HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN 07.10.2018 CC-RMinutes of a Meeting of the
Governing Body of the
City of Georgetown, Texas
Tuesday, July 10, 2018
The Georgetown City Council will meet on Tuesday, July 10, 2018 at 6:00 PM at the Council Chambers at 101
East Th 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 three (3) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or City Hall at 113 East 81
Street for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711.
Mayor Pro Tem, John Hesser, called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM. All Councilmembers were in attendance,
with the exception of Mayor Dale Ross. Councilmember Ana Eby, District 1, Councilmember Valerie Nicholson,
District 2, Councilmember John Hesser, District 3, Councilmember Steve Fought, District 4, Councilmember
Kevin Pitts, District 5, Councilmember Rachael Jonrowe, District 6, and Councilmember Tommy Gonzalez,
District 7 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
- Robyn Densmore — TMCA Certification Proclamation
City Council Regional Board Reports
Announcements
Action from Executive Session
Motion by Fought, second by , to authorize the advertisement and potential sale of a 1.0 acre lot out of the
Richard West Survey, located on County Road 201 northwest of Quarry Bluff Cove, and for the Mayor to
execute the necessary documents on the terms discussed in Executive Session
Approved: 7-0
Statutory Consent Agenda
The Statutory Consent Agenda includes non -controversial and routine 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 Special Meeting on Monday, June 25,
2018 and the Workshop and Regular Meetings held on Tuesday, June 26, 2018 -- Shelley Nowling, City
Secretary
C. Consideration and possible action to appoint Bob Weimer to the Housing Advisory Board to fill a
vacancy -- Mayor Dale Ross
D. Consideration and possible action to appoint PJ Stevens to the UDC Advisory Committee to fill a
vacancy -- Mayor Dale Ross
E. Consideration and possible action to appoint Sandi Gordon to the Commission on Aging to fill a
vacancy -- Mayor Dale Ross
F. Consideration and possible action to appoint Rhonda Mundhenk to the Comprehensive Plan Steering
Committee to fill a vacancy -- Mayor Dale Ross
G. Consideration and possible action to appoint Trisha Tallman to the Downtown TIRZ Board to fill a
vacancy — Mayor Dale Ross
H. Consideration and passible action to approve disbursement of the remaining balance of the FY 2017-18
Strategic Partnerships for Community Services Grant Funds awarded to A Gift of Time Adult
Daycare in the amount of $8,500.00 -- Jaquita Wilson, SPCS Advisory Board Chair and Shirley Rinn,
SPCS Staff Liaison
I. Consideration and possible action to authorize the Mayor to execute an Assignment of Water Services
Agreement to Pulte Homes of Texas, LP for the Abbott Tract -- Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems
Engineering Director
J. Consideration and possible action to approve an Electric Service Agreement with WRAI 2017-5 for the
Mansions of Georgetown II -- Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Director
K. Consideration and possible action to approve a Master Services Agreement with Dunham Engineering,
Inc. of College Station, Texas -- Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Director
L. Consideration and possible action to continue utilizing the annual Blanket Agreement with G & K
Services to provide uniform services through the BuyBoard Contract #507-16 in an amount not to
exceed $80,000.00 and to ratify $79,231.00 of previous expenditures for similar purchases from G &
K Services pursuant to that contract -- Rosemary Ledesma, Purchasing Manager
Motion by Jonrowe, second by Pitts, to approve the Statutory Consent Agenda in its entirety.
Approved: 7-0
Legislative Regular Agenda
M. Public Hearing and First Reading of an Ordinance rezoning approximately 0.2610 acres in the Clement
Stubblefield Survey, also being all of Lot 4 and a part of Lot 3, Block 1, Hart's Addition to Georgetown,
located at 608 W 15th Street, from the Office (OF) zoning district to the Residential Single -Family (RS)
zoning district -- Andreina Davila- Quintero, Current Planning Manager (action required)
Current Planning Manager, Andreina Davila, spoke on a rezoning request for property located at 608 W.
1511 Street. She explained that this is a request to rezone to the property at 608 W. 1511 Street to a single
family residential designation. Davila provided a location map, aerial view, future land use map and
existing zoning map of the property. She explained that the RS Zoning district designation is intended for
areas of medium density with a minimum lot size of 5,500 square feet. Davila noted that the RS District
contains standards for development that maintain single-family neighborhood characteristics. She said
that the district may be located within proximity of neighborhood -friendly commercial and public services
and protected from incompatible uses. Davila explained that all hOUsing types in the RS District shall use
the lot, dimensional and design standards of the District.
Davila displayed a chart showing the District Development Standards and Specific Uses Allowed within
the District.
Davila spoke on the criteria for rezoning and said that staff found all criteria to be in compliance.
The application is complete and the
information contained within the
application is sufficient and correct X
enough to allow adequate review and
final action.
The zoning change is consistent with x
the Comprehensive Plan.
The zoning change promotes the
health, safety or general welfare of x
the City and the safe orderly, and
healthful development of the City.
(o
The zorgng change Is compatlbk with
the present zoning and conforming X
uses of nearby property and with the
character of the neighborhood.
The property to be rezoned is suitable
for uses permitted by the District that X
would be applied by the proposed
amendment.
Davila noted that the Planning & Zoning Commission had recommended approval of the rezoning request
and read the caption.
Mayor Pro Tem, John Hesser, opened the Public Hearing at 6:14 PM. No persons had signed up to
speak on the item. Hesser closed the Public Hearing at 6:14 PM.
Motion by Pitts, second by Fought, to approve Item M.
Approved: 7-0
N. Public Hearing and First Reading of an Ordinance rezoning approximately 4.62 acres in the William
Addison Survey, located at 2705 E SH -29, from the Residential Single -Family (RS) zoning district to the
Public Facility (PF) zoning district, to be known as Fire Station #7 -- Andreina Davila- Quintero, Current
Planning Manager (action required)
Current Planning Manager, Andreina Davila, spoke on a rezoning request for property located at 2705 E.
SH 29. She explained that the request was to rezone the property from single-family to Public Facility and
this is the property to be known as Fire Station V.
Davila provided a location map, aerial view, future land use map and existing zoning map of the property.
She explained that a Public Facility District is intended to provide a location for government and other
public or quasi -public facility operations. Davila noted that this may include schools, public parks,
hospitals, airports, government offices, churches and other related uses, but would not include industrial
facilities or storage yards. She explained that some uses allowed in this district might generate heavy
traffic volumes and high-intensity operations. Davila noted that the PF District shall contain uses that are
allowed in both residential and non-residential districts and is subject to non-residential design and
landscaping standards for compatibility with nearby or adjacent residential uses.
Davila provided a chart of District Development Standards and Specific Uses Allowed within the District.
She said that staff had found all criteria to comply.
The application Is complete and the
information contained within the
application Is sufficient and correct
enough to allow adequate review and
final action.
The zoning change is consistent with
the Comprehensive 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 zoning change Is compatible with
the present zoning and conforming X
uses of nearby property and with the
character of the neighborhood.
The property to be rezoned is suitable
for uses permitted by the District that X
would be applied by the proposed
amendment.
Davila noted that the Planning & Zoning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the rezoning
request and read the caption.
Mayor Pro Tem, John Hesser, opened the Public Hearing at 6:20 PM. No persons had signed up to speak
on the item. Hesser closed the Public Hearing at 6:20 PM.
Motion by Gonzalez, second by Nicholson, to approve Item N.
Approved: 7-0
O. Public Hearing and First Reading of an Ordinance rezoning approximately 33.6486 acres consisting
of Lots 1 and 2, Bonnet Subdivision, Lots 1 through 6, Legend Oaks Section II Subdivision, and 5.273
acres out of the Joseph P. Pulsifer Survey, Abstract No. 498, generally located in the 1300 block of W
University Ave between Wolf Ranch Parkway and River Chase Boulevard, from the Agriculture (AG),
Office (OF), and Local Commercial (C-1) zoning districts, to the General Commercial (C-3) zoning
district, to be known as Bluebonnet Plaza -- Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director (action required)
Planning Director, Sofia Nelson, spoke on a rezoning request for property located in the 1300 block of W.
University Ave, between Wolf Ranch Parkway and River Chase Blvd. She provided a location map, aerial
view, future land use map, zoning map and pictures of Memorial Drive.
Nelson described General Commercial (C-3) Zoning Districts. She said this district is intended to provide
a location for general commercial and retail activities that serve the entire community and its visitors.
Nelson said the uses may be large in scale and generate substantial traffic, making the C-3 District only
appropriate along freeways and major arterials.
■ Max height 60 feet
• Front setback 25 feet
• Rear setback 15 feet
• Side setback 10 feet
• Max IC 70%
Nelson provided a chart showing the District Development Standards and Specific Uses allowed within the
District.
Nelson spoke on the Criteria for rezoning and noted that all criteria complied, with partial compliance with
criteria stating that the zoning change is compatible with the present zoning and conforming uses of
nearby property and with the character of the neighborhood. Nelson said staff found that both the
screening and landscaping met the intent of the area and recommends approval. She noted that the
Planning & Zoning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the request.
The application is complete and the X
information contained within the
application is sufficient and correct enough
to allow adequate review and final action.
The zoning change is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan;
The zoning change promotes the health, X
safety or general welfare of the City and
the safe orderly, and healthful
development of the City;
'�7
The zoning change Is compatible with the X
present zoning and conforming uses of
nearby property and with the character of
the neighborhood; OW
The property to be rezoned is suitable for X
uses permitted by the district that would
be applied by the proposed amendment.
Nelson read the caption.
