Loading...
09-02-2025 Agenda Packet       MEETING AGENDA City Council REGULAR SESSION CITY COUNCIL September 2, 2025                                 HAL BALDWIN MUNICIPAL COMPLEX COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1400 SCHERTZ PARKWAY BUILDING #4 SCHERTZ, TEXAS 78154 CITY OF SCHERTZ CORE VALUES Do the right thing Do the best you can Treat others the way you want to be treated Work cooperatively as a team    AGENDA TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 2, 2025 at 6:00 p.m.        Call to Order   Opening Prayer and Pledges of Allegiance to the Flags of the United States and State of Texas. (Councilmember Heyward)   Proclamations   National Preparedness Month - September 2025 (Councilmember Heyward)    Employee Introductions   Finance:Alaina Ortiz-Accountant Fleet: Matthew Chappell-Fleet Superintendent Parks & Recreation: Margaret Mikula-Administrative Assistant Police: Jesus Reyes-Police Officer Public Works Utilities: Edgar Estrada-Water/Wastewater Worker I   City Events and Announcements  Announcements of upcoming City Events (B.James/S.Gonzalez) Announcements and recognitions by the City Manager (S.Williams) Announcements and recognitions by the Mayor (R.Gutierrez ) September 2, 2025  City Council Agenda                                Page 1    Hearing of Residents This time is set aside for any person who wishes to address the City Council. Each person should fill out the speaker’s register prior to the meeting. Presentations should be limited to no more than 3 minutes.  All remarks shall be addressed to the Council as a body, and not to any individual member thereof. Any person making personal, impertinent, or slanderous remarks while addressing the Council may be requested to leave the meeting. All handouts and/or USB devices must be submitted to the City Secretary no later than noon on the Monday preceding the meeting.  Handouts will be provided to each Councilmember prior to the start of the meeting by the City Secretary.  All USB devices will be vetted by City IT staff to ensure City property is protected from malware. Discussion by the Council of any item not on the agenda shall be limited to statements of specific factual information given in response to any inquiry, a recitation of existing policy in response to an inquiry, and/or a proposal to place the item on a future agenda. The presiding officer, during the Hearing of Residents portion of the agenda, will call on those persons who have signed up to speak in the order they have registered.   Consent Agenda Items The Consent Agenda is considered self-explanatory and will be enacted by the Council with one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless they are removed from the Consent Agenda upon the request of the Mayor or a Councilmember.   1.Minutes – Approval of the minutes from the City Council Meeting on August 19, 2025 (S.Edmondson/S.Courney)    2.Resolution 25-R-113 - Authorizing an amendment to the Park Improvement Agreement for The Parklands Subdivision and Parklands II Subdivision (B.James/L.Wood/S.Haas)    Discussion and Action Items   3.Resolution 25-R-118 - Authorizing an agreement with Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas for medical insurance for plan year 2026 (S.Gonzalez/J.Kurz)    Public Hearings September 2, 2025  City Council Agenda                                Page 2  Public Hearings   4.Ordinance 25-S-035 - Conduct a public hearing and consider a request for a Specific Use Permit to allow Mixed-Use Self-Storage in General Business District (GB) on approximately 2.14 acres, located along the IH-35 North access road, approximately 900 feet west of the intersection of IH-35 and Cibolo Valley Drive, more specifically known as a portion of Guadalupe County Property Identification Number 62840, City of Schertz, Guadalupe County, Texas (B.James/L.Wood/W.Willingham)    5.Ordinance 25-S-036 – Conduct a public hearing and consider a request to rezone approximately 36.2 acres of land from Planned Development District (PDD) to Planned Development District (PDD), generally known as 13011 Lower Seguin Road, at the intersection of Lower Seguin Road and Red Bud Canyon, more specifically known as Bexar County Property Identification Numbers 310011, 1436811, 1437570, 1394925 City of Schertz, Bexar County, Texas (B.James/L.Wood/S.Haas)    6.Ordinance 25-S-037– Conduct a public hearing and consider request for a Specific Use Permit to allow a convenience store with gas pumps on approximately 4.2 acres of land, located at the intersection of North Graytown Road & IH 10, known as 11185 IH 10 E, Bexar County Property Identification Number 619232, City of Schertz, Bexar County, Texas (B.James/L.Wood/S.Haas)    7.PLAPP20250187 - Conduct a public hearing and consider an appeal to a decision by the Planning and Zoning Commission for a waiver in relation to wall signage for the Home Depot on Lot 10 Block 1 of the Schertz Station Subdivision, approximately 18.709 acres of land, located at 18541 Ripss-Kreusler Road, Schertz, Texas, 78154, more specifically known as Guadalupe County Parcel Identification Number 68313 (B.James/L.Wood/S.Haas)    8.Ordinance 25-T-033 – Conduct a Public Hearing and approve an Ordinance approving the appraisal roll; setting the tax rate; levying and assessing general and special ad valorem taxes for the use and support of the municipal government of the City of Schertz, Texas (S.Gonzalez/J.Walters)    9.Resolution 25-R-101 - Conduct a public hearing regarding annexation vs. land use regulation related to Resolution 25-R-101 Special Election for properties within a five-mile boundary of JBSA-Randolph (Mayor/B.James/S.Edmondson)    Information available in City Council Packets - NO DISCUSSION TO OCCUR   10.Monthly Update - Major Projects In Progress/CIP (B.James/K.Woodlee)    11.Updated Purchasing Policy and Vendor Expenditure Report (S.Gonzalez/J.Kurz)    September 2, 2025  City Council Agenda                                Page 3  Requests and Announcements  Requests by Mayor and Councilmembers for updates or information from Staff  Requests by Mayor and Councilmembers that items or presentations be placed on a future City Council agenda City and Community Events attended and to be attended (Council)     Adjournment   CERTIFICATION I, SHEILA EDMONDSON, CITY SECRETARY OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS, DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE ABOVE AGENDA WAS PREPARED AND POSTED ON THE OFFICIAL BULLETIN BOARDS ON THIS THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 AT 4:30 P.M., WHICH IS A PLACE READILY ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC AT ALL TIMES AND THAT SAID NOTICE WAS POSTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 551, TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE.    SHEILA EDMONDSON    I CERTIFY THAT THE ATTACHED NOTICE AND AGENDA OF ITEMS TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE CITY COUNCIL WAS REMOVED BY ME FROM THE OFFICIAL BULLETIN BOARD ON ________DAY OF ___________________, 2025. TITLE: _______________________________ This facility is accessible in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Handicapped parking spaces are available. If you require special assistance or have a request for sign interpretative services or other services, please call 210-619-1030. The City Council for the City of Schertz reserves the right to adjourn into closed session at any time during the course of this meeting to discuss any of the matters listed above, as authorized by the Texas Open Meetings Act. Closed Sessions Authorized: This agenda has been reviewed and approved by the City’s legal counsel and the presence of any subject in any Closed Session portion of the agenda constitutes a written interpretation of Texas Government Code Chapter 551 by legal counsel for the governmental body and constitutes an opinion by the attorney that the items discussed therein may be legally discussed in the closed portion of the meeting considering available opinions of a court of record and opinions of the Texas Attorney General known to the attorney. This provision has been added to this agenda with the intent to meet all elements necessary to satisfy Texas Government Code Chapter 551.144(c) and the meeting is conducted by all participants in reliance on this opinion.     September 2, 2025  City Council Agenda                                Page 4      COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND LIAISON ASSIGNMENTS     Mayor Gutierrez Member Audit Committee Investment Advisory Committee Main Street Committee TIRZ II Board Liaison Board of Adjustments Senior Center Advisory Board-Alternate Councilmember Davis– Place 1 Member Interview Committee  Main Street Committee - Chair TIRZ II Board Liaison Parks & Recreation Advisory Board Schertz Housing Authority Board Transportation Safety Advisory Board Councilmember Watson – Place 2 Member Audit Committee Liaison Library Advisory Board Senior Center Advisory Board Cibolo Valley Local Government Corporation-Ex-Officio  Councilmember Macaluso – Place 3 Member Interview Committee  Hal Baldwin Scholarship Committee TIRZ II Board Liaison Animal Services Advisory Committee Councilmember Guerrero – Place 4 Member Hal Baldwin Scholarship Committee Investment Advisory Committee Liaison Schertz Historical Preservation Committee Councilmember Westbrook – Place 5 Liaison Schertz-Seguin Local Government Corporation (SSLGC)     Planning and Zoning Commission Schertz Historical Preservation Committee Cibolo Valley Local Government Corporation (CVLGC)-Alternate   Councilmember Heyward – Place 6 Member Animal Services Advisory Committee Audit Committee Interview Committee-Chair Investment Advisory Committee Main Street Committee Liaison Building and Standards Commission Economic Development Corporation - Alternate Senior Center Advisory Board Councilmember Brown – Place 7 Member Main Street Committee Schertz-Seguin Local Government Corporation (SSLGC) Liaison Economic Development Corporation      September 2, 2025  City Council Agenda                                Page 5  Agenda No.   CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM    City Council Meeting:September 02, 2025 Department:City Secretary Subject:National Preparedness Month - September 2025 (Councilmember Heyward) BACKGROUND September marks National Preparedness Month, the annual campaign to remind everyone that preparing for emergencies and disasters can keep them, their families and their communities safe.  The resources and information shared during National Preparedness Month and on Ready.gov can be used by anyone at any time to get prepared for whatever may come their way. The Ready Campaign aims to ensure all our friends and neighbors have the tools they need to prepare for disasters and build resilience before disaster strikes.  Talking about bad things that could happen like a disaster or emergency isn't always easy. We may think we're protecting the people we love by avoiding these conversations, but they are important to start taking steps to get ready and stay safe.  Starting a conversation today can help you and your family to take more actions to prepare. By taking simple steps, you can build your preparedness at your own pace:  Set aside a time when everyone is calm and relaxed.  It may help to hold the discussions over a set time period, so decisions aren't rushed, and people feel more comfortable talking about the topic.  Talk about steps you've taken to prepare and encourage others to ask questions about preparedness actions that might work for them.  Attachments Proclamation National Preparedness Month Proclamation September 2025 WHEREAS, National Preparedness Month is observed every September to raise awareness about the importance of preparing for disasters that could happen at any time; and WHEREAS, the City of Schertz will continue its preparedness culture whenever possible; and WHEREAS, National Preparedness Month creates an important opportunity for the Schertz community to focus on preparing for any type of emergency including natural and man-made disasters and accidents; and WHEREAS, investing in preparedness can reduce fatalities, prevent physical and economic damage, and aid in accelerated recovery after events in our communities; and WHEREAS, the Schertz Office of Emergency Management encourages all community members to be informed, make a plan, build a kit, and get involved in preparedness activities; and WHEREAS, the 2025 Emergency Preparedness Month theme is “Start a Conversation” Talking about bad things that could happen such as a disaster or emergency isn’t always easy. We may think we are protecting the people we love by avoiding these conversations, but they are important to start taking steps to get ready and stay safe. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Ralph Gutierrez, Mayor of Schertz do hereby proclaim September 2025 as National Preparedness Month and encourage all members of the Schertz community to develop their own emergency plans and work together toward creating a more prepared and resilient community. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the City of Schertz to be affixed on this September 2, 2025. _____________________________ Ralph Gutierrez, Mayor Agenda No. 1.   CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM    City Council Meeting:September 02, 2025 Department:City Secretary Subject:Minutes – Approval of the minutes from the City Council Meeting on August 19, 2025 (S.Edmondson/S.Courney) Attachments 08-19-2025 Draft minutes D R A F T MINUTES REGULAR MEETING August 19, 2025 A Regular Meeting was held by the Schertz City Council of the City of Schertz, Texas, on August 19, 2025, at 6:00 p.m. in the Hal Baldwin Municipal Complex Council Chambers, 1400 Schertz Parkway, Building #4, Schertz, Texas. The following members present to-wit: Present: Mayor Ralph Gutierrez; Mayor Pro Tem Tim Brown; Councilmember Mark Davis; Councilmember Michelle Watson; Councilmember Paul Macaluso; Councilmember Ben Guerrero; Councilmember Robert Westbrook; Councilmember Allison Heyward Staff present: City Manager Steve Williams; City Attorney Daniel Santee; Deputy City Manager Brian James; Assistant City Manager Sarah Gonzalez; City Secretary Sheila Edmondson; Deputy City Secretary Sheree Courney          Call to Order Mayor Gutierrez called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.   Opening Prayer and Pledges of Allegiance to the Flags of the United States and State of Texas. (Councilmember Westbrook) Councilmember Westbrook provided the opening prayer and led the Pledges of Allegiance to the Flags of the United States and State of Texas.   Proclamations   National Emergency Management Awareness Month - August 2025 (Councilmember Westbrook) Councilmember Westbrook presented the National Emergency Management Awareness Month proclamation to Mr. Brandon High, Schertz Emergency Management Coordinator.      City Events and Announcements Announcements of upcoming City Events (B.James/S.Gonzalez) Deputy City Manager Brian James announced upcoming City Events. Announcements and recognitions by the City Manager (S.Williams) City Manager Steve Williams provided no announcements or recognitions. Announcements and recognitions by the Mayor (R.Gutierrez) 1 Mayor Gutierrez provided no announcements or recognitions.   Hearing of Residents This time is set aside for any person who wishes to address the City Council. Each person should fill out the speaker’s register prior to the meeting. Presentations should be limited to no more than 3 minutes.  All remarks shall be addressed to the Council as a body, and not to any individual member thereof. Any person making personal, impertinent, or slanderous remarks while addressing the Council may be requested to leave the meeting. All handouts and/or USB devices must be submitted to the City Secretary no later than noon on the Monday preceding the meeting.  Handouts will be provided to each Councilmember prior to the start of the meeting by the City Secretary.  All USB devices will be vetted by City IT staff to ensure City property is protected from malware. Mayor Pro Tem Tim Brown recognized the following residents: Dee Santa Cruz, provided information supporting GRAYSA's oversight of the Schertz Soccer Complex. Robert Sheridan, 1024 Keanna Pl, provided information supporting GRAYSA's oversight of the Schertz Soccer Complex. Henry Fahnert, spoke on behalf of the Schertz Police Association, supporting a moderate tax increase to allow ECI increases for city staff noting the benefits provided by competitive pay rates. Richard Kunz, 2960 Red Tip, encouraged Council to consider a tax rate increase and supported ECI increases for city staff. Robert Fishback, 140 Dew Fall Trail, Cibolo, provided background information related to his previous employment at the Senior Center under the YMCA, and asked to be considered for appointment to Director when the city resumes control of the center. Bob Jameson, 4504 Brush Creek, provided Council with issues he is enduring due to the development occurring behind his home, which he stated has been reported to city staff and told nothing can be done. Karen Jameson, 4504 Brush Creek, explained the impact the development behind her home is having on her daily life - noise, dust, house shaking, etc.   Presentations   Workshop on the Schertz Historical Preservation Committee's Heritage Neighborhood street sign project (S.Williams/B.James/M.Titterington) Mayor Gutierrez recognized Ms. Maggie Titterington, Chair of the Schertz Historical Preservation Committee, who presented renderings of a new style street sign with a topper denoting historic neighborhood. Council expressed appreciation, and thanks for the efforts employed by the Committee. The council's consensus was that the    2 appearance of the new signs is aligned with the vision of the Main Street Project. Ms. Titterington also presented longtime SHPC member Rosalyn "Roz" Wise with a certificate for her dedication and hard work since 2017.   Consent Agenda Items The Consent Agenda is considered self-explanatory and will be enacted by the Council with one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless they are removed from the Consent Agenda upon the request of the Mayor or a Councilmember.   1.Minutes – Approval of the minutes from the City Council/Staff Budget Meeting on August 1, 2025, and City Council Regular Meeting on August 5, 2025 (S.Edmondson/S.Courney)      2.Resolution 25-R-085 - Authorizing Amendment Number 1 to the EMS Interlocal Agreements with multiple governmental entities for the provision of Emergency Medical Services (S.Williams/J.Mabbitt)      3.Resolution 25-R-109 - Authorizing a Lease Agreement with Guadalupe County for Lease Use of County Facility (S.Williams/J.Lowery)      4.Resolution 25-R-104 – Authorizing a Task Order with Unintech Consulting Engineers, Inc. for Preliminary Engineering Services related to the Pickrell Park and FM 1518 Drainage Improvements (B.James/K.Woodlee/E.Schulze)      5.Resolution 25-R-105 – Authorizing a Task Order with Unintech Consulting Engineers, Inc. for Professional Engineering Design Services related to the Wendy Swan Memorial Park Drainage Improvements (B.James/K.Woodlee/E.Schulze)      6.Resolution 25-R-107 – Authorizing a Task Order with Unintech Consulting Engineers, Inc. for Professional Engineering Design Services related to the IH 35 Ground Storage Tank and Pump Station Project (B.James/K.Woodlee/E.Schulze)      7.Resolution 25-R-103 – Authorizing a Wastewater Easement Agreement for the easement along Parcel 5 of the IH 35NEX Sewer Relocation Project (B.James/K.Woodlee/E.Schulze)      8.Resolution 25-R-108 – Authorizing a Task Order with Unintech Consulting Engineers, Inc. for Professional Engineering Design Services related to the FM 3009 18 inch Transmission Line Replacement Project (B.James/K.Woodlee/E.Schulze) Mayor Gutierrez asked if any items needed to be removed for separate action. No items were removed. Mayor Gutierrez asked for a motion to approve Consent Agenda Items #1 - 8.    3    Moved by Councilmember Allison Heyward, seconded by Councilmember Michelle Watson  AYE: Mayor Pro Tem Tim Brown, Councilmember Mark Davis, Councilmember Michelle Watson, Councilmember Paul Macaluso, Councilmember Ben Guerrero, Councilmember Robert Westbrook, Councilmember Allison Heyward Passed   Public Hearings   9.Resolution 25-R-112- Conduct a public hearing and consider a resolution accepting a petition for voluntary annexation of approximately 4.7 acres, Bexar County Property Identification Numbers 310108 and 1061511, Bexar County, Texas (B.James/L.Wood/D.Marquez) Mayor Gutierrez recognized Planning Manager Emily Delgado who introduced Resolution 25-R-112 to accept a petition for voluntary annexation. Mayor Gutierrez stated this item is on the agenda as a public hearing. Public Hearing opened at 6:45 p.m. No public came forward to speak. Public Hearing closed at 6:45 p.m. Mayor Gutierrez opened the floor to Council for discussion. No discussion occurred. Mayor Gutierrez asked for a motion to approve Resolution 25-R-112.       Moved by Mayor Pro Tem Tim Brown, seconded by Councilmember Allison Heyward  AYE: Mayor Pro Tem Tim Brown, Councilmember Mark Davis, Councilmember Michelle Watson, Councilmember Paul Macaluso, Councilmember Ben Guerrero, Councilmember Robert Westbrook, Councilmember Allison Heyward Passed   Discussion and Action Items   10.Resolution 25-R-077 - Authorizing an Agreement for the Rumpf Property for drainage ROW and easement acquisition and reimbursement and to acquire drainage ROW easements from SCUCISD (S.Williams/B.James) Mayor Gutierrez recognized Deputy City Manager Brian James who introduced    4 Resolution 25-R-077 authorizing an agreement with the developer for the Rumpf Property for drainage ROW and easement acquisition from SCUCISD. No cost to the city as the developer will reimburse all costs to the city. Mayor Gutierrez opened the floor to council for discussion. No discussion occurred. Mayor Gutierrez asked for a motion to approve Resolution 25-R-077.    Moved by Councilmember Paul Macaluso, seconded by Councilmember Ben Guerrero  AYE: Mayor Pro Tem Tim Brown, Councilmember Mark Davis, Councilmember Michelle Watson, Councilmember Paul Macaluso, Councilmember Ben Guerrero, Councilmember Robert Westbrook, Councilmember Allison Heyward Passed   11.Resolution 25-R-100 - Authorizing a lease agreement with the Guadalupe County Children's Advocacy Center (GCCAC) for an approximately 1.1 acre tract at 1049 Live Oak Road (S.Williams/B.James) Mayor Gutierrez recognized Deputy City Manager Brian James, who introduced Resolution 25-R-100 authorizing a lease agreement with the Guadalupe County Children's Advocacy Center. The lease is for $10 for up to 50 years, provided GCCAC pulls a building permit by 2030, and a Certificate of Occupancy (CofO) within two years following. Mayor Gutierrez opened the floor to Council for discussion. After brief discussion, a motion to approve Resolution 25-R-100 was made.       Moved by Councilmember Ben Guerrero, seconded by Councilmember Michelle Watson  AYE: Mayor Pro Tem Tim Brown, Councilmember Mark Davis, Councilmember Michelle Watson, Councilmember Paul Macaluso, Councilmember Ben Guerrero, Councilmember Robert Westbrook, Councilmember Allison Heyward Passed   12.Resolution 25-R-111 - Authorizing the cancellation of the Public Facility License Agreement with the Schertz Youth Soccer Alliance (SYSA) and transitioning to city operations of the Schertz Soccer Complex (S.Gonzalez/L.Shrum) Mayor Gutierrez recognized Parks and Recreation Director Lauren Shrum who introduced Resolution 25-R-111. Ms. Shrum provided background information related to the Schertz Soccer Complex and the Public Facility License Agreement with the    5 Schertz Youth Soccer Alliance (SYSA). Ms. Shrum recommended cancellation of the SYSA agreement and moving the Schertz Soccer Complex under City operations due to concerns with the administration and maintenance of the fields. The city has invested $1.8 million in recent repairs and maintenance. She presented a plan for future operations if moved under the city's purview. Mayor Gutierrez opened the floor to Council for discussion. After a lengthy and contentious discussion, whereby councilmembers expressed concerns with the city's management of the program and responsibility under the SYSA agreement, Mayor Gutierrez asked for a motion to approve Resolution 25-R-111 dissolving the alliance and transition to city operations.    Moved by Councilmember Paul Macaluso, seconded by Councilmember Allison Heyward  AYE: Councilmember Paul Macaluso, Councilmember Ben Guerrero, Councilmember Allison Heyward NAY: Mayor Pro Tem Tim Brown, Councilmember Mark Davis, Councilmember Michelle Watson, Councilmember Robert Westbrook Failed   13.Ordinance 25-M-034 - Amend the City of Schertz Code of Ordinances and certain other ordinances by amending and establishing fees for certain licenses, permits, and other services (S.Gonzalez/J.Walters) Mayor Gutierrez recognized Finance Director James Walters, who introduced Ordinance 25-M-034 amending and establishing fees for certain licenses, permits, and other services. He provided a listing of the proposed amendments and explained the justification. He then introduced Mr. Dan Jackson, Willdan Financial Services, who provided a presentation on the Water/Wastewater Drainage 5-year rate plan. He highlighted proposed increases, outlining the impact of the amendments on city operations. Mayor Gutierrez asked questions regarding storm water management programs and projects, specifically Cibolo Creek, and the sharing of costs with neighboring communities, which were addressed by Public Works Director Larry Busch. After brief Council discussion regarding the impact of the fee at $8 and the increase over time to $15, including the effect on the CIP, debt service, maintenance, etc., Mayor Gutierrez asked for a motion to approve Ordinance 25-M-034.       Moved by Councilmember Mark Davis, seconded by Councilmember Michelle Watson  AYE: Mayor Pro Tem Tim Brown, Councilmember Mark Davis, 6  AYE: Mayor Pro Tem Tim Brown, Councilmember Mark Davis, Councilmember Michelle Watson, Councilmember Paul Macaluso, Councilmember Ben Guerrero, Councilmember Robert Westbrook, Councilmember Allison Heyward Passed   Public Hearing   14.Mayor Gutierrez called for a short recess at 8:29 p.m. Mayor Gutierrez reconvened open session at 8:46 p.m. Ordinance 25-T-032 - Conduct a Public Hearing and Adopt a budget for the FY 2025-26 Annual Budget (S.Williams/S.Gonzalez/J.Walters) Mayor Gutierrez recognized Finance Director James Walters, who introduced Ordinance 25-T-032 to adopt the FY 2025-26 Annual Budget, beginning October 1, 2025, and ending September 30, 2026. He highlighted each fund and showed the supplemental requests submitted by staff. City Manager Steve Williams provided four budget options related to the tax rate, ECI, merit increases, and streets/sidewalks funds. Mayor Gutierrez stated this item is on the agenda as a public hearing. Public Hearing opened at 8:57 p.m. The following residents came forward to speak: Sarah Dunlap, speaking on behalf of Homestead Residential Master Association, located at 5853 Homestead Parkway. Currently, there are no crosswalks, and she is advocating for one at the amenity center as presented in the Traffic Safety package. Todd Vician, 8926 Green Grant, advocated for a no-new revenue tax rate, stating that property appraisals and tax increases are hurting renters as well homeowners. Public Hearing closed at 9:01 p.m. Mayor Gutierrez polled Council to get an idea on what tax rate each was proposing. 2 Councilmembers and Mayor supported no-new revenue rate of 50.64 2 Councilmembers supported 51.18 4 Councilmembers supported 51.90 Mayor Gutierrez stated that a vote of 5-2 is needed to pass the tax rate. He then opened the floor to Council for discussion. After much discussion, Councilmembers came to a consensus to adopt a 51.18 tax rate with 1% COLA and one-time streets/sidewalk funds. Mayor Gutierrez asked for a motion to approve Ordinance 25-T-032.    7 A motion to adopt ordinance 25-T-032 with a 1% COLA and one-time streets and sidewalks funds, was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Tim Brown, seconded by Councilmember Michelle Watson.    AYE: Mayor Pro Tem Tim Brown, Councilmember Michelle Watson, Councilmember Ben Guerrero, Councilmember Robert Westbrook, Councilmember Allison Heyward NAY: Councilmember Mark Davis, Councilmember Paul Macaluso Passed   Discussion and Action Items   15.Resolution 25-R-110 - Ratifying the property tax increase reflected in the Adopted Budget for FY 2025-26 (S.Gonzalez/J.Walters) Mayor Gutierrez recognized Finance Director James Walters, who introduced Resolution 25-R-110 to ratify the property tax increase reflected in the Adopted Budget for FY 2025-26. With a $0.5118 tax rate (1.1% increase), recurring funds of $317,000 will be allocated as 1% COLA and one-time funds of $315,000 will be allocated to Traffic Safety Projects and $100,000 will be allocated to Sidewalk Repair and Installation. Mayor Gutierrez opened the floor to Council for discussion. No discussion occurred. Councilmember Allison Heyward moved to approve Resolution 25-R-110 with the updated language: This budget will increase more total property taxes than previous year by $1,597,093 or 5.8% increase and of that amount, $1,205,226 is tax to be raised from new property added to the tax roll this year. Seconded by Councilmember Michelle Watson.       AYE: Mayor Pro Tem Tim Brown, Councilmember Michelle Watson, Councilmember Ben Guerrero, Councilmember Robert Westbrook, Councilmember Allison Heyward NAY: Councilmember Mark Davis, Councilmember Paul Macaluso Passed   Public Hearings   Ordinance 25-T-033 – Conduct a Public Hearing and approve an Ordinance approving the    8 Ordinance 25-T-033 – Conduct a Public Hearing and approve an Ordinance approving the appraisal roll; setting the tax rate; levying and assessing general and special ad valorem taxes for the use and support of the municipal government of the City of Schertz, Texas (S.Gonzalez/J.Walters) Mayor Gutierrez recognized Finance Director James Walters, who introduced Ordinance 25-T-033. Mr. Walters stated that they discovered the notice on the website was not sufficient to meet state standards, so Council would not be able to adopt the tax rate at this meeting. Staff would republish the notice and adopt the rate at the next City Council meeting, September 2, 2025. Public hearing could still be held. He then explained the changes in tax revenue and foregone taxes. Mayor Gutierrez stated this item is on the agenda as a public hearing. Public Hearing opened at 9:36 p.m. No public came forward to speak. Public Hearing closed at 9:36 p.m. Mayor Gutierrez opened the floor to Council for discussion. No discussion occurred. Mayor Gutierrez stated a second public hearing would be held at the City Council Meeting on September 2, 2025.      Workshop   17.Discuss which land use regulations the Council desires to adopt and enforce via an ordinance given their authority to regulate land uses in the area in the manner recommended by the most recent joint land use study depending on the outcome of the November 5, 2025 Special Election (Mayor/S.Edmondson) Mayor Gutierrez recognized City Secretary Sheila Edmondson who opened discussion on the land use regulations Council desires to adopt and enforce via ordinance following the November 5, 2025, Special Election. She stated there would be two public hearings regarding the special election. The first is to be held at the City Council Meeting on September 2, 2025, and the second one at the City Council Meeting on September 16, 2025. Notice of Special Election will be published in the San Antonio Express News on October 15, 2025. She then introduced Deputy City Manager Brian James, who explained the two options (full annexation or land use controls) being brought forward to voters. The options are based on the Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) done in July 2015. If voters opt for the land use regulations, Council will have to adopt an ordinance creating those regulations based on the JLUS.      Mayor Gutierrez recessed to closed session at 9:57 p.m. Closed Session   9 18.The City Council will meet in Closed Session in accordance with Section 551.071 of the Texas Government Code to receive legal advice from its attorney regarding the impact of recent legislative changes to legal requirements associated with land use matters. Mayor Gutierrez stated discussion with the city attorney regarding the impact of recent legislative changes to legal requirements associated with land use matters began at 10:05 p.m. and ended at 10:17 p.m.   19.The City Council will meet in closed session under Section 551.074 of the Texas Government Code, Personnel Matters, to conduct the annual evaluation of the City Manager, Mr. Steve Williams. Mayor Gutierrez stated that discussion regarding the annual evaluation of the City Manager, Mr. Steve Williams began at 10:20 p.m. and ended at 11:28 p.m.      Reconvene into Regular Session Mayor Gutierrez reconvened Regular Session at 11:29 p.m.   20.Take any action based on discussion held in Closed Session under Agenda Item # 18. No action was taken on Agenda Item #18.   21.Take any action based on discussion held in Closed Session under Agenda Item # 19. Mayor Gutierrez stated there were three actions taken under Agenda Item #19. Mayor Gutierrez asked for a motion to accept the new severance package. Moved by Councilmember Michelle Watson, seconded by Councilmember Robert Westbrook. AYE: Mayor Pro Tem Tim Brown, Councilmember Mark Davis, Councilmember Michelle Watson, Councilmember Paul Macaluso, Councilmember Ben Guerrero, Councilmember Robert Westbrook, Councilmember Allison Heyward. Passed Mayor Gutierrez asked for motion to approve the new three-year contract for the city manager. Moved by Councilmember Michelle Watson, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Tim Brown. AYE: Mayor Pro Tem Tim Brown, Councilmember Mark Davis, Councilmember Michelle Watson, Councilmember Paul Macaluso, 10 Councilmember Michelle Watson, Councilmember Paul Macaluso, Councilmember Ben Guerrero, Councilmember Robert Westbrook, Councilmember Allison Heyward. Passed Mayor Gutierrez asked for motion to approve the 1% COLA increase for the city manager's compensation. Moved by Councilmember Michelle Watson, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Tim Brown. AYE: Mayor Pro Tem Tim Brown, Councilmember Mark Davis, Councilmember Michelle Watson, Councilmember Paul Macaluso, Councilmember Ben Guerrero, Councilmember Robert Westbrook, Councilmember Allison Heyward. Passed All motions have an August 19, 2025, effective date.   Information available in City Council Packets - NO DISCUSSION TO OCCUR   Requests and Announcements Requests by Mayor and Councilmembers for updates or information from Staff No requests for updates or information for staff were made. Requests by Mayor and Councilmembers that items or presentations be placed on a future City Council agenda No requests for items or presentations to be placed on a future City Council agenda. City and Community Events attended and to be attended (Council) Councilmember Mark Davis attended the Schertz Housing Authority meeting. Councilmember Ben Guerrero attended the VFW breakfast. Councilmember Robert Westbrook attended an opening for an orthopedic practice for The Chamber, and the Northeast Partnership Luncheon. Councilmember Allison Heyward attended the Main Street Committee meeting, the Northeast Partnership Luncheon, The Chamber Luncheon.   Adjournment Mayor Gutierrez adjourned the meeting at 11:32 p.m.   _______________________________ Ralph Gutierrez, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ Sheila Edmondson, City Secretary 11 12 Agenda No. 2.   CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM    City Council Meeting:September 02, 2025 Department:Planning & Community Development Subject: Resolution 25-R-113 - Authorizing an amendment to the Park Improvement Agreement for The Parklands Subdivision and Parklands II Subdivision (B.James/L.Wood/S.Haas) BACKGROUND On November 28, 2017, City Council approved Resolution 17-R-105 which authorized a Parkland Improvement Agreement with Parklands Subdivision Unit 1 and Unit 2 to defer construction of public parkland until a later stage in the development. At the time, the developer was to construct the public parkland prior to recorded the plat for The Parklands Unit 3. The agreement was amended in 2020 as the Parklands development was split into separate subdivisions known as The Parklands and Parklands II. The public parkland was then deferred to be constructed until January 2023. The agreement was amended again in 2023 to extend the parkland construction to July of 2024. The developer was unable to complete the public parkland in this time frame. The developer reached out and informed staff that parkland construction was underway but that the current agreement needed to be amended again to match the timeline on the ground.  The amendment extends the deadline for the construction of the parkland until the end of 2025.   GOAL Provide for the orderly development of park improvements in the City of Schertz.  COMMUNITY BENEFIT Provide for development of park improvements in a timely, cost-effective manner.  SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED ACTION Approval of Resolution 25-R-113 authorizing an amendment to the Park Improvement Agreement for The Parklands Subdivision and Parklands II Subdivision to allow the deferral of the construction of park improvements to the end of 2025.   RECOMMENDATION Approval of Resolution 25-R-113.  Attachments Resolution 25-R-113 with Exhibits Original Parkland Agreement RESOLUTION 25-R-113 A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE PARKLAND IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT WITH ROLLING HILLS RANCH DEVELOPMENT LTD AND SCAPPY DEVELOPMENT, LLC FOR THE PARKLANDS SUBDIVISION AND PARKLANDS II SUBDIVISION. WHEREAS, the CITY and landowner have entered into a Parkland Improvement Agreement pursuant to City of Schertz Code of Municipal Ordinances Section 21.4.15.F.1 and 21.9.10.F of the City's Unified Development Code to defer the construction of parkland improvements, and required recordation of the final plat for The Parklands Subdivision Unit 3A and Parklands II Subdivision Unit 2 to be no later than July 1, 2024, and; WHEREAS, the Agreement was filed for record with the Guadalupe County Clerk on February 6, 2023, Document # 202399002819; and WHEREAS, plats have been filed for The Parklands and Parklands II Subdivisions; and WHEREAS, the Developer has requested that Section 2.11 of the Agreement be amended to allow the Developer to record final plats for The Parklands Subdivision Unit 3A, and/or The Parklands Subdivision Unit 3B; and WHEREAS, the Developer has requested that Section 2.13 of the Agreement be amended to extend the completion date of the parkland improvements; and WHEREAS, the City staff is agreeable to this amendment, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is in the best interest of the City to enter into the amended agreement with the Developer to defer the construction of the public parkland until the end of 2025. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS THAT: Section 1. The City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute the amendment to the Agreement generally in the form attached subject to approval of minor changes approved by the City Attorney as shown on Exhibit “A”. Section 2. The recitals contained in the preamble hereof are hereby found to be true, and such recitals are hereby made a part of this Resolution for all purposes and are adopted as a part of the judgment and findings of the City Council. Section 3. All resolutions, or parts thereof, which are in conflict or inconsistent with any provision of this Resolution are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict, and the provisions of this Resolution shall be and remain controlling as to the matters resolved herein. Section 4. This Resolution shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas and the United States of America. Section 5. If any provision of this Resolution or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall be held to be invalid, the remainder of this Resolution and the application of such provision to other persons and circumstances shall nevertheless be valid, and the City Council hereby declares that this Resolution would have been enacted without such invalid provision. Section 6. It is officially found, determined, and declared that the meeting at which this Resolution is adopted was open to the public and public notice of the time, place, and subject matter of the public business to be considered at such meeting, including this Resolution, was given, all as required by Chapter 551, Texas Government Code, as amended. Section 7. This Resolution shall be in force and effect from and after its final passage, and it is so resolved. PASSED and ADOPTED, this ____day of ________ 2025. CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS _____________________________ Ralph Gutierrez, Mayor ATTEST: Sheree Courney, Deputy City Secretary Exhibit “A” The Parklands – Parkland II Amendment AMENDMENT TO THE PARKLAND IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE PARKLANDS SUBDIVSION AND THE PARKLANDS II SUBDIVISION This Amendment to the Amended and Restated Parkland Improvement Agreement (“Amendment”) is entered into to be effective as of__________________________________ by and between the City of Schertz (hereinafter “CITY”) a Texas Home Rule municipality and The Parklands Units 1 and 2, Ltd., Rolling Hills Ranch Development, Ltd., and Scrappy Development, LLC (hereinafter “DEVELOPER”) a Limited Partnership created under the laws of Texas, collectively, the “PARTIES”. WHEREAS, the City and Developer have entered into a Parkland Improvement Agreement (“AGREEMENT”) pursuant to City of Schertz Code of Municipal Ordinances Section 21.4.15.F.1 and 21.9.10.F of the City's Unified Development Code to defer the construction of parkland improvements, and required recordation of the final plat for The Parklands Subdivision Unit 3A and Parklands II Subdivision Unit 2 to be no later than July 1, 2024, and, WHEREAS, the Agreement was filed for record with the Guadalupe County Clerk on February 6, 2023 Document # 202399002819; and WHEREAS, plats have been filed for The Parklands and Parklands II Subdivisions; and WHEREAS, the Developer has requested that Section 2.11 of the Agreement be amended to allow the Developer to record final plats for The Parklands Subdivision Unit 3A, and/or The Parklands Subdivision Unit 3B; and WHEREAS, the Developer has requested that Section 2.13 of the Agreement be amended to extend the completion date of the parkland improvements; and WHEREAS, the City is agreeable to this amendment, NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, benefits and agreements described and contained in this Amendment, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged and further described herein, the Parties agree as follows: SECTION 2 AMENDED AS FOLLOWS: 2.11. The City shall allow the Developer to record final plats for The Parklands Subdivision Unit 3A, and/or The Parklands Subdivision Unit 3B in order to facilitate land dedication and improvement construction within the public parkland. The City shall allow permitting and construction of the public parkland improvements prior to final plat recordation of The Parklands Subdivision Unit 3A. Final plat for The Parklands Subdivision Unit 3A must be recorded prior to City acceptance of the public park improvements. 2.13. In the event Developers fail to fully complete construction of the Park Improvements by December 31, 2025 in the manner prescribed herein, the City may declare this Agreement to be in default and at the City’s sole discretion: (i) Require that all Improvements be installed by Developers regardless of the extent of completion of the improvements on the Property at the time this Agreement is declared to be in default; (i) Unilaterally draw from the Surety a sufficient amount to complete the Improvements itself or through a third party; or (ii) Assign the Surety to any third party, including a subsequent owner of the Property, provided that such funds shall only be assigned for the purpose of causing the construction of the Park Improvements by such third party and for no other purpose and in exchange for the subsequent owner’s agreement and posting of security to complete the Park Improvements. (iii) Withdraw a lump sum payment from the Surety at the rate of $1,000 per platted buildable lot ($350 for parkland dedication and $650 for park improvements) to be accepted by the City as a fee-in-lieu of parkland dedication and improvement. Any remaining surety would be released by the City. ALL TERMS NOT DEFINED IN THIS AMENDMENT SHALL HAVE THE MEANING ASCRIBED TO THEM IN THE AGREEMENT. THE REMAINING PROVISIONS OF THE AGREEMENT SHALL REMAIN IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT. THIS AMENDMENT MAY BE EXECUTED IN MULTIPLE COUNTERPARTS, WHICH COLLECTIVELY, WILL BE CONSTRUED AS AN ORIGINAL. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, THE PARTIES HERETO HAVE EXECUTED THIS AMENDMENT TO THE PARKLANDS AND PARKLANDS II SUBDIVISION PARKLANDS IMPROVEMENTS ON THE DATE SET FORTH ABOVE. [Signatures and acknowledgments on the following pages] . Signature Page to the Amendment to the Parkland Improvement Agreement This Parkland Improvement Agreement has been executed by the parties as of the dates of the Acknowledgments to be effective as of the Effective Date. Developer: PARKLANDS UNITS 1 & 2 LTD By: Its Sole General Partner: BITTERBLUE, INC., a Texas corporation By: Name: Title: Date: THE STATE OF TEXAS § § COUNTY OF __________ § This instrument was acknowledged before me on the ____ day of ________, 2025 by ___________________, President of Bitterblue, Inc., a Texas corporation, the sole General Partner of Parklands Units 1 & 2, Ltd., a Texas limited partnership, on behalf of said limited partnership. (SEAL) Notary Public in and for The State of Texas My Commission Expires: Signature Page to Parkland Improvement Agreement This Parkland Improvement Agreement has been executed by the parties as of the dates of the Acknowledgments to be effective as of the Effective Date. Developer: ROLLING HILLS RANCH DEVELOPMENT LTD By: Its Sole General Partner: ROLLING HILLS RANCH MANAGEMENT, L.C., a Texas limited liability company By: Name: Title: Date: THE STATE OF TEXAS § § COUNTY OF __________ § This instrument was acknowledged before me on the ____ day of ________, 2025 by _____________, ________________ of Rolling Hills Ranch Management, L.C., a Texas limited liability company, the sole General Partner of Rolling Hills Ranch Development, Ltd., a Texas limited partnership, on behalf of said limited partnership. (SEAL) Notary Public in and for The State of Texas My Commission Expires: Signature Page to Parkland Improvement Agreement This Parkland Improvement Agreement has been executed by the parties as of the dates of the Acknowledgments to be effective as of the Effective Date. Developer: SCRAPPY DEVELOPMENT, LLC By: Name: Gordon V. Hartman Title: President Date: THE STATE OF TEXAS § § COUNTY OF __________ § This instrument was acknowledged before me on the ____ day of ________, 2025 by Gordon V. Hartman, President of Scrappy Development, LLC, a Texas limited liability company, on behalf of said limited liability company. (SEAL) Notary Public in and for The State of Texas My Commission Expires: Signature Page to Parkland Improvement Agreement This Parkland Improvement Agreement has been executed by the parties as of the dates of the Acknowledgments to be effective as of the Effective Date. City: CITY OF SCHERTZ, a Texas municipal corporation By: Name: _____________________________ Date: THE STATE OF TEXAS § § COUNTY OF GUADALUPE § This instrument was acknowledged before me on the ____ day of _________, 2025 by Steve Williams, City Manager of the City of Schertz, Texas, a Texas municipal corporation, on behalf of said City. (SEAL) Notary Public in and for The State of Texas My Commission Expires: Agenda No. 3.   CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM    City Council Meeting:September 02, 2025 Department:Human Resources Subject: Resolution 25-R-118 - Authorizing an agreement with Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas for medical insurance for plan year 2026 (S.Gonzalez/J.Kurz) BACKGROUND As part of the ongoing effort to combat rising healthcare premiums and develop a long-term sustainable benefits strategy, the City issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for medical insurance for plan year 2026. Three proposals were received from Cigna (current carrier), Blue Cross Blue Shield, and United Healthcare. Prior to releasing the RFP, staff conducted a benchmark benefit analysis (specifically looking at plan design offerings) of Cibolo, Seguin, New Braunfels and San Marcos. Schertz continues to far surpass our peer cities relative to the level of benefit offered by our medical plans. In consultation with our benefits broker, staff has been exploring ways to maintain competitive benefit offerings while managing rising healthcare costs, especially in a tight budget environment. One such strategy is re-evaluating our plan designs and introducing incremental changes that will maximize premium savings. In this vein, proposals reflected some plan design changes, namely to maximum out-of-pocket (OOP) amounts and out-of-network benefit coverage.  Proposed Plan Design Changes:  Increase Max OOP by $1,000 on all medical plans1. Reduce Out of Network benefits after deductible from 60% to 50% coinsurance2. Introduce 10% coinsurance on High Deductible Health Plan (HDHP). Plan pays 90% after deductible instead of 100% (until OOP max is reached) 3. With their initial proposal, United Healthcare was the least competitive of all the carriers, and they were not included in Best and Final Offers (BAFO). Below is a summary of Cigna and BCBS BAFOs. Cigna BAFO: +6.5% increase across all plans. No rate cap offered for 2027. BCBS BAFO: +1.96% increase on HDHP only. Rate pass on PPO plans. 15% rate cap offered for 2027. Staff has concluded that BCBS is offering the best value medical plans to the City, and recommends contracting with BCBS for plan year 2026.  GOAL Enter into an agreement with Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas for medical insurance coverage for plan year 2026.  COMMUNITY BENEFIT Through this RFP process, the City was able to effectively negotiate competitive medical benefits Through this RFP process, the City was able to effectively negotiate competitive medical benefits with minimal fiscal impact. This demonstrates staff's commitment to exercising fiscal stewardship and ensuring that we are providing the best value to our current employees, retirees, and ultimately, the taxpayers. Additionally, offering competitive and affordable benefits is an integral part of the City's total compensation strategy to more effectively recruit and retain top talent.   SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED ACTION Approve Resolution 25-R-118  FISCAL IMPACT With the switch to BCBS, there will be a 1.96% increase in premiums on the HDHP, which is approximately $16,500 (fund breakdown below). There will be no fiscal impact to the PPO plans. General Fund = $12,705 Water = $1,155 EMS = $2,310 Drainage = $165  RECOMMENDATION Approve Resolution 25-R-118  Attachments Resolution 25-R-118 CC Presentation 9-2-25 RESOLUTION 25-R-118 A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT WITH BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD OF TEXAS FOR MEDICAL INSURANCE WHEREAS, the City solicited proposals from insurance carriers for medical insurance for plan year 2026; and WHEREAS, after analysis of the responses, City staff and the City’s insurance broker are confident that Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas can provide insurance coverage and services at the best value; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to contract with Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas for medical insurance. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS THAT: Section 1. The City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager to enter into an agreement with Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas for medical insurance. Section 2. The recitals contained in the preamble hereof are hereby found to be true, and such recitals are hereby made a part of this Resolution for all purposes and are adopted as a part of the judgment and findings of the City Council. Section 3. All resolutions, or parts thereof, which are in conflict or inconsistent with any provision of this Resolution are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict, and the provisions of this Resolution shall be and remain controlling as to the matters resolved herein. Section 4. This Resolution shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas and the United States of America. Section 5. If any provision of this Resolution or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall be held to be invalid, the remainder of this Resolution and the application of such provision to other persons and circumstances shall nevertheless be valid, and the City Council hereby declares that this Resolution would have been enacted without such invalid provision. Section 6. It is officially found, determined, and declared that the meeting at which this Resolution is adopted was open to the public and public notice of the time, place, and subject matter of the public business to be considered at such meeting, including this Resolution, was given, all as required by Chapter 551, Texas Government Code, as amended. Section 7. This Resolution shall be in force and effect from and after its final passage, and it is so resolved. - 2 - PASSED AND ADOPTED, this _______ day of _____________, 2025 CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS Ralph Gutierrez, Mayor ATTEST: Sheila Edmondson, City Secretary 2026 Medical Insurance RFP 2025-003 9/2/2025 City Council Meeting Jessica Kurz | Director | Human Resources Background •Current Medical Carrier – Cigna Healthcare •Healthcare trends/costs àUnsustainable premium costs •Issued RFP for medical coverage •3 proposals received: Cigna, BCBSTX, United •Responses included proposals with plan design changes •After initial evaluation, most competitive vendors were invited to submit BAFOs. •Conducted benchmark benefit analysis 2 Benchmark Analysis 3 Proposed Plan Design Changes 4  Base PPO Buy Up PPO HDHP Increase Max OOP by $1,000 Current: $3,000 / $6,000 Proposed: $4,000 / $7,000 Current: $3,000 / $6,000 Proposed: $4,000 / $7,000 Current: $3,300 / $6,000 Proposed: $4,300 / $7,000 Reduce Out of Network Benefit Current: 60% coinsurance after deductible Proposed: 50% coinsurance after deductible Introduce 10% coinsurance on HDHP N/A N/A Current: Plan pays 100% after deductible* Proposed: Plan pays 90% after deductible* *until max OOP reached BAFO Summary CIGNA BCBSTX •+6.5% rate increase across all plans • No rate cap offered for 2027 •$100K wellness, communication, tech fund •+1.96% Rate Increase on HDHP only •Rate Pass (no increase) on PPO plans •15% Rate Cap offered for 2027 •6.5% increase = approx. $400K •1.96% HDHP increase = approx. $16.5K General Fund = $12,705 Water = $1,155 EMS = $2,310 Drainage = $165 •No fiscal impact to PPO plans Proposal Costs *United was least competitive carrier and did not participate in BAFOs. Next Steps •Council Approval of Resolution 25-R-118 •Work with broker, carriers & ADP on implementation for 1/1/26 plan start •Employee Communication •Open Enrollment – October 2025 •FY 26 •Continue review of current insurance plan designs in an effort to develop a long- term (sustainable) strategies for managing rising healthcare costs. 6 COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS 7 Agenda No. 4.   CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM    City Council Meeting:September 02, 2025 Department:Planning & Community Development Subject: Ordinance 25-S-035 - Conduct a public hearing and consider a request for a Specific Use Permit to allow Mixed-Use Self-Storage in General Business District (GB) on approximately 2.14 acres, located along the IH-35 North access road, approximately 900 feet west of the intersection of IH-35 and Cibolo Valley Drive, more specifically known as a portion of Guadalupe County Property Identification Number 62840, City of Schertz, Guadalupe County, Texas (B.James/L.Wood/W.Willingham) BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting a Specific Use Permit to allow Mixed-Use Self-Storage in General Business District (GB) on approximately 2.14 acres of land. The subject property is currently undeveloped and not platted. Unified Development Code Article 16 defines Mixed-Use Self-Storage as a climate-controlled building containing ground floor retail, service, or office space with separate, individual storage units for rent or lease. The conduct of sales, business, or any activity other than storage shall be prohibited within the individual storage units and such buildings shall be a minimum of 45 feet in height. As per UDC Section 21.5.8, a Specific Use Permit is required for Mixed-Use Self-Storage in General Business District (GB). More specifically, the applicant is proposing a four-story Mixed-Use Self-Storage building to include approximately 4,230 square feet of retail/office flex space as part of the ground floor of the building. On July 25, 2025, four (4) public hearing notices were mailed to the surrounding property owners within a 200-foot boundary of the subject property. At the time of the staff report, zero (0) responses in favor, zero (0) responses neutral, and zero (0) responses in opposition have been received. A public hearing notice was published in the "San Antonio Express" on August 13, 2025 prior to the City Council Meeting. Additionally, one (1) notification sign was placed on the property along the IH-35 access road. Subject Property:   Zoning Land Use Existing General Business District (GB)Undeveloped Proposed General Business District with Specific Use Permit to allow Mixed-Use Self-Storage Mixed-Use Self-Storage and Retail Adjacent Properties:    Zoning Land Use North General Business District (GB)Undeveloped  South Right-of-Way IH-35 East General Business District (GB)Undeveloped West Manufacturing District-Light (M-1)Electric Substation GOAL The proposed Specific Use Permit is to allow Mixed-Use Self-Storage in General Business District (GB) on approximately 2.14 acres of land.  COMMUNITY BENEFIT It is the City’s desire to promote safe, orderly, efficient development and ensure compliance with the City’s vision of future growth.  SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED ACTION When considering specific use permit requests, staff considers the criteria listed in UDC Section 21.5.11.D. The criteria are listed below. 1. The proposed use at the specified location is consistent with the policies of the adopted Comprehensive Land Plan, or any other applicable adopted plans. The proposed Specific Use Permit for Mixed-Use Self-Storage is consistent with the policies of the adopted Comprehensive Land Plan. The Comprehensive Land Plan designates this subject property as Regional Corridor. The Regional Corridor designation is intended for commercial and entertainment areas along major thoroughfares that serve populations within the city and the broader region. This includes regional shopping centers, department stores, and office buildings to include limited industrial and logistics uses, which are currently existing uses in the Regional Corridor land use type. The applicant is proposing a Mixed-Use Self-Storage building to include retail/office flex space on the ground floor of the development. 2. The proposed use is consistent with the general purpose and intent of the applicable zoning district regulations. General Business District (GB) is intended to provide suitable areas for the development of non-residential uses which offer a wide variety of retail and service establishments that are generally oriented toward serving the overall needs of the entire community. These businesses are usually located on appropriately designed and attractively landscaped sites along principal transportation corridors. The proposed Specific Use Permit to allow Mixed-Use Self-Storage allows for retail and offices on the first floor of a multi-level enclosed storage facility located along the IH-35 access road.  3. The proposed use is compatible with and preserves the character and integrity of adjacent developments and neighborhoods. The subject property is surrounded by other General Business District (GB) properties and is compatible with the surrounding properties. To the east of the subject property exists undeveloped property zoned as (GB) while approximately 300 feet north of the property exists an electrical substation. The parcel of land to the north and east of this property is also zoned as Manufacturing District-Light (M-1) further north from the IH-35 frontage.  4. The proposed use will not adversely affect the overall health, safety, or general welfare of the City. As part of promoting health, safety, and welfare, the City should encourage development compatible with surrounding uses utilizing standards and transitional uses to alleviate negative impacts. Due to the existing General Business District (GB) zoning of the surrounding properties and the location of the subject property on IH-35, the proposed Specific Use Permit to allow Mixed-Use Self-Storage in General Business District (GB) would not pose an adverse impact on adjacent properties. The City of Schertz Fire, EMS, and Police Departments have been notified of the specific use permit and have not provided any specific concerns relating to this request. 5. Whether other factors are deemed relevant and important in the consideration of the Specific Use Permit. Staff has ensured all Unified Development Code requirements have been met for the proposed Specific Use Permit. The public hearing and City Council discussion is an environment where the City Council can discuss other criteria relevant to the consideration of the Specific Use Permit.  RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of Ordinance 25-S-035, the Specific Use Permit to allow Mixed-Use Self-Storage at the subject property, conditioned upon the following: 1. A building permit is approved within two (2) years of the adoption of the SUP ordinance in accordance with Unified Development Code Article 5, Section 21.5.11.F Expiration of Specific Use Permit. 2. Twenty-Five (25%) of the usable square footage of the first floor of the proposed Mixed-Use Self-Storage building be for office, service, or retail space, separate from the individual units for rent or lease, and must be along the side of the building facing the IH-35 street frontage. The Planning and Zoning Commission met on August 6, 2025 and made a recommendation to approve the proposed specific use permit with conditions as presented by staff, to City Council, with a 6-0 vote.   Attachments Ordinance 25-S-035 with attachments Public Hearing Notice Map Aerial Exhibit  Metes and Bounds City Council Presentation Slides ORDINANCE 25-S-035 AN ORDINANCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS TO APPROVE A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT TO ALLOW MIXED-USE SELF-STORAGE IN GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT (GB) ON APPROXIMATELY 2.14 ACRES, LOCATED ALONG THE IH-35 NORTH ACCESS ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 900 FEET WEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF IH-35 AND CIBOLO VALLEY DRIVE, MORE SPECIFICALLY KNOWN AS A PORTION OF GUADALUPE COUNTY PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER 62840, CITY OF SCHERTZ, GUADALUPE COUNTY, TEXAS WHEREAS, an application for a Specific Use Permit to allow Mixed-Use Self-Storage in General Business District (GB) on approximately 2.14 acres, located along the IH -35 North access road, approximately 900 feet west of the intersection of IH-35 and Cibolo Valley Drive, more specifically known as a portion of Guadalupe County Property Identification Number 62840, more specifically described in Exhibit A (herein, the “Property”) has been filed with the City; and WHEREAS, the City’s Unified Development Code Section 21.5.11. D. provides for certain criteria to be considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission in making recommendations to City Council and by City Council in considering final action on a requested specific use permit (the “Criteria”); and WHEREAS, on August 6, 2025, the Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing and, after considering the Criteria, made a recommendation to City Council to approve the Specific Use Permit for Mixed-Use Self-Storage; and WHEREAS, on September 2, 2025 the City Council conducted a public hearing and after considering the Criteria and recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission, determined that the requested Specific Use Permit be approved as provided for herein. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS THAT: Section 1. A Specific Use Permit for a portion of Guadalupe County Property ID 62840, more particularly described in the attached Exhibit A, is hereby approved to allow Mixed- Use Self-Storage conditioned upon the following occurring: a) A building permit is approved within two (2) years of the adoption of the SUP Ordinance in accordance with Unified Development Code Article 5, Section 21.5.11.F Expiration of Specific Use Permit. b) Twenty-five percent (25%) of the usable square footage of the first floor of the proposed Mixed-Use Self-Storage building be for office, service, or retail space, separate from the individual self-storage units for rent or lease. Section 2. The recitals contained in the preamble hereof are hereby found to be true, and such recitals are hereby made a part of this Ordinance for all purposes and are adopted as a part of the judgment and findings of the Council. Section 3. All ordinances and codes, or parts thereof, which are in conflict or inconsistent with any provision of this Ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict, and the provisions of this Ordinance shall be and remain controlling as to the mat ters resolved herein. Section 4. This Ordinance shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas and the United States of America. Section 5. If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall be held to be invalid, the remainder of this Ordinance and the application of such provision to other persons and circumstances shall nevertheless be valid, and the City hereby declares that this Ordinance would have been enacted without such invalid provision. Section 6. It is officially found, determined, and declared that the meeting at which this Ordinance is adopted was open to the public and public notice of the time, place, and subject matter of the public business to be considered at such meeting, including this Ordinance, was given, all as required by Chapter 551, as amended, Texas Government Code. Section 7. This Ordinance shall be effective upon the date of final adoption hereof and any publication required by law. Section 8. This Ordinance shall be cumulative of all other ordinances of the City of Schertz, and this Ordinance shall not operate to repeal or affect any other ordinances of the City of Schertz except insofar as the provisions thereof might be inconsistent or in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance, in which event such conflicting provisions, if any, are hereby repealed. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED on this ___ day of __________, 2025. CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS _____________________________ Ralph Gutierrez, Mayor ATTEST: Sheila Edmondson, City Secretary Exhibit “A” Property Description- Legal Metes and Bounds INTER S T A T E H I G H W A Y N O . 3 5 2.142 ACRES (93,319 SQ. FT. MORE OR LESS) N2 8 ° 1 6 ' 2 0 " W 4 8 0 . 0 0 ' N60°10'26"E 199.65' S3 0 ° 0 2 ' 1 3 " E 2 2 7 . 0 0 ' S 4 7 ° 0 2 ' 1 3 " E 1 5 2 . 0 0 ' S37°46 ' 0 0 " W 2 1 2 . 3 1 ' S36°56 ' 2 7 " W 6 7 . 6 9 ' GUA D A L U P E C O U N T Y COM A L C O U N T Y PROJECT NAME: AL T A / N S P S L A N D T I T L E S U R V E Y 30126-00 1 1 BRUNDAGE CIBOLO VALLEY LOCATION MAP REFERENCE: --- A 2. 1 4 2 AC R E , OR 93 , 3 1 9 SQ U A R E FE E T MO R E OR LE S S , TR A C T OF LA N D OU T OF TH E RE M A I N I N G PO R T I O N OF A CA L L E D 99 . 5 AC R E TR A C T OF LA N D , DE S C R I B E D IN A DE E D TO HA R T M A N N LA N D & CA T T L E CO . , LT D . , RE C O R D E D IN VO L U M E 29 2 5 , PA G E 81 3 , OF TH E OF F I C I A L PU B L I C RE C O R D S OF GU A D A L U P E CO U N T Y , TE X A S , FU R T H E R DE S C R I B E D AS TH E RE M A I N I N G PO R T I O N OF A CA L L E D 13 4 . 0 4 AC R E TR A C T OF LA N D , RE C O R D E D IN VO L U M E 34 4 , PA G E 38 1 , OF TH E DE E D RE C O R D S OF GU A D A L U P E CO U N T Y , TE X A S , AN D IN VO L U M E 12 7 , PA G E 55 , OF TH E DE E D RE C O R D S OF CO M A L CO U N T Y , T E X A S , O U T O F T H E J A C O B D E C O R D O V A S U R V E Y N O . 5 1 4 , A B S T R A C T 1 1 7 , I N G U A D A L U P E C O U N T Y , T E X A S . 1 6 7 2 I N D E P E N D E N C E D R , S T E 1 0 2 I N E W B R A U N F E L S , T X 7 8 1 3 2 I 8 3 0 . 6 3 2 . 5 6 3 3 T E X A S E N G I N E E R I N G F I R M # 4 7 0 I T E X A S S U R V E Y I N G F I R M # 1 0 0 2 8 8 0 0 TO: MCM RANCH CO., LTD.; HARTMANN LAND & CATTLE CO., LTD.; KEITH KLABUNDE; BRANDA FUHRMANN; KIMBERLEY WILLIAMS AND JAMIE KLABUNDE; THOMAS O. BRUNDAGE; HOWDY NEIGHBORS, LLC; AND ALAMO TITLE COMPANY, THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP OR PLAT AND THE SURVEY ON WHICH IT IS BASED WERE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 2021 MINIMUM STANDARD DETAIL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEYS, JOINTLY ESTABLISHED AND ADOPTED BY ALTA AND NSPS, AND INCLUDES ITEMS 1-4, 8, AND 9 OF TABLE A THEREOF. THE FIELD WORK WAS COMPLETED ON MAY 21, 2025. DATE OF MAP OR PLAT: MAY 22, 2025 _______________________________________ JOSHUA M. TREE REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR NO. 7186 JTREE@PAPE-DAWSON.COM CITY OF SCHERTZ SITE NOTES: 1)THE BEARINGS FOR THIS SURVEY ARE BASED ON THE NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1983 (NA2011) EPOCH 2010.00, FROM THE TEXAS STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM ESTABLISHED FOR THE SOUTH CENTRAL ZONE. 2)VERTICAL DATUM IS BASED ON NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988, GEOID 12B. 3)CONTOURS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON AN ON THE GROUND SURVEY. FIELDWORK COMPLETED ON MAY 21, 2025. 4)THE COORDINATES SHOWN HERON ARE SURFACE VALUES USING A SURFACE ADJUSTMENT FACTOR OF 1.00015. THESE VALUES CAN BE CONVERTED TO STATE PLANE GRID COORDINATES BY APPLYING THE RECIPROCAL = 0.999850022496626 5)ILLUSTRATED UTILITIES ARE BASED ON FOUND VISIBLE EVIDENCE. THE LOCATION AND DEPTH OF EXISTING UTILITIES SHOULD BE FIELD VERIFIED BEFORE CONSTRUCTION. THE SURVEYOR DOES NOT HAVE KNOWLEDGE AS TO THE AVAILABILITY OF SERVICE TO, OR THE STATUS OF THE UTILITIES ON THIS SITE. 6)THE SURVEYOR DID NOT RESEARCH THE MINERAL TITLE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY OR ANY EXISTING OIL AND GAS LEASES WHICH MAY AFFECT THE USE OF SAID PROPERTY. P.O.B. METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION FOR A 2.142 ACRE, OR 93,319 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS, TRACT OF LAND OUT OF THE REMAINING PORTION OF A CALLED 99.5 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, DESCRIBED IN A DEED TO HARTMANN LAND & CATTLE CO., LTD., RECORDED IN VOLUME 2925, PAGE 813, OF THE OFFICIAL PUBLIC RECORDS OF GUADALUPE COUNTY, TEXAS, FURTHER DESCRIBED AS THE REMAINING PORTION OF A CALLED 134.04 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, RECORDED IN VOLUME 344, PAGE 381, OF THE DEED RECORDS OF GUADALUPE COUNTY, TEXAS, AND IN VOLUME 127, PAGE 55, OF THE DEED RECORDS OF COMAL COUNTY, TEXAS, OUT OF THE JACOB DE CORDOVA SURVEY NO. 514, ABSTRACT 117, IN GUADALUPE COUNTY, TEXAS. SAID 2.142 ACRE TRACT BEING MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS, WITH BEARINGS BASED ON THE TEXAS COORDINATE SYSTEM ESTABLISHED FOR THE SOUTH CENTRAL ZONE FROM THE NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1983 NAD 83 (NA2011) EPOCH 2010.00: BEGINNING:AT A FOUND ½” IRON ROD ON A NORTHEAST LINE OF A CALLED 6.335 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, RECORDED IN VOLUME 4022, PAGE 120, OF SAID OFFICIAL PUBLIC RECORDS, ON THE NORTHWEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF INTERSTATE HIGHWAY NO. 35, A VARIABLE WIDTH PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY, AND AT THE SOUTH CORNER OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED TRACT, FROM WHICH A FOUND TXDOT TYPE II MONUMENT AT THE SOUTHERNMOST CORNER OF SAID 6.335 ACRE TRACT, AT THE EAST CORNER OF LOT 2, BLOCK 1, OF SAN ANTONIO MACHINE & WELDING, RECORDED IN VOLUME 8, PAGE 452, OF SAID OFFICIAL PUBLIC RECORDS, AND AT AN ANGLE POINT IN THE NORTHWEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID INTERSTATE HIGHWAY NO. 35, BEARS S 36°56'27" W, A DISTANCE OF 63.60 FEET AND FROM WHICH A FOUND ½” IRON ROD WITH A RED CAP MARKED “CEC” AT THE EAST CORNER OF SAID 6.335 ACRE TRACT, BEARS S 28°16'20" E, A DISTANCE OF 5.76 FEET; THENCE:N 28°16'20" W, DEPARTING THE NORTHWEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID INTERSTATE HIGHWAY NO. 35, WITH SAID NORTHEAST LINE OF SAID 6.335 ACRE TRACT, A DISTANCE OF 480.00 FEET TO A SET ½” IRON ROD WITH A YELLOW CAP MARKED “PAPE-DAWSON” AT THE WEST CORNER OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED TRACT, FROM WHICH A FOUND ½” IRON ROD WITH A RED CAP MARKED “CEC” AT AN ANGLE POINT IN SAID NORTHEAST LINE OF SAID 6.335 ACRE TRACT, BEARS N 28°16'20" W, A DISTANCE OF 87.59 FEET; THENCE:DEPARTING SAID NORTHEAST LINE OF SAID 6.335 ACRE TRACT, OVER AND ACROSS SAID 99.5 ACRE TRACT, THE FOLLOWING BEARINGS AND DISTANCES: N 60°10'26" E, A DISTANCE OF 199.65 FEET TO A SET ½” IRON ROD WITH A YELLOW CAP MARKED “PAPE-DAWSON” AT THE NORTH CORNER OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED TRACT; S 30°02'13" E, A DISTANCE OF 227.00 FEET TO A SET ½” IRON ROD WITH A YELLOW CAP MARKED “PAPE-DAWSON”; AND S 47°02'13" E, A DISTANCE OF 152.00 FEET TO A SET MAG NAIL WITH A WASHER MARKED “PAPE-DAWSON” ON THE NORTHWEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID INTERSTATE HIGHWAY NO. 35 AND AT THE EAST CORNER OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED TRACT, FROM WHICH A FOUND ½” IRON ROD WITH A YELLOW CAP MARKED “PAPE-DAWSON” AT THE SOUTH CORNER OF A CALLED 6.85 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, RECORDED IN DOCUMENT NO. 202199043267, OF SAID OFFICIAL PUBLIC RECORDS, AND AT AN ANGLE POINT IN THE NORTHWEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID INTERSTATE HIGHWAY NO. 35, BEARS N 37°46'00" E, A DISTANCE OF 187.15 FEET; THENCE:WITH THE NORTHWEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID INTERSTATE HIGHWAY NO. 35, THE FOLLOWING BEARINGS AND DISTANCES: S 37°46'00" W, A DISTANCE OF 212.31 FEET TO A FOUND TXDOT TYPE II MONUMENT; AND S 36°56'27" W, A DISTANCE OF 67.69 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING AND CONTAINING 2.142 ACRES IN GUADALUPE COUNTY, TEXAS. DEED/PLAT REFERENCE LEGENDSYMBOL LEGEND LINE LEGEND ALTA/NSPS TABLE A NOTES: ITEM 1:MONUMENTS FOUND OR SET AT ALL MAJOR CORNERS AS SHOWN HEREON. ITEM 2:SUBJECT PROPERTY ADDRESS: IH 35 SCHERTZ, TX 78154 PER THE GUADALUPE APPRAISAL DISTRICT. ITEM 3:THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS WITHIN THE FOLLOWING FLOOD ZONE(S) AS DEPICTED ON THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (F.E.M.A.) FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP NUMBER 48187C0210F, DATED NOVEMBER 2, 2007 FOR GUADALUPE COUNTY, TEXAS AND INCORPORATED AREAS. THIS DATA IS AVAILABLE ON THE WEBSITE WWW.MSC.FEMA.GOV . ZONE X (UNSHADED), DEFINED AS: “OTHER AREAS; AREAS DETERMINED TO BE OUTSIDE 0.2% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOODPLAIN.” FLOOD LIMIT LINES DO NOT REPRESENT THAT THE PROPERTY WILL OR WILL NOT FLOOD. SUCH LINES AND AREAS ARE FROM SAID FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY DATA SOURCES AND ARE STATISTICAL ONLY. THE SURVEYOR ACCEPTS NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ACCURACY OF SAID DATA. ITEM 4:GROSS LAND AREA OF SUBJECT SITE IS 2.142 ACRES AS SHOWN HEREON. ITEM 8:SUBSTANTIAL FEATURES OBSERVED IN THE PROCESS OF CONDUCTING FIELDWORK SHOWN HEREON. ITEM 9:NO PARKING SPACES WERE OBSERVED AT THE TIME OF SURVEY. JACOB DE CORDOVA SURVEY NO. 514 ABSTRACT 117 GUADALUPE COUNTY REFERENCES: This survey was prepared in conjunction with, but not solely relying on, the Title Commitment listed below. Title Commitment:G.F. # SAT-03-4000032500159-CF Title Company: Alamo Title Insurance Date Issued:May 16, 2025 Effective Date:May 11, 2025 Only those matters identified in the Title Commitment and those that the surveyor was aware of at the time of this survey are shown. 