Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet City Council - 12/09/2003CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DECEMBER 9, 2003 1:45 P.M. - Proclamation declaring November 29, 2003 as "Gabe Lozano, Sr. Day" Proclamation declaring December 9, 2003 as "Tuloso-Midway High School Day' AGENDA CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING CITY HALL - COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1201 LEOPARD DECEMBER 9, 2003 12:00 P.M. PUBLIC NOTICE - THE USE OF CELLULAR PHONES AND SOUND ACTIVATED PAGERS ARE PROHIBITED IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS DURING MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. Members of the audience will be provided an opportunity to address the Council at approximately 5:30 p.m. or at the end of the Council Meeting, whichever is earlier. Please speak into the microphone located at the podium and state your name and address. Your presentation will be limited to three minutes. if you have a petition orotherinformation pertaining to your subject, please present it to the City Secretary. Si ud. Desea dirigirse al Concilio y cree qua su ingl6s as limftado, habM un int6rprete ingl6s-espahol an todas las juntas del Concilio para ayudarie. Persons with disabilities who plan to attend this meeting and who may need auxiliary aids or services are requested to contact the City Secretary's office (at 361-880-3105) at least 48 hours in advance so that appropriate arrangements can be made. A. Mayor Samuel L. Neal, Jr. to call the meeting to order. B. Invocation to be given by Reverend E. F. Bennett. C. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States. D. City Secretary Armando Chapa to call the roll of the required Charter Officers. Mayor Samuel L. Neal, Jr. Mayor Pro Tem Brent Chesney Council Members: Melody Cooper Javier D. Colmenero Henry Garrett Bill Kelly Rex A. Kinnison Jesse Noyola Mark Scott E. MINUTES: City Manager George K. Noe Acting City Attorney R. Jay Reining City Secretary Armando Chapa Approval of Joint and Regular Meetings of November 11, 2003 and Regular Meeting of November 18, 2003. (Attachment # 1) Agenda Regular Council Meeting December 9, 2003 Page 2 CITY COUNCIL PRIORITY ISSUES (Refer to legend at the end of the agenda summary) F. EXECUTIVE SESSION: PUBLIC NOTICE is given that the City Council may elect to go into executive session at any time during the meeting in order to discuss any matters listed on the agenda, when authorized by the provisions of the Open Meeting Act, Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code, and that the City Council specifically expects to go into executive session on the following matters. In the event the Council elects to go into executive session regarding an agenda item, the section or sections of the Open Meetings Act authorizing the executive session will be publicly announced by the presiding office. 2. Executive session under Texas Government Code Section 551.071 regarding measures that can be taken to protect and enhance the City's existing water rights, with possible discussion and action related thereto in open session. 3. Executive session under Texas Government Code Section 551.071 regarding City of San Benito v. PG&E Gas Transmission, Texas Corporation, et al No. 96-12-7404-A, 107`h District Court, Cameron County, Texas; the remaining related claims of the City of Corpus Christi against PG&E's successor GulfTerra Texas Pipeline, L.P. and other entities; and similar claims of the City of Corpus Christi against other similar entities, with possible discussion and action related thereto in open session. G. BOARDS & COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS: (NONE) H. EXPLANATION OF COUNCIL ACTION: For administrative convenience, certain of the agenda items are listed as motions, resolutions, or ordinances. If deemed appropriate, the City Council will use a different method of adoption from the one listed, may finally pass an ordinance by adopting it as an emergency measure rather than a two reading ordinance, ormay modify the action specified. A motion to reconsider may be made at this meeting of a vote at the last regular, or a subsequent special meeting, such agendas are incorporated herein for reconsideration and action on any reconsidered item. Agenda Regular Council Meeting December 9, 2003 Page 3 CITY COUNCIL PRIORITY ISSUES (Refer to legend at the end of the agenda summary) I. CONSENT AGENDA Notice to the Public The following items are of a routine or administrative nature. The Council has been furnished with background and support material on each item, and/or it has been discussed at a previous meeting. All items will be acted upon by one vote without being discussed separately unless requested by a Council Member or a citizen, in which event the item or items will immediately be withdrawn forindividual consideration in its normal sequence afterthe items not requiring separate discussion have been acted upon. The remaining items will be adopted by one vote. CONSENT MOTIONS. RESOLUTIONS, ORDINANCES AND ORDINANCES FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS: (At this point the Council will vote on all motions, resolutions and ordinances not removed for individual consideration) 4. Motion authorizing a supply agreement with National Water Works, of Corpus Christi, Texas for approximately 2,974 ductile iron mechanical joint, flanged and swivel fittings and approximately 5,100 related accessories in accordance with Bid Invitation No. BI -0015-04, based on low total bid for an estimated annual expenditure of $26,182.95. The term of the contract is for twelve months with options to extend for up to two additional twelve-month periods, subject to the approval of the contractor and the City Manager or his designee. These items are purchased into the Warehouse Inventory and charged out to the Water and Wastewater Departments. (Attachment # 4) 5. Motion authorizing a supply agreement for hot tap fittings in accordance with Bid Invitation No. BI -0010-04 with T.D. Williamson, of Tulsa, Oklahoma based on sole source for an estimated annual expenditure of $26,306. The term of the supply agreement will be for twelve months with an option to extend for up to two additional twelve-month periods, subject to the approval of the supplier and the City Manager or his designee. Funds are available from the Warehouse Inventory Account for FY 2003- 2004. (Attachment # 5) Agenda Regular Council Meeting December 9, 2003 Page 4 CITY COUNCIL PRIORITY ISSUES (Refer to legend at the end of the agenda summary) 6. Motion authorizing a maintenance agreement with Medtronic Physio -Control Corporation of Redmond, Washington for testing and calibrating of automatic external defibrillators for the Fire Department - Emergency Medical Service based on sole source, for a total amount of $30,602. Funds have been budgeted by the Fire Department in FY 2003-2004. (Attachment # 6) 7. Motion authorizing a supply agreement with Miller Environmental Services, of Corpus Christi, Texas for storm water inlet cleaning in accordance with Bid Invitation No. BI -0005-04, based on only bid for an estimated annual expenditure of $447,258. The term of the contract will be for twelve months with an option to extend for up to two additional twelve-month periods, subject to the approval of the supplier and the City Manager or his designee. Funds have been budgeted by the Storm Water Department in FY 2003-2004. (Attachment # 7) 8. Motion authorizing the purchase of an IP telephone system for the new Animal and Vector Control Facility with Logicalis, of Houston, Texas in accordance with the State of Texas Cooperative Purchasing Program for a total amount of $46,694.39. Funds have been budgeted by the Municipal Information Systems Department in FY 2003-2004. (Attachment # 8) Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a construction contract with Jhabores Construction Company, Inc., of Corpus Christi, Texas in the amount of $67,707.50 for the Clarkwood Road Gravity Sewer Extension for Base Bid B. (Attachment # 9) 10. Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a construction contract with IHS Construction, Inc., of Corpus Christi, Texas in the amount of $238,345 for the Alta Plaza Drainage Improvements. (Attachment # 10) 11. Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to issue payment to the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) for the bridge rehabilitation on the Cayo Del Oso Bridge on Ocean Drive (closest to the Naval Air Station) at a cost to the City not to exceed $86,843.83. (Attachment # 11) Agenda Regular Council Meeting December 9, 2003 Page 5 CITY COUNCIL PRIORITY ISSUES (Refer to legend at the end of the agenda summary) 12. Ordinance appropriating $2,500 from the United States Tennis Association and $2,500 from the United States Tennis Association - Texas Section into Fund No. 3280 for the Al Kruse Tennis Center Court Improvements Project; and amending the FY 2002-2003 Capital Budget adopted by Ordinance No. 025144 by increasing appropriations by $5,000. (Attachment # 12) 13. Resolution authorizing the City Manageror his designee to submit a grant application in the amount of $42,633 to the State of Texas, Criminal Justice Division for Year 5 funding available under the Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) Fund for the Police Department's Family Violence Unit with a City match of $11,370 in the No. 1061 Trust Fund and $3,500 in-kind services; for a total project cost of $57,503. (Attachment # 13) 14. Motion adopting the timetable for the FY 2004 Consolidated Plan/Annual Action Plan (CP/AAP) that is the planning and application process for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME), and Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) Programs. (Attachment # 14) 15. Motion authorizing a three-year (3) contract with two (2) one-year options to renew or until termination pursuant to the Agreement between the City of Corpus Christi, Texas and Dennis A. Joiner & Associates to perform professional services under this Agreement as an independent contractor for Fire and Police Promotional Examinations and Assessment Centers for the City. (Attachment # 15) 16. Resolution authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute an Interlocal Cooperative Agreement with the Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) for the sharing of technology. (Attachment # 16) 17. Resolution authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute an Interlocal Cooperative Agreement with the Texas Department of Transportation (State) to permit connection of the City's Fiber Optic Network (FON) to the State's FON. (Attachment # 17) Agenda Regular Council Meeting December 9, 2003 Page 6 CITY COUNCIL PRIORITY ISSUES (Refer to legend at the end of the agenda summary) 18. Ordinance authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a Use Privilege Agreement with Stabil Drill Corpus Christi for the right to construct, maintain and alter approximately 200 - linear feet of an 8 -foot high chain link fence, adjacent to approximately 700 -square feet of bedding and landscaping and approximately 1,700 -square feet of parking lot area, all within the South Navigation Boulevard street right-of-way; establishing a fee of $8,427; and requiring Stabil Drill Corpus Christi to comply with the specified conditions. (Attachment # 18) 19. First Reading Ordinance - Authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a five-year lease with Tejas Bowmen Archery Club to construct, maintain, and operate an archery range; and providing for termination upon 30 days notice by either party. (Attachment # 19) 20. Second Reading Ordinance - Authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a five-year lease with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to site continuous air quality monitors in Woodlawn Park and in H.J. Williams Park in consideration of TCEQ providing the air monitoring services. (First Reading- 11/11/03) (Attachment # 20) J. PRESENTATIONS: Public comment will not be solicited on Presentation items. 21. Fifteenth Annual "Feast of Sharing", HEB Holiday Dinner (Attachment # 21) 22. First Quarterly Update on the City's Title II Transition Plan under the Americans with Disability Act (ADA) (Attachment # 22) 23. Update on Status of Convention Center and Multipurpose Arena by SMG, Management Company (Attachment # 23) 24. Status of Services, Capital Requirements, and new initiatives by the Street Department (Attachment # 24) 25. Proposed South Central Area Development Plan (Attachment # 25) Agenda Regular Council Meeting December 9, 2003 Page 7 CITY COUNCIL PRIORITY ISSUES (Refer to legend at the end of the agenda summary) 26. Risk Management Fund Quarterly Update for the period ended July 31, 2003 and October 31, 2003 (Attachment # 26) 27. Community Youth Development Program (78415) Progress Report (Attachment # 27) (RECESS REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING) K. MEETING OF CITY CORPORATION: 28. CORPUS CHRISTI INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION SPECIAL MEETING: (Attachment # 28) AGENDA CORPUS CHRISTI INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION Date: Tuesday, December 9, 2003 Time: During the meeting of the City Council beginning at 12 p.m. Place: City Council Chambers 1201 Leopard St. Corpus Christi, TX 78401 President Henry Garrett calls meeting to order. 2. Secretary Armando Chapa calls roll. Board of Directors Henry Garrett, President Jesse Noyola, Vice President Javier Colmenero Brent Chesney Melody Cooper Bill Kelly Rex A. Kinnison Mark Scott Samuel L. Neal, Jr. Officers George K. Noe, General Manager Armando Chapa, Secretary Mary Juarez, Asst. Secretary Vacant, Treasurer Constance P. Sanchez, Asst. Treasurer 3. Approval of Minutes of May 13, 2003. 4. Election of Treasurer to fill vacancy. Agenda Regular Council Meeting December9,2003 Page 8 Le 29. 5. Financial Report. Consideration of the following resolution to approve amendments to the resolution adopted in 1984 in connection with financing the Medical Plaza building located on S. Staples Street north of Six Points: RESOLUTION AMENDING A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF CORPUS CHRISTI INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1984 (MEDICAL PLAZA ASSOCIATES PROJECT) 7. Public Comment. 