Mayor Pro Tem, John Hesser, opened the Public Hearing at 6:24 PM. No persons had signed up to
speak on the item. Hesser closed the Public Hearing at 6:24 PM.
Motion by Nicholson, second by Gonzalez, to approve Item O.
Councilmember Jonrowe asked Nelson about transitional zoning between C3 and single family residential
zoning. Jonrowe said that, before the next meeting, she would like to know the actual feet between a
potential 60 foot building and the homes across Memorial Drive. Nelson said she will be happy to follow
up with this information.
Councilmember Nicholson said transportation along the 29 corridor is a concern and asked Nelson if a
TIA would be required. Nelson confirmed. Nicholson asked about residential road use to the north and
west and at what point of time the traffic impact would be understood. Nelson said a better
understanding would come from the TIA process. She said at the beginning of site development and
subdivision platting a TIA meeting takes place and roadways and intersections to be studied are identified.
Nelson confirmed to Nicholson that developers are required to speak with adjacent property owners to
obtain their input.
Jonrowe asked if the sidewalk project to the east, or right of the feed store, was complete. Nelson said
she does not think so, but is not entirely sure, and will confirm at the second reading. Jonrowe asked if the
completion of the sidewalks would be a requirement during development. Nelson confirmed
Approved: 7-0
P. Public Hearing and First Reading of an Ordinance to grant an exemption of certain fees for permits
required for work performed on eligible projects by Habitat for Humanity of Williamson County in their
administration of the Home Repair Program for the City of Georgetown -- Susan Watkins, AICP, Housing
Coordinator (action required)
Housing Coordinator, Susan Watkins, spoke on Council directed exemption from certain fees for permits
required for Habitat for Humanity projects. She noted that the partnership had been approved at the May
22nd City Council meeting.
Watkins read the caption
Mayor Pro Tem, John Hesser, opened the Public Hearing at 6.28 PM. No persons had signed up to speak
on the item. Hesser closed the Public Hearing at 6:28 PM.
Motion by Fought, second by Jonrowe, to approve Item P.
Approved: 7-0
Q. Consideration and possible action directing staff to prepare a petition for the voluntary annexation and
zoning designation, in accordance with State law, for an approximate 1.42 -acre tract out of the William
Addison Survey, Abstract 21, generally located north of E University Ave, west of NE Inner Loop, to be
known as Fire Station No. 7 -- Eric Johnson, CIP Manager
CIP Manager, Eric Johnson, spoke an the voluntary annexation and zoning designation for property to be
used for Fire Station No. 7. He explained Council direction to purchase the property and said the
purchase was completed one month ago. Johnson explained that this is the voluntary annexation request
to the property that had been identified for rezoning earlier in this meeting. Johnson explained that 4 acres
of the property are in the City Limits and 1.4 acres are outside the City Limits. He noted that this request is
to annex the 1.4 acres into the City Limits.
Johnson provided a map of the property and read the caption.
Motion by Gonzalez, second by Nicholson, to approve Item Q.
Approved: 7-0
R. Consideration and possible action to adopt a Neighborhood Traffic Management Policy -- Octavio
Garza, PE, Public Works Director
Public Works Director, Octavio Garza, spoke on the Neighborhood Traffic Management Policy. He
explained that the policy presentation had been provided in detail at the earlier workshop meeting that day
and at a workshop meeting the previous month. Garza noted that the policy attached to the agenda item in
the agenda software had needed to be amended with the deletion of 3 sentences. Garza read the
sentences to be deleted — one on page 3, one on page 5 and one on page 13. He explained that a redline
version of the policy will be included in the minutes of this meeting to provide full understanding of the
changes.
Garza read the caption.
Persons signed up to speak on Item R included: Rich Barbee, John May, Marshall Friedman and Frank
Nelson.
Comments and concerns voiced included:
Thanks to the Council for the process
City has taken steps to apply logic
Fantastic job and congratulations to the engineering staff
Please be careful of any exceptions
This is long overdue — and needed
Put together quite well
Few minor tweaks needed
Serves the City well
Long overdue — good intention
Not happy with a permanent closure of an existing road, meant to exist
Interface needed between County and City
Signs regarding commercial vehicles are causing problems
Google maps needs to be contacted and advised to route correctly
Principles included in new zoning for plot developments
Motion by Fought, second by Nicholson, to approve Item R.
Approved: 7-0
S. Second Reading of an Ordinance amending the FY2018 Annual Budget for mid -year obligations that
were not known at the time the budget was adopted; appropriating the various amounts thereof; and
repealing all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict therewith -- Paul Diaz, Budget Manager (action
required)
Paul Diaz, the City's Budget Manager, spoke on the ordinance amending the FY2018 Budget for mid -year
obligations. He explained that the Council had received a detailed workshop presentation on June 12th
and had approved the first reading on June 26th.
Diaz read the caption.
Motion by Nicholson, second by Pitts, to approve Item S.
Approved: 7-0
T. Second Reading of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas ("City") Amending
Chapter 9.13 of the Code of Ordinances relating to the Juvenile Curfew; Making Such Other Findings
and Provisions Related to the Subject; and Declaring an Effective Date -- Wayne Nero, Chief of Police
(action required)
Chief Wayne Nero spoke on an ordinance amending Chapter 9.13 of the Code of Ordinances related to the
Juvenile Curfew provisions. He explained that this is a sunset provision to the juvenile curfew ordinance
and must be brought to the Council every 3 years.
Nero read the caption.
Motion by Gonzalez, second by Nicholson, to approve Item T.
Approved: 7-0
U. Second Reading of an Ordinance rezoning approximately 314.54 acres in the Burrell Eaves Survey,
located at 2451 and 2453 SH 195 Georgetown, Texas, from Agriculture (AG) to Planned Unit
Development District (PUD) to be known as Berry Creek Highlands -- Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning
Director (action required)
Planning Director, Sofa {Nelson, spoke on a rezoning request for property located at 2451 and 2453 SH
195. She provided a concept plan and explained that the developer is seeking a Public Utility District
(PUD). Nelson said the property is seeking to develop 1500 units with a mix of single family residential,
multifamily residential, general commercial and public facilities with a school within this development.
Nelson read the caption.
Motion by Fought, second by Gonzalez, to approve Item U.
Approved: 7-0
V. Public hearing and possible action to approve a Resolution of the City of Georgetown, Texas, consenting
to the creation of the Berry Creek Highlands Municipal Utility District consisting of 314.54 acres (+/-) in
the Burrell Eaves Survey, Abstract No. 216 located in Williamson County and generally situated north of
Shell Road and HWY 195 intersection on the south side of HWY 195 -- Wayne Reed, Assistant City
Manager
Mayor Pro Tem Hesser moved on to hear Item W of the agenda prior to item V, allowing Assistant Manager,
Wayne Reed, time to be present. Item V was then presented right after Item W.
Assistant City Manager, Wayne Reed, explained that this was a public hearing and possible action to
approve a resolution, consenting to the creation of the Berry Creek Highlands Municipal Utility District
(MUD), consisting of 314.54 acres located in Williamson County and generally situated north of Shell Road
and HWY 195 intersection on the south side of HWY 195. Reed explained that he would speak on proposed
terms of the agreement and ask for Council action.
Reed provided a location map and concept plan of the property.
t —
Cayce O AOEtOw*liI '
Reed noted that Avanti intends to develop the property as a mixed-use development, as shown. He
explained that the developer proposes a maximum of 1,500 residential units on 225 acres, of which 942 are
planned to be single family. Reed said that there would be 15 acres of commercial, retail and office
development and 20 acres of public parkland. Reed noted that 13 acres would be for an elementary school
site, 3 acres for a neighborhood amenity center and an additional 20 acres of open space. He explained
that the residential portion of the development would include a mix of 943 single family homes,
approximately 226 cluster homes and a maximum of 324 multifamily units.
Reed described the Water/Wastewater Infrastructure and the Transportation Infrastructure.
Transportation Infrastructure
■ Shell Spur Road
• ROW per City standard for major collector
• Constructed over 4 phases
• City obligated to construct bridge
• SH 195 and Shell Spur Road Intersection
• Relocation of cross access on HWY 195
• Signalization of Intersection (warrants met)
• Developer to provide $400,000 Fiscal Security and
cater into agreement with TxDOT
Transportation Infrastructure
$4:L V 9 ROAC PK4$PIG
_ =rA�E s :� � +Mm.�rt� �rairaNt:ixnrrprstw
Reed described the Fire Station Site and the Parkland, Trails and Recreation areas proposed.
Parkland, Trails, and Recreation
• 20 Acre Parkland
• Developer commits $425.000 to develop Parkland
• Public Trailhead and parking lot
• Parkland Improvements Agreement
• Parkland Improvements Deadline (earlier of)
• Recordation of any final plat within Parcel I
• 180 days after the City provides Notice to Developer
of the City Council's appropriation of or receipt of
funds for Phase I of the Westside Park-. or
• December 31, 2023
c.,,"
Parkland, Trails, and Recreation
• Neighborhood Amenity Center
• 3 acres of land adjacent to the Parkland:
• Amenity Center shall include a clubhouse. restrooms
and showers, meeting space, a pavilion with picnic
tables and chairs, a covered grill area, lounge chairs,
a swimming pool, a children's play area:
• Site shall include a soccer field, a basketball court,
and other playing fields
• Commence construction by 250'" single-family
residential home and complete construction within
eighteen (18) months thereafter
G<<,::,.r., ,,.
