HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN 01.24.2017 CC-WMinutes of a Meeting of the
Governing Body of the
City of Georgetown, Texas
Tuesday, January 24, 2017
The Georgetown City Council will meet on Tuesday, January 24, 2017 at 3:00 PM at the Council Chambers, at 101
E. 71s 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 8a'
Street for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711.
Mayor Ross called the meeting to order at 3:00 PM. All Councilmembers were in attendance, with the exception of
Councilmember Tommy Gonzalez, District 7. Gonzalez joined the meeting at 3.55 PM.
Policy Development/Review Workshop — Call to order at 3:00 PM
A. Overview presentation and discussion of the City's Debt Program -- Leigh Wallace, Finance Director
Leigh Wallace, the City's Finance Director, provided a presentation and discussion on the City's Debt
Program. She began the presentation with a description of debt policies. Wallace said that she wanted
Council to be aware and comfortable with the debt process, debt policies and the current debt held by the
City.
- GCORGETA\VFX
i(%A\
Debt Policies
• Provide debt update annually
• Balance needs of the City between pay as you
go and debt financing
— Stability of tax rate
• Explore all funding options for a capital item
• Finance a capital item over its useful life
• Method of sale — competitive
Wallace described the Types of Debt next.
Types of Debt
• General Obligation Bonds
— Used for large projects
— Approved by the voters
— Repaid with property taxes over long terms
• Certificates of Obligation
— Used for required or routine items
— Public notice required
— Repaid with property taxes or other revenue
— Term over the life of the asset
Wallace provided a slide of current bond ratings. She explained that the City has excellent bond ratings.
—iib^ - (rt OAGRO\VK�
Current Bond Ratings
• Independent review of city's management and
financial condition to determine
creditworthiness
• Impacts the interest rate
• Standard & Poor's 2016 Rating
— General obligation AA+
— Revenue bonds AA
Wallace spoke on the current tax rate and the debt coverage ratio, which the agencies look at closely.
(i]ORGIi�ilrA�
Current Tax Rate
• Total 42.4 cents per $100 assessed valuation
— Interest & Sinking 22.7 cents
— Operations & Maintenance 19.7 cents
• Contract with the voters
— 2015 Transportation Bond
— No increase more than 10 cents total
— No increase more than 2 cents in one year
Debt Coverage Ratio
• For revenue bonds
• Combined water and electric
• Number of times net operating revenue can
cover debt service
— Bond covenants 1.35x
— Fiscal and Budgetary Policy 1.5x
— 2017 coverage is 3.07x
Wallace provided charts and graphs of the current tax obligations, the historical GO/CO debt payments, the
current utility revenue obligations, the historical utility revenue obligations, the debt per capita, the debt per
customer and the historical assets net of debt.
Wallace explained that the growth in blue shows major projects approved by the voters. She said that utility
revenue obligations such as electric and water tend to fluctuate and the size can vary greatly from one year
to another.
Wallace noted that the debt per capita increased somewhat over 10 years, mainly in 2012, from obligation
bond projects. She noted that the acquisition of Chisholm Trail is also significant in these fluctuations.
Wallace also noted the increase in assets over the last 10 years and explained that assets increase with
capital project completions.
_ - giurai iun.ns
Current Tax Obligations
General Gmenm...I
Tax 5appned IX•bt 5125M
_
uxn. GIORI I.AI YNR
Historical GO/CO Debt Payments
1ta.M,m
120ss
W WD mo-
Up00000
ssao0wo
UE00000
3240000p
L
Tax Supported General Obligation Debt Payments
e.ry ere.e.pwoma n
.ep.w
— Gnn:r.l riiia�
Current Utility Revenue Obligations
WafleYraler
25%
Airport
1%
Enterprise Debt 58IM
rigation
1%
5tormwater Drainage
5%
V:
public Safety
iF
19% .