1.The following restrictive covenants of record itemized below: Document No. 202199043268, Official Public Records, Guadalupe County, Texas. (APPLIES) Omitting any covenants or restrictions, if any, including but not limited to those based upon race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, familial status, marital status, disability, handicap, national origin, ancestry, or source of income, as set forth in applicable state or federal laws, except to the extent that said covenant or restriction is permitted by applicable law. 10.The following matters and all terms of the documents creating or offering evidence of the matters: f.100 foot wide electric easement, as shown on plat recorded in Volume 4, Page 313, Map and Plat Records, Guadalupe County, Texas. (DOES NOT APPLY, This document describes what appears to be a portion of an easement that applies to a property situated west of the herein described tract) g.Variable width electric easement and transmission tower, as shown on plat recorded in Volume 4, Page 313, Map and Plat Records, Guadalupe County, Texas. (DOES NOT APPLY) h.Easement(s) as provided therein, granted to City Public Service Board of San Antonio, dated May 30, 1970, recorded in Volume 430, Page 493, Deed Records, Guadalupe County, Texas. (DOES NOT APPLY) i.Easement(s) as provided therein, granted to City Public Service Board of San Antonio, dated January 5, 1970, recorded in Volume 179, Page 304, Deed Records, Comal County, Texas. (APPLIES - AS SHOWN) j.Controlled access to Highway Facility as described in Deed filed February 7, 1996 and recorded in Volume 1188, Page 650, Official Public Records, Guadalupe County, Texas. (APPLIES - AS SHOWN) k.Easement(s) as provided therein, granted to the city of San Antonio, dated December 28, 2012, recorded in Document No. 201306000120, Official Public Records, Comal County, Texas and Volume 4022, Page 110, Official Public Records, Guadalupe County, Texas. (DOES NOT APPLY) l.Easement(s) as provided therein, granted to the City of Schertz, dated November 11, 2021, recorded in Document No. 202199041800, Official Public Records, Guadalupe County, Texas. (APPLIES - AS SHOWN) m.Easement Agreement dated December 17, 2021, recorded in Document No. 202199043269, Official Public Records, Guadalupe County, Texas. (APPLIES - AS SHOWN) Last update: June 16th, 2025 City of Schertz, GIS Specialist: Alexa Venezia, avenezia@schertz.com (210) 619-1174 *The City of Schertz provides this Geographic Information System product "as is" without any express or implied warranty of any kind including but not limited to the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose. In no event shall The City of Schertz be liable for any special, indirect, or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever arising out of or in connection with the use of or performance of these materials. Information published in this product could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Periodical changes may be added to the information herein. The City of Schertz may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) described herein at any time.* City of Schertz Parcel ID: 62840 : 18111 IH 35 N (148816) 18115 IH 35 N (159705) IH 35 N (62840) 18279 IH 35 N (185564) CI B O L O V A L L E Y D R IH 3 5 N IH 3 5 N IH 3 5 N A C C E S S R D IH 3 5 N A C C E S S R D IH 3 5 N A C C E S S R D IH 3 5 N A C C E S S R D 0 100 200 30050 Feet Project Boundary City Limits Schertz ETJ Boundary 200' Buffer :PARCEL ID: 62840 U U U U !P !P !P !P !P !P S t a r s V i p e r s C h e e r & T u m b l i n g W e R e n t It Interstate 3 5 N S A S S h o e s Interstate 35 N 35 35 35 35 I n t e r s t a t e 3 5 N Interstate 3 5 N Interstate 3 5 N 35 35 35 I n t e r s t a t e 3 5 N Interstate 3 5 N Interstate 3 5 N 35 35 35 35 35 Inter state 3 5 N Interstate 3 5 N Interstate 3 5 N 35 35 35 I n t e r s t a t e 3 5 N In ter state 3 5 N I n t e r s t a t e 3 5 N C ib olo V alle y D r 35 35 Inte rstate 3 5 N Cib olo V alle y D r 148816 CITY OF SAN ANTONIO 159705 MAS DEVELOPMENT CO LP 62840 VOIGT MARVIN R & KLABUNDE MELVA 185564 QT SOUTH LLC 2" W L 12" W L 6 " W L 1 2 " W L 1 2 " W L 12" W L 12" W L 12" W L 8"P V C SDR 3 5 8"P V C S D R 2 6 CI B O L O V A L L E Y D R IH 3 5 N IH 3 5 N I H 3 5 N A C C E S S R D IH 3 5 N A C C E S S R D IH 35 N A C C E S S R D I H 3 5 N A C C E S S R D IH 35 N A C C E S S R D CI B O L O V A L L E Y D R Maxar, Microsoft, Sources: Esri, TomTom, Garmin, FAO, NOAA, USGS, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community 0 100 200 30050 Feet Highways Major Roads Minor Roads Freeway Principal Arterial Planned Principal Arterial Secondary Arterial Planned Secondary Arterial Secondary Rural Arterial Planned Secondary Rural Arterial Residential Collector Planned Residential Collector Planned Commercial Collector B Commercial Collector A Planned Commercial Collector A 1" 2" 3" 4" 6" 8" 10" 12" 16" 18" 20" 24" 30" 36" Unknown Schertz Gravity Schertz Pressure Neighboring Gravity Private Pressure U Hydrant !P Manholes [Ú CCMA Lift Station [Ú Private Lift Station [Ú Schertz Lift Station 3Q CCMA Treatment Plant 3Q Schertz Treatment Plant County Boundaries Schertz Municipal Boundary ETJ INTER S T A T E H I G H W A Y N O . 3 5 2.142 ACRES (93,319 SQ. FT. MORE OR LESS) N2 8 ° 1 6 ' 2 0 " W 4 8 0 . 0 0 ' N60°10'26"E 199.65' S3 0 ° 0 2 ' 1 3 " E 2 2 7 . 0 0 ' S 4 7 ° 0 2 ' 1 3 " E 1 5 2 . 0 0 ' S37°46 ' 0 0 " W 2 1 2 . 3 1 ' S36°56 ' 2 7 " W 6 7 . 6 9 ' GUA D A L U P E C O U N T Y COM A L C O U N T Y PROJECT NAME: AL T A / N S P S L A N D T I T L E S U R V E Y 30126-00 1 1 BRUNDAGE CIBOLO VALLEY LOCATION MAP REFERENCE: --- A 2. 1 4 2 AC R E , OR 93 , 3 1 9 SQ U A R E FE E T MO R E OR LE S S , TR A C T OF LA N D OU T OF TH E RE M A I N I N G PO R T I O N OF A CA L L E D 99 . 5 AC R E TR A C T OF LA N D , DE S C R I B E D IN A DE E D TO HA R T M A N N LA N D & CA T T L E CO . , LT D . , RE C O R D E D IN VO L U M E 29 2 5 , PA G E 81 3 , OF TH E OF F I C I A L PU B L I C RE C O R D S OF GU A D A L U P E CO U N T Y , TE X A S , FU R T H E R DE S C R I B E D AS TH E RE M A I N I N G PO R T I O N OF A CA L L E D 13 4 . 0 4 AC R E TR A C T OF LA N D , RE C O R D E D IN VO L U M E 34 4 , PA G E 38 1 , OF TH E DE E D RE C O R D S OF GU A D A L U P E CO U N T Y , TE X A S , AN D IN VO L U M E 12 7 , PA G E 55 , OF TH E DE E D RE C O R D S OF CO M A L CO U N T Y , T E X A S , O U T O F T H E J A C O B D E C O R D O V A S U R V E Y N O . 5 1 4 , A B S T R A C T 1 1 7 , I N G U A D A L U P E C O U N T Y , T E X A S . 1 6 7 2 I N D E P E N D E N C E D R , S T E 1 0 2 I N E W B R A U N F E L S , T X 7 8 1 3 2 I 8 3 0 . 6 3 2 . 5 6 3 3 T E X A S E N G I N E E R I N G F I R M # 4 7 0 I T E X A S S U R V E Y I N G F I R M # 1 0 0 2 8 8 0 0 TO: MCM RANCH CO., LTD.; HARTMANN LAND & CATTLE CO., LTD.; KEITH KLABUNDE; BRANDA FUHRMANN; KIMBERLEY WILLIAMS AND JAMIE KLABUNDE; THOMAS O. BRUNDAGE; HOWDY NEIGHBORS, LLC; AND ALAMO TITLE COMPANY, THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP OR PLAT AND THE SURVEY ON WHICH IT IS BASED WERE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 2021 MINIMUM STANDARD DETAIL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEYS, JOINTLY ESTABLISHED AND ADOPTED BY ALTA AND NSPS, AND INCLUDES ITEMS 1-4, 8, AND 9 OF TABLE A THEREOF. THE FIELD WORK WAS COMPLETED ON MAY 21, 2025. DATE OF MAP OR PLAT: MAY 22, 2025 _______________________________________ JOSHUA M. TREE REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR NO. 7186 JTREE@PAPE-DAWSON.COM CITY OF SCHERTZ SITE NOTES: 1)THE BEARINGS FOR THIS SURVEY ARE BASED ON THE NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1983 (NA2011) EPOCH 2010.00, FROM THE TEXAS STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM ESTABLISHED FOR THE SOUTH CENTRAL ZONE. 2)VERTICAL DATUM IS BASED ON NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988, GEOID 12B. 3)CONTOURS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON AN ON THE GROUND SURVEY. FIELDWORK COMPLETED ON MAY 21, 2025. 4)THE COORDINATES SHOWN HERON ARE SURFACE VALUES USING A SURFACE ADJUSTMENT FACTOR OF 1.00015. THESE VALUES CAN BE CONVERTED TO STATE PLANE GRID COORDINATES BY APPLYING THE RECIPROCAL = 0.999850022496626 5)ILLUSTRATED UTILITIES ARE BASED ON FOUND VISIBLE EVIDENCE. THE LOCATION AND DEPTH OF EXISTING UTILITIES SHOULD BE FIELD VERIFIED BEFORE CONSTRUCTION. THE SURVEYOR DOES NOT HAVE KNOWLEDGE AS TO THE AVAILABILITY OF SERVICE TO, OR THE STATUS OF THE UTILITIES ON THIS SITE. 6)THE SURVEYOR DID NOT RESEARCH THE MINERAL TITLE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY OR ANY EXISTING OIL AND GAS LEASES WHICH MAY AFFECT THE USE OF SAID PROPERTY. P.O.B. METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION FOR A 2.142 ACRE, OR 93,319 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS, TRACT OF LAND OUT OF THE REMAINING PORTION OF A CALLED 99.5 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, DESCRIBED IN A DEED TO HARTMANN LAND & CATTLE CO., LTD., RECORDED IN VOLUME 2925, PAGE 813, OF THE OFFICIAL PUBLIC RECORDS OF GUADALUPE COUNTY, TEXAS, FURTHER DESCRIBED AS THE REMAINING PORTION OF A CALLED 134.04 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, RECORDED IN VOLUME 344, PAGE 381, OF THE DEED RECORDS OF GUADALUPE COUNTY, TEXAS, AND IN VOLUME 127, PAGE 55, OF THE DEED RECORDS OF COMAL COUNTY, TEXAS, OUT OF THE JACOB DE CORDOVA SURVEY NO. 514, ABSTRACT 117, IN GUADALUPE COUNTY, TEXAS. SAID 2.142 ACRE TRACT BEING MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS, WITH BEARINGS BASED ON THE TEXAS COORDINATE SYSTEM ESTABLISHED FOR THE SOUTH CENTRAL ZONE FROM THE NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1983 NAD 83 (NA2011) EPOCH 2010.00: BEGINNING:AT A FOUND ½” IRON ROD ON A NORTHEAST LINE OF A CALLED 6.335 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, RECORDED IN VOLUME 4022, PAGE 120, OF SAID OFFICIAL PUBLIC RECORDS, ON THE NORTHWEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF INTERSTATE HIGHWAY NO. 35, A VARIABLE WIDTH PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY, AND AT THE SOUTH CORNER OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED TRACT, FROM WHICH A FOUND TXDOT TYPE II MONUMENT AT THE SOUTHERNMOST CORNER OF SAID 6.335 ACRE TRACT, AT THE EAST CORNER OF LOT 2, BLOCK 1, OF SAN ANTONIO MACHINE & WELDING, RECORDED IN VOLUME 8, PAGE 452, OF SAID OFFICIAL PUBLIC RECORDS, AND AT AN ANGLE POINT IN THE NORTHWEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID INTERSTATE HIGHWAY NO. 35, BEARS S 36°56'27" W, A DISTANCE OF 63.60 FEET AND FROM WHICH A FOUND ½” IRON ROD WITH A RED CAP MARKED “CEC” AT THE EAST CORNER OF SAID 6.335 ACRE TRACT, BEARS S 28°16'20" E, A DISTANCE OF 5.76 FEET; THENCE:N 28°16'20" W, DEPARTING THE NORTHWEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID INTERSTATE HIGHWAY NO. 35, WITH SAID NORTHEAST LINE OF SAID 6.335 ACRE TRACT, A DISTANCE OF 480.00 FEET TO A SET ½” IRON ROD WITH A YELLOW CAP MARKED “PAPE-DAWSON” AT THE WEST CORNER OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED TRACT, FROM WHICH A FOUND ½” IRON ROD WITH A RED CAP MARKED “CEC” AT AN ANGLE POINT IN SAID NORTHEAST LINE OF SAID 6.335 ACRE TRACT, BEARS N 28°16'20" W, A DISTANCE OF 87.59 FEET; THENCE:DEPARTING SAID NORTHEAST LINE OF SAID 6.335 ACRE TRACT, OVER AND ACROSS SAID 99.5 ACRE TRACT, THE FOLLOWING BEARINGS AND DISTANCES: N 60°10'26" E, A DISTANCE OF 199.65 FEET TO A SET ½” IRON ROD WITH A YELLOW CAP MARKED “PAPE-DAWSON” AT THE NORTH CORNER OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED TRACT; S 30°02'13" E, A DISTANCE OF 227.00 FEET TO A SET ½” IRON ROD WITH A YELLOW CAP MARKED “PAPE-DAWSON”; AND S 47°02'13" E, A DISTANCE OF 152.00 FEET TO A SET MAG NAIL WITH A WASHER MARKED “PAPE-DAWSON” ON THE NORTHWEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID INTERSTATE HIGHWAY NO. 35 AND AT THE EAST CORNER OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED TRACT, FROM WHICH A FOUND ½” IRON ROD WITH A YELLOW CAP MARKED “PAPE-DAWSON” AT THE SOUTH CORNER OF A CALLED 6.85 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, RECORDED IN DOCUMENT NO. 202199043267, OF SAID OFFICIAL PUBLIC RECORDS, AND AT AN ANGLE POINT IN THE NORTHWEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID INTERSTATE HIGHWAY NO. 35, BEARS N 37°46'00" E, A DISTANCE OF 187.15 FEET; THENCE:WITH THE NORTHWEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID INTERSTATE HIGHWAY NO. 35, THE FOLLOWING BEARINGS AND DISTANCES: S 37°46'00" W, A DISTANCE OF 212.31 FEET TO A FOUND TXDOT TYPE II MONUMENT; AND S 36°56'27" W, A DISTANCE OF 67.69 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING AND CONTAINING 2.142 ACRES IN GUADALUPE COUNTY, TEXAS. DEED/PLAT REFERENCE LEGENDSYMBOL LEGEND LINE LEGEND ALTA/NSPS TABLE A NOTES: ITEM 1:MONUMENTS FOUND OR SET AT ALL MAJOR CORNERS AS SHOWN HEREON. ITEM 2:SUBJECT PROPERTY ADDRESS: IH 35 SCHERTZ, TX 78154 PER THE GUADALUPE APPRAISAL DISTRICT. ITEM 3:THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS WITHIN THE FOLLOWING FLOOD ZONE(S) AS DEPICTED ON THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (F.E.M.A.) FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP NUMBER 48187C0210F, DATED NOVEMBER 2, 2007 FOR GUADALUPE COUNTY, TEXAS AND INCORPORATED AREAS. THIS DATA IS AVAILABLE ON THE WEBSITE WWW.MSC.FEMA.GOV . ZONE X (UNSHADED), DEFINED AS: “OTHER AREAS; AREAS DETERMINED TO BE OUTSIDE 0.2% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOODPLAIN.” FLOOD LIMIT LINES DO NOT REPRESENT THAT THE PROPERTY WILL OR WILL NOT FLOOD. SUCH LINES AND AREAS ARE FROM SAID FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY DATA SOURCES AND ARE STATISTICAL ONLY. THE SURVEYOR ACCEPTS NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ACCURACY OF SAID DATA. ITEM 4:GROSS LAND AREA OF SUBJECT SITE IS 2.142 ACRES AS SHOWN HEREON. ITEM 8:SUBSTANTIAL FEATURES OBSERVED IN THE PROCESS OF CONDUCTING FIELDWORK SHOWN HEREON. ITEM 9:NO PARKING SPACES WERE OBSERVED AT THE TIME OF SURVEY. JACOB DE CORDOVA SURVEY NO. 514 ABSTRACT 117 GUADALUPE COUNTY REFERENCES: This survey was prepared in conjunction with, but not solely relying on, the Title Commitment listed below. Title Commitment:G.F. # SAT-03-4000032500159-CF Title Company: Alamo Title Insurance Date Issued:May 16, 2025 Effective Date:May 11, 2025 Only those matters identified in the Title Commitment and those that the surveyor was aware of at the time of this survey are shown. 1.The following restrictive covenants of record itemized below: Document No. 202199043268, Official Public Records, Guadalupe County, Texas. (APPLIES) Omitting any covenants or restrictions, if any, including but not limited to those based upon race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, familial status, marital status, disability, handicap, national origin, ancestry, or source of income, as set forth in applicable state or federal laws, except to the extent that said covenant or restriction is permitted by applicable law. 10.The following matters and all terms of the documents creating or offering evidence of the matters: f.100 foot wide electric easement, as shown on plat recorded in Volume 4, Page 313, Map and Plat Records, Guadalupe County, Texas. (DOES NOT APPLY, This document describes what appears to be a portion of an easement that applies to a property situated west of the herein described tract) g.Variable width electric easement and transmission tower, as shown on plat recorded in Volume 4, Page 313, Map and Plat Records, Guadalupe County, Texas. (DOES NOT APPLY) h.Easement(s) as provided therein, granted to City Public Service Board of San Antonio, dated May 30, 1970, recorded in Volume 430, Page 493, Deed Records, Guadalupe County, Texas. (DOES NOT APPLY) i.Easement(s) as provided therein, granted to City Public Service Board of San Antonio, dated January 5, 1970, recorded in Volume 179, Page 304, Deed Records, Comal County, Texas. (APPLIES - AS SHOWN) j.Controlled access to Highway Facility as described in Deed filed February 7, 1996 and recorded in Volume 1188, Page 650, Official Public Records, Guadalupe County, Texas. (APPLIES - AS SHOWN) k.Easement(s) as provided therein, granted to the city of San Antonio, dated December 28, 2012, recorded in Document No. 201306000120, Official Public Records, Comal County, Texas and Volume 4022, Page 110, Official Public Records, Guadalupe County, Texas. (DOES NOT APPLY) l.Easement(s) as provided therein, granted to the City of Schertz, dated November 11, 2021, recorded in Document No. 202199041800, Official Public Records, Guadalupe County, Texas. (APPLIES - AS SHOWN) m.Easement Agreement dated December 17, 2021, recorded in Document No. 202199043269, Official Public Records, Guadalupe County, Texas. (APPLIES - AS SHOWN) Ord. 25-S-035 Proposed SUP for Mixed-Use Self-Storage William Willingham | Planner 2 Zoning Use Subject Property General Business District (GB) Undeveloped North General Business District (GB) and Manufacturing District- Light (M1) Undeveloped East General Business Undeveloped South Right-of-Way IH-35 access road West General Business District (GB) Electric Substation Orientation Aerial Exhibit: 2.14 Acres Unplatted Vicinity Zoning and Land Use 3 •4 public notices were sent on 7.25.2025 •As of today •(0) in favor •(0) Neutral •(0) in Opposition •1 sign was placed by the applicant •A public hearing notice was published in the “San Antonio Express” on 08.13.25 Notification Background: SUP Request •UDC Section 21.5.8, Permitted Use Table, requires a Specific Use Permit for Mixed-Use Self-Storage in General Business District (GB). 4 Applicant Intent: •4 Story Structure •Approximately 121,000 sq ft total •Office/Retail space on the first floor of building •Applicant is considering commercial development beyond the limits of requested SUP boundary of 2.14 acres 5 Acreage: 2.2 P&Z Hearing: May 8, 2024 P&Z Recommendation: 6-0 approval Council Approval date: June 18, 2024 SUP Expiration: June 18, 2026 Acreage: 3.6 P&Z Hearing: Nov. 6, 2024 P&Z Recommendation: 4-0 approval Council Approval date: Dec. 3, 2024 SUP Expiration: Dec. 3, 2026 Ord. 24-S-26 Ord. 24-S-170Background 6 SUP Area Map SUP Focus Map Background 7 1.The proposed use at the specified location is consistent with the policies of the adopted Comprehensive Land Plan, or any other applicable adopted plans. -The comprehensive plan is a guiding document for the long-range vision of Schertz - “Regional Corridor” designation: Commercial and Entertainment area serving the region, located along major thoroughfares -General Business District (GB) with an SUP for Mixed-Use Self-Storage: Offers ground floor retail/service or office space separate from the storage units. UDC SECTION 21.5.11.D Criteria for Approval 8 2. The proposed use is consistent with the general purpose and intent of the applicable zoning district regulations; -General Business District (GB): Non-residential uses offering retail and services for the overall needs of the community -The SUP for Mixed-Use Self-Storage ensures that the structure can offer retail/services beyond self storage alone UDC SECTION 21.5.11.D Criteria for Approval 9 -Surrounded by General Business (GB) and Manufacturing- Light (M-1) Zoning districts -Near by existing uses include a Gas Station, Equipment rental, and an electric substation. UDC SECTION 21.5.11.D Criteria for Approval 3. The proposed use is compatible with and preserves the character and integrity of adjacent developments and neighborhoods. 10 4. The proposed use will not adversely affect the overall health, safety or general welfare of the City; •As part of promoting health, safety, and welfare, the City should encourage development compatible with surrounding uses utilizing standards and transitional uses to alleviate negative impacts. •Surrounded by General Business (GB) and Manufacturing- Light (M-1) Zoning districts •The City of Schertz Fire, EMS, and Police Departments have been notified of the specific use permit and have not provided any specific concerns relating to this request UDC SECTION 21.5.11.D Criteria for Approval 11 5. Whether other factors are deemed relevant and important in the consideration of the Specific Use Permit. Staff has ensured all Unified Development Code requirements have been met for the proposed Specific Use Permit. The public hearing is an environment where the City Council can discuss other criteria relevant to the consideration of the Specific Use Permit. UDC SECTION 21.5.11.D Criteria for Approval Commission Recommendation The Planning and Zoning Commission met on August 6, 2025 and made a recommendation to approve the proposed specific use permit, with conditions as presented by staff, with a 6-0 vote to City Council. 12 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of Ordinance 25-S-035, the Specific Use Permit to allow Mixed-Use Self-Storage at the subject property conditioned upon the following: 1. A building permit is approved within two (2) years of the adoption of the SUP ordinance in accordance with Unified Development Code Article 5, Section 21.5.11.F Expiration of Specific Use Permit. 2.Twenty-five percent (25%) of the useable square footage of the first floor of the proposed Mixed-Use Self-Storage building be for office, service, or retail space, and separate from the individual units for rent or lease. 13 Agenda No. 5.   CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM    City Council Meeting:September 02, 2025 Department:Planning & Community Development Subject: Ordinance 25-S-036 – Conduct a public hearing and consider a request to rezone approximately 36.2 acres of land from Planned Development District (PDD) to Planned Development District (PDD), generally known as 13011 Lower Seguin Road, at the intersection of Lower Seguin Road and Red Bud Canyon, more specifically known as Bexar County Property Identification Numbers 310011, 1436811, 1437570, 1394925 City of Schertz, Bexar County, Texas (B.James/L.Wood/S.Haas) BACKGROUND The Saddlebrook Ranch development is a large Planned Development located east of FM 1518 along Lower Seguin Road. The original Planned Development District (PDD) zoning request was approved as Ordinance 21-S-06 on March 21, 2021, and consists of approximately 229 acres of mixed lot sizes, housing types, and uses, including an approximately 3.3 acre site designated for commercial uses along the frontage of Lower Seguin Road. Currently, this development is in various stages of planning, permitting, and construction. The Saddlebrook Ranch II PDD will adhere to the requirements of the original PDD (Ord. 21-S-06) with some minor changes. The original PDD, which was a mixture of commercial and various single-family residential lot sizes, outlines modifications for residential lots, including a single-story height restriction for 75% of lots abutting arterial roadways; modified width requirements for lots on cul-de-sacs, knuckles, or curves (39' at lot frontage line and 50' at the building setback line); and driveway location restrictions that prevent side orientation and access of lots on street corners. The original PDD also proposes to modify the regulations for subdivision entry signs and development signs by increasing the maximum area and maximum number of subdivision entry signs. Also, there are specific provisions for signage related to the builder’s Model Home, identifying the builder's name and to clearly designate that the home is a model home. These specific signs may be monument signs and may be made of wood, masonry, or metal. The original PDD also modifies UDC Sec. 21.14.1 Streets, to increase the pavement width for a 'Paved Alley' from 20 feet to 24 feet. The remainder of the thoroughfare classifications within the Saddlebrook subdivision will remain consistent with the Unified Development Code. The applicant has requested a new Planned Development District for an approximately 36.2 acre portion of the original request to remove the commercial site from the original planned development, and create more single-family lots and rearrange drainage. Other than removing the commercial portion, the Planned Development standards are not changing. The Saddlebrook Ranch II PDD will consist of a base zoning district of Single-Family Residential (R-2). This is in the PDD design standards document as a corresponding lot code of 'SF 70'. This indicates a lot width of 70 feet. The width is the same as the base district of Single Family Residential (R-2). However, the Saddlebrook Ranch II PDD requests a reduction in the depth from 120 feet to 118 feet, a variation that is allowed through the PDD process.  In summary, the Saddlebrook Ranch II PDD will be the same as Ord. 21-S-06 with the request to remove the commercial portion of the original development and request slightly smaller Single Family Residential District (R-2) lots. On July 25, 2025, five (5) public hearing notices were mailed to the surrounding properties within a 200-foot notification boundary of the subject property. At the time of the staff report, zero (0) response in favor, zero (0) responses neutral, and zero (0) responses in opposition were received. A public hearing notice will be published in the "San Antonio Express" prior to the City Council meeting. Additionally, one (1) sign was placed on the subject property.  The Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on August 6, 2025 and recommended denial of the Planned Development District request with a 6-1 vote. Subject Property:   Zoning Land Use Existing Planned Development District (PDD)Mixed-Use Development Proposed Planned Development District (PDD)Single-Family Development Adjacent Properties:    Zoning Land Use North Planned Development District (PDD), Single Family Residential District (R-2), Single Family Residential District (R-6) Undeveloped South Right of Way (ROW)Lower Seguin Road East Single Family Residential District (R-6)Undeveloped West Right of Way (ROW), Planned Development District (PDD) Red Bud Canyon, Single Family Residential (Under Construction) GOAL The applicant has requested a new Planned Development District for an approximately 36.2 acre portion of the original request (Ord. 21-S-06) to remove the commercial site from the development, and create more single-family lots and rearrange drainage.  COMMUNITY BENEFIT It is the City’s desire to promote safe, orderly, efficient development and ensure compliance with the City’s vision of future growth.  SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED ACTION When evaluating Planned Development District requests, staff utilizes UDC Section 21.5.10.F Criteria for Approval. 1. Whether the proposed PDD implements the policies of the adopted Comprehensive Land Plan. The Comprehensive Plan designates this area as Complete Neighborhood. The Complete Neighborhood Land Use Designation is intended for a mix of residential housing types with complimentary neighborhood commercial to create a complete neighborhood. The proposed request to remove the commercial portions of the Saddlebrook Ranch Development, a small 3.3 acre tract in an overall development of 229 acres, does not meet the policies of the adopted Comprehensive Plan and is less appropriate than what was originally approved. 2. Whether the proposed PDD promotes the health, safety, or general welfare of the City and the safe, orderly, efficient and healthful development of the City. The Lower Seguin Corridor is quickly becoming a dense stretch of the city with several developments being planned, built, or recently approved:  Rhine Valley - 447 lots Carmel Ranch - 131 lots Monterey Meadows - Ord. 24-S-148 - Approx. 174 lots, R-2 and R-6 zoning districts  Judah Ranch - Ord. 25-S-029 - 173 acre tract with R-1,R-2, and R-6 zoning districts. The original Saddlebrook Ranch PDD calls for 633 lots of various widths and sizes. By removing the commercial portion and rearranging the detention pond, this new PDD request effectively increases the lot count of the development to 657. While adding more residential lots might not work against promoting health, safety, and general welfare per se, staff must also consider orderly, efficient and healthful development as well as the aspirations for Southern Schertz. When the corridor is fully built out, there will be thousands of homes in this area. South Schertz residents, City Council, and the Planning and Zoning Commission, have all expressly desired to see commercial services in this area to serve existing and future residents. The potential loss of the commercial portion of the Saddlebrook Ranch Development works against expressly stated goals and policy decisions and is not an orderly, efficient, or healthful development for South Schertz. 3. Whether the uses permitted by the proposed change in zoning district classification and the standards applicable to such uses will be appropriate in the immediate area of the land to be reclassified. The immediate area consists of undeveloped land, rural residences, and several single-family subdivisions currently being developed. The uses permitted in the requested base district of Single-Family Residential Districts (R-1) are as follows:    UDC Section 21.5.8 Permitted Uses Single-Family Residential Districts (R-1) Permitted by Right Permitted with SUP Accessory Building, Residential Family or Group Home Gated Community Golf Course and/or Country Club Municipal Uses Operated by the City of Schertz One-Family Dwelling Detached Park/Playground/Similar Public Site School, Public or Private Bed and Breakfast Inn Church, Temple, Synagogue, Mosque, or Other Place of Worship In-Home Day Care New and Unlisted Uses The uses allowed by right and by Specific Use Permit are consistent with the current immediate area and consistent with the trajectory of the Lower Seguin Corridor. However, having commercial uses at the corner of two major thoroughfares identified in our Master Thoroughfare Plan, Red Bud Canyon and Lower Seguin, is more appropriate. 4. Whether the proposed change is in accord with any existing or proposed plans for providing public schools, streets, water supply, sanitary sewers or other public services and utilities to the area. SCUCISD has been notified of the zone change request and the Saddlebrook Ranch project has been under development for several years. This project has already made improvements to water and wastewater infrastructure, as well as improvements to Lower Seguin Road and constructed a portion of the FM 3009 extension identified in the Master Thoroughfare Plan which is identified as Redbud Canyon. The development is required to continue these improvements regardless of the outcome of this zoning request. 5. The extent to which the proposed PDD will result in a superior development than could be achieved through conventional zoning. This request is not superior to conventional zoning. What this request effectively does is reduce the lot depth of the Single-Family Residential District (R-2) from 120-feet to 118-feet. The original request that included a commercial portion was considered superior and is evident from Staff's City Council Memorandum from the March 5, 2021 City Council meeting. In this memorandum, Staff originally recommended approval for the Saddlebrook Ranch PDD explicitly because of "limited commercial development at the intersection of two arterial roadways on our Master Thoroughfare Plan in order to support the surrounding neighborhood".  6. Whether all of the applicant's back taxed owed to the City have been paid in full (no application will receive final approval until all back taxes are paid in full). This did not affect the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission nor does this affect City Council's decision. 7. Whether other criteria are met which, at the discretion of the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council, are deemed relevant and important in the consideration of the amendment. All UDC requirements have been met for the proposed zone change. City of Schertz Fire, EMS, and Police Departments have been notified of the zone change and have provided no objections to the request. SCUC ISD has also been notified of the zone change request. The scheduled public hearing provides the opportunity to introduce additional considerations.  RECOMMENDATION The request does not implement the policies of the Comprehensive Plan, does not promote orderly and efficient development, and removes the unique and superior element of the original PDD request. Therefore, Staff is recommending denial of Ord. 25-S-036. The Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on August 6, 2025 and recommended denial of the Planned Development District request with a 6-1 vote.  Attachments Ord. 25-S-036 with Exhibits Aerial Exhibit Public Hearing Notice Map Zoning Exhibit PDD Design Standards  SCUC ISD 10- Year Forecasting SCUC ISD Demographic Report City Council Presentation Slides ORDINANCE 25-S-036 AN ORDINANCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 36.2 ACRES OF LAND FROM PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (PDD) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (PDD), GENERALLY KNOWN AS 13011 LOWER SEGUIN ROAD, AT THE INTERSECTION OF LOWER SEGUIN ROAD AND RED BUD CANYON, MORE SPECIFICALLY KNOWN AS BEXAR COUNTY PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS 310011, 1436811, 1437570, 1394925 CITY OF SCHERTZ, BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS. WHEREAS, an application for a request to rezone approximately 36.2 acres of land from Planned Development District (PDD) to Planned Development District (PDD), known as Bexar County Property Identification Numbers 310011, 1436811, 1437570, 1394925 City of Schertz, Bexar County, Texas., generally known as 13011 Lower Seguin Road, more specifically described in the Exhibit A and Exhibit B attached herein (herein, the “Property”) has been filed with the City; and WHEREAS, the City’s Unified Development Code Section 21.5.4.D. provides for certain criteria to be considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission in making recommendations to City Council and by City Council in considering final action on a requested zoning (the “Criteria”); and WHEREAS, on August 6, 2025, the Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing and, after considering the Criteria, made a recommendation to City Council to deny the requested zoning; and WHEREAS, on September 2, 2025, the City Council conducted a public hearing and after considering the Criteria and recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission, determined that the requested zoning be approved as provided for herein. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS THAT: Section 1. The Property as shown and more particularly described in the attached Exhibit A and Exhibit B, is hereby zoned to Planned Development District (PDD) Section 2. The Official Zoning Map of the City of Schertz, described and referred to in Article 2 of the Unified Development Code, shall be revised to reflect the above amendment. Section 3. The recitals contained in the preamble hereof are hereby found to be true, and such recitals are hereby made a part of this Ordinance for all purposes and are adopted as a part of the judgment and findings of the Council. Section 4. All ordinances and codes, or parts thereof, which are in conflict or inconsistent with any provision of this Ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict, and the provisions of this Ordinance shall be and remain controlling as t o the matters resolved herein. Section 5. This Ordinance shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas and the United States of America. Section 6. If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall be held to be invalid, the remainder of this Ordinance and the application of such provision to other persons and circumstances shall nevertheless be valid, and the City hereby declares that this Ordinance would have been enacted without such invalid provision. Section 7. It is officially found, determined, and declared that the meeting at which this Ordinance is adopted was open to the public and public notice of the time, place, and subject matter of the public business to be considered at such meeting, includ ing this Ordinance, was given, all as required by Chapter 551, as amended, Texas Government Code. Section 8. This Ordinance shall be effective upon the date of final adoption hereof and any publication required by law. Section 9. This Ordinance shall be cumulative of all other ordinances of the City of Schertz, and this Ordinance shall not operate to repeal or affect any other ordinances of the City of Schertz except insofar as the provisions thereof might be inconsistent or in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance, in which event such conflicting provisions, if any, are hereby repealed. PASSED and ADOPTED, this ____day of ________ 2025. CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS _____________________________ Ralph Gutierrez, Mayor ATTEST: Sheree Courney, Deputy City Secretary Exhibit “A” Metes & Bounds Exhibit “B” Zoning Exhibit R-1 AD PRE PDD R-A R-2 R-2 R-6 R-2 AD R-6 PDD PDD PDD PDD RED A P P L E R D SO R R E L R I V E R D E W R I D G E W A Y B U L L B R A N C H A V E P A S E O P O S T P L MULH O U S E DR K E T T L E C O R N T R L LOWE R S E G U I N R D M E S Q U I T E T R E E L N SPUR H O L L O W PALO M I N O SPUR P V T R D A T 1 2 8 2 0 L O W E R S E G U I N R D HOME S I D E HOLLO W P V T R D A T 1 3 0 1 1 L O W E R S E G U I N R D HILL P L A I N S D R P E P P E R C O R N P L LOWE R P E A C H W A Y DENI M S T A K E D R HORS E B A C K P L R E D B U D C A N Y O N R-1 AD PRE PDD R-A R-2 R-2 R-6 R-2 AD R-6 RED A P P L E R D SO R R E L R I V E R D E W R I D G E W A Y B U L L B R A N C H A V E P A S E O P O S T P L K E T T L E C O R N T R L MULH O U S E DR LOWE R S E G U I N R D M E S Q U I T E T R E E L N SPUR H O L L O W PALO M I N O SPUR P V T R D A T 1 2 8 2 0 L O W E R S E G U I N R D HOME S I D E HOLLO W P V T R D A T 1 3 0 1 1 L O W E R S E G U I N R D HILL P L A I N S D R P E P P E R C O R N P L LOWE R P E A C H W A Y DENI M S T A K E D R HORS E B A C K P L R E D B U D C A N Y O N Last update: July 10th, 2025 City of Schertz, GIS Specialist: Alexa Venezia, avenezia@schertz.com (210) 619-1174 *The City of Schertz provides this Geographic Information System product "as is" without any express or implied warranty of any kind including but not limited to the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose. In no event shall The City of Schertz be liable for any special, indirect, or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever arising out of or in connection with the use of or performance of these materials. Information published in this product could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Periodical changes may be added to the information herein. The City of Schertz may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) described herein at any time.* BEXAR COUNTY PARCEL IDs: 310011, 1436811, 1437570, & 1394925 CURRENT : Classification (PRE) Pre-Development (PDD) Planned Development (PUB) Public Use (R-A) Single-family Residential/Agricultural (R-1) Single-Family Residential (R-2) Single-Family Residential (R-3) Two-Family Residential (R-4) Apartment/Multi-Family Residential (R-5) Middle Density District (R-6) Single-family Residential (R-7) Single-family Residential (AD) Agricultural District (GH) Garden Home/Single-Family Residential (Zero Lot Line) (TH) Townhome (MHS) Manufactured Home Subdivision (MHP) Manufactured Home Parks (GB) General Business (GB-2) General Business II (NS) Neighborhood Services (OP) Office and Professional (MSMU) Main Street Mixed Use (MSMU-ND) Main Street Mixed Use New Development (M-1) Manufacturing (Light) (M-2) Manufacturing (Heavy) (DVL) Development Agreement (Delayed Annexation) 0 500 1,000 1,500250 Feet PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE PROPOSED Exhibit “C” Planned Development District Design Standards SADDLEBROOK RANCH II A Planned Development District Schertz, Texas July. 2025 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. General __________________________________________________________________ 1 A. Introduction ______________________________________________________________ 1 B. Purpose and Intent ________________________________________________________ 1 C. The Property _____________________________________________________________ 1 Table One – Units and Land Use _____________________________________________ 2 Affected UDC Articles II. Zoning Districts (Article 5) __________________________________________________ 2 A. Single- Family Residential District per the PDD _________________________________ 2 B. Dimensional and Development Standards (Section 21.5.7) _________________________ 3 Table Two - Dimensional and Development Standards ____________________________ 4 III. Special Uses (Article 8) _____________________________________________________ 5 A. Home Owners Association - Section 21.8.1(C.) __________________________________ 5 B. Architectural Review Committee _____________________________________________ 5 IV. Site Design Standards (Article 9) ) ____________________________________________ 5 A. Lots (Section 21.9.3)_______________________________________________________ 5 V. Signs (Article 11) __________________________________________________________ 5 A. Subdivision Entry Signs (Section 21.11.15) _____________________________________ 5 B. Development Signs (Section 21.11.18) ________________________________________ 6 VI. Transportation (Article 14) ) _________________________________________________ 7 A. Street Improvement Standards (Section 21.14.1) _________________________________ 7 Table Three - Street Improvement Standards ____________________________________ 7 VII. Amendments to the Planned Development District (PDD) _________________________ 8 APPENDIX Exhibit "A" – Conceptual Overall Recreation and Open Space Plan _________________________ 9 1 SADDLEBROOK RANCH I. General A. Introduction A Planned Development District Schertz, Texas Understanding that there would be circumstances in which a development might not be able to adhere to the strict regulations and design standards set forth in the Schertz Unified Development Code (UDC), the UDC established Article 5, Section 21.5.10, a Planned Development District (PDD), as an alternative approach to conventional land development. The City of Schertz Unified Development Code as amended will govern development of the property, except for the following statements. Development within the subject property is subject to general development plan review and approval by the City Council. Such general development plan review is to ensure conformance with the guidelines required herein and the goals and objectives of the City of Schertz Comprehensive Plan. B. Purpose and Intent The purpose of PDD regulations is to encourage and promote more creative, innovative, and imaginative land development than would not be possible under the regulations found in a typical zoning district. The intent is to allow substantial flexibility in planning, design and development standards in exchange for greater land values and amenities, such as enhanced parkland and open space, preservation of natural resources, pedestrian friendly environment, and deviation from the typical traffic patterns. It is this intrinsic flexibility, in the form of relief from the normal zoning ordinances, design standards, land use densities, and subdivision regulations, that allows for the definition of uses, densities and standards that will permit the alternative planning associated with a PDD and this development known as Saddlebrook Ranch II ("Saddlebrook Ranch II"). C. The Property The property is located within the corporate limits of the City of Schertz and Bexar County, Texas. The property is bounded on the north by Raf Burnette Road and on the south by Lower Seguin Road and intersected by the extension of Redbud Canyon. The property contains 36.21 acres of land. Analysis of the property does not reveal any physical constraints or potential health or safety hazards. Further evaluation of the tract reveals that utilities are available and that the property’s demands can be served. The Overall Recreation and Open Space Master Plan (exhibit “A”) are proposed. Such amenities will include both passive and active areas, as well as pathways and hike and bike trails. Multi-purpose walkways will provide links between park areas, open spaces, neighborhood units, a school site, and such amenities as playscapes, sports courts, picnic tables, and natural water features. All of which to promote a safe and pedestrian friendly environment and overall livable community. 2 Table One – Units and Land Use Unit Land Use 5 SF - 70' Lots Affected UDC Articles II. Zoning Districts (Article 5) There are circumstances, due to property constraints or external factors, which do not always support the notion that one size fits all especially in applying zoning subdivision codes as such relates to property development. As a planned development, the attached PDD Master Plan (Exhibit “A”) as well as this document defines the types of uses for this proposed PDD. The plan delineates land uses that are residential in character as well as shows parks, and open space. This document requests that those Articles and Sections affected by the zoning change be amended or modified and granted by ordinance. The following districts would be defined or modified as: A. Single-Family Residential District per the PDD Each area, as shown and identified on the PDD Master Plan, is comprised of a single-family residential dwelling on one (1) minimum size lots of 8,260 sf for 70-foot wide lots. The SF 70 residential district areas will be subject to the same zoning regulations as the Single Family Residential District (R-2) in the Schertz UDC. 3 B. Dimensional and Developmental Standards (Section 21.5.7) The applicable dimensional and development standards for the land use districts are shown in Table Two and reflect those changes proposed by this PDD development. 1. Additional Standards Lots developed under this PDD for residential purposes will comply with the minimum requirements established in Table Two. Such lots designated as residential will have at least the minimum area and width and depth indicated in Table Two of this proposal. No portion of the main or primary structure on a residential lot may be located any closer to any lot line or to the street right-of-way line than is authorized in Table Two. The front yard setback shall be measured from the property line to the front face of the main or primary building. Eaves and roof line of the main structure may project into any setback line by no more than two (2) feet. 2. Double Frontage Lots Where residential lots have double frontage, running from one street to another, no access from the rear of the property will be permitted to the street. Only one access point will be permitted from a residential lot, so long as the access is from the front of the lot. All lots with double frontage within that block will have the same restriction and orientation as the lot on either side. Access in this case shall mean, but not limited to any opening or gate for use by vehicles or pedestrians. Table Two – Dimensional Requirements Min Lot Size Min. Yard Setback Min. Off- Street Parking Spaces Misc. Requirements Code Classification Area sf Width ft Depth ft Front ft Side ft Rear ft Parking Max. Ht. Max. Cover Keys SF 70 Single Family 8,260 70 118 25(d) 10 15 2 35 65%(f) 50%(g) a. b, c, d Key: a. Corner lots against a street, not an alley, shall have a minimum fifteen (15) foot side yard building setback adjacent to the street side b. Houses on irregular lots, including cul-de-sacs and knuckle sacs, shall have a minimum front yard setback of 20 feet. c. One-story homes to have a maximum impervious coverage at 65%. d. Two-story homes to have a maximum impervious coverage at 50%. 3. Height Restriction for Lots abutting the Principal Arterial (Redbud Canyon) and Lower Seguin Road. Only 25% of the Lots that abut the Principal Arterial and Lower Sequin Road may be two-story homes. 4 5 III. Special Uses (Article 8) A. Home Owners Association - Section 21.8.1(C) Even though Saddlebrook is not proposed as a gated community, a Homeowners Association (HOA) will be established to provide upkeep within the development including the maintenance of common areas, landscape buffers, and maintaining fences, and/or walls, except for fences and/or walls located on individual or private lots, as well as hiking trails and multi-use paths within the development’s common areas. B. Architectural Review Committee The Developer will establish an Architectural Review Committee (ARC) which will be responsible for reviewing and approving construction plans for all residential construction within the Saddlebrook PDD II. The ARC will consist of members appointed by the Developer until all of the property within the Saddlebrook PDD II has been transferred to an independent third party purchaser or to the HOA. Construction of residential and community amenities within the Saddlebrook PDD II shall first be submitted to the ARC for approval and to verify compliance with the terms, conditions and obligations of the PDD and deed restrictions. The ARC shall review such contemplated construction and shall, if approved, provide verification in a form acceptable to the City by which the ARC verifies that the plan for the contemplated construction complies with the PDD and associated guidelines. IV. Site Design Standards (Article 9) This proposed development conforms to the Comprehensive Land Plan for orderly and unified development of streets, utilities, neighborhood design, and public land and facilities. A. Lots (Section 21.9.3) Lot sizes and dimensions will conform to the minimum requirements recognized in Table Two of this PDD. In addition, the following requirements will apply to this PDD:  On a residential corner lot, orientation of the dwelling will be forward facing and in similar physical orientation with the other houses next-door and on the same street. Side orientation will not be permitted;  No driveway cuts or garage access will be permitted from a side orientation of a corner lot;  The width of a residential lot located on a cul-de-sac, knuckle or curve will be no less than thirty-nine (39) feet wide at the property line, and at least fifty (50) feet wide at the building line. V. Signs (Article 11) A. Subdivision Entry Signs (Section 21.11.15) 6 The provisions of this section shall only apply to entry signs that identify the residential development associated with this PDD and include the Subdivision Entry Signs, Wayfinding Signs, and Park ID Signs. 1. Subdivision Entry Signs (Section 21.11.15) Subdivision Entry Signs are two types, being Primary Subdivision Entry Signs and Secondary Entry Signs. Primary Subdivision Entry Signs may be located at both sides of the primary entrance into the subdivision located on Redbud Canyon which meets up with the connecting road into Rhine Valley. Secondary entrances may have one (1) subdivision entry sign per entrance which shall be a maximum of seventy-five percent (75%) of the size of the primary entrance sign. 2. Maximum Area i. Project Entry Signs: Primary Subdivision Entry Signs will allow for a maximum area not to exceed one-hundred and eighty-seven (187) square feet per sign face and may consist of a surface with lettering and logo or a combination of both. 3. Subdivision Entry Feature An entry feature which is appropriate in scale to the size of the development and incorporating masonry walls, berms and/or decorative fencing, in combination with the Primary Subdivision Entry Signs, may be constructed at the primary subdivision entrance on Redbud Canyon and the Secondary Entry locations provided the maximum area per entry sign(s) shall not exceed the square footage noted above. B. Development Signs (Section 21.11.18) Development Signs are typically wood, durable plastic, or metal and advertise the community, builders, land uses within the community, and communities within the development. The signs may also be used for providing traffic direction to specific internal destinations. Development signs may be categorized into two types, being Wayfinding Signs and Model ID Signs. Wayfinding signs will give directional ques to drivers to locate the Parks, trailheads, the next door school and builder model homes. The Model ID Signs may be monument signs and are made of wood, masonry, or metal built signs that are located at a builder’s Model Home, identifying the builder name and to clearly designate that the home is a Model Home. 1. Maximum Area Wayfinding Signs: Wayfinding Signs are internal to the community, and shall not exceed thirty- two (32) square feet per sign face. These signs will be double-faced and placed perpendicular to the street 7 2. Maximum Height Wayfinding Signs: Wayfinding Signs shall not exceed eight (8) feet in height. Model ID Signs: The Model ID Signs, will allow for a maximum face height of six (6) feet. 3. Number of Signs Wayfinding Signs: One Wayfinding Signs is allowed per the number of recorded Units. Model ID Signs: One Model ID Sign may be installed at each Model Home. 4. Duration Wayfinding Signs: Wayfinding Signs per Unit may be installed at any time after approval and recordation of the Final Plat for each Unit identified on the Master Development Plan. Model ID Signs: The Model ID Signs may be installed at any time after the approval and recordation of the Final Plat of the Unit in which the Model Home resides. The Model ID Signs must be removed when a model home is sold and closes. VI. Transportation (Article 14) A. Street Improvement Standards (Section 21.14.1) Street Improvement Standards for the Saddlebrook master development plan are described in Table Three. Table Three – Street Improvement Standards Classification ROW Pavement Drainage Width Sidewalk Width Hike/Bike Trail Principal Arterial – w/ 10' Future Roadway Dedication 120 feet 48 feet (see Section Drawing) Curb or Curb and Gutter 5 feet one side 10 feet other side Collector – Local B Residential 60 feet 42 feet Curb or Curb and Gutter 5 feet both sides - Local Street – Local A Residential 50 feet 30 feet Curb or Curb and Gutter 5 feet both sides - Paved Alley 30 feet 24 feet Rear Ingress/Egress Curb or Curb and Gutter None - 8 10' 8' MASONRY WALL MEANDERING SIDEWALK 120' R.O.W. STREET SECTION PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL 8' MASONRY WALL 5' FUTURE ROADWAY DEDICATION CURB & GUTTER CURB & GUTTER 5' 5' SIDEWALK SHARED USE PATH 5' FUTURE ROADWAY DEDICATION 20' 24' 2' 12' 12' 2' 16' 2' 12' 12' 2' 24' 20' 20' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 20' LANDSCAPE BUFFER Note: Only 25% of the Lots that abut the Principal Arterial and Lower Sequin Road may be two-story homes. VII. Amendments to the Planned Development District (PDD) Any significant future changes from the established Dimensional Requirements for the approved PDD, which alter the concept of the PDD or increase the density, will cause the plan to be re-submitted for approval by the Planning & Zoning Commission and the City Council, including a new public hearing with applicable fees. Minor changes which do not change the concept or intent of the development shall be approved or denied administratively. 120' R.O.W. PARKWAY TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL TRAVEL MEDIAN TRAVEL LANE LANE LANE PARKWAY 8' 8' 5' 8' W a l l 8' W a l l DRAINA G E 60' LOTS 201 274 86 44 DRA I N A G E 55' LOTS DETE N T I O N PON D Open S p a c e PARK 4.277 AC PARK 2.251 AC 60' LOTS 60' LOTS 55' LOTS 70' LOTS 5 5 ' L O T S 55' LOTS 50' LOTS 60' LOTS 70' LOTS DRA I N A G E 8' WALL PARK 2.251 AC 86 Park - 6.528 Acres Drainage - Open Space - 12.32 Acres 20' OPEN SPACE 36.21 SCHOOL 20' LANDSCAPE BUFFER SADDLEBROOK RANCH PDD Legend Lot Count Typ Size SADDLEBROOK RANCH PDD II FUTURE TOWNHOMES II Last update: July 11th, 2025 City of Schertz, GIS Specialist: Alexa Venezia, avenezia@schertz.com (210) 619-1174 *The City of Schertz provides this Geographic Information System product "as is" without any express or implied warranty of any kind including but not limited to the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose. In no event shall The City of Schertz be liable for any special, indirect, or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever arising out of or in connection with the use of or performance of these materials. Information published in this product could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Periodical changes may be added to the information herein. The City of Schertz may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) described herein at any time.* City of Schertz Parcel IDs: 310011, 1436811, 1437570, & 1394925 : LOW E R S E G U I N R D (310 0 1 2 ) 9904 B U L L B R A N C H A V E ( 1 4 3 7 5 1 5 ) 9637 R E D B U D C A N Y O N (143 7 5 2 3 ) 9790 REDB U D C A N Y O N (143 8 8 7 1 ) 1014 4 KETT L E C O R N T R L (143 8 9 2 8 ) 1294 7 LOW E R S E G U I N R D (143 7 5 7 0 ) 1301 1 LOW E R S E G U I N R D (309 4 2 5 ) 1301 1 LOW E R S E G U I N R D (310 0 1 1 ) 1301 1 LOW E R S E G U I N R D (139 4 9 2 5 ) 1291 1 LOWE R S E G U I N R D (143 6 8 1 1 ) 1284 0 LOW E R S E G U I N R D (310 0 2 2 ) 1287 0 LOW E R S E G U I N R D (310 0 2 1 ) LOW E R S E G U I N R D (136 7 3 9 0 ) 9791 R E D B U D C A N Y O N ( 1 4 3 8 8 2 4 ) REDB U D C A N Y O N (143 8 8 2 3 ) 1285 4 H I L L P L A I N S D R ( 1 4 3 7 5 1 6 ) 9908 B U L L B R A N C H A V E ( 1 4 3 7 5 1 4 ) 9916 B U L L B R A N C H A V E ( 1 4 3 7 5 5 2 ) 9920 B U L L B R A N C H A V E ( 1 4 3 7 5 5 1 ) 9924 B U L L B R A N C H A V E ( 1 4 3 7 5 5 0 ) 9703 R E D B U D C A N Y O N ( 1 4 3 7 5 5 3 ) 1286 8 R E D A P P L E R D ( 1 4 3 8 7 8 2 ) 1015 2 K E T T L E C O R N T R L ( 1 4 3 8 9 2 4 ) 1014 8 K E T T L E C O R N T R L ( 1 4 3 8 9 2 5 ) 1014 0 K E T T L E C O R N T R L ( 1 4 3 8 9 2 6 ) 1013 6 K E T T L E C O R N T R L ( 1 4 3 8 9 2 7 ) 1000 2 S O R R E L R I V E R ( 1 4 3 8 8 6 9 ) 1000 1 S O R R E L R I V E R ( 1 4 3 8 8 9 4 ) 1292 3 H O R S E B A C K P L ( 1 4 3 8 8 9 0 ) 1292 6 H O R S E B A C K P L ( 1 4 3 8 8 8 1 ) 1292 2 H O R S E B A C K P L ( 1 4 3 8 8 8 0 ) 1291 9 S P U R H O L L O W ( 1 4 3 8 8 8 2 ) 1291 5 S P U R H O L L O W ( 1 4 3 8 8 8 3 ) 1292 0 S P U R H O L L O W ( 1 4 3 8 8 7 7 ) 1291 6 S P U R H O L L O W ( 1 4 3 8 8 7 6 ) 1291 2 S P U R H O L L O W ( 1 4 3 8 8 7 5 ) 1290 8 S P U R H O L L O W ( 1 4 3 8 8 7 4 ) 1290 4 S P U R H O L L O W ( 1 4 3 8 8 7 3 ) K E T T L E C O R N T R L SO R R E L R I V E R OLD CHUT E R D SPUR H O L L O W PALO M I N O SPUR P V T R D A T 1 2 8 2 0 L O W E R S E G U I N R D S A R R E B O U R G S T HOM E S I D E HOL L O W P V T R D A T 1 3 0 1 1 L O W E R S E G U I N R D PI N E R I V E R D R S U N N Y V E R A N D A R D P E P P E R C O R N P L WIND I N G P E A R L N PRAI R I E V A L L E Y BAY M A R E L N DENI M S T A K E D R ST LO U I S W A Y HORS E B A C K PL B L U E B O N N E T P T MULH O U S E D R G A L I N E E R G L E N P V T R D A T 1 3 1 9 1 L O W E R S E G U I N R D R E D B U D C A N Y O N LOWE R S E G U I N R D 0 500 1,000 1,500250 Feet Project Boundary City Limits Schertz ETJ Boundary 200' Buffer R-1 AD PRE PDD R-A R-2 R-2 R-6 R-2 AD R-6 PDD PDD PDD PDD RED A P P L E R D SO R R E L R I V E R D E W R I D G E W A Y B U L L B R A N C H A V E P A S E O P O S T P L MULH O U S E DR K E T T L E C O R N T R L LOWE R S E G U I N R D M E S Q U I T E T R E E L N SPUR H O L L O W PALO M I N O SPUR P V T R D A T 1 2 8 2 0 L O W E R S E G U I N R D HOME S I D E HOLLO W P V T R D A T 1 3 0 1 1 L O W E R S E G U I N R D HILL P L A I N S D R P E P P E R C O R N P L LOWE R P E A C H W A Y DENI M S T A K E D R HORS E B A C K P L R E D B U D C A N Y O N R-1 AD PRE PDD R-A R-2 R-2 R-6 R-2 AD R-6 RED A P P L E R D SO R R E L R I V E R D E W R I D G E W A Y B U L L B R A N C H A V E P A S E O P O S T P L K E T T L E C O R N T R L MULH O U S E DR LOWE R S E G U I N R D M E S Q U I T E T R E E L N SPUR H O L L O W PALO M I N O SPUR P V T R D A T 1 2 8 2 0 L O W E R S E G U I N R D HOME S I D E HOLLO W P V T R D A T 1 3 0 1 1 L O W E R S E G U I N R D HILL P L A I N S D R P E P P E R C O R N P L LOWE R P E A C H W A Y DENI M S T A K E D R HORS E B A C K P L R E D B U D C A N Y O N Last update: July 10th, 2025 City of Schertz, GIS Specialist: Alexa Venezia, avenezia@schertz.com (210) 619-1174 *The City of Schertz provides this Geographic Information System product "as is" without any express or implied warranty of any kind including but not limited to the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose. In no event shall The City of Schertz be liable for any special, indirect, or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever arising out of or in connection with the use of or performance of these materials. Information published in this product could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Periodical changes may be added to the information herein. The City of Schertz may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) described herein at any time.* BEXAR COUNTY PARCEL IDs: 310011, 1436811, 1437570, & 1394925 CURRENT : Classification (PRE) Pre-Development (PDD) Planned Development (PUB) Public Use (R-A) Single-family Residential/Agricultural (R-1) Single-Family Residential (R-2) Single-Family Residential (R-3) Two-Family Residential (R-4) Apartment/Multi-Family Residential (R-5) Middle Density District (R-6) Single-family Residential (R-7) Single-family Residential (AD) Agricultural District (GH) Garden Home/Single-Family Residential (Zero Lot Line) (TH) Townhome (MHS) Manufactured Home Subdivision (MHP) Manufactured Home Parks (GB) General Business (GB-2) General Business II (NS) Neighborhood Services (OP) Office and Professional (MSMU) Main Street Mixed Use (MSMU-ND) Main Street Mixed Use New Development (M-1) Manufacturing (Light) (M-2) Manufacturing (Heavy) (DVL) Development Agreement (Delayed Annexation) 0 500 1,000 1,500250 Feet PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE PROPOSED SADDLEBROOK RANCH II A Planned Development District Schertz, Texas July. 2025 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. General __________________________________________________________________ 1 A. Introduction ______________________________________________________________ 1 B. Purpose and Intent ________________________________________________________ 1 C. The Property _____________________________________________________________ 1 Table One – Units and Land Use _____________________________________________ 2 Affected UDC Articles II. Zoning Districts (Article 5) __________________________________________________ 2 A. Single- Family Residential District per the PDD _________________________________ 2 B. Dimensional and Development Standards (Section 21.5.7) _________________________ 3 Table Two - Dimensional and Development Standards ____________________________ 4 III. Special Uses (Article 8) _____________________________________________________ 5 A. Home Owners Association - Section 21.8.1(C.) __________________________________ 5 B. Architectural Review Committee _____________________________________________ 5 IV. Site Design Standards (Article 9) ) ____________________________________________ 5 A. Lots (Section 21.9.3)_______________________________________________________ 5 V. Signs (Article 11) __________________________________________________________ 5 A. Subdivision Entry Signs (Section 21.11.15) _____________________________________ 5 B. Development Signs (Section 21.11.18) ________________________________________ 6 VI. Transportation (Article 14) ) _________________________________________________ 7 A. Street Improvement Standards (Section 21.14.1) _________________________________ 7 Table Three - Street Improvement Standards ____________________________________ 7 VII. Amendments to the Planned Development District (PDD) _________________________ 8 APPENDIX Exhibit "A" – Conceptual Overall Recreation and Open Space Plan _________________________ 9 1 SADDLEBROOK RANCH I. General A. Introduction A Planned Development District Schertz, Texas Understanding that there would be circumstances in which a development might not be able to adhere to the strict regulations and design standards set forth in the Schertz Unified Development Code (UDC), the UDC established Article 5, Section 21.5.10, a Planned Development District (PDD), as an alternative approach to conventional land development. The City of Schertz Unified Development Code as amended will govern development of the property, except for the following statements. Development within the subject property is subject to general development plan review and approval by the City Council. Such general development plan review is to ensure conformance with the guidelines required herein and the goals and objectives of the City of Schertz Comprehensive Plan. B. Purpose and Intent The purpose of PDD regulations is to encourage and promote more creative, innovative, and imaginative land development than would not be possible under the regulations found in a typical zoning district. The intent is to allow substantial flexibility in planning, design and development standards in exchange for greater land values and amenities, such as enhanced parkland and open space, preservation of natural resources, pedestrian friendly environment, and deviation from the typical traffic patterns. It is this intrinsic flexibility, in the form of relief from the normal zoning ordinances, design standards, land use densities, and subdivision regulations, that allows for the definition of uses, densities and standards that will permit the alternative planning associated with a PDD and this development known as Saddlebrook Ranch II ("Saddlebrook Ranch II"). C. The Property The property is located within the corporate limits of the City of Schertz and Bexar County, Texas. The property is bounded on the north by Raf Burnette Road and on the south by Lower Seguin Road and intersected by the extension of Redbud Canyon. The property contains 36.21 acres of land. Analysis of the property does not reveal any physical constraints or potential health or safety hazards. Further evaluation of the tract reveals that utilities are available and that the property’s demands can be served. The Overall Recreation and Open Space Master Plan (exhibit “A”) are proposed. Such amenities will include both passive and active areas, as well as pathways and hike and bike trails. Multi-purpose walkways will provide links between park areas, open spaces, neighborhood units, a school site, and such amenities as playscapes, sports courts, picnic tables, and natural water features. All of which to promote a safe and pedestrian friendly environment and overall livable community. 2 Table One – Units and Land Use Unit Land Use 5 SF - 70' Lots Affected UDC Articles II. Zoning Districts (Article 5) There are circumstances, due to property constraints or external factors, which do not always support the notion that one size fits all especially in applying zoning subdivision codes as such relates to property development. As a planned development, the attached PDD Master Plan (Exhibit “A”) as well as this document defines the types of uses for this proposed PDD. The plan delineates land uses that are residential in character as well as shows parks, and open space. This document requests that those Articles and Sections affected by the zoning change be amended or modified and granted by ordinance. The following districts would be defined or modified as: A. Single-Family Residential District per the PDD Each area, as shown and identified on the PDD Master Plan, is comprised of a single-family residential dwelling on one (1) minimum size lots of 8,260 sf for 70-foot wide lots. The SF 70 residential district areas will be subject to the same zoning regulations as the Single Family Residential District (R-2) in the Schertz UDC. 3 B. Dimensional and Developmental Standards (Section 21.5.7) The applicable dimensional and development standards for the land use districts are shown in Table Two and reflect those changes proposed by this PDD development. 1. Additional Standards Lots developed under this PDD for residential purposes will comply with the minimum requirements established in Table Two. Such lots designated as residential will have at least the minimum area and width and depth indicated in Table Two of this proposal. No portion of the main or primary structure on a residential lot may be located any closer to any lot line or to the street right-of-way line than is authorized in Table Two. The front yard setback shall be measured from the property line to the front face of the main or primary building. Eaves and roof line of the main structure may project into any setback line by no more than two (2) feet. 2. Double Frontage Lots Where residential lots have double frontage, running from one street to another, no access from the rear of the property will be permitted to the street. Only one access point will be permitted from a residential lot, so long as the access is from the front of the lot. All lots with double frontage within that block will have the same restriction and orientation as the lot on either side. Access in this case shall mean, but not limited to any opening or gate for use by vehicles or pedestrians. Table Two – Dimensional Requirements Min Lot Size Min. Yard Setback Min. Off- Street Parking Spaces Misc. Requirements Code Classification Area sf Width ft Depth ft Front ft Side ft Rear ft Parking Max. Ht. Max. Cover Keys SF 70 Single Family 8,260 70 118 25(d) 10 15 2 35 65%(f) 50%(g) a. b, c, d Key: a. Corner lots against a street, not an alley, shall have a minimum fifteen (15) foot side yard building setback adjacent to the street side b. Houses on irregular lots, including cul-de-sacs and knuckle sacs, shall have a minimum front yard setback of 20 feet. c. One-story homes to have a maximum impervious coverage at 65%. d. Two-story homes to have a maximum impervious coverage at 50%. 3. Height Restriction for Lots abutting the Principal Arterial (Redbud Canyon) and Lower Seguin Road. Only 25% of the Lots that abut the Principal Arterial and Lower Sequin Road may be two-story homes. 4 5 III. Special Uses (Article 8) A. Home Owners Association - Section 21.8.1(C) Even though Saddlebrook is not proposed as a gated community, a Homeowners Association (HOA) will be established to provide upkeep within the development including the maintenance of common areas, landscape buffers, and maintaining fences, and/or walls, except for fences and/or walls located on individual or private lots, as well as hiking trails and multi-use paths within the development’s common areas. B. Architectural Review Committee The Developer will establish an Architectural Review Committee (ARC) which will be responsible for reviewing and approving construction plans for all residential construction within the Saddlebrook PDD II. The ARC will consist of members appointed by the Developer until all of the property within the Saddlebrook PDD II has been transferred to an independent third party purchaser or to the HOA. Construction of residential and community amenities within the Saddlebrook PDD II shall first be submitted to the ARC for approval and to verify compliance with the terms, conditions and obligations of the PDD and deed restrictions. The ARC shall review such contemplated construction and shall, if approved, provide verification in a form acceptable to the City by which the ARC verifies that the plan for the contemplated construction complies with the PDD and associated guidelines. IV. Site Design Standards (Article 9) This proposed development conforms to the Comprehensive Land Plan for orderly and unified development of streets, utilities, neighborhood design, and public land and facilities. A. Lots (Section 21.9.3) Lot sizes and dimensions will conform to the minimum requirements recognized in Table Two of this PDD. In addition, the following requirements will apply to this PDD:  On a residential corner lot, orientation of the dwelling will be forward facing and in similar physical orientation with the other houses next-door and on the same street. Side orientation will not be permitted;  No driveway cuts or garage access will be permitted from a side orientation of a corner lot;  The width of a residential lot located on a cul-de-sac, knuckle or curve will be no less than thirty-nine (39) feet wide at the property line, and at least fifty (50) feet wide at the building line. V. Signs (Article 11) A. Subdivision Entry Signs (Section 21.11.15) 6 The provisions of this section shall only apply to entry signs that identify the residential development associated with this PDD and include the Subdivision Entry Signs, Wayfinding Signs, and Park ID Signs. 1. Subdivision Entry Signs (Section 21.11.15) Subdivision Entry Signs are two types, being Primary Subdivision Entry Signs and Secondary Entry Signs. Primary Subdivision Entry Signs may be located at both sides of the primary entrance into the subdivision located on Redbud Canyon which meets up with the connecting road into Rhine Valley. Secondary entrances may have one (1) subdivision entry sign per entrance which shall be a maximum of seventy-five percent (75%) of the size of the primary entrance sign. 2. Maximum Area i. Project Entry Signs: Primary Subdivision Entry Signs will allow for a maximum area not to exceed one-hundred and eighty-seven (187) square feet per sign face and may consist of a surface with lettering and logo or a combination of both. 3. Subdivision Entry Feature An entry feature which is appropriate in scale to the size of the development and incorporating masonry walls, berms and/or decorative fencing, in combination with the Primary Subdivision Entry Signs, may be constructed at the primary subdivision entrance on Redbud Canyon and the Secondary Entry locations provided the maximum area per entry sign(s) shall not exceed the square footage noted above. B. Development Signs (Section 21.11.18) Development Signs are typically wood, durable plastic, or metal and advertise the community, builders, land uses within the community, and communities within the development. The signs may also be used for providing traffic direction to specific internal destinations. Development signs may be categorized into two types, being Wayfinding Signs and Model ID Signs. Wayfinding signs will give directional ques to drivers to locate the Parks, trailheads, the next door school and builder model homes. The Model ID Signs may be monument signs and are made of wood, masonry, or metal built signs that are located at a builder’s Model Home, identifying the builder name and to clearly designate that the home is a Model Home. 1. Maximum Area Wayfinding Signs: Wayfinding Signs are internal to the community, and shall not exceed thirty- two (32) square feet per sign face. These signs will be double-faced and placed perpendicular to the street 7 2. Maximum Height Wayfinding Signs: Wayfinding Signs shall not exceed eight (8) feet in height. Model ID Signs: The Model ID Signs, will allow for a maximum face height of six (6) feet. 3. Number of Signs Wayfinding Signs: One Wayfinding Signs is allowed per the number of recorded Units. Model ID Signs: One Model ID Sign may be installed at each Model Home. 4. Duration Wayfinding Signs: Wayfinding Signs per Unit may be installed at any time after approval and recordation of the Final Plat for each Unit identified on the Master Development Plan. Model ID Signs: The Model ID Signs may be installed at any time after the approval and recordation of the Final Plat of the Unit in which the Model Home resides. The Model ID Signs must be removed when a model home is sold and closes. VI. Transportation (Article 14) A. Street Improvement Standards (Section 21.14.1) Street Improvement Standards for the Saddlebrook master development plan are described in Table Three. Table Three – Street Improvement Standards Classification ROW Pavement Drainage Width Sidewalk Width Hike/Bike Trail Principal Arterial – w/ 10' Future Roadway Dedication 120 feet 48 feet (see Section Drawing) Curb or Curb and Gutter 5 feet one side 10 feet other side Collector – Local B Residential 60 feet 42 feet Curb or Curb and Gutter 5 feet both sides - Local Street – Local A Residential 50 feet 30 feet Curb or Curb and Gutter 5 feet both sides - Paved Alley 30 feet 24 feet Rear Ingress/Egress Curb or Curb and Gutter None - 8 10' 8' MASONRY WALL MEANDERING SIDEWALK 120' R.O.W. STREET SECTION PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL 8' MASONRY WALL 5' FUTURE ROADWAY DEDICATION CURB & GUTTER CURB & GUTTER 5' 5' SIDEWALK SHARED USE PATH 5' FUTURE ROADWAY DEDICATION 20' 24' 2' 12' 12' 2' 16' 2' 12' 12' 2' 24' 20' 20' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 20' LANDSCAPE BUFFER Note: Only 25% of the Lots that abut the Principal Arterial and Lower Sequin Road may be two-story homes. VII. Amendments to the Planned Development District (PDD) Any significant future changes from the established Dimensional Requirements for the approved PDD, which alter the concept of the PDD or increase the density, will cause the plan to be re-submitted for approval by the Planning & Zoning Commission and the City Council, including a new public hearing with applicable fees. Minor changes which do not change the concept or intent of the development shall be approved or denied administratively. 