Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_GTAB_09.14.2018Minutes of the Meeting of the Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board and the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas September 14 2018 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 three (3) 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 Present: John Marler - Board Chair, Dan Jones, Robert Redoutey, Sheila Mills, Doug Noble, Troy Hellmann, Ron Bindas - Vice Chair Board Members Absent: John Hesser, Donna Courtney - Secretary Staff Present: Wes Wright, Octavio Garza, Mike Babin, Ed Polasek, Emily Koontz Others Present: Carl Norris, John Milford, Richard Valentine, Wendy Dew Regular Session A. Call to Order: Meeting called to order by John Marler at 10:00am 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: All visitors and staff were introduced. C. Industry/CAMPO/TxDOT/Transit Updates: Ed Polasek gave updates. TxDot has convened a meeting of Leander, Williamson County, and City of Georgetown to go over the Leander Road schematic and start getting that through their design process. D. Airport Monthly Update: Garza gave updates. The city is in the process of interviewing for the airport manager. TxDOT moved the bid opening date and the award for the Runway Rehabilitation Project to the September commission hearing. All of the projects that were funded by discretionary funds got moved to September. Bindas asked about jet fuel sales decline and Garza responds that it is normal. Bindas explains that it was likely because of the high temperatures in July. Marler asks and Garza responds that once the bid is awarded the work would get started as soon as possible because the goal is to be finished by the end of 2019. Hellmann asked and Babin confirms that the bond revenue corresponding to the capital expense is shown on reports in the fiscal year it was awarded. This particular revenue was not awarded this fiscal year so it is in the fund. Citizens Wishing to Address the Board: The following people with the Airport Concerned Citizens (ACC) signed up to speak to the Board on Item G: Wendy Dew - 6 minutes Carl Norris - 6 minutes E. September 2018 GTAB Updates: Wright gave updates. All updates included in the packet. Hellmann asked where the Onyx was applied. Wright responded that it was placed in a subdivision and the Onyx was still tacky after 48 hours and the PMM was dry after about three hours which is why they decided to go with the PMM instead. F. Discussion and review of the 29 by-pass road. - John Marler, Board Chair. Marler included this item on the agenda to bring it to the forefront of the public because he spoke to other board members and city councilors and many people have asked him why they have DB Woods going and then a 20 -mile turn. Marler referenced the email included in the packet from Tom Crawford referencing the bypass plan and that the current plan was not the bypass plan that he had expected. Marler asked that the staff give them an idea of what plan the city ended up with and why it chose that plan. Babin responded that that segment of the project was its own project and it was part of the discussion through the road bond committee. As with all the project in the road bond, each one was evaluated and given a set of scores and then rank ordered. At the end, the dollar amount of the bond did not go far enough to get to that project so it ended up below the line. The challenge for that segment was not the extension, but the intersection on 29 which is TxDOT controlled and TxDOT has robust expectations about what that intersection will look like. That's why it ended up where it did on the ranking. It was given full consideration and it has certainly not dropped off the radar, but since then the city used GTEC money to acquire the right of way so that we were assured of the ability to go forward with it. Polasek added that when the bond committee started the 540 million dollar package, this was one project. As the bond committee went through their deliberations, this project was split out for two factors: one, the TxDOT consideration on the intersection and, two, there was a cave right past where Wolf Ranch goes straight and the city did not know what the mitigation would be from that. So when the bond committee when through their discussions, this project was the 191h ranked project, so it was very highly ranked. It was part of the 22 -project 220 million dollar presentation to Council on January 131h12015. At that presentation they were instructed to go back to the bond committee and remove their number one marked project, the Austin Avenue Bridges, and to find a reduction to around 100 million dollars. When that deliberation occurred with the bond committee the following week, the city when from 220 million to about 95 million dollars in projects. That project, being the 19th ranked, was below the list, but the city did take into account that fact that these projects have to be developed and that project was funded, partially, as an engineering design project which means the city can get construction ready plans with bond revenue programmed over time. So it wasn't eliminated from the bond, it was left in the bond funding scenario, so you can do the design work. Hellmann asked and Polasek confirmed that that was a Council decision. When the Council approved the list on January 27th, they approved the list with that construction design money for that project and they added 5 million dollars to ADA improvements. Marler asked that, in the future, when another bond is done for the construction or another funding source is available, TxDOT has to give the plan approval. Marler also mentioned that Crawford's letter expressed what the board members were hearing so Marler wanted an official response and explanation from the city about the project to be able to show citizens exactly how the bypass plan came about. Wright also added that getting traffic off of 29 is still a priority and that staff is working on a conceptual plan that would take eastbound 29 traffic off of 29 and get them on the bypass. What the city is looking at doing is securing funding to essentially put in a right turn lane on state highway 29 that would