The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda CC 11.22.2016Notice of M eeting of the Governing B ody of the City of Georgetown, Texas November 22 , 20 16 The Ge orgetown City Council will meet on No vember 22, 2016 at 6:00 PM at Co uncil Chambers, 101 E. 7th St., Geo rgeto 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, at least three (3 ) days prio r to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930- 3652 o r City Hall at 113 East 8th Street fo r additional information; TTY use rs ro ute through Relay Texas at 7 11. 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 - Council Compensation Committee - Parks Maintenance Staff Award Reco gnitio ns Ci ty Co unci l Regi onal Board Re po r ts Announcements - City Bo ards & Commissions Applic atio ns - Annual Tro ut Fishing Derby - Camp Goo dwater 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 po ssible action to approve the mi nutes o f the Wo rksho p and Regular Meeting held on Tuesday, November 8, 2 01 6 and the Special Meeting held November 12-16, 2016 -- She lley Nowling, City Secretary Page 1 of 316 C Consideration and possible actio n to appro ve the reappoi ntment of Mary Fai th Sterk as the City of Geo rgetown’s representative o n the Wi l l i amson County and Ci ti es Heal th Di stri ct B o ar d -- Mayor Dale Ross D Consideration and possible action to renew the Lease Agreement between the City of Geo rgeto wn and Boy Scout Troo p #1 55 and St. J ohn's Uni ted Methodi st Church for use of the B o y Scout Hut and adjacent shed in San Gabri el P ark -- Shirley Rinn, Executive Assistant to the City Manager E Consideration and possible action to formally cancel the City Council meeting that would fall on the fourth Tuesday of December, cancelling the Ci ty Counci l mee ti ng that would have fallen on December 27 , 2016 -- Shelley Nowling, City Secretary F Consideration and possible actio n to grant a Temporary Li cense for i ngress and egress across city pro perty, located south of the cur r e nt termi nus of D.B. Woo ds Road, to Enterprise Crude Pipe lines, LLC, and to authorize the Mayor to execute the license agreement -- Travis Baird, Real Estate Services Coordinator G Consideration and po ssible action to authorize the Chief o f Police to enter into an affi l i ate ag r e ement with CrossF i t, Inc. -- Wayne Nero, Chief of Police H Consideration and possible action to approve a Resolution requesting the members of the 85th Le gi sl ati ve Sessi o n of the State o f Texas support the City o f Georgetown’s legislative agenda - - Jack Daly, Assistant to the City Manager, and David Morgan, City Manager I Consideration and possible action to approve a Memorandum of Agreement between the Lead Reg i onal Advi so r y Counci l and Georgetown Fire Department as a “Sponso ri ng Enti ty” to partic ipate as a member of the Emerg ency Medi cal Task F orce (EMTF) -- John Sullivan, Fire Chief J 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 changes to Georg e tow n Emergency Medi cal Se r vi ce fees and F i re & Li fe Safety Servi ce fees -- John Sullivan, Fire Chief K F orw arded from the G eorgetow n Transpo rtati on Advi sory Board (G TAB ): Co nsideratio n and possible recommendation for the composition o f t h e Pl anni ng Advi sory Co mmi ttee (PAC) for the Ai rport Master P l an P roject -- Jim Briggs, Gene ral Manager of Utilities and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Dire c to r L F orw arded from G eorgetow n Uti l i ty Systems Advi sory B oard (G US): Consideration and po ssible action to approve a change order with Iti neri s N.A. to provide management, suppo rt, and oversi ght of the transformati on and c onversi o n tasks for Data Mi g r ati on in the amount of $56,0 00 .00 -- Leticia Zavala, Customer Care Director M F orw arded from G eorgetow n Uti l i ty Systems Advi sory B oard (G US): Consideration and possible action to appro ve a contract with KHA Inte l l i gence G roup, LLC to pro vide transformati on rul e desi gn, devel o pment, and data conver si o n o f the l egacy system data fo r Data Mi grati on in the amount of $83 ,470.00 -- Leticia Zavala, Customer Care Director N F orw arded from G eorgetow n Uti l i ty Systems Advi sory B oard (G US): Consideration and possible actio n to approve a task o rder with El ectSol ve Technol ogy Sol uti ons and Servi ce to deve l op and co nfi gure i ntegrati ons betw een the meter data management syste m and the new CIS UMAX softw are in the amount o f $7 5,000.00 -- Leticia Zavala, Custo mer Care Director O F orw arded from the G eorgetow n Uti l i ty Systems Advi sory Board (G US): Consideration and po ssible action to renew the contract for l abor servi ces for El ectri c System Overhead Co nstructi on and Mai ntenance to Techl i ne Constructi on, LLC of Austin, Texas, in the not to exceed amount of $75 0,0 00.00 -- We sle y Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Dire c to r P F orw arded from G eorgetow n Uti l i ty Systems Advi sory B oard (G US): Consideration and possible action to r enew the contract for l abo r se r vi ces fo r Outsi de P l ant F i ber Opti c Infrastructure Constructi on to JC Communi cati o ns of Cedar Park, Texas, in the not to exceed amount of $300 ,00 0.0 0 -- Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Director Q F orw arded from G eorgetow n Uti l i ty Systems Advi sory B oard (G US): Page 2 of 316 Consideration and possible actio n to appro ve Task Order DEI-17-001 with Dunham Eng i neeri ng, Inc. of College Station, Texas, for professi onal servi ces related to the Desi gn of a Sun Ci ty 2.0 MG (mi l l i on gal l o n) Composi te EST (el evated storage tank) in the amount of $30 0,0 00 .00 -- Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Directo r R F orw arded from G eorgetow n Uti l i ty Systems Advi sory B oard (G US): Consideration and possible actio n to appro ve Task Order DEI-17-002 with Dunham Eng i neeri ng, Inc. of College Station, Texas, for professi onal servi ces related to the Desi gn of t h e Ai rport 1.5 MG (mi l l i on gal l o n) G ST (G round Storage Tank) Rehabi l i tati on in the amo unt o f $8 0,000.00 -- Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Dire cto r S F orw arded from the P arks and Recreati o n Advi sory B oard: Consideration and possible action to recommend approval of a constructi on contract for ADA co mpl i ance renovati ons at McMasters P ark, Vi l l age Park and the Parks and Recreati on Admi ni strati on B ui l di ng to Choi ce B ui l ders, LLC of Temple, Texas in the amount of $25 8,3 93 .50 -- Kimberly Garrett, Parks and Recreation Director Le gislative Re gular Age nda T P ubl i c Heari ng and F i rst Readi ng of an Ordinance rezoni ng appr oxi matel y 165.65 acres desc ribed as 1 42 .80 acres in the N. P orter and A. Flores Surveys, 0.68 acres, 5.07 acres, and 1 2.3 1 acres in the N. Porter Survey, and 4 .79 acres, being Blocks 1-3 of the North Georgetown Additio n, lo cated betw een Austi n Ave. and N. Col l ege St. south of F M 971 , from the Re sidential Single-Family (RS) and Lo cal Commercial (C-1) Districts to the Public Facilities (PF) District -- Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director (acti on r e qui r ed) U P ubl i c Heari ng and F i rst Readi ng of an Ordinance rezoni ng 3.5 acres o f San Gabriel Estates, Blo c k 1 , Lo t 22A located at 700 B ooty's Crossi ng Road from the Agriculture (AG) District to the Neighborhood Commercial (CN) District -- Sofia Ne lson, CNU-A, P lanning Director (acti on requi red) V P ubl i c Heari ng and F i rst Readi ng o f an Ordinance to rezone appr oxi matel y 10.058 acres in the Francis A Hudson Survey located at 5 55 Rabbi t Hi l l Road from the Agriculture (AG) District to the Business P ark (BP ) District -- Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director (acti on requi red) W F orw arded from G eorgetow n Uti l i ty Systems Advi sory B oard (G US): Consideration and possible actio n to award a contract to C.C. Carl to n, LTD of Austin, Texas for t h e c onstructi on of the Westi nghouse South Regi onal Wastew ater Syste m Improvements and Stonehedge Li ft Stati on Mo di fi cati ons in the amount of $2 ,112 ,011 .00 -- Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Directo r X Se c ond Readi ng of an Ordinance for the Vo l untary Annexati on o f 14 .45 9 acres in the W. Roberts Survey, also known as Hi dden Oaks at B erry Creek -- Sofia Nelso n, CNU-A, Planning Dire c to r (acti on requi red) Y Se c ond Readi ng of an Ordinance r e zoni ng approxi matel y 83.5 acres o f the W. Roberts Survey located north of F ai rway Lane and south of Shel l Road, from the Agriculture (AG) District to the Residential Single-Family (RS) and Local Comme rc ial (C-1) Distric ts -- Sofia Nelson, CNU- A, P lanning Director (acti on requi red) Z Se c ond Readi ng of an Ordinance rezo ni ng approxi mate l y 75.415 acres in the David Wright Survey located at 2101 Ai rport Road fro m the General Commercial (C3) District to the Industrial (IN) District -- Sofia Ne lson, CNU-A P lanning Director (acti o n requi red) AA Se c ond Readi ng of an Ordinance establ i shi ng the cl assi fi cati o ns and number of posi ti ons (Strength of Force) fo r all the City of Georgetown Fi re Fi ghters and P ol i ce Offi cers pursuant to Chapter 143 of the Te xas Local Governme nt Code pertaining to Civil Service -- Tadd Phillips, Dire c to r of Human Resources (ac ti on requi red) AB Consideration and possible actio n to appro ve a Resolution suppo rting the Wi l l i amson County and Ci ti es Heal th Di stri ct in processing requests for a variance from the Texas F ood Establ i shment Rul es pertaining to l i ve ani mal s i n foo d e stabl i shments to give food establishment owne rs the opti o n to al l ow dogs in outdoor di ni ng areas -- Anna Eby, Page 3 of 316 Councilmember, District 1, Keith Brainard, Councilmember, District 2, Rachael Jonrowe, Councilmember, District 6 and Andre ina Davila-Quintera, Project Co ordinator AC F orw arded from the Mai n Stre e t Advi sory Board: Consideration and possible action to approve the proposed ame ndme nts to the Mai n Street F aç ade and Si gn G rant P rogram -- Shelly Hargrove, Main Street Manager Proje ct Update s AD Pro ject updates and status reports re garding current and future transpo rtation and traffic project; street, sidewalk, and other infrastructure projects; police, fire and other public safety projects; eco nomic develo pment projects; city facility proje c ts;downtown pro jects including parking enhancements, city lease agreements, sanitatio n services, and possible direction to c ity staff -- David Mo rgan, City Manager Public Wishing to Addre ss Council On a subje c t that is posted on this agenda: Ple ase fill out a speaker registratio n form which can be found on the table at the entrance to the Council Chamber. Clearly print your name and the letter of the item on whic h you wish to speak and present it to the City Secretary on the dais, preferably prior to the start of the me e ting. You will be called forward to speak when the Council conside rs that item. On a subje c t no t po sted on the agenda: P e rso ns may add an item to a future City Co uncil agenda by contac ting the City Secretary no later than noo n on the Wednesday prior to the Tuesday meeting, with 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. AE - 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. AF Se c . 55 1.0 71 : Consul tati on wi th Atto rney - Advice from attorney about pending or contemplated litigatio n and other matte rs on which the attorney has a duty to advise the City Co uncil, including agenda items 5 51 .07 4: P ersonnel Matters - City Manager, City Attorney, City Secretary and Municipal Judge: Co nsideration of the appointment, employment, evaluatio n, reassignment, duties, discipline, o r dismissal 5 51 .08 7: Del i berati on Regardi ng Economi c Devel opment Neg oti ati o ns - Pro ject Juniors 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 s cheduled time of s aid meeting. __________________________________ Shelley No wling, City S ecretary Page 4 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Cal l to Order Invocati on Pl edge of Al l e gi anc e Comments fro m the Mayo r - Council Compe nsation Committee - P arks Maintenanc e Staff Award Recognitions Ci ty Counci l Re gi o nal Bo ard Reports Announcements - City Boards & Commissio ns Applications - Annual Trout Fishing Derby - Camp Goodwater Acti on from Executi ve Sessi on ITEM SUMMARY: FINANCIAL IMPACT: NA SUBMITTED BY: Page 5 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to approve the mi nutes o f the Workshop and Regular Me e ting he ld o n Tue sday, November 8, 2 01 6 and the Special Meeting held November 1 2-16, 2016 -- Shelley No wling, City Secretary ITEM SUMMARY: FINANCIAL IMPACT: NA SUBMITTED BY: ATTACHMENT S: Description Regular Meeting Minutes 11.8.2016 Works hop Meeting Minutes 11.8.2016 S p ecial Meeting Minutes 11.12.16 - 11.16.16 Page 6 of 316 The Georgetown City Council will meet on Tuesday, November 8, 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 6:00 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 - Carol Light Proclamation City Council Regional Board Reports Announcements - Williams Drive Open House Action from Executive Session Motion by Fought, second by Hesser to authorize the General Manager to execute the 2nd amendment to the Purchased Power Agreement with Buckthorn Westex, and all related agreements, to facilitate the sale of Buckthorn from SunEdison to NRG Energy, as discussed in executive session. Approved: 7-0 Motion by Fought second by Hesser to approve the purchase of real property from Todd Ln., LLC (Parcel 18), plus closing costs, in connection with the Rivery Blvd. Extension Project on the settlement terms discussed in executive session. Approved: 6-1 (Brainard opposed) Motion by Fought second by Hesser to approve the appraised value of real property to be acquired from the W.D. Kelley Foundation, Dale Illig, Custodian for Elizabeth Illig, Patricia A. Katt and CPI Investments, Ltd. (Parcel 14) in connection with the Rivery Blvd. Extension Project and the extension of a revised offer for the purchase of said property on the terms discussed in executive session. Approved: 6-1 (Brainard opposed) 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, October 11, 2016 -- Shelley Nowling, City Secretary Minutes of a Meeting of the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas Tuesday, November 8, 2016 Page 7 of 316 C. Consideration and possible action to appoint Teresa Robinson to the Library Advisory Board to fill a vacancy - - Mayor Dale Ross D. Consideration and possible action to appoint Commissioner in Training Aaron Albright as a member of the Planning & Zoning Commission to fill a vacancy – Mayor Dale Ross E. Consideration and possible action to reject all bid responses for the construction of Garey Park -- Kimberly Garrett, Parks and Recreation Director F. Forwarded from the General Government and Finance Advisory Board (GGAF): Consideration and possible action to approve the purchase of vehicles and equipment in the amount of $1,348,523.36 -- Stan Hohman, Fleet Services Manager Motion by Jonrowe, second by Hesser to approve the Statutory Consent Agenda in its entirety. Approved: 7-0 Legislative Regular Agenda G. Public Hearing and First Reading of an Ordinance Rezoning approximately 83.5 acres of the W. Roberts Survey from the Agriculture (AG) District to the Residential Single-Family (RS) and Local Commercial (C-1) Districts, located at 200 Fairway Lane -- Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director (action required) Sofia Nelson, Planning Director, explained the rezoning request. She described the property as the Hidden Oaks project and said that 80 acres were intended to be residential, while 3 acres have a commercial intent. Nelson provided the location map and the future land use map. She described a mixed use community and then provided the current zoning map and the proposed zoning map. Nelson spoke on the neighborhood retail uses. She showed the rezoning criteria chart. Nelson said that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommends approval of the rezoning and proposed project. She explained that there had been 4 persons who spoke at the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting, in support of the project, but who had cautioned about flooding and drainage in the area. Nelson said that there will be an appropriate time in the process of the project for addressing these concerns. Nelson read the caption. Mayor Ross opened the Public Hearing at 6:15 PM. Persons signed up to speak on Item G included Ercel Brashear, Jay Warren and Gary Stewzynski. Brashear showed pictures and images of the area in question. He spoke in favor of the rezoning but wanted to voice concern about the existing storm water conditions. Brashear spoke on the channel that carries the stormwater and showed videos of moving water across Fairway Lane. He asked Council to approve the request but with express direction to staff on the importance of studying the stormwater issues. Jay Warren echoed Mr. Brashear’s concerns. Warren said that the water issues for Berry Creek homeowners need to be addressed. He noted that ingress and egress also need to be considered. Gary Stewzynski said that his concerns are similar to those already raised. Stewznyski said he is In favor of the development but wants the water and drainage concerns addressed. Tim Moltz, the engineer for the project, spoke on the drainage issues and said they would be addressed. He mentioned the problem relating to TXDOT construction at Hwy 195 and Shell Rd. Moltz then addressed the concerns with access and said that access will be off of Shell Road in the first stage of development and when finished, the development will have 3 access points. Brainard asked Moltz about the running water. Moltz said they are working hard with city staff and TXDOT. He said a TXDOT chief hydrologist noticed concerns and TXDOT will be working with others on pipe installations for water control. Moltz said the developers are also working closely with David Munk, the engineer for the City. He explained that pipes installed for roads have caused some the issues. He assured the Council that the issues will continue to be studied and solutions would be identified. Gipson said he had looked at the property. He voiced concern on how this can be fixed and how staff will stay on this and not create other problems. City Manager, David Morgan, said all the right people and experts are in place and this is actually an opportunity to improve the water issues in the area. He explained that this is a dynamic situation but this development creates the opportunity for improvement. Mayor Ross closed the Public Hearing at 6.25 PM. Motion by Brainard, second by Gipson to approve Item G. Page 8 of 316 Approved: 7-0 H. Public Hearing and First Reading of an Ordinance Rezoning approximately 75.415 acres in the Nan W Evans Tract of the David Wright Survey, located at 2101 Airport Road, from the General Commercial (C3) District to the Industrial (IN) District -- Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director (action required) Sofia Nelson, Planning Director, spoke on the rezoning ordinance proposed at 2101 Airport Road. She provided the location map and current zoning map. Nelson explained that the Planning & Zoning Commission and staff recommend approval of the rezoning request. Nelson read the caption. Mayor Ross opened the Public Hearing at 6.27PM. No persons had signed up to speak. Mayor Ross closed the Public Hearing at 6.27 PM. Motion by Brainard, second by Eby, to approve Item H. Approved: 7-0 I. First Reading of an Ordinance establishing the classifications and number of positions (Strength of Force) for all the City of Georgetown Fire Fighters and Police Officers pursuant to Chapter 143 of the Texas Local Government Code pertaining to Civil Service -- Tadd Phillips, Human Resource Director (action required) Tadd Phillips, the Human Resource Director for the City, spoke on the ordinance establishing the classification and number of positions in the Fire Department. He explained that the proposed revision would reflect 3 new firefighter positions. Phillips noted that this had been previously presented at an earlier workshop meeting. Phillips read the caption. Motion by Brainard, second by Jonrowe to approve Item I. Approved: 7-0 J. Second Reading of an Ordinance amending the FY2016 Annual Budget due to conditions that resulted in a year-end budget deficit for the Fire Department and repealing all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict therewith -- Leigh Wallace, Finance Director (action required) Leigh Wallace, the City’s Finance Director, spoke on the ordinance to amend the annual budget due to conditions that resulted in a year end budget deficit for the Fire Department. She explained that an earlier discussion had been presented at an October 25, 2016 City Council workshop meeting. Wallace explained that the amendment was necessary and resulted from overtime in the Fire Department. Motion by Brainard, second by Eby to approve Item J. Approved: 7-0 Project Updates K. 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 City Manager, David Morgan, if he had any project updates to share. Morgan answered that he did not at this time. Public Wishing to Address Council On a subject that is posted on this agenda: Please fill out a speaker registration form which can be found on the table at the entrance to the Council Chamber. Clearly print your name and the letter of the item on which you wish to speak and present it to the City Secretary on the dais, preferably prior to the start of the meeting. You will be called forward to speak when the Council considers that item. On a subject not posted on the agenda: Persons may add an item to a future City Council agenda by contacting the City Secretary no later than noon on the Wednesday prior to the Tuesday meeting, with the subject matter of the topic they would like to address and their name. The City Secretary can be reached at 512/930-3651. Page 9 of 316 L. - 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. M. 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 - PEC Settlement Sec. 551.072: Deliberation Regarding Real Property Forwarded from Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation (GTEC) - Parcel 14, Northwest Blvd. - Parcel 18, 1521 Northwest Blvd. Sec. 551.074: Personnel Matters - City Manager, City Attorney, City Secretary and Municipal Judge: Consideration of the appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal Sec. 551.086: Competitive Matters - Buckthorn Update Section 551.087: Deliberation Regarding Economic Development Negotiations - Project CAT Adjournment Motion by Fought, second by Eby to adjourn the meeting. Mayor Ross adjourned the meeting at 6:31 PM. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Approved by the Georgetown City Council on _____________________________ Date ____________________________ __________________________ Dale Ross, Mayor Attest: City Secretary Page 10 of 316 Minutes of a Meeting of the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas Tuesday, November 8, 2016 The Georgetown City Council will meet on Tuesday, November 8, 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 3:02 PM. All Councilmembers were in attendance. Policy Development/Review Workshop A. Presentation, discussion, and possible direction on the solid waste contract, services, and strategic objectives -- Mike Babin, Deputy General Manager Mike Babin, Deputy General Manager, provided a presentation on the solid waste contract, services and strategic objectives. Babin introduced Jordan Fengel, the City’s Solid Waste and Conservation Coordinator. Babin explained that Fengel has received a solid waste license, which is a huge qualification and has made a big difference for the City. The Presentation Agenda Included contract terms, downtown services, transfer stations, the master plan and Council direction. Babin spoke on how this discussion involves infrastructure, landfills, collection stations, bulky material storage, facilities and trucks. Babin provided an explanation of Contract Terms and the Current Status • TDS (Texas Disposal Systems) is the contractor, selected by an RFP process in 2012 • The contract is set to expire September 30, 2017, but has three 5-year renewal options, if selected mutually between TDS and the City • There is an opportunity to address multiple issues, including potential service amendments, transfer station futures, and a solid waste plan Babin noted that the City’s relationship with TDS began in 1998 with a 20 year contract in 5 year bites, with mutual consent. He explained that the relationship has been a good one with mutual respect. Babin explained the opportunity, at this time, to address potential changes in services, transfer station solutions, and a solid waste master plan. He went on to present 4 options: Solution 1 – Renew with no changes • Contract would extend from October 2017 through October 2022 • Wholesale prices would increase about 12%, or $1.90 per in-City resident per month (if applied across the board), or 22% if applied across all commercial rates • All services would stay the same Babin spoke on TDS, saying the relationship has always been positive. He explained that the City rarely hears complaints of the service, but TDS is very responsive to complaints that occur. Babin explained that City and staff have always been treated well and that TDS has made several improvements on their own initiative. He noted that TDS operates the transfer station and transports the waste to facilities for disposal. They process the commodity side and grind yard waste. Babin spoke about how the industry has changed since the contract was written and specifically spoke on tipping fees. He said there has be a $20 per ton increase, explaining that this is represents a $5 to $6 per customer per month increase or an increase of over $1 million per year to the City. Babin explained that the ability to transfer is important. Solution 2a – Renew with service changes • Same price change and term extension as Solution 1 Page 11 of 316 • City would move metal recycling to TDS • City could evaluate service amendments for an additional cost, such as adding brush to tier 2 customers, setting a price for green teams as City events, provide exclusive in-City commercial recycling, provide weekly recycling versus every other week, provide every other week yard trimming pickup and change the collection station customer drop-off rates Solution 2b = Renew for a longer term • Target 20 year length (10 + 10) design • New pricing adjustment method with modified inflation indexes and audited cost reimbursement • Redesign services • Cooperative transfer station operation design • Examine pilot programs Solution 3 – RFP for new contract • Retain a consultant • RFP for new contract would be launched in December or January • Close bids in February • Review results and evaluate with Council in March • Negotiate a new contract April through June • Council execute contract in July • New contract to begin in October 2017 • RFP based on Council direction of services desired Babin noted that this would be an aggressive schedule, but achievable. He explained that the TDS contract would revert to a month to month agreement until a new agreement is reached (180 days). He explained that staff would need to know very soon if RFP was the option that Council chooses. Babin then spoke on contract terms, potential service amendments and the wholesale price, based on a TDS renewal. He provided a slide on City generated metal recycling, currently and suggested. Babin explained that the recovery of metal gets lost in the costs of the service. Brainard asked if metal is generated by the Utility Department. Babin confirmed that this was the case and that there is enough to warrant disposal. Babin spoke next on the Tier 2 Scope and how this had changed with the Chisholm Trail acquisition. He explained that any customer of utilities is a potential tier 2 customer and the City does not want to discriminate against ETJ customers or change the parameters. Page 12 of 316 Babin spoke on exclusive in-City commercial recycling, currently and suggested. Page 13 of 316 Babin explained that TDS believes they have 99% of the market of customers who are able to choose their provider. Babin said the City would like to get to the point where recycling is cheaper than trash service, encouraging recycling. Babin went on to discuss weekly recycling. He offered solutions and alternative solutions. Councilmember Fought asked about the fee for a cart. Jordan Fengel said the fee is $8 per month, but the customer pays for the service, not the cart. Councilmember Jonrowe asked if using the smaller cart drops the price. Fengel said the fee does not change. Babin said staff has not established recycling objectives but are working on setting the goals for this. Councilmember Gonzales said he is concerned with the number of ala carte solutions. He said staff and Council could spend a lot of time discussing all of the many different choices. Gonzalez suggested a global goal and long term solutions. Gonzalez said more items and free services or carts could cause all citizens to bear the burden of the need of only some. He asked staff to come back with long term and short term solutions. Mayor Ross asked the Councilmembers if they disagreed. Councilmember Brainard said people will not try to get a cart for free because they are bulky and not fun to have. Brainard said the Council should and can decide on these things. Councilmember Fought agreed that Council is capable of making the decisions. Mayor Ross said the goal is to encourage recycling and make it as easy as possible for the citizens. He spoke on lawn clippings and tree clippings. He said that at his commercial office building, staff rotates the role of taking home recyclables and putting them into their residential recycling cans. Ross said there is a need to encourage commercial recycling. Babin said it is not currently in the contract but discussion to begin this service is recommended. He said it is important to encourage as much recycling as possible and standardization can create cost savings. Babin went on to discuss a solution of every other week yard trimming pickup. • Everyone gets more frequent yard trimming pickup • Costs about $1.02 per customer per month • Service is vastly under utilized Hesser asked about yard trimming pick up in Sun City, where many people have their yards done by professionals. Babin said the pick-up is less used in Sun City than other areas but said he does not have exact data on this. Brainard said he is grateful to the City and staff for working out a once a month yard trimmings pick-up schedule and it seems to be working well. Brainard asked why the City would consider offering every other week pick-up when once monthly pick-up is not being heavily utilized. City Manager, David Morgan, said staff is currently walking through several things, over time, from public input. He explained that staff is doing due diligence and introducing the topic and discussion for the Council, but are not looking for concrete answers today. Morgan said there might be more that Council would like considered and that is the purpose of today’s presentation. Page 14 of 316 Brainard said public awareness is lacking and gave an example of a neighbor with a lot of yard waste in his trash can. He said the City needs to educate the citizens that yard waste is picked-up once per month. Mayor Ross said that it must be made to be as easy as possible. Gonzalez spoke on smaller carts for families not requiring as large of cart and if there could be a cost savings. He asked how many options can be given and still be cost effective. Mayor Ross asked Babin what he is looking for from Council. Morgan said there will be a slide at the end of the presentation, along with transfer station slides, that will play into this. Babin showed a slide on changing station customer drop-off rates, currently and suggested alternatives. He said the negative is high incidents of misuse. He explained that builders are paying citizens to bring trash to the transfer stations. He spoke, again, on the need for a long term plan. Babin spoke on other items, including services for apartment recycling, green teams, side arm loaders and EV truck pilot programs. He spoke on contract issues such as CPI language and software integration. Babin spoke on practical limitations to customer service and the importance of behavioral shifts and long term solutions. Babin discussed downtown services and the issues and solutions He said that fire code prohibits carts in alleys because public safety vehicles cannot navigate. Babin explained that the recent turn-over of retail tenants causes a lack of understanding of the issues. He spoke on the sharing of dumpsters and the need to possibly use a scale to determine the amount of use to set the rate for these users. Page 15 of 316 Babin emphasized that staff is not asking Council to pick a solution today but instead wanted to bring these things up for discussion and future decisions. Babin said that whatever happens there will be happy customers and not so happy customers. He asked Council to provide direction if there is anything they would like staff to address. The transfer station was the next discussion. The City’s transfer station is uncovered. Babin explained that this is not common in Texas and the state regulates control of the water from rain. He explained that the issues began because the City no longer dumps into a compacter, but dumps by transfer. The City indicated that it would eventually cover the transfer station ten years ago and this will eventually become a crisis. The City will need to cover the transfer station or build a new enclosed transfer station. Babin spoke on a Master Plan and strategic goals. • Council developed • Per City Charter, a solid waste master plan should be part of the Comprehensive Plan • Done in conjunction with the Planning Department • Behavioral Shifts would include diversion targets/goals, incentives/penalties, mandated services and development code standards Babin explained the direction he would need from the City Council • Direction on the contract – 5 year or 20 year contract design, whether to renew, negotiate or RFP and service amendments • Direction on the transfer station – whether to cover the existing station or study a replacement • Solid waste master plan and development plan Page 16 of 316 Babin said that if an RFP was needed, staff would need to have Council direction immediately. If not, there is not a crisis and the purpose of the presentation was to give Council a sense of upcoming decisions and a chance to think about what they would like to do. Babin said it would be staff’s recommendation to go with a longer term contract and no RFP. Brainard said it has been a good, long relationship that the City has had with TDS. He said there has been a very high level of trust and both entities would benefit with a 10 plus 10 year agreement. Jonrowe said she seldom hears complaints on TDS and they run their facility impressively. She noted that the City needs to keep pushing in green ways. Jonrowe said she does not see the need for an RFP. She noted that she would welcome hashing out additional services such as apartments and recycling. She is in agreement with performing a study on the transfer station options and the development of a master plan. Mayor Ross asked Council if they were in agreement with the 10 10 suggestions. He then asked if anyone felt there was a need for the RFP. No one saw the need for an RFP and all were in agreement with the 10 10 suggestions. Councilmember Hesser asked what the consultant fee has been in the past. Jim Briggs, the City’s General Manager of Utilities, said that, in the past, this was done in house and mostly by internal staff. Mayor Ross asked the Council if they agreed with renewing the contract with TDS. Gipson said he would like a long term contract with TDS and for the transfer station to be a long term goal. He suggested getting consultation from the experts. Gipson said he encourages TDS to get involved early on. Babin said staff would recommend consultation firms for Council approval. Babin asked Council for direction on downtown services. Brainard said there is a need to have a group study this. David Morgan, City Manager, said staff would continue to look at this and bring it back to Council. Morgan asked Council if there was anything on the service amendment option list that they would not want to use. Gonzalez said to eliminate the every other week yard clipping pick-up. Jonrowe spoke on customers paying for services they are receiving. She said she is not willing to have costs shared by everyone, when some are not receiving the service. Mayor Ross suggested leaving everything on the list for the preliminary discussions. Hesser asked if all recycling items get recycled. Babin explained that there is some contamination and that TDS sorts it. Fengel said the City has 16% contamination rate which is considered very good. Most cities have worse numbers, he explained. Morgan said an update will be brought to Council in early 2017. B. Presentation and discussion on the Bid Review for Garey Park – Kimberly Garrett, Parks and Recreation Director Kimberly Garrett, the Parks and Recreation Director, spoke on the bid review for Garey Park. The agenda for the presentation included an update on the bids reviewed, a bid evaluation review, proposed revised project scope, impacts to the project, next steps and the schedule. Garrett explained that the construction budget was $13.5 million. She explained that bids were expected to come in high due to cost escalation and design factors. Garrett said it was also anticipated that there would be a need to value engineer the project after the bids were received. She said the bids opened on October 12th and 3 bidders responded – Harrison Walker & Harper, Jordan Foster and Smith Contracting. Garrett noted that the lowest bid was $22.2 Million. Garrett explained the factors for the high bids. • Bidder Market – record development in Williamson & Travis Counties, driving bid pricing up • Strived to include as much of the master plan as possible and making enhancements to improve cost recovery • Design impacts – fire flow, electrical utilities, drainage, and road widths due to emergency access • Feedback from general contractors regarding bid package noted difficulty in bid response from sub- contractors because the project has significant diversity in trades Garrett spoke on the bid evaluation. She explained that staff & Halff Associates met with the Garey family to review the bids and discussed holding off on specific amenities. It was decided to hold off on items that were a high cost with a low return on investment and to keep the entry fee for day users with minimal impact. Garrett said they would continue to value engineer the project on site work that supports vertical. Garrett explained that the site and civil construction numbers were close to the estimates, while the vertical construction was extremely high. She explained that new construction was 2 times the estimate and renovation Page 17 of 316 was 3 times the estimate. Garrett said that a third party estimator was used on the vertical construction throughout the project. Garrett provided a map of the site plan, which depicted the portions of the project proposed to be removed at this time. These included primitive camping, group camping, amphitheater, retreat cabins and the host house. Garrett provided a slide depicting this proposed revised project scope and said the estimated cost savings, based off of the lowest bid, would be $11 million, which is within the budget. She then provided a slide on the overall budget summary. Garrett described the impacts to the project. She noted that since there would not be overnight quests, there would no longer be the need for an on-site caretaker home. She also noted that even though there would not be a formal amphitheater, there would still be opportunities for festivals and special events in the meadow event area and the opportunity for portable stages and generators to accommodate multiple venues. Garrett explained that the active recreation components would be retained, including the play area, splash pad, pavilions, equestrian arena, the dog park, hiking and equestrian trails and recreation programming. She noted that the Garey House Event Venue would be retained. Garrett showed the Business Plan Model and Pro Forma • Model showed annual cost of $295,000 • Currently reviewing the impact of operations within the revised scope • Anticipate annual cost to remain the same or decrease based on the return of investment for elements being put on hold Garrett described the next steps and explained that the bid would be repackaged into 3 distinct projects 1. Bid package for site/civil with alternates for remaining vertical construction elements. 2. Bid package for Garey House Renovation 3. Create a package for active recreation construction and installation through the Cooperative Purchasing Network (TCPN) job order contract Garrett provided the revised schedule. Page 18 of 316 Councilmember Gonzalez asked what “hold off” means. Garrett said as the City grows, and demands grow, the opportunities for the plans will become available. She said that it will be determined what can be done and what cannot be done and staff will come back to Council for approval. Jonrowe thanked Garrett. She said she is in favor of the rejection of the bids and rethinking it. Jonrowe said this will be a fantastic product in the end and everyone will be satisfied. Mayor Ross asked Mr. Jack Garey if he would like to say anything. Mr. Garey said he understands and is willing to go along with the new plans. C. Discussion on the status of planning activities related to the MoKan Corridor by the Lone Star Rail District and other regional agencies – Ed Polasek, Transportation Planning Coordinator Ed Polasek, the City’s Transportation Planning Director, provided an update and discussion of the planning activities related to the Mokan Corridor. He explained the name change to the MoKan Corridor. Polasek said that the focus, in the past, has been on the Union Pacific corridor and the focus is now on the MoKan Corridor. Polasek spoke on the CAMPO action taken on October 10, 2016 • Removed the Lone Star Rail Project from the CAMPO 2040 Plan Page 19 of 316 • CAMPO/AAMPO and TXDOT discussing • Lone Star Rail has suspended work on the environmental analysis. The Rail District staff have confirmed there has been no additional background work completed in the MoKan Corridor to date and there has not been a Record of Decision reached to date Polasek spoke on the next steps for the Region • TXDOT working on method to close out environmental process with a record of decision • CAMPO/TXDOT will work to develop regional analysis project for 35 corridor from Austin to San Antonio • CAMPO/TXDOT working on updates to MoKan Corridor Analysis with regional partners • Lone Star Rail cancelled the November 4th Executive Committee meeting. A board meeting is scheduled for December 2nd. Polasek then spoke on the current status for the City. • The City’s 2017 membership dues for Lone Star Rail is currently loaded into the 2016-17 budget as a placeholder • Payment for membership to Lone Star Rail is not due until January • Working with CAMPO/TXDOT on MoKan Corridor study Polasek described the next steps for the City • Staff recommends not renewing membership in Lone Star Rail • Focus activities on CAMPO/TXDOT led MoKan Corridor study • Recommends participation in AARO Regional Transportation Study, which is a coalition of Cities looking at holistic transportation alternatives, including Mobility35, Project Connect and other programs to serve the region; providing a $5,000 contribution from the Lone Star allocation and returning $44,500 to the City Council Discretionary Fund. Polasek emphasized the importance of supporting regional transportation in general. Polasek said staff could bring back a membership study and other issues to Council soon. He asked for Council’s approval of the $5,000 contribution. Mayor Ross asked that this be listed as a legislative item on a future agenda so that the approval would be recorded. The Council agreed with staff’s recommendations. Councilmember Hesser said he has been down this road before and does not wish to continue. He instructed staff to come back when they have something. D. Discussion and direction regarding a review and future adoption of a legislative agenda for the City of Georgetown during the 85th Legislative Session -- Jack Daly, Assistant to the City Manager and David Morgan, City Manager Jack Daly, the Assistant to the City Manager, provided a presentation and review of future items for the state legislative agenda. He explained that a legislative agenda would guide the Council and staff to promote City interests. Daly said it would establish policy direction for general topics that could affect the City. He noted the importance for the City to work to establish and maintain active, positive partnerships with our elected state officials. Daly provided a list of elected officials and a map of their jurisdictions. He then provided a map depicting the state house districts. Page 20 of 316 Daly provided a review of the 84th Legislative Session. He explained that out of 6,276 bills introduced, 1600 of them could impact cities. He noted the importance of staying aware of anything that could impact Georgetown. Page 21 of 316 Daly explained that the City’s plan for the 85th Legislative Session would include adopting a legislative agenda, attending important portions of the session (January 10th through May 29th) and participating in Williamson County Day. Daly described the consultation assistance the City would receive from the Texas Municipal League and Focused Advocacy, a firm hired by the City of Georgetown to represent them on utility issues. Daly described the focus and intended topics from the City during the legislative session. • Preserve local home-rule control • Oppose unfunded mandates • Oppose revenue caps • Support local parks funding • Protect utility interest Daly spoke on Local Control and said the City would support local control, where elected officials are tasked with raising funds and providing services to respond to the individual needs of the community they serve. He said the City would oppose legislation that would erode the authority of Texas cities, such as annexation and local option ordinances (tree preservation) Daly spoke next on unfunded mandates. He said the City would oppose unfunded or underfunded mandates from state and federal governments that ultimately end up costing local tax payers. Daly explained that mandates from the state should include funding to implement the mandate. Taxation was next. Daly explained that the City would oppose legislation that reduces the appraisal growth cap established in current law and legislation that imposes revenue caps in the form of adjusting provisions for the current property tax rollback rate. Daly noted that revenue caps impact high growth cities, such as Georgetown. Daly said that the City will support legislation that provides a fair and equitable distribution of the sporting goods sales tax revenue for local and state parks. He said the City would support pass-thru federal dollars for parks and support constitutional dedication of sporting goods sales tax revenues for parks. Daly listed the City’s support and opposition for utilities. • Support dissolution of CTSUD Board • Support local control regarding Municipally Owned Utility (MOU) decision making related to electric market participation • Oppose expansion of PUC jurisdiction or loss of MOU control related to rates or regulations • Support continued MOU general fund transfers an ROI • Oppose changes to current law regarding disclosure of competitively sensitive information • Oppose required discount mandates Page 22 of 316 Daly said that with Council direction, staff would review and possibly provide a proposed agenda to Council on November 22nd. He said updates would be provided to the Council throughout the Session and he anticipates specific topics and initiatives that will require Council feedback. Councilmember Brainard gave words of appreciation and encouragement. Mayor Ross confirmed with the Councilmembers that they were in agreement. Mayor Ross recessed the meeting to Executive Session under Section 551.071, Section 551.072, Section 551.074, Section 551.086 and Section 551.087 at 4.32 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. E. 