Loading...
04-11-2017 Supplemental Agenda with backupMEETING AGENDA City Council REGULAR SESSION CITY COUNCIL April 11, 2017 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 would want to be treats Work together cooperatively as a tea Call to Order — Regular Session Opening Prayer and Pledtes of Allegiance to the Flats of the United States and State of Texas. (Minister C.D. Peterson, Resurrection Baptist Church) PrPcPntatian • Schertz Sweetheart Court Fiesta Medal Presentation (S. Gonzalez /L. Klepper /M. Spence) Proclamation • Proclamation recognizing National Public Safety Telecommunications Week. (D. Wait/M. Hansen /M. Carey/R. Rutkowski) City Events and Announcements • Announcements of upcoming City Events (B. James /D. Wait /S. Gonzalez) • Announcements and recognitions by City Manager (J. Kessel) 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. 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 04- 11- 2017Council Agenda 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 — Consideration and/or action regarding the approval of the minutes of the Special Meeting of April 3, 2017 and the regular meeting of April 4, 2017. (J. Kessel /B. Dennis) 2. Excused Council Absences — Consideration and/or action excusing City Council Member absences for the following dates: April 4, 2017. (B. Dennis /Mayor /Council) 3. Boards, Commissions and Committee Member Appointments — Consideration and /or action ratifying the appointment of Mr. Dean Midlick as a regular member to the Historical Preservation Committee. (B. Dennis /Mayor /Council) Discussion Items 4. Issuance of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2017 — Consideration and /or action authorizing City Staff and Consultants to proceed with the issuance of $4,000,000.00 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2017 for the purpose of constructing Fire Station No. 3 as previously approved by the voters at a bond election held November 3, 2015. (J. Kessel /J. Walters /M. McLiney /A. Friedman) DISCUSSION ITEM FOUR (4) ABOVE HAS BEEN REVISED TO CORRECT THE AMOUNT OF THE BOND ISSUANCE. THERE IS AN URGENT PUBLIC NECESSITY TO ISSUE THE BONDS REFERENCED IN ORDER ENSURE FUNDING IS IN PLACE FOR THE CITY'S NEW FIRE STATION. 5. Resolution No. 17 -R -22 — Consideration and/or action approving a Resolution by the City Council of the City of Schertz Texas authorizing and approving publication of Notice of Intention to issue Certificates of Obligation; complying with the requirements contained in Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 15c2 -12; and providing an effective date. (J. Kessel /J. Walters /M. McLiney /A. Friedman) 6. Ordinance No. 17 -T -15 — Consideration and /or action approving an Ordinance by the City Council of the City of Schertz, Texas authorizing a Budget amendment to fund Fire Station #2 Repairs and to remodel the Senior Center, repealing all Ordinances or Parts of Ordinances in conflict with the Ordinance, declaring an emergency, and providing an effective date. First & Final Reading (B. James) 7. Resolution No. 17 -R -26 — Consideration and/or action approving a Resolution approving an amendment to the existing agreement with the Construction Manager at Risk for repairs to Fire Station No. 2 and Alterations to the Senior Center. (B. James /P. Gaudreau) 04 -11 -2017 City Council Agenda Page - 2 - 8. Ordinance No. 1.7 -D -14 - Consideration and /or action approving an Ordinance amending Chapter 86, parking prohibited 40 ft in front of drainage inlet on Cameron River in the Fairway Ridge Subdivision. First Reading (B. James /K. Woodlee /C. Palomo) 9. Ordinance No. 17 -S -12 — Conduct a Public Hearing and First Reading of an Ordinance PH regarding a request to rezone approximately 4 acres of land generally located at the intersection of IH 35 Frontage Road and Covers Cove, from General :Business (GB) to Planned Development District (PDD). The area In the proposed rezone includes the following addresses, all located along Covers Cove: 6001, 6005, 6009, 6013, 601.4, 6017, 6018, 6021, 6022, 6025, and 6026. First Reading (B. James /L. Wood /E. Grobe) 1.0. Ordinance No. 17 -S -13 - Conduct Public Hearing and First Reading of an Ordinance regarding a request to amend the Schertz Comprehensive Land Plan and Future Land PH Use Plan to change the land use designation of properties generally located in the area from IH -10 to approximately 2,000 feet north of Lower Seguin Road between FM 1518 and the western boundary of the City limits to the "Air Installation Impact" land use designation. First Reading (B. James) Roll Call Vote Confirmation Requests and Announcements 11. Announcements by City Manager. 12. Future Agenda Item Request for City Council: This is an opportunity for City Council members to request that items be placed on a future agenda. No discussion of the merits of the item may be taken at this time. Should a Council Member oppose placement of the requested item on a future agenda, the Mayor, without allowing discussion, shall ask for the consensus of the other City Council members to place or not place the item on a future agenda. 13. Announcements by Mayor and Councilmembers • City and community events attended and to be attended • City Council Committee and Liaison Assignments (see assignments below) • Continuing education events attended and to be attended • Recognition of actions by City employees • Recognition of actions by community volunteers Adjournment CERTIFICATION I, DONNA SCHMOEKEL, DEPUTY 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 11th DAY OF APRIL 2017 . AT LEAST TWO HOURS PRIOR TO THE SCHEDULED MEETING TIME. 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. 04 -11 -2017 City Council Agenda Page - 3 - ]SON NA SChfMOEK EL- Donna Schmoekel, Deputy City Secretar 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 executive 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. Executive Sessions Authorized: This agenda has been reviewed and approved by the City's legal counsel and the presence of any subject in any Executive 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. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND LIAISON ASSIGNMENTS Mayor Carpenter Councilmember Davis— Place 1 Audit Committee Schertz Housing Authority Board Interview Committee for Boards and Commissions Interview Committee for Boards and Investment Advisory Committee Commissions TIRZ II Board Councilmember Gutierrez — Place 2 Councilmember Larson — Place 3 Mayor Pro -Tem Edwards — Place 4 Councilmember Thompson — Place 5 Audit Committee Audit Committee Hal Baldwin Scholarship Committee Investment Advisory Committee Interview Committee for Boards and Commissions Cibolo Valley Local Government Corporation Councilmember Kiser — Place 6 Councilmember Crawford — Place 7 Schertz Animal Services Advisory Commission Schertz- Seguin Local Government Corporation Interview Committee for Boards and Commissions 04 -11 -2017 City Council Agenda Page - 4 - CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM City Council Meeting: April 11, 2017 Department: Subject: BACKGROUND City Secretary Minutes Agenda No. 1 The City Council held a Special Meeting on April 3, 2017 and a Regular meeting on April 4, 2017. FISCAL IMPACT RM Staff recommends Council approve the minutes of the Special Meeting on April 3, 2017 . and the Regular meeting on April 4, 2017. ATTACHMENTS Special Meeting of April 3, 2017 and Regular Meeting of April 4, 2017 minutes. MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING April 3, 2016 A Special. Meeting was held by the Schertz City Council of the City of Schertz, Texas, on April 3, 2017 at 6:00 p.m., at the Hal Baldwin Municipal Complex Council Chambers, 1400 Schertz Parkway, Building #4, Schertz, Texas. The following members present to -wit: Mayor Michael Carpenter Councilmember Mark Davis Councilmember Scott Larson Councilmember Angelina Kiser Staff Present: Executive Director Brian James Executive Director Kyle Kinateder Assistant to City Manager Sarah Gonzalez Call to Order — Special Session. Mayor Pro -Tem Cedric Edwards Councilmember Ralph Gutierrez Councilmember Robin Thompson Councilmember Bert Crawford City Manager John Kessel Executive Director Dudley Wait City Attorney Charles Zech City Secretary Brenda Dennis Mayor Carpenter called the meeting to order at 6:08 p.m. Opening Prayer and Pledges of Allegiance to the Flans of the United States and State of Texas. (Councilmember Davis) Mayor Carpenter welcomed everyone who was in attendance and stated that his purpose in calling this special session was to discuss some things regarding the project being proposed in the City of Cibolo regarding a toll road which would extend across their city limits and into the City of Schertz. He explained the order of the meeting would be to hear any individuals who would like to speak, followed by a brief presentation by staff and then a council discussion. After that he will again invite anyone else who would like to speak again. This will probably be the first of other sessions to come in order to discover, learn and hear from the public. He proceeded to open the session called Hearing of Residents. 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. 4 -3 -201.7 Minutes Page -1- Mayor Carpenter recognized the following individuals who spoke: Mr. Don Dixon, 206 Morningside Drive, San Antonio, who stated he was a long time taxpayer of the City of Schertz on property he owns off of FM 3009. He stated FM 1103 is a state farm to market road and you want a state road to stay that way for efficient maintenance by TxDOT, which is a good thing for the taxpayer. However, in terms of it becoming a toll road, to him this would be devastating. It would be a double tax and a burden to all of us. A resolution would be in order protecting your Schertz citizens and stating you don't want this. This is his suggestion. Toll roads have a lot of issues associated with them, especially private toll roads. Ms. Michelle Womack, 2944 Mineral Springs, Schertz, who stated she has several concerns. 1) Neither Resolution 16 -R -19 nor the bond referenced in Ordinance 15 -E -23 were passed with any knowledge of this proposed parkway existing. It was just supposed to be the widening of FM 1103. Our bond money should not be going here; this is not what we are paying for. 2) The overpass proposed at Chelsea and Old Wiederstein is not in our bond; we did not agree to that. 3) The toll collection point at FM 1103 and IH 35; again, we did not agree to that. 4) The collection of tolls for the Schertz portion —the City of Cibolo has told her they are not going to collect any money for this portion of the road and that all the toll revenue is going back to the company, which is not correct. 5) The contract shows that Cibolo will be collecting 50% of surplus income, to include the Schertz portion. This is unacceptable. She also addressed the suggested `turn over of the Schertz portion of the road to Cibolo as unacceptable (pgs. 2 and 1.5, section 7.2). Why would we put our bond money into this and then turn over our part of the road to Cibolo? 6) Delays in TxDOT project because of the parkway project: They want to do this project simultaneously as the FM 1103 expansion and they have until December 2018 to come up with the money to do so. This could ultimately slow down our widening project. She suggested the City of Schertz have something in writing from TxDOT stating that for Schertz's portion of this road we are not going to allow those center lanes to come through. It is only for what we bonded to do. Other than that, she asks that our bonds be removed from this project. Mr. Jeff Womack, 2944 Mineral Springs, Schertz, who stated he questions the legality of both the City of Schertz and City of Cibolo citizens. By overwhelming margins in 2014, . the City of Cibolo voted 71% in favor of bonds to widen FM 1103 from the City line down to Wagon Way. In 2015, . the City of Schertz followed it up with 73% approval of stated bonds going from the city limits out to IH 35. On average, 72% of Schertz and Cibolo residents paid to have FM 1103 widened (two lanes in each direction, raised medians in the middle, a left turning lane in the middle, bicycle lanes on the outside of those two lanes and five to six foot sidewalks). He questions the legality of TTC and the City of Cibolo taking two taxpayer funded bonds and basically ripping them up right after construction or during construction so they can put their express lanes in there. He is not against toll roads in the right circumstances but running them right in the middle of residential neighborhoods where you have only about 120 feet right -of -way as it is —he doesn't think this is a good idea. He doesn't want to see high speed traffic right against their homes. Terri Hall, representing Texas Turf and Texans for Toll Free Highways, Spring Branch, TX, who stated their movement started as a taxpayer revolt against converting existing Highway 281 into a toll road. They were also involved in the fight against the Trans Texas Corridor. She thinks 4 -3 -201.7 Minutes Page - 2 - some of the biggest red flags on this particular project is the imminent domain for private gain. It affects the property rights of all Texans. It doesn't just stay isolated in the City of Cibolo. Now they are asking the City of Schertz, for imminent domain in the expansion of these express lanes. The jurisdiction issues are another big one. How can the City of Cibolo operate this highway, take it back from TxDOT in the Schertz portion and operate this toll road and hand it to a private company after that. She does not see any legal precedent anywhere to be able to do that. Obviously, this is a huge problem. She doesn't believe any of Schertz officials /staff were consulted before this toll road agreement with this private company was signed. Also, there is a pattern of failure with these public /private partnerships—example—bankruptcy of State Hwy 130 and the bankruptcy of Communal Columbia toll road in Laredo. They heard there is a bill up in the legislature to take the tolls off the Communal. Columbia because it is so controversial. It went bankrupt and TxDOT got a $90 million road back for about $20 million and they are still charging tolls even though our gas taxes paid for it in full. This just starts more controversy. Now we are getting our roads back by contract rather than just plain vanilla widening them for everyone to access and use them freely. Another problem with these public /private partnerships is optimism bias in the traffic and revenue studies. They basically gin up the numbers to prove whatever they need to in order to go to the bond market and get the money to do the road projects. There are now some of these bond guys suing some of these private toll operators, some with accusations of fraud. Then they have the punitively high level of tolls on these public /private partnerships. There are two open in the metro -plex today which are on Hwy 635 and Hwy 820, both operated by Centro, which went bankrupt on 1.30. In an urban area we are seeing punitively high tolls up to $40 a day in tolls to take these roads because there is no cap on these toll rates. Also, there will be more costs to the Schertz taxpayer because you share legal counsel with Cibolo so you will need to get another independent counsel to represent you. Since TxDOT is responsible for the maintenance of FM 1103 if it gets turned over to Cibolo and Schertz, it becomes a local taxpayer expense for maintenance. Lastly, Cibolo signed their agreement and the Cibolo citizens were not even allowed to see it before it was signed. It isn't even about solving a traffic problem; it is about converting private agriculture farmland into a commercial tax base, which is really about economic development. She implores you to reject this toll road agreement and she remains available as a resource to answer any questions anyone may have. Mr. Woodrow Richardson 2496 Jane Adams Drive Schertz TX, who stated he wants to talk about this from a truck driver's standpoint. He spoke about a private toll road in Laredo. The first week he drove it, the cost was $1.9 for traveling 1.8 miles. He called and complained about it. Six months later it was out of business. Then the state opened it up and had three people collecting the toll fees. However, the trucks had to sit and wait until 6:00 a.m. before they could enter the road. He is against it. In Texas there are about 5 to 6 different toll passes. It is the biggest waste of money he has ever seen. When the toll road in Laredo went bankrupt, we bought it with the taxpayer's dollars. It has been ten years ago and it still isn't making a profit today. If they would 4 -3 -201.7 Minutes Page - 3 - use the fuel tax money for the purpose it is intended you wouldn't need a toll road. He is still driving truck and he had to come down here today to share this. There is a toll road going through several northern states, one pass that takes care of everything and you buzz right through it. You get to Texas and you have five or six different toll passes. Mr. John Sullivan, 513 Triple Crown, Schertz, TX, who stated a concern he has is the right of way width. He didn't see anything in the memo about bike lanes and sidewalks. He prefers to see a multi -use trail like ten foot sidewalks and no bike lanes. Mr. Brent Bolter, 2633 Clover Brook Lane Schertz TX, who stated those in his area that need to head out to FM 1103 in order to leave their neighborhoods face a stream of cars who are coming north on FM 1103 to get to 1H 35 as well as those on the access road trying to cross over. They need the widening of this road. However, the toll road would bring even more cars into the mix in addition to the already congested situation from the two neighborhoods. A lot of Cibolo residents are cutting through their (Schertz) subdivisions to get out to the access road to get onto IH 35. He is still mystified as to where is all this need for IH 10 access coming from? And, yes, Schertz residents (especially in those neighborhoods) have a stake in this. Mr. Stace Long, 548 Stonebrook Drive, Cibolo, TX, who stated he lives right off of FM 1103. They moved out here to avoid the hustle and bustle of the big city. The Cibolo City Council decisions seem to be all about bringing in more progress. He also does not see the reason for the full connection from IH 35 to IH 10. He sees no advantage to the citizens for having a toll road. The city council is supposed to be representing the citizens but when decisions are made quietly with nobody knowing anything about them, it's the `cart before the horse' situation. He thinks it is appalling and unethical what his representatives are doing to the Cibolo citizens and now to Schertz as well. He is here for the safety and quiet of his neighborhood. This is a small