10-24-1992 PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES
The Schertz Planning and Zoning Commission and Economic
Development Task Force convened in a joint session on Tuesday,
November 24, 1992 at 7:00 P.M. in the Municipal Complex
conference room, 1400 Schertz Parkway, Schertz, Texas. Those
present were as follows:
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TASK FORCE
BOB ANDREWS, CHAIRMAN LEW BORGFELD, CHAIRMAN
MERWIN WILLMAN MARY MARSH
KEITH VAN DINE W.J. SWEATY
BOBBIE VONADA HARRY RICHBURG
DAVID RICHMOND CHARLES MCDONALD
CHUCK SHARPE
MEMBERS ABSENT JACK GARBER
GEORGE VICK, VICE-CHAIRMAN
OLIVER NELSON, SECRETARY
CITY STAFF
KERRY SWEATY, CITY MANAGER
STEVE SIMONSON, ASST. CITY MGR.
MARK MARQUEZ, ADMINISTRATIVE ASST.
NORMA ALTHOUSE, RECORDING SECY.
#1 CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Andrews called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
#2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Public Meeting and Regular Session
November 10, 1992
Merwin Willman made a motion to approve the minutes for the
public meeting and regular session November 10, 1992. David
Richmond seconded the- motion and the vote was unanimous in
favor. Motion carried.'
#3 CITIZENS' INPUT OTHER THAN AGENDA ITEMS
There was none.
#4 CONSIDER AND TARE APPROPRIATE ACTION: Final Plat Approval
SCUC ISD District Offices (PC #184-92)
Chairman Andrews informed the Commission this is the platting
of Lot 1, Block l and the appropriate changes have been made.
Merwin Willman made a motion to approve the final plat for the
SCUC. ISD District Offices. .Keith Van Dine seconded the motion
and the vote was unanimous in favor. Motion carried.
Chairman Andrews temporarily finished the Planning and Zoning
meeting, saying he will come back o Item #6 later, and turned
the meeting over to Lew Borgfeld, EDTF Chairman for Item #5F
the joint session. Mr. Borgfeld indicated they would have
Mark Marquez explain. the Tax Increment Financing Plan first and
then open the floor for questions after that.
Before Mr. Marquez started, Merwin Willman, saying he didn't
wish to criticize Mr. Marquez, pointed out that in the TIF
Plan it mentions the Schertz Overlay District and that is no
longer proper. It is now the Schertz Parkway District, it is
a zoning all of its own.
Mark Marquez, acknowledging he stands corrected, began by
asking if everyone had copies of the plan and if everyone had
read it. The response was affirmative.
Mr. Marquez stated that the background on the Schertz Parkway
is fairly straightforward. We have looked at it for quite a
while as far as what to do with it and how to keep it in its
relatively pristine state when it develops. The problem is how
to finance the expansion of the roadway and such things as
sewer construction, underground cabling, widening and paving,
sidewalks and signage. The current Platting Fee Ordinance
makes development cost prohibitive.
Mark Marquez stressed the Tax Increment Financing Plan involves
no additional taxes. What you are doing is taking some part of
the additional rise in value that occurs when development
occurs and putting it in a fund for the widening and paving,
etc. Definitive numbers will be established by the players.
Mr. Marquez went on to say the plan itself is designed by
intent in two parts because of the way the law is structured
for taxing and financing. The final plan with definitive cost
numbers will be created by a board of directors that is
appointed by City Council and other tax entities that are
players.
Mr. Marquez noted that this preliminary plan is a document for
City .Council to view so they can see the merits of it and, what
they are asking for this evening is a recommendation, from both
P&Z and EDTF, that it go forward.
Chairman Andrews asked if the school and the County have been
approached as players and Mark Marquez replied they have 'not.
Mr. Marquez then added that, in ;his opinion, if the school
does not participate, it's not worth the time. You'll never
generate the funds necessary.
Mark ..Marquez related he had worked up some figures .for' ~n
example of how the plan could work. City Manager Kerry Sweatt
warned everyone these figures are:not cast in stone and to keep
in mind they are tentative.