Financial Terms
• Bonds to be Issued (Maximum Amount) — $30,150,000
• Bond Maturity (Maximum) — 25 years from date of issue
• Bond Issuance Period (from first to last) — 10 years
• District Only Tax Rate (Maximum) — $0.551$100 AV
• City Tax Rate (FY18) — $0.4200
• Total Maximum Tax Rate, City and District (based upon
FY18) — $0.97
4N
76EOR x
W N
Conditions Precedent
• Effective Date: the date on which the last of the conditions
precedent (below) has been performed by Developer and
this Agreement has been fully executed
— BCI Easements
— Acquisition of the Land (314 54 acres)
— Acquisition of Off-site Portion of Shell Spur Road
— SH 195 Traffic Improvements Fiscal Surety
— Reimbursement of City Expenses
— Execution of the Parkland Improvements Agreement
Exc (:ution of the Consent Agreement
is
�.
rEiFus
Councilmember Fought said he was confused by the "generally situated" description. He said two different
descriptions of the same property do not match. Fought said he is in favor of the development, and after
looking at the detailed diagrams does not believe that there will be traffic going through Sun City. He said
he believes that Sun City residents will go to the intersection because there is a light there. Fought said this
is not a West Majestic Oaks duplication. City Manager, David Morgan, noted that it is collecting on a
collector grade road, which makes a difference.
Fought said it is important to get the language correct in this legal document. Reed said the caption in the
presentation is a little different than the cover sheet description. He said he understands Fought's confusion
and asked that he make his motion by reading the caption on the screen.
Motion by Fought, second by Gonzalez, to approve Item V.
Councilmember Jonrowe asked about the definition of cluster homes. Pete Dwyer, the developer, said
cluster homes are referred to as lock and leave homes and are similar to condominiums. He said there is
more creativity with angles. He explained that the Association maintains the grounds and exteriors of these
units.
Approved: 7-0
W. Second Reading of an Ordinance rezoning Lot 2, Block A, Rivery Phase 1 Subdivision, located at 1200
Wolf Ranch Parkway, from the General Commercial (C-3) to the High -Density Multi -Family (MF -2)
zoning district -- Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director (action required)
Planning Director, Sofia Nelson, spoke on a rezoning request for property located at 1200 Wolf Ranch
Parkway. Nelson provided a location map, aerial view, future land use map, zoning map and surrounding
zoning designations.
Nelson read the caption.
Motion by Jonrowe, second by Fought, to approve Item W.
Approved: 7-0
Mayor Pro Tem returned to Item V for presentation.
X. Second Reading of an Ordinance granting a Special Use Permit (SUP) for a Commercial Vehicle Sales
and Services within the General Commercial (C-3) zoning district on the property located at 2150 N 1-35,
bearing the legal description of 5.99 acres out of the David Wright Survey, Abstract No. 13 -- Andreina
Davila- Quintero, Current Planning Manager (action required)
Current Planning Manager, Andreina Davila spoke on a Special Use Permit for property located at 2150
N.135. She said there had been no changes to the request since the first reading and the condition specified
by Council at first reading has been included.
Davila read the caption.
Motion by Jonrowe, second by Nicholson, to approve Item X.
Approved: 7-0
Project Updates
Y. 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; parks and recreation projects; city facility projects; and downtown projects including
parking enhancements, city lease agreements, sanitation services, and possible direction to city staff --
David Morgan, City Manager
Mayor Pro Tem, John Hesser, asked City Manager, David Morgan, if he had any updates to share.
Morgan said he did not at this time, but would be happy to answer any questions.
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.
Z. Jo Ellen Lyons would like to address the Council regarding preservation and future benefits of the arena in
San Gabriel Park. There were many people who signed up to speak on Item Z, as well.
Mayor Pro Tem Hesser announced that it is important for the Council to receive public input. He said that
during this portion of the agenda the Council is not permitted to engage in dialogue. Hesser said that this
was a business meeting and there is a level of decorum that is expected. He said that cheering, shouting
or speaking from the audience would not be tolerated. Hesser said that his plan would be for the Council
to hear from speakers for a period of one hour. He explained that each speaker would be given 3 minutes
to speak and would be required to state their name and address as they came to the podium to speak.
Others that signed up to speak on Item Z included: Kimberly Richter -Keller, Lee Brown, Alex Mouton,
Kathy Powers, Sabrina Bryant, Rob Hardy, Brooke Fincher, Michael Cogser, Chris Mattice, Johnny Hayle,
Jimmy Cairnes, Judy Wolf Hindelang, Rob Hipp, Michael LaPorta, Chad Knudsen, Carter Klingmann,
Danise Jordan, and Joe Farris.
Comments and Concerns voiced included:
Very emotional subject
11 acres, 40 parks, 700 acres which could absorb parkland without using the arena
Many say part of family for many, many years
No continuous event exists for as long as the rodeo
70 million used to read paper, now only 40 million, so there is misunderstanding in City intentions
Over 2,000 signatures on the petition
Last time at rodeo, there were 5 nationalities tasting Texas
Wants Council workshop to be able to show the heart of Georgetown
Sheriff Posse Sweetheart enjoying rodeo since very small child, part of her heritage
Shared time with Reba Macintyre
Asked Council to regain control
Lines up in a wind storm with her Posse
Arena since 1938 has had rodeo
Sheriff Posse works to hold the tradition of history
Second longest running rodeo held in the same location in the state of Texas
Historical events
Connect the youth to the western heritage
Asked for Workshop with the Council
28 year Navy Veteran would hate to not see his home town rodeo
Knows about serenity of family activities and tradition for life long memories
75 years is a pretty good tradition
8500 at this Year's rodeo
Piece of Texas history
Honor the Sheriffs Posse
Officer of the Sheriffs Posse
Current arena was actually finished in 1950
Rodeo is one of the top 5 events in Georgetown
Arena is rented and used almost every weekend
2 saddle clubs in the area for play dates
Arena is sometime used for emergency placement of animals
Youth organization will no longer have a viable venue for activities
Moved to Georgetown in the 90s and immediately loved the rodeo
Children ended up showing steers for 10 years
History needs to be preserved
Rodeo means so much to the community
Children learn morals and values from the rodeo by watching the comradery
This is Texas
Served on the health district
Past captain of the Sheriffs Posse
Who has input to what happened to the arena
Survey was a problem
No distinction showing the demolishment of the arena
Only 400 surveyed
Some people could not be surveyed
4 h clubs will be in community center soon
Georgetown is their hub
Consider those not surveyed but now providing input
18 year old — sheriff posse sweetheart spoke
Entered barrel race just a few years ago
Rides for god, family and every other supporter
Many have had their first and last ride in that arena
Wants to come back to Georgetown and be able to still enjoy the arena
Wants to provide the honor of the arena to all children
This county needs a passionate youth generation
Let's give another 75 years of stories to tell
Please save and maintain the arena
Phase 3 has not yet been funded, put on pause
Arena has made a significant impact for many
Cost is losing the long standing joy and history of the arena
Asked for opportunity for dialogue
Captain of WCSP
Expo is for the Taylor rodeo only
Guidelines are in place to protect their rodeo
2 rodeos cannot exist
Garey Park is equine friendly but not set up for rodeos
No rough stock events or speed events would be viable at Garey Park
Current arena provides support to lots of local youth clubs
Can't afford to use Wilco expo center
Continue long term lease
Family is so important
Memories for families at the arena
Large community is tied to that arena
Getting rid of arena gets rid of this community
This rodeo one of top 10 ticket sellers in Texas
Rodeo taken to Taylor is like holding the high school football game in Taylor
Roped his first calf in this arena
Place means a lot to him
Showed the stack of petitions
Want a workshop to discuss with Council and the whole community
Our home town — we love our home town -- tradition and history
Read from a historic newspaper article
Please reconsider the demolition of the arena
Need legends and traditions - please do not destroy the arena
Organizers of this movement are pro City, pro Posse
Efforts to save the arena is not new
Council needs to take an honest look at the desires of the community
Please save or build another arena
Want opportunity for residents to take a vote
Wants city to treat the arena as a historical building
Embrace our heritage
These are the folks that provide the mesh, even though they do not live in Georgetown
Citizen from New York loves the rodeo
New York took down Penn Station — people were angry — now have historical markers
75 years of tradition
Grandfather former Mayor built the arena
Same box seats from the beginning
A lot of new people embrace the arena
Georgetown is different
Don't take down things that represent the uniqueness of Georgetown
Need a discussion or workshop
2015 Champion
Don't take away the arena
Hurts to think about the arena being gone
Grandparents moved here in early 40s
135 was just a 2 lane road to Austin
Grandfather constructed the arena
Many Georgetown natives have enjoyed the activities at the arena
Used to be 3 weekends a year for the rodeo
Beautiful parades represented the rodeo
Grandparents lifetime members of the Sheriffs Posse
Best rodeo stock and a great announcer
Please reconsider
Rodeo is a great family event
Public was not notified properly
Have a music event there
Western culture needs to be preserved
Revenue generator
Georgetown is the coolest city in the world
City Manager, David Morgan, thanked everyone for showing up and said he appreciates peoples' heart
felt feelings and passions, which are valid. He said a lot of these issues pre -date his time in Georgetown.
He noted his "Letter to the Editor' in the Williamson County Sun which he hoped provided clarification and
perspective of the public process that has been taking place since 2008. Morgan said there has been a
lot of effort and public meetings and public work to look at the best utilization of the City's Parks Master
Plan. He said the Master Plan was again refined in 2015 with many public meetings, as well.
Morgan said the challenge is a decade long effort, including Williamson County's look at regional
resources for an event center, and City bonds which have been issued for the Park Master Plan. He said
he hopes everyone can appreciate the public input efforts that the City has been providing for over a
decade. He said the City will stand available and will continue to communicate.