community and he prefers to keep it that way as much as possible. Mr. Jay Lambert, 975 Oak Ridge, Schertz, TX, who stated he also owns property in Cibolo and he is also a business owner in San Antonio, Cibolo and south Texas. He moved to reside in Schertz in 2000 and it has grown a lot. He leaves early in the morning to go south to IH 10 and he does not see a problem. There is a problem for those trying to commute to Randolph Air Force Base. That is where the traffic is, on Hwy 78. He commends the Schertz City Council on the great job they are doing running their city. He is totally against this toll road and has previously had occasions to take the toll road to Dallas, where he pays a $1.1.00 bill and six months later gets another one for $66.00. He is sick of toll roads. Ms. Rebecca Melton, 352 Saddlehorn Way, Cibolo, TX, who stated she recently found out the Cibolo City Council put this toll road agreement through and did not bring it to the citizens first. With the magnitude of this decision a lot of Cibolo citizens feel it should have been brought before them for a vote first. Some felt this did not follow the normal sequence of business and this bothers people. She lives in a subdivision across from Steele High School which is in the vicinity where the toll road is projected to pass. The traffic is already congested, so what is it going to be like when the toll road comes through that area. She thanked the City of Schertz for having this special meeting and allowing some of the Cibolo residents to come and voice their 4 -3 -201.7 Minutes Page - 4 - thoughts on the proposed toll road project. This is a project of interest to both cities and she feels we all need to cooperate with each other. Mr. Robert Roberson, 4015 Lower Seguin Rd, Cibolo, TX, who stated he owns property in the affected area. He stated TxDOT has money set aside and ready to go to widen FM 1103 from IH 35 to Steele High School and he saw a presentation at a Cibolo City Council Meeting which was provided by TxDOT sometime in October 2016. It showed how they were going to widen the road two lanes in each direction with a turn lane in the middle and install stop lights at key intersections. He feels this will solve 90% of the traffic problems on this road. There was also money in that project to completely rework the intersection at IH 35 and FM 1103. He feels this would cause the toll project to become mute. If Cibolo wants to do something, they could widen Haeckerville Road. Like others, he doesn't think the numbers add up. They already have a project in hand to widen Haeckerville Rd from Lower Seguin Rd to IH 10. However, it certainly does not have enough traffic to put forth a $100 million project and turn over control of state highways to private entities. Mr. Dana Eldridge, 2628 Gallant Fox Drive, Cibolo, TX, who stated there are two schools that are going to be built on the other side of IH 35 from FM 1103 which will cause a lot more traffic on top of what we already have. The kids in the neighborhood know the back roads and they drive them fast, including passing people, most likely because they are late for school or whatever. Our backroads are going to get more dangerous and they are already hard to get to by our emergency responders if there is an accident. We have enough traffic. He doesn't like stop lights, but more may be a bad idea. People don't like to pay more taxes but they do because it goes for certain things. But when we see it being stolen, that's not a good thing. Traffic is only going to get worse when those schools are built and things start building up over there. Workshop • Discussion regarding the Development Agreement executed and agreed to by the City of Cibolo and Cibolo Turnpike, L. P., and discussion regarding Schertz City Policy as to the tolling of roads, both involving newly constructed roads and existing public roads. In addition, discussion regarding the City's policy on Thoroughfare Planning and issues associated with the proposed toll roads as it affects the City's Infrastructure, and its Land Use Planning. (Mayor /Council) Mayor Carpenter recognized Executive Director Brian James who stated we were aware that Cibolo was working on a toll project but we were not aware that it affected Schertz. Previously, it appeared that the Cibolo Tollway Project was entirely within the Cibolo city limits. New information indicates the project encroaches into Schertz city limits. Our initial reaction of concerns and questions were similar to what has been brought forward here tonight. Part of the reason for holding this meeting was to hear other concerns. Our concerns are the negative impacts on our residents, significant traffic impact in Schertz, inconsistencies with what our voters approves with the FM 1.103 TxDOT contract and is this what our community wants — we don't believe it is. These concerns require a factual understanding of what Cibolo is proposing, what the potential impact on Schertz is so we can develop a list of questions and 4 -3 -2017 Minutes Page - 5 - concerns and get factual answers to those issues so staff can provide council with full and complete information and then make an informed decision for the community. We feel we don't have that yet, so this meeting is so we can all get on the same page, develop a list of questions from council, staff and citizens so we can get answers when we come back for another meeting. Mayor Carpenter opened the discussion for council and started with the development agreement Cibolo entered into with the Cibolo Turnpike, L.P. He stated there were many things of concern to him which were confusing and contradictory. He stated this is the first of more meetings they will be having on this subject. The meetings will be published so everyone will know about them and we need to also hear from our Schertz residents. There is no question that the City of Schertz will be affected if the `ask' from Cibolo is that we ask TxDOT to turn over FM 1.103 from IH 35 to our city limits to us and then we turn that over to Cibolo and then Cibolo turns that over to a private company for operations and maintenance. We need feedback from our residents on this. He himself has some strong opinions about this matter which he will express in a few minutes. This idea that he as mayor and a resident taxpayer would invest our taxpayer money in the form of a bond in the improvement of an asset, and then as soon as those improvements are completed, turn that asset over to another entity so they could turn it over to a private sector for profit is ludicrous. That is crazy talk! He cannot imagine a situation where that would be beneficial except if there was something significant or valuable in return for our residents. He sees nothing beneficial for us in Cibolo's agreement. He has concerns about the residents in the area of the city off of Orth Road whose only exit /entry from their neighborhood is on to FM 1103 inside the city limits of Cibolo. What effect will express lanes have if they are allowed to be put in there? He saw some pictures of an area where some flyover lanes were proposed (Chelsea & Wiederstein at FM 1103). In the picture was a reference to undeveloped land. It is not undeveloped. People live in those houses and he is sure they would not want a flyover going over their property. He is not going to tell Cibolo how to run their business, but when it comes to things being done in the corporate city limits of Schertz, he expects that same treatment back our way. It is our city, we pay taxes, we are each other's neighbors and we have responsibilities to one another. At this time with the information he has today (the express lanes, the tolling, whatever), if Cibolo wants to do that they can, but he doesn't think it is the best solution, today, and that stops at the corporate limits of the City of Schertz. It does not pass into our city. Mayor Carpenter recognized Councilmember Bert Crawford who asked if this is our first overture on sort of being ignored by the City of Cibolo? Everything he read today didn't really mention Schertz at all except that no tolls for EMS and Fire would need to be paid. He also referenced a letter dated April 3, 2017 from Cibolo apologizing, saying they had ignored us. He stated there are a lot of issues associated with this. Mayor Carpenter recognized Mayor Pro -Tem Edwards who stated in his time on council they have been open and transparent and worked with Cibolo and maintained a cordial relationship 4 -3 -201.7 Minutes Page - 6 - with them. He knows a lot of the leadership at Cibolo and they are great guys. He just feels they misplaced value and ethics on this particular project and he thinks their citizens are feeling that. He recommended an exhaustive search for independent counsel to represent us on this case. It will be costly, but for us it is the right thing to do; openly and correctly, it is important. He recommended we put out signs regarding future meetings well in advance to let others know because he believes the folks that are here tonight is just a small representative of the whole. Mayor Carpenter recognized Councilmember Thompson who had questions for Executive Director Brian James. He asked him to define what a turnback is? Mr. James stated his definition may not match what Cibolo's interpretation is so that is something they need to get clarification on. Other questions were as follows. 1) Do we know if the express lanes in the proposed Cibolo Expressway would be periodic lanes with flyover as the concept shows or would they be a continuous isolated two lane expressway all along FM 11.03? 2) Do we know if the turnback would be automatic upon completion of the FM 1103 project? 3) Do we know what the status of this project would be on Schertz commercial businesses and homes along the proposed turnback portion if the turnback goes into effect? In other words are they still within the city limits? 4) Do we know where the locations of the toll collection booths would be especially along the FM 1103 and IH 35 portion? 5) Do we know where the express lanes in the proposed turnback portion will be; in other words where would the express lane traffic enter FM 1.1.03 or IH 35? 6) Do we know what the added legal cost would be of attaining outside counsel if indeed the law firm representing both cities cannot represent both cities? Mr. James responded that they did not have answers to these questions at this time. Councilmember Thompson stated he believes he knew the answer to these questions but it just points out that there are many facts that are totally up in the air. There is no way we can move forward one way or the other. As Mayor Carpenter has stated, we value the city of Cibolo and relationships we have built over the years. We have a lot of other great agreements that benefit both cities. A discussion of a whole lot of facts is needed before we can move forward. Mayor Carpenter recognized Councilmember Gutierrez who asked if when the study is done could they look at the distance of FM 46 that goes from IH 35 to IH 10 in comparison to FM 1.103 and also FM 1.604? It seems they are trying to put a toll road between two other roads that already connect to IH 10. He is also concerned about the conflict of interest because Cibolo and Schertz both share the same legal counsel. He would like more information as to who is going to step down. His other concern is the increase in traffic along the Schertz portion of FM 1103. Even if we don't agree, the turnpike is going to automatically get an increase in traffic. The average citizen is going to try to avoid these toll roads and google maps make it easy for students to do that. He has a big concern about safety and health because the people will try to navigate through the residential areas. Basically, toll roads are trying to generate revenue (i.e. toll road in Houston). They also have a rate hike during peak hours. The signage of fees is also very surprising /confusing to the average motorist. 4 -3 -201.7 Minutes Page - 7 - Mayor Carpenter recognized Councilmember Kiser who stated she thought the residents who spoke did an excellent job in doing your homework and coming here to give us a lot to think about. She agrees with pretty much everything they stated. She too, saw the date on the letter from Cibolo that Councilmember Crawford pointed out earlier. The initial concept of this project was in the Spring of 2015 and now on April 3, 2017 in the letter they say `Oh, we made some assumptions about Schertz." To her this is a problem. However, she agrees we have to continue to work with Cibolo, who are our neighbors. But did they not think of all the things the residents brought up, because if they did, this would not be happening. Or, did they just ignore it? It is a question she would like to ask them. Mayor Carpenter recognized Councilmember Davis who stated he grew up amongst toll roads and bridges up north. In his experience, they have a place, but this is the wrong place. He understands a toll road for the purpose of moving traffic and cutting down on the distance of getting from point A to point B, but he doesn't understand the concept of a toll road that cuts through a city and more importantly through residential areas. He agrees with Dr. Kiser noting that this has been going on for about two years, and two years after the fact, they say, "Oh, by the way, we thought you guys would be happy about this.' It is disheartening and concerning. He looks forward to getting the rest of the questions answered from staff and having some more public hearings on this. He cannot see how a toll road concept going through or along our residential area is going to be a good thing for Schertz. Mayor Carpenter recognized Councilmember Larson who stated he echoed a lot of the previously mentioned concerns. Toll roads can be a potential private market solution to a real problem but in reality it doesn't make sense in the end. The thing that is a non - starter for him is the idea of imminent domain —using the force of government to take someone's land against their will at a value the government decides. We still have a lot of facts to learn. From his perspective, you have the right to know what he is thinking and if there is ever any portion of a contract that says we are going to use the force of the government to make somebody sell their land and give it to a private for - profit company, he doesn't need any other facts. That is a non - starter. Government exists as a partnership between the people who are in the government and staff and elected officials in the community. Staff and elected officials are at the bottom holding up that partnership and supporting the community and the community is what dictates us. There are times when we run into conflict in our community. That is not always bad, it sharpens one another. He is going to give the benefit of doubt to the leaders of Cibolo, but there is frustration; the letter they wrote us today, the message was, we thought it would be good for you. He never trusts a government entity who does an agreement without including all parties involved and comes out and says "Well, we thought it would be good for you." He thinks moving forward, the residents that are here this evening; that sends a message. They mayor spearheaded this tonight and along with him we know how important it is to hear your voice. Take advantage of this, let your neighbors know and let them come here. If you were not heard in Cibolo, you will be heard here. He thanked Schertz staff for all their extra work on this. 4 -3 -201.7 Minutes Page - 8 - Mayor Carpenter recognized Councilmember Crawford who suggested more signage to let people know about future meetings on this subject such as a sign on FM 1103 in the Schertz portion. Mayor Carpenter stated we intend to over - communicate to get the message out. Mayor Carpenter stated he doesn't want to tell Cibolo how to run their business but a lot of the decisions they are making will affect our community as well as their own. He read a quote from one of his heroes, the second President of the United States, John Adams. He stated: `Government is instituted for the common good, for the protection, safety, prosperity and happiness of ' the people and not for profit, honor or private interest of any one man, family or class of men. Therefore, the people alone have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government and to reform, alter or totally change the same when their protection, safety, prosperity and happiness require it.' Therefore, if we want something different, it is up to all of us and we will have to work together to get where we want to go. There will be a minimum of three public hearings to follow this one tonight, one of which will be at our' Council on the Go' meeting. The location may be moved. They will make sure everyone will have an opportunity to speak who wants to. Mayor Carpenter went back to the Hearing of Residents portion of the agenda. Hearing of Residents Mayor Carpenter recognized the following who spoke: Mr. Harvey Hill, Cibolo, TX who stated he participated on the original planning of the extension of FM 1103 down to IH 10 with TxDOT. In speaking with the engineer over this area out here, he doesn't even know what was negotiated in the first place with them. It was supposed to originally be four lanes up to 38 and six lanes to 35. They have already started on the expansion of the bridge across IH 35. Until that is done, nothing will be done as far as the road itself. He just left and was talking to the City Secretary (Cibolo) and the only thing that has been negotiated as far as the toll road to come up to Hwy 78 and a flyover, the railroad track and from there it is the city's responsibility all the way on up and Schertz too. TxDOT is going to expand it to a five lane with a turn lane in the middle according to the engineer. Because TxDOT has to purchase right of ways it will probably be a year or two before anything gets done on it. Lastly, he stated he is not in favor of the toll road either. Terri Hall, representing Texas Turf and Texans for Toll Free Highways, Spring Branch, TX, who stated another thing you need to consider is how Cibolo Turnpike's expressway lanes will affect your ability to expand those free lanes on FM 1103 in the future. Due to the toll lanes taking up valuable real estate in the center of this already very valuable asset, it will force you to possibly condemn very expensive commercial property, especially near IH 35 in order to expand those free lanes. She is seeing where you don't get the roads back when the private organizations go bankrupt. What happens is they go to court and the senior lien holder, the bond holders, get first dibs at getting their money back. You will not get your road back at fire sale price. She stated that in regard to overpasses, when they come through the middle of property, they are not going 4 -3 -201.7 Minutes Page - 9 - to build overpasses for convenient crossing over because the overpasses cost about $10 million each. Because they are private companies, the government cannot force them to do so. This is another problem that will impact people's property and potentially their livelihood. Another issue is traffic diversion —to the side roads, which belong to the cities (i.e., Cibolo & Schertz). That is going to definitely impact you by increasing your maintenance. Lastly, who is going to police and collect tolls for this road? There are three things the private operator wants the government for: 1) non - compete – bondholders require some type of non - compete agreement or they won't give you the money. Non - compete means they aren't going to expand any free roads or will penalize you or make you pay the private toll company for any loss of revenue if you expand any of your city roads that compete with their toll roads. 