120' R.O.W. PARKWAY TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL TRAVEL MEDIAN TRAVEL LANE LANE LANE PARKWAY 8' 8' 5' 8' W a l l 8' W a l l DRAINA G E 60' LOTS 201 274 86 44 DRA I N A G E 55' LOTS DETE N T I O N PON D Open S p a c e PARK 4.277 AC PARK 2.251 AC 60' LOTS 60' LOTS 55' LOTS 70' LOTS 5 5 ' L O T S 55' LOTS 50' LOTS 60' LOTS 70' LOTS DRA I N A G E 8' WALL PARK 2.251 AC 86 Park - 6.528 Acres Drainage - Open Space - 12.32 Acres 20' OPEN SPACE 36.21 SCHOOL 20' LANDSCAPE BUFFER SADDLEBROOK RANCH PDD Legend Lot Count Typ Size SADDLEBROOK RANCH PDD II FUTURE TOWNHOMES II FORECASTING CONSIDERATIONS • • • • • • 13,540 14,056 14,586 15,081 15,465 15,615 15,768 15,972 15,673 15,890 15,521 15,146 14,864 10,000 11,000 12,000 13,000 14,000 15,000 16,000 17,000 18,000 19,000 20,000 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024-P # O F S T U D E N T S DISTRICT ENROLLMENT HISTORICAL ENROLLMENT 1.0% growth per year (153 students per year) 1.3% loss per year (-195 students per year) 3.4% growth per year (481 students per year) HISTORICAL ENROLLMENT BY CAMPUS LEVEL 5,261 5,446 5,512 5,716 5,783 5,811 5,899 5,547 5,596 5,406 5,110 4,895 2,125 2,211 2,326 2,253 2,252 2,344 2,445 2,375 2,345 2,200 2,176 2,226 2,210 2,211 2,341 2,421 2,453 2,403 2,363 2,467 2,605 2,536 2,442 2,324 4,460 4,718 4,902 5,075 5,127 5,210 5,265 5,284 5,344 5,379 5,418 5,419 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024-P # O F S T U D E N T S CAMPUS LEVEL ENROLLMENT Elementary Intermediate Junior High High School ENROLLMENT HISTORY BY LEVEL –OCTOBER • • • • • • • STUDENT TRANSFERS PEIMS YEAR TRANSFER IN TRANSFER OUT DIFFERENCE 2012 216 681 -465 2013 212 704 -492 2014 244 647 -403 2015 302 702 -400 2016 297 907 -610 2017 290 1061 -771 2018 304 1079 -775 2019 296 1283 -987 2020 300 1591 -1291 2021 317 1981 -1664 2022 308 2695 -2387 2023 Data available in March First Year of Founders Charter School First Year of School of Science and Technology First Year of Legacy Traditional School STUDENT TRANSFERS IN VS. OUT 216 212 244 302 297 290 304 296 300 317 308 681 704 647 702 907 1,061 1,079 1,283 1,591 1,981 2,695 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 # O F S T U D E N T S STUDENT TRANSFERS IN vs OUT TRANSFER IN TRANSFER OUT School of Science and Technology Pre-K –8th Grade Legacy Traditional Pre-K –8th Grade Founders Academy K –12th Grade MAIN DESTINATIONS FOR TRANSFERS OUT 444 472 551 529 504 272 328 356 365 414 34 43 119 159 192 16 24 71 285 367 52 106 229 0 463 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 # O F S T U D E N T S TRANSFER DESTINATIONS Randolph ISD Founders Academy Great Hearts School of Science and Technology Judson ISD Legacy Traditional SO, HOW MANY STUDENTS WILL WE HAVE IN THE FUTURE? 14,056 15,081 15,615 15,972 15,890 15,146 14,661 14,217 14,007 14,036 14,162 10,000 11,000 12,000 13,000 14,000 15,000 16,000 17,000 18,000 19,000 20,000 # O F S T U D E N T S DISTRICT HISTORICAL ENROLLMENT AND PROJECTIONS ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS o o o o PEIMS YEAR PROJECTED ENROLLMENT GROWTH (DECLINE) PERCENTAGE CHANGE 2023 15,146 -375 -2.42% 2024-P 14,864 -282 -1.86% 2025-P 14,661 -203 -1.37% 2026-P 14,451 -210 -1.43% 2027-P 14,217 -234 -1. 62% 2028-P 14,073 -144 -1.01% 2029-P 14,007 -66 -0.47% 2030-P 14,017 10 0.07% 2031-P 14,036 19 0.14% 2032-P 14,059 22 0.16% 2033-P 14,162 103 0.73% PEIMS YEAR PROJECTED ENROLLMENT GROWTH (DECLINE) PERCENTAGE CHANGE 2023 15,146 -375 -2.44% 2024-P 14,864 -282 -1.86% 2025-P 14,661 -203 -1.37% 2026-P 14,451 -210 -1.43% 2027-P 14,217 -234 -1. 62% 2028-P 14,073 -144 -1.01% 2029-P 14,007 -66 -0.47% 2030-P 14,017 10 0.07% 2031-P 14,036 19 0.14% 2032-P 14,059 22 0.16% 2033-P 14,162 103 0.73% ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS o o o WHY HAS IT BECOME SO HARD TO PROJECT ENROLLMENT? o o o o o o FORECASTING CONSIDERATIONS • • • • •CAMPUS CAPACITY UNDERSTANDING CAMPUS CAPACITY o o o o o o o o o PLANNING USING OUR MAXIMUM CAPACITY o CAPACITY RELIEF TOOLS o o o o o o o o o ELEMENTARY CAPACITIES Campus Functional Capacity Max Capacity Previous Year Current PEIMS ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 CIBOLO VALLEY EL 891 1,200 761 657 611 587 589 594 594 608 617 620 627 637 % Max Capacity 63%55%51%49%49%49%49%51%51%52%52%53% GREEN VALLEY EL 673 924 586 533 497 482 469 497 506 524 535 537 535 529 % Max Capacity 63%58%54%52%51%54%55%57%58%58%58%57% NORMA PASCHAL EL 673 924 603 625 591 582 564 544 546 559 569 574 580 585 % Max Capacity 65%68%64%63%61%59%59%60%62%62%63%63% ROSE GARDEN EL 891 1,200 899 896 882 878 891 923 957 999 1,046 1,075 1,104 1,131 % Max Capacity 75%75%74%73%74%77%80%83%87%90%92%94% SCHERTZ EL 675 1,102 671 668 628 605 601 576 581 588 591 586 582 582 % Max Capacity 61%61%57%55%55%52%53%53%54%53%53%53% SIPPEL EL 675 1,058 742 672 679 690 721 756 782 827 867 904 961 1,030 % Max Capacity 70%64%64%65%68%71%74%78%82%85%91%97% WATTS EL 673 924 593 513 469 440 428 423 428 446 457 463 476 490 % Max Capacity 64%56%51%48%46%46%46%48%49%50%52%53% WIEDERSTEIN EL 675 1,058 551 546 538 544 527 517 529 549 568 574 587 602 % Max Capacity 52%52%51%51%50%49%50%52%54%54%55%57% ELEMENTARY TOTALS 5,826 8,390 5,406 5,110 4,895 4,808 4,790 4,830 4,922 5,099 5,250 5,335 5,453 5,587 % Max Capacity 64%61%58%57%57%58%59%61%63%64%65%67% Elementary Percent Change -3.40%-5.48%-4.21%-1.78%-0.37%0.83%1.91%3.59%2.96%1.63%2.20%2.46% Elementary Absolute Change -190 -296 -215 -87 -18 40 92 177 151 85 117 134 ELEMENTARY CAPACITIES 90% 92%94% 91% 97% 67% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 110% 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 % of MAXIMUM CAMPUS CAPACITY CIBOLO VALLEY EL GREEN VALLEY EL NORMA PASCHAL EL ROSE GARDEN EL SCHERTZ EL SIPPEL EL WATTS EL WIEDERSTEIN EL ELEMENTARY TOTALS INTERMEDIATE CAPACITIES Campus Functional Capacity Max Capacity Previous Year Current PEIMS ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 JORDAN INT 810 1,000 716 769 796 763 777 742 676 646 641 695 734 739 % Max Capacity 72%77%80%76%78%74%68%65%64%70%73%74% SCHLATHER INT 810 1,200 750 682 700 689 640 573 563 594 597 651 682 677 % Max Capacity 63%57%58%57%53%48%47%50%50%54%57%56% WILDER INT 810 1,250 734 725 730 743 748 739 683 627 616 654 681 685 % Max Capacity 59%58%58%59%60%59%55%50%49%52%54%55% INTERMEDIATE TOTALS 3,450 2,201 2,176 2,226 2,195 2,165 2,054 1,922 1,867 1,854 2,000 2,097 2,101 % Max Capacity 64%63%65%64%63%60%56%54%54%58%61%61% Intermediate Percent Change -6.13%-1.09%2.30%-1.39%-1.37%-5.13%-6.43%-2.86%-0.70%7.87%4.85%0.19% Intermediate Absolute Change -144 -24 50 -31 -30 -111 -132 -55 -13 146 97 4 INTERMEDIATE CAPACITIES 74% 61% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 110% 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 % of MAXIMUM CAMPUS CAPACITY JORDAN INT SCHLATHER INT WILDER INT INTERMEDIATE TOTALS JUNIOR HIGH CAPACITIES Campus Functional Capacity Max Capacity Previous Year Current PEIMS ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 DOBIE JH 1,300 1,540 1,348 1,316 1,229 1,194 1,228 1,196 1,152 1,058 1,009 1,025 1,025 1,109 % Max Capacity 88%85%80%78%80%78%75%69%66%67%67%72% CORBETT JH 1,080 1,500 1,188 1,126 1,095 1,096 1,103 1,111 1,114 1,083 1,001 936 924 989 % Max Capacity 79%75%73%73%74%74%74%72%67%62%62%66% JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL TOTALS 3,040 2,537 2,442 2,324 2,290 2,331 2,307 2,266 2,141 2,010 1,961 1,949 2,098 % Max Capacity 83%80%76%75%77%76%75%70%66%65%64%69% Junior High School Percent Change -2.62%-3.71%-4.83%-1.46%1.79%-1.03%-1.78%-5.52%-6.12%-2.44%-0.61%7.64% Junior High School Absolute Change -68 -94 -118 -34 41 -24 -41 -125 -131 -49 -12 149 JUNIOR HIGH CAPACITIES 72% 66% 69% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 110% 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 % of MAXIMUM CAMPUS CAPACITY DOBIE JH CORBETT JH JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL TOTALS HIGH SCHOOL CAPACITIES Campus Functional Capacity Max Capacity Previous Year Current PEIMS ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 CLEMENS HS 2,700 3,300 2,544 2,563 2,576 2,550 2,469 2,419 2,397 2,400 2,418 2,383 2,292 2,183 % Max Capacity 77%78%78%77%75%73%73%73%73%72%69%66% STEELE HS 2,160 3,200 2,716 2,700 2,688 2,663 2,541 2,452 2,411 2,345 2,330 2,202 2,113 2,038 % Max Capacity 85%84%84%83%79%77%75%73%73%69%66%64% HIGH SCHOOL TOTALS 6,650 5,381 5,418 5,419 5,368 5,165 5,026 4,963 4,900 4,903 4,740 4,560 4,376 % Max Capacity 81%81%81%81%78%76%75%74%74%71%69%66% High School Percent Change 0.69%0.71%0.02%-0.94%-3.78%-2.69%-1.25%-1.27%0.06%-3.32%-3.80%-4.04% High School Absolute Change 37 38 1 -52 -204 -137 -64 -63 3 -163 -180 -183 HIGH SCHOOL CAPACITIES 66% 64% 66% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 110% 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 % of MAXIMUM CAMPUS CAPACITY CLEMENS HS STEELE HS HIGH SCHOOL TOTALS FORECASTING CONSIDERATIONS • • • • • •BONDING CAPACITY PROJECTING BONDING CAPACITY -SCUC o PROJECTING TAX REVENUE o ASSUMES NO REFINANCING FOR BOND SAVINGS o DEFEASING PRINCIPAL o MODEST PROPERTY VALUE GROWTH o 4.0% ANNUAL INCREASE FOR 2024-2028 o 2.0% ANNUAL INCREASE FOR 2029-2033 o AS DEBT IS RESTRUCTURED AND PROPERTY VALUES INCREASE, WE BEGIN TO HAVE SOME BONDING CAPACITY o CAPACITY FOR ADDITIONAL DEBT IS LOWER AT FIRST, MORE IN LATER YEARS o FORECASTING USING THREE OPTIONS FOR I&S TAX RATE o $0.47 PER $100 OF VALUATION (C URRENT), $0.48 PER $100 VALUATION, AND $0.49 PER $100 VALUATION PROJECTED AVAILABLE BOND DOLLARS $215 $246 $278 $312 $347 $362 $380 $399 $419 $438 $284 $316 $351 $388 $426 $442 $463 $483 $505 $526 $- $50 $100 $150 $200 $250 $300 $350 $400 $450 $500 $550 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 BO N D C A P A C I T Y I N M I L L I O N S SCUC Bond Capacity by Year & Rate Bond Capacity 47¢Bond Capacity 48¢Bond Capacity 49¢ PROJECTING FACILITY COSTS -SCUC o o o o o o o o o o o PROJECTING FACILITY COSTS -SCUC YEAR High School Junior High Elementary/ Intermediate 2024 $ 235,000,000 $ 113,000,000 $ 72,000,000 2025-P $ 242,050,000 $ 116,390,000 $ 74,160,000 2026-P $ 246,891,000 $ 118,717,800 $ 75,643,200 2027-P $ 251,828,820 $ 121,092,156 $ 77,156,064 2028-P $ 256,865,396 $ 123,513,999 $ 78,699,185 2029-P $ 262,002,704 $ 125,984,279 $ 80,273,169 2030-P $ 267,242,758 $ 128,503,965 $ 81,878,632 2031-P $ 272,587,614 $ 131,074,044 $ 83,516,205 2032-P $ 278,039,366 $ 133,695,525 $ 85,186,529 2033-P $ 283,600,153 $ 136,369,435 $ 86,890,260 2034-P $ 289,272,156 $ 139,096,824 $ 88,628,065 PROJECTED BOND CAPACITIES VS. CONSTRUCTION COSTS $0 $100,000,000 $200,000,000 $300,000,000 $400,000,000 $500,000,000 $600,000,000 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 BONDING CAPACITY VS CONSTRUCTION COSTS JUNIOR HIGH Bond Capacity 47¢Bond Capacity 48¢Bond Capacity 49¢ PROJECTED BOND CAPACITIES VS. CONSTRUCTION COSTS $0 $100,000,000 $200,000,000 $300,000,000 $400,000,000 $500,000,000 $600,000,000 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 BONDING CAPACITY VS CONSTRUCTION COSTS JUNIOR HIGH Bond Capacity 47¢Bond Capacity 48¢Bond Capacity 49¢ Estimated $41 M in HVAC needs over the next 10 years Estimated $9 M in Ancillary Systems needs over the next 10 years Estimated $40 M in Building and Site needs over the next 10 years TAKE AWAYS…. o o o o o o o o o QUESTIONS/COMMENTS 4Q24 Demographic Report 2.9 3.1 3.1 3.5 3.5 3.3 3.3 3.4 3.7 3.8 01234 Guadalupe Co. Comal Co. San Antonio MSA Texas US Unemployment Rate, Year  Over Year Dec‐24 Dec‐23 2 Local Economic Conditions 3 12.6 3.4 3.5 3.7 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Se p ‐19 No v ‐19 Ja n ‐20 Ma r ‐20 Ma y ‐20 Ju l ‐20 Se p ‐20 No v ‐20 Ja n ‐21 Ma r ‐21 Ma y ‐21 Ju l ‐21 Se p ‐21 No v ‐21 Ja n ‐22 Ma r ‐22 Ma y ‐22 Ju l ‐22 Se p ‐22 No v ‐22 Ja n ‐23 Ma r ‐23 Ma y ‐23 Ju l ‐23 Se p ‐23 No v ‐23 Ja n ‐24 Ma r ‐24 Ma y ‐24 Ju l ‐24 Se p ‐24 No v ‐24 Unemployment Rate, Sept 2019 –Dec 2024 San Antonio MSA Texas 3 Local Economic Conditions San Antonio International Airport •Broke ground on third terminal at end of 2024 •Estimated total cost = $2.5 billion •Third terminal will anchor the expansion &  improvement project housing as many as 17  new gates spanning approx. 850,000 sq. ft.  •Will include concessions and lounge areas  while housing new Federal Inspection Station  to accommodate expanded international air  service •Expected to generate $3.2 billion in revenue  for the city over 15 years •New ground loading facility also added at  Terminal A including new passenger gates and  overnight aircraft parking •The third terminal is scheduled for completion  in 2028 4 Housing Activity by MSA © 2022 Zonda 18,503 19,046 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 2014Q4 2015Q4 2016Q4 2017Q4 2018Q4 2019Q4 2020Q4 2021Q4 2022Q4 2023Q4 2024Q4 Annual Housing Starts vs. Annual Closings Annual Housing Starts Annual Closings Source:  Zonda San Antonio New Home Starts & Closings Key Trends Starts:  +26% YOY  / +6% QOQ Closings:  +4% YOY / +6% QOQ Closings Exceed Starts by 543 Homes 6 SCUC ISD Housing Market Analysis Average New vs. Existing Home Sale Price, 2013 - 2024 • The average new home sale price in SCUC ISD has risen 54% between 2014 and 2024, an increase of more than $135,200 • The average existing home sale price in SCUC ISD has risen 85% in the last 10 years, an increase of more than $158,800 Avg New Home Avg Existing Home 2014 $250,897 $187,097  2015 $262,532 $181,881  2016 $284,037 $189,189  2017 $297,182 $197,710  2018 $328,762 $221,637  2019 $314,299 $234,868  2020 $318,065 $247,691  2021 $345,858 $257,537  2022 $431,606 $327,526  2023 $422,149 $333,286  2024 $386,156 $345,921  $0 $50,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $300,000 $350,000 $400,000 $450,000 $500,000 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 New Home Price Existing Home Price 7 San Antonio New Home Ranking Report ISD Ranked by Annual Closings –4Q24 * Based on additional Zonda Education housing research Rank District Name Annual Starts Annual Closings Inventory VDL Future 1NORTHSIDE ISD (BEXAR) 3,739 3,920 1,909 6,114 21,246 2COMAL ISD 2,691 3,028 1,670 4,843 21,591 3MEDINA VALLEY ISD 2,377 2,410 1,232 5,228 27,810 4EAST CENTRAL ISD 2,513 2,230 1,243 4,351 24,478 5SOUTHWEST ISD 1,301 1,328 628 2,269 7,296 6 JUDSON ISD 615 899 207 547 871 7SCUC ISD 787 894 391 2,113 5,896 8NAVARRO ISD 841 832 453 1,290 6,635 9 BOERNE ISD 777 761 497 1,545 9,427 10 SOUTHSIDE ISD 700 730 322 927 16,702 11 NEW BRAUNFELS ISD 656 589 407 854 6,164 12 NORTH EAST ISD 397 361 234 906 5,196 13 SEGUIN ISD 325 342 204 668 5,384 14 SOUTH SAN ANTONIO ISD 300 238 164 86 790 15 MARION ISD 230 174 139 327 4,559 16 FLORESVILLE ISD 116 137 49 227 0 17 SAN ANTONIO ISD 59 87 126 305 772 18 LYTLE ISD 91 76 44 319 1,046 19 PLEASANTON ISD 54 61 25 72 0 20 ALAMO HEIGHTS ISD 3 41 8 15 19 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Annual Starts Annual Closings 8 District New Home Starts and Closings Starts 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Closings 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 1Q 175 201 237 294 349 103 189 1Q 133 138 165 190 181 280 235 2Q 180 176 197 300 393 187 260 2Q 185 211 249 258 227 247 249 3Q 177 207 261 265 174 241 163 3Q 185 240 286 268 218 199 200 4Q 185 198 232 319 63 157 161 4Q 161 179 213 196 334 155 214 Total 717 782 927 1,178 979 688 773 Total 664 768 913 912 960 881 898 9 District Housing Overview by Elementary Zone Elementary Annual  Starts Quarter  Starts Annual  Closings Quarter  Closings Under  Const.Inventory Vacant   Dev. Lots Future CIBOLO VALLEY 76 11 123 30 13 33 118 36 GREEN VALLEY00000 0 00 PASCHAL 10321 141242 ROSE GARDEN 234 64 230 53 85 137 827 2,499 SCHERTZ 0 0210 0 1 060 SIPPEL 298 70 277 68 76 154 729 1,817 WATTS 47 7 80 20 8 16 15 580 WIEDERSTEIN 131 9 160 41 13 49 383 662 Grand Total 787 161 894 214 196 391 2,113 5,896 Highest activity in the category Second highest activity in the category Third highest activity in the category • The district has 23 actively building subdivisions • Within SCUC ISD there are 6 future subdivisions in various stages of planning • Of these, groundwork is underway on more than 500 lots within 6 subdivisions • 462 lots were delivered in the 4 th quarter 10 District Housing Overview Mont Blanc • 100 total future lots • Preliminary plat approved Jan 2023 • Groundwork underway on all lots 11 Residential Activity Homestead • 1,470 total lots • 783 future lots • 296 vacant developed lots • 20 homes under construction • 339 homes occupied • Started 66 homes in last 12 months; started 16 homes in 4Q24 • Equipment on site for 62 lots in Phase 11 • $400K - $700K January 24, 2025 12 Residential Activity Saddle Creek Ranch • 807 total lots • 36 future lots • 61 vacant developed lots • 7 homes under construction • 690 homes occupied • Closed 61 homes in last 12 months; closed 16 homes in 2Q24 • Groundwork underway on remaining lots • $290K+ Grace Valley – Cibolo Farms • 331 total lots • 186 future lots • 124 vacant developed lots • 17 homes under construction • First homes started 4Q24 • Lennar January 24, 2025 13 Residential Activity Grace Valley • 868 total lots • 557 future lots • 163 vacant developed lots • 16 homes under construction • 128 homes occupied • Closed 123 homes in last 12 months; closed 32 homes in 4Q24 • Groundwork underway on 111 lots in Phase 3A • Lennar • $237K+ January 24, 2025 14 Residential Activity Venado Crossing • 507 total lots • 311 future lots • 15 vacant developed lots • 8 homes under construction • 165 homes occupied • Closed 48 homes in last 12 months; closed 20 homes in 4Q24 • Groundwork underway on 61 lots in Phase 4 • $350K+ Steele Creek • 940 total lots • 335 future lots • 118 vacant developed lots • 1 home under construction • 474 homes occupied • Closed 98 homes in last 12 months; closed 25 homes in 4Q24 • Delivered 111 lots for homebuilding in 4Q24 • DR Horton • $365K+ 15 Residential Activity Saddlebrook Ranch • 635 total lots • 335 future lots • 287 vacant developed lots • 12 homes under construction • Started first homes 3Q24 • Delivered 132 lots for homebuilding in Phase 4 & 5 in 4Q24 • Ashton Woods • $362K+ January 24, 2025 16 Residential Activity Crossvine • 1,017 total lots • 168 future lots • 291 vacant developed lots • 19 homes under construction • 516 homes occupied • Started 56 homes in last 12 months; started 15 homes in 4Q24 • $400K+ Clearwater Creek • 1,156 total future lots • Prelim plat Phase 1 (104 lots) approved April 2022 • Groundwork underway on Phase 1 • Lennar 17 Residential Activity January 24, 2025 18 Housing Market Trends: Multi‐family market‐December 2024 • There are 618 multifamily units under construction, 318 of which are single family rental homes • There are nearly 1,300 future multifamily units in various stages of planning across the district 19 District Multifamily Overview 20 Multi‐Family Activity January 24, 2025 Aviator 1518 • 300 apartment units under construction • Groundwork started early 2024 • Estimated lease date late spring 2025 21 Multi‐Family Activity Schertz Station • 318 single-family rental homes under construction • Groundwork started July 2024 • Estimated lease date August 2025 January 24, 2025 • There are 287 students residing in 2,472 multifamily units across the district • The overall district multifamily yield is 0.116 22 District Multifamily Yield 2,065 1,9111,988 1,690 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 2023/24 2024/25 Newcomers Leavers 23 Newcomers and Leavers +77 +221 24 Birth Rate Analysis Kindergarten Enrollment District Births Ratio 2006 (2011/12) 827 568 1.456 2007 (2012/13) 862 695 1.240 2008 (2013/14) 937 745 1.258 2009 (2014/15) 985 758 1.299 2010 (2015/16) 989 779 1.270 2011 (2016/17) 995 790 1.259 2012 (2017/18) 1,009 860 1.173 2013 (2018/19) 982 838 1.172 2014 (2019/20) 1,048 874 1.199 2015 (2020/21) 951 900 1.057 2016 (2021/22) 935 978 0.956 2017 (2022/23) 819 900 0.910 2018 (2023/24) 788 962 0.819 2019 (2024/25) 739 913 0.809 2020 (2025/26) 699 867 0.806 2021 (2026/27) 763 946 0.807 2022 (2027/28) 750 934 0.803 2023 (2028/29) 776 972 0.798 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Schertz‐Cibolo‐U City ISD KG  Enrollment vs. District Births Kindergarten Enrollment District Births 25 Yellow box = largest grade per year Green box = second largest grade per year Ten  Year  Forecast by Grade Level Year (Oct.) EE/PK K 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th 12th Total Total  Growth % Growth 2020/21 325 951 1,019 1,040 1,077 1,135 1,143 1,232 1,248 1,219 1,293 1,394 1,305 1,292 15,673 2021/22 455 935 997 1,019 1,074 1,116 1,124 1,221 1,287 1,318 1,428 1,347 1,305 1,264 15,890 217 1.4% 2022/23 436 819 962 998 1,077 1,114 1,067 1,133 1,230 1,306 1,478 1,371 1,247 1,283 15,521 ‐369 ‐2.3% 2023/24 430 788 838 967 997 1,090 1,079 1,097 1,178 1,264 1,435 1,459 1,238 1,286 15,146 ‐375 ‐2.4% 2024/25 444 737 814 895 989 1,018 1,121 1,116 1,112 1,232 1,469 1,403 1,394 1,202 14,946 ‐200 ‐1.3% 2025/26 452 715 766 853 925 1,022 1,057 1,171 1,147 1,150 1,415 1,438 1,354 1,374 14,839 ‐107 ‐0.7% 2026/27 458 780 747 805 886 972 1,051 1,094 1,207 1,189 1,315 1,388 1,374 1,352 14,618 ‐221 ‐1.5% 2027/28 461 768 815 789 838 922 998 1,091 1,120 1,253 1,370 1,286 1,335 1,363 14,409 ‐209 ‐1.4% 2028/29 463 797 806 858 825 877 953 1,038 1,119 1,160 1,436 1,342 1,237 1,326 14,237 ‐172 ‐1.2% 2029/30 463 811 826 836 888 851 903 988 1,057 1,161 1,331 1,406 1,287 1,232 14,040 ‐197 ‐1.4% 2030/31 463 833 840 860 865 918 878 938 1,015 1,098 1,335 1,303 1,352 1,279 13,977 ‐63 ‐0.4% 2031/32 463 850 867 874 894 900 948 913 961 1,052 1,264 1,307 1,252 1,343 13,888 ‐89 ‐0.6% 2032/33 463 862 877 899 906 926 929 985 935 997 1,207 1,237 1,254 1,246 13,723 ‐165 ‐1.2% 2033/34 463 885 890 910 931 939 957 966 1,009 970 1,146 1,184 1,185 1,247 13,682 ‐41 ‐0.3% 2034/35 463 902 917 924 943 965 971 995 991 1,047 1,115 1,124 1,140 1,180 13,677 ‐50.0% 26 Ten  Year  Forecast by Campus Yellow box = exceeds Functional capacity Pink box = exceeds Max capacity Fall ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS Campus  Functional  Capacity Max  Capacity 2024/25 2025/26 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 2029/30 2030/31 2031/32 2032/33 2033/34 2034/35 CIBOLO VALLEY EL 1,038 1,200 591 535 523 519 510 512 521 526 534 544 554 GREEN VALLEY EL 732 899 503 481 463 469 462 453 451 450 450 448 449 NORMA PASCHAL EL 704 871 574 556 545 521 531 524 528 527 530 531 531 ROSE GARDEN EL 1,031 1,200 861 838 814 813 814 830 856 876 906 936 969 SCHERTZ EL 683 1,017 663 635 618 571 561 561 564 556 553 550 545 SIPPEL EL 704 997 641 625 628 645 647 665 689 707 731 757 783 WATTS EL 739 906 500 486 473 457 473 480 494 505 519 530 546 WIEDERSTEIN EL 704 997 564 577 584 598 628 650 676 701 710 722 737 ELEMENTARY TOTALS 4,897 4,733 4,648 4,593 4,626 4,675 4,779 4,848 4,933 5,018 5,114 Elementary Percent Change ‐4.17%‐3.35%‐1.80%‐1.18% 0.72% 1.06% 2.22%1.44% 1.75% 1.72% 1.91% Elementary Absolute Change ‐213 ‐164 ‐85 ‐55 33 49 104 69 85 85 96 JORDAN INT 888 1,126 811 781 754 752 711 675 665 694 728 737 755 SCHLATHER INT 832 1,116 724 740 683 615 607 607 556 569 583 585 599 WILDER INT 855 1,188 702 707 708 722 673 609 595 598 603 601 612 INTERMEDIATE TOTALS 2,237 2,228 2,145 2,089 1,991 1,891 1,816 1,861 1,914 1,923 1,966 Intermediate Percent Change 2.80%‐0.40%‐3.73%‐2.61%‐4.69%‐5.02%‐3.97% 2.48% 2.85% 0.47% 2.24% Intermediate Absolute Change 61 ‐9 ‐83 ‐56 ‐98 ‐100 ‐75 45 53 9 43 DOBIE JH 1,285 1,540 1,231 1,184 1,262 1,256 1,180 1,108 1,073 1,052 992 1,023 1,058 CORBETT JH 1,285 1,500 1,113 1,113 1,134 1,117 1,099 1,110 1,040 961 940 956 980 JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL TOTALS 2,344 2,297 2,396 2,373 2,279 2,218 2,113 2,013 1,932 1,979 2,038 Junior High School Percent Change ‐4.01%‐2.01% 4.31%‐0.96%‐3.96%‐2.68%‐4.73%‐4.73%‐4.02% 2.43% 2.98% Junior High School Absolute Change ‐98 ‐47 99 ‐23 ‐94 ‐61 ‐105 ‐100 ‐81 47 59 CLEMENS HS 2,733 3,300 2,589 2,618 2,531 2,523 2,523 2,491 2,503 2,492 2,388 2,309 2,206 STEELE HS 2,733 3,200 2,790 2,871 2,806 2,739 2,726 2,673 2,674 2,582 2,464 2,361 2,261 ALSELC 89 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 HIGH SCHOOL TOTALS 5,468 5,581 5,429 5,354 5,341 5,256 5,269 5,166 4,944 4,762 4,559 High School Percent Change 0.92% 2.07%‐2.72%‐1.38%‐0.24%‐1.59% 0.25%‐1.95%‐4.30%‐3.68%‐4.26% High School Absolute Change 50 113 ‐152 ‐75 ‐13 ‐85 13 ‐103 ‐222 ‐182 ‐203 DISTRICT TOTALS 14,946 14,839 14,618 14,409 14,237 14,040 13,977 13,888 13,723 13,682 13,677 District Percent Change ‐1.32%‐0.72%‐1.49%‐1.43%‐1.19%‐1.38%‐0.45%‐0.64%‐1.19%‐0.30%‐0.04% District Absolute Change ‐200 ‐107 ‐221 ‐209 ‐172 ‐197 ‐63 ‐89 ‐165 ‐41 ‐5 27 Key Takeaways   Annual closings near 900 in 2024 Housing market remains cloudy with continued  high interest rates  and looming tariffs   The district has more than 390 homes currently in  inventory and more than 2,100 vacant developed  lots available for builders Groundwork is underway on approx. 500 lots  within 6 subdivisions Schertz‐Cibolo‐Universal City ISD is forecasted to  enroll more than 14,000 students by 2029/30 14,946 14,040 13,677 12,500 13,000 13,500 14,000 14,500 15,000 15,500 16,000 16,500 Enrollment Projections Ord. 25-S-036 Saddlebrook Ranch II PDD Samuel Haas | Senior Planner •Approx 36.2 ac •Zoning: PDD •Currently: Undeveloped / Drainage 2 Background •The original Planned Development District (PDD)zoning request was approved as Ordinance 21-S-06 on March 21, 2021. •229 acres •Mixed lot sizes, housing types, and uses •3.3 acre site designated for commercial uses along the frontage of Lower Seguin Road •Saddlebrook Ranch II PDD will adhere to the requirements of the original PDD (Ord. 21-S-06) with some minor changes. 3 Background 4 •Ord. 21-S-06 •Original Concept Plan Background •The Saddlebrook Ranch II PDD will consist of a base zoning district of Single- Family Residential (R-2) •“SF 70” •70 x 118 Lots •86 Lots •20 + than original PDD •Removes commercial •Rearranges drainage 5 •July 25, 2025, a total of 5 Public Hearing Notices were sent out. •Responses Received: 0– Opposition, 0-In Favor 0-Neutral •1 sign was posted on the property. 6 7 •Existing Zoning: Planned Development District (PDD) •Proposed Zoning: Planned Development District (PDD) UDC SECTION 21.5.10.F Criteria for Approval 1. Whether the proposed PDD implements the policies of the adopted Comprehensive Land Plan. •The Comprehensive Plan designates this area as Complete Neighborhood •Intended for a mix of residential housing types with complimentary neighborhood commercial services to create a complete neighborhood. •Request removes commercial portions •Designation allows for a variety of commercial uses, and the requested SUP is consistent with Comprehensive Plan 8 UDC SECTION 21.5.10.F Criteria for Approval 2.Whether the proposed PDD promotes the health, safety, or general welfare of the City and the safe, orderly, efficient and healthful development of the City. The City should encourage development compatible with surrounding uses. There are several single-family subdivisions either in development or constructed along the Lower Seguin Road corridor: •Rhine Valley - 447 lots •Carmel Ranch - 131 lots •Saddlebrook Ranch (Ord. 21-S-06) - 633 lots •Monterey Meadows - Ord.24-S-148 - Approx. 174 lots •Judah Ranch - Ord. 25-S-029 - 173 acre tract with R-1,R-2, and R-6 zoning districts. 9 10 Judah Ranch Saddlebrook Ranch •Rhine Valley - 447 lots •Carmel Ranch - 131 lots •Saddlebrook Ranch - 633 lots •Monterey Meadows - Ord.24-S-148 - Approx. 174 lots •Ord. 25-S-022 – R-2 (20 acres) •Judah Ranch - 173 acres (R-1, R-2, R-6) Rhine Valley Monterey Meadows Carmel Ranch Ord. 25-S-022 Proposed UDC SECTION 21.5.10.F Criteria for Approval 2.Whether the proposed PDD promotes the health, safety, or general welfare of the City and the safe, orderly, efficient and healthful development of the City (cont.) •South Schertz residents, City Council, and the Planning and Zoning Commission, have all expressly desired to see commercial services in this area. •The loss of the commercial portion works against expressly stated goals and policy decisions •Not an orderly, efficient, or healthful development for South Schertz. 11 UDC SECTION 21.5.10.F Criteria for Approval 3.Whether the uses permitted by the proposed change in zoning district classification and the standards applicable to such uses will be appropriate in the immediate area of the land to be reclassified; •The immediate area being undeveloped land, rural residences, and several single-family subdivisions currently in development. •Uses consistent. •However, having commercial uses at the corner of two major thoroughfares identified in our Master Thoroughfare Plan, is more appropriate. 12 Examples of Permitted Uses (UDC 21.5.8) Permitted by Right Specific Use Permit Accessory Building, Residential Family or Group Home Gated Community Golf Course and/or Country Club Municipal Uses Operated by the City of Schertz One-Family Dwelling Detached Park/Playground/Similar Public Site School, Public or Private Bed and Breakfast Inn Church, Temple, Synagogue, Mosque, or Other Place of Worship In-Home Day Care New and Unlisted Uses UDC SECTION 21.5.10.F Criteria for Approval 4.Whether the proposed change is in accord with any existing or proposed plans for providing public schools, streets, water supply, sanitary sewers or other public services and utilities to the area. •SCUCISD has been notified of the zone change request and the Saddlebrook Ranch project has been under development for several years. •This project has already made improvements to water and wastewater infrastructure •Road Improvements •Improvements to Lower Seguin Road •Constructed a portion of the FM 3009 •Identified as Redbud Canyon 13 UDC SECTION 21.5.10.F Criteria for Approval 5.The extent to which the proposed PDD will result in a superior development than could be achieved through conventional zoning. •This request is not superior to conventional zoning. •Reduces R-2 from 70’ x 120’ to 70 x 118’ •City Council Memorandum from the March 5,2021 •Including commercial portion was considered superior •Staff recommended approval because of "limited commercial development at the intersection of two arterial roadways on our Master Thoroughfare Plan in order to support the surrounding neighborhood" 14 UDC SECTION 21.5.10.F Criteria for Approval 6.Whether all of the applicant's back taxed owed to the City have been paid in full (no application will receive final approval until all back taxes are paid in full). This does not affect the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission nor does this affect City Council's decision. 7.Whether other criteria are met which, at the discretion of the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council, are deemed relevant and important in the consideration of the amendment. •All UDC requirements have been met for the proposed zone change. City of Schertz Fire, EMS, and Police Departments have been notified of the zone change and have provided no objections to the request. •SCUCISD has also been notified of the zone change request. •The scheduled public hearing provides the opportunity to introduce additional considerations. 15 Recommendation Staff Recommendation •The request does not implement the policies of the Comprehensive Plan, does not promote orderly and efficient development, and removes the unique and superior element of the original PDD request. •Therefore, Staff is recommending denial of Ord. 25-S-036 •The Schertz Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on August 6, 2025, and recommended denial with a 5-1 vote. 16 Agenda No. 6.   CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM    City Council Meeting:September 02, 2025 Department:Planning & Community Development Subject: Ordinance 25-S-037– Conduct a public hearing and consider request for a Specific Use Permit to allow a convenience store with gas pumps on approximately 4.2 acres of land, located at the intersection of North Graytown Road & IH 10, known as 11185 IH 10 E, Bexar County Property Identification Number 619232, City of Schertz, Bexar County, Texas (B.James/L.Wood/S.Haas) BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting a Specific Use Permit to allow a convenience store with covered gas pumps on approximately 4.2 acres of land. This Specific Use Permit was approved on June 20, 2023, as Ordinance 23-S-12. A condition of that approval was "a building permit is approved within two years of the adoption of the SUP Ordinance." To date, a building permit has not been approved for the property and the SUP expired on June 20, 2025. The applicant has requested another SUP for the same proposed use: Convenience Store with Gas Pumps. The subject property is currently vacant and undeveloped. Per the letter of intent and the conceptual site plan, the applicant is proposing a 6,500 square foot convenience store with a fuel canopy for both passenger cars and diesel trucks. The property is currently zoned General Business District (GB), for which the proposed use requires a Specific Use Permit. On July 25, 2025, four (4) public hearing notices were mailed to the surrounding properties within a 200-foot notification boundary of the subject property. At the time of the staff report, one (1) response in favor, zero (0) responses neutral, and zero (0) responses in opposition were received. A public hearing notice will be published in the "San Antonio Express" prior to the City Council meeting. Additionally, one (1) sign was placed on the subject property.  The City of Schertz Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on August 6, 2025 and made a recommendation of approval with a 6-0 vote. Subject Property:   Zoning Land Use Existing General Business District (GB)Vacant / Undeveloped Proposed General Business District (GB)Convenience Store with Gas Pumps Adjacent Properties:    Zoning Land Use North General Business District (GB)Vacant / Empty Structure South Right of Way (ROW)IH 10 East General Business District (GB)Vacant / Undeveloped West Right of Way (ROW)North Graytown Road GOAL The applicant is requesting a Specific Use Permit to allow a convenience store with covered gas pumps on approximately 4.2 acres of land, located at 11185 IH 10 E.  COMMUNITY BENEFIT It is the City’s desire to promote safe, orderly, efficient development and ensure compliance with the City’s vision of future growth.  SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED ACTION When evaluating specific use permit requests, staff considers the criteria listed in UDC Section 21.5.11.D. The criteria are listed below. 1. The proposed use at the specified location is consistent with the policies of the adopted Comprehensive Land Plan, or any other applicable adopted plans. The Comprehensive Plan designates this area as Regional Corridor, which is intended to accommodate multifamily developments, regional destinations (like "big box" stores) and other complimentary commercial uses. The designation allows for a variety of commercial uses, and the requested SUP is consistent with Comprehensive Plan. 2. The proposed use is consistent with the general purpose and intent of the applicable zoning district regulations. The subject property is currently zoned General Business District (GB). This district is "intended to provide suitable areas for the development of non-residential uses which offer a wide variety of retail and service establishments that are generally oriented toward serving the overall needs of the entire community. These businesses are usually located on principal transportation corridors." The specific use and location is consistent with the zoning district. 3. The proposed use is compatible with and preserves the character and integrity of adjacent developments and neighborhoods. The subject property lies at the intersection of N. Graytown Road and the IH 10 access road, and is currently zoned General Business District (GB). Other properties along IH 10 are similarly zoned. Directly to the north is a vacant residential structure, while the property to the east and to the west across Graytown Road are also vacant/undeveloped. Directly to the south is the IH 10 corridor. This business can take advantage of its proximity to IH 10, as it is a highway/transportation-oriented business and is dependent on the traffic generated from the highway. With the proposed convenience store being surrounded by mostly vacant land, and being directly adjacent to IH 10 the proposed Specific Use Permit is compatible with and preserves the character and integrity of adjacent developments. 4. The proposed use will not adversely affect the overall health, safety, or general welfare of the City. Staff has determined that with the proposed convenience store being surrounded by mostly vacant land, and being directly adjacent to IH 10 the proposed Specific Use Permit would not adversely impact the overall health, safety, and general welfare of the City. 5. Whether other factors are deemed relevant and important in the consideration of the Specific Use Permit. Schertz Fire, EMS, and Police have been notified of the zone change requests and have provided no objection. All UDC requirements have been met for the proposed Specific Use Permit. City of Schertz Fire, EMS, and Police Departments have been notified of the Specific Use Permit and have provided no objections to the request. The scheduled public hearing provides the opportunity to introduce additional considerations.  RECOMMENDATION The request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, conforms to the intent of the General Business District (GB), and has no adverse impact. Therefore, Staff is recommending approval of Ord. 25-S-037 with the following condition: 1. A building permit is approved within two years of the adoption of the Specific Use Permit ordinance.  The Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on August 6, 2025 and made a recommendation of approval with a 6-0 vote.  Attachments Ord. 25-S-037 with Exhibits Aerial Exhibit Public Hearing Notice Map Public Hearing Responses City Council Presentation Slides ORDINANCE 25-S-037 AN ORDINANCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS TO APPROVE A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A CONVENIENCE STORE WITH GAS PUMPS ON APPROXIMATELY 4.2 ACRES OF LAND, LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF NORTH GRAYTOWN ROAD & IH 10, KNOWN AS 11185 IH 10 E, BEXAR COUNTY PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBER 619232, CITY OF SCHERTZ, BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS WHEREAS, an application for a Specific Use Permit to allow for an operation of a convenience store with gas pumps located at the intersection of North Graytown Road & IH 10, known as Bexar County Property Identification Number 619232, more specifically described in the Exhibit A attached herein (herein, the “Property”) has been filed with the City; and WHEREAS, the City’s Unified Development Code Section 21.5.4.D. provides for certain criteria to be considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission in making recommendations to City Council and by City Council in considering final action on a requested zoning (the “Criteria”); and WHEREAS, on August 6, 2025, the Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing and, after considering the Criteria, made a recommendation to City Council to approve the requested Specific Use Permit; and WHEREAS, on September 2, 2025, the City Council conducted a public hearing and after considering the Criteria and recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission, determined that the requested zoning be approved as provided for herein. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS THAT: Section 1. The Property as shown and more particularly described in the attached Exhibit A, is hereby approved to allow a convenience store with gas pumps conditioned upon the following occurring: a) A building permit is approved within two years of the adoption of the Specific Use Permit Ordinance Section 2. The recitals contained in the preamble hereof are hereby found to be true, and such recitals are hereby made a part of this Ordinance for all purposes and are adopted as a part of the judgment and findings of the Council. Section 3. All ordinances and codes, or parts thereof, which are in conflict or inconsistent with any provision of this Ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict, and the provisions of this Ordinance shall be and remain controlling as t o the matters resolved herein. Section 4. This Ordinance shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas and the United States of America. Section 5. If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall be held to be invalid, the remainder of this Ordinance and the application of such provision to other persons and circumstances shall nevertheless be valid, and the City hereby declares that this Ordinance would have been enacted without such invalid provision. Section 6. It is officially found, determined, and declared that the meeting at which this Ordinance is adopted was open to the public and public notice of the time, place, and subject matter of the public business to be considered at such meeting, includ ing this Ordinance, was given, all as required by Chapter 551, as amended, Texas Government Code. Section 7. This Ordinance shall be effective upon the date of final adoption hereof and any publication required by law. Section 8. This Ordinance shall be cumulative of all other ordinances of the City of Schertz, and this Ordinance shall not operate to repeal or affect any other ordinances of the City of Schertz except insofar as the provisions thereof might be inconsistent or in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance, in which event such conflicting provisions, if any, are hereby repealed. PASSED and ADOPTED, this ____day of ________ 2025. CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS _____________________________ Ralph Gutierrez, Mayor ATTEST: Sheree Courney, Deputy City Secretary Exhibit “A” Metes and Bounds 1.BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE REFERENCED TO THE TEXAS COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983, (NAD83) SOUTH CENTRAL ZONE (FIPS 4204) PER GPS OBSERVATIONS AND ARE BASED ON CONTROL MONUMENTS DEPICTED ON THIS SURVEY 2.SURVEY WAS PERFORMED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF A TITLE COMMITMENT, EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS MAY EXIST WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN HEREON; NO ADDITIONAL RESEARCH REGARDING THE EXISTENCE OF EASEMENT OR RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD HAS BEEN PERFORMED BY SURVEYOR 3.SURVEY BASED ON THE BEST OF FIELD EVIDENCE FOUND TEMPORARY BENCHMARK (TBM) A FOUND "DISC" APPROX. 10 FEET IN A SOUTHWESTERLY DIRECTION FROM THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF THE SUBJECT TRACT. LOCATED NEAR A POWER POLE AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE EAST LINE OF GRAYTOWN ROAD AND THE NORTHERLY LINE OF I-10 FRONTAGE ROAD. ELEV=606.52' (NAVD 88, 2001 ADJ.) THIS TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY HAS BEEN REFERENCED TO BEXAR COUNTY FLOODPLAIN REFERENCE MARK NO: Z807 HAVING GRID COORDINATES OF: N:13722034.499 E:2205689.437 ELEVATION: 631.43' (NAVD88, 2001 ADJ.) ADD -0.73 TO ALL ELEVATIONS SHOWN TO ADJUST TO RMZ807 REFERENCE ELEVATION=630.70' BENCHMARK SCALE: 1"=60' N DANIEL VILLA, JR. 6751 603.81 610.97610.64 610.22 609.52 609.34 609.14 608.88 608.62 608.26 608.30 608.23 608.52 608.45 608.53 608.40 608.39 608.59 608.95 608.91 609.04 609.10 609.09 609.17 609.14 609.23 609.03 609.09 608.40 608.13 607.94 609.14 609.93 610.56 610.80 610.11 610.16 613.33 612.75 607.58 606.99 607.02 604.45 604.26 606.31 604.79 607.59 607.61 607.57 605.22 605.96 606.90 606.72 607.15 607.80 607.62 606.16 605.25 607.27 607.29 607.42 608.37 607.89 607.46 607.23 607.31 607.88 608.50 608.88 608.10 609.62 609.50 609.12 608.68 608.44 609.27 610.20 610.51 610.30 609.77 611.66 612.36 612.80 613.24 614.41 614.18 613.92 613.03 611.49 612.90612.24 611.80 611.11 610.36 609.87 610.68 610.23 607.99 607.90 607.42 608.77 608.10 608.87 608.78 608.90 608.92 608.55 608.70 608.99 609.39 609.26 609.80 609.90 610.45 610.88 610.32 609.91 609.28 608.95 608.83 608.10 607.49 606.33 607.11 608.25 609.28 610.45 609.15 608.32 610.32 609.49 610.84 611.50 611.10 610.93 610.92 610.79 611.47 612.14 609.96 609.99 609.54 609.56 609.86 610.02 609.86 609.49 609.10 608.57 609.03 609.04 608.14 608.16 607.76 606.95 607.22 607.21 606.18 606.25 606.07 605.03 605.37 604.78 604.17 604.57 604.18 604.34 604.48604.43 604.18 604.89 604.86 605.84 606.46 606.36606.03 605.32 603.78 603.72 604.22 605.89 605.92 605.87 607.43 607.83 608.12 610.47 610.33 610.25 611.92 611.93 612.44 613.74 613.05 613.23 613.86 613.50 614.29 614.85 615.66 614.97 615.67 615.83 616.36 607.10 608.60 608.86 609.76 609.51 610.13 609.98 611.69 610.91 610.41 613.01 606.23 605.66 604.14603.93 610.35 611.18 610.97 610.43 617.80 610.06 609.74 TR 12 TR TAL 10 TR TAL 12 CLUSTER TR TAL 8 TR TAL 12 TR TAL 8 TR 12 TR 8 TR TALLOW 8 TR TALLOW 8 TR TALLOW 8 TR 8 TR 8 TR 8 TR 8 TR 8 TR TALLOW 12 TR 10 TR TALLOW 8 TR TALLOW 12 TR TALLOW 10 TR TALLOW 10 TR TALLOW 8 TR TALLOW 8 TR 12 TR TALLOW 18 TR TALLOW 12 TR TALLOW 12 TR TALLOW 18 CLUSTER TR TALLOW 18 CLUSTER TR TALLOW 15 CLUSTER TR TALLOW 12 TR TALLOW 10 TR TALLOW 8 TR TALLOW 18 CLUSTER TR TALLOW 12 TR 12 TR TALLOW 15 TR TALLOW 15 TR TALLOW 12 TR TALLOW 18 TR TALLOW 12 TR TALLOW 24 TR TALLOW 8 TR TALLOW 8 TR TALLOW 8 TR 12 TR 12 TR TALLOW 18 TR TALLOW 15 TR TALLOW 8 TR TALLOW 8TR TALLOW 8 TR TALLOW 8 TR TALLOW 18 CLUSTER TR TALLOW 12 TR TALLOW 18 CLUSTER TR 15 TR TALLOW 15 TR 18 TR TALLOW 10 TR TALLOW 12 TR TALLOW 12 TR TALLOW 12 PP E D G E O F R O A D PP TBM ELEV.=606.52' PP PP LP PP(2) PP PP SEPTIC ON CONC. PLM(GAS) PLM(GAS) PLM(GAS) C UM(CABLE) CABLE BOX PP PP 1-STORY METAL BLDG. WV FH INLET LP 1-STORY METAL BLDG. LP LP UM(CABLE)WM INT E R S T A T E I - 1 0 F R O N T A G E R D . G R A Y T O W N R O A D N59 ° 2 4 ' 5 1 " E 3 9 5 . 5 0 ' S 3 0 ° 3 5 ' 0 9 " E 5 0 0 . 7 2 ' S68° 5 4 ' 5 1 " W 3 0 8 . 0 3 ' N70 ° 2 2 ' 3 9 " W 1 5 1 . 6 1 ' N 2 9 ° 4 0 ' 0 9 " W 3 3 3 . 4 3 ' S.C . I . R . PROPERTY CORNER F.I.R. 3 8" (CM) PP PED MARK T. & JANET MELLO CALLED A 1.50 AC. TRACT (VOL. 10923, PG. 1465, O.P.R.) ALAN G. & BARBARA K. MUNZY CALLED A 49.341 AC. TRACT (VOL. 4762, PG. 1292, O.P.R.) 0.24 1 2 A C . E A S E M E N T F O R ELEC T R I C & G A S S Y S T E M S A S P E R (DOC . N O . 0 0 2 1 2 5 1 1 B . C . O . P . R . ) 0.35 5 7 A C . E A S E M E N T F O R ELEC T R I C & G A S S Y S T E M S A S P E R (DOC. N O . 0 0 2 1 2 4 0 6 B . C . O . P . R . ) KGG ENTERPRISES CALLED A 4.167 AC. TRACT (VOL. 2898, PG. 2250, O.P.R.) 3 1 1 . 5 4 ' 1 0 3 . 6 3 ' 3 2 . 0 0 ' F.C.I.R. 1 2" (CM) F.I.R. 1 2" (CM) F.I.R. 1 2" (CM) 3 1 1 . 4 3 ' 1 0 3 . 7 3 ' F.C.I.R. 1 2" (CM) F.C.I.R. 1 2" (CM) 210 . 3 4 ' FLOOD PLAIN INFO: LEGEND: T; EN*,NEER,N* ),RM NO ) T; S8R9EY,N* ),RM NO 10160 11 )RY ROA' S8,TE 0 CYPRESS TE;AS  110 REVISIONS: NO.DATE DESCRIPTION BOUNDARY SURVEY OF A 4.167 AC. PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE ANTONIO ZAMORA SURVEY NO. 36 ABSTRACT NO. 828, COUNTY BLOCK 5083 11185 E. INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 10, SCHERTZ TEXAS BEXAR COUNTY, TX 78154 JOB NO.: DATE: FOR: GF#: PURCHASER: D2202-053 03-01-2022 - - - GRAVEL GRAVEL GRAVEL GRAVEL CONC. CONC. CONC. S.C . I . R . POINT OF BEGINNING S.C.I.R. ALAN G. & BARBARA K. MUNZY CALLED A 49.341 AC. TRACT (VOL. 4762, PG. 1292, O.P.R.) :PARCEL ID: 619232 U U NGrayto w n R d N G r a y t o w n R d Inter s t a t e 1 0 E I n t e r s t a t e 1 0 E N G r a y t o w n R d N G r a y t o w n R d N G r a y t o w n R d N G r a y t o w n R d N G r a y t o w n R d 10 10 10 N G r a y t o w n R d N G r a y t o w n R d I n t e r s t a t e 1 0 E I n t e r s t a t e 1 0 E I n t e r s t a t e 1 0 E I n t e r s t a t e 1 0 E I n t e r s t a t e 1 0 E I n t e r s t a t e 1 0 E 10 10 10 10 N G r a y t o w n R d N G r a y t o w n R d N G r a y t o w n R d N G r a y t o w n R d I n t e r s t a t e 1 0 EI n t e r s t a t e 10 E Intersta t e 1 0 E I n t e r s t a t e 1 0 E 10 10 10 I n t e r s t a t e 1 0 E I n t e r s t a t e 1 0 E 10 I n t e r s t a t e 1 0 E I n t e r s t a t e 1 0 E 10 10 I n t e r s t a t e 1 0 E I n t e r s t a t e 1 0 E 619229 MELLO MARK T & MELLO JANET 619232 QUALCO OPPORTUNITY FUND LLC 619236 GARZA HOLLY PFANNSTIEL & RENE 619230 MUZNY ALAN G & BARBARA K 619202 2020 FI GRAYTOWN LLC 8 " W L 3" WL 2" WL 2" WL 2" WL I H 1 0 E A C C E S S R D I H 1 0 E A C C E S S R D I H 1 0 E A C C E S S R D I H 1 0 E A C C E S S R D I H 1 0 E A C C E S S R D I H 1 0 E A C C E S S R D IH 10 E IH 10 E N G R A Y T O W N R D Maxar, Microsoft, Sources: Esri, TomTom, Garmin, FAO, NOAA, USGS, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community 0 100 200 30050 Feet Highways Major Roads Minor Roads Freeway Principal Arterial Planned Principal Arterial Secondary Arterial Planned Secondary Arterial Secondary Rural Arterial Planned Secondary Rural Arterial Residential Collector Planned Residential Collector Planned Commercial Collector B Commercial Collector A Planned Commercial Collector A 1" 2" 3" 4" 6" 8" 10" 12" 16" 18" 20" 24" 30" 36" Unknown Schertz Gravity Schertz Pressure Neighboring Gravity Private Pressure U Hydrant !P Manholes [Ú CCMA Lift Station [Ú Private Lift Station [Ú Schertz Lift Station 3Q CCMA Treatment Plant 3Q Schertz Treatment Plant County Boundaries Schertz Municipal Boundary ETJ Last update: July 24th, 2025 City of Schertz, GIS Specialist: Alexa Venezia, avenezia@schertz.com (210) 619-1174 *The City of Schertz provides this Geographic Information System product "as is" without any express or implied warranty of any kind including but not limited to the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose. In no event shall The City of Schertz be liable for any special, indirect, or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever arising out of or in connection with the use of or performance of these materials. Information published in this product could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Periodical changes may be added to the information herein. The City of Schertz may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) described herein at any time.* City of Schertz Parcel ID: 619232 : 5190 N GRAYTOWN RD (619229) 11185 IH 10 E (619232) 11239 IH 10 E (619236) 11403 IH 10 E (619230) 5021 N GRAYTOWN RD (619202) IH 10 E A C C E S S R D I H 1 0 E A C C E S S R D IH 10 E A C C E S S R D IH 10 E IH 10 E IH 10 E A C C E S S R D N G R A Y T O W N R D 0 100 200 30050 Feet Project Boundary City Limits Schertz ETJ Boundary 200' Buffer Ord. 25-S-037 Specific Use Permit for Convenience Store with Gas Pump Samuel Haas | Senior Planner •Approx 4.2 ac •Zoning: GB •Currently Vacant 2 Background •Applicant is requesting a Specific Use Permit to allow a convenience store with covered gas pumps •This property previously had a Specific Use Permit approved on June 20, 2023, as Ordinance 23-S- 12 •Conditioned upon a building permit approval within two years of the adoption of the SUP Ordinance. •SUP has expired •Intends to develop a 6,500 square foot convenience store with a fuel canopy for both passenger cars and diesel trucks •Requires SUP in General Business District (GB) 3 •July 25, 2025, a total of 4 Public Hearing Notices were sent out. •Responses Received: 0– Opposition, 1-In Favor 0-Neutral •1 sign was posted on the property. 4 5 UDC SECTION 21.5.11.D Criteria for Approval 1.Whether the proposed use at the specified location is consistent with the policies of the adopted Comprehensive Land Plan, or any other applicable adopted plans. •The Comprehensive Plan designates this area as Regional Corridor •Intended for a multifamily developments, regional destinations (like "big box" stores) and other complimentary commercial uses •Designation allows for a variety of commercial uses, and the requested SUP is consistent with Comprehensive Plan 6 UDC SECTION 21.5.11.D Criteria for Approval 2. The proposed use is consistent with the general purpose and intent of the applicable zoning district regulations. •Subject property is currently zoned General Business District (GB). •"intended to provide suitable areas for the development of non-residential uses which offer a wide variety of retail and service establishments that are generally oriented toward serving the overall needs of the entire community” •The specific use and location is consistent with the zoning district. 7 UDC SECTION 21.5.11.D Criteria for Approval 3. The proposed use is compatible with and preserves the character and integrity of adjacent developments and neighborhoods. •Surrounded by mostly vacant land •Adjacent to IH 10 •The proposed Specific Use Permit is compatible 8 UDC SECTION 21.5.11.D Criteria for Approval 4. The proposed use will not adversely affect the overall health, safety, or general welfare of the City. Staff has determined that the proposed Specific Use Permit would not adversely impact the overall health, safety, and general welfare of the City. 5. Whether other factors are deemed relevant and important in the consideration of the Specific Use Permit.Schertz Fire, EMS, and Police have been notified of the zone change requests and have provided no objection. All UDC requirements have been met for the proposed Specific Use Permit. City of Schertz Fire, EMS, and Police Departments have been notified of the Specific Use Permit and have provided no objections to the request. The scheduled public hearing provides the opportunity to introduce additional considerations. 9 Recommendation Staff Recommendation •The request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, conforms to the intent of the General Business District (GB), and has no adverse impact. •Therefore, Staff is recommending approval of Ord. 25-S-037 with the condition that a building permit is approved within two years of the adoption of this ordinance. •The Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on August 6, 2025 a made a recommendation of approval with a 6-0 vote. 10 Agenda No. 7.   CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM    City Council Meeting:September 02, 2025 Department:Planning & Community Development Subject: PLAPP20250187 - Conduct a public hearing and consider an appeal to a decision by the Planning and Zoning Commission for a waiver in relation to wall signage for the Home Depot on Lot 10 Block 1 of the Schertz Station Subdivision, approximately 18.709 acres of land, located at 18541 Ripss-Kreusler Road, Schertz, Texas, 78154, more specifically known as Guadalupe County Parcel Identification Number 68313 (B.James/L.Wood/S.Haas) BACKGROUND The Schertz City Council recently passed updates to Article 11 - Signs and Advertising Devices on June 17, 2025 as Ord. 25-S-024. In these updates, is Section 21.11.15 Waivers. This section allows applicants the opportunity to request waivers from the sign standards in extenuating circumstances. These requests are then decided upon by the Schertz Planning and Zoning Commission. The applicant intends to construct a 136,466-square-foot Home Depot on Lot 10 Block 1 of the Schertz Station subdivision, a large mixed-use subdivision consisting of multifamily housing and restaurant / retail sites on the corner of Cibolo Valley Drive and IH-35. The waiver request is in relation to the new wall sign requirements. Wall signs under the new Article 11 updates have an allowable square footage of signage available per facade. This can be either 1 sign for the full square footage or multiple signs that add up to the maximum allowable square footage for signage. The amount of square footage is determined based off of roadway classification and the address of the site.  The address for the Home Depot is 18541 Ripps-Kreusler, which has a roadway classification as "All Others" and would give the applicant 100 square feet of available signage. Additionally, because the applicant is constructing a building over 100,000 square feet, the applicant is allowed an additional 100 square feet, for a total of 200 square feet of allowable signage. The applicant requested a waiver from that requirement and would like the allowable signage area to be increased to 580 square feet for the front facade facing Station Road to the north towards IH-35. Staff had recommended approval of the waiver request to the Planning and Zoning Commission with the condition that the maximum allowable wall signage for the front-facing facade be increased to 350 square feet as the new Article 11 provides, and not to 580 square feet as the applicant had requested.    Wall Sign Home Depot Sign Request UDC Code Applicant's Requests Staff's Recommendation Roadway Classification: 100 sq. ft. 100,000 sq. ft. building: additional 100 sq. ft. Total = 200 sq. ft. 580 sq. ft. Increased Roadway Classification: 250 sq. ft. 100,000 sq. ft. building: additional 100 sq. ft. Total = 350 sq. ft. The Planning and Zoning Commission held a meeting on July 2, 2025 and considered the waiver request. It should be noted that only 6 members of the commission were present. The Commission made two motions on the item. The first was to approve the waiver request with Staff's conditions. That motion resulted in a 3-3 tie. The motion failed.   The "nay" votes held the opinion that the applicant's request was appropriate due to the location of the site and the size of the building. One commissioner expressed concern over a smaller sign looking awkward on a large building, and another commissioner was concerned that the building sat far enough away from the IH 35 frontage road that visibility of the business would be an issue. A second motion was made to approve the applicants request of 580 sq. ft. That motion resulted in a 3-3 tie. The motion failed.   The "nay" votes on this motion held the opinion that the city had just recently amended the sign code to allow bigger signs, and that applicants should adhere to the new code. The commissioners also felt that Staff's condition was an adequate concession and a good middle ground solution. It should be noted that a representative from Home Depot was not present at the waiver request hearing. Instead, a representative from the engineering firm developing the site was there. The applicant has submitted a narrative (attached) related to the appeal. In summary, the applicant feels that the new sign code is not appropriate for large commercial buildings and that buildings in proximity have greater signage allowances in proportion to their building size.   On August 15, 2025, three (3) public hearing notices were mailed to the surrounding properties within a 200-foot notification boundary of the subject property. At the time of the staff report, zero (0) response in favor, zero (0) responses neutral, and zero (0) responses in opposition were received. A public hearing notice will be published in the "San Antonio Express" prior to the City Council meeting. Additionally, one (1) sign was placed on the subject property.   GOAL Provide a mechanism by which a property owner can appeal a Planning and Zoning waiver request decision.  COMMUNITY BENEFIT Ensure that business and property owners have adequate signage while balancing the goals, policies, and vision for the community of Schertz.  SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED ACTION The criteria for sign waivers is found in UDC Section 21.11.15. Staff has used these criteria for the The criteria for sign waivers is found in UDC Section 21.11.15. Staff has used these criteria for the following analysis. 21.11.15.B has the the following considerations: 1. The nature of the proposed use of the land involved. The Schertz Station Subdivision is a large subdivision currently zoned Planned Development District (PDD). The subdivision as a whole consists of multifamily-style housing and several retail / restaurant sites. The site for this specific waiver is a large proposed home improvement center that is set back approximately 800 feet from IH35. Given the nature of the shopping center-style land use as a whole and the particular location of the home improvement center, Staff feels that additional signage area for the front of the building is appropriate. However, Staff has determined that the applicant's request of 580 sq. ft. of signage is too large and not appropriate. Staff has proposed a compromise of 350 sq. ft.  2. The location of the property in relation to roadway classification. Several public roadways provide access to the subdivision. That being said, Schertz Station functions effectively as a regional destination center on the corner of IH-35 and Cibolo Valley Drive. Article 11 determines roadway classification based on addressing and Staff has determined that this requirement is not appropriate for this particular site. It would be more appropriate to classify Home Depot as adjacent to IH35. 3. The existing uses of land in the vicinity. The land uses in the vicinity consist of the remainder of the Schertz Station subdivision which, as mentioned above, consists of multifamily-style housing and several retail / restaurant sites. Additionally, the EVO site is adjacent to the property. 21.11.15.C has the following considerations: 1. That the granting of the waiver will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or injurious to other property in the area The granting of this waiver would not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare. Home Depot acts as an anchor tenant and would help drive commercial activity for the surrounding properties. 2. Strict interpretation of the provisions of the section would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other nearby properties with the same land use that would comply with the same provisions. The neighboring EVO sight has a similar location and setback approximately 1000 feet from the frontage of IH35. As part of their Planned Development District zone change request (Ord.18-S-37), they were allowed to have a 478 sq. ft. front wall sign. Staff has determined that the Home Depot has a similar situation and thus a waiver would be in-line with what other properties have been allowed to do.  Staff does not support the request to increase allowable wall signage space to 580 square feet. Under the new code updates passed on June 17, 2025, properties located on interstates are allowed a maximum signage space of 250 square feet, and buildings that are over 100,000 square feet in size are allotted an additional 100 square feet. If applied to only the front-facing facade, this would provide Home Depot a maximum of 350 square feet of wall signage space, and Staff has determined this amount to be more appropriate and more in-line with the intent of the UDC. The other facades in which signage is permitted would remain capped at 200 sq. ft. of signage area, as stipulated in the UDC.  Staff had recommended approval of the waiver request to the Planning and Zoning Commission with the condition that the maximum allowable wall signage for the front-facing facade be increased to 350 square feet as the new Article 11 provides, and not to 580 square feet as the applicant had requested. Staff's recommendation to City Council is to approve the appeal with staff's original conditions. Staff understands that as new ordinances are applied, it provides an opportunity to evaluate the implications of those new regulations. These real-world examples provide insight into how the regulations impact new projects. Additionally, the criteria or basis for approval of waivers/exceptions can be evaluated. For example, as has been pointed out to staff, commercial developments rely on signage to attract business. These commercial projects bring value to the community, in the form of property and sales tax revenue as well as providing services to residents and businesses and if the developer indicates that the signage is necessary in order for the commercial project to be viable or more successful, this should be sufficient to allow more signage. Additionally, it has been pointed out that other developments in the past were allowed more signage and as such the City should never in the future restrict signage to less than what other businesses were allowed.  If in evaluating this case Council does not find anything unique to justify the increased signage, but still feel it is appropriate, staff suggests amending the ordinance to allow the additional signage by right going forward. In this way, there is clarity as to how much signage will be allowed and it does not delay development by relying on waivers.  RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending approval of the appeal with  staff's original conditions to allow 350 square feet of wall signage.  Attachments Home Depot Appeal  City Council Presentation Slides 8/4/2025 City of Schertz Planning and Community Development 1400 Schertz Parkway Schertz, TX 78154 Home Depot Schertz – Wall Sign Area Appeal Request Home Depot is proposing to build a new retail store in Schertz, TX. The Site Certification Package for this project has been submitted with the assigned reference number PLSPC20240209. This project is part of the Schertz Station Planned Development District (PDD). For this PDD, the City of Schertz Unified Development Code (UDC) adopted in June 2025 allows for wall sign size to be up to 100 SF plus an additional 100 SF because The Home Depot building is over 100,000 SF, resulting in a maximum wall sign area of 200 SF per building façade (Article 11 Sec. 21-11-9). The Home Depot is proposing four wall signs that total approximately 580 SF on the front building façade. The 580 SF proposed is larger than the 200 SF allowed by code. Because of this, The Home Depot has previously requested a waiver to increase the maximum sign area allowance from 200 SF to 580 SF for the building façade facing Station Road or IH-35. Home Depot requested a waiver to increase the wall sign size due to the following reasons: · The front building façade has an area of 17,514 SF and will need a larger sign than the code allows to stay proportional (architecturally) and consistent with other stores in the area. The total proposed wall sign square footage (580 SF) only covers 3.3% of the front building façade area. · The multi-tenant commercial buildings facing IH-35 within the Schertz Station development with a smaller building front façade of 4,332 SF, that has three tenants with each having a 250 SF sign, will be allowed 750 SF total of wall signage (17% of the front façade). · The Schertz Station PDD is directly adjacent to the Interstate-35 frontage road. The UDC allows for wall sign size increases if the property is adjacent to an interstate. The Home Depot is part of the Schertz Station PDD and is requesting a wall sign size due to the proximity to the interstate. · The Home Depot proposed store is in the Schertz Station PDD as a commercial land use and will be surrounded by other commercial land uses. No residential land uses are adjacent to the Home Depot property. The nearest residential land use is approximately 1500 feet away and does not face the Home Depot building façade with the proposed wall signs. The waiver request was considered by City of Schertz Planning & Zoning Commission on July 2, 2025. Two motions were made to act on that request during the public meeting, and both resulted in a tie, or an even vote. The first motion made was in support of staff’s recommendation that was based on the current related sign code (increase the wall sign size to 350 SF as if Home Depot was addressed off I-35). The second motion made was to support the applicant’s waiver request (increase the wall sign size to 580 SF). From the applicant’s understanding, the main reason the Planning & Zoning Commission motions both resulted in a tie is because the City of Schertz just approved a new code regarding wall sign size in June 2025 and Commissioners were hesitant to vote in favor of a variance for code that was just approved. Because both motions made both resulted in a tie vote, by default, the application was denied. The Home Depot is submitting this appeal request to City Council to follow that tie vote from the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. We understand staff’s recommendation since it is based on how the current code is written. But as evidenced by the graphic attached to this appeal request, the current code language considers smaller commercial buildings and does not have appropriate regulations for standard signage packages that are typical for large commercial buildings. As illustrated on the attached graphic, per the current code allowances, a retail building of 13,300 SF with a front façade of 4,332 SF is allowed 750 SF of building façade signage. This results in the permitted sign size being 17% of the front facade. The Home Depot’s standard building façade signage includes 580 SF of signage on a front building façade of 17,514 SF, resulting in the wall signage being 3.3% of the front building façade. The design and development team believes that this is a reasonable amount of signage to propose on a building of this size. The team also believes that the approval of this appeal request is still in line with the intent of the City sign code in that this appeal request only allows 580 sf of building façade signage, with that being less than 5% of the façade area of the proposed building. This is much less building façade signage on a percentage basis than the current City code allows for a much smaller building as described above and illustrated on the exhibit included with this appeal request. We appreciate the City’s consideration of this appeal request. Please contact us for any further information and discussion that may be helpful. Thank you, Austin Edelen, PE Kimley-Horn & Associates Site Development Coordinator Team for The Home Depot, Inc. Attachments: · Site Plan · Wall Sign Plan · Project Location Exhibit · Permitted Signage Exhibit Appeal of Sign Waiver Request Decision PLAPP20250187 Samuel Haas | Senior Planner Background •Article 11 updates approved on June 17,2025 (Ord.25-S-024). •New Section 21.11.15 Waivers. •Allows for applicants to ask for waivers to the sign requirements. •Planning and Zoning Commission decides on the waiver requests •Appeal of that decision go before City Council 2 Background •Article 11 updates approved on June 17,2025 (Ord.25-S-024). •Wall Signs 3 •Schertz Station Subdivision •Lot 10 Block 1 •Zoning: PDD •Address: 18541 Ripps- Kreusler •136,466-square-foot Home Depot 4 Background •Home Depot Wall Signage per Article 11 •All Others = 100 sq. ft. •Additional 100 sq. ft. (per 100,000+ sq. ft. building) •Total = 200 sq. ft. per façade (3 out of 4) 5 Background 6 Background •Applicant requested a waiver to allow more signage on front facade •580 sq. ft. 7 Background 8 •Flower Mound ,TX Background 9 •Flower Mound, TX •290 sq. ft. Background 10 •Dallas, TX •413 sq. ft. Background 11 •Bee Cave, TX •290 sq ft. •Addt’l signage Background •Staff used UDC Article 21.11.15.B & C. in analysis of waiver request •Staff determined that due to the proximity to IH-35 and the large mixed-use nature of the development – the applicant had justification for a larger sq. ft. allotment. •However, staff recommended a compromise – considering the address of the property to be off IH 35. 12 Home Depot Sign Waiver Request UDC Code Applicant Request Staff’s Recommendation All Others – 100 sq. ft. 100,000 sq. ft. building – 100 sq. ft. Total = 200 sq. ft. 580 sq. ft.Interstate – 250 sq. ft. 100,000 sq. ft. building – 100 sq. ft. Total = 350 sq. ft. Background •The Planning and Zoning Commission held a meeting on July 2, 2025 and considered the waiver request. •Only 6 members were present. •The Commission made two motions on the item. •The first was to approve the waiver request with Staff's conditions. That motion resulted in a 3 -3 tie. The motion failed. •The "nay" votes: •Applicant's request was appropriate due to the location of the site and the size of the building. •Expressed concerns over visibility of the business. •A second motion was made to approve the applicants request of 580 sq. ft.That motion resulted in a 3-3 tie. The motion failed. •The "nay" votes: •The city had just recently amended the sign code to allow bigger signs, and that applicants should adhere to the new code. •The commissioners also felt that Staff's condition was an adequate concession and a good middle ground solution. •Home Depot allowed 200 sq. ft. or wall signage as a result. 13 Background •Applicant appealed 14 Background •Applicant appealed 15 UDC 21.4.14.D Appeals In deciding the appeal, the City Council responsible for consideration of the appeal shall apply the same criteria that govern the initial decision on the Development Application under the provisions of this Article UDC Article 21.11.15.B & C. 16 UDC SECTION 21.11.15.B Waiver Considerations 1. The nature of the proposed use of the land involved. •The use proposed is a large proposed home improvement center. •Component of a mixed-used subdivision with multifamily and retail / restaurant. 17 UDC SECTION 21.11.15.B Waiver Considerations 2. The location of the property in relation to roadway classification 18 •Several public roadways within subdivision. •Regional destination center. •Corner of IH35 & Cibolo Valley Dr. UDC SECTION 21.11.15.B Waiver Considerations 3. The existing uses of land in the vicinity. 19 Retail / Restaurant Pad Sites Home Depot Location EVO Multifamily Housing •Schertz Station Subdivision •mixed-used subdivision with multifamily and retail / restaurant UDC SECTION 21.11.15.C Waiver Considerations 1.That the granting of the waiver will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or injurious to other property in the area •Not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare. •Home Depot - anchor tenant •Drive commercial activity for the surrounding properties. 20 UDC SECTION 21.11.15.C Waiver Considerations 2. Strict interpretation of the provisions of the section would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other nearby properties with the same land use that would comply with the same provisions. 21 EVO •EVO site •Similar location in relation to IH-35 •Allowed 478 sq. ft. sign •PDD - 2018 UDC SECTION 21.11.15.C Waiver Considerations 2. Strict interpretation of the provisions of the section would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other nearby properties with the same land use that would comply with the same provisions. 22 •HEB site •Similar site •Allowed 10 total signs •Total Approx. 1221 sq. ft •Variance - 2013 UDC SECTION 21.11.15.C Waiver Considerations 2. Strict interpretation of the provisions of the section would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other nearby properties with the same land use that would comply with the same provisions. 23 •Lowes site •Similar site •Total Approx. 