Pads Y. Ree
7%
_
uxn. GIORI I.AI YNR
Historical GO/CO Debt Payments
1ta.M,m
120ss
W WD mo-
Up00000
ssao0wo
UE00000
3240000p
L
Tax Supported General Obligation Debt Payments
e.ry ere.e.pwoma n
.ep.w
— Gnn:r.l riiia�
Current Utility Revenue Obligations
WafleYraler
25%
Airport
1%
Enterprise Debt 58IM
rigation
1%
5tormwater Drainage
5%
Historical Utility Revenue Obligations
noaeaa .-
uewom
uo.ao.ao
aeaewa
uoaaaa
uo Mona
u
Guu-i.I otc�t
Debt per Capita
Total Tax -Guaranteed Debt per Capita
shot law
Nnnf Vm
alio. ' u.m
sitnl 1].]ID
sf�.] YJ59
MID"
M<b;1
swE1
MIN
Acta;
S:
Nnn
Nun
Nw
NYn
Nil.
N14.
awn
Main
MMa
11:.
Gf(1R<i1T\(:
Debt Per Customer
Oulflanding Debt per Utility Customer
N
v.w9
rtun
Il,fry
n.W
i5y
S1 Ca
I1 .10
ti Wi
1]'ii
11:.
Gf(1R<i1T\(:
Debt Per Customer
Oulflanding Debt per Utility Customer
N
2115
2114
7013
2112
Nil
2010
2009
2003
2007
2003
MMIIIIMem017 annul euLaVeMMOF
Historical Assets Net of Debt
any Assam Net of Iterated Deb.
S- 5100 4200 5300 Wo $500 Swo
v:n;on:
.G.raml •Utq
Wallace spoke on the FY2017 Proposed Debt. She noted that the Garay Park impact will be spread over 2
years and that the Downtown West and Transfer Station Pond have been added since the budget adoption.
She spoke of the Council feedback directing the $13 million dollar project. Wallace said that $5.7 million
dollars will need to be issued, after monies from City building sales is looked at. Wallace also noted that the
electric fun is included, as discussed and approved by Council.
Gtou;rmwNas
FY 2017 Proposed Debt
General Obligation Bonds
Garey Park 5,500,000
San Gabriel 1,000,000
Sidewalks [2015 Referendum) 2,632,000
General Obligation Bonds Total 9,132,000
Garey Park structured to spread impact over two tax years
srm,aai.,m
FY 2017 Proposed Debt
Certificate of Obligation
City Wide Radio Replacement 500,000
ADA Phase 11
300,000
Grace Heritage Phase 11
140.000
Public Safety Vehicles
1,987,999
Downtown West'
5,730,000
Transfer Station Pond'
150,000
Certificate of0bligationTotal
8,807,999
Project added todebt sale since H2017 budget adoption
__ G,rwcrinl,.�
FY 2017 Proposed Debt
self-supporting Debt
GTEC- Airport Road 1.850,000
Self-Supportingi ebt Total 1,eS0,000
UtilityRevenua Debt
Electric CIP (as amended) 7,025,000
Water/Wastewater CIP 20,00.000
Total Utility Revenue Debt 27,025,000
Total City Wide Debtlssue 46,810,999
Paul Diaz, the Budget Manager, spoke on how this will affect the tax rate over the next five years. He
provided a tax impact analysis slide, a slide depicting how the model works and two slides showing the five
year CIP. He explained that the Five Year CIP charts include Garay Park, San Gabriel Park, Downtown
West and Transportation Initiatives.
Tax Impact Analysis
• Developed in FY2016, the Five Year Debt
Model is a tool to better understand the
impacts of issuing debt.
• Allows for scenario testing and the adjustment
of multiple variables including assessed value,
sales tax, tax rate distribution, and debt service
requirements.
How the Model Works
Five Year CIP
AOd l . NAAgGmp
Izaactm
4MOOO
SMA000
Gpxup.S*.
F.Ifizai
Gt.-Cfem.del
F.,ht,o
Fire Sutim 7
FK.hbts
300"
3=000
ssg..Wt..y
F.,hs.t
Flan.
PI".
1984=
2,DWAM
ZMM
ZODUW
2.UAM
ADATI.,iti"Aii,i
Nib
I%WD
ISO)OW
350.000
354000
MCDO
me We
P.k,
=.OW
G..,P.k
Pars:
SISK=
M,=, Pk
Put
Summ
fie. oA
Pert
250=
N..T,*IDi,,,Im
Pert,
5000
LOWOOD
LOOM
LSMODD
F.L M,1W, RN
Part
-
Sat GaGnq Pak
P4,t
LODCL=
Z700=
-mm
ZODQZW
2.==
Pert
MODO
weStlftpvk
vat
LCOQOOO
35MODO
IUI%II Ilr\�.F�.