Morgan spoke on the effort for the best utilization for San Gabriel Park. He explained the voter approved
bond for San Gabriel Park and noted that Phase 1 is complete, Phase 2 will start this month, and Phase 3
is included in the City's 5 -Year CIP Plan.
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.
AA. 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: Deliberations about Real Property
- Discussion regarding possible sale of 1 acre of land located on CR 201, Liberty Hill, TX -- Travis Baird, Real Estate
Services Coordinator
- Rock Street/at" Street
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 Toms
Adjournment
Motion by Pitts, second by Fought, to adjourn the meeting. Mayor Pro Tem, Hesser, adjourned the meeting at 8:00
PM.
Approved by the Georgetown City Council on �D(�
Date
-(IJX (CC 44,
Dale Ross, Mayor
O
Attest: 6
Secretary
City of Georgetown
Public Works Division
Neighborhood Traffic Management
)WN
It X. I1X-t
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 10, 2018
City of Georgetown, Texas
Neighborhood Traffic Management
Public Works Division
Effective Date: July 10, 2018
Table of Contents
Chapter1- Purpose......................................................................................................................................1
Chapter2 - Intent..........................................................................................................................................1
Chapter3 - City Authority...........................................................................................................................2
Chapter 4 - Application Process for Traffic Management Study.........................................................3
A. Applicability.......................................................................................................................................3
B. Eligibility.............................................................................................................................................4
C. Non -Eligible Submissions.................................................................................................................5
D. Approval of Application...................................................................................................................5
E. Cost Responsibility............................................................................................................................6
F. Funding of Recommended Improvements....................................................................................6
Chapter5 - Traffic Speed.............................................................................................................................7
A. Staff Review for Traffic Speed Studies..........................................................___ ............... ............
7
B. Consideration for Reduced Speed Limits.......................................................................................7
C. Potential Shifts of Traffic...................................................................................................................8
D. Notification/Evidence of Support ................. ................................... _............................................ 8
E. Location and Design of Devices for Speeding Mitigation............................................................9
Chapter6 - Traffic Volume.......................................................................................................................10
A. Staff Review for Traffic Volume....................................................................................................10
B. Notification/Evidence of Support ..................................................................................................11
C. Location and Design of Devices for Traffic Volume Mitigation...............................................12
D. Road Closure Policy........................................................................................................................13
Chapter 7 - Planning, Design, & Construction......................................................................................13
A. Concept Plan Development............................................................................................................13
B. Community Meeting.......................................................................................................................14
C. Decision on Final Disposition of the Concept Plan .....................................................................15
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program l
As approved July, 10, 2018
D. Final Design......................................................................................................................................15
E. Implementation of Traffic Management Measure......................................................................16
F. Reporting and Measurement of Traffic Management Measure................................................16
G. Maintenance of Traffic Management Measures..........................................................................17
H. Removal of Traffic Management Measures by Maintenance or Construction Activities ......18
Appendix A: Neighborhood Traffic Control Options........................................................................19
AppendixB: Application Form...............................................................................................................23
Appendix C: Sample Maintenance Agreement....................................................................................29
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
As approved July, 10, 2018
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
Chapter 1 Purpose
The purpose of this document is to provide guidance on the process that the City of Georgetown
will use to address traffic speed and volume concerns in residential areas. The purpose of this
document is not to override, supersede, ignore, or otherwise conflict with current and future
Local, State and Federal regulations concerning traffic safety or best engineering practices.
Information included in Appendix A addresses traffic calming techniques that can be
implemented to address vehicle speed and volume concerns. These guidelines andprocedures
provide an objective framework to better address mitigation of adverse levels of speeding and
traffic volume in City of Georgetown neighborhoods. Mitigation of speeding and volume are
typically addressed through traffic calming in numerous communities. Traffic calming will also
need to address bicycle and pedestrian mobility. While road closure may be an option, in rare
cases it could be implemented due to the cause -and -effect on the overall commuting public and
the transportation network.
Chapter 2 Intent
It is the intent of this document to provide guidance and outline an application process for
traffic management in residential neighborhoods. Traffic management includes addressing
citizen concerns regarding high traffic speeds, increasing traffic volumes and pedestrian and
bicycle movement. This document provides for the consideration of modifying existing
roadways to mitigate impacts from existing motor vehicle traffic, including golf cart traffic, as
applicable, within a defined area through the design and implementation of geometric street
features and/or traffic control and traffic calming techniques.
This document specifically considers two types of impacts:
• Adverse levels of speeding along a defined roadway segment; and
Adverse levels of traffic volume or neighborhood pass through traffic within a defined
area.
In order to address identified adverse impacts, the Public Works Division, through an
engineering study, may implement the potential neighborhood traffic management methods
including, but not limited to:
• Enforcement and education measures
■ Speed reduction
• Changing texture of roadway
• Narrowing of lanes
• Curb extensions (bulb outs)
• Road diets
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program 1
As approved July 10, 2018
One-way conversion
Closure
Appendix A contains further information on traffic calming and control techniques.
The application process is created to allow application requests for traffic management to
proceed in the following mariner:
Step 1: Meet with Public Works Division staff and submit application for Neighborhood
Traffic Management Study.
Step 2: Staff review and determine type of application and potential mitigation measures
and set Public Meeting.
Step 3: Public Meeting and identification of preferred alternative for potential mitigation
measure(s).
Step 4: Survey of property owners on potential mitigation measure.
Step 5: Staff recommendation for mitigation measures and approval process with the
Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board and City Council.
Step 6: If capital programming is required, Capital Improvement Program plan of
funding for design of mitigation measure(s).
Step 7: Design of concept plan to implement mitigation measure(s).
Step 8: Public meeting for design feedback.
Step 9: Final design; construction, testing and reporting.
Chapter 3 - City Authority
This document applies only to roadways that are owned and maintained by the City of
Georgetown. In all cases, the City has and retains the authority and responsibility to determine
what changes to the roadway and/or traffic control, if any, are appropriate in accordance with
City of Georgetown Code of Ordinances Title 10, Chapter 10.04, Chapter 10.08, Chapter 10.10,
Chapter 10.12 and Chapter 10.16.
Accepted engineering practices and standards shall take precedence in all decisions. Nothing
in this document shall compel or constrain the Public Works Division, acting on behalf of the
City, to take or not take an action that conflict with Local, State, or Federal regulations for traffic
safety as indicated in the Texas Manual for Uniform Traffic Safety Devices. The Public Works
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
As approved July 10, 2018
Division has primary responsibility for the City's neighborhood traffic management and will
act in the capacity -of technical advisor to the City Manager's Officeand-the City Council Anr
Chapter 4 - Application Process for Traffic Management Study
A. Applicability
The initial request for the Traffic Management Study must be initiated by a property owner,
business, school, or other entity whose property is within the requested study area. If the
request includes the potential closure or structural improvements to a public street, the request
must be submitted by a property owner whose property is contiguous to the street subject to
the request.
Prior to the submittal of the request for a Traffic Management Study, the requester shall
schedule a meeting with the Public Works Division to discuss the anticipated request. The
Public Works Division will advise the requester of the potential viability of the request, any
foreseeable challenges or opportunities, and any alternative strategies or programs that may
better address the requester's concerns. If the request is considered potentially viable, the
requestor may initiate the process by submitting the Application Form included in Appendix
B.
The Applicant for the Traffic Management Study must be willing to:
1. Be considered the applicant of record and act as the primary contact for the request;
2. Take responsibility for community notification and the compilation of evidence of
support for their requested area should it be determined eligible;
3. Serve as liaison to any community organizations within whose boundaries the requested
area exists;
4. Support the City's process to design and implement traffic management measures, and
funded geometric street features, including the design of any landscaping or
hardscaping.
The application process does not accept recommendations from applicants regarding types or
locations of mitigation measures. Requests containing such information will not be accepted
and will be returned to the requester without action.
All requests for a Traffic Management Study will follow the application's timeline located in
Appendix B.
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program 3
As approved July 10, 2018
B. Eligibility
The -Public Works Division will review any available traffic studies. A determination of the
street's eligibility for consideration of speed and volume mitigation will be based on the
following criteria:
1. The Applicant for the Study must meet the eligibility requirements in Chapter 4,
Section A Applicability.
2. The street must be a public street, as this term is defined in the Unified Development
Code, under the jurisdiction of the City of Georgetown.
The street must be designated a Residential or Minor Collector per the City's Overall
Transportation Plan (defined as a Neighborhood Collector in the Unified
Development Code).
4. City streets higher than a Minor Collector (Major Collector, Minor Arterial and
Major Arterial) will not be eligible for consideration other than through enforcement
or capacity improvements.
5. The street must not be designated as an alley as this term is defined in the Unified
Development Code.
6. Only two (2) lane roadways, one (1) lane in each direction, will be considered.
Unmarked streets are assumed to satisfy this criterion. For purposes of this process,
a continuous two-way left turn lane is considered a third (3rd) lane.
7. The street must have a posted or prima facie speed limit of 35 mph or less.
8. Potential Neighborhood Traffic Management measures shall not violate the City's
current Fire Code, including standards for proper lane width and the removal of fire
access points.
9. The street must be paved.
Other factors such as, but not limited to, ongoing maintenance, grades, sight distances,
pending construction projects, system needs, public services delivery, emergency services
delivery, or conflicts with adopted neighborhood plans may affect consideration for eligibility.
