has submitted all ROW documents;
acquisition has begun with the property owners
south of Westinghouse Road.
Project will be bid as ROW is acquired. Project will
take 12 months to complete (tentatively set for
Spring 2017).
Interlocal Agreement (ILA) with Round Rock
has been adopted by Councils of
both cities.
In Process 196,000 196,000 0 196,000 196,000 0
IH 35/ Hwy 29 Intersection 5RJ TBD 650,000 0 650,000 650,000 0 650,000
L:\Global\CIP Budgetary Worksheets\GTEC Status Report\2016\GTEC - Project Status - 2016-04.xlsx Page 2 of 3 3/30/2016Page 239 of 252
Current Capital Improvement Projects TIP
No.
Project
No.
Update On Schedule/
Or Behind
Project
Budget
Project
Cost
Available Current Year
Projected
Current Year
Cost
Current Year
Available
GTEC PROJECT UPDATE AND STATUS REPORT
April 2016
Project to Date Current Year Budget (13/14)
Current Economic Development Projects Project
Type
Project
No.
Update On Schedule/
Or Behind
Project
Budget
Project
Cost
Available Current Year
Budget
Current Year
Cost
Current Year
Available
100 S. Austin Ave Eco Devo
Project
5RA In-process 507,000 507,000 0 0
Williams Drive Gateway 5RC Engineer working on schematic design alternatives
and preliminary cost estimates.
On Schedule 65,000 61720 3,280 0 0
Economic Development Projects 1,137,500 1,137,500 1,137,500 0 1,137,500
16,062,596 3,467,093 12,595,503
Project to Date Current Year Budget (13/14)
L:\Global\CIP Budgetary Worksheets\GTEC Status Report\2016\GTEC - Project Status - 2016-04.xlsx Page 3 of 3 3/30/2016Page 240 of 252
2nd Street
Austin Avenue to College Street
Project No. 1BU TIP None
April 2016
Unchanged
Project Description Design and preparation of plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for the
widening and reconstruction of 2nd Street from Austin Avenue to College Street.
Purpose To provide a safer roadway between Austin Avenue and College Street serving the
citizens of the north portion of “Old Town” and VFW baseball fields. The proposed
project provides improved sidewalk for pedestrian activities along the roadway.
Project Manager Mark Miller and Joel Weaver
Engineer KPA, LP
Element Status / Issues
Design Complete
Environmental/
Archeological
Complete
Rights of Way Existing
Utility Relocations Work complete!
Construction As of March 2nd, the contractor was finishing punch list and working on completing
curb work on 4th Street. (add alternate)
Other Issues The VFW park reconstruction was bid on Feb. 2nd. The Parks department is looking
into funding options.
Page 241 of 252
Austin Avenue Bridges Project
(North and South San Gabriel Bridges)
Project No. TBD TIP Project No. N/A
April 2016
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– 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.
Mid 2016
2 Develop geometric layouts and preliminary construction
estimates for two alternatives
Mid 2016
3 Selection of alternative by Council End 2016
4 Develop schematic and 30% plans. Mid 2017
Proj. Mgrs Ed Polasek, AICP; Bill Dryden, P.E.; Nat Waggoner, PMP®
Engineer Aguirre & Fields, LP
Element Status/Issues
Public Involvement 1st Public held March 31, 2016.
24 meetings with Affected Property Owners (MAPO)
to date. 4/19 Meeting with Village Park Condos HOA.
Design TBD
Surveying Underway, 8% complete.
Environmental Resolution to enter into an Advanced Funding
Agreement with TxDOT, authorized by Council 3/22.
Rights of Way Exist. ROW from N. of 2nd to Morrow; Additional
ROW may be required 3rd to N. of 2nd.
Utility Relocations TBD (future)
Construction TBD
Other Issues Private property owner meeting 3/22, City attended at
request of meeting hosts.
Page 242 of 252
CDBG Sidewalk Improvements Project
MLK/3rd Street (Scenic Dr. to Austin Ave.)
Project No. None TIP No. None
April 2016
Project Description Design and preparation of final plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for
sidewalk improvements along MLK/ and 3rd streets from Scenic Drive to Austin
Avenue.