allow eastbound traffic to get to the bypass. Staff is slow -playing that plan and is not ready to bring anything forward yet. Staff is currently looking into trying to find funding and making sure there are no environmental issues. Staff also does not want to put that in right now because the city wants the county to get their portion done through the quarry so that people who do not want to go to the Wolf Ranch shopping center area and just want to get on I35 can get there. Legislative Regular Agenda G. Consideration and possible approval of the Minutes from the August 10, 2018 Meeting and the cancelled July 13, 2018 Meeting - Emily Koontz - Board Liaison. MOTION Hellmann by, second by Noble to approve the minutes as presented. APPROVED 7-0-2 (Courtney, Hesser - absent) H. Consideration and possible Texas Department of Transportation Grant for Routine Airport Maintenance - Octavio A. Garza, P.E., C.P.M, Public Works Director. Garza explained that this is simply a recurring yearly application to TxDOT for routine airport maintenance grant. It's a reimbursable account. The city does the work on routine maintenance and then can submit it to TxDOT for reimbursement. MOTION by Hellmann, second by Mills. APPROVED 7-0-2 (Courtney, Hesser - absent) I. Consideration and possible action to recommend an Interlocal Agreement (ILA) with Capital Metro for GoGeo Transportation Services for FY '19 - Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Planning Coordinator. Polasek explained that this is the contract for services and there are two significant changes. The first is that the transit development plan showed an increase in the hourly rate from $77 to $79. Polasek stated that, based on fuel costs, that is more than reasonable. The second is that they added an option for a second paratransit bus. The option being that, they don't currently have it in the budget so they would have to do a budget amendment, but if Council chooses to do the budget amendment, this based on the Georgetown Health Foundation contributing an additional $50,000 to the program. In appendix C, they have the annual cost of another paratransit bus, they would just prorate that amount based on a mid -year budget amendment and, by agreement between the Capitol Metro director and the city manager, they can add the second paratransit bus when funding becomes available. Helllman asked and Polsek explained that the only thing the city is adding is a paratransit bus because right now the paratransit bus they do have is serving almost double capacity and that this is the demand response for the ADA requirements. The paratransit bus is the only bus that is continuously over capacity and they are being asked to make more trips than one bus can handle. Hellmann asks and Polasek confirms that citizens pay a fare for paratransit services. Hellmann asks about ridership numbers and Polasek explains that, out of the 2000 trips in July, 400 were paratransit which is more than any other singular route. Noble asked and Polasek answered that the overall budget will go up by $200,000. Jones asks and Polasek explains that the $2 fare is part of the ridership outreach program in establishing a transit program. $2 per ride was chosen because that was the current CARTS fare for paratransit trips and was recommended by the consultant. Hellmann asks and Polasek confirms that if you accept the federal money for transit, you must have similar paratransit services. Polasek adds that in year two of the contract they are going to be reevaluating the routes, the stops, and the fare revenue. MOTION by Bindas, second by Jones. APPROVED 5-2-2 (Marler, Hellmann - opposed / Courtney, Hesser - absent) GTAB STATEMENT SEPTEMBER 14, 2018 AGENDA ITEM "D" AIRPORT MONTHLY REPORT Good morning Mr. Chairman, and members of the GTAB. My name is Hugh C. Norris, Jr. My residence is 4400 Luna Trail, Georgetown, Texas. I am a member of the Airport Concerned Citizens (ACC). The ACC is a major community public interest stakeholder group demanding compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for all federal and state taxpayer funded grants for the Georgetown Municipal Airport (GTU). My comments this morning address the "RW 18-36 Rehabilitation" project currently scheduled for federal funding and construction implementation by the Texas Transportation Commission on September 27, 2018 AND include a request for this board to conduct a public workshop for the project prior to its recommendation for city council approval. As this board is aware, the ACC has vigorously protested this project since the May 8, 2015 GTAB meeting prior to the city manager's letter dated June 30, 2015 that officially requested TxDOT funding for this project. Our protests have never been to deny resurfacing treatment for the runway, but instead have consistently protested the proposed doubling of the runway's strength from its existing 30,000 Ib to 60,000 Ib Single Wheel Load (SWL) design. That strength increase without an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) preparation process would enable the GTU to accommodate single wheel aircraft up to 120,000 Ib gross weight and still heavier DUAL wheeled aircraft, support heavier, noisier, more dangerous aircraft, and further adversely and cumulatively increase the public health and safety hazards and environmental impacts of the GTU. City staff has consistently refused to justify this strength increase on engineering or NEPA level review, and TxDOT officials claim no such increase is planned. The general public is unaware of the hidden adverse impacts of this project on their lives and the community at large. The city has had ample opportunities over the past 20 years to provide fully adequate surface treatment to this runway at a fraction of the cost of this project by use of a federal grant as earlier identified on the TxDOT GTU Airport Development Worksheet or conventional street maintenance operations and receive 50% RAMP grants such as addressed in Item "G" of this agenda, BUT has chosen to do otherwise. However, few things can destroy a roadway or runway pavement faster than subjecting it to loadings beyond its design strength. The Garver engineering report for this project shows that this