The installation of geometric street features shall be approved by the Public Works Division,
Georgetown Fire and Police Divisions, and Georgetown Emergency Response and Emergency
Medical Services prior to consideration by the City Council. The Planning Department and
other City divisions, as well as other governmental entities will be consulted on a case by case
basis. Any future transit companies, whether fixed route or a Transportation Network
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program 4
As approved July 10, 2018
Company (e.g., Uber, Lyft, Autonomous Vehicles) will also be considered and consulted, as
applicable: Any proposed pass-through traffic management involving the fun -or partial
closure of a street must be approved by all of the aforementioned as well as City Council.
C. Non -Eligible Submissions
Applicantwill be notified in writing if a submission is not eligible for the study based on the
following reasons:
1. Traffic recounts are being requested as part of the submission without specific
reasons why the original count should be considered invalid.
2. Traffic studies presented in support of the request are based on potential future
traffic volumes, trends or routes beyond the scope of the application and not
representative of the existing traffic conditions.
3. The request is a duplicate request or overlaps with any other active request.
4. The request is submitted within two (2) years from the review of a former request
for the same street segment.
5. Previously installed devices or changes in posted speed limits have been in place for
a period of less than two (2) years.
6. The street does not meet the requirements of eligibility for speeding and volume
mitigation consideration in Chapter 4, Section B Eligibility, of this Policy.
D. Approval of Application
An application found eligible for consideration will be presented with identified potential
mitigations measures at a public meeting for the review, feedback, and selection of a preferred
alternative. In addition, all affected property owners will be surveyed to measure community
support for the proposed preferred alternative as outlined in Chapter 5, Section D and Chapter
6, Section B of this Policy.
If the application receives support from the affected property owners, feedback received at the
public meeting and staff recommendation for continuation of the study will be presented at a
regularly scheduled Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board meeting for a
recommendation to City Council. That recommendation with either approval, approval with
conditions, or denial, will be presented to City Council on a future City Council Meeting for
action (approval or denial).
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
As approved July 10, 2018
Once an application has received approval from City Council staff will begin review and data
collection .of the neighborhood traffic management issue andpotential measures in -accordance
with the process outlined below.
If the City Council disapproves the concept plan, the same or similar project will not be eligible
for reconsideration for a period of two (2) years. If the there is a significant change in traffic
volume or traffic patterns, the Public Works Division's through reasonable professional
judgement may prompt an earlier review.
E. Cost Responsibility
The neighborhood traffic management policy establishes a Neighborhood Traffic Management
Program in the Public Works Division's Budget, which will provide an identified source of
budgeted General Fund Revenue to implement the program. Cost responsibility for the
neighborhood traffic management program fall in two (2) specific categories: 1) application and
traffic study; and 2) funding of capital improvements.
1. Application and Traffic Study
Special studies and data collection will be paid from the Neighborhood Traffic
Management Fund. If there are no funds in the current year budget the study will be
delayed until the fund is replenished in the following fiscal year budget. City Council
may choose to fund from another source, and/or the applicant may choose to fund the
study.
2. Funding of Capital Improvements
If improvements are recommended they will be placed in budget requests for the
following fiscal year to fund the Neighborhood Traffic Management Fund. A discussion
of the funding of improvements and eligibility is outlined in Chapter 4, Section F.
F. Funding of Recommended Improvements
Implementation of neighborhood traffic management methods identified in the study need to
fall into one (1) of the four (4) categories listed below:
1. Operational Improvements
Operational improvements may include enhanced enforcement and educational
programs.
2. Public Funding
For improvements identified to receive public funding, the Public Works Division will
be responsible for design and implementation of the improvements utilizing the Public
Works Neighborhood Traffic Management Program budget established to implement
this Policy within the City of Georgetown's budget cycle. If budget does not include
funding for the improvements, City Council may choose to fund from another source,
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program 6
As approved July 10, 2018
and/or the applicant may choose to fund following the additional measures discussed
below.
3. Joint Public/Private Funding.
An applicant completing the neighborhood traffic management program request may
provide funding, in whole or in part, when full public funding through the
Neighborhood Traffic Management Fund in not available. All funding must be
collected and encumbered before the installation of the project. Fiscal surety shall not be
accepted in lieu of payment in advance.
4. Private Funding.
Private Funding will be required for projects that did not receive Public Funding
through the Neighborhood Traffic Management Fund. An applicant for neighborhood
traffic management may expedite improvements by voluntary payment of all costs.
Private Funding must be submitted for full cost of the improvements prior to installation
of the project. Fiscal surety shall not be accepted in lieu of payment in advance.
Chapter 5 - Traffic Speed
A. Staff Review for Traffic Speed Studies
The Public Works Division will conduct preliminary studies and determine a street's eligibility
for speed mitigation. Consideration will be made in a timely manner, based on the following
criteria:
1. Applicability criteria outlined in Chapter 4, Section A Applicability and Chapter 4,
Section B Eligibility of this Policy.
2. The measured 851h percentile speed must exceed the prima facie or posted speed limit
by three (3) miles per hour or more in a 24-hour study period; or there must be five (5)
or more reported speed -related crashes within the street segment during the last twelve
(12) months of recorded data. Eligibility under the 851h percentile speed criterion
considers direction of travel independently.
Requests for repeating speed and volume studies (recounts) will be considered but funded by
the applicant, unless circumstances indicate otherwise. All studies submitted by the applicant
shall be signed and sealed by a licensed engineer in the State of Texas. If the street is determined
not to be eligible for consideration, the applicant will be notified in writing of the reason for
ineligibility.
B. Consideration for Reduced Speed Limits
1. Street segments where the measured 850, percentile speed is less than 28 MPH and the
posted or prima facie speed limit is 30 MPH will be eligible for consideration for a
reduction of the speed limit to 25 MPH.
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
As approved July 10, 2018
2. The extents of any street segments being considered for a reduction of the speed limit to
25 MPH must be contiguous and have their terminus at a designated arterial, collector,
or tee intersection with another local street or physical terminus. The extents of any
requested street segments that do not satisfy these requirements will be revised so as to
satisfy these requirements. The applicant will be notified in writing of any changes in
extents.
3. The consideration of a speed limit reduction will require Ordinance approval by City
Council in accordance with Chapter 10.12 of the City of Georgetown Code of
Ordinances.
C. Potential Shifts of Traffic
1. The roadway network in the vicinity of the petition area for a requested street segment
will be studied to identify alternative routes and probable traffic shifts. This
identification is limited to the streets immediately adjacent to and relatively parallel to
the requested street. Traffic studies will be conducted along adjacent alternate routes,
prior to construction of any devices, to provide baseline data to document any future
occurrence of traffic shifts. Potential traffic shifts to designated major collectors or
arterials shall not be considered.
2. If the adjacent alternate route is requested to be considered for speeding mitigation
within two (2) years of the completion of the installation of speed mitigation devices, it
shall be considered as all other requested segments are considered. The results of the
first and second study will be compared. If the segment is eligible for speeding
mitigation consideration and any increases in either traffic speeds or volumes are
shown, additional consideration for those increases will be given in the ranking for
funding process. Any decreases in volume or speed will not penalize the segment's
consideration for funding.
D. Notification/Evidence of Support
1. If the street subject to the request is determined to be eligible for speed reduction
measures, the Public Works Division will develop potential mitigation measures, define
the type(s) and approximate location(s) of the speed reduction or geometric street
features on a map, and schedule a public meeting. The mitigation measures and notice
of the public meeting will be provided to the affected property owners to select a
preferred alternative and gather evidence of support through a ranking process.
2. At a minimum, the notice of the public meeting and subsequent survey will be sent by
U.S. mail to all the owners of record of real property, as determined by the most recent
tax roll information, within 500 feet of the segment of roadway under consideration. A
larger area of notification may be determined by thePublic Works Division. Generally,
a property may be considered a part of the petition notification area if it's only or primary
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program g
As approved July 10, 2018
access/egress route requires traversing existing or proposed devices. If there is an
alternate route to the property that does not require traversing the existing or proposed
devices, the property might not be considered in the petition area. Notification of "cul-
de-sac communities" will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
3. The notification letter shall be mailed two (2) weeks prior to the public meeting and will
include instructions on how to participate in the ranking process, as well as the place,
date and time of the public meeting concerning the potential mitigation measures.
4. At the Public Meeting, attendees will rank or select a preferred alternative for the
potential mitigation measure(s).
All potentially affected property owners will be mailed a survey to "Support", "Do Not
Support", or "Agree with Majority" on the preferred alternative for mitigation
measure(s). Only one completed survey per property will be accepted. Any property
represented by multiple signatures with identical indications will be considered
singularly. Any property represented by multiple signatures with differing indications
will be considered non-responsive but accounted for in the petitioning process.
Property owners must respond in writing to the mitigation measures survey within
three (3) weeks following the notice being mailed.
6. Surveys that do not receive responses from at least fifty percent (50%) of the affected
property owners within the notification area will be considered incomplete and thus
end the process.
7. In the event that 50% or more of the affected property owners respond, the mitigation
measures must receive support from two-thirds (2/3) of the respondents or the process
will end.
8. Any affected property owner who wishes to alter their indication of support on the
petition form after its submittal must do so by individual letter of request to the Public
Works Division. No such requests will affect funding that has already been awarded.
E. Location and Design of Devices for Speeding Mitigation
1. The Public Works Division will determine the final location of all traffic management
measures according to the guidelines in this Policy, and in accordance with current
engineering principles. All measures requiring construction activities will be designed
to provide for the safety of all roadway users and delivered in the process outlined in
Chapter 7, Planning Design and Construction of this Policy.
2. Speed reduction measures will require approval of an Ordinance setting the speed limit
consistent with the City Code of Ordinances. Physical improvements must be consistent
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
As approved July 10, 2018
with the Fire Code, Unified Development Code, Construction Specifications and
Drainage Criteria Manual, and other applicable City Codes and Ordinances.