8. Adjournment. (RECONVENE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING) PUBLIC HEARINGS: ZONING CASES: Case No. 1003-01, John Butler. A change of zoning from an "F- R" Farm-Rural Distdct to a "B-4" General Business District on Flour Bluff and Encinal Farm and Garden Tracts, being 1.953 acres out of the east one-half of Lot 14, Section 21, located north of Yorktown Boulevard and 1,700 feet east of Cimarron Road. (Attachment # 29) Planninq Commission's Recommendation: Denial of the "B-4" Distdct and in lieu thereof, approval of a "B-l" Neighborhood Business Distdct with a Special Permit for a mini-storage facility subject to five (5) conditions. Staff's Recommendation: Approval of a "B-4" General Business District. CITY COUNCIL PRIORITY ISSUES (Refer to legend at the end of the agenda summa[y) Agenda Regular Council Meeting December9,2003 Page 9 ORDINANCE Amending the Zoning Ordinance upon application by John Butler by changing the zoning map in reference to 1.953 acres out of Lot 14, Section 21, Flour Bluff and Encinal Farm and Garden Tracts (currently zoned "F-R" Farm-Rural District) by granting a "B-l" Neighborhood Business Distdct with a special permit for a mini- storage facility subject to five (5) conditions; and amending the comprehensive plan to account for any deviations from the existing comprehensive plan. STORM WATER MASTER PLAN: 30.a. Public headng to consider amending the 1982 Storm Drainage Plan for the area west of Calallen (Five Points) to transfer about 8 acres from Basin "E" to an unidentified basin neighboring on the east. (Attachment # 30) 30.b. First Reading Ordinance - Amending the 1982 Storm Drainage Master Plan for the area west of Calallen (Five Points) to transfer about 8 acres from Basin "E' to an unidentified basin neighboring on the east as better described in the attached exhibit. (Attachment # 30) M= REGULAR AGENDA CONSIDERATION OF MOTIONS, RESOLUTIONS, AND ORDINANCES: 31. First Reading Ordinance -Waiving the 60-day waiting period and publication of legal notice; and renaming the park at 701 St. Pius Drive from Meadowbrook Park to Dan Whitworth Park. (Attachment # 31) 32.a. Motion amending prior to second reading the Code of Ordinances, Chapter 24, Human Relations, by adding Article V, Discrimination Against Individuals with Disabilities, establishing procedure, and implementation. (Attachment # 32) CITY COUNCIL PRIORITY ISSUES (Refer to legend at the end of the agenda summary) Agenda Regular Council Meeting December9,2003 Page 10 32.b. 33.a. 33.b. 34. 35. Second Reading Ordinance -Amending the Code of Ordinances, Chapter 24, Human Relations by adding Article V, Discrimination Against Individuals with Disabilities, establishing procedure and implementation and providing for penalties. (First Reading - 07/22/03) (Attachment # 32) Ordinance appropriating $11,356.56 in unappropriated interest earnings from Street 1990 Capital Improvement Program Fund No. 3534; and appropriating $11,350.48 from the unappropriated interest earnings in Street 1995 Capital Improvement Program Fund No. 3537; and appropriating $233,960.46 from the unappropriated interest earnings in Street 1995B Capital Improvement Program Fund No. 3538; and appropriating $160,642.35 from the unappropriated interest earnings in Street 2001 Capital Improvement Program Fund No. 3640 for street improvements to Home Road from Ayers Street to Kostoryz Road; and amending the Capital Budget FY 2002-2003 adopted by Ordinance No. 025144 by increasing appropriations by $417,309.85. (BOND ISSUE 2000) (Attachment # 33) Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a construction contract with Haas-Anderson Construction Company, of Corpus Christi, Texas in the amount of $2,999,999.99 for Horne Road from Ayers Street to Kostoryz Road Street Improvement Project. (BOND ISSUE 2000) (Attachment # 33) Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a contract with KIS-SSl, LLC, Joint Venture dba Kitchen Installation Services/Stafford-Smith, Inc., of Houston, Texas in the amount of $1,219,122 for the Multi-Purpose Arena and Convention Center Food Service Equipment. (Attachment # 34) Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute an engineering services contract with Wilbur Smith Associates, Inc., of Dallas, Texas in an amount not to exceed $32,500 for Parking, Roadway, and Traffic Study for the Professional Minor League Baseball Stadium. (Attachment # 35) CITY COUNCIL PRIORITY ISSUES (Refer to legend at the end of the agenda summary) Agenda Regular Council Me~ing December9,2003 Page 11 36. 37. 38. First Reading Ordinance - Amending the Code of Ordinances, City of Corpus Chdsti, Chapter 55 to establish procedures regarding secudty deposit, delinquent payments, late fees, and average billing for the Utilities Business Office; and providing for penalties. (Attachment # 36) Consideration granting a variance, under Section 4-5(F) of the Code of Ordinances, City of Corpus Chdsti to Get Happy, LLC to operate an on premises alcoholic beverage establishment located at 526 South Staples Street. (Attachment # 37) First Reading Ordinance - Amending Section 4-5, Code of Ordinances, City of Corpus Chdsti regarding the location of establishments serving on-premise alcoholic beverages; and providing for penalties. (Attachment # 38) PUBLIC COMMENT FROM THE AUDIENCE ON MATTERS NOT SCHEDULED ON THE AGENDA WILL BE HEARD AT APPROXIMATELY 5:30 P.M. OR AT THE END OF THE COUNCIL MEETING, WHICHEVER IS EARLIER. PLEASE LIMIT PRESENTATIONS TO THREE MINUTES. IF YOU PLAN TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL DURING THIS TIME PERIOD, PLEASE SIGN THE FORM AT THE REAR OF THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, GIVING YOUR NAME, ADDRESS AND TOPIC. (A recording is made of the meeting; therefore, please speak into the microphone located at the podium and state your name and address. If you have a petition or other information pertaining to your subject, please present it to the City Secretary.) Si usted se didge a la junta y cree qua su ingl&s es limitado, habr~ un int~rprete ingl~s-espat~ol en la reunion de la junta para ayudade. PER CITY COUNCIL POLICY, NO COUNCIL MEMBER, STAFF PERSON, OR MEMBERS OF THE AUDIENCE SHALL BERATE, EMBARRASS, ACCUSE, OR SHOW ANY PERSONAL DISRESPECT FOR ANY MEMBER OF THE STAFF, COUNCIL MEMBERS, OR THE PUBLIC AT ANY COUNCIL MEETING. THIS POLICY IS NOT MEANT TO RESTRAIN A CITIZEN'S FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS. CITY COUNCIL PRIORITY ISSUES (Refer to legend at the end of the agenda summary) Agenda Regular Council Meeting December9,2003 Page12 O. REPORTS: The following reports include questions by Council to Staff regarding City policies or activities; request by Council for information or reports from Staff; reports of activities of individual Council members and Staff; constituent concerns; current topics raised by media; follow-up on Staff assignments; scheduling of future Council meetings and activities; and other brief discussions regarding city-related matters. 39. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT 40. 41. P. * Upcoming Items MAYOR'S UPDATE COUNCIL AND OTHER REPORTS ADJOURNMENT: POSTING STATEMENT: This agenda was posted on the City's official bulletin board at the front entrance to City Hall, 1201 Leopard Street, at 4:30 p.m., December 5, 2003. Armando Chapa City Secretary CiTY COUNCIL PRIORITY ISSUES (Refer to legend at the end of the agenda summary) Agenda Regular Council Meeting December 9, 2003 Page 13 NOTE: The City Council Agenda can be found on the City's Home Page at www.cctexas.com after 7:00 p.m. on the Friday before regularly scheduled council meetings. If technical problems occur, the agenda will be uploaded on the Internet by Monday morning. Symbols used to highlight action item that Implement council priority Issues. CITY COUNCIL PRIORITY ISSUES (Refer to legend at the end of the agenda summary) 2003 CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITIES Charter Revisions Legislative Agenda Increased CVB funding Trashy Neighborhoods Master Drainage Plan Garwood Water New Funding Sources for Inner City Improvements Improved Permitting Process NEW PRIORITY ISSUES Bond 2004 Long-Term Revenue Picture Downtown Revitalization Skate Park Storm Water Drainage Distdct ADA Compliance Park Master Plan Communication with Other Taxing Entities Review of Sexually Oriented Businesses Ordinance Call Center ' NEW PRIORITY INITIATIVES AND ISSUES City sta. ff will develop and present to City Cowacil action/implementation plans for the following priority Desalination Pilot Project *Code Enforcement in Trashy Neighborhoods ~l~ *Employee Classification Study Ma stet Drainage Plan ~ Garwood Water *New Golf Course *Charter Revision with Specific Charge(s) *More Funding for Economic Development *Fire and Police Contracts New Funding Sources / Plan for Inner City Improvements Improve Permitting Process (online / customer service) Padre Island Development Plan Downtown / South Central Development Plan (marina, t-heads, breakwater) Housing Emphasis / Process (older neighborhoods, working class neighborhoods ~ **Road Projects ~ Southside Traffic Plan 2001-2002 CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITY ISSUES I ~CONTINUING PRIORITY ISSUES Airport / SeawaH /Conv, gnti0n Center / Arena · Continue quarterly reporting process for these initiatives. '86 Bond Issue Improvements Update status on Senior Centers. · Provide communication on completion of these projects (e.g. "Report to the Community"). · Continue community involvement on issues such as Leopard Street improvements. prlvatizatl~n / Re-Eneineering · Clearly define "privatization" and "re-engineering." · Make decisions regarding privatization and re-engineering in the next 12-24 months, with disenssions within 90 days. · Establish process to identify what services can and cannot be privatized. · Continue focus on park maintenance. Finance · Maintain the 5-year forecast model. · Review the August 1 budget adoption deadline. Crime ,Control and Prev~ntion · Continue implementation of the Community Policing initiative. · Establish date for Crime Control and Prevemion District election. · Continue City participation in Youth Opportunities United and other youth crime initiatives. Employee Health Care · Address concerns related to employee compensation and benefits, including health insurance. · Work to coordinate Police and Fire health benefits with those of other City employees Economic Development $~les Tax · Establish election date. Stgrm Water Utilltv · Reconsider implementation plan for a Storm Water Utility. Pacgery Channel Continue quarterly reports on the progress of the TIF and Beach Restoration Project. L4ndfill · Continue to evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of operations. · Examine alternatives for solid waste management system, including privatization. Iuternct · Continue regular updates and expansion of the City's web site, including individual council member web pages. · Establish target date for online permitting process, · Communicate brash pickup via e-mail. CDBG · Continue active role. Fro~ Bapk B, uildiu~ · Lease and complete renovation Annexation Plan · Implement current island annexation plan ADA Transition Plan · Develop and approve ADA Transition Plan within 90 days. Redistricting, · Develop Council-approved redistricting plan for the City of Corpus Christi Industrial District Contract · Review Industrial District contracts and determine date for approval Co[moil Action Ite~as Staff completes action requests in a timely manner. C~ty / County Health Issues · Continue discussions with County to determine structure and process for the most effective and efficient delivery of health services Markefino of cc Museum and Columbus Ships · Continue to develop marketing plans for the Museum of Science and History and the Columbus Fleet Relationships with Other Governments Development Initiative Packages *Park Rehabilitation *Leopard Street Curbs and Gutters Economic Development Summit and Post-Summit Meetings Agnes~Laredo Corridor Market (studies, plans) *Solid waste / Pickup Base Closures **Northwest Library Northside Development Plan Traffic Controls (channeling, studying on/off ramps on SPID) *Five Points Ambulance Effluent Plan for Leopard Medians RTA--Public Improvements Arts and Sciences Park Plan Budget Item ** Capital Improvement Pro,ram Item 1 MINUTES JOINT MEETiNG OF THE CORPUS CHRISTI CITY COUNCIL AND CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS November 11, 2003 - 12:10 p.m. CITY COUNCIL Mayor Samuel L. Neal Jr. Mayor Pro Tem Brent Chesney (Arrived at 12:20 p.m.) Javier Colmenero Melody Cooper (Arrived at 12:15 p.m.) Henry Garrett Bill Kelly (Arrived at 12:15 p.m.) Rex Kinnison Jesse Noyola Mark Scott (Arrived at 12:15 p.m.) CRIME CONTROL DISTRICT BOARD Linda Bridges, Chairman Vicky Alexander Larry Baker W.L. Hermis Butch Pool City Staff Present City Manager George K. Noe Acting City Attorney R. Jay Reining City Secretary Armando Chapa Police Commander Bryan Smith Police Chief Pete Alvarez The meeting was called to order in the Sixth Floor Conference Room of City Hall. City Secretary Chapa checked the roll and verified that quorums of both the Council and the Crime Control District (CCD) Board were present to conduct the meeting. Chairman Bridges thanked the Council for the opportunity to meet with them today. She introduced Commander Bryan Smith, who provided an update on Crime Control and Prevention District projects. Commander Smith briefly reported on the following areas: Palo Alto at Mesquite; Ruth at Bluntzer; and the Flour Bluff Clean-up targeting transient camping. Commander Smith reported on results from the Chula Vista project. He said l 11 abandoned vehicles had been identified. Of these vehicles, 96 were voluntarily removed and 15 were cited or removed through an alternate process. He stated that Crime Control funds were used to purchase seven new street light fixtures and five updated street light fixtures. Commander Smith noted that 34 felony drag arrests were made in a three-month time period. He said one on-view "drive-by" incident led to an arrest. Finally, he said two houses were demolished and one was rebuilt. With regard to the Property Recovery Unit, Commander Smith reported that 1,340 cases were closed and $1,413,261 in property were recovered. Commander Smith also reported on Crime Control District cost-cutting initiatives. The cost savings included the following items: 318 houses were boarded at a savings of over $100,000 and Minutes - Joint Meeting November 11, 2003 - Page 2 264 tons of trash were removed using inmate labor. Commander Smith highlighted the efforts of the North Side Art Program. He stated that the North Side Committee's goals included the following: art projects and instruction; children's recreation; education and tutoring;job preparation and training; law enfomement; art studio building renovations; and an "Art Park" playground. He mentioned the following North Side accomplishments: quilting classes; art instruction furnishings and supplies; youth car wash; and monthly clean up events (four so far). He said the following organizations had offered their support: Leadership Corpus Christi project; Weed and Seed grant; Junior League "Done in a Day" Project; submitted CBCF grant. Commander Smith mentioned the following recent developments in the Northside area: working on 70 abandoned structures; 70 vehicles tagged (30-day notice); 20 abandoned vehicles removed; and patrol, bikes and narcotics working in the area. Finally, Commander Smith provided a brief update on the Juvenile Assessment Center. Chairman Bridges noted that Youth Opportunities United (YOU) was assisting the JAC in securing alternate funding for a number of case manager positions currently funded by a grant that was being eliminated. She also said YOU was establishing a fund to support ten case manager assistants for three to four years. She asked the Council to share the information with the community to raise their awareness and elicit their support. Council members asked questions regarding the following subjects: police efforts on the Northside; drug arrests and prosecution; resurgence of turf tagging; and the Graffiti Wipe-Out program. There being no other business, Mayor Neal adjourned the joint meeting at 12:50 p.m. on November 11, 2003. MINUTES CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS Regular Council Meeting November 11, 2003 - 1:00 p.m. PRESENT Mayor Samuel L. Neal Jr. Mayor Pro Tem Brent Chesney CouncilMemb~s: Javier D. Colmenero Melody Cooper Henry Garrett Bill Kelly Rex A. Kinnison Jesse Noyola Mark Scott City Staff.' City Manager George K. Noe Acting City Attorney R. Jay Reining City Secretary Armando Chapa Recording Secretary Rebecca Huerta Mayor Neal called the meeting to order in the Council Chambem of City Hall. The invocation was delivered by Council Member Scott and the Pledge of Allegiance to the United States flag was led by Council Member Kinnison. City Secretary Chapa called the roll and verified that the necessary quorum of the Council and the required charter officers were present to conduct the meeting. Mayor Neal called for approval of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of October 28, 2003. A motion was made and passed to approve the minutes as presented. Mayor Neal referred to Item 2 and the following board appointments were made: Arts & Cultural Commission Linda Avila (Reappointed) James Jones (Reappointed) Lynda Jones (Reappointed) Daiquiri Richard (Reappointed) DeAnn Gould-Lancaster (Appointed) Diane La_Rue (Appointed) Karen Middleton (Appointed) Gustavo Valadez Ortiz (Appointed) Marilyn Spencer (Appointed) Rose Zuniga (Appointed) Citizens Advisory Health Board Amanda Stukenberg (Reappointed) Committee for Persons with Disabilities Brian Watson (Appointed) Ethics Commission Harlan R. Heitkamp (Appointed) Human Relations Commission Dr. Clifton Baldwin (Appointed) Theresa Holder (Appointed) Library Board Reynaldo Rodriguez (Reappointed) Charles Bumes (Reappointed) Dr. C. Thomas Cron (Reappointed) Treva Bedwell (Reappointed) Barbara Silverman (Appointed) Port of Corpus Christi Authority Ruben Bonilla Jr. (Reappointed) Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November ! 