�r.
Five Year CIP
Diaz described assumptions with the model.
• Short term growth will continue with more moderate growth in the out years (based on statewide
sales tax information, development pipeline, and Dallas fed report in January)
• The ratio of frozen to non -frozen assessed value will continue to hold at a two to one ratio
• New assessed value is set at $200 million annually
• Every $1 million of debt requires around $70,000 of debt service
Diaz next provided a Forecast of I &S Tax Impact in Cents- He explained that there was a 12% increase in
sales tax in Georgetown from 2015 to 2016. Diaz cautioned that other cities are not seeing this and
Georgetown would want to be conservative in their approach.
rUFGI rON.�
Forecast: I&S Tax Impact in Cents
Conservative
Projection:
Tax Impact 0.09 2.55 2.48 2.57
Middle
Projection:
Taxlmpact -0.01 2.38 1.98 1.97
Diaz said that there are several tools that staff uses to keep the overall tax rate low. He noted that if sales
tax increases, the overall tax rate and base can be sufficient to absorb the debt impact.
-
lOthSt.IMkin-nodi
Sidewalk
9+,000
11th St.(MinRockl
Sidewalk
15L000
-
-
- -
2nd5lreet
Sidewalk
-
82.000
3.000
-
8thStreet(Church/AyNle)
Sidewalk
37,010
-
- -
BNSlreet(WK-Rock)
Sidewalk
84.000
-
-
-
Austin Ave (90,University)
Sidewalk
17&000
-
-
- -
Austin Ave t51Q%Fh42A3)
Sidewalk
70,OM
370.000
-
- -
Chv<hStreet (800thl
Sidewalk
105.007
-
-
- -
SN29 (IN 35 -IN 130))
Sidewalk
-
-
- 2100[00
hlin St.(7N-2nd)
Sidewalk
35,000
255,007
- -
old To" NOOheaat
Sidewalk
960001
-
-
- -
old To" Southeast
Sidewalk
-
-
-
- 11500100DPhase
Improver Sidewalk
l- SiBnst&& Coro Ramp Improve
D0
5om
250,000
102.000
- -
Remainin8Downtown R=3in,
Sidewalk
-
671.007
504.000
114000 -
RockSt(Sth-15th56)
Sidewalk
-
-
23.000
13LCCD -
t 1Year Sidewalk
Sidewalk
353000
Road Bond
Street$
10000,000
10007.000
10000t'OD 10,000000
FIS
Teonndo8y
2.507,000
-
- -
Radio
TeOmology
5006000
500000
.500.000
,
Diaz described assumptions with the model.
• Short term growth will continue with more moderate growth in the out years (based on statewide
sales tax information, development pipeline, and Dallas fed report in January)
• The ratio of frozen to non -frozen assessed value will continue to hold at a two to one ratio
• New assessed value is set at $200 million annually
• Every $1 million of debt requires around $70,000 of debt service
Diaz next provided a Forecast of I &S Tax Impact in Cents- He explained that there was a 12% increase in
sales tax in Georgetown from 2015 to 2016. Diaz cautioned that other cities are not seeing this and
Georgetown would want to be conservative in their approach.
rUFGI rON.�
Forecast: I&S Tax Impact in Cents
Conservative
Projection:
Tax Impact 0.09 2.55 2.48 2.57
Middle
Projection:
Taxlmpact -0.01 2.38 1.98 1.97
Diaz said that there are several tools that staff uses to keep the overall tax rate low. He noted that if sales
tax increases, the overall tax rate and base can be sufficient to absorb the debt impact.
Leigh Wallace provided the takeaways from the presentation.
• City's debt has increased over the past decade
• Correlates to population growth and voter approved projects to improve services and the quality of
life
• City has excellent credit ratings
• Economic conditions and fiscal management ensure ability to pay debt
• Current economic forecast shows assessed value will cover tax rate for debt
Wallace described the next steps.