Purpose To provide ADA/TDLR compliant sidewalks in the area.
Project Managers Bill Dryden, P.E.
Engineer Steger Bizzell
Element Status / Issues
Design Complete
Environmental/
Archeological
Complete
Rights of Way N/A
Utility Relocations N/A
Construction NTP has been issued effective April 4th.
Other Issues Construction will be scheduled around the Red Poppy Festival weekend.
Page 243 of 252
CDBG Sidewalk Improvements Project
University Avenue (SH 29) (I 35 to Hart St.)
Project No. None TIP No. None
April 2016
Unchanged
Project Description Design and preparation of final plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for
sidewalk improvements along University Avenue (SH 29) from I 35 to Hart Street.
Purpose To provide ADA/TDLR compliant sidewalks in the area.
Project Managers Bill Dryden, P.E.
Engineer Steger Bizzell
Element Status / Issues
Design Design is complete; awaiting TCEQ review and comments.
Environmental/
Archeological
N/A
Rights of Way Existing
Utility Relocations TBD
Construction TBD
Other Issues Engineer is addressing some TCEQ‐raised issues regarding water quality.
Page 244 of 252
FM 971 at Austin Avenue
Realignment Intersection Improvements
Project No. 1BZ TIP No. AG
March 2016
Unchanged
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 Bill Dryden, P.E.
Engineer Klotz Associates, Inc.
Element Status / Issues
Design Preliminary Engineering complete;
Engineer working on 60% design submittal
Environmental/
Archeological
10/2015
Rights of Way Complete
Utility Relocations TBD
Construction 10/2016
Other Issues Meeting scheduled with TxDOT on February 5th to discuss the Advance Funding
Agreement.
Page 245 of 252
FM 1460
Quail Valley Drive to University Drive
Project No. 5RB TIP No. BO & CD
April 2016
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 Ed Polasek, AICP and Bill Dryden, P.E.
Engineer Brown and Gay Engineers, Inc.
Element Status / Issues
Design Complete
Environmental/
Archeological
Complete
Rights of Way 1 Remaining parcel of original 36 – pending closing documents.
Utility Relocations Ongoing
Construction Construction is underway.
Other Issues Engineer preparing Change Orders for construction contract.
Page 246 of 252
Jim Hogg Drive/Road at Williams Drive
Intersection and Signalization Improvements
Project No. 1DE TIP No. None
April 2106
Project Description Design and preparation of final plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for the
widening of Jim Hogg at the intersection of Williams Drive, inclusive of installation
of a traffic signal.
Purpose To provide a widened 3‐lane section with signal at the intersection of Jim Hogg and
Williams Drive. The proposed improvements will provide improved access for the
residents and the employees of the new City Service Center to Williams Drive.
Project Manager Bill Dryden, P.E.
Engineer Kimley‐Horn and Associates, Inc.
Element Status / Issues
Design Complete
Environmental/
Archeological
Complete
Rights of Way Existing
Utility Relocations Included with construction project
Construction Construction is on‐going; signal foundations have been installed; Contractor is
working on utility relocations.
Other Issues Waste water line being installed across Jim Hogg Road to proposed development
on west side.
Page 247 of 252
Southwest Bypass Project
(RM 2243 to IH 35)
Project No. 1CA Project No. BK
April 2016
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 and Bill Dryden, P.E.
Engineer HDR, Inc.
Element Status / Issues
Williamson County
Project Status
(from WilCo’s status
report)
Southwest Bypass Driveways – Award of the construction contract was approved
at 3/8/16 Commissioners Court Meeting. Five (5) bids were received on 2/24/16, with
the apparent low bidder being Smith Contracting with a bid of $289,981.90.
Southwest Bypass (RM 2243 to IH 35) – A meeting with HDR to discuss the WA
Supplemental and project status was held on 3/9/16. A meeting with TxDOT and the
City of Georgetown to discuss the turn lanes on RM 2243 was held on 3/9/16. A
meeting with the City of Georgetown and County staff was held on 2/26/16 to
discuss project status. A 30% PS&E Submittal for the Southwest Bypass Phase 1 was
received on 2/23/16 and is under review. A GEC Constructability review meeting
was held on 3/3/16. An ILA with the City of Georgetown was approved by
Commissioners Court on 2/23/16. Comments were issued 2/18/16 on a 60% PS&E
submittal for turn lanes on RM 2243 at Southwest Bypass.