510 sq. ft •Variance - 2007 UDC SECTION 21.11.15.C Waiver Considerations 2. Strict interpretation of the provisions of the section would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other nearby properties with the same land use that would comply with the same provisions. 24 •Walmart site •Similar site •Total 1,113 sq. ft. •Variance - 2004 Recommendation Staff Recommendation •Staff does not support the request to increase allowable wall signage space to 580 square feet. •Staff does support increasing wall signage space to 350 square feet •IH-35 roadway classification + 100,000 sq. ft. building . 25 UDC 21.4.14.D Appeals City Council may: •Affirm the Planning and Zoning Commission decision •Home Depot would only be allowed 200 sq. ft. •Reverse or modify the decision •Staff’s recommendation, or •Applicant’s request, or •City Council’s discretion 26 Agenda No. 8.   CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM    City Council Meeting:September 02, 2025 Department:Finance Subject:Ordinance 25-T-033 – Conduct a Public Hearing and approve an Ordinance approving the appraisal roll; setting the tax rate; levying and assessing general and special ad valorem taxes for the use and support of the municipal government of the City of Schertz, Texas (S.Gonzalez/J.Walters) BACKGROUND At the August 5, 2025 Council meeting, the City Council, by record vote, established a proposed preliminary maximum tax rate of $0.5350, per $100 of value, with the M&O rate at $0.3669 and the I&S portion of $0.1681. This rate was under the Voter-Approval rate but greater than the No-New-Revenue rate. The rate was set to give council flexibility in discussion of the budget impacts of various tax rates. On August 19, 2025, Council adopted a Budget that is funded at the rate of $0.5118 which is above the No-New-Revenue Rate but lower than the Voter-Approval Rate. The No-New-Revenue rate is a rate calculated per state regulations that would raise the same amount of property taxes on properties that existed in the 2024 tax year while the Voter-Approval Rate is the highest rate Council can adopt without holding an election on the tax rate. In accordance with Chapter 26.05(d) of the State’s Property Tax Code, a governing body must hold a public hearing on the tax rate if the proposed tax rate exceeds the lower of the No-New-Revenue or Voter-Approval Tax Rate.  In this case, a public hearing is required as the proposed rate does exceed the No-New-Revenue rate.   During the tax rate adoption motion Council can approve a lower rate, however they will not be able to approve a rate higher than this without republishing the notices and holding additional public hearings. Due to timing constraints set by the State Tax Code 26.05(a), the latest council could set a new preliminary rate is September 2, 2025 without calling special meetings or declaring an emergency. Per Sec 26.05(b) of the Tax Code, the tax rate can only be adopted with more than 60% of the votes in favor of the proposed tax rate if the motion would raise the tax rate higher than the No-New-Revenue rate of $0.5064. Since Schertz has 7 voting councilmembers, 5 members must vote in favor of the tax rate for it to pass.  GOAL To adopt a tax rate in compliance with state statutes and the City Charter.  COMMUNITY BENEFIT The programs funded by this tax rate will provide additional benefits and service levels to the community.  SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED ACTION Staff recommends adoption of the tax rate of $0.5118  FISCAL IMPACT The Proposed Tax Rate of $0.5118 rate will raise more total property taxes than last year by $1,597,093, or a 5.8% increase, and of that amount, $1,205,226 is tax revenue to be raised from new property added to the tax roll this year.      Total Tax Rate M&O Rate I&S Rate % Change Proposed Rate $0.5118 $0.3437 $0.1681 1.1% No-New-Revenue $0.5064 $0.3383 $0.1681 0.0% Voter-Approval $0.5350 $0.3669 $0.1681 5.6% RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve Ordinance No. 25-T-033 approving the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Proposed Tax Rate. MOTION LANGUAGE: “I move that the property tax rate be increased by the adoption of a tax rate of $0.5118, which is effectively a 1.1% increase in the tax rate.” Attachments Ordinance 25-T-033 Adopting the Tax Rate Taxpayer Impact Statement Schertz Tax Rate Calculation 2025 City Council Tax Rate Presentation ORDINANCE NO. 25-T-033 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE APPRAISAL ROLL; SETTING THE TAX RATE; LEVYING AND ASSESSING GENERAL AND SPECIAL AD VALOREM TAXES FOR THE USE AND SUPPORT OF THE MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS; APPORTIONING THE LEVIES FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Manager of the City of Schertz submitted a tax rate proposal to the City Council prior to the beginning of the fiscal year, and in said tax rate proposal set forth the estimated necessary tax rate required to provide adequate revenues for the general use and support of the Municipal Government of the City of Schertz Texas; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that all provisions pertaining to the adoption of an ad valorem tax rate have been in all things complied with; and WHEREAS, a Public hearing was held by the City Council of the City of Schertz on the 2nd day of September 2025; and WHEREAS, after a full and final consideration, the City Council is of the opinion the tax rate and ad valorem tax appraisal roll should be approved and adopted; and WHEREAS, the taxes have been levied in accordance with the adopted 2025-26 budget as required by state law; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS, THAT: Section 1. The ad valorem tax appraisal roll and effective tax rate information as presented by the tax assessor for the tax year 2025, be and is hereby in all things approved and adopted. Section 2. This tax rate will not raise more taxes for Maintenance and Operations than last year’s tax rate. Section 3. The tax rate will effectively increase and will raise taxes for maintenance and operations on a $100,000 home by approximately $2.30. Section 4. There is hereby levied and assessed and there shall be collected for the tax year 2025 for the general use and support of the Municipal Government of the City of S chertz, Texas a total ad valorem tax of Fifty-One and Eighteen Cents ($0.5118) on each One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) of valuation of property – real and personal – within the corporate limits of the City of Schertz, Texas, subject to taxation. The assessment ratio shall be One Hundred percent (100%). Section 5. The City Council of the City of Schertz, Texas, does hereby levy or adopt the tax rate on $100.00 valuation for this city for tax year 2025 as follows: 0.3437 for the purpose of maintenance and operation 0.1681 for the payment of principal and interest on debt 0.5118 total tax rate Section 6. It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance are severable, and if any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section of the ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional by the valid judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by the City Council without the incorporation in this ordinance of any such unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section. Section 7. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, and it is so ordained. Section 8. Ad valorem taxes for the year are due and payable on October 1, 2025 and shall become delinquent after January 31, 2026. A delinquent tax shall incur all penalty and interest authorized by state law, Section 33.01 of the Property Tax Code. Taxes that remain delinquent on and after July 1, 2026, incur an additional penalty of 15% of the amount of the taxes, penalty and interest due, such additional penalty to defray the cost of collection as authorized in Section 6.30 of the Property Tax Code. The City shall have available all rights and remedies provided by law for the enforcement of the collection of taxes levied under this ordinance. Section 9. Taxes are payable at the office of the counties of Comal, Bexar and Guadalupe. PASSED AND APPROVED on the _____day of ______________, 2025. CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS ____________________________ Ralph Gutierrez, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________ Sheila Edmondson, City Secretary Median Valued Homestead Estimated Tax Bill 2024 = $341,902 $1,675.32 2025 = $331,835 $1,698.33 *2025 Estimated tax bill is based on the proposed tax rate of $0.5118 Form developed by: Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, Property Tax Assistance Division For additional copies, visit: comptroller.texas.gov/taxes/property-tax 50-856 • 3-25/12 Form 50-8562025 Tax Rate Calculation WorksheetTaxing Units Other Than School Districts or Water Districts ____________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________ Taxing Unit Name Phone (area code and number) ____________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________ Taxing Unit’s Address, City, State, ZIP Code Taxing Unit’s Website Address GENERAL INFORMATION: Tax Code Section 26.04(c) requires an officer or employee designated by the governing body to calculate the no-new-revenue (NNR) tax rate and voter-approval tax rate for the taxing unit. These tax rates are expressed in dollars per $100 of taxable value calculated. The calculation process starts after the chief appraiser delivers to the taxing unit the certified appraisal roll and the estimated values of properties under protest. The designated officer or employee shall certify that the officer or employee has accurately calculated the tax rates and used values shown for the certified appraisal roll or certified estimate. The officer or employee submits the rates to the governing body by Aug. 7 or as soon thereafter as practicable. School districts do not use this form, but instead use Comptroller Form 50-859 Tax Rate Calculation Worksheet, School District without Chapter 313 Agreements or Comptroller Form 50-884 Tax Rate Calculation Worksheet, School District with Chapter 313 Agreements. Water districts as defined under Water Code Section 49.001(1) do not use this form, but instead use Comptroller Form 50-858 Water District Voter-Approval Tax Rate Worksheet for Low Tax Rate and Developing Districts or Comptroller Form 50-860 Developed Water District Voter-Approval Tax Rate Worksheet. The Comptroller’s office provides this worksheet to assist taxing units in determining tax rates. The information provided in this worksheet is offered as technical assistance and not legal advice. Taxing units should consult legal counsel for interpretations of law regarding tax rate preparation and adoption. SECTION 1: No-New-Revenue Tax Rate The NNR tax rate enables the public to evaluate the relationship between taxes for the prior year and for the current year based on a tax rate that would produce the same amount of taxes (no new taxes) if applied to the same properties that are taxed in both years. When appraisal values increase, the NNR tax rate should decrease. The NNR tax rate for a county is the sum of the NNR tax rates calculated for each type of tax the county levies. While uncommon, it is possible for a taxing unit to provide an exemption for only maintenance and operations taxes. In this case, the taxing unit will need to calculate the NNR tax rate separately for the maintenance and operations tax and the debt tax, then add the two components together. Line No-New-Revenue Tax Rate Worksheet Amount/Rate 1.Prior year total taxable value. Enter the amount of the prior year taxable value on the prior year tax roll today. Include any adjustments since last year’s certification; exclude Tax Code Section 25.25(d) one-fourth and one-third over-appraisal corrections from these adjustments. Exclude any property value subject to an appeal under Chapter 42 as of July 25 (will add undisputed value in Line 6). This total includes the taxable value of homesteads with tax ceilings (will deduct in Line 2) and the captured value for tax increment financing (adjustment is made by deducting TIF taxes, as reflected in Line 17).1 $ _____________ 2.Prior year tax ceilings. Counties, cities and junior college districts. Enter the prior year total taxable value of homesteads with tax ceilings. These include the homesteads of homeowners age 65 or older or disabled. Other taxing units enter 0. If your taxing unit adopted the tax ceiling provision last year or a prior year for homeowners age 65 or older or disabled, use this step.2 $ _____________ 3.Preliminary prior year adjusted taxable value. Subtract Line 2 from Line 1.$ _____________ 4.Prior year total adopted tax rate.$ __________/$100 5.Prior year taxable value lost because court appeals of ARB decisions reduced the prior year’s appraised value. A.Original prior year ARB values:....................................................................... $ _____________ B.Prior year values resulting from final court decisions:................................................ - $ _____________ C. Prior year value loss. Subtract B from A.3 $ _____________ 6.Prior year taxable value subject to an appeal under Chapter 42, as of July 25. A.Prior year ARB certified value: ....................................................................... $ _____________ B.Prior year disputed value:............................................................................ - $ _____________ C. Prior year undisputed value. Subtract B from A. 4 $ _____________ 7.Prior year Chapter 42 related adjusted values. Add Line 5C and Line 6C.$ _____________ 1 Tex. Tax Code §26.012(14) 2 Tex. Tax Code §26.012(14) 3 Tex. Tax Code §26.012(13) 4 Tex. Tax Code §26.012(13) 2025 Tax Rate Calculation Worksheet – TaxingUnits Other Than School Districts or Water Districts Form 50-856 For additional copies, visit: comptroller.texas.gov/taxes/property-tax Page 2 Line No-New-Revenue Tax Rate Worksheet Amount/Rate 8.Prior year taxable value, adjusted for actual and potential court-ordered adjustments. Add Line 3 and Line 7.$ _____________ 9.Prior year taxable value of property in territory the taxing unit deannexed after Jan. 1, 2024. Enter the prior year value of property in deannexed territory. 5 $ _____________ 10.Prior year taxable value lost because property first qualified for an exemption in the current year. If the taxing unit increased an original exemption, use the difference between the original exempted amount and the increased exempted amount. Do not include value lost due to freeport, goods-in-transit, temporary disaster exemptions. Note that lowering the amount or percentage of an existing exemption in the current year does not create a new exemption or reduce taxable value. A.Absolute exemptions. Use prior year market value: .................................................... $ _____________ B.Partial exemptions. Current year exemption amount or current year percentage exemption times prior year value: ................................................................................. + $ _____________ C. Value loss. Add A and B. 6 $ _____________ Prior year taxable value lost because property first qualified for agricultural appraisal (1-d or 1-d-1), timber appraisal, recreational/ scenic appraisal or public access airport special appraisal in the current year. Use only properties that qualified for the first time in the current year; do not use properties that qualified in the prior year. "Prior year market value:.............................................................................. $ _____________ #Current year productivity or special appraised value:................................................ - $ _____________ $Value loss. Subtract B from A. 7 $ _____________ 12.Total adjustments for lost value. Add Lines 9, 10C and 11C.$ _____________ 13.Prior year captured value of property in a TIF. Enter the total value of the prior year captured appraised value of property taxable by a tax- ing unit in a tax increment financing zone for which the prior year taxes were deposited into the tax increment fund. 8 If the taxing unit has no captured appraised value in line 18D, enter 0.$ _____________ 14.Prior year total value. Subtract Line 12 and Line 13 from Line 8.$ _____________ 15.Adjusted prior year total levy. Multiply Line 4 by Line 14 and divide by $100.$ _____________ 16.Taxes refunded for years preceding the prior tax year. Enter the amount of taxes refunded by the taxing unit for tax years preceding the prior tax year. Types of refunds include court decisions, Tax Code Section 25.25(b) and (c) corrections and Tax Code Section 31.11 payment errors. Do not include refunds for the prior tax year. This line applies only to tax years preceding the prior tax year. 9 $ _____________ 17.Adjusted prior year levy with refunds and TIF adjustment. Add Lines 15 and 16. 10 $ _____________ 18.Total current year taxable value on the current year certified appraisal roll today. This value includes only certified values or certified esti- mate of values and includes the total taxable value of homesteads with tax ceilings (will deduct in Line 20). These homesteads include home- owners age 65 or older or disabled. 11 A.Certified values:...................................................................................... $ _____________ B.Counties: Include railroad rolling stock values certified by the Comptroller’s office: ....................... + $ _____________ C. Pollution control and energy storage system exemption: Deduct the value of property exempted for the current tax year for the first time as pollution control or energy storage system property:........... - $ _____________ D.Tax increment financing: Deduct the current year captured appraised value of property taxable by a taxing unit in a tax increment financing zone for which the current year taxes will be deposited into the tax increment fund. Do not include any new property value that will be included in Line 23 below. 12 .................... - $ _____________ E. Total current year value. Add A and B, then subtract C and D.$ _____________ 5 Tex. Tax Code §26.012(15) 6 Tex. Tax Code §26.012(15) 7 Tex. Tax Code §26.012(15) 8 Tex. Tax Code §26.03(c) 9 Tex. Tax Code §26.012(13) 10 Tex. Tax Code §26.012(13) 11 Tex. Tax Code §26.012, 26.04(c-2) 12 Tex. Tax Code §26.03(c) 2025 Tax Rate Calculation Worksheet – TaxingUnits Other Than School Districts or Water Districts Form 50-856 For additional copies, visit: comptroller.texas.gov/taxes/property-tax Page 3 13 Tex. Tax Code §26.01(c) and (d) 14 Tex. Tax Code §26.01(c) 15 Tex. Tax Code §26.01(d) 16 Tex. Tax Code §26.012(6)(B) 17 Tex. Tax Code §26.012(6) 18 Tex. Tax Code §26.012(17) 19 Tex. Tax Code §26.012(17) 20 Tex. Tax Code §26.04(c) 21 Tex. Tax Code §26.04(d) Line No-New-Revenue Tax Rate Worksheet Amount/Rate 19.Total value of properties under protest or not included on certified appraisal roll. 13 A.Current year taxable value of properties under protest. The chief appraiser certifies a list of properties still under ARB protest. The list shows the appraisal district’s value and the taxpayer’s claimed value, if any, or an estimate of the value if the taxpayer wins. For each of the properties under protest, use the lowest of these values. Enter the total value under protest. 14.................................................... $ _____________ B.Current year value of properties not under protest or included on certified appraisal roll. The chief appraiser gives taxing units a list of those taxable properties that the chief appraiser knows about but are not included in the appraisal roll certification. These properties also are not on the list of properties that are still under protest. On this list of properties, the chief appraiser includes the market value, appraised value and exemptions for the preceding year and a reasonable estimate of the market value, appraised value and exemptions for the current year. Use the lower market, appraised or taxable value (as appropriate). Enter the total value of property not on the certified roll. 15 .............................. + $ _____________ C. Total value under protest or not certified. Add A and B.$ _____________ 20.Current year tax ceilings. Counties, cities and junior colleges enter current year total taxable value of homesteads with tax ceilings. These include the homesteads of homeowners age 65 or older or disabled. Other taxing units enter 0. If your taxing unit adopted the tax ceiling pro- vision in the prior year or a previous year for homeowners age 65 or older or disabled, use this step.16 $ _____________ 21.Current year total taxable value. Add Lines 18E and 19C. Subtract Line 20. 17 $ _____________ 22.Total current year taxable value of properties in territory annexed after Jan. 1, of the prior year. Include both real and personal property. Enter the current year value of property in territory annexed. 18 $ _____________ 23.Total current year taxable value of new improvements and new personal property located in new improvements. New means the item was not on the appraisal roll in the prior year. An improvement is a building, structure, fixture or fence erected on or affixed to land. New additions to existing improvements may be included if the appraised value can be determined. New personal property in a new improvement must have been brought into the taxing unit after Jan. 1, of the prior year and be located in a new improvement. New improvements do include property on which a tax abatement agreement has expired for the current year. 19 $ _____________ 24.Total adjustments to the current year taxable value. Add Lines 22 and 23.$ _____________ 25.Adjusted current year taxable value. Subtract Line 24 from Line 21.$ _____________ 26.Current year NNR tax rate. Divide Line 17 by Line 25 and multiply by $100. 20 $ __________/$100 27.COUNTIES ONLY. Add together the NNR tax rates for each type of tax the county levies. The total is the current year county NNR tax rate. 21 $ __________/$100 SECTION 2: Voter-Approval Tax Rate The voter-approval tax rate is the highest tax rate that a taxing unit may adopt without holding an election to seek voter approval of the rate. The voter-approval tax rate is split into two separate rates: 1. Maintenance and Operations (M&O) Tax Rate: The M&O portion is the tax rate that is needed to raise the same amount of taxes that the taxing unit levied in the prior year plus the applicable percentage allowed by law. This rate accounts for such things as salaries, utilities and day-to-day operations. 2. Debt Rate: The debt rate includes the debt service necessary to pay the taxing unit’s debt payments in the coming year. This rate accounts for principal and interest on bonds and other debt secured by property tax revenue. The voter-approval tax rate for a county is the sum of the voter-approval tax rates calculated for each type of tax the county levies. In most cases the voter-approval tax rate exceeds the no-new-revenue tax rate, but occasionally decreases in a taxing unit’s debt service will cause the NNR tax rate to be higher than the voter-approval tax rate. Line Voter-Approval Tax Rate Worksheet Amount/Rate 28.Prior year M&O tax rate. Enter the prior year M&O tax rate.$ __________/$100 29.Prior year taxable value, adjusted for actual and potential court-ordered adjustments. Enter the amount in Line 8 of the No-New-Revenue Tax Rate Worksheet.$ _____________ 2025 Tax Rate Calculation Worksheet – TaxingUnits Other Than School Districts or Water Districts Form 50-856 For additional copies, visit: comptroller.texas.gov/taxes/property-tax Page 4 Line Voter-Approval Tax Rate Worksheet Amount/Rate 30.Total prior year M&O levy. Multiply Line 28 by Line 29 and divide by $100 $ _____________ Adjusted prior year levy for calculating NNR M&O rate. "M&O taxes refunded for years preceding the prior tax year. Enter the amount of M&O taxes refunded in the preceding year for taxes before that year. Types of refunds include court decisions, Tax Code Section 25.25(b) and (c) corrections and Tax Code Section 31.11 payment errors. Do not include refunds for tax year 2024. This line applies only to tax years preceding the prior tax year.. .......... + $ _____________ #Prior year taxes in TIF. Enter the amount of taxes paid into the tax increment fund for a reinvestment zone as agreed by the taxing unit. If the taxing unit has no current year captured appraised value in Line 18D, enter 0. ...................................................................................... – $ _____________ $Prior year transferred function. If discontinuing all of a department, function or activity and transferring it to another taxing unit by written contract, enter the amount spent by the taxing unit discontinuing the function in the 12 months preceding the month of this calculation. If the taxing unit did not operate this function for this 12-month period, use the amount spent in the last full fiscal year in which the taxing unit operated the function. The taxing unit discontinuing the function will subtract this amount in D below. The taxing unit receiving the function will add this amount in D below. Other taxing units enter 0. .................................................................... +/- $ _____________ %Prior year M&O levy adjustments. Subtract B from A. For taxing unit with C, subtract if discontinuing function and add if receiving function. .................................................... $ _____________ &Add Line 30 to 31D.$ _____________ 32.Adjusted current year taxable value. Enter the amount in Line 25 of the No-New-Revenue Tax Rate Worksheet.$ _____________ 33.Current year NNR M&O rate (unadjusted). Divide Line 31E by Line 32 and multiply by $100.$ __________/$100 34.Rate adjustment for state criminal justice mandate. 23 A.Current year state criminal justice mandate. Enter the amount spent by a county in the previous 12 months providing for the maintenance and operation cost of keeping inmates in county-paid facilities after they have been sentenced. Do not include any state reimbursement received by the county for the same purpose. $ _____________ B.Prior year state criminal justice mandate. Enter the amount spent by a county in the 12 months prior to the previous 12 months providing for the maintenance and operation cost of keeping inmates in county-paid facilities after they have been sentenced. Do not include any state reimbursement received by the county for the same purpose. Enter zero if this is the first time the mandate applies................. – $ _____________ C. Subtract B from A and divide by Line 32 and multiply by $100............................................ $ __________/$100 D.Enter the rate calculated in C. If not applicable, enter 0.$ __________/$100 35.Rate adjustment for indigent health care expenditures. 24 A.Current year indigent health care expenditures. Enter the amount paid by a taxing unit providing for the maintenance and operation cost of providing indigent health care for the period beginning on July 1, of the prior tax year and ending on June 30, of the current tax year, less any state assistance received for the same purpose. $ _____________ B.Prior year indigent health care expenditures. Enter the amount paid by a taxing unit providing for the maintenance and operation cost of providing indigent health care for the period beginning on July 1, 2023 and ending on June 30, 2024, less any state assistance received for the same purpose................................................................................... – $ _____________ C.Subtract B from A and divide by Line 32 and multiply by $100. ........................................... $ __________/ $100 D.Enter the rate calculated in C. If not applicable, enter 0.$ __________/$100 22 [Reserved for expansion] 23 Tex. Tax Code §26.044 24 Tex. Tax Code §26.0441 2025 Tax Rate Calculation Worksheet – TaxingUnits Other Than School Districts or Water Districts Form 50-856 For additional copies, visit: comptroller.texas.gov/taxes/property-tax Page 5 Line Voter-Approval Tax Rate Worksheet Amount/Rate Rate adjustment for county indigent defense compensation. 25 "Current year indigent defense compensation expenditures. Enter the amount paid by a county to provide appointed counsel for indigent individuals and fund the operations of a public defender’s office under Article 26.044, Code of Criminal Procedure for the period beginning on July 1, of the prior tax year and ending on June 30,of the current tax year, less any state grants received by the county for the same purpose. ......... $_____________ #Prior year indigent defense compensation expenditures. Enter the amount paid by a county to provide appointed counsel for indigent individuals and fund the operations of a public defender’s office under Article 26.044, Code of Criminal Procedure for the period beginning on July 1, 2023 and ending on June 30, 2024, less any state grants received by the county for the same purpose.......................... $_____________ $Subtract B from A and divide by Line 32 and multiply by $100. ........................................... $ __________/$100 %Multiply B by 0.05 and divide by Line 32 and multiply by $100............................................ $ __________/$100 &Enter the lesser of C and D. If not applicable, enter 0.$ __________/$100 37.Rate adjustment for county hospital expenditures. 26 A.Current year eligible county hospital expenditures. Enter the amount paid by the county or municipality to maintain and operate an eligible county hospital for the period beginning on July 1, of the prior tax year and ending on June 30, of the current tax year............................................................... $ _____________ B.Prior year eligible county hospital expenditures. Enter the amount paid by the county or municipality to maintain and operate an eligible county hospital for the period beginning on July 1, 2022 and ending on June 30, 2023. .............................................................................. $ _____________ C. Subtract B from A and divide by Line 32 and multiply by $100............................................ $ __________/$100 D.Multiply B by 0.08 and divide by Line 32 and multiply by $100............................................ $ __________/$100 E. Enter the lesser of C and D, if applicable. If not applicable, enter 0.$ __________/$100 38.Rate adjustment for defunding municipality. This adjustment only applies to a municipality that is considered to be a defunding municipal- ity for the current tax year under Chapter 109, Local Government Code. Chapter 109, Local Government Code only applies to municipalities with a population of more than 250,000 and includes a written determination by the Office of the Governor. See Tax Code Section 26.0444 for more information. A.Amount appropriated for public safety in the prior year. Enter the amount of money appropriated for public safety in the budget adopted by the municipality for the preceding fiscal year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ _____________ B.Expenditures for public safety in the prior year. Enter the amount of money spent by the municipality for public safety during the preceding fiscal year .................................................................. $ _____________ C. Subtract B from A and divide by Line 32 and multiply by $100 ........................................... $ __________/$100 D.Enter the rate calculated in C. If not applicable, enter 0.$ __________/$100 39.Adjusted current year NNR M&O rate. Add Lines 33, 34D, 35D, 36E, and 37E. Subtract Line 38D.$ __________/$100 40.Adjustment for prior year sales tax specifically to reduce property taxes. Cities, counties and hospital districts that collected and spent additional sales tax on M&O expenses in the prior year should complete this line. These entities will deduct the sales tax gain rate for the current year in Section 3. Other taxing units, enter zero. A.Enter the amount of additional sales tax collected and spent on M&O expenses in the prior year, if any. Counties must exclude any amount that was spent for economic development grants from the amount of sales tax spent ...................................................................................... $ _____________ B.Divide Line 40A by Line 32 and multiply by $100 ........................................................ $ __________/$100 C. Add Line 40B to Line 39.$ __________/$100 41.Current year voter-approval M&O rate. Enter the rate as calculated by the appropriate scenario below. Special Taxing Unit. If the taxing unit qualifies as a special taxing unit, multiply Line 40C by 1.08. - or - Other Taxing Unit. If the taxing unit does not qualify as a special taxing unit, multiply Line 40C by 1.035. $ __________/$100 25 Tex. Tax Code §26.0442 26 Tex. Tax Code §26.0443 2025 Tax Rate Calculation Worksheet – TaxingUnits Other Than School Districts or Water Districts Form 50-856 For additional copies, visit: comptroller.texas.gov/taxes/property-tax Page 6 Line Voter-Approval Tax Rate Worksheet Amount/Rate D41.Disaster Line 41 (D41): Current year voter-approval M&O rate for taxing unit affected by disaster declaration. If the taxing unit is locat- ed in an area declared a disaster area and at least one person is granted an exemption under Tax Code Section 11.35 for property located in the taxing unit, the governing body may direct the person calculating the voter-approval tax rate to calculate in the manner provided for a special taxing unit. The taxing unit shall continue to calculate the voter-approval tax rate in this manner until the earlier of 1) the first year in which total taxable value on the certified appraisal roll exceeds the total taxable value of the tax year in which the disaster occurred, or 2) the third tax year after the tax year in which the disaster occurred If the taxing unit qualifies under this scenario, multiply Line 40C by 1.08. 27 If the taxing unit does not qualify, do not complete Disaster Line 41 (Line D41).$ __________/$100 42.Total current year debt to be paid with property taxes and additional sales tax revenue. Debt means the interest and principal that will be paid on debts that: (1)are paid by property taxes, (2)are secured by property taxes, (3)are scheduled for payment over a period longer than one year, and (4)are not classified in the taxing unit’s budget as M&O expenses. A.Debt also includes contractual payments to other taxing units that have incurred debts on behalf of this taxing unit, if those debts meet the four conditions above. Include only amounts that will be paid from property tax revenue. Do not include appraisal district budget payments. If the governing body of a taxing unit authorized or agreed to authorize a bond, warrant, certificate of obligation, or other evidence of indebtedness on or after Sept. 1, 2021, verify if it meets the amended definition of debt before including it here. 28 Enter debt amount .................................................................................... $ _____________ B.Subtract unencumbered fund amount used to reduce total debt. ...................................... – $ _____________ C. Subtract certified amount spent from sales tax to reduce debt (enter zero if none) .................... – $ _____________ D.Subtract amount paid from other resources ............................................................ – $ _____________ E. Adjusted debt. Subtract B, C and D from A.$ _____________ 43.Certified prior year excess debt collections. Enter the amount certified by the collector. 29 $ _____________ 44.Adjusted current year debt. Subtract Line 43 from Line 42E.$ _____________ 5Current year anticipated collection rate. "Enter the current year anticipated collection rate certified by the collector. 30.............................. ___________% #Enter the prior year actual collection rate................................................................ ____________% $Enter the 2023 actual collection rate. ................................................................... ____________% %Enter the 2022 actual collection rate. ................................................................... ____________% &If the anticipated collection rate in A is lower than actual collection rates in B, C and D, enter the lowest collection rate from B, C and D. If the anticipated rate in A is higher than at least one of the rates in the prior three years, enter the rate from A. Note that the rate can be greater than 100%. 31 ____________% 46.Current year debt adjusted for collections. Divide Line 44 by Line 45E.$ _____________ 47.Current year total taxable value. Enter the amount on Line 21 of the No-New-Revenue Tax Rate Worksheet.$ _____________ 48.Current year debt rate. Divide Line 46 by Line 47 and multiply by $100.$ __________/$100 49. Current year voter-approval .0rateQMVTDVSSFOUZFBSEFCUSBUF. Add Lines 41 and 48.$ __________/$100 D49.Disaster Line 49 (D49): Current year voter-approval tax rate for taxing unit affected by disaster declaration. Complete this line if the taxing unit calculated the voter-approval tax rate in the manner provided for a special taxing unit on Line D41. Add Line D41 and 48.$ __________/$100 27 Tex. Tax Code §26.042(a) 28 Tex. Tax Code §26.012(7) 29 Tex. Tax Code §26.012(10) and 26.04(b) 30 Tex. Tax Code §26.04(b) 31 Tex. Tax Code §§26.04(h), (h-1) and (h-2) 2025 Tax Rate Calculation Worksheet – TaxingUnits Other Than School Districts or Water Districts Form 50-856 For additional copies, visit: comptroller.texas.gov/taxes/property-tax Page 7 32 Tex. Tax Code §26.041(d) 33 Tex. Tax Code §26.041(i) 34 Tex. Tax Code §26.041(d) 35 Tex. Tax Code §26.04(c) 36 Tex. Tax Code §26.04(c) 37 Tex. Tax Code §26.045(d) 38 Tex. Tax Code §26.045(i) Line Voter-Approval Tax Rate Worksheet Amount/Rate 50.COUNTIES ONLY. Add together the voter-approval tax rates for each type of tax the county levies. The total is the current year county voter-approv- al tax rate.$ __________/$100 SECTION 3: NNR Tax Rate and Voter-Approval Tax Rate Adjustments for Additional Sales Tax to Reduce Property Taxes Cities, counties and hospital districts may levy a sales tax specifically to reduce property taxes. Local voters by election must approve imposing or abolishing the additional sales tax. If approved, the taxing unit must reduce its NNR and voter-approval tax rates to offset the expected sales tax revenue. This section should only be completed by a county, city or hospital district that is required to adjust its NNR tax rate and/or voter-approval tax rate because it adopted the additional sales tax. Line Additional Sales and Use Tax Worksheet Amount/Rate 51.Taxable Sales. For taxing units that adopted the sales tax in November of the prior tax year or May of the current tax year, enter the Comptroller’s estimate of taxable sales for the previous four quarters. 32 Estimates of taxable sales may be obtained through the Comptroller’s Allocation Historical Summary webpage. Taxing units that adopted the sales tax before November of the prior year, enter 0.$ _____________ 52.Estimated sales tax revenue. Counties exclude any amount that is or will be spent for economic development grants from the amount of esti- mated sales tax revenue. 33 Taxing units that adopted the sales tax in November of the prior tax year or in May of the current tax year. Multiply the amount on Line 51 by the sales tax rate (.01, .005 or .0025, as applicable) and multiply the result by .95. 34 - or - Taxing units that adopted the sales tax before November of the prior year. Enter the sales tax revenue for the previous four quarters. Do not multiply by .95.$ _____________ 53.Current year total taxable value. Enter the amount from Line 21 of the No-New-Revenue Tax Rate Worksheet.$ _____________ 54.Sales tax adjustment rate. Divide Line 52 by Line 53 and multiply by $100.$ __________/$100 55.Current year NNR tax rate, unadjusted for sales tax.35 Enter the rate from Line 26 or 27, as applicable, on the No-New-Revenue Tax Rate Worksheet.$ __________/$100 56.Current year NNR tax rate, adjusted for sales tax. Taxing units that adopted the sales tax in November the prior tax year or in May of the current tax year. Subtract Line 54 from Line 55. Skip to Line 57 if you adopted the additional sales tax before November of the prior tax year.$ __________/$100 57.Current year voter-approval tax rate, unadjusted for sales tax.36 Enter the rate from Line 49, Line D49 (disaster) or Line 50 (counties) as applicable, of the Voter-Approval Tax Rate Worksheet.$ __________/$100 58.Current year voter-approval tax rate, adjusted for sales tax. Subtract Line 54 from Line 57.$ __________/$100 SECTION 4: Voter-Approval Tax Rate Adjustment for Pollution Control A taxing unit may raise its rate for M&O funds used to pay for a facility, device or method for the control of air, water or land pollution. This includes any land, structure, building, installation, excavation, machinery, equipment or device that is used, constructed, acquired or installed wholly or partly to meet or exceed pollution control requirements. The taxing unit’s expenses are those necessary to meet the requirements of a permit issued by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). The taxing unit must provide the tax assessor with a copy of the TCEQ letter of determination that states the portion of the cost of the installation for pollution control. This section should only be completed by a taxing unit that uses M&O funds to pay for a facility, device or method for the control of air, water or land pollution. Line Voter-Approval Rate Adjustment for Pollution Control Requirements Worksheet Amount/Rate 59.Certified expenses from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). Enter the amount certified in the determination letter from TCEQ. 37 The taxing unit shall provide its tax assessor-collector with a copy of the letter. 38 $ _____________ 60.Current year total taxable value. Enter the amount from Line 21 of the No-New-Revenue Tax Rate Worksheet.$ _____________ 61.Additional rate for pollution control. Divide Line 59 by Line 60 and multiply by $100.$ __________/$100 2025 Tax Rate Calculation Worksheet – TaxingUnits Other Than School Districts or Water Districts Form 50-856 For additional copies, visit: comptroller.texas.gov/taxes/property-tax Page 8 Line Voter-Approval Rate Adjustment for Pollution Control Requirements Worksheet Amount/Rate 62.Current year voter-approval tax rate, adjusted for pollution control. Add Line 61 to one of the following lines (as applicable): Line 49, Line D49 (disaster), Line 50 (counties) or Line 58 (taxing units with the additional sales tax).$ __________/$100 SECTION 5: Voter-Approval Tax Rate Adjustment for Unused Increment Rate The unused increment rate is the rate equal to the sum of the prior 3 years Foregone Revenue Amounts divided by the current taxable value. 39 The Foregone Revenue Amount for each year is equal to that year’s adopted tax rate subtracted from that year’s voter-approval tax rate adjusted to remove the unused increment rate multiplied by that year’s current total value. 40 I The difference between the adopted tax rate and adjusted voter-approval tax rate is considered zero in the following scenarios: • a tax year in which a taxing unit affected by a disaster declaration calculates the tax rate under Tax Code Section 26.042; 41 • a tax year in which the municipality is a defunding municipality, as defined by Tax Code Section 26.0501(a); 42 or • after Jan. 1, 2022, a tax year in which the comptroller determines that the county implemented a budget reduction or reallocation described by Local Government Code Section 120.002(a) without the required voter approval. 43 This section should only be completed by a taxing unit that does not meet the definition of a special taxing unit. 44 Line Unused Increment Rate Worksheet Amount/Rate 63.Year 3 Foregone Revenue Amount. Subtract the 2024 unused increment rate and 2024 actual tax rate from the 2024 voter- approval tax rate. Multiply the result by the 2024 current total value A. Voter-approval tax rate (Line 67)..................................................................................................... B. Unused increment rate (Line 66) ..................................................................................................... C. Subtract B from A................................................................................................................... D. Adopted Tax Rate ................................................................................................................... E. Subtract D from C ................................................................................................................... F. 2024 Total Taxable Value (Line 60) .................................................................................................... G. Multiply E by F and divide the results by $100. If the number is less than zero, enter zero ........................................... $ __________/$100 $ __________/$100 $ __________/$100 $ __________/$100 $ __________/$100 $ _____________ $ _____________ 64.Year 2 Foregone Revenue Amount. Subtract the 2023 unused increment rate and 2023 actual tax rate from the 2023 voter- approval tax rate. Multiply the result by the 2023 current total value A. Voter-approval tax rate (Line 67)..................................................................................................... B. Unused increment rate (Line 66)..................................................................................................... C. Subtract B from A................................................................................................................... D. Adopted Tax Rate ................................................................................................................... E. Subtract D from C ................................................................................................................... F. 2023 Total Taxable Value (Line 60) .................................................................................................... G. Multiply E by F and divide the results by $100. If the number is less than zero, enter zero ........................................... $ __________/$100 $ __________/$100 $ __________/$100 $ __________/$100 $ __________/$100 $ _____________ $ _____________ 65.Year 1 Foregone Revenue Amount. Subtract the 2022 unused increment rate and 2022 actual tax rate from the 2022 voter- approval tax rate. Multiply the result by the 2022 current total value C. Subtract B from A................................................................................................................... D. Adopted Tax Rate ................................................................................................................... E. Subtract D from C ................................................................................................................... F. 2022 Total Taxable Value (Line 60) .................................................................................................... G. Multiply E by F and divide the results by $100. If the number is less than zero, enter zero ........................................... A. Voter-approval tax rate (Line 67)..................................................................................................... $ __________/$100 B. Unused increment rate (Line 66) ..................................................................................................... $ __________/$100 $ __________/$100 $ __________/$100 $ __________/$100 $ _____________ $ _____________ 66.Total Foregone Revenue Amount. Add Lines 63G, 64G and 65G $ __________ 67.2025 Unused Increment Rate. Divide Line 66 by Line 21 of the No-New-Revenue Rate Worksheet. Multiply the result by 100 $ __________/$100 68.Total 2025 voter-approval tax rate, including the unused increment rate. Add Line 67 to one of the following lines (as applicable): Line 49, Line 50 (counties), Line 58 (taxing units with additional sales tax) or Line 62 (taxing units with pollution)$ __________/$100 39 Tex. Tax Code §26.013(b) 40 Tex. Tax Code §26.013(a)(1-a), (1-b), and (2) 41 Tex. Tax Code §§26.04(c)(2)(A) and 26.042(a) 42 Tex. Tax Code §§26.0501(a) and (c) 43 Tex. Local Gov’t Code §120.007(d) 44 Tex. Local Gov’t Code §120.007(d) 2025 Tax Rate Calculation Worksheet – TaxingUnits Other Than School Districts or Water Districts Form 50-856 For additional copies, visit: comptroller.texas.gov/taxes/property-tax Page 9 SECTION 6: De Minimis Rate The de minimis rate is the rate equal to the sum of the no-new-revenue maintenance and operations rate, the rate that will raise $500,000, and the current debt rate for a taxing unit. 44 This section should only be completed by a taxing unit that is a municipality of less than 30,000 or a taxing unit that does not meet the definition of a special taxing unit. 45 Line De Minimis Rate Worksheet Amount/Rate 69.Adjusted current year NNR M&O tax rate. Enter the rate from Line 39 of the Voter-Approval Tax Rate Worksheet. 70.Current year total taxable value. Enter the amount on Line 21 of the No-New-Revenue Tax Rate Worksheet.$ _____________ 71.Rate necessary to impose $500,000 in taxes. Divide $500,000 by Line  and multiply by $100.$ __________/$100 72.Current year debt rate. Enter the rate from Line 48 of the Voter-Approval Tax Rate Worksheet.$ __________/$100 73.De minimis rate. Add Lines 69, 71 and 72.$ __________/$100 SECTION 7: Voter-Approval Tax Rate Adjustment for Emergency Revenue Rate In the tax year after the end of the disaster calculation time period detailed in Tax Code Section 26.042(a), a taxing unit that calculated its voter-approval tax rate in the manner provided for a special taxing unit due to a disaster must calculate its emergency revenue rate and reduce its voter-approval tax rate for that year.48 Similarly, if a taxing unit adopted a tax rate that exceeded its voter-approval tax rate, calculated normally, without holding an election to respond to a disaster, as allowed by Tax Code Section 26.042(d), in the prior year, it must also reduce its voter-approval tax rate for the current tax year. 49 This section will apply to a taxing unit other than a special taxing unit that: • directed the designated officer or employee to calculate the voter-approval tax rate of the taxing unit in the manner provided for a special taxing unit in the prior year; and • the current year is the first tax year in which the total taxable value of property taxable by the taxing unit as shown on the appraisal roll for the taxing unit submitted by the assessor for the taxing unit to the governing body exceeds the total taxable value of property taxable by the taxing unit on January 1 of the tax year in which the disaster occurred or the disaster occurred four years ago.This section will apply to a taxing unit in a disaster area that adopted a tax rate greater than its voter-approval tax rate without holding an election in the prior year. Note: This section does not apply if a taxing unit is continuing to calculate its voter-approval tax rate in the manner provided for a special taxing unit because it is still within the disaster calculation time period detailed in Tax Code Section 26.042(a) because it has not met the conditions in Tax Code Section 26.042(a)(1) or (2). Line Emergency Revenue Rate Worksheet Amount/Rate 74. 2024 adopted tax rate. Enter the rate in Line 4 of the No-New-Revenue Tax Rate Worksheet.$ __________/$100 75.Adjusted 2024 voter-approval tax rate. Use the taxing unit’s Tax Rate Calculation Worksheets from the prior year(s) to complete this line. If a disaster occurred in 2024 and the taxing unit calculated its 2024 voter-approval tax rate using a multiplier of 1.08 on Disaster Line 41 (D41) of the 2024 worksheet due to a disaster, complete the applicable sections or lines of Form 50-856-a, Adjusted Voter-Approval Tax Rate for Taxing Units in Disaster Area Calculation Worksheet. - or - If a disaster occurred prior to 2024 for which the taxing unit continued to calculate its voter-approval tax rate using a multiplier of 1.08 on Disaster Line 41 (D41) in 2024, complete form 50-856-a, Adjusted Voter-Approval Tax Rate for Taxing Units in Disaster Area Calculation Worksheet to recalculate the voter-approval tax rate the taxing unit would have calculated in 2024 if it had generated revenue based on an adopted tax rate using a multiplier of 1.035 in the years following the disaster. 50 Enter the final adjusted 2024 voter-approval tax rate from the worksheet. - or - If the taxing unit adopted a tax rate above the 2024 voter-approval tax rate without calculating a disaster tax rate or holding an election due to a disaster, no recalculation is necessary. Enter the voter-approval tax rate from the prior year’s worksheet. $ __________/$100 76. Increase in 2024 tax rate due to disaster. Subtract Line 75 from Line 74.$ __________/$100 77.Adjusted 2024 taxable value. Enter the amount in Line 14 of the No-New-Revenue Tax Rate Worksheet.$ _____________ 78.Emergency revenue. Multiply Line 76 by Line 77 and divide by $100.$ _____________ 79.Adjusted 2024 taxable value. Enter the amount in Line 25 of the No-New-Revenue Tax Rate Worksheet.$ _____________ 80.Emergency revenue rate. Divide Line 78 by Line 79 and multiply by $100. 51 $ __________/$100 45 Tex. Tax Code §26.04(c)(2)(B) 46 Tex. Tax Code §26.012(8-a) 47 Tex. Tax Code §26.063(a)(1) 48 Tex. Tax Code §26.042(b) 49 Tex. Tax Code §26.042(f) 50 Tex. Tax Code §§26.42(c) 51 Tex. Tax Code §§26.42(b) 2025 Tax Rate Calculation Worksheet – TaxingUnits Other Than School Districts or Water Districts Form 50-856 For additional copies, visit: comptroller.texas.gov/taxes/property-tax Page 10 Line Emergency Revenue Rate Worksheet Amount/Rate 81.Current year voter-approval tax rate, adjusted for emergency revenue. Subtract Line 80 from one of the following lines (as applicable): Line 49, Line D49 (disaster), Line 50 (counties), Line 58 (taxing units with the additional sales tax), Line 62 (taxing units with pollution control) or Line 68 (taxing units with the unused increment rate).$ __________/$100 SECTION 8: Total Tax Rate Indicate the applicable total tax rates as calculated above. $ __________/$100 $ __________/$100 $ __________/$100 No-new-revenue tax rate. ................................................................................................................ As applicable, enter the current year NNR tax rate from: Line 26, Line 27 (counties), or Line 56 (adjusted for sales tax). Indicate the line number used: ______ Voter-approval tax rate ................................................................................................................... As applicable, enter the current year voter-approval tax rate from: Line 49, Line D49 (disaster), Line 50 (counties), Line 58 (adjusted for sales tax), Line 62 (adjusted for pollution control), Line 68 (adjusted for unused increment), or Line 81 (adjusted for emergency revenue). Indicate the line number used: ______ De minimis rate........................................................................................................................... If applicable, enter the current year de minimis rate from Line 73. SECTION 9: Taxing Unit Representative Name and Signature Enter the name of the person preparing the tax rate as authorized by the governing body of the taxing unit. By signing below, you certify that you are the designated officer or employee of the taxing unit and have accurately calculated the tax rates using values that are the same as the values shown in the taxing unit’s certified appraisal roll or certified estimate of taxable value, in accordance with requirements in the Tax Code. 52 ____________________________________________________________ Printed Name of Taxing Unit Representative ____________________________________________________________ ________________________________________ Taxing Unit Representative Date 52 Tex. Tax Code §§26.04(c-2) and (d-2) City Council Tax Rate Adoption August 19, 2025 2025 Property Values 2 2024 Taxable Value $5,563,014,685​ 2025 Equivalent Taxable Value $5,480,002,657 2025 Change in Existing Value -$83,012,028 2025 New Development/Annexations $254,812,798 Total Taxable Value Change $171,800,770 2025 Total Taxable Value $5,734,815,455 DVHS Update DVHS​2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Total Exempt​$550,500,000​$694,200,000​$834,200,000​$999,100,000​$1,084,700,000​ Taxes Forgone $2,819,000 $3,436,000 $4,064,000 $4,868,000 $5,735,000 Tax Rate w/o DVHS​​ $0.4428​​$0.4234​​$0.4126​$0.4107 $0.4091 3 •23% of Homesteads have a DVHS Exemption for 2025 •55% of Homesteads have some DV Exemption for 2025 2025 Property Values – Impact Factors •Increases in New Construction and Annexation •Guadalupe County Residential Homestead value $192,000,000 decrease, including new homes added. Revenue loss: $640,000 at current rate •DVHS Increase: 8.6% •DVHS Retroactive Adjustment – Prior Year Refunds and Current Year Adjustments •Revenue loss $675,000 General Fund 4 5 TAX RATE DEFINITIONS​ No New Revenue The tax rate which will generate the same revenue for the city from property on the previous year’s tax roll. Voter Approval Rate The rate if exceeded triggers an automatic election on the tax rate. Current The rate currently adopted by the City. Proposed Tax Rate The maximum rate set at which the final adopted rate cannot exceed. 6 TAX RATE​ Current​$0.4900 No New Revenue​ $0.5064 Voter Approval​ (Highest Allowed)$0.​5350 Proposed $0.5118 $0.01 is equal to $573,500 revenue or $33.18 per year on the average home​ 7 TARGET TAX RATE​ TAX RATE CURRENT PROPOSED TAX RATE M&O $0.3326 $0.3437 For day-to -day operations I&S $0.1574 $0.1681 To pay the City’s debt TOTAL $0.4900 $0.5118 8 FY 2025-26 City Tax Rate​ Tax Rate Name Tax Rate per $100 Est. Tax Bill Bill Increase % Increase No New Revenue $0.5064 $1,680.41 ---- Voter Approval $0.5350 $1,746.11 $94.91 5.6% Proposed $0.5118 $1,698.33 $17.92 1.1% Historic Tax Rates – Total 9 M&O 0.3496 M&O 0.347 M&O 0.3517 M&O 0.347 M&O 0.3325 M&O 0.3326 M&O 0.3437 I&S 0.165 I&S 0.1651 I&S 0.1604 I&S 0.148 I&S 0.1548 I&S 0.1574 I&S 0.1681 0.5416 0.5121 0.5121 0.495 0.4873 0.499 0.5118 0.0000 0.1000 0.2000 0.3000 0.4000 0.5000 0.6000 Tax Year DISCUSSION 10 Agenda No. 9.   CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM    City Council Meeting:September 02, 2025 Department:City Secretary Subject:Resolution 25-R-101 - Conduct a public hearing regarding annexation vs. land use regulation related to Resolution 25-R-101 Special Election for properties within a five-mile boundary of JBSA-Randolph (Mayor/B.James/S.Edmondson) BACKGROUND On August 5, 2025, City Council passed Resolution 25-R-101 Ordering a Special Election on November 4, 2025, for the areas in the extra-territorial jurisdiction within the five-mile boundary of a military base to choose between either annexation or providing the municipality with the authority to adopt and enforce an ordinance regulating the land use in the area in the manner recommended by the most recent joint land use study. Residents of those areas will consider Proposition A and may select Option 1-Full annexation or Option 2-Authorize the city to regulate land use.   Attachments Resolution 25-R-101 Special Election Joint Land Use Study 2015 Special Election 2025 Resolution 25-R-101 Workshop: Land Uses Sheila Edmondson| City Secretary Brian James| Deputy City Manager Special Election-Resolution 25-R-101 On August 5, 2025, The City Council of the City of Schertz passed Resolution 25-R-101. ordering a Special Election :  “FOR THE SUBMISSION TO THE QUALIFIED VOTERS OF A SPECIFIC AREA PURSUANT TO SECTION 43. 0117, TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, THE QUESTION OF WHETHER SUCH AREA, AS SITUATED WITHIN THE CITY OF SCHERTZ EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION AND WITHIN FIVE MILES OF THE JOINT BASE SAN ANTONIO RANDOLPH BOUNDARY, SHOULD BE ANNEXED INTO THE CITY, OR WHETHER THE CITY SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH THE AUTHORITY TO ADOPT AND ENFORCE AN ORDINANCE REGULATING THE LAND USE IN THE AREA IN THE MANNER RECOMMENDED BY THE MOST RECENT JOINT LAND USE STUDY.” 2   Map of the properties in the city's extra territorial jurisdiction that are affected in Bexar County. 3 City of Schertz Proposition A OPTION 1: YES ANNEXATION: SHALL THE CITY OF SCHERTZ ANNEX FOR FULL PURPOSES CERTAIN AREAS IN THE CITY' S EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION WITHIN FIVE MILES OF THE BOUNDARY OF THE JOINT BASE SAN ANTONIO RANDOLPH? •Option 1  would  authorize  the  City  of  Schertz  to  annex,  for  full-purpose  annexation,  certain  areas  in  the  city’s extraterritorial jurisdiction within five miles of the boundary of the Joint Base San Antonio. The following services would be provided on the effective date of annexation. •Services include: (A)  police  protection; (B)  fire  protection;  (C)  emergency  medical  services; (D)  operation  and maintenance of water and wastewater facilities in the annexed area; (E)  operation and maintenance of roads and streets, including road and street lighting; (F)  operation and maintenance of parks, playgrounds, and swimming pools; and (G) operation and maintenance of any other publicly owned facility, building, or service 4 City of Schertz Proposition A OPTION 2: NO ANNEXATION BUT WITH LAND USE REGULATIONS: SHALL THE CITY OF SCHERTZ BE PROVIDED WITH THE AUTHORITY TO ADOPT AND ENFORCE AN ORDINANCE REGULATING THE LAND USE IN THE CITY' S EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION WITHIN FIVE MILES OF THE BOUNDARY OF THE JOINT BASE SAN ANTONIO RANDOLPH IN THE MANNER RECOMMENDED BY THE MOST RECENT JOINT LAND USE STUDY, FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROTECTING THE MILITARY MISSIONS, AND INCLUDING THE AUTHORITY TO ADOPT AND IMPOSE RELATED FEES, FINES AND OTHER CHARGES? •Option 2 would authorize the City of Schertz, instead of annexation of the area, to adopt and enforce an ordinance regulating   the  land use (zoning) recommended by the most recent joint land use study. 5 Election Results •The option which receives the most votes will affect all the properties on the map.  •Leaving the ballot blank or voting for both Option 1 and 2 will result in authorization of Option 2. 6 •A certified letter was sent out on Tuesday, August 12, 2025, to all the affected areas with a copy of Resolution 25-R-101, the explanation of the Special Election and the map of the areas that are affected in the city's extra territorial jurisdiction.  •A Notice of the November 4, 2025 Special Election will be published once in the San Antonio Newpaper on October 15, 2025. •The City of Schertz will conduct two public hearings to be held on Tuesday, September 2, 2025, and on Tuesday, September 16, 2025 at the Schertz City Council Chambers.  7 Notifications and Public Hearings Regulating Land Uses - basis •The most recent Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) was produced in July 2015 •It was adopted by the City of Schertz via Resolution 15-R-96 •If this option is chosen by the voters an ordinance adopting specific land use regulations supported by the JLUS is required. 8 Regulating Land Uses - mechanism •The mechanism for enforcing the land use regulations would be the requirement for property owners to obtain permits or approvals from the City prior to commencing construction and receiving a certificate of occupancy. •Violations would be dealt with through the same process as in the rest of the city generally. 9 Regulating Land Uses - scope •Military Influence Area Subzones •Bird Air Strike Hazard (BASH) MIA Subzone •Vertical Obstruction MIA Subzone •Safety MIA Subzone •Noise MIA Subzone •Enforcement of the applicable Strategies within the JLUS related to: •Generally, these are the "Zoning Ordinance/Subdivision Regulations" strategies but also may include other strategies that lead to UDC changes. 10 Regulating Land Uses – Examples •Potential regulations/restrictions include but are not limited to: •Prohibiting certain land uses within certain noise contours •Requiring sound attenuation within certain noise contours •Limitations on heights of structures •Restrictions on the use of cranes over a certain height during construction •Lighting restrictions •Limit density/floor area ratios (FAR) •Regulations to reduce Bird Airstrike Hazards (BASH)  •General restrictions on type of land use 11 Regulating Land Uses – Next Steps •Staff recommends Council hold off making a final decision until hearing from impacted residents/property owners at the September public hearings. •Based on that input Council could direct staff to develop a draft ordinance for presentation in October to provide clarity as to what will be regulated and how it will be enforced. 12 This study was prepared under contract with Bexar County, with financial support from the Office of Economic Adjustment, Department of Defense. The content reflects the views of the key JLUS partners involved in the development of this study and does not necessarily reflect the views of the Office of Economic Adjustment. JBSA – RANDOLPH JOINT LAND USE STUDY July 2015 Prepared for: County of Bexar Public Works Department 233 N Pecos-La Trinidad Street, Suite 420 San Antonio, Texas 78207 P (210) 335-1243 Prepared by: Matrix Design Group Please see the next page. Executive Committee The Executive Committee (EC) served an active and important role in providing policy direction during the development of the Joint Base San Antonio (JBSA) Randolph Joint Land Use Study (JLUS). The Executive Committee comprised the following individuals: Tommy Adkisson, Commissioner  (Former) County of Bexar Tommy Calvert, Jr. Commissioner County of Bexar  Judy Cope, Commissioner County of Guadalupe Jeannette Crabb, Councilwoman  City of Seguin  Phil Crane, Representative  Real Estate Council of San Antonio  Tom Daly, Mayor  City of Selma  Lloyd Doggett, Representative, District 35  U.S. House of Representatives  Joe Farias, Representative, District 118  Texas House of Representatives  Jim Fowler, Councilman  City of Schertz  Gilbert Gonzalez, VP of Risk Management  San Antonio Board of Realtors  Col. Gerald Goodfellow, Commander (former)  12th FTW, JBSA‐Randolph  Roland Gutierrez, Representative, District 119,  Texas House of Representatives  Col. Matt Isler, Commander  12th FTW, JBSA‐Randolph Lisa Jackson, Mayor  City of Cibolo  Nadine Knaus, Mayor Pro‐Tem  City of Garden Ridge  BG Bob Labrutta, Commander  502 ABW, JBSA  Ron Lozano, Support Specialist  FAA, Air Traffic Control Division Ruth Jones McClendon, Representative, District  120, Texas House of Representatives  Robert Murdock, Office of Military Affairs  City of San Antonio  Tim O’Krongley, Assistant Aviation Director  City of San Antonio  Tim Pruski, Representative  Greater San Antonio Builders  Association BGen Karen S. Rankin, Commissioner  USAF (Ret)  Texas Military Preparedness  Commission  Darcie Schipull, Transportation  Planner Texas Department of  Transportation  Greg Seidenberger, Commissioner  County of Guadalupe  Al Suarez, Mayor  City of Converse  Rebecca Viagran, Councilwoman  District 3, City of San Antonio  Scott Wayman, Assistant City  Manager  City of Live Oak  John Williams, Mayor  City of Universal City  Jim Wolverton, Commissioner  County of Guadalupe  EC Alternates Nancy Cain, Administrator  City of Garden Ridge Pamela Centano, Planning Assistant  City of Seguin  Timothy Ginn, Program Manager, Office of the Governor,   Texas Military Preparedness Commission  Lisa Marie Gomez, Director,   District 35 U.S. House of Representatives  Texas House of Representatives  Julianna Gonzaba, Chief of Staff,   District 118  Deborah Hosey, Senior Executive Secretary  City of San Antonio  Felipe Jimenez, Technical Director  502 ABW, JBSA  Amy Putney, Chief of Staff  County of Bexar Cavett McCrary, Executive Assistant  County of Bexar Marge Reyna, Office Manager, District 120  Texas House of Representatives  Ken Roberts, City Administrator  City of Selma Francess Randall, Representative  County of Guadalupe Ryan Rocha, Airport Operations Manager  City of San Antonio  Angela Shields, CEO/ President  San Antonio Board of Realtors  Terry Trevino, Director of Economic Development  City of Seguin  Margaret Wallace, Chief of Staff, District 119  Texas House of Representatives  Advisory Committee The Advisory (AC) served a key role in the development of the JBSA-Randolph JLUS, providing the overall technical support, review, and guidance of the study. The Advisory Committee comprised the following individuals: Michael Barrow, District 35  U.S. House of Representatives Robert Brach, Development Services Engineer  County of Bexar Bob Cantu, Chief of Staff  City of Schertz  Billy Classen, Representative  Greater San Antonio Builders Association Rick Cortes, Assistant City Manager  City of Seguin  Allen Dunn, Representative  County of Guadalupe Arthur Emerson, Commissioner  Texas Military Preparedness Commission Jesús Garza, AICP, Office of Military Affairs  City of San Antonio Gabriel Gonzales, Community Planner  JBSA Lt. Col. Courtney Hamilton, 12th Operations  Support Squadron 12TH FTW, JBSA‐Randolph Robert Herrera, City Manager  City of Cibolo  Richard Hetzel, Representative  County of Guadalupe Linda Jackson, District 120  Texas House of Representatives Dawn Ann Larios, District 119  Texas House of Representatives  Christopher Looney, Policy Administrator,  Development Services, City of San Antonio Ron Lozano, Support Specialist  FAA, Air Traffic Control Division Jordan Matney, Economic and Community  Development Manager, City of Live Oak John McCaw, Councilman  City of Garden Ridge Michael Moore, President  Real Estate Council of San Antonio John Quintanilla, Assistant City Manager  City of Converse  Ryan Rocha, Airport Operations Manager  City of San Antonio Michele Ross, Representative  San Antonio Board of Realtors Darcie Schipull, Transportation Planner  Texas Department of Transportation Kim Turner, Development Services Director  City of Universal City Larry Verner, Engineer City of Selma Walt Williams, Representative  County of Guadalupe James Wimberley, 502 CES/CENPL  JBSA  AC Alternates Lt. Col. Robin Baldwin, Director of Staff  12th FTW, JBSA‐Randolph Timothy Ginn, Program Manager,   Office of the Governor, Texas Military  Preparedness Commission  J. Landon Kane, Representative Real Estate Council of San Antonio Randy Luensmann, Director of Public Works  City of Universal City Nina Nixon-Mendez, AICP, Planning Administrator  City of San Antonio  Kate Silvas, Executive Director, City of Converse  Economic Development Corporation Wiley Smith, AICP, Community Planner  JBSA  Lesa Wood, Senior Planner  City of Schertz County of Bexar Robert Brach, P.E., Development Services Engineer County of Bexar Public Works JLUS Consultant Celeste Werner, AICP Project Manager Mike Hrapla Deputy Project Manager Rick Rust, AICP Technical Manager Michele Zehr-Mora Planning Lead Please see the next page.  Page i Acronyms ......................................................................................................................... iii 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Why Prepare a JLUS .......................................................................................... 1 1.2 Economic Benefit to the Region ....................................................................... 2 1.3 Compatibility Concerns ..................................................................................... 2 1.4 JLUS Goal and Objectives .................................................................................. 2 1.5 JLUS Partners .................................................................................................... 2 1.6 Local Communities ............................................................................................ 3 1.7 Public Participation ........................................................................................... 3 1.8 JLUS Study Area ................................................................................................. 5 2 Community Profile................................................................................................. 7 2.1 JLUS Community Growth Trends ...................................................................... 7 2.2 Current Development in Adjacent Communities ............................................. 9 3 Military Profile ..................................................................................................... 11 3.1 JBSA-Randolph ................................................................................................ 11 3.2 JBSA-Randolph Military Mission Profile .......................................................... 12 3.3 JBSA-Seguin Auxiliary Airfield ......................................................................... 17 3.4 Stinson Municipal Airport ............................................................................... 19 4 Existing Compatibility Tools ................................................................................. 23 4.1 Federal Programs and Policies ........................................................................ 23 4.2 JBSA-Randolph Tools ....................................................................................... 23 4.3 State of Texas Tools ........................................................................................ 24 4.4 Texas Local Jurisdiction Planning Tools .......................................................... 24 5 Compatibility Issues ............................................................................................. 25 5.1 Identification of Compatibility Issues ............................................................. 25 5.2 JBSA-Randolph Compatibility Issues by Factor ............................................... 25 6 Implementation Plan ........................................................................................... 31 6.1 Implementation Plan ...................................................................................... 31 6.2 How to Read the Implementation Plan .......................................................... 43 Page ii Tables and Figures Table 1. Population Change 2000-2010 JBSA-Randolph JLUS Study Area ...................................................................... 8 Table 2. Population Projections 2010-2050 JBSA-Randolph JLUS Study Area ................................................................ 8 Figure 1. JLUS Study Area .................................................................................................................................................. 4 Figure 2. Military Footprint Composite JBSA-Randolph ................................................................................................. 13 Figure 3. Special Use Airspace JBSA-Randolph ............................................................................................................... 14 Figure 4. Military Footprint Composite JBSA-Seguin Auxiliary Airfield ......................................................................... 18 Figure 5. Military Footprint Composite Stinson Municipal Airport ............................................................................... 20 Figure 6.1. Military Influence Area Overlay District (MIAOD) and Subzones Composite JBSA-Randolph ....................... 35 Figure 6.2. Military Influence Area Overlay District (MIAOD) with Subzones JBSA-Randolph ........................................ 36 Figure 6.3 Military Overlay District (MOD) with Subzones JBSA-Randolph ..................................................................... 37 Figure 7.1. Military Influence Area Overlay District (MIAOD) with Subzones JBSA-Seguin Auxiliary Airfield .................. 39 Figure 7.2. Military Influence Area Overlay District (MIAOD) with Subzones JBSA-Seguin Auxiliary Airfield ................... 40 Figure 7.3 Military Influence Area Overlay District (MIAOD) with Subzones JBSA-Seguin Auxiliary Airfield ................... 41 Figure 8.1 Military Influence Area Overlay District (MIAOD) and Subzones Composite Stinson Municipal Airport ...... 43 Figure 8.2 Military Influence Area Overlay District (MIAOD) with Subzones Stinson Municipal Airport ........................ 44 Figure 9. JBSA-Randolph JLUS Strategy Key .................................................................................................................... 