• February 28 Council Agenda — authorize financial advisors to proceed with bond sale schedule and
documents and approve a notice of intent to issue certificates of obligation.
• March 2017 — offering statements reviewed by staff and a staff meeting with the bond rating agency
Mayor Ross thanked Wallace for the presentation. Ross asked the Council if they had any questions. No
questions were posed.
B. Presentation and discussion of the CAMPO/City of Georgetown Williams Drive Study — Nathaniel
Waggoner, AICP, PMP, Transportation Analyst, Jordan Maddox, AICP, Principal Planner, and Andreina
Davila -Quintero, Project Coordinator
Nathaniel Waggoner, Transportation Analyst, provided a presentation and discussion on the CAMPO and
City sponsored Williams Drive Study. Waggoner recognized Jordan Maddox, Principal Planner, and
Andreina Davila -Quintero, Project Coordinator, who have also worked on the project. Waggoner said the
presentation would include the purpose and goals of the project, progress to date, primary issues that have
been identified, project timelines and next steps. Waggoner said the feedback needed from the City
Council would be concurrence with the primary issues identified, concurrence with the next steps and any
additional opportunities suggested to engage stakeholders.
Purpose:
Develop a plan of action that will incorporate safety, efficient
transportation operations, safeaccommodations of all modes, and
integration of smart transportation and land use, community needs,
and the future economic growth of Williams Drive.
The goats for Williams Drive include:
• Enhance multimodal movements and transportation
operations
• Support corridor -wide and regional sustainable growth and
economic development.
• Protect and enhance the corridor's quality of life.
• Encourage development that creates a variety of context
sensitive mixed-use services that are accessible to
neighborhoods.
Technical Data Collection
Two Public Meetings
— Open House
— Charrette Week
Numerous Stakeholder Engagements
— Internal (City boards, Council, etc.)
— External (GISD, Health Foundation, WilCo, etc.)
Ongoing Public Communication and Updates
Developed an Existing Conditions Report
Initiated Conceptual Design
Waggoner said he is proud of the public outreach, which has been by phone, email and social media. He
explained that nearly 33,000 people have been reached and there were over 100 attendees at the first open
house.
Waggoner spoke on the primary issues with the study. He said these are across five different categories
and he will be showing possible solutions later in the presentation. The categories mentioned included:
• Traffic congestion and circulation
• Traffic operations and safety
• Redevelopment and reinvestment barriers
• Aesthetic enhancements
• Pedestrian and bicycle improvements
Councilmember Fought said Williams Drive is a motor vehicle transit drive and pedestrians and bicycles
might be a problem. He noted the City must look at improving the motor vehicle safety and efficiency and
there would be better ways to serve bicyclists and pedestrians.
Councilmember Hesser said he is receiving feedback from merchants who do not feel like they are being
heard. He explained that they feel as if everything has been predetermined. Hesser said he wants to know
what has been suggested and if these suggestions are feasible or not. Waggoner said all comments and
suggestions have been logged and all are possible solutions. He noted that no suggestion or comment has
been ignored. Waggoner said if there are merchants who have not had the opportunity to meet, he will be
happy to be available to them. Waggoner explained that the desire is to capture all comments and
solutions. Waggoner said he be will sharing the solutions and suggestions with Council in the near future.
Hesser noted that if the City does a good job with the study and growth, there should not be traffic issues.
Hesser said he has been researching converging diamonds. He said that he found an organization, an
engineering firm, which shows a list of converging diamonds - 81 in the Country. He said that most have
two open ends on both sides and only one converging diamond, in St. George Utah, compares to the one
proposed in Georgetown. Hesser explained that if there is a stop sign at the end, the road will still clog up.
He said he wants to know what would happen at Austin Avenue to prevent this.
Mayor Ross said this would be brought to Council in the future and no decisions have been made. Ross
said perceptions might be that decisions have been made, but they have not. Waggoner said there is much
more,opportunity to meet with those with concerns.
Waggoner continued with the primary issues and provided charts with possible solutions. He explained that
Williams Drive was originally built to rural standards, but now has urban traffic.
Primary Issues (continued)
Traffic Congestion/Circulation
29K vehicles use Williams Possible Solutions j
Dr.