damaging practice is exactly what has been transpiring for an extended time. Garver's report shows RW 18-36 with a design gross weight single wheel aircraft limit of 60,000 Ib has been repeatedly subjected to wheel loads from aircraft weighing up to 115,000 Ib. Further, the city's request to double its strength by a 4 -inch overlay has been revised by Garver to reconstruction AND a 5 -inch overlay at a cost of about $2 Million over the original $3 Million request. This ruination of the runway has been sanctioned by uncaring attitudes of city Airport personnel and FAA tower operators allowing indifferent pilots to destroy the pavement without sanctions or loss of pilot licenses. This indifference to Fraud, Waste and Abuse of Public Funds is never tolerated by TxDOT and our legal system for surface roadways and bridges where overload violators are fined and lose licenses. Board members, this project is a high priority, interrelated, and interconnected project of the $60 Million, 20 year PROGRAM of airport capital improvements proposed by the new Airport Master Plan, a Major Federal Action, with goals for expanded numbers of based aircraft and operations, AND proposed for federal and state taxpayer funding. This project is scheduled to be the first project SEGMENTED out of that PROGRAM and provided an unjustified Categorical Exclusion for evasion of an EIS preparation process and the NEPA. By its approval, others will follow. Board members, needless indifference to Fraud, Waste, and Abuse of Public Funds and unjustified Categorical Exclusion of the project from a NEPA preparation process demands a GTAB public workshop for full public review of controversial issues associated with this project. Mr. Chairman, questions and comments from the board are welcomed. GTAB STATEMENT SEPTEMBER 14, 2018 AGENDA ITEM "D" AIRPORT MONTHLY REPORT Good morning Mr. Chairman, and members of the GTAB. My name is Wendy Dew. My residence is 30109 Spyglass Circle, Georgetown, Texas. I am a member of the Airport Concerned Citizens (ACC). My comments protest the Categorical Exclusion (CATEX) dated January 16, 2018 prepared by TxDOT AVN staff for "RW 18-36 Rehabilitation" . A modified copy of this CATEX question form used by TxDOT staff for the project's exclusion and evasion of an EIS preparation and the NEPA showing marked protested sections and questions has been prepared for circulation to board members. I request a copy of this form be attached to my remarks for the minutes of this meeting. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) was passed by the Congress in 1969 and signed into federal law by the President of the United States in 1970 to ensure that all lead federal agencies proposing federal taxpayer funding of a local project must determine PRIOR to the Action all potential social, economic and environmental impacts of the Action on the general public. The Congress created within the NEPA the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) to assist these federal agencies in compliance with this law, to oversee development of regulations for such compliance, and placed the CEQ in the Executive Office of the President. CEQ approved FAA NEPA compliance regulations FAA Orders 5050.413 and 1050.1F recognize CATEX's as benign and having no more adverse social, economic, or environmental impacts on the public than painting the airport entrance sign. FAA Order 1050.1F identifies 12 Extraordinary Circumstances that if one or more potentially exists with a proposed funding Action an EIS for the Action must be prepared. Due to the high degree of political importance of a CATEX to the safety, health and environment of the impacted public these FAA Orders require the environmental request for a CATEX be prepared by the politically accountable airport SPONSOR and submitted to the FAA for review, modification or denial. As Texas is an FAA State Block Grant Program (SBGP) participant, TxDOT is the legislative assigned FAA surrogate. The ACC objects to the CATEX for "RW 18 Rehabilitation" as illicit and unjustified for a variety of reasons including, but not limited to: (1) The major Federal Action of which this SEGMENTED project is a priority project is one of 52 interrelated, interconnected components of the 20 year (2016-2036) Airport Master Plan proposed $60 Million PROGRAM of airport capital improvements. This PROGRAM prepared by Coffman Associates has specific goals for attainment of expanded aviation operations and was funded by the 16MPGRGTN federal grant. (2) No Sponsor environmental document requesting a CATEX has ever been prepared as required by FAA regulations, (3) No official review of any Sponsor prepared environmental document requesting a CATEX has been presented to the GTAB, the City Council, or TxDOT for official review and approval, (4) No documented Sponsor notification of CATEX approval by TxDOT has been provided as required by FAA Order 5050.413, Sec 609, (5) Public controversy regarding the project has been documented and made known to city, TxDOT and federal officials since May 2015 by multiple comprehensive emails to Coffman Associates, GTAB, city, state and federal officials, and (6) ACC objections to the major federal Action of which this project is a part comprise at least eight of the Extraordinary Circumstances identified in FAA Order 1050.117 and marked by questions on the modified CATEX copy circulated for your review. Details can and will be provided upon your request. Mr. Chairman, the details of the illicit preparation of this CATEX and its inevitable adverse impacts on our community is another reason for a fully scoped GTAB sponsored public workshop on the new 2016-2036 Airport Master Plan, its proposed $60 Million PROGRAM, and impact on the 2030 Comprehensive Plan update process. Questions and comments from the board would be appreciated. * The CATEX document referred to by Ms. Dew is attached in the online archived version of the official minutes and will appear in the agenda directly after the minutes. Adjournment Motion by Hellmann, second by Jones. APPROVED 7-0-2 (Courtney, Hesser - absent) Meeting was Adjourned at 10:45 AM Approved: Attested: �r 7 John Marler - .hair Donna Court4y - Secretary Emily ontz - GT Board Liaison