-2-
Mr. Marquez listed some basic assumptions in his example:
(1) land .values will increase by about 1$ per year;
(2) entities (county school, City) will increase taxes by about
two cents per year;
(3.} we are using a 75~ increment and that's a sticky point; and
(4) we draw 3.5~ on-our investment (net results by year 2023 -
two million dollars.
Chairman Andrews asked why they're indicating a 1,000' depth
when normally only 750' is zoned for commercial use and Mark
Marquez replied they need it for the funding.
A Chairman Andrews then asked if he understands correctly that
none of the TIF zone can be residential.
Mark Marquez answered that's incorrect. Residential can be 10~
of the TIF zone and perhaps more later.
Mr. Marquez then pointed out a downside to the TIF zone - you
cannot do tax abatements within this zone. We will need other
incentives such as the board of directors, when developing the
plan and the funding, setting aside money for sewer hook-up
fees.
Chairman Borgfeld asked how the open spaces and the
agricultural exemptions effect this and Mark Marquez replied
.there are no changes in those designations.
Mr. Borgfeld then asked about rollbacks and Mark Marquez
responded that the TIF doesn't touch rollbacks.
Mr. Marquez went on to say that two issues that need to be
resolved are the size of the TIF zone and the amount of the
increment.
Chairman Andrews inquired if there's any track record showing
what a TIF has done. Mark Marquez mentioned there are only
nine in Texas, and it has been done in California, but he
hasn't checked them out.
Mr. Marquez reminded everyone this is not a short term plan,
it is 'long term with a minimum of 10 years and probably 20
years to accomplish the goals.
There was further discussion about only being allowed 10$
residential in the zone and Mark Marquez pointed out that's
only .single-family residential, multi-family residential is
allowed:
-3-
Lew Borgfeld questioned if that's future use and Mark Marquez
replied yes, that's his understanding.
Chairman Andrews then referred to Live Oak Hills where people
have bought lots with the intent of building a home on them in
the future, and commented this plan will wipe that out.
Mark Marquez remarked he does not think that's a problem
because he doesn't feel Live Oak Hills represents more than 10$
of the TIF zone and mentioned you can arbitrarily change the
boundary lines of the zone.
City Manager, Kerry Sweatt, mentioned that some difficulty
-might come if for some reason along the way, instead of saving
up the two million dollars, the board decided to sell bonds.
David Richmond, referring back to the comment about 75$ being a
sticky point, asked why. Mark Marquez explained that's what
you're asking-the entities to give up. Mr. Marquez went on to
say he thinks 75~ will be the most efficient, but it is
negotiable.
Mary Marsh then asked what the argument is to persuade the
other players to participate. Mark Marquez said that's
something he wanted to discuss. What is our strategy in
convincing the school board the TIF is in their best interest?
Chairman Borgfeld asked if when the project is finished, does
the fund go away and Mark Marquez replied yes, that is required
by law. The remaining funds are divided up among the
contributing entities. In the case of bonds, the district may
be in effect until the bonds .are paid off.
Mr. Marquez discussed the fact that it is very important not
to leave anything out of the plan because it will be easier to
take out than to add on at a later date.
Mary Marsh remarked on controlled growth being one of the
biggest arguments in trying to change the mindset of the school
board. We have to show what the result will be and how it will
be good for the school.
Chairman Andrews,observed that a bigger tax base (commercial)
will be a benefit to the school district, and then speaking of
..commercial, asked what kind of business will 'want a 1000' foot
depth.
Mary Marsh replied a high-tech business.
Mr. Andrews once again mentioned the 750' as a normal depth
for businesses and Steve Simonson c~rrected him saying it's
500'.
-4-
Steve Simonson brought up the aesthetics of Schertz Parkway and
how they would like to; prevent having power line. poles all
along the way and instead; have the lines installed underground.
Mr. Simonson then emphasized that if they don't move soon on
controlled growth along the parkway, the poles will be up.
Mary Marsh indicated she thinks the 1000' depth is essential.