3. General
a. For traffic management measures that could impact drainage and/or are located near
drainage inlets, the device should be placed just downstream of the inlet. If this is
not feasible, special treatment may be considered for drainage.
b. To improve nighttime visibility, coordinating traffic management measures location
with existing or planned street lighting should be considered.
c. Preferences of requesters or property owners adjacent to proposed geometric street
feature locations will not be considered unless unique or special circumstances
warrant relocation. The Public Works Division will consider these circumstances on
a case-by-case basis.
d. Traffic control measures consisting of signs and markings to advise roadway users of
the presence of any improvements will be installed in accordancewith the Texas
Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (TxMUTCD).
e. For requested streets on approved bicycle routes, bicycle lanes maybe included in
the mitigation plan which may require existing on -street parking to be revised or
prohibited.
Chapter 6 - Traffic Volume
A. Staff Review for Traffic Volume
1. The Public Works Division will evaluate and prioritize all requests for traffic volume
pursuant to the following criteria:
a. Whether the request identifies a problem that could be remedied under these
guidelines and procedures;
b. Whether the request identifies an operational problem that could readily be
addressed through the installation of a type of traffic control measure that may be
installed without approval under these guidelines and procedures;
c. Whether special conditions concerning the neighborhood area, including but not
limited to the location and nature of businesses, schools, parks, churches or other
non-residential traffic generators within or inclose proximity to the neighborhood
area, may support approval of the project;
d. Whether the request conflicts with an existing approved neighborhood plan;
e. Whether there is community support for the project as evidencing that the project
will enhance and promote the public health, safety and welfare; and,
f. Whether existing evidence, studies, data or reports regarding the severity of the
existing problem, if any, merit the project.
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program 10
As approved July 10, 2018
2. Requested areas for Traffic Volume may be divided or otherwise revised at the sole
determination of the Public Works Division.
3. For those requests that are accepted for further consideration, the Public Works Division
will, in coordination with the Applicant, develop a preliminary project schedule to
further the project's consideration. The Applicant shall make all reasonable efforts to
abide by the published schedule andcomplete any assigned tasks or processes. Failure
to do so will result in the request being closed. Any Applicant who desires to renew a
request for a project that has been closed will be required to submit a new written
request in accordance with this Policy.
B. Notification/Evidence of Support
1. If the public street is determined to be eligible for volume reduction measures, the Public
Works Division will develop potential mitigation measures, define the type(s) and
approximate location(s) of the volume reduction or geometric street features on a map,
and schedule a public meeting. The mitigation measure and notice of the public meeting
will be provided to the affected property owners to gather evidence of support through
a ranking process.
2. Physical improvements must be consistent with the Fire Code, Unified Development
Code, Construction Specifications and Drainage Criteria Manual and other applicable
City Codes and Ordinances.
3. At a minimum, the notice of the public meeting and subsequent survey will be sent by
U.S. mail to all the owners of record of real property, as determined by the most recent
tax roll information, within 500 feet of the segment of roadway under consideration. A
larger area of notification may be determined by thePublic Works Division. Generally,
a property may be considered a part of the petition notification area if it's only or primary
access/egress route requires traversing existing or proposed devices. If there is an
alternate route to the property that does not require traversing the existing or proposed
devices, the property might not be considered in the petition area. Notification of "cul-
de-sac communities" will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
4. The notification letter shall be mailed two (2) weeks prior to the public meeting and will
include instructions on how to participate in the ranking process, as well as the place,
date and time of the public meeting concerning the potential mitigation measures.
5. At the Public Meeting, attendees will rank or select a preferred alternative for the
potential mitigation measure(s).
6. All potentially affected property owners will be mailed a survey to "Support", "Do Not
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program it
As approved July 10, 2018
Support", or "Agree with Majority" on the preferred alternative for mitigation
measure(s). Only one completed survey per property will be accepted. Any property
represented by multiple signatures with identical indications will be considered
singularly. Any property representedby multiple signatures with differing indications
will be considered non-responsive but accounted for in the petitioning process.
Property owners must respond in writing to the mitigation measures survey within
three (3) weeks following the notice being mailed.
7. Surveys that do not receive responses from at least fifty percent (50%) of the affected
property owners within the notification area will be considered incomplete and thus
end the process.
8. In the event that 50% or more of the affected property owners respond, the mitigation
measures must receive support from two-thirds (2/3) of the respondents or the process
will end.
9. Any affected property owner who wishes to alter their indication of support on the
petition form after its submittal must do so by individual letter of request to the Public
Works Division. No such requests will affect funding that has already been awarded.
C. Location and Design of Devices for Traffic Volume Mitigation
1. The Public Works Division will determine the final location of all traffic management
measures according to the guidelines in this Policy, and in accordance with current
engineering principles. All traffic management measures requiring construction
activities will be designed to provide for the safety of all roadway users and delivered
in the process outlined in Chapter 7 Planning, Design & Construction of this Policy.
2. General
a. For traffic management measures that could impact drainage and/or are located near
drainage inlets, the measure should be placed just downstream of the inlet. If this is
not feasible, special treatment may be considered for drainage.
b. To improve nighttime visibility, coordinating traffic management measures
location with existing or planned street lighting should be considered.
c. Preferences of requesters or property owners adjacent to proposed geometric street
feature locations will not be considered unless unique or special circumstances
warrant relocation. The Public Works Division will consider these circumstances
on a case-by-case basis.
d. Traffic control devices consisting of signs and markings to advise roadway users of
the presence of any devices will be installed in accordancewith the Texas Manual
of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (TxMUTCD).
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program 12
As approved July 10, 2018
e. For requested streets on approved bicycle routes, bicycle lanes maybe included in
the mitigation measure which -may require existing on -street -parking to17e revised
or prohibited.
D. Road Closure Policy
1. Road Closure is the permeant closure of the public street. It will not consist of the
temporary use or emergency access use of a public right-of-way.
2. If a street is considered for road closure, it will require identification of alternative
routes and public notice before implementation.
3. The identified Road Closure will take into account the potential for either:
a. Abandonment of the Right of Way (ROW); and/or
b. Installation of cul-de-sac or other mitigation measures for traffic movement
including:
L Design of streets consistent with the Unified Development Code, and
ii. Safety and aesthetic design measures consistent with the neighborhood.
Chapter 7 Planning, Design, & Construction
Once a potential neighborhood traffic management study has been approved by City Council,
Staff will program the funding of the design, construction and testing of recommended capital
improvements.
A. Concept Plan Development
1. A concept plan will be developed for the traffic management measure, taking into
account all traffic studies, community input and comments, and other data and factors
developed in accordance with the requirements of this Policy.
2. The concept plan will be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Division and the
Neighborhood Traffic Committee before being submitted for community input and
comment. The Neighborhood Traffic Committee will comprise of representatives from
the following Divisions: Fire, Police, Planning, and City Attorney Office, as well as other
City departments, as appropriate. The concept plan shall also be reviewed in the context
of transit operations.
beyend +e G47 of Georgetown eity limits, the 0
3. Where appropriate, the Public Works Division will include basic landscaping in all
concept plan designs. Applicants desiring enhanced levels of landscaping and
hardscaping, or who wish to include public art, street furniture, irrigation, lighting, etc.,
must provide funding for the design, implementation and maintenance of those
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program 13
As approved July 10, 2018
features. That funding will be agreed to in the form of a Maintenance Agreement, which
is ineladed in Appendix C.-
4. No concept plan or traffic management measure shall be approved if it is found that:
a. Property owners contiguous to any physical improvement or modifications to
existing facilities are opposed to the project;
b. Pedestrian or bicycle traffic access to a neighborhood area would be denied or
materially impeded;
c. General mobility of traffic in the neighborhood area, the surrounding community,
or both would be unreasonably adversely affected to material extent;
d. That the proposed solution is not the least restrictive that could reasonably be
expected to substantially mitigate or resolve the documentedproblem;
e. The project would prevent any owner of property from having direct vehicular
access to at least one abutting street in the city or county; or
f. The project would likely significantly delay ingress to or egress from neighborhoods
by emergency service vehicles.
5. Written notice of the review results will be given to the Applicant.
B. Community Meeting
1. Upon acceptance of the concept plan is completed through the Neighborhood Traffic
Committee, a community meeting will be held to gather community input and
comments on the concept plan.
2. At a minimum, notice of the community meeting will be sent by U.S. mail to all the
owners of record of real property, as determined by the most recent tax roll information,
within 500 feet of the segment of roadway under consideration, unless a larger area is
determined by the Public Works Division. The Public Works Division will include all
the property owners contacted in the petition process, as well as any additional property
owners who have requested inclusion in the design review process. Initial notice of the
community meeting will be distributed two (2) weeks prior to the scheduled meeting.
3. At the community meeting, the Public Works Division will provide a description of the
concept plan and a comment card for use by members of the community to address
public convenience and traffic issues, and to express either support or opposition to the
concept plan.
4. At the community meeting, comments regarding the concept plan maybe made by any
interested party.
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program 14
As approved July 10, 2018
C. Decision on Final Disposition of the Concept Plan
1. The Public Works Division shall review and consider comments received duringthe
community meeting and evaluate the concept plan. The Public Works Division may:
a. Approve the concept plan for further consideration;
b. Disapprove of the concept plan and its underlying request; or
c. Require modification of the plan in response to comments or other information
received. Modified plans must be reviewed and approvedby the Neighborhood
Traffic Committee. Revised plans do not require a subsequent community meeting.