46 * * * Page iii A A- AC Acq AAFES AE Alert Area Advisory Committee Acquisition Army and Air Force Exchange Service Alternative Energy Development ABW Air Base Wing AFB Air Force Base AGL above ground level AICUZ Air Installation Compatible Use Zone AHOD Airport Hazard Overlay District APZ Accident Potential Zone AT Anti-Terrorism / Force Protection ATCT Air Traffic Control Tower AT/FP Anti-Terrorism / Force Protection B BASH Bird Aircraft Strike Hazard BRAC Base Realignment and Closure C CCLUA Controlled Compatible Land Use Area CFR Code of Federal Regulations CIP Capital Improvement Program COM Communication / Coordination Comm Communication and Coordination CPS City Public Service Energy CY Calendar Year CZ Clear Zone D dB decibel Disc Real Estate Disclosures DOD Department of Defense DNL Day-night level DSS Dust, Smoke and Steam E EC Executive Committee ETJ Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Page iv F  FAA Federal Aviation Administration FAR Floor to Area Ratio FM Farm to Market FTW Flying Training Wing FY fiscal year G GIS Geographic Information System H HA Hab HQ Housing Availability Habitat Conservation Tools Headquarters I I Interstate IE Infrastructure Extensions IFR instrument flight rule J JAZB JBSA- Randolph Joint Airport Zoning Board Joint Base San Antonio-Randolph JBSA- Seguin Joint Base San Antonio-Seguin Auxiliary Airfield JLUS Joint Land Use Study L LAS LEG Land, Air and Sea Space Competition Legislative Initiatives Leg Legislative Tools LG Light and Glare LU Land Use M MAOZ Military Airport Overlay Zone MIA MIAOD Military Influence Area Military Influence Area Overlay District MOA MOA Military operating area Memorandum of Agreement MOU Memorandum of Understanding MSL mean sea level MTR Military Training Route N NGO Nongovernmental Organization NV Noise and Vibration O OEA Office of Economic Adjustment OFA Object Free Area OFZ Obstacle Free Zone R RA (R-) Restricted Airspace RC Roadway Capacity RECSA Real Estate Council of San Antonio RPZ Runway Protection Zone RSA Runway Safety Area S SABOR SAF San Antonio Board of Realtors Safety Zones SAWS San Antonio Water System SIP Strategic Impact Plan SH State Highway SR Slow speed low altitude training route STC Sound Transmission Class SUA Special Use Airspace Page v T TSDC Texas State Data Center TX Texas TXDOT Texas Department of Transportation U UDC U.S. Unified Development Code United States USAF United States Air Force V VO Vertical Obstructions VFR visual flight rule W WQQ Water Quality/ Quantity Z Zon Zoning Ordinance / Subdivision Regulations Page vi Please see the next page. The Joint Base San Antonio-Randolph (JBSA-Randolph) Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) is a joint effort between the cities of Cibolo, Converse, Garden Ridge, Live Oak, San Antonio, Schertz, Selma, and Seguin, and the counties of Bexar and Guadalupe, and JBSA-Randolph. The JLUS was undertaken in an effort to guide planning and development in local jurisdictions surrounding JBSA-Randolph, JBSA-Seguin Auxiliary Airfield (JBSA-Seguin), and the Stinson Municipal Airport (Stinson). JBSA-Randolph is a flying training wing asset in the United States Air Force and the Air Education Training Command. Because these activities are vital to continuing the military mission at JBSA-Randolph, the land used for the activities must be protected. Landowners with property near JBSA-Randolph, JBSA-Seguin,Stinson, and residents and businessowners on property surrounding these facilities must also be protected from adverse impacts that could occur due to training activities performed at these facilities. Joint planning efforts on the part of the local governments and JBSA-Randolph will establish recommended strategies that will equally protect all interested parties. The JLUS for JBSA-Randolph has resulted in a set of strategy recommendations in the areas of legislation, policy, planning and zoning, coordination and communication, acquisition, and outreach. A set of strategies was provided to address each JBSA-Randolph Compatibility Factor. Priorities were set initially to help determine when the strategies would be implemented, either within two years, five years, or longer than five years. One of the key recommendations is the formation of a JLUS Implementation Task Force that will be responsible for overseeing implementation in the months and years following the JLUS completion. The recommended strategies are outlined in more detail in Chapter 6 of this report. Additionally, a Background Report was prepared in conjunction with the JLUS that details the compatibility issues and process integral to the development of the strategies. These recommendations address the need for increased coordination and communication between JBSA-Randolph, local governments, regional agencies, and the public. They also seek to address public health, safety, and welfare, and protection of quality of life in the areas surrounding JBSA-Randolph and its sub-facilities. The collaborative spirit of the JLUS is an effective starting point for a continued collaborative planning and communication effort between all involved parties. Why Prepare a JLUS? 1.1 A JLUS is necessary to ensure the future compatibility between land uses in surrounding communities necessary to support the continuation of the military mission at JBSA-Randolph and the increasing development occurring proximate to the installation. JBSA-Randolph is one of the three noncontiguous installations that comprise Joint Base San Antonio located in Bexar County. JBSA-Randolph is home to the 12th Flying Training Wing (FTW) whose primary mission is to provide basic pilot training and instructor pilot training to airmen. In addition, JBSA-Randolph is Headquarters for Air Education Training Command (AETC) whose mission is to develop airmen of today and tomorrow through various education disciplines and training activities. Page 1 Economic Benefit to the 1.2 Region In addition to being a critical flying training asset in the United States Air Force (USAF), JBSA-Randolph is also an important economic engine contributing to the local and regional economies through annual payroll, annual expenditures, and value of jobs created. The JLUS assists in preserving the continued economic benefit that JBSA-Randolph provides. In 2012, JBSA-Randolph generated over $1.3 billion in local and regional economic impact and supported and served over 17,000 personnel. The $1.3 billion in impact is broken down into three categories: annual payroll at $892.1 million, annual expenditures (i.e. contracts and operations and maintenance) procured at $190.3 million, and value of jobs created at $314.5 million. Compatibility Concerns 1.3 At JBSA-Randolph, the compatibility concerns relate to the growing population and expansion of developed land taking place in the incorporated communities surrounding the Joint Base. Over the past 10 years, the local communities surrounding JBSA-Randolph have increased by 60 percent from a base population of nearly 82,000 (from the communities surrounding the base and facilities excluding the City of San Antonio) to over 131,000 by the year 2010. While the regional area is expected to grow at a slow, steady rate for the next 20 years, the areas surrounding the base are growing rapidly. Such growth has the potential to cause development and infrastructure to be located in areas that are adjacent to or proximate to JBSA-Randolph. While adjacent development exists in various locations along the installation perimeter, without proper oversight and guidance, this continued pattern of development could unintentionally jeopardize the USAF’s ability to train its airmen, especially in newer aircraft systems. JLUS Goal and Objectives 1.4 The goal of the JBSA-Randolph JLUS is to protect the viability of current and future military training operations, while simultaneously guiding community growth, sustaining the environmental and economic health of the region, and protecting public health, safety, and welfare. To achieve this goal, three primary JLUS objectives were identified: Understanding. Convene community and military representatives to identify, confirm, and understand compatibility issues in an open forum, taking into consideration both community and JBSA-Randolph perspectives and needs. This includes public awareness, education, and input organized into a cohesive outreach program. Collaboration. Encourage cooperative land use and resource planning among JBSA-Randolph and the surrounding communities so that future community growth and development are compatible with the training and operational missions at JBSA-Randolph seeking ways to reduce operational impacts on adjacent land proximate and within the study area. Actions. Provide a set of mutually supported tools, activities, and procedures from which local jurisdictions, agencies, and JBSA-Randolph can select, prepare, and approve / adopt and use to implement the recommendations developed during the JLUS process. The actions include both operational measures to mitigate installation impacts on surrounding communities and local government and agency approaches to reduce community impacts on military operations. JLUS Partners 1.5 As highlighted in the objectives stated previously, the JBSA-Randolph JLUS process was designed to create a locally relevant study that builds consensus and obtains support from the various stakeholders involved. To Page 2 achieve the stated JLUS goal and objectives, the planning process included a public outreach program that utilized a variety of opportunities for interested parties to contribute to the development of the study. Stakeholders include individuals, groups, organizations, and government entities interested in, affected by, or affecting the outcome of the JLUS project. An early step in any planning process is the identification of stakeholders. Informing or involving them early in the project is essential in the identification of their most important issues to address and resolve through the development of integrated strategies and measures. Stakeholders identified for the JBSA-Randolph JLUS included, but were not limited to, the following: JBSA-Randolph and JBSA personnel; Local jurisdictions (cities, counties and metropolitan planning organizations); Other partner agencies and organizations, such as local, regional, and state planning, regulatory, and land management agencies; landholding and regulatory federal agencies; landowner and realty associations; and other special interest groups (including local educational institutions and school districts); The general public, including residents and landowners. These groups of stakeholders played a critical role in the development of the JBSA-Randolph JLUS and Background Report. Their input provided comprehensive, technical guidance relevant to their jurisdiction’s policies, regulations, culture, and values. The JBSA-Randolph stakeholder groups helped shape the various strategies identified in this document. Local Communities 1.6 This JLUS could not have been possible without the effort provided by the 11 communities participating in this study illustrated on Figure 1: Bexar County City of Converse City of Garden Ridge City of Live Oak City of San Antonio City of Schertz City of Selma City of Universal City Guadalupe County City of Cibolo City of Seguin In addition to the partners listed above, the JBSA-Randolph JLUS partnered with other agencies and organizations that provide a state, regional and / or community perspective. These partners brought to the study a vast, expert knowledge base in varying disciplines, including regional transportation practices, natural resources, and local “on-the-ground” perspective relevant to the unique land features and land ownership patterns. A complete listing of affiliated stakeholder groups that played a vital role in the development of the JBSA-Randolph JLUS includes: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Greater San Antonio Builders Association Real Estate Council of San Antonio San Antonio Board of Realtors Texas House of Representatives, District 118 Texas House of Representatives, District 119 Texas House of Representatives, District 120 Texas Military Preparedness Commission U.S. House of Representatives, District 35 Texas Department of Transportation Public Participation 1.7 The general public was instrumental in the development of the JLUS and strategies by providing their perspective and feedback, both in public workshops and through the use of the interactive project website (www.jbsa-randolphjlus.com). During the development of the JLUS, three public workshops and one public hearing were held to solicit public input on the direction and content of the JLUS. Page 3 Page 4 o o o o o o o o o o B e x a r B e x a rC o u n t y C o u n t y G u a d a l u p e G u a d a l u p eC o u n t y C o u n t y W i l s o n W i l s o nC o u n t y C o u n t y C o m a l C o m a lC o u n t y C o u n t y G o n z a l e s G o n z a l e sC o u n t y C o u n t y S a n A n to n ioRi v e r M e d in a Ri v e r G u a d a l u peRiver San M a rcosRiver §¨¦10§¨¦35 §¨¦37 §¨¦410 §¨¦10 §¨¦410 JBSA - Randolph JBSA - SeguinAuxiliaryAirfield Stinson MunicipalAirport Schertz Converse Live Oak Universal City San Antonio Seguin Garden Ridge Selma Cibolo La Vernia Lockhart MunicipalAirport San MarcosMunicipal Airport New Braunfels Municipal Airport San Antonio International Airport Kyle New Braunfels St. Hedwig LockhartSan Marcos BulverdeBoerne Wimberley Helotes Luling Poth Floresville Fair Oaks Ranch Mustang Ridge Santa Clara Buda Elmendorf Creedmoor China Grove Uhland Kirby Niederwald Leon Valley New Berlin Poteet Shavano Park Castle Hills Windcrest Somerset Martindale Staples Stockdale Terrell HillsAlamo Heights Hill Country Village Hollywood Park Woodcreek Smiley Blanco Olmos Park Grey Forest Balcones Heights Mustang Ridge Mountain City Falls CityPleasanton §¨¦10 §¨¦37 £¤87 £¤281 £¤90 £¤181 £¤183 £¤281 £¤87 £¤90 UV1604 UV46 UV123 UV80 UV119UV16 UV21 UV13 UV97 UV142 UV151 UV345 UV353 UV536 UV122 UV173 UV218 UV82 UV211 UV337 UV371 UV282 UV422 UV66 UV97 UV46 UV80 UV16 UV97 §¨¦35J UV123B Legend JLUS Study Area JBSA - Randolph andJBSA - Seguin Stinson Municipal Airport County JLUS City Partners Regional Cities JLUS County Partners County River Railroad Interstate / Highway Road o Public Airport Source: TNRIS, 2013. 0 105Miles JLUS Study AreaFigure 1 JLUS Committees Two committees, comprising city, county, military, and other partner agencies and organizations, guided the development of the JBSA-Randolph JLUS: Executive Committee (EC). This committee was responsible for leading the direction of the JLUS; its members are listed in the Acknowledgements section of this report. JLUS Advisory Committee (AC). The AC identified and addressed technical issues, provided feedback on report development, and assisted in the development and evaluation of implementation strategies. The AC members are listed in the Acknowledgements section of this report. JLUS Study Area 1.8 The JBSA-Randolph JLUS Study Area was designed to encompass all lands and operational areas of JBSA-Randolph locations and use areas that may impact current or future military operations or be impacted by these operations. JBSA-Randolph is located in northeastern Bexar County, Texas, situated outside the San Antonio city limits, and is surrounded by several small municipalities: the City of Universal City to the north; the City of Schertz to the northeast, east and south; and the City of Converse to the west. The areas north and west of the installation are urbanized, while the area south and east of the installation are predominantly agricultural and open space with pockets of residential subdivisions. JBSA-Seguin is a sub-installation of JBSA-Randolph and is located one mile east-southeast of the City of Seguin along U.S. Route 90 (US-90). The City of Seguin is characterized as a rural and agriculture-friendly municipality located 30 miles east of JBSA-Randolph along the Interstate-10 and US-90 corridor. Stinson Municipal Airport is owned and operated by the City of San Antonio. It is situated in San Antonio City Council District 3, just south of downtown and is open to public use. It is approximately 33 miles south-southwest of JBSA-Randolph proper and is contracted by the Department of Defense (DOD) to enable flying training exercises. The area around Stinson Municipal Airport is characterized by portions of residential development and open and park space. Figure 1 illustrates the overall JBSA-Randolph JLUS study area. Page 5 Please see the next page. Page 6 The Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) study area includes three distinct and separate locations all within south-central Texas. Joint Base San Antonio-Randolph (JBSA-Randolph) is northeast of the City of San Antonio and is located between Interstates 10 and 35 in Bexar County. JBSA-Seguin Auxiliary Airfield (JBSA-Seguin) is located about 30 miles east of JBSA-Randolph, just south of Interstate-10 (I-10) in Guadalupe County. Stinson Municipal Airport, which is owned and operated by the City of San Antonio, is located in the southeast sector of San Antonio in City Council District 3, just west of I-37. The present setting and character of the three areas within the overall study area are both, urban and rural. The area surrounding JBSA-Randolph includes both developed and undeveloped lands. The northern and western areas adjacent to the installation are primarily developed including residential, commercial, and industrial uses. The east and south areas of JBSA-Randolph are characterized by more rural land including agricultural, open / undeveloped, and low-density or rural residential uses. The San Antonio metropolitan area is host to a diverse local economy and is a regional center for retail, business, and manufacturing. Several significant economic drivers exist throughout the JLUS Study Area, including the Caterpillar engine assembly plant in Seguin; the Hanson Quarry in Garden Ridge; and the San Antonio Military Medical Center in San Antonio. The diverse economy within the San Antonio metropolitan area comprises several industries including healthcare, retail, accommodation, administration, finance and insurance, construction, and manufacturing. These industries reflect the major economic development sectors found throughout the region. The suburban communities have diverse economies, but also rely on JBSA-Randolph for local economic support. JLUS Community Growth Trends 2.1 Recent population growth has brought significant development to the study area. Every jurisdiction, with the exception of the cities of San Antonio and Seguin, experienced growth rates higher than those of the State of Texas and Bexar County, with the City of Selma growing by over 600 percent in the last decade. Additionally, the cities of Converse, Cibolo, Garden Ridge, and Schertz all experienced substantial growth due to the outward expansion from the central core of San Antonio and general expansion within these cities. Table 1 shows the population change from 2000 to 2010 and notes the percent change in the 10 years. Despite this being a large, urbanized area, the majority of land in Bexar County is developed characterized by one major city, the City of San Antonio, numerous other cities, towns and military bases. This urbanized area encompasses 656 square miles within Bexar County, while the unincorporated area covers 600 square miles. JBSA R and Stinson Municipal Airport are located entirely within the county while JBSA-S is located in neighboring Guadalupe County. Currently, the area within Guadalupe County continues to experience growth and, in recent years, a diversified economy and population boom. Manufacturing supported over 6,000 jobs in Guadalupe County in 2009, generating $1.62 billion. Caterpillar built a $170 million manufacturing plant in the City of Seguin, which supports 1,400 jobs in the area. The county’s population has experienced a dramatic increase in recent years and had a 2010 population of 131,533. This population is largely clustered in or around Schertz, Cibolo, Seguin, and, to a small extent, the peripheries of New Braunfels and San Marcos. Page 7 The balance of Guadalupe County remains unchanged from earlier times and is primarily rural and agricultural. Table 1. Population Change 2000-2010 JBSA-Randolph JLUS Study Area Jurisdiction 2000 2010 Percent Change State of Texas 20,851,820 25,145,561 21% Bexar County 1,392,931 1,714,773 23% City of Converse 11,508 18,198 58% City of Garden Ridge 1,882 3,259 73% City of Live Oak 9,156 13,131 43% City of San Antonio 1,144,646 1,327,407 16% City of Schertz 18,694 31,465 68% City of Selma 788 5,540 603% City of Universal City 14,849 18,530 25% Guadalupe County 89,023 131,533 48% City of Cibolo 3,035 15,349 406% City of Seguin 22,011 25,175 14% Source: Census.gov, 2000, 2010.  Future Population Projections The Texas State Data Center (TSDC) prepared three projection scenarios for forty year population growth estimates for the State of Texas and all counties within its jurisdiction. The estimates included Bexar and Guadalupe counties, which are included in the study area. The TSDC included a background of the methodology used to prepare the three projection scenarios and provided recommendations regarding the use of each scenario’s data set. The three data sets focused on a “Zero Migration Scenario”, a “One-Half 2000-2010 Migration (0.5) Scenario”, or a “2000-2010 Migration (1.0) Scenario”. Matrix employed the recommendation for use of the “One-Half 2000-2010 Migration (0.5) Scenario” by the TSDC in so far as the TSDC noted that the “0.5 scenario continues to be the most appropriate scenario for most counties for use in long-term planning.” These 0.5 migration projections are identified in Table 2. These projections demonstrate a continued rate of growth in the State of Texas, Bexar County, and Guadalupe County. Although this information is not specific to the JLUS study area, it is helpful as it substantiates other growth projections and helpful in understanding regional growth trends. Source: Texas State Data Center, Projections of the Population of  Texas and Counties in Texas by Age, Sex and Race/Ethnicity for  2010‐2050, Nov 2012JLUS Community Economic Trends  Table 2. Population Projections 2010-2050 JBSA-Randolph JLUS Area Jurisdiction 2010 2020 2030 2040 % Change State of Texas 25,145,561 28,921,650 32,927,245 37,022,513 47% Bexar County 1,714,773 1,974,041 2,231,550 2,468,254 44% Guadalupe County 131,533 160,265 192,682 225,850 72% Source: Texas State Data Center, Projections of the Population of Texas and Counties in Texas by Age, Sex and Race/Ethnicity for 2010‐2050,  November 2012 Page 8 Current Development in 2.2 Adjacent Communities A few of the communities within the JBSA-Randolph JLUS Study Area are located directly adjacent to JBSA-Randolph. These communities include the cities of Converse, Schertz, and Universal City. Development pressures extending from these adjacent jurisdictions can impact JBSA-Randolph operations and vice versa the military operations can impact the communities’ ability to develop. The cities of Cibolo, Garden Ridge, Live Oak, San Antonio, and Selma, comprise the other communities included in the study area, which are proximate or adjacent to Converse, Schertz and Universal City and can absorb development from the adjacent communities or create additional impacts for the installation. Otherwise, the City of Seguin is located proximate to JBSA-Seguin and the City of San Antonio is located proximate to the Stinson Municipal Airport (Stinson). City of Converse The City of Converse while mostly developed, hired a firm to develop a plan for the city’s 1604 Corridor to expand upon its amenities offered to its residents and visitors. The development is proposed for the city’s eastern / southeastern boundary along the alignment of Loop 1604. This area encompasses both incorporated land and proposed future extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ). This corridor development is outlined in the 1604 Commercial Corridor Study and provides a variety of uses and amenities to the city’s residents and visitors including but not limited to a healthcare / medical zone, several retail zones, and open space and recreational opportunities. The proposed development would be considered the gateway for the community and provide another foundation for the city’s economic base. Source: 1604 Commercial Corridor Study, Aug 2013  City of Schertz According to the City of Schertz’s Comprehensive Land Plan, the city witnessed a large amount of residential and industrial growth from 2000 to 2010 and expects continued growth in both sectors. The plan noted that the residential and industrial growth is occurring more in northern areas of Schertz when compared to the southern areas, since the southern areas face development challenges. Future constraints for continued residential and industrial growth include available land, flood plain, and the recommended land use guidelines to develop property located within the JBSA-R airfield safety zones and noise contours. Schertz has some concerns about sprawl and looks to the implementation of Smart Growth techniques, i.e., traditional neighborhood development, transit-oriented development, conservation subdivision techniques / cluster zoning, and planned unit, to grow efficiently. Source: City of Schertz Comprehensive Land Plan, undated  City of Universal City The main retail corridor through the City of Universal City is State Highway (SH) 218, Pat Booker Road, which provides the greatest development opportunity within the city. In the 2008 Universal City Comprehensive Plan, the city identified redevelopment and infill as the major means to obtain housing growth. The city zoned the areas along Pat Booker Road for retail and commercial services and has increased the density of its neighborhoods to medium-density zoning in many of the areas along the highway. Furthermore, the city’s zoning ordinance includes three overlay districts: redevelopment, aviation district, and campus, in addition to the Randolph compatible use zone overlay, which will provide more flexible requirements to assist in developing these areas. Sources: Universal City Comprehensive Plan 2008‐2013; Universal  City Zoning Ordinance  City of Cibolo The City of Cibolo includes a large amount of ETJ area south of the incorporated city area. This ETJ extends south past I-10, abutting the City of San Antonio’s ETJ, and east along I-10, abutting the City of Seguin’s ETJ. The recent rapid population growth is likely to spur development and increase the rate of annexation. The ETJ area along I-10 is expected to provide an important development thoroughfare and contribute to the overall growth within the area. The city has currently zoned much of the annexed area between SH 539 and I-10 as rural residential, while the areas closer to I-10, along Bolton Road and Main Street Extension, are zoned for commercial, commercial / industrial, single-family residential and mixed use land uses. Page 9 These areas of concentration support the city’s goals of expanding business development, industrial parks, and retail development to diversify the city’s economy. Sources: City of Cibolo – Update to the Master Plan, 2005; City of  Cibolo Economic Development website homepage, accessed Oct  2013; City of Cibolo Future Land Use and Thoroughfare Map, 2013;  City of Cibolo Overall Annex Map, July 9, 2013; Seguin City Limits /  ETJ map, undated  City of Garden Ridge The City of Garden Ridge is bound to the north and west by the City of San Antonio’s ETJ, to the east by New Braunfels’ and Schertz’s ETJ, and to the south by Schertz’s incorporated area. Current development is limited by the location of the active quarry, in the middle of the city. The city expects that the quarry will conclude operations in approximately 25 years. At that time, Garden Ridge expects to convert the property to 1,490 residential lots. Until such time the quarry operations cease, land cannot be developed. The zoning within the city is currently split into an even mix of single-family residential / residence-agriculture and industrial land uses. Sources: City of Garden Ridge, Ordinance 13‐102008 (zoning),  Dec 3, 2008; City of Garden Ridge, Existing Zoning map, undated;  City of Garden Ridge, 2009 Water Master Plan & Impact Fee  Analysis   City of Live Oak The City of Live Oak is bound to the north and west by the City of San Antonio’s incorporated area, to the south by the San Antonio ETJ and the City of Converse, and to the east by the cities of Universal City and Selma. The city supports goals for infill development and increased density development. The city seeks to incorporate varied density mixed uses with retail elements in neighborhood-type residential developments. This mixed use redevelopment is one of the city’s future land use recommendations; others include encouraging unique mixed-use non-residential development and protecting prime retail property for the highest use development. The city also seeks to capitalize on its location at the intersection of I-35 and Loop 1604 by furthering development of the business district in the area through redevelopment and infill. Sources: Future Land Use Plan, City of Live Oak Comprehensive  Plan 2022, undated; City of Live Oak, Texas, Zoning Map, Jul 2008 City of San Antonio To further the city’s long-term viability and growth, the City of San Antonio has identified supporting military installations as one of their Comprehensive Master Plan major goals, and supporting military missions and operations as one of their Annexation Policy statements. The City’s ETJ and incorporated areas are located north, west, and south of JBSA-Randolph, but both are physically separated from JBSA-Randolph by the cities of Selma, Live Oak, Converse, and Schertz. The city’s incorporated areas have been largely zoned for single-family residential uses with adjoining / nearby park and open space uses. Given the significant single-family residential development occurring in the cities between San Antonio and JBSA-Randolph, similar growth is likely to occur in the area controlled by the City of San Antonio. Sources: City of San Antonio Comprehensive Master Plan  Framework, 2011; City of San Antonio Future Land Use Plan,  I‐10 East Perimeter Plan Update, 2008  City of Selma The City of Selma is bound to the north by the City of San Antonio’s ETJ, to the east by the City of Schertz, to the south by the City of Universal City, and to the west by the City of Live Oak. In 2005, approximately one-quarter to one-third of Selma was undeveloped, vacant land. Since then, several single-family residential developments have been constructed as well as multi-family residential; office; hotel, i.e., a Holiday Inn Express; and both large, i.e., a Costco, and small retail development. Source: City of Selma, 2005‐2020 Comprehensive Development  Plan Volume I, Jun 2007  Page 10 To appropriately develop and assess compatibility issues for the JBSA-Randolph JLUS, it is critical to understand the military operations and activities associated with JBSA-Randolph missions and how those operations interface with nearby communities. This chapter provides a brief overview of the mission operational footprint for JBSA-Randolph, JBSA-Seguin, and Stinson. JBSA-Randolph is located in Bexar County, Texas about 15 miles northeast of downtown San Antonio. The installation is near major transportation corridors including Interstate 35 (I-35), I-10, and Loop 1604 and rail operated by Union Pacific. Neighboring, developed communities include the City of Converse to the west, the City of Universal City to the north, and the City of Schertz, which wraps around JBSA-Randolph extending from the installation’s northeast corner to the installation’s southwest corner. In addition, there are other communities that are proximate to the aforementioned cities including Cibolo, Garden Ridge, Live Oak, and Selma. JBSA-Randolph 3.1 The installation covers 2,894 acres and supports numerous activities and buildings that support the mission. These include facilities and uses associated with airfield operations; industrial / maintenance; administration; community commercial, i.e., Army and Air Force Exchange Service (AAFES), and community service, i.e., chapel; medical; housing; outdoor recreation; and open space / water. Source: General Plan Randolph AFB, TX (undated)  Military Strategic Importance JBSA-Randolph is a critical asset to the DOD and provides flying training to student and instructor pilots. Test and evaluation of aviation-related training systems is also conducted as part of the overall mission. JBSA-Randolph not only trains pilots and instructor pilots, the base is also home to major headquarters within the United States Air Force (USAF) including Air Education and Training Command, a major command in the USAF responsible for all education and training of today’s airmen, Headquarters (HQ) Air Force Personnel Center, and HQ Air Force Recruiting Service. In addition to being a critical flying training wing in the USAF and a home to several AF HQs, JBSA-Randolph provides over $1.3 billion in economic impact to both local and regional economies. This impact is comprised of three components: annual payroll, annual expenditures, and value of jobs created. Moreover, JBSA comprised of JBSA-Randolph, JBSA-Lackland, and JBSA-Fort Sam Houston / Camp Bullis, in Bexar County provides over $27.7 billion in economic impact to the region. These figures not only demonstrate the economic importance of JBSA to the region, but demonstrate that JBSA-Randolph is a significant component of the local economy. Page 11 Military Operations The 12th Flying Training Wing (FTW), the host unit at JBSA-Randolph, conducts training for instructor pilots, combat systems officers and introduction to fighter fundamentals student pilot training. Pilot training is performed in the T-6A Texan II, T-38 Talon, and T-1A Jayhawk aircraft. Flight operations in support of the 12th FTW mission are conducted 260 days annually. These operations are conducted during the day and generally limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Night operations, i.e., from 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m., are rare exceptions and require coordination with and approval from the 12th FTW Operations Group in accordance with the JBSA-R Noise Management Plan. T-38C Talon aircraft. Photo courtesy of JBSA-Randolph. Aside from flight operations conducted by aircraft based at JBSA-Randolph, other military aircraft occasionally utilize the airfield at the installation. These operations are considered transient operations and have steadily decreased over the years with 1,124 operations in calendar year (CY) 2010 and 314 operations as of July 2013 for CY13. Transient operations are accepted up to 312 days per year – in contrast to the 260 days provided to the 12th FTW for training. In addition to flying training mission, the 12th FTW provides repair or replacement of external parts on aircraft engines from aircraft at JBSA-R and other AF installations. Future Operations To enable the US Air Force to train in a new two-seat jet trainer, the USAF T-X program will begin in 2017 and is expected to be fully operational by 2023. The T-X aircraft will replace the T-38 Talon as the T-38 Talon fleet is over 43 years old. The new T-X aircraft is a faster two- seat jet that will enable sustained high-G operations, aerial refueling, night vision imaging systems operations, air-to-air intercepts, and data-link operations. This aircraft will be more advanced regarding the information systems capability of the aircraft as opposed to the T-38 aircraft. With this advanced technology, the T-X aircraft is more likely to have a larger noise footprint than its counterpart the T-38. This could have increased impacts on the communities in the vicinity of the JBSA-Randolph airfield. JBSA-Randolph Military 3.2 Mission Profile The JBSA-Randolph mission profile is composed of various footprints that are associated with the mission. These components are either tangible meaning that they are either physically seen and / or heard or intangible meaning that they exist within space without being seen or heard. One example of a tangible footprint is noise associated with aircraft activity; one example of an intangible component is the flight path that an aircraft follows. These tangible and intangible footprints comprise the mission profile. Oftentimes, the profile is not contained within the confines of the military installation; noise, for example, does not stop at the fence line. The mission profile can potentially affect areas adjacent to or near the installation. Conversely, some development activities occurring in communities such as residential or commercial development within or adjacent to a military installation (depending on location) have a potential to adversely impact aircraft operations. The JBSA-Randolph mission footprints are both localized and regional in nature. Localized footprints are shown in Figure 2 and include: Accident Potential Zones Noise Contours Bird and Wildlife Air Strike Hazard (BASH) Vertical Obstructions Imaginary Surfaces Regional footprints are illustrated in Figure 3 and include: Military Training Routes (MTRs) Military Operating Areas (MOAs) Restricted Airspace Page 12 Page 13 JBSA - Randolph Schertz Cibolo San Antonio San Antonio Selma Converse Live Oak Universal City Garden Ridge Cibolo B e x a r B e x a rC o u n t y C o u n t y G u a d a l u p e G u a d a l u p eC o u n t y C o u n t y C o m a l C o m a lC o u n t y C o u n t y §¨¦35 §¨¦10 §¨¦410 §¨¦410 £¤87 UV1604 UV13 UV368 UV218 UV106 UV539 UV337 Legend Airfield Imaginary Surface Primary Surface Approach/DepartureClearance Surface(glide angle) = 50 ftto 1 ft up to 500 ft Approach/DepartureClearance Surface(horizontal) = 500 ft Inner HorizontalSurface = 150 ft Conical Surface= 20 ft to 1 ft Outer HorizontalSurface = 500 ft Transitional Surface= 7ft to 1 ft 5-mile BASHRelevancy Area Special Use Airspace(Alert Area A-635) Noise Contour(dB) 65 70 75 80 FAA Part 77 Up to 200' @ 3NM Up to 300' @ 4NM Up to 400' @ 5NM Up to 500' @ 6NM Accident Potential Zones Clear Zone APZ I APZ II Regional Cities JLUS Partners City / Community Bexar andGuadalupe CountyBoundaries JBSA - Randolph Runway Centerline Interstate / Highway Road Railroad River Sources: JBSA - Randolph, 2013; FAA, 2013. 0 21 Miles Military Footprint CompositeFigure 2 JBSA - Randolph Page 14 ^_ ^_^_ Mexico VR1421,876,759 acres VR1401,083,375 acres SR287899,272 acres SR290845,482 acres SR293719,456 acres(Closed) SR286714,538 acres SR292792,163 acres TEXON MOA, TX889,066 acres RANDOLPH 2A MOA, TX1,123,696 acres RANDOLPH 1A MOA, TX1,103,243 acres RANDOLPH 1B MOA, TX588,754 acres KINGSVILLE 5 MOA, TX368,120 acres RANDOLPH 2B MOA, TX246,112 acres R6312(C)61,749 acres R6312(B)52,483 acresR6312(A)5,754 acres A635118,186 acres A638109,468 acres JBSA - Randolph Stinson Municipal Airport JBSA - Seguin Auxiliary Airfield Gulf ofMexico Legend ^_JLUS Airfield / Airport Special Use Airspace Military Training Route Slow Speed Low Altitude Training Route State Boundary U.S. - Mexico Boundary Sources: Randolph AFB, 2013; ESRI, 2013.0 7035Miles NewMexico Oklahoma Arkansas Louisiana Mississippi MEXICO Gulf ofMexico Texas Special Use AirspaceFigure 3 JBSA - Randolph Maintaining and sustaining these local and regional footprints plays a significant role in the long-term viability of JBSA-Randolph and continued mission readiness of the USAF. JBSA-R Local Operational Footprint The JBSA-Randolph airfield operational footprint is comprised of the mission components associated with airfield operations including accident potential zones, noise contours, the BASH area, and imaginary surfaces. These components involve varying levels of land use planning from jurisdictions and the military to enable compatibility with the military mission. Such planning recommendations include restricting development in the clear zone (CZ) of the airfield and lowering building heights to prevent unnecessary vertical obstructions and promote navigable airspace. Accident Potential Zones   Accident potential zones (APZs) encompass three main areas from the end of the runway(s): the CZ, APZ I, and APZ II. These zones start at the ends of the runways and extend outward and are delineated based upon historical data of aircraft accidents. DoD recommends land uses for these areas to encourage and promote compatibility with military operations and to protect the public welfare. As shown in Figure 2, the CZ extends outward from the ends of the runways by 3,000 feet and is 3,000 feet wide and has the potential to create compatibility issues within the cities that are encompassed within the CZs. The APZ I measures 3,000 feet wide by 5,000 in length and APZ II measures 3,000 feet wide and 7,000 feet in length, they extend outward from the CZ respectively. It should be noted that the northern JBSA-Randolph CZs encompass land within Universal City and the City of Schertz, and the southern CZs encompass land within the cities of Converse and Schertz. The northern APZ I areas are within the cities of Universal City and Schertz and the southern APZ I encompasses land in the cities of Converse, Schertz, and San Antonio. The northern and southern APZ II areas extend into the cities of Universal City, Selma, and Schertz, respectively. Aircraft Noise Contours  The noise contour information was prepared for Randolph AFB in the 2008 AICUZ Study. The AICUZ was updated in part, due to the change in noise exposure since the 2000 AICUZ. The noise exposure is modeled based off of the type of aircraft flown, including the T-6 and T-38 for annual average busy-day aircraft operations. The loudest JBSA-R noise contours generated by military aircraft operations occur within the installation boundaries, but portions of the 65 dB and 70 dB noise contours extend off base into the surrounding communities of Converse, Universal City and Schertz and in small portions of land not contained in the Study Area. Imaginary Surfaces   The DOD under Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) 03-260-01 has identified certain imaginary surfaces around runways at military installations to determine how structures and facilities are evaluated for creating vertical obstructions around an active airfield. The imaginary surfaces build upon each other and are designed to eliminate obstructions either natural or man-made, to air navigation and operations. Each type of imaginary surface has different dimensions, planes or slopes in which a structure intruding upon it may be considered a vertical obstruction. Figure 2 illustrates the JBSA-Randolph imaginary surfaces and provides the allowable heights and slopes in these imaginary surfaces. Bird Air Strike Hazard Relevancy Area  Birds and wildlife pose a threat to military training and flight operations. Due to changes in regional migratory patterns and the availability of dense foliage for roosting on the installation, JBSA Randolph has become an ideal habitat for a flock of migratory White Winged Dove. At an estimated flock size of 12,000-15,000 birds, and growing, the White Winged Doves present a particularly acute risk to high-speed jet operations on Randolph's east runway. These birds accounted for only 12.5 percent of damaging bird-strikes in FY 12, but this rate steadily increased to 55.6 percent of damaging bird- strikes in FY 14. Aggressive efforts are underway to contain the expanding BASH threat. Risk mitigation techniques, such as adjusting flight operations, successfully reduced overall bird strikes from 75 in FY13 to 70 in FY 14. Page 15 Previous short-term methods are planned for expanded use in FY 15 but are considered unsustainable due to long term effects on lost training and reduced pilot production. Habitat reduction by eliminating retaining ponds and flora favorable to these species greatly reduces the risk associated with bird activities. While small in number, large bird species that inhabit installation water sources are especially damaging in an aircraft strike incident. These large birds, such as Cranes and Egrets, are most effectively controlled by eliminating nonessential water sources both on the installation and in the communities surrounding the installation. Figure 2 illustrates the FAA statistical BASH relevancy area around JBSA-Randolph. BASH impact to aircraft. Photo courtesy of JBSA-Randolph. Vertical Obstructions   Separately from and in addition to the established imaginary surfaces, the FAA also establishes further guidance to reduce the potential for accidents surrounding an airfield. This guidance is codified in the Code of Federal Regulations at Title 14, Part 77.17 and utilized by the FAA during obstruction evaluations. The guidance and process for obstruction evaluation is more fully detailed in Section 4: Existing Tools as it is not a military-specific element and is not a direct result of JBSA-Randolph operations. It is included here, within the military profile, nonetheless, because it is associated with airfield operations. Figure 2 illustrates Part 77 relevancy areas. JBSA-R Regional Operational Airspace With respect to military operations, regulatory special use airspace (SUA) includes prohibited areas and restricted areas. Non-regulatory special use airspace includes military operating areas (MOAs), military training routes (MTRs), warning areas, alert areas, national security areas, and controlled firing areas. Specific to JBSA-Randolph, regulatory and non-regulatory special use airspace includes MOAs, MTRs, and slow-speed low altitude training routes, as well as alert areas and restricted airspace as illustrated in Figure 3. Military Operating Areas  The Randolph 1A MOA is located east/southeast of San Antonio. The Randolph 1B and Kingsville 5 MOAs are both located southeast of San Antonio. The Randolph 2A and 2B MOAs are both located west of San Antonio. The TEXON MOA is located northwest of San Antonio and is the greatest distance away from San Antonio out of all of the MOA. While these areas are not located within this JLUS study area, it is discussed here and shown in Figure 3 to provide a comprehensive picture of the overall airspace footprint for the JBSA-Randolph mission. Source: San Antonio Sectional (May 2, 2013) FAA; Joint Order  7400.2J: Procedures for Handling Airspace Matters – Military  Operations Areas (Aug 22, 2013) FAA; Installation Complex  Encroachment Management Action Plan figure (March 2012) JBSA;  in person interview with S Taylor (Jul 2013); GIS data provided by  JBSA‐R  Military Training Routes  There are two types of MTRs associated with the JBSA-R operations: instrument flight rule or IFR and visual flight rule or VFR. The primary difference between IFR and VFR MTR is the ability to fly with or without the use of instruments in various weather conditions. There are also Slow Speed Altitude Training Routes associated with JBSA-Randolph and an alert area. Slow speed, low altitude training routes (SR) are generally not considered a MTR, but are treated much the same as a MTR. The SUA and Slow Speed Low Altitude Training Routes are illustrated in Figure 3. This figure also illustrates the regional airspaces for which numerous installations in the region use to perform their training missions. Source: Area Planning AP/1B Chart, Military Training Routes‐ Central U.S. (May 2, 2013) National Geospatial‐Intelligence Agency  [NGA]; Area Planning, Military Training Routes – North and South  America (Nov 15, 2012) NGA; Installation Complex Encroachment  Management Action Plan figure (March 2012) JBSA; in person  interview with S Taylor (Jul 2013); GIS data provided by JBSA‐R  Page 16 JBSA‐R Alert Area A‐635  The large amount of flight activity involving student pilots associated with the JBSA-Randolph mission required the airspace surrounding the airfield to be designated Alert Area A-635. It should be noted that Alert Area A-635 does not extend into or include any of the Class D airspace that is directly associated with the JBSA-Randolph airfield; it does, though, envelop and surround the entire Class D airspace. Alert Area A-635 covers an area comprising 118,186 acres and is illustrated on Figure 3. Alert Area A‐638  Like the designation of Alert Area A-635 due to the large amount of flight activity involving student pilots associated with the JBSA-Randolph mission, the airspace over the JBSA-Seguin airfield is also designated as Alert Area A-638 for the same reasons. A-638 covers an area comprising 109,468 acres. This SUA is shown in Figure 3. Alert Area A-638 does not preclude entry by aircraft unassociated with the military flight operations; although, it does require all flight operations in the area to be conducted under VFR. Other attributes associated with Alert Area A-638 includes an operational area that extends vertically to and including 3,000 ft. mean sea level (MSL) and horizontally across a large area encompassing the airfield. The time of use associated with A-638 begins at sunrise and ends at sunset from Monday to Friday. Source: San Antonio Sectional (May 2, 2013) FAA; Installation  Complex Encroachment Management Action Plan figure (March  2012) JBSA; in person interview with S Taylor (Jul 2013); GIS data  provided by JBSA‐R  Aerial Refueling Area AR614  There is one aerial refueling area west of JBSA-Randolph designated as AR614. Aerial refueling must be conducted within the designated airspace under instrument flight rules and on flight tracks with specific entry and exit points. In AR-614, the refueling altitude is designated at flight level (FL) 250 (25,000 ft.), FL 270 (27,000 ft.) or as designated by Air Traffic Control. The time of operation for AR614 is unlimited. Source: http://ivaous.org/main/pilot/military/Airrefueltracks.pdf         JBSA-Seguin Auxiliary Airfield 3.3 JBSA-Seguin is centrally located in Guadalupe County, three miles east-southeast of the City of Seguin and almost 27 miles east of JBSA-Randolph. It has one runway and covers 961 acres. It is an unattended airport and restricted to use by the military; prior authorization is required prior to landing at the airfield. The infrastructure and environs at JBSA-Seguin are the responsibility of JBSA-Randolph. Military Operations JBSA-Seguin supports the flight instruction training mission at JBSA-Randolph, providing an area free from urban encroachment ideal for touch-and-go operations, practice approaches, and emergency landing procedures practice. Runway renovations were recently completed at JBSA-Seguin and the airfield is operational to support the flight instruction training mission. JBSA-Seguin Military Mission Footprints The JBSA-Seguin mission footprint is illustrated on Figure 4 and is comprised of the mission components associated with airfield operations including accident potential zones, noise contours, the BASH area, and imaginary surfaces. Accident Potential Zones  The APZ zones, i.e., CZ and APZs, for JBSA-Seguin were mapped in the 2000 AICUZ Study for Seguin Auxiliary Airfield, Texas. Knowing that the length of the runway has not changed since that time, the safety zone dimensions have not changed. As mentioned before, the AF standard measurements for CZs extend outward 3,000 feet from the end of the runway and 3,000 feet wide. The CZ is the standard size and encompasses areas in unincorporated Guadalupe County. The APZ I and II measurements are the standard size affecting both the city and county. Figure 4 illustrates these APZs. Source: AICUZ Study for Seguin Auxiliary Airfield, TX, Dec 2000.  Page 17 Page 18 JBSA - SeguinAuxiliary Airfield New Braunfels NewBerlin G u a d a l u p e G u a d a l u p eC o u n t y C o u n t y G o n z a l e s G o n z a l e sC o u n t y C o u n t y C o m a l C o m a lC o u n t y C o u n t y C a l d w e l l C a l d w e l lC o u n t y C o u n t y Seguin G uadalupeRiver §¨¦10 £¤90 £¤90 UV123 UV46 UV130 UV80 UV123B Legend Airfield Imaginary Surface Primary SurfaceApproach/DepartureClearance Surface(glide angle) = 50 ftto 1 ft up to 500 ft Approach/DepartureClearance Surface(horizontal) = 500 ft Inner HorizontalSurface = 150 ft Conical Surface= 20 ft to 1 ft Outer HorizontalSurface = 500 ft Transitional Surface= 7 ft to 1 ft 5-mile BASHRelevancy Area Special Use Airspace(Alert Area A-638) Noise Contour(dB) 65 70 75 80 FAA Part 77 Up to 200' @ 3NM Up to 300' @ 4NM Up to 400' @ 5NM Up to 500' @ 6NM Accident Potential Zones Clear Zone APZ I APZ II Regional Cities JLUS Partners Seguin Guadalupe County JBSA - Seguin Auxiliary Airfield Runway Centerline Interstate / Highway Road Railroad River Sources: JBSA - Randolph, 2013; FAA, 2013;AICUZ Study for Seguin Auxiliary Airfield, 2000. 0 21 Miles Military Footprint CompositeFigure 4 JBSA - Seguin Auxiliary Airfield Aircraft Noise Contours  As shown in Figure 4, the JBSA-Seguin noise contours do not interface with the City of Seguin directly. However, it should be noted that a majority of the noise contours directly affect land uses within Guadalupe County. Additionally, the 65 dB contour is proximate to a portion of the eastern city limit of Seguin, and there is a small portion of the 75 dB noise contour that is located off-installation. Imaginary Surfaces   Figure 4 also displays the dimensions of the imaginary surfaces layers that build upon each other and surround the JBSA-Seguin airfield. The dimensions, planes, and slopes of these surfaces are the same as those associated with the JBSA-Randolph airfield, as both JBSA-Randolph and JBSA-Seguin airfields include Class B runways. Source: AICUZ Study for Seguin Auxiliary Airfield, TX (Dec 2000);  Unified Facilities Criteria: Airfield and Heliport Planning and Design  (Nov 17, 2008) DOD   Bird Air Strike Hazard Relevancy Area  Figure 4 illustrates the JBSA-Seguin BASH relevancy area, the BASH Plan notes one issue related to this area– circling and soaring raptors and increased vulture activity. JBSA-Randolph believes these activities are associated with hunting field dressing deer during the season, beginning the end of September to the beginning of November for archery only and beginning November to the beginning of January for the general season. Vertical Obstructions  As previously indicated within the information regarding JBSA-Randolph, the FAA established guidance to reduce the potential for accidents surrounding an airfield. More information about the FAA guidance is included in Section 4: Existing Tools and in the JBSA-Randolph description. Figure 4 displays JBSA-Seguin Part 77 relevancy areas. Source: 14 CFR § 77.17  Stinson Municipal Airport 3.4 Stinson Municipal Airport (Stinson) is owned and operated by the City of San Antonio. The inclusion of Stinson within the JBSA-Randolph JLUS is based on the JBSA-Randolph military flight operations that occur at Stinson. Accordingly, information in this section regarding Stinson will be limited to the operations involving JBSA-Randolph to the extent possible. Current Operations While the majority of Stinson’s current operations are general aviation, the relevant component to this JLUS is the JBSA-Randolph military operation involvement. The total of all military activities totaled 7,146 for a 12-month period ending March 26, 2011. This total represents 4.5 percent of the total aviation operations conducted at Stinson for the same period. Historical data captured from 2002 to 2011 shows transient military operations outnumbered local military operations for all years between and including 2002 to 2008. Beginning in 2009, the number of transient military operations decreased from previous years, but appears to have stabilized around 3,000 to 3,500 annual operations based on available data. Source: Stinson Municipal Airport Master Plan Update (May 2013)  Kimley‐Horn and Assoc.; Airport Master Record (Jun 27, 2013) FAA;  Advisory Circular 150/5300‐13A (Sept 28, 2012) FAA; San Antonio  Sectional (May 2, 2013) FAA; FAA Airport Master Record, 2013.  Stinson Mission Footprint The overall footprint relating to the operations at Stinson is likely to be reflective of the general aviation operations unlike the footprint for JBSA-Randolph and JBSA-Seguin, where data for those two locations only included military operations. In addition, the footprint relative to military operations, as illustrated in Figure 5, is likely to be exaggerated since the military operations only comprise a small percentage of the overall aviation operations. Safety Zones Several different safety and protection zones comprise the Stinson Municipal Airport Safety Zones. They are Object Free Areas, Runway Protection Zones, Runway Safety Areas and Obstacle Free Zones. Page 19 Page 20 Stinson MunicipalAiport B e x a r B e x a rC o u n t y C o u n t y San Antonio San Anto nio Rive r M e d ina River San Ant o n i o R i v er §¨¦37 §¨¦35 §¨¦410 §¨¦10 §¨¦10 £¤87 £¤281 £¤90 £¤181 £¤281 UV16 UV536 UV353 UV122 UV421 UV371 UV422 UV66 UV151 UV1604 UV368 Legend 5-mile BASH Relevancy Area Runway Protection Zones Noise Contours (DNL) 60 dB 65 dB 70 dB 75 dB FAA Part 77 Up to 200' @ 3NM Up to 300' @ 4NM Up to 400' @ 5NM Up to 500' @ 6NM JLUS Partner San Antonio Bexar County Stinson Municipal Airport Runway Interstate / Highway Road Railroad River 0 21 MilesSources: FAA, 2013; Ricondo & Associates, 2013. Military Footprint CompositeFigure 5 Stinson Municipal Airport Object Free Areas and Runway Protection Zones  CZs and APZs are associated with military airfields. Civilian airfields, in contrast, utilize object free areas (OFAs) and runway protection zones (RPZs). The OFA is located in the same general area and serves the same purpose as the military’s CZs in that it is an area located at the end of a runway and is intended to be “free of objects” as noted in the FAA Advisory Circular regarding airport design. Additionally, the RPZs act similarly to the APZs in that they are designed to minimize harm to persons and property in the event of an aviation-related incident during takeoff or landing. RPZs, though, differ from APZs in size, shape, and property ownership requirements. RPZs vary in size and are enlarged or minimized according to the type of aircraft a runway supports. Figure 5 displays RPZs at Stinson. All of the runways at Stinson include RPZs, but do not include OFAs. This is because the active part of the runway, the point at which an aircraft will physically gain or lose contact with the runway during landing or takeoff, starts several hundred feet from the end of the paved area associated with the runway. The active start of the runway – the runway threshold - is displaced from the end of the paved area. These runway areas are not used for takeoff or landing and act as the OFA since the area is kept free of objects by virtue of the paved areas associated with the runway location. Source: Advisory Circular 150/5300‐13A (Sep 28, 2012) FAA;  Memorandum: Interim Guidance on Land Uses within a Runway  Protection Zone (Sep 27, 2012) FAA; Stinson Municipal Airport  Master Plan Update (May 2013) Kimley‐Horn and Assoc.  Runway Safety Area  The runway safety area (RSA) includes all areas directly adjacent to the runway and is sized to arrest 90 percent of all runway overruns. According to the FAA, “The RSA enhances the safety of aircraft which undershoot, overrun, or veer off the runway, and it provides greater accessibility for fire-fighting equipment during such incidents.” The size of the RSA is standardized based on the aircraft approach category and the aircraft design group. Source: Advisory Circular 150/5300‐13A (Sep 28, 2012) FAA;  Stinson Municipal Airport Master Plan Update (May 2013)  Kimley‐Horn and Assoc.; FAA AC, 2012.  Obstacle Free Zone  The primary purpose of the obstacle free zone (OFZ) is to ensure the safe maneuver of aircraft in the areas near and adjacent to an airfield / runway. The OFZ dimensions for civilian runways are fully dependent on “approach minimums for the runway end and the aircraft on approach”. Accordingly, the size of the OFZ is standardized based on the aircraft approach category and the aircraft design group. Source: Advisory Circular 150/5300‐13A (Sep 28, 2012) FAA;  Stinson Municipal Airport Master Plan Update (May 2013)  Kimley‐Horn and Assoc.; FAA AC, 2012.  Aircraft Noise Contours   Similar to the noise modeling and resulting noise contours prepared for JBSA-Randolph, noise contours were produced for activities at Stinson and are shown in Figure 5. While the DNL 75 dB and 70 dB noise contours are confined to the Stinson Municipal Airport property, the DNL 65 dB contour extends off the southern end of Stinson approximately 500 feet into San Antonio. The DNL 60 dB noise contour associated with the south end of the airport property extends into areas where residential and industrial uses are located. According to the Airport Improvements document, four residential dwelling units having approximately 11 persons would be affected by noise equal to or greater than DNL 60 dB. Source: Airport Improvements for Stinson Municipal Airport  Environmental Assessment (Jun 2007) Ricondo & Assoc  Imaginary Surfaces   The imaginary surfaces that help to define acceptable height limits for civilian airports are established by the FAA and implemented based on the aircraft approach category and the aircraft design group. The City of San Antonio’s Unified Development Code Airport Hazard Overlay District stipulates the surfaces and size of surfaces developed for and utilized by Stinson. These surfaces are shown in Figure 5. Source: 14 CFR § 77.17; City of San Antonio Unified Development  Code Section 35‐331: “AHOD” Airport Hazard Overlay District,  Jan 2006  Page 21 Bird Air Strike Hazard Subzone  FAA recommendations for BASH management state that land use management around an active airfield out to five statute miles from the center of the runway is key to mitigating the incidence of BASH. The FAA indicated this area was the area where BASH incidents were most likely to occur because aircraft are flying at lower altitudes and speeds. This makes the probability for BASH incidents to occur higher as BASH incidents typically occur at altitudes up to 3,500 feet AGL. The BASH relevancy area for Stinson is shown on Figure 5. Vertical Obstructions  As previously mentioned in the JBSA-Randolph and JBSA-Seguin operational footprints, the FAA established guidance to reduce the potential for accidents surrounding an airfield based on heights of structures and ground elevation. More information about the FAA guidance is included in Section 4: Existing Tools and in the JBSA-R description. Figure 5 illustrates the FAA Part 77 footprint for Stinson. Page 22 There are numerous existing tools that can be used to encourage, promote, and manage compatibility between military installations and their neighboring communities. These tools exist at the federal, installation, state, regional, and local level and are used for compatibility purposes to guide every day land use and operational decisions in communities and on military installations. This chapter lists some of the key tools that are currently, or are recommended to be more efficiently utilized or enhanced to address the compatibility issues identified by the JBSA-Randolph (JBSA-Randolph) Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) process. The tools listed in this section are not exhaustive, but are meant to provide a brief overview of the primary tools currently utilized in the JLUS Study Area.  Federal Programs and Policies 4.1 The federal programs and policies are provided for by the various branches of the federal government. These tools authorize other federal, state, and local agencies to implement regulatory measures and policies to protect the multiple resources that are involved in land use and military compatibility planning. The intent of these regulatory measures and policies include the protection and preservation of the quality of life and public welfare and the myriad of natural resources including land, water, and airspace. These tools assist land use decision makers and planners of all levels to make informed decisions, which can enable compatible land use development between joint land uses— military and community land uses. Federal programs and policies were evaluated in the JBSA-Randolph JLUS to assist in determining where areas of improvement could enable enhanced land use planning at the local level. Some key federal programs that were evaluated in the JBSA-Randolph JLUS process include but are not limited to the Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) Program and the Federal Aviation Act, specifically FAA Regulation Title 14 Part 77. For a complete description of these programs and tools, see the Background Report, Chapter 4, Existing Compatibility Tools. JBSA-Randolph Tools 4.2 The JBSA-Randolph installation tools provide guidance for land uses and development activities on the installation. These tools govern land use decisions that occur inside the fence line. These tools provide guidance and establish standard operating procedures during certain events such as a bird air strike hazard (BASH) condition and / or the parameters for conducting missions within the military operating area (MOA). There are various installation tools that are instrumental in assisting and guiding land use decisions as they interface with the military mission. Some key JBSA-Randolph tools that were evaluated in the JLUS process include but are not limited to the BASH Plan and the JBSA-Randolph 2030 General Plan. However it should be noted, the 12 Flying Training Wing (FTW) does not consider the AICUZ land use recommendations as compatible with its training operations. The 12 FTW conducts approximately 200,000 flight movements annually in fighter-trainer type aircraft and the density of urban development recommended by the AICUZ substantially increases mission risk and the likelihood that people and property will be significantly impacted by an aircraft mishap. Page 23 State of Texas Tools 4.3 The state tools provide further assistance and protection of land uses in the State of Texas. The tools authorize or mandate local counties and cities to provide for the protection of the State’s valuable industries including the DOD and agriculture. In addition, the State’s tools require communities and developers to protect and preserve the State’s natural resources including land and water by establishing further regulatory measures to ensure the natural environment is preserved and protected from over-consumptive practices. Some essential State tools that were analyzed in this JLUS include but are not limited to the Joint Airport Zoning Board (JAZB) authorized by Chapter 241 of the Texas Local Government Code, the Texas Military Preparedness Commission and the Airport Compatibility Guidelines authored by the Texas Department of Transportation, Aviation Division. Texas Local Jurisdiction 4.4 Planning Tools The planning tools used by the study area jurisdictions were analyzed and categorized as permanent, semi-permanent, or conditional. In Texas, only cities may enforce traditional land use and development regulatory authority. Very few counties in Texas have limited authority to regulate land uses, i.e. Bexar County is authorized to regulate lighting in the unincorporated portions of the county. Counties are not required to adopt Comprehensive Plans; however, cities are required by state law to have a comprehensive plan and update it every five years. Texas Local Government Code provides cities and counties with authority to regulate the subdivision of land within incorporated and extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) areas, including managing roads, streets, drainage, and rights-of-way. In general, land cannot be divided in Texas without local government approval. Dividing land for sale or lease is regulated by local ordinances based on the Texas Local Government Code (Chapter 212 for cities and Chapter 232 for counties). In the case of cities, the comprehensive plan, zoning, subdivision, and other ordinances govern the design of the subdivision, the size of its lots, and the types of improvements (street construction, sewer lines, drainage facilities, etc.). Counties may only regulate subdivisions as they apply to roads, property setbacks and groundwater. There are 29 incorporated municipalities and numerous smaller, unincorporated communities within Bexar and Guadalupe Counties. While the missions conducted at JBSA-Randolph have the potential to intermittently affect different parts of the counties at one time or another, this JLUS focuses on areas of Bexar County and its incorporated cities of Converse, Garden Ridge, Live Oak, San Antonio, Schertz, Selma, and Universal City, and Guadalupe County and its incorporated cities of Cibolo and Seguin. These areas are most affected by JBSA-Randolph operations and conversely, are the areas that have the most potential to pose compatibility issues for JBSA-Randolph. Some essential local jurisdiction planning tools that were analyzed in this JLUS include but are not limited to the following: Comprehensive Plans, Unified Development Code and Zoning Ordinances and Orders, and Subdivision Regulations Building Codes Annexation Regulations City of San Antonio Airport Hazard Overlay District/ Military Airport Overlay Zone City of San Antonio Military Sound Attenuation Overlay Districts, Section 35-339.05 City of Schertz Airport Installation Compatible Use Zone District City of Universal City Perpetual Clear Zone Easement and Formal Coordination Letters The local jurisdiction planning tools provide further assistance and protection of land uses in the communities proximate to JBSA-Randolph facilities. Page 24  Identification of Compatibility Issues 5.1 Compatibility, in relation to military readiness, is defined as the balance or compromise between community and military needs and interests. The goal of compatibility planning is to promote an environment where both entities communicate, coordinate, and implement mutually supportive actions that allow them to achieve their respective goals and objectives. Numerous factors influence whether community and military plans, programs, and activities are compatible or in conflict. For the JBSA-Randolph JLUS, 24 compatibility factors were evaluated to confirm the presence of, and establish priorities for, the key Study Area issues. Two of these factors, noise and vibration, were grouped together due to similar issues and strategies. JBSA-Randolph Compatibility Issues by Factor 5.2 Alternative Energy Development is the likelihood of development of alternative energy developments within the JBSA-Randolph JLUS Study Area. Alternative energy includes wind and solar energy facilities. Any current or proposed wind or solar facilities in the study area located in areas where low-altitude aviation operations can occur can create a vertical obstruction and / or visual impairment for pilots. The uncoordinated placement of these facilities can lead to incompatibilities with the JBSA-Randolph mission. The following Alternative Energy Development issue was identified: Local ordinances do not regulate alternative energy equipment or facility siting which may pose a vertical obstruction and/or safety issue for flight operations. Anti-Terrorism / Force Protection is the protection and security of the nation’s defense assets. Issues are created when national defenses can be breached or compromised, such as development close to the fence line where the public can view operational activities. It is important for the DOD and JBSA-Randolph to address these issues to ensure military readiness. The following Anti-Terrorism / Force Protection issue was identified: JBSA-Randolph East Gate does not meet all AT / FP requirements, which may affect security and local community traffic congestion due to the traffic throughput constraints at the gate. Communication / Coordination is the communication and collaboration between multiple agencies engaged in a common goal. For the JBSA-Randolph JLUS, interagency coordination represents several challenges for both JBSA-Randolph and surrounding communities. The lack of a coordinated approach when planning activities including proposed development and infrastructure extensions can result in incompatibilities for sustaining the JBSA-Randolph mission and growth of the surrounding communities. The lack of information sharing such as important geographic information system data used for planning and mapping can potentially result in incompatible development near the installation and ranges. The following Interagency Communication / Coordination issues were identified: Local jurisdictions and the public are not clear who they should contact at JBSA-Randolph regarding specific questions, complaints or coordination. Page 25 There is a need for JBSA-Randolph to enhance their coordination and notification with the local jurisdictions / public when there is an increase in military training activities that are outside their typical training schedule. There is a need for better coordination between JBSA-Randolph and local jurisdictions regarding proposed development applications to achieve compatible development in support of the military mission and the positive economic impact the military brings to the community. There is no defined JBSA-Randolph response time for reviewing proposed development actions within the Universal City Perpetual Clear Zone Easement Area. There is a lack of notification or accurate notification to potential buyers looking to purchase property / homes within the Accident Potential or Clear Zones. There is a lack of notification to potential home buyers that a military installation is located within the area which may generate noise, vibration or other impacts associated with military missions. Multiple agencies advocate for the preservation of military mission and local economic development and have similar overarching goals, but lack integrated coordination reducing the potential for maximization of resource use and shared benefits. A comprehensive set of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) data depicting military mission profiles and footprints is not available to local jurisdictions and agencies. Continued coordination of the shared airspace between JBSA-Randolph and San Antonio International Airport is important to ensure the safety of the pilots and the public located beneath the airspace. Despite notification from Houston Air Route Traffic Control Center, general aviation aircraft enter Military Operating Areas where military aircraft are conducting nontraditional flight maneuvers. The Metropolitan Planning Organization Board does not include JBSA-Randolph representation. There is a lack of temporary construction and crane operation permits within the jurisdictions for the approach and departure corridor. Dust, Smoke, and Steam is a by-product generated by both military and civilian activities. Dust and smoke is not only a visibility nuisance, but can also be an air quality issue for Bexar County. Dust from agriculture activities located near the airfields can be incompatible with low-level flight operations and create visual impediments for pilot navigation. The following Dust, Smoke, and Steam issue was identified: The refinery near Stinson Municipal Airport emits particulate into the air that can create a visibility hazard for pilots. Housing Availability is the availability of eligible and qualified housing units to military personnel and their families. While military personnel from visiting units reside on-base, mission increases will need to be coordinated with communities so that they can plan and prepare for additional housing to accommodate any growth in personnel. The following Local Housing Availability issue was identified: As growth continues to occur within the area surrounding JBSA-Randolph, the availability of adequate housing to support the needs of military personnel may be limited. Infrastructure Extensions represent compatibility issues for JBSA-Randolph based on their proposed or planned location. Transportation routes and electrical and water infrastructure impact land uses differently based on location, magnitude of the improvements, and the resulting outcome. Infrastructure extensions tend to catalyze development in the surrounding communities. This development can create incompatibilities with JBSA-Randolph military operations. The following Infrastructure Extensions issues were identified: Page 26 Desire for additional sewer treatment capacity within the City of Schertz – south and east of JBSA-Randolph as well as other future plans for infrastructure improvements in surrounding communities could encourage incompatible growth. JBSA-Randolph currently does not have a redundant water supply system and may be at risk if their existing system fails. Land / Air Space Competition is defined as multiple uses of both land and air spaces. The JBSA-Randolph JLUS evaluated land and air space shared between military and civilian activities relative to commercial / civilian— general aviation operations in the region. The JBSA- Randolph JLUS also assessed several land areas used for recreational purposes. The following Competition for Land and Air Spaces issues were identified: The airspace that JBSA-Randolph uses is already congested and concerns exist that the competition for airspace will increase due to community airport growth, expanded JBSA-Randolph operations, and potential San Antonio International Airport runway improvements. New Braunfels Regional Airport and Stinson Municipal Airport civilian flight training operations occur in the same airspace used by JBSA-Randolph military trainers for runway approach. Proximity of other airfields to JBSA-Randolph and JBSA-S auxiliary runway approaches create airspace conflicts. Land Use is the impetus for the JBSA-Randolph JLUS. The JLUS assesses various components of land use to determine compatibility between unique military missions and the economic vision of the surrounding jurisdictions. This assessment considers accomplishing mutual goals and benefits to facilitate the military’s continued training mission for readiness while allowing for economic development in adjacent communities. Certain land uses are sensitive to noise, vibration, and other impacts generated by military training exercises. In contrast, certain land uses employed by communities can limit military training activities by encouraging annexation practices in areas critical to the military mission. The following Land Use issues were identified: Several local jurisdictions that have areas which are located within the airfield safety zones or noise contours do not reference or implement the AICUZ recommendations. The language about AICUZ recommendations in a few of the local jurisdictions zoning ordinances are not clear and may create an interpretation challenge. Concern about the application of the 2011 AICUZ DOD Instructions Floor to Area Ratio (FAR) recommendation. The Floor to Area ratio recommendation was not part of the AICUZ but it is part of the instructions. Legislative Initiatives are issues that require legislative action or amendments to ensure compatibility factors are addressed within local jurisdictions that affect or are affected by proximity to JBSA-Randolph. The following Legislative Initiatives issue was identified: Current real estate seller disclosure forms do not contain notice informing potential buyers that military training operations occur within the area. Bexar and Guadalupe Counties have limited zoning and subdivision authority, which restricts the enforcement of compatible development. Light and Glare can be generated by both military and civilian uses. Light and glare can be generated from certain construction materials during the daytime when sunlight reflects off the structure. This can create visual impairments for pilots flying at low altitudes. Certain types of alternative energy development can create glare for pilots in training, posing a safety hazard to the pilot and the aircraft. The following Light and Glare issues were identified: Commercial and retail development, particularly outdoor retail and commercial activities that require additional lighting, may impact flight operations at JBSA-Randolph. Rooftop- or ground-mounted solar panels without anti-reflective coating can create glare. Directed light from unregulated and unconventional sources, i.e., laser scope for paint Page 27 ball shooting accuracy, can be hazardous to pilots and cause temporary blinding. A lack of consistency in controlling light sources, glare, and general ambient light may result in an unsuitable night training environment for flying training operations. Noise and Vibration are the result of both military training exercises and construction and development activities. These factors can be incompatible with sensitive land uses. Noise that is loud and extending into night hours can disrupt the lives of the public. Vibration can disrupt daily living activities and in extreme cases cause structural damage. The JLUS strives to balance community quality of life with mission operations and readiness. The following Noise and Vibration issues were identified: The military flight operations that occur at JBSA-Randolph, JBSA-S, and Stinson Municipal Airport produce noise that is heard outside the boundaries of the installations. Local jurisdiction’s building codes do not require sound attenuation per the Federal Aviation Administration / Department Of Defense guidance. JBSA-Randolph and San Antonio International Airport flight patterns may be redirected due to weather or congestion which may lead to noise complaints sent to JBSA-Randolph that were actually caused by aircraft from the commercial airport. General concern that JBSA-Randolph cannot forecast future mission requirements, i.e., larger aircraft, which may generate a larger noise footprint and increase noise complaints from the community since many people are not aware that a change in a flying mission may impact the amount of aircraft noise they may hear. JBSA-Randolph may expand maintenance depot activities and night operations that could include engine run-up exercises on test cells which may generate an increase in noise complaints. Concern that noise complaints may increase at JBSA-S Auxiliary Airfield after the runway improvements are completed and flight operations resume. Vibration complaints are an issue in the cities of Schertz and Universal City. Roadway Capacity can create incompatibilities between military operations and civilian activities due to limited roadway capacity. Roadway Capacity was evaluated for coordination of improved public roadways to meet the needs of both military and civilian uses. The following Roadway Capacity issue was identified: Mass transit is limited around JBSA-Randolph due to the suburban nature of the area. Road network near JBSA-Randolph is congested with frequent wait times / delays during peak use hours; this affects JBSA-Randolph and local communities. Potential retail development along FM-3009 (Roy Richard Drive) and Interstate 35 in the city of Schertz may result in increased local traffic. Current Union Pacific rail operations supporting the natural gas extraction industry temporarily halt thru-traffic on State Highway 218 (Pat Booker Road) causing periodic vehicle stacking near JBSA-Randolph. Thirty to forty commercial deliveries / trucks queue along Old Seguin Road to enter JBSA-Randolph through the South Gate and impact local roadway congestion. Existing interstate infrastructure is at capacity, which results in regional traffic congestion and impacts daily workforce commuters to and from JBSA-Randolph. Safety issues are generated by both military and civilian land uses. Safety concerns relevant to military operations include development (i.e. even the stacking of hay bales and other such commodities) near or adjacent to the runway in areas where development is strongly discouraged such as the Clear Zone. Safety issues are also evaluated based on the land uses located near active runways, such as water features, that can attract birds and wildlife to this critical aviation area where low-speed low-altitude aircraft perform operations. The following Safety issues were identified: Page 28 There are existing land uses and proposed developments within the airfield safety zones around JBSA-Randolph that are incompatible. A portion of existing development within the JBSA-Seguin airfield safety zones is incompatible due to the type of land use and / or density. A portion of existing development near Stinson Municipal Airport is nonconforming due to buildings or structures located in runway protection zones. There are no policies or regulations that deal with land uses that may pose Bird/Wildlife Aircraft Strike Hazard risks near JBSA-Randolph and JBSA-Seguin. Any development that occurs within the CZ and is not part of the CZ easement will be incompatible per DOD AICUZ instructions. San Antonio International Airport’s aging radar equipment services all local airfields, but requires routine repairs and lacks a backup and redundancy system. Vertical Obstructions are structures that impede navigable airspace for both military and civilian aircraft operations. Structures that pose a threat to the airspace for military and civilian aviation include tall wind turbines and wireless communication towers. It is important to ensure the communities adjacent to JBSA-Randolph plan accordingly to safeguard against unintended safety concerns relative to structures that obstruct navigable airspace. The following Vertical Obstructions issues were identified: Current ordinances do not adequately regulate building heights in conjunction with FAA Imaginary Surfaces height recommendations. Though local zoning ordinances do not consider adjustments for site elevations that are higher than the existing airfield elevation at JBSA-Randolph for wireless communication tower permits, telecom contractors coordinate directly with the FAA regarding height restrictions and lighting and a statement from JBSA-Randolph must be provided that the proposed communication use will not interfere with flight operations prior to approaching local municipalities to install or upgrade cell towers. Allowing each new vertical structure / equipment application to construct an individual tower results in crowded airspace. Above ground utility poles are located in JBSA-Randolph runway approach and departure flight corridors and may be a vertical obstruction to flight operations and pose a safety risk. Water Quality and Quantity is the factor that assesses the quantity and quality of water resources in the JBSA-Randolph JLUS Study Area. This factor evaluates the amount of water that is utilized by the installation relative to the available supply of water and then compares that with the demand and supply that is utilized by the surrounding communities to provide for the necessary public services. In addition to evaluating the water supply, this factor also reviews the overall quality of public water use in the JLUS Study Area. Water quality can be affected by military operations, public recreation use and stormwater drainage. The following Water Quality and Quantity issues have been identified: Edwards Aquifer provides the majority of local water supply and future supplies could be constrained by various demands. Current and future regional water quantity and availability are major concerns. The City of Converse may face additional storm water runoff from the JBSA-Randolph runway if additional paving is installed. Page 29 Please see the next page.  