1, 2003 - Page 2 Mayor Neal called for consideration of the consent agenda (Items 3-20). Council members requested that Items 5, 14 and 16 be discussed. There were no comments from the audience. A motion was made and passed to approve Items 3 through 20, constituting the consent agenda, except for Items 5, 14 and 16, which were pulled for individual consideration. City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes as follows: 3. MOTION NO. 2003-395 Motion approving a supply agreement with Wilson Supply, of Houston, Texas for approximately 26,000 feet of steel pipe ranging in size fi'om 1 inch to 8 inches, in accordance with Bid Invitation No. BI-0004-04, based on low bid for an estimated semi-annual expenditure of $84,594. The pipe is used by the Gas Department. The term of the contract will be for six months with an option to extend for up to four additional six-month periods, subject to the approval of the supplier and the City Manager or his designee. Funds have been budgeted by the Gas Department in FY 2003-2004. The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". 4. MOTION NO. 2003-396 Motion approving a supply agreement with Casco Industries, Inc., of Pasadena, Texas for firefighting clothing consisting of seventy-six sets of pants and coats, based on sole source, for an estimated annual expenditure of $68,020. The term of the agreement will be for twelve months with an option to extend for up to two additional twelve-month periods, subject to the approval of the supplier and the City Manager or his designee. Funds have been budgeted by the Fire Department in FY 2003-2004. The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". 6. MOTION NO. 2003-397 Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a consultant contract with Martinez, Guy & Maybik, Inc., of Corpus Christi, Texas in the amount not to exceed $152,993 for the Water Main Improvements along Elizabeth Street andl9th Street. The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 11, 2003 - Page 3 10. MOTION NO. 2003-398 Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a construction contract with H & G Contractors, of Corpus Christi, Texas in the amount of $2,388,102.98 for the Yorktown Boulevard (Lake Travis Drive to Weber Road) Improvement Project. (BOND ISSUE 2000) The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". MOTION NO. 2003-399 Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a consultant contract with HNP, Inc., of Corpus Christi, Texas in an amount not to exceed $97,930 for the Wastewater Lit~ Station located at Cimarron and Lens. The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". MOTION NO. 2003-4000 Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a consultant contract with Arcadis G & M, Inc., of Corpus Christi, Texas for a total fee not to exceed $308,620 for the McBride Lift Station and Force Main. The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". RESOLUTION NO. 025547 Resolution recognizing the public necessity of acquiring utility and construction easements for the Southside Water Transmission Main Project, Phases 4,4a, and 5, for utility and other municipal purposes in connection with said project; and authorizing acquisition by means of negotiations or eminent domain proceedings by the City of Corpus Christi or its agents in acquiring said easements. The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kiunison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 1 I, 2003 - Page 4 11.a. ORDINANCE NO. 025548 Ordinance appropriating $60,000 from unappropriated settlement proceeds in the No. 3160 City Hall Capital Improvement Program Fund to provide funding for architectural services for the City Hall Renovation, Phase 1 Project; and amending the FY 2002-2003 Capital Budget adopted by Ordinance 025144 to increase appropriations by $60,000. An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting ,'Aye". 11.b. MOTION NO. 2003-401 12. Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute an architectural services contract with Dykemas Architects, Inc., of Corpus Christi, Texas in an amount not to exceed $60,000 for City Hall Renovation, Phase 1 Project. The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". ORDINANCE NO. 025549 Ordinance appropriating $255,000 from the estimated program income revenue in the No. 1066 Health Grants Fund as State FY 2003-2004 program income to fund environmental health, laboratory, and nursing services for the period of September 1, 2003 through August 31, 2004. An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". 13.a. MOTION NO. 2003-402 Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to accept a $1,000 grant from the Coastal Bend Alliance for Youth (CBAY) to be used toward counseling for youth receiving case management services and for fundraising efforts to provide services to youth served by the Juvenile Assessment Center. The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 11, 2003 - Page 5 13.b. ORD1NANCENO. 025550 15. Ordinance appropriating a grant in the amount of $1,000 from the Coastal Bend Alliance for Youth in the No. 1067 Park and Recreation Grants Fund for youth services provided by the Juvenile Assessment Center. An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". RESOLUTION NO. 025552 Resolution authorizing the City Manager or his designee to submit a grant application to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Pump Out Program in the amount of $11,000 for the purchase of a portable boat sewage pump out unit with a city match of $2,750 in the No. 4700 Marina Fund, for a total project cost of $13,750. The foregoing resolution was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". 17.a. MOTION NO. 2003-404 Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a Girl Agreement with the Friends of the Corpus Christi Public Libraries which provides the City with a gift of $54,000 for the expansion and remodeling of the Mary and Jeff Bell Children's Library at the Central Library. The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". 17.b. ORDINANCE NO. 025554 Ordinance appropriating $54,000 from the Friends of the Public Libraries in the No. 3210 Library Capital Improvement Program Fund for improvements to the Mary and Jeff Bell Children's Library at the Central Library; and amending the Capital Budget adopted by Ordinance No. 025144 by increasing appropriations by $54,000. An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 11, 2003 - Page 6 18.a. RESOLUTION NO. 025555 Resolution authorizing participation in the Texas Term Local Government Investment Portfolio, a Public Funds Investment Pool and designating authorized representatives. The foregoing resolution was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". 18.b. RESOLUTION NO. 025556 Resolution authorizing participation in Texas Short Term Asset Reserve Program (TEXSTAR), a Local Government Investment Pool and designating authorized representatives. The foregoing resolution was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". 18.¢. RESOLUTION NO. 025557 Resolution amending the City Investment Policy to provide the maximum amount that may be invested in Local Government Investment Pools and adopting the investment policy as amended. The foregoing resolution was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". 19. RESOLUTION NO. 025558 Resolution supporting the development of the La Quinta Trade Gateway Container Terminal by the Port of Corpus Christi Authority. The foregoing resolution was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". 20. Ordinance amending Section 33-79, Code of Ordinances, City of Corpus Christi, regarding entering or remaining on City premises with a firearm; and providing for penalties. The foregoing ordinance was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". (NOTE: This item will return for a second reading on November 18, 2003) Mayor Neal opened discussion on Item 5 regarding improvements to the Gabe Lozano and Oso Golf Courses. Council Member Kelly asked for more information on the extent of the improvements. City Manager Noe replied that these improvements were consistent with the plan the Council had viewed before. He said the improvements were basic upgrades to the existing courses. He said the work did not include any reconfigurations or additional boles. Mr. David Ondrias, Acting Director of Park and Recreation, added that the funds would be used to make Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 11, 2003 - Page 7 significant irrigation improvements to the Gabe Lozano Golf Course, including the replacement of the pumping system. In addition, the pumping system at Oso Golf Course was also going to be replaced. He said these improvements alone were approximately $500,000. Council Member Kelly asked if the funding for any reconfigurations or additional holes would be included as part of a bond election. City Manager Noe answered affirmatively. City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes as follows: 5. ORDINANCE NO. 025546 Ordinance appropriating $733,900 from the reserve for Golf Course Design in the No. 4690 Golf Fund for improvements to Gabe Lozano, Sr. and the Oso Beach Municipal Golf Courses; and amending the FY 2003-2004 Operating Budget adopted by Ordinance No. 025394 to increase appropriations by $733,900. An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved by the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kiunison, and Noyola, voting "Aye"; Scott was absent. Mayor Neal opened discussion on Item 14 regarding a grant to build a boat ramp in Cooper's Alley L-Head. Council Member Cooper asked staffto describe the project in more detail and to provide more information on the funding sources. Mr. Ondrias answered that the Texas Parks and Wildlife were providing $500,000 through a grant program. He said the $250,000 local match for this grant was being funded with seawall project fimds. City Engineer Angel Escobar said the existing boat ramp in the Cooper's Alley L-Head was not optimally located for the prevailing winds. He said the proposed project would relocated the ramps on the opposite end of the L-Head, in the northwest comer. He said the proposed project would increase the number of lanes in the boat ramp from two to three. Council Member Garrett asked if there were plans to remove the area where repairs are currently being done and create a parking area for boat owners. Mr. Escobar answered affirmatively, saying that the parking area would be relocated to the eastern side of the L-Head to make it more accessible to the boat ramp and the filling station. City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes as follows: 14. RESOLUTION NO. 025551 Resolution authorizing the City Manager or his designee to submit a grant application to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department in the amount of $500,000 for the construction ora new three lane boat ramp in the northwest comer of the Cooper's Alley L-Head; with a City match of $250,000 in the No. 3270 Seawall Capital Improvement Program Fund for a total project cost of $750,000. The foregoing resolution was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". Mayor Neal opened discussion on Item 16 regarding a gift to the Northwest Branch Library from Walmart and the Grand Aerie Fraternal Order of Eagles. Council Member Kelly recognized Walmart and the Fraternal Order of Eagles for their generosity in making the donations to the Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November I 1, 2003 - Page 8 Northwest Branch Library for library materials. City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes as follows: 16.a. MOTION NO. 2003-403 Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to accept girls totaling $1,300 from Walmart and the Grand Aerie Fraternal Order of Eagles. The funds will be used at the Northwest Branch Library to purchase library materials, particularly audio tapes and CD's for the elderly and vision impaired. The foregoing motion was passed and approved by the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". 16.b. ORDINANCE NO. 025553 Ordinance appropriating a $1,000 girl from Walmart and a $300 girl from Grand Aerie Fraternal Order of Eagles in the No. 4720 Community Enrichment Fund to purchase library materials for the elderly and vision impaired; and amending the FY 2003-2004 Operating Budget adopted by Ordinance No. 025394 to increase appropriations by $1,300. An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved by the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". Mayor Neal adjourned the regular meeting to hold the North Padre Island Development Corporation meeting. Mayor Neal adjourned the North Padre Island Development (NPID)Corporafion Meeting and called the regular meeting back into session. Mayor Neal recognized Nueces County Commissioner Chuck Cazalas, who was in the audience, and asked him if he would like to comment. Commissioner CaTalas spoke in support of the Packery Channel project and thanked the Council for their efforts. Mayor Neai opened discussion on Item 22 regarding a resolution by the NPID Corporation to authorized the issuance of bonds. City Manager Noe explained that this item would authorized the issuance of bonds by the corporation. Mr. Jeff Leuschell, Bond Counsel, commented that this action was required under the organizational documents that the Council had approved when they created the NPID Corporation. He said it simply followed the format of the last transaction earlier this year where the Council authorized and approved the corporation's action and the expenditure of the monies for the project in connection with Packery Channel. There was no public comment. Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 11, 2003 - Page 9 City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes as follows: 22. RESOLUTION NO. 025559 Resolution approving the resolution by the North Padre Island Development Corporation authorizing the issuance of Series 2003A Bonds in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $2,500,000. The foregoing resolution was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye"; Garrett and Kelly abstained. Mayor Neal opened discussion on Item 23 regarding the baseball stadium. City Manager Noe explained that staffhad advertised and received bids for the demolition of the stadium site. He said the bids had come in substantially under budget. He thanked the Port of Curpus Christi staff for their assistance in the preparation of the documents needed. He said the demolition would begin after January 1,2004 to meet the deadline to begin the construction of the stadium in March or April 2004. He concluded that staff was recommending award of the contract to the low bidder. Council Member Chesney asked ifRFPs were sent out to local bidders as well. Mr. Kevin Stowers, Assistant Director of Engineering Services, replied that all of the local bidders that do this type of work did bid on the project. Mr. Noe added that the bid tabulation included one local bidder, A-1 Contracting. Mr. Scott noted that A-1 Contracting's bid was significantly higher than the low bid. Mr. Chesney asked why the city had to use the competitive bid method for finding the demolition contractor. Mr. Stowers replied that due to time constraints, the competitive bid method was the most expedient option available. He said there were other methods available, such as the Construction Manager At Risk, where criteria other than price could be considered, but they required more lead time. Mr. Chesney cautioned that he did not want to see all of the remaining contracts for the baseball stadium awarded on low bid. Mr. Stowers replied that the stadium construction would use the Construction Manager At Risk method, which meant that a variety of factors would be considered besides price. Mr. Chesney asked for a copy of the law which dictated when low bids were required. Council Member Scott asked how much the demolition costs were estimated to be during negotiations. City Manager Noe replied that the Port had offered to do the demolition for $1.5 million, but staff had declined the offer. There were no comments from the audience. City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes as follows: 23. MOTION NO. 2003-405 Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a demolition contract with Cherry Demolition Company, of Houston, Texas in an amount not to exceed $466,000 for demolition of compress units 1,2, and 3 for stadium construction, subject to approval of an agreement with the Port of Corpus Christi Authority to purchase the property. The foregoing motion was passed and approved by the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 11, 2003 - Page 10 Mayor Neal deviated from the agenda and referred to Item 26, a presentation on the Airport Terminal Reconstruction Projects and Air Service Efforts. Assistant City Manager Jorge Cruz-Aedo reported that the airport had several projects underway over the last 18 months, including the following: Commercial Apron - Phase 1; Commercial Apron - Phase 2; Automated Lighting Control System; Terminal Reconstruction; Jetbridge Acquisition and Installation; Parking Lot/Roadway Phase 1; Roadway Phase 2; TxDot Grant for SH-44 at International Drive; Tower Demolition; and Covered Parking Lot. Regarding the Commercial Apron - Phase 1 project, Mr. Cruz-Aedo said the total project cost was $1,275,229. He said the project enlarged the commercial apron, added two paved roads on the airfield, and addressed a number of drainage issues. Mr. Cruz-Aedo reported that 90 percent of the project was funded by a federal grant. He said the project was complete and the apron was in use. Regarding the Commercial Apron - Phase 2 project, Mr. Cruz-Aedo reported the total project cost was $2,027,163, 90 percent of which was funded by the federal government. He said the original low bidder was debarred, and a local company was the second lowest bidder. He explained that the project was designed to add additional concrete, replace some existing pavement, and provide new asphalt. He noted that the project was 90 percent complete, despite a number of weather delays. Mr. Cruz-Aedo said the anticipated completion date was the end of December. With regards to the Airport Lighting Control System (ALCS) project, Mr. Cruz-Aedo said the project was necessitated by FAA relocation. He said the project cost was $640,162, 90 percent of which was federally funded. He stated that the project allowed for new computerized control of all of the runway and approach lighting systems and the construction of a new rotating beacon. He said the project was complete and in use. Mr. Cruz-Aedo briefly covered the Terminal Reconstruction Project, saying that it was funded by a combination of bonds, reserves, Passenger Facility Charges (PFCs) and federal participation. He said the project was 90 percent complete. He noted that there were two remaining elements of the project which needed to be completed: Transportation Security Administration (TSA) offices (2ND floor of the terminal) and a TSA Federal Inspection Station (1~ Floor). Regarding the Jetbridge Acquisition and Installation project, Mr. Cruz-Aedo reported that four Jetbridges have been installed, the fifth was delivered today and was scheduled for installation in December. He said the project was funded by a combination of P.F.C.s and federal participation. Mr. Cruz-Aedo noted that there were initial problems with the bridges that had been resolved, except for the uneven floor. He said the manufacturer's engineers were working on a solution to the problem. In reference to the Parking Lot/Roadway Phase 1 project, Mr. Cmz-Aedo reported that the project realigned the loop road. He said this project was probably the most visible project for the airport. He stated that the project was complete except for landscaping. He noted that the project increased the number of parking spaces from 877 to approximately 1,350. He said the project was Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 11, 2003 - Page 11 funded by a combination of bonds and P.F.C.s and was scheduled for completion by the end of November. Regarding the Roadway Phase 2 project, Mr. Cruz-Aedo stated that the project included the following elements: overlay of International Drive; landscaping; and upgrading the drainage to handle a 25-year storm event. He said the project was funded by a combination of P.F.C.s, bonds, Stormwater funds and federal participation. He stated that the project was scheduled for completion by the end of December, weather permitting. Mr. Cruz-Aedo reported on the SH-44 and International Drive Landscaping project, saying that it would completely re-landscape the intersection of SH-44 and International Drive. He said the landscaping would include irrigation and a one-year maintenance agreement after which the airport would assume maintenance responsibilities. He said the city had paid for the landscaping design and TxDot had authorized $160,000 of state funds to pay for the project. Finally, Mr. Cmz-Aedo reported on the Tower Demolition Project, which would consist of asbestos removal and demolition of the old city-owned tower building. He said the project would not begin until after construction of the TSA facilities in the new terminal building. This project will be receive 90 percent of its funding through a federal grant. He noted that the asbestos removal was estimated to be more than originally programmed. He said staff was working with the FAA to acquire more funding. Mr. Cmz-Aedo also provided a brief report on the Covered Parking Project. Mr. Cruz-Aedo reported briefly on domestic flight services. He said staff was in final negotiations with a charter service to provide non-stop service to Las Vegas, estimated to begin in March or April. He also mentioned a marketing program to encourage residents to fly out of the local airport instead of San Antonio or Houston. In reference to international service, Mr. Cruz- Aedo reported that staff was looking at establishing service to Monterrey, Mexico. He said staff had received one proposal from a carrier on October 31, 2003. The proposal including five-day a week service. He said staffwould enter negotiations with the carder in the near future. Mr. Cruz-Aedo concluded by saying that the city's airport operations were built upon the air service of its current providers. When the city solicited new services, he said staffasked current providers to participate and gave them every opportunity to propose new services. Council Member Scott thanked everyone involved in making the new airport such a success. Mayor Neal called for a brief recess to present proclamations. The Council retumed from recess, and Mayor Neal deviated from the agenda. He referred to Item 24, and a motion was made, seconded and passed to open the public hearing on the following item: 24.a. Public hearing to consider a five-year lease with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to site continuous air quality monitors in the Woodlawn Park and in H.J. Williams Park in consideration of TCEQ providing the air monitoring services. Assistant City Manager Ron Massey explained that the Texas Commission on Environmental Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 11, 2003 - Page 12 Quality (TCEQ) had requested a lease to site two continuous air quality monitors on city park property near 1-37. He said the monitors are two of a series of air quality monitors being funded out of a Supplemental Environmental Program grant resulting fi.om a settlement between the Environmental Protection Agency and Flight Hills Resources. Since the best locations for the monitors were on park land, Mr. Massey said that the state required a public hearing before a lease agreement could be executed because the land was being used for non-recreational purposes. There were no comments fi.om the audience. A motion was made, seconded and passed to close the public hearing. City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes as follows: 24.b. FIRST READING ORDINANCE Authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a five-year lease with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to site continuous air quality monitors in the Woodlawn Park and in H.J. Williams Park in consideration of TCEQ providing the air monitoring services. The foregoing ordinance was passed and approved on its first reading with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye"; Cooper was absent. Mayor Neal referred to Item 25, a presentation on the Proposed Mustang-Padre Island Area Development Plan. Mr. Michael Gunning, Director of Planning, stated that the ultimate goal of this planning effort was to have a plan adopted by the end of the 2003 calendar year. He said a key element of the planning process was to formulate a detailed list of issues to be addressed in the plan with residents, business ownem and developers on the island. He stated that the Island Stakeholders Group played a fundamental role in evaluating initial staffdrafts of the plan. Mr. Gunning said staff met with the stakeholders group four times between March and September. Mr. Gunning stated that staffalso went through a public hearing process, presenting the plan to the Transportation Advisory Committee, Water Shore Advisory Committee, the Park and Recreation Advisory Committee, the Nueces County Beach Management Committee and the Planning Commission. He said the Planning Commission conducted two public heatings on the plan and make recommendations on November 5. He noted that all the aforementioned boards and commissions recommended adoption of the plan with only minor revisions and amendments. Mr. Gunning stated that their suggestions were incorporated into the plan distributed to the Council today. He said a public hearing and first reading ordinance for adoption of the plan were scheduled for November 18. The second reading ordinance was scheduled for December 9. Mr. Gunning introduced Mr. Bob Payne, Senior Planner in charge of Comprehensive Planning, who would be making a brief presentation on the highlights of the plan. Mr. Payne said the plan mission statement was to assist in transforming the Mustang-Padre Island area into a world- renowned tourist, resort and residential community. Mr. Payne emphasized that there was a growing residential community in this area that needed to be balanced with the plans for tourism and Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 11, 2003 - Page 13 economic development. Mr. Payne stated that the area boundaries for the study were the following: all land within city limits on Mustang Island; all land within the city's ETJ on Padre Island; and the JFK Causeway. He said the area geographic characteristics were as follows: approximately 48 square miles or about 10 percent of the city's area; the area is comprised of a barrier island connected to the mainland by a causeway; soil is composed mainly of sand; topography is mostly flat, except for the dunes; and area has an abundance of wetlands, tidal flats and other environmentally sensitive features. Regarding the population growth on the islands, Mr. Payne remarked that the area had grown at a rapid rate compared to the city, an average rate of 11.9 percent per year between 1990 and 2000. By comparison, the city grew at an average rate of one percent during that same time flame. Mr. Payne provided statistics on the age characteristics of area residents. He said that 16 percent of island residents were in the 0-20 age group, compared with 33 percent in the city. In the 21-64 age group, 70 percent of the island residents were in this age group, compared with 56 percent in the city. Finally, 14 percent of island residents were in the 65+ age group, compared with 11 percent citywide. Mr. Payne noted that the median income in the area was $60,200, compared with $36,400 citywide. Mr. Payne also provided statistics on the housing market on the island. He said the median home value on Padre Island was $216,000 and on Mustang Island was $154,000. By comparison, he said the city's median home value was $70,000. Mr. Payne added that the average value ora home citywide was $100,000, while the average home value on the islands was approximately $200,000. Mr. Payne briefly discussed a number of highlights in the plan in the areas of environment, future land use, urban design, transportation, dune protection and public services. Regarding the environment, he mentioned the following highlights: approximately 62 percent of the area is publicly held and cannot be developed, and the remaining land met federal, state and county requirements to allow development; Site Plan Review; encourage cluster development to induce voluntary protection of wetlands; and encourage water exchange to ensure high water quality especially between Padre Isles and Gulf waters. Regarding the area of furore land use, Mr. Payne stated that future land use patterns will support the following: commercial activities at locations with good access and high visibility; compatible configuration of activities, including the protection of residential activities fi.om incompatible activities and identification of environmentally sensitive areas that should be preserved; higher intensity activities at major arterial intersections; medium and lower intensity activities at the arterial/collector or local street intemections; prohibit induslyial uses on the islands, except for gas/petroleum extraction as allowable by law; and place utilities underground wherever practical. Mr. Payne stated that urban design and architectural controls will be required within designated "Gateway Corridors", namely Park Rd. 22 and State Hwy. 361 on Padre Island. No architectural controls were currently recommended for Mustang Island. Mr. Payne stated that the urban design elements would be comprised of the following items: restriction prohibiting metal Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 11, 2003 - Page 14 buildings - allow masonry, stucco, brick, wood, stone or pre-case concrete panel construction; pedestrian amenities; stricter signage controls; color guidelines; architectural controls; and increased landscaping requirements. Council Member Scott asked if the island could be developed similarly to major developments in Port Aransas. Mr. Payne answered affirmatively, saying that the plan was geared toward promoting the economic development of the community. City Manager Noe added that staff's plan was to take an area that was difficult to develop and give developers the flexibility they needed to create a proposal that worked for them. Regarding transportation, Mr. Payne discussed the following issues raised by residents and stakeholders: increase the elevation of streets intersecting Park Road 22 and State Highway 361; intersection improvements at the intersection of Encantada and Park Road 22; pedestrian access enhancements at signalized intersections of Park Road 22; and terminal planning for high speed water transportation. He stated that the plan in response to these concerns would be to require access management along major thoroughfares in the plan area, which may include marginal access, shared driveways, and shared parking. He said the access management would be implemented through incentives and "best practices". With regard to beach access, Mr. Payne stated that it was a difficult issue to ensure access to and from the beach in these areas for visitors and residents. He said the basic issue, especially on Mustang Island, has been that beach access was at half-mile intervals. He said the development community felt that half-mile intervals were too close. Thus, the plan has changed the intervals to half-mile intervals that alternate between vehicular and pedestrian access points. In addition, Mr. Payne said beach access would be available at two mile intervals south of the city limits to the National Seashore. In response to Mr. Scott's question, Mr. Payne said that the plan stated that pedestrian beach access and parking should be purchased through GLO grants and other grants. Council Member Scott remarked that he liked the idea of having a natural beach, with few roads. He added that the beach in front of the island seawall posed a public safety hazard because there wasn't enough room to drive on the beach and ensure the safety of those using the beach. He asked why this section of the beach was not closed. Acting City Attorney Reining stated that GLO rules required that this section of the beach could not be closed until the city built a parking lot on top of the seawall. City Manager Noe added that there were no funds in the budget at this time to pay for a parking lot except possibly in the general operating budget. Council Member Scott asked if the parking lot could be constructed in phases. City Manager Noe replied that staffwould look into it. Regarding public services, Mr. Payne highlighted the following items: create a specific Beach Master Plan; pursue possible additional funding for beach cleaning operations; and support economic development in the Padre Island TIF by providing sufficient utility capacity. Council Member Scott reported that we have been unable to resolve the non-competitive relationship the city has with Port Aransas in dune protection, yet the city is still attempting to maintain a dialogue with the county on this subject. He said that Corpus Christi was the only city along the Texas Gulf that did not have dune protection authority because Nueces County was reluctant to grant this authority to the city. Mr. Scott also expressed his concern about having too Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 11, 2003 - Page 15 many vehicles on the beach because it could erode the value of the property. He again asked staff to look into building a parking lot for vehicle access. Mayor Neal asked what the Council's next action would be on this matter. City Manager Noe replied that a public hearing was scheduled at the next Council meeting. The Council would also be asked to consider a first reading ordinance to adopt this plan. He said the second reading would be on December 9. Mayor Neal said he had met with the Padre Island residential group last night, and they were in support of the plan. Council Member Scott also spoke in support of the plan. Mayor Neal asked if the plan could be adopted by the end of the year. Mr. Gunning replied affirmatively, saying the plan could be adopted on its second reading on December 9. Mayor Neal asked if the plan could be discussed at a Commissioners Court meeting once it was adopted to show the county that the city could handle dune protection authority. City Manager Noe replied affirmatively. Mayor Neal announced the executive sessions, which were listed on the agenda as follows: 28. Executive session under Texas Government Code Section 551.071 to obtain legal advise regarding the conveyance of vessels by the City marina staff, with possible discussion and action related thereto in open session. He noted that Item 27 was withdrawn. The Council went into executive session. The Council returned from executive session. Mayor Neal called for the City Manager's report. City Manager Noe distributed a memo providing a status report of the Bond 2000 projects. He was happy to report that the city had basically met the public's mandate that the projects be under construction or underway in three years. He said at this point, there were only two city projects that were not currently under contract, but both would be under contract by the end of the year. He said the main credit went to City Engineer Angel Escobar and his staff. Mayor Neal also thanked local contractors for their efforts. City Manager Noe also noted the opening of Island Fire Station No. 16 last Monday morning. OnThursdaymomingat 10:00a.m. inCole Park, Mr. Noeannouncedapromotionalevent for the Bay Trail Project to encourage the citizens to use it. City Manager Noe announced that next week's council meeting will begin at noon to allow several members of the Council to attend the Texas Municipal League conference in San Antonio. He noted that the following items would be on the agenda: public hearing on the Capital Budget; public hearing and first reading on the Mustang/Padre Island Development Plan; and presentation on the S.P.I.D. Congestion Study. On December 9, Mr. Noe announced that the following items were scheduled to be on the agenda: Animal Control; South Central Area Development Plan presentation; and a report on the non-discrimination ordinance and ADA Transition Plan. Mayor Neal called for Council concerns and reports. Council Member Chesney asked for Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 11, 2003 - Page 16 a status on information he had requested regarding local participation. City Engineer Eseobar replied that it would be probably be ready by the end of the week. Mr. Chesney asked if staff had responded to all the questions asked by residents at the Crockett Town Hall meeting. Mr. Noe replied that he would check. Mr. Chesney announced that the next town hall meeting would be on December 8 at Oveal Williams Senior Center hosted by Ms. Cooper, Mr. Kelly, Mr. Garrett and himself. He stated he would be holding a roast for Council Member Garrett tomorrow, and asked everyone to forward any stories they might want to share. He also thanked the members of the Padre Island Stakeholders Group. Finally, he asked for a status on the constituent concerns he had forwarded to the City Manager. Council Member Noyola asked what staffdid with city vehicles that had met their useful life. City Manager Noe replied that they were auctioned off or, in some cases, transferred to a needy department. Mr. Noyola remarked that he had enjoyed attending the Arbor Day celebration last weekend. He said he had read the article in the Caller-Times reporting the economic benefits of planting trees. He asked staff to look into incorporating some of those ideas in the city. In response to Mr. Noyola's question, Mr. Escobar replied that he would include a sketch detailing the placement of new lighting on Tiger Lane in the City Manager's transmittal. Council Member Cooper asked if the construction on McArdle Road from Everhart Road to the mall was scheduled to be completed before the holiday rash. City Engineer Escobar replied negatively. Ms. Cooper asked about the status of the unsightly metal building on Cedar Pass that had been brought to her attention at a town hall meeting. Mr. Noe replied that the city has identified a number of code violations which the property owner has corrected. Mr. George Oresco, Code Enforcement Officer, reported that the owner's plan was to build multi-family units on the site. Ms. Cooper asked if there was any way to prohibit this type of unsightly construction. Mr. Noe replied that the city will look into amending the code to limit the size of similar types of construction. Council Member Garrett remarked that the city was installing a water line on Ayers Street between Home Road and Gollihar,. He asked if there was any way to reschedule this construction because it would hurt the businesses in that area during the holiday shopping season. City Engineer Escobar replied that workers had opened up an additional driveway and were in the process of securing an additional opening to ease the situation. He said, however, that if it was necessary to postpone the work itself, staff would arrange it. Council Member Kelly asked if the new light at 69 and Northwest Boulevard was synchronized with the other lights yet. Mr. Escobar replied that he would find out. Mr. Kelly also noted that he was impressed with the Caller-Times article about the economic impact of planting trees in the San Antonio area. He also asked staff to look into it. Mr. Noe said he would provide a report on the subject. Council Member Scott asked staffto follow-up with Beautify Corpus Christi on their plans to work with TXDoT to landscape the medians between the highways. He commented that the main library building was a beautiful facility. He mentioned that a number of lights were out at the library and asked staff to replace them. He also complimented Assistant City Manager Margie Rose on the positive comments he has heard from the building community about the One Stop Shop. He asked what the process was to deal with aggressive animals when Animal Control was closed. Assistant City Manager Jorge Cruz-Aedo replied that the Police Department would take the calls for Animal Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 11, 2003 - Page 17 Control after hours. He said there was an immediate dispatch within 20 to 30 minutes of receiving the call fi.om the Police Department. Mr. Scott said that the police dispatcher had told his constituent that no one was coming out when they called on a Monday night. Mr. Cruz-Aedo said he would look into it. Mr. Scott said he kept receiving e-mails on the B-2A zoning issue and asked for a status report. Mr. Gunning replied that staffmet with representatives from the Island Planning Task Force yesterday. He said outside counsel had advised that there were serious concerns about how far the city could go in requiring architectural design controls and had recommended that a survey be conducted to further the city's case. Acting City Attorney Reining added that the city needed to justify why these controls were necessary and the survey would help do this. Mr. Gunning said the survey would be conducted within the next 60 days. Mr. Scott stated that if the city was not able to construct a parking lot on the beach in front of the island seawall, perhaps the police department could better enforce the one-way traffic flow fi.om north to south. Finally, Mr. Scott congratulated the Mayor and staff for their leadership in ensuring the success of Bond 2000. Council Member Colmenero noted that there were several items on the Council Action Request list that needed to be removed. He thanked staffand others for attending the downtown meeting held at the Omni Bayfront last night. He asked staff to keep the Council informed on the progress of the next Neighborhood Improvement Project. He also asked for an update on the county's efforts on the Old Courthouse project. Finally, he for an update on Animal Control's efforts to control the cat population in the area. City Manager Noe noted that a Animal Control presentation was scheduled on December 9. The Mayor called for petitions fi.om the audience. Mr. Jack Gordy, 41 lg Bray, expressed his concern about city employees driving city vehicles without wearing their seat belts, sign violations in the Ayers/Staples area, and a code violation involving junk vehicle in the right-of-way near Ayers Street and Holly Road. Mr. Abel Alonzo, 1701 Thames, asked for assistance with a Thanksgiving fundraiser that he was co-chairing. Ms. Rachel Stender, 15322 Beaufort Court, stated that she was a member of the Leadership Corpus Christi Class XXXII and was attending the meeting today as part of her community activism commitment. Council Member Scott asked staffto notify affected residents that the Ocean House zoning case had been withdrawn fi.om the agenda. Mayor Neal asked staff to articulate the city's position on signage in public buildings prohibiting firearms in response to misinformation being circulated by a local radio show. Acting City Attorney Reining said there was no requirement in the law that the city had to remove any of its signs. He said the law eliminated the city's authority to prohibit concealed handgun license (CHL) holders from entering on city property with a firearm. However, he said the city could prohibit anyone other than a CHL holder fi.om entering the building with a firearm. Nonetheless, he said staff had been directed to remove the signs from all buildings except Municipal Court and the City Council Chambers, which were still protected by law. Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 11, 2003 - Page 18 Council Member Chesney suggested that a staff member could listen to these radio shows and rebut the comments. City Manager Noe expressed his concern about becoming an active participant in these discussions because, in effect, they would lend validity to the radio show's false claims. Council Member Chesney replied that he felt the city's lack of participation in the discussions had the exact opposite effect. Mayor Neal commented that the city circulates an enormous amount of good information to all the media. He stated that if certain members of the media choose to ignore it, it was outside of the city's control. There being no further business to come before the Council, Mayor Neal adjourned the Council meeting at 4:05 p.m. on November 11, 2003. MINUTES CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS Regular Council Meeting November 18, 2003 - 12:00 p.m. PRESENT Mayor Samuel L. Neal Jr. Mayor Pro Tem Brent Chesney (Arrived at 12:45 p.m.) Council Members: Javier D. Colmenero (Arrived at 12:20 p.m.) Melody Cooper (Arrived at 12:15 p.m.) Henry Garrett Bill Kelly Rex A. Kinnison (Arrived at 12:02 p.m.) Jesse Noyola Mark Scott Ci_ty Staff: City Manager George K. Noe Acting City Attorney R. Jay Reining City Secretary Armando Chapa Recording Secretary Rebecca Huerta Mayor Neal called the meeting to order in the Council Chambers of City Hall. The invocation was delivered by Reverend Al Schubert of the Lord of Life Lutheran Church and the Pledge of Allegiance to the United States flag was led by Council Member Garrett. City Secretary Chapa called the roll and verified that the necessary quorum of the Council and the required charter officers were present to conduct the meeting. City Secretary Chapa announced that the minutes from the joint meeting and the regular meeting of November 11 were not ready at this time. He stated that both sets of minutes from the November 11 meetings would be provided at the December 9 council meeting. (Council Member Kinnison arrived at 12:02 p.m.) Mayor Neal announced the executive sessions, which were listed on the agenda as follows: Executive session under Texas Government Code Section 551.071 regarding Larry Young, et al v. City of Corpus Christi, Cause No. 13-03-00559-CV, on appeal from the 94* Judicial District Court of Nueces County, Texas (Cause No. 01-0647-C), with possible discussion and action related thereto in open session. Executive session under Texas Government Code Section 551.071 regarding Mary Collins, et al v. City of Corpus Christi, Cause No. 13-03-00428-CV, on appeal from the 94* Judicial District Court of Nueces County, Texas (Cause No. 01-0646-C), with possible discussion and action related thereto in open session. Executive session under Texas Govemment Code Section 551.071 regarding Robert Parmey, et al v. City of Corpus Christi, Civil Action No. C-03-153, in the United States District Court, Southem District of Texas, Corpus Christi Division, with possible discussion and action related thereto in open session. Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 18, 2003 - Page 2 Executive session under Texas Government Code Section 551.071 regarding fire collective bargaining negotiations, with possible discussion and action related thereto in open session. o Executive session under Texas Government Code Section 551.071 regarding a potential claim against the City's stop loss carrier, with possible discussion and action related thereto in open session. Executive session under Texas Government Code Section 551.071 regarding Kourtney Hancock vs. Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc. and the City of Corpus Christi, Cause No. 02-1169- B, 117th District Court, Nueces County, Texas, with possible discussion and action related thereto in open session. Executive session under Texas Government Code Section 551.074 for deliberations regarding the appointment of the City Attorney, with possible discussion and action related thereto in open session. Executive session under Texas Government Code Section 551.071 regarding City of San Benito v. PG&E Gas Transmission, Texas Corporation et al, No. 96-12-7404-A, 107th District Court, Cameron County, Texas; the remaining related claims of the City of Corpus Christi; against Gulfierra Energy Partners, L.P., and its predecessors, and similar claims of the City of Corpus Christi against other similar entities, with possible discussion and action related thereto in open session. The Council went into executive session. (Council Members Cooper arrived at l2: l S p. m.; Council Member Colmenero arrived at 12:20 p. tn.; and Mayor Pro Tern Chesney arrived at 12:45 p.m.) The Council returned fi.om executive session and the following motions were passed with the following vote: 1. MOTION NO. 2003-406 Motion authorizing the City Manager to execute an amendment to the Legal Services Agreement with Lowell Denton of Denton, Navarro, Rocha & Bemal to represent the City in Larry Young, et al v. City of Corpus Christi, Cause No. 13-03-00559-CV; on appeal from the 94th Judicial District Court of Nueees County, Texas (Cause No. 01-0647-C), at an hourly rate of $200, plus expenses, subject to certification of funds. Mayor Neal made the foregoing motion, which was seconded by Ms. Cooper. The motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye"; Colmenero was absent. Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 18, 2003 - Page 3 MOTION NO. 2003-407 Motion authorizing the City Manager to execute an amendment to the Legal Services Agreement with Lowell Denton of Denton, Navarro, Rocha & Bemal to represent the City in Mary Collins, et al v. City of Corpus Christi, Cause No. 13-03-00428-CV; on appeal fi.om the 94® Judicial District Court of Nueces County, Texas (Cause No. 01-0646-C), at an hourly rate of $200, plus expenses, subject to certification of funds. Mayor Neal made the foregoing motion, which was seconded by Ms. Cooper. The motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye"; Colmenero was absent. MOTION NO. 2003408 Motion authorizing the City Manager to execute an amendment to the Legal Services Agreement with Lowell Denton of Denton, Navarro, Rocha & Bernal to represent the City in Robert Partney, et al v. City of Corpus Christi; Civil Action No. C-03-153 in United States District Court, Southern District of Texas, Corpus Christi Division, at an hourly rate of $200, plus expenses, subject to certification of rinds. Mayor Neal made the foregoing motion, which was seconded by Mr. Garrett. The motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye"; Colmenero was absent. MOTION NO. 2003-409 Motion authorizing the City Manager to execute an amendment to the Legal Services Agreement with Lowell Denton of Denton, Navarro, Rocha & Bemal to represent the City in the fire collective bargaining negotiations, at an hourly rate of $200, plus expenses, subject to certification of funds. Mayor Neal made the foregoing motion, which was seconded by Ms. Cooper. The motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye"; Colmenero was absent. MOTION NO. 2003-410 Motion authorizing the City Manager to execute an amendment to the Legal Services Agreement with James Perschbach ofBracewell & Patterson to represent the City regarding a potential claim against the City's stop loss carrier, at an hourly rate of $200, plus expenses, subject to certification of fimds. Mayor Neal made the foregoing motion, which was seconded by Mr. Garrett. The motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kiunison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye"; Colmenero was absent. Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 18, 2003 - Page 4 MOTION NO. 2003-411 Motion to settle Kourmey Hancock v. Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc. and the City of Corpus Christi, Cause No. 02-1169-B, 117th District Court, Nueces County, Texas, by payment of the sum of $250,000. Mayor Neal made the foregoing motion, which was seconded by Mr. Gat'rea. The motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Cooper, Garrett, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye"; Colmenero was absent; Kelly abstained. MOTION NO. 2003 -412 Motion confirming the City Manager's appointment of Mary Kay Fischer to serve as City Attorney effective December 22, 2003. Mayor Neal made the foregoing motion, which was seconded by Ms. Cooper. The motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". Mayor Neal called for consideration of the consent agenda (Items 9-19). City Secretary Chapa announced that Council Member Noyola would be abstaining from the vote and discussion on Item 19. He also noted that Item 16 was withdrawn by staff. Council members requested that Item 10 be discussed. There were no comments from the audience. A motion was made and passed to approve Items 9 through 19, constituting the consent agenda, except for Item 10, which was pulled for individual consideration. City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes as follows: 9. MOTION NO. 2003413 Motion approving the purchase of two brush loader trucks from Bayou City Ford Truck Sales, of Houston, Texas for the total amount of $165,824. This award is based on the Cooperative Purchasing Agreement with the Texas Local Government Purchasing Cooperative (TLGPC). These brush loader tracks will be used by the Neighborhood Services Department. Funds are budgeted in the Maintenance Service Capital Outlay Fund. Both units are additions to the fleet. The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 18, 2003 - Page 5 11. MOTION NO. 2003-415 Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute Amendment No. 2 to a contract with the University of Texas Marine Sciences Institute, of Austin, Texas, in an amount not to exceed $191,545 for biological monitoring services associated with the Rincon Bayou Diversion Project. The foregoing motion was passed and approved by the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". 12. MOTION NO. 2003-416 Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute Ratification of Amendment No. 6 with HDR Engineering, Inc., of Corpus Christi, Texas for a total fee not to exceed $181,000 for the Reservoir Operating Plan Update and Flood Release Model Project. The foregoing motion was passed and approved by the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye"; 13. RESOLUTION NO. 025562 Resolution recognizing the public necessity of acquiring utility and construction easements for the Buckingham Estates Lif~ Station and Force Main Diversion Project No. 7117 for utility and other municipal purposes; and authorizing acquisition by means of negotiations or eminent domain proceedings by the City of Corpus Christi or its agents in acquiring said easements. The foregoing resolution was passed and approved by the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kiunison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". 14. RESOLUTION NO. 025563 Resolution authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute an Interlocal Governmental Agreement with the Corpus Christi Independent School District for a joint project to install a new concrete connecting trail between South Pope Park and Robert Wilson Elementary School. The foregoing resolution was passed and approved by the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kiunison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 18, 2003 - Page 6 15. MOTION NO. 2003-417 Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a contract with John Buck for the purchase of the sculpture "Westfork" in the amount of $50,000 as a part of the "Percent For Art Program" associated with the Convention Center/Arena Project. The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". 16. WITHDRAWN 17. Joi,c,. & Aaaoclatca to iz~, f,,,,, v,,.,f,.o,,i,.,,M ,,~, ,i,..~.,, ~idci ;fils ag, ¢,.,,,~.,,; aa a,i ORDINANCE NO. 025564 Ordinance abandoning and vacating 4,404.1 O-square feet of utility/drainage easements out of Lots 16 -19 and Lot 24, Block 51, Kings Crossing Unit 15, as follows: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 44.65-square foot portion of a 15-foot wide utility/drainage easement out of Lot 16, Block 51; 726.47-square foot portion of a 15-foot wide utility/drainage easement out of Lots 16 & 17, Block 51; 398.75-square foot portion ora 15-foot wide utility/drainage easement out of Lot 16, Block 51; 3,039.65-square foot portion of a 7.5-foot wide utility easement out of Lots 16-19, Block 51; 137.10-square foot portion of a 7.5-foot wide utility easement out of Lot 24, Block 51; 57.48-square foot portion of a 15-foot wide utility/drainage easement out of Lots 18 & 19, Block 51; originally dedicated by King's Crossing Unit 1, Phase 3, Lot 1, Block 41, Volume 59, Pages 183-188, Map Records, Nueces County, Texas; requiring the owner, King's Crossing Realty, Ltd., to comply with the specified conditions and replat the property within 180 days at owner's expense. An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved by the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 18, 2003 - Page 7 18. ORDINANCE NO. 025560 Amending Section 33-79, Code of Ordinances, City of Corpus Christi, regarding entering or remaining on City premises with a firearm; and providing for penalties. (First Reading - 11/11/03) The foregoing ordinance was passed and approved on its second reading by the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Gan-eR, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye". 19. ORDINANCE NO. 025561 Authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a lease with the United States Postal Service to lease space containing approximately 463 square feet located in the cargo facility for th.e operation of United States Postal Services in consideration of an annual rental payment of $13,840 for a term of up to fifty-four months. (First Reading - 10/14/03) The foregoing ordinance was passed and approved on its second reading by the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, and Scott, voting "Aye"; Noyola abstained. Mayor Neal opened discussion on Item 10 regarding the ice rink chiller unit for the arena. Council Member Kinnison asked staffto provide an update on the status of the city's negotiations with the IceRayz because he was concerned that the city was buying this equipment without a tenant. He also asked for an update on the status of the arena project in general, including information on any operational budget changes, luxury box sales and SMG's marketing efforts. City Manager Noe remarked that this was an excellent idea, and he would schedule a presentation in December. He said negotiations were ongoing between the city, SMG and the IceRayz. Mr. Noe stated that the Rayz had made it quite clear that they had every intention of moving into the new building. Mr. Noe said he was confident that the negotiations would be successful and completed within the next several months. Mr. Kinnison replied that staff did not have to wait until December to provide a report. He said a written report would suffice. Mr. Noe also remarked that the city's negotiations with the Islanders were also ongoing and would probably be completed within the next 60 days. Mr. Noyola noted that the city did not chose the sealed proposal offering the lowest cost for the arena project. Instead, he said the city chose another sealed proposal, and negotiated with that contractor to lower their original price to a more acceptable level, which they did. He expressed concern that the change orders were increasing the cost to the contractor's original proposal price. Mr. Noe replied that during the course of value engineering, staffremoved several items from the contract to come within an acceptable price level, acknowledging that staff would come back to the Council asking for change orders to execute them if the project was proceeding without any major problems. He said the two change orders in question were for the suite build-out and for the ice rink chiller unit. He stated that the project is far enough along now where there are no other substantial change orders planned. Mr. Noe commented that this particular equipment required a long lead time in order to have it installed and ready for the start of the IeeRayz season in October or November. Thus, Mr. Noe said the change order needed to be authorized now. Mr. Noyola commented that Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 18, 2003 - Page 8 perhaps the city should have negotiated with the bid proposal offering the lowest cost. City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes as follows: 10. MOTION NO. 2003-414 Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute Change Order No. 5 with Fulton Coastcon, Joint Venture, of Corpus Christi, Texas in the amount of $363,609 for the ice rink chiller unit for the Multi-Purpose Arena. The foregoing motion was passed and approved by the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye"; Kelly abstained. Mayor Neal referred to Item 20, and a motion was made, seconded and passed to open the public heating on the following zoning case: 20. Case No. 0603-04, Paul S. Vera: A change of zoning from a "R-lB" One-family Dwelling District and "B-I" Neighborhood Business District with a "SP" Special Permit to a "B-4" General Business District on Laguna Acres, Block 1, Lot 12 and a portion of Lot 11, located at the southeast comer of Home Road and Teresa Street. (Tabled on 08/26/03) City Secretary Chapa said the Planning Commission and staffrecommended the denial of the "B-4" District, and in lieu thereof, approval ora revised Special Permit on Lot 12 to include a portion of Lot 11 to allow the auto repair use limited to minor and major auto repair and to correct the building expansion setback subject to a site plan and 10 conditions. Mr. Michael Gunning, Director of Planning, provided a brief history on the case. He noted that at the August 26, 2003 meeting, the Council had tabled this case to November 18, 2003 to allow Mr. Vera to make the necessary changes to his property to bring it into compliance with all city codes. He said the applicant was advised by the Council that it was imperative that he bring his property into full compliance on or before today's meeting. He stated that Code Enforcement was instructed to make periodic inspections of the subject property to determine if reasonable progress had been made. As of November 11, 2003, Mr. Gunning said Code Enforcement had reported that the following conditions of the first special permit had not been met: landscaping; complete fencing of property; and removal of all non-operable property. He also provided photographs illustrating the condition of the property. Mr. Gunning said he also knew that Mr. Vera was conducting break tests on heavy vehicles on Teresa Street which could potentially damage that street and that he was not complying with the required hours of operation. Thus, Mr. Gunning concluded that staffwas recommending the denial of the permit. Mayor Neal asked for public comment. Mr. Paul Vera stated that he had completed all the work required to bring his property into compliance. Mayor Neal replied that staff's presentation indicated the contrary. Mr. George Oresco, Code Enforcement Administrator, reported that Mr. David De La Cruz, Property Advisor, was assigned to this case. He stated the Mr. Vera had made Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 18, 2003 - Page 9 significant progress in meeting the code requirements; however, there was much more work to be done before full compliance with the city code was met. Mr. Garrett asked Mr. Gunning if Mr. Vera was being asked to comply with any regulations which were above and beyond those required of any other similar business. Mr. Gunning replied negatively. Mr. Garrett asked if Mr. Vera would be required to close down his business if the Council were to deny his special permit today. Mr. Gunning replied affirmatively. Mr. Garrett asked Mr. Oresco if Mr. Vera had cooperated with Code Enforcement. Mr. Oresco replied that since the case had been assigned to Code Enforcement on September 22, 2003, Mr. Vera had been cooperative and had complied with the majority of the requirements. Mr. Garrett asked if Mr. Oresco thought that Mr. Vera would ever fully comply with the city code requirements. Mr. Oresco replied that he could not say. He did comment, however, that Code Enforcement had been meeting with Mr. Vera on a weekly basis just to get to this point, and he did not believe staff could continue doing so. Mr. Kinnison remarked that the photos Mr. Gunning presented, dated October 29, 2003, did not seem to indicate that Mr. Vera was making an effort to meet the 90-day extension. He said it seemed that there were some improvements made in the two-week period after October 29, but now it appeared to be sliding back into disrepair. Mr. Oresco replied that the condition of the property had improved significantly, but most of the improvements had not been made until the end of October, even though the 90-day extension had been granted back in August. Mr. Kinnison felt this was cause for concern. Mr. Kelly remembered considering this case when he was a member of the Planning Commission in 2000. Mr. Gunning replied that the Planning Commission had recommended the approval of the special permit in 2000, and the Council had granted the permit. Mr. Kelly asked what the level of compliance with the provisions of the special permit had been since then. Mr. Gunning replied that he did not believe Mr. Vera had done anything to reach compliance. Mr. Kelly remarked that Mr. Vera has been given numerous chances over the years to bring his property into compliance, but has only come into partial compliance now. Mr. Noyola told Mr. Vera that he had been advised to comply with all the requirements to get a special permit, yet he had only reached partial compliance. Mr. Vera replied that the poor weather had prevented him from meeting the deadline. Mr. Noyola answered that the real problem seemed to be that Mr. Vera had waited too long before beginning the work. Mr. Noyola stated that although the business was in his district, Mr. Vera's inability to bring the property into full compliance by the deadline made it difficult for him to support granting the special permit. Mr. Colmenero remarked that the Council had made a commitment to cleaning up the neighborhoods in the city. He told Mr. Vera that the Council would not stand for any more violations from anyone. He told Mr. Vera that because he had not brought his property into full compliance, he was very close to losing his business. Mr. Chesney asked what percentage of compliance Mr. Vera had reached to date. Mr. Oresco replied that he believed it was approximately 70 percent. Mr. Chesney remarked that it appeared that Mr. Vera had made a sincere effort to make improvements to his property. He did not Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 18, 2003 - Page 10 think, however, that it was appropriate to have Code Enforcement visit the property on a weekly basis. He said Mr. Vera should meet the requirements without the extra supervision or risk losing his business. Mr. Chesney asked Mr. Victor Medina, an engineer Mr. Vera hired to assist him, what his assessment was of Mr. Vera's efforts to comply with the Council's mandate. Mr. Medina replied that he thought Mr. Vera had met over 90 percent of the requirements. He added that Mr. Vera had begun working on the improvements before October by hiring a landscaper and a striping company. He said, however, that the landscaper was not able to complete the work on time because of the rainy weather. He also noted that Mr. Vera could only have the work done on weekends when his parking lot was empty. Mr. Chesney felt this was a plausible argument, but he stressed that if the Council were to grant Mr. Vera another extension, this would be the last chance the Council would give him to fully comply with the requirements. Mr. Scott remarked that he found it odd that Mr. Medina would allow the landscaper to incorrectly execute the job when the Council had been led to believe it was his responsibility to ensure that all the improvements would be made by the deadline. Mr. Scott expressed his frustration that this case has been a problem for so many years. He said it seemed like Mr. Vera had made a sincere attempt to make the necessary improvements this time, but it was difficult to give Mr. Vera the benefit of the doubt based on the city's experience dealing with him over the years. Mr. Scott emphasized that he did not want to spend any more of the city's time dealing with this code enforcement issue. He told Mr. Vera that he was in support of tabling the case until December 16 to allow him to fully comply with the necessary requirements. He stressed that he would not hesitate to deny the special permit if Mr. Vera had not met the all the improvements by or on December 16. Ms. Cooper also spoke in support of tabling the case until December 16. She told Mr. Vera that the Council would not grant him another extension. She told Mr. Medina that if he represented Mr. Vera, it was incumbent upon him to ensure that Mr. Vera met the requirements or that he understood that his business would be closed down if he didn't. Mr. Kelly spoke against tabling the Vera case. He expressed his frustration that although his constituents have told him that cleaning up the city should be a high priority, Mr. Vera was about to be given yet another chance to come into compliance, despite the fact that his property has been in violation for many years. A motion was made, seconded and passed to close the public hearing. Mayor Neal asked for clarification on what the Council was voting on today. Acting City Attorney Reining replied that if the Council were to vote against the Planning Commission and staff's recommendation, then Mr. Vera would have to shut down his operation because it would be unauthorized in a "B-I" district. Mayor asked how long Mr. Vera would be shut down. Mr. Reining replied that his business could not reopen until the property was rezoned. Mr. Gunning said there was an automatic 12-month waiting period on any rezoning request on any portion of the property. Mr. Noyola said he would make a motion to table the case until December 16. He emphasized, however, that when the case came before the Council at that time, Mr. Vera would be expected to have fully complied with all the requirements without the weekly visits fi.om Code Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 18, 2003 - Page 11 Enforcement. He asked that staffmake a recommendation to deny or approve the special permit on December 16, and the Council would vote upon the matter without discussion. Mr. Noyola made a motion to table the case until December 16, seconded by Ms. Cooper. Mr. Chapa polled the Council for their votes, and the motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye"; Neal, Kelly and Kiunison, voting "No". Mayor Neal called for a brief recess to conduct a swearing-in ceremony for new board and committee appointees. The Council returned from recess. Mayor Neal deviated from the agenda and referred to Item 23, a presentation on the South Padre Island Drive (SPID) Traffic Congestion Study. Assistant City Manager Ron Massey introduced Mr. Bryan Wood, Acting District Director of TXDoT, who would be making the presentation. Mr. Wood commented that SPID was one of the major corridors in the city and, consequently, was also one of the most congested corridors. He said the roadway was approximately 30 years old and had served the city well, but was now becoming inadequate. Thus, Mr. Wood said TXDoT wanted to improve SPID, so they hired Texas Transportation Institute (TTI) about 18 months ago to conduct a study. He said one of their main concerns was what changes needed to be made in light of the Crosstown Extension project and the Interchange Project, which TXDoT thought would have a major impact on SPID. Mr. Wood asked Mr. Russell Henk with TTI to brief the Council on the results of the study. Mr. Henk prefaced his report by thanking TXDoT for their funding support. He also thanked key staff and the members of the MPO Technical Committee, the Planning Commission, Transportation Advisory Committee, and the Chamber of Commerce for their input. Mr. Henk stated that the SPID Corridor was used by 140,000 vehicles per day, making it the largest ADT in the Corpus Christi District. Mr. Henk provided the following characteristics of SPID: congested conditions experienced six days a week; critical component of local economy (slow speeds = slow business); and SPID intersection lead the city in traffic crashes (contains 10 of top 15 crash locations). Mr. Henk provided a brief overview of the SPID study to examine improvements. He said the objective of the study was to evaluate the SH 358 Corridor fi'om SH 285 to Airline Road. He stated that they used the following procedure: traffic data collection; origin-destination study; traffic crash analysis; and traffic operation analysis. Mr. Henk furnished a summary of the Origin-Destination Study. He said the completion of the Crosstown Interchange is estimated to divert approximately 13 percent of the existing SPID traffic. At the current growth rate, SPID will return to today's volumes in five years. The Crosstown Intemhange "in place" assumed as "base case" for alternative analysis. Regarding the crash data analysis, Mr. Henk stated that the procedure used to obtain the data was an analysis of three years of DPS traffic crash data. He said the procedure included freeway Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 18, 2003 - Page 12 main-lanes, ramps and frontage roads. The results of the study indicated that rear-end collisions on freeway main-lanes near queue spill-back onto exit ramps from intersections. He said the estimated annual traffic crash cost over $28 million. For the traffic operations analysis, Mr. Henk stated that his group used the VISSIM micro- stimulation model. The network included 17 actuated/coordinated traffic signals, with 11 arterial intersections and six diamond interchanges. He said the model had to be calibrated to real world conditions, a time-consuming process, in order to obtain accurate results. He said his team used this tool to look at seven different alternatives, including freeway main-lane and ramp configuration changes. They also evaluated morning and evening peak hour conditions, focusing on the evening peak hour conditions because of higher traffic volumes and delays. Mr. Henk provided a summary of the results of the traffic operations model. He said the results indicated that it would be preferable to migrate from a yield treatment to a free-flow merge condition. He said most of the alternatives involved changing the exit ramps from a diamond- configuration to an X-ramp configuration. He discussed Alternative 2, which would involve reversing the enwance and exit ramps near at the Everhart and Eastbound SPID frontage intersection. He also discussed Alternative 5, which he said was the best alternative in terms of operations and safety. An added benefit was that there was funding already identified and available to implement this improvement. He said the operational savings were estimated to be $15 million and safety savings were estimated at $3 million. The estimated benefit/cost ratio was 3.3. He noted that these were very conservative estimates because they were based on existing traffic and "2003 dollars". He stated that Alternative 5 would carry an additional lane close to Crosstown all the way to Weber. Then the intersection would be changed from diamond-configuration to an X-ramp configuration between Weber and Everhart, essentially an entrance and exit ramp reversal. In addition, the mid-block traffic would benefit fi'om new access to the exit and entrance ramps. Thus, Mr. Henk stated that their short-term recommendation was to pursue Alternative 5 as an effective use of available funding because it would reduce network delay. The mid- to long-term recormnendations were to pursue Alternative 8 as the ultimate design to ensure freeway mobility. He said Alternative 8 was similar to Alternative 2 because it carried over the basic concept of carrying the additional lane further and reversing the ramps between Weber and Staples off SPID. He noted that a different approach was recommended between Staples and Airline, a graded ramp, because of the limited spacing in that area. In addition, Mr. Henk recommended a major multi-agency investment in SPID corridor reconstruction and associated arterial improvements. The goal would be to increase the capacity of arterials and expand use of access management techniques. Mr. Henk provided a number of additional recommendations. He noted that state and national guidelines indicate that two-way left turn lanes begin to break down around 20,000 vehicles per day. At this point, he said Weber Road had 34,000 vehicles per day (vpd), Everhart Road had 40,500 vpd and Staples had 45,000 vpd. Regarding signal spacing guidelines, Mr. Henk stated that ideally, signal spacing on major arterials should be approximately 2,640 feet. He said that Everhart and Staples currently had between 600 feet and 1,200 feet between signals. Mr. Henk stated that the driveway spacing guideline recommended access spacing on major arterials to be between 300 Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 18, 2003 - Page 13 to 500 feet. On Everhart near SPID, he said the distance was 90 feet. As a conceptual example, Mr. Henk discussed access management techniques that could be used on Everhart between McArdle and Corona, in essence creating a "superarterial". The techniques included raised median treatment, improved access density, and added capacity. He said the net result of the analysis from a safety perspective was a 50 percent reduction in the number of conflict points. In addition, the national averages for projects with this reduction yield a 25 to 50 percent reduction in mid-block crashes. From an operational standpoint, Mr. Henk stated that the total network delay would be reduced by about 44 percent, resulting in a yearly time savings for more than $3 million. Also, the analysis indicated that the average travel speed from SPID to Corona would increase from 15 mph to 22 mph. In conclusion, Mr. Henk recognized that it was not realistic to expect to completely transition to half-mile signal spacing and eliminating driveways on all the arterials. Ifa few strategic arterials could be selected, however, especially in critical areas adjacent to SPID, the community would benefit greatly. Council Member Scott asked for more information on how a superarterial could be created on Staples Street, for example. Mr. Wood replied that ideally a large number of stop lights and driveways would be eliminated. He acknowledged that this was a painful experience, but removing stop lights and driveways was not the starting place for creating a superarterial. Actually, Mr. Wood said that the starting point was a detailed planning process, including developing and adopting ordinances that require businesses to combine driveways in providing access to each business to eliminate conflict points. Council Member Kinnison asked for more information on how quickly the short-term recommendation would be implemented. Mr. Wood replied that in two years, TXDoT anticipated going to construction with project, assuming public support and no environmental conflicts. He anticipated that construction time would be about a year. Mr. Kinnison asked about the time line for the other improvements mentioned for north and south of the arterials, such as traffic lights. Mr. Wood replied that most of those streets were city streets, and deferred the question to city staff. Mr. Angel Escobar, City Engineer, replied that one of the improvements that has already been completed was to add lane delineators on Staples and Everhart, which has improved the capacity of those streets. He said adding lane delineators to other arterials would help tremendously. Mr. Kinnison asked when staff planned to implement these improvements. Mr. Escobar replied that on the CIP budget the Council would be reviewing later this afternoon, them are several million dollars allocated for the next bond program to complete future improvements. Mr. Kinnison asked if there were any other plans for improvements between now and Christmas. Assistant City Manager Massey replied that staff continued to work on signal timing. Mr. Kinnison asked if the Staples Street traffic signals were synchronized. Mr. Escobar replied affmnatively, except when a pedestrian using a crosswalk pushed a button. Mr. Kinnison asked if there were any ways to keep the lights synchronized while still allowing for pedestrian safety. Mr. Escobar replied that the crosswalks could be moved farther away. Ms. Cooper commented that it seemed that a superarterial would be created more easily on a streets like Rodd Field and Airline because they were not as developed as Staples or Everhart. Mr. Wood agreed, saying that any ordinance the city were to create regarding driveways would only affect future development. Creating a superarterial on a highly developed street like Staples would Minutes ~ Regular Council Meeting November 18, 2003 - Page 14 involve intensive negotiations between the city and the business owners affected, a painful process. Mr. Garrett commented that in his opinion, closing the first entrance into Padre Staples Mall at Staples Street would eliminate a great deal of congestion. He asked if this could be done. Mr. Wood said TXDoT has been discussing the matter with the mall manager, and he is planning to make a number of changes. Of course, Mr. Wood acknowledged that they could not force him to make this change, but if he was willing, TXDoT would offer their assistance. Mayor Neal deviated from the agenda and opened discussion on Item 28 regarding AEP Texas Central's rate change request. Mr. Steve Porter with Lloyd, Gosselink, Blevins and Rochelle, said that today's resolution would suspend a rate request that AEP Texas Central Company had filed before the Public Utility Commission on November 3, 2003. He said the 90-day suspension would allow his firm to evaluate the company's claims and its request. He said the filing was 13 volumes with 25 expert witnesses and would require some time to go through. He said 33 cities in AEP's service territory adopt the resolution before the Council today. He said the case was particularly important case because AEP was proposing to increase residential rates by 18 percent and street lighting rates would increase by 35 percent. There were no comments from the audience. City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes as follows: 28. RESOLUTION NO. 025565 Resolution suspending the effective date of AEP Texas Central Company's (formerly Central Power and Light Company) requested rate changes to permit the City time to study the request and to establish reasonable rates; approving cooperation with other cities within AEP Texas Central Company's service territory; authorizing intervention in the proceeding at the Public Utility Commission; authorizing the hiring of legal counsel and consultants; requiring reimbursement of the City's rate case expenses; and requiring notice of this resolution to the company. The foregoing resolution was passed and approved with the following vote: Neal, Chesney, Colmenero, Cooper, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, and Noyola, voting "Aye"; Scott was absent. Mayor Neal deviated from the agenda and referred to Item 21, an overview of the proposed FY 2003-2004 Capital Budget and Capital Improvement Guide (CIP). Mr. Mark McDaniel, Executive Director of Support Services, provided a general overview of the budget. He said the CIP Planning Process consisted of a long-range CIP, a short-range CIP and an annual capital budget. The long-range plan included unfunded future needs assessment beyond Year 3. The short-range CIP was a fully-funded, three-year plan. Finally, the annual capital budget was the first year of the short-range CIP. Regarding the Year 1 plan, Mr. McDaniel provided the following issues: $173.6 million in expenditures; Bond 2000 projects are substantially underway or complete; six percent utility rate increase adopted for FY 2003-04; enhanced storm water/drainage funding; water supply projects; Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 18, 2003 - Page 15 and continued funding for ADA Transition Plan. He noted that the ADA Transition Plan had been programmed beyond three years, including 2004-05 and 2005-06. He also noted that the landfill was not included for the next budget year, but staff would be presenting the Council with a variety of options next month. Regarding FY 2003-04 revenues, Mr. McDaniel reviewed a pie chart with the following highlights: Commercial Paper- $73,823,700 (43 percent); Sales Tax Bond Issues - $32,636,700 (19 percent); and FAA grant - $27,580,700 (16 percent). Regarding FY 2003-04 expenditures, Mr. McDaniel provided more detail on the utilities fund, comprised of $76,556,500 (43.9 percent) of total expenditures. The utilities portion included the following funding: storm water $33,050,000 (19 percent); wastewater $20,247,000 (11.5 percent); water $15,280,000 (nine percent); water supply $6,371,000 (3.5 percent); and gas $1,608,500 (0.9 percent). Mr. McDaniel reviewed the short-range CIP revenues and the short-range CIP expenditures in two bar graphs. He remarked that the funding stream for the three-year time period did not include any projects for Bond 2004. Mr. McDaniel noted that Year 1 expenditures were being planned primarily for drainage and storm water improvements. In Year 2, expenditures were focused for water, wastewater and seawall improvements. Mr. McDaniel provided a pie chart of the FY 2007 and beyond long-range CIP. He noted that streets were being allocated $488,375,000 or 42 percent. He said utilities comprised 41 percent of the long-range budget, or $471,263,000. For Park and Recreation projects, he said $99,286,000 was being allocated, or nine percent. Mr. McDaniel reviewed the short-range CIP budget for the Airport. He noted that terminal improvements comprised approximately 64 percent of the total. In the long-range CIP, the largest project was the runway extension, comprising 56 percent of the budget. He said the funding sources were primarily FAA grants and Passenger Facility Charges (PFC). Mr. McDaniel reviewed the Park and Recreation short-range CIP. He noted that the largest part of the budget was going toward Corpus Christi Natatorium Improvements, comprising 71 percent of the budget, or $450,000,000. He said the project was jointly funded by CCISD and the city. The city's share was 35 percent of the funding. The long-range plan included a large number of unfunded projects, ranging from $20 million in marina improvements to a third golf course and a skate park. Mayor Neal asked if the implementation of the bayfront study was included in these figures. Mr. McDaniel replied negatively, but said staff was using a "placeholder" to recognize that the project was out there. Regarding the public facilities short-range CIP, 88 percent, or $21,500,000, of the total budget was comprised by the minor league baseball stadium. The City Hall renovation project comprised 10 percent of the budget, or $2,500,000. The long-range CIP was dedicated in large part to the Southside Branch expansion (47 percent) and the Northwest Library expansion (27 percent). He also noted that the Museum improvements and the Harbor Bridge Lighting were included. Mr. McDaniel said the Coliseum was not included in the long-range C1P, but staff has set a "place holder"for it as well. Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 18, 2003 - Page 16 In reference to Public Health and Safety, the short-range CIP included the seawall, sidewalk and marina bulkhead comprised 63 percent of the budget, or $30,486,700. The new landfill or J.C. Elliott improvements were also included, comprising 37 percent or $18,134,000. The long-range CIP was focused on new Municipal Court facilities ($10,225,000 or 30 percent) and the Public Safety Training Facility, Phase 2 ($10,000,000 or 29 percent). The Streets short-range CIP was primarily comprised of the Yorktown Road project (19 percent or $2,994,800), the Home Road project (14 percent or $2,231,100), FM 624 project (17 percent or $2,776,400) and the McKinzie Road, Phase 2 project (12 percent or $1,950,400). The long-range CIP included 64 large-scale projects, with $124,000,000 (25 percent) for ADA curb ramps. He noted that these numbers did not include drainage that the Council might want to add in lieu of funding through utility rates. Council Member Noyola expressed his concern that improvements to neighborhood streets were not included in the CIP budget. Regarding Combined Utilities, Mr. McDaniel discussed the gas short-range CIP. He said the automated gas meter reading project comprised the majority of the budget, 85 percent or $3,500,000. The gas long-range CIP included the automated gas meter reading program, budgeted at $7,000,000 or 57 percent. Regarding the storm water short-range CIP, Mr. McDaniel noted that the candidate storm water drainage projects comprised 89 percent or $37,800,000 of the budget. The storm water long-range CIP was primarily composed of the Water Street Pump Station construction at 39 percent or $18,500,000. Regarding the wastewater short-range CIP, the major project was the New Broadway Plant and Diversion, comprising $20,450,000 or 32 percent of the budget. He noted that the Broadway Plant was also a major component of the long-range CIP at $40,00,000 or 25 percent of the budget. The water short-range CIP consisted of additional water supply to Padre/Mustang Island at 34 percent or $18,550,000 and 18 percent or $9,338,000 for improvements to the O.N. Stevens Plant. Mr. McDaniel stated that a large portion of the long-range CIP was comprised of improvements to the O.N. Stevens Plant (59 percent or $86,078,000). Regarding the water supply short-range CIP, he noted that there were aggressive measures included for the engineering for the Garwood Water Supply pipeline ($7,500,000 or 36 percent). The Padre Island Desalination Facility was also a major project, budgeted at $5,000,000 or 48 percent. He noted that the Governor's Desalination Project funding was yet to be determined. In summary, Mr. McDaniel remarked that the proposed CIP was reviewed by the Planning Commission. They recommended one amendment to the streets section to include a Phase 3 on Wooldridge Road from Rodd Field to the terminus (Victoria Park area). Mayor Neal remarked that the CIP budget included provisions for improvements for storm water drainage and streets to some degree. However, Mayor Neal was concerned that although the citizens had identified these areas as priority needs, he did not feel that the proposed CIP addressed their concerns about the poor conditions of neighborhood streets. He was concerned that the CIP projects would not be attractive to the voters during the Bond 2004 election. City Manager Noe replied that staff needed direction from the Council in terms of how much money they wanted to spend - e.g. $5 million a year over three years for streets. He said once the Council decided on a Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 18, 2003 - Page 17 target amount, staff could develop some estimates on the highest priority residential street construction projects. Mayor Neal replied that Council needed guidelines on breaking down the numbers and allowing the Council to identi~ which street projects were needed in their district. Mr. McDaniel discussed the Proposed Bond 2004 