Improve traffic flow
7K area residents commute Recognize the importance of
elsewhere land use decisions on traffic
95% area residents have at volume, street design and
least 1 car; 80% drive alone access management
Lack of alternative routes to
1-35/destinations
I
Develop alternate routes
Consider additional future
traffic capacity
Heavy traffic volume at
intersections
Continuous two-way center
turn lanes
ccess manageme p a
Set block standards for
street/driveway connection
Traffic Operations and Safety
150+ curb cuts (and
Possible Solutions
j
growing) along the corridor
Establish a unified signal
Lack of alternative streets
management plan
and connectivity
Establish new street design
Unsynchronized traffic
criteria
signals
A nt [an
Heavy traffic volume at
intersections
Continuous two-way center
turn lanes
ccess manageme p a
Set block standards for
street/driveway connection
Primary Issues (continued) ,
Redevelopment and Reinvestment Barriers
Redevelopment of older
Possible Solutions
parcels challenging due to
Create development strategy
new development
that is not "one -size -fits -all"
requirements
Land Use
Fragmented ownership and
smaller, disjointed parcels
Development Standards
Zoning districts and land
'Utilities/Public
uses not customized to
Improvements
corridor
Partner with landowners of
catalytic sites
Recruit retailers
INPrimary Issues (continued)
Aesthetic Enhancements
Older developments
constructed without zoning
codes or evolved through
iterations of codes
Landscaping, signage,
parking lots front
yard/gateway treatments -
nonconforming to today's
standards
Possible Solutions j
Consider new Gateway
design standards
Consider zoning solutions
for older properties to offer
flexibility for redevelopment
Adjust nonconforming site
requirements to ensure
incremental improvements
and upgrades
Primary Issues (continued)
LA
Pedestrian/Bicycle Improvements
Sidewalks are neitherPossible Solutions
continuous nor desirable Focus attention through CIP
Lack of dedicated bicycle planning
paths and lanes
Provide incentives/grants
Existing and new driveways, -Consider on- and off-street
speeds and site design are bike improvements where..
not conducive to non- - -
vehicular modes of appropriate
transport
Councilmember Brainard asked Waggoner if the City owns all of Williams Drive. Waggoner said the City
owns the portion out to Jim Hogg Road. Brainard asked why traffic signals have not been better
synchronized. Waggoner said they have been, but growth keeps changing the demands. Management of
the traffic, as now needed, has changed. City Manager, David Morgan explained that synchronizing has a
fraction of drift on the timing. He explained that the ability to link through a centralized place would be an
advance that could be made. Morgan said the City anticipates that this would be a major short term solution
to improved traffic on Williams Drive.
Mayor Ross asked about the 150 curb cuts. Waggoner said there would be split curb cuts in the future and
strategy to create shared access in the new developments.
Morgan said both the amount of curb cuts and the locations will be improved
Waggoner provided a Project Timeline.
M.......
Project Kick -Off
Task 1. Existing Conditions and Needs
Assessment
• Revieve existing studies and plans, and evaluate
t; emsting conditions
Public Meeting No. 1
••• Task 2. Develop Concept Plan
'®' Corridor performance. land use, private realm and
the transect, and connections to subdivisions.
OEMi.: Circulation and connectivity, economic and urban
development, housing, environment and place.
Public Meeting No. 2 (Charrette)
••• Task 3. Recommendations, Implementation
' Strategies and Prioritization
. Refinement of primary issues and possible
.. solutions
• Draft recommendations; measures of effectiveness;
' and evaluation of cost-effectiveness, impacts and
priorities
• Public Meeting No. 3
•••• Task 4. Final Report with Recommendations
• Public Meeting No. 4
Waggoner spoke on the next steps.
Develop Concept Plan and Draft Recommendations
- GTAB (February 2017)
- P&Z (February 2017)
- Public Meeting No. 3 - Open House (March 2017)
- City Council (March/April 2017)
Public Comment Period (month of March)
Finalize Recommendations
- GTAB (April 2017)
- P&Z (April 2017)
- Public Meeting No. 4 - (April 2017)
- City Council (May 2017)
Waggoner asked the Council if they concurred with the primary issues identified and the next steps. He said
he would also ask them for any additional opportunities to engage with the public.