Page 30 6.1 Implementation Plan This section identifies and organizes the recommended actions (strategies) developed through a collaborative effort between representatives of local jurisdictions, JBSA-Randolph (JBSA-Randolph), state and federal agencies, local organizations, the general public and other stakeholders that own or manage land or resources in the region. Because the JBSA-Randolph JLUS is the result of a collaborative planning process, the recommendations in this section represent a true consensus plan; a realistic and coordinated approach to compatibility planning developed with the support of stakeholders involved throughout the process. JLUS strategies incorporate a variety of actions that can be implemented to promote compatible land use and resource planning. Upon implementation, existing and potential compatibility issues arising from the civilian / military interface can be removed or significantly mitigated. As such, the recommended strategies function as the heart of the JLUS document and are the culmination of the planning process. The recommended strategies for JBSA-Randolph JLUS have been tailored to consider the unique flight operations and associated risk factors including Bird / Wildlife Aircraft Strike Hazards (BASH) specific to JBSA-R and to assist the installation and surrounding counties and cities with informed development decisions that protect the aviation mission and growth capability of communities while protecting the public health, safety, and welfare. The JBSA-Randolph mission is unique within the Air Force due to its high volume of pilot training aircraft operations, making the installation control towers the busiest in the Air Force. Due to weather factors and pre-existing high-density development north of JBSA-Randolph, approximately 70-80% of these operations are conducted to the south. The 12th Flying Training Wing conducts over 26,000 sorties annually, including more than 212,000 local takeoffs and landing traffic pattern operations in 2014. In particular, the 12th Flying Training Wing conducted over 115,000 takeoffs and landings on the west runway in 2014 alone with the high-performance T-6 Texan trainer as the primary aircraft accounting for these operations. Due to the requirement to deconflict operations from the east parallel runway, departing aircraft must fly a course heading of 160 degrees to the west of the APZs. However, on every takeoff, there is a 30 second window in which a pilot’s only safe option is to eject in the case of an engine failure. In this circumstance, the probability that the aircraft will land in the APZs is high. The T-38 Talon is a dual-engine fighter-trainer aircraft that operates from the east runway. There is a significantly more acute risk of an accident occurring with this aircraft during traffic pattern operations due the higher speeds and weight of the T-38 compared to the T-6. The 2008 Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) study indicates that 80 percent of all aircraft mishaps that occur within 10 nautical miles involve fighter-trainer type aircraft. A safety risk assessment conducted by the 12th Flying Training Wing concluded that the development recommendations made by the 2000 and 2008 Air Installation Compatible Use Zone Study (AICUZ) are not sufficiently restrictive to protect the community from the risks involved in high-volume trainer operations and that high-volume trainer operations flown by the 12th Flying Training Wing's 145 T-38, T-6, and T-1 aircraft are not compatible with urban environments. Page 31 Bird / Wildlife Aircraft Strike Hazards present a significant threat to aircraft safety. In particular, there is a significant year-round bird strike risk caused by thousands of migratory and resident white-winged doves that transit JBSA-Randolph's east runway on a daily basis. These birds have become a major problem for JBSA-Randolph and significant resources have been invested to modify the habitat on Base. Unique to Randolph, aircraft operating at this location frequently strike these birds on takeoff which results in a much greater hazard to development in the southern APZs. The bird strike risk is heightened because T-38 engines are highly susceptible to engine loss due to bird ingestion. Due to risk profile associated with the aircraft operations and BASH at JBSA-Randolph, the 12th Flying Training Wing has recommended restrictions on development: Urban development within southern APZ I of either the west or east runway is not compatible. Residential development of 1 house per 10 acres in a non-linear arrangement within southern APZ II of the west runway is compatible. Residential development of 1 house per 20 acres within southern APZ II of the west runway is compatible. Other uses in accordance with AICUZ criteria may be compatible. Residential development within the 65 decibel noise contour is not compatible. Residential construction in these zones presents the possibility of future training restrictions due to the sustained impact of noise on residents. These collective factors and recommended development restrictions are critical considerations that have influenced the unique nature of the recommended strategies as they apply to the JBSA-R JLUS. The key to the implementation of the strategies is the establishment of the JLUS Implementation Task Force to oversee the JLUS execution. Through this Task Force, local jurisdictions, JBSA-Randolph, and other interested parties can continue their initial work together to establish procedures, recommend or refine specific actions for member agencies, and make adjustments to strategies over time to ensure the JLUS continues to resolve key compatibility issues through realistic strategies and implementation. Implementation Plan Guidelines The key to a successful plan is balancing the different needs of all involved stakeholders. Several guidelines formed the basis upon which the strategies were developed: In concert with the Texas state laws, the Implementation Plan was developed with the understanding that the recommended strategies must not result in a taking of property value. In some cases, the recommended strategies can only be implemented with new enabling legislation. In order to minimize regulation, where appropriate, strategies were recommended only for specific geographic areas to resolve the compatibility issue. Similar to other planning processes that include numerous stakeholders, the challenge is to create a solution or strategy that meets the needs of all parties. In lieu of eliminating strategies that do not have 100 percent buy-in from all stakeholders, it was determined that the solution / strategy may result in the creation of multiple strategies that address the same issue but tailored to individual circumstances. It is important to note that the JLUS is not an adopted plan, but rather a recommended set of strategies which should be implemented by the JLUS participants to address current and potential future compatibility issues. Page 32 Military Influence Areas In compatibility planning, the term “Military Influence Area” (MIA) is used to formally designate a geographic area where military operations may impact local communities, and conversely, where local activities may affect the military’s ability to conduct its mission. An MIA is designated to accomplish the following: 1.Promote an orderly transition between community and military land uses so that land uses remain compatible. 2.Protect public health, safety, and welfare. 3.Maintain operational capabilities of military installations and areas. 4.Promote an awareness of the size and scope of military training areas to protect areas separate from the actual military installation (i.e., critical air space) used for training purposes. 5.Establish compatibility requirements within the designated area, such as requirements for sound attenuation and avigation easements. An MIA delineates a geographic area where strategies are recommended to support compatibility planning and JLUS goals and objectives. The MIAs are where the majority of the recommended strategies apply. The proposed JBSA-Randolph, JBSA-Seguin, and Stinson Municipal Airport (Stinson) Military Influence Area Overlay Districts (MIAOD) are areas that incorporate all MIAs and Subzones. To better reflect the area of interest and focus implementation, several MIAs are further divided into subzones. The MIAOD and its subzones including the Controlled Compatible Land Use Area for JBSA-Seguin (CCLUA) are used to define the geographic areas where policies and regulations will be developed and applied to implement the JLUS strategies. This technique ensures the strategies are applied to the appropriate areas, and that locations deemed not subject to a specific compatibility issue are not adversely impacted by regulations inappropriate for their location or circumstance. JBSA-Randolph JBSA-Randolph Military Influence Area Overlay District The JBSA-Randolph MIAOD is a proposed geographic area where strategies associated with each JBSA-Randolph MIA subzone apply. Figure 6.1 illustrates the overall MIAOD with all of the subzones. Figure 6.2 illustrates the MIAOD and areas comprising the BASH and Vertical Obstruction Subzones. Figure 6.3 illustrates the Safety and Noise Subzones encompassed within the MIAOD geographic area. JBSA-Randolph Military Influence Area Subzones The four MIA subzones identified for JBSA-Randolph are shown on Figures 6.1, 6.2 and 6.3 and described on the following pages: Bird Air Strike Hazard (BASH) MIA Subzone Vertical Obstruction MIA Subzone Safety MIA Subzone Noise MIA Subzone BASH Military Influence Area Subzone The BASH MIA subzone is characterized by areas that could be affected by bird and wildlife strikes due to low-level flight operations. These operations can impact community activities and conversely, community activities could adversely affect operations in this area if not coordinated with JBSA-R. The BASH MIA subzone is illustrated in Figure 6.2. The BASH subzone represents a 5-mile statistical relevancy area from the center of the runway recommended by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Land uses in this area may be subject to additional regulations to prevent attractants of birds and wildlife that could increase the risk of safety to pilots and aircraft flying at lower speeds and altitudes. Vertical Obstruction Military Influence Area Subzone The Vertical Obstruction MIA subzone includes both the imaginary surfaces and FAA Part 77 guidance for determining vertical obstructions illustrated on Figure 6.2. This combined guidance serves to protect important flight areas for aircraft that operate out of JBSA-Randolph. Within this MIA subzone, strategies address various height restrictions to avoid vertical obstructions. Page 33 500-Foot Vertical Clearance The 500-foot clearance zone is characterized by the vertical limits of the most expansive imaginary surface— the approach and departure clearance surface, illustrated on Figure 6.2. In this surface, for every 50 horizontal feet extending from the end of runway, development can extend one vertical foot up to 500 feet. Land uses should be coordinated with JBSA-Randolph to ensure safety to the public and pilots is of highest priority. Safety Military Influence Area Subzone The Safety MIA Subzone addresses areas that could be affected by low-speed and low-altitude aircraft associated with military training operations. As described in Chapter 3 of the Background Report, the safety zones include the Clear Zone and Accident Potential Zones I and II. These areas are characterized by a high risk for aircraft collisions due to location and types of aviation operations that occur. The size and location of these areas are illustrated in Figure 6.3. New development located within this MIA subzone may be subject to lower densities and potentially other regulations to control attractants for birds and other wildlife. Noise Military Influence Area Subzone The Noise MIA subzone includes all land located off installation within the 65 dB noise contour for JBSA-R. Other noise contours represent subzones for which residential development and other noise sensitive land uses within this MIA subzone may be subject to sound attenuation measures to reduce noise impacts. Figure 6.3 illustrates the Noise MIA subzone. Page 34 Page 35 JBSA - Randolph Schertz Cibolo San Antonio San Antonio Selma Converse Live Oak UniversalCity Garden Ridge Cibolo B e x a r B e x a rC o u n t y C o u n t y G u a d a l u p e G u a d a l u p eC o u n t y C o u n t y C o m a l C o m a lC o u n t y C o u n t y §¨¦35 §¨¦10 §¨¦410 §¨¦410 £¤87 UV1604 UV13 UV368 UV218 UV539 UV337 Legend MIAOD Boundary 5-mile BASHRelevancy AreaSubzone Safety Subzone Clear Zone APZ I APZ II FAR Part 77 FAA Part 77 Up to 200' @ 3NM Up to 300' @ 4NM Up to 400' @ 5NM Up to 500' @ 6NM Airfield Imaginary Surface Primary Surface SubzoneApproach/Departure Clearance Surface Subzone (glide angle)= 50 ft to 1 ft up to 500 ft Imaginary Surfaces - Legend 2 Airfield Imaginary SurfaceApproach/Departure Clearance Surface Subzone (horizontal) = 500 ft Inner Horizontal SurfaceSubzone = 150 ft Conical SurfaceSubzone = 20 ft to 1 ft Outer Horizontal SurfaceSubzone = 500 ft Transitional SurfaceSubzone = 7ft to 1 ft Noise Subzone 65 dB 70 dB 75 dB 80 dB Regional Cities JLUS Partners City / Community Bexar and GuadalupeCounty Boundaries JBSA - Randolph Perpetual CZ Easement Runway Centerline Interstate / Highway Road Railroad River Sources: FAA, 2013; JBSA-Randolph, 2013. 0 21 MilesFigure 6.1 JBSA-Randolph Military Influence Area Overlay District (MIAOD) andSubzones Composite Vertical Obstruction Subzone Page 36 JBSA - Randolph Schertz Cibolo San Antonio San Antonio Selma Converse Live Oak UniversalCity Garden Ridge Cibolo B e x a r B e x a rC o u n t y C o u n t y G u a d a l u p e G u a d a l u p eC o u n t y C o u n t y C o m a l C o m a lC o u n t y C o u n t y §¨¦35 §¨¦10 §¨¦410 §¨¦410 £¤87 UV1604 UV13 UV368 UV218 UV337 UV539 Legend MIAOD Boundary 5-mile BASHRelevancy AreaSubzone FAR Part 77 FAA Part 77 Up to 200' @ 3NM Up to 300' @ 4NM Up to 400' @ 5NM Up to 500' @ 6NM Airfield Imaginary Surface Primary Surface Subzone Approach/Departure Clearance Surface Subzone (glide angle)= 50 ft to 1 ft up to 500 ft Imaginary Surfaces - Legend 2 Airfield Imaginary Surface Approach/Departure Clearance Surface Subzone (horizontal) = 500 ft Inner Horizontal SurfaceSubzone = 150 ft Conical SurfaceSubzone = 20 ft to 1 ft Outer Horizontal SurfaceSubzone = 500 ft Transitional SurfaceSubzone = 7ft to 1 ft Regional Cities JLUS Partners City / Community Bexar and GuadalupeCounty Boundaries JBSA - Randolph Perpetual CZ Easement Runway Centerline Interstate / Highway Road Railroad River Sources: FAA, 2013; JBSA-Randolph, 2013. 0 21 Miles Figure 6.2 JBSA-RandolphBASH and Vertical ObstructionMilitary Influence Area Overlay District (MIAOD) with Subzones Vertical Obstruction Subzone Page 37 Schertz LiveOak Schertz Cibolo Converse Universal City San Antonio Selma Cibolo B e x a r B e x a rC o u n t y C o u n t y G u a d a l u p e G u a d a l u p eC o u n t y C o u n t y §¨¦10 §¨¦35 UV1604 UV218 UV539 Legend Safety Subzone Clear Zone APZ I APZ II Noise Subzone 65 dB 70 dB 75 dB 80 dB JLUS Partners Cibolo Converse Live Oak San Antonio Schertz Selma Universal City Bexar and GuadalupeCounty Boundaries Regional Cities JBSA-Randolph Perpetual CZ Easement Runway Interstate / Highway Road Railroad River Source: JBSA-Randolph, 2013. 0 10.5 Mile Figure 6.3 JBSA-RandolphSafety and NoiseMilitary Influence Area Overlay District (MIAOD) with Subzones JBSA-Seguin Auxiliary Airfield JBSA-Seguin Military Influence Area Overlay District The JBSA-Seguin MIAOD is a proposed geographic area where strategies associated with each JBSA-Seguin MIA subzone apply. Figure 7.1 illustrates the overall MIAOD with all of the subzones. Figure 7.2 illustrates the MIAOD and areas comprising the BASH and Vertical Obstruction Subzones. Figure 7.3 illustrates the CCLUA, Safety. And Noise Subzones encompassed within the MIAOD geographic area for JBSA-Seguin airfield. The four MIA subzones and Controlled Compatible Land Use Area (CCLUA) for JBSA-Seguin are identified below, and shown and described on the following pages: BASH MIA Subzone Vertical Obstruction MIA Subzone Controlled Compatible Land Use Area Subzone Safety MIA Subzone Noise MIA Subzone BASH Military Influence Area Subzone The BASH MIA subzone is characterized by areas that could be affected by bird and wildlife strikes due to low-level flight operations. The BASH MIA subzone illustrated in Figure 7.2 represents a 5-mile statistical relevancy area from the center of the runway around the JBSA-Seguin airfield prescribed by the FAA. Certain land uses in this area may be subject to additional regulations to prevent attractants of birds and wildlife that could increase the risk of safety to pilots and aircraft flying at lower speeds and altitudes. Vertical Obstruction Military Influence Area Subzone The Vertical Obstruction MIA subzone includes both the imaginary surfaces and FAA Part 77 guidance for determining vertical obstructions illustrated on Figure 7.2. This combined guidance serves to protect important flight areas for aircraft that operate out of JBSA-S. Within this MIA subzone, strategies address various height restrictions to avoid vertical obstructions. 500-Foot Vertical Clearance The 500-foot clearance zone is characterized by the vertical limits of the most expansive imaginary surface— the approach and departure clearance surface, illustrated on Figure 7.2. In this surface, for every 50 horizontal feet extending from the end of runway, development can extend one vertical foot up to 500 feet. Controlled Compatible Land Use Area Subzone The CCLUA boundary around JBSA-Seguin is the MIA subzone that would allow for airfield zoning coordination and would give land use authority to an established Joint Airport Zoning Board (JAZB), pursuant to Texas Local Government Code, Section 241.014. This MIA subzone defines an area for the JAZB to regulate and adopt airport zoning regulations for lower densities and height restrictions, including areas within the Safety and Noise Subzones, and within the unincorporated portion of Guadalupe County since the county does not have land use authority. The CCLUA boundaries for JBSA-Seguin are shown on Figure 7.3. Noise Military Influence Area Subzone The Noise MIA subzone includes all land located off installation within the 65 dB noise contour for JBSA-Seguin. Other noise contours represent subzones for which noise sensitive land uses within this MIA subzone may be subject to sound attenuation measures to reduce noise impacts. Figure 7.3 illustrates the Noise MIA subzone. Safety Military Influence Area Subzone The Safety MIA subzone addresses areas that could be affected by low-speed and low-altitude aircraft associated with military training operations. As described in Chapter 3 of the Background Report, the safety zones include the Clear Zone and Accident Potential Zones I and II. These areas are characterized by a high risk for aircraft collisions due to location and types of aviation operations that occur. The size and location of these areas are indicated in Figure 7.3. Although development proximate to JBSA-Seguin is minimal, any new development located within this MIA subzone may be subject to lower densities and potentially other regulations. Page 38 Page 39 JBSA - SeguinAuxiliary Airfield New Braunfels NewBerlin G u a d a l u p e G u a d a l u p eC o u n t y C o u n t y G o n z a l e s G o n z a l e sC o u n t y C o u n t y C o m a l C o m a lC o u n t y C o u n t y C a l d w e l l C a l d w e l lC o u n t y C o u n t y Seguin G uadalupeRiver §¨¦10 £¤90 £¤90UV123 UV46 UV130 UV80 UV123B Legend MIAOD Boundary 5-mile BASHRelevancy AreaSubzone Controlled CompatibleLand Use AreaSubzone Safety Subzone Clear Zone APZ I APZ II FAR Part 77 FAA Part 77 Up to 200' @ 3NM Up to 300' @ 4NM Up to 400' @ 5NM Up to 500' @ 6NM Airfield Imaginary Surface Primary Surface SubzoneApproach/Departure Clearance Surface Subzone (glide angle)= 50 ft to 1 ft up to 500 ft Imaginary Surfaces - Legend 2 Airfield Imaginary SurfaceApproach/Departure Clearance Surface Subzone (horizontal) = 500 ft Inner Horizontal SurfaceSubzone = 150 ft Conical SurfaceSubzone = 20 ft to 1 ft Outer Horizontal SurfaceSubzone = 500 ft Transitional SurfaceSubzone = 7ft to 1 ft Noise Subzone 65 dB 70 dB 75 dB 80 dB Regional Cities JLUS Partners Seguin Guadalupe CountyBoundary JBSA - SeguinAuxiliary Airfield Runway Centerline Interstate / Highway Road Railroad River 0 21 Miles Figure 7.1 JBSA-Seguin Auxiliary Airfield Military Influence Area Overlay District (MIAOD) andSubzones Composite Sources: FAA, 2013; JBSA-Randolph, 2013. Vertical Obstruction Subzone Page 40 JBSA - SeguinAuxiliary Airfield New Braunfels NewBerlin G u a d a l u p e G u a d a l u p eC o u n t y C o u n t y G o n z a l e s G o n z a l e sC o u n t y C o u n t y C o m a l C o m a lC o u n t y C o u n t y C a l d w e l l C a l d w e l lC o u n t y C o u n t y Seguin G uadalupeRiver §¨¦10 £¤90 £¤90UV123 UV46 UV130 UV80 UV123B Legend MIAOD Boundary 5-mile BASHRelevancy AreaSubzone FAR Part 77 FAA Part 77 Up to 200' @ 3NM Up to 300' @ 4NM Up to 400' @ 5NM Up to 500' @ 6NM Airfield Imaginary Surface Primary Surface SubzoneApproach/Departure Clearance Surface Subzone (glide angle)= 50 ft to 1 ft up to 500 ft Imaginary Surfaces - Legend 2 Airfield Imaginary SurfaceApproach/Departure Clearance Surface Subzone (horizontal) = 500 ft Inner Horizontal SurfaceSubzone = 150 ft Conical SurfaceSubzone = 20 ft to 1 ft Outer Horizontal SurfaceSubzone = 500 ft Transitional SurfaceSubzone = 7ft to 1 ft Regional Cities JLUS Partners Seguin Guadalupe CountyBoundary JBSA - SeguinAuxiliary Airfield Runway Centerline Interstate / Highway Road Railroad River Sources: FAA, 2013; JBSA-Randolph, 2013. 0 21 Miles Figure 7.2 JBSA-Seguin Auxiliary AirfieldBASH and Vertical ObstructionMilitary Influence Area Overlay District (MIAOD) with Subzones Vertical Obstruction Subzone Page 41 G u a d a l u p e G u a d a l u p eC o u n t y C o u n t y Guadalu pe R i v e r §¨¦10 £¤90 £¤90 UV123 UV46 UV130 Seguin UV123B Legend Safety Subzone Clear Zone APZ I APZ II Noise Subzone 65 dB 70 dB 75 dB 80 dB Controlled CompatibleLand Use AreaSubzone JLUS Partners Seguin Guadalupe County Boundary JBSA-Seguin Auxiliary Airfield Runway Interstate / Highway Road Railroad River Source: JBSA - Randolph 2013 0 8,0004,000 Feet Controlled Compatible Land Use Area, Safety, and Noise Figure 7.3 JBSA-Seguin Auxiliary Airfield Military Influence Area Overlay District (MIAOD) with Subzones Stinson Municipal Airport Stinson Municipal Airport Military Influence Area Overlay District The Stinson MIAOD is a proposed geographic area where strategies associated with each Stinson MIA subzone apply. Figure 8.1 illustrates the overall MIAOD, which is designed to reflect the area comprising all the MIA subzones for Stinson Municipal Airport. Figure 8.2 provides an inset of the Safety and Noise Subzones surrounding the airport. Stinson Municipal Airport Military Influence Area Subzones The four MIA subzones for Stinson are shown in Figure 8.1 and described on the following pages: BASH MIA Subzone Vertical Obstruction MIA Subzone Safety MIA Subzone Noise MIA Subzone BASH Military Influence Area Subzone The BASH MIA subzone is characterized by areas that could be affected by bird and wildlife strikes due to low-level flight operations. The BASH MIA subzone illustrated on Figure 8.1 represents a 5-mile statistical relevancy area from the center of the runway around Stinson. Certain land uses in this area may be subject to additional regulations to prevent attractants of birds and wildlife that could increase the risk of safety to pilots and aircraft flying at lower speeds and altitudes. Vertical Obstruction Military Influence Area Subzone The FAA Part 77 Vertical Obstruction MIA subzone serves to protect important flight areas for aviation operations associated with Stinson. Within this MIA subzone, strategies address height restrictions to avoid vertical obstructions. The Vertical Obstruction MIA subzone for Stinson is depicted on Figure 8.1. Safety Military Influence Area Subzone The Safety MIA subzone addresses areas that could be affected by low-speed and low-altitude aircraft associated with military training operations. Safety zones for civilian airports include Object Free Areas, Runway Protection Zones, Runway Safety Areas and Obstacle Free Zones. These areas are characterized by a high risk for aircraft collisions due to location and types of aviation operations that occur. The size and location of the Stinson Runway Protection Zones are illustrated in Figures 8.1 and 8.2. Noise Military Influence Area Subzone The Noise MIA subzone includes all land located off installation within the 60 dB noise contour for Stinson. Other noise contours represent subzones for which residential development and other noise sensitive land uses within this MIA subzone may be subject to sound attenuation measures to reduce noise impacts. Figures 8.1 and 8.2 illustrate the 60 dB Noise MIA subzone. Page 42 Page 43 Stinson MunicipalAiport B e x a r B e x a rC o u n t y C o u n t y San Antonio San Anto nio Rive r M e d ina River San Ant o n i o R i v er §¨¦37 §¨¦35 §¨¦410 §¨¦10 §¨¦10 £¤87 £¤281 £¤90 £¤181 £¤281 UV16 UV536 UV353 UV122 UV421 UV371 UV422 UV66 UV151 UV1604 UV368 Legend MIAOD Boundary 5-mile BASHRelevancy AreaSubzone Safety Subzone Noise Subzone 60 dB 65 dB 70 dB 75 dB Vertical Obstruction Subzone (FAA Part 77) Up to 200' @ 3NM Up to 300' @ 4NM Up to 400' @ 5NM Up to 500' @ 6NM JLUS Partner San Antonio Bexar County Boundary Stinson Municipal Airport Runway Interstate / Highway Road Railroad River 0 21 MilesSources: FAA, 2013; Ricondo & Associates, 2013. Military Influence Area Overlay District (MIAOD) andSubzones Composite Figure 8.1 Stinson Municipal Airport Page 44 B e x a r B e x a rC o u n t y C o u n t y San Antonio S a n A ntonioRiver UV536 UV122 Legend Safety Subzone Noise Subzone 60 dB 65 dB 70 dB 75 dB JLUS Partners San Antonio Bexar County Boundary Stinson Municipal Airport Runway Interstate / Highway Road Railroad River Source: Ricondo & Associates, 2013 0 ¼Mile Stinson Municipal AirportSafety and Noise Figure 8.2Military Influence Area Overlay District (MIAOD) with Subzones 6.2 How to Read the Implementation Plan The strategies developed were designed to address the issues identified during preparation of the JLUS. The purpose of each strategy is to: 1.Avoid future actions, operations, or approvals that would cause a compatibility issue, 2.Eliminate an existing compatibility issue, 3.Reduce the adversity of an existing issue, or 4.Provide for on-going communications and collaboration. To make the strategies easier to use, they are presented in a table format that provides the strategy and information on when and how that strategy will be implemented. Figure 9 highlights the format and content of the strategy table, and the following paragraphs provide an overview of how to read the information presented within each strategy. Issue #. The issue # is an alpha-numeric number that provides a unique reference for each specific issue and strategy. Type of Strategy. This column identifies the type of strategy being recommended. The column contains one of the following acronyms to represent the tool type: Acq Acquisition CIP Capital Improvement Program Comm Communication and Coordination Disc Real Estate Disclosures Hab Habitat Conservation Tools Leg Legislative Tools MIA Military Influence Area MOA Memorandum of Agreement MOU Memorandum of Understanding Plans General / Comprehensive / Master / Hazard / Airport Plans Zon Zoning Ordinance / Subdivision Regulations Geographic Area. This column indicates the applicable Military Influence Area (MIA), if the strategy relates to an area outside JBSA-R. Additional details on MIAs are provided under the previous “Influence Areas” section. Strategy. In bold type is a title that describes the strategy. This is followed by the complete strategy statement that describes the action needed. Timeframe. This column indicates the projected timeframe of each strategy. The timeframes are described below: 2015 Strategy to be initiated by 2015 (within 1‐2 years of JLUS completion) 2017 Strategy to be initiated by 2017 (3 to 5 years from JLUS completion) On-Going An on-going implementation action Responsible Party. At the right end of the strategy table are a series of columns, one for each jurisdiction, military entity, agency, and organization with responsibility for implementing the JLUS strategies. If an entity has responsibility relative to implementing a strategy, a mark is shown under their name. This mark is one of two symbols that represent their role. A solid square () designates that the entity identified is responsible for implementing the strategy. A hollow square () designates that the entity plays a key supporting role, but is not directly responsible for implementation. The responsible parties are identified by their assigned acronym in the heading at the top of each page. JBSA Joint Base San Antonio CPS/SAWS City Public Service Energy/ San Antonio Water System FAA Federal Aviation Administration RECSA Real Estate Council of San Antonio SABOR San Antonio Board of Realtors TXDOT Texas Department of Transportation Page 45 Figure  9.  JBSA-­‐R  Strategy  Key   Page 46 JBSA-Randolph JLUS Strategies St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T ALTERNATIVE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AE-1 Zon JBSA-R JBSA-S Stinson Vertical Obs MIAOD Subzone Amend Unified Development Codes and Zoning Ordinances to Establish Height Limits, and Siting for Alternative Energy Development Structures. In an effort to be proactive, amend unified development codes and zoning ordinances to regulate the height and siting of residential and commercial wind energy turbines to prevent interference with the safety of aviation within both the Vertical Obstruction MIAOD Subzones 2015  AE-2 Comm JBSA-R JBSA-S Stinson Vertical Obs MIAOD Subzone Educate Utility Companies and Encourage Them to Adopt Non-Reflective Solar Panel Criteria. Educate utility companies on the importance of non- reflective solar panels and encourage them to adopt criteria for use within the Vertical Obstruction Military Overlay District. 2015  Page 47 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T AE-2 (cont’d) Other Partners:  CPS Energy, GVEC  AE-3 Plans/ Zon/ MOA JBSA-R JBSA-S Stinson Vertical Obs MIAOD Subzone Coordinate with DoD Siting Clearinghouse. Update comprehensive plans to include policies and amend Unified Development Codes (UDCs) and zoning ordinances to require all proposed alternative energy development projects be submitted to the DOD Siting Clearinghouse to review each project for mission compatibility. Include coordination with DOD Siting Clearinghouse as part of the MOA between JBSA and stakeholders. Note:  The DOD  Siting Clearinghouse  requirements and  standards published  in Title 32, Code of  Federal Regulations,  Part 211 shall advise  and guide the  process to facilitate  the early submission  of renewable energy  project proposals to  the Clearinghouse  for military mission  compatible review.   2015/ On- going  Page 48 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T AT-1 Comm JBSA-R JBSA-S MIAOD JBSA to Provide the Cities with the AT/FP Guidance for Development Along the Fence Line. JBSA should provide the adjacent cities to JBSA-R and JBSA-S with the AT/FP criteria (setbacks, heights and types of structures, etc.) for development standards along and proximate the fence line. This would enable quick assessment of proposed development at or near the fence line. 2015  AT-2 CIPs JBSA-R MIAOD AT/FP Improvements to JBSA-R East Gate Program and construct project for East Gate improvements to achieve AT/FP compliance and to provide queuing inside the installation boundary. 2017  Page 49 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T AT-3 Plans/ CIPs JBSA-R MIAOD FM 78 JBSA Randolph East Gate Intersection Improvements JBSA should coordinate with TXDOT and plan, budget and construct dedicated turn lane from western FM 78 into East Gate and restriping of center turn lane from eastern FM 78 into East Gate entrance. Other Partners:   Alamo Area  Metropolitan  Planning  Organization (MPO)  2015  INTER-AGENCY COMMUNICATION / COORDINATION COM-1 MOA JBSA-R JBSA-S Stinson MIAOD JBSA Representative to Attend City Council, Planning Commission, County Commissioners Court and other Agency Board Meetings to Provide Comments on Mission Compatibility Concerns for Proposed Developments In an effort to continue a collaborative partnership, include in the MOA between stakeholders and JBSA that JBSA 2015  Page 50 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T COM-1 (cont’d) agrees to provide a representative to attend and comment on mission compatibility issues on proposed developments at City Council, Planning Commission, County Commissioner Court and other agency board meetings. Note: The JBSA  representative will  provide technical  information on items  being considered,  but shall not directly  vote to approve,  conditionally  approve, or deny a  project or  development  application.  Other Partners:   Alamo Area MPO,  Bexar Regional  Watershed  Management  (BRWM), San  Antonio River  Authority (SARA)  COM-2 MOA JBSA-R JBSA-S Stinson MIAOD Stakeholders to Provide JBSA an Opportunity to Review and Comment on Proposed Developments within the MIAOD In an effort to continue a collaborative partnership, include 2015  Page 51 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T COM-2 (cont’d) in the MOA between stakeholders and JBSA that the stakeholders agree to inform JBSA of any proposed developments within the MIAOD, and JBSA will provide comments regarding mission compatibility concerns, within an agreed upon and reasonable timeframe. This will include: Provide technical input and assistance to local jurisdictions to support discussion of projects and potential compatibility issues Definition of project types that require review Identification of the Points of Contact for all coordination Identify opportunities for appropriate JBSA personnel to participate in pre-application meetings for significant  Page 52 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T COM-2 (cont’d) projects Establish a formal procedure for requesting and receiving comments JBSA review of development applications for property adjacent to JBSA-Randolph and JBSA-Seguin fenceline for compliance with AT/FP requirements Establish a standard, maximum timeline for responses, keeping in mind mandated review time periods as specified by State law and local procedures Provide notice to the JBSA on all public hearings regarding projects identified for coordination While consultation is expected to occur primarily on projects in the defined MIAOD, the Air Force should establish contacts Page 53 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T COM-2 (cont’d) and procedures for receiving notices and review opportunities on significant regional projects. Other Partners:   Alamo Area MPO,  BRWM, SARA  COM-3 Plan MOA Study Area JBSA to Develop a Stakeholders’ Communications Protocol Plan and a Community Communications Portal JBSA should develop both an internal and external stakeholders’ communications protocol plan to manage external communications with the public, civic and business leaders, and other groups. Develop a Stakeholder Communications Protocol Plan that identifies who stakeholders at all technical and leadership levels should call for questions and coordination. Plan should include frequently called numbers and 2015  Page 54 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T COM-3 (cont’d) points-of- contact Develop a JBSA Community Communications Portal that includes a JBSA portal phone number and email that acts as a clearinghouse for all incoming community questions Incorporate the Stakeholders’ Communication Plan into the MOA between JBSA and stakeholders Add “Who-to- Call” Lists to the websites for topic matters that would be useful to the public Other Partners: Alamo Area MPO, BRWM, SARA COM-4 Comm Study Area JBSA to Enhance Notifications to the Public for Training that Occurs Outside the Routine Schedule and Other Current Event News Relevant to Communities JBSA should enhance notification techniques and measures about 2015  Page 55 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T COM-4 (cont’d) training events that occur outside or in addition to the normal training schedule and other current events that are relevant to the citizens. Include a point of contact in all notifications. Notification techniques should include but not be limited to: JBSA Facebook / Twitter Public Service Announcements JBSA newspaper and other local newspapers Jurisdictions Public Affairs Office Links from jurisdiction websites to the JBSA website Group Email Blast to jurisdiction’s elected and appointed officials and public safety officers COM-5 Comm Study Area Enhance Visibility of the 12th FTW Community Engagement Office. The 12th FTW should enhance the visibility of the 2015  Page 56 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T COM-5 (cont’d) Community Engagement Office to include but not limited to: Post the contact information and building location on the main JBSA-Randolph website Outreach to adjacent and proximate communities with the contact information for the office Provide regular updates to community officials and staff Respond in a timely manner in the events of complaints, etc. COM-6 Zon JBSA-R Safety MIAOD Subzone Amend the Perpetual Clear Zone Easement To Define a JBSA Response Time For Proposed Development Application Reviews JBSA-R and the City of Universal City should amend the Easement to incorporate a reasonable response time from the Air Force to enable efficient use of resources and maintain consistency with mandated 2017  Page 57 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T COM-6 (cont’d) timeframes for the development review process. COM-7 Comm JBSA-R JBSA-S Stinson MIAODs Response Time from JBSA The cities, counties and JBSA should work together to delineate a reasonable amount of time for JBSA to respond to development applications and other such planning matters. {See Strategy COM-2] 2015  COM-8 Comm Study Area Establish a JBSA-R JLUS Implementation Task Force Formalize through a resolution that the JLUS-R Executive and Advisory Committees will transition to a JLUS Implementation Task Force and Sub Committee respectfully, and be responsible for monitoring the implementation of the recommended JLUS strategies and act as a forum for continued communication and sharing of information and current events associated with military 2015  Page 58 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T COM-8 (cont’d) compatibility. Note: This may be  achieved through  existing collaborative  efforts, such as the  JBSA Community  Partnership.  COM-9 Comm Study Area Plan and Facilitate a Visioning Session for Multiple Military Advocacy Organizations. Bexar County should plan and facilitate a visioning session among all the organizations in the JBSA metrocom area that have similar missions and common goals to determine where efficiencies can be realized, resources can be optimized and advocate with a one-voice approach while preventing competing missions. Other Partners:   Alamo Area Council  of Governments  (AACOG), Tri‐County  Chamber of  Commerce, San  Antonio Chamber of  Commerce,  Northeast  Partnership (NEP),  Schertz Chamber of   Commerce, JBSA  Community  Partnership  2015  Page 59 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T COM-10 MOA Region Wide Develop Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) for Multiple Military Advocacy Agencies The County should work with JBSA to determine needs for advocacy of military- related matters. Then County should develop a MOA with the cities and other advocacy agencies AACOG and NEP delineating points- of-contacts and protocols for communication methods of contact, identification of appropriate agency for certain matters, and an action plan for managing and aligning multiple advocacy agencies in the Bexar and Guadalupe Counties. Other Partners:   AACOG, Tri‐County  Chamber of  Commerce, San  Antonio Chamber of  Commerce, NEP,  Schertz Chamber of  Commerce, JBSA  Community  Partnership  2015  Page 60 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T COM-11 Comm Study Area / County- wide Create and Maintain a Regional Portal GIS Information Clearinghouse for Collecting and Distributing Updated GIS Layers / Maps Related to Military Operations Currently, the City of San Antonio has a grant with the OEA to determine and identify an agency that could serve as the Regional Clearinghouse that can provide a portal to all JLUS stakeholders that would house as well as make available GIS layers and maps related to military operations. JBSA would be responsible for providing a comprehensive set of GIS layers for all military to the clearinghouse. The clearinghouse would be responsible for distributing all updated military operation GIS layers and maps to the partnering jurisdictions and stakeholder agencies to enable enhanced long-range compatibility 2015  Page 61 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T COM-11 (cont’d) planning. A protocol for accessing and updating the information should be developed to ensure accuracy and appropriate security measures are established. Other Partners:   AACOG, Alamo Area  MPO, BRWM, SARA  COM-12 Comm Study Area Randolph Tower (RND) Airspace Manager and 12 FTW Safety Office should continue working with General Aviation groups and the FAA in reducing VFR pop-up traffic transiting Military Operating Areas (MOAS) RND Airspace Manager, Airspace squadron Points-of- Contact (POCs) and squadron Duty Officers (DOs) should continue to visit Houston Center and San Antonio Tower/Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON) to brief air traffic controllers on an annual basis the importance of issuing Traffic Advisories and Alerts to all users of RND 2015  Page 62 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T COM-12 (cont’d) MOAs. 12 FTW Safety Office and Airspace Manager should continue safety briefings at venues attended by General Aviation pilots and inform them of the hazards associated with flying into active MOAs. 12 FTW Safety Office should vigorously reach out to airports in the surrounding area by conducting on site visits and posting diagrams depicting RND flying routes and MOAs along with Mid-Air- Collision- Avoidance brochures. MOA scheduling utilizing the latest software program sanctioned by the Air Force will be utilized and specified in Letters of Agreement with RND and FAA agencies as required so that Page 63 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T COM-12 (cont’d) Notices to Airmen are automatically issued advising all General Aviation flyers when the MOAs are active. Other Partners:  San Antonio  International Airport  (SAT) and RND   COM-13 Zon JBSA-R JBSA-S Stinson Vertical Obs MIAOD Subzone Amend UDCs or Building Codes to Not Permit Temporary Cranes within the Transitional Area of the Airfield The cities should amend their UDCs to incorporate regulations for not permitting temporary cranes within the transitional area of the imaginary surface in order to prevent vertical obstruction into critical navigable airspace. The cities should require coordination with the FAA to determine obstruction evaluations so mitigation measures and coordination with JBSA can be applied. 2015  Page 64 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T COM-14 Comm Study Area Consider Public- Public or Public- Private (P4) Partnerships for Cost Savings Identify opportunities for jurisdictions and JBSA to partner on and use Section 331 of the Federal Regulations to achieve cost savings. 2015  COM-15 Zon MIAOD / CCLUAs Update or Develop Crane / Temporary Construction Permit Forms Some jurisdictions surrounding JBSA-R regulate temporary construction cranes through the use of permits; however the permits need to be updated to reflect current information and other cities need to develop these permits to regulate such activity. The City of San Antonio should update their website with the updated Crane / Temporary Construction Form and remove old copies on internal sites and the website. The cities of 2015  Page 65 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T COM-15 (cont’d) Schertz, Selma, Live Oak, and Universal City should develop temporary crane / construction permits to enable appropriate coordination with the FAA and JBSA-R and determine obstruction evaluations so mitigation measures can be applied prior to construction. COM-16 Comm JBSA-R JBSA Representative to Accompany City Officials to talk to Landowners A uniformed JBSA Representative should accompany City of Converse Officials to talk to Landowners about the issue with the clear zones and the 1604 Corridor Study. 2015 On- going  Page 66 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T COM-17 Comm JBSA-R Study Area Coordinate Partnering Efforts The Air Force / JBSA will use the JLUS Report and associated information / data as part of the communities’ input into the ICEMAP development process to eliminate the potential for conflicting data and recommendations. If there are conflicts between the ICEMAP and JLUS recommendations, JBSA-Randolph shall resolve them with the communities. 2015  COM-18 Comm JBSA-R JBSA-S and Stinson Study Area Incorporate Recommendations of the JBSA-Randolph JLUS into the Joint Base San Antonio Regional Joint Land Use Implementation Strategy The City of San Antonio should ensure that the findings and recommendations of the JBSA-Randolph JLUS are incorporated into and coordinated with the Joint Base San Antonio Regional Implementation Strategy. 2015  Page 67 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T DUST, SMOKE, STEAM DSS-1 Comm JBSA-R JBSA-S and Stinson Study Area Coordinate with JBSA Regarding Proposed Developments that Generate Dust, Smoke or Steam Within the Approach and Departure Corridor Coordinate with JBSA about any existing facilities undergoing renovations and proposed developments that generate dust, smoke, or steam that are located within the approach and departure corridor in order to prevent plumes that may impair the vision of the pilots. Other Partners:  TCEQ, Texas Railroad  Commission (TRRC)  On- going  Page 68 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T DSS-2 Comm Stinson Study Area Notify RND when Visibility Near Stinson Municipal Airport is Less Than Desirable for Aviation Operations The City of San Antonio / SAT should continue to monitor visibility near the Stinson Municipal Airport and notify JBSA-R when conditions are not safe for aviation activity in the area. On- going  Page 69 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T HOUSING AVAILABILITY HA-1 Comm Study Area Coordinate JBSA Housing Needs Develop partnership with local realtors, realtor associations, and local planning departments to share information regarding military housing needs on a regular basis via the JBSA Housing Market Analysis (HMA) report On- going  Page 70 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T HA-2 Plans Study Area Incorporating Military Housing Needs in Jurisdictional Comprehensive Plans When a jurisdiction updates its comprehensive plan, the plan should include a discussion of military housing needs and programs to address housing needs, both permanent (family and unaccompanied service members) and transient housing. As part of this effort, JBSA will provide jurisdictions with current information on housing demands, amount of housing provided by the installation, generalized income, by rank, of personnel living off-base, and current distribution data on off-base personnel by zip code via the JBSA Housing Market Analysis (HMA) report. On- going  Page 71 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T INFRASTRUCTURE EXTENSIONS IE-1 Plans JBSA-R JBSA-S and Stinson MIAOD Coordinate Infrastructure Capacity Planning with JBSA Stakeholders should coordinate with JBSA on a region-wide basis in the development of infrastructure master plans, capital improvement plans (CIP), utility service agreements (USAs), and other similar long-range plans to avoid overlap and duplication of services. Development of systems that can serve both community (including Converse) and JBSA-R’s needs should be evaluated when appropriate. Other Partners:   Alamo Area MPO,  BRWM, SARA,  Regional Mobility  Authority (RMA)  On- going  IE-2 Comm JBSA-R JBSA-S and Stinson MIAOD Coordination on Infrastructure Planning Notify and coordinate infrastructure expansion plans with JBSA. When communities or 2015  Page 72 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T IE-2 (cont’d) other service providers move forward with any plans of extending infrastructure in the vicinity of JBSA-R, such as a sewer extension, JBSA-R should be notified. The provider should be prepared to discuss alternatives that would help reduce potential future incompatible development along the infrastructure line (incompatible growth- inducement). The coordination should be done early in the planning process to optimize compatibility and reduce costs associated with plan changes. JBSA should prepare and provide feedback within a reasonable timeframe so as not to delay development. Other Partners:   Alamo Area MPO,  RMA, SARA  Page 73 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T LAND / AIR SPACE COMPETITION LS-1 CIP Study Area Next Generation Air Transportation System Improvements SAT and RND should work with the FAA to identify and budget for specific NextGen improvements that have a regional benefit including System Wide Information Management (SWIM) program and Automatic Dependent Surveillance – Broadcast (ADS-B) technology. 2017  LS-2 Comm Study Area Advertise / Educate Mid-Air Collision Avoidance (MACA) Program Develop education brochures on how to avoid mid-air collisions within airspace where military operations occur. Provide the MACA Handbook and the mid-air collision brochure on the JBSA website and other online locations where general aviation pilots have access. 2015 On- going  Page 74 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T LS-3 Comm Study Area / Region- Wide Region-Wide Airspace Utilization Study FAA should work with SAT, RND, and TXDOT representatives (as appropriate) to facilitate discussions regarding the feasibility of conducting a region- wide airspace utilization study. This discussion would include representatives of JBSA, TXDOT, regional airport operators, and other relevant stakeholders to determine feasibility and funding mechanisms for such a study. 2015  Page 75 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVES LEG-1 Leg Study Area Facilitate Legislative Initiative to Amend Property Sellers Disclosure Work with San Antonio Board of Realtors (SABOR), Real Estate Council of San Antonio (RECSA), Texas Association of Realtors (TAR) and other real estate advocates to facilitate a legislative initiative to include notification of military impacts on property in seller disclosures (TAR Forms 1406 and 1506). Other Partners:  SABOR, RECSA, TAR,  other reals estate  advocates  2017  Page 76 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T LEG-2 Leg Study Area Amend Property Code Section 5.008 of Sellers Disclosure of Military Impacts The State Legislature with the support of TAR and Non-TAR members to amend the property code to incorporate language that discloses information related to military impacts, as it pertains to the property in the transaction. Primary Partner:  State Legislature  2015  LEG-3 Plans JBSA-R JBSA-S and Stinson Vertical Obs MIAOD Subzone State to Adopt Part 77 as State Law to ensure Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 77 Compliance State should adopt Part 77 and any amendments to the law to ensure Part 77 compliance for local jurisdictions. For all new, redeveloped or rehabilitated transmission, communications, energy generation structures (including electrical transmission towers/lines, cellular and radio transmission towers, wind generation 2015  Page 77 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T LEG-3 (cont’d) towers, and other similar uses.) or any type of structures that have a proposed height of 99’ or higher, ensure compliance with FAR Part 77 height limit requirements to minimize vertical obstructions and congested airspace. In addition, ensure the developments and structures are compatible with, and do not pose a safety hazard to, air operations in the region. Primary Partner:    State Legislature  Page 78 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T LEG-4 Acq Study Area State to Establish Grant Matching Program to assist Jurisdictions to Acquire Land in the CZs The State should establish or modify current grant mechanisms that provide a match to local jurisdictions around military installations to acquire the land within the CZs of the airfield. This will protect the JBSA-R mission as well as other military missions. Primary Partner:  State Legislature  2015  Page 79 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T LIGHT AND GLARE LG-1 Plans Study Area Conduct Lighting Study / Screening Bexar County should work with JBSA and the surrounding communities to conduct a lighting study / screening to determine areas where light pollution may adversely impact the base’s mission. This will determine for the communities what types of lighting regulations would be necessary to stop further light pollution in this area and region-wide. 2015  LG-2 Zon Study Area Amend UDCs and Zoning Ordinances to Incorporate Dark Sky Lighting Controls The cities should amend their UDCs and zoning ordinances delineating the downward directional lighting for land uses, regulations for light pollution trespass including lumens and not permitting light to be emitted above the 90 degree horizontal plane, and timers for lights. 2017  Page 80 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T LG-2 (cont’d) Limit Correlated Color Temperature (CCT) values for LED street lights to 4100k. This shall include requirements for downward directional, shielded, or fully-cutoff lighting in new construction and street lights, and controls for unregulated and unconventional sources of light, i.e. laser scopes for paintball shooting accuracy and other similar uses. Other Partners:   Cities of Live Oak  LG-3 Comm JBSA-R JBSA-S Stinson Vertical Obs MIAOD Subzone Educate Utility Companies and Encourage Them to Adopt Anti-Glare Construction Materials in Solar and Renewable Energy Facilities Educate utility companies on the importance of anti- glare construction materials, such as the use of an anti- reflective coating on photovoltaic solar panels and prohibiting the use of reflective (mirrored) materials, for solar panels and 2015  Page 81 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T LG-3 (cont’d) other renewable energy facilities for roof-top on ground- mounted applications. Encourage utility providers to adopt criteria for use within the Vertical Obstruction Military Overlay District. Other Partners:   CPS Energy, GVEC Page 82 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T LAND USE LU-1 Plans/ Zon JBSA-R JBSA-S and Stinson MIAOD Military Influence Area Overlay Zoning District (MIAOD) Amend the UDCs and update comprehensive plans to include the Military Influence Area Overlay District (MIAOD). The MIAOD will assist in achieving military compatibility. Description of the MIAOD and its subzones can be found in the JLUS Implementation section narrative. The MIAOD consists of 4 subzones: Safety MIAOD Subzone – This area is comprised of the CZs, APZs and the Runway Protection Zones (RPZ) Noise MIAOD Subzone – This subzone is comprised of the area encompassed within the footprint of the noise contours identified in the most recent JBSA-R AICUZ and the Stinson noise contours 2015  Page 83 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T LU-1 (cont’d) Vertical Obstruction MIAOD Subzone – This Subzone is comprised of the area that encompasses the various airfield imaginary surfaces zones and the FAA Part 77 vertical obstruction evaluation criteria (rings). BASH MIAOD Subzone –This area is comprised of a five nautical mile radius around these areas in consideration of the potential future new aircraft scheduled for operational capability in 2017 – 2023. Jurisdictions should consider adopting the heights and slopes of imaginary surfaces of the Vertical Obstruction MIAOD into their plans and UDCs  Page 84 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T LU-1 (cont’d) and collaborate on a case-by- case basis with JBSA to ensure development does not pose a vertical obstruction. Jurisdictions should work with JBSA concerning land uses that may attract birds i.e. detention ponds, landfills, golf courses, certain agriculture uses, etc. LU-2 Plans Study Area Update City Comprehensive Plans The cities should update their comprehensive plans to support military compatibility policies based on the assessment provided in Chapter 5 of the JLUS Background Report. The compatibility policies should be based on guidance from the JLUS and be incorporated in the following topic areas: Land use, transportation, parks and recreation, water quality, infrastructure, 2015  Page 85 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T LU-2 (cont’d) economic development, etc. LU-3 Zon JBSA-R Safety MIAOD Amend Comprehensive Plans to Limit Density on Land in West Side of JBSA-R Southern Accident Potential Zone II. Amend Comprehensive Plan policy and the future land use map to limit development in APZ II of the JBSA- Randolph western runway to 1 dwelling unit per 10 acres. 2015  LU-4 Zon JBSA-R Safety MIAOD Amend Comprehensive Plan to Limit Density on East Side of JBSA-R Southern Accident Potential Zone II. Amend Comprehensive Plan policy and the future land use map to limit development in APZ II of the eastern JBSA- Randolph runway to 1 dwelling unit per 20 acres. 2015  Page 86 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T LU-5 Zon JBSA-R Safety MIAOD Amend Comprehensive Plans to Limit Density on Land Between West and East Runway South Safety Zones Amend Comprehensive Plan policy and the future land use map to limit development between the west and east runway south safety zones of JBSA-Randolph to 1 dwelling unit per 10 acres. 2015  LU-6 Zon JBSA-S CCLUA Establish a Joint Airport Zoning Board (JAZB) Establish a JAZB for JBSA-S’s Controlled Compatible Land Use Area (CCLUA) using the authority of the State Local Government Code 241. The JAZB is required to develop a charter, a zoning ordinance (that would include the MIAOD and its associated subzones), and a zoning map for the CCLUA. The zoning categories within each of the MIAOD subzones should be based on the AF AICUZ instructions 2015  Page 87 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T LU-6 (cont’d) guidance, FAA guidance and the TXDOT guidance for compatible land use around airports. LU-7 Zon JBSA-R Safety MIAOD Subzone Evaluate the Feasibility of Creating a JAZB for JBSA- Randolph for the West and East Runway Safety Zones The cities of Schertz, Selma, and Universal City along with Bexar and Guadalupe counties should evaluate the feasibility of creating a JAZB for the JBSA- Randolph West and East Runway Safety Zones to provide adequate protections and land use regulations for the ETJs and land located in this area. 2015  Page 88 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T LU-8 MOU JBSA-R JBSA-S and Stinson Safety and Noise MIAOD Sub- zones Develop a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with School Districts JBSA should develop a MOU with the surrounding school districts to coordinate on all future school master plans to prevent schools from being planned in noise sensitive and safety areas of the Noise and Safety Subzones. 2015/ On- going  LU-9 Plans JBSA-R JBSA-S and Stinson MIAOD Acquire Conservation Easements to Secure Buffer in JBSA-R Airfield Safety Zones Participate in the Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative (REPI) program and other buffering and conservation programs to purchase restrictive use easements or fee title to lands that present threat of encroachment and impact on military operations. The Air Force should identify potential REPI and other conservation partners, land that meet the REPI criteria, and identify willing sellers. Other Partners:  2017  Page 89 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T LU-9 (cont’d) Nature Conservancy  Agencies  LU-10 Acq JBSA-R Safety MIAOD Subzone Acquire Land in JBSA- R’s Northern and Southern CZs JBSA-R to determine an ideal funding mechanism to purchase the vacant land located in the northern and southern JBSA-R CZs to provide protection for the JBSA-R mission. 2017  LU-11 Plans JBSA-R MIAOD Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Program The cities should assess and consider developing a TDR program to protect the JBSA-R mission and redirect potentially incompatible development to a more ideal location away from mission- critical operational areas. 2017  Page 90 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T LU-12 Zon JBSA-R JBSA-S Stinson Safety and Noise MIAOD Subzone Include Statement (Note) in Plats In order to prevent litigation regarding a situation where a property owner stated they were not informed that their property was located within an airfield safety zone (CZ, APZ I and II, or RPZs) and / or a Noise Subzone, jurisdictions should include on all future plats that are located in these subzones language stating that they are located in a military operating area that can be subject to noise, vibrations, odors and other such impacts. 2015       LU-13 Plans N/A Amend 1604 Corridor Study Consider amending the 1604 Corridor Study in conjunction with JBSA-Randolph advocating for the funding of Rocket Lane Gate construction. 2015  Page 91 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T LU-14 Plans/ Zon/ Comm JBSA-R JBSA-S Stinson Consider a Development Coordination Area Until legislation is enacted that mandates development coordination with JBSA-Randolph, consider using the Military Overlay District as a Development Coordination Area where development will be coordinated with JBSA officials on a case-by-case basis. The criteria that will trigger coordination include the following: Structure Height Density Light and Glare (Daytime glare from buildings) Noise Uses that produce dust and smoke On- going  Page 92 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T LU-15 Acq JBSA-R Consider Subdividing the Three Parcels of Land to Account for the 500 Feet in the Clear Zone City of Converse and an uniformed Air Force personnel should consider advocating to the landowners to subdivide the land that would account for the 500 feet in the CZ. Then the City or the AF could reasonably acquire the 500 feet of land to protect general public. 2017  LU-16 Acq/ Plans JBSA-R Consider Pursuing Funding Opportunity with the State to either Acquire the CZ land or to Fund Portions of the Rocket Lane Gate. City of Converse should consider utilizing the funding opportunities available to them through the Governor’s Office, Texas Military Preparedness Commission to either acquire the land in the CZ and place under perpetual easement or assist in funding the improvements at the proposed Rocket 2015  Page 93 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T LU-16 (cont’d) Lane Gate. LU-17 Acq JBSA-R Cities should Support JBSA-R in Efforts to Acquire Land with the CZs. The Cities support JBSA-Randolph in efforts to acquire land within the CZs by identifying and pursuing potential funding opportunities including bonds, state funds, sales tax revenue, grants, etc. 2015   LU-18 Plans JBSA-R MIAOD Develop Land Use Plans for ETJs in the JBSA-Randolph MIAOD Although cities do not have land use or zoning authority in their ETJ, they should consider developing land use plans for these areas that achieve a future vision compatible with the existing and future military mission of JBSA- Randolph and promotes viable community development if annexed. 2015/ On- going   Page 94 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T LU-19 Plans JBSA-R MIAOD Consider and Potentially Develop Plan for Annexation or Limited Purpose Annexation The cities should consider and potentially develop plans for annexation or limited purpose annexation of ETJ parcels where infrastructure improvements and regulations are consistent with the JLUS findings and recommendations to ensure development in these areas is compatible with the existing and future JBSA-Randolph mission. 2015/ On- going   LU-20 Plans / Zon JBSA-R Safety MIAOD Amend Zoning to Stipulate how Planned Developments in the APZ I and II Should be Utilized The Cities of Selma and Schertz should amend the UDC and Zoning Code to expressly note that Planned Development Zoning Districts in the APZ I and II safety zones should be used only to achieve greater compliance with the JLUS goals. 2015  Page 95 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T LU-20 (cont’d) They should not be used to allow cluster developments that concentrate development, including houses, within these areas. LU-21 Plans / Zon JBSA-R Safety MIAOD Amend Zoning to Prohibit Clustering in JBSA-Randolph APZ I and APZ II Areas The cities should amend their UDC or Zoning Codes to prohibit the clustering of residential development within JBSA- Randolph APZ I and APZ II areas. 