City Manager, Kerry Sweatt, reiterated that multi-family
residential is allowed in the TIF zone. It might be beneficial
to start with business in the first 500' and transition into
multi-family.
Jack Garber inquired as to what the incentive is to build along
Schertz Parkway as opposed to FM 3009 where there's a possible
tax abatement.
Mark Marquez replied a business may want the setting/nature
along the parkway, or possibly part of a set-aside fund will be
used to pay for sewer .line fees, etc. That would be up to the
board.
Keith Van Dine then asked where the funds would come from to
pick up the slack. Mark Marquez noted that will have to be
built into the plan from the start.
Merwin Willman stated that the zoning will preclude some
businesses from building along FM 3009, it's more Neighborhood
Services than General Business. Mr. Willman then added that
if no fund is established for Schertz Parkway, it will remain
two lanes and we need four lanes for it to develop.
Steve Simonson asked Mark Marquez how many acres are in the TIF
zone and Mr. Marquez replied he does not. know.
Mr. Simonson then related, that in reference to the 10~
figure, part of the land in Woodland Oaks is already zoned PUD
inside the 1000'.
Lew Borgfeld questioned if you have to get the concurrence of
the property owners or does the City have the authority to go
ahead. Mark Marquez replied there's no requirement to obtain
their concurrence, but .they can petition for this on their own
if they choose.
Steve Simonson then wondered if you have to have public
hearings and Mark Marquez yes you do.
Mr. Simonson then asked if it's required to notify landowners
that are effected and Mark Marquez indicated that he sees
nothbng in the law to require this, but feels certain that
course of action would be prudent. We will need to convince
them. their taxes will not go up and their property values will
increase.
-5-
Merwin Willman commented on the current Platting Fees Ordinance
:and informed everyone that on a piece of land 100' x 100', the
platting fees according. to that ordinance. would be $5000.
Mark Marquez observed you can't get rid of the ordinance until
you have something to replace it.
-Jack Garber questioned where the 1000' starts and was informed
by Mark Marquez it starts from the right-of-way on either side
of Schertz Parkway.
Mr. Garber then brought up runoff/drainage and asked if
something about it should be included in the plan. Mark
Marquez indicated that would be for the board to decide.
Mr. Marquez reminded everyone that the board will have to come
up with a plan, but City Council will have to approve it.
Chairman Andrews asked if there's any time frame as to when the
plan could be implemented. Mark Marguez replied it will become
effective on January 1 following approval of the plan, so the
earliest date possible would be 1994. Also, there's a minimum
60 day window, after the City Council says go ahead, for
negotiations by the entities involved. There will also need to
be appointment of board members and they will need a period of
time to put together a plan and have it approved by City
Council. Mr. Marquez commented it will be 4-6 months before a
plan is ready for review.
Mary Marsh inquired how we're going to control growth in the
meantime and Mark Marquez replied the current Platting Fee
Ordinance will apply until a TIF Plan is ready to replace it.
Harry Richburg asked what course of action would be taken if
someone is interested in a specific area before the plan is
approved. Merwin Willman related it would go before City
Council - we can make exceptions.
Councilman Ken Greenwald asked what happens if the school board
says no to being one of the players.
Mark Marquez remarked he had spoken with a Mr. Hays who is
president of the Comal ISD and was told by Mr. Hays that
whatever funds are given up,-for example in a tax abatement or
a TIF, do not count against state funds the schools receive.
As a matter of fact, if the revenue base is smaller, the funds
are more. Mr. Marquez said he would have to research this
further to confirm it, but it appears the only way to lose is
if the property values drop below the base line.
Bobbie Vonada asked Mark Marquez if he had talked to businesses
about this and Mr. Marquez replied no. You have to inform.
businesses about this, but it is an arrangement- between the
players.
-6- .
Mrs. Vonada then questioned if a TIF plan makes development
more attractive and Mark Marquez commented you can be sure he
would advise any prospect of all the benefits.
Merwin Willman made a motion that Planning and Zoning recommend
approval to City Council of the preliminary Tax Increment
Financing Plan and suggested the Council establish the
necessary procedures to get the plan implemented.