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 - PEC Settlement Sec. 551.072 Deliberation Regarding Real Property Forwarded from Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation (GTEC) - Parcel 14, Northwest Blvd. - Parcel 18, 1521 Northwest Blvd. Sec. 551.074: Personnel Matters - City Manager, City Attorney, City Secretary and Municipal Judge: Consideration of the appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal Sec. 551.086: Competitive Matters - Buckthorn Update Section 551.087: Deliberation Regarding Economic Development Negotiations - Project CAT Adjournment Mayor Ross adjourned the meeting to begin the Regular City Council meeting at 6:00 PM ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Approved by the Georgetown City Council on _____________________________ Date ____________________________ __________________________ Dale Ross, Mayor Attest: City Secretary Page 23 of 316 Minutes of Special Meeting of the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas and the City of Georgetown Advisory Boards & Commissions November 12, 2016 through November 16, 2016 The Georgetown City Council will meet on Wednesday, November 17, 2015at 4:00 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. 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 The City Council and the City of Georgetown Boards & Commissions members have been invited to participate in an interactive series of events to help shape the future of Williams Drive. The events will take place between November 12th and November 16th, 2016. All events are open to the public. No action will be taken by the City Council or any boards or commissions. The events of the series are as follows: A week-long Open Design Studio and Charrette will take place November 12 – 16 which will provide multiple opportunities for stakeholders and the general public to learn about the project and provide feedback. NO ACTION WAS TAKEN BY THE CITY COUNCIL OR ANY CITY OF GEORGETOWN BOARDS OR COMMISSIONS. Page 24 of 316 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Approved by the Georgetown City Council on _____________________________ Date _____________________________ _____________________________ Dale Ross, Mayor Attest: City Secretary Page 25 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Consideration and po ssible action to appro ve the reappo i ntment of Mary Fai th Sterk as the City of Georgetown’s representative o n the Wi l l i amson County and Ci ti e s Heal th Di stri ct B oard -- Mayo r Dale Ross ITEM SUMMARY: Mary Faith Sterk currently se rves as the City of Geo rgetown's representative on the WCCHD Board. Her curre nt te rm expires in Dece mber 2 01 6. The City Council is asked to consider reappointing he r to this Board for another te rm. FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A SUBMITTED BY: Shirley J. Rinn o n Behalf o f Mayor Dale Ross ATTACHMENT S: Description Res ume o f Mary Faith Sterk Page 26 of 316 Page 27 of 316 Page 28 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Consideration and possible actio n to renew the Le ase Ag reement between the City of Georgetown and Boy Sco ut Troop #155 and St. John's Uni te d Methodi st Church fo r use of the B oy Sco ut Hut and adjacent shed in San G abri el P ark -- Shirley Rinn, Executive Assistant to the City Manager ITEM SUMMARY: The City Co uncil appro ved a two (2) year Lease Agreement with Boy Scout Troop #155 and St. Jo hn’s United Metho dist Church, the troo p’s sponsor, on October 28, 2014 . October 28, 20 14 Legi sl ati ve Agenda L Consideration and po ssible action to approve a Le ase Agreement between the City of Georgetown and Boy Scout Tro op #155 and St. Jo hn's United Methodist Churc h for use of the Bo y Scout Hut and adjace nt shed in San Gabriel P ark -- Paul E. Brandenburg, City Manager Rinn introduced the item and Garrett Epstein spoke about the Boy Scout program and Troop 155. He spoke about the planned service for the remainder of 2014. Moti on by Fought, seco nd by Eason to approve the l ease agreement. Approve d 7 -0 The Boy Scouts have performed the required servic e projects as required per the te rms of the Lease Agreement: 1. Eagle Pro ject - built a staircase from the Chautauqua Park down to the San Gabriel River 2. Clean de bris under the walking bridge on the south side of San Gabriel Park. Boy Scout Troo p #15 5 and its sponsor, St. John's Uni ted Methodi st Church, are requesting that the City Council consider approval of a renewal of the Lease Agreement fo r the use o f the Boy Scout Hut and adjacent shed in San Gabrie l P ark under the same terms and conditions as the prio r Lease Agreement. FINANCIAL IMPACT: This item contains a Lease Agreement between Bo y Sco ut Tro op #155 and St. John's United Methodist Church for $1 pe r year in addition to at least one service project pe r ye ar in return for the Boy Scout's usage o f the Boy Scout Hut in San Gabriel Park. SUBMITTED BY: Shirley J. Rinn, Executive Assistant to the City Manager ATTACHMENT S: Description Boy Scout Leas e Agreement Map o f Boy Sc o ut Hut in S an Gab riel Park Page 29 of 316 Boy Scout Hut Lease Page 1 of 8 STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON This is an Agreement between the City of Georgetown, Texas (referred to in the Agreement as the “City”), and St. John’s United Methodist Church and Boy Scout Troop #155 (collectively referred to in this Agreement as the “Boy Scouts”), for the use of buildings located at San Gabriel Park. The Boy Scouts and the City are collectively referred to as the “Parties”. RECITAL The purpose of this Agreement is to state the terms and the conditions under which the Boy Scouts is permitted to use City premises for the purpose of conducting Scout Youth Activities only. In consideration of the mutual promises contained in this Agreement, the Boy Scouts and the City agree as follows: I. NATURE OF AGREEMENT A. Each party recognizes that the City has no authority under law to permit exclusive control of public park property by anyone other than the City. Therefore, this Agreement shall not be construed as giving said control to the Boy Scouts. B. The City agrees to permit the Boy Scouts to use certain facilities for the purpose of Scout Youth Activities which will be available to all City of Georgetown youth and of which, the City finds to be a benefit to the public. C. The Boy Scouts agree to be responsible for the maintenance and for the utilities of facilities described in Exhibits “A” and “B”, attached hereto and made a part hereof. Page 30 of 316 Boy Scout Hut Lease Page 2 of 8 D. The Boy Scouts agree to use the facilities to manage and administer a Scouts youth program (hereinafter called “said program”) in the City of Georgetown San Gabriel Park. E. The City of Georgetown does not assume any responsibility for the supervision and administration of said program nor does it assume any liability arising hereunder. F. It is expressly agreed and understood by all parties hereto that the Boy Scouts is an independent contractor in its relationship to the City of Georgetown. Nothing herein contained at any time or in any manner shall be construed to affect a contract of partnership or joint venture or render any other party hereto the employer or master of any other party and/or its employees, agents or representatives. All necessary personnel shall be deemed agents or employees of the Boy Scouts. G. Inasmuch as the facilities are on public property, the Boy Scouts agrees to permit the public to use the building any time that they are not being used by the Boy Scouts. However, the City agrees that any use of the building by any person or group other than the Boy Scouts must be approved by the City Manager and the Boy Scouts. No one can use the building after 10:30 p.m. without the approval of the City Manager. H. The Boy Scouts shall not remove any structures constructed by the Boy Scouts that are attached to the premises owned by the City without first notifying the City Manager or his designee of its intent to do so and obtaining approval. The Boy Scouts shall be responsible for any damage to the premises or to any other property owned by the City as a result of the removal of any structures by the Boy Scouts. Page 31 of 316 Boy Scout Hut Lease Page 3 of 8 I. Should the Boy Scouts desire to expand or modify the facilities, the Boy Scouts shall pay the cost of said improvements and notify the Parks and Recreation Department of any such changes. All expansions/additions or modifications must be reviewed and approved by the City of Georgetown’s City Manager or his designee. II. DURATION OF THE AGREEMENT This Agreement shall be in force from December 1, 2016 until November 30, 2018. III. RENTAL TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT The Boy Scouts agree to pay to the City in advance on the Lease Date Base Rent for the entire term of the Agreement, which is One Dollar and No/100 ($1.00) per year. Additionally, the Boys Scouts will be required to do at least one (1) service project per year to beautify City of Georgetown Parks. IV. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT This Agreement may be terminated by either party giving thirty (30) days written notice to the other party of its desire to terminate said Agreement, or said Agreement may be terminated at any time by mutual agreement to the parties. V. INDEMNIFICATION The Boy Scouts covenants and agrees to indemnify, and does hereby indemnify, hold harmless and defend, the City of Georgetown, its officers, employees, and agents from and against any and all liability, loss, damages, expenses or claims for injuries to persons or property of whatsoever kind or Page 32 of 316 Boy Scout Hut Lease Page 4 of 8 character, whether real or asserted, arising out of or incident to either or both of the following: (1) the activities of the Boy Scouts, or (2) the operations under or otherwise incident to the provisions of this contract. The Boy Scouts hereby assumes all liability and responsibility for injuries, claims or suits for damages to person or property, of whatever kind or character, whether real or asserted, arising out of or incident to either both of the following: (1) the activities of the Boy Scouts, or (2) the operations under or otherwise incident to the provisions of this contract. The foregoing indemnification provisions shall apply to the Boy Scouts regardless of whether said liability, injury, loss, damage, expense or claim is caused in part by the City or its officers, employees, or agents. VI. LIABILITY INSURANCE The Boy Scouts agrees to procure and maintain in force during the term of this lease and any extension thereof, at its expense, liability insurance in companies and through brokers approved by the City, adequate to protect against liability for damage claims through public use or arising out of accidents or injuries occurring in or around the described premises, in a minimum amount of $100,000.00 for each person injured, $300,000.00 for any one accident, and $100,000.00 for property damage. The insurance policies shall name the City and its officers, employees and agents as an additional insured. The Boy Scouts agrees to obtain a written agreement from the insurers to notify the City in writing in at least 30 days prior to cancellation or refusal to renew any of the policies. The Boy Scouts agrees that if the insurance policies are not kept in force during the entire term of this Agreement, and any extension thereof, the City may procure the necessary insurance, pay the premium therefore, and the Boy Scouts shall repay the premium to the City the next month following the date on which the premium is paid. Page 33 of 316 Boy Scout Hut Lease Page 5 of 8 VII. If the facilities are not maintained the City reserves the right, at its discretion, to demolish all dilapidated structures and/or repair those structures. Depending on the nature of the repairs, renovations and/or demolition, the City reserves the right to charge the Boy Scouts for costs associated with their noncompliance with this agreement. VIII. If the buildings described in Exhibits “A” and “B” are damaged by a casualty, the City reserves the right to terminate this Agreement as is needed by the City. SIGNED AND AGREED TO ON THE ______ DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016. ATTEST: CITY OF GEORGETOWN By:_______________________________ Shelley Nowling, City Secretary Dale Ross, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Charlie McNabb City Attorney Page 34 of 316 Boy Scout Hut Lease Page 6 of 8 ST. JOHN’S UNITED METHODIST CHURCH By:________________________________ Printed Name:______________________ 311 E. University Avenue Georgetown, Texas 78628 STATE OF TEXAS § § ACKNOWLEDGMENT COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON § This instrument was acknowledged before me on this the ______ day of __________, 2016, by ________________, a person known to me, in his capacity as ________________ of St. John’s United Methodist Church, on behalf of said Church. SEAL Notary Public, in and for the State of Texas BOY SCOUT TROOP #155 BY:________________________________ Glenn Beck, Scoutmaster 6015 Tonkowa Trail Georgetown, Texas 78628 STATE OF TEXAS § § ACKNOWLEDGMENT COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON § Before me, a Notary Public, on this day personally appeared Glenn Beck, known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the forgoing instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same for the purpose and consideration therein expressed. SEAL Notary Public, in and for the State of Texas Page 35 of 316 Boy Scout Hut Lease Page 7 of 8 EXHIBIT A DESCRIPTION OF THE PREMISES - SURVEYED METES & BOUNDS BEING 0.12 of an acre of land, situated in the Nicholas Porter Survey, Abstract No. 497, in Williamson County, Texas; said land being a portion of that certain tract of land, called 154 96/100 acres, as conveyed to the City of Georgetown, by deed as recorded in Volume 266, Page 498, of the deed records of Williamson County, Texas. Surveyed on the ground in the month of April, 1989, under the supervision of Don H. Bizzell, registered Public Surveyor, and being more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at an iron pin set for the Northwest corner hereof; said point being S 85 02’ E, 1,230.26 feet from the most northerly corner of that certain tract of land, called 5.07 acres, as conveyed to the Georgetown Commission Company by deed as recorded in Volume 1037, Page 636, of the Official Records of Williamson County, Texas; THENCE, S 80° 32’ E, 94.00 feet to an iron pin set on the west line of a paved road, for the Northeast corner hereof; THENCE, along the said West line of the paved road S 9° 28’ to an iron pin set for the Southeast corner hereof; THENCE, N 80° 32’ W, 94.00 feet to an iron pin set for the Southwest corner hereof; THENCE, N. 9° 28’ E, 55.00 feet to the Place of BEGINNING and containing 0.12 of an acre of land. Buildings: Those certain Buildings consisting of approximately 1400 square feet and 1800 square feet respectively originally constructed by the Optimists Club and Boy Scout Troop #155 and now owned by the City of Georgetown, Texas (per the terms of the Existing Lease) and situated on the Premises. Page 36 of 316 Boy Scout Hut Lease Page 8 of 8 EXHIBIT B DESCRIPTION OF THE PREMISES – AERIAL MAP Page 37 of 316 Page 38 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to formally canc e l the City Council meeting that wo uld fall on the fourth Tue sday of December, canc e lling the Ci ty Counci l meeti ng that would have fallen on Decembe r 27 , 20 16 -- Shelley No wling, City Secretary ITEM SUMMARY: The second City Council meeting in December is typically cancelled. FINANCIAL IMPACT: NA SUBMITTED BY: Shelley Nowling, City Secretary Page 39 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to grant a Temporary Li cense for i ngress and eg ress ac ross c ity pro pe rty, located south of the current termi nus of D.B. Woods Ro ad, to Enterprise Crude Pipelines, LLC, and to authorize the Mayor to execute the license agreement -- Travis Baird, Re al Estate Services Coordinator ITEM SUMMARY: The City has re c eived a request for the right to cross City property, which is currently an active c onstructio n site and the future Wolf Ranch Parkway. The property is at the So uthern Terminus o f DB Woods Drive. The prospective Lic e nsee, Enterprise Crude Pipelines, LLC, requests the right to cro ss the area in order to re ach their existing access easements and ultimately the ir pipeline to the South for perio dic, routine maintenanc e . The proposed license will allo w the crossing of the property by Enterprise under certain conditio ns, as the area is an active constructio n site. STAF F RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council approve a resolution granting the Temporary License and autho rizing the Mayor to sign the Temporary License Agreement. FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A SUBMITTED BY: Travis Baird ATTACHMENT S: Description Licens e Area Res o lutio n P ac kage Page 40 of 316 Page 41 of 316 Resolution No. _____________________________ Description: Temporary License Agreement, Future Wolf Ranch Parkway- South of DB Woods Terminus Date Approved:____________________________ Page 1 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. ____________ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN MAKING CERTAIN DETERMINATIONS AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A TEMPORARY LICENSE AGREEMENT TO ALLOW INGRESS AND EGRESS ACROSS THE FUTURE RIGHT OF WAY FOR WOLF RANCH PARKWAY SOUTH OF THE CURRENT TERMINUS OF D.B. WOODS ROAD. WHEREAS, the City of Georgetown (the City) owns real property which is the future right of way of Wolf Ranch Parkway; and WHEREAS, the City has received a request to allow Enterprise Crude Pipeline, LLC, a Texas limited liability company (Enterprise) ingress and egress across the right of way south of the current terminus of D.B. Woods Road in order to access existing easements for the purpose of maintaining their pipeline infrastructure, utilizing an area detailed in the Exhibit “A”, attached hereto (License Area); and, WHEREAS; this ingress and egress will be limited to small vehicles and for only the term during which the future Wolf Ranch Parkway is under construction, and is not public right of way; and WHEREAS, the property owner agrees to accept the terms of the revocable license agreement as set forth in the City Code of Ordinances Section 12.09 as they may apply and to reimburse the City for costs incurred to process the request in accordance with State law requirements; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1. The facts and recitations contained in the preamble of this resolution are hereby found and declared to be true and correct, and are incorporated by reference herein and expressly made a part hereof, as if copied verbatim. SECTION 2. The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute a Temporary License Agreement in substantially the same form attached hereto as Exhibit “B”. SECTION 3. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption. Page 42 of 316 Resolution No. _____________________________ Description: Temporary License Agreement, Future Wolf Ranch Parkway- South of DB Woods Terminus Date Approved:____________________________ Page 2 of 2 RESOLVED this ______ day of ___________, 2016. CITY OF GEORGETOWN ATTEST: By: Dale Ross, Mayor Shelley Nowling, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: _______________________ Charlie McNabb, City Attorney Page 43 of 316 Page 44 of 316 Exhibit “B” TEMPORARY LICENSE AGREEMENT This Temporary License Maintenance Agreement (the “Agreement”) is made this ____ day of ___________, 2016 (the “Effective Date”) between THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, a Texas home rule corporation (“Licensor”), whose mailing address is P.O. Box 409, Georgetown, Texas 78726 and ENTERPRISE CRUDE PIPELINE, LLC, a Texas limited liability company (“Licensee”), whose mailing address is P.O. Box 4324, Attn: Land Dept., Houston, Texas 77210- 4324. RECITALS: WHEREAS, the City of Georgetown, Texas, has acquired certain tracts of land, those being more particularly detailed on Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof for all purposes (hereinafter referred to as the "License Area"); and, WHEREAS, The City is in the process of constructing on this property an extension of Wolf Ranch Parkway (the “Project”) which will, upon completion of construction and acceptance by the City, become a public road and right-of-way. WHEREAS, Licensee wishes to utilize the License Area for temporary ingress and egress during the construction of the Project; and WHEREAS, Licensor has agreed to grant Licensee the right to use the License Area for such purpose, subject to and in accordance with the terms and provisions hereinafter set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the parties have agreed as follows: 1.Grant of License: Licensor hereby grants to Licensee, for the duration of this Agreement, the exclusive right, privilege and permission to use the License Area for Licensee’s ingress and egress across the License Area, and only for such purpose. 2.Consideration for the License: As consideration for the rights granted herein to Licensee, Licensee shall pay to Licensor, upon full execution hereof, a one-time license fee (the “License Fee”) of One and No/100 Dollars ($100.00). 3.Extent of License. The license hereby granted to Licensee is revocable at any time by Licensor, in the manner provided in Section 5 below. Page 45 of 316 2 4.Title of Licensor: Licensee acknowledges the legal title of Licensor to the License Area and agrees to never deny this title or to claim title in Licensee’s name. 5.Revocation: The City shall have the right at any and all times upon 180 days written notice to the Licensee, its representatives, successors or assigns, to take possession of and use all or any part of the licensed area in the event that such use be reasonably desired or needed by the City for street, sewer, transportation or any other public or municipal use or purpose, and in such event, the City shall have the right to cancel the revocable license as to that portion of the licensed area so designated and required by the City. The Licensee shall have the right at any time upon 180 days written notice to the City, to relinquish the use and possession of all or any part of the licensed area as it may so determine and to cancel said revocable license as to that part so relinquished. 6.Restrictions on Use: Licensee shall not 1) store any items or material within the License Area, including but not limited to, personal property, vehicles, equipment, spoils or materials, 2) utilize the License Area for any activity other an ingress and egress to and from its facilities or easements, 3) utilize the License area for ingress or egress of construction equipment or construction vehicles, 4) utilize the License Area in a manner inconsistent with the best industry practices and safety standards for an active construction site. Licensee’s use of this license is restricted to Class 1 vehicles as rated by the Federal Highway Administration, as of the execution of this Agreement. Licensee agrees to contact the City’s contractor at 512-801-4039 to notify of any plan to access the License Area between the hours of 7 am and 7 pm, Monday through Saturday, prior to accessing the License Area. Access of the License Area outside of the aforementioned period is permitted, but prior notification is not required. Licensee further agrees to follow the orders and directions of the City’s employees, agents and contractors while within the License Area. 7.Insurance: Licensee shall maintain a policy of commercial general liability insurance pertaining to Licensee’s use of the License Area, including personal injury and property damage, with the premiums thereof fully paid in advance, issued by and binding upon a solvent insurance company acceptable to Licensor, such insurance to name Licensor as an additional insured. Such policy shall afford minimum protection of not less than One Hundred thousand and No/100 Dollars ($100,000.00) combined single limit coverage for bodily injury, death to any one person, or Page 46 of 316 3 property damage in any one occurrence. Licensee shall furnish a certificate of insurance to Licensor as evidence of the maintenance of insurance coverage required hereunder prior to Licensee being entitled to have access to the License Area. 8.Indemnification: Licensee shall indemnify, defend with counsel of Licensee’s choice, and hold Licensor, its successors and assigns, agents, employees and contractors, harmless from and against all and any actual or alleged claims, demands, damages, losses, liabilities, costs or expenses (including, without limitation, attorney’s fees) arising from or incurred in connection with (i) any injury to person or damage to property caused by any act, omission or neglect of Licensee, Licensee’s agents, servants, employees, or invitees; (ii) Licensee’s use of the License Area; and (iii) any activity, work or operation done, permitted or suffered by Licensee in the License Area. THIS INDEMNITY SHALL APPLY REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE LOSS IN QUESTION ARISES OR IS ALLEGED TO ARISE IN PART FROM ANY NEGLIGENT ACT OR OMISSION OF LICENSOR OR LICENSOR’S AGENTS, FROM STRICT LIABILITY OF ANY SUCH PERSON OR OTHERWISE, BUT IN SUCH EVENT LICENSEE SHALL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT PORTION OF ANY LOSS WHICH IS HELD TO BE CAUSED BY THE NEGLIGENCE OR STRICT LIABILITY OF LICENSOR OR LICENSOR’S AGENTS. 9.Assignment. Licensor may freely transfer its interest in the License Area and in this Agreement at any time. Licensee may not at any time transfer or assign all or any portion of the rights granted to Licensee herein. 10.Binding Effect: The terms, provisions and covenants contained in this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. 11.Expiration of License: This license shall expire upon completion and acceptance of the Project by the City. Page 47 of 316 4 LICENSOR: THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, a Texas home rule corporation. By:__________________________ __ Name: ________________________ _ Title: _________________________ _ LICENSEE: ENTERPRISE CRUDE PIPELINE, LLC, a Texas limited liability company By:_____________________________ _ Name: __________________________ _ Title: __________________________ __ APPROVED AS TO FORM, ONLY: __________________________________ _______________, Assistant City Attorney Page 48 of 316 [Exhibit “A” to Temporary License Agreement] Exhibit “A” to the Temporary License Agreement is heretofore attached as Exhibit “A” to the foregoing Resolution and will be attached accordingly to the original Temporary License Agreement prior to execution. Page 49 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to authorize the Chief of Po lice to e nter into an affi l i ate agreement with Cro ssFi t, Inc. -- Wayne Ne ro, Chief o f P olice ITEM SUMMARY: With the completion of PSOTC, the police department has created a “functional fitness” area within the tactical building. The department has 5 certified fitness trainers, two o f which are certified Level 1 CrossFit Trainers, which is a prerequisite fo r affiliatio n. By entering into an affiliate agreement with CrossFit, Inc, the Georgetown Po lice Department will become part of the CrossFit community and be recognized as having an official and sanc tioned CrossFit gym. Affiliatio n is a mo rale bo oster and allows for another ave nue of community engagement. The de partment will be pro pe rly licensed to use to use the “CrossFit” trademarked name and tag lines. The department gym name will be Cro ssFit Ad herence. There are currently fewer than 30 law enfo rcement CrossFit affiliate s ac ross the country and only one o ther in Texas. The o bligations pursuant to the agreement are minimal and mainly outline the use of the CrossFit name and trademark. There is no cost asso ciated with this request. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None SUBMITTED BY: Wayne Nero ATTACHMENT S: Description Cro s s fit Affiliate Agreement Page 50 of 316 Page 51 of 316 Page 52 of 316 Page 53 of 316 Page 54 of 316 Page 55 of 316 Page 56 of 316 Page 57 of 316 Page 58 of 316 Page 59 of 316 Page 60 of 316 Page 61 of 316 Page 62 of 316 Page 63 of 316 Page 64 of 316 Page 65 of 316 Page 66 of 316 Page 67 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to appro ve a Re so lutio n requesting the members of the 85 th Legi sl ati ve Sessi on o f the State of Texas support the City o f George to wn’s legislative agenda -- Jack Daly, Assistant to the City Manage r, and David Morgan, City Manager ITEM SUMMARY: Based on direc tion fro m the November 8th Counc il meeting, staff is bringing a reso lutio n forward for Council's consideration. This resolution requests that membe rs o f the 8 5th Texas Legislative Session co nsider and support the City's Legislative Agenda. Generally, the agenda re que sts: the preservation of local ho me-rule control; opposes unfunded mandates from the State; o pposes revenue caps; supports local parks funding; and prote c tion o f municipally owned utility interests. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None at this time . SUBMITTED BY: Jackson Daly ATTACHMENT S: Description Legislative Agenda Res olution Exhib it A - Legis lative Agenda Page 68 of 316 Resolution No. _________ Description: 2017 Legislative Agenda Date Approved: November 14, 2016 Page 1 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. ____________ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, REQUESTING THE MEMBERS OF THE 85TH LEGISLATIVE SESSION OF THE STATE OF TEXAS SUPPORT THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN LEGISLATIVE AGENDA; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; WHEREAS, the 85th legislative session convenes on January 10, 2017, and will be considering issues of interest and importance to the City of Georgetown; and WHEREAS, the City of Georgetown desires to adopt a Legislative Agenda that is consistent with the mission and vision of the City and in the best interest of the public it serves; and WHEREAS, local control is where local elected officials tasked with raising funds and providing services to respond to the individual and market driven needs of the unique community they serve; and WHEREAS, City staff, legal counsel and the legislative consultant will work under the direction of the City Council to affirmatively pursue the City of Georgetown's Legislative Agenda; and WHEREAS, the City of Georgetown's Legislative Agenda is intended to be a broad policy statement on issues that are anticipated to be discussed during the 85th session, while additional items will be more specifically reviewed and discussed by the City Council as necessary during the Legislative Session. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1. That the City Council request the members of the 85th Legislature of Texas actively pursue the items found in the City of Georgetown Legislative Agenda set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. RESOLVED this 22nd day of November 2016. ATTEST: THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: ______________________________ _______________________________ Shelley Nowling Dale Ross City Secretary Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ______________________________ Charles McNabb Page 69 of 316 Resolution No. _________ Description: 2017 Legislative Agenda Date Approved: November 14, 2016 Page 2 of 2 City Attorney Page 70 of 316 Exhibit A 2017 Legislative Agenda 85th Texas Legislature The City of Georgetown's Legislative Agenda establishes a policy direction for a summary of important issues that affect the Georgetown residents, businesses, and stakeholders. Local Control - Oppose Legislation that would: • Erode or otherwise diminish home rule authority and local control (local control: where local elected officials are tasked with raising funds and providing services to respond to the individual and market driven needs of the unique community they serve); • Impose limits on the city's existing economic development authority; • Restrict the ability of cities to provide economic and efficient methods of financing city purchases and projects; • Erode zoning authority; or • Erode municipal authority over the rights-of-way or erode municipal authority to collect reasonable compensation for the use of rights-of-way. Taxation - Oppose Legislation that would: • Impose revenue caps in the form of adjusting provisions for the current property tax rollback; or • Reduce the appraisal growth cap established in current law. Unfunded Mandates - Oppose Legislation that would: • Create unfunded or underfunded mandates from state and federal government which ultimately end up costing local taxpayers. Parks – Support Legislation that would: • Provide a fair and equitable distribution of the sporting goods sales tax revenue for Local and State parks; • Pass-thru federal dollars for local parks; or • Create a constitutional dedication of sporting goods sales tax revenues for parks. Utilities - Support Legislation that would: • Dissolve the Chisholm Trail Special Utility District (CTSUD) Board; • Allow continued MOU general fund transfers and return on investment; or • Preserve local control regarding Municipally Owned Utility (MOU) decision making related to electric market participation. Utilities – Oppose Legislation that would: • Expand of Public Utility Commission’s jurisdiction or limit MOU control related to rates or regulations; • Change current law regarding disclosure of competitively sensitive information; or • Create required discount mandates for MOUs. Page 71 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to approve a Memo randum of Agreement between the Lead Regi onal Advi sory Counci l and Georgetown Fire Departme nt as a “Sponso ri ng Enti ty” to participate as a member o f the Emerg e ncy Medi cal Task Fo r c e (EMTF ) -- John Sullivan, Fire Chief ITEM SUMMARY: The primary purpose of this agreement is to include the Georgetown Fire/Medical Department in the EMTF and assist with local and/or statewide disaster issues. All responses, by GFD, will be reimburse d by the State. The provisions of this Memorandum o f Agreement apply to the ac tivities perfo rmed by the Spo nso ring Entity at the request of the Eme rge ncy Me dical Task Force. The Texas EMTF is comprised o f eight regional teams, strategic ally located througho ut the State of Texas, aligned with the DSHS Public Health Re gio ns. These regional teams leve rage existing relationships with EMS P roviders, Fire Departments, Hospitals and Healthcare Organizations to provide personnel and essential resources available to respo nd within its specific region or thro ughout the State when needed. The EMTF co nsists of seven components which pro vide maximum flexibility fo r the activation, deployment and utilization of spe c ialized teams and resources ne e ded for unique situations and missio ns resulting f r o m natural or manmade disaste rs. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. SUBMITTED BY: John Sullivan, Fire Chief ATTACHMENT S: Description Memorand um of Agreement Page 72 of 316 MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT between LEAD REGIONAL ADVISORY COUNCIL and SPONSORING ENTITY for EMERGENCY MEDICAL TASK FORCE 1. PARTIES The Parties to this Memorandum of Agreement (“Agreement”) are a Department of State Health Services designated Lead Regional Advisory Council (“Lead RAC”) Lead Regional Advisory Council (RAC), properly authorized to do business in the State of Texas, and Georgetown Fire Department, as a Sponsoring Entity, hereafter referred to as “Sponsoring Entity” that wishes to participate as a member of the Emergency Medical Task Force (“EMTF”). Entities eligible to participate in the Emergency Medical Task Force Program include: a. Pre-hospital Emergency Medical Services Providers i) Must be a DSHS Licensed Emergency Medical Services Provider or First Responder Organization (FRO). ii) Must meet Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS) requirements for minimum, lawful staffing per applicable DSHS licensure. iii) Must have at least twelve (12) months of experience providing emergency medical services in the State of Texas. iv) Must maintain a business office within the boundaries of the State of Texas. v) Must adhere and abide by all federal, state and local laws and rules and must adhere and abide by the Texas Health & Safety Code, Chapter 773, Emergency Medical Services and the Texas Administrative Code, Title 25: Health Services, Chapter 157: Emergency Medical Care during the time of its deployment to provide mutual aid in a pending or actual disaster. b. Healthcare Facility Clinical Personnel i) Must operate a Department of State Health Services licensed General Hospital. ii) Must maintain a business office within the boundaries of the State of Texas. iii) Must adhere and abide by all federal, state and local laws and must adhere and abide by the Texas Health & Safety Code, Chapter 241, Hospitals and the Texas Administrative Code, Title 25: Health Services, Chapter 133: Hospital Licensing. c. Physician and Professional Clinical Groups i) Must be a business doing business in the State of Texas, providing board certified Emergency Medicine Physicians, Physician Assistants and Nurse Practitioners. ii) Must maintain a business office within the boundaries of the State of Texas. Page 73 of 316 2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Texas Emergency Medical Task Force is comprised of eight regional teams, strategically located throughout the State of Texas, aligned with the DSHS Public Health Regions. These regional teams leverage existing relationships with EMS Providers, Fire Departments, Hospitals and Healthcare Organizations to provide personnel and essential resources available to respond within its specific region or throughout the State when needed. In general, regional deployments are shorter than 12 hours in duration and are initiated at the request of a local partner or jurisdiction. This type of activation constitutes regional mutual aid; therefore reimbursement may not be available. Activations originating at the state level will include a mechanism for reimbursement through a State Mission Assignment (“SMA”). Additionally, an incident that exceeds twelve (12) hours in duration will include a mechanism for reimbursement per Chapter 418 of the Texas Government code. It is important to note that an incident which warrants a State Mission Assignments can occur anywhere within the State of Texas and that Parties to this memorandum may be activated on a regional mutual aid request and transitioned to a State Mission Assignment when the incident exceeds the State threshold based on complexity, duration or cost. Additionally, the Emergency Medical Task Force may be activated by the State of Texas to respond outside the State, if requested by other States or through the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Federal Health and Human Service Department or another duly authorized federal agency. The Emergency Medical Task Force Program consists of seven components: Task Force Leadership, Ambulance Strike Teams, Ambulance Buses, Mobile Medical Units, Registered Nurse Strike Teams, Medical Incident Support Teams and Ambulance Staging Management Teams. These components provide maximum flexibility for the activation, deployment and utilization of specialized teams and resources needed for unique situations and missions resulting from tragedies, such as hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, wildfire, flooding, terrorism and any other natural or manmade disaster. The Emergency Medical Task Force relies on active participation from partners and stakeholders within each region and across the State of Texas to provide this valuable response capability to the citizens of Texas. 3. PREEMPTION a. This Agreement is not intended to replace any mutual aid agreement or compact that a Sponsoring Entity legally has in place in its community. b. Any business or contractual relationship that exists outside the scope of this Agreement between the Lead RAC and the Sponsoring Entity shall remain in full effect, and where provisions are applicable to multiple agreements, the Parties agree to comply with the higher standard. Page 74 of 316 c. Parties agree that the Sponsoring Entity has the right to accept or decline an activation request during the process. d. The Lead RAC has final authority to assign Resources to positions within the team for a specific activation. 4. LIABILITY a. Sponsoring Entity shall have no right, and does by this Agreement waive its right, to file a claim(s) against DSHS, the State of Texas, and the Lead RAC for any personal or property injuries, damages or requests for State subrogation for any tort that they may incur during activation or arising therefrom, or any other claims filed against them as a result of their activities during activation. DSHS, the State of Texas, and the Lead RAC do not waive any immunity from suit or liability that they may have under state/federal laws and the Texas constitution notwithstanding the above. To the extent that Resource is a local governmental entity, unit of State government, or a Texas political subdivision, the waivers provided herein are further subject to state law and the Texas constitution which may make them unenforceable in whole or in part. b. Sponsoring Entity shall assume responsibility for liability claims, malpractice claims, disability claims, workers’ compensation claims, attorneys' fees, and other incurred costs to the extent required by Texas law for its personnel and equipment. c. The Sponsoring Entity shall continue to assume legal and financial responsibility of the personnel and equipment for the duration of activation or deployment. 5. RESOURCE CREDENTIALING a. Sponsoring Entity shall ensure that all personnel meet all licensing, training and certification requirements related to his/her particular profession and/or mission. b. Sponsoring Entity shall ensure that all personnel are actively employed and engaged in the clinical specialty which they are assigned within the team. 6. REIMBURSEMENT a. Summary i) The Emergency Medical Task Force Program, in conjunction with the Department of State Health Services, committed to timely reimbursement of Sponsoring Entities that provide resources and personnel in times of disaster. ii) Sponsoring Entities are encouraged to file their reimbursement packets through their Lead RAC as quickly as possible to ensure timely reimbursement from DSHS but no later than 6 (six) months after the demobilization. Page 75 of 316 iii) Reimbursement for costs associated with EMTF activities will be process and paid within 45 days. The 45 day reimbursement timeline will begin only after a completed reimbursement packet is accepted by the Department of State Health Services. 7. TERM a. The term of this Agreement is ongoing until cancelled by either part with 30 day written notice to the other. This Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas without regard to its conflicts of law rules. 8. MODIFICATION a. This Agreement constitutes the complete agreement between the Parties relating to the matters specified in this Agreement, and supersedes all prior representations or agreements, whether written or oral, with respects to such matters. b. This Agreement may only be modified through a written amendment signed by the Parties and thus no oral modifications hereof shall be permitted. The Parties agree to take such action as is necessary to amend this Agreement periodically as may be required by federal or State law. c. Operational plans and administrative procedures pertaining to the participation of the Sponsoring Entity within the program will be facilitated through the Sponsoring Entity Point of Contact, listed below. Changes to the individual identified as the Sponsoring Entity Point of Contact shall be submitted in writing by the authority signed below. Sponsoring Entity Point of Contact: Name: Chad Berg Title: Emergency Management Coordinator Page 76 of 316 d. Any notice required under this Agreement to be given to either the Lead RAC or the Sponsoring Entity shall be made in writing to: Lead RAC: Attn to: Address: City, State: Zip: Entity: Attn to: Address: City, State: Zip: IN WITNESS WHEREOF and acknowledging acceptance of the foregoing, the Parties affix their signatures hereto Lead (RAC) Sponsoring Entity DBA Signature Printed Name Title Signature Printed Name Title Date Date Page 77 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 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 chang e s to G eorgetown Eme r gency Medi cal Servi ce fees and F i re & Li fe Safety Ser vi c e fees -- John Sullivan, Fire Chief ITEM SUMMARY: In accordance to Section(s) 2 .28 .14 0 and 2 .28 .15 0, the Fire Chief is recommending changes to the Fire Departme nt Operation and Fire /Life Safety Service Fees. P lease refer to the attached fee schedule and refer to the follo wing recommended c hanges: 1 . PAGE 8 - Create new reimbursement c lassificatio n entitle d “Critical Care Transport (CCT)” to allow for market competitive reimburse ment. The pro posed rate of $11 00 has be e n validated by our third-party provider and billing company, Emergicon. This re pre sents the low end of the State CCT rates which range from $11 00 - $1500 . 2 . PAGE 10 - Residential lock box has been adjuste d to $1 60 and this represents our direct cost fro m the manufac turer. 3 . PAGE 11 - “P artial Co mmercial Sprinkler Inspection” fee in the amount of $75 has been added for a convenie nc e optio n to the developer and/o r c ontractor. FINANCIAL IMPACT: New fee reimbursement. SUBMITTED BY: John Sullivan, Fire Chief ATTACHMENT S: Description GF D Service F ee S ched ule Page 78 of 316 GFD I. TITLE All rules and regulations contained herein, together with additions and amendments as may be hereafter adopted, are hereby designated as the “Georgetown Fire Department Fee Schedule.” II. AUTHORITY This Fee Schedule is adopted by Ordinance of the City of Georgetown which reads as follows: Sec. 2.28.140. Fire Department Operation Service Fees. The City Council authorizes the Fire Chief to establish Fire Department Operations Service Fees, and policies and regulations governing the collection of those fees. The Fire Chief shall provide the City Council with an annual updated fee schedule with a summary of changes adopted during the previous year, if the fees, or policies and regulations are changed within the preceding year. Sec. 2.28.150. Fire & Life Safety Service Fees. The City Council authorizes the Fire Chief to establish Fire & Life Safety Service Fees, and policies and regulations governing the collection of those fees. The Fire Chief shall provide the City Council with an annual updated fee schedule with a summary of changes adopted during the previous year, if the fees, or policies and regulations are changed within the preceding year. Sec. 2.28.160. Special Events Fees. Special events sponsors shall be charged for any and all services required by the fire department, as determined by the fire department in its sole discretion, working in conjunction with the City's special events personnel, including, but not limited to standby fire apparatus and its personnel, and/or fire/medical crews and vehicles. Such special events fees shall be due and payable with the special events permit application, and shall be in addition to any fees incurred for other fire department services rendered. Sec. 2.28.170 Fines for Negligent or Irresponsible Actions. A. A fine shall be charged for negligent, irresponsible, or otherwise unacceptable and malicious acts. B. The fire department may file charges in Municipal Court by the City fire department, and a fine may be accessed. Any such fine shall be in addition to any fees charged. SERVICE FEE SCHEDULE GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT Page 79 of 316 C. Fines for such acts shall be assessed as follows: 1. False alarms (each incident, after three alarms in a calendar year from a single component of an automatic fire alarm or fire sprinkler system)—$150.00 minimum. This includes mischievous actions of small children and the unknowing actions of special needs adults. 2. False alarms (each incident, for a deliberate and/or malicious act of a telephone message or the activation of a manual alarm)—$200.00 minimum, plus Municipal Court costs, if any. 3. Misadventure and/or deliberate risk taking (each incident)—$200.00 minimum, plus Municipal Court costs, if any. 4. Failure to respond to lawful warning or order (each occurrence)—$200.00 minimum plus Municipal Court costs, if any. 5. Injury to fire personnel due to deliberate act (each injury)—Any and all medical costs incurred by the employee, rehabilitation costs, loss of income, and any further compensation that may be necessary. 6. Damage to fire apparatus, equipment or property due to a deliberate act (each item)— The replacement cost of the individual item. 7. Failure to notify the fire department of an alarm activation (each)—$150.00 minimum. Sec. 2.28.180. Fee Collection. A. Fire Department is authorized to collect fees for services provided inside the city limits as well as those provided outside the city limits pursuant to all applicable rules, regulations, and state law. B. Fees that are the result of any actions listed in section 2.28.140, 2.28.150, 2.28.160 and 2.28.170 are the responsibility of the property owner or occupant and are due and payable immediately upon receipt of an invoice from the fire department or its authorized agent. C. Fire Department is authorized to obtain the requisite incident information to collect fees through internal and/or contractual services. D. Fire Department shall coordinate with development services for applicable fee collection along with utilizing fire records management for the collection of any additional fees not collected by development services. Sec. 2.28.190. Exemptions from fees. Calls for service at residential structure fires shall not be subject to any fees unless it is determined to be for cause, as is identified in Section 2.28.170. Page 80 of 316 III. PURPOSE The purpose of the Fee Schedule is to provide for the reimbursement of costs for emergency and/or non-emergency responses by the Georgetown Fire Department for certain emergency incidents, special events, malicious incidents, hazardous material incidents, technical or specialized rescue incidents, motor vehicle collisions, and incidents caused by negligence and/or willful disregard for established fire and life-safety codes. Additionally, the Fee Schedule shall be applied to responses to non-City residents and/or those responses not covered under an approved mutual or automatic-aid agreement. IV. LIABILITY The Georgetown Fire Department shall, at its sole discretion, determine whether or not Fire Department resources and/or personnel are available for reimbursable services cited within this document. Furthermore, all persons responsible for the enforcement or application of the Fee Schedule, shall not be liable for any damage or injury to persons or property arising out of or relating in any way to the application or enforcement of this Fee Schedule. V. DEFINITIONS Unless the context specifically indicates otherwise, the meaning of terms used in the Fee Schedule shall be as follows: a. Emergency Incident shall mean those incidents that require fire, rescue and/or medical response in an immediate fashion, following established emergency response protocols. b. Fire Department shall mean the Georgetown Fire Department. c. Emergency Personnel shall mean personnel who are employees of the Georgetown Fire Department during their involvement in an emergency or non-emergency incident. d. Hazardous Material Incident shall mean those incidents involving the release of any product that could prove a danger to health or the environment. e. Malicious Incident shall mean those emergency incidents which stem from an individual’s intentional purpose to cause property damage, endanger lives, and/or cause the response of emergency personnel for other than an actual emergency. f. Medical Call shall mean those emergency incidents in which the Georgetown Fire Department responds and functions as the primary care provider. g. Motor Vehicle Collision shall mean incidents involving one or more motorized vehicles including cars, trucks, buses, planes, helicopters, trains, motorcycles, and the vehicles and trailers being pulled by motorized vehicles. Page 81 of 316 h. Non-Emergency Incident shall mean those incidents which allow for fire, rescue and/or emergency medical response in a less urgent fashion, following established non-emergency response protocols. i. Non-Permitted Burns shall mean the intentional disposal of debris without the written permission from the Georgetown Fire Department. j. Nuisance Incident shall mean those incidents that are of the same nature, on a repetitive basis, at the same location, due to the lack of servicing to mechanical and/or electrical equipment of an emergency system, or the failure to correct a previously documented fire hazard, or false reporting of an emergency incident or any other fire department response that is deemed unnecessary by the Fire Chief, including but not limited to false alarms caused by carelessness. k. Special Event shall mean those non-emergency events that occur within and/or outside the City of Georgetown that require the presence of Emergency Personnel employed by the Fire Department, or as requested by owner/coordinator of the involved property. l. Technical Rescue Event shall mean incidents that require rope rescue, water rescue, confined space rescue or technical rescue services and/or extrication. m. Wildland Fire shall mean any outside fire involving general natural combustible materials, other than a permitted burn, with no restriction concerning area involved, or size of any damaged area. Page 82 of 316 VI. ELIGIBLE EXPENSES/INCIDENTS The following types of occurrences and incidents that involve the response of Georgetown Fire Department personnel and/or resources are eligible for invoicing pursuant to this document. a. Fire protection services b. Services for preservation of life (hazardous material, technical rescue, mva, etc.) c. Medical services d. Plan reviews (includes plan review, inspection, citation, permit, and investigative) e. Standby charges (special events, fire watch, etc.) f. User fees (classroom fees, community outreach fees, etc.) g. Other charges (nuisance, negligent or malicious incidents) h. Non-permitted Burns i. Responses or use of Fire Department personnel and/or resources to non-City properties or persons not covered under an approved mutual or automatic-aid agreement. VII. ENFORCEMENT All enforcement, invoicing, and application of the Fee Schedule is the responsibility of the Fire Chief and/or his designee. Furthermore, the Fire Chief is authorized to conduct investigations and take other steps necessary and provided by law to enforce. VIII. INVOICING The invoice must contain, at minimum, the date on which services were rendered by the Georgetown Fire Department, due date for payment of invoice, mailing address for payment, the type of incident under the Fee Schedule that serves as the basis for the invoice, an explanation of the services provided, and the cost of rendered services. a. Responsible Party i. Special Events may be invoiced per occurrence, with the property owner or event organizer(s) responsible as indicated at the time of the event planning. ii. Malicious Incidents may be invoiced per occurrence to the responsible party. iii. Hazardous Material Incidents may be invoiced per occurrence for negligent events, with the property owner and/or responsible party. Page 83 of 316 iv. Technical Rescue Incidents may be invoiced per occurrence for negligent events that result in rendered services. v. Motor Vehicle Collisions where extrication is performed may be invoiced per occurrence. In the event multiple vehicles are involved, responsibility for costs may be prorated, as determined by the Fire Chief, among the person(s), operator(s), or vehicle owner(s). vi. Non-Permitted Burns may be invoiced per occurrence to responsible party. vii. Permitted Burns that get out-of-control due to negligence may be invoiced to the person that was issued the permit. viii. Wildland Fires caused by negligence may be invoiced per occurrence to the individual responsible for starting the fire. ix. Nuisance Incidents may be invoiced per occurrence, after three occurrences within a calendar year. The property owner shall be considered the responsible party. x. Medical Calls may be invoiced per occurrence, with the individual being treated held responsible for the costs. Invoices shall be the sole discretion of Fire Chief. xi. Out-of-City Responses may be invoiced to the property owner or person receiving assistance from Fire Department resources and/or personnel. b. Reimbursement rates shall be invoiced at the determined rate for each resource and/or employee. Additional time shall be prorated to the nearest ½-hour increments. The established reimbursement rates are published in the accompanying Georgetown Fire Department FY2014/15 Fee Schedule. Payment of the invoice shall be due within 30-days of the invoice date, and interest shall accrue at a ten percent (10%) Annual Percentage Rate (APR) beginning the thirty-first (31st) day. IX. EFFECTIVE DATE The Georgetown Fire Department Fee Reimbursement schedule is effective November 12, 2014 and shall remain in effect until repealed. The Fire Chief is authorized to modify and/or amend the schedule per the adopted Ordinance. John Sullivan, Fire Chief Date Page 84 of 316 FIRE PROTECTION & EMERGENCY RESPONSE FEES a. Equipment Type Taxpayer (T) Non-Taxpayer (NT) Note Ladder Truck $300/Hour $300/Hour 1hr min (T) / 2hr min (NT) Fire Engine (Type I) $250/Hour $250/Hour 1hr min (T) / 2hr min (NT) Fire Engine (Type III) $200/Hour $200/Hour 1hr min (T) / 2hr min (NT) Fire Engine (Type VI) $100/Hour $100/Hour 1hr min (T) / 2hr min (NT) Equipment/Support Unit $200/Hour $200/Hour 1hr min (T) / 2hr min (NT) Water Tender Unit $150/Hour $150/Hour 1hr min (T) / 2hr min (NT) Command Unit $75/Hour $75/Hour 1hr min (T) / 2hr min (NT) Fire Investigation Unit $75/Hour $75/Hour 1hr min (T) / 2hr min (NT) b. Personnel Rank Taxpayer (T) Non-Taxpayer (NT) Note Chief Officer Actual + ERE $65/Hour + ERE ERE = 23.29% Inspector/Investigator Actual + ERE $45/Hour + ERE ERE = 23.29% Officer (LT or CPT) Actual + ERE $45/Hour + ERE ERE = 23.29% Driver/Engineer Actual + ERE $35/Hour + ERE ERE = 23.29% Paramedic Actual + ERE $35/Hour + ERE ERE = 23.29% Firefighter Actual + ERE $30/Hour + ERE ERE = 23.29% c. Supplies Supplies Taxpayer (T) Non-Taxpayer (NT) Note All supplies used or damaged Cost + 10% Cost + 10% Supplies may include water, foam, hose, tools, fuel, personal protection equipment, medical supplies, and any other equipment that was used or damaged as part of the response. Notes a. After the full hour, all fees will be prorated to the next half-hour b. ERE calculated at 12.50%TMRS, 7.65% FICA,3.26% ICA, Unemployment Insurance 2.30% OPERATION SERVICE FEE SCHEDULE GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT Page 85 of 316 AMBULANCE SERVICE FEES a. Patient Charges Type Resident Non-Resident Note Basic Life Support (BLS) $690 Base Rate $790 Base Rate + Oxygen, Supplies, Miles Advanced Life Support (ALS I) $745 Base Rate $845 Base Rate + Oxygen, Supplies, Miles Advanced Life Support (ALS II) $765 Base Rate $865 Base Rate + Oxygen, Supplies, Miles Critical Care Transport (CCT) $1036 Base Rate $1036 Base Rate + Oxygen, Supplies, Miles b. Oxygen Type Resident Non-Resident Note Oxygen therapy $45 $45 + Base, supplies, miles c. Supplies Type Resident Non-Resident Note Routine BLS Supplies $50 $50 + Base, oxygen, and miles Routine ALS Supplies $100 $100 + Base, oxygen, and miles d. Cost Per Loaded Mile Type Resident Non-Resident Note Cost per loaded mile $15 $15 Rounded to nearest 10th e. Extra Attendant Type Resident Non-Resident Note Extra Attendant $35 $35 Eg. CPR f. Treatment With No Transport Type Resident Non-Resident Note Basic Life Support (BLS) $150 $200 Treatment w/ EKG, IV or Drugs $250 $300 g. Standby Services Type Resident Non-Resident Note BLS Standby (2 EMT’s) $60/hour + ERE $60/hour +ERE 2-hour minimum ALS Standby (Paramedic/EMT) $90/hour + ERE $90/hour + ERE 2-hour minimum BLS Standby w/ Ambulance $150/hour $200/hour 2-hour minimum ALS Standby w/ Ambulance $200/hour $300/hour 2-hour minimum OPERATION SERVICE FEE SCHEDULE GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT Page 86 of 316 Regional Fire Training Fees a. Training Tower & Props Item Rate Note Training Tower (without Burn Room or props) $75.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours Training Tower with use of props $100.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours Training Tower w/ Burn Room $150.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours, plus cost of GFD Safety Officer and Supplies Wall Breach Prop $25.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours, responsible for supplies Confined Space Tubing Prop $25.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours, plus use of GFD Safety Officer Movable Maze $25.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours Rebar Prop $25.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours, must supply rebar Garage Door Prop $25.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours, must supply garage door panels FDC / Sprinkler Prop $25.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours Forcible Entry Prop $25.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours must supply flat stock, rebar, etc. Rappelling Tower $25.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours, must use GFD Safety Officer Ventilation Prop (Flat or Pitched roof) $75.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours, must supply OSB/2x4 Ventilation Prop with use of other movable props $100.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours b. Live Fire Training Item Rate Note Basic Burn Package $1500/day 8hrs, hay, pallets, safety officer, smoke machine, rescue dummy, cascade , A/V, classroom, up to 30 ppl Engine Company Package $2000/day Basic Burn + Type I Engine (if available), Hose/appliances, Standpipe/Sprinkler Truck Company Package $2200/day Engine pkg + vent prop, breach props c. Miscellaneous Item Rate Note Safety Officer $75.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours, Moveable Props $25.00 per hour/prop Minimum charge of two (2) hours OPERATION SERVICE FEE SCHEDULE GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT Page 87 of 316 Community Outreach Fees a. CPR Training Course Rate Note Healthcare Provider $35/person $40/person City Resident Non-resident Heart Saver $35/person $40/person City Resident Non-resident Family & Friends No Charge $20/person City Resident Non-resident CPR/First-Aid Combo $50/person City Resident/Business b. First-Aid Course Rate Note First-Aid Course $25/person $40/person City Resident Non-resident c. Babysitter Course Course Rate Note First-Aid Course $35/person $45/person City Resident Non-resident d. Fire Extinguisher Course Course Rate Note Fire Extinguisher Class No Charge $10/person City Resident – Scheduled Class Non-resident/Unscheduled/Off-site (min. 10ppl) e. Residential Lock Box Course Rate Note Residential Lock Box $160/box $60/box City Resident f. Speaker & Teacher Bureau Course Rate Note Life Safety Education No Charge Salary + ERE* City Resident – Scheduled Class/Event Non-resident/Business Notes a. Calculated hours shall include travel time and be prorated to the next half-hour b. Salary shall be calculated at actual cost + ERE FIRE & LIFE SAFETY SERVICE FEE SCHEDULE GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT Page 88 of 316 Fire Code Compliance Fees a. Fire Code Permits Permit Rate Note Automatic Extinguishing Systems Alternative Automatic Extinguishing a $250 $100 New system installation Modification Automatic Extinguishing Systems Commercial Cooking Systems a $150 $100 $100 New single system installation Each additional system installation Modification Automatic Extinguishing Systems Commercial Sprinkler New a $250 $500 $250 $250 $75 New system installation 1-10,000sqft 10,000-52,000sqft Each addt’ 52,000sqft or fraction thereof Each floor above or below first floor Partial Inspection (after initial) Automatic Extinguishing Systems Commercial Sprinkler Modification a $100 $200 $350 $100 1-20 Heads 21-100 Heads 101-500 Heads Each 100 heads or fraction thereof over 500 Automatic Extinguishing Systems Fire Pump and Related Equipment a $500 $250 $150 New single pump, includes tank Each additional pump Modification Automatic Extinguishing Systems Residential Sprinkler a $100 No Fee One- two-family dwelling Voluntary installation, not required by code Automatic Extinguishing Systems Standpipe Systems a $200 $100 System with 1-4 outlets Each additional 4 outlets or fraction thereof Automatic Extinguishing Systems Underground Fire Line Supply a $200 $100 $100 First 150 lineal feet Each additional 150 feet Fireline stubout when submitted separately Blasting - Explosives a $200 Operational permit, each 30 day period Burning Open Burn, Open Flames, Candles, Torches, Recreational Fire (Wildfire Risk Area) a $100 $100 $50 $25 $25 Air Diffuser Operation (per 30 days) Commercial open burn (per 30 days) Open flames, candles, torches (annual) Public assembly fire (event) Residential fire (permit period) Fire Alarm and Detection Systems New Installation a $250 $500 $250 $250 New system installation 1-10,000sqft 10,000-52,000sqft Each addt’ 52,000sqft or fraction thereof Each floor above or below first floor FIRE & LIFE SAFETY SERVICE FEE SCHEDULE GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT Page 89 of 316 Permit Rate Note Fire Alarm and Detection Systems Modification to Existing System a $150 $250 1-10 Devices Greater than 10 devices Fire Alarm and Detection Systems Monitoring System a $150 Fire protection monitoring system when submitted separately Fire Apparatus Access a $100 $50 $75 Access and fire lane marking Each fire apparatus access gate Annual gate operation inspection (per site) Fireworks and Pyrotechnics Display/Show $250 Per display or show Includes review and insp (Additional fee for fire protection operational standby as determined by Chief) Flammable and Combustible Liquids a $200 $100 $75 New installation single tank Each additional tank install at same time Annual inspection of tanks not regulated by State Fire Marshal Hazardous Materials a $100/hr $100/hr $150 New system, storage area, tank, includes HMIS and HMMP review, min 2hr. Revision/Modification of approved submittal Annual inspection and HMIS, HMMP review LP-Gas a $150 $75 New installation Annual inspection (exception-containers with 500-gallon capacity or less serving one- and two-family dwellings) Tents and Membrane Structures a $150 $50 Single tent Each additional tent on site Mobile Food Vendor Fee $125 Annual permit w/ up to 1-hour of inspection Other Operational Permits - IFC a (permit not separately indicated) $75 $75/hr Annual permit w/ up to 1-hour of inspection Per rounded hour of addt’ inspection time Other Construction Permits – IFC a (permit not separately indicated) $150 New system installation b. Inspection / Response Fees Type Rate Note Business Inspection No Fee No Fee $75 $150 $150 Annual Business Inspection Fee First re-inspection Second re-inspection due to non-compliance Third re-inspection due to non-compliance Business may be issued a Stop Work Order pending compliance w/ code /or Citation. Re-inspection - restore business operation Certificate of Occupancy Inspection $100 $75 $75 Includes up to 2-hours Per hour of additional inspection Re-inspection per hour (minimum of 1-hr) Code Consultation Interpretations, Pre-Submittal Consultations, and Technical Services with Documented Record/Report $150 $75 Includes initial meeting and up to two hours of research and documentation. Per hour fee for follow up meeting or additional time and documentation (not intended for simple/minor issues) Page 90 of 316 Type Rate Note Construction Inspection New and/or modification construction No Fee $75 $150 First inspection included in permit fee First re-inspection Second and/or each subsequent re- inspection Construction Document Review Development, Preliminary, and Concept $150 $75 Each development submitted as a whole Additional, each separately submitted unit, or phase Construction Document Review Building Construction - New Building $200 $200 $75 0-52,000sqft, includes two reviews Each addt’ 52,000sqft or fraction thereof Per hour of additional review to achieve code compliance or due to revisions Construction Document Review Building Construction - Modification Tenant Improvements Landlord Improvements $100 $100 $75 0-52,000sqft, includes two reviews Each addt’ 52,000sqft or fraction thereof Per hour - For additional review to achieve code compliance or due to revisions to approved plan Licensed Inspection/Re-Inspection Care Center, Nursing Home, Hospital, etc. $75 $75 Up to one-hour of inspection For each subsequent hour, portion thereof Expedited Permit/Plan Review 300% 300% of regular permit fee, written request required, when available and pre-approval by Chief required. Fire Alarm Response $150 $1000 $500 Each false alarm exceeding 3/yr, due to "failure to notify" when working on or testing sprinkler and / or fire alarm system, and alarm malfunctions Intentional false alarm Burning or hazardous operation without permit causing emergency response Fire Watch/Standby – Fire Code Official $75/hr Minimum 2hrs., when available and pre- approval by Chief required. Does not include operational response equipment, additional fee may be required Inspection After Business Hours $75/hr Minimum 2hrs., when available and pre- approval by Chief required Inspection No-Show $150 Failure to attend a scheduled inspection after 30 minute Fire Code Official wait time Work Without Approved Permit 500% 500% of regular permit fee Notes a. Fee includes fire code compliance review, and inspections during business hours Page 91 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Forwarded fro m the G eo rgetown Transportati on Advi sory Board (G TAB): Consideration and po ssible re c ommendation fo r the composition of the Pl anni ng Advi sory Commi ttee (PAC) for the Ai rport Master Pl an Pro ject -- Jim Briggs, General Manager of Utilities and Edward G. P olasek, AICP, Transportation Services Direc to r ITEM SUMMARY: The Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) for the Airpo rt Master Plan P roject is a gro up of citizens identified to provide input during the master plan update process. The PAC will meet four (4) times througho ut the process, approximate ly once every three months. The PAC members are provided draft c hapters of the Maste r Plan about a week befo re e ach meeting. Membe rs then provide fe e dback o n the draft material within a couple of weeks of the meeting and ac tive participation in the meeting discussion. The reco mmended c omposition of the PAC, which includes three (3) Airport users, two (2) member of the public who live near the Airpo rt and two (2) GTAB Board membe rs, is as follows: Gary Nelon - Chair (P ublic) Erc e l Brashear (Public) Donna Co urtney (GTAB) Ro n Bindas (GTAB) Larry Woo d (Airport User) Dwayne Mo quett (Airport User) Dick Go ssen (Airport User) In addition to the PAC, Citizens of Georgetown will be encouraged to participate in meetings open to the public during the master plan update pro cess. Meeting dates and times will be identified after kickoff o f the update process. G TAB B OARD RECOMMENDATION: This item was unanimo usly recommended by the GTAB Board for Council appro val at the November 15, 2016 GTAB Board meeting. STAF F RECOMMENDATION : Staff suppo rts the reco mmended PAC member list. FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A SUBMITTED BY: Russ Volk, C.M., Airport Manager Page 92 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Forwarded fro m G eorg etow n Uti l i ty Systems Advi so ry B oard (G US): Consideration and possible ac tion to approve a change o rde r with Iti neri s N.A. to pro vide management, support, and oversi ght o f the tr ansfo rmati on and co nversi on tasks for Data Mi grati on in the amount of $56,000.00 -- Leticia Zavala, Customer Care Director ITEM SUMMARY: The Data Migratio n P lan fo llows the traditional ETL (Extractio n – Transformation – Lo ad) process and is a critical part of the CIS project. It consists of extracting data from the legacy (Incode) system, co nverting that data to a fo rmat that complies with the UMAX data model, and loading the co nverted data into UMAX. (Se e attached documents for diagram) A Data Migration Impact Assessment was conducted during the first phase of the pro ject to de termine the e ffort needed to complete the transformatio n and mapping tasks for the Data Migratio n Plan. The assessment provided a Responsibility Assessment Matrix that identified the tasks and assigned responsibilities so that a cost estimate could be developed. While this change o rder inc ludes the manage ment o f the data conversion deliverables it does no t include the ac tual conversion of the data. There is another asso ciated agenda item for the transformation rule design, development, and conversion of the Inco de data into the UMAX data model. STAF F RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of this change order to ensure the project stays on track and all conversio n re lated deliverables are me t without an impact to the ove rall project timeline. The lack of specialized in ho use tec hnical expertise necessitate s the vendor assume responsibility fo r the management, support, and o versight of the data conve rsion deliverables. B OARD RECOMMENDATION: This item was unanimously approved for reco mmendation to Co uncil by the GUS Board at their meeting held on November 11, 2 01 6. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The cost was unknown in May 2016 when the so ftware contract with Itineris N.A. was appro ved. The Pro ject Contingency amount of $50 0,0 00 inc ludes an internal cost estimate for Data Migration. The general ledger account #610-9-058 0-9 1- 105 will be used to fund the $56,000 and is part of the overall project budget. P roject Components B udg et Software & Integration Services $2,500,557 IT & Infrastructure 400,000 Consulting Services 672,180 Co ntingency**500,000 To tal Project Budget:$4,072,737 SUBMITTED BY: Leticia Zavala, Custo mer Care Director (skm) ATTACHMENT S: Description Co versheet with Diagram Data Migration C hange Ord er Data Migration R AC I Page 93 of 316 Georgetown Utility System Advisory Board Meeting Date: November 11, 2016 Item No. SUBJECT Consideration and possible recommendation to approve a change order with Itineris N.A to provide management, support, and oversight of the transformation and conversion tasks for Data Migration in the amount of $56,000. ITEM SUMMARY The Data Migration Plan follows the traditional ETL (Extraction – Transformation – Load) process and is a critical part of the CIS projec t. It consists of extracting data from the legacy (Incode) system, converting that data to a format that complies with the UMAX data model, and loading the converted data into UMAX. A Data Migration Impact Assessment was conducted during the first phase of the project to determine the effort needed to complete the transformation and mapping tasks for the Data Migration Plan. The assessment provided a Responsibility Assessment Matrix that identified the tasks and assigned responsibilities so that a cost estimate could be developed. While this change order includes the management of the data conversion deliverables it does not include the actual conversion of the data. There is another associated agenda item for the transformation rule design, development, and conversion of the Incode data into the UMAX data model. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of this change order to ensure the project stays on track and all conversion related deliverables are met without an impact to the overall proj ect timeline. The lack of specialized in house technical expertise necessitates the vendor assume responsibility for the management, support, and oversight of the data conversion deliverables. FINANCIAL IMPACT The cost was unknown in May 2016 when the software contract with Itineris N.A. was approved. The Project Contingency amount of $500,000 includes an internal cost estimate for Data Migration. The general ledger account #610-9-0580-91-105 will be used to fund the $56,000 and is part of the overall project budget. Project Components Budget Software & Integration Services $2,500,557 IT & Infrastructure 400,000 Consulting Services 672,180 Contingency** 500,000 Total Project Budget: $4,072,737 ATTACHMENTS Itineris Data Migration Change Order Data Migration RACI Leticia Zavala Customer Care Director Page 94 of 316 11.11.16 Itineris Change OrderCO - Transformation 1 | P a g e Change Order Change Order 003: Data Migration Impact Assessment Client: City of Georgetown Project: Georgetown CIS UMAX Implementation - Project Genesis Itineris Project Manager: K. Jeanine Stone Date Delivered: 10/31/2016Revision to 9/20/2016 v04 Georgetown Project Manager: Cindy Pospisil Analysis Phase End Date: 8/25/2016 Background Information: GUS requested that Itineris provide a Data Migration Impact Assessment to evaluate the effort required for Itineris to complete the Transform tasks for Data Migration. Sections from related documents are included for complete reference of Transformation tasks. These documents include:  Data Migration Plan & Strategy  Data Migration Scope & Acceptance Criteria Description of Work: Management Summary: The Georgetown CIS UMAX Implementation - Project Genesis project entails the transition from the Georgetown Utility Systems legacy billing system to the use of a standard ERP solution for the North American utility market: UMAX. The data migration is considered to be a crucial aspect of the project, and follows the traditional ETL (Extraction – Transformation – Load) process. It consists of a controlled extraction of data from the legacy system, a transformation of those data to a format that complies with the UMAX data model, and a load of the transformed data into UMAX. Definitions / Acronyms ETL Extraction – Transformation – Load Data Entity A logical grouping of data (e.g. customer, account, meter, consumption, etc.) IMAC Itineris Migration Administration Cockpit (UMAX migration framework for the load activities) IST Integrated System Testing No. Assumptions 1 Only data that is necessary for the correct processing of the in-scope UMAX functionalities is migrated. If the data has no value in UMAX, it is by default out of scope. 2 GUS requires 24 months (2 years) of historical data will be migrated to UMAX. 3 Data scope for data migration is frozen at the end of the analysis phase. Page 95 of 316 11.11.16 Itineris Change OrderCO - Transformation 2 | P a g e No. Assumptions 4 All data cleansing activities are performed by GUS or their designate. No data cleansing or data enrichment will be performed by Itineris. 5 GUS has the necessary knowledge and expertise available for the source data quality assessment, both from a technical and a business perspective. 6 Every data entity has one ‘master’, i.e. one source system (and owner) that is leading in providing the correct data. 7 GUS Legacy System (Incode) and ESRI will be the sole sources of the data migration. 8 All extracted data must be available in a normalized database. 9 All data migration test runs will be performed on a fresh (i.e. max 1 week old) backup of the source environments. 10 The Georgetown Utility Systems Database is synced with the legacy CIS on a nightly basis. This accounts for 95% of Legacy tables (the Transaction Bill Tables are not included). 11 Georgetown Utility Systems populates the Transaction Bill tables overnight on the weekend, due to the large size of the transaction bill file. (6GB) 12 No data manipulations are performed on the legacy CIS data when transferred to the Intermediary database. 13 The (meta-) datamodel of the source system(s) does not change during the project. 14 GUS will be responsible for the Extraction. 15 Itineris will be responsible for the Load into UMAX. 16 GUS has a data migration lead who is the single point of contact for matters concerning the data migration. Itineris has a data migration lead who is the single point of contact for matters concerning the data migration. 17 GUS and Itineris are responsible for a timely delivery of the necessary extraction files and transformation files/load tables for each migration run. 18 GUS has the necessary knowledge and expertise available for the transformation design and development, both from a technical and a business perspective. 19 Formal business decisions required for the data migration will be made within 5 business days. 20 GUS and Itineris provide answers to outstanding questions within 5 business days. 21 GUS is responsible for a timely delivery of the necessary access to the system and the necessary capacity (environments, storage requirements) to support the supplier. 22 The technical setup of the intermediary environment will be done by Georgetown Utility Systems. 23 System maintenance windows will be planned in a way that does not hinder the planned data migration test runs. 24 Data migration activities will be executed on a dedicated server. 25 The Itineris users will be able to establish a direct connection to these servers from a remote location. 26 Itineris will have local admin rights on both the AOS and DB migration servers. Page 96 of 316 11.11.16 Itineris Change OrderCO - Transformation 3 | P a g e No. Assumptions 27 Itineris will not be dependent on any external party to make intermediary backups or execute restores of the DM environments. 28 This infrastructure will be made available by GUS for the start of the first migration run, and until post-go-live. 29 The last 2 migration test runs will be performed on the production environment (or an environment of the same technical specifications). 30 There will be a code freeze on the UMAX target from the start of the last migration test run until go- live (excluding bug fixes). 31 When performing comparisons between source and target data, the UMAX data have to be compared to the same source system backup(s) that have been used to start the migration run. 32 Test users that perform the comparisons between source and target data have the necessary access to the source system backup(s) that have been used to start the migration run 33 The Integration System Tests and User Acceptance Tests will be performed on migrated data. 34 Planning and budget estimates are based on the availability of the necessary resources and infrastructure to have all necessary DTAP streets until post-go-live. 35 Parameterization is not in scope of the data migration. 36 Cutover and go-live activities are not described in this document. 37 The data migration will be finalized (full scope and all attributes mapped) by the start of the Integration & System Testing. 38 This document does not take into account any unplanned activities nor possible ‘idle time’ that is a consequence of GUS or Itineris not meeting exit- or entry-criteria for which it is responsible. Solution Detail: Transform Proposed Solution This section describes a proposed solution on how to successfully transform data from the Legacy System (INCODE) to UMAX. Based on Itineris best practices and experience with previous data migrations, the proposed solution outlined below, if followed, has been proven to provide high quality data migrations. 1.1.1. Stages The transformation typically consists of 2 steps: the step from Intermediary Source to Staging, and the step from Staging to Transformed. Each step has its own goals, and characteristics. Step 1: Intermediary Source --> Staging: In this step, a first filtering of data is performed: all data that are OUT of the scope of the data migration are left behind in Intermediary Source. Examples of these are:  Non-Billed Meter readings  Historic bills older than 24 months  Premises that have never been linked to an occupant in Incode  Etc. Page 97 of 316 11.11.16 Itineris Change OrderCO - Transformation 4 | P a g e Transform Proposed Solution It is important that the Staging environment contains the full IN-SCOPE dataset, and nothing else. So all data that arrives in the Staging environment, is also to be expected in the Target environment for go-live. In this stage, the data still complies with the source datamodel. Step 2: Staging --> Transformed: In this step, the following actions are performed:  Mapping of source values to target values (possibly based on configuration)  Transformation of source datamodel to target datamodel (UMAX) The technical setup of the intermediary environment will be done by Georgetown Utility Systems. Itineris can provide assistance here, but that assistance is not considered to be in the Itineris scope. Once the data is published in the Transformed environment, it is ready to be loaded to UMAX. 1.1.2. UMAX Loadsheets Itineris will provide detailed loadsheets for each in-scope data entity, so that there is no extensive knowledge needed of the UMAX data model to be able to design and develop the transformation rules. The format of these loadsheets is an excel spreadsheet, where all attributes for that data entity are listed and documented: functional attribute name, technical attribute name, data type, length, validations, extra information, etc. Itineris will support, manage and direct the GUS contractor with interpreting the loadsheets and all related transformation tasks. The combination of the documentation of the loadsheets and the delivered support should provide the GUS contractor with the necessary knowledge transfer, and familiarize them with the UMAX datamodel. Itineris will load the transformed data into UMAX. Itineris will perform the load, and provide Georgetown Utility Systems with a load report afterwards, where the following aspects of the load are reported back to Georgetown Utility Systems:  Exception % per data entity (= per loadsheet)  Exception details (which transactions were rejected and why)  Lead times per data entity (= per loadsheet) It is then up to Georgetown Utility Systems/Itineris to analyze exceptions, and make the necessary adjustments to their extraction/ transformation scripts. Page 98 of 316 11.11.16 Itineris Change OrderCO - Transformation 5 | P a g e Transform Proposed Solution 1.2. Quantity of Migrated Data 1.2.1. Traceability It is important that the data migration team keeps track of the number of transactions that flow through the ETL process (Source – Staging – Transformed – Target) – and even more importantly, the number of transactions that are left behind. As discussed earlier (see Section 1.1.1), filtering will take place in some stages of the data migration because some categories of data that are part of the source database are out of scope of the data migration. Examples of these are:  Non-Billed Meter readings  Historic data (that older than 24 months)  Premises that have never been linked to an occupant in the Legacy System  Etc. However, it is important that the number of transactions that are filtered out, are documented as well: the general philosophy should be that all data that is left behind in some stage of the data migration process (either Source, Staging or Transformed) should be accounted for, i.e., a clear reason has to be given (and documented) why this data is left behind. Page 99 of 316 11.11.16 Itineris Change OrderCO - Transformation 6 | P a g e Transform Proposed Solution This quantity check will typically be performed for each data migration test run (and for go-live as well), and is shared responsibility GUS-Itineris:  Per loadsheet, the number of transactions in each stage (Intermediary Source, Staging, Transformed, Target (UMAX)) is noted. o GUS is responsible for the counts in the Intermediary Source. o The party responsible for the transformation will be responsible for the counts in Staging and Transformed. o Itineris will validate the counts for the Transformed Stage, and is responsible for the count in the Target stage.  These counts will be brought together, and an explanation will be given for any differences between different stages (out of scope, still to be cleansed, transformation exception, load exception, etc.). Example: This document will focus on one level, i.e. the number of transactions for each data entity. A drilldown to a deeper level of understanding will also be needed (e.g. drilldown the number of customers to distinguish between residential customers and commercial customers, etc.), this will be discussed in the next section. Page 100 of 316 11.11.16 Itineris Change OrderCO - Transformation 7 | P a g e 1.2.2. Migration Dashboard It is important to detail the Migration Dashboard in this Assessment as the party responsible for Transform activities will be required to design control counts for Transform tasks. 1.2.2.1. What is it? The migration dashboard is a quantity instrument that is generated after each migration test run (and go- live). It is made up of a list of predefined control counts, for which the comparison is made between source and target environment, and whose visual representation allows for a quick overview of the quality/quantity of the data migration run.  Quantity instrument: it is an instrument that can be used to provide the accepters of the data migration with a deep insight into the completeness of the migration.  Predefined control counts: Itineris and GUS will agree on a limited but representative set of control counts for which they want to see a comparison between source and target.  Comparison: the control counts are executed on both source (Intermediary Source) and target environment (UMAX). The difference between the two counts is displayed as well.  Visual representation: the layout of the dashboard has to allow for a quick identification of concern areas: control counts that fall outside of a predefined range are highlighted. The additional insight gained through the dashboard compared to the traceability report, is that the functional control counts that are defined here are meant to give a deeper insight and drilldown, and only take into account the in scope entities and attributes. For example, in the previous section, we would count the number of customer transactions in the customer loadsheet. This does provide some insight, but you might want to dig deeper to distinguish between:  Commercial and residential customers  Customers with a payment that is past due  Etc. Note: the migration dashboard is not meant to contain comprehensive BI reports. The control counts that are used here should be kept relatively simple. Complex reports fall outside of the scope of the data migration. 1.2.2.2. Responsibilities Itineris- Georgetown Utility Systems Since the control counts are performed on both source and target, both Itineris and GUS have a responsibility:  GUS responsibility: o Review the list of control counts that is proposed by Itineris (+ potentially make requests for additional control counts) to land on a baseline. o Provide Itineris with all counters from the source database after each migration run (and go- live).  Itineris responsibility: Page 101 of 316 11.11.16 Itineris Change OrderCO - Transformation 8 | P a g e Transform Proposed Solution o Present an initial proposition of control counts to GUS based on previous experience and best practice o Agree on a baseline (of control counts) after review by GUS o Design the dashboard o Build the dashboard o Provide counters from the target database after each migration run (and go-live) o Consolidate source and target counters after each migration run (and go-live) It is crucial that the agreed list of control counts is supported by the accepters of the data migration, as the dashboard will typically be used as an important tool for the acceptance. Only when the accepters feel that the list of agreed control counts is representative for the complete dataset, will they feel confident in taking an informed decision. To reach the support of the accepters, they have to be involved in the composition and review of the set of control counts. 1.3. Data Entities In this section, an overview is given of the data entities (+specifications) that will be in scope of the data migration. Some entities or specifications that have been discussed in the migration workshops are explicitly mentioned in the out of scope section. Any other entities that are not mentioned in the table, or that are not in the “in scope” column, are considered out of scope. Data Entity In Scope Out of Scope Assumptions Customer Account  All Active  All Inactive with end date within last 24 months  Final Emergency Contacts (notes are out of scope for migration) No accounts in disconnect status will be migrated, i.e. none will exist at Go-Live. Party The current financially responsible party for every in scope customer account  Owner/Tenant (Data not reliable)  Other parties: roommate, spouse etc. (Data not reliable and incomplete) Consolidation of financially responsible party will be performed by GUS during data cleansing activities prior to transformation. Premises All premises in the ServiceAddress table, including COGEAMID from ESRI  Living Units (data NOT reliable)  Premises that have NEVER been linked to an occupant Every premises is migrated as a single premises (no grouped premises). Page 102 of 316 11.11.16 Itineris Change OrderCO - Transformation 9 | P a g e Data Entity In Scope Out of Scope Assumptions Landlords All unique landlords Service  All records in the Occupant table with no end date (=active)  All records in the Occupant table with start date <= 24 months Meters  All installed meters (=meters in the Meter table)  All Meters in Inventory  Any information from Infor  Meter test results All open meter exchanges/installations/ removals are completed prior to the go live freeze. Geographical Coordinates  Geo coo for each in scope service Point (=service or installed meter, tbd)  Geo coo for each in scope premises Geographical coordinates on any other entities ESRI is added as direct source for extraction so that the COGEAMID and geographical coordinates of the premises are available in the intermediary database Registers All registers on an in scope meter Modules All current modules installed on an in scope meter Historic modules on meters Street Light All currently installed street lights History  Migrated as separate assets without serial number  Serial numbers are inserted manually after go live Page 103 of 316 11.11.16 Itineris Change OrderCO - Transformation 10 | P a g e Data Entity In Scope Out of Scope Assumptions Cart All currently installed carts History Dumpster All currently installed dumpsters History Locking Device All currently installed locking devices History Backflow Device Currently installed backflow devices (including date of last successful test result)  History Backflow Device  Test results Other assets Due to not tracked in legacy:  Compactor  AC unit  Water heater  Pressure reducing valve  Irrigation controller  Meter control panel  Load management device  Current & potential transformers Drainage Pond Current ponds History Well Current wells History Solar Panel Current solar panels History Other appliances Due to not tracked in legacy:  Swimming pool  Hydrant private  Wind Turbine  Cattle through  Septic Service Orders Service Orders in Incode for the last year  Call Center tickets (Infor)  Service/Work Orders in Infor  All other service orders in Incode  Historic service orders are migrated as Cases  All open service orders are completed prior to the go live freeze Contracts  One commercial agreement per in scope premises  One or more delivery agreements per in scope Rates (rate structure and prices are configured in UMAX)  Contracts are migrated based on a template with product.  Complex structures (if any) will be migrated manually. Page 104 of 316 11.11.16 Itineris Change OrderCO - Transformation 11 | P a g e Data Entity In Scope Out of Scope Assumptions premises (Contracts do not exist in Legacy -to be created during transformation)  All ongoing move in/outs are completed prior to the go live freeze Invoice Structures One invoice structure per in scope premises (Invoice structures do not exist in Legacy –to be created during transformation) Certificates & fixed quantities Current/last known situation for each In Scope Customer History (Not available) Meter Readings  For each in scope service that has been billed in legacy: all billed meter readings for the last 24 months  For each in scope service that has not yet been billed in legacy: initial meter reading  Meter Reading requests  Consumptions calculated in Legacy system  Not billed meter readings Historic meter readings are migrated for consultation purposes only Period Quantity Period Quantities for all In Scope meter readings DAC  Most recent DAC for every in scope contract  Most recent DAC for every installed register Historic DACs Bill For each in scope customer, all bills of the past two years  Budget Billing  Non posted bills  All Bills are processed and posted prior to the go live freeze  Bills are migrated as bill header + document reference  Migrated bills are for consultation only; no automatic Page 105 of 316 11.11.16 Itineris Change OrderCO - Transformation 12 | P a g e Data Entity In Scope Out of Scope Assumptions adjustment or cancellation is supported. Customer Transactions For each in scope customer account:  Amount due on the last legacy bill  All non-settled payments, credits, others received after the last legacy bill  Unposted transactions  Settled transactions All bills and transactions are processed and posted prior to the go live freeze General Ledger For all in scope customer transactions, at least one ledger transaction (possibly split per fund for the amount due) All other general ledger transactions Cases  Service Orders as discussed in topic 'Service Orders'  TBD: which comment codes need to be a Case  Call Center tickets  ALL CommentCodes NOT in Contract or Customer or Premises  Notes  ONLY cases related to in scope entities can be migrated  GUS will archive the existing notes that can be searchable by customer number or address in Incode Deposits TBD: all deposits that have not been paid back. ALL paid deposits Deposits are in scope until decision is reached Inspections Start date of every vacant premises at go live  Historical vacancy dates  Inspection records (not available in Incode) Turn off/on reason codes None  Complete all ongoing/scheduled turn offs/ons 2 weeks prior to go live freeze  Reconnections on migrated turn offs will be handled as move ins (to be UMAX process) Page 106 of 316 11.11.16 Itineris Change OrderCO - Transformation 13 | P a g e Data Entity In Scope Out of Scope Assumptions Direct Debit File TBD: Decision recurring payments and credit cards Possible manual migration or import of journal lines Payment Plan Active Payment plans  Deposits in legacy  Historical payment plans  Complete as many open payment plans as possible prior to the go live freeze  Manual Migration because customer specific Dubious TBD; pending decision on how to migrate bad debt accounts Collection Letter TBD; Depends on decision whether or not to wave current penalties Other files  Commission commitment  Bankruptcy  Dispute  Depreciation  Lien  Refund  NSF  Disconnection Document References For each migrated bill, when available All other document references  Unique identifier to identify specific bills/account is provided by GUS  Path to the physical location or URL will be migrated (TBD) Note that the entire scope has not yet been completely defined, but it is expected that the above entities (excluding the scoping specifications) are 90% accurate. The open topics are to be discussed and clarified as soon as possible (by mid Design phase). The fact that a data entity is ‘in scope’ does not necessarily mean that the import will be automated (through a loadsheet or a sql script or an AX script). The ‘migration method’ (automated vs manually) will be determined based on the number of transactions and/or the complexity. For instance, when the number of transactions is small and complex, it may be more beneficial to import the transactions manually (e.g. payment arrangements). Page 107 of 316 11.11.16 Itineris Change OrderCO - Transformation 14 | P a g e 1.4. Source Systems It is assumed that the Georgetown Utility Legacy System (Incode) and ESRI are the main (and only) sources of the data migration. All other sources are either indirect sources for the migration are out-of-scope. Estimate Formulas Itineris has compiled an estimating process to evaluate the tasks and efforts to perform Transform tasks. This estimating* includes:  Functional Effort – Itineris Functional Consultant additional task effort to work w/Technical Transform Consultant  Transform Effort – tasks to be performed by Technical Transform Consultant  Staffing – percentage of monthly required staffing of Functional Consultant, Technical Consultant (Load) and Technical Consultant (Transform).  Complexity – each entity was analyzed and assigned a complexity level of 1-10  Estimates - Transform tasks were estimated based on the complexity of the entities and the required development, workshop attendance, testing, rework, dashboard & traceability report counts & execution required. *Estimations are based on a total of 8 data migration iterations including Go-Live. Transformation Tasks are estimated in man days and include: Transformation Development Initial development Two different formats of load tables: line and block structure 0 .00 Rework (as a result of migration runs and testing) 0.00 Dashboard + Traceability Development of all counts for intermediary environments 0.00 Error analysis (technical comparison and discussion with counts of extract and load) 0.00 Technical support - General support/assistance for migration related technical tasks. i.e. set up of intermediate tables, infrastructure, etc. -Support for ITI and GUS leads in work sessions and DM meetings 0.00 Migration runs Execution transform 0.00 Reports (traceability, dashboard) 0.00 Dry run (Mock Go-Live) Execution transform 0.00 Additional activities during dry run (roadmap meetings, infrastructure meetings, etc.) 0.00 Reports (traceability, dashboard) 0.00 Go-Live Execution transform 0.00 Reports (traceability, dashboard) 0.00 Page 108 of 316 11.11.16 Itineris Change OrderCO - Transformation 15 | P a g e Sub-Total 0.00 Itineris Functional Itineris Technical Support of Transformation  64 man days to support transformation (mapping design): This is a task done by the Itineris migration lead and the customer migration lead together, in both scenarios (transform responsibility by Itineris or by customer)  46 man days transformation support for the GUS contractor including:  Transformation guidance throughout the process to support transformation plan.  Support Transformation rule design  Data migration status meetings and follow-up, if direction is needed.  Escalation and resolution to complete plan  Technical support and guidance of how to set up particular data load tables from legacy system (e.g. for block structure load sheets)  Support to deliver data migration reports to ensure data is not lost and migration has migrated correctly.  General support and assistance as needed to successfully complete the data migration.  5 days load count support  5 days technical support 56.00 Total Kent’s estimated effort per completion of a Staffing Effort matrix totals 122.75 man days. It is assumed that Kent will remain a sub-contractor for GUS and not under the employ of Itineris. Staffing Efforts per Data Migration Consultant were estimated per month based on Itineris historical efforts and are as follows: Page 109 of 316 11.11.16 Itineris Change OrderCO - Transformation 16 | P a g e A RACI.xls has been provided as part of this Change Order for review and approval by GUS of Data Migration responsibilities. The Transform efforts being primarily completed by a GUS contractor but managed and directed by Itineris for the transformation delivery. The following deliverables’ responsible party should be revised as follows:  Del. 38 – Transformation Rules Design Responsible: Itineris/GUS  Del. 51 – Transformation Rules Development Responsible: Itineris/GUS  Del. 71 – Converted Data/Audit Trail Responsible: Itineris / GUS  Del. 73 – Trial Data Migration Responsible: Itineris / GUS  Del. 79 – Migration Final Load Responsible: Itineris / GUS Project Impact Impact Description Budget 46 man days of Itineris Transformation Support 5 man days load count report support 5 man days of technical support 56 Total man days @ project rate of $1,000 per MD = $56,000. This is a fixed price for the services provided and will not exceed $56,000 Travel and lodging expenses, if needed will be billed monthly as the work is performed and due 30 days from the date of invoice. Costs are in addition to the initially agreed upon travel budget. Resource(s) TBD Payments $ 56,000 To be billed on a Time & Material basis monthly and will not exceed $56,000. Due upon receipt of DMIA Schedule The 1st Migration run at the end of the design stage in still on track with this change control so the overall delivery schedule will not be impacted. Risk Any delay in the activities laid out in this change control to achieve the 1st migration run at the end of the design phase may result in a delay to the delivery of the overall project. Page 110 of 316 11.11.16 Itineris Change OrderCO - Transformation 17 | P a g e Approvals Item # City of Georgetown Itineris Itineris Name Byron King K. Jeanine Stone Role VP Professional Services Project Manager Signature Date Customer signature serves as an acceptance of the budget amount listed above as it relates to the description of work contained in this Change Order. Your signature also indicates you have reviewed and agree to the scope of work as detailed in any accompanying enclosures or attachments. Page 111 of 316 R:Responsible - owns/completes the tasks A: C: I:Informed - notified of decisions/results Project Project Genesis - Georgetown UMAX CIS Implementation Updated 10/19/2016 Kent Hudson Task DESCRIPTION Aloysious Sheil Load Consultant Transform Consultant James Foutz Business Process & Data Christina Richison Testing Data Migration - Analysis Phase May - August 2016 1 Data Migration Plan & Strategy (D: 17-I)R/A I C/I A C/I 2 Data (Quality) Assessment (D: 18-G)C/I I I R/A C/I 3 High Level Entity Mapping (D:19-I)R/A I C/I A C/I 4 Data Migration Workshops (D:20-I)R/A I C/I R C/I 5 Extraction and Extraction Design (D: 21-G)C/I I C/I R/A C/I 6 Data Migration Scope and Acceptance Criteria (D: 22-G)C/I I C/I R/A C/I Data Migration - Design Phase September - December 2016 7 Entity Mapping - (D: 37-I)R/A C/I C/I A C/I 8 Transformation Rules Design D: 38-I)R/A C/I R A C/I 9 Iteration Scope and & Acceptance Criteria (D: 39-G)C/I I C/I R/A C/I 10 Data Cleansing (D: 40-G)C/I I C/I R/A C/I 11 Set Up Intermediary Environments C/I I R R/A I 12 Intermediate DM Runs (mini runs for all master data entities)R/A R/A R/A R/A C/I 13 Iteration 1 - schedule to be developed in Design Phase R/A R/A R R/A C/I Data Migration - Development Phase December 2015 - May 2017 14 Transformation Rules Development (D: 51-I)R/A C/I R A C/I 15 Data Cleansing - GUS C/I I C/I R/A C/I 16 Data Migration Scripts (D: 52-I)R/A R/A C/I A C/I 17 Data Migration Dashboard (D:53-I/G)R/A C/I R R/A C/I 18 Visual Comparisons on Migrated Data C/I I I R/A A 19 Load Reports R/A R/A I I I 20 Traceability Report R/A R/A R R/A C/I 21 Error Analysis and Fixes R/A R/A R R/A C/I 22 Intermediate Runs (ad hoc Test Runs between Iterations) D: 54-I/G)R/A R/A R/A R/A C/I 23 Iteration 2 - schedule to be developed in Design Phase R/A R/A R/A R/A C/I 24 Iteration 3 - schedule to be developed in Design Phase R/A R/A R/A R/A C/I 25 Iteration 4 - schedule to be developed in Design Phase R/A R/A R/A R/A C/I Data Migration - Deployment Phase May 2017 - November 2017 26 Converted Data/Audit Trail (D:71 - I)R/A R/A R A C/I 27 Data Cleansing - GUS C/I I C/I R/A C/I 28 Intermediate Runs (ad hoc in between official runs and before Mock Go-Live)R/A R/A R/A R/A C/I 29 Iteration 5 R/A R/A R/A R/A C/I 30 Iteration 6 - Trial Data Migration (D: 73-I)R/A R/A R/A R/A C/I Data Migration - Operations Phase December 2017 31 Mock Go-Live - Iteration 7 R/A R/A R/A R/A C/I 32 Migration Final Load - Iteration 8 (D: 79-I)R/A R/A R/A R/A C/I GeorgetownItineris Data Migration RACI Accountable - Approver, to whom R is responsible Consulted - communicated with regarding decisions and tasks Page 112 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Forwarded fro m G eorg etow n Uti l i ty Systems Advi so ry B oard (G US): Consideration and possible actio n to appro ve a co ntract with KHA Intel l i gence G roup, LLC to provide transformati o n rul e desi gn, devel opment, and data conversi on of the l egacy syste m data for Data Mi grati on in the amount of $83,4 70 .00 -- Leticia Zavala, Customer Care Director ITEM SUMMARY: The Data Migratio n P lan fo llows the traditional ETL (Extractio n – Transformation – Lo ad) process and is a critical part of the CIS project. It consists of extracting data from the legacy (Incode) system, co nverting that data to a fo rmat that complies with the UMAX data model, and loading the co nverted data into UMAX. (Se e attached documents for diagram) A Data Migration Impact Assessment was conducted during the first phase of the pro ject to de termine the e ffort needed to complete the transformatio n and mapping tasks for the Data Migratio n Plan. The assessment provided a Responsibility Assessment Matrix that identified the deliverable s and assigned responsibilities fo r the migration of the data. Kent Hudso n, owner of KHA Intelligence Group LLC, is one o f the original developers o f the Incode system and as a result, has expert kno wle dge of the system, e specially as it relates to database structures. Mr. Hudso n was re tained through a sole source arrangement earlier in the CIS project to provide data extraction services fro m the Inco de syste m. This item will secure additio nal hours to pe rform the transformation rule design, de velopment, and data co nversion of the legacy system data into a format that complies with the UMAX data model. STAF F RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval o f this contract to ensure the pro ject stays on track and all co nversion related deliverables are met without an impact to the overall pro ject timeline. The lack of spe c ialized in house technical expertise necessitate s contracting with a 3rd party. B OARD RECOMMENDATION: This item was unanimously approved for reco mmendation to Co uncil by the GUS Board at their meeting held on November 11, 2 01 6. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The co st was unknown in May 2 01 6 when the so ftware co ntract was appro ved. The Pro ject Co ntingency amount of $500,000 includes an internal cost estimate for Data Migration Services. The general ledger acco unt #610-9-058 0-9 1- 105 will be used to fund the $83,470 and is part of the overall project budget. P roject Components B udg et Software & Integration Services $2,500,557 IT & Infrastructure 400,000 Consulting Services 672,180 Co ntingency **500,000 To tal Project Budget:$4,072,737 SUBMITTED BY: Leticia Zavala, Custo mer Care Director (skm) ATTACHMENT S: Description Co versheet with Diagram KHA Contrac t Page 113 of 316 Georgetown Utility System Advisory Board Meeting Date: November 11, 2016 Item No. SUBJECT Consideration and possible recommendation to approve a contract with KHA Intelligence Group LLC to provide transformation rule design, development, and data conversion of the legacy system data for Data Migration in the amount of $83,470. ITEM SUMMARY The Data Migration Plan follows the traditional ETL (Extraction – Transformation – Load) process and is a critical part of the CIS project. It consists of extracting data from the legacy (Incode) system, converting that data to a format that complies with the UMAX data model, and loading the converted data into UMAX. A Data Migration Impact Assessment was conducted during the first phase of the project to determine the effort needed to complete the transformation and mapping tasks for the Data Migration Plan. The assessment provided a Responsibility Assessment Matrix that identified the deliverables and assigned responsibilities for the migration of the data. Kent Hudson, owner of KHA Intelligence Group LLC, is one of the original developers of the Incode system and as a result, has expert knowledge of the system, especially as it relates to database structures. Mr. Hudson was retained through a sole source arrangement earlier in the CIS project to provide data extraction services from the Incode system. This item will secure additional hours to perform the transformation rule design, development, and data conversion of the legacy system data into a format that complies with the UMAX data model. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of this contract to ensure the project stays on track and all conversion related deliverables are met without an impact to the overall project timeline. The lack of specialized in house technical expertise necessitates contracting with a 3 rd party. FINANCIAL IMPACT The cost was unknown in May 2016 when the software contract was approved. The Project Contingency amount of $500,000 includes an internal cost estimate for Data Migration Services. The general ledger account #610-9-0580-91-105 will be used to fund the $83,470 and is part of the overall project budget. Project Components Budget Software & Integration Services $2,500,557 IT & Infrastructure 400,000 Consulting Services 672,180 Contingency ** 500,000 Total Project Budget: $4,072,737 ATTACHMENTS Contract Leticia Zavala Customer Care Director Page 114 of 316 1 of 5 CONSULTATION AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN This Consultation Agreement (the “Agreement”) is entered into and made effective on the ______ day of ___________, _________ by and between kha Intelligence Group (“Consultant”) and the City of Georgetown, Texas (“City”). 1. Scope of Services. Consultant agrees to provide such services as are further described in Exhibit A, which is attached and incorporated herein. 2. City Terms Prevail. In the event there is a conflict between a term in Exhibit A and a term in this agreement, the terms of this agreement shall prevail. 3. Total Compensation. The total compensation paid by the City to the Consultant, including expenses, under this agreement shall not exceed $83,470. 4. Term. The term of this agreement shall be in effect until the services have been completed by Consultant, but in no event shall the term extend beyond 02/01/2018. 5. Amendments. Any changes to the terms of this agreement will not be effective unless in writing and signed by both parties. 6. Insurance. Consultant shall maintain insurance coverage appropriate for the fulfillment of this Agreement. In the event the Consultant, its employees, agents or subcontractors enter premises occupied by or under the control of the City, the Consultant agrees to maintain public liability and property damage insurance in reasonable limits covering the obligations set forth in this Agreement, and will maintain Workers’ Compensation coverage (either by insurance or if qualified pursuant to law, through a self-insurance program) covering all employees performing on premises occupied by or under control of the City. Upon request, Consultant shall provide a copy of its insurance policies to the City. 7. INDEMNITY. THE CONSULTANT SHALL DEFEND, INDEMNIFY AND HOLD HARMLESS THE CITY, ITS OFFICERS, AGENTS, SERVANTS AND EMPLOYEES FROM AND AGAINST ANY AND ALL SUITS, ACTIONS, LEGAL PROCEEDINGS, CAUSES OF ACTION, CLAIMS, DEMANDS, DAMAGES, JUDGMENTS, LOSSES, LIENS, COSTS, EXPENSES, ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND ANY AND ALL OTHER COSTS, FEES AND/OR CLAIMS OF ANY KIND OR DESCRIPTION ARISING OUT OF, IN CONNECTION WITH OR RESULTING FROM THE AGREEMENT OR SERVICES PROVIDED UNDER THE AGREEMENT OR FROM ITS NEGLIGENCE OR WILLFUL ACT WHETHER SUCH ACT BE BY THE CONSULTANT OR ITS DESIGNEE. THE CITY, AS A GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, SHALL NOT INDEMNIFY THE CONSULTANT. 8. Release by Consultant. The Consultant releases, relinquishes and discharges the City, its elected officials, officers, directors, agents, employees, representatives and volunteers from all claims, demands, and causes of action of every kind and character, including the cost of defense, for any injury to or death of any person (whether employees of either party or other Page 115 of 316 2 of 5 third parties) and any loss or damage to any property that is caused by or alleged to be caused by, arising out of, or in connection with the work it performed under this Agreement. This release shall apply regardless of whether the claims, demands and/or causes of action are covered in whole or in part by insurance. 9. Dispute Resolution. If either the Consultant or the City has a claim or dispute, the parties shall first attempt to resolve the matter through this dispute resolution process. The disputing party shall notify the other party in writing as soon as practicable after discovering the claim, dispute or breach. The notice shall state the nature of the dispute and list the party’s specific reasons for such dispute. Within ten (10) business days of receipt of the notice, both parties shall make a good faith effort, in person or through generally accepted means, to resolve any claim, dispute, breach or other matter in question that may arise out of, or in connection with, this Agreement. If the parties fail to resolve the dispute within sixty (60) days of the date of receipt of the notice of the dispute, then the parties may submit the matter to non -binding mediation upon written consent of authorized representatives of both parties. If the parties cannot resolve the dispute through mediation, then either party shall have the right to exercise any and all remedies available under law regarding the dispute. 10. Payment Terms. All payments will be processed in accordance with Texas Prompt Payment Act, Texas Government Code, Subtitle F, Chapter 2251. The City will pay Consultant within thirty days after of receipt of a correct invoice for services. The Consultant may charge a late fee (fee shall not be greater than that permitted under the Texas Prompt Payment Act) for payments not made in accordance with this prompt payment policy; however, the policy does not apply to payments made by the City in the event: (a) there is a bona fide dispute between the City and Consultant concerning the goods, supplies, materials, equipment delivered, or the services performed, that causes the payment to be late; (b) the terms of a federal agreement, grant, regulation or statute prevents the City from making a timely payment with Federal funds; (c) there is a bona fide dispute between the Consultant and a subcontractor and its suppliers concerning goods, supplies, material or equipment delivered, or the services performed, which caused the payment to be late; or (d) the invoice is not mailed to the City in accordance with Agreement. 11. Termination for Convenience. The City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement, in whole or in part, without cause any time upon thirty (30) calendar days’ prior written notice. Upon receipt of a notice of termination, the Consultant shall promptly cease all further work pursuant to the Agreement, with such exceptions, if any, specified in the notice of termination. The City shall pay the Consultant, to the extent of funds appropriated or otherwise legally available for such purposes, for all services performed and obligations incurred prior to the date of termination. 12. Termination for Cause. In addition to the termination rights described above, either party may terminate this Agreement effective upon written notice to the other if the other breaches any of the terms and conditions of this Agreement and fails to cure that breach within thirty (30) days after receiving written notice of the breach. In the event of an incurable breach, the non-breaching party may terminate this Agreement effective immediately upon written notice to the breaching party. Page 116 of 316 3 of 5 13. Notices. Any notice or communication permitted or required by this Agreement shall be deemed effective when personally delivered or deposited, postage prepaid, in the first class mail of the United States properly, or sent via electronic means, addressed to the appropriate party at the address set forth below: Notice to the Consultant: Kha Intelligence Group___ ATTN: Kent Hudson_____ PO Box 591____________ McKinney, TX 75070____ ______________________ Notice to the City: City of Georgetown ATTN: City Manager P.O. Box 409 Georgetown, Texas 78627 ________________@georgetown.org With a copy to: City of Georgetown ATTN: City Attorney P.O. Box 409 Georgetown, Texas 78627 ________________@georgetown.org 14. Independent Contractor. The Agreement shall not be construed as creating an employer/employee relationship, a partnership or joint venture. The Consultant’s services shall be those of an independent contractor. The Consultant agrees and understands that the Agreement does not grant any rights or privileges established for employees of the City. Consultant shall not be within protection or coverage of the City’s Worker Compensation insurance, Health Insurance, Liability Insurance or any other insurance that the City, from time to time, may have in force. 15. Force Majeure. The City and the Consultant will exert all efforts to perform the tasks set forth herein within the proposed schedules. However, neither the City nor the Consultant shall be held responsible for inability to perform under this Agreement if such inability is a direct result of a force substantially beyond its control, including but not limited to the following: strikes, riots, civil disturbances, fire, insurrection, war, embargoes, failures of carriers, acts of God, or the public enemy. 16. No Waiver. The waiver by either party of a breach or violation of any provision of this Agreement shall not operate as or be construed to be a waiver of any subsequent breach hereof. Page 117 of 316 4 of 5 17. Nondiscrimination. The Consultant, with regard to the work performed by it after award and prior to completion of this Agreement, shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, sex, or national origin in the selection and retention of Sub-consultants, including procurements of materials and leases of equipment. The Consultant shall not participate either directly or indirectly in the discrimination prohibited by any federal, state or local law. 18. Confidential Information. Each party agrees not to use, disclose, sell, license, publish, reproduce or otherwise make available the Confidential Information of the other party except and only to the extent necessary to perform under this Agreement or as required by the Texas Public Information Act or other applicable law. Confidential Information shall be designated and marked as such at the time of disclosure. Each party agrees to secure and protect the other party’s Confidential Information in a manner consistent with the maintenance of the other party’s confidential and proprietary rights in the information and to take appropriate action by instruction or agreement with its employees, consultants, or other agents who are permitted access to the other party’s Confidential Information to satisfy its obligations under this Section. The provisions of this paragraph shall survive the term of the Agreement. 19. Severability. This Agreement is severable and if any one or more parts of it are found to be invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the remainder of this Agreement if it can be given effect without the invalid parts. 20. Governing Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Texas. Venue shall be located in Williamson County, Texas. 21. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and any subsequent successors and assigns. The Consultant shall not subcontract or assign responsibility for performance of any portion of this Agreement without the prior written consent of the City. 22. Third Party Beneficiaries. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall create a contractual relationship with or a cause of action in favor of a third party against either the City or the Consultant. 23. Entire Agreement. This Agreement, with all exhibits, includes the entire agreement of the City and the Consultant and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous agreements between the parties, whether oral or written, relating to the subject of this agreement. Page 118 of 316 5 of 5 THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN KHA INTELLIGENCE GROUP ______________________________ ________________________________ ________________, _____________ Kent Hudson, Owner Date Signed: ___________________ Date Signed:_______________ 11/3/2016 Page 119 of 316 Exhibit A - Scope of Work Overview: Assist Georgetown Utility Systems (GUS) with Data Migration Plan incorporating transformation rule design, development and data conversion of the Incode legacy system data to the Itineris UMAX model. Deliverables: 1. Set up Intermediary server environments 2. Design data conversion rules 3. Oversees the extraction and conversion of the legacy system data during the Data Migration Iterations (8) a. Iteration schedule to be developed with coordination from Itineris & GUS 4. Develop data conversion rules and assist with documentation 5. Create data migration dashboard 6. Create traceability Report 7. Assist with error analysis & fixes 8. Provide audit trail for converted data Work Performed: Majority of the work will be performed remotely in collaboration with the GUS and Itineris data migration project team. Contract Pricing: Travel is included in the contract pricing of $83,470. This contract is for 122.75 work days at a rate of $680 per work days. Network Access: City of Georgetown will grant the necessary server and IT UMAX infrastructure access as needed for Data Migration tasks. Page 120 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Forwarded fro m G eorg etow n Uti l i ty Systems Advi so ry B oard (G US): Consideration and possible action to approve a task o rder with El ectSol ve Technol o gy Sol uti o ns and Servi ce to devel op and confi g ure i ntegrati o ns betw een the meter data manag e ment system and the new CIS UMAX softw are in the amo unt o f $7 5,000.00 -- Leticia Zavala, Custo mer Care Director ITEM SUMMARY: This task order is for the deve lo pment and configuration o f a new Web Service Interface fo r the integration between the existing meter data management (MDM) software (Ele c tSolve/uCentra) and the new Itineris CIS system (UMAX). (See attached documents fo r diagram) The existing uCentra MDM software pro vides a co mmon infrastructure for receiving meter reads from the c urre nt AMR/AMI systems, pro cessing the reads to pro duce billing quantity data, storing and managing data, and providing o ther applications ac c e ss to meter data. The Itineris UMAX software is the system of record for custo mers and billing records. It re quires meter reads in order to pro vide accurate billings to the customers. The inte gratio ns include d in this task order between UMAX and uCentra enables the following data exchanges. Exchange active customer information Exchange active meter information Exchange billing histo ry Provide single sign o n for web portal Exchange meters read Exchange ad-ho c remote requests Exchange service o rder meter reads STAF F RECOMMENDATION Staff re c ommends approval of this co ntract to develop and co nfigure ne c e ssary integrations within the existing uCentra MDM in order to pro vide the necessary data exchanges with the CIS UMAX system. B OARD RECOMMENDATION: This item was unanimously approved for reco mmendation to Co uncil by the GUS Board at their meeting held on November 11, 2 01 6. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The task order includes time and materials pricing at a rate of $1 25 /ho ur which equates to 600 hours of work. This c ost was included in the IT & infrastructure amount of the ove rall project budget. The general ledger account #610-9-0 58 0- 91-105 will be used to fund the $75,000. P roject Components B udg et Software & Integration Services $2,500,557 IT & Infrastructure **400,000 Consulting Services 672,180 Contingency 500,000 To tal Project Budget:$4,072,737 SUBMITTED BY: Leticia Zavala, Custo mer Care Director (skm) ATTACHMENT S: Description Co versheet with Diagram ElectSolve Tas k Order Page 121 of 316 Page 122 of 316 Georgetown Utility System Advisory Board Meeting Date: November 11, 2016 Item No. SUBJECT Consideration and possible recommendation to approve a task order with ElectSolve Technology Solutions and Service to develop and configure integrations between the meter data management system and the new CIS UMAX software in the amount of $75,000. -- Leticia Zavala, Customer Care Director ITEM SUMMARY This task order is for the development and configuration of a new Web Service Interface for the integration between the existing meter data management (MDM) software (ElectSolve/uCentra) and the new Itineris CIS system (UMAX). The existing uCentra MDM software provides a common infrastructure for receiving meter reads from the current AMR/AMI systems, processing the reads to produce billing quantity data, storing and managing data, and providing other applications access to meter data. The Itineris UMAX software is the system of record for customers and billing records. It requires meter reads in order to provide accurate billings to the customers. The integrations included in this task order between UMAX and uCentra enables the following data exchanges .  Exchange active customer information  Exchange active meter information  Exchange billing history  Exchange meters read  Exchange ad-hoc remote requests  Exchange service order meter reads  Provide single sign on for web portal STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of this contract to develop and configure necessary integrations within the existing uCentra MDM in order to provide the necessary data exchanges with the CIS UMAX system . FINANCIAL IMPACT The task order includes time and materials pricing at a rate of $125/hour which equates to 600 hours of work. This cost was included in the IT & inf rastructure amount of the overall project budget. The general ledger account #610-9-0580-91-105 will be used to fund the $75,000. Project Components Budget Software & Integration Services $2,500,557 IT & Infrastructure ** 400,000 Consulting Services 672,180 Contingency 500,000 Total Project Budget: $4,072,737 ATTACHMENTS Task Order Leticia Zavala Customer Care Director Page 123 of 316 TASK ORDER City of Georgetown (COG) uCentra Upgrade and CIS Conversion/Web Services Interface DATE: 7/29/16 TASK ORDER #: 1010 1.0 Background. City of Georgetown is requesting the development and configuration of a new Web Services Interface for the integration between the ElectSolve uCentra ODM/MDM and the new Itineris UMAX Solutions CIS that will be installed at the City of Georgetown. 2.0 Deliverales and Scope of Work. 2.1 MDM uCentra Upgrade and CIS Interface Conversion from Incode to uMAX 2.1.1 Billing process review, evaluation and change evaluation. 2.1.2 Production planning, testing and rollout. 2.1.3 Installation of latest uCentra MDM version release. 2.1.4 Interface and Integration of uMax to the uCe ntra MDM. 2.1.5 Installation of Multispeak Interfaces and other needed interfaces to synchronize and update the uCentra system from uMax; Data synchronization includes at a minimum: Meters, Customers, Accounts, Locations, Rates and all other required CIS fields. uCentra supports both Multispeak versions 3 and 4.16. File based methods and other web services will be used as required for fields not supported by Multispeak methods. 2.1.6 Billing determinant data exchange integration utilizing Webservice methods and file exchange methods as required by uMax. 2.1.7 Billing module re-configuration and testing. 2.1.8 Data conversion of existing Incode data stored in uCentra to support any conversions of key fields from Incode to uMAX 2.1.9 Parallel testing, all cycles. 2.1.10 Project Management Services; reporting, issues tracking, schedule management, meeting coordination. 3.0 Place of Performance. The Contractor shall perform tasks under this contract in accordance with Contract Exhibit A. 4.0 Travel. Travel shall be reimbursed in accordance with Contract Exhibit A. 5.0 Customer Property and Office Space. COG will provide the contractor with office space in accordance with Contract Exhibit A. Computer, printer, facsimile service, reproduction capability, Internet access and administrative support for the project as required, while working on the Task Order. Telephone service for official use and local calls only will be provided to the contractor; all other calls shall be made at the contractor’s expense. The contractor shall not use COG furnished material or equipment to work on projects other than those directed by this task order. COG furnished equipment provided to the contractor will be returned to COG in good working order. 6.0 Hazards Information. There is no requirement for the contractor to handle any hazardous material. 7.0 Security. Employees selected by the contractor for this task order must be able to pass all security requirements and back-ground checks. Page 124 of 316 8.0 Identification of Contractor Employee(s). 8.1 At the request of COG , the contractor shall provide each employee an identification (ID) badge on contract start or employment start date. The ID badge shall be made of nonmetallic material, easily readable and include employee’s name, Contractor’s name, functional area of assignment and color photograph. 8.2 Display of ID Badges: At the request of COG, Contractor personnel shall wear the ID badge at all times when performing work under this contract to include attending off -site meetings while representing COG. Unless otherwise specified in the contract, each Contractor employee shall wear the ID badg e in a conspicuous place on the front of exterior clothing and above the waist except when safety or health reasons prohibit such placement. 8.3 Answering Telephones: Contractor personnel shall identify themselves as Contractor employees when answering COG telephones. 9.0 Technical Point of Contact (TPOC): Name: Erika Valentine Address: P.O.Box 661 Shreveport, La. 71162 Phone # 877-221-2055/2077 Fax # 318-861-7700 Email Address: evalentine@electsolve.com 10.0 Payment: The vendor shall bill COG on a monthly basis. 11.0 Price: Time and Materials at COG preferred rate of $125.00 per hour plus expenses (if applicable). ElectSolve recommends a budget of $75,000. Bill to: Attn: of Leticia Zavala PO #____________ SIGNED THIS ____ day of _______, 2016 CITY OF GEORGETOWN ELECTSOLVE TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS AND SERVICES, INC. By: ______________________________________ By: ___________________________________ Name: ___________ ________________________ Name: Mark Ponder Title: ___________________________________ Title: President/CEO Page 125 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Forwarded fro m the G eo rgetown Uti l i ty Systems Advi sory Board (G US): Consideration and possible action to rene w the contract for l abo r servi ces for El ectri c System Overhead Constructi on and Mai ntenance to Te chl i ne Constructi on, LLC of Austin, Te xas, in the not to exceed amount o f $7 50 ,00 0.00 -- Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Director ITEM SUMMARY: The bid fo r Electric System Overhead Construction and Maintenance is a labor only contract, to co nstruct planned or anticipated CIP, Develo pment and Mainte nance projects in the not to exceed amount o f $7 50 ,00 0.00. The term will begin October 1, 2 01 6 through September 30, 201 7. This is the second renewal. STAF F RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends appro val o f the renewal with Te c hline Co nstruction, LLC of Austin, Texas. B OARD RECOMMENDATION: This item was unanimously approved for reco mmendation to Co uncil by the GUS Board at their meeting held on November 11, 2 01 6. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Funds for the planned expenditures are available in the Electric Capital Improveme nt and Operations Budgets SUBMITTED BY: Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Direc to r Page 126 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Forwarded fro m G eorg etow n Uti l i ty Systems Advi so ry B oard (G US): Consideration and possible action to renew the co ntract for l abor servi c e s for Outsi de P l ant Fi ber Opti c Infrastructure Co nstructi on to JC Communi cati o ns o f Cedar P ark, Te xas, in the not to exceed amo unt of $300,000.00 -- Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Director ITEM SUMMARY: The bid for Outside P lant Fiber Optic Infrastructure Constructio n is a labor only contract, to construct planned or anticipated CIP, Develo pment and Mainte nance projects in the not to exceed amount o f $3 00 ,00 0.00. The term will begin December 1 , 20 16 thro ugh November 30, 20 17 . This is the Second renewal. STAF F RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends appro val o f the renewal with JC Co mmunications of Cedar Park, Texas. B OARD RECOMMENDATION: This item was unanimously approved for reco mmendation to Co uncil by the GUS Board at their meeting held on November 11, 2 01 6. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Funds for the planned expenditures are available in the Electric Capital Improveme nt and Operations Budgets SUBMITTED BY: Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Direc to r Page 127 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Forwarded fro m G eorg etow n Uti l i ty Systems Advi so ry B oard (G US): Consideration and po ssible action to approve Task Order DEI-17 -00 1 with Dunham Engi neeri ng, Inc. of College Station, Texas, for professi onal servi ces related to the Desi gn of a Sun Ci ty 2 .0 MG (mi l l i on gal l on) Compo si te EST (el evated sto r age tank) in the amount of $30 0,0 00 .00 -- Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Director ITEM SUMMARY: This Task Orde r is P rofessional Engineering Services to prepare plans and specifications for the construction of a new 2 MG (million gallo n) EST (elevated storage tank) to replace the existing 0.4 MG EST. Services will also include site survey, geotechnical survey, structural service, bid phase, and specialized constructio n inspection services. The existing Sun City 0.4 MG EST has long lived it useful capacity to the 1015 pressure plane located in Sun City. The improvements include: a new 2 MG composite EST, piping, associated electrical e quipment, and demolition of the existing 0.4 EST. A rendering of the propo sed EST is attached for reference. STAF F RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends exec uting Task Order DEI-1 7-001 for professional services relating to the Sun City EST with Dunham Engineering, Inc . of College Station, Texas, in the amount of $300,000. B OARD RECOMMENDATION: This item was unanimously approved for reco mmendation to Co uncil by the GUS Board at their meeting held on November 11, 2 01 6. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Funds for this expenditure are budgeted in the Water CIP. See attached CIP Budgetary & Financial Analysis Sheet. SUBMITTED BY: – Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Director ATTACHMENT S: Description B&FAW DEI Task Ord er Page 128 of 316 FINANCIAL IMPACT: YTD Spent/Enc Agenda Item Engineering 238,550 Right of Way 60,000 Construction 1,159,755 Other Costs testing/inspection Current Budget Available Budget BUDGET BALANCE Variance TOTAL 1,500,000 298,550 1,201,450 1,159,755 41,695 2.78% General Ledger Account Number COMMENTS: Testing costs are expected to be 25,000 and will be funded from BUDGET BALANCE FINANCIAL IMPACT: YTD Spent/Enc Agenda Item Engineering 238,550 Right of Way 60,000 Construction 1,220,000 Other Costs testing/inspection Current Budget Available Budget BUDGET BALANCE Variance TOTAL 1,500,000 298,550 1,201,450 1,220,000 (18,550) -1.24% General Ledger Account Number COMMENTS: Testing costs are expected to be 25,000 and will be funded from BUDGET BALANCE Example Project Project 2 Example Page 129 of 316 DATE: PROJECT NAME:2CP 10/20/2016 Sun City EST Division/Department:GUS / Water Director Approval Prepared By:Michael Hallmark Finance Approval TW 10/25/2016 TOTAL ANNUAL BUDGET 3,050,000.00 (Current year only) Actual Cost Agenda Total Spent Encumbrance Item & Encumbered % Annual (A) before agenda item (B)(A + B) Budget Consulting 300,000.00 300,000.00 10% Right of Way 0.00 0% Construction 0.00 0% Other Costs 0.00 0% Total Current Year Costs 0.00 300,000.00 Approved GENERAL LEDGER ACCOUNT NUMBER CY Budget 660-9-0580-90-097 3,050,000.00 Total Budget 3,050,000.00 TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET 3,050,000.00 (includes all previous yrs) Prior Years Current Year Total Project % Total Spent/Encumbered Costs Costs Budget Consulting 300,000.00 300,000.00 10% Right of Way 0.00 0.00 0% Construction 0.00 0.00 0% Other Costs 0.00 0.00 0% Total Project Costs 0.00 300,000.00 300,000.00 Comments: Task Order DEI-17-001 CIP- Budgetary and Financial Analysis Worksheet Page 130 of 316 Page 131 of 316 Page 132 of 316 Page 133 of 316 Page 134 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Forwarded fro m G eorg etow n Uti l i ty Systems Advi so ry B oard (G US): Consideration and po ssible action to approve Task Order DEI-17 -00 2 with Dunham Engi neeri ng, Inc. of College Station, Texas, fo r pro fessi o nal servi ces related to the Desi g n of the Ai rport 1.5 MG (mi l l i o n g al l on) G ST (G ro und Storage Tank) Re habi l i tati on in the amount of $8 0,0 00 .00 -- Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Director ITEM SUMMARY: This Task Orde r is P rofessional Engineering Services to prepare plans and specifications for the construction to rehabilitate the 1 .5 MG (million gallon) GST (Gro und Storage Tank) and oversite of co nstruction. STAF F RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends executing Task Order DEI-17-002 for pro fessio nal services relating to the Airport GST Rehabilitation with Dunham Engineering, Inc. of College Station, Texas, in the amount of $80,000. B OARD RECOMMENDATION: This item was unanimously approved for reco mmendation to Co uncil by the GUS Board at their meeting held on November 11, 2 01 6. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Funds for this expenditure are budgeted in the Water CIP. See attached CIP Budgetary & Financial Analysis Sheet. SUBMITTED BY: Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Direc to r ATTACHMENT S: Description B&FAW Tas k Ord er Page 135 of 316 FINANCIAL IMPACT: YTD Spent/Enc Agenda Item Engineering 238,550 Right of Way 60,000 Construction 1,159,755 Other Costs testing/inspection Current Budget Available Budget BUDGET BALANCE Variance TOTAL 1,500,000 298,550 1,201,450 1,159,755 41,695 2.78% General Ledger Account Number COMMENTS: Testing costs are expected to be 25,000 and will be funded from BUDGET BALANCE FINANCIAL IMPACT: YTD Spent/Enc Agenda Item Engineering 238,550 Right of Way 60,000 Construction 1,220,000 Other Costs testing/inspection Current Budget Available Budget BUDGET BALANCE Variance TOTAL 1,500,000 298,550 1,201,450 1,220,000 (18,550) -1.24% General Ledger Account Number COMMENTS: Testing costs are expected to be 25,000 and will be funded from BUDGET BALANCE Example Project Project 2 Example Page 136 of 316 DATE: PROJECT NAME:2CQ 10/20/2016 Airport GST Rehab. Division/Department:GUS / Water Director Approval Prepared By:Michael Hallmark Finance Approval TW 10/25/16 TOTAL ANNUAL BUDGET 480,000.00 (Current year only) Actual Cost Agenda Total Spent Encumbrance Item & Encumbered % Annual (A) before agenda item (B)(A + B) Budget Consulting 80,000.00 80,000.00 17% Right of Way 0.00 0% Construction 0.00 0% Other Costs 0.00 0% Total Current Year Costs 0.00 80,000.00 Approved GENERAL LEDGER ACCOUNT NUMBER CY Budget 660-9-0580-90-071 480,000.00 Total Budget 480,000.00 TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET 480,000.00 (includes all previous yrs) Prior Years Current Year Total Project % Total Spent/Encumbered Costs Costs Budget Consulting 80,000.00 80,000.00 17% Right of Way 0.00 0.00 0% Construction 0.00 0.00 0% Other Costs 0.00 0.00 0% Total Project Costs 0.00 80,000.00 80,000.00 Comments: Task Order DEI-17-002 CIP- Budgetary and Financial Analysis Worksheet Page 137 of 316 Page 138 of 316 Page 139 of 316 Page 140 of 316 Page 141 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Forwarded fro m the P arks and Recreati on Advi so ry B oard: Consideration and po ssible actio n to recommend appro val o f a constructi o n contract for ADA compl i ance renovati ons at Mc Masters P ark, Vi l l age Park and the P arks and Recreati on Admi ni strati on B ui l di ng to Choi ce B ui l ders, LLC of Temple, Texas in the amount of $25 8,3 93 .50 -- Kimberly Garrett, Parks and Recreation Director ITEM SUMMARY: In 2015, The City o f Georgetown implemented an ADA Transition P lan. In that same year, the City also conduc ted se lf- assessments o f parks, fac ilities and public pedestrian rights-of-way to identify physic al barriers to accessibility. The Transition Plan pro vides a ranking for each location and a schedule that indicates a pro jected time for resolution. McMaster ’s P ark, Village Park and the Parks and Recreation Administration Building were all highly ranked due to the ir volume of public visitors. Additionally, these locatio ns have significant limitation in providing accessible route s therefore disallo wing access to amenities for persons with disabilities. The propose d bid includes removal of non- compliant parking spaces, ramps, and side walks. Additionally, it includes the reinstallation o f these features to e nsure accessibility to the se public facilities The City received sealed bids from four bidders on Thursday, November 1, 2016. Choice Builders was the low bidder and has previously completed related parks projects for the City. Additio nally, KPA has use d them with satisfac to ry results and is recommending contract approval. Estimate d Co mpletion of the project is spring o f 20 17 . This item was unanimo usly approved by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board at the ir No vember 10, 2016 meeting. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Funds fo r the co nstruction were budgeted in the follo wing accounts Parks Administration Building 12 0-9 -08 80 -90 -093 $6 3,8 19 .00 McMasters P ark 12 0-9 -02 80 -91 -003 12 0-9 -02 80 -90 -060 $6 8,2 42 .41 $3 9,7 02 .09 Village Park 12 0-9 -02 80 -90 -060 2 29 -9-0 28 0-9 0-011 $3 3.3 98 .34 $5 3,2 31 .66 SUBMITTED BY: Kimberly Garrett, Parks and Recreation Director ATTACHMENT S: Description Bid Tab Letter of Rec ommend ation Page 142 of 316 Page 143 of 316 Page 144 of 316 Page 145 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Publ i c Heari ng and F i rst Readi ng of an Ordinanc e rezoni ng approxi matel y 16 5.6 5 acres described as 142.80 ac re s in the N. P orter and A. Flores Surveys, 0.6 8 acres, 5.07 acres, and 12.3 1 acres in the N. Porter Survey, and 4 .79 ac re s, being Blocks 1-3 of the North Georgetown Addition, located between Austi n Ave. and N. Co l l ege St. south of FM 97 1 , from the Residential Single-Family (RS) and Local Commercial (C-1) Districts to the P ublic Facilities (PF) Distric t -- Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, P lanning Director (acti on requi red) ITEM SUMMARY: B ackground: The City of Georgetown Parks and Recreation Department has requested the San Gabriel Park and surrounding city properties, 165.65 acres total, be rezoned from the Residential Single-family (RS) and Lo c al Co mme rcial (C-1) districts to the Public Fac ilities (P F) district. The majority of the property, the San Gabriel P ark, has been a public park for o ver 5 0 years and will continue to be so. The City has approved a master plan to renovate San Gabriel Park including public restrooms, pavilions, playgrounds, hike and bike trails, and parking and driving areas. In addition to the active park areas, sports fields and playgro unds, the area to be re zo ned inc ludes the Recreation Center and Community Center, and properties the City of Georgetown leases to o ther organizatio ns including the Chamber of Comme rc e site, the Williamson Co unty Sherriff ’s P osse Rodeo Arena, the VFW P ost and the Masonic Lodge. The rezoning to the Public Facilities district will not affect the use of any of these properties. Publ i c comment: To date, staff has rec e ive d one written public comment in favor, although staff has received numero us phone inquirie s. There was one public speaker at the Planning and Zoning Co mmission meeting o n November 1st, who was concerned about the rezoning affecting access to her property. Staff Recommendati o n: Staff recommends appro val o f the request to rezo ne the 1 65 .65 acres to the PF District. Pl anni ng and Zoni ng Commi ssi on Recommendati o n: At their November 1st, 2016, meeting, the P lanning and Zoning Commissio n reco mmended to the City Council appr oval (5-0) of the request to rezone the 165.65 acres to the PF District. 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 Attachments 1-3 - Loc ation, Future Land Us e, and Zoning Maps Attachment 4 - P ublic Co mment Ordinanc e Page 146 of 316 Georgetown Planning Department Staff Report San Gabriel Park Rezoning Page 1 of 6 Report Date: October 27, 2016 File No.: REZ-2016-029 Project Planner: Valerie Kreger, AICP, Principal Planner Item Details Project Name: San Gabriel Park Rezoning Project Location: Between Austin Ave. and N. College St. south of FM 971 Total Acreage: 165.65 acres Existing Zoning: Residential Single-Family (RS) and Local Commercial (C-1) Proposed Zoning: Public Facilities (PF) Applicant’s Request The City of Georgetown Parks and Recreation Department has requested the San Gabriel Park and surrounding city properties, 165.65 acres total, be rezoned from the Residential Single-family (RS) and Local Commercial (C-1) districts to the Public Facilities (PF) district. The majority of the property, the San Gabriel Park, has been a public park for over 50 years and will continue to be so. The City has approved a master plan to renovate San Gabriel Park including public restrooms, pavilions, playgrounds, hike and bike trails, and parking and driving areas. In addition to the active park areas, sports fields and playgrounds, the area to be rezoned includes the Recreation Center and Community Center, and properties the City of Georgetown leases to other organizations including the Chamber of Commerce site, the Williamson County Sherriff’s Posse Rodeo Arena, the VFW Post and the Masonic Lodge. The rezoning to the Public Facilities district will not affect the use of any of these properties. Site Information Physical Characteristics: The 165 acres is mostly developed as parkland and public/nonprofit buildings with approximately a mile of the San Gabriel River running through the property. The land is fairly flat, except the change in elevation on either side of the river, and much of the area on the lower side of the river is within the floodplain. While tree coverage is generally not heavy throughout most of the property, there are significant trees, many Heritage size, nearer the river. The property is bounded by over 2,200 feet of frontage along N. Austin Avenue, over 1,100 feet along F.M. 971, approximately 1,000 feet along River Haven Drive, and almost 5,000 feet along N. College Street. Additionally, Chamber Way runs through the property as a public street and approximately 4,700 feet of E. Morrow Street runs through the property as a park road. Page 147 of 316 Planning Department Staff Report San Gabriel Park Rezoning Page 2 of 6 The current improvements on the city property include the Recreation Center, Community Center, Chamber of Commerce, Williamson County Sherriff’s Posse rodeo arena and show barn, VFW Post, Masonic Lodge, baseball and soccer fields, playscapes, pavilions, restrooms, hike and bike trails, and parking and driving areas. The facilities on the east side of N. College Street, including the Parks and Recreation Administrative building, animal shelter, and McMaster sports fields are not part of this rezoning. Page 148 of 316 Planning Department Staff Report San Gabriel Park Rezoning Page 3 of 6 Surrounding Properties: The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: Utilities The property is in the City of Georgetown water, wastewater, and electric service areas. There is adequate capacity to serve the existing development and proposed improvements. Transportation The subject property has significant frontage along N. Austin Avenue, a Major Arterial on the City’s 2035 Thoroughfare Plan, and N. College Street, a Major Collector, each providing a bulk of the access to this property. Additional access is taken from E. Morrow Street, a Local Street, although it continues through the property as an internal park road. Access is also available to the adjacent residential area via E. Valley Street, although this access will potentially be eliminated with future park improvements. 2030 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use: This property is designated on the 2030 Plan Future Land Use Map as Parks, Recreation, and Protected Open Space, which applies to existing public parks, golf courses, and protected open spaces of city-wide significance that are expected to remain as open space in perpetuity. Location Zoning Future Land Use Existing Use North Residential Single-family (RS), Local Commercial (C-1) Moderate Density Residential Senior living facilities, multifamily South Residential Single-family (RS), Townhouse (TH), Agriculture (AG), Office (OF), Local Commercial (C-1), General Commercial (C-3) Parks Recreation and Protected Open Space, Employment Center Multifamily, business offices, open space East Residential Single-family (RS), Agriculture (AG), Public Facilities (PF) Parks Recreation and Protected Open Space, Institutional City properties, open space, undeveloped West Residential Single-family (RS), Local Commercial (C-1), General Commercial (C-3), Industrial (IN) Community Commercial, Specialty Mixed Use Retail center, bowling- alley, multifamily, single-family, undeveloped Page 149 of 316 Planning Department Staff Report San Gabriel Park Rezoning Page 4 of 6 Vision and Goals: The 2030 Plan’s Vision Statement identifies Quality of Life as the first value envisioned by the community for the City of Georgetown’s future. The Community Character envisioned under Quality of Life expresses the desire to expand public recreational use and enjoyment of the City’s parks and open spaces by expanding sports facilities and enhancing the network of greenways and trails linking major open spaces, recreational areas, rivers and lakes. The City’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan also cites goals for the City to accomplish its vision of the future, with the first of those being to promote sound, sustainable, and compact development patterns with balanced land uses, a variety of housing choices and well-integrated transportation, public facilities, and open space amenities. Growth Tier: 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 2030 Plan Growth Tier Map designation is Tier 1A, that portion of the city where infrastructure systems are in place, or can be economically provided and where the bulk of the city’s growth should be guided over the near term. Parks, Recreation and Trails Master Plan: The Georgetown Parks, Recreation and Trails Master Plan envisions parks as focal points of the community. In particular, the renovation and enhancement of San Gabriel Park into Georgetown’s “central park” is listed as one of the most important priorities for the City to pursue. Zoning District The Public Facilities (PF) District is intended to provide a location for government and other public or quasi-public facility operations. These may include schools, public parks, hospitals, airports, governmental offices, churches and other related uses, but would not include industrial facilities or storage yards. Some uses allowed in this district might generate heavy traffic volumes and high- intensity operations. The PF district is subject to non-residential design and landscaping standards for compatibility with nearby or adjacent residential uses. Page 150 of 316 Planning Department Staff Report San Gabriel Park Rezoning Page 5 of 6 Staff Analysis The majority of the property, the San Gabriel Park, has been a public park for over 50 years, which the City plans to update and renovate. The other existing uses included in the property being rezoned are public or quasi-public in nature. The PF District is intended for government and other public or quasi-public facilities such as schools, parks, governmental offices, churches and similar uses. The PF district allows uses that may generate heavy traffic, which the subject property can provide for as it has access to a Major Arterial roadway (N. Austin Avenue) and a Major Collector street (N. College Street). The 2030 Plan Future Land Use designation is Parks, Recreation, and Protected Open Space, which envisions public parks, golf courses, and significant protected open spaces expected to remain as such in perpetuity. The Plan’s Vision Statement expresses the community’s desire to expand public use and enjoyment of parks and open spaces. The Plan also includes the goal of promoting well- integrated transportation, public facilities, and open space amenities. The Parks, Recreation and Trails Master Plan identifies the renovation of San Gabriel Park into Georgetown’s “central park” as one of the most important priorities for the City. The PF district is intended for public facilities, including parks, while still allowing improvement of the public facilities currently located within the park. Staff has evaluated the request under the following rezoning criteria established in UDC Section 3.06.030 and has made the following findings: Criteria Finding The application is complete and the information contained within the application is sufficient and correct enough to allow adequate review and final action This application was reviewed by staff and deemed to be complete. The zoning change is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan The PF zoning district is consistent with the 2030 Plan as it best implements the parks and public facilities located within this area and shown as Parks, Recreation, and Protected Open Space on the Future Land Use Plan. The zoning change promotes the health, safety or general welfare of the City and the safe orderly, and healthful development of the City The development of these city properties is not proposed to change from its current use. However, the allowed uses and development standards of the PF district will promote the orderly and healthful development of the City should the uses or development of the property change. The zoning change is compatible with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property and with the character of the neighborhood The zoning change is compatible with the surrounding properties as many of the properties along the east side of this rezoning are public. Additionally, with the internal layout of the property, access to the adjacent residential area is minimal and will be further reduced with future improvements. Page 151 of 316 Planning Department Staff Report San Gabriel Park Rezoning Page 6 of 6 The property to be rezoned is suitable for uses permitted by the District that would be applied by the proposed amendment. The PF district is intended for public facilities and permits schools, parks and churches and does not permit uses, such as industry, that would be detrimental to the existing park. Findings: Based on all the information presented, staff has made the following findings: 1. The PF zoning district best implements the visions and goals of the 2030 Plan for this property, including protection and expansion of public parks. 2. The PF district allows for public facilities and parks, therefore allowing improvement of the public facilities currently located within the park as identified in the Parks, Recreation and Trails Master Plan. 3. The PF district is compatible with the public properties to the east of this rezoning and provides for buffers for the adjacent residential properties. 4. The subject property has access to a Major Arterial roadway and a Major Collector street, sufficient to handle any heavy traffic generated by PF uses. Access to the residential area is minimal and will be reduced with future improvements. Staff Recommendation Staff is recommending Approval of the application based on the above findings. Public Comments Public notice was mailed to property owners of 85 properties within a 200-foot radius of the subject property and within the city limits, a legal notice advertising the public hearing was placed in the Sun Newspaper on October 16, 2016, and signs were posted on-site. There have been no written public comments received at the time of this report, although staff has received numerous phone inquiries. Attachments Attachment 1 – Location Map Attachment 2 – Future Land Use Map Attachment 3 – Zoning Map Page 152 of 316 N IH 3 5 S O UTHW E S T E R N B L V D R I V E RY B L V D W I L L I A M S D R E U N IVERS I T Y AVE N A UST I N A VE S IH 35 NE I N N E R L O O P W UNIVERSITY AV E S M A I N S T H U T T O R S A U S T IN A V E §¨¦35 ¬«130 ") B OOTYS CROSSING RD LO O P E U NI V ERSIT Y A VE W I L L I A M S D R ")971 REZ-2016-029 Exhibit #1 Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US Feet Cartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only ¯ Location Map 00.51 Mi Legend Site Parcels City Limits Georgetown ETJ Page 153 of 316 N I H 3 5 R I V E RY B L V D N A U S T I N A V E S IH 3 5 S M A I N S T §¨¦35 W I L L I A M S D R Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US Feet Cartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only ¯ Future Land Use / Overall Transportation Plan Exhibit #2 REZ-2016-029 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 0¼½¾ Mi Legend Site Parcels City Limits Georgetown ETJ Page 154 of 316 N I H 3 5 R I V E RY B L V D N A U S T I N A V E S IH 3 5 S M A I N S T §¨¦35 W I L L I A M S D R Zoning Information REZ-2016-029 Exhibit #3 Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US Feet Cartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only Legend Site Parcels City Limits Georgetown ETJ ¯ 0¼½¾ MiPage 155 of 316 Page 156 of 316 Ordinance Number: ___________________ Page 1 of 2 Description: San Gabriel Park Case File Number: REZ-2016-029 Date Approved: December 13, 2016 Exhibits A Attached ORDINANCE NO. _____________________ An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, amending part of the Official Zoning Map to rezone 165.65 acres described as 142.80 acres in the N. Porter and A. Flores Surveys, 0.68 acres, 5.07 acres, and 12.31 acres in the N. Porter Survey, and 4.79 acres, being Blocks 1‐3 of the North Georgetown Addition, including San Gabriel Park, from the Residential Single‐Family (RS) and Local Commercial (C‐1) Districts to the Public Facilities (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 (ʺThe Propertyʺ): 165.65 acres described as 142.80 acres in the N. Porter and A. Flores Surveys, 0.68 acres, 5.07 acres, and 12.31 acres in the N. Porter Survey, and 4.79 acres, being Blocks 1‐3 of the North Georgetown Addition, as recorded in Volume 266, Page 498, and Volume 2221, Page 629, and Document Number 9536826 of the Official Public Records of Williamson County, Texas, hereinafter referred to as ʺThe Propertyʺ; 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 November 1, 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 November 22, 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 157 of 316 Ordinance Number: ___________________ Page 2 of 2 Description: San Gabriel Park Case File Number: REZ-2016-029 Date Approved: December 13, 2016 Exhibits A 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 (RS) and Local Commercial (C‐ 1) Districts to the Public Facilities (PF) District, in accordance with the attached Exhibit A 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 22nd day of November, 2016. APPROVED AND ADOPTED on Second Reading on the 13th day of December, 2016. THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: ATTEST: ______________________ _________________________ Dale Ross Shelley Nowling Mayor City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: ______________________ Charlie McNabb City Attorney Page 158 of 316 ST E P H E N T A N N E R S R O C K S T . E 2ND ST. WA L N U T PI N E S T . JA N I S LA N E P A R K L A N E PARK LANE CEN T R A L F.M. 971 N O R T H W E S T W I L L I A M S SHA N N O N RIO VIS T A RIO VISTA BENCH M A R K S T . PARQ U E PARQ U E PAR K W A Y D R . GA N N S T R E E T COVE COVE W MORROW VALLEY RIVE R S I D E D R I V E CED A R D R I V E N M A I N S T . N C H U R C H N M Y R T L E N C O L L E G E MOR R I S ST. ST. ST . ST . ST. S T A D I U M D R M.K . T . R A I L R O A D N E L M S T . D R I V E STR E E T CIRCL E HO L L Y S T . A P P L E C R E E K D R . D R . RIVER HAVEN DR. W . L . WAS H A M D R . W A T E R S SAN GABRIEL VILLAGE BLVD . W A L D E N D R . N A U S T I N A V E E M O R R O W S T . E SPRING ST. W 2ND ST. LOW E R P A R K R D LO W E R PAR K R D E M O R R O W S T . SMITH CRE E K R D BLUE HOLE PARK RD San Gabriel Park Owner: City of Georgetown PIN & WCADR: R089953 4.7899 acres San Gabriel Park Owner: City of Georgetown PIN: R089953 WCADR: R040401 12.312 acres San Gabriel Park Owner: City of Georgetown PIN & WCADR: R319954 142.8013 acres San Gabriel Park Owner: City of Georgetown PIN & WCADR: R417136 0.6817 acres San Gabriel Park Owner: City of Georgetown PIN & WCADR: R417137 5.07 acres Page 159 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Publ i c Heari ng and F i rst Readi ng o f an Ordinance rezoni ng 3 .5 acres o f San Gabriel Estates, Block 1, Lot 22 A located at 700 B o oty's Crossi ng Road from the Agriculture (AG) District to the Neighbo rhood Commercial (CN) District -- Sofia Ne lson, CNU-A, Planning Direc to r (acti on requi red) ITEM SUMMARY: B ackground: The applicant has requested to rezone the 3.5 acre site fro m the Agriculture (AG) District to the Neighborhood Commercial (CN) District. The property was anne xe d April 22 , 2003 and assigned the default AG District. The requested rezoning would pro vide the property owner with permitted uses allowed by the CN District. Publ i c comment: To date , staff has re c e ived one email, two phone calls and one written lette r concerning this project re lated to traffic concerns. Staff also received a phone c all from the abutting property owner facing Williams Drive with concerns of how a church will limit potential future alcohol related uses on his undeveloped commerc ial pro perty. Staff Recommendati o n: Staff recommends appro val o f the request to rezo ne the 3 .5 acre tract to the CN Distric t. Pl anni ng and Zoni ng Commi ssi on Recommendati o n: At their November 1, 2 01 6 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended to the City Council appr oval (5-0) to rezone the 3.5 acres to the CN District. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None studied at this time SUBMITTED BY: Juan Enriquez, Planner, and Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning 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 - C N Dis trict Development Stand ard s and P ermitted Land Us es P ublic Co mment Ordinanc e Exhib it A - Loc ation Map Exhib it B - Legal Des c rip tion Page 160 of 316 Georgetown Planning Department Staff Report Faith Impact Church Rezoning Page 1 of 5 Report Date: October 26, 2016 File No: REZ-2016-024 Project Planner: Juan Enriquez, Planner Item Details Project Name: Faith Impact Church Project Address: 700 Booty’s Crossing Road Total Acreage: 3.5 acres Legal Description: San Gabriel Estates, Block 1, Lot 22A Existing Zoning: Agriculture District Proposed Zoning: Neighborhood Commercial District Overview of Applicant’s Request The applicant has requested to rezone the 3.5 acre site from the Agriculture (AG) District to the Neighborhood Commercial (CN) District. The property was annexed April 22, 2003 and assigned the default AG District. The requested rezoning would provide the property owner with permitted uses allowed by the CN District. Site Information Location: The property is located at 700 Booty’s Crossing Road, near the southwest intersection of Williams Drive and Booty’s Crossing Road in the western portion of the City. Physical Characteristics: The platted and rectangular shaped property is 3.5 acres in size and is generally flat with various shrubs throughtout the lot. The site has approximately 245 feet of street frontage along Booty’s Crossing Road. There are several trees, including heritage trees, located on-site. A tree survey will be required upon Site Development Plan submittal to identify protected and heritage trees. Surrounding Properties: Location Zoning Future Land Use Existing Use North C-1 Mixed Use Neighborhood Center Commercial Use South RS Moderate Density Residential Single Family Residential Use East C-1 and Office Moderate Density Residential/ Mixed Use Neighborhood Center Commercial Daycare West Agriculture Moderate Density Residential Single Family Residential Use Property History The 3.5 acre platted property was annexed into the City on April 22, 2003 by Ordinance No. 2003- 34. At the time of annexation into the City, the default AG District was assigned. A single family Page 161 of 316 Planning Department Staff Report Faith Impact Church Rezoning Page 2 of 5 residence existed on this property for many years but was recently demolished due to fire damage. The property is currently vacant and undeveloped. 2030 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use: The 2030 Future Land Use category for this site is Moderate Density Residential. This land use category includes single family neighborhoods with a density ranging between 3.1 and 6 dwelling units per acre. The Comprehensive Plan also supports non-residential uses in Moderate Density Residential along major roadways such as neighborhood-serving retail, office, institutitonal and civic uses. Growth Tier: The 2030 Plan Growth Tier Map designation is Tier 1A (Developed, Redeveloping), which is the portion of the City where infrastructure systems are in place, or can be economically provided, and where the bulk of the City’s growth should be guided over the near term. Transportation The site’s primary inbound and outbound access is on Booty’s Crossing Road. Trip generation will be reviewed with the Site Development Plan application, possibly triggering the need for a TIA will be determined at that time. Booty’s Crossing Road is considered a major collector road. Utilities Water/Wastewater and Electric is served by the City of Georgetown. It is anticipated that there is adequate water capacity at this time to serve this property by existing capacity. Proposed Zoning District The applicant has requested Neighborhood Commercial (CN) zoning on this property. The CN District is intended to provide small scale office, commercial, and personal service businesses that primarily serve the adjacent residential areas. Neighborhood commercial areas are generally located within neighborhoods and have pedestrian access to adjacent residential areas. Notable Development Standards in CN District: Maximum building height 30 feet Minimum side setback to residential district 10 feet (5 foot setback when not next to residential) Bufferyard required between: • CN and AG with residential use • A 10 foot wide planting area; 2 evergreen ornamental trees and 4 evergreen shrubs per each 50 linear feet of bufferyard Maximum Impervious Cover 70% (20% maximum in AG District) Floor Area Ratio (FAR): FAR and maximum building size limitation does not Page 162 of 316 Planning Department Staff Report Faith Impact Church Rezoning Page 3 of 5 Shall not exceed 0.3 for commercial, retail, service, and office buildings. No single building can exceed 7,500 sq ft in size. apply to civic uses such as religious assembly facilities Staff Analysis As part of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan adoption process, the land use element identified a number of land use goals, policies and actions. The following goals and action statements are the most relevant to this request: The subject property is located within the Moderate Density Residential future land use category, which includes single family neighborhoods with a density ranging between 3.1 and 6 dwelling units per acre. The Comprehensive Plan also supports non-residential uses in Moderate Density Residential along major roadways such as neighborhood-serving retail, office, institutitonal and civic uses. These uses are permitted in the CN District. Booty’s Crossing Road is considered a major collector. Additionally, Goal 4 of the Comprehensive Plan says to “Maintain and strengthen viable land uses and land use patterns (e.g. stable neighborhoods, economically sound commercial and employment areas). The policies listed under this goal include minimizing impacts of encroachment by incompatible land uses. In this case, the CN District, will serve as a buffer between the more intense Office and Local Commercial zoning districts to the east of the site and the established residential neighborhoods of Falls of San Gabriel and River Bend to the west and south. For example, the C- 1 (Local Commercial) District allows full service hotels, gas stations, live music/entertainment, dance halls, car washes where the CN District does not allow these types of uses. The C-1 District also allows a higher FAR (0.5) while the buildings in the CN are limited to a maximum 7,500 square feet. However, this building size limitation does not apply to religious assembly facilities. The Office District allows medical and dental offices and the CN District does not allow them. The CN zoning district buffer will help ensure compatibility with land uses. At the same time, the CN district will provide services to the nearby neighborhoods with pedestrian access. UDC Section 3.06.030 establishes the following criteria for zoning changes: The application is complete and the information contained within the application is sufficient and correct enough to allow adequate review and final action An application must provide the necessary information to review and make a knowledgeable decision in order for staff to schedule an application for consideration by P&Z and City Council. This application was reviewed by staff and deemed to be complete. The zoning change is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan The proposed zoning change is consistent with the Future Land Use of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan as the Moderate Density Residential category allows for neighborhood serving commercial and civic development when located adjacent to a major Page 163 of 316 Planning Department Staff Report Faith Impact Church Rezoning Page 4 of 5 roadway such as Booty’s Crossing Road. The zoning change promotes the health, safety or general welfare of the City and the safe orderly, and healthful development of the City The zoning change request promotes health, safety and general welfare of the City because it minimizes impacts of encroachment by incompatible land uses since the CN District does not allow more intense uses that are permitted by right in the OF and C-1 Districts. The zoning change is compatible with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property and with the character of the neighborhood The proposed rezoning is compatible with the surrounding zoning districts and will provide a buffer to the nearby single family development from more intense office and commercial land uses such as hotels, live entertainment, gas stations and car washes that are permitted in the C-1 District but not in the CN District. The property to be rezoned is suitable for uses permitted by the District that would be applied by the proposed amendment. The uses allowed in the CN District are appropriate at this location since there are established neighborhoods within walking distance that can be serviced. The CN District could provide walking distance to uses such as retail, farmer’s market, bakeries, personal services. Findings Based on all the information presented, staff has made the following findings: 1. The Future Land Use category of Moderate Density Residential supports complementary non- residential uses along major roadways such as neighborhood-serving retail, office, institutional and civic uses. Booty’s Crossing Road is considered a major collector road. 2. The requested CN District is intended to provide small scale office, commercial, and personal service businesses that primarily serve the adjacent residential areas. Falls of San Gabriel neighborhood and other residential lots are located to the west and southwest of the site. The River Bend Subdivision is located across the street to the south. These neighborhoods could be served by uses permitted in the CN district. 3. The permitted land uses of the CN District are appropriate at this location since they could serve as a buffer between the more intense Office and Local Commercial zoning districts to the east from the nearby residential neighborhood. This zoning district buffer will help ensure compatibility with land uses. For example, the C-1 (Local Commercial) District allows full service hotels, gas stations, live music/entertainment, dance halls, car washes where the CN District does not allow these types of uses. The Office District allows medical and dental offices and the CN District does not allow them. 4. There is sufficient water capacity at this time to accommodate the proposed rezoning from AG to CN District at this location. Page 164 of 316 Planning Department Staff Report Faith Impact Church Rezoning Page 5 of 5 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 that are located within City limits were notified of the rezoning application (22 notices mailed), a legal notice advertising the public hearing was placed in the Sun Newspaper (October 16, 2016) and signs were posted on-site. To date, staff has received one email and a phone call from neighbors with traffic related concerns. Staff also received a phone call from the abutting property owner facing Williams Drive with concerns of how a church will limit certain uses on his property. Attachments Attachment 1 – Location Map Attachment 2 – Future Land Use Map Attachment 3 – Zoning Map Attachment 4 – CN District Development Standards and Permitted Land Uses Page 165 of 316 WilliamsDr W illia ms Dr Lake w ay Dr Lakeway D r DB W o o d R d Booty'sCrossingRd Shell Rd NAustinAve N A u s t i n A v e NColleg e StRiveryBlvd N A u s t i n A v e W olfRanchPkw y S eren a da D r EMorro w St N orth w estBlvd Lake w ay Dr §¨¦35 (River/ S t r e a m ) (R i v e r /St r e a m ) REZ-2016-024 Attachment 1 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 166 of 316 GABRIELVIEWDR B O O T Y S CROSSING RD SUT T O N P L R A N D OLPH RD W E S T W O O D L N DEE R H A V E N D R N ORTHWESTBLV D WESTE R N T R L R ID GECRESTRD POW E R R D PARKER D R PARK M E A D O W B L V D O A K L N KAT H I L N P E C A N L N MELANI E L N WAGON W HEELTRL DAWNDR S P R INGW O O D LN ME S Q U I T E L N D U N M AN DR STACEY LN JO H N T H O M A S D R NORTHCROSSRD W I N DMILL CV ME L I S S A C T C L E A R S P R I N G R D B UFFAL O S P RIN G S T R L C O T T O N W O O D D R FAIRVIE W R D P A T TI D R E RU S T L E C V KIMB E R L Y S T R I V E R B E N D D R P R I M R O S E T R L S P A N I S H O A K D R PARKLN WHITE TAILCV BRIAR W O O D D R VERNASPU R G O LD E N O A K S D RBRANDYLN B R O K E N S P O K E T R L N O R T H W O O D D R T I F F A N Y L N R O C K Y H O L L O W T R L A X I S LP OAK R I D G E C I R S P R I N G V A L L E Y R D WILLIAMSDR L O N E S O M E TRL TERRYLN L A K E W AY D R ADDIELN WHISPEROAKSLN SKINN E R L N O A K CREST LN RIVERRD W OODLANDRD CANYONRD Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only ¯ Future Land Use / Overall Transportation Plan Attachment 2 REZ-2016-024 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 ¼½Mi LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ Page 167 of 316 GABRIELVIEWDR B O O T Y S CROSSING RD SUT T O N P L R A N D OLPH RD W E S T W O O D L N DEE R H A V E N D R N ORTHWESTBLV D WESTE R N T R L R ID GECRESTRD POW E R R D PARKER D R PARK M E A D O W B L V D O A K L N KAT H I L N P E C A N L N MELANI E L N WAGON W HEELTRL DAWNDR S P R INGW O O D LN ME S Q U I T E L N D U N M AN DR STACEY LN JO H N T H O M A S D R NORTHCROSSRD W I N DMILL CV ME L I S S A C T C L E A R S P R I N G R D B UFFAL O S P RIN G S T R L C O T T O N W O O D D R FAIRVIE W R D P A T TI D R E RU S T L E C V KIMB E R L Y S T R I V E R B E N D D R P R I M R O S E T R L S P A N IS H O A K D R PARKLN WHITE TAILCV BRIAR W O O D D R VERNASPU R G O LD E N O A K S D RBRANDYLN B R O K E N S P O K E T R L N O R T H W OOD D R T I F F A N Y L N R O C K Y H O L L O W T R L A X I S LP OAK R I D G E C I R S P R I N G V A L L E Y R D WILLIAMSDR L O N E S O M E TRL TERRYLN L A K E W AY D R ADDIELN WHISPEROAKSLN SKINN E R L N O A K CREST LN RIVERRD W OODLANDRD CANYONRD Zoning InformationREZ-2016-024 Attachment 3 Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only Legend SiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ ¯ 0 ¼½MiPage 168 of 316 Maximum Building Height = 30 feet Front Setback = 20 feet Bufferyard = 10 feet with plantings Maximum Building Size = 0.3 FAR, (0 feet for build-to/downtown) adjacent to AG, RE, RL, RS, TF, MH, max. bldg. size 7,500 SF Side Setback = 5 feet MF-1, or MF-2 districts (only applies to those uses Side Setback to Residential = 10 feet marked with * below)Rear Setback = 0 feet Rear Setback to Residential = 20 feet Allowed by Right Subject to Limitations Special Use Permit (SUP) Required Assisted Living Activity Center (youth/senior)Bar/Tavern/Pub* Dry Cleaning Service*Bed and Breakfast (with events)Community Center Emergency Services Station Consumer repair*Event Facility Government/Postal Office Day Care (group/commercial)Inn Group Home (7+ residents)Dry cleaning service (drop off only)Restaurant (drive-through)* Hospice facility Farmer's market* Library/Museum Fitness center* Nature Preserve/Community Garden Food catering services* Nursing/Convalescent/Hospice General retail* Parking Lot (park-n-ride)General office* Utilities (Minor)Home health care services* Home based business Laundromat* Medical or dental offices* Micro Brewery/Winery Park (neighborhood) Printing, mailing and reproduction services* Personal services* Religious assembly facility (with columbarium) Restaurant (General)* School (Elementary, Middle) Upper-story Residential Utilities (Intermediate) Wireless Transmission Facility (<41') Neighborhood Commercial (CN) District District Development Standards Specific Uses Allowed within the District Page 169 of 316 1 Juan Enriquez From:Marie Kelley <soldbymk@aol.com> Sent:Tuesday, October 18, 2016 9:50 AM To:Juan Enriquez Subject:Re: Rezoning 700 Booty's Road Juan, Your information was helpful. As a HOA neighborhood known as Village I and Village II we would be concerned about the additional traffic since it is a two lane road and what access the church would have. I know the city required Explor School next door to have a road connection into the current exit at Walgreens and another one on Williams Drive. We are certainly not opposed to the church but how the additional traffic will be handled depending on their membership. Marie Kelley Right-click here to download pictures. To help protect your privacy, Outlook prevented automatic download of thi s pi ctu re from the In ternet. -----Original Message----- From: Juan Enriquez <Juan.Enriquez@georgetown.org> To: 'Marie Kelley' <soldbymk@aol.com> Sent: Tue, Oct 18, 2016 8:25 am Subject: RE: Rezoning 700 Booty's Road Hello Marie, I received your email and I just listed to your voicemail. You are correct in terms of churches being able to be built in agriculturally zoned land. The City of Georgetown’s Unified Development Code allows churches to be built within the Agricultural district (AG). However, there is a maximum 20% impervious cover requirement for properties in the AG district which says how much of the property can be built. Additionally, the property at 700 Bootys Crossing Road also has many protected trees which made it more restrictive to build a church on site. Therefore, the church decided to change the zoning district to Neighborhood Commercial (CN) in order to get up to 70% impervious cover, if needed, and have more flexibility meeting the City’s development standards. Staff is supportive of the rezoning application because the Neighborhood Commercial zoning district will have the least impact to the surrounding neighborhoods compared to the other options of C‐1 (Local Commercial) or C‐3 (General Commercial) and allow the church to build a new facility. Let me know if I answered your question and if you have additional questions. Sincerely, Juan Enriquez Planner City of Georgetown Planning Department 406 W. 8th Street Georgetown, TX 78626 Office 512.930.3575 | Direct 512.930.3580 Planning Department Hours of Operation Application Submittal Hours Page 170 of 316 2 Monday‐Friday 8 am to 5 pm Monday‐Friday 9 am to 4 pm From: Marie Kelley [mailto:soldbymk@aol.com] Sent: Monday, October 17, 2016 5:19 PM To: Juan Enriquez <Juan.Enriquez@georgetown.org> Subject: Rezoning 700 Booty's Road To: Juan Enriquez, Case Manager We are in reciept of your letter for Faith Impact Church requesting rezoning from agriculture to commercial. We would like to know the reason because you can build churches on agricultural land such as found in Williamson County farm areas. Marie and Windle Kelley 113 Stacey Lane Click here to report this email as spam. Page 171 of 316 Page 172 of 316 Page 173 of 316 Page 174 of 316 Ordinance Number: ___________________ Page 1 of 2 Description: Rezone 3.5 acres San Gabriel Estates, Block 1, Lot 22A Case File Number: REZ-2016-024 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 3.5 acres of San Gabriel Estates, Block 1, Lot 22A from the AG (Agriculture) District to the CN (Neighborhood Commercial) District also known as Faith Impact Church; 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"): 3.5 acres of San Gabriel Estates, Block 1, Lot 22A, as recorded in Document Number 196300020G of the Official Public Records of Williamson County, Texas, hereinafter referred to as "The Property"; and Whereas, public notice of such hearing was accomplished in accordance with State Law and the City’s Unified Development Code through newspaper publication, signs posted on the Property, and mailed notice to nearby property owners; and Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission, at a meeting on November 1, 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 November 22, 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. Section 2. The Official Zoning Map, as well as the Zoning District classification(s) for the Property is hereby amended from the AG District (Agriculture) to the CN District (Neighborhood Commercial), 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. Page 175 of 316 Ordinance Number: ___________________ Page 2 of 2 Description: Rezone 3.5 acres San Gabriel Estates, Block 1, Lot 22A Case File Number: REZ-2016-024 Date Approved: __________________ Exhibits A-B Attached Section 4. If any provision of this Ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstance shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions, or application thereof, of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby declared to be severable. Section 5. The Mayor is hereby authorized to sign this ordinance and the City Secretary to attest. This ordinance shall become effective in accordance with the provisions of state law and the City Charter of the City of Georgetown. APPROVED on First Reading on the 22nd day of November, 2016. APPROVED AND ADOPTED on Second Reading on the 13th day of December, 2016. THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: ATTEST: ______________________ _________________________ Dale Ross Shelley Nowling Mayor City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: ______________________ Charlie McNabb City Attorney Page 176 of 316 WilliamsDr W illia ms Dr Lake w ay Dr Lakeway D r DB W o o d R d Booty'sCrossingRd Shell Rd NAustinAve N A u s t i n A v e NColleg e StRiveryBlvd N A u s t i n A v e W olfRanchPkw y S eren a da D r EMorro w St N orth w estBlvd Lake w ay Dr §¨¦35 (River/ S t r e a m ) (R i v e r /St r e a m ) REZ-2016-024 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 ETJExhibit A Page 177 of 316 Exhibit B - Legal Description Page 178 of 316 Page 179 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Publ i c Heari ng and Fi rst Readi ng of an Ordinance to rezone appro xi matel y 1 0.0 58 acres in the Francis A Hudson Survey located at 5 55 Rabbi t Hi l l Road from the Agric ulture (AG) District to the Busine ss Park (BP) District -- Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, P lanning Director (acti on requi red) ITEM SUMMARY: B ackground The applicant has requested to rezone the 1 0.058 acre tract from the Agriculture (AG) District to the Business Park (BP) District for future co mmercial development o f the property. The propo sed initial project includes a crude oil pipeline pump station o n approximately 2 acres of the parc e l, reserving the remaining portion fo r future comme rc ial developme nt. Publ i c Comment To date, one written public co mment was received in favor o f the request. Staff Recommendati o n: Staff recommends appro val o f the request to rezo ne the 1 0.0 58 acre tract to the BP District. Pl anni ng & Zoni ng Commi ssi on Acti on The P lanning and Zoning Commissio n reviewed the applicatio n and recommended approval at the No vember 1 , 2 01 6 meeting. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None studied at this time SUBMITTED BY: Matt Synatschk, Historic P lanner and Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director ATTACHMENT S: Description REZ-2016-026 Enterp ris e Rezo ning Staff Report Attachment 1 - Lo catio n Map Attachment 2 - F uture Land Us e Map Attachment 3 - Zo ning Map Attachment 4 - Aerial Map Attachment 5 - BP Zoning Dis tric t Develo pment Standards and Land Us es Ordinanc e - Enterp ris e P ip eline Ordinanc e Exhibit A - Loc ation Map Ordinanc e Exhibit B - P ro p erty S urvey Page 180 of 316 Georgetown Planning Department Staff Report Enterprise Pipeline Rezoning AG to BP Page 1 of 5 Report Date: October 14, 2016 File No: REZ-2016-026 Project Planner: Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner Item Details Project Name: Enterprise Pipeline Rezoning Project Address: 555 Rabbit Hill Road Total Acreage: 10.058 acres Legal Description: 10.058 acres of the Frances A Hudson Survey Current Zoning: Agriculture (AG) Proposed Zoning: Business Park (BP) Overview of Applicant’s Request The applicant has requested to rezone the undeveloped 10.058 acre tract from the Agriculture (AG) District to the Business Park (BP) District for future commercial development of the property. The proposed initial project includes a crude oil pipeline pump station on approximately 2 acres of the parcel, reserving the remaining portion for future commercial development. Page 181 of 316 Planning Department Staff Report Enterprise Pipeline Rezoning AG to BP Page 2 of 5 Site Information Location: The subject site is located on Rabbit Hill Road, between Southeast Inner Loop to the north and Westinghouse Road to the south in the southeastern portion of the City. Physical Characteristics: The property is 10.058 acres in size, and currently developed as a single family residence. A tree survey has not been submitted at this stage of the process and therefore the presence of protected or heritage trees is unknown. The property has public street access on Rabbit Hill Road. Surrounding Properties: Location Zoning Future Land Use Existing Use North ETJ Employment Center Undeveloped Commercial/Residential Land South ETJ Employment Center Single family residence East ETJ Employment Center Undeveloped Commercial/Residential Land West ETJ Employment Center Undeveloped Commercial/Residential Land Property History The 10.058 acre property was annexed into the City in 2016 by Ordinance No. 2016-34. At the time of annexation into the City, the default Agriculture (AG) District was assigned. The property is currently developed for single family residential use. 2030 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use: The 2030 Future Land Use category for this subject site is Employment Center. The Employment Center category is described in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan as appropriate for undeveloped land at strategic locations, designed for large scale employment and business activities. Uses may include retail, services and high density residential development. The land use type may also serve as a transitional zone between more intense commercial and residential areas. Growth Tier: The 2030 Plan Growth Tier Map designation is Tier 2, which is typically in the City’s ETJ areas that will likely be needed to serve the City’s growth needs over the next 10-20 years. However, the City may consider requests for annexation, extension of city services, and rezonings in these areas. Transportation The property has approximately 740 feet of street frontage on along Rabbit Hill Road, which is designated as a collector level road by the 2035 Thoroughfare Plan. The property is primarily accessed by Rabbit Hill Road. The proposed use will not generate a significant increase in traffic, but future development may trigger a Traffic Impact Analysis. Page 182 of 316 Planning Department Staff Report Enterprise Pipeline Rezoning AG to BP Page 3 of 5 Utilities Water/wastewater is served by the City of Georgetown. Electric service is dually-certified by the City of Georgetown and ONCOR. Proposed Zoning District The Business Park District (BP) is intended to provide a location for office, research, and light industrial uses typically located as part of a large development. The BP District may be appropriate adjacent to residential areas, provided that there is adequate buffering and pedestrian and vehicular access to the residential area for workers in the business park. The BP District typically has more traffic than in an office area, but fewer heavy vehicles than in an industrial area. The Business Park District is a special purpose district because it has a minimum size acreage for limited complementary uses that may expand with the size of the park. Larger parks often include commercial activities such as restaurants, banks, day care and similar uses that are intended to serve the on-site community and may include some limited high-density residential. A list of allowed uses is included as Exhibit # 4. Staff Analysis The proposed Business Park zoning district is appropriate for this site based upon the property owner’s proposed use and the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The property owner is proposing to construct a pump station for the Enterprise Pipeline crude oil line, which will run from Midland, TX to Sealy, TX. The proposed pipeline will run adjacent to an existing refined fuels pipeline, minimizing the impact on the surrounding areas. Since the pump station will only use a portion of the parcel, the BP zoning allows for other uses that are consistent with the desired uses outlined in the Employment Center land use category of the Future Land Use Plan. Policy 1.A of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan encourages a mix of residential, commercial and employment uses, reflecting a gradual transition from high intensity uses to lower intensity uses. The BP zoning district creates a transitional area between the high intensity commercial developments along the I-35 corridor, and the Moderate Density Residential areas to the east. Policy 1.B promotes a mix of uses that create a more compact, higher density development in appropriate locations. These include walkable communities, and developments that blend residential and commercial uses. The BP zoning district is appropriate for this location because it allows for the mix of uses, including retail and employment opportunities, along with options for high density housing. Page 183 of 316 Planning Department Staff Report Enterprise Pipeline Rezoning AG to BP Page 4 of 5 The proposed rezoning request meets all of the criteria established in UDC Section 3.06.030 for zoning changes: Approval Criteria for Rezoning 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 was reviewed by staff and deemed complete. The zoning change is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan The proposed zoning change is consistent with the Future Land Use Plan’s Employment Center designation. The zoning change promotes the health, safety or general welfare of the City and the safe orderly, and healthful development of the City The proposed zoning change promotes orderly growth in the City by creating lower intensity uses that help transition from the high intensity uses found along the I-35 corridor and the residential uses to the east of the subject property. The zoning change is compatible with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property and with the character of the neighborhood The proposed rezoning is compatible with the surrounding zoning districts and uses. The majority of the surrounding property is located outside of the City limits, where zoning ordinances are not applicable. The property to the northwest is located within in City limits, and is zoned for Industrial uses. The property to be rezoned is suitable for uses permitted by the District that would be applied by the proposed amendment. The uses allowed by the BP district are compatible with the property owners planned use and future uses for the property. General Findings Based on all the information presented, staff has made the following findings: 1. The southeast quadrant of Georgetown is experiencing increased growth as the Austin metropolitan area continues to expand. Much of the existing and proposed land use in the area is residential, so the BP zoning district creates an opportunity for employment centers and retail opportunities to support the surrounding residential areas. 2. The Future Land Use category of Employment Center supports the BP zoning district for this location to serve as a transitional area from commercial development to residential development. 3. Goal 1, Policies and Action 1.A states that the City should “adjust zoning provisions to provide greater flexibility for mixed-uses, multiple housing types, compact development and redevelopment.” The BP zoning district supports this goal by providing for a mix of commercial and residential uses, design to create a more compact development. Page 184 of 316 Planning Department Staff Report Enterprise Pipeline Rezoning AG to BP Page 5 of 5 4. The property is located along Rabbit Hill Road, a collector level road, and can support the traffic that may be generated by the uses anticipated in the BP District. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the applicant’s zoning 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 that are located within City limits were notified of the rezoning application (2 notices mailed), a legal notice advertising the public hearing was placed in the Sun Newspaper (October 16, 2016) and two signs were posted on-site. To date, staff has not received any written or verbal comments in support or against the zoning request. Attachments Exhibit 1 – Location Map Exhibit 2 – Future Land Use Map Exhibit 3 – Zoning Map Exhibit 4 – BP District Development Standards and Permitted Land Uses Page 185 of 316 §¨¦35 Leander R d W e s ti n g h o u s e R d S E I n n e r L o o p SamHoustonAve ")1460 ")14 60 Tera vi s t a X in g Teravista C l u b D r W e s ti n g h o u s e R d R a b b it H I ll R d REZ-2 016-0 26Exhibit #1 Co ord inate System: Texas Sta te Plane/Centra l Zone/NAD 83/U S FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purp oses Only ¯ Locati on Map 0 0.5 1Mi Le ge n dSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ Page 186 of 316 \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ BL UE S P R I N G SBLVD §¨¦35 ")1460 Coo rd inate Sys tem: Te xas S tate Plane/C entral Zone/N AD 83/U S FeetCartographic D ata Fo r General Planning Purposes O nly ¯ Future Land Use / Overall Transportation Plan Exhi bit #2 REZ-20 16 -02 6 Legend Thoroughfare Future Land Use Institutional Regi onal Commercial Community Commerc ial Em ployment Center Low Dens ity Residential Mining Mix ed Us e Community Mix ed Us e Neighborhood Center Moderate Density Residential Open Space Specialty Mixed Us e Area Ag / Rural Residential Ex isting Collector Ex isting Freeway Ex isting Major Arterial Ex isting Minor Arterial Ex isting Ramp Pr oposed Collector Pr oposed Freeway Pr opsed Frontage Road Pr oposed Major Arterial Pr oposed Minor Arterial Pr oposed Railroad High Density Residential 0 ¼½¾Mi Le ge ndSi teParcelsCity Lim itsGeorgetown ETJ Page 187 of 316 BL UE S P R I N G SBLVD §¨¦35 ")1460 Zon in g Inf ormationREZ-2 016-0 26Exhibit #3 Co ord inate System: Texas Sta te Plane/Centra l Zone/NAD 83/U S FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purp oses Only Le ge n dSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ ¯ 0 ¼½¾MiPage 188 of 316 S IH 35 SB S IH 35 NB S IH 35 FWY SB F O X D R S IH 35 FWY NB L O O K O U T R D G EXIT 255B NB R A B B I T H I L L R D SIE R R A W A Y S T C O U R T N E Y D R S IH 35 NB R A B B I T H I L L R D S IH 35 NB S IH 35 FWY NB R A B B I T H I L L R D R A B B I T H I L L R D R A B B I T H I L L R D S I E R R A W A Y S T Co ord inate System: Texas Sta te Plane/Centra l Zone/NAD 83/U S FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purp oses Only ¯ Aerial REZ-2 016-0 26 Le ge n d SiteCity Limits 0 500 1,000FeetPage 189 of 316 Maximum Building Height = 60 feet Front Setback = 25 feet Bufferyard = 15 feet with plantings Side Setback = 10 feet adjacent to AG, RE, RL, RS, TF, MH, Side Setback to Residential = 20 ft TH, MF‐1, or MF‐2 districts Rear Setback = 10 feet Rear Setback to Residential = 25 ft Allowed by Right Subject to Limitations Special Use Permit (SUP) Required Emergency Services Station Upper Story Residential MF Detached Unity Government/Post Office Home Based Business Boutique Hotel Nature Preserve/Community Garden Trade/Business School Fuel Sales Food Catering Services Day Care, Group/Commercial Car Wash Home Health Care Services Church Warehouse/Distribution, Limited Medical Complex Church with Columbarium General Office Neighborhood Public Park Integrated Office Center Hotel (Full/Limited Service) Data Center Hotel Extended Stay Small Engine Repair Restaurant, General/Drive Through Commercial Document Storage General Retail Event Catering/Equipment Rental Personal Services Furniture Repair/Upholstery Dry Cleaning, Drop off Only Office Showroom Printing/Mailing/Copy Services Wholesale Showrooms Fitness Center Parking Lot, Offsite/Commercial Heliport Park‐n‐Ride Facility Seasonal Product Sales Utilities (Minor, Intermediate, Major)Farmer's market, Temporary Contractor Services, Limited Mobile/Outdoor Food Vendor Movie Production Business Offices, Temporary Printing/Publishing Concrete Products, Temporary Office/Warehouse Construction Field Office Research, Testing/Development Lab Construction Staging, Off‐site Manufacturing, Processing, Assembly Parking Lot, Temporary Limited Wireless Transmission Facility (>40') BUSINESS PARK (BP) DISTRICT District Development Standards Specific Uses Allowed within the District Page 190 of 316 Ordinance Number: ___________________ Page 1 of 2 Description: _______________________________ Case File Number: ___________________ Date Approved: __________________ Exhibits X-XX Attached ORDINANCE NO. _____________________ An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, amending part of the Official Zoning Map to rezone 10.058 acres of the Francis A Hudson Survey from the Agriculture District to the Business Park 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"): 10.058 acres of the Francis A Hudson Survey as recorded in Document Number 2016033755 of the Official Public Records of Williamson County, Texas, hereinafter referred to as "The Property"; and Whereas, public notice of such hearing was accomplished in accordance with State Law and the City’s Unified Development Code through newspaper publication, signs posted on the Property, and mailed notice to nearby property owners; and Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission, at a meeting on November 1, 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 November 22, 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. Section 2. The Official Zoning Map, as well as the Zoning District classification(s) for the Property is hereby amended from the Agriculture District (AG) to the Business Park District (BP), 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. Page 191 of 316 Ordinance Number: ___________________ Page 2 of 2 Description: _______________________________ Case File Number: ___________________ Date Approved: __________________ Exhibits X-XX Attached Section 4. If any provision of this Ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstance shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions, or application thereof, of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby declared to be severable. Section 5. The Mayor is hereby authorized to sign this ordinance and the City Secretary to attest. This ordinance shall become effective in accordance with the provisions of state law and the City Charter of the City of Georgetown. APPROVED on First Reading on the __th day of ____, 20__. APPROVED AND ADOPTED on Second Reading on the __th day of ____, 20__. THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: ATTEST: ______________________ _________________________ Dale Ross Shelley Nowling Mayor City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: ______________________ Charlie McNabb City Attorney Page 192 of 316 §¨¦35 Leander R d W e s ti n g h o u s e R d S E I n n e r L o o p SamHoustonAve ")1460 ")14 60 Tera vi s t a X in g Teravista C l u b D r W e s ti n g h o u s e R d R a b b it H I ll R d REZ-2 016-0 26Exhibit #1 Co ord inate System: Texas Sta te Plane/Centra l Zone/NAD 83/U S FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purp oses Only ¯ Locati on Map 0 0.5 1Mi Le ge n dSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ Page 193 of 316 Page 194 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Forwarded fro m G eorg etow n Uti l i ty Systems Advi so ry B oard (G US): Consideration and possible action to award a contr act to C.C. Carl ton, LTD of Austin, Texas for the constructi o n o f the Westi ng ho use So uth Regi onal Waste w ater System Improveme nts and Stonehedge Li ft Stati on Modi fi cati ons in the amount o f $2 ,112 ,011 .00 -- Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Dire c to r ITEM SUMMARY: The proposed project includes construc tion o f a 2 MGD (million gallon a day) Wastewater Lift Station, approximate ly 6000 LF of 12-inc h force main, and all piping necessary to connect to the existing wastewater system. This pro ject was publicly advertised on Septembe r 7, 20 16 and September 1 6, 2 01 6. Fifteen (15) co ntracto rs obtained plans. Fro m these plan ho lders on September 29 , 2 01 6 we receive Nine (9) competitive bids. The low qualified bidder for the proje c t was C.C. Carlto n, LTD with a total bid o f $2,112,011.0 0. They have co mpleted the Wolf Ranch Lift Station and are c urrently working on the Mays Street roadway extension. Therefore, staff believes C.C. Carlton, LTD is qualified to construct this proje c t. Staff Recommendati o n: CDM Smith and staff reco mmend awarding the c ontract for the construction of the We stingho use South Regional Wastewater System Improvements and Stonehedge Lift Statio n Modifications for $2,11 2,0 11.0 0. B OARD RECOMMENDATION: This item was unanimously approved for reco mmendation to Co uncil by the GUS Board at their meeting held on November 11, 2 01 6. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Funds for this expenditure are budgeted in the Waste water Capital Fund: SUBMITTED BY: Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Direc to r ATTACHMENT S: Description B&FAW Recommendatio n letter Page 195 of 316 Project Number DATE: PROJECT NAME:3CE 10/13/2016 Division/Department:Director Approval Prepared By:Michael Hallmark Finance Approval TW10/14/16 TOTAL ANNUAL BUDGET 3,298,900.00 (Current year only) Actual Cost Agenda Total Spent Encumbrance Item & Encumbered % Annual (A) before agenda item (B)(A + B) Budget Consulting 320,900.00 0.00 320,900.00 10% Right of Way 2,500.00 0.00 2,500.00 0% Construction 0.00 2,112,011.00 2,112,011.00 64% Other Costs 28.00 0.00 28.00 0% Total Current Year Costs 323,428.00 2,435,439.00 Proposed GENERAL LEDGER ACCOUNT NUMBER FY 15 Budget 660-9-0581-90-154 320,900.00$ 2,981,000.00 Total Budget 2,981,000.00 TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET 2,981,000.00 (includes all previous yrs) Prior Years Current Year Total Project % Total Spent/Encumbered Costs Costs Budget Consulting 0.00 320,900.00 320,900.00 11% Right of Way 0.00 2,500.00 2,500.00 0% Construction 0.00 2,112,011.00 2,112,011.00 71% Other Costs 0.00 28.00 28.00 0% Total Project Costs 0.00 2,435,439.00 2,435,439.00 Comments: Project will use budget from the upcoming year (2015). Water Services CIP- Budgetary and Financial Analysis Worksheet Westinghouse Regional LS & FM with C.C. Carlton Page 196 of 316 12357-A Riata Trace Parkway Building 5, Suite 210 Austin, Texas 78727 Tel: (512) 346-1100 Fax: (512) 345-1483 October 10, 2106 Michael Hallmark City of Georgetown 300-1 Industrial Ave. Georgetown, TX 78627 RE: Westinghouse South Regional Wastewater System Improvements and Stonehedge Lift Station Modifications Recommendation of Award Dear Mr. Hallmark: The Westinghouse South Regional Wastewater System Improvements and Stonehedge Lift Station Modifications project was advertised for public bids on September 7, 2016 and September 14, 2016 in the Williamson County Sun. Through our office, we provided plans and specifications to fifteen interested parties, including general contractors, subcontractors, suppliers and plan rooms. On September 29, 2016 at 2:00 p.m. bids were received at the Georgetown Municipal Complex, Purchasing Department, at 300-1 Industrial Avenue, Georgetown, Texas 78626 for the construction of the Westinghouse South Regional Wastewater System Improvements and Stonehedge Lift Station Modifications project and then opened and publically read aloud. Nine bids were received, and the names of the bidders and total combined project base bid amount plus the two additive alternative amounts are summarized below. 1. C.C. Carlton $2,112,011.00 2. Patin Construction $2,197,710.00 3. Santa Clara Construction $2,268,299.00 4. Central Road and Utility $2,341,956.00 5. JKB Construction $2,414,123.10 6. Sky Blue Utilities $2,576,407.15 7. Royal Vista $2,840,675.00 8. Joe Bland Construction $2,890,810.00 9. Prota Construction $3,219,585.00 A bid tabulation of all the bid items is attached. The low bidder on the project based on the base bid amount plus the two additive alternative amount is C.C. Carlton Industries, LTD (CC Carlton) of Page 197 of 316 Mr. Michael Hallmark October 10, 2016 Page 2 Austin, Texas. Also, as reflected on the attached bid tabulation, CC Carlton is also the low bidder based on the base bid amount only. The engineer’s estimate for the project was;  Westinghouse Rd S Regional WW System Improvements: $2.8 M  Stonehedge Lift Station Modifications: $245 K In addition to submitting the bids, each of the bidders submitted a Statement of Bidder’s Experience. We believe that CC Carlton can successfully complete the Westinghouse South Regional Wastewater System Improvements and Stonehedge Lift Station Modifications project as designed and specified. Moreover, CC Carlton is the contractor for the Mays Street improvements project, and for the Westinghouse Rd S Regional WW System Improvements, the contractor will have to share the construction easement with the Mays Street Contractor. Therefore, it is beneficial from a coordination effort that these two projects are completed by the same contractor. We recommend that the City of Georgetown award the Westinghouse South Regional Wastewater System Improvements and Stonehedge Lift Station Modifications contract base bid and whichever combination of additive alternatives that are in the City’s best interest to CC Carlton. Sincerely, Ana Karamalegos, P.E., BCEE Project Manager CDM Smith Inc. TBPE Firm Registration No. F-3043 cc: Allen Woelke, PE, CDM Smith Ken Taylor, City of Georgetown Attachments Enclosed Page 198 of 316 City of Georgetown Westinghouse S Regional WWSystem Imp and Stonehedge LS Modifications Project No. 3CE/3CD BID TABULATION September 29, 2016 Bidders Joe Bland Construction JKB Construction Patin Construction, LLC Prota Acknowledged all Addenda X X X X Provide Bid Security (5%)X X X X Provide Information from 00400 X X X X Westinghouse S Reg. Total Base Bid 2,376,430.00$ 2,142,615.40$ 1,809,400.00$ 2,690,345.00$ Stonehedge LS Total Base Bid 251,210.00$ 113,490.00$ 176,660.00$ 195,655.00$ Total Combined Project Base Bid 2,627,640.00$ 2,256,105.40$ 1,986,060.00$ 2,886,000.00$ Additive Alternative No.1 Total Bid 181,510.00$ 116,947.50$ 137,150.00$ 201,865.00$ Additive Alternative No.2 Total Bid 81,660.00$ 41,070.20$ 74,500.00$ 131,720.00$ Base Bid + Add Alt. 1 & 2 2,890,810.00$ 2,414,123.10$ 2,197,710.00$ 3,219,585.00$ Bidders Royal Vista, Inc. Santa Clara Construction, LTD CC Carlton Sky Blue Utilities Central Road and Utilities Acknowledged all Addenda X X X X X Provide Bid Security (5%)X X X X X Provide Information from 00400 X X X X X Westinghouse S Reg. Total Base Bid 2,344,625.00$ 1,969,564.00$ 1,831,876.00$ 2,047,103.38$ 1,959,220.00$ Stonehedge LS Total Base Bid 256,100.00$ 142,550.00$ 139,235.00$ 349,819.02$ 194,941.00$ Total Combined Project Base Bid 2,600,725.00$ 2,112,114.00$ 1,971,111.00$ 2,396,922.40$ 2,154,161.00$ Additive Alternative No.1 Total Bid 154,400.00$ 108,560.00$ 99,700.00$ 123,568.35$ 121,945.00$ Additive Alternative No.2 Total Bid 85,550.00$ 47,625.00$ 41,200.00$ 55,916.40$ 65,850.00$ Base Bid + Add Alt. 1 & 2 2,840,675.00$ 2,268,299.00$ 2,112,011.00$ 2,576,407.15$ 2,341,956.00$ Note: 1. All amounts in blue, bond italic font are corrected values. In accordance with Section 00100 Article 14, the bid form math was checked and amounts have been updated accordingly. Page 199 of 316 City of Georgetown Westinghouse S Regional WWSystem Imp and Stonehedge LS Modifications Project No. 3CE/3CD BID TABULATION Approved Bidders Acknowledged all Addenda Provide Bid Security (5%) Provide Information from 00400 Bid Item WESTINGHOUSE SOUTH REGIONAL WW SYSTEM IMP BASE BID AMOUNT Estimated Quantity Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount 1 Furnish and install all necessary labor,materials,equipment and incidentals to complete in place improvements to the Westinghouse South Regional Wastewater System Improvements, as detailed and specified; and not included in other base bid items. 1 $ 1,530,000.00 1,530,000.00$ $ 1,314,000.00 1,314,000.00$ $ 1,044,000.00 1,044,000.00$ $ 1,512,000.00 1,512,000.00$ $ 1,400,000.00 1,400,000.00$ $ 1,150,000.00 1,150,000.00$ $ 1,240,200.00 1,240,200.00$ $ 1,467,678.86 1,467,678.86$ $ 1,294,000.00 1,294,000.00$ 2 Bonding,Insurance,and Mobilization Related Expenses not to exceed 5% of Total Bid.1 $ 74,000.00 74,000.00$ $ 70,000.00 70,000.00$ $ 90,000.00 90,000.00$ $ 134,000.00 134,000.00$ $ 100,000.00 100,000.00$ $ 98,000.00 98,000.00$ $ 60,000.00 60,000.00$ $ 57,000.00 57,000.00$ $ 91,000.00 91,000.00$ 3 Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)and SWPPP Implementation,including installing the stabilized construction entrances,silt fence,and other required temporary sedimentation and erosion control best management practices as required by the SWPPP plan, complete in place as detailed and specified. 1 $ 25,000.00 25,000.00$ $ 17,000.00 17,000.00$ $ 1,500.00 1,500.00$ $ 35,000.00 35,000.00$ $ 25,000.00 25,000.00$ $ 19,500.00 19,500.00$ $ 17,000.00 17,000.00$ $ 4,560.00 4,560.00$ $ 5,100.00 5,100.00$ 4 Traffic Control Plan and Implementation,complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 7,000.00 7,000.00$ $ 17,200.00 17,200.00$ $ 2,000.00 2,000.00$ $ 1,750.00 1,750.00$ $ 30,000.00 30,000.00$ $ 2,300.00 2,300.00$ $ 11,000.00 11,000.00$ $ 1,710.00 1,710.00$ $ 10,500.00 10,500.00$ 5 Site and Right-of-Way Preparation, including clearing, grubbing, and tree protection, complete in place as detailed and specified.11.6 $ 2,000.00 23,200.00$ $ 4,700.00 54,520.00$ $ 4,500.00 52,200.00$ $ 2,000.00 23,200.00$ $ 5,000.00 58,000.00$ $ 2,015.00 23,374.00$ $ 1,500.00 17,400.00$ $ 570.00 6,612.00$ $ 2,100.00 24,360.00$ 6 Furnish and Install Temporary Improvements to provide temporary access gate(s)and fencing to keep the property secure and cattle onsite. 1 $ 2,000.00 2,000.00$ $ 58,000.00 58,000.00$ $ 4,000.00 4,000.00$ $ 3,750.00 3,750.00$ $ 20,000.00 20,000.00$ $ 3,450.00 3,450.00$ $ 4,000.00 4,000.00$ $ 4,560.00 4,560.00$ $ 3,500.00 3,500.00$ 7 Furnish and Install Access Gates and Security Fence at Lift Station, complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 4,000.00 4,000.00$ $ 14,900.00 14,900.00$ $ 20,000.00 20,000.00$ $ 17,000.00 17,000.00$ $ 20,000.00 20,000.00$ $ 17,500.00 17,500.00$ $ 10,500.00 10,500.00$ $ 18,240.00 18,240.00$ $ 15,000.00 15,000.00$ 8 Install 15-ft wide temporary access road from Mays Rd.to the proposed lift station site,complete in place as detailed and specified. 1,960 $ 16.00 31,360.00$ $ 15.60 30,576.00$ $ 35.00 68,600.00$ $ 45.00 88,200.00$ $ 40.00 78,400.00$ $ 37.00 72,520.00$ $ 26.00 50,960.00$ $ 20.52 40,219.20$ $ 30.00 58,800.00$ 9 Trench Safety Plan and Implementation,as required for all pipe trenches deeper than 5 feet,complete in place as detailed and specified. 5,900 $ 1.00 5,900.00$ $ 1.00 5,900.00$ $ 2.00 11,800.00$ $ 1.00 5,900.00$ $ 2.00 11,800.00$ $ 1.35 7,965.00$ $ 1.00 5,900.00$ $ 1.14 6,726.00$ $ 1.10 6,490.00$ 10 Excavation Safety Plan and Implementation complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 800.00 800.00$ $ 1,110.00 1,110.00$ $ 2,500.00 2,500.00$ $ 6,000.00 6,000.00$ $ 4,000.00 4,000.00$ $ 500.00 500.00$ $ 1,000.00 1,000.00$ $ 3,420.00 3,420.00$ $ 3,000.00 3,000.00$ 11 Furnish and Install 8-inch PVC SDR 26 Pipe (Open Trench Construction),including excavation,dewatering,bedding,backfill, and trench surface restoration,complete in place as detailed and specified. 640 $ 37.00 23,680.00$ $ 46.00 29,440.00$ $ 80.00 51,200.00$ $ 160.00 102,400.00$ $ 55.00 35,200.00$ $ 60.00 38,400.00$ $ 31.00 19,840.00$ $ 61.03 39,059.20$ $ 29.00 18,560.00$ 12 Furnish and Install 12-inch PVC SDR 26 Pipe (Open Trench Construction),including excavation,dewatering,bedding,backfill, and trench surface restoration,complete in place as detailed and specified. 150 $ 54.00 8,100.00$ $ 47.00 7,050.00$ $ 150.00 22,500.00$ $ 250.00 37,500.00$ $ 60.00 9,000.00$ $ 72.00 10,800.00$ $ 68.00 10,200.00$ $ 65.69 9,853.50$ $ 38.50 5,775.00$ 13 Furnish and Install 12-inch PVC C900, DR 18 or Epoxy Coated Ductile Iron Pipe (Open Trench Construction),including excavation, dewatering,bedding,backfill,and trench surface restoration, complete in place as detailed and specified. 5,000 $ 63.00 315,000.00$ $ 56.00 280,000.00$ $ 50.00 250,000.00$ $ 90.00 450,000.00$ $ 60.00 300,000.00$ $ 75.00 375,000.00$ $ 38.00 190,000.00$ $ 46.76 233,800.00$ $ 44.60 223,000.00$ 14 Furnish and Install 12-inch PVC C900, DR 18 or Epoxy Coated Ductile Iron Pipe with concrete encasement,including excavation, dewatering,bedding,backfill,and trench surface restoration, complete in place as detailed and specified. 40 $ 580.00 23,200.00$ $ 138.00 5,520.00$ $ 100.00 4,000.00$ $ 250.00 10,000.00$ $ 90.00 3,600.00$ $ 100.00 4,000.00$ $ 120.00 4,800.00$ $ 45.89 1,835.60$ $ 60.00 2,400.00$ 15 Furnish and Install 12-inch PVC C900, DR 18 or Epoxy Coated Ductile Iron Pipe with cap concrete,including excavation,dewatering, bedding,backfill,and trench surface restoration,complete in place as detailed and specified. 70 $ 120.00 8,400.00$ $ 91.00 6,370.00$ $ 100.00 7,000.00$ $ 115.00 8,050.00$ $ 90.00 6,300.00$ $ 82.00 5,740.00$ $ 90.00 6,300.00$ $ 72.11 5,047.70$ $ 50.00 3,500.00$ 16 Furnish and Install 12-inch PVC C900,DR-18 Pipe or Epoxy Coated Ductile Iron Pipe in casing,complete in place as detailed and specified. 160 $ 80.00 12,800.00$ $ 74.00 11,840.00$ $ 500.00 80,000.00$ $ 80.00 12,800.00$ $ 105.00 16,800.00$ $ 64.00 10,240.00$ $ 15.00 2,400.00$ $ 51.29 8,206.40$ $ 49.00 7,840.00$ 17 Furnish and Install 24-inch Steel Casing Pipe (Boring and Jacking Construction), complete in place as detailed and specified.115 $ 650.00 74,750.00$ $ 515.00 59,225.00$ $ 35.00 4,025.00$ $ 475.00 54,625.00$ $ 475.00 54,625.00$ $ 400.00 46,000.00$ $ 480.00 55,200.00$ $ 285.00 32,775.00$ $ 513.00 58,995.00$ 18 Furnish and Install 24-inch Steel Casing Pipe (Open Trench Construction), complete in place as detailed and specified.45 $ 330.00 14,850.00$ $ 112.00 5,040.00$ $ 250.00 11,250.00$ $ 225.00 10,125.00$ $ 150.00 6,750.00$ $ 75.00 3,375.00$ $ 60.00 2,700.00$ $ 204.90 9,220.50$ $ 170.00 7,650.00$ 19 Furnish and Install 4-Foot Diameter Drop Manhole,complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 10,000.00 10,000.00$ $ 8,730.00 8,730.00$ $ 6,500.00 6,500.00$ $ 14,000.00 14,000.00$ $ 6,700.00 6,700.00$ $ 7,550.00 7,550.00$ $ 7,500.00 7,500.00$ $ 7,762.32 7,762.32$ $ 6,500.00 6,500.00$ 20 Furnish and Install 5-Foot Diameter Manhole,Combination Air/Vacuum Valve,and associated appurtenances as shown in Detail F on Sheet CZ-5, complete in place as detailed and specified. 4 $ 8,000.00 32,000.00$ $ 13,700.00 54,800.00$ $ 7,000.00 28,000.00$ $ 14,000.00 56,000.00$ $ 8,500.00 34,000.00$ $ 6,750.00 27,000.00$ $ 8,400.00 33,600.00$ $ 12,410.27 49,641.08$ $ 10,400.00 41,600.00$ 21 Furnish and Install 4-Foot Diameter Manhole,complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 5,000.00 5,000.00$ $ 6,600.00 6,600.00$ $ 6,000.00 6,000.00$ $ 10,000.00 10,000.00$ $ 5,700.00 5,700.00$ $ 5,650.00 5,650.00$ $ 9,100.00 9,100.00$ $ 5,261.02 5,261.02$ $ 4,800.00 4,800.00$ 22 Connect to existing manhole by coring and reshape invert, complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 7,000.00 7,000.00$ $ 4,300.00 4,300.00$ $ 5,000.00 5,000.00$ $ 13,000.00 13,000.00$ $ 1,950.00 1,950.00$ $ 1,500.00 1,500.00$ $ 2,000.00 2,000.00$ $ 3,420.00 3,420.00$ $ 2,100.00 2,100.00$ 23 Connection to 12-inch WW pipeline system by Others (or provide a cap if WW pipeline is not installed),complete in place as detailed and specified. 2 $ 6,000.00 12,000.00$ $ 960.00 1,920.00$ $ 1,200.00 2,400.00$ $ 2,500.00 5,000.00$ $ 1,500.00 3,000.00$ $ 500.00 1,000.00$ $ 2,000.00 4,000.00$ $ 1,368.00 2,736.00$ $ 1,800.00 3,600.00$ 24 Connection to 8-inch WW pipeline system by Others at the manhole stub, complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 5,000.00 5,000.00$ $ 914.00 914.00$ $ 1,200.00 1,200.00$ $ 2,250.00 2,250.00$ $ 900.00 900.00$ $ 500.00 500.00$ $ 2,000.00 2,000.00$ $ 1,368.00 1,368.00$ $ 1,470.00 1,470.00$ 25 Cut and cap existing 8-inch WW pipeline,complete in place as detailed and specified.3 $ 2,000.00 6,000.00$ $ 880.00 2,640.00$ $ 500.00 1,500.00$ $ 2,250.00 6,750.00$ $ 750.00 2,250.00$ $ 500.00 1,500.00$ $ 1,500.00 4,500.00$ $ 627.00 1,881.00$ $ 2,500.00 7,500.00$ 26 Cleaning of 8-inch PVC SDR 26 pipeline and associated manholes, complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 4,000.00 4,000.00$ $ 710.00 710.00$ $ 800.00 800.00$ $ 3,250.00 3,250.00$ $ 3,000.00 3,000.00$ $ 640.00 640.00$ $ 1,000.00 1,000.00$ $ 570.00 570.00$ $ 1,300.00 1,300.00$ 27 Testing of 8-inch PVC SDR 26 pipeline,complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 100.00 100.00$ $ 710.00 710.00$ $ 800.00 800.00$ $ 2,750.00 2,750.00$ $ 1,500.00 1,500.00$ $ 640.00 640.00$ $ 1,000.00 1,000.00$ $ 912.00 912.00$ $ 2,000.00 2,000.00$ 28 Cleaning of 12-inch PVC SDR 26 pipeline and associated manholes, complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 3,000.00 3,000.00$ $ 170.00 170.00$ $ 800.00 800.00$ $ 800.00 800.00$ $ 4,000.00 4,000.00$ $ 150.00 150.00$ $ 500.00 500.00$ $ 570.00 570.00$ $ 500.00 500.00$ September 29, 2016 WESTINGHOUSE SOUTH REGIONAL WW SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS BASE BID AMOUNT (BASE BID ITEM Nos. 1 - 35) CC Carlton X X X X Joe Bland Construction JKB Construction X X X X Patin Construction, LLC X X X X X Prota X X X Skyblue Utilities, Inc. X X X Royal Vista, Inc. X X X Santa Clara Construction, LTD X X Central Road and Utility, Ltd. Dba CRU, Ltd. X X X Page 200 of 316 City of Georgetown Westinghouse S Regional WWSystem Imp and Stonehedge LS Modifications Project No. 3CE/3CD BID TABULATION Approved Bidders September 29, 2016 CC CarltonJoe Bland Construction JKB Construction Patin Construction, LLC Prota Skyblue Utilities, Inc.Royal Vista, Inc.Santa Clara Construction, LTD Central Road and Utility, Ltd. Dba CRU, Ltd. 29 Testing of 12-inch PVC SDR 26 pipeline,complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 200.00 200.00$ $ 170.00 170.00$ $ 800.00 800.00$ $ 1,250.00 1,250.00$ $ 2,000.00 2,000.00$ $ 150.00 150.00$ $ 500.00 500.00$ $ 1,596.00 1,596.00$ $ 1,000.00 1,000.00$ 30 Cleaning of 12-inch PVC C900,DR-18 (or DI)pipeline,complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 8,000.00 8,000.00$ $ 5,860.00 5,860.00$ $ 2,500.00 2,500.00$ $ 13,000.00 13,000.00$ $ 15,000.00 15,000.00$ $ 500.00 500.00$ $ 5,600.00 5,600.00$ $ 1,140.00 1,140.00$ $ 5,300.00 5,300.00$ 31 Testing of 12-inch PVC C900,DR-18 (or DI)pipeline,complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 11,000.00 11,000.00$ $ 5,860.00 5,860.00$ $ 2,500.00 2,500.00$ $ 9,000.00 9,000.00$ $ 10,000.00 10,000.00$ $ 1,500.00 1,500.00$ $ 1.00 1.00$ $ 3,990.00 3,990.00$ $ 6,500.00 6,500.00$ 32 Testing of new manholes,complete in place as detailed and specified.2 $ 2,000.00 4,000.00$ $ 550.00 1,100.00$ $ 850.00 1,700.00$ $ 600.00 1,200.00$ $ 700.00 1,400.00$ $ 250.00 500.00$ $ 750.00 1,500.00$ $ 399.00 798.00$ $ 550.00 1,100.00$ 33 Testing of retrofitted manholes,complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 2,000.00 2,000.00$ $ 850.00 850.00$ $ 5,000.00 5,000.00$ $ 1,200.00 1,200.00$ $ 1,000.00 1,000.00$ $ 125.00 125.00$ $ 1,000.00 1,000.00$ $ 399.00 399.00$ $ 1,600.00 1,600.00$ 34 Furnish and Install Access Road at Lift Station,complete in place as detailed and specified.335 $ 14.00 4,690.00$ $ 16.00 5,360.00$ $ 35.00 11,725.00$ $ 45.00 15,075.00$ $ 50.00 16,750.00$ $ 37.00 12,395.00$ $ 45.00 15,075.00$ $ 20.52 6,874.20$ $ 48.00 16,080.00$ 35 Provide Re-vegetation, complete in place as detailed and specified.11.2 $ 7,000.00 78,400.00$ $ 4,842.00 54,230.40$ $ 500.00 5,600.00$ $ 2,100.00 23,520.00$ $ 5,000.00 56,000.00$ $ 1,750.00 19,600.00$ $ 3,000.00 33,600.00$ $ 684.00 7,660.80$ $ 1,500.00 16,800.00$ Total - Base Bid (Item Nos. 1-35)--2,376,430.00$ -2,142,615.40$ -1,809,400.00$ -2,690,345.00$ -2,344,625.00$ -1,969,564.00$ -1,831,876.00$ -2,047,103.38$ -1,959,220.00$ Bid Item STONHEDGE LIFT STATION MODIFICATIONS BASE BID AMOUNT Estimated Quantity Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount 36 Furnish and install all necessary labor,materials,equipment and incidentals necessary to complete in place improvements to the Stonehedge Lift Station,as detailed and specified;and not included in other base bid items. 1 $ 233,000.00 233,000.00$ $ 99,900.00 99,900.00$ $ 165,000.00 165,000.00$ $ 178,445.00 178,445.00$ $ 230,000.00 230,000.00$ $ 130,000.00 130,000.00$ $ 125,000.00 125,000.00$ $ 318,925.02 318,925.02$ $ 175,000.00 175,000.00$ 37 Bonding,Insurance,and Mobilization Related Expenses not to exceed 5% of Total Bid.1 $ 12,000.00 12,000.00$ $ 7,100.00 7,100.00$ $ 8,750.00 8,750.00$ $ 10,000.00 10,000.00$ $ 10,000.00 10,000.00$ $ 7,000.00 7,000.00$ $ 6,500.00 6,500.00$ $ 11,400.00 11,400.00$ $ 9,500.00 9,500.00$ 38 Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)and SWPPP Implementation,including installing the stabilized construction entrances,silt fence,and other required temporary sedimentation and erosion control best management practices as required by the SWPPP plan, complete in place as detailed and specified. 1 $ 5,000.00 5,000.00$ $ 1,380.00 1,380.00$ $ 1,200.00 1,200.00$ $ 4,000.00 4,000.00$ $ 6,000.00 6,000.00$ $ 3,850.00 3,850.00$ $ 3,000.00 3,000.00$ $ 11,400.00 11,400.00$ $ 4,800.00 4,800.00$ 39 Traffic Control Plan and Implementation,complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 1,000.00 1,000.00$ $ 4,900.00 4,900.00$ $ 1,500.00 1,500.00$ $ 3,000.00 3,000.00$ $ 8,000.00 8,000.00$ $ 650.00 650.00$ $ 4,000.00 4,000.00$ $ 5,700.00 5,700.00$ $ 5,200.00 5,200.00$ 40 Trench Safety Plan and Implementation,as required for all pipe trenches deeper than 5 feet,complete in place as detailed and specified. 210 $ 1.00 210.00$ $ 1.00 210.00$ $ 1.00 210.00$ $ 1.00 210.00$ $ 10.00 2,100.00$ $ 5.00 1,050.00$ $ 3.50 735.00$ $ 11.40 2,394.00$ $ 2.10 441.00$ Total - Base Bid (Item Nos. 36-40)--251,210.00$ -113,490.00$ -176,660.00$ -195,655.00$ -256,100.00$ -142,550.00$ -139,235.00$ -349,819.02$ -194,941.00$ Total - Base Bid (Item Nos. 1-40)--2,627,640.00$ -2,256,105.40$ -1,986,060.00$ -2,886,000.00$ -2,600,725.00$ -2,112,114.00$ -1,971,111.00$ -2,396,922.40$ -2,154,161.00$ Bid Item ADDITIVE ALTERNATE No. 1: ACM DIVERSION LINE Estimated Quantity Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount 1 Bonding,Insurance,and Mobilization Related Expenses not to exceed 5% of Total Bid.1 $ 8,000.00 8,000.00$ $ 5,500.00 5,500.00$ $ 6,500.00 6,500.00$ $ 9,000.00 9,000.00$ $ 7,000.00 7,000.00$ $ 5,500.00 5,500.00$ $ 4,900.00 4,900.00$ $ 11,400.00 11,400.00$ $ 10,000.00 10,000.00$ 2 Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)and SWPPP Implementation,including installing the stabilized construction entrances,silt fence,and other required temporary sedimentation and erosion control best management practices as required by the SWPPP plan, complete in place as detailed and specified. 1 $ 5,000.00 5,000.00$ $ 1,650.00 1,650.00$ $ 850.00 850.00$ $ 1,500.00 1,500.00$ $ 4,000.00 4,000.00$ $ 500.00 500.00$ $ 1,500.00 1,500.00$ $ 7,980.00 7,980.00$ $ 3,500.00 3,500.00$ 3 Traffic Control Plan and Implementation,complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 3,000.00 3,000.00$ $ 4,900.00 4,900.00$ $ 2,500.00 2,500.00$ $ 1,500.00 1,500.00$ $ 8,000.00 8,000.00$ $ 450.00 450.00$ $ 3,000.00 3,000.00$ $ 3,990.00 3,990.00$ $ 5,000.00 5,000.00$ 4 Site and Right-of-Way Preparation,complete in place as detailed and specified.0.05 $ 94,000.00 4,700.00$ $ 4,700.00 235.00$ $ 5,000.00 250.00$ $ 2,000.00 100.00$ $ 40,000.00 2,000.00$ $ 5,500.00 275.00$ $ 50,000.00 2,500.00$ $ 2,280.00 114.00$ $ 10,000.00 500.00$ 5 Furnish and Install Temporary Improvements to provide temporary access gate(s)and fencing to keep the property secure and cattle onsite. 1 $ 2,000.00 2,000.00$ $ 5,600.00 5,600.00$ $ 1,500.00 1,500.00$ $ 2,500.00 2,500.00$ $ 6,000.00 6,000.00$ $ 1,650.00 1,650.00$ $ 1,500.00 1,500.00$ $ 3,420.00 3,420.00$ $ 1,500.00 1,500.00$ 6 Trench Safety Plan and Implementation,as required for all pipe trenches deeper than 5 feet,complete in place as detailed and specified. 360 $ 1.00 360.00$ $ 1.00 360.00$ $ 5.00 1,800.00$ $ 4.00 1,440.00$ $ 10.00 3,600.00$ $ 1.00 360.00$ $ 2.00 720.00$ $ 1.14 410.40$ $ 2.00 720.00$ 7 Excavation Safety Plan and Implementation complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 800.00 800.00$ $ 1,110.00 1,110.00$ $ 1,500.00 1,500.00$ $ 1,000.00 1,000.00$ $ 1,000.00 1,000.00$ $ 250.00 250.00$ $ 750.00 750.00$ $ 1,140.00 1,140.00$ $ 2,500.00 2,500.00$ 8 Furnish and Install 8-inch PVC SDR 26 Pipe (Open Trench Construction),including excavation,dewatering,bedding,backfill, and trench surface restoration,complete in place as detailed and specified. 360 $ 40.00 14,400.00$ $ 48.00 17,280.00$ $ 80.00 28,800.00$ $ 225.00 81,000.00$ $ 55.00 19,800.00$ $ 72.00 25,920.00$ $ 28.00 10,080.00$ $ 76.56 27,561.60$ $ 45.00 16,200.00$ 9 Furnish and Install 8-inch PVC SDR 26 Pipe in casing,complete in place as detailed and specified.145 $ 60.00 8,700.00$ $ 41.00 5,945.00$ $ 200.00 29,000.00$ $ 70.00 10,150.00$ $ 70.00 10,150.00$ $ 60.00 8,700.00$ $ 20.00 2,900.00$ $ 91.75 13,303.75$ $ 20.00 2,900.00$ 10 Furnish and Install 18-inch Steel Casing Pipe (Boring and Jacking Construction), complete in place as detailed and specified.145 $ 670.00 97,150.00$ $ 394.00 57,130.00$ $ 300.00 43,500.00$ $ 375.00 54,375.00$ $ 450.00 65,250.00$ $ 350.00 50,750.00$ $ 350.00 50,750.00$ $ 257.08 37,276.60$ $ 325.00 47,125.00$ 11 Furnish and Install 4-Foot Diameter Manhole,complete in place as detailed and specified.2 $ 5,000.00 10,000.00$ $ 5,200.00 10,400.00$ $ 6,000.00 12,000.00$ $ 11,500.00 23,000.00$ $ 6,500.00 13,000.00$ $ 5,350.00 10,700.00$ $ 5,300.00 10,600.00$ $ 4,382.00 8,764.00$ $ 8,500.00 17,000.00$ 12 Connect to existing manhole by coring and reshape invert, complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 8,000.00 8,000.00$ $ 2,610.00 2,610.00$ $ 5,000.00 5,000.00$ $ 6,000.00 6,000.00$ $ 1,950.00 1,950.00$ $ 1,500.00 1,500.00$ $ 2,000.00 2,000.00$ $ 3,990.00 3,990.00$ $ 3,500.00 3,500.00$ 13 Connection to 8-inch WW pipeline system by Others at the manhole stub (or provide a cap if WW pipeline by Others is not installed), complete in place as detailed and specified. 1 $ 5,000.00 5,000.00$ $ 950.00 950.00$ $ 850.00 850.00$ $ 2,500.00 2,500.00$ $ 1,250.00 1,250.00$ $ 500.00 500.00$ $ 2,000.00 2,000.00$ $ 1,368.00 1,368.00$ $ 5,000.00 5,000.00$ 14 Cleaning of 8-inch PVC SDR 26 pipeline and associated manholes, complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 3,000.00 3,000.00$ $ 550.00 550.00$ $ 500.00 500.00$ $ 2,750.00 2,750.00$ $ 4,500.00 4,500.00$ $ 150.00 150.00$ $ 1,500.00 1,500.00$ $ 798.00 798.00$ $ 1,000.00 1,000.00$ 15 Testing of 8-inch PVC SDR 26 pipeline,complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 500.00 500.00$ $ 550.00 550.00$ $ 500.00 500.00$ $ 2,500.00 2,500.00$ $ 2,500.00 2,500.00$ $ 505.00 505.00$ $ 1,500.00 1,500.00$ $ 570.00 570.00$ $ 1,000.00 1,000.00$ 16 Testing of new manholes,complete in place as detailed and specified.2 $ 2,000.00 4,000.00$ $ 550.00 1,100.00$ $ 500.00 1,000.00$ $ 600.00 1,200.00$ $ 700.00 1,400.00$ $ 250.00 500.00$ $ 750.00 1,500.00$ $ 456.00 912.00$ $ 1,000.00 2,000.00$ 17 Testing of retrofitted manholes,complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 2,000.00 2,000.00$ $ 835.00 835.00$ $ 850.00 850.00$ $ 1,250.00 1,250.00$ $ 1,000.00 1,000.00$ $ 125.00 125.00$ $ 1,500.00 1,500.00$ $ 456.00 456.00$ $ 2,000.00 2,000.00$ 18 Provide Re-vegetation, complete in place as detailed and specified.0.05 $ 98,000.00 4,900.00$ $ 4,850.00 242.50$ $ 5,000.00 250.00$ $ 2,000.00 100.00$ $ 40,000.00 2,000.00$ $ 4,500.00 225.00$ $ 10,000.00 500.00$ $ 2,280.00 114.00$ $ 10,000.00 500.00$ Total - Additive Bid (Item Nos. 1-18)--181,510.00$ -116,947.50$ -137,150.00$ -201,865.00$ -154,400.00$ -108,560.00$ -99,700.00$ -123,568.35$ -121,945.00$ STONEHEDGE LIFT STATION MODIFICATIONS BASE BID AMOUNT (BASE BID ITEM Nos. 36 - 40) TOTAL PROJECT WESTINGHOUSE SOUTH REGIONAL WW SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS & STONEHEDGE LIFT STATION MODIFICATIONS BASE BID AMOUNT (BASE BID ITEM Nos. 1- 43) ADDITIVE ALTERNATE No. 1: ACM DIVERSION LINE Refer to Westinghouse South Regional Wastewater System Improvements Drawing Sheet CP-1. Page 201 of 316 City of Georgetown Westinghouse S Regional WWSystem Imp and Stonehedge LS Modifications Project No. 3CE/3CD BID TABULATION Approved Bidders September 29, 2016 CC CarltonJoe Bland Construction JKB Construction Patin Construction, LLC Prota Skyblue Utilities, Inc.Royal Vista, Inc.Santa Clara Construction, LTD Central Road and Utility, Ltd. Dba CRU, Ltd. Bid Item ADDITIVE ALTERNATE No. 2: WESTINGHOUSE POINTE APARTMENTS DIVERSION LINE Estimated Quantity Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount 1 Bonding,Insurance,and Mobilization Related Expenses not to exceed 5% of Total Bid.1 $ 4,000.00 4,000.00$ $ 2,200.00 2,200.00$ $ 5,000.00 5,000.00$ $ 6,500.00 6,500.00$ $ 4,000.00 4,000.00$ $ 3,150.00 3,150.00$ $ 2,200.00 2,200.00$ $ 5,700.00 5,700.00$ $ 7,500.00 7,500.00$ 2 Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)and SWPPP Implementation,including installing the stabilized construction entrances,silt fence,and other required temporary sedimentation and erosion control best management practices as required by the SWPPP plan, complete in place as detailed and specified. 1 $ 21,000.00 21,000.00$ $ 830.00 830.00$ $ 850.00 850.00$ $ 1,500.00 1,500.00$ $ 4,000.00 4,000.00$ $ 500.00 500.00$ $ 1,500.00 1,500.00$ $ 3,420.00 3,420.00$ $ 3,500.00 3,500.00$ 3 Traffic Control Plan and Implementation,complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 3,000.00 3,000.00$ $ 4,900.00 4,900.00$ $ 2,500.00 2,500.00$ $ 1,950.00 1,950.00$ $ 4,000.00 4,000.00$ $ 450.00 450.00$ $ 2,000.00 2,000.00$ $ 1,140.00 1,140.00$ $ 5,000.00 5,000.00$ 4 Site and Right-of-Way Preparation,complete in place as detailed and specified.0.13 $ 36,000.00 4,680.00$ $ 4,700.00 611.00$ $ 5,000.00 650.00$ $ 2,000.00 260.00$ $ 40,000.00 5,200.00$ $ 5,500.00 715.00$ $ 20,000.00 2,600.00$ $ 2,280.00 296.40$ $ 10,000.00 1,300.00$ 5 Furnish and Install Temporary Improvements to provide temporary access gate(s)and fencing to keep the property secure and cattle onsite. 1 $ 2,000.00 2,000.00$ $ 2,800.00 2,800.00$ $ 1,500.00 1,500.00$ $ 2,500.00 2,500.00$ $ 8,000.00 8,000.00$ $ 1,150.00 1,150.00$ $ 1,500.00 1,500.00$ $ 2,280.00 2,280.00$ $ 5,000.00 5,000.00$ 6 Trench Safety Plan and Implementation,as required for all pipe trenches deeper than 5 feet,complete in place as detailed and specified. 250 $ 1.00 250.00$ $ 1.00 250.00$ $ 10.00 2,500.00$ $ 5.00 1,250.00$ $ 10.00 2,500.00$ $ 1.00 250.00$ $ 1.00 250.00$ $ 5.70 1,425.00$ $ 3.00 750.00$ 7 Furnish and Install 8-inch PVC SDR 26 Pipe (Open Trench Construction),including excavation,dewatering,bedding,backfill, and trench surface restoration,complete in place as detailed and specified. 250 $ 40.00 10,000.00$ $ 48.00 12,000.00$ $ 160.00 40,000.00$ $ 270.00 67,500.00$ $ 55.00 13,750.00$ $ 110.00 27,500.00$ $ 30.00 7,500.00$ $ 93.66 23,415.00$ $ 50.00 12,500.00$ 8 Connect to existing manhole by coring and reshape invert, complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 8,000.00 8,000.00$ $ 4,250.00 4,250.00$ $ 5,000.00 5,000.00$ $ 13,500.00 13,500.00$ $ 1,950.00 1,950.00$ $ 1,500.00 1,500.00$ $ 2,000.00 2,000.00$ $ 3,420.00 3,420.00$ $ 3,500.00 3,500.00$ 9 Connect to proposed manhole (Additive Alternative No.1,ACM MH No. 1), complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 4,000.00 4,000.00$ $ 2,600.00 2,600.00$ $ 4,000.00 4,000.00$ $ 7,500.00 7,500.00$ $ 1,950.00 1,950.00$ $ 800.00 800.00$ $ 2,000.00 2,000.00$ $ 4,332.00 4,332.00$ $ 4,000.00 4,000.00$ 10 Cut and cap existing 12-inch WW pipeline,complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 2,000.00 2,000.00$ $ 1,000.00 1,000.00$ $ 1,000.00 1,000.00$ $ 2,500.00 2,500.00$ $ 1,500.00 1,500.00$ $ 500.00 500.00$ $ 4,000.00 4,000.00$ $ 684.00 684.00$ $ 1,500.00 1,500.00$ 11 Cleaning of 8-inch PVC SDR 26 pipeline and associated manholes, complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 3,000.00 3,000.00$ $ 270.00 270.00$ $ 500.00 500.00$ $ 1,500.00 1,500.00$ $ 4,500.00 4,500.00$ $ 250.00 250.00$ $ 500.00 500.00$ $ 570.00 570.00$ $ 1,000.00 1,000.00$ 12 Testing of 8-inch PVC SDR 26 pipeline,complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 400.00 400.00$ $ 270.00 270.00$ $ 500.00 500.00$ $ 2,250.00 2,250.00$ $ 2,500.00 2,500.00$ $ 350.00 350.00$ $ 500.00 500.00$ $ 45.60 45.60$ $ 1,000.00 1,000.00$ 13 Testing of retrofitted manholes,complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 2,000.00 2,000.00$ $ 840.00 840.00$ $ 850.00 850.00$ $ 2,250.00 2,250.00$ $ 1,000.00 1,000.00$ $ 125.00 125.00$ $ 1,000.00 1,000.00$ $ 4,560.00 4,560.00$ $ 2,000.00 2,000.00$ 14 Demolish and repair existing headwall and concrete apron, complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 8,000.00 8,000.00$ $ 4,900.00 4,900.00$ $ 5,000.00 5,000.00$ $ 13,000.00 13,000.00$ $ 19,500.00 19,500.00$ $ 5,750.00 5,750.00$ $ 7,500.00 7,500.00$ $ 1,482.00 1,482.00$ $ 6,500.00 6,500.00$ 15 Repair existing driveway,complete in place as detailed and specified.1 $ 4,000.00 4,000.00$ $ 2,720.00 2,720.00$ $ 4,000.00 4,000.00$ $ 7,500.00 7,500.00$ $ 6,000.00 6,000.00$ $ 4,050.00 4,050.00$ $ 5,500.00 5,500.00$ $ 2,850.00 2,850.00$ $ 9,500.00 9,500.00$ 16 Provide Re-vegetation, complete in place as detailed and specified.0.13 $ 41,000.00 5,330.00$ $ 4,840.00 629.20$ $ 5,000.00 650.00$ $ 2,000.00 260.00$ $ 40,000.00 5,200.00$ $ 4,500.00 585.00$ $ 5,000.00 650.00$ $ 2,280.00 296.40$ $ 10,000.00 1,300.00$ Total - Additive Bid (Item Nos. 1-16)--81,660.00$ -41,070.20$ -74,500.00$ -131,720.00$ -85,550.00$ -47,625.00$ -41,200.00$ -55,916.40$ -65,850.00$ Notes: 1. All amounts highlighted are corrected values. In accordance with Section 00100 Article 14, the bid form math was checked and amounts have been updated accordingly. 2. CRU only provided the 'total amounts', thus the 'unit amounts' were back-calculated accordingly. ADDITIVE ALTERNATE No. 2: WESTINGHOUSE POINTE APARTMENTS DIVERSION LINE Refer to Westinghouse South Regional Wastewater System Improvements Drawing Sheet CP-1 Page 202 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Second Readi ng o f an Ordinance for the Vol untar y Annexati on of 14.459 acres in the W. Roberts Survey, also kno wn as Hi dden Oaks at B erry Creek -- Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director (acti on r equi red) ITEM SUMMARY: The 14.45 9 acres included in this petition for voluntary annexation are two separate parc e ls of land lo cated in proximity to Shell Road and State Highway 195, and both are c ontiguo us to the city limits. One of the properties is currently governed by an annexation agreement that will no longer be in effect after the anne xatio n. 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. A zoning application is currently in pro cess fo r this prope rty, which include s Residential Single Family (RS) and Lo c al Co mmercial (C-1). Staff Recomme ndatio n Staff recommends appro val o f the voluntary anne xatio n request for the two parcels totaling 1 4 acres. Council Action On Tuesday, Oc to be r 25 th City Council voted 6-0 in favo r of o rdinance adoption. 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. Full financ ial impact is uncertain until the ultimate develo pment occurs, which is planned fo r re sidential use. SUBMITTED BY: Matt Synatschk, Historic P lanner ATTACHMENT S: Description Ordinanc e - Hid d en Es tates at Berry Creek Exhib it A - Loc ation Map Exhib it B - P ro p erty S urvey Exhib it C - Servic e Plan Vo luntary Annexatio n Resolution Letter of Intent Page 203 of 316 Ordinance No. _____________________ Page 1 of 2 Hidden Estates at Berry Creek 14.459 acres ANX-2016-003 Date Approved: 11.22.2016 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 14.459 acres in the Roberts Survey, 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 September 13, 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 14.459 acres in the Roberts Survey, as shown in “Exhibit A” of this ordinance, and as described in “Exhibit B” of this ordinance. “Exhibit C” contains the service plan. Section 3. The 14.459 acres, as described in “Exhibit A” and depicted in “Exhibit B” of this ordinance, is included in City Council District 5, as it is adjacent to Council District 5 and no other City Council Districts. Page 204 of 316 Ordinance No. _____________________ Page 2 of 2 Hidden Estates at Berry Creek 14.459 acres ANX-2016-003 Date Approved: 11.22.2016 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 25th day of October, 2016. Passed and Approved on Second Reading on the 22nd day of November, 2016. Attest: The City of Georgetown: _________________________________ _________________________________ Shelley Nowling Dale Ross City Secretary Mayor Approved as to form: _________________________________ Charlie McNabb City Attorney Page 205 of 316 §¨¦35 S h ell R d ¬«195 ¬«195 SunCityBlvd ¬«195 AirportRd ANX-2016-003Exhibit #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 206 of 316 Exhibit B1 - Tract 1 Page 207 of 316 Exhibit B1 - Tract 1 Page 208 of 316 Exhibit B2 - Tract 2 Page 209 of 316 Exhibit B2 - Tract 2 Page 210 of 316 Annexation Service Plan Hidden Estates at Berry Creek Page 1 of 11 Exhibit C CITY OF GEORGETOWN ANNEXATION SERVICE PLAN AREA: HIDDEN OAKS AT BERRY CREEK COUNCIL DISTRICT NO. 5 DATE: OCTOBER 25, 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” “B1 and B2” and “C” to this Service Plan, which has sometimes been referred to as “Hidden Estates at Berry Creek.” 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 211 of 316 Annexation Service Plan Hidden Estates at Berry Creek 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 212 of 316 Annexation Service Plan Hidden Estates at Berry Creek 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 213 of 316 Annexation Service Plan Hidden Estates at Berry Creek 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 214 of 316 Annexation Service Plan Hidden Estates at Berry Creek 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 215 of 316 Annexation Service Plan Hidden Estates at Berry Creek 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 216 of 316 Annexation Service Plan Hidden Estates at Berry Creek 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 217 of 316 Annexation Service Plan Hidden Estates at Berry Creek 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 218 of 316 Annexation Service Plan Hidden Estates at Berry Creek 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 219 of 316 Annexation Service Plan Hidden Estates at Berry Creek 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 220 of 316 Annexation Service Plan Hidden Estates at Berry Creek 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 221 of 316 Page 222 of 316 Page 223 of 316 Page 224 of 316 Page 225 of 316 Page 226 of 316 Page 227 of 316 Page 228 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Second Readi ng o f an Ordinance rezoni ng appro xi matel y 83.5 acres o f the W. Roberts Survey located nor th o f Fai rw ay Lane and so uth o f Shel l Road, fro m the Agriculture (AG) District to the Residential Single-Family (RS) and Local Commerc ial (C-1) Districts -- Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director (ac ti on requi red) ITEM SUMMARY: B ackground: The applicant has requested to rezone the undevelo ped 83 .5 acre tract from the Agriculture (AG) District to the Residential Single-family (RS) and Lo cal Commercial (C-1 ) Districts to allow for future residential and comme rc ial development of the property. Publ i c Comment: To date, Staff has received two written response in favo r of the request. Staff Recommendati o n: Staff recommends approval of the request to rezo ne the 8 3.5 acre tract to the RS and C-1 Districts. Pl anni ng and Zoni ng Commi ssi on Recommendati o n: At their November 1, 2 01 6 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended to the City Council appr oval (4-0, Schroeder recused, Marler absent) to rezone the 83 .5 acres to RS and C-1 Districts. Ci ty Counci l Fi rst Readi ng Acti on: At their November 8, 2016 meeting, the City Council voted unanimo usly to approve the request to rezo ne the 83.5 ac re s to the RS and C-1 Districts. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None studied at this time. SUBMITTED BY: Carolyn Horne r, AICP, Planner, and Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director ATTACHMENT S: Description S taff Report Lo catio n Map F uture Land Us e Zo ning Map RS District Standards C-1 District Standards P ublic Co mment Ordinanc e Exhib it A Exhib it B Page 229 of 316 Georgetown Planning Department Staff Report Hidden Oaks at Berry Creek rezoning AG to RS and C‐1 Page 1 of 6 Report Date: October 20, 2016 File No: REZ‐2016‐025 Project Planner: Carolyn Horner, AICP, Planner Item Details Project Name: Hidden Oaks at Berry Creek Project Address: 200 Fairway Lane Total Acreage: 83.5 acres Legal Description: 83.5 acres out of the W. Roberts Survey Existing Zoning: Agriculture (AG) Proposed Zoning: Single‐family Residential (RS) and Local Commercial (C-1) Overview of Applicant’s Request The applicant has requested to rezone the undeveloped 83.5 acre tract from the Agriculture (AG) District to the Residential Single‐family (RS) and Local Commercial (C‐1) Districts to allow for future residential and commercial development of the property. The applicant is proposing several open space/habitat protection areas to preserve Heritage Trees. Site Information Location: The subject site is located south of Shell Road, between State Highway 195 and Fairway Lane in the northwestern portion of the city. Physical Characteristics: The property is mostly undeveloped with heavy tree coverage and a couple of residences. Public street frontage is located on Fairway Lane, existing in the Berry Creek Subdivision, and State Highway 195. Surrounding Properties: Location Zoning Future Land Use Existing Use North AG, ETJ Mixed Use Community, Community Comm. Node Church, undeveloped South RS Moderate Density Residential Berry Creek subdivision East AG Mixed Use Community Undeveloped West ETJ Mixed Use Community Boat/RV Storage, maternity home Page 230 of 316 Planning Department Staff Report Hidden Oaks at Berry Creek rezoning AG to RS and C‐1 Page 2 of 6 Property History The majority of the 83.5‐acre property was annexed in 2006 by Ordinance 2006‐134. The smaller southern and eastern pieces totaling 14.459 acres will be annexed after second reading scheduled for November 22, 2016. The default AG District is the default zoning district assigned at time of annexation. The property is currently developed with two residences. 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, the area within the present city limits, or subject to a development agreement, surrounding Tier 1A that is generally underserved by infrastructure and where such service and facilities will likely be needed to meet the growth needs of the city once Tier 1A approaches build‐out. Transportation The development will extend existing Fairway Lane into the subject property. A phase of the development will provide one new connection to SH 195. One connection to Shell Road is planned with future development of the property. A TIA has been submitted by the applicant for review, and will be completed prior to approval of the associated preliminary plat. Utilities Water/wastewater is served by the City of Georgetown. Electric service is provided by PEC. The Development Engineer has determined there is adequate capacity for development, with a master‐planned water line in the area. Proposed Zoning District The 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. All housing types in the RS District shall meet the lot, dimensional and design standards of the District. (See attached). Page 231 of 316 Planning Department Staff Report Hidden Oaks at Berry Creek rezoning AG to RS and C‐1 Page 3 of 6 The C‐1 District is intended to provide areas for commercial and retail activities that primarily serve residential areas. Uses should have pedestrian access to adjacent and nearby residential areas, but are not appropriate along residential streets or residential collectors. The District is most appropriate along major and minor thoroughfares. Typical uses within this district are general retail, restaurants (including drive‐through), gas stations, medical or dental offices, etc. Attachment 4 contains a comprehensive list of C‐1 District allowable uses and development standards. Certain land uses have specific design limitations to ensure compatibility with the surrounding properties; for example, in the C‐1 District, the floor to area ratio of a building cannot exceed 0.5 for certain land uses specified in Attachment 5. Staff Analysis The subject property is located within the Future Land Use category of Mixed Use Community that encourages a mixture of residential and commercial uses within close proximity to each other. The first land use goal of the 2030 Plan encourages a balanced mix of residential, commercial, and employment uses to reflect a gradual transition of development throughout the city. Although mixed use can be integrated vertically, it can also be accomplished horizontally with adjacent mixes of uses that complement one another. Commercial development in the mixed use category should complement a mix of residential types by providing supporting retail and small to medium scale office development. The land uses permitted in the C‐1 District proposed along SH 195 with the district development standards directly help to implement the 2030 Plan’s goals of a balance of land uses as well as ensuring smooth transitions with space and landscaping buffers between residential and commercial uses. As development continues to extend to the northwest portion of the city, the Page 232 of 316 Planning Department Staff Report Hidden Oaks at Berry Creek rezoning AG to RS and C‐1 Page 4 of 6 need for goods and services closer to residents (both current and future) is necessary in order to achieve a balanced community as well as incrementally address traffic related concerns.  Goal 1 of the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan states that the City should “promote sound, sustainable, and compact development patterns with balanced land uses, a variety of housing choices and well‐integrated transportation, public facilities, and open space amenities.” The rezoning of this property to the RS District for the future residential development supports this goal. C‐1 zoning at this location will reserve land suitable for commercial development along a major arterial. The proposed rezoning request meets all of the criteria established in UDC Section 3.06.030 for zoning changes: Approval Criteria for Rezoning The application is complete and the information contained within the application is sufficient and correct enough to allow adequate review and final action An application must provide the necessary information to review and make a knowledgeable decision in order for staff to schedule an application for consideration by P&Z and City Council. This application was reviewed by staff and deemed to be complete. The zoning change is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan The proposed zoning change is consistent with the Future Land Use of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The request is consistent with the goal to direct commercial development primarily to “nodes” or “corridors” where the pattern is established or appropriate. The Mixed Use Community category supports the C‐1 District at this location since the district’s allowed uses include neighborhood serving businesses that would accommodate the existing and future residential neighborhoods that are part of this request. The zoning change promotes the health, safety or general welfare of the City and the safe orderly, and healthful development of the City The zoning change request promotes the health, safety and general welfare of the City. The C‐1 District will help facilitate orderly commercial development along a major arterial roadway. The large open spaces of the residentially‐ zoned portion protects environmentally sensitive areas, and provides undeveloped, natural areas. The zoning change is compatible with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property and with the character of the neighborhood The proposed rezoning is compatible with the surrounding zoning districts and uses. Landscape buffers will be required, per the UDC, where the property abuts residential zoning. The property to be rezoned is suitable for uses permitted by the District that would be applied by the proposed amendment. The uses allowed in the C‐1 District are suitable along major arterials (SH 195) and within the areas of the Future Land Use designated as Mixed Use Community. Page 233 of 316 Planning Department Staff Report Hidden Oaks at Berry Creek rezoning AG to RS and C‐1 Page 5 of 6 General Findings Based on all the information presented, staff has made the following findings: 1. Fairway Lane is an existing collector, built to early code standards. The applicant will extend Fairway Lane as a collector and provide connectivity to State Highway 195, and a future connection to Shell Road. These connections will provide alternative routes to the residents in the neighborhood, as well as easy access to the proposed C‐1 district along State Highway 195, an existing highway, and the transportation network at this location can support the traffic that may be generated by the uses anticipated in the C‐1 District. 2. The Future Land Use category of Mixed Use Community supports the mix of single‐family residential types proposed by the applicant, and also the C‐1 District along the existing highway, since this category is intended for a mixture of land uses where commercial uses will complement existing and future residential development anticipated in the surrounding area. 3. Goal 1 of the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan states that the City should “promote sound, sustainable, and compact development patterns with balanced land uses, a variety of housing choices and well‐integrated transportation, public facilities, and open space amenities.” The rezoning of this property to the RS District for the future residential development supports this goal. C‐1 zoning at this location will reserve land suitable for commercial development along a major arterial. 4. There are master‐plan construction projects that will ensure sufficient capacity within the City Utility Systems to accommodate the residential and commercial development resulting from the proposed rezoning from the AG to RS and C‐1 District at this location. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the applicant’s zoning 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 that are located within City limits were notified of the rezoning application (21 notices mailed), a legal notice advertising the public hearing was placed in the Sun Newspaper (October 16, 2016) and signs were posted on‐site. To date, staff has received 2 written letters in support of this request. Page 234 of 316 Planning Department Staff Report Hidden Oaks at Berry Creek rezoning AG to RS and C‐1 Page 6 of 6 Attachments Attachment 1 – Location Map Attachment 2 – Future Land Use Map Attachment 3 – Zoning Map Attachment 4 – RS District Development Standards and Permitted Land Uses Attachment 5 – C‐1 District Development Standards and Permitted Land Uses Attachment 6 – Public Notice Responses Page 235 of 316 §¨¦35 S h ell R d ¬«1 9 5 ¬«1 9 5 SunCityBlvd ¬«1 9 5 AirportRd REZ-2 016-0 25Exhibit #1 Co ord inate System: Texas Sta te Plane/Centra l Zone/NAD 83/U S FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purp oses Only ¯ Locati on Map 0 0.5 1Mi Le ge n dSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ Page 236 of 316 B E R R Y C R E EKDR SHELL RD ¬«19 5 S H 1 9 5 SHELL RD Coo rd inate Sys tem: Te xas S tate Plane/C entral Zone/N AD 83/U S FeetCartographic D ata Fo r General Planning Purposes O nly ¯ Future Land Use / Overall Transportation Plan Exhi bit #2 REZ-20 16 -02 5 Legend Thoroughfare Future Land Use Institutional Regi onal Commercial Community Commerc ial Em ployment Center Low Dens ity Residential Mining Mix ed Us e Community Mix ed Us e Neighborhood Center Moderate Density Residential Open Space Specialty Mixed Us e Area Ag / Rural Residential Ex isting Collector Ex isting Freeway Ex isting Major Arterial Ex isting Minor Arterial Ex isting Ramp Pr oposed Collector Pr oposed Freeway Pr opsed Frontage Road Pr oposed Major Arterial Pr oposed Minor Arterial Pr oposed Railroad High Density Residential 0 ¼½¾Mi Le ge ndSi teParcelsCity Lim itsGeorgetown ETJ Page 237 of 316 B E R R Y C R E EKDR SHELL RD ¬«19 5 S H 1 9 5 SHELL RD Zon in g Inf ormationREZ-2 016-0 25Exhibit #3 Co ord inate System: Texas Sta te Plane/Centra l Zone/NAD 83/U S FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purp oses Only Le ge n dSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ ¯ 0 ¼½¾MiPage 238 of 316 Minimum Lot Size = 5,500 square feet Front Setback = 20 feet Bufferyard = 10 feet with plantings Minimum Lot Width = 45 feet Side Setback = 6 feet when non‐residential develops Maximum Building Height = 35 feet Rear Setback = 10 feet adjacent to residential Allowed by Right Subject to Limitations Special Use Permit (SUP) Required Group Home (<7 residents) Church (with columbarium) Accessory Dwelling Unit Single‐family Detached Day Care (family home) Activity Center (youth/senior) Utilities (Minor) Golf Course Bed and Breakfast (with events) Home Based Business Cemetary/Columbaria/Mausoleum Nature Preserve/Community Garden Community Center Neighborhood Amenity Center Day Care (Group) Park (Neighborhood) Emergency Services Station School (Elementary) General Office Single‐family Attached Halfway House Utilities (Intermediate) Hospice Facility Wireless Transmission Facility (<41') Rooming/Boarding House School (Middle) Residential Single‐Family (RS) District District Development Standards Specific Uses Allowed within the District Page 239 of 316 Maximum Building Height = 35 feet Front Setback = 25 feet Bufferyard = 15 feet with plantings Maximum Building Size = .5 FAR (0 feet for build‐to/downtown) adjacent to AG, RE, RL, RS, TF, MH, (only applies to those uses Side Setback = 10 feet MF‐1, or MF‐2 districts marked with * below) Side Setback to Residential = 15 feet Rear Setback = 0 feet Rear Setback to Residential = 25 feet Allowed by Right Subject to Limitations Special Use Permit (SUP) Required Agricultural Sales* Activity Center (youth/senior) Event Facility Artisan Studio/Gallery* Bar/Tavern/Pub Meat Market Assisted Living Bed and Breakfast (with events) Multifamily Attached Automotive Parts Sales (indoor)* Business/Trade School Personal Services Restricted Banking/Financial Services* Car Wash Private Transport Dispatch Facility Blood/Plasma Center* Church (with columbarium) Student Housing Consumer Repair* College/University Dry Cleaning Service* Commercial Recreation Emergency Services Station Community Center Farmer's Market* Dance Hall/Night Club Fitness Center* Day Care (group/commercial) Food Catering Services* Fuel Sales Funeral Home* Live Music/Entertainment General Retail* Micro Brewery/Winery General Office* Neighborhood Amenity Center Government/Postal Office Park (neighborhood/regional) Group Home (7+ residents) Pest Control/Janitorial Services Home Health Care Services* Self‐Storage (indoor only) Hospital School (Elementary, Middle, High) Hotel/Inn (excluding extended stay) Theater (movie/live) Integrated Office Center* Upper‐story Residential Landscape/Garden Sales* Wireless Transmission Facility (<41') Laundromat* Library/Museum Medical Diagnostic Center* Medical Office/Clinic/Complex* Membership Club/Lodge* Nature Preserve/Community Garden Nursing/Convalescent/Hospice Parking Lot (commercial/park‐n‐ride) Personal Services* Printing/Mailing/Copying Services* Restaurant (general/drive‐through)* Rooming/Boarding House Social Service Facility Surgery/Post Surgery Recovery* Urgent Care Facility* Utilities (Minor/Intermediate/Major) Veterinary Clinic (indoor only)* Local Commercial (C‐1) District District Development Standards Specific Uses Allowed within the District Page 240 of 316 Page 241 of 316 Page 242 of 316 Ordinance Number: ___________________ Page 1 of 2 Description: _AG to RS and C-1___ Case File Number: _REZ-2016-025_ 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 83.5 acres out of the W. Roberts Survey from the Agriculture (AG) District to the Residential Single- family (RS) and the Local Commercial (C-1) Districts, to be known as Hidden Oaks at Berry Creek; 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"): 83.5 acres of the W. Roberts Survey, as recorded in Document Numbers 9555654 and 2008034177, and Volume 2003, Page 437, and Volume 1963, Page 944, of the Official Public Records of Williamson County, Texas, hereinafter referred to as "The Property"; and Whereas, public notice of such hearing was accomplished in accordance with State Law and the City’s Unified Development Code through newspaper publication, signs posted on the Property, and mailed notice to nearby property owners; and Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission, at a meeting on November 1, 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 November 8, 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. Section 2. The Official Zoning Map, as well as the Zoning District classification(s) for the Property is hereby amended from the Agriculture District (AG) to the Residential Single-family District (RS) and the Local Commercial District (C-1), in accordance with the attached Exhibit A (Location Map) and Exhibit B (Legal Description) and incorporated herein by reference. Page 243 of 316 Ordinance Number: ___________________ Page 2 of 2 Description: _AG to RS and C-1___ Case File Number: _REZ-2016-025_ Date Approved: __________________ Exhibits A-B Attached 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 8th day of November, 2016. APPROVED AND ADOPTED on Second Reading on the 22nd day of November, 2016. THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: ATTEST: ______________________ _________________________ Dale Ross Shelley Nowling Mayor City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: ______________________ Charlie McNabb City Attorney Page 244 of 316 §¨¦35 S h ell R d ¬«1 9 5 ¬«1 9 5 SunCityBlvd ¬«1 9 5 AirportRd REZ-2 016-0 25Exhibit #1 Co ord inate System: Texas Sta te Plane/Centra l Zone/NAD 83/U S FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purp oses Only ¯ Locati on Map 0 0.5 1Mi Le ge n dSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ Page 245 of 316 Page 246 of 316 Page 247 of 316 Page 248 of 316 Page 249 of 316 Page 250 of 316 Page 251 of 316 Page 252 of 316 Page 253 of 316 Page 254 of 316 Page 255 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Second Readi ng o f an Ordinance rezoni ng appro xi matel y 75.415 acres in the David Wright Survey locate d at 2 10 1 Ai rport Road from the General Commercial (C3) District to the Industrial (IN) District -- Sofia Nelson, CNU-A P lanning Director (acti o n requi red) ITEM SUMMARY: B ackground: The applicant has requested to rezone the unde veloped 7 5.4 15 acre tract from General Commercial (C3 ) Distric t, to Industrial (IN) District to allow for future comme rc ial develo pment of the property. Publ i c Comment: To date, no written public co mments have been received. Staff Recommendati o n: Staff recommends appro val o f the request to rezo ne the 7 5.4 15 acre tract to the IN district. Pl anni ng and Zoni ng Commi ssi on Recommendati o n: At their November 1, 2 01 6 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously recommended to the City Council appro val (5-0 ) to rezone the 75.41 acres to the IN District. Ci ty Counci l Fi rst Readi ng Acti on: At their November 8, 2 01 6 meeting, the City Council voted unanimously t o appro ve the request to rezone the 7 5.4 1 acres to the IN district. FINANCIAL IMPACT: n/a SUBMITTED BY: Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, P lanning Director ATTACHMENT S: Description S taff Report loc ation map future land us e map zoning map IN district us e and d evelopment s tand ard s Ordinanc e Ordinanc e Exhibit A – Loc ation Map Ordinanc e Exhibit B – F ield No tes Page 256 of 316 Georgetown Planning Department Staff Report Carlson Tract Rezoning Page 1 of 5 Report Date: October 9, 2016 File No: REZ-2016-030 Project Planner: Sofia Nelson, Planning Director Item Details Project Name: Project Cat Project Address: 2101 Airport Road Total Acreage: 75.415 acres Applicant: Randy Mongold Property Owner(s): Kenneth A. Garrett Contact: Randy Mongold Overview of Applicant’s Request The applicant has requested to rezone the site from the General Commercial (C3) District to the Industrial (IN) District. Site Information Location: This property is located just north of the intersection of Airport Road and Lakeway Drive, with frontage on both Airport Road and IH 35. Physical Characteristics: The property is relatively flat with few trees. No decerable physical characteristics. Surrounding Properties: The majority of the immediately surrounding property is undeveloped, except a residence next door to this tract and the city’s Airport across Airport Road. Page 257 of 316 Planning Department Staff Report Project Cat zoning Page 2 of 5 Location Zoning Future Land Use Existing Use North AG Employment Center, Regional Commercial rural residential and undeveloped property South C-3 Employment Center, Community Commercial undeveloped East IH35 Employment Center, Regional Commercial Interstate highway West IN(PUD) Institutional Georgetown Airport Property History The subject property was annexed in November of 2006 and assigned Agriculture zoning, the default zoning district for annexations. In 2014 the subject property was rezoned from the interim zoning district of Agriculture to the current C-3 zoning. 2030 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use: The 2030 Plan provides for a Regional Commercial node at the intersection of the SH 130 Tollroad and IH 35 and a Community Commercial node at the intersection of the Northeast Innerloop and IH 35, all surrounded by the Employment Center land use category. Individually, this tract is primarily shown as Employment Center, with the northeastern portion extending into the Regional Commercial node. The Employment Center land use designation is intended for tracts of undeveloped land located at strategic locations, which are 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 (stand-alone or in mixed-use buildings) as a conditional use. Many Employment Center designations will include undeveloped properties identified by the City as opportunity sites for centers of commerce or employment. These sites may be acquired and developed through public-private partnerships. Primary uses include offices, flex offices, and technology research and development, as well as environmentally friendly manufacturing. These uses should be encouraged to develop in a campus-like setting with generous, linked open space to maximize value, promote visual quality, and encourage pedestrian activity between employment areas and areas of supporting uses such as retail, restaurants, and residential. Page 258 of 316 Planning Department Staff Report Project Cat zoning Page 3 of 5 Growth Tier: The 2030 Plan Growth Tier Map designation is Tier 1B, which is the portion of the City or extra- territorial jurisdiction (ETJ) where growth and the provision of public facilities are anticipated within 10 years following the adoption of the 2030 Plan. Transportation This parcel has direct frontage on both Airport Road, an existing Minor Arterial on the city’s Thoroughfare Plan, and to IH 35. GTEC is considering a design task order in October to widen Airport Road from 2 to 5 lanes (inclusive of a center turn lane) and a slight realignment at the intersection of Lakeway Blvd to promote better traffic flow (inclusive of a traffic signal). Design should be complete in the spring of 2017. The project will require ROW acquisition which is difficult to time. However, construction could start as early as FY 2017.Additionally, an OTP map amendment is being processed to remove a portion of a collector level roadway that bisects this property. The amendment is scheduled for review by the Planning Commission in December Utilities The City of Georgetown will provide water, wastewater and electric services at this location. Page 259 of 316 Planning Department Staff Report Project Cat zoning Page 4 of 5 Proposed Zoning District The Industrial District (IN) is intended to provide a location for manufacturing and industrial activities that may generate some nuisances. Traffic generation will likely include heavy vehicles, making access to an arterial or freeway necessary. Unless separated by a major roadway, the Industrial District is not appropriate adjacent to any residential uses. Staff Analysis The subject property is located along the northern portion of the City’s I-35 corridor, a portion which is largely undeveloped and planned as an employment center district. The rezoning of the project is in keeping with the location goals for Industrial zoning by having direct access to I-35 and Airport Road, an arterial level roadway. Additionally, given the property’s location near the Georgetown Municipal Airport, the future transportation improvements, and the designation of this area as an employment center, the rezoning of this property is working in concert with the 2030 vision and the pending public improvements to develop this area in a manner that supports and creates employment opportunities that may be most suitable with direct freeway frontage. UDC Section 3.06.030 establishes the following criteria for zoning changes: The application is complete and the information contained within the application is sufficient and correct enough to allow adequate review and final action This application was reviewed by staff and deemed to be complete. The zoning change is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan The proposed zoning change is consistent with the Future Land Use of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan and the Plan’s Goal of preserving and emphasizing land ideally suited for employment uses. The zoning change promotes the health, safety or general welfare of the City and the safe orderly, and healthful development of the City The zoning change from General Commercial to Industrial allows for an employment center district to be developed as originally envisioned. It allows for industrial type uses and development to occur in an area that has direct access to I-35 and, with its adjacency to undeveloped property, overtime has the ability to bring the vision of an employment center to fruition. The zoning change is compatible with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property and with the character of the neighborhood The proposed rezoning is compatible with the surrounding zoning districts, specifically those located to the south and west of the site. The property to be rezoned is suitable for uses permitted by the District that would be applied by the proposed amendment. The uses allowed in the IN District are appropriate at this location given the vision for this area in the adopted 2030 Plan. Page 260 of 316 Planning Department Staff Report Project Cat zoning Page 5 of 5 Findings Based on all the information presented, staff has made the following findings: 1. The Future Land Use category of Employment Center supports the IN District at this location since this category is intended for large tracts of undeveloped open land where supporting uses such as retail, services, hotels, and high density residential development are conditionally supported. The Commercial property to the south and the community commercial node to the north will allow for the commercial uses that may support the employment center node. 2. The city is developed with stable neighborhoods and commercial areas; however, industrially zoned property and development of key employments center districts are essential to providing a variety of employment opportunities and land uses within the Georgetown Community. 