2. The Applicant will be notified in writing of the decision of the Public Works Division.
3. If funding is required, the Public Works Division will give the approved concept plan
priority ranking in the following budget year when recommending funding for the
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program. If funding is not received in the normal
budgeting process, alternative funding may be applied following guidelines of Chapter
4, Section D.
D. Final Design
Following determination of funding, the Applicant will be invited to a design initiation
meeting with City staff.
1. For all projects, the Applicant is strongly encouraged to form a Design Advisory
Committee of not more than five (5) persons.
2. The Design Advisory Committee's responsibilities include:
a. Providing the City with information regarding community interests in the design of
the aesthetic aspects of the devices such as landscaping, hardscaping, or public art
opportunities;
b. Providing the City with information regarding the community's willingness and
ability to accept responsibility for long-term maintenance of landscaping in the form
of a Maintenance Agreement (Appendix D);
c. Providing feedback to the City regarding design concepts and details. While good -
faith efforts will be made to incorporate suggestions from the design advisory
committee, the City retains its authority to design and implement improvements that
are considered to be in the best interest of the City; and
d. If deemed appropriate, submitting proposals for partnering throughefforts such as
pursuit of appropriate grants and other similar programs.
3. It is the assumption of the City that those participating on the Design Advisory
Committee are representing the community, and are authorized and empowered to
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program 15
As approved July 10, 2018
make recommendations on behalf of the community.
4. The Public Works Division will develop a preliminary project schedule to further the
project. The Applicant and Design Advisory Committee must make all reasonable
efforts to abide by the published schedule and complete any assigned tasks or processes.
5. Should the Applicant or Design Advisory Committee not engage inthe design process
or disengage during the design process, the City will proceed with design and
implementation of the traffic management measures in accordance with the preliminary
project schedule.
6. The design and construction or removal of the traffic management measures and
associated features are the responsibility of the Public Works Division.
E. Implementation of Traffic Management Measure
1. Concept plans that do not include diversionary traffic management measures may be
built as soon as funding and resources allow and do not require a testing period with
temporary traffic management measures.
2. Concept plans that include diversionary traffic management measures may be tested
with temporary traffic management measures that replicate the intended function of the
planned diversionary traffic management measure.
3. No temporary traffic management measure will be installed unless funding is available
to complete the project, if approved, during the current or next succeedingbudget year.
The Public Works Division may remove any temporary traffic management measure if
a funded project later becomes unfunded.
4. The Public Works Division may approve any permanent or temporary traffic
management measure for any ranked project without regard to its priority ranking in
order to reflect special or changed circumstances, or to avoid delay in implementing
worthy projects that have not been approved for funding.
5. No temporary traffic management measures may be placed without the approval of the
Public Works Division.
6. Temporary traffic management measures will be in place for a testing period of not less
than 90 days, provided that the Public Works Division will immediately remove a
temporary traffic management measure that is determined to be a threat to public
health, safety or welfare.
F. Reporting and Measurement of Traffic Management Measure
1. The traffic management measures will be constructed within the study area in
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program 16
As approved July 10, 2018
accordance with the approved concept plan, and tested for a period of approximately
90 days.
2. The Public Works Division and the Neighborhood Traffic Management Committee will
monitor and review traffic impacts and any comments received regarding the traffic
management measures following installation.
3. At least 120 days, but no more than one year, following the placement of the traffic
management measures, the Public Works Division will review all of the available
information regarding the traffic management measures, and either:
a. Approve the concept plan and direct the implementation and maintenance of
permanent traffic management measures or replacement of the temporary measures
with permanent measures, during which time the temporary measures may remain
in place;
b. Recommend to the Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board at a regularly
scheduled meeting for a recommendation to City Council to remove or modify the
traffic management measure. That recommendation, either approval, approval with
conditions or denial, will be presented at a future City Council Meeting for action
(approval or denial); or
c. If a recommendation is approved that removes or causes to be removed some or all
of the traffic management devicesand/or deny all or part of the concept plan, absent
demonstrable evidence ofa significant change in traffic volume or traffic patterns in
the intervening period, the concept plan or disapproved portions thereof may not be
resubmitted as any part of a new request for the same or a similar project for a period
of two (2) years.
4. Written notice of the City's action will be given to theApplicant.
G. Maintenance of Traffic Management Measures
1. The City will prepare and maintain current design standards and installation and
removal procedures for geometric street features in accordance with these guidelines
and procedures.
2. The maintenance of the traffic management measures and all related features are
ultimately the responsibility of the City.
a. The community will maintain any landscaping, public art, or other associated
features in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Maintenance Agreement;
an example agreement appears in Appendix D.
b. Should a community or applicant not provide maintenance in accordance with the
terms and conditions of the Maintenance Agreement, the City may at their sole
discretion remove, modify, or revise the traffic management measures and any
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program 17
As approved July 10, 2018
associated features in order to allow ease of maintenance by City forces.
H. Removal of Traffic Management Measures by Maintenance or Construction Activities
1. Any traffic management measure that is fully removed during the course of publicly
funded construction or maintenance activities will be reinstalled upon completion of
that activity at the City's expense by the forces conducting those activities.
2. Traffic management measures that are partially removed or damaged during the course
of publicly funded construction or maintenance activities will be repaired or
reconstructed to original conditions upon completion of those activities at the City's
expense by the forces conducting those activities.
3. Any traffic management measure that is fully or partially removed or damaged during
the course of privately funded maintenance or construction will be reinstalled upon
completion of those activities at the expense of the private constructor.
4. The replacement of traffic management measures completely removed through the
above actions is not automatic, but contingent upon a finding by the Public Works
Division.
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program lg
As approved July 10, 2018
Appendix A: Neighborhood Traffic Control Options
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program i9
As approved July 10, 2018
e
I
$
S
3S
Id
SC
13
Al
.m..
8
m
m
s
v25
m.°'
is
'Ei
�y'e
m
a
3&
'm
b
_
0
3
`o
2.9
Nc
G
Ea.
Ca
�
E
E
8
8.5
°> •O
S
9
2 °«�
O 6._
°'
m a
@
o
V
y
$ v
>
c c3
U
E 8
Q y
O
o
3
.a �m
6>
2-9
O
y
m m
y _�
s
m
g
e ,u
y
c a$
0
wi>
HTV
I
a$C
a'I
w
Z°
"
at
m
5�
>
y
Y
.�
o
$ O
'a
� �
m
A'�
U
i T
W
�
U a
m'O'
y U
'9 $
'�
'O $
FO
C O• �
Y b
m s
t O
>
5 m
J
6�i•
AZ O
�
V �
�
OD G
y y'
� m
`
IAm>
a •g �
`� �
2
3�
= �c
5 °>
9m
°o
a 5
9 u
Yi o
e00'�N�
qqc�
T•�
�z�,
U
9 32
Uig
D a�G
zC?
i0
y
FTz
E
fi
U
u
o
a
gg
g
Y
a
46.o
U
R
o
Z
I
Appendix B: Application Form
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program 23
As approved July 10, 2018
CITY OF GEORGETOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
MITIGATION REQUEST APPLICATION FORM G�eonGB5r0`Wta
TOW
Submittal of this form constitutes a formal request and must contain the completed information in the
application and any additional background material you wish to include. This request will be processed
according to the guidelines and procedures for the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program in effect as of
the date of this request.
REQUESTED STREET LOCATION:
Requested Street:
From:
To:
Example
Requested Street
� 4 Requested Street: George St.
Q From: Austin Ave.
George Street `L To: 5`" Ave.
3
n
Limits of Study Area
By my signature below, I agree to be the Requester of Record for this request. I have read the guidelines and
procedures governing the Local Area Traffic Management Program and agree to carry out to the best of my abilities
the duties and responsibilities associated with being the Requester of Record. I also understand that any documents
submitted to the City of Georgetown may be subject to public disclosure in accordance with the Texas Public
Information Act.
REOUESTOR INFORMATION:
Name:
Address:
City, St, Zip:
Email Address:
Phone Number:
Signature of Applicant: Date:
CITY OF GEORGETOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
MITIGATION REQUEST APPLICATION FORM AGEOWN
--PAGE 2 —
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
A request can be made by a resident, business, school, neighborhood association or other entity whose property is located
within the study area. The requester of record will receive all correspondence and is the primary contact for the request. This
person will also serve as the liaison to any community organizations within whose boundaries the requested study area exist.
Prior to submitting a request, the requester must meet with the Public Works Division/Traffic Engineer to discuss the speed
or traffic volume issues being considered for mitigation.
1. Date of Pre -application conference with the Public Works Division:
2. Type of Application:
Traffic Speed Study: Traffic Volume Study:
3. A general description of the traffic problem or condition to be remedied:
4. Special conditions concerning the proposed study area that are germane to this request:
CITY OF GEORGETOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
MITIGATION REQUEST APPLICATION FORM
--PAGE 3 —
5. Any evidence of support from the neighborhood and community:
Please attach any additional information to support the application.
APPLICATIN REQUEST TIMELINE:
Process SteR
Duration*
Deadline for request submission.
September 1
Staff review and determination of ty2e of a lication/com leteness.
1 to 2 Months
Staff determination of potential mitigation measures.
2 to 3 Months
Public Meeting on staff determination.
1 to 2 Months
Staff Recommendation to Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board
(GTAB) and City Council
2 to 3 Months
Design of mitigation measures not requiring capital improvements.
1 to 2 Months
Approval of funding for design of mitigation measures requiring capital
improvements.
Next FY
* Timeline subject to change based on contracting requirements, type and extent of data collection,
technical review, number of projects, and/or other factors that will be discussed with the applicant upon
submittal.
