HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES_GTAB_02.14.2014Notice of Meeting of the
Georgetown Transportation Advisory board and the
Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas
February 14, 2014
The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If
you require assistance in participation 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 at least four (4) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512)930-3652 or City Hall at 113 East 81h
Street for additional information: TTY users' route through Relay Texas at 711.
Board Members: Rachel Jonrowe — Vice Chair, Truman Hunt — Secretary, John Hesser, Ray Armour,
Chris H'Luz, David Johnson
Board Members Absent: John Pettitt. William Maples, Scott Rankin
Staff Present: Jim Briggs, Wes Wright, Ed Polasek, Jana Kern, Bill Dryden, Mark Miller, Matt Synatschk,
Mike Babin, Nat Waggoner, Bridget Chapman
Others Present: Trae Sutton & Brenton Burney — KPA Engineers, Hugh Norris, John Milford, Margie
Holguin, Bob Burczak, Jeanne Burczak, Pablo Holguin — Serenada Residents.
Regular Session
A. Call to Order: Ms. Rachel Jonrowe called the regular GTAB Board meeting to order on Friday,
February 14, 2014 at 10:00 AM
Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to
convene an Executive Session at the request of the Chair, a Board Member, The City Manager,
Assistant City Manager, General Manager of Utilities, City Council Member, or legal counsel for
any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code Chapter 551, and
are subject to action in the Regular Session that follows.
B. Introduction of Visitors
C. Industry/CAMPO/TxDOT Updates: For your information the Director of CAMPO has retired.
CAMPO will begin the search for a new Director.
TxDOT has kicked off the MOKAN study. TxDOT Austin is funding another study on the
MOKAN corridor. Staff has met with TxDOT, internally, on review of the projects. Possible by
spring there could be a summary report.
D. Discussion regarding the Project Progress Reports and Time Lines — Bill Dryden, P. E.,
Transportation Engineer, Mark Miller, Transportation Services Manager and Edward G. Polasek,
AICD, Transportation Services Director. FM 971 Land swap was approved by Council.
E. 1. Discussion regarding the Airport Project Progress Report and Time Lines. — Curtis
Benkendorfer, Acting Airport Manager and Edward G. Polasek, AICD, Transportation Services
Director.
2. Public wishing to comment: Mr. Hugh Norris - Mr. Chairman, members of the board of the
Georgetown Traffic Advisory Board, city staff, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Hugh Carlton Norris,
Jr. My wife, Nancy, and I have lived for the past 15 years at 4400 Luna Trail in Serenada Estates.
I appear before you today as a representative of the Airport Concerned Citizens (ACC), a group
of an ever growing number of concerned citizens opposed to the city's pians to expand aviation
operations at the Georgetown Municipal Airport (GTU). The ACC requests that all components of the
city's 20 year airport capital improvements plan program as described in the 2005 Master Plan Update
and included in the business analysis study by CH2MH111 Engineers, and as may be amended by the
pending GTU master plan update be held in abeyance pending outcome of a public participation process
concluding with a citizen consensus on the program.
It is our understanding that staff was requested by the City Council to implement portions of the
2005 Master Plan Update and the business analysis study with no qualifications for removal or deletion of
any projects contained therein. Nor, were any instructions issued to staff to implement only sufficient
projects for safety and maintenance service to support the existing 286 aircraft based at the airport, the 19
private businesses and 15 private leases thereon. With no official documentation to the contrary,
implementation instructions to staff are understood to implement all components of the 20 year program.
It is our understanding that the funding program of the Texas Department of Transportation
Aviation Division (TxDOT CIP) in support of the airport currently contains 17 projects. Three of these
contracts being the revised land acquisition with condemnation approved by City Council on January 14,
2014, a design contract with Garver Engineering, a GTU master plan update and 14 "elements" included
in the 2014 and 2015 TxDOT CIP. The 20 year plan contained in both the above described engineering
studies contains an additional 48 projects. With no official documentation to the contrary we understand
that the remaining 48 projects will be implemented by staff as quickly as funding assistance from TxDOT
becomes available.