2) subsidy – they can't make these toll roads work just on their own money. She has not yet seen one of these projects get off the ground without public money. 3) toll collection – TxDOT has the power to block your vehicle registration if you fail to pay the toll. Policing —are they going to use City of Schertz Police Officers time if you fail to pay? Mayor Carpenter recognized Executive Brian James who stated a staff member will be coming around amongst the audience members tonight with a sheet of paper to collect your e -mail addresses so we can notify you of any more upcoming meetings on this matter. Mr. Eric Beam, 570 American Flag, Schertz, TX, who stated he likes toll roads and uses the ones on 45 and 1.31. There has been speculation of a lot of commercial development along the way of this local proposed toll road. He does not see this coming based on what he has seen on existing ones. Seeing where the proposed toll road is being planned, he thinks it is ridiculous. The four lanes will impede on the area enough, but with the expressway lanes added, it will make it even worse. He thinks council needs to listen to the residents. They don't necessarily dislike toll roads, they just think there is a better place for them and FM 1103 is not a good place for one. Mr. Greg Howell, 2525 Pillory Point, Schertz, TX, who stated like a few other folks here tonight, he is having difficulty digesting the fact that Cibolo has been working on this project for two years and today suddenly had an `aha' moment and decided to let Schertz know since part of their jurisdiction is involved in the agreement. Also, he has read the agreement several times and it says that it is `irrevocable' meaning if everything doesn't pan out as stated in that agreement then they are going to be out of a lot of money. He would have thought before they signed that knowing that some property involved belonged to Schertz, someone would not have signed that saying Schertz will give us their property and all the citizens who approved this bond; who cares we will get the money, toll road , and revenues, and they won't even think about it. He has a really difficult time understanding that. Mr. Jeff Womack, 944 Mineral. Springs, Schertz, TX, who thanked all the City of Schertz representatives here tonight as well as the individuals from both cities who have come to participate in this representative government, because this is the way it should be. Tt is not supposed to be we are going to tell you how to do things. He appreciates everyone coming together to work for the City of Schertz and even the City of Cibolo. This city (Schertz), particularly, has a long history of slow and deliberate progress towards making the city great. 4 -3 -201.7 Minutes Page -10 - We don't do things for expediency but rather for what it is going to mean for our children and ourselves as we age. He moved to Schertz in 2002, and feels we have grown smart. We are better for the smart decisions and the wise leadership that we have coming from our staff and our council and he just wants to thank everyone. Mr. Dana Eldridge, 2628 Gallant Fox Drive, Cibolo, TX, who stated he agrees; how can this project have been going on for two years and we don't know about it. He has lived in Belmont Park for eleven years and in Schertz since 1996. When Walmart was coming into Cibolo there was a huge outcry of all the issues that it would cause in the neighborhood; so why haven't we heard about this stuff with FM 1103? How was it kept so quiet? Over the years several things have blown up in Cibolo. He doesn't know how this has been kept out of the public eye for so long—it is a very questionable thing. Ms. Melissa Tovar, 1740 Bolton Road Marion TX who stated in regard to imminent domain which was mentioned earlier by Councilmember Larson, there are approximately 40 landowners who can potentially be affected by thisa pretty significant amount of people. Mainly she wants to thank Mayor /Council for having this meeting and making other citizens welcome here and most importantly for listening to your citizens. There is a large amount of citizens in Cibolo who do not feel that their voices have been heard or represented. She commends Schertz for stepping up, listening to your citizens and making decisions based on what your constituents want. Ms. Rebecca Melton, 352 Saddlehorn Way, Cibolo, TX, who started by saying the Schertz EMS saved her life several years ago when she had a heart attack. They are awesome. She also appreciates council's demeanor, taking this toll road issue seriously, and listening to people outside of your community. They were told that this would not cost the citizens of Cibolo anything. When 130 went bankrupt on the southern portion, it had $500 million in federal low cost loans. Everyone in the U.S. will be paying for that because they defaulted on their loans. Also, in regard to imminent domain, it is for public use—it is not for private entities to profit from. The other thing that bothers her is that the private entity is giving the City of Cibolo the money to acquire imminent domain. That is a real ethical issue. She has a problem with that. Mr. Stace Long, 548 Stonebrook Drive, Cibolo, TX, who stated the concern he has is that when you asked them what happened here, he doesn't even care what they say because just like with Walmart, business was conducted and completed before the citizens knew about it. This is almost identical to that situation. In this case, there are a lot more ramifications. He just wanted to stress that just because you checked with them and asked what happened here and can you explain it, he isn't going to even believe what they have to say. It doesn't matter because he doesn't trust what they are doing. He was also told the reason for the toll was to have access to IH 1.0 for business development purposes for Cibolo. He doesn't see how that benefits any of the Cibolo residents. Ms. Michelle Womack, 2944 Mineral Springs, Schertz, TX, who stated the copy of the newsletter she was holding is what was sent to the citizens of Cibolo. It talks about Cibolo Parkway being the City of Choice. In the last paragraph it says, `Collaboration is key to the construction, finance, and maintenance of Cibolo Parkway. The city is working closely with Texas Turnpike Company who will secure private funds for construction, operation, and 4 -3 -201.7 Minutes Page - 11 - maintenance of the toll road. Under this development agreement the city does not expend any city funds and therefore property taxes will not be used or increased. As the project moves forward the Texas Turnpike Company will continue to work closely with the City of Cibolo as well as the Texas Department of Transportation, the Metropolitan Planning Organization and the City of Schertz. Again this has gone to all their residents. Mr. Ron Hayward, 2628 Castle Heights, Schertz, TX who had a question. You say you all worked in the past closely with the City of Cibolo, so his question becomes, `Do they really understand where the boundary lines are for the City of Schertz and the City of Cibolo ?' Everything you have read seems to indicate they don't understand where those boundaries are. He grew up in the north and had the toll road experiences —it sucks. He thanked council for having this meeting and stated he will attend the next one, so please keep everyone posted. Mayor Carpenter stated that the question has been asked this evening, how is it that Schertz did not know and Cibolo didn't say anything. As a statement of fact, he was at a meeting of the Northeast Partnership and he asked a pointed question: `So my understanding is that this project is completely confined within the city limits of the City of Cibolo.' He was told yes that is correct. He relied upon that until March 10 when he had an opportunity to read the agreement that was signed. He doesn't know how come communication was not better. What they can control is what happens here in this city, our ongoing public hearings with our residents and anyone else from Cibolo who wants to join us. We will march forward in a very open manner and continue to public discourse. Mayor Carpenter stated they have an e -mail from TxDOT dated March 23, 2017 from Jonathan Bean, Director of Transportation and Development in the San Antonio District. The note clarified that TxDOT has not made any change to their plans for FM 1103 regarding the expansion project with the cities of Cibolo and Schertz. The expansion includes four lanes with a two way left turn lane, raised median, bike lanes and sidewalks. Any change to this section would involve discussions and approval by both city councils. Any project development activities conducted by the City of Cibolo and /or the private developer regarding the Cibolo Parkway connection between the existing FM 1.103 and IH 10 are independent from the FM 1103 project that has been discussed with TxDOT. Mayor Carpenter stated it sounds like TxDOT is not on board with the expressway project either. Mayor Carpenter recognized Councilmember Thompson who stated he wanted to stress that we are not under any set timetable for the public hearings. We have a great city staff who does a great job who already have a lot of responsibilities and asking them to find the facts to the many questions that are coming out is going to take some time. If you don't hear of another meeting in the immediate future it doesn't mean this has gone underground —staff is simply trying to get more information together. When the facts are ready, a public hearing will be announced. Mayor Carpenter recognized Councilmember Crawford who asked if it would be advisable for any of the residents to contact them when they hear something on their end. Mayor Carpenter stated it would be fine if anyone wanted to contact them or city staff. He invited anyone to request a business card from council or staff. They remain accessible. Mayor Carpenter again . thanked everyone present for coming. He stated as they could see this evening, the Schertz city 4 -3 -201.7 Minutes Page -12 - council is unanimous in the way they feel about how things have gone so far. As he stated earlier, and he thinks council agrees, at this time in the absence of any further information, that project stops at the Schertz city limits. Adiournment Mayor Carpenter adjourned the meeting at 7:58 p.m. Michael R. Carpenter, Mayor Brenda Dennis, City Secretary 4 -3 -201.7 Minutes Page -13 - MINUTES REGULAR MEETING April 4, 2017 A Regular Meeting was held by the Schertz City Council of the City of Schertz, Texas, on April 4, 2017, 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: Councilmember Mark Davis Councilmember Scott Larson Councilmember Angelina Kiser Staff Present: Executive Director Brian James City Attorney Charles Zech Absent: Mayor Michael Carpenter Mayor Pro- Tem Cedric Edwards Councilmember Thompson called the (Minister C.D As Minister Peterson wa the pledges of allegiance Counc for the Councilmember Councilmember States and State of Texas. rez provided the opening prayer followed by and the State of Texas. there are any students present who wish to sign up is on the table out in the foyer. Mayors and Student Councilmembers for the Day. Management) Councilmember Thompson stated we had a great day today as we had the Student Mayors and Student Councilmembers for the day. They were able to participate in a mock City Council meeting training session and we would like to introduce them. Councilmember Thompson introduced the following students: - Student Mayors — Dobie Jr. High, 8th Grade Zoe Gamboa and Corbett Jr. High, 8th Grade Griffin Matthys - Student Councilmembers — Dobie Jr. High, 7th Grade Zaryah Wray and Corbett Jr. High, 7th Grade Alexandra Hickok 4 -04 -201.7 Minutes Page - 1 - Councilmember Thompson recognized each student who provided information on what they had learned. Councilmembers congratulated the students for their interest and participation and each one received a certificate and plaque commemorating the event, presented by all members of Council present and City Manager John Kessel. Councilmember Thompson thanked Councilmembers Gutierrez and Larson who participated today with the students, as this was a great learning experience. Presentation • Presentation regarding donations to the Animal Services Department. (D. Wait /M. Harris /S. O'Brien) Councilmember Thompson recognized Animal introduced student Emil Worley and her mom. l second year in selling T -Shirts to raise fund, fc explained that this is the third year "Raise the Animal Services Department with a check in 1 congratulated Emily on her project and asked that participate. Proclamations • National Crime Victims Week (Nicole Douglass) • Sexual Assault Prevention and Awareness -Month • Child Abuse Prevention Month (Nicole Douglass) S) Ms. Williams also stated that on May 4th they will be hosting a Schertz Designer Purse Bingo fundraiser at the K C 'Hall and sponsorships are still available; tickets are all sold out but if you wish to have a ticket please get on the waiting list. Councilmember Thompson recognized Mr. Tim Judkins; Case Work Supervisor with CASA Central serving Guadalupe, Hays, Comal and Caldwell Counties who came up and provided information on how citizens can get involved in the local. CASA program in Guadalupe County. They welcome any volunteers. Councilmember Thompson called for a brief break at 6:31 p.m. Councilmember Thompson reconvened the meeting at 6:34 p.m. 4 -04 -2017 Minutes Page - 2 - New Employee Recognition • Public Affairs — Marketing & Communications Specialist Devan Flores. (S. Gonzalez /:L. Klepper) • Public Works — Water & Wastewater Serviceman 1 Anthony Jimenez. (D. Wait /J. Hooks /D. Letbetter) Councilmember Thompson recognized Public Affairs Director Linda Klepper and Assistant Public Works Director Jimmy Hooks who provided a brief bio on their respective new staff members and introduced them to Council. Each employee was given a chance to say a few words and Council welcomed them both on board. City Events and Announcements • Announcements of upcoming City Events (B. James /D. Wait /S. Councilmember Thompson recognized As provided the following announcements: Sarah Gonzalez who • Saturday, Apri18 13BSA Retiree Appreciation .Day, Randolph Kendrick Club 8:15 a.m. — Noon Celebrate retirees, and spousps of all services. Visit with friends. Tricare, Association of he Army, Casualty Texas Veterans Commission and many more vendors present. • Saturday, April 8 Schertz Ball Park 6 :00 PM — 10:00 p.m. Fun begins at 6:00 pm with hayrides, baseball kids' crafts aid' the movie begins at sunset. Bring your blankets and chairs. Concessions will be available. • Tuesday, April 11 City Council Meeting, 6:00 p.m. • Thursday, April 13 Northeast Partnership Meeting Olympia Hills Golf and Conference Center, 1.1:30 p.m. 4 -04 -2017 Minutes Page - 3 - • Thursday, April 13 Ribbon Cutting for Murphy USA FM 3009 & Elbel Road, 4:00 p.m. • Thursday, April 13 Community Volunteer Fair, 5:30 -7:00 p.m., Schertz Civic Center • Saturday, April 15 Easter in the Park Pickrell Park — Registration begins at 9:30 a.m. Appearance by the Easter Bunny, games and an children available. Saturday, April 15 Home Grown Saturday's 9001 Hollering Vine, Noon to 3:00 PM Hosted by The Crossvine - Month of April is Announcements and recognitions Councilmember Thompson recognizes brag on the B Shift of the Fire Depart Mr. Kessel also thanked the City of Hearin This time is set aside for out the speaker's 're isu minutes. All rem arks Any person may be requ vision screening for Things esel who stated he wanted to a vacant house fire on Sunday. City who also assisted in the the City Council. Each person should fill ms should be limited to no more than 3 mncil as a body, and not to any individual member thereof. ent, or slanderous remarks while addressing the Council Discussion by the Council of any item not on the agenda shall be limited to statements of specific Actual information given an 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. Councilmember Thompson recognized the following who spoke against the proposed amendment to the Schertz Comprehensive Land Plan and Future Land Use Plan change for Randolph. Some of the concerns expressed were: • Not against the mission of Randolph 4 -04 -201.7 Minutes Page - 4 - • Against the 1 -20 and 1 -10 houses per acre • confusion regarding the JLUS study • negative impact should a natural disaster occur and enable them to rebuild • noise contours, • confusion on what they can and cannot do on their properties • concern on property values • stakeholders were not involved in the JLUS Study • give property owners a voice • not use a broad stroke of a brush for the areas • have staff get with stakeholders to narrowly tailor this area so not to diminish their property • Ms. Stacy Padgett, 1.21.20 W • Mr. Chuck Padgett, 12120 Ware - Seguin • Ms. Jill • Mr. W. R. Bruce, • Ms. • Mr. Bob Cantu, • Mr: Keith Van Dine, • Mr. Glen`R.istow, 11 • Mr. John guin Road Ware - Seguin Road also owns property in the area also complained on the condition of Pfeil Road are- Seguin Road e, 11409 Ware - Seguin Road • Mr. Jeremy Ward, 6975 Pfeil Road • Mr. Ron Noll, 6975 Pfeil Road • Mr. Jose Garcia, 11413 Ware- Seguin Road • Ms. Christy Van Dine, 61.47 Pfeil Road 4 -04 -2017 Minutes Page - 5 - there is • Ms. Betty Greenwood, 6407 Pfeil Road • Mr. David Recknagel, 1.2224 Ware- Seguin Road • Mr. Taz Leachman, 6811 Pfeil Road Councilmember Thompson recognized the follow who spoke on • Mr. Miguel. Gutierrez, Bexar Waste who provided Spring Clean -up Event • Kristoffer & Chrystine Myers, 4907 Buc information on the upcoming events of Kung J Workshops • Discussion regarding proposed Comprehensive Plan Arneridi JLUS update. (B. James) Prior to the adoption of th and associated mendme Randolph within the Acc Potential Zone (APZ) *` ti topics and events: the City of Schertz Kristoffer provided Schertz. prompted by °the Randolph James who stated The City is Ise Plan in order to mitigate t Land Use Study (JLUS) for gateway Plan as" an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan ) the Future Land Use Plan (FLUP), the area south of JBSA nt Potential Zones was designated by the FLUP as "Accident he area between those zones was designated as "Air Installation Zy' 4 -04 -201.7 Minutes Page - 6 - SCIFTEIRTZ Proposed Future vs Land Use Change CD C-j rj With the 201,3,,,,,G atewa y Plan update to the Comprehensive Plan, the designation of much of this area was changed to Estate Neighborhood which allows residential uses with a minimum lot size of 1/2 acre. The plan also makes a provision for the potential to develop cluster style residential developments with smaller lot sizes in exchange for greater usable open space. Unlike the Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) designation, the Estate Neighborhood does not allow commercial uses. The areas within the Accident Potential Zones I were designated Air Installation Impact. The 2015 JBSA Randolph JLUS departed from previous JLUS documents by recommending significantly lower residential densities in the Accident Potential Zone 11. Previous JLUS documents allowed for residential development with a minimum lot size of V2 acre. It should 4-04-2017 Minutes Page - 7 - be noted that while the 2008 JLUS allowed residential units in the APZ II, it did so with the caveat that residential uses should be discouraged in areas with noise contours of 65 dB to 74 dB "unless there is a demonstrated community need and there is no viable alternate location." It should be noted that most of the eastern APZ II south of JBSA Randolph is within this noise contour and as there are other viable locations for residential uses in the community, residential uses would be discouraged. Since the adoption of the 2008 JLUS, development of '/2 acre minimum lots in a suburban style development began in the Laura Heights development which is located within the western APZ II zone south of JBSA Randolph. This type of development, as opposed to small scattered ranchettes, prompted a lot of discussion and consideration during the update of the JLUS in 2014 and 2015. As a result, the 2015 JBSA ,Randolph JLUS included recommendations that in western APZ II Zone south of"Randolph,'the minimum lot size for residential use should be 10 acres, in the eastern APZ I Zone south of Randolph the minimum lot size for residential uses should be 20 acres, and that for the area between the APIs south of Randolph, the maximum density should bell, I unit per 10 acres. It should be noted that noise restrictions would still apply, further restricting residential uses in some of these areas. The recommendations for the APZ Its south of Randolph :varies based on differences in the operations of each runway, which is also reflected in 'the" different noise contour within each APZ II south of Randolph. ty. have relied on Defense Department Instruction dpatible Use Zones. This document includes ,r-the clear zones and APZs. It should be noted ecommenrdtions. This document suggests that are allowable but with the caveat of up to a If this document provided comprehensive and the" Land Uses Studies would not need to -ariability of factors such as base operations, dust, etc. the JLUS documents do develop Given the variety of factors ''and 'regulations that impact land uses in this area, it is recommended that the area be designated as Air Installation Impact and that text be added to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan describing Air Installation Impact as: Air Installation Impact: This area is located within close proximity of JBSA Randolph. Land Use compatibility is a key consideration both for the impact land uses may have on base operations and in how base operations may impact land uses. Land Uses will be significantly impacted by development standards that restrict light, noise, dust, density and height. Determinations as to appropriate land uses shall be based primarily on the 2015 JBSA Randolph JLUS. The Comp. Plan and FLUP are not zoning and as such do not in and of themselves establish regulations. They are the basis of zoning and the establishment of development regulations. 4 -04 -201.7 Minutes Page - 8 - Councilmember Thompson opened this agenda item up for discussion. Mr. James went over the following once again. `( 11II 1FTL CJ + Proposed Future , �:�,.�, CPM19FH9Mi4 9enV'w"E S?Pa4PYNHtEk 4J" Land Use Change "Amend the Comprehensive, Land Plan and: Future Land Use Plan" to Air Installation Impact. This area is located within close proximity of JBSA Randolph. Land Use compatibility is a key consideration both for the impact land use may have on base operations and in how base operations may impact land;uses. Land Uses v111 be significantly impacted by development standards that restrict ;light, noise,: dust, density and height. Determinations as to appropriate land uses, shall be, based primarily on the 20l 5 JBSA Randolph JLUS. The Comp Plan and `LUP are-not zoning and as such do not in and of themselves establish regulations. They are the basis of zoning and the establishment of development regulations. Next steps — determine need to consider city initiated rezoning on larger tracts that are underdeveloped and underdeveloped tracts that are zoned in conflict with current JLUS. Mr. James addressed earlier,concerns that were raised again. Current UDC A. Air Installation Compatible Use Zone District (AICUZ). studies published by the military will control the development, construction and density of the area. The area is subject to high frequency of noise from aircraft and is at high risk to potential aircraft accidents. All uses and regulations contained within the AICUZ shall be in accordance with the AICUZ study and regulations published by Randolph Air Force Base. 2. pass or not pass this. Cotincilmember", Thompson ,opened this item up for Council discussion and recognized C9,uncilmember Davis ,who stated, that when the city has a change they mail out notices to property owners. When the JLUS,''was having their meetings were there steps to specifically invite the affected property owners? Did they just publish it? Mr. James answered that to his knowledge, property owners were not notified. He believes information was placed on their website but riot sure how consistent it was updated. If what drove this concern, say Laura Heights, then why isn't the remedial action to address the future development of something like Laura Heights versus taking some broad paint brush or roller over the entire area with a 1- 10 and 1-20 standard? Mr. James answered one of the things that came up during the JLUS Randolph was Laura Heights was a concern for them as well as some of the other developments going in. The concern was voiced and staff asked and they walked through why this was a concern for them. The next question was what would be something they would be comfortable with going forward? If you are not comfortable with the 1/2acre lots, what would you be comfortable with and why. Then Randolph came back with this recommendation. 4-04-2017 Minutes Page - 10- Mr. James wants to be clear their initial recommendation focused solely on the APZ II areas and the residential density allowed there. The current APZ I residential is not an allowed use in those designations, which is where they focused their efforts. The issue then became from staff's perspective, if you are going to limit development to that degree in those two areas of the AICUZ it frankly creates a problem in providing services to all. The lot after lot raised this issue with Randolph. The Comprehensive Land Plan is a plan not zoning; it is a tool which we use. If citizens are opposed to this change they need to address it with the city and speak out against this proposed change. There is a bird strike iss,i,e which is different from other bases and they are trying to mitigate that, and addresses it by the I -10 and 1 -20 areas. Councilmember Davis stated he is very sensitive to the needs of Randolph Air Force Base but on the same token he does not understand the logic of th ,] -10 and the 1 -20 wide paint brush affect. The DOD publishes a standard that is a recomrnerlded guide—Alp is fully aware that every Air Force Base /Military Base is different, the missions are different and the impacts are different based on the type of aircraft based on t' it's a training base a large air1rarne base, or a fighter base, he has been stationed at all, 6fth&m, so he understands the missions. But the DOD publishes a guide with recommended plannir g taud�rds and the Air Force publishes an Air Force instruction that mirrors the DOD guidance: does not understand why the JLUS would not have looked at the specific guidance that is'itifh at Air Force instruction and tailor that to meet their mission needs versus,, just coming up with an arbitrary 1 -20 — 1 -10 acre standard. Mr. James stated that he can't really come up with are: answer but again as you referenced it is a bit of a dilemma, but if you look to the' Jeartment of defense documents that sort of apply everywhere it's a acre rrti imum lot size; 2 units per acre. If you start with the assumption that is a guideline' it does n6t ecessarily mean its correct or appropriate everywhere then you sort of say where else do we look for guidance and unfortunately that's kind of all there is. At which point you are there to say, haw do you make a determination about what density would be appropriate given the reasons that there to limit density at all in the area. Why would you want to limit it, to given a l z an acre? Your point is well taken, why 20 acres and not 10 acres, why 20 and notl,'hy 10 and not 5; at some point when you get with that it's not necessarily a: quantitative decision, but a quality: Councilmember Davis -stated there is, he would counter that it is. The AFI states, and he is reading it,, dated 15 July, 2015, relatively new, attachment 2 states "suggested land use compatibility guidelines for clear zones in APZ is shown in A2 -1. The last sentence says "the compatible land use 'recommendations for the clear zones and APZ are provided for local governments as well as Air Force personnel for on base planning ". So they publish this as a recommended guide for local governments to go by and it covers the clear zone APZ1, APZ 11, it gives you the densities and it goes on down in the remarks and basically says, and he understands the whole purpose of this, is risk. God forbid no one wants to see an air craft come down anywhere, but it goes on to say that 25 people per acre in APZ1 is considered low density, 50 people per acre in APZ 11 is considered low density, so their instruction for planning purposes says "a low density load of personnel, 50 people per acre in APZ1.1, but now we are recommending a 1 dwelling per 20 acres, which a typical family is a family of 4? We are not talking about low density; we are talking about a ghost town. He has a hard time 4 -04 -201.7 Minutes Page - 11 - understanding how we arrived at a 1 -20, and again, he fully supports the Air Force mission and he understands the importance of Randolph Air Force base to our community and the surrounding communities, but he just has a hard time with how we came to the point of this level of standard for development and just paint brushing across the entire southern side of the base without any rational explanation, and again without doing due diligence to talk to the property owners and the affected personnel before we got to this point. Councilmember Thompson recognized Councilmember Kiser who echoed Councilmember Davis. She said the same thing when she saw 1 -20. She doesn't even understand going to 1- 10, there seemed to be no logic. I know you said their intent was to prevent developments, but there is nothing about that. She also has a problem if weare:going to be using this for our future regulations; intent is not enough for her. We need to have some explicit statements. Some of these things could have been prevented, we were not included in anything, was staff included in any talks with Randolph before this came ,out? Mr. James answered yes,we had a staff representative who attended'411,,of the JLUS development meetings. Councilmember Kiser asked were any of these questions asked. Mr. James answered he believe they were asked. He knows w,hcn he was involved in meetings and discussions we had a significant number of discussions, to say if the 2 units per acre were a problem what are you recommending? Councilmember miser said it should have been more clearly stated; if development is the issue, there is nothing ,about that mentioned. You are saying if something happens to your home, you,can rebuild; however, nothing says you can. Also, if the land is sold, for the new owner, Auclill regulation will he be under? What happens in that case? Mr. James said it would be a function of what development regulations impose. What initiating city rezoning is done? What changes to the unified development code are done — that would put :those restrictions in place. Generally our development regulations don't speak directly to sale of property' per se'."Till we get to that step he hesitates to say what may or may' not came out of it. The sale of property has not been a concern, but rather the subdivision of a property teat would create more houses. Ms. Kiser pointed out that this concern is not mentioned in the study at, ill. Mr. James said that what you have with the JLUS are strategie §; some are ver specific while others are very broad and is left up to the cities. Councilmember Thompson recognized Councilmember Gutierrez who stated he believes a lot of property owners are here because of `the fear of the unknown'. Nothing is written and that is their concern (natural disasters, restrictions for family growth, etc.). In response to Mr. Gu�tierrez's question about availability, Mr. James stated staff would assist as much as pos ible. Councilmember Thompson recognized Councilmember Davis who asked if Fire Station No. 3 was in any of the APZs. The answer was no, it is not. Councilmember Thompson recognized Councilmember Larson who stated the proposal that is coming before council next week is for the land use plan and does not impose regulations but begins the process for imposing regulations, is this correct? 4 -04 -201.7 Minutes Page -12 - Mr. James stated it is a beginning stage, like the first thing you do to start that process. He asked if the zoning would be more individualized. Mr. James said, yes it is more of a parcel by parcel basis. Councilmember Larson asked if there was a reason why we can't have a more clear picture of what that zoning piece will look like prior to deciding on changing the comprehensive land use plan. Mr. James stated they don't want to imply that this is the regulation that will always be in place and tied to that land use designation. They will regularly amend their land use regulations and unified development code. Councilmember Larson said once again he thinks the property owners would like more clarity. Mr. James stated Council can certainly table Pubs amendment - And direct staff to add more information and clarity. He asked if there were any other challenges they should be aware of if they go that route. Mr. James stated there are a variety of factors but to the degree staff can they will look at the other major development regulations at the same time. Councilmember Larson stated he thinks it is a good idea to look at these challenges concurrently so we can know what-we are opening the door to. Mr. James stated the strategy in the JLUS does not obligate us to do anything. If we go back and work with ,property owners we may come back with something else. Councilmember Crawford says he doesn't want to see an accident, but how do we balance this for folks to live on their property like they would like to. Mr. James said we can make a change or we don't have to. Councilmember Crawford said these folks need some more answers. Councilmember Thompson stated everyone in his family has served in the military except for himself. He lived in an area and left about a year before the base closed. However, through friends, he experienced the economic devastation that occurred as a result of the closure. Therefore he supports the mission of Randolph. Two things: 1) nationally, our federal government at times told the citizens, `Let us pass this, it is in the best interest of you and we 4 -04 -201.7 Minutes Page -13 - will fill in the details later'. Invariably, those types of programs don't seem to succeed. 2) Locally, last night we had a special called council meeting; there was a lot of ambiguity and confusion and we did not know a lot of facts —plus a lack of clarity. He feels it is in the best interest of residents and the city if we clear up those ambiguities. Not everyone may be happy but at least we will know where we stand. Councilmember Thompson called for a brief break at 8:29 p.m. Councilmember Thompson reconvened the meeting at 8:39 p.m. • Discussion regarding Schertz Parkway Repairs. (B. J. Councilmember Thompson recognized City Engineer Kathy Woodlee wvho provided a PowerPoint Presentation with the following information answering questions from Council: e 2 Project Background:. • October 2015 – Need for improvement to Schertz Parkway between Maske and Live Oak Roads identified and programmed as a project along with other minor roadway projects to be funded out of remaining 2006 bond funds. • Roadway continued to deteriorate rapidly, strategy changed from interim resurfacing to recommendation of full reconstruction. • Summer /Fall 2016 – Staff worked with geotechnical engineer to have samples analyzed, roadway section options designed. 4-04-2017 Minutes Page -14 - • February 2017 — Design contract authorized with Ford Engineering, Inc. • February 2017 — Worst potholes filled by Public Works crew. Points of Interest: • Scope • All travel and turn lanes to be reconstructed between Intent is to preserve curb and gutter and median imps • Reconstruct pedestrian trail (optional) (currently surf • Widen Live Oak Road at intersection to provide duel • Project to be bid with alternative road sections — 4 -04 -201.7 Minutes Page -15 - and Live Oak Road. is being evaluated) and lanes (optional) as r. 4 -04 -201.7 Minutes Page -15 - and Live Oak Road. is being evaluated) and lanes (optional) current Project acneaule: • 50% Design — Mid April 2017 • 1005 Design — Mid May 2017 • Construction start — Summer 2017 • Construction Period 6 -9 months — The Consent Agenda is motion. There will be Consent Agenda tt on tr utes — Consid tine of March will be enacted by the Council with one items unless they are removed from the i regarding the approval of the minutes of the Special Regular Meeting of March 28, 2017. (J. Kessel /B. 2. Ordinan No. 17- T -11- - Consideration and/or action approving an Ordinance authorizing a budget adjutm,ent to fund the Northcliffe Waterline Replacement Project Phase 3. Final Reading (D. Wait /J, Hooks) ORDINANCE NO. 17 -T -11 AN ORDINANCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS AUTHORIZING A BUDGET ADJUSTMENT TO FUND THE NORTHCLIFFE WATERLINE REPLACEMENT REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT WITH THIS ORDINANCE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE 4 -04 -2017 Minutes page - 16 - 3. Boards, Commissions and Committee Member Appointments — Consideration and /or action ratifying the appointment of Mr. Earl Hartzog, Board of Adjustments Liaison to the Committee of Committees Advisory Board, and revising and updating the Committee of Committees Board Members. (B. Dennis /Mayor /Council) Councilmember Thompson recognized Councilmember Davis who moved, seconded by Councilmember Kaiser to approve consent agenda items 1 -3. The vote was unanimous with Councilmembers Davis, Gutierrez, Larson, Thompson, Kiser and Crawford voting for and no one voting no. Mayor Pro -Tem Edwards was absent. Motion passed. Discussion Items 4. Resolution No. 17 -R -23 — Consideration and /or action approving a Resolution authorizing a contract with R. L. Jones LP relating to the Northcliffe= Water] ine Replacement Project Phase 3 and authorizing the budget expenditures for the Project. (B. James /K. Wtidlee /L. Busch) RESOLUTION N0,''147- A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF: THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT WITH R.L. JONES, LP, RELATING TO THE NORTHCLIFFE WATERLINE-- .REPLACEMENT PROJECT PHASE 3 AND AUTHORIZING THE BUDGET-,'EXPENDITURES "FOR THE PROJECT AND OTHER MATTERS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH Councilmember this item stating water mains in .c+ Northcliffe Subd of breaks due to area. Repairing in the rest c ;h the effort This project was into consideratio . ipson recognized Storm. Water Manager Larry Busch who introduced "ity has for some year's been working to replace aging asbestos cement areas' of Schertz with more durable pipe materials. The portion of the in, of which this projectarea is a part, was experiencing a large number ground shifting causing interruption of service to the residents in this bretxks ncit aitly inconvenienced residents, they occupied staff time, damaged streets, sidewalks, and driveway aprons and let to a loss of City has completed the replacement of the aging asbestos cement water is targeted area of Northcliffe as indicated in Exhibit B, and staff wishes wornpleting the final phase of the planned improvements. )rocured through the RFP Process where factors other than price are taken to determine the best value to the City. Staff recomrnefi4 Council approve Resolution 17 -R -23 and authorize the City Manager to award the contract for the Northcliffe Waterline Replacement Project Phase 3 to R.L. Jones, LP, for the total of $730,730.00 with a not exceed amount of $803,803.00. Councilmember Thompson recognized Councilmember Kaiser who moved, seconded by Councilmember Crawford to approve Resolution No. 17 -R -23. The vote was unanimous with Councilmembers Davis, Gutierrez, Larson, Thompson, Kiser and Crawford voting for and no one voting no. Mayor Pro -Tem Edwards was absent. Motion passed. 4 -04 -201.7 Minutes Page -17 - 5. Resolution No. 1.7 -R -24 — Consideration and /or action approving a Resolution authorizing an agreement with Microsoft authorizing the renewal of our Enterprise Agreement and to purchase licenses from SHI Government Solutions relating to email and software services for the Microsoft Office 365 email system. (B. James /M. Clauser) RESOLUTION NO. 17 -R -24 A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT WITH MICROSOFT AUTHORIZING THE RENEWAL OF OUR ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT AND TO PURCHASE LICENSES FROM SHI GOVERNMENT SOLUTIONS RELATING TO EMAIL AND SOFTWARE SERVICES FOR THE MICROSOFT.'OFFICE 365 EMAIL SYSTEM, AND OTHER MATTERS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH Councilmember Thompson who recognized IT of 2014, the City Council authorized the City, l Microsoft to purchase email and other services�; Resolution 14 -R -19. This original agreement i agreement from 2014 . also provided for a 3 -year approve the extension in 2017. tyles Clauser Who stated in March enter into a 3 -yc4r agreement with Microsoft Office 365 platform on licenses for email services. The but that Schertz City Council must This service has provided city petonnel access to email technology (cell phone, tablet and pc) af any Jime. The Offic Justice Information Security) compliant and approved by the Safety Agencies for cloud storage of protected data. ' Seve advantage of this feature to allow access'to important inform outside contacts as tnecded: ared calendars, etc. via any F5 platform is CJIS (Criminal e of Texas for use by Public departments are now taking n to field staff and approved The agreement'requires renewal of the licenses: for Microsoft Office 365 every 3 years. The renewal agreement will be purchased from I SHI Government Solutions. The I.T. Dept. is proposing to renew 423 licenses at , hi time. The agreement is part of the State of Texas' Depaient (of f Information Resources (DIR) Cooperative Contracts Program. This is a streamlined co -op; urchasing Program for state and local governments which leverages the Mate's purchasing pdyer to negotiate competitive discounts with vendors. If additional licenses are added (as hew staff are hired) or upgraded (staff members need a greater range of software). costs will increase and will require staff to seek council approval to increase the number =Cif licenses as the cost would exceed the amount authorized by the resolution authorizing the,purehase. The renewal agreement is for a three -year term. The City is seeking approval of Resolution 17 -R -24 which authorizes the City Manager to enter into a series of agreements associated with the licensing and use of Microsoft 365 for a three -year term and purchase the licenses from SHI Government Solutions at a cost of $23,819.64 annually. Mr. Clauser addressed questions from Council. Councilmember Thompson recognized Councilmember Kaiser who moved, seconded by Councilmember Gutierrez to approve Resolution No. 17 -R -24. The vote was unanimous with Councilmembers Davis, Gutierrez, Larson, Thompson, Kiser and Crawford voting for and no one voting no. Mayor Pro -Tem Edwards was absent. Motion passed. 4 -04 -201.7 Minutes Page - 18 - Executive Session Councilmember Thompson adjourned the regular meeting at 8:58 p.m. to executive session. 9. City Council will meet in closed session under section 551.087 of the Texas Government Code, Deliberation Regarding Economic Development Negotiations; Closed Meeting. The governmental body is not required to conduct an open meeting (1) to discuss or deliberate regarding commercial or financial information that the governmental body has received from a business prospect that the governmental body seeks to have locate, stay, or expand in or near the territory of the governmental body and with which the governmental body is conducting economic development negotiations; or (2) to deliberate, the offer of a financial or other incentive to a business prospect. Project E -028 Reconvene into Regular Session Councilmember Thompson reconvened back into regular session at 10:10 p.m. 9a. Take any action based on discussions -bold in closed session under Agenda Item 9. No action was taken. Roll Call Vote Confirma Councilmember T for agenda items 1 7. nests announc members to r, the item may, requested item consensus oft agenda. recognized City Secretary Brenda Dennis who provided the roll call votes Item Request for City Council: This is an opportunity for City Council zest that items be placed on a future agenda. No discussion of the merits of e taken at this time. Should a Council Member oppose placement of the ,u 'a future agenda, the Mayor, without allowing discussion, shall ask for the other City Council members to place or not place the item on a future No items were requested. 4 -04 -2017 Minutes Page -19 - 8. Announcements by Mayor and Councilmembers Adi Con AT" C- • City and community events attended and to be attended • City Council Committee and Liaison Assignments (see assignments below) • Continuing education events attended and to be attended • Recognition of actions by City employees • Recognition of actions by community volunteers 4 -04 -201.7 Minutes Page - 20 - Agenda No. 2 CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM City Council Meeting: April 11, 2017 Department: Mayor /Council Subject: Excused Council Absences — Consideration and /or action excusing City Council Member absences BACKGROUND Per the revised Charter approved by voters on November 3, 2015, regarding Council absences, Section 4.06 (3) Vacancies, Forfeiture, Filling of Vacancies, "Failure to regularly attend City Council meetings without an approved absence obtained by a majority vote by City Council either before or after the absence. There shall be a presumption of failure to regularly attend when three (3) regular meetings are missed during a term year without obtaining an approved absence from City Council." An affirmative vote of a majority of Council approving the Council's absences is required for the following: 4 -4 -2017 Regular Council Meeting 4 -4 -201.7 Regular Council Meeting WYi • ' • On None RECOMMENDATION Mayor Michael Carpenter Mayor Pro -Tem Cedric Edwards Staff recommends Council approve the absences as listed above. Agenda No. 3 CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM City Council Meeting: April 11, 2017 Department: Subject: City Secretary Boards, Commissions and Committee Member Resignations and Appointments The City Secretary's office received an application from Mr. Dean Midick who is interested in serving on The Historical Preservation Committee. The Committee has three (3) regular position vacancies at this time. Mr. Midlick's application was vetted through the Interview Committee and agreed to place him on this committee. FISCAL IMPACT None RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends ratifying the appointment of Mr. Dean Midlick to the Historical Preservation Committee. CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM City Council Meeting: April 11, 2017 Department: Finance Agenda No. 4 Subject: AUTHORIZING CITY STAFF AND CONSULTANTS TO PROCEED WITH THE ISSUANCE OF $4,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2017 FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING A FIRE STATION No. 3 AS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY THE VOTERS AT A BOND ELECTION HELD NOVEMBER 3, 2015 The voters authorized the City to issue $15,000,000 for street and bridge improvements and public safety facilities at an election held November 3, 2015. The Council is requested to authorize City staff and consultants to proceed with the sale of approximately $4,000,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2017. . The Proceeds will be used for the construction of Fire Station No. 3. The Bonds will be amortized over 20 years and will be callable by the City in 10 years as is customary for a financing of this size. FISCAL IMPACT The issuance of the Bonds should not result in a tax rate increase. The proceeds will be delivered to the City on June 20th. The Bonds are being issued at the same time as the Certificates of Obligation, to be discussed in greater detail under separate agenda items to follow. When the CO's are approved, along with this GO Bond, it is estimated that there will be little to no impact on the I &S Tax Rate. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends authorizing staff and consultants to proceed with the issuance process. ATTACHMENT(S) Timetable. CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM City Council Meeting: April 11, 2017 Department: Finance Agenda No. 5 Subject: RESOLUTION 17 -11-22- CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING PUBLICATION OF NOTICE OF INTENTION TO ISSUE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION; COMPLYING WITH THE REQUIREMENTS CONTAINED IN SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION RULE 15c2 -12; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE I: - tII!'J3111 El As stated in the December 20, 2017 . Council meeting, it is the City's intent to issue Certificates of Obligation Bonds (CO) in the 2017 year for street maintenance, to start building repairs and renovations in the City Hall complex, parks trails and maintenance, renovation of the Senior Center, and a fire apparatus for Station #3. By issuing bonds for these projects, the city will be able to continue to grow its fund balance for future projects while taking advantage of lower interest rates while they last. Also included in this issuance proposal is the purchase of 2 ambulances for Emergency Medical Services (EMS). These ambulances will keep the city's fleet reliable and safe when providing service to the communities they serve. This proposal was approved during the 2016 -17 Budget process. The ambulances plus equipment are estimated to cost $550,000 to purchase with an annual debt payments estimated at $114,000. Originally planned as a separate Tax Note, a short term debt instrument that the City uses to buy ambulances, by combining it with the CO bonds the City can save an estimated $1.0,000 in issuance costs. The total EMS ambulance fleet is made up of 9 vehicles with an estimated 5 year useful life. This averages out to 2 ambulances being purchased each year, with 1 year of only 1 being purchased. For item (5) on the Notice, no land, right of way, or landscaping is expected with any of the renovation or maintenance projects. However, the City must strictly adhere to the bond language when expending these funds. This section is included to provide for any unseen events during the construction of these projects. In order to sell Certificates of Obligation Bonds (CO), City Council must approved to publish a Notice of Intent in our paper of record for two consecutive weeks. 30 days after the notice, City Council will review the bids for the sale on May 23, 2017 to take final action to approve the sale of the bonds. Once the projects are ready to begin, Staff will return to council once again to approve the construction contracts and to move forward with these items. Goal To provide improved infrastructure for the citizens through roadway maintenance and renovations. To provide a safer working environment, with additional space to accommodate staffing needs to service a growing population through city buildings remodels and maintenance. To provide matching funds for the parks trails grant that will improve quality of life for our citizens. To provide for the funding for a fire apparatus for Station #3, which will reimburse the General Fund for fronting the purchase as authorized on December 20, 2016. To continue to provide safe and reliable EMS service through the replacement of aging ambulances. FISCAL IMPACT The Resolution only alerts the Citizens that the proposed projects will be considered and a Certificate of Obligation will be approved on May 23, 2017. The City intends to issue Certificates of Obligation in an amount not to exceed $5,600,000 for the purpose of making street repairs, making repairs to municipal buildings, the purchase of fire - fighting apparatus and making park improvements including the construction of walking trails. The authorization of the Notice of Intention Resolution will not have a fiscal impact. When the CO's are approved, along with the GO Bond, it is estimated that there will be little to no impact on the I &S Tax Rate. Breakdown of the anticipated use of the bond proceeds are projected as follows: $2,200,000 PCI Streets Funding (remainder from year 1 and year 2, $3.2 million total) $ 700,000 Schertz Pkwy (remainder from 2009 bond, $1.5 million total) $ 250,000 Senior Center Renovation (remainder from general fund, $750,000 total) $ 175,000 City Building Maintenance and Repair $ 75,000 City Building Remodel $ 400,000 Fire Station 2 Repair $ 250,000 Parks Trail Grant Match $ 50,000 Parks Maintenance $ 950,000 Fire Apparatus for Station 3 $ 550,000 Two Ambulances While some of these items have been discussed at length, the prioritization of maintenance, repairs and remodeling projects has not. Therefore, prior using the bonds funds for any of those projects, staff will hold a City Council work session to receive direction from Council on prioritization of those projects. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approving the Notice of Intention Resolution, publishing the Notice of Intention, and to authorize the consultants to move forward with the intent to issue Certificates of Obligation (along with the General Obligation Bonds) scheduled to sell through council action on May 23rd and funds would be delivered on June 201H REQUIRED ED x' OTION City Council motion "A motion by Council ember a seconded ed. y Council e ber that the City Council Adopt a Notice of Intention esolLrti011" ATTACHMENT(S) Notice of Intention Resolution. Resolution 17 -R -22 11114 RaVE41 ' A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING PUBLICATION OF NOTICE OF INTENTION TO ISSUE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION; COMPLYING WITH THE REQUIREMENTS CONTAINED IN SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION RULE 15c2 -12; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS, the City Council (the City Council) of the City of Schertz, Texas (the City) has determined that it is advisable and necessary to issue and sell one or more series of certificates of obligation (the Certificates) in an amount not to exceed $5,600,000, as provided pursuant to the provisions of the Certificate of Obligation Act of 1971, as amended, Texas Local Government Code, Section 271.041 through Section 271.064, for the purpose of paying contractual obligations of the City to be incurred for making permanent public improvements and for other public purposes, to -wit: (1) constructing street improvements (including utilities repair, replacement, and relocation), curbs, gutters, and sidewalk improvements, including drainage incidental thereto; (2) designing, renovating, repairing, and improving the City's Municipal. Complex and the Senior Center; (3) purchase of ambulances and Fire apparatus and constructing improvements to Fire Station No. 2; (4) designing, constructing, renovating, improving, and equipping the City's parks and recreational facilities, including the construction of new hike and bike trails; (5) the purchase of materials, public safety equipment, supplies, equipment, machinery, landscaping, land, and rights -of.- -way for authorized needs and purposes relating to the aforementioned capital improvements; and (6) the payment of professional services related to the design, construction, project management, and financing of the aforementioned projects; and WHEREAS, prior to the offering, sale, and issuance of the Certificates, the appropriate officials of the City must review and approve the distribution of a "deemed final" preliminary official statement (the Official Statement) in order to comply with the requirements contained in 17 C.F.R. §240.15c2 -12 (the Securities and Exchange Commission Rule); and WHEREAS, based upon their review of the Official Statement, the appropriate officials of the City must find to the best of their knowledge and belief, after reasonable investigation, that the representations of facts pertaining to the City contained in the Official Statement are true and correct and that, except as disclosed in the Official Statement, there are no facts pertaining to the City that would adversely affect the issuance of the Certificates or the City's ability to pay the debt service requirements on the Certificates when due; and WHEREAS, the City Council will comply with the requirements contained in the Securities and Exchange Commission Rule concerning the creation of a contractual obligation between the City and the proposed purchaser(s) of the Certificates (the Purchasers) to provide the Purchasers with an Official Statement in a time and manner that will enable the Purchasers to comply with the distribution requirements and continuing disclosure requirements contained in the Securities and Exchange Commission Rule; and 28166920.3 WHEREAS, the City Council authorizes the Mayor, City Manager, City Secretary, and the City Attorney, as appropriate, or their designees, to review, approve, and execute any document or certificate in order to allow the City to comply with the requirements contained in the Securities and Exchange Commission Rule; and WHEREAS, prior to the issuance of the Certificates, the City Council is required to publish notice of its intention to issue the Certificates in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, such notice stating (i) the time and place the City Council tentatively proposes to pass the ordinance authorizing the issuance of the Certificates, (ii) the maximum amount proposed to be issued, (iii) the purposes for which the Certificates are to be issued, (iv) and the manner in which the City Council proposes to pay the Certificates; and WHEREAS, the City Council hereby finds and determines that such documents pertaining to the sale of the Certificates should be approved, and the City should proceed with the giving of notice of intention to issue the Certificates in the time, form, and manner provided by law; and WHEREAS, the City Council hereby finds and determines that the adoption of this Resolution is in the best interests of the residents of the City; now, therefore, THAT: SECTION 1. The City Secretary is hereby authorized and directed to cause notice to be published of the City Council's intention to issue the Certificates in an amount not to exceed $5,600,000 for the purpose of paying contractual obligations of the City to be incurred for making permanent public improvements and for other public purposes, to -wit: (1) constructing street improvements (including utilities repair, replacement, and relocation), curbs, gutters, and sidewalk improvements, including drainage incidental thereto; (2) designing, renovating, repairing, and improving the City's Municipal Complex and the Senior Center; (3) purchase of ambulances and Fire apparatus and constructing improvements to Fire Station No. 2; (4) designing, constructing, renovating, improving, and equipping the City's parks and recreational facilities, including the construction of new hike and bike trails; (5) the purchase of materials, public safety equipment, supplies, equipment, machinery, landscaping, land, and rights -of -way for authorized needs and purposes relating to the aforementioned capital improvements; and (6) the payment of professional services related to the design, construction, project management, and financing of the aforementioned capital improvements. The Certificates will be payable from the levy of an annual ad valorem tax, within the limitations prescribed by law, upon all taxable property within the City and additionally from a pledge of and lien on certain revenues derived from the operation of the City's utility system. The notice hereby approved and authorized to be published shall read substantially in the form and content of Exhibit A attached hereto, which notice is incorporated herein by reference as a part of this Resolution for all purposes. SECTION 2. The City Secretary shall cause the notice described in Section 1 to be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, once a week for two consecutive 28166920.3 -2- weeks, the date of the first publication shall be at least thirty (30) days prior to the date stated therein for passage of the ordinance authorizing the issuance of the Certificates. SECTION 3. The Mayor, City Manager, City Secretary, and the City Attorney, as appropriate, or their designees, are authorized to review and approve the Official Statement pertaining to the offering, sale, and issuance of the Certificates and to execute any document or certificate in order to comply with the requirements contained in the Securities and Exchange Commission Rule. SECTION 4. 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 5. All ordinances and 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 6. This Resolution shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas and the United States of America. SECTION 7. 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 8. 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, as amended, Texas Government Code. SECTION 9. This Resolution shall be in force and effect from and after the date of its adoption, and it is so resolved. [The remainder of this page intentionally left blank.] 28166920.3 -3- PASSED AND APPROVED, this the I I 1h day of April, 2017. CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS Mayor ATTEST: City Secretary (CITY SEAL) 28166920.3 -4- Exhibit A NOTICE OF INTENTION TO ISSUE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Schertz, Texas will convene at its regular meeting place in the City Hall in Schertz, Texas, at 6:00 o'clock P.M., Schertz, Texas time on May 23, 2017, and, during such meeting, the City Council will consider the passage of an ordinance or ordinances and take such other actions as may be deemed necessary to authorize the issuance of one or more series of certificates of obligation in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $5,600,000 for the purpose or purposes of paying contractual obligations of the City to be incurred for making permanent public improvements and for other public purposes, to -wit: (1) constructing street improvements (including utilities repair, replacement, and relocation), curbs, gutters, and sidewalk improvements, including drainage incidental thereto; (2) designing, renovating, repairing, and improving the City's Municipal Complex and the Senior Center; (3) purchase of ambulances and Fire apparatus and constructing improvements to Fire Station No. 2; (4) designing, constructing, renovating, improving, and equipping the City's parks and recreational facilities, including the construction of new hike and bike trails; (5) the purchase of materials, public safety equipment, supplies, equipment, machinery, landscaping, land, and rights -of -way for authorized needs and purposes relating to the aforementioned capital improvements; and (6) the payment of professional services related to the design, construction, project management, and financing of the aforementioned projects. The certificates of obligation (the Certificates) will be payable from the levy of an annual ad valorem tax, within the limitations prescribed by law, upon all taxable property within the City and from a lien on and pledge of certain revenues derived by the City from the operation of the City's utility system. The Certificates are to be issued, and this notice is given, under and pursuant to the provisions of the Certificate of Obligation Act of 1971, as amended, Texas Local Government Code Section 271.041 through Section 271.064, Chapter 1502, as amended, Texas Government Code, and the City's Home Rule Charter. /s/ Brenda Dennis City Secretary, City of Schertz, Texas 28166920.3 A -1 Agenda No. 6 CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM City Council Meeting: April 11, 2017 Department: Finance Subject: ORDINANCE 17-T-15 AN ORDINANCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS AUTHORIZING A BUDGET ADJUSTMENT TO FUND FIRE STATION #2 REPAIRS AND TO REMODEL THE SENIOR CENTER; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT WITH THIS ORDINANCE; DECLARING AN EMERGENCY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (First and Final Reading) On tonight's agenda, the City Council will consider a resolution authorizing the City to start the process of issuing Certificates of Obligation bonds for Fire Station #2 repairs and a portion of the cost of the Senior Center remodel. Council will also consider a contract for construction services for both of these projects. This ordinance provides the means to provide the remaining funding needed and allow the company to start construction before the bond funds are received. The Senior Center remodel costs were higher than expected at an estimated $750,000. The bonds will provide for $250,000 and the project will need an additional $500,000 of funding to complete the project. Back in 2014, ordinance 14-T-14 authorized funding of $425,000 to replace the recreation center windows. The 2016 Bonds fully funded those window replacements instead. With the approval of the 2014-15 Budget (Ord 14-T-42), an additional $150,000 identified for other building repairs. The repair projects were put on hold since bids were coming in much higher than expected and alternate plans were made. Staff recommends council amend the budget and reallocate $500,000 of these funds to make up the balance on the Senior Center remodel project. Also before council tonight is a resolution to enter into a construction contract for the Fire Station #2 repairs and the Senior Center remodel. If the bonds are issued as planned the funds won't arrive until June 20, 2017. . In order to start these projects now, staff recommends council approve the use of fund balance to make payments on the construction progress until the bond funds are received. The City will reimburse the fund balance for any expenditures made out it for these projects from the bond funds. Authorize a budget amendment to reallocate funds set aside for repairs to the Senior Center remodel project in the amount of $500,000. Authorize the use of fund balance to start the Senior Center Remodel and Fire Station #2 repairs until the bonds are sold and to reimburse the fund balance for these expenditures once the bond funds are received. COMMUNITY BENEFIT The Fire Station #2 repairs will improve conditions for staff that works in that building and reduce the chance of any further damage to building by fixing the leaks. The Senior Center remodel will provide more space for its members and make safety upgrades, such as fire sprinkler systems, to protect the building and those inside. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED ACTION Approval of the ordinance will allocate $500,000 of funds to the Senior Center remodel project. It also allows for the Senior Center remodel and Fire Station #2 repairs to begin before the bond funds are received. FISCAL IMPACT This ordinance will allocate funding in the amount of $500,000, which is already set aside. It will also allow up to $250,000 for the Senior Center and $400,000 for the Fire Station #2 repairs, a total of $660,000, to be used from the General Fund fund balance to be reimbursed when the bond funds arrive. The projected unrestricted fund balance for FY 2017 is estimated at $9,233,587. If all $660,000 was used before the bond funds arrive, the fund balance would be at $8,573,587 which is $1.5 million over the 25% floor. Approval of Ordinance 17 -T -15 first and final reading and declaring an emergency. ATTACHMENT(S) Ordinance 17 -T -15 ORDINANCE NO. 17 -T -15 AN ORDINANCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS AUTHORIZING A BUDGET ADJUSTMENT TO FUND FIRE STATION #2 REPAIRS AND TO REMODEL THE SENIOR CENTER; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT WITH THIS ORDINANCE; DECLARING AN EMERGENCY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS, funds were previously set aside by Ordinance 14 -T -14 and 14 -T -42 to fix the recreation center windows and building repairs respectively; and WHEREAS, the City plans to issue Certificates of Obligation (Bonds) to fully fund the Fire Station #2 repairs and partially fund the Senior Center Remodel; and WHEREAS, the City needs to authorize use of the funds previously allocated to the recreation center window repairs and other building repairs to complete the Senior Center Remodel in the amount of $500,000; and WHEREAS, the City needs to authorize the use of fund balance up to $660,000 for these projects until the delivery of the bond funds; and WHEREAS, the City will reimburse the fund balance with the bond funds for any related project expenditures that use fund balance; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to authorize the use of funds previously allocated to the recreation center window and other building repairs and the use of fund balance for these projects which will be repaid by the issuance of bonds, as more fully set forth in this Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS: Section 1. The City shall authorize the use $500,000 for the Senior Center Remodel previous identified for the recreation center window and other building repairs. Section 2. The City shall authorize the use of fund balance for Senior Center Remodel and the Fire Station #2 Repairs until the bonds are sold and the funds are received. Section 3. The City shall reimburse the fund balance with the bond funds for expenditures made on these projects before the bonds were sold and the funds are received. Section 4. 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 5. 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 matters resolved herein. Section 6. This Ordinance shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas and the United States of America. Section 7. 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 8. 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 9. This Ordinance shall be effective upon the date of final adoption hereof and any publication required by law. 50558021.1 - 2 - PASSED ON FIRST READING AND FINAL READING, this I I 1 day of April, 2017. CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS Mayor City Secretary (CITY SEAL) 50558021.1 - 3 - Agenda No. 7 CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM City Council Meeting: April 11, 2017 Department: City Manager Office Subject: Resolution 17 -R- 26 Approving an Amendment to the existing Agreement with the Construction Manager at Risk for Repairs to Fire Station #2 and Alterations to the Senior Center 1 X1 4',T" Z111L`I 1 GOAL To provide much needed repairs to the exterior of Fire Station #2 in order to provide a watertight exterior envelope and to provided needed renovations to the Senior Center as part of capturing the former Wellmed space. The renovations to the Senior Center also include installing a fire suppression system throughout the building. PRIOR ACTIONS An Agreement with Thomas S Byrne, Ltd for Construction Manager at Risk (CM @R) for Preconstruction Services only for Fire Station #3 and other Miscellaneous Projects was approved by City Council on February 14, 2017. Pursuant to Section 2.2.6 of the existing A133 Agreement, the CM @R has prepared Exhibit A, Amendment Number l in the amount of One Million One Hundred Ten Thousand Two Hundred Twenty Four Dollars ($1,110,224.00) to their existing Agreement stating the Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) for repairs to the exterior envelope of Fire Station #2 and the renovations to the Senior Center which were listed as two of the Miscellaneous Projects. The portion of the GMP for Fire Station #2 is $366,533.00 and the portion for the Senior Center is $743,042.00. The GMP is based on construction documents prepared by LPA Architects. The CM @R guarantees that the cost of the Project will not exceed the stated amount unless changes are made to the project scope subsequent to the approval of the Amendment or there are unforeseen conditions not reasonably anticipated. The Amendment also lists the assumptions and exceptions that would affect the final costs. Staff is proposing to include an additional $50,000.00 in owner controlled contingency for these projects. Community :Benefit The community will benefit by providing a facility for the City's fire fighters that provides a watertight exterior envelope. Given the growth of the community and corresponding growth to the senior center, as well as the desire to provide wider range or programming at the Senior Center, this renovation allows the City to utilize the existing vacant space to meet that need. The work at the senior center also provides for a fire suppression system for the entire building, something that is needed even if the senior center did not expand into the Wellmed space given that they often utilize the senior center space for things like the craft fair and dances. Fiscal Impact The $400,000 in funds for the Fire Station #2 repairs are proposed to come from the Certificates of Obligation (CO) bond issuance, for which the notice of sale is on this agenda. The $750,000 in funds for the Senior Center repairs will come from two sources: $250,000 is proposed from this same CO bond issuance and the remaining $500,000 are from general funds set aside for building repairs /renovations. RECOMMENDATION Approval of Resolution 17 -R -26 authorizing the amendment to the CM @R contract with Thomas S. Byrne, Ltd. To which allows these projects to move forward and construction to begin. ATTACHMENT(S) Resolution. No. 1.7 -R -26 Exhibit A Cost Estimate Exhibit B Cost Estimate for the Fire Suppression System for the Senior Center Exhibit C Current Senior Center and Wellmed Layout Exhibit D Proposed Senior Center Layout RESOLUTION NO. 17 -R -26 A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE EXISTING A133 AGREEMENT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES OF THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT RISK AGREEMENT FOR THE REPAIRS TO FIRE STATION #2 AND ALTERATIONS TO THE SENIOR CENTER OTHER MATTERS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH WHEREAS, the City staff of the City of Schertz (the "City ") has recommended that the City authorize an Amendment to the existing Agreement with Thomas S Byrne, Ltd. as the Construction Manager at Risk for the Construction Phase Services for Repairs to Fire Station #2 and Alterations to the Senior Center; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to amend the existing Agreement with Thomas S Byrne, Ltd and the Amendments are attached hereto as Exhibit A (the "Amendment "). THAT: Section 1. The City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute and deliver the Amendment to the existing Agreement with Thomas S Byrne, Ltd for the Construction :Phase Services in substantially the form set forth on Exhibit A. The total Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) amount payable under this Agreement shall not exceed One Million One Hundred Ten Thousand Two Hundred Twenty Four Dollars and no cents ($1,110,224.00) plus an Owner controlled contingency of Fifty Thousand Dollars and no cents ($50,000.00) for a total not to exceed of One Million One Hundred Sixty Thousand Two Hundred Twenty Four Dollars and no cents ($1,160,224.00). 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, d. 1 CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS Michael R Carpenter, Mayor Brenda Dennis, City Secretary (CITY SEAL) 50234811.1 imall AMENDMENT TO THE EXISTING AIA A133 AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT RISK SERVICES FOR, Im Guat-tanteed Mamimmt Pxice Amendmen& ior h: F OR THOMAS S BYRNE, LTD NA Add SP S£..'r t to r' mokud , for its F iati a. %8 murtu"u may elan taa:.a THE OWNER- aimed the text of the 'i 'grant Aa.e4 st&m, 'rd gtsrxa;... ' At: r?'�.q .,aaaet EreFIeC3;snr y:. ftparrr : ait W'T.Rs Ar'ddaxa'a aq wai.1 ao, ., tai )strums t, the atan4ard Us wvmrar an i al'p -a^"sd t UkWfR- fmamr . hual 3'.. id '.,... ":;a shin drrmmnt has important. .. attfi+' m y IOR e'dm'C.naur'yg*a9. 5w`u"t@ 0 rfo . to irs; a =q't .am or md�.rvaziam- ARMLE A-1 aatt, MA Guaranteed Maxkrmm Pra r �iimjit`sams of tt to Sectiza 12_6€mf ¢ Ylzmagff hereby CoryUra'a` -m for Cnnstaucricnr W esUbhsh EL Guaranteed e- As agreed lyy the s' Ad%,w, in tram a7ac r%t , ag 05 D:a iW'fa Via. ;.t m" aaitin rtW garai Conn:= cons= of :y r t amipss ti%is; Fee, phis the Cost oft a as that tam is defined in Artticle 6 of IhE5 Agreement. Jfigd, 11-11. :, Sum is guaranteed by the Ccustruction Mam1per not tD ` to ad&,Wm by Clim9e, Order as Fmaded in the CAMILICT s x an 1&1 -11-2 RWOLmd nrt �__ ,r� . . -, C" – n, — raffia =alt " 5 F thalumprise the CCaaar which are descidaed in &a Czutract n ror emis and are hereby accepted by the Owmex .. .. (SWe tha numbm or olhor mAmttfica al&77miAom the Q=Fwr D7�tspm= the OWniv to azqpto , s ttxa, axamMm ' thpz,'... t; amrh Pf,rCch aftk ef°.se ch a allonwas zh rjbr each ... zmzqmKmlc QQTYING of any when dw mmmW ) Portlam ar Yts.'. Axe m ""�rdt Tag rvtth r el ct rank tiid7 is PEaahlbl ld .aced. MR 'itut s 5. wic.lt..iram o f s xki right .1y ass met falt'h in the i'antar rof A41d14 A.Uowmces mchided in ffie Guarani .. Vie. '. �m __�89.Ya� _ �Pi�& t b. •:.,a; tT'aaS',. � .w�i,n :%d'.�a ms.X n3:�G hw a?�e: - xx . nmr.:.art,m rs;" M^:i�1:a,:,°m. 5].% xi gtota uakm ^1 A.im asx3iax. %3ra 9.;ama. ,�.9m ra rim y.ea.:. ..arei t =,= ?�. a.n x�sm m::@. .d,. aeE..x S, rrya .:2" > <fs':s arn^%rr .. cair�g' a4x ., .�dd.dX•t Ga _y atl..h —}Si­. -xn. F OR THOMAS S BYRNE, LTD Amendment 1 - Exhibit A Mr. John Kessel City of Schertz — City Manager 1400 Schertz Parkway Schertz. Texas 78154 Re: City of Schertz — Fire Station #2 & Senior Center Renovations Dear Mr. Kessel, Thos. S. Byrne, Inc. is pleased to submit the GMP for renovation of the City of Schertz Fire Station #2 & Senior Center project based on available information and drawings provided by LPA Architects. Fire Station #2: $366,533 Senior Center: $743,042 • Eal Please find attached the following components included as part of this estimate: 1. Estimate Summary 2. Qualification 3. Self-Perform If you have any questions or need any additional information, please contact me via email at cmorris@tsbyrne.com or via phone at 210-402-3335. Sincerely, Thos. S. Byrne, Ltd. Chris Morris Senior Estimator — South Texas T. S. Byrne Construction Services 14220 Northbrook Dr. Suite 400 San Antonio, Texas 78232 Telephone: (210) 402-3335 Fax: (210) NINE DECADES OF EXCELLENCE I WWW.TSBYRNE.COM Page 1 of 1 Cost Estimate Summary Shea5 Schertz Fire Station #2 CD Budget Kigia insuiaTion To txTerior t se Existing Masonry Veneer ye 2" EIFS Svstern in Lieu of Page 1 Cost Breakdown by Bid Package uate: iviarcn zu, zu -it timaing bquare i-eet: 6,b4b 011000 Conditions 27,515 $ 7.55 011010 = Construction Aids $ 73,934 $ 20.28 020000 _Demo $ 35,910 $ 9.85 030000 -Concrete 3,038 $ 0.83 040000 Masonr $ 17,586 $ 4.82 050000 ,Steel $ 12,550 $ 144 060000 Rough Carpentry $ 5,468 $ 1.50 072500 Mater proofing Consultant Allowance $ 10,000 $ 2.74 072500 Mater proofing 55,832 $ 15.32 092116 ;Gyp Board Assemblies 19,664 $ 5.39 092239 1 Plaster 35,669 $ 9.79 099100 15,838 $ 4.35 320000 Landscape & Exterior Improments 10,700 $ 2.94 Cost of Work Subtotal $ 323,703-T$ 88.81 C o ntingency Contractor's Contingency 10.00 %Q 1 $ 32,370 $ 8. 88 B u il di n Permit O2/$ - $ - Data Processing (Acou!ting/IT 0.33%1 $ 1,210 $ 0.33 Construction Costs Subtotall 1 $ 3,57,283 =$98.02 CGL & Umbrella Insurance 0.80% $ 2,932 $ 0.86 Builder's Risk 025% $ 87 $ 0.02 Payment & Performance Bondi 0.85% $ 3,116 $ 0.85 Construction Costs & Insurance Subtotall 1 $ 363,41 Preconstruction Feel --- 0_.0_0 $ - Kigia insuiaTion To txTerior t se Existing Masonry Veneer ye 2" EIFS Svstern in Lieu of Page 1 Cost Breakdown by Bid Package 1 1A Contractor's Construction Contingency of 10% is included in this estimate, and is intended for construction use only. Owner contingency is excluded from this estimate. 21A construction fee of 3.25% is included on the cost summary, and is based upon the total construction cost. 3 1 Builders Risk Insurance is included, and based upon the total cost. 4 CGL & U brella Insurance is included, and based upon the total cost. 5 Payment and Performance bonds for Byrne have been included on the cost summary, and are based upon the total cost. 6 Dividends will not be 2rovided for scopes of work that require a bond. rThe CM pre-construction services fee is excluded from this budget. 8 All costs associated with approvals, easements, assessments, fees, deposits, charges, permits, studies, impact fees, tap fees, services fees, or similar, required by any governing agency to include County, City, State, or Federal entities, in addition to any and all utility entities are specifically excluded. 9 1 Building permit cost is excluded. 10 Testing Lab services for materials, mock-ups, or delegated engineering components are to be provided by the Owner, and are excluded. 11 Testing of building components for water or air intrusion is included, but as a $10,000 Allowance oni 12 Testing and Balancing of the building systems is to be erovided by the Owner. 13 Commissioning Agent and Services are to be provided by the Owner. 14 Design Fees or services are not included. Where required in the specifications, the Construction Manager will provide design calculations and information provided by the Trade Contractors to the Architect and Engineer for approval and acceptance of the design. 15 The CM does not warrant of guarantee functionality of the design with the Owner's requirements. The CM relies upon the designers to provide and implement the Owner's requirements into the design documents, 16 The CM will provide oversight and review of submittals for compliance with the contract documents, however, the design team shall bear the full res2onsibility for acceptance and approval of all submittals. 17 Includes trucks, fuel, tolls, and maintenance related to the Byrne personnel assigned to this project. Truck I Auto Allowance is inclusive of vehicle costs, insurance, fuel and maintenance. 18 All costs for mobile phones is inclusive of mobile data management. 19 All initial and final survev's and olats reauired bv the Citv are bv the Owner. 20 JAII costs associated with temporary fencing is by the Owner including onsite relocation based to maintain project 21 JAII electrical costs associated with construction is by the Owner. 22 JAII water costs associated with construction is by the Owner. _72_3�_This budqet is to be reviewed as a whole; not as individual line items. 21This budget is based upon electronic design document files and models being available to all subcontractors at no additional cost. 31AII FF&E, OFE, and furnishings are excluded from this budget, unless specifically noted in the budget detail. 41AII hazardous or contaminated material and soil testing, remediation, investigation, and abatement is excluded. 11 5| Site is assumed tobefree ofanv contaminates. unencumbered. and naadvtobeoin demo work. 11 Page 1 Qualifications & Clarifications �ualifications & Clarifications Schertz Fire Station #2 CD Budget Date: March 29, 2017 Page 2 Qualifications & Clarifications uaT.e: tviarcn zo, zy i i Byrne 01.001 = Project Scaffolding 55,153 Byrne 01.002 = Project Boom Lift $ 7,031 Byrne 01.003 'Project Fork Lift $ 6,094 Byrne 01.004 -Project Bobcat $ 3,906 :Small Byrne 01.005 Small 1,750 020000 =Demo Byrne 02.001 -Supplemental Clean Up 3,563 Byrne 02.002 =Partial Deck Removal 1,429 Byrne 03.001 Rub and Patch at Building Foundation 3,038 040000 Byrne 04.001 Clean Up $ 2,313 Byrne 04.002 'Palletize Existing Masonry Veneer $ 12,750 Byrne 04.003 =Clean Existing Masonry Veneer $ 4,000 050000 Byrne 05.001 ,Galvanized Awning at Exterior Electrical Service 7,229 Galvanized Angle for Additional Air Space Byrne 05.002 IBehind Stone Veneer. 5,321 060000 _Millwork, Rough & Finish Carpentry Byrne 06.001 .New Roof Blocking $ 5,468 070000 =Thermal & Moisture Protection Temporary Moisture Protection at Open Backup Byrne 07.001 5,536 Misc. Through Wall Flashing and Termination Byrne 07.002 at the Existing Parapets 4,813 Byrne 07.003 'Reflash Existing Awning $ 3,234 Byrne 07.004 -Misc. Sealants & Through Wall Flashing $ 2,313 090000 Byrne 09.001 -Temporary Protection for Painting $ 1,063 Byrne 09.002 -Supplemental Clean Up $ 2,744 Byrne 09.003 New In-wall Light Gauge Blocking/Framing $ 4,981 323000 'Exterior Improvements Byrne 32.001 = Landscape Protection $ 1,563 IByrne 32.002 Misc. Landscape Repairs $ 7,456 FBY—rn–e –32.00-3 -Reinstall Existing Deck $ 1,681 Page I Self-Preform Page 1 Cost Breakdown by Bid Package Date: April 4, 2017 Building Square Feet: 2,396 011000 ;General Conditions 58,213 $ 24.30 011010 -Construction Aids $ 3,850 $ 1.61 020000 -Demo $ 47,824 $ 19.96 030000 -Concrete $ 5,421 $ 226. 040000 -Masonry $ 6,825 $ 2.85 050000 -Steel $ 6,945 $ 2.90 060000 Rough Carpentry $ 2,214 $ 0.92 072500 :Waterproofing 10,750 $ 4.49 080000 'Doors $ 4,310 $ 1.80 092116 _Gyp Board Assemblies $ 39,360 $ 16.43. -New Acoustical Ceilings Allowance Existing 092116 Space" 25,416 $ 10.61 093000 Tile $ 7,770 $ 3.24 096000 -Resilient Flooring $ 21,600 $ 9.02 099100 $ 32,930 $ 13.74 100000 .Misc. Specialties $ 8,235 $ 3.44 210000 :Fire Suppression $ 30,470 $ 12.72 220000 $ 25,875 $ 10.80 230000 HVAC $ 48,702 $ 20.33 260000 Electrical $ 32,292 $ 13.48 260000 ,New Lighting Allowance "Existing Space" $ 74,281 $ 31.00 320000 .Misc Landscape Repairs $ 3,500 $ 1.46 330000 :Utilities 164,731 $ 68.75 Cost of Worl Subtotal $ 661,614 $ 2776.09 Contractor's Contingency Calc $ 60,953 $ 25.44 Building Permit 0.00% $ - $ - Data Processing {Accounting /IT)i 0.33% $ 2,454 $ 1.02 Construction Costs Subtotal 724,9: CGL & Umbrella Insurancel —0.8-00/o]-$ 5,950 $ 2.48 Builder's Risk 0.25% $ 177 $ 0.07 Payment & Performance Bond l 0.85%1$ 6,321 Construction Costs & Insurance Subtotal 737,36 Preconstruction F - Feel 3.25%1$ 23,96 Project i otal 1 $ 74 39T Page 1 Cost Breakdown by Bid Package Page 1 Qualifications & Clarifications NINE DECADES OF EXCELLENCE 14220 Northbrook Dr. BYRAE Suite 400 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES Amendment I - Exhibit A San Antonio, TX 78232 Phone: (210) 402-3335 Fax: (210) 402-3376 Qualifications & Clarifications Senior Center GMP Uate: April 4, ZU1 / 5 Site is assumed to be free of any contaminates, unencumbered, and ready to begin demo work. 11 1111mi! i1i Mil I Aji::: j i ; 1 :i -;-11 a d — 11 No materials will be salvaged. 11 1 JGMP includes reusinq all existing door hardware. No new door hardware has been included. 11 -i juivit- inciucies repainting the entire Duiming interior to ensure a seamless 100K. 2 1 GMP includes an allowance of $25,416 for new 2x2 ceiling and grid at existing area. a new Tire su 11 11 New Air Handlers are excluded. The existing will be reused. 11 11 11 Replacing existing single phase system with a three phase system is excluded. 11 2 An allowance of $74,281 is included for new lights that includes the following: 70 - 2x4 Lay ins, 18 - 2x4 Lay ins with emergency battery, 14 - 2x2 Lay ins, 2 - 2x2 Lay ins with emergency battery, Wiring as required for new fixtures using the existing circuits, remove and reinstall up to 4 existing exit lights, Provide new dimmers and Occ sensors modeled after the remodeled area, using the existing conduits, switch locations and circuits. If additional conduit installations are required we will provide additional pricing. 1 IAII I IAII work is excluded. 11 1 I GMP includes 325 If of new fire line connecting to the existing 6" line, 112sy of asphalt repair in parking lots, 601f II of boring, 100' of 6" sanitary sewer, and 3 - 6" cleanouts. Page 2 Qualifications & Clarifications Date: April 4, 2017 2 All street repairs are excluded. Page 3 Qualifications & Clarifications NINE DECADES OF EXCELLENCE 14220 Northbrook Dr. BYRAE Suite 400 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES Amendment I - Exhibit A San Antonio, TX 78232 Phone: (210) 402-3335 Fax: (210) 402-3376 Self-Perform Summary Byrne Self-Preform Senior Center tiaie: April 4, zu-i ( MEMENEEMENEEM Byrne 01.001 Project Rolling Scaffolding & Small Tools $ 3,850 020000 jl)emo Byrne 02.001 - Supplemental Clean Up $ 4,523 Byrne 02.002 Saw Cutting $ 3,125 Byrne 02.003 :interior Demo $ 40,176 030000 -Concrete Byrne 03.001 -Misc. Floor Patching $ 3,826 Byrne 03.002 'Misc Sidewalk and Curb Repair $ 1,595 040000 Masonry Byrne 04.001 'Supplemental Clean Up & Misc Patching 6,825 050000 =Steel Byrne 05.001 ,Galvanized Angle for Lintels at Louvers $ 6,945 060000 Millwork, Rough & Finish Carpentry Byrne 06.001 .Inwall Blocking $ 2,214 070000 :Thermal & Moisture Protection Byrne 07.001 Misc Site Caulking 3,500 Byrne 07.002 Misc, Sealants & Through Wall Flashing 7,250 090000 Byrne 09.001 -Temporary Protection for Painting $ 3,500 Byrne 09.002 Interior Painting $ 29,430 Byrne 09.002 Supplemental Clean Up i $ 8,570 'Byrne 09.003 -Interior Drywall & Ceilings $ 30,790 Byrne 09.004 Resilient Flooring $ 17,020 Byrne 09.005 -Tile $ 7,770 Byrne 09.006 :Temp Floor Protection $ 4,580 1000000 Misc. Specialties Byrne 10.001 ,Toilet Accessories & Partitions $ 8,235 2100000 =Fire Suppression Byrne 21.001 'Fire Sprinkler System $ 30,470 JjByrne 32.001 -Misc. Landscape Repairs 3,500 Page 1 Self-Preform Agenda No. 8 CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM City Council Meeting: April 11, 2017 Department: Engineering / Public Works Subject: Ordinance No. 17 -D -14 - An Ordinance by the City Council of the City of Schertz, Texas providing that the Code of Ordinances of the City of Schertz, Texas be amended by revising Chapter 86, Article V, Section 86- 149 Parking Prohibited. (First Reading) BACKGROUND Fairway Ridge Subdivision residents requested that the city look into vehicles parking in front of the drainage channel and possibly restricting flow (Exhibit A) during rain events. When flow is restricted from efficiently entering the channel, water backing up in the street is more significant than when runoff is allowed to run into the inlet unimpeded. The area of interest for no parking is in the vicinity of the drainage inlet in front of 3145 Cameron River (Exhibit A). Staff is also investigating additional drainage improvements in the same drainage system in the Fairway Ridge Subdivision. The restriction from having any vehicles parked in front of the inlet is the first step toward improving drainage in the vicinity. This situation was presented to the Transportation. Safety Advisory Commission (TSAC) at the regular meeting on April 6, 2017. TSAC recommended approval of a "No Parking" ordinance in front of the drainage structure on Cameron River. Goal To ensure that City Drainage Channels are not restricted of flow. Community Benefit To provide for unobstructed runoff conveyance into the City's drainage channel systems. Summary of Recommended Action. Recommend approval on first reading to prohibit parking in front of the drainage inlet on Cameron River in the Fairway Ridge Subdivision. FISCAL IMPACT The fiscal impact will be approximately $100 for no parking signs paid out of FY 2016 -17 approved budget account number 101- 359 - 551.600 Street Maintenance. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council approve on first reading Ordinance No. 17 -D -14 to amend Chapter 86, Article V, Section 86 -149 Parking Prohibited of the Code of Ordinances to include No Parking in front of the drainage inlet shown on Exhibit A. Exhibit A: Proposed No Parking Zone ( -25 ft.) in Front of Drainage Inlet on Cameron River in Fairway Ridge Subdivision. ATTACHMENT Ordinance No. 17 -D -14 ORDINANCE NO. 17 -D -14 AN ORDINANCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS PROVIDING THAT THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS BE AMENDED BY REVISING CHAPTER 86, ARTICLE V, SECTION 86 -149 PARKING PROHIBITED; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, it has been established that parking should be prohibited adjacent to the drainage inlet on Cameron River in the Fairway Ridge Subdivision. The No Parking zone will be limited to —25' along the curb perpendicular to the drainage inlet. This No Parking area is not currently covered under Chapter 86, Article V, Section 86 -149 Parking Prohibited of the City Code of Ordinances; and WHEREAS, it is recommended to add these areas as shown in Exhibit A to the City Code of Ordinances under Article V, Section 86 -149, Parking Prohibited. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS: THAT: Section 1. Chapter 86, Article V, Section 86 -149 of the Code of Ordinances, Parking Prohibited by the City of Schertz, Texas is amended to add the following: (a) When signs are erected and/or, when recommended by the City Engineer or the Chief of Police, curb(s) are marked by painting them red with "No Parking" painted in white letters thereon, giving notice thereof, no person shall park a vehicle at any time (or at times as limited) upon any of the following streets or portions thereof. Street Extent Cameron River 25' of linear curb in front of Drainage Inlet at intersection with Eagle Valley 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 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, 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. Approved on first reading the 1 lth day of April 2017. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED on final reading the day of April, 2017. Michael R. Carpenter, Mayor ATTEST: Brenda Dennis, City Secretary (SEAL OF THE CITY) CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM City Council Meeting: April 11, 2017 Department: Subject: BACKGROUND Agenda No. 9 Planning & Community Development Ordinance No. 17 -5 -12 — Conduct a public hearing and consideration and /or action to rezone approximately 4 acres of land generally located at the intersection of lH 35 Frontage Road and Covers Cove, from General Business (GB) to Planned Development District (PDD). The area in the proposed rezone includes the following addresses, all located along Covers Cove: 6001, 6005, 6009, 6013, 6014, 6017, 6018, 6021, 6022, 6025, and 6026. (First Reading) This is a city initiated rezone of approximately 4 acres of land from General Business District (GB) to Planned Development District (PDD). The subject area currently has eight (8) single family residences, two (2) vacant / undeveloped properties, one (1) lift station lot, and a portion of one 1.6' wide drainage lot. The subject area is generally located at the intersection of 1H 35 Frontage Road and Covers Cove extending into the subdivision approximately 700 feet. The properties included are The Fairways at Scenic Hills Unit 3B block 15: Lots 22 -25, Block 1.7: Lots 4 -6, 27 and a portion of lot 28, a 16' wide drainage right -of -way, and Northcliffe 1: Lots 1 -3. The subject properties are designed to be residential lots with the exception of the lift station lot and the drainage lot. The public hearing notice was published in the San. Antonio Express News on March 24, 2017. Twenty -one (2 1) public hearing notices were mailed to surrounding property owners within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property on March 8, 2017, prior to the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting that took place on March 22, 2017. At the time of this report, Staff has received two (2) responses in favor, one (1) response opposed, and zero (0) responses neutral to the request. City Council Memorandum Page 2 Comments received at the March 22, 2017 Planning & Zoning Commission Public Hearing: • Thomas Mailhiot, 6038 Covers Cove, asked about the land uses that will be permitted with the proposed rezone in relation to what is currently permitted, and asked about the choice of Planned Development District zoning rather than a straight residential zoning. Goal The proposed rezone is for approximately 4 acres of land from General Business District (GB) to Planned Development District (PDD). The goal in this proposed rezone is to allow for single - family residential use. 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. The Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) through the Future Land Use Plan designates the subject property as Highway Commercial. The purpose of Highway Commercial is to provide for regional scale retail and commercial uses that can take advantage of the highway frontage. • Comprehensive Land Plan Goals and Objectives: The proposed rezoning is generally in conformance with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, the proposed rezoning to PDD with a base zoning of Single - Family Residential- 2 (R -2) provides for compatible land uses with the existing single- family homes to the south and is directly compatible with the future commercial development to the east and existing golf course to the west. The Future Land Use Plan is a graphic representation that is intended to help the City's elected and appointed officials and residents visualize the desired future land development pattern in the community and does not constitute zoning regulations nor establish zoning districts. The proposed rezoning to PDD with a base zoning of R -2 is a more appropriate zoning designation than commercial zoning for this area due to the existing neighborhood development adjacent to and within the subject area. • Impact on Infrastructure: The proposed zoning request should have a minimal impact on the existing and planned water and wastewater systems. • Impact on Public Facilities /Services: The proposed rezoning should have a minimal impact on public services, such as schools, fire, police, parks and sanitation services. • Compatibility with Existing and Potential Adjacent Land Uses: The subject property is generally surrounded by single family land uses. The property was also intended for single family land use when it was originally platted. The Planned Development District (PDD) will allow for residential use of the property. City Council Memorandum Page 3 The Fairways at Scenic Hills Unit 3B was final platted in September of 2006. This final plat established 46 residential lots, 1 greenbelt, 1 park, and 1 sanitary sewer lift station. With this plat eight (8) of the subject property lots were created. The final plat for The Fairways at Scenic Hills Unit 3B was recorded with a note that states "Existing zoning pre development with a R -6 use with variance to setback requirements." Staff has interpreted this note to mean that the subdivision was created while the property was zoned pre development. However, the desire for the property was to allow for single family residential in accordance with the R -6 lot dimensions with a setback alteration. The plat also states a portion of the plat exists within the General Business zoning. Additionally, within the subject area of this rezone are three (3) lots out of the Northcliffe 1 subdivision, which was subdivided and platted before it was annexed into the City. This area along IH 35 has been zoned General Business since 1996. When the Fairways at Scenic Hills Unit 3B was created it was platted following a Single Family Residential — 6 (R -6) lot dimension layout. Additionally, the remainder of the Fairways at Scenic Hills Unit 3B is currently zoned :R -6. It is unclear as to why the subject properties were not rezoned for a residential use when the remainder of the Fairways at Scenic Hills was completed. The approval of Ordinance No. I 0 -5 -29 approved by the City Council on September 28, 2010, which prohibits the acceptance, consideration, and approval of requests to zone property to R -6 and R -7, the subject properties cannot be zoned the same as the rest of the developed Fairways at Scenic Hills neighborhood to the south. It is the opinion of staff that a single- family residential zoning is the most appropriate land use for this area. Additionally, it is staffs opinion that the best way to allow for the existing single- family residential use to continue and for the two remaining lots to develop is to rezone to PDD to allow for single - family residential use. The proposed Planned Development District (PDD) will be subject to the following zoning standards: Property within the Covers Cove PDD will develop in accordance with the base zoning of Single - Family Residential District - 2 (R -2) with modifications to the dimensional requirements and the current Unified Development Code as amended for all other code requirements and specifications. The dimensional requirements change will be as follows: Minimum Lot Size and Minimum Yard Miscellaneous Lot Dimensions Setback Requirements Area Width Depth Front Side Rear Ft. Maximum Max Sq. Ft. Ft. Ft. Ft. Ft. height Ft. Impervious Cover 7,200 60 120 25 10 20 35 50% The proposal to rezone the property from the current General Business District (GB) to Planned Development District (PDD), to allow residential uses is more appropriate as the subject property lots were platted for residential use, and most are developed with residential homes. The current zoning of these properties as General Business makes these homes legal non - conforming uses which would not allow for certain rights that a home owner in a residential zoned property would have. This could include home expansions, pools, and sheds. City Council Memorandum Page 4 FISCAL IMPACT RM The Planning and Zoning Commission conducted the public hearing on March 22, 2017 . and offered a recommendation of approval by a unanimous vote. Based on the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan, the existing land use conditions, and history of platting and zoning for this area, Planned Development District is the most appropriate zoning district for these properties. Staff recommends approval of the proposed rezoning as submitted. ATTACHMENT Ordinance No. 17 -5 -12 ORDINANCE NO. 17 -S -12 AN ORDINANCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP BY REZONING APPROXIMATELY 4 ACRES OF LAND FROM GENERAL BUSINESS, (GB) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (PDD). WHEREAS, the City has initiated a rezone of approximately 4 acres of land generally located at the intersection of IH 35 Frontage Road and Covers Cove and more specifically described in the Exhibit A and Exhibit B attached herein (herein, the "Property "); 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 zone change (the "Criteria "); and WHEREAS, on March 22, 2017, the Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing and, after considering the Criteria, made a recommendation of approval of the rezoning according to the development standards set forth in Exhibit C attached herein (the "Development Standards "); and WHEREAS, on April 11, 2017 . 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. BE IT ORDAINED 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 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 to 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, including 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. Approved on first reading the l lth day of April, 2017. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED on final reading the 25th day of April, 2017. Michael R. Carpenter, Mayor ATTEST: Brenda Dennis, City Secretary (SEAL OF THE CITY) Exhibit A "The Property" The property consists of the following lots: • The Fairways at Scenic Hills Unit 3B Subdivision Lot 22, Block 15 • The Fairways at Scenic Hills Unit 3B Subdivision Lot 23, Block 15 • The Fairways at Scenic Hills Unit 3B Subdivision Lot 24, Block 15 • The Fairways at Scenic Hills Unit 3B Subdivision Lot 25, Block 1.5 • The Fairways at Scenic Hills Unit 3B Subdivision Lot 4, Block 1.7 • The Fairways at Scenic Hills Unit 3B Subdivision Lot 5, Block 17 • The Fairways at Scenic Hills Unit 3B Subdivision Lot 6, Block 17 • The Northcliffe 1 Subdivision Lot 1 • The Northcliffe 1 Subdivision Lot 2 • The Northcliffe 1 Subdivision Lot 3 • A portion of The Fairways at Scenic Hills Unit 3B Subdivision Lot 28, Block 1.7 extending 204 feet southeast from the north western property line Exhibit B "The Property" 0 w CL 0 cn UA LU uj 0 C—) \: \ / Exhibit C "The Development Standards" Property within the Covers Cove PDD will develop in accordance with the base zoning of Single - Family Residential District - 2 (R -2) with modifications to the dimensional requirements and the current Unified Development Code as amended for all other code requirements and specifications. The dimensional requirements change will be as follows: Minimum Lot Size and Minimum Yard Setback Miscellaneous Lot Dimensions Requirements Area Width Depth Front Side Rear Maximum Max Sq. Ft. Ft. Ft. Ft. Ft. Ft. height Ft. Impervious Cover 7,200 60 120 25 10 20 35 50% CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM City Council Meeting: April 11, 2017 Department: Subject: BACKGROUND Agenda No. 10 Planning & Community Development Ordinance No. 17 -5 -13 — Conduct a public hearing and consideration and /or action to amend the Schertz Comprehensive Land Use Plan and Future Land Use Plan to change the land use designation of properties generally located in the area from IH -1.0 to approximately 2,000 feet north of Lower Seguin Road between FM 1518 and the western boundary of the City limits to "Air Installation Impact" land use designation. (First Reading) Based on discussion at the April 4, 2017 City Council meeting, staff is recommending that no action be taken to allow staff to work with the property owners to understand their concerns in light of the proposed changes and develop draft ordinances to amend the UDC that would accompany a change to the Future Land Use Plan and Comprehensive Plan. The goal is to allow the residents, property owners and City Council to fully understand the implications of the proposed change. Prior to the adoption of the Gateway Plan as an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan as associated amendment of the Future Land Use Plan (FLOP), the area south of JBSA Randolph within the Accident Potential Zones was designated by the FLUP as "Accident Potential Zone (APZ)" and the area between those zones was designated as "Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) ". The Comprehensive Plan described the AICUZ as "Mixed use limited to activities permitted in accordance with the AICUZ recommendations. Uses are generally low intensity and designed to enhance the concept of open space, including agriculture, recreation, a water feature, and clustered, low density housing." The Comprehensive Plan goes on to note that key feature of the FLUP is to promote "use of areas near Randolph Air Force Base in ways that are sensitive to the recommendations of the AICUZ Study" and that "Areas that are within or near Accident Potential Zones (APZ! And APZ II) or sever noise contours are proposed to develop in accordance with the AICUZ study." With the update to the 2013 Gateway Plan update to Comprehensive Plan, the designation of much of this area was changed to Estate Neighborhood which allows residential uses with a minimum lot size of /2 acre. City Council Memorandum Page 2 The plan also makes a provision for the potential to develop cluster style residential developments with smaller lot sizes in exchange for greater usable open space. Unlike the Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) designation, the Estate Neighborhood does not allow commercial uses. The areas within the Accident Potential Zones I were designated Air Installation Impact. The 2015 JBSA Randolph JLUS departed from previous JLUS documents by recommending significantly lower residential densities in the Accident Potential Zone 11. Previous JLUS documents allowed for residential development with a minimum lot size of /2 acre. It should be noted that while the 2008 JLUS allowed residential units in the APZ 11, it did so with the caveat that residential uses should be discouraged in areas with noise contours of 65 to 74 "unless there is a demonstrated community need and there are no viable alternate location." It should be noted that most of the eastern APZ II south of JBSA Randolph is within this noise contour and as there are other viable locations for residential uses in the community, residential uses would be discouraged. Since the adoption of the 2008 JLUS, development of /2 acre minimum lots in a suburban style development began in the Laura Heights development which is located within the western APZ II zone south of JBSA Randolph. This type of development, as opposed to small scattered ranchettes, prompted a lot of discussion and consideration during the update of the JLUS in 2014 and 2015. As a result, the 2015 JBSA Randolph JLUS included recommendations that in western APZ II Zone south of Randolph, the minimum lot size for residential use should be 10 acres, in the eastern APZ II Zone south of Randolph the minimum lot size for residential uses should be 20 acres, and that for the area between the APZs south of Randolph, the maximum density should be 1 unit per 10 acres. It should be noted that noise restrictions would still apply, further restricting residential uses in some of these areas. The recommendations for the APZ Its south of Randolph varies based on difference in the operations of each runway, which is also reflected in the different noise contour within each APZ II south of Randolph. Prior to this change, the JLUS studies seem to have relied on Defense Department Instruction Number 4165.57 regarding Air Installation Compatible Use Zones. This document includes suggested land use compatibility guidelines for the clear zones and APSs. It should be noted that these are "suggested' and that they are recommendations. This document suggests that in the APZ II that single family detached units are allowable but with the caveat of up to a maximum density of 2 dwelling units per acre. If this document provided comprehensive and final determinations on land use compatibility, the Joint Land Uses Studies would not need to address land use compatibility. Given the variability of factors such as base operations, existing land uses, impacts from light, noise, dust, etc. the JLUS documents do develop strategies for land use compatibility. Given the variety of factors and regulations that impact land uses in this area, it is recommended that the area be designated as Air Installation Impact and that text be added to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan describing Air Installation Impact as: Air Installation Impact. This area is located within close proximity of JBSA Randolph. Land Use compatibility is a key consideration both for the impact land uses may have on base operations and in how base operations may impact land uses. Land Uses will be significantly impacted by development standards that restrict light, noise, dust, density and height. Determinations as to appropriate land uses shall be based primarily on the 2015 JBSA Randolph JLUS. The Future Land Use Plan for this are shall be changed as per the attached exhibit. City Council Memorandum Page 3 Goal Minimize land use conflicts in the area and provide for the safety of residents and pilots at JBSA Randolph. Community Benefit Minimize negative impacts of flight operations on resident and prevent impacts from development, including light, noise etc. from negatively impacting flight operations. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that no action be taken on this item by City Council. ATTACHMENT Current and Proposed Land Use Change 1 ON �<r z� - E 2 - - 2• O a � - u = u o m E - a e r � 1 • s • ELI it