2015   Page 96 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T NOISE AND VIBRATION NV-1 Zon JBSA-R JBSA-S AND Stinson Noise MIAOD Subzone Adopt Statewide Building Code Requirements Incorporating Sound Attenuation Measures Jurisdictions should adopt building code requirements for new construction within the Noise MIA Subzone that requires attenuation measures to meet the guidelines of the AICUZ recommended by this JLUS. Other Potential  Partners:   Cities of Cibolo,  Garden Ridge, and  Live Oak  2017  Page 97 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T NV-2 Com Study Area Educational Materials on Sound Attenuation Methods Use or modify DOD or FAA Sound Attenuation educational materials as a supplemental educational document, describing building techniques which can be used to achieve the required 45 dB LDN interior noise maximum threshold. Local jurisdictions should make use of already available technical support materials from the Federal Aviation Administration and / or Department of Defense. 2015/ On- going  NV-3 Zon JBSA-R JBSA-S Stinson Noise MIAOD Subzone Amend UDCs, Building Codes, and Zoning Ordinances to Incorporate Recommended Land Use Guidelines and Sound Attenuation Measures for Properties Within the 65 dB noise contour and greater. If the adopted building codes of the jurisdictions do not require residential uses and other noise 2015  Page 98 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T NV-3 (cont’d) sensitive land uses to have an interior noise level of 45 dB, then the jurisdictions should amend their UDCs, building codes, and zoning ordinances to require the recommended 45 dB for interior noise levels for properties within the 65 dB noise contour and greater. This amendment should apply to all new construction and renovations where more than 50 percent of the structure is renovated. NV-4 Comm JBSA-R JBSA-S Stinson Noise MIAOD Subzone Signage in the Rights- of-Way to Notify Citizens that the Community is Shared with JBSA-Randolph The cities should design, develop, and place signage in community-wide rights-of-way to notify citizens that the community is shared with JBSA- Randolph and subject to potential impacts of overflight and noise. 2015  Page 99 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T NV-5 Plans JBSA-R JBSA-S and Stinson Noise MIAOD Subzone Develop a Voluntary Sound Attenuation Retrofit Program for Noise Sensitive Uses Develop a sound attenuation program for willing property / home owners supporting the Statewide Energy Code. Where possible incorporate incentives. 2017  NV-6 Zon JBSA-R JBSA-S and Stinson Noise MIAOD Subzone Assess the Viability of the Dedication of Avigation / Noise Easements for Discretionary Development Approvals Assess the viability of the dedication of avigation / noise easements for new development projects requiring discretionary development approvals. Avigation easements confer the right to aircraft overflight and to generate impacts associated with normal aircraft operation such as noise, vibration, odor, air currents, illumination, and fuel consumption. 2015  Page 100 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T NV-7 Zon JBSA-R JBSA-S and Stinson Noise MIAOD Subzone Require the Dedication of Avigation / Noise Easements and a Note on the Plat for Discretionary Development Approvals Require avigation / noise easements and a Note on the Plat of the avigation easement for new development projects requiring discretionary development approvals. Ensure that easement language is standardized across all jurisdictions. 2015  Page 101 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T ROADWAY CAPACITY RC-1 Comm Study Area Transportation Improvements / Expansions Monitor capital improvement projects to ensure roadway capacity is sufficient to meet local and regional mobility needs without causing growth inducement and increased roadway congestion near JBSA-R. Other Partners:   Alamo Area MPO,  RMA  On- going  Page 102 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T RC-2 Zon / Plans JBSA-R Study Area Mass Transit Options The cities surrounding JBSA-R should work with VIA Metropolitan Transit Authority and consider voting in and assessing the sales tax to their residents that would fund mass transit options for their residents. Provide educational materials to residents about the mass transit options that are available to them both on-base and off-base, including van pools. Other Partners:   VIA Metropolitan  Transit Authority  2015  RC-3 Plans JBSA-R Study Area Prepare a Traffic Modeling Study for the Areas Immediately Surrounding JBSA- Randolph TXDOT should coordinate with JBSA-R and the surrounding communities to prepare and develop a comprehensive traffic modeling study for the areas immediately around JBSA-R to assess roadway capacity levels for egress and ingress of the base. 2017  Page 103 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T RC-3 (cont’d) Other Partners:  Alamo Area MPO,  RMA  RC-4 Plans JBSA-R Study Area Coordinate and Budget for Intelligent Transportation Systems TXDOT should work with the communities around JBSA-R and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) to install intelligent transportation systems such as infrastructure-to- vehicle wireless systems to enable enhanced planning and manage roadway capacity issues. This should include electronic marquee boards identifying when UPRR trains are scheduled to cross at the Pat Booker Roadway and FM-78. Other Partners:   Alamo Area MPO,  RMA, UPRR  2017  Page 104 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T RC-5 CIPs JBSA-R Program and Budget for Installation Gate Projects that Improve Off-Base Roadway Capacity JBSA-R should program and budget for installation gate projects that will improve off-base roadway capacity, enhance base access for commercial deliveries and improve vehicular mobility outside the base. These improvements include the South Gate ACP reconfiguration. Coordinate with the Alamo Area MPO and other stakeholders including TXDOT, if the roadways are state roadways. Other Partners:   Alamo Area MPO 2017  Page 105 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T RC-6 Plans JBSA-R Consider Additional Increases in Compressed Work Week Schedules for Eligible Employees JBSA-R should work with command units and tenants to determine if it is feasible to allow additional staffing that would be eligible to work compressed or flexible work weeks to decrease vehicular miles on roadways during peak morning and evening hours. 2015  Page 106 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T SAFETY SA-1 Plans JBSA-R Safety MIAOD Subzone CZ and APZ Land Use Evaluation Study The JLUS Implementation Task Force should work with the cities of Schertz and Universal City to prepare a comprehensive land use evaluation of the land within the safety zones (CZ & APZs) of the JBSA-R airfield to identify property owners, vacant land, entitled land, and other recorded instruments on the land within the safety zones. This information will be used to determine lands that have willing sellers that can be acquired to secure lands within the CZs and APZs that are not developed. The study should also identify funding mechanisms for acquisition such as the Texas Revolving Military Loan Program, DEAAG Program, and 2015  Page 107 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T SA-1 (cont’d) municipal bonds, sales tax revenue, grants, etc. Primary Partner:  JLUS Implementation  Task Force  SA-2 Plan JBSA-R Safety MIAOD Subzone Partial Update of the 2008 JBSA-R AICUZ Update the 2008 AICUZ to revise the clear zone boundary and consider incorporation of the Navy instruction for curved CZs and APZs that accurately reflect the primary flight tracks. The measurements of the standard CZ should be 3,000 feet X 3,000 feet, not 2,000 feet X 3,000 feet. Consider incorporating the curved patterns of the CZs and APZs as the Navy Instruction for AICUZs recommends. It should be noted that a partial update of the AICUZ is scheduled for FY 16 including a new noise study. 2015  Page 108 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T SA-3 Plans/ Zon JBSA-R Safety MIAOD Identify and Adopt Reductions to Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for Land Uses within APZ I and APZ II JBSA-Randolph and Bexar and Guadalupe counties and the cities of Converse, San Antonio, Schertz, Selma, and Universal City should collaborate to identify FAR reductions for land uses within the JBSA-Randolph APZ I and APZ II areas. Consider FAR recommendations from DOD guidance in Instruction 4165.57 as the model FAR reductions. Adopt FAR reductions in AICUZ update, city planning documents, and Controlled Compatible Land Use Area regulations for Bexar and Guadalupe counties. For existing undeveloped platted lots FAR modifications may be considered when coupled with additional use and 2015   Page 109 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T SA-3 (cont’d) development restrictions. SA-4 Plans JBSA-R Safety MIAOD Incorporate the FAR Recommendations for Land Use within Safety Zones in AICUZ Update Include the FAR recommendations from current DOD guidance in Instruction 4165.57 for land uses within the safety zones in the update of the 2008 JBSA- Randolph AICUZ. 2015  SA-5 Plans JBSA-R Safety MIAOD Provide Study Area Jurisdictions the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Recommendations for Land Use within Safety Zones JBSA-Randolph to provide the Study Area jurisdictions the FAR recommendations for land uses within the safety zones from the DOD Instruction 4165.57. 2015  Page 110 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T SA-6 Plans / Zon JBSA-R Safety MIAOD Ensure that Platting Applications are Consistent with Amended Zoning Changes for Land in Northern and Southern Safety Zones Ensure that all platting applications for property within the JBSA-Randolph Northern and Southern Safety Zones comply with changes to zoning regulations per the JLUS recommendations. 2015  SA-7 Zon JBSA-R Safety MIAOD Amend UDC and Zoning Ordinances for West Side of JBSA-R Southern Accident Potential Zone II Amend the UDC and Zoning Ordinances to limit development in south APZ II of the JBSA-Randolph western runway to 1 dwelling unit per 10 acres. 2015  SA-8 Zon JBSA-R Safety MIAOD Amend UDC for East Side of JBSA-R Southern Accident Potential Zone II Amend the UDC to limit development in south APZ II of the eastern JBSA- Randolph runway to 1 dwelling unit per 20 acres. 2015  Page 111 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T SA-9 Zon JBSA-R Safety MIAOD Amend UDCs and Zoning Ordinances for Land Between West and East Runway South Safety Zones Amend the UDC and Zoning Ordinance to limit development between the west and east runway south safety zones of JBSA-Randolph to 1 dwelling unit per 10 acres. 2015  SA-10 Zon JBSA-R JBSA-S and Stinson Safety MIAOD Sub- zone Amend UDCs and Zoning Ordinances to Incorporate MIAOD Safety Subzone and the Associated AICUZ Guidelines for CZs and APZs. Amend UDCs, County Orders, and zoning ordinances to incorporate a MIAOD Safety Subzone and the associated AICUZ compatible development guidelines for the safety of their citizens. Where more stringent guidelines are recommended in the JLUS, incorporate JLUS recommended guidelines. Examples of 2015  Page 112 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T SA-10 (cont’d) regulations in this area should include conditions associated with types of uses such as restricting new development that attracts large congregations of people and uses that attract concentrations of birds creating a hazard to aircraft. SA-11 Zon JBSA-R Safety MIAOD Subzone Identify Viable Compatible Uses for APZs South of the Runways and Amend UDC to Incorporate These Uses. The City of Schertz, with consultation from JBSA-Randolph, should develop an official list of compatible uses within Accident Potential Zones south of the JBSA- Randolph Runways. Compatible uses may include opportunities for alternative energy and appropriate development criteria to ensure compatibility with the JBSA-Randolph mission. Adopt FAR reductions for non- residential uses in conjunction with Strategy SA-3 and 2015  Page 113 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T SA-11 (cont’d) consider flexibility for small lots that may not support viable development based on use guidance per DOD Instruction 4165.57. Other Partners:   Wind Industry SA-12 Zon JBSA-S Safety MIAOD Subzone Create a JAZB for JBSA-Seguin to include a MIAOD Safety Subzone Create a JAZB for JBSA-Seguin to include a zoning MIAOD Safety Subzone within the Controlled Compatible Land Use Area and incorporate the associated AICUZ compatible development guidelines. 2015  Page 114 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T SA-13 Comm JBSA-R Safety/ Noise MIAOD Subzone Coordinate with JBSA-Randolph in Requesting No-Fly Days and Weekends for Special Community Events The City of Schertz should coordinate in a timely manner (a month’s notice) with JBSA-Randolph to request no-flying operations during specific times of the year for special community events, e.g. July 4th, Schertz Fest. 2015/ On- going  SA-14 Zon JBSA-R and JBSA-S Safety MIAOD Subzone Amend UDCs and Zoning Ordinance to Require CZ Language on Plats Amend UDCs, zoning ordinance and platting regulations to require that plats include language stating the property is located within the CZ which is located at the end of a military training installation runway and is identified as an area with the highest aircraft accident potential. 2015  SA-15 Plans CIP  NA Secondary Radar System and NextGen Air Transportation Systems SAT and RND should work with FAA to identify projects to 2017  Page 115 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T SA-15 (cont’d) include in their capital investment plans within the next five years such as a redundant radar system and NextGen air transportation systems including Automatic Dependent Surveillance – Broadcast (ADS-B) technology. SA-16 Comm JBSA-R JBSA-S and Stinson BASH MIAOD Sub- zone Amend UDCs and Zoning Ordinances to include BASH Regulations Amend UDCs and zoning ordinances to regulate land uses and guide building standards that will not attract birds and other wildlife in the MIAOD BASH Subzone, specifically within the airport approach and departure zone. Such controls should include not permitting certain trees and foliage that attract birds in this area. 2015  Page 116 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T SA-17 Comm JBSA-R JBSA-S and Stinson BASH MIAOD Subzone Continue to Implement BASH regulations per JBSA- R BASH Plan JBSA should continue to implement BASH regulations per the JBSA-Randolph BASH Plan including the regulation of land uses, building standards, and appropriate vegetation to deter birds and other wildlife. 2015  SA-18 Hab JBSA-R BASH MIAOD Subzone Control Dove Population at JBSA-R JBSA-Randolph shall control the White Winged Dove population through habitat management inside the installation fenceline to reduce the potential for BASH. 2015/ On- going  SA-19 Plans JBSA-R BASH MIAOD Subzone Improve Water Drainage on Golf Course JBSA-Randolph should improve the water drainage features on the golf course in order to discourage use by birds and other wildlife. 2015/ On- going  Page 117 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T SA-20 Plans / Comm JBSA-R Safety MIAOD Coordination of Recreational Land Uses with JBSA in the Future The City of Schertz and JBSA will coordinate in the future to restrict utilization of recreational type uses (e.g. soccer fields) when night training occurs at the Base. 2017/ On- going  SA-21 Plans JBSA-R Safety MIAOD Modify the Veterans Park Plan in Universal City The City should consider modifying the Veterans Park Plan to ensure that recreational facilities within the plan that encourage congregations of people, e.g. amphitheater, should be relocated outside the standard CZ. 2015/ On- going  SA-22 Comm JBSA-R Safety MIAOD Engage in Discussions with Private Company in Northeast Clear Zone City of Schertz, Bexar County, and with the support of JBSA-Randolph should engage in discussions with private company in NE CZ to 2015/ On- going  Page 118 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T SA-22 (cont’d) encourage the company to not operate or park vehicles in the area of the Critical Glide Slope Path. SA-23 Comm JBSA-S Safety MIAOD Engage in Discussions with Private Company East of JBSA-Seguin Runway within the Transitional Surface Guadalupe County with the support of JBSA-Randolph should engage in discussions with private company east of the runway along Weber Road in the Transitional Surface to encourage the active management of bird attractants and mitigation of activities that may affect flight operations. 2015  Page 119 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T SA-24 Plans /Zon JBSA-R Safety MIAOD Amend Zoning in APZs Based on Revised Safety Zones JBSA-Randolph may change the West And East Runway south safety zones based on actual flight paths as part of AICUZ update. The cities of San Antonio and Schertz should evaluate, identify, and amend the allowable land uses within the revised south safety zones from residential to compatible non- residential uses. Work with JBSA- Randolph to determine the safety zone boundaries. 2015  Page 120 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T VERTICAL OBSTRUCTIONS VO-1 Plans/ Zon JBSA-R JBSA-S and Stinson Vertical Obs MIAOD Subzone Develop a 3- Dimensional Imaginary Surfaces Model Bexar County should work with the cities to develop a 3D model of existing height regulations compared to allowable heights based on the FAA Imaginary Surfaces of airfields. This tool will assist the jurisdictions in amending their UDCs further to enhance military compatibility as well as be used to evaluate development applications to see if the heights of proposed structures do not obstruct the navigable airspace. Other Partner:   City of Live Oak  2017  Page 121 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T VO-2 Comm JBSA-R JBSA-S and Stinson Vertical Obs MIAOD Subzone Utility Infrastructure Coordination Electric utility companies should coordinate with the cities and JBSA on siting above ground utility poles and infrastructure to ensure utilities do not constitute a vertical obstruction to the aviation operations in the area. 2015 On- going  VO-3 Plans CIP JBSA-R JBSA-S and Stinson Vertical Obs MIAOD Subzone Site New Utility Lines Within Existing Energy Utility Corridors / Joint Utility Corridors Work with CPS Energy and TXDOT to use existing energy corridors for joint utility corridors when planning infrastructure projects. This will ensure that additional vertical obstructions in other locations do not occur. Other Partners:  TRRC  On- going  Page 122 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T WATER QUALITY / QUANTITY WQ-1 Plans Study Area Develop and Implement a Water Resources Management Plan Identify future demand and supply and coordinate with the regional resources and agencies to develop and implement a Regional Water Management Plan. This plan would assess all possible solutions to conserving water and securing future water resources. Such solutions would include sharing of water resources with proximate cities, JBSA obtaining additional water rights from the Carrizo-Wilcox Springs, and the use of Reuse Water for Outdoor uses, i.e. watering lawns. Other Partners:   San Antonio River  Authority (SARA),  Edwards Aquifer  Authority (EAA),  BRWM, SARA   2017  WQ-2 Zon Study Area Develop Ordinance Reducing Lawn Landscaping Area The participating JBSA-R JLUS cities should develop, if 2015       Page 123 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T WQ-2 (cont’d) they do not already have, an ordinance limiting the size of landscaped lawns and requiring the remaining lawn area be xeriscaped in order to reduce water consumption and waste. Consider incorporating and encouraging application of LID practices recommended by SARA. Page 124 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T WQ-3 Comm Study Area Coordinate Infrastructure Projects and Apply for State Funding The cities and counties should coordinate with JBSA when applying for priority water infrastructure project funding from the State of Texas Water Development Board in order to prevent siting water infrastructure projects in areas that may support incompatible development that may affect the military mission. Other Partners:  Texas Commission  on Environmental  Quality (TCEQ) ,  BRWM, Texas Water  Development Board  (TWDB), SARA On- going          Page 125 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T WQ-4 Plans Study Area Address Military Water Concerns in Agency Plans When SARA, jurisdictions and other agencies update plans for the management of their water resources, they should incorporate the military water needs in their plans. Other Partners:   SARA, EAA and  BRWM 2017  WQ-5 Plans JBSA-R Inventory and Assess High-risk Storm water Ponding Areas On-Base Conduct a base-wide assessment of high- risk storm water drainage system deficiencies. Prioritize those deficiencies that affect external land uses including community storm water drainage facilities. 2017  Page 126 St r a t e g y N o . Ty p e o f S t r a t e g y Ge o g r a p h i c A r e a Strategy Ti m e f r a m e Ci t y o f C o n v e r s e Ci t y o f G a r d e n R i d g e Ci t y o f S a n A n t o n i o Ci t y o f S c h e r t z Ci t y o f S e g u i n Ci t y o f S e l m a Ci t y o f U n i v e r s a l C i t y Be x a r C o u n t y Gu a d a l u p e C o u n t y JB S A CP S / S A W S FA A RE C S A / S A B O R TX D O T WQ-6 Comm Study Area Encourage and Conduct Outreach to Developers on Low Impact Storm Water Development Practices Encourage developers and builders to incorporate Low Impact Development (LID) practices, such as reduction in impervious surfaces into site design, to reduce the volume of storm water runoff. Develop brochures describing the different LID practices. Where possible, provide incentives for the developers to use LID practices. Other Primary  Partner:  SARA  Note: SARA is  developing a  voluntary set of LID  optional standards  with incentives that  will be considered as  part of the City of  San Antonio’s UDC’s  update program.   Other jurisdictions  should consider  adapting some of  these LID practices  within their UDCs. On- going  Page 127 Please see the next page.  Page 128 County of Bexar Public Works 233 N Pecos-La Trinidad, Suite 420 San Antonio, Texas 78207 210-335-1243 www.bexar.org Agenda No. 10.   CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM    City Council Meeting:September 02, 2025 Department:Engineering Subject:Monthly Update - Major Projects In Progress/CIP (B.James/K.Woodlee) Attachments 9-2-25 Council Update on In Progress Projects Informational Only CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM City Council Meeting: September 2, 2025 Department: City Manager Subject: Update on Major Projects in Progress Background This is the monthly update on large projects that are in progress or in the planning process. This update is being provided so Council will be up to date on the progress of these large projects. If Council desires more information on any project or on projects not on this list, please reach out to staff and that information will be provided. Facilities Projects: 1. Fleet Building Parking Lot Project Description – Pave the open grassy area located at 27 Commercial Place o Project Status: Site Plan Development and Construction Design o Projected Completion: To be determined o Consultant: Unintech Consulting Engineers, Inc. o Contractor: To be determined Project Update: This project is being pushed back to FY 25-26 or FY26-27 as we need to reallocate funding from this project to help fund the repairs of the retention wall and pavers at the Schertz Library. 2. Library Retention Wall (Pavers) Project Description – Replacing the failing plastic panels around the library foundation with concrete panels. This includes removal and replacement of some of the concrete pavers in the rear courtyard. o Project Status: Design o Projected Completion: Spring 2026 o Project Cost: $350,000 o Consultant: Unintech Consulting Engineering o Contractor: To be determined Project Update: No change since last report. Staff is reviewing internally whether to replace the pavers with concrete with this project. 3. Fire Station 4 Project Description – Fire Station 4 Design and Build o Project Status: Site Plan Submitted to the city. Construction Design going to formal pricing and plans being submitted to the City o Projected Completion: December 2026 o Project Cost: Estimated $13.25 million o Consultant: AGCM – Owner Rep o Architect: Martinez Architecture o Contractor: Marksman – CMAR Project Update: Floor Plan review and Renderings to be coming soon for preview to Council. 4. FM 78 Build Out PD CID Property Room Project Description – Remodel a portion of the County Building that PD will utilize for CID and Property o Project Status: Pending approval from County o Projected Completion: To be determined once the project is approved by Guadalupe County. o Consultant: TBD o Contractor: TBD Project Update: Currently awaiting approval from the County as to when the Police Department can move into the designated space in the County building located off FM 78. City staff (PD, GIS, Facilities, IT) has met and toured the location creating a rough sketch for office placement, interview room placement, and other installations. Per Facilities, the project must be consulted on with an architect and official renderings will be completed. 5. Police Department Building Remodel Project Description – Remodel office areas within building 06 where the Police Department operates. Areas to remodel may include the current CIS division, P&E holding area, and possibly other offices along that hallway. o Project Status: Pending approval from the County that PD can move into the County building. Once that project is approved, this one can move forward. o Projected Completion: To be determined once the County FM 78 project moves forward. o Consultant: TBD o Contractor: TBD Project Update: This project is in conjunction with the Police Department moving into the County building on FM 78. Once moved, remodeling of the specific areas within the Police Department will begin. At this time, there are several possible ideas being developed for these areas but nothing official. Drainage Projects: 1. FM 78 South Channel Silt Removal Project Description – Silt removal for the existing FM 78 South Drainage channel to include permitting, easement acquisition and construction. o Project Status: Easement Acquisition o Projected Completion: Summer 2025 o Project Cost: Design $32,100, Drainage Report $4,600 o Consultant: Unintech Consulting Engineers, Inc. o Contractor: TBD Project Update: No new updates since last council meeting. Design of the project is complete. The project has been on hold pending resolution of some easement acquisition challenges. Staff are working to identify the appropriate path of access to the channel. Unintech will resume work to acquire necessary easements for the project once those challenges have been resolved. After easements are acquired, the project will be rebid, and construction will proceed. 2. Pickrell Park & FM 1518 Drainage Project Description – Installation of underground drainage, upgraded creek outfalls and provide localized surface drainage swales. Sanitary sewer relocation within areas of conflict with proposed drainage improvements o Project Status: Preliminary Engineering Study o Projected Completion: TBD o Project Cost: $41,987 - $47,500 NTE (study only) o Consultant: Unintech Consulting Engineers, Inc. o Contractor: TBD Project Update: The task order for professional services approved by Council on August 19 is being executed. The consultant will begin surveying activities soon. 3. Wendy Swan Drainage Project Description – Removal of an existing concrete retaining wall, install underground drainage and fill to grade with localized surface drainage. o Project Status: Design o Projected Completion: o Project Cost: Design $108,500 ($115,000 NTE), Construction Estimate $939,000 o Consultant: Unintech Consulting Engineers, Inc. o Contractor: TBD Project Update: The task order for professional services approved by Council on August 19 is being executed. The consultant will begin surveying activities soon. 4. Friesenhahn Lift Station Drainage Improvements Project Description – Drainage study of Friesenhahn Lift Station site will be performed and used to develop plans for construction of recommended improvements to remedy poor drainage conditions around the site. o Project Status: Study and Design o Projected Completion: TBD o Project Cost: Design $74,815 Construction Estimate TBD o Consultant: Utility Engineering Group o Contractor: TBD Project Update: The task order for professional services is being executed. The consultant will begin surveying activities soon. Water and Wastewater Projects: 1. Woman Hollering Creek Wastewater Interceptor Main and Lift Station Project Description – Design and construction of a sanitary sewer system to collect and convey wastewater to the future CCMA water reclamation plant off Trainer Hale Road in Southern Schertz. The system consists of approximately 19,000 linear feet of 30” gravity wastewater line running generally along Woman Hollering Creek from the existing Sedona lift station on FM 1518 to a new lift station on IH 10 and approximately 6,000 feet of force main from the lift station to CCMA plant. It also includes an additional 18” gravity line approximately 1,500 feet in length that will first serve the Hallie’s Cove Subdivision. The system is necessary for the new CCMA plant to begin operation and to allow the existing Woman Hollering Lift Station at Sedona to be taken out of service. o Project Status: Construction o Projected Completion: Fall 2025 o Project Cost: Engineering/Design $1,187,594, Land purchases, ROW, legal and advertising $700,810, Construction $11,100,000, totaling $12,988,404 o Design Engineer: Cobb Fendley & Associates, Inc. o Owner’s Representative: AGCM, Inc. o Contractor: Thalle Construction Co, Inc. Project Update: No change since the last update. The collection and conveyance system including the lift station was put into operation March 3, 2025. The CCMA South Plant is operational. The Woman Hollering Package Treatment Plant has been shut down and is being cleaned and removed from the leased property location. The Sedona Lift Station and the pump and haul operation at Hallie’s Cove are being decommissioned. Staff are continuing to work on generating punch lists for the project to be completed. It is estimated that the remainder of the work on the project will take several months to complete. 2. Riata Lift Station Relocation Project Description – Relocation of the Riata Lift Station ahead of TxDOT’s IH 35 NEX project to remove it from conflict with the proposed highway improvements. The design phase included identification of a new site for the list station, design of new lift station and design of the abandonment of the existing lift station. Property and easement acquisitions were required. The new lift station is needed to maintain sewer services. o Project Status: Begin Construction 4th Quarter of 2024. o Projected Completion: Summer 2026 o Project Cost: Design & Acquisition of easements and existing lift station $478,000; Construction: $2,545,375 o Consultant: Utility Engineering Group, PLLC o Contractor: Keystone Construction o Project Update: Keystone has completed the gravity and force main installation within Fairlawn Avenue. The roadway is back open for traffic, but final repaving will be completed at the end of the project once the new lift station is operational and the old lines can be abandoned. 3. FM 1518 Utility Relocations Project Description – Relocation of water and sewer utilities to avoid conflicts as part of the TxDOT FM 1518 Improvement Project. o Project Status: Construction o Projected Completion: The City’s utility relocation portion of the project is expected to be completed in the summer of 2025. o Project Cost: Design NTE $980,000, Construction Joint Bid $8,986,837/Aztec 16” Line $884,270 o Consultant: Halff Associates o Contractor: SER Construction Partners (TxDOT’s General Contractor)/Qro Mex Construction (Aztec 16” Line) Project Update: SER has slowed down on the installation of water and sewer on the north end of the project due to CCMA working on their utility relocations within the same area. Once CCMA is completed in the area, SER will resume utility installation. TXDOT is reviewing the City’s request to fully abandon in place the old 10” sewer line near the Founders School. If approved, Capital Excavation will be complete with the public water and sewer install in this location 4. Corbett Ground Storage Tank Project Description – Construction of a new 3-million-gallon Ground Storage Tank (GST). The GST will be used to fill the existing Corbett Elevated Storage Tank and provide additional water storage capacity. This new GST will receive water directly from the Schertz Seguin Local Government Corporation. o Project Status: Construction Phase o Projected Completion: Fall 2025 o Project Cost: Design $466,265, Construction $7,360,054 o Consultant: Unintech Consulting Engineers o Contractor: Pesado Construction Co. Project Update: Construction efforts resumed in August with the delivery of the electrical switchboard. The planned schedule is to be substantially complete near the end of September. 5. Water Loop Lines Project Description – Install 12” water main lines to provide a looped distribution system from Ware Seguin to Lower Seguin and Pfeil Road to N Graytown Road. o Project Status: Design/Easement Acquisition o Projected Completion: Spring 2026 o Project Cost: Design NTE $200,000, Construction Estimate $4,400,000 Project Update: No new updates to this project at this time. 6. IH 35 NEX-North Utility Relocations Project Description – Relocation of water and sewer utilities to avoid conflicts as part of the TxDOT IH 35 NEX project. o Project Status: Design o Projected Completion: Joint Bid Construction is planned for End of 2026 o Project Cost: Design & Easement Acquisition Services - $1,250,000 o Consultant: Halff Associates Project Update: The final easement payment is being processed. The construction for the non-joint bid sewer relocations was bid on August 21st. Unfortunately, the City only received one (1) bid which exceeded the engineers’ OPCC. We are discussing this with TXDOT to confirm whether or not we can accept this bid. Extent of IH 35 NEX – Northern Segment 7. Robin Hood Way Waterline Replacement Project Description – Replacement and upsizing of water line in Robin Hood Way, Sherlock Lane, and Nottingshire. The main replacement is to increase flows in the area, particularly to meet fire flow requirements. The project also includes street resurfacing and rehabilitation work that was previously removed from the SPAM project. o Project Status: Design o Projected Completion: Fall 2025 o Project Cost: $5,350,000 o Consultant: Kimley- Horn & Associates Project Update: Staff has reviewed the preliminary plans and provided comments to the consultant. The consultant is preparing a new cost estimate for the project. 8. Bell North Sewer Extension Project Description – Ten commercial properties on the west end of Bell North Drive are served by private grinder pumps that pump into a public wastewater force main that discharges into a manhole near 17316 Bell North Drive. This project is the construction of a gravity sewer main within Bell North Drive that will flow toward and discharge into the main on Doerr Lane. o Project Status: Design o Projected Completion: TBD o Project Cost: Design $95,000 o Consultant: Freeland Turk Engineering Group LLC Project Update: Staff is reviewing the most recent set of plans, project manual, and cost estimate provided by Freeland Turk. Once everything is approved, we will start advertising to bid the project. 9. Northcliffe Country Club Estates Water and Wastewater Main Replacement Project Description – replacement of the water and wastewater mains and rehabilitation of the streets in the Northcliffe Country Club Estates subdivision. o Project Status: Design o Projected Completion: Fall 2026 o Project Cost: Design & Easement Acquisition Services - $10,435,000 o Consultant: Unintech Consulting Engineers, Inc. Project Update: No change from last month. Project design is underway. 10. Cibolo West Wastewater Trunk Main Project Description – Installation of approximately 21,680 LF of gravity wastewater trunk main that will collect wastewater at the location of the Saddlebrook Wastewater Lift Station as well as areas north of Schaefer Road and convey flows south along a route including along Weir and Trainer Hale Roads and the west side of Cibolo Creek to the CCMA South Water Reclamation Plant. Having this line in place will ultimately allow the decommissioning of the Corbett and Saddlebrook Lift Stations. The project is a collaboration between the City of Schertz and Green Valley Special Utility District (GVSUD). o Project Status: Route Study o Projected Completion: Study expected to be complete Summer 2025 o Total Project Cost: $16,213,000 o Consultant for Study: Lockwood, Andrews, & Newnam, Inc. Project Update: Staff provided comments on the Technical Memorandum, “Cibolo West Trunk Main Route Study and Analysis” to the consultant. The report includes the final proposed alignment, line sizes, easement needs, and preliminary cost estimates. Staff is awaiting the final draft at the time of this report. The next phase of the project will be the acquisition of easements needed for the line. 11. Elevated Storage Tank Pipe Replacement and Tank Painting Project Description – Rehabilitation of vertical fill and drain line piping in the East Live Oak and Northcliffe elevated storage tanks due to increased signs of fatigue at the welded joints. The project also includes the painting of the interior and exterior of the East Live Oak and Northcliffe elevated tanks and the Ware Seguin ground storage tank. o Project Status: Design o Projected Completion: Design expected to be complete Fall 2025 o Total Project Cost: $2,600,000 Estimated Total o Consultant for Study: Unintech Consulting Engineers, Inc. Project Update: Staff is working with consultant to hire a contractor who is able to perform sampling of the piping with as little disruption to service as possible. Once the samples are taken and testing complete, the results will be evaluated to determine the underlying cause of the deterioration and design the rehabilitation plan. 12. Schertz Parkway 16” Water Transmission Main Replacement Project Description – Replacement of approximately 1,200 linear feet of 16” water transmission main along Schertz Parkway between Mare Way and Maske Road. o Project Status: Design o Projected Completion: TBD o Project Cost: Design $180,824 ($220,000 NTE), Construction Estimate $1,575,000 o Consultant: Unintech Consulting Engineers, Inc. o Contractor: TBD Project Update: The task order for professional services approved by Council on June 3 has been executed. A kickoff meeting with the design consultant will be scheduled soon. 13. FM 3009 18” Water Transmission Main Replacement Project Description – Replacement of approximately 7,600 linear feet of 18” water transmission main. o Project Status: Design o Projected Completion: TBD o Project Cost: Design $431,752 ($475,000 NTE), Construction Estimate (including easement acquisition) $4,875,000 o Consultant: Unintech Consulting Engineers, Inc. o Contractor: TBD Project Update: The task order for professional services approved by Council on August 19 is being executed. A kickoff meeting with the design consultant will be scheduled soon. 14. IH 35 Ground Storage Tank and Pump Station Project Description – Construction of a 3-million-gallon ground storage tank and pump station adjacent to the existing IH 35 elevated storage tank to provide storage capacity that can be filled during non-peak hours of the day. o Project Status: Design o Projected Completion: TBD o Project Cost: Design $728,068 ($800,000 NTE), Construction Estimate (including land acquisition $13,750,000 o Consultant: Unintech Consulting Engineers, Inc. o Contractor: TBD Project Update: The task order for professional services approved by Council on August 19 is being executed. A kickoff meeting with the design consultant will be scheduled soon. 15. Lift Station Decommissioning Project Description – Decommissioning of Elbel and Whisper Branch Lift Stations including regulatory documentation and physical demolition and abandonment. The project also includes the development of a lift station decommissioning standard guidance document that can be used by the City for future lift station decommissioning projects. o Project Status: Design o Projected Completion: TBD o Project Cost: Design $49,635 Construction Estimate TBD o Consultant: Utility Engineering Group o Contractor: TBD Project Update: The task order for professional services is being executed. The consultant will begin information gathering soon. Street Projects: 1. Main Street Improvements Project Project Description – The project will improve sidewalks, provide street lighting, way-finding signage, landscaping, utility relocations, and architectural elements such as decorative concrete, decorative lighting, screening, and area signage. This project will also replace aging water and sanitary sewer mains and reconstruct the street with a new, stronger pavement section. Additionally, Lindbergh between Main and Exchange will be reconstructed. o Project Status: Design o Projected Completion: Fall 2027 o Project Cost: Design NTE $2,173,905, Construction $24,600,000 o Consultant: Kimley- Horn Associates Project Update: Staff has confirmed the underground space needs for the other utilities and is coordinating with AT&T. Final plans for the water main and sewer main replacement are in progress. Staff expects to start the public outreach effort and easement acquisition this Fall. 2. Lookout Road Reconstruction Project Description – The project involves reconstruction of Lookout Road from Schertz Parkway to Doerr Lane. A traffic signal at the Lookout Road/Schertz Parkway intersection will also be installed. The project also includes the replacement and upsizing the existing sanitary sewer main in Lookout Road from Doerr Lane to Schertz Parkway. o Project Status: Design o Projected Completion: March 2026 o Project Cost: Design $571,000 ($20,000 from Selma), Construction estimate $6,738,092 ($100,000 from Selma) o Design Consultant: Halff Associates Project Update: No changes from last month. Right-of-Way acquisition at the Schertz Parkway and Doerr Lane intersections is underway. Our consultant is coordinating with the utility companies to get the known conflicts addressed. There are some last-minute sewer line changes are being incorporated into the project plans to up-size part of the new sewer line to a 24” diameter. Staff will be working with EDC to start detailed public outreach to businesses in the near future. 3. Lower Seguin Road Reconstruction Project Description – The project will reconstruct a 2.9-mile segment of Lower Seguin Road to widen and improve the street to the section identified in the Master Thoroughfare Plan. The City intends to pursue Federal DCIP funding for project construction. o Project Status: Design o Projected Completion: January 2027 o Project Cost: $18,200,000 o Consultant: Halff & Associates Project Update: We have been informed that our DCIP funding application was unsuccessful for the project. We will be able to get feedback on our application in early October from the DCIP folks. Staff and our consultant are exploring other potential funding sources that could be used for the project. In the meantime, right-of-way acquisition and environmental clearance is still underway to get the project fully “shovel ready” as soon as possible. 4. Buffalo Valley South Resurfacing and Rehabilitation and Utility Replacements Project Description – Water and sanitary sewer main replacements and street rehabilitation of Buffalo Valley South, specifically Mill Street, 1st St, 2nd St, Bowman St, Lee St, Church St, Zuehl St, and Wuest. PCI data was used to select the streets in the project. Project will be funded with a combination of SPAM funding (for the street rehabilitation) and ARP funding for the utility replacement. o Project Status: Construction o Projected Completion: Winter 2026 o Project Cost: $5,705,000 (estimated total) o Design Consultant: Unintech Consulting Engineering o Contractor: E-Z Bel Construction, LLC Project Update: The water and sewer line installation is still progressing well in the subdivision. The installation is over halfway complete and less than half of the contract time has elapsed for the project. Sewer line and water line installation in Church Street has been completed and the sewer line installation in Dowman, and 1st Street is nearly complete and the sewer line installation in 2nd street is well underway. The contractor’s street crews have been delayed on other projects, so the street rehabilitation hasn’t started yet. The contractor expects to start the street work at the middle of this month. Below are two pictures showing the gage for the pressure test of one of the new water mains. The left picture shows the pressure at the start of the test, and the right shows the same gage two hours later, passing the “hydrostatic test.” 5. Boenig Drive Reconstruction Project Description – Reconstruction of Boenig Drive between Ware Seguin Road and Graytown Road. The reconstruction includes reconfiguration of the intersection with Ware Seguin Road to improve efficiencies and eliminate having two street intersections side-by side on Ware Seguin Road. o Project Status: Design o Projected Completion: Winter 2025 o Project Cost: $3,240,000 o Consultant: Unintech Consulting Engineers, Inc. Project Update: No change from last month. The preliminary plan review has been completed and comments provided to our consultant. The consultant is working on Final plans now. 6. 2024 SPAM Rehabilitation Project Description – Rehabilitation of St. Andrews, Maple, and part of the Silvertree Subdivision streets. Rehabilitation involves removing the existing pavement, applying cement stabilizing to the material underneath, and placing a new layer of pavement on the street. o Project Status: Construction o Projected Completion: Winter 2025 o Project Cost: $3,581,000 o Consultant: Kimley-Horn Associates o Contractor: E-Z Bel Construction, LLC Project Update: Due to eh contractor’s crews being delayed on other projects, this project start has been delayed. The contractor expects to start construct towards the end of this month. Staff and our consultant are reviewing material submittals for the project now. 7. 2025 SPAM Resurfacing Project Description – Resurfacing of the streets in the Ashley Woods, Woodbridge, and Rio Vista subdivisions. Resurfacing involves performing localized concrete repairs; base repairs; asphalt level up; crack sealing; and applying a slurry seal to the surface of the streets. o Project Status: Design o Projected Completion: Spring 2026 o Project Cost: $1,282,231 o Consultant: Kimley-Horn Associates Project Update: No change from last report. Design is underway. 8. Kramer Farm Rehabilitation Project Description – Rehabilitation of the western streets in Kramer Farm Subdivision. Rehabilitation involves removing the existing pavement, applying cement stabilizing to the material underneath, and placing a new layer of pavement on the street. o Project Status: Construction o Projected Completion: Winter 2025 o Project Cost: $1,446,582 o Consultant: Kimley-Horn Associates Project Update: No change from last report. Design is underway. 9. FM 3009 Overpass Project Description – TXDOT project for overpass construction at the FM 3009/FM 78 intersection to elevate the main lanes of FM 3009 over the railroad tracks and FM 78. On and off ramps will be provided so vehicles can travel between FM 3009 and FM 78 at the intersection. The project includes some improvements to FM 78 to improve operational efficiencies of the on and off ramps. o Project Status: Schematic Design and Environmental Clearance o Projected Completion: TBD o Project Cost: $40,000,000 (TXDOT) o Consultant: Kimley-Horn Associates Project Update: No change from last month. The schematic plans and the environmental clearance are still underway. TXDOT has formally applied to the Alamo Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (AAMPO) for construction funding. While TXDOT has applied for funding, this doesn’t mean the funding will be available and construction starting soon. By applying for funding now, it gets the project “on the list” for AAMPO to consider and does not mean construction will occur soon. While funding is being considered by AAMPO, the environmental clearance and design efforts will continue, and more public meetings will be held to help refine the project design. Parks & Recreation Projects: 1. Schertz Soccer Complex Irrigation Water Storage Project Project Description – Upgrading electrical components, upsizing well pump and piping, and adding storage capacity for irrigation of the Schertz Soccer Complex. o Project Status: Pending Construction Schedule o Projected Completion: Fall 2025 o Project Cost: $200,000 (estimated total) o Consultant: Unintech Engineering o Contractor: Kutscher Drilling Project Update: One bid was received (Kutscher Drilling) for the new well that is needed to be compliant with Edwards Aquifer Authority standards and Council approved the contract on May 6. Construction is still pending the vendor’s scheduling and the permit approval from EAA, likely September 2025. Once the new well is drilled, the final phase is adding the additional storage tanks which city staff will facilitate. I.T. Projects: 1. Asset Management- Work Order System – Open Gov Project Description- Replace the current work order and asset management systems o Project Status: In progress o Projected Completion: Fall 2025 o Project Cost: Approximately $470,000 o Contractor: Open Gov Project Update: Over the past month, Fleet, Facilities, IT, and Water/Wastewater have been actively working within the OpenGov Asset Management System. Staff have been developing processes, work orders, and procedures tailored to each department’s specialized needs. OpenGov is now preparing to begin Phase II of the software integration, which will include Parks, Drainage, and Streets, starting in September. Studies and Plans: 1. Master Thoroughfare Plan and Roadway Impact Fee Update Project Description – Update to City’s Master Thoroughfare Plan and Roadway Impact Fee Program. o Project Status: Study o Projected Completion: Schedule Pending o Total Project Cost: $$149,460 ($170,000 NTE) o Consultant for Study: Kimley-Horn Associates Project Update: The task order for this project was approved by Council on August 5. Staff is scheduling a kick-off meeting with the consultant to begin work on an update to the Master Thoroughfare Plan and Roadway Impact Fee Program. The meeting is expected to take place in early September. 2. Southern Schertz Interim Sewer Service Study Project Description – Until the completion of expansion of the CCMA South Water Reclamation Plant, treatment capacity in southern Schertz is severely limited. This project is a study to identify potential short-term and long-term sewer service treatment options for the City’s southern service area. o Project Status: Study o Projected Completion: Schedule Pending o Total Project Cost: $59,695 o Consultant for Study: Utility Engineering Group Project Update: The task order for this professional services effort is being executed. A kickoff meeting for the consultant to begin gathering information will be scheduled soon. 3. Regional Flood Planning Though not a formal, funded study, Staff is working with Regions 11 and 12 Flood Planning Groups to identify flooding issues throughout the City and flood management strategies to address them. Staff has provided information previously missing from the groups’ mapping regarding low water crossings, critical facilities, shelters, etc. TxDOT Roadway Projects: Note: If links do not work, please contact engineering@schertz.com 1. FM 1103 Improvement Project: Construction officially began in November 2022 and was originally expected to be complete in fall 2026. Minor progress is being made on the roadway while utility relocation continues. General project updates are available by signing up at this link: FM 1103 Construction Newsletter 2. FM 1518 Improvement Project: SER Construction, LLC, formally began construction on April 9, 2024. The contractor has leased property owned by the City on Schaefer Road to stage construction activities. The first few months of the project will be mainly underground utility construction and will mostly take place outside travel lanes. While there may be some delays, major traffic disruptions should not be experienced much during this phase of the project. The project is currently anticipated to be completed in 2028. Updates regarding the FM 1518 project are available by visiting and subscribing at the following link: FM 1518 Expansion 3. IH-35 NEX (I-410 South to FM 1103): The central segment of the I-35 Northeast Expansion project continues with Alamo NEX Construction handling the design-build project. The central section runs from 410 N to FM 3009. Utility coordination work for the northern segment of the project is underway. TxDOT consultants have met with Public Works and Engineering Staff to begin establishing relocation needs. The City will be reimbursed for the costs of all relocations needed except for any upsizing or improvements above current conditions. Updates about the project can be obtained by signing up at the following link: I 35 NEX Project Updates 4. IH-10 Graytown Road to Guadalupe County Line: Work for the widening of the main lanes and utility relocations continues. Work on the FM 1518 bridge over IH 10 continues and will involve numerous episodes of the rerouting of traffic including shifting lanes and detours as necessary. Updates regarding the IH 10 project are available by signing up at the following link: IH 10 Expansion Information Agenda No. 11.   CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM    City Council Meeting:September 02, 2025 Department:Purchasing & Asset Management Subject:Updated Purchasing Policy and Vendor Expenditure Report (S.Gonzalez/J.Kurz) BACKGROUND The City Charter previously dictated that the Purchasing Policy be approved by City Council. However, with the 2015 Charter amendments, this authority was delegated to the City Manager. The Purchasing Policy was last updated in March 2024, with the implementation of the Incode update (ERP Pro 10). The 2024 updates included procedural changes only and did not alter or negate statutory requirements such as procurement standards, authority, or competitive bidding thresholds. During the 89th Legislative Session, Senate Bill (SB) 1173 was passed, raising the competitive bidding threshold for local governments from $50,000 to $100,000 effective September 1, 2025. This means cities, counties, school districts, and other local entities can now make purchases or enter into contracts up to $100,000 without having to go through a formal competitive bidding process. SB 1173 gives local governments more flexibility, allowing them to respond to needs quickly and reduce administrative overhead. Bidding thresholds were last raised in 2007, and without periodic adjustments to account for inflation, local governments may waste time and resources bidding out relatively routine projects or purchases that used to cost far less. SB 1173 doesn’t remove oversight entirely—internal controls, audits, and public transparency still apply—but it modernizes the rules to reflect economic reality. Effective September 1, 2025, the City's Purchasing Policy has been revised as follows:  Congruency with the new statutory competitive bidding thresholds1. Added verbiage regarding compliance with Federal Procurement Standards (2CFR Part 200, D), which is required by some granting agencies 2. Minor procedural clarifications3. A copy of the redlined changes and a clean copy of the revised policy is attached for Council's reference. Additionally, attached is a vendor expenditure report from July 2025, detailing all vendors with whom the City spent $25,000 - $100,000. These reports will be provided to Council monthly going forward for awareness.  Attachments Purchasing Policy 09.01.2025 FINAL Purchasing Policy 09.01.2025 Redline July 2025 Vendor Expenditure Report TX Senate Bill 1173 THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS PURCHASING POLICY 1400 SCHERTZ PARKWAY SCHERTZ, TEXAS 78154 Effective 1 September 2025 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ................................... ..................................................................... 3 2. ROLE OF THE PURCHASING DEPARTMENT .................................................................. 3 3. PROCUREMENT STANDARDS ..................................................................................... 4 4. PROCUREMENT AUTHORITY ...................................................................................... 6 5. PURCHASING THRESHOLDS ........................................................................................ 7 6. EXEMPT PURCHASING FUNCTIONS .......................................................................... 10 7. EQUIPMENT AND VEHICLE PURCHASES .................................................................... 13 8. PETTY CASH PURCHASES .......................................................................................... 13 9. SPECIAL PROCEDURES FOR PUBLIC SAFETY SPECIFIC ITEMS ...................................... 14 10. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS .................................................................................... 14 11. FIXED ASSETS ........................................................................................................... 14 12. SURPLUS ................................................................................................................. 14 13. CONSIDERATION OF LOCATION OF BIDDER’S PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS ............ 14 ATTACHMENTS A. PURCHASING DECISION TREE ............... ................................................................... 15 B. SOURCING STRATEGY .......................... ................................................................... 16 C. CITY STANDARD INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS ........................................................... 17 D. FEDERAL PROCUREMENT STANDARDS ...................................................................... 18 3 1. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this policy is to establish and describe the basic procurement philosophy and processes under which the City of Schertz (“the City”) operates. This established procurement framework provides for the planned and consistent approach of cost-effectively obtaining the necessary goods and services required to operate City departments in order to maintain service at appropriate levels. Additionally, the policy outlines the consistent and ethical processes and procedures that will demonstrate the City’s commitment to procuring goods and services in a fair, transparent, effective and legally compliant manner. The processes used to procure goods and services should always provide the best value (price and quality) for the City, while providing an open and fair process for vendors. This policy will apply to all procurements funded by the City of Schertz, bond funds, and other funds unless specifically exempted by applicable law or by City policy. The exceptions are limited to items listed in Section 7, as well as certain professional services, real property, and leases that, because of their nature, are not conducive to normal purchasing routine. These procurements shall be made under the direction of the City Manager or designee. This policy is effective immediately upon issuance and supersedes all previous purchasing policy instructions or directives. 2. ROLE OF THE PURCHASING DEPARTMENT The Purchasing Department is charged with the overall responsibility for issuing solicitations and negotiating with sources on matters relating to price, delivery, vendor selection and execution of contracts in accordance with the City Policy, State of Texas Statutes, and applicable Federal government requirements. The Purchasing Department will provide the initial contact point for directors, managers, staff, suppliers, consultants, and the public interested in information on the City’s activities. It will oversee and supervise the issuance, receipt, and opening of all offers and proposals that are submitted relative to the purchase of equipment, materials, supplies, and surplus disposal. The Purchasing Department shall maintain purchase history information files, as well as documentation of all transactions. The Purchasing Department will participate in negotiations, where appropriate, with user departments, project managers, consultants or contractors relative to specifications and contractual responsibilities. This will facilitate the thorough understanding and preparation of specifications or contract terms and conditions. The Purchasing Department will participate with user departments in establishing clear, concise, nonrestrictive specifications and instructions to be utilized in procurement. City consultants and/or project managers, when conducting the “request for quote” or bid processes, shall coordinate with the Purchasing Department for all approvals to bid, advertisements and bid opening dates, as well as resulting purchase orders or contracts. The Purchasing Department shall promote and maintain good vendor, inter-departmental and community relationships. 4 3. PROCUREMENT STANDARDS a. Ethics: The City shall maintain the best possible relationship with all vendors. The goodwill of sources and the reputation of the City will be promoted by: i. Keeping competition fair and open. ii. Maintaining consistent procurement policies and principles. iii. Observing strict truthfulness in all transactions and correspondence. iv. Respecting the confidence of sales personnel and their companies as to confidential or proprietary information, as well as being scrupulous about maintaining the highest level of business ethics when dealing with sources and City departments. b. Conflicts of Interest: i. Affiliates (e.g., business concerns, organizations or individuals) and employees of the City are prohibited from submitting offers for or participating in any contract for City purchases from which they would financially benefit, directly or indirectly. No affiliate or employee of the City shall seek to influence in any manner the award of a contract or purchase of a product or service from any vendor. Affiliates and employees must immediately disclose to the City of any silent partnership, proprietorship, employment, relationship or other involvement in a prospective contract or procurement. ii. Acceptance of gifts by employees from sources or potential sources at any time is strictly prohibited, except for that which would be defined as de minimus by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Employees must not accept any gifts that create an obligation to any source and shall not conclude any transaction from which they benefit, directly or indirectly. City employees are not to participate in any type of extravagant entertainment with a supplier, customer, consultant, or contractor. These restrictions do not include entertainment such as business meals, company sponsored dinners, etc., which are customary and proper under the circumstances, as long as they are consistent with good business ethics and do not place the recipient under an obligation of any kind. Employees may not solicit or accept gratuities such as any type of compensation, contribution, emolument, offer of employment, loan, reward, rebate, gift, money, lodging, service, or “other thing of value,” except as specifically outlined in this section. iii. Employees who do not comply with this policy may be subject to disciplinary action in accordance with the City’s Discipline policy. 5 c. Purchasing Department Personnel: When potential conflict with an existing procurement regulation is suspected, or legal assistance is advisable, it is the responsibility of the Purchasing Department to notify the Department, Project Manager, Assistant City Manager, and/or City Manager. d. City Employees: All City employees are required to file a City of Schertz Conflict of Interest Form with the Purchasing Department if any family member is conducting, will conduct, or plans to conduct business with the City of Schertz. The form will be filled out annually (once a year) and filed with the Purchasing Department no later than October 1 of each year in which the family member begins discussions, correspondence, negotiations, submits an application or responds to a bid or proposal. e. Contractors: A person or business, and their agents, who contract with the City or who seek to contract with the City are required by Texas Local Government Code, Chapter 176, to file a conflicts disclosure questionnaire (Form CIQ) created by the Texas Ethics Commission which is available online at www.ethics.state.tx.us. The form must be filed with the City no later than seven (7) days after the date the person or business begins contract discussions or negotiations with the City, or submits an application, response to a request for proposals or bids, correspondence, or other writing related to a potential agreement with the city. Such person and businesses, and their agents, must also file an updated questionnaire not later than September 1 of each year in which the person or business begins contract discussions or negotiations with the City, or submits an application, response to a request for proposals or bids, correspondence, or other writing related to a potential agreement with the City and within seven (7) days after the date of an event that would make a filed questionnaire incomplete or inaccurate. An updated, complete questionnaire is not required if the person or business filed a questionnaire or updated questionnaire after June 1 but before September 1. Effective January 1, 2016, pursuant to House Bill 1295 passed by the 84th Texas Legislature (Section 2252.908, Texas Government Code, as amended) and formal rules released by the Texas Ethics Commission (TEC), all contracts with private business entities requiring approval by the Schertz City Council will require the on-line completion of Form 1295 "Certificate of Interested Parties." Form 1295 is also required for any and all contract amendments, extensions or renewals. Contractors are required to complete and file electronically with the Texas Ethics Commission using the online filing application. f. Elected and Appointed Officials: Elected and appointed officials are required to file with the Purchasing Department the state-mandated Conflicts Disclosure Statement as enumerated below: i. Officers of the City and its boards and commissions (including the Economic Development Corporation) must file a “conflicts disclosure statement” (Form CIS) with the Purchasing Department within seven days of becoming aware of: 6 1. The officer or a family member of the officer has an employment or business relationship that results in taxable income with a person who has executed a contract with the City or with whom the City is considering doing business; or 2. The officer or a family member of the officer has accepted one or more gifts (other than food, lodging, transportation, or entertainment) with an aggregate value of $250 in the preceding 12 months from a person who has executed a contract with the City or who is being considered for business with the City. 3. A family member is defined as a person related to another person within the first degree by consanguinity (blood) or affinity (marriage) which includes a spouse, father, mother, son, daughter, father-in-law, mother- in-law, etc. 4. The conflicts disclosure statement (Form CIS) has been created by the Texas Ethics Commission and is available online at www.ethics.state.tx.us. Failure to disclose information is a Class C misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed $500. g. Federal Procurement Standards When using Federal funds, the City of Schertz will adhere to the procurement standards as outlined in 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart D, and Appendix II. These standards apply to all procurement transactions for property or services under a Federal award or sub-award. The City's procurement procedures must be consistent with these federal standards, as well as all applicable State and local laws and regulations. See Attachment D for full text of federal requirements from 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart D, §§ 200.218–200.237, and Appendix II. 4. PROCUREMENT AUTHORITY The City Manager or one of the City Manager’s Designees has authority to approve procurements in the amount of $99,999.99 or less provided these expenditures are part of the City’s budget and do not require a budget transfer. Contracts for the purchase of goods and services involving an expenditure of $100,000 or greater require the approval of the City Council, whether or not the purchase has been obtained through a competitive bidding or RFP procedure. Council will approve all contract awards or reject all bids, if a contract is not awarded following a formal solicitation. 7 5. PURCHASING THRESHOLDS a. Purchases Less Than $3,000 Department head or designee may exercise discretion regarding the procurement of goods or services less than $3,000. Competitive quotations, formal bidding or a bid tabulation sheet are not required, but competition is recommended. If a physical signature is required on an agreement for less than $3,000, the City Manager has designated signature authority to the Department Head, but only AFTER the agreement has been reviewed by the Purchasing Department. b. Purchases Greater Than $3,000 But Less Than $25,000 User departments are responsible for obtaining a minimum of three informal telephone, email, fax or online quotes for goods or services when the total estimated cost is within the $3,000 to $24,999.99 range with exceptions as authorized by this policy. The quotes must be documented on a bid tabulation sheet and filed with purchase order documentation. Procurement of services in an amount less than $25,000 but greater than $3,000 will be accomplished with a Purchase Order (PO). For all purchases greater than $3,000 but less than $25,000, staff must obtain quotes from at least two (2) Historically Underutilized Businesses (HUB) located in Guadalupe County on a rotating basis. If a HUB cannot be identified, the City is exempt from this requirement. If a physical signature is required on an agreement for more than $3,000 but less than $25,000, the City Manager has designated signature authority to the Executive Team, but only AFTER the agreement has been reviewed by the Purchasing Department. c. Purchases Greater Than $24,999.99 But Less Than $100,000 User departments are responsible for obtaining a minimum of three informal written quotes for goods or services when the total estimated cost is within the $25,000 to $99,999.99 range with exceptions as authorized by this policy. The quotes must be documented on a bid tabulation sheet and filed with purchase order documentation. Procurement of services in an amount greater than $25,000 will require a written contract prepared by the Purchasing Department, in addition to a PO. For all purchases greater than $24,999.99 but less than $100,000, staff must obtain quotes from at least two (2) Historically Underutilized Businesses (HUB) located in Guadalupe County on a rotating basis. If a HUB cannot be identified, the City is exempt from this requirement. 8 The City Manager will sign all agreements with a contract value of more than $25,000 once the agreement has been reviewed by the Purchasing Department. d. Purchases Greater Than $100,000 The Texas Local Government Code requires either competitive bidding or competitive Requests for Proposals (“RFP”) for City purchases exceeding $100,000 with few exceptions. City employees are prohibited from making "separate, sequential, or component purchases to avoid the competitive bidding requirements". A violation of these prohibitions is a Class B misdemeanor ($1,000 fine and/or 180 days in jail), and conviction resulting in immediate removal from office or employment and ineligibility for other public office or employment for four (4) years after the date of conviction. Departments shall consult with the Purchasing Department on the proper procurement process to obtain goods and services greater than $100,000. Detailed specifications and statements of work (SOW) will be developed by the Department, in consultation with the Purchasing Department. The Purchasing Department will coordinate all formal solicitations, in accordance with State of Texas and local statutes. Component orders or contracts, each less than $100,000, but which in the aggregate exceed that amount, and which reasonably should be included in the one order or contract shall not be used to avoid the prohibition of Statutes. All Purchases $100,000 or greater require approval by City Council and the Purchasing Office prior to processing. The approved resolution number should be included in the Purchase Order notes. HIGH TECHNOLOGY PURCHASES: "High technology item" means a service, equipment, or good of a highly technical nature, including: a. data processing equipment and software and firmware used in conjunction with data processing equipment; b. telecommunications, radio, and microwave systems; c. electronic distributed control systems, including building energy management systems; and d. technical services related to those items. High technology purchases will be accomplished using a RFP process where the anticipated expense is in excess of $100,000. The Texas Local Government Code requires that the relative importance of price and other evaluation factors be specified in the RFP. All RFP’s will be prepared in cooperation with the User Department, Information Technology and the Purchasing Department. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES: "Professional Services" are those services which involve mental or intellectual skills, usually accompanied by formal certification or 9 licensing by a state agency, such as accounting, architecture, land surveying, engineering, medicine, real estate appraisal services. Section 2254 of the Government Code prohibits the purchase of professional services using competitive bidding requirements. User departments will select professional service consultants on the basis of demonstrated competence and qualifications and will negotiate fees on the basis of what is fair and reasonable for the type of services, rather than on a "low bid" basis. Except for architect, engineer and surveyor services as discussed below, both price and qualifications can be considered in selecting consultants. For the professional services listed above involving an anticipated expenditure of more than $100,000, user departments are encouraged to use a formal solicitation process in coordination with the Purchasing Department, but it is not mandatory. ARCHITECTS/ENGINEERS/SURVEYORS: Procurement of architectural, engineering or surveying services is two-step process. The first step involves the initial selection of the most highly qualified provider of the services based on demonstrated competence and qualifications (and not considering price); and the second step involves negotiation of a fee with the selected provider at a fair and reasonable price. If a contract cannot be successfully negotiated with the most highly qualified provider of services, then the contract negotiations will be formally ended and negotiations with the second most qualified provider may be undertaken, and so forth. It is important to keep in mind that price may not be considered in the initial selection of an engineer, architect or surveyor. CONTRACT AMENDMENTS: Contract amendments will be approved by the City Council if the contract was originally approved by the City Council and the amendment amount will take the total contract value above the Not-To-Exceed approved by City Council, or if amendment amount will take the total contract value above $100,000. ALTERNATIVE PROJECT DELIVERY METHODS FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS: The alternatives to the basic competitive bidding model of construction procurement are best-value competitive bidding, competitive sealed proposals, design-build, construction management-agent, construction management at-risk, and job order contracting. Alternative project delivery methods, as defined in the Local Government Code, Chapter 271, Subchapter H, may be used as applicable. 