The 20 year airport capital improvements program as described in the 2005 Master Plan Update
by GRW Willis, Inc. and incorporated in the August 2013 Georgetown Municipal Airport Business Case
Analysis by CH2MHill Engineers has never been vetted by the general public for acceptance. The
apparent reason for such non -vetting being that it is not a bond program. Its cost is split by 10% local city
share and 90% federal funds as sourced through the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as managed
and executed by TxDOT.
If the airport program were a bond program such a new school, school improvements, new
library, public park, new bridge or roadway or any other public bond funded improvement it would be
exposed to numerous reviews in publications, interviews between opponents and proponents, yard and
roadway signs and finally a public election to determine public approval or denial. None of the entire 20
year program contained in the two engineering documents or the portion of that program included in the
current TxDOT 2014/2015 capital improvements program has had public exposure, review, or acceptance.
The airport has been the property of the citizens of this city for over 70 years and its current 20
year plan will have more of a permanent and profound impact on the future long term safety and
environmental status of this city than any other capital improvements program of this generation. A
properly vetted program would determine whether the program is acceptable or whether alternatives
including possible relocation of the airport are preferred by the airport's citizen owners.
The ACC strongly supports a viable municipal airport for our community and its economy both
for private, recreation and business needs. But our city and county are rapidly growing. A child born
today who lives to my age will see a completely different city when he or she becomes my age. By then
Georgetown may be the size of Akron, Ohio. Because of increasing use of aviation services by business it
is probable that aviation services will grow at a faster rate than the population growth curve for the
general population. If we consider no changes to the airport our future city will have a surging 640 acre
aviation industrial complex existing in its geographic and cultural heart. It is highly questionable that
such a future is the highest and best use for the citizen owned 640 acres currently occupied by the airport.
We have no problem with TxDOT which ranks our airport as a highly ranked Reliever Airport
and has responded to requests from the city as an official sponsor requesting its authorized financial
assistance. Regardless of the outcome of a citizen consensus on the airport program we encourage
coordination, respect and compliance with that agency and its FAA oversight. Our city will need their
continued assistance.
Regarding the requested public participation process, it is requested it be conducted in full
compliance with applicable National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) and FAA rules and
regulations. For that reason it should not be a burden other than oversight placed on the city staff already
fully loaded with assigned tasks. Rather, it should be performed by a contracted consulting firm with
demonstrated expertise in planning, conduct and completion to public consensus status of federal funded
projects having long term public impacts. The ACC has qualified personnel with experience in selection
and contract negotiation with consultants and desires to participate with city staff in the process for
selection and oversight of the work.
Toward that end, we have attached a set of suggested guidelines for such a process as an
attachment to this presentation. We would look forward to working with you in final development and
execution of that process.
Thank you one and all for providing an opportunity for this request presentation.
]Legislative Regular Agenda
The Board will individually consider and possibly take action on any or all of the following items:
F. Review and possible action to approve the minutes from the Regular GTAB Board meeting
held on January 10, 2014 — Jana Kern
Motion by Armour, seconded by Johnson to approve minutes. Approved 6-3-0 (Maples, Rankin
& Pettitt absent)
G. Consideration and recommendation to approve Task Order KPA 14-004 with Kasberg, Patrick
and Associated, LP of Georgetown, Texas in the amount of $331,220.00 for design services for the
2014 Street Maintenance and Rehabilitation Projects. — Wesley Wright, Systems Engineering
Director
Wright explained the task order and the scope of work. Motion by HTLuz, seconded by Hunt
to approve Task Order KPA 14-004. Approved 6-3-0 (Maples, Rankin & Pettitt absent)
H. Consideration and possible action on Downtown Master Plan adoption. - Matt Synatschk,
Historic Planner and Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager
Synatschk gave the Board an overview of the Downtown Mast Plan.
Adjournment
Motion by Hesser, seconded by HTLuz to adjourn meeting. Approved 6-3-0 (Maples, Rankin &
Pettitt absent) Meeting adjourned at 10:55 AM
Approved:
Rachel Jonrowe — Vice Chair
Attested:
Truman Hunt — Secretary
Jana R. Kern — GTAB Board Liaison