Waggoner said there is a willingness to engage the public and provided links where information and
comments and concerns are collected.
httos: //tran s oortati on.aeo roetown. o ra/wi I I i a ms -d rive/
hfto://wikimar)Dina.com/wikimaDANiIliams-Drive-Studv.htmI
Councilmember Brainard asked if traffic circles or roundabouts are being considered. Jim Briggs, General
Manager of Utilities, came forward to discuss. Briggs said there will be traffic circles in the City but they
would not bean effective use on Williams Drive. Briggs said there will be one utilized on Rivery Road. He
explained that these are being visited by the Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board (GTAB). Brainard
asked if there are areas on Williams Drive that could have an additional lane added. Briggs confirmed that
this could happen in certain areas. Briggs noted that DB Wood was originally built to mitigate an earlier
Campo plan that indicated Williams Drive as 8 or 9 lanes across. He explained that Williams Drive is
geographically disconnected because of the lake. Briggs said there are other solutions to moving traffic.
City Manager, David Morgan, added that Williams Drive has areas that the City does not have right of way
and thus it is difficult to be able to expand.
Mayor Ross confirmed to Waggoner that staff is on the right track
C. Update on Unified Development Code amendment process and presentation of recommendations from the
Unified Development Code Advisory Committee and Planning and Zoning Commission — Sofia Nelson,
CNU-A, Planning Director
Sofia Nelson, Planning Director, spoke on the Unified Development Code amendment process and provided
a presentation of recommendations from the Unified Development Code Advisory Committee and the
Planning & Zoning Commission. She noted that the Council has received a number of these presentations
and this will be one of the last brought before Council for action at the regular City Council meeting to be
held that evening.
Nelson said she would be discussing a recap of action taken, an update on direction given at the November
26, 2016 workshop, next steps and questions and direction from Council
Nelson provided slides of the process recap.
Nelson provided a summary of process.
Nelson spoke on the discussion points of the October and November 2016 workshops.
• Development Plats
• Specify types of trees permitted as street trees
• Examine appeal process for connectivity variances
• Connectivity challenges of existing neighborhoods
Nelson said that staff is pulling back on the Development Plats portion in order to put in further work.
Nelson spoke on street trees and provided on optional street tree section slide and a slide showing the
approved street tree species.
Nelson explained that sometimes approved trees are selected correctly, but then not enough right of way
space is reserved for the tree to develop. This is why the City has established choices that a developer
may choose from in an effort to eliminate these issues.
Nelson said that Council had previously asked if there are trees whose roots can penetrate down instead of
spreading. She said that the City's Arborist, Heather Brewer, was present for any questions.
Councilmember Brainard asked if the tree list had changed. Brewer said it is now a smaller list. She
explained that trees with low arches and trees that have nuts have been eliminated from the list. These are
on the preferred plan list and the number of trees to choose from has been reduced. Brewer explained that
the root barrier system has been examined for all trees on this list and a list of tap root systems does not
exist here. Councilmember Hesser said this would not eliminate root problems. Brewer said the space
required is what eliminates the issue. Councilmember Gipson asked about the species in Georgetown
Village. Brewer noted that trees had been planted there without the distance requirements. City Manager,
David Morgan, explained the sidewalk construction and how that standard will now illuminate root structure
problems.
Mayor Ross asked if this goes against the normal growth pattern of the tree. Brewer said the trees will have
organic matter and an infrastructure of water, etc. that encourages a different growth.
Councilmember Gipson asked how it will be addressed, if these trees don't work and what would be the next
step. Brewer said the required distance is the key.
Brainard asked about Bartlett Pear trees. Brewer said they are not a desirable long term tree because of
poor growth habits.
Sofia Nelson, Planning Director, continued with the UDC presentation and spoke on connectivity challenges
in existing neighborhoods. She discussed proposed connectivity tools.