Rights of Way Complete for the parcels east of the Texas Crushed Stone properties.
Other Issues City and WilCo completing the Interlocal Agreement for the Project.
Page 248 of 252
Transit Development Plan
(Fixed Route Bus)
Project No. TBD TIP Project No. N/A
April 2016
Project
Description
The purpose of this study is to develop a local transit plan for the City of Georgetown that
would serve transit needs within the city limits and connect to existing and future regional
transit options to form a regional transit network that would improve mobility, improve
the region’s environmental and economic sustainability, and slow the increase of congestion
on roadways.
Schedule Phase Activity Completion
1 Initiation Fall 2014
2 Public Involvement, Existing Conditions, Recommendations Spring 2015
3 Report Completed Summer 206
4 Boards and Commissions Review, Council Summer 2016
5 Consideration by Council Spring 2016
Proj. Mgrs Ed Polasek, AICP; Bill Dryden, P.E.; Nat Waggoner, PMP®
Engineer Aguirre & Fields, LP
Element Status/Issues
Public Involvement 2 Public Meetings
Public Intercept Survey, Online Survey, GYAB Survey,
Multiple Stakeholder Interviews
More than 20 presentations
Design Baseline of routes, service parameters recommended.
Stops locations and designs TBD
Next Step(s) City staff currently negotiating an Interlocal Agreement
(ILA) with the Georgetown Health Foundation
Staff and consultant revising TDP based on events and
guidance provided since 6/2015 completion
Workshop with City Council 5/24 to review ILA,
funding structure and consider adoption of final
Transit Development Plan
Page 249 of 252
Transportation Services Operations
CIP Maintenance
April 2016
Project Description 2015‐2016 CIP Maintenance of roadways including, Chip seal, Cutler Overlays,
Fog seal applications 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
Chip Seal 2016 work in design phase. Bid phase May 2016. In‐house staff working on
pre‐construction patching and crack sealing. (Council direction from
workshop: “No single chip seals, two course chip seal only while further
evaluation of chip seals is done” “watch how the perform”. Council will
consider and review implications of this action later this year as part of the
budget process) Half of the roads originally proposed for single chip seal were
moved into the 2017 budget. Engineering packages are being put together
accordingly.
Fog Seal 2015 – Rejuvenation has been discontinued indefinitely! The product E‐fog
which has been used successfully for the past two years is not performing as it
has in the past. Application made in March experienced an initial cure
allowing traffic to be released in 1 to 3 hours and then soften on warmer days
to a point of tracking into driveways. Material testing and discussions with
the manufacturer have not resulted in an explanation. City crews have been
removing the tracks from driveways with power‐washers. The product is
believed to be cured at this time but will continue to monitor the roadways
into warm weather.
HIPR/overlay Bids taken on March 30th. Contract recommendation item today!
Engineering 2016 Work in progress!
Page 250 of 252
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Regula r Meeting
May 10, 2016
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 251 of 252
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Regula r Meeting
May 10, 2016
SUBJECT:
Sec. 551.071: Consul tati on w i th Attorney
- Advice from attorney about pending o r co ntemplated litigation and other matters o n which the attorney has a duty to
advise the City Council, including agenda item
- Sneed Industrial Agreement
- P UC Docket #4 55 96 - P EC v. GUS
- P UC Docket #4 58 66 - LCRA TSC CNN Application
Sec. 551.072: De l i berati o n Regardi ng Real P ro perty
- Discussion of the appraised values of real prope rty regarding the Rivery Blvd. Exte nsion Pro ject
Sec. 551.074: Personnel Matters
- City Manager, City Attorney, City Sec re tary and Municipal Judge: Consideratio n of the appointment, employme nt,
evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal
- City Secretary Evaluatio n
- Municipal Co urt Judge Evaluation
Sec. 551.087: De l i berati o n Regardi ng Economi c Devel opment Negoti ati ons
- Tamiro Plaza Phase 2
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
TBD
SUBMITTED BY:
Page 252 of 252