Loading...
MIN 08.23.2016 CC-WNotice of a Meeting of the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas Tuesday, August 23, 2016 The Georgetown City Council will meet on Tuesday, August 23, 2016 at 3:30 PM at the Council Chambers, at 101 E. 7t' 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 (5 12) 930-3652 or City Hall at 113 East 8th Street for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711. Mayor Ross called the meeting to order at 3:30 PM. All Councilmembers were in attendance, with the exception of Councilmember Eby who joined the meeting at 3.33 PM. Policy Development/Review Workshop — Call to order at 3:30 PM Mayor Ross moved Item B to be heard prior to Item A on the agenda by request from Fire Chief Sullivan. B. Update, information and possible feedback on the budget for Downtown West -- Eric Johnson, CIP Manager and Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager David Morgan, City Manager, said the presentation would show how staff was following Council direction on Downtown West. A handout was provided to the Council regarding the cost estimates. Morgan explained that the cost information was broken into two sections - $10.5 million for the construction and $2.5 million for other City contracted services. Morgan said demolition and new building costs would also be presented. Morgan explained that Council would also see the cost of doing the same thing on the GCAT building. He explained that this would add significant cost because of the data center being housed there, but the intention is to provide a full range of options to the Council, even if proven to be cost prohibitive. Eric Johnson, the City's CIP Manager, provided a presentation on Downtown West budget update options, applying Council's previous feedback, and requesting Council's continued guidance. Johnson began the presentation with the Development Process • First Step is programming • Programming uncovers needs Schematic Design is based on those needs • Not unusual to see an escalation through that process Johnson provided a list of benefits of Downtown West being Downtown • Buffer between Downtown and residential • Money gained from sale offset by land purchase • Keeps the Light and Waterworks building as part of a Campus • Shared parking • Revitalizes buildings the City already owns • Shotgun House is on the Old Library lot Johnson next provided facts of the Downtown West Project • Considered in both the 2003 and the 2014 Downtown Master Plans • Extensive public process that sought input from internal and external stakeholders • Parking study concluded there is ample parking for the use • Relocates approximately 50 employees (cars) out of the Downtown core, plus Municipal Court and Council Chambers visitors Johnson listed and discussed City Council Feedback from July 26, 2016 included the following: • Renovation Plan that is worthy of the City and exemplifies the City's values • Cursory review of demolition and reconstruction Funding strategies • $13,000,000 Fought said once assumption is listed at $180 per square foot there is no need for an analysis showing a comparison, because that is the comparison. Fought said it will need to be decided if $300 a square foot is an accurate figure. He said the assumption of $180 seems low and one must always assume there will be some hiccups. Gonzalez asked if the estimate already includes the land. Johnson confirmed. Discussion followed about earlier projects and what those cost per square foot. Gonzalez said the renovation cost will likely cost more than $180 per square foot. Mr. Blake, a representative from the construction firm, Balfour Beatty, spoke. He said there are several factors, including historical costs data and material and labor increased costs. Blake said they generally engage with contractors in the market and ask for their assumptions of what it would cost today. Blake noted that estimates are usually very accurate. Fought said he spent a lot of time reading up on this. Fought noted that when cost has gone up on materials, then renovation costs have increased also. He added that, generally speaking, when renovating more than 60% of a building, new construction would be less costly. Johnson said saving the shell of the building is less expensive than building new. Fought said renovation scares him and new construction does not. Gonzalez asked about contingencies and how they are considered. Johnson said contingencies are for the many things that are still to be decided, such as brick and colors and materials. He explained that the $2.5 million dollar figure is the figure for inclusion of the contingencies. Johnson showed the design map and continued with the exhibit listing renovating existing buildings Services: OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES David Morgan, the City Manager, clarified the next steps. He explained that the City is currently in the schematic phase. Morgan explained that as the City gets to the design phase, construction managers will be involved. He said staff would be keeping an eye on the market and the City will adjust accordingly. Morgan explained that at this stage the City will eventually have a guaranteed maximum price that cannot be exceeded. Morgan explained that Council will see and be a part of all steps throughout the project. He spoke of the importance of assuring quality subs throughout the project. Morgan said that contingencies will be able to be reduced as these things are decided. Johnson provided images of the proposed City Hall and Council Chambers. He provided a slide depicting the floor plan, prior to detail design, and explained that the blue areas are the expandable areas. Hesser asked how many square feet are in the blue, expandable area. Johnson answered — 3,000 square feet. Johnson listed benefits and challenges of renovation: Benefits • Provides expandability —18 spaces in city hall and 10 spaces in municipal court, council chambers • Quickest option • Lowest cost • Open existing structure allows flexibility 5/58 rural a,r6o Ykeo Snvm $ 98 5 361.937 pna Gblirg 5 591 5 218,067 Semrrry/{ne aum 5 9.ID S 335.772 Pomuuq 5 16.75 5 617,9:: Temps ila/C(onwp 5 3a5 S 127,198 Lttlnu4 ie+l.g 5 1.50 5 55,W If [.yemef Ismlum0. So-,. "o 5 ID.wo trIap" < lire. WIWImalrn. eril 5 50.W0 David Morgan, the City Manager, clarified the next steps. He explained that the City is currently in the schematic phase. Morgan explained that as the City gets to the design phase, construction managers will be involved. He said staff would be keeping an eye on the market and the City will adjust accordingly. Morgan explained that at this stage the City will eventually have a guaranteed maximum price that cannot be exceeded. Morgan explained that Council will see and be a part of all steps throughout the project. He spoke of the importance of assuring quality subs throughout the project. Morgan said that contingencies will be able to be reduced as these things are decided. Johnson provided images of the proposed City Hall and Council Chambers. He provided a slide depicting the floor plan, prior to detail design, and explained that the blue areas are the expandable areas. Hesser asked how many square feet are in the blue, expandable area. Johnson answered — 3,000 square feet. Johnson listed benefits and challenges of renovation: Benefits • Provides expandability —18 spaces in city hall and 10 spaces in municipal court, council chambers • Quickest option • Lowest cost • Open existing structure allows flexibility Challenges • Unforeseen existing conditions • Connecting to existing structure Johnson provided slides on the demolition of the Old Library Only ($15,787,000). Johnson spoke on the Benefits and Challenges of the old library demolition: Benefits • Could allow for a second floor • Could reorient the building • Could better tie in to the adjacent development • Could maximize efficiency Challenges: • Higher cost • More time • Aesthetic compatibility with the neighborhood Fought asked about the assumed cost. Johnson said it would be anywhere from $20 to $25 per square feet to demolish. Johnson said there is a lot of steel and heavy materials in this building. He spoke of the heavy beams that run through the expansive space. Fought said having less risk for renovation seems unusual. Hesser asked if the materials demolished would have value. Johnson said this was a possibility. Fought asked if the schematic shown is aesthetic with the neighborhood. He said it seems very contemporary. Morgan said a new building would be patterned after the old library look that has been in the neighborhood for a long time. Gipson asked about the expansion areas and what type of growth the blue areas would provide. Johnson said timelines of growth are hard to predict, but the proposed expansion would allow for 18 additional chairs in city hall — the City could hire 18 people before having to expand again. Morgan said departments shown on the map are departments that would not see enormous growth. Morgan said the proposed expansion in the project will allow for a multi -decade runway. He said municipal court and the accounting department will likely see substantially more growth. Morgan said the campus philosophy of the project will help accommodate future needs and this will definitely allow for proper growth. Hesser asked for the square footage of the GCAT building. Johnson said it is currently 8,200 square feet and is proposed to add 8,100 square feet. Johnson spoke next on the demolition of the old library and the GCAT Building and the benefits and Johnson spoke on the cash funding portion of the project. He explained that, in addition to the design modifications, staff evaluated possible alternate funding sources to supplement the sale of the buildings at $6,249,000. He then listed the following funding options: Johnson provided a funding summary as follows: • Budget $13,000,000 • Cash Funding $6,249,000 • Other Possible Funding $1,295,000 • Certificate of Obligation $5,456,000 Debt Service $ 366,729 Johnson then described the Next Steps: • Feedback on design options • Proceed with design development • Guaranteed maximum price — Fall 2016 • Begin construction — Winter 2016/2017 • Occupy building by the end of Quarter 1, 2018 Mayor Ross asked Johnson about the $794,000 figure shown for schematic design contingency listed on the handout. Johnson explained the equation and the 8% philosophy. Ross then asked who assumes the risk — the builder or the City. Morgan said that the contractor would announce the contingency later in the project and the City would have the approval process for the contingency. Morgan explained that, if construction was to happen flawlessly, the contingency amount comes back to the City. Ross asked again who owns the risk. Morgan said both the contractor and the City would own the risk. Morgan explained the importance of having a contingency element and that it is a benefit to both the contractor and the City. Ross asked about the 5% of City Contracted Services and asked for clarification that the construction budget is the $10 million figure. Johnson confirmed and said that the City has 100% control of that figure. Brainard asked for the funding option slide to be shown again. Brainard asked about the $270,000 from the TIRZ. Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager, explained that Downtown Master Plan projects could be deferred. She explained that when the Downtown TIRZ was developed, this construction was listed as an allowed project for funding. Brewer said staff would be looking to Council for that direction. She said that there is eligible funding there, but this is a suggestion to be directed by Council. Morgan explained that staff feels an obligation to present all options. Brainard said he does not want the Downtown TIRZ money taken from projects it was slotted for originally. Gonzalez said he agreed. Brainard said TIRZ money is meant to be used to rebuild the area and not to build a City building. Brainard explained that it was just a matter of using the appropriate pots. Fought said there is a definite need for anew city hall. He spoke on how things have changed from when the project was first introduced. He thanked staff for coming back with more accurate figures. Fought said there is now a need to re -mission the project. He said this needs to bethought through. Fought said there is the need for the facility. He said questions to be asked would include: Where are we going to put it and if it is put other than downtown, can the existing building be sold? Fought said Council still needs to decide on renovation or new construction. He said he feels like the City is rushing the project and should dial back and revisit, since somewhere around $15 million will be spent. Hesser said the analysis of Fought was good. Hesser said he is a banker and comes up with a total of $7.9 million. Hesser said there is still a lot is missing in the calculation. He suggested breaking up the project into pieces that will be easier to understand. Mayor Ross said this has all been discussed for quite awhile. Ross noted that staff has done a good job and has executed the direction of Council. Ross said it is not necessary to abort the mission. Ross said Council needs to be very specific and added that Johnson has done everything Council has directed. Johnson noted that the location of the project was included in the 2003 and 2014 Downtown Master Plans. Fought said the City will march ahead with a way to build the project, but the figures need to be scrubbed further. He said he is not yet confident with the figures. Fought said he wants to continue to study and explore the options. Gonzalez said he understands that Council is experiencing sticker shock. Gonzalez said construction is expensive and there is no need to discontinue the project while prices continue to rise. He said that something will always change in the middle of a project. Gonzalez said he definitely wants the plan to be a part of the Downtown Master Plan. He said that since new construction is so much more than renovation, renovation would be the way to go. Gonzalez asked staff to bring Council the real numbers and construction plans with the opportunity to still make decisions. Jonrowe said she has been paying great attention to this project and congratulated Johnson on his involvement. Jonrowe said she is committed to having the project happen Downtown. She said renovation is the more fiscally responsible way to go and added that she does not want to degrade the quality of the project. Gipson said staff has done exactly what Council has asked. He agreed with the sticker shock but that it is what it is. Gipson said he does want the figures revisited, but does not want to save money and end up with an inferior project. Eby said, at the last workshop meeting, the consensus from Council was the $13 million number and Johnson has done this. Eby said that no one on Council is a construction professional. Eby said this is what construction is and she is comfortable with moving forward as it has been shown. She said she would opposed to starting over or changing the location. Mayor Ross said the majority of Council would like the location to be Downtown and the option to be renovation. Ross said he also heard that Council would prefer to have TIRZ funds kept as originally planned. Eby said Council would still be able to weigh in on TIRZ funding. Fought said he would still like staff to work to refine and defend the difference between renovation and new construction, but it would be ok to go ahead with the direction from Council. Morgan said staff would continue to scrub the numbers. He noted that it is good to find things out now because the next step will be the design element and then construction elements, both costing money. Morgan explained the importance of getting Council feedback. He explained that any major shifts will add costs to the project. Morgan suggested that he and Johnson can meet with Council on a one-on-one basis throughout the project, in an effort to answer any questions and assure Council direction. Mayor Ross noted that it is much more helpful if handouts to Council are provided earlier so that they can review them prior to the presentation. Ross thanked Johnson for all the good work. A. Review and discussion regarding an ESD #8 partnership with the future Fire Station #6 — John Sullivan, Fire Chief John Sullivan, Fire Chief, spoke on an ESD #8 and Fire Station #6 partnership and provided a Power Point presentation. Sullivan provided an agenda of the discussion: • Introduction of ESD Commissioners • Overview of ESD/City relationship • Emergency service demand analysis • Proposed Fire Station site • General terms, timeline and operation • Open discussion and feedback Sullivan introduced the ESD Commissioners— Bobby Bunte, President, Benny Piper, Vice President, Troy Rodriguez, Secretary, Troy Dalton, Member and Dr. Ira Wood, Member. Sullivan showed a map of the ESD in Williamson County and described Georgetown and the surrounding areas. Sullivan spoke about the funding which began back in 2005. He explained that revenue is provided by ESD #8. Sullivan described the relationship between ESD and the City of Georgetown. Brainard asked if Georgetown serves ESD. Sullivan said yes and that the revenue is approximately $1.6 million annually. Brainard asked if this covers the cost. Sullivan said it is close. Sullivan provided a slide depicting drive times for emergency response. He spoke on call times per areas on the map. He explained that the new fire station is being placed because of a need. Sullivan next provided Emergency Service Demand maps which depict where emergencies are occurring. He explained the choice for fire station placement following current and future demand. Sullivan said that the proposed Station 6 would be at FM 3405 and Williams Drive because of the need to assist the growth in that area. He explained that the placement of this fire station would provide savings to the residents in the area because of improved insurance rates by having a station close by. Jonrowe asked who notifies insurance companies that a new fire station has been provided. Sullivan said, generally speaking, there is a break in insurance rates if a home is within 5 miles of station. He explained that the insurance rate is figured at the time of the sale of a building or of a new property. He said it is a condition of mortgage to have hazard insurance. Sullivan said insurance companies call the Fire Department to ask how close a property is to a station. Sullivan provided descriptions of General Terms: • ESC8 — Purchase property and pay for construction — Maintain title on property — Maintain insurance on building • City — Assist with RFP/Q process and construction oversight — Pay portion of FF&E — Assume operational costs (move engine from FS5) — Reimburse ESD for FMV of building (if annexed) — Consideration of FS costs within service contract • Joint — Design and approval Sullivan spoke next on the Proposed Construction Timeline: • October 2016 — Finalize Term Agreement • November 2016 — RFQ/P for Design • January 2017 — RFQ/P to GGAF, ESD, Council • February 2017 — Design/Develop (8 weeks) • April 2017 — Present to Council/ESD • April 2017 — Construction Docs (12 weeks) • August 2017 — Present to Council/ESD for CM@R • September 2017 — Construction (9-12 months) • October 2018 — Station 6 Operational Fought said the proposal sounds great and asked what's not to like. Gonzalez asked about Station 7. Sullivan said it would be In the GCP for 2019. Morgan said staff could provide information on this for the Council. Gonzalez said there has been a lot of growth in that area and perhaps it should be revisited to build it sooner than 2019. Brainard agreed that the Station 7 should be put in sooner rather than later. Brainard asked how the City would pay for this. Sullivan said the City does not pay for it - ESD does. He explained that the City would reimburse the cost if it ends up annexing the area. Morgan said there is state law that requires the City to compensate the ESD if the City were to take over their area. Sullivan said City will staff the station and insure its own employees and ESD will build the station and assume the insurance costs. Brainard asked if there will be revenue. Sullivan said it is an extension of City services. Sullivan explained that how the contract is written, it can be reconsidered. He spoke on credits on the contract costs. Brainard said the whole operation seems to be cost neutral. Sullivan said there is an intangible cost for calls made. Hesser asked Sullivan for the drive time from Sun City to Station 5. Sullivan said it is about 4 miles from DB Wood Rd. to Sun City and he would estimate the drive time from Station 6 to be approximately 7 minutes. Sullivan said Station 6 would be further from Sun City than Station 5. C. Lone Star Rail Project Update— Ed Polasek, Transportation Services Director Ed Polasek, Transportation Services Director, provided an update on the Lone Star Rail Project. He began the presentation with a Lone Star Rail History of the City of Georgetown Participation. City of Georgetown Participation • July 9, 2013 City Council Direction. — Continue membership on annual basis to support Environmental Process to clear the corridor. — Begin study of O&M cost and how the Citywould fund. — Determine what cost the City would incur in construction of station and source of funding. — Determine Economic Development effortsnecessaryfor successful TOD Development. • Staff began work on Draft Interlocal Agreement with LSTAR and draft TIZ, awaiting economic analysis from LSTAR. Agreements predicated on UP relocation. Lone Star Status 1. February 91h Union Pacific withdrew from participation in Lone Star Environmental Process. 2. CAMPO directed Staff and the Executive Committee to seek funding share with Alamo Area MPO (AAMPO) to continue revised Environmental on alternative Corridors. 3. AAMPO Executive Committee declined to extend their funding to current EIS process. 4. CAMPO August 8th Action. CAMPO Action (August 8, 2016) 1. Initiate Removal of the Lone Star Rail Project from the CAMPO 2040 Plan. 2. CAMPO/AAMPO and TxDOT reach out to Union Pacific to discuss opportunities to keep current Environmental Process active. 3. Draft amendments included in 30 -day public review (late August to early September). 4. Plan amendments return on October 1 Oth for CAMPO TPB approval. CAMPO Public Hearing Schedule • Attend an open house and provide your comments on amendments to the 2017-2020 TIP and the CAMPO 2040 Plan. • All open houses are a come -and -go format, there will be no formal presentation. All open houses will be held from 4-7 p.m. • Requested amendments, maps, and commenting will be available at the online open house August 29 - September 26, 2016. www.campotexas.org Open House Dates and Locations ✓ Monday, August 29: Bastrop Public Library ✓ Tuesday, August 30th: Bertram Library ✓ Wednesday, August 31: Pflugerville Public Library ✓ Thursday, September 1: Dr. Eugene Clark Library, Lockhart ✓ Wednesday, September 7: Cepeda Library, Austin ✓ Thursday, September 8: Buda Public Library ✓ Tuesday, September 13: Lake Travis Community Library ✓ Wednesday, September 14: Taylor Public Library ✓ Tuesday, September 20: Cedar Park Library Polasek spoke on the next steps regarding the Lone Star Rail District. • The City's 2017 membership dues for Lone Star Rail is currently loaded into the proposed 2016-17 budget as a placeholder • Payment for membership in Lone Star Rail is not due until January 2017 and City staff will not make the payment until receiving direction for the City Council • City staff recommends waiting on any decision regarding future Lone Star Rail membership until after CAMPO's October 10, 2016 meeting. Gonzalez asked about waiting and said it is very evident that Lone Star Rail will not be used in the future. Polasek said a couple of other options are being studied. He said there are some who are trying to get CAMPO to revisit a relationship with Union Pacific. Gonzalez said he would stay out of Lone Star but still might be willing to look at other options. Mayor Ross recessed the meeting to Executive Session under Section 551.071, Section 551.072, Section 551.074 and Section 551.087 at 5.05 PM. Executive Session In compliance with the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551, Government Code, Vernon's Texas Codes, Annotated, the items listed below will be discussed in closed session and are subject to action in the regular session. D. Sec. 551.071: Consultation with Attorney - Advice from attorney about pending or contemplated litigation and other matters on which the attorney has a duty to advise the City Council, including agenda items Sec. 551.072: Deliberation about Real Property Forwarded from the Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation - Rivery Blvd. Extension Project (Parcel 11, 1611 Park Lane) - Mays Street Project (Parcel 8, Westinghouse at Rabbit Hill Rd.) - SW Bypass Project (Laubach — 4200 IH35 South) 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. 551.087: Deliberation Regarding Economic Development Negotiations - Tamiro Plaza Phase 2 Adjournment Approved by the Georgetown City Council on l L t 3 � 1(O Date 6 Dale Ross, Mayor Attest: City Se W iy