Keith Van Dine seconded the motion and the Commission voted
unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
Charles McDonald made a motion that EDTF recommend City Council
adopt the preliminary Tax Increment Financing Plan. Chuck
Sharpe seconded the motion and the EDTF voted unanimously in
favor. Motion carried.
City Manager, Kerry Sweatt, advised that at the current
schedule, he would anticipate this being on the agenda for
discussion at .the second workshop in December.
Keith Van Dine wanted to know if the City would strike a deal
as far as giving businesses more return on their investment,
say 10 or 15 years down the road, after their business gets
booming. He doesn't like making deals with school boards, etc.
because you can paint yourself in a corner.
" Mark Marquez pointed out that once the increment is
established, it won't change and Chairman Andrews noted that
the increment applies only until the project is completed..
Mr. Van Dine then gave an example of his concern. A business
has to put in aseptic system because there are no. funds for
sewer lines. Ten years later, before the fund builds up, the
business grows and is now a four building operation that
requires more sewer lines than originally thought. There have
to be some hard and fast rules about what we're going to do for
~~hese businesses.
Chairman Andrews implied this is something that should be
brought up at the next discussion on the TIF.
This concluded the joint session.
#6 GENERAL DISCUSSION
Keith Van Dine•
(a) Mentioned his concerns again about. the City striking deals.
Merwin Willman stressed that the board will have to establish
rules.
(b) Stated he has told the citizens in his area of the City to
hang in there, it looks like they're going to get a new road.
-7-
Merwin Willman•
(a) Mentioned the public hearing on December 8th on the name
change for FM 3009 and said he would like to see a list of the
effected property owners.
Steve Simonson asked Norma Althouse how many are on the list
and was told there are approximately 30.
Councilman Ken Greenwald:
(a) Reminded everyone of the City Council public hearing on
December 1 on a proposed curfew. Suggested that if anyone has
thoughts on this, they, attend the hearing.
Keith Van Dine inquired if the curfew is for teenagers and Mr.
Greenwald replied for those under 17.
Mr. Van Dine then asked what times are being proposed and Mr.
Greenwald informed from 11:30pm to 5:30am Monday through Friday
and from 1:30am to 5:30am Saturday and Sunday.
Steve Simonson indicated there are lots of exceptions and Mr. £
Greenwald acknowledged there are eleven exceptions.
Keith Van Dine then asked how it is going to be enforced. Mr.
Greenwald explained for the first offense, the family gets a
written letter. The second time, they get a letter from either
Juvenile Court or Juvenile Probation. The third time, the
parents get ticketed.
Mr. Greenwald asked how you legislate parental responsibility
and morality and David Richmond replied you can't and you
shouldn't.
Mr. Richmond asked if the police have commented on the curfew
and Mr. Greenwald commented the officers want it, but the
Chief doesn't.
Mr. Greenwald urged everyone, whether they agree or not, to
attend the public hearing.
(b) Reported bond approval on November 17th at an interest rate.
of 6.2~.
Chairman Andrews asked if it's possible to refinance the bonds
we have to the lower interest rate. Mr. Greenwald answered
they're- almost paid off, and besides, they are. also at a good
interest rate.
-8-
Steve Simonson:
(a) Noted that in regard to the FM 3009 widening, one more
crisis has been solved. (Every subdivision entrance has to be
moved.)
(b) Advised Merwin Willman is working hard on putting together
a Unified Development Code. Noted that in one court action, it
was decided that cities can do some regulating in their
extraterritorial jurisdiction besides platting.
Chairman Andrews:
(a) Commented on the annual Christmas Lighting Contest and
noted that this year, in order to enter, you need to call City
Hall with your name and address. Also mentioned that judges
are needed.
Steve Simonson asked that they tell citizens to call the
Planning Department at 658-4611 to enter.
#7 ADJOURPII~iENT
Chairman Andrews adjourned the meeting at 8:15 P.M.
The next scheduled meeting is a public hearing on December 8,
1992.
-9-
e.