10 6. EXEMPT PURCHASING FUNCTIONS State law provides few exemptions from competitive bidding requirements. The City encourages the use of making certain exempt purchases using an RFP procedure even though such a procedure may not be required under state law. a. Emergency Purchases: Emergency purchases are those procurements necessary due to public calamity, to act at once to relieve the hardship of the citizens or to preserve the property of the City, to preserve or protect the public health or safety of the citizens, or when it is due to unforeseen damage to public property, machinery, or equipment. i. When emergency procurement of materials or services is required, the Department Head will consult with the Purchasing Department and obtain approval from the Assistant City Manager prior to any procurement action. ii. If an Assistant City Manager is not available, the Department Head will obtain only those materials or services absolutely critical to restore or re- establish essential City services. The Department Head must advise the Purchasing Department and the Assistant City Manager of these actions as soon as possible. iii. With approval from the City Manager or one of the City Manager’s Designees, specific procurements ($100,000 or more) may be outside the sealed bid process in the event of an emergency. The Purchasing Department must be notified of the emergency situation as soon as possible. iv. Staff will seek and obtain approval from the City Council for emergency procurements in excess of $100,000 as soon as possible. v. In the event of a declared local state of disaster or public health emergency, as authorized by City of Schertz Charter and Ordinance No. 00-M-36, please refer to the disaster purchasing policies included in the City’s Emergency Management Plan, Annex M – Resource Management. b. Sole Source Purchases: State laws allow for a limited exemption from competitive bidding for the purchase of goods where the functional requirements of the City can be satisfied by only one source. This applies to purchases where competition is precluded such as: 11 i. The existence of patents, copyrights, secret processes or natural monopolies; ii. The purchase of films, manuscripts or books; purchases of gas, water, and other utility services; and iii. The purchase of captive replacement parts or components for equipment. A product is eligible for sole source purchase only when there is a significant functional difference between the product and other similar products on the market, and when the item is available only from one vendor. The following are not sufficient justifications for a sole source purchase: i. A product is made by only one manufacturer, if products from other manufacturers are available that perform a similar function. ii. A particular name brand of product is preferred over other brands. iii. Only one local vendor offers a product, if other vendors who offer the product can meet the City's needs. All requests for sole source purchase require a sole source justification form be completed and approved by the Purchasing Department prior to any procurement action. c. Cooperative Purchasing: The City may enter into cooperative buying agreements with other local government agencies in accordance with the State of Texas Interlocal Cooperation Act of 1971. Use of co-ops should be coordinated through the Purchasing Department. When co-ops are used, bids are not required. However, employees are expected to use due diligence to ensure best value for the City. Cursory checks should be completed to ensure that cooperative pricing is competitive and in line with market value. An approved purchase order referencing the Group Purchasing Cooperative Contract and Contract Number is required before any purchase can be finalized. d. Exempt Purchases: Local Government Code Chapter 252.022 expressly exempts certain purchases from competitive procurement requirements. Purchases made under this exemption do not require formal consent of the City Council. The following are considered exempt: 12 (1) a procurement made because of a public calamity that requires the immediate appropriation of money to relieve the necessity of the municipality's residents or to preserve the property of the municipality; (2) a procurement necessary to preserve or protect the public health or safety of the municipality's residents; (3) a procurement necessary because of unforeseen damage to public machinery, equipment, or other property; (4) a procurement for personal, professional, or planning services; (5) a procurement for work that is performed and paid for by the day as the work progresses; (6) a purchase of land or a right-of-way; (7) a procurement of items that are available from only one source (8) a purchase of rare books, papers, and other library materials for a public library; (9) paving drainage, street widening, and other public improvements, or related matters, if at least one-third of the cost is to be paid by or through special assessments levied on property that will benefit from the improvements; (10) a public improvement project, already in progress, authorized by the voters of the municipality, for which there is a deficiency of funds for completing the project in accordance with the plans and purposes authorized by the voters; (11) a payment under a contract by which a developer participates in the construction of a public improvement as provided by Subchapter C, Chapter 212; (12) personal property sold: (A) at an auction by a state licensed auctioneer; (B) at a going out of business sale held in compliance with Subchapter F, Chapter 17, Business & Commerce Code; (C) by a political subdivision of this state, a state agency of this state, or an entity of the federal government; or (D) under an interlocal contract for cooperative purchasing administered by a regional planning commission established under Chapter 391; 13 (13) services performed by blind or severely disabled persons; (14) goods purchased by a municipality for subsequent retail sale by the municipality; (15) electricity; or (16) advertising, other than legal notices. 7. EQUIPMENT AND VEHICLE PURCHASES a. All equipment and vehicle purchases will be coordinated through the Fleet Department. Once the Fleet Department has approved the specifications, the Purchasing Department will coordinate the bidding process and issue the Purchase Order. b. Vehicle purchase and outfitting must be processed through Fleet and the Purchasing Department to ensure proper operation, registration, vehicle markings, and insurance requirements are met. This applies to all vehicles regardless of which Department or funding source made the purchase. c. All vehicles shall be delivered to the Fleet Department. Fleet will not release the vehicle until all requirements are met. Once the vehicle passes inspection Fleet will notify the owning department for payment processing. The owning department will then process the payment against the invoice and submit it to the Finance Department. 8. PETTY CASH PURCHASES: a. Petty cash may be used for emergency acquisition of supplies and/or services when the vendor will not accept a purchase order or procurement card. It is also used for attendance at luncheons, meetings, etc., where “cash only” is the normal method of payment. b. No item purchased with petty cash funds may exceed $100. c. All petty cash purchases must be supported with a receipt and written justification for the purchase. d. Individuals authorized to maintain petty cash accounts can get their accounts replenished by submitting a Purchase Order and attaching all relevant receipts as back-up to the Finance Department. 14 9. SPECIAL PROCEDURES FOR PUBLIC SAFETY SPECIFIC ITEMS: a. Any items that require special licensing to order, including but not limited to such items as medical supplies, medicines, firearms and ammunition, chemicals, etc., will be ordered by an authorized individual in the department. b. The person who holds a valid license to make such purchases must still coordinate with the Purchasing Department to ensure the best source of procurement. c. After the Purchasing Department has determined the best source of procurement, the license holder will prepare the appropriate purchase order, in accordance with this policy. 10. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS: The City may require certain insurance coverage to be provided by contractors, vendors and consultants. In general, if a service is being provided on City property, proof of insurance is required. Specific insurance requirements are incorporated into bid documents and specifications for each bid, proposal, or “request for purchase.” Insurance requirements are reviewed periodically to determine the appropriateness of coverage and values. 11. FIXED ASSETS The City is responsible for keeping records of all of its fixed assets. All new assets which have an original cost of $5,000 or more and an estimated life span of greater than one (1) year are fixed assets and will be added to the fixed assets records. All duties and responsibilities related to fixed assets inventory records are supervised by the Purchasing Department. Cooperation from department directors and division managers throughout the City is necessary if the system is to work; however, this effort is centrally organized, monitored, and reported by the Purchasing Department staff. Departments should submit a copy of the Purchase Order for a Fixed Asset to the Purchasing Department. 12. SURPLUS Individual Departments must contact the Purchasing Department for assistance with asset disposal. Surplus items will only be accepted with the proper forms and with advance notice and approval by the Purchasing Department. The Purchasing Department will determine if an item is surplus or salvage property. 13. CONSIDERATION OF LOCATION OF BIDDER’S PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS For purchases of $100,000 and over, where competitive sealed bids are used, a bid received from a bidder whose principal place of business is located within the City limits may be approved if the bid is within 3% of the lowest bid price received from a bidder outside the City limits, provided that said bid meets all qualifications and specifications and provides the best value to the City. 15 ATTACHMENT A Purchasing Decision Tree 16 ATTACHMENT B Sourcing Strategy Identifying a need properly is important; however, determining how best to meet that need is of equal importance. Needs can be met by a multitude of sources. These basic classifications are: o Insourcing: process of completing a business function in-house. o Outsourcing: process of contracting out a business function to an external entity. o Multi-sourcing: a strategy that distributes a function such as IT or Finance, as a portfolio of activities, some of which are performed internally and some of which are external. In order to determine if a service should be insourced, outsourced, or multi-sourced, the following criteria should be considered: o Efficiency of cost vs value; o Effectiveness in meeting the need; o Expertise needed to solve the problem; o Workload timing of insourced staff availability; o Workload volume of insourced staff to continue to provide service; o Scalability of the solution to adjust to demand; and o Mandated compliance requirements. A Case for Insourcing: There are several sources of solutions for needs that are not currently met by the City. Some may be derived internally. For a short-term need such as a storm damage cleanup of fallen trees, this can be accomplished by one of two means, temporary reassignment of staff or increase in the hours worked. Both have costs to the City; however, the short-term nature of the need does not require an extended cost commitment on departments if personnel and equipment resources are available. Long-term needs, however, may require a different approach. A Case for Outsourcing: For example, instead of storm damage cleanup of trees, City properties may have suffered a blight such as oak wilt. The mitigation would require extended specialized and technical capability to handle such a situation. In this case, the time committed to such a project might stretch in-house resources beyond the ability to effectively combat the issue. The City may hire additional staff to confront the issue however, after the issue is resolved, additional staff would require a long-term commitment of financial and administrative resources. This need could effectively be outsourced to a firm with the specialized technical skills and equipment to quickly and professional mitigate the issue. After the project is complete, the expenditure commitment is ended. Contact the Purchasing Department for assistance with sourcing. 17 ATTACHMENT C Standard Insurance Requirements Worker’s Compensation* Employer’s Liability Statutory $1,000,000/$1,000,000/$1,000,000 Commercial General (Public) Liability insurance to include coverage for the following: a. Premises Operations b. Independent Contractors** c. Products/Completed Operations d. Personal Injury e. Contractual Liability For Bodily Injury and Property Damage of $1,000,000 per occurrence. $2,000,000 General Aggregate, or its equivalent in Umbrella or Excess Liability Coverage Business Automobile Liability a. Owned/Leased Vehicles b. Non-owned Vehicles c. Hired Vehicles Combined Single Limit for Bodily Injury and property Damage of $1,000,000 per occurrence Professional Liability (Claims Made Form) $1,000,000 per claim to pay on behalf of the insured all sums, which the insured shall become legally obligated to pay as damages to the extent caused by any negligent act, error, or omission in the performance of professional services. *Alternate Plans must be approved by CITY’S Risk Manager **If applicable All insurance policies are to contain or be endorsed to contain the following required provisions: - The City of Schertz shall be named as an additional insured with respect to General Liability and Automobile Liability (not applicable to workers’ compensation and professional liability policies); - A waiver of subrogation in favor of The City of Schertz shall be contained in the Workers Compensation and all liability policies; - All insurance policies, which name The City of Schertz as an additional insured, must be endorsed to read as primary and non-contributory coverage regardless of the application of other insurance. - All insurance policies shall be endorsed to the effect that The City of Schertz will receive at least thirty (30) days written notice prior to cancellation or non-renewal of the insurance. Chapter 1811 of the Texas Insurance Code, Senate Bill 425 82(R) of 2011, states that the above endorsements cannot be on the certificate of insurance. Separate endorsements must be provided for each of the above. 18 ATTACHMENT D Federal Procurement Standards 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart D, §§ 200.218–200.237, and Appendix II Section V: Federal Procurement Standards (2 CFR Part 200, Subpart D) When using Federal funds, the City of Schertz must adhere to the procurement standards as outlined in 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart D, and Appendix II. These standards apply to all procurement transactions for property or services under a Federal award or sub-award. The City's procurement procedures must be consistent with these federal standards, as well as all applicable State and local laws and regulations. The following is a restatement of the federal requirements from 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart D, §§ 200.218–200.237, and Appendix II. § 200.218 General procurement standards (a) The City of Schertz must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The City's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.218 through 200.237. (b) The City must maintain oversight to ensure that contractors perform in accordance with the terms, conditions, and specifications of their contracts or purchase orders. (c) The City must maintain written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing the actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award and administration of contracts. No employee, officer, or agent may participate in the selection, award, or administration of a contract supported by a Federal award if he or she has a real or apparent conflict of interest. Such a conflict of interest would arise when the employee, officer, or agent, any member of his or her immediate family, his or her partner, or an organization that employs or is about to employ any of the parties indicated herein, has a financial or other interest in or a tangible personal benefit from a firm considered for a contract. The officers, employees, and agents of the City may neither solicit nor accept gratuities, favors, or anything of monetary value from contractors or parties to subcontracts. (d) The City's procedures must avoid the acquisition of unnecessary or duplicative items. Consideration should be given to consolidating or breaking out procurements to obtain a more economical purchase. When appropriate, an analysis should be made between leasing and purchasing property or equipment to determine the most economical approach. (e) When appropriate for the procurement or use of common or shared goods and services, the City is encouraged to enter into State and local intergovernmental agreements or inter-entity agreements for procurement transactions. These or similar procurement arrangements may foster greater 19 economy and efficiency. Documented procurement actions of this type will meet the competition requirements of this part. (f) The City is encouraged to use excess and surplus Federal property in lieu of purchasing new equipment and property whenever such use is feasible and reduces project costs. (g) The City is encouraged to use value engineering clauses in contracts for construction projects of sufficient size to offer reasonable opportunities for cost reductions. Value engineering means analyzing each contract item or task to ensure its essential function is provided at the overall lowest cost. (h) The City must award contracts only to responsible contractors that possess the ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of a proposed contract. The City must consider contractor integrity, public policy compliance, past performance record, and financial and technical resources when conducting a procurement transaction. (i) The City must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. (j) The City may use a time-and-materials type contract only after a determination that no other contract is suitable and if the contract includes a ceiling price that the contractor exceeds at its own risk. Further, the City must assert a high degree of oversight to obtain reasonable assurance that the contractor is using efficient methods and effective cost controls. (k) The City alone is responsible, in accordance with good administrative practice and sound business judgment, for the settlement of all contractual and administrative issues arising out of procurements. These issues include, but are not limited to, source evaluation, protests, disputes, and claims. These standards do not relieve the City of any contractual responsibilities under its contracts. The Federal awarding agency will not substitute its judgment for that of the City unless the matter is primarily a Federal concern. Appendix II to Part 200—Contract Provisions for Non-Federal Entity Contracts Under Federal Awards All contracts made by the City of Schertz under a Federal award must contain provisions covering the following, as applicable. 1. Remedies. All contracts for more than the simplified acquisition threshold must address administrative, contractual, or legal remedies in instances where contractors violate or breach contract terms, and provide for such sanctions and penalties as appropriate. 2. Termination for cause and for convenience. All contracts in excess of $10,000 must address termination for cause and for convenience by the City, including the manner by which it will be effected and the basis for settlement. 20 3. Equal Employment Opportunity. All contracts must contain a provision for Equal Employment Opportunity, as described in Executive Order 11246, "Equal Employment Opportunity," as amended by Executive Order 11375, "Amending Executive Order 11246 Relating to Equal Employment Opportunity," and supplemented by regulations at 41 CFR part 60, "Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Equal Employment Opportunity, Department of Labor." 4. Davis-Bacon Act, as amended (40 U.S.C. 3141-3148). When required by Federal program legislation, all prime construction contracts in excess of $2,000 awarded by the City must include a provision for compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act. 5. Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (40 U.S.C. 3701-3708). Where applicable, all contracts in excess of $100,000 that involve the employment of mechanics or laborers must include a provision for compliance with sections 102 and 107 of the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act. 6. Rights to Inventions Made Under a Contract or Agreement. If the Federal award meets the definition of "funding agreement" under 37 CFR § 401.2 (a) and the City wishes to enter into a contract with a small business firm or nonprofit organization regarding the substitution of parties, assignment or performance of experimental, developmental, or research work under that "funding agreement," the City must comply with the requirements of 37 CFR Part 401, "Rights to Inventions Made by Nonprofit Organizations and Small Business Firms Under Government Grants, Contracts, and Cooperative Agreements," and any implementing regulations issued by the awarding agency. 7. Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.) and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251-1387). Contracts and subawards of amounts in excess of $150,000 must contain a provision that requires the City to agree to comply with all applicable standards, orders, or regulations issued pursuant to the Clean Air Act and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. 8. Debarment and Suspension (Executive Orders 12549 and 12689). A contract award must not be made to parties listed on the government-wide Excluded Parties List System in the System for Award Management (SAM), in accordance with the OMB guidelines at 2 CFR part 180 that implement Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, "Debarment and Suspension." 9. Byrd Anti-Lobbying Amendment (31 U.S.C. 1352). Contractors that apply or bid for an award of $100,000 or more must file the required certification. Procurement of Recovered Materials. The City must comply with section 6002 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS PURCHASING POLICY 1400 SCHERTZ PARKWAY SCHERTZ, TEXAS 78154 Effective 1 September 2025 Redline 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ................................... ..................................................................... 3 2. ROLE OF THE PURCHASING DEPARTMENT .................................................................. 3 3. PROCUREMENT STANDARDS ..................................................................................... 4 4. PROCUREMENT AUTHORITY ...................................................................................... 6 5. PURCHASING THRESHOLDS ........................................................................................ 7 6. EXEMPT PURCHASING FUNCTIONS .......................................................................... 10 7. EQUIPMENT AND VEHICLE PURCHASES .................................................................... 13 8. PETTY CASH PURCHASES .......................................................................................... 13 9. SPECIAL PROCEDURES FOR PUBLIC SAFETY SPECIFIC ITEMS ...................................... 14 10. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS .................................................................................... 14 11. FIXED ASSETS ........................................................................................................... 14 12. SURPLUS ................................................................................................................. 14 13. CONSIDERATION OF LOCATION OF BIDDER’S PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS ............ 14 ATTACHMENTS A. PURCHASING DECISION TREE ............... ................................................................... 15 B. SOURCING STRATEGY .......................... ................................................................... 16 C. CITY STANDARD INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS ........................................................... 17 D. FEDERAL PROCUREMENT STANDARDS ...................................................................... 18 3 1. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this policy is to establish and describe the basic procurement philosophy and processes under which the City of Schertz (“the City”) operates. This established procurement framework provides for the planned and consistent approach of cost-effectively obtaining the necessary goods and services required to operate City departments in order to maintain service at appropriate levels. Additionally, the policy outlines the consistent and ethical processes and procedures that will demonstrate the City’s commitment to procuring goods and services in a fair, transparent, effective and legally compliant manner. The processes used to procure goods and services should always provide the best value (price and quality) for the City, while providing an open and fair process for vendors. This policy will apply to all procurements funded by the City of Schertz, bond funds, and other funds unless specifically exempted by applicable law or by City policy. The exceptions are limited to items listed in Section 7, as well as certain professional services, real property, and leases that, because of their nature, are not conducive to normal purchasing routine. These procurements shall be made under the direction of the City Manager or designee. This policy is effective immediately upon issuance and supersedes all previous purchasing policy instructions or directives. 2. ROLE OF THE PURCHASING DEPARTMENT The Purchasing Department is charged with the overall responsibility for issuing solicitations and negotiating with sources on matters relating to price, delivery, vendor selection and execution of contracts in accordance with the City Policy, State of Texas Statutes, and applicable Federal government requirements. The Purchasing Department will provide the initial contact point for directors, managers, staff, suppliers, consultants, and the public interested in information on the City’s activities. It will oversee and supervise the issuance, receipt, and opening of all offers and proposals that are submitted relative to the purchase of equipment, materials, supplies, and surplus disposal. The Purchasing Department shall maintain purchase history information files, as well as documentation of all transactions. The Purchasing Department will participate in negotiations, where appropriate, with user departments, project managers, consultants or contractors relative to specifications and contractual responsibilities. This will facilitate the thorough understanding and preparation of specifications or contract terms and conditions. The Purchasing Department will participate with user departments in establishing clear, concise, nonrestrictive specifications and instructions to be utilized in procurement. City consultants and/or project managers, when conducting the “request for quote” or bid processes, shall coordinate with the Purchasing Department for all approvals to bid, advertisements and bid opening dates, as well as resulting purchase orders or contracts. The Purchasing Department shall promote and maintain good vendor, inter-departmental and community relationships. 4 3. PROCUREMENT STANDARDS a. Ethics: The City shall maintain the best possible relationship with all vendors. The goodwill of sources and the reputation of the City will be promoted by: i. Keeping competition fair and open. ii. Maintaining consistent procurement policies and principles. iii. Observing strict truthfulness in all transactions and correspondence. iv. Respecting the confidence of sales personnel and their companies as to confidential or proprietary information, as well as being scrupulous about maintaining the highest level of business ethics when dealing with sources and City departments. b. Conflicts of Interest: i. Affiliates (e.g., business concerns, organizations or individuals) and employees of the City are prohibited from submitting offers for or participating in any contract for City purchases from which they would financially benefit, directly or indirectly. No affiliate or employee of the City shall seek to influence in any manner the award of a contract or purchase of a product or service from any vendor. Affiliates and employees must immediately disclose to the City of any silent partnership, proprietorship, employment, relationship or other involvement in a prospective contract or procurement. ii. Acceptance of gifts by employees from sources or potential sources at any time is strictly prohibited, except for that which would be defined as de minimus by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Employees must not accept any gifts that create an obligation to any source and shall not conclude any transaction from which they benefit, directly or indirectly. City employees are not to participate in any type of extravagant entertainment with a supplier, customer, consultant, or contractor. These restrictions d o not include entertainment such as business meals, company sponsored dinners, etc., which are customary and proper under the circumstances, as long as they are consistent with good business ethics and do not place the recipient under an obligation of any kind. Employees may not solicit or accept gratuities such as any type of compensation, contribution, emolument, offer of employment, loan, reward, rebate, gift, money, lodging, service, or “other thing of value,” except as specifically outlined in this section. iii. Employees who do not comply with this policy may be subject to disciplinary action in accordance with the City’s Discipline policy. 5 c. Purchasing Department Personnel: When potential conflict with an existing procurement regulation is suspected, or legal assistance is advisable, it is the responsibility of the Purchasing Department to notify the Department, Project Manager, Assistant City Manager, and/or City Manager. d. City Employees: All City employees are required to file a City of Schertz Conflict of Interest Form with the Purchasing Department if any family member is conducting, will conduct, or plans to conduct business with the City of Schertz. The form will be filled out annually (once a year) and filed with the Purchasing Department no later than October 1 of each year in which the family member begins discussions, correspondence, negotiations, submits an application or responds to a bid or proposal. e. Contractors: A person or business, and their agents, who contract with the City or who seek to contract with the City are required by Texas Local Government Code, Chapter 176, to file a conflicts disclosure questionnaire (Form CIQ) created by the Texas Ethics Commission which is available online at www.ethics.state.tx.us. The form must be filed with the City no later than seven (7) days after the date the person or business begins contract discussions or negotiations with the City, or submits an application, response to a request for proposals or bids, correspondence, or other writing related to a potential agreement with the city. Such person and businesses, and their agents, must also file an updated questionnaire not later than September 1 of each year in which the person or business begins contract discussions or negotiations with the City, or submits an application, response to a request for proposals or bids, correspondence, or other writing related to a potential agreement with the City and within seven (7) days after the date of an event that would make a filed questionnaire incomplete or inaccurate. An updated, complete questionnaire is not required if the person or business filed a questionnaire or updated questionnaire after June 1 but before September 1. Effective January 1, 2016, pursuant to House Bill 1295 passed by the 84th Texas Legislature (Section 2252.908, Texas Government Code, as amended) and formal rules released by the Texas Ethics Commission (TEC), all contracts with private business entities requiring approval by the Schertz City Council will require the on-line completion of Form 1295 "Certificate of Interested Parties." Form 1295 is also required for any and all contract amendments, extensions or renewals. Contractors are required to complete and file electronically with the Texas Ethics Commission using the online filing application. f. Elected and Appointed Officials: Elected and appointed officials are required to file with the Purchasing Department the state-mandated Conflicts Disclosure Statement as enumerated below: i. Officers of the City and its boards and commissions (including the Economic Development Corporation) must file a “conflicts disclosure statement” (Form CIS) with the Purchasing Department within seven days of becoming aware of: 6 1. The officer or a family member of the officer has an employment or business relationship that results in taxable income with a person who has executed a contract with the City or with whom the City is considering doing business; or 2. The officer or a family member of the officer has accepted one or more gifts (other than food, lodging, transportation, or entertainment) with an aggregate value of $250 in the preceding 12 months from a person who has executed a contract with the City or who is being considered for business with the City. 3. A family member is defined as a person related to another person within the first degree by consanguinity (blood) or affinity (marriage) which includes a spouse, father, mother, son, daughter, father-in-law, mother- in-law, etc. 4. The conflicts disclosure statement (Form CIS) has been created by the Texas Ethics Commission and is available online at www.ethics.state.tx.us. Failure to disclose information is a Class C misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed $500. g. Federal Procurement Standards When using Federal funds, the City of Schertz will adhere to the procurement standards as outlined in 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart D, and Appendix II. These standards apply to all procurement transactions for property or services under a Federal award or sub -award. The City's procurement procedures must be consistent with these federal standards, as well as all applicable State and local laws and regulations. See Attachment D for full text of federal requirements from 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart D, §§ 200.218–200.237, and Appendix II. 4. PROCUREMENT AUTHORITY The City Manager or one of the City Manager’s Designees has authority to approve procurements in the amount of $49,999.99 99,999.99 or less provided these expenditures are part of the City’s budget and do not require a budget transfer. Contracts for the purchase of goods and services involving an expenditure of $50,000 100,000 or greater require the approval of the City Council, whether or not the purchase has been obtained through a competitive bidding or RFP procedure. Council will approve all contract awards or reject all bids, if a contract is not awarded following a formal solicitation. 7 5. PURCHASING THRESHOLDS a. Purchases Less Than $3,000 Department head or designee may exercise discretion regarding the procurement of goods or services less than $3,000. Competitive quotations, formal bidding or a bid tabulation sheet are not required, but competition is recommended. If a physical signature is required on an agreement for less than $3,000, the City Manager has designated signature authority to the Department Head, but only AFTER the agreement has been reviewed by the Purchasing Department. b. Purchases Greater Than $3,000 But Less Than $25,000 User departments are responsible for obtaining a minimum of three informal telephone, email, fax or online quotes for goods or services when the total estimated cost is within the $3,000 to $24,999.99 range with exceptions as authorized by this policy. The quotes must be documented on a bid tabulation sheet and filed with purchase order documentation. Procurement of services in an amount less than $25,000 but greater than $3,000 will generally be accomplished with a Purchase Order (PO). For all purchases greater than $3,000 but less than $25,000, staff must obtain quotes from at least two (2) Historically Underutilized Businesses (HUB) located in Guadalupe County on a rotating basis. If a HUB cannot be identified, the City is exempt from this requirement. If a physical signature is required on an agreement for more than $3,000 but less than $25,000, the City Manager has designated signature authority to the Executive Team, but only AFTER the agreement has been reviewed by the Purchasing Department. c. Purchases Greater Than $24,999.99 But Less Than $50,000100,000 User departments are responsible for obtaining a minimum of three informal written quotes for goods or services when the total estimated cost is within the $25,000 to $49,999.99 99,999.99 range with exceptions as authorized by this policy. The quotes must be documented on a bid tabulation sheet and filed with purchase order documentation. Procurement of services in an amount greater than $25,000 will require a written contract prepared by the Purchasing Department, in addition to a PO. For all purchases greater than $24,999.99 but less than $50,000100,000, staff must obtain quotes from at least two (2) Historically Underutilized Businesses (HUB) located in Guadalupe County on a rotating basis. If a HUB cannot be identified, the City is exempt from this requirement. 8 The City Manager will sign all agreements with a contract value of more than $25,000 once the agreement has been reviewed by the Purchasing Department. d. Purchases Greater Than $100,000 The Texas Local Government Code requires either competitive bidding or competitive Requests for Proposals (“RFP”) for City purchases exceeding $50,000.00 100,000 with few exceptions. City employees are prohibited from making "separate, sequential, or component purchases to avoid the competitive bidding requirements". A violation of these prohibitions is a Class B misdemeanor ($1,000 fine and/or 180 days in jail), and conviction result ing in immediate removal from office or employment and ineligibility for other public office or employment for four (4) years after the date of conviction. Departments shall consult with the Purchasing Department on the proper procurement process to obtain goods and services greater than $50,000100,000. Detailed specifications and statements of work (SOW) will be developed by the Department, in consultation with the Purchasing Department. The Purchasing Department will coordinate all formal solicitations, in accordance with State of Texas and local statutes. Component orders or contracts, each less than $50,000100,000, but which in the aggregate exceed that amount, and which reasonably should be included in the one order or contract shall not be used to avoid the prohibition of Statutes. All Purchases $50,000 100,000 or greater require approval by City Council and the Purchasing Office prior to processing. The approved resolution number should be included in the Purchase Order notes. HIGH TECHNOLOGY PURCHASES: "High technology item" means a service, equipment, or good of a highly technical nature, including: a. data processing equipment and software and firmware used in conjunction with data processing equipment; b. telecommunications, radio, and microwave systems; c. electronic distributed control systems, including building energy management systems; and d. technical services related to those items. High technology purchases will be accomplished using a RFP process where the anticipated expense is in excess of $50,000.00100,000. The Texas Local Government Code requires that the relative importance of price and other evaluation factors be specified in the RFP. All RFP’s will be prepared in cooperation with the User Department, Information Technology and the Purchasing Department. 9 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES: "Professional Services" are those services which involve mental or intellectual skills, usually accompanied by formal certification or licensing by a state agency, such as accounting, architecture, land surveying, engineering, medicine, real estate appraisal services. Section 2254 of the Government Code prohibits the purchase of professional services using competitive bidding requirements. User departments will select professional service consultants on the basis of demonstrated competence and qualifications and will negotiate fees on the basis of what is fair and reasonable for the type of services, rather than on a "low bid" basis. Except for architect, engineer and surveyor services as discussed below, both price and qualifications can be considered in selecting consultants. For the professional services listed above involving an anticipated expenditure of more than $50,000100,000, user departments are encouraged to use a formal solicitation process in coordination with the Purchasing Department, but it is not mandatory. ARCHITECTS/ENGINEERS/SURVEYORS: Procurement of architectural, engineering or surveying services is two-step process. The first step involves the initial selection of the most highly qualified provider of the services based on demonstrated competence and qualifications (and not considering price); and the second step involves negotiation of a fee with the selected provider at a fair and reasonable price. If a contract cannot be successfully negotiated with the most highly qualified provider of services, then the contract negotiations will be formally ended and negotiations with the second most qualified provider may be undertaken, and so forth. It is important to keep in mind that price may not be considered in the initial selection of an engineer, architect or surveyor. CONTRACT AMENDMENTS: All cContract amendments will be approved by the City Council if the contract was originally approved by the City Council and, the amendment amount will take the total contract value above the Not -To-Exceed approved by City Council, or if amendment amount will take the total contract value above $50,000100,000. ALTERNATIVE PROJECT DELIVERY METHODS FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS: The alternatives to the basic competitive bidding model of construction procurement are best-value competitive bidding, competitive sealed proposals, design-build, construction management-agent, construction management at-risk, and job order contracting. Alternative project delivery methods, as defined in the Local Government Code, Chapter 271, Subchapter H, may be used as applicable. 10 6. EXEMPT PURCHASING FUNCTIONS State law provides few exemptions from competitive bidding requirements. The City encourages the use of making certain exempt purchases using an RFP procedure even though such a procedure may not be required under state law. a. Emergency Purchases: Emergency purchases are those procurements necessary due to public calamity, to act at once to relieve the hardship of the citizens or to preserve the property of the City, to preserve or protect the public health or safety of the citizens, or when it is due to unforeseen damage to public property, machinery, or equipment. i. When emergency procurement of materials or services is required, the Department Head will consult with the Purchasing Department and obtain approval from the Assistant City Manager prior to any procurement action. ii. If an Assistant City Manager is not available, the Department Head will obtain only those materials or services absolutely critical to restore or re- establish essential City services. The Department Head must advise the Purchasing Department and the Assistant City Manager of these actions as soon as possible. iii. With approval from the City Manager or one of the City Manager’s Designees, specific procurements ($50,000 100,000 or more) may be outside the sealed bid process in the event of an emergency. The Purchasing Department must be notified of the emergency situation as soon as possible. iv. Staff will seek and obtain approval from the City Council for emergency procurements in excess of $50,000 100,000 as soon as possible. v. In the event of a declared local state of disaster or public health emergency, as authorized by City of Schertz Charter and Ordinance No. 00-M-36, please refer to the disaster purchasing policies included in the City’s Emergency Management Plan, Annex M – Resource Management. b. Sole Source Purchases: State laws allow for a limited exemption from competitive bidding for the purchase of goods where the functional requirements of the City can be satisfied by only one source. This applies to purchases where competition is precluded such as: 11 i. The existence of patents, copyrights, secret processes or natural monopolies; ii. The purchase of films, manuscripts or books; purchases of gas, water, and other utility services; and iii. The purchase of captive replacement parts or components for equipment. A product is eligible for sole source purchase only when there is a significant functional difference between the product and other similar products on the market, and when the item is available only from one vendor. The following are not sufficient justifications for a sole source purchase: i. A product is made by only one manufacturer, if products from other manufacturers are available that perform a similar function. ii. A particular name brand of product is preferred over other brands. iii. Only one local vendor offers a product, if other vendors who offer the product can meet the City's needs. All requests for sole source purchase require a sole source justification form be completed and approved by the Purchasing Department prior to any procurement action. c. Cooperative Purchasing: The City may enter into cooperative buying agreements with other local government agencies in accordance with the State of Texas Interlocal Cooperation Act of 1971. Use of co-ops should be coordinated through the Purchasing Department. When co-ops are used, bids are not required. However, employees are expected to use due diligence to ensure best value for the City. Cursory checks should be completed to ensure that cooperative pricing is competitive and in line with market value. An approved purchase order referencing the Group Purchasing Cooperative Contract and Contract Number is required before any purchase can be finalized. d. Exempt Purchases: Local Government Code Chapter 252.022 expressly exempts certain purchases from competitive procurement requirements. Purchases made under this exemption do not require formal consent of the City Council. The following are considered exempt: 12 (1) a procurement made because of a public calamity that requires the immediate appropriation of money to relieve the necessity of the municipality's residents or to preserve the property of the municipality; (2) a procurement necessary to preserve or protect the public health or safety of the municipality's residents; (3) a procurement necessary because of unforeseen damage to public machinery, equipment, or other property; (4) a procurement for personal, professional, or planning services; (5) a procurement for work that is performed and paid for by the day as the work progresses; (6) a purchase of land or a right-of-way; (7) a procurement of items that are available from only one source (8) a purchase of rare books, papers, and other library materials for a public library; (9) paving drainage, street widening, and other public improvements, or related matters, if at least one-third of the cost is to be paid by or through special assessments levied on property that will benefit from the improvements; (10) a public improvement project, already in progress, authorized by the voters of the municipality, for which there is a deficiency of funds for completing the project in accordance with the plans and purposes authorized by the voters; (11) a payment under a contract by which a developer participates in the construction of a public improvement as provided by Subchapter C, Chapter 212; (12) personal property sold: (A) at an auction by a state licensed auctioneer; (B) at a going out of business sale held in compliance with Subchapter F, Chapter 17, Business & Commerce Code; (C) by a political subdivision of this state, a state agency of this state, or an entity of the federal government; or (D) under an interlocal contract for cooperative purchasing administered by a regional planning commission established under Chapter 391; 13 (13) services performed by blind or severely disabled persons; (14) goods purchased by a municipality for subsequent retail sale by the municipality; (15) electricity; or (16) advertising, other than legal notices. 7. EQUIPMENT AND VEHICLE PURCHASES a. All equipment and vehicle purchases will be coordinated through the Fleet Department. Once the Fleet Department has approved the specifications, the Purchasing Department will coordinate the bidding process and issue the Purchase Order. b. Vehicle purchase and outfitting must be processed through Fleet and the Purchasing Department to ensure proper operation, registration, vehicle markings, and insurance requirements are met. This applies to all vehicles regardless of which Department or funding source made the purchase. c. All vehicles shall be delivered to the Fleet Department. Fleet will not release the vehicle until all requirements are met. Once the vehicle passes inspection Fleet will notify the owning department for payment processing. The owning department will then process the payment against the invoice and submit it to the Finance Department. 8. PETTY CASH PURCHASES: a. Petty cash may be used for emergency acquisition of supplies and/or services when the vendor will not accept a purchase order or procurement card. It is also used for attendance at luncheons, meetings, etc., where “cash only” is the normal method of payment. b. No item purchased with petty cash funds may exceed $100. c. All petty cash purchases must be supported with a receipt and written justification for the purchase. d. Individuals authorized to maintain petty cash accounts can get their accounts replenished by submitting a Purchase Order and attaching all relevant receipts as back-up to the Finance Department. 14 9. SPECIAL PROCEDURES FOR PUBLIC SAFETY SPECIFIC ITEMS: a. Any items that require special licensing to order, including but not limited to such items as medical supplies, medicines, firearms and ammunition, chemicals, etc., will be ordered by an authorized individual in the department. b. The person who holds a valid license to make such purchases must still coordinate with the Purchasing Department to ensure the best source of procurement. c. After the Purchasing Department has determined the best source of procurement, the license holder will prepare the appropriate purchase order, in accordance with this policy. 10. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS: The City may require certain insurance coverage to be provided by contractors, vendors and consultants. In general, if a service is being provided on City property, proof of insurance is required. Specific insurance requirements are incorporated into bid d ocuments and specifications for each bid, proposal, or “request for purchase.” Insurance requirements are reviewed periodically to determine the appropriateness of coverage and values. 11. FIXED ASSETS The City is responsible for keeping records of all of its fixed assets. All new assets which have an original cost of $5,000 or more and an estimated life span of greater than one (1) year are fixed assets and will be added to the fixed assets records. All duties and responsibilities related to fixed assets inventory records are supervised by the Purchasing Department. Cooperation from department directors and division managers throughout the City is necessary if the system is to work; however, this effort is centrally organized, monitored, and reported by the Purchasing Department staff. Departments should submit a copy of the Purchase Order for a Fixed Asset to the Purchasing Department. 12. SURPLUS Individual Departments must contact the Purchasing Department for assistance with asset disposal. Surplus items will only be accepted with the proper forms and with advance notice and approval by the Purchasing Department. The Purchasing Department will determine if an item is surplus or salvage property. 13. CONSIDERATION OF LOCATION OF BIDDER’S PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS For purchases of $50,000 100,000 and over, where competitive sealed bids are used, a bid received from a bidder whose principal place of business is located within the City limits may be approved if the bid is within 3% of the lowest bid price received from a bidder outside the City limits, provided that said bid meets all qualifications and specifications and provides the best value to the City. 15 ATTACHMENT A Purchasing Decision Tree 16 ATTACHMENT B Sourcing Strategy Identifying a need properly is important; however, determining how best to meet that need is of equal importance. Needs can be met by a multitude of sources. These basic classifications are: o Insourcing: process of completing a business function in-house. o Outsourcing: process of contracting out a business function to an external entity. o Multi-sourcing: a strategy that distributes a function such as IT or Finance, as a portfolio of activities, some of which are performed internally and some of which are external. In order to determine if a service should be insourced, outsourced, or multi -sourced, the following criteria should be considered: o Efficiency of cost vs value; o Effectiveness in meeting the need; o Expertise needed to solve the problem; o Workload timing of insourced staff availability; o Workload volume of insourced staff to continue to provide service; o Scalability of the solution to adjust to demand; and o Mandated compliance requirements. A Case for Insourcing: There are several sources of solutions for needs that are not currently met by the City. Some may be derived internally. For a short-term need such as a storm damage cleanup of fallen trees, this can be accomplished by one of two means, temporary reassignment of staff or increase in the hours worked. Both have costs to the City; however, the short-term nature of the need does not require an extended cost commitment on departments if personnel and equipment resources are available. Long-term needs, however, may require a different approach. A Case for Outsourcing: For example, instead of storm damage cleanup of trees, City properties may have suffered a blight such as oak wilt. The mitigation would require extended specialized and technical capability to handle such a situation. In this case, the time committed to such a project might stretch in-house resources beyond the ability to effectively combat the issue. The City may hire additional staff to confront the issue however, after the issue is resolved, additional staff would require a long-term commitment of financial and administrative resources. This need could effectively be outsourced to a firm with the specialized technical skills and equipment to quickly and professional mitigate the issue. After the project is complete, the expenditure commitment is ended. Contact the Purchasing Department for assistance with sourcing. 17 ATTACHMENT C Standard Insurance Requirements Worker’s Compensation* Employer’s Liability Statutory $1,000,000/$1,000,000/$1,000,000 Commercial General (Public) Liability insurance to include coverage for the following: a. Premises Operations b. Independent Contractors** c. Products/Completed Operations d. Personal Injury e. Contractual Liability For Bodily Injury and Property Damage of $1,000,000 per occurrence. $2,000,000 General Aggregate, or its equivalent in Umbrella or Excess Liability Coverage Business Automobile Liability a. Owned/Leased Vehicles b. Non-owned Vehicles c. Hired Vehicles Combined Single Limit for Bodily Injury and property Damage of $1,000,000 per occurrence Professional Liability (Claims Made Form) $1,000,000 per claim to pay on behalf of the insured all sums, which the insured shall become legally obligated to pay as damages to the extent caused by any negligent act, error, or omission in the performance of professional services. *Alternate Plans must be approved by CITY’S Risk Manager **If applicable All insurance policies are to contain or be endorsed to contain the following required provisions: - The City of Schertz shall be named as an additional insured with respect to General Liability and Automobile Liability (not applicable to workers’ compensation and professional liability policies); - A waiver of subrogation in favor of The City of Schertz shall be contained in the Workers Compensation and all liability policies; - All insurance policies, which name The City of Schertz as an additional insured, must be endorsed to read as primary and non-contributory coverage regardless of the application of other insurance. - All insurance policies shall be endorsed to the effect that The City of Schertz will receive at least thirty (30) days written notice prior to cancellation or non-renewal of the insurance. Chapter 1811 of the Texas Insurance Code, Senate Bill 425 82(R) of 2011, states that the above endorsements cannot be on the certificate of insurance. Separate endorsements must be provided for each of the above. 18 ATTACHMENT D Federal Procurement Standards 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart D, §§ 200.218–200.237, and Appendix II Section V: Federal Procurement Standards (2 CFR Part 200, Subpart D) When using Federal funds, the City of Schertz must adhere to the procurement standards as outlined in 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart D, and Appendix II. These standards apply to all procurement transactions for property or services under a Federal award or sub-award. The City's procurement procedures must be consistent with these federal standards, as well as all applicable State and local laws and regulations. The following is a restatement of the federal requirements from 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart D, §§ 200.218–200.237, and Appendix II. § 200.218 General procurement standards (a) The City of Schertz must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The City's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.218 through 200.237. (b) The City must maintain oversight to ensure that contractors perform in accordance with the terms, conditions, and specifications of their contracts or purchase orders. (c) The City must maintain written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing the actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award and administration of contracts. No employee, officer, or agent may participate in the selection, award, or administration of a contract supported by a Federal award if he or she has a real or apparent conflict of interest. Such a conflict of interest would arise when the employee, officer, or agent, any member of his or her immediate family, his or her partner, or an organization that employs or is about to employ any of the parties indicated herein, has a financial or other interest in or a tangible personal benefit from a firm considered for a contract. The officers, employees, and agents of the City may neither solicit nor accept gratuities, favors, or anything of monetary value from contractors or parties to subcontracts. (d) The City's procedures must avoid the acquisition of unnecessary or duplicative items. Consideration should be given to consolidating or breaking out procurements to obtain a more economical purchase. When appropriate, an analysis should be made between leasing and purchasing property or equipment to determine the most economical approach. (e) When appropriate for the procurement or use of common or shared goods and services, the City is encouraged to enter into State and local intergovernmental agreements or inter-entity agreements for procurement transactions. These or similar procurement arrangements may foster greater 19 economy and efficiency. Documented procurement actions of this type will meet the competition requirements of this part. (f) The City is encouraged to use excess and surplus Federal property in lieu of purchasing new equipment and property whenever such use is feasible and reduces project costs. (g) The City is encouraged to use value engineering clauses in contracts for construction projects of sufficient size to offer reasonable opportunities for cost reductions. Value engineering means analyzing each contract item or task to ensure its essential function is provided at the overall lowest cost. (h) The City must award contracts only to responsible contractors that possess the ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of a proposed contract. The City must consider contractor integrity, public policy compliance, past performance record, and financial and technical resources when conducting a procurement transaction. (i) The City must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. (j) The City may use a time-and-materials type contract only after a determination that no other contract is suitable and if the contract includes a ceiling price that the contractor exceeds at its own risk. Further, the City must assert a high degree of oversight to obtain reasonable assurance that the contractor is using efficient methods and effective cost controls. (k) The City alone is responsible, in accordance with good administrative practice and sound business judgment, for the settlement of all contractual and administrative issues arising out of procurements. These issues include, but are not limited to, source evaluation, protests, disputes, and claims. These standards do not relieve the City of any contractual responsibilities under its contracts. The Federal awarding agency will not substitute its judgment for that of the City unless the matter is primarily a Federal concern. Appendix II to Part 200—Contract Provisions for Non-Federal Entity Contracts Under Federal Awards All contracts made by the City of Schertz under a Federal award must contain provisions covering the following, as applicable. 1. Remedies. All contracts for more than the simplified acquisition threshold must address administrative, contractual, or legal remedies in instances where contractors violate or breach contract terms, and provide for such sanctions and penalties as appropriate. 2. Termination for cause and for convenience. All contracts in excess of $10,000 must address termination for cause and for convenience by the City, including the manner by which it will be effected and the basis for settlement. 20 3. Equal Employment Opportunity. All contracts must contain a provision for Equal Employment Opportunity, as described in Executive Order 11246, "Equal Employment Opportunity," as amended by Executive Order 11375, "Amending Executive Order 11246 Relating to Equal Employment Opportunity," and supplemented by regulations at 41 CFR part 60, "Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Equal Employment Opportunity, Department of Labor." 4. Davis-Bacon Act, as amended (40 U.S.C. 3141-3148). When required by Federal program legislation, all prime construction contracts in excess of $2,000 awarded by the City must include a provision for compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act. 5. Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (40 U.S.C. 3701-3708). Where applicable, all contracts in excess of $100,000 that involve the employment of mechanics or laborers must include a provision for compliance with sections 102 and 107 of the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act. 6. Rights to Inventions Made Under a Contract or Agreement. If the Federal award meets the definition of "funding agreement" under 37 CFR § 401.2 (a) and the City wishes to enter into a contract with a small business firm or nonprofit organization regarding the substitution of parties, assignment or performance of experimental, developmental, or research work under that "funding agreement," the City must comply with the requirements of 37 CFR Part 401, "Rights to Inventions Made by Nonprofit Organizations and Small Business Firms Under Government Grants, Contracts, and Cooperative Agreements," and any implementing regulations issued by the awarding agency. 7. Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.) and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251-1387). Contracts and subawards of amounts in excess of $150,000 must contain a provision that requires the City to agree to comply with all applicable standards, orders, or regulations issued pursuant to the Clean Air Act and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. 8. Debarment and Suspension (Executive Orders 12549 and 12689). A contract award must not be made to parties listed on the government-wide Excluded Parties List System in the System for Award Management (SAM), in accordance with the OMB guidelines at 2 CFR part 180 that implement Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, "Debarment and Suspension." 9. Byrd Anti-Lobbying Amendment (31 U.S.C. 1352). Contractors that apply or bid for an award of $100,000 or more must file the required certification. Procurement of Recovered Materials. The City must comply with section 6002 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. 8/18/2025 10:41:59 AM Page 1 of 2 Check Report City of Schertz, TX By Check Number Date Range: 07/01/2025 - 07/31/2025 Vendor Number Vendor DBA Name Payment Amount NumberPayment TypePayment Date Discount Amount Bank Code: NAP-Schertz Bank Pooled Cash 019853 MCCi, LLC 07/03/2025 10079133,443.47EFT0.00 13949 Martinez Architects LP 07/09/2025 10080795,000.00EFT0.00 016859 YMCA of Greater San Antonio 07/09/2025 10081253,963.00EFT0.00 0110617 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 07/17/2025 10083789,258.16EFT0.00 019837 Motorola Solutions, Inc 07/17/2025 10083848,843.75EFT0.00 019082 Citibank, N.A.07/30/2025 10088351,747.21EFT0.00 12638 Lockwood Andrews & Newnam Inc 07/31/2025 10089496,564.24EFT0.00 0112098 SCHERTZ 1518 LTD 07/31/2025 10089636,153.94EFT0.00 0110500 INNOVATIVE INTERFACES, INC.07/03/2025 71926727,574.79Regular0.00 0111269 Vector Solutions 07/03/2025 71929227,585.96Regular0.00 0111875 On Duty Health - Texas, PLLC 07/09/2025 71937927,978.00Regular0.00 019465 CVLGC 07/10/2025 719417100,000.00Regular0.00 0111995 GVEC 07/10/2025 71942561,168.13Regular0.00 011256 MALDONADO NURSERY & LANDSCAPING 07/10/2025 71943436,810.28Regular0.00 0111632 WEX BANK 07/10/2025 71945144,378.12Regular0.00 13150 KS StateBank 07/11/2025 71945399,792.00Regular0.00 12806 Global Traffic Technologies, LLC 07/17/2025 71949133,794.66Regular0.00 13099 Qro Mex Construction Co, Inc 07/17/2025 71949945,695.12Regular0.00 0110468 Computer Solutions 07/23/2025 71961428,574.64Regular0.00 011097 Schertz Seguin Local Government Corporation 07/23/2025 71966172,828.18Regular0.00 12838 Thermo Scientific Portable Analytical Instruments Incorporated07/23/2025 71967635,119.00Regular0.00 12891 The Urban Foresters, LLC 07/30/2025 71977430,670.00Regular0.00 Regular Checks Manual Checks Voided Checks Discount Payment CountPayment Type Bank Code NAP Summary Bank Drafts EFT's 14 0 0 0 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 22 0.00 Payment 671,968.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 504,973.77 1,176,942.65 Payable Count 26 0 0 0 60 86 Check Report Date Range: 07/01/2025 - 07/31/2025 Page 2 of 28/18/2025 10:41:59 AM All Bank Codes Check Summary Payment Type Discount Payment Count Payment Payable Count Regular Checks Manual Checks Voided Checks Bank Drafts EFT's 14 0 0 0 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 22 0.00 671,968.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 504,973.77 1,176,942.65 26 0 0 0 60 86 Fund Name AmountPeriod Fund Summary 999 OPERATING POOLED CASH 1,176,942.657/2025 1,176,942.65 O*>*=Jk*=--3/ =J =?P nah]pejc pk pda ]ikqjp kb ]j atlaj‘epqna i]‘a ^u _anp]ej lkhepe_]h oq^‘ereoekjo bkn sde_d ]_kilapepera lnk_qnaiajp iapdk‘i]u ^a namqena‘* >A EP AJ=?PA@ >U PDA HACEOH=PQNA KB PDA OP=PA KB PAT=O6 OA?PEKJ=-*==Oa_pekj 00*,/-$]%(A‘q_]pekj ?k‘a(eo ]iaj‘a‘pk na]‘]o bkhhkso6 $]%==At_alp ]o lnkre‘a‘^u pdeo oq^_d]lpan(]hh o_dkkh ‘eopne_p _kjpn]_po bkn pda lqn_d]oa kb ckk‘o ]j‘oanre_ao(at_alp _kjpn]_po bkn pda lqn_d]oa kb lnk‘q_a kn rade_ha bqah(r]hqa‘]p i-,,(,,,Wi1,(,,,Y kn ikna ej pda ]ccnac]pa bkn a]_d -.)ikjpd lanek‘od]hh ^a i]‘a ^u pda iapdk‘(kb pda bkhhksejc iapdk‘o(pd]p lnkre‘ao pda ^aop r]hqa bkn pda ‘eopne_p6 $-%==_kilapepera ^e‘‘ejc bkn oanre_ao kpdan pd]j _kjopnq_pekj oanre_ao7 $.%==_kilapepera oa]ha‘lnklko]ho bkn oanre_ao kpdan pd]j _kjopnq_pekj oanre_ao7 $/%==]namqaop bkn lnklko]ho(bkn oanre_ao kpdan pd]j _kjopnq_pekj oanre_ao7 $0%==]j ejpanhk_]h _kjpn]_p7 $1%==]iapdk‘lnkre‘a‘^u ?d]lpan ..25(Ckranjiajp ?k‘a(bkn _kjopnq_pekj oanre_ao7 $2%==pda naranoa ]q_pekj lnk_a‘qna ]o ‘abeja‘^u Oa_pekj .-11*,2.$‘%(Ckranjiajp ?k‘a7 kn - . / 0 1 2 3 4 5 -, -- -. -/ -0 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 ., .- .. ./ .0 - $3%==pda bkni]pekj kb ]lkhepe_]h oq^‘ereoekj _knlkn]pekj qj‘an Oa_pekj /,0*,,-(Hk_]h Ckranjiajp ?k‘a* OA?PEKJ=.*==Oa_pekj 331*,40$]%(Da]hpd ]j‘O]bapu ?k‘a(eo ]iaj‘a‘pk na]‘]o bkhhkso6 $]%==At_alp ]o lnkre‘a‘^u Oq^oa_pekj $e%(pda ^k]n‘iqop oq^iep pk _kilapepera ^e‘o ]j atlaj‘epqna kb ikna pd]j i-,,(,,, Wi1,(,,,Y bkn6 $-%==kja epai kn oanre_a7 kn $.%==ikna pd]j kja kb pda o]ia kn ]oeieh]n pula kb epai kn oanre_a ej ]beo_]h ua]n* OA?PEKJ=/*==Oa_pekj .1.*,.-$]%(Hk_]h Ckranjiajp ?k‘a(eo ]iaj‘a‘pk na]‘]o bkhhkso6 $]%==>abkna ]iqje_el]hepu i]u ajpan ejpk ]_kjpn]_p pd]p namqenao ]j atlaj‘epqna kb ikna pd]j i-,,(,,,Wi1,(,,,Y bnki kja kn ikna iqje_el]h bqj‘o(pda iqje_el]hepu iqop6 $-%==_kilhu sepd pda lnk_a‘qna lnao_ne^a‘^u pdeo oq^_d]lpan ]j‘Oq^_d]lpan ?bkn _kilapepera oa]ha‘^e‘‘ejc kn _kilapepera oa]ha‘lnklko]ho7 $.%==qoa pda naranoa ]q_pekj lnk_a‘qna(]o ‘abeja‘^u Oa_pekj .-11*,2.$‘%(Ckranjiajp ?k‘a(bkn lqn_d]oejc7 kn $/%==_kilhu sepd ]iapdk‘‘ao_ne^a‘^u ?d]lpan ..25( Ckranjiajp ?k‘a* OA?PEKJ=0*==Oa_pekj .1.*,.-1(Hk_]h Ckranjiajp ?k‘a(eo ]iaj‘a‘pk na]‘]o bkhhkso6 Oa_*=.1.*,.-1*==?KILAPEPERA >E@@EJC EJ NAH=PEKJ PK DEOPKNE?=HHU QJ@ANQPEHEVA@ >QOEJAOO*===iqje_el]hepu(ej i]gejc ]j atlaj‘epqna kb ikna pd]j i/(,,,^qp haoo pd]j i-,,(,,,Wi1,(,,,Y( - . / 0 1 2 3 4 5 -, -- -. -/ -0 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 ., .- .. ./ .0 .1 .2 .3 O*>*=Jk*=--3/ . od]hh _kjp]_p ]p ha]op psk deopkne_]hhu qj‘anqpeheva‘^qoejaooao kj ]nkp]pejc ^]oeo(^]oa‘kj ejbkni]pekj lnkre‘a‘^u pda _kilpnkhhan lqnoq]jp pk ?d]lpan .-2-(Ckranjiajp ?k‘a*Eb pda heop b]eho pk e‘ajpebu ]deopkne_]hhu qj‘anqpeheva‘^qoejaoo ej pda _kqjpu ej sde_d pda iqje_el]hepu eo oepq]pa‘(pda iqje_el]hepu eo atailp bnki pdeo oa_pekj* OA?PEKJ=1*==Oa_pekj .2.*,,/$]%(Hk_]h Ckranjiajp ?k‘a(eo ]iaj‘a‘pk na]‘]o bkhhkso6 $]%===ju h]s pd]p namqenao ]_kqjpu pk bkhhks ]_kilapepera lnk_qnaiajp lnk_a‘qna ej i]gejc ]lqn_d]oa namqenejc pda atlaj‘epqna kb i-,,(,,,Wi1,(,,,Y kn haoo ‘kao jkp ]llhu pk pda lqn_d]oa kb ]j epai ]r]eh]^ha bkn lqn_d]oa bnki kjhu kja oqllhean* OA?PEKJ=2*==Oa_pekj .2.*,./$]%(Hk_]h Ckranjiajp ?k‘a(eo ]iaj‘a‘pk na]‘]o bkhhkso6 $]%==>abkna ]_kqjpu i]u lqn_d]oa kja kn ikna epaio qj‘an ] _kjpn]_p pd]p sehh namqena ]j atlaj‘epqna at_aa‘ejc i-,,(,,, Wi1,(,,,Y(pda _kiieooekjano _kqnp kb pda _kqjpu iqop6 $-%==_kilhu sepd pda _kilapepera ^e‘‘ejc kn _kilapepera lnklko]h lnk_a‘qnao lnao_ne^a‘^u pdeo oq^_d]lpan7 $.%==qoa pda naranoa ]q_pekj lnk_a‘qna(]o ‘abeja‘^u Oa_pekj .-11*,2.$‘%(Ckranjiajp ?k‘a(bkn lqn_d]oejc7 kn $/%==_kilhu sepd ]iapdk‘‘ao_ne^a‘^u ?d]lpan ..25( Ckranjiajp ?k‘a* OA?PEKJ=3*==Oa_pekj .3-*,.0(Hk_]h Ckranjiajp ?k‘a(eo ]iaj‘a‘pk na]‘]o bkhhkso6 Oa_*=.3-*,.0*==?KILAPEPERA LNK?QNAIAJP LNK?A@QNA =LLHE?=>HA PK ?KJPN=?P*==Eb ]ckranjiajp]h ajpepu eo namqena‘^u op]pqpa pk - . / 0 1 2 3 4 5 -, -- -. -/ -0 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 ., .- .. ./ .0 .1 .2 .3 O*>*=Jk*=--3/ / ]s]n‘]_kjpn]_p bkn pda _kjopnq_pekj(nal]en(kn najkr]pekj kb ] opnq_pqna(nk]‘(decds]u(kn kpdan eilnkraiajp kn ]‘‘epekj pk na]h lnklanpu kj pda ^]oeo kb _kilapepera ^e‘o(]j‘eb pda _kjpn]_p namqenao pda atlaj‘epqna kb ikna pd]j i-,,(,,,Wi1,(,,,Y bnki pda bqj‘o kb pda ajpepu(pda ^e‘‘ejc kj pda _kjpn]_p iqop ^a ]__kilheoda‘ej pda i]jjan lnkre‘a‘^u pdeo oq^_d]lpan* OA?PEKJ=4*==Oa_pekj .3-*,10(Hk_]h Ckranjiajp ?k‘a(eo ]iaj‘a‘pk na]‘]o bkhhkso6 Oa_*=.3-*,10*==?KILAPEPERA LNK?QNAIAJP NAMQENAIAJP*==>abkna pda ckranjejc ^k‘u kb ]j eooqan i]u ajpan ejpk ]_kjpn]_p namqenejc ]j atlaj‘epqna ^u kn eilkoejc ]j k^hec]pekj kn he]^ehepu kj pda eooqan(kn kj ]oq^‘ereoekj kb pda eooqan eb pda eooqan eo ]_kqjpu( kb ikna pd]j i-,,(,,,Wi1,(,,,Y(pda ckranjejc ^k‘u iqop6 $-%==oq^iep pda lnklkoa‘_kjpn]_p pk _kilapepera lnk_qnaiajp7 kn $.%==qoa ]j ]hpanj]pa iapdk‘kb lnkfa_p ‘aheranu ]qpdkneva‘^u ?d]lpan ..25(Ckranjiajp ?k‘a* OA?PEKJ=5*==Oa_pekjo .1.*/-.$^%]j‘$_%(Pn]jolknp]pekj ?k‘a(]na ]iaj‘a‘pk na]‘]o bkhhkso6 $^%==Eb pda _kqjpu nk]‘ajcejaan ok na_kiiaj‘o ]j‘pda _kiieooekjano _kqnp _kjoe‘ano ep pk ^a ej pda ^aop ejpanaop kb pda _kqjpu(]lqn_d]oa ej ]j ]ikqjp kb i-,,(,,,Wi1,(,,,Y kn haoo i]u ^a i]‘a pdnkqcd jackpe]pekj ^u pda _kiieooekjano _kqnp kn pda _kqnp #o ]qpdkneva‘nalnaoajp]pera kj namqeoepekj pk ^a ]llnkra‘^u pda _kiieooekjano _kqnp kn pda _kqjpu ]q‘epkn sepdkqp ]‘ranpeoejc bkn _kilapepera ^e‘o* $_%===lqn_d]oa i]u jkp ^a ‘ere‘a‘kn na‘q_a‘pk ]rke‘pda - . / 0 1 2 3 4 5 -, -- -. -/ -0 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 ., .- .. ./ .0 .1 .2 .3 O*>*=Jk*=--3/ 0 _kilapepera ^e‘‘ejc namqenaiajp kj ]lqn_d]oa pd]p skqh‘kpdanseoa _kop ikna pd]j i-,,(,,,Wi1,(,,,Y* OA?PEKJ=-,*==Oa_pekj 01-*--,$_%(Pn]jolknp]pekj ?k‘a(eo ]iaj‘a‘pk na]‘]o bkhhkso6 $_%==Oq^oa_pekj $]%‘kao jkp ]llhu pk ]_kjpn]_p bkn6 $-%==i-,,(,,,Wi1,(,,,Y kn haoo7 $.%==pda lqn_d]oa kb na]h lnklanpu7 $/%==lanokj]h kn lnkbaooekj]h oanre_ao7 kn $0%==pda ]_mqeoepekj kb ]j ateopejc pn]joep ouopai* OA?PEKJ=--*==Pda _d]jcao ej h]s i]‘a ^u pdeo =_p ]llhu kjhu pk ]lqn_d]oa i]‘a kj kn ]bpan pda abba_pera ‘]pa kb pdeo =_p*= lqn_d]oa i]‘a ^abkna pda abba_pera ‘]pa kb pdeo =_p eo ckranja‘^u pda h]s ]o ep ateopa‘eiia‘e]pahu ^abkna pda abba_pera ‘]pa kb pdeo =_p(]j‘pd]p h]s eo _kjpejqa‘ej abba_p bkn pd]p lqnlkoa* OA?PEKJ=-.*==Pdeo =_p p]gao abba_p Oalpai^an -(.,.1* - . / 0 1 2 3 4 5 -, -- -. -/ -0 -1 O*>*=Jk*=--3/ 1 [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[====[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ Lnaoe‘ajp kb pda Oaj]pa=============Ola]gan kb pda Dkqoa E dana^u _anpebu pd]p O*>*=Jk*=--3/l]ooa‘pda Oaj]pa kj =lneh=-,(=.,.1(^u pda bkhhksejc rkpa6 Ua]o=.5(J]uo=-7 ]j‘pd]p pda Oaj]pa _kj_qnna‘ej Dkqoa ]iaj‘iajp kj I]u=.,(=.,.1(^u pda bkhhksejc rkpa6 Ua]o=.5(J]uo=.* [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ ====Oa_nap]nu kb pda Oaj]pa E dana^u _anpebu pd]p O*>*=Jk*=--3/l]ooa‘pda Dkqoa(sepd ]iaj‘iajp(kj I]u=-1(=.,.1(^u pda bkhhksejc rkpa6 Ua]o=-,/( J]uo=/4(psk lnaoajp jkp rkpejc* [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ ====?deab ?hang kb pda Dkqoa =llnkra‘6 [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ =============@]pa [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ ===========Ckranjkn O*>*=Jk*=--3/ 2