• Retain link to node
• Distinguish between actual connections and future connections
• Measure intersection spacing in lieu of block length
• Calculate required connections based on accumulated lots vs. subdivision lots
• Require pedestrian connections and mid -block connections for long blocks and cul-de-sacs
Nelson provided a slide showing Actual Connections in comparison with Future Connections
Nelson provided a slide showing actual minimum street connection requirements for existing major streets
and minimum connection requirements for future streets. She spoke on providing a new street connection
formula to ensure adequate existing connections and future connectivity.
Nelson spoke briefly on the variance process for connectivity requirements. She explained that Council had
previously asked if a variance could allow a super majority vote from Council. Nelson said the variance is
reviewed by the Planning & Zoning Commissions and would only come to Council if the applicant wants to
appeal the Planning & Zoning Commission's decision.
Nelson spoke on developments and water bodies blocking connections. She said these have been
structured to be flexible and to be allowed to receive public hearing.
Nelson described the Next Steps
• Public Hearing and Action
o City Council Public Hearing and 15t Reading on February 14, 2017
o City Council 2ntl Reading on February 28, 2017
• Effective Date — 30 days from City Council action: March 31, 2017 deadline
Nelson spoke on the street cross section changes, which had been reviewed with Council, and how this will
allow staff to update the fire code so that the fire code is consistent with the street cross section changes,
moving forward.
Nelson said that she was seeking direction from Council regarding any additional work they would like to see
prior to the first reading and public hearing.
Jonrowe asked Nelson to go to connectivity challenges and why that slide had been dropped. Nelson said
it is hard to encompass so many different variables with so many different codes. She said she wanted to
speak about the challenges that staff has heard and how those have been addressed. She explained that
the new standards are for new developments but do not apply to previous developments.
D. Presentation on the Fiscal Impact Model -- Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager and Wayne Reed,
Assistant City Manager
Assistant City Manager, Laurie Brewer, began the presentation of the Fiscal Impact Model. She explained
to Council that this is a request to approve a contract with TischlerBise for a fiscal impact model which would
enhance the City's ability to better analyze the financial impact of development projects and land use
policies and enhance long range financial planning.
Brewer explained how establishing a fiscal impact model would answer a Council goal. She noted that the
presentation would show the benefits, selection process, tasks and timeline of establishing the fiscal impact
model. Brewer provided a slide depicting the Council Goals.
Council Goals
• Four Council Visioning Sessions in November
— Role of Council
— Vision
— Goals
— 14 strategies
• Expand and diversify the tax base
— Fiscal Impact Model strategy
— Budgeted for 2017 at $120,000
OGEO;-G�OWN
What is a Fiscal Impact Model?
Benefit
• Evaluate Fiscal Impact of Future Land Use
Related Decisions
— Future Land Use Scenarios (Comp. Plan)
— Annexation Proposals
— Rezoning Requests
— Site Development Plans
— Municipal Utility Districts
— Financial Incentives
GmF�iTalvn
N
O
7
N
O
r
m
3
CLC
N
(D
YaG Ni.n.MmmY.a�Y �I G'YYM
Brewer spoke on the tasks and fees of the project.
Brewer described the next steps:
Contract and Licensing Agreement— On the January 24, 2017 agenda for consideration
• Study kicks off in February
• Approximately 6 months to complete
Mayor Ross asked Councilmember Brainard if the General Government and Finance Advisory Board
(GGAF) had looked at this. Councilmember Brainard said the General Government and Finance Advisory
Board (GGAF) had studied this intently and had many questions and lively discussions. He explained that
this has come about by Council's request to staff to diversify the tax base. Brainard said this is the tool they
need.
Councilmember Gonzalez added that the tool is multifaceted and it can be used by many departments in
many areas. Gonzalez said this program would bring about a good return on investment.
Mayor Ross recessed the meeting to Executive Session under Section 551.071, Section 551.072, Section
551.074 and Section 551.087 at 4.25 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
Sec. 551.072: Deliberation Regarding Real Property
- Rivery Blvd Extension Project (Parcel 14, Northwest Blvd)
- SW Bypass Project (Laubach, 4200 IH 35 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
- Project CAT
Adjournment
Mayor Ross adjourned the workshop meeting to proceed to the regular City Council meeting at 6:00 PM.
Approved by the Georgetown City Council on I j C4 I a0
Date
ONV
Da ss, Mayor
Attest: City�e Mary