3. The uses allowed in the IN District are appropriate at this location given the property’s location within a gateway overlay district will require stricter site and building requirements. 4. The location of the subject property along I-35 and Airport Road (with improvements to the Airport Road and Lakeway Intersection) allows for the development of this tract in a manner that supports the employmenet center vision with site and architectural standards that protect from adverse impacts potentially associated with industrial uses. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the applicant’s request based on the above-mentioned findings. Public Comments Staff has received no public comments regarding this case. Attachments Attachment 1 – Location Map Attachment 2 – Future Land Use Map Attachment 3 – Zoning Map Attachment 4 – Uses permitted in Industrial zoning Page 261 of 316 N IH 35 SB N IH 35 NB A I R P O R T R D N IH 35 FWY SB N IH 35 FWY NB S H 1 3 0 S B S H 130 N B L A K E W A Y D R S H 1 30 T O L L S B S H 130 T O L L N B EXIT 265 NBEXIT 264 SB EXIT 262 SB EXIT265SB JUNIPER DR AZALEA DR J E F F E R S O N LN A V I A T I O N D R NEINNERLOOP T E R M I N A L D R ENTR 265 NBHALMAR C V S E R V I C E D R S U D D U T H D R ENTR 266 SB E X IT 4 1 1 N B H I C K O R Y T R E E D R A S P E N T R L CRYSTALKNOLLBL V D D O G W O O D D R N AUSTIN AVE CALADIU M D R S T E A R M A N D R I N D U S T R I A L P A R K C I R W I S T E R I A D R H A N G A R D R M A H O G A N Y L N EV E R G R E E N C I R IR I S D R W R I G H TBROTHE R S D R O S A G E C T COR S AIR DR S E R V I C E R D S E R V I C E D R N IH 35 NB Co ord inate System: Texas Sta te Plane/Centra l Zone/NAD 83/U S FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purp oses Only ¯ Aerial REZ-2 016-0 30 Le ge n d SiteCity Limits 0 0.25 0.5Mi Page 262 of 316 LAKEWAYDR S H A D Y H O L L O W D R AZALEA DR L A Z Y R D L U N A T R L VORTAC LN CALADIUM DR C A L A D I U M C T B I S O N D R JUNIPER DR C O R D O B A C I R W E L K D R WINDMILL CV WRIGHT BROTHERS DR E A S T D R CANYON RD H A L M A R C V S E R V I C E D R A S P E N T R L O S A G E C T I N D U S T R I A L P A R K C I R H I C K O R Y T R E E D R CRYSTALLKNOLL B LV D W HISPEROAKS LN S H A N G A R D R S T E A R M A N D R D O G W O O D D R M A H O G A N Y L N C O U G A R D R PILOT PL L O N NIE T H O M A SD R O R A N G E T R E E L N E V E R G R E E N C I R C H A N C E T R L WILLIAM SCOTSMAN D E L P R A D O L N J E F F E R S O N L N C A V U R D B A R B E R R Y D R CO RS A I R D R I R I S D R J A S M I N E T R L")SPUR158 T O L E D O T R L K L E I N C T W I S T E R I A D R T E J A N O C T CACTU STR L L O R I L N A I R P O R T R D S T A D I U M D R C A V U R D G R A N A D A D R A E R O D R GOLDEN OAKS RD N AUSTIN AVE A I R P O R T R D S E R V I C E D R I N D U S T R I A L P A R K C I R L A K E W A Y DR S T A D I U M D R C R 1 5 2 CAVU RD C R 1 5 2 CIE L O D R NEINNERLOOP SABINAS CT MARI-POSA CT C A S A BLANCA BO S Q U E T R L C ORDOBA CIR E SE R V I C E D R T E R M I N A L D R H A N G A R R D SUDDUTH D R A V I A T I O N D R !(130 Coo rd inate Sys tem: Te xas S tate Plane/C entral Zone/N AD 83/U S FeetCartographic D ata Fo r General Planning Purposes O nly ¯ Future Land Use / Overall Transportation Plan Exhi bit #2 REZ-20 16 -03 0 Legend Thoroughfare Future Land Use Institutional Regi onal Commercial Community Commerc ial Em ployment Center Low Dens ity Residential Mining Mix ed Us e Community Mix ed Us e Neighborhood Center Moderate Density Residential Open Space Specialty Mixed Us e Area Ag / Rural Residential Ex isting Collector Ex isting Freeway Ex isting Major Arterial Ex isting Minor Arterial Ex isting Ramp Pr oposed Collector Pr oposed Freeway Pr opsed Frontage Road Pr oposed Major Arterial Pr oposed Minor Arterial Pr oposed Railroad High Density Residential 0 ¼½¾Mi Le ge ndSi teParcelsCity Lim itsGeorgetown ETJ Page 263 of 316 LAKEWAYDR A I R P O R T R D ")SP U R158 Zon in g Inf ormationREZ-2 016-0 30Exhibit #3 Co ord inate System: Texas Sta te Plane/Centra l Zone/NAD 83/U S FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purp oses Only Le ge n dSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ ¯ 0 ¼½¾MiPage 264 of 316 Maximum Building Height = 45 feet Front Setback = 25 feet Bufferyard = 30 feet with a fence and Side Setback = 10 feet plantings adjacent to AG, RE, RL, Side Setback to Residential = 25 feet RS, TF, MH, TH, MF-1, or MF-2 Rear Setback = 10 feet districts Rear Setback to Residential = 35 feet Allowed by Right Subject to Limitations Special Use Permit (SUP) Required Emergency Services Station Business/Trade School Correctional Facility Government/Post Office Animal Shelter Hospital Naure Presreve/Community Garden Neighborhood Public Park Psychiatric Hospital Food Catering Services Kennel Substance Abuse Clinic Athletic Facility, Indoor/Outdoor Self-Storage, Outdoor Cemetery, Columbaria, Mausoleum, Driving Range Heliport or Memorial Park Medical Complex Wireless Transmission Facility (>40')Sexually Oriented Business General Office Seasonal Product Sales Major Event Entertainment Integrated Office Center Farmer's market, Temporary Indoor Firing Range Data Center Mobile/Outdoor Food Vendor Fuel Sales Artisan Studio/Gallery Business Offices, Temporary Car Wash Small Engine Repair Concrete Products, Temporary Airport Self-Storage, Indoor Construction Field Office Wireless Transmission Facility (<41') Commercial Document Storage Construction Staging, Off-site Resource Extraction Event Catering/Equipment Rental Parking Lot, Temporary Oil Refinery/Distribution Furniture Repair/Upholstery Waste Related Uses Heavy Equipment Sales/Repair Wrecking, Scrap, Salvage yard Pest Control/Janitorial Services Office/Showroom Wholesale Showrooms Stone/Dirt/Mulch Sales Yards Manufactured Housing Sales Car Sales/Rental/Leasing Facility Car Parts/Accessories Sales, Outdoor Car Repair/Service, Limited Bus Barn Parking Lot, Off-site/Commercial Park-n-Ride Facility Private Transport Service Dispatch Facility Rail or Transit Yard Allowed by Right con't Transit Passenger Terminal Utilities (Minor, Intermediate, Major)Truck Terminal Contractor Services, Limited/General Lumber Yard Movie Production Dry Cleaning/Laundry Plant Printing/Publishing Asphalt/Concrete Batch Plant Office/Warehouse Recycling Collection Center Manufacturing, Processing and Meat Market Assembly, Limited/General Taxidermist Warehouse/Distribution, Limited/General INDUSTRIAL (IN) DISTRICT District Development Standards Specific Uses Allowed within the District Page 265 of 316 Ordinance Number: ___________________ Page 1 of 2 Description: Project Cat C3-IN Case File Number: REZ-2016-030 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 75.415 acres out of the David Wright Survey from the General Commercial (C3) District to the Industrial (IN) District also known as Project Cat; 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"): 75.14 acres of the David Wright Survey as recorded in Document Numbers 2002050652 and Volume 278, Page 311, of the Official Public Records of Williamson County, Texas, hereinafter referred to as "The Property"; and Whereas, public notice of such hearing was accomplished in accordance with State Law and the City’s Unified Development Code through newspaper publication, signs posted on the Property, and mailed notice to nearby property owners; and Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission, at a meeting on November 1, 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 November 8,2016 , 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. Section 2. The Official Zoning Map, as well as the Zoning District classification(s) for the Property is hereby amended from the General Commercial District (C3) to the Industrial District (IN), in accordance with the attached Exhibit A (Location Map) and Exhibit B (Legal Description) and incorporated herein by reference. Page 266 of 316 Ordinance Number: ___________________ Page 2 of 2 Description: Project Cat C3-IN Case File Number: REZ-2016-030 Date Approved: __________________ Exhibits A-B Attached 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 __th day of ____, 20__. APPROVED AND ADOPTED on Second Reading on the __th day of ____, 20__. THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: ATTEST: ______________________ _________________________ Dale Ross Shelley Nowling Mayor City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: ______________________ Charlie McNabb City Attorney Page 267 of 316 N IH 35 SB N IH 35 NB A I R P O R T R D N IH 35 FWY SB N IH 35 FWY NB S H 1 3 0 S B S H 130 N B L A K E W A Y D R S H 1 30 T O L L S B S H 130 T O L L N B EXIT 265 NBEXIT 264 SB EXIT 262 SB EXIT265SB JUNIPER DR AZALEA DR J E F F E R S O N LN A V I A T I O N D R NEINNERLOOP T E R M I N A L D R ENTR 265 NBHALMAR C V S E R V I C E D R S U D D U T H D R ENTR 266 SB E X IT 4 1 1 N B H I C K O R Y T R E E D R A S P E N T R L CRYSTALKNOLLBL V D D O G W O O D D R N AUSTIN AVE CALADIU M D R S T E A R M A N D R I N D U S T R I A L P A R K C I R W I S T E R I A D R H A N G A R D R M A H O G A N Y L N EV E R G R E E N C I R IR I S D R W R I G H TBROTHE R S D R O S A G E C T COR S AIR DR S E R V I C E R D S E R V I C E D R N IH 35 NB Co ord inate System: Texas Sta te Plane/Centra l Zone/NAD 83/U S FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purp oses Only ¯ Aerial REZ-2 016-0 30 Le ge n d SiteCity Limits 0 0.25 0.5Mi Page 268 of 316 Page 269 of 316 Page 270 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Second Readi ng o f an Ordinance establ i shi ng the cl assi fi cati ons and number of posi ti ons (Strength of Force) fo r all the City of Geo rge to wn F i re F i ghters and Pol i ce Offi cers pursuant to Chapter 1 43 of the Texas Local Governme nt Code pertaining to Civil Service -- Tadd Phillips, Director o f Human Resources (acti o n requi red) ITEM SUMMARY: Chapter 143 of the Texas Lo cal Government Code, Se ction 1 43.021, requires that the governing body of a municipality shall establish classifications and numbers of positions by ordinance. This ordinanc e supplements the Ordinance that adopts the Annual Operating Budget Plan as the o rdinance that establishes the classific atio ns and numbers of positio ns. This "Strength of Force" Ordinance separates and details the specific classifications and numbers of Civil Service positions. The changes re flecte d on this Strength of Force are as follo ws: Fi re - 3 additio nal Firefighter positions based on a budget transfer FINANCIAL IMPACT: New positions ac c ounted for in proposed 16/17 budget document. Positions created with a budget transfer of funds SUBMITTED BY: Tadd Phillips, Human Reso urce Director ATTACHMENT S: Description S trength o f Forc e Ordinanc e Page 271 of 316 Ordinance Number: Page 1 of 2 Description: Strength of Force Ordinance Date Approved: ORDINANCE NO. ____ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS RELATING TO THE CLASSIFICATIONS AND NUMBER OF POSITIONS FOR ALL CITY OF GEORGETOWN FIRE FIGHTERS AND POLICE OFFICERS PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 143 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE PERTAINING TO CIVIL SERVICE; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT THEREWITH; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETINGS AT WHICH THE ORDINANCE IS PASSED ARE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the citizens of the City of Georgetown, Texas have adopted the civil service system for its fire and police departments; and WHEREAS, civil service is governed under Chapter 143 of the Texas Local Government Code; and WHEREAS, Local Government Code, Section 143.021, requires that the governing body of a municipality shall establish classifications and numbers of positions by ordinance. WHEREAS, the caption of this ordinance was printed in the Williamson County Sun in compliance with the City Charter of the City of Georgetown. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1. The classification plans for classified positions in the Fire and Police Departments shall be as follows: PART ONE – FIRE DEPARTMENT The following classifications of firefighters in the Fire Department shall exist effective on and after the dates set forth herein under the provisions of Chapter 143 of the Texas Local Government Code. These classifications and no others shall exist effective on and after the dates set forth herein with the number shown indicating the number of positions in each classification. Number in Classification Classification Assistant Chief 2 Fire Battalion Chief 5 Fire Captain 9 Fire Lieutenant 17 Fire Driver 21 Firefighter 60 Total 114 The one (1) Assistant Fire Chief is appointed by the head of the department, and serves at the pleasure of the Department Head, in accordance with Local Government Code, Section 143.014. Page 272 of 316 Ordinance Number: Page 2 of 2 Description: Strength of Force Ordinance Date Approved: PART TWO – POLICE DEPARTMENT The following classifications of officers in the Police Department shall exist effective on and after the dates set forth herein under the provisions of Chapter 143 of the Texas Local Government Code. These classifications and no others shall exist effective on and after the dates set forth herein with the number shown indicating the number of positions in each classification. Number in Classification Classification Assistant Chief of Police 1 Police Captain 2 Police Lieutenant 9 Police Sergeant 13 Police Officer / Detective 55 Total 80 The one (1) Assistant Police Chief is appointed by the head of the department, and serves at the pleasure of the Department Head, in accordance with Local Government Code, Section 143.014. SECTION 2. All positions, other than the position immediately below the Department Head, shall be filled pursuant to the provisions of Local Government Code, Chapter 143, and eligibility lists applicable to the position. SECTION 3. That it is hereby found and determined that the meetings at which this ordinance was passed were open to the public, as required by Section 551, Texas Government Code, and that advance public notice of the time, place and purpose of said meetings was given. SECTION 4. Should any section, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or word of this ordinance be declared unconstitutional or invalid for any purpose by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this ordinance shall not be affected thereby and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are declared to be severable. SECTION 5. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately after its second and final reading. PASSED AND APPROVED on First Reading on the ____ day of __________, 2016 at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas. PASSED AND APPROVED on Second Reading on the ____ day of __________, 2016 at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas. ATTEST: CITY OF GEORGETOWN By: Shelley Nowling, City Secretary Dale Ross, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Charlie McNabb City Attorney Page 273 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Consideration and po ssible action to approve a Resolution supporting the Wi l l i amso n County and Ci ti es He al th Di stri ct in processing requests for a variance from the Texas F oo d Establ i shment Rul es pertaining to l i ve ani mal s i n food establ i shments to give food establishment owners the o pti on to al l ow dog s in outdo or di ni ng areas -- Anna Eby, Councilmember, District 1, Keith Brainard, Councilmember, District 2, Rachael Jonrowe, Councilme mber, District 6 and Andreina Davila-Quintera, P roject Coordinator ITEM SUMMARY: On February 23 , 2 01 6, the City Council gave direction to staff to work with the Williamson Co unty and Citie s He alth District (“Health District”) on a Resolution to give food establishme nt owne rs the optio n to reque st approval to allo w dogs in their outdoo r dining areas. Chapter 8.1 2 o f the City Code establishes the Health District as the regulato ry authority for food establishments in the City o f Ge orgetown. As part of its function, the Distric t administers and enforces the Texas Foo d Establishment Rule s (the “Rules”) (also known as Title 25, Chapter 2 28 of the Texas Administrative Code) to safeguard public health and provide to consumers foo d that is safe, unadulterated, and honestly presente d. Additionally, it comple tes all re quired inspections and issues the required permits to ope rate a fo od establishment in accordance with local and state law. P ursuant to Sectio n 2 28.186(o) of the Rules, live animals are prohibited within the premises o f a food establishme nt, save a few exceptio ns. Premises is define d as “The physical facility, its contents, a nd the contiguous land o r pro perty under th e control of the permit holder o r the physical facility…,” which includes outdo or dining areas thus prohibiting certain live animals, such as dogs (except service dogs), from being within the premises. Howeve r, these Rules allow the Health District to grant a variance, by modification o r waiving the requirements of the Rules if, in the opinio n of the Health District, the variance will not result in a he alth hazard or nuisance. The Health District has established Appro val Crite ria for Dog Friendly P atios fo r foo d establishments fo r municipalitie s within the County that have allowed dog-friendly patios. The Health District’s Appro val Criteria includes, but is no t limited to, the fo llowing requirements (Exhibit “A”): The outdoo r patio is separated from the re maining premises by a barrier (fe nc e ). There is an o utside entrance to the patio to prevent do gs from entering any o ther areas of the Food Establishment. A sign is po sted that states “Dog Friendly Patio – Dog Access Only through Outdoo r P atio”. Dogs are not allowed within seven (7) fe e t of any entrance to the interior of the Food Establishment unless necessary to enter o r exit the patio. All doors allo wing access from the patio to the interior of the Food Establishment are equipped with self-closing devices. No food preparation, including mixing drinks or serving ice, is performed on the patio (refilling of drinks from pitchers stored inside the establishment is allowed). Tables on the patio are no t set up with utensils, plates, glasses, or condiments (dogs may not have contact with any of these ite ms). The proposed Re so lutio n establishes the City of Geo rgeto wn’s support of the He alth District accepting and reviewing variance requests fro m the Rules pertaining to live animals in fo od establishments within the city limits. Should the City Council appro ve this Resolution, Georgetown foo d establishment owners will have the optio n to request a variance fro m the Health District to allo w dogs in their outdoor dining areas, subject to the Health District’s Approval Criteria. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. All reque sts fo r a variance will be processed by the Williams County and Cities Health District upon receipt of a completed applic atio n and required fee. SUBMITTED BY: Andreina Dávila-Quintero , P roject Coordinator Page 274 of 316 ATTACHMENT S: Description Exhib it A - WC&CHD Ap p ro val Criteria & Variance Reques t Template Res o lutio n Page 275 of 316 John H. Teel, MS, RS, Executive Director Deborah L. Marlow, RS, Director for Environmental Health Services ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Retail Food Inspection Services  211 Commerce, Suite 111, Round Rock, TX 78664 512-248-7617  Fax: 512-248-7619 Visit your public health department online at www.wcchd.org Dog Friendly Patio – Checklist for Approval Establishment: Address: Owner Name: Phone: The items below must be observed at the time of the site inspection before issuance of the variance approval letter: ____ The outdoor patio is separated from the remaining premises by a barrier (fence). ____ An outside entrance to the patio prevents dogs from entering any other areas of the Food Establishment. ____ A sign is posted that states “Dog Friendly Patio – Dog Access Only Through Outdoor Patio”. ____ Dogs are not allowed within seven (7) feet of any entrance to the interior of the Food Establishment unless necessary to enter or exit the patio. ____ All doors allowing access from the patio to the interior of the Food Establishment are equipped with self-closing devices. ____ Pests are controlled at all times. ____ No food preparation, including mixing drinks or serving ice, is performed on the patio (refilling of drinks from pitchers stored inside the establishment is allowed) ____ Tables on the patio are not set up with utensils, plates, glasses, or condiments. (Dogs may not have contact with any of these items) EXHIBIT A - Approval Criteria & Variance Request Template Page 276 of 316 Retail Food Inspection Services  211 Commerce, Suite 111, Round Rock, TX 78664 512-248-7617  Fax: 512-248-7619 Visit your public health department online at www.wcchd.org If items below are not observed, a written plan established by the Food Establishment and a form signed by all employees that they have received the appropriate training must be provided before issuance of the variance approval letter: ____ Dogs are accompanied by the owner at all times. ____ Dogs are not fed any food, including dog food, snacks or treats ____ Dogs are kept on a leash and remain under the owner’s control at all times ____ Dogs wear a collar or harness with a current rabies tag attached at all times. ____ Dogs are not on a seat, table, countertop, or similar surface in the outdoor patio area ____ Training has been provided for all employees on the following: ____ Staff may not pet or have contact with any dog. ____ Outdoor patio must be continuously maintained free of visible dog hair, dog dander, and other dog-related waste or debris. ____ Patio must be hosed down or mopped with animal friendly chemicals at each shift change or every six hours, whichever comes first. ____ Waste created by animal must be cleaned up immediately, no longer than 5 minutes after the occurrence. All dog waste must be disposed of outside the Food Establishment in an appropriate waste receptacle ____ Equipment used to clean the outdoor patio must be kept outside the Food Establishment. / Establishment Employee Printed Name / Signature Date / WCCHD Representative Printed Name / Signature Date EXHIBIT A - Approval Criteria & Variance Request Template Page 277 of 316 John H. Teel, MS, RS, WCCHD Executive Director Deborah L. Marlow, RS, Director for Environmental Health Services _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Retail Food Inspection Services  211 Commerce, Suite 111, Round Rock, TX 78664 512-248-7617  Fax: 512-248-7619 Visit your public health department online at www.wcchd.org Variance Request – Dog Friendly Patio Food Establishment Name: Food Establishment Address: Owner Name: Owner Phone: Owner E-mail: This is a written request for a variance to the Texas Food Establishment Rules (TFER), 228.186(o)(1) which states that “…live animals may not be allowed on the premises of a food establishment.”. This does not apply to service animals as defined by the Texas Health and Safety Code §§437.023(c). The TFER defines “premises” as the “physical facility, its contents, and the continuous land or property under the control of the permit holder.” To provide the same level of food safety required in the TFER, I will provide the following safeguards: • An outdoor patio separated from the remaining premises by a barrier (fence). • An outside entrance to the patio that prevents the dog from entering any other areas of the Food Establishment. • Post a sign that states “Dog Friendly Patio – Dog Access Only Through Outdoor Patio”. • Ensure that the dogs are not within seven (7) feet of any entrance to the interior of the Food Establishment unless necessary to enter or exit the patio. • Ensure that all doors allowing access from the patio to the interior of the Food Establishment are equipped with self-closing devices. • Ensure that pests are controlled at all times. • Ensure that no food preparation, including mixing drinks or serving ice, is performed on the patio. Beverages may be refilled from a pitcher or other container filled or prepated inside the Food Establishment. • Ensure that tables on the patio will not be set up with utensils, plates, glasses or condiments until the customer is seated. Dogs may not have contact with any of these items. • Ensure that dogs are accompanied by the owner at all times. • Ensure that dogs are not fed any food, including dog food, snacks or treats • Ensure that dogs be kept on a leash and remain under the owner’s control at all times. • Ensure that all dogs wear a collar or harness with a current rabies tag attached. • Ensure that dogs are not on a seat, table, countertop, or similar surface in the outdoor patio area. • Provide training for all employees on the following: o Staff may not pet or have contact with any dog. o Outdoor patio must be continuously maintained free of visible dog hair, dog dander, and other dog-related waste or debris. o Patio must be hosed down or mopped with animal friendly chemicals at each shift change or every six hours, whichever comes first. EXHIBIT A - Approval Criteria & Variance Request Template Page 278 of 316 Retail Food Inspection Services  211 Commerce, Suite 111, Round Rock, TX 78664 512-248-7617  Fax: 512-248-7619 Visit your public health department online at www.wcchd.org o Waste created by a dog must be cleaned up immediately, no longer than 5 minutes after the occurance. All dog waste must be disposed of outside the Food Establishment in an appropriate waste receptacle. o Equipment used to clean the outdoor patio must be kept outside the Food Establishment. I hereby certify that the above named food establishment will comply with the above conditions and standards and any other conditions and standards that may be establishment by the regulatory authority to secure and maintain a variance from the Texas Food Establishment Rules, §228.186(o). If the person in charge fails to comply with the standards and conditions establishmenbt by the regulatory authority, the regulatory authority may revoke the privilege of the food establishment to allow dogs to be present in the outdoor patio area of the food establishment. I also understand that this privilege is non-transferable and is valid only at the location listed on this form. Owner Name (Print) Owner Signature Date EXHIBIT A - Approval Criteria & Variance Request Template Page 279 of 316 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 1 OF 2 DOG-FRIENDLY PATIOS RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, SUPPORTING THE WILLIAMSON COUNTY AND CITIES HEALTH DISTRICT IN PROCESSING REQUESTS FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE TEXAS FOOD ESTABLISHMENT RULES PERTAINING TO LIVE ANIMALS IN FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS TO GIVE FOOD ESTABLISHMENT OWNERS THE OPTION TO ALLOW DOGS IN OUTDOOR DINING AREAS; MAKING OTHER FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. WHEREAS, The Williamson County and Cities Health District (“Health District”) is the regulatory authority for food establishments in the City of Georgetown; and WHEREAS, food establishments are subject to the rules and regulations of the Texas Food Establishment Rules (Title 25, Chapter 228 of the Texas Administrative Code), as amended; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 228.186(o) of the Texas Food Establishment Rules, live animals, save a few exceptions as outlined therein, may not be allowed on the premises of a food establishment; and WHEREAS, Section 228.243 of the Texas Food Establishment Rules allows the Health District to grant variances from these rules if, in the opinion of the Health District, a health hazard or nuisance will not result from the variance; and WHEREAS, the City Council supports a process whereby food establishment owners will be given the option to allow dogs in the outdoor dining areas of the food establishment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1: The facts and recitations contained in the preamble of this resolution are hereby found and declared to be true and correct, and are incorporated by reference herein and expressly made a part hereof, as if copied verbatim. The City Council hereby finds that this resolution implements the City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 2: City Council hereby supports the Health District granting a variance from Section 228.186(o) of the Texas Food Establishment Rules, subject to an approval criteria to prevent health hazards and nuisances as determined by the Health District, to allow food establishment owners the option to allow dogs in outdoor dining areas of the food establishment. Page 280 of 316 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 2 OF 2 DOG-FRIENDLY PATIOS SECTION 3: The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute, and the City Secretary to attest this Resolution. SECTION 4: This resolution shall become effective immediately upon adoption. RESOLVED this day of , 2016. Dale Ross, Mayor ATTEST: Shelley Nowling, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Charlie McNabb, City Attorney Page 281 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 2016 SUBJECT: Forwarded fro m the Mai n Street Advi sory B o ar d: Consideration and possible action to appro ve the pro posed amendments to the Mai n Street F açade and Si gn G r ant Program -- Shelly Hargrove, Main Street Manage r ITEM SUMMARY: Background: The Main Street Adviso ry Board (MSAB) will assist the Main Street Manager in a number of ways including the following: 1. e xpand inte rest base/suppo rt group; 2. fund raising fo r the Main Street program or for special pro jects organized through Main Street, including ide ntifying and utilizing local, state, federal and private so urces inc luding grants and co ntributions; 3. make recommendations as to Main Street pro gram policy; 4. develo ping a strategic plan and se tting goals of the Main Stree t program; 5. administering monie s from the Main Street Facade Fund; and 6. providing a report to the City Council o n its pro grams on a timely basis. The Main Street Façade & Sign Grant P rogram is the main program through which the MSAB is able to incentivize reinvestment that will add to the tax base and historic nature o f the downtown. T his is a 50/50 matching grant program for commercial properties located in the Downtown Overlay District. Established in 2001, the program has awarded over $325,000 in matching grants to over 70 public-private partners, including downtown organizations, property owners and/or small business owners. Current eligible façade grant expenses up to $10,000, with the recipient matching a minimum of 50% of the costs, include: paint, masonry cleaning, paint removal, awning/canopy, uncovering/replacing windows, roof work and foundation work. T he sign grant is a maximum 50/50 match of up to $500. Applicants are only able to start their grant project after they have received design approval from HARC and grant approval from Main Street. Applicants are eligible to apply for the program once every three years. T he City of Georgetown contributes $15,000 annually to the Façade Fund, and the Main Street program allocates all proceeds from the annual Georgetown Swirl to the fund. T he current Façade Fund balance is approximately $100,000. This item was brought to the September 27 and Oc to ber 25 City Council Worksho p meetings. The Main Street Advisory Board voted unanimously at their Octobe r 14, 2016 bo ard meeting to recommend the following purpose stateme nt fo r the grant program: “Georgetown Main Street P rogram’s Facade and Sign Grant Program provides reso urces which preserve, prote c t, and enhanc e commercial property in the Do wntown Overlay District.” Mai n Street Advi so ry B oard Recommendati on: The Main Street Advisory Board voted unanimo usly at their August 12, 2 01 6 board meeting to recommend the following proposed update s to the grant program: Increase the façade grant match from $1 0,0 00 to $20,000 Add the el i g i bl e g rant w ork to i ncl ude: 1. Fire Sprinkler/Suppression Systems 2. Removal of Barriers to Public Ac c e ssibility. Now staff respectfully requests that city council appro ve this item from the Main Stre e t Advisory Board. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The city has budge ted $15 ,00 0 from the General Fund in the adopted FY 2017 budget. SUBMITTED BY: Shelly Hargrove Page 282 of 316 ATTACHMENT S: Description Main Street Fac ad e S ign P ro gram Presentation Page 283 of 316 Main Street Facade & Sign Grant Program Proposed City Council Workshop October 25, 2016 Page 284 of 316 •Review current and proposed Main Street Facade & Sign Grant Program •Follow up from September 27 workshop: Present Main Street Advisory Board (MSAB) recommended grant program purpose –Board Chair Taylor Kidd Map of downtown fire suppression locations – Fire Chief John Sullivan Review distribution of information on the grant program •Receive direction from City Council Discussion Goals: Page 285 of 316 Main Street Facade and Sign Grant Program 50/50 Matching Grant Current Application Max $10,000 2016 Proposed Max $20,000 Signage ($500 max)Signage ($500 max) Paint Paint Masonry Cleaning/Paint Removal Masonry Cleaning/Paint Removal Awning/Canopy Awning/Canopy Uncovering/Replacing Windows Uncovering/Replacing Windows Roof Work Roof Work Foundation Work Foundation Work Fire Sprinkler/Suppression Systems Removal of Barriers to Public Accessibility Page 286 of 316 Georgetown Main Street Program’s Facade and Sign Grant Program provides resources which preserve, protect, and enhance commercial property in the Downtown Overlay District. Main Street Advisory Board’s Grant Program Purpose Statement: Page 287 of 316 Grant Program Revenue vs.Expenses: FY ‘12 -FY ‘16 Page 288 of 316 Fire Suppression Locations in Downtown Page 289 of 316 Downtown Farmersville Fire Before Page 290 of 316 Distribution of Grant Program Info. •Guide for New Downtown Business Owners distributed at: Quarterly Breakfast Bites and Downtown Low Down Mtg. Downtown Block Captains through EV Committee Planning and Permitting Departments Chamber of Commerce and Visitor Center Local Sign Companies •Online version on mainstreet.georgetown.org •Annual Georgetown Swirl event and website Page 291 of 316 •Consider increasing the maximum façade grant amount from $10,000 to $20,000 •Consider adding to Eligible Grant Work: Fire Sprinkler/Suppression Systems Removal of Barriers to Public Accessibility City Council Direction: Page 292 of 316 Main Street Façade and Sign Grant Program 50/50 Matching Grant Current Application Max $10,000 2016 Proposed Max $20,000 Signage ($500 max)Signage ($500 max) Paint Paint Masonry Cleaning/Paint Removal Masonry Cleaning/Paint Removal Awning/Canopy Awning/Canopy Uncovering/Replacing Windows Uncovering/Replacing Windows Roof Work Roof Work Foundation Work Foundation Work Fire Sprinkler/Suppression Systems Removal of Barriers to Public Accessibility Page 293 of 316 Downtown Overlay DistrictPage 294 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 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 inc luding parking enhancements, c ity lease agreements, sanitation services, and possible direction to city staff -- David Morgan, City Manager ITEM SUMMARY: The City Council has requested regular updates regarding the status of projects, as well as the ability to discuss the se projects as a collective. FINANCIAL IMPACT: This is an Council Update Item. SUBMITTED BY: Shirley J. Rinn o n be half of David S. Morgan, City Manager ATTACHMENT S: Description GTEC Projec t Up d ate GTAB Pro jec t Updates GEDCO Page 295 of 316 FM 1460 (Quail Valley Drive to University Drive) Project No. 5RB TIP No. BO & CD Rights-of-Way Acquisition and Utility Relocation October 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 Michael Hallmark 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: 36 8 Pending: 0 - Condemnation: 0 - Total: 36 8 Utility Relocations Ongoing Two Utility companies have submitted invoices for reimbursement – Atmos Energy and Seminole Pipeline Construction Under Construction. Tentatively scheduled to be complete Spring 2018. Other Issues Engineer preparing Change Orders for construction contract. Page 296 of 316 Mays Street Extension (Teravista Parkway in Round Rock to the intersection with Westinghouse Road) Project No. 5RI TIP No. CK October 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 Ken Taylor Engineer CP&Y, Inc. Element Status / Issues Design Complete Environmental/ Archeological Complete Rights of Way ROW acquisition – on-going. Only parcel not pending closing has been approved by Council for condemnation and proceeding are moving forward. This only impacts signal construction. Total Parcels: 8 Acquired: 4 Pending: 4 Utility Relocations TBD Construction Council – August 9th; Contracts being processed for signatures NTP – October 3, 2016 Anticipated completion Summer 2017 Erosion Controls going in, grading to being immediately. Other Issues Page 297 of 316 NB Frontage Road (SS 158 to Lakeway Drive) Project No. 5QX TIP No. AF October 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 Ed Polasek, AICP and Wesley Wright, P.E. 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 298 of 316 Northwest Boulevard (Fontana Drive to Austin Avenue) Project No. 5QX TIP No. AF October 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 Joel Weaver and Wesley Wright, 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 299 of 316 Rabbit Hill Road Improvements Project (Westinghouse Road to S. Clearview Drive) Project No. 5RQ TIP No. BZ October 2016 Unchanged Project Description Reconstruct Rabbit Hill Road from Westinghouse Road northward to S. Clearview Dr. Widening along Westinghouse Road will also be included in the schematic for additional turning lanes to/from Westinghouse Road. The project length along the anticipated alignment is approximately 0.75 miles Purpose To develop final PS&E and complete construction of the project. Project Managers Joel Weaver and Wesley Wright, P.E. Engineer CP&Y, Inc. Element Status / Issues Design Task Order awarded by Council August 9, 2016 Environmental/ Archeological TBD Rights of Way ROW – TBD Total Parcels: Acquired: Pending: Utility Relocations TBD Construction Tentatively scheduled to be bid Summer 2017 Other Issues Page 300 of 316 Rivery Boulevard (TIA Improvements) Project No. 5RP TIP No. None October 2016 Project Description Develop the Plans, Specifications and Estimate for roadway improvements necessitated by the development for the Summit at Rivery. Purpose To provide improved traffic flow into the Summit at Rivery hotel and conference center from Rivery Boulevard. Project Manager Joel Weaver and Wesley Wright, P.E. Engineer M&S Engineering, LLC Element Status / Issues Design Design contract awarded by Council; NTP issued to Engineer. Survey underway. Environmental/ Archeology TBD Rights of Way TBD Total Parcels: Appraised: Offers: Acquired: Closing pending: Condemnation: Utility Relocations TBD Construction Tentatively scheduled to begin Spring 2017 Other Issues TBD Page 301 of 316 Rivery Boulevard Extension (Williams Drive to Northwest Boulevard @ Fontana Drive) Project No. 5RM TIP No. AD October 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 Travis Barid, Joel Weaver, and Wesley Wright, P.E. Engineer Kasberg Patrick and Associates Element Status / Issues Design City staff reviewing 75% plans. Environmental/ Archeology Complete Rights of Way Appraisals complete. Offers have been made to all 22 parcels. Closed on 9 parcels; 4 pending contract execution or final closing preparation. Total Parcels: 22 Appraised: 22 Offers: 22 Acquired: 9 Closing pending: 4 Condemnation: 0 Utility Relocations TBD Construction Tentatively scheduled to begin mid-FY 2018. Other Issues TBD Page 302 of 316 Page 303 of 316 Page 304 of 316 Page 305 of 316 Page 306 of 316 Page 307 of 316 Page 308 of 316 Page 309 of 316 Page 310 of 316 Page 311 of 316 Page 312 of 316 Name Description Start Date (Council Approved)End Date $ Encumbered $ Expended Citigroup Grant for wastewater infrastructure for construction of datacenter. 12/12/2006 12/31/2018 1,300,000 $ 1,300,000 DisperSol Grant for job creation related to expansion of manufacturing facilities.10/16/2014 2/15/2019 250,000 $ 70,000 Georgetown Indpendent School District Grant for the purchase of qualified expenditures related to the equipment for the Engineering Program and Laboratories at Georgetown and East View High Schools. 9/25/2012 12/31/2016 200,560 184,911$ Georgetown Winery Grant for Qualified Expenditures described as equipment for wine production and an agreement to maintain and operate the existing winery in Georgetown.8/23/2011 6/30/2016 70,000 70,000$ Grape Creek Grant for reimbursement of Qualified Expenditures for the lease/purchase and future site improvements at 101 E. 7th Street and 614 Main Street for the operation of a winery on the Downtown Square. 8/23/2011 3/1/2018 280,000 280,000$ Grape Creek GEDCO purchase of building. GCV currently under lease/purchase agreement with right to exercise purchase at end of PA for $447K.8/23/2011 3/1/2018 447,000.00$ 447,000.00$ Lone Star Circle of Care Grant for Qualified Expenditures for future site improvements at 205 East University Avenue, Georgetown, Texas. Loan Agreement and Promissory Note have been executed. 6/28/2011 11/30/2017 387,000 $ 387,000 GEDCO - ACTIVE PERFORMANCE AGREEMENTS STATUS REPORT October 24, 2016 Over Page 313 of 316 Name Description Start Date (Council Approved)End Date $ Encumbered $ Expended GEDCO - ACTIVE PERFORMANCE AGREEMENTS STATUS REPORT October 24, 2016 Radiation Detection Corporation Grant for Qualified Expenditures and job creation related to the relocation of the corporate offices to Georgetown. 7/23/2013 12/31/2021 320,000 320,000$ Radix BioSolutions, Ltd. Provided grant to assist with the work and future plans of Radix BioSolutions at the TLCC. Radix paid back $47K on 3/15/15. Radix paid back $50K 3/10/16.3/9/2010 3/31/2018 250,000 $ 153,000 TASUS Texas Corporation Provide a grant of $67,500 for job creation related to expansion of manufacturing facilities. 2/25/2014 5/31/2017 67,500 -$ Texas Life Sciences Collaboration Center (4) Provide a grant of $100,000 for the maintenance of the TLCC. 1/12/2016 10/31/2016 100,000 $ 100,000 The Summit at Rivery Park Provide a grant not to exceed $4.5 Million for Public Infrastructure Improvements. 12/10/2013 6/30/2016 4,500,000 $ - Page 314 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 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 315 of 316 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Regula r Meeting November 22, 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 items 551.074: Perso nne l 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 551.087: Del i be r ati on Regardi ng Economi c Devel o pment Negoti ati ons - P roject Juniors ITEM SUMMARY: FINANCIAL IMPACT: NA SUBMITTED BY: Page 316 of 316