City of Georgetown Certification:
Type of Application:
Date of Receipt:
Completeness Review: YES 0 NO
Staff Recipient: Initial Here:
A copy of the completed Staff Certification will be sent to applicant upon completion.
Appendix C: Sample Maintenance Agreement
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program 29
As approved July 10, 2018
SAMPLE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
Funding & Volunteer Landscaping, Maintenance, and Related Services
NEIGHBORHOOD COST PARTICIPATIONAGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN AND
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION/CORPORTATION/LLC
STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON
This Agreement is made and entered into by and between the City of Georgetown, Texas (the "City")
and the Neighborhood Association/Corporation/LLC (the
"Association"), hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Parties."
WHEREAS, the Association desires to participate in developing and/or funding certain City
improvements in City right-of-way or, as applicable, park space; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to participate in the development and funding of the improvements as a
City project (the "Project");
NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree asfollows:
1. The Project. The location and scope of the Project is described in attached Exhibit "A". The
City may self -perform the design and construction of the Project or contract for such services. The
Project may consist of multiple sub -projects, all of which will be developed, designed, constructed,
and maintained pursuant to the terms of this Agreement.
2. Project Development.
a. The City will manage the Project. The Project will be designed in accordance with applicable
City standards, specifically including the requirements of the Texas Accessibility Standards.
b. In its complete discretion, the City will construct the Project with its own forces or will
solicit bids for the construction of the Project. If the City contracts for the construction of
the Project, the City will notify the Association of the lowest responsible bid and, subject to
available funding, enter into a firm unit -price contract with the successful bidder.
c. The reasonable costs to the City of its employees and equipment dedicated to the Project may
be credited as an "in-kind" funding contribution.
d. The Association may cost participate in the Project with funding and/or in-kind volunteer
services. 'Volunteer" means a person rendering services for or on behalf of a charitable
organization who does not receive compensation in excess of reimbursement for expenses
incurred. The term includes a person serving as a director, officer, trustee, or direct service
volunteer. A Volunteer is liable to a person for death, damage, or injury to the person or his
property proximately caused by any act or omission arising from the operation or use of any
motor -driven equipment, to the extent insurance coverage is required by Chapter 601,
Transportation Code, and to the extent of any existing insurance coverage applicable to the act
or omission. Any Volunteer providing labor or other services for or in connection with the
Project will not receive any compensation in excess of reimbursement for expenses incurred.
Any measurement of the value of "in-kind" volunteer services to be provided under this
Agreement will not result in any direct or indirect payment to the Association or its Volunteers
or exceed the amount of expenses incurred.
3. Project Management.
a. The President of the Association will act on behalf of the Association with respect to the Project
and coordinate with the City.
b. The Director of the City's Public Works Division will act on behalf of the City with respect
to the Project, coordinate with the Association, and have complete authority to interpret and
define the City's policies and decisions with respect to the Project. The Director will designate
a City Project Manager and may designate other representatives to transmit instructions and
act on behalf of the City with respect to the Project.
4. Management Duties of the City.
a. The City agrees to provide:
L Written protocols for the performance of landscaping, maintenance, and other associated
services by the Volunteers;
ii. Written copies of all contracts affecting the Project;
iii. A statement of all disbursements made relating to the Project;
iv. A copy of any executed change orders; and
V. Advance notice of the anticipated date of commencement of construction and the area to be
impacted by the Project; and the date on which the Volunteer services obligations will
commence.
b. The City is not responsible for the preservation or replacement of private improvements and
landscaping in the City's right-of-way or other property which may be impacted by the
construction of the Project. Those improvements remain the responsibility of the property
owner or Association.
5. Management Duties of the Association. The Association hereby agrees to:
a. Provide notice to all owners of the properties abutting the Project of the Project's anticipated
schedule and the area to be impacted by the Project;
b. Inform the City's Project Manager immediately of any problems observed during construction
or maintenance;
c. Attend meetings at the request of the City's Project Manager;
d. Provide the level of funding and/or Volunteer services agreed to in this Agreement; and
e. Ensure that each and every Volunteer, who will provide labor or other services for the Project,
executes a waiver and release in the form attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and made a part
hereof prior to performingany volunteer work or services for the Project under this
Agreement.
6. Liability
GET CITY POLICY LANGUAGE
7. Financial Obligations.
a. The cost of the Project is currently estimated at .00, including a
construction contingency amount of$ .00.
b. The Association's share, which is based on providing funding and/or volunteer services with
an agreed -to value, is percent ( %) of the cost of the
Project. The City's share is perceizt (_%) of the cost of the
Project.
c. To the extent applicable, within 30 days of the execution of this Agreement, the Association will
pay the City the amount of $ .00
d. As provided below, the Parties will participate in funding any change orders necessary for the
completion of the Project on the basis of their respective funding percentages.
e. The City will notify the Association in the event additional volunteer services or funding is
needed to address Project conditions and the Association will endeavor to provide additional
Volunteers to meet the City's needs and schedules or its share of such funding within 30 days
of approval by the Association. The City will pay the remaining balance of any such cost.
f. Subject to the availability of funding and volunteer participation, the City may, with a written
recommendation from the Association, adjust the Project scope to address budget constraints,
legal requirements, or construction conditions.
g. In addition, if construction conditions, the availability of funding or other constraints restrict
the City's ability to complete the Project, the City, in its complete discretion, may determine
whether to pursue the Project or a portion of the Project.
h. The City will place any Association's funds in a Project escrow fund. Any unused portion of
the funds will be returned to the Association within 30 days of Project completion. If applicable,
the City will provide the Association with an accounting of the Project expenses, including
Association funding, within 90 days of Project completion.
8. City Inspection and Testing. The City will inspect, test, and accept the Project. The Director will
require the contractor to immediately take any appropriate remedial action to correct any
deficiencies identified by the City or Association.
9. Additional Projects. Subject to the availability of funding or other project resources, the Parties may
agree to additional projects or subprojects through an amendment to this Agreement.
10. Miscellaneous.
a. Force Majeure. In the event that the performance by the Association or the City of any of its
obligations or undertakings hereunder shall be interrupted or delayed by any occurrence not
occasioned by its own conduct, whether such occurrence be an act of God, or the common
enemy, or the result of war, riot, civil commotion, sovereign conduct, or the act of conduct of
any person or persons not a party or privy hereto, then it shall be excused from such
performance for such period of time as it reasonably necessary after such occurrence to
remedy the effects hereto.
b. Notice. Any notice given hereunder by either party to the other shall be in writing and may be
effected by personal delivery in writing or by registered or certified mail, return receipt
requested when mailed to the proper party, at the following addresses:
CITY: City of Georgetown Public Works Division
address
Georgetown, Texas
ASSOCIATION:
ASSOCIATION:
Project Manager
Georgetown, Texas 77777
c. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the complete and entire Agreement between the
parties respecting the matters addressed herein, and supersedes all prior negotiations,
agreements, representations, and understanding, if any, between the parties respecting the
joint construction of the Projects. This Agreement may not be modified, discharged, or changed
in any respect whatsoever except by a further agreementin writing duly executed by
authorized representatives of the parties hereto. All representations and indemnifications
made in accordance with this Agreement, as well as all continuing obligations indicated in the
Agreement, will survive completion and acceptance of the Project and termination or
completion of this Agreement.
d. Effective Date. This Agreement takes effect upon full execution.
e. Other Instruments. The Parties agree that they will execute other and further instruments
and documents as may become necessary or convenient to effectuate and carry out the purposes
of this Agreement.
f. Invalid Provision. Any clause, sentence, provision, paragraph, or article of this agreement held
by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal, or ineffective shall not impair,
invalidate, or nullify the remainder of this Agreement, but the effect thereof shall be confined to
the clause, sentence, provision, paragraph, or article so held to be invalid, illegal, or ineffective.
CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS
By:
Name:
Title:
Date:
Approved as to Form:
City Attorney
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, INC.
By:
Name:
Title:
Date:
EXHIBIT A
Insert project work plan here.
EXHIBIT B
NEIGHBORHOOD PARTICIPATION PROGRAM LIABILITY WAIVER AND RELEASE
PROJECT: Project (the "Project").
The undersigned Volunteer hereby makes the following representations and acknowledgements in
connection with this Waiver andRelease:
My legal name is set forth below. I reside at the address set forth below. I am over the age of 18
years and I can read the English language. If I am under the ageof 18 years, this Waiver and Release
must be executed by my parent or guardian.
I am currently volunteering to provide labor or other services on or for the Project.
I understand that the Project may involve landscaping, maintenance, and other related activities
and that I have the duty to prevent accidents and comply with the Project's safety precautions and
programs.
I hereby release the City of Georgetown, Texas, from any and all liability for personal injury or
death or property damage, arising out of or connected in any way to the landscaping, maintenance, or
other related activities to be undertaken by me or onmy behalf for the Project. I also waive any and all
claims that may be asserted againstthe City by me or on my behalf related to any personal injury, death
or property damage, arising out of or connected in any way to the landscaping, maintenance or other
related activities to be undertaken by me or on my behalf for the Project.
I have read and understand this Waiver and Release and I have executed this Waiver and
Release of my free will and with personal knowledge of the facts set forth herein. I understand and
agree that the City of Georgetown, Texas, is relying on this Waiver and Release with respect to the
Project in awarding the Project for the benefit of the City of Georgetown.
If this waiver and release is executed on behalf of a minor by a parent or guardian, it will serve
and operate as a waiver and release of any liability for or claims of the minor child named below and
his/her parents or guardians.
Volunteer:
Printed Name:
Signature:
Relationship: Self or Parent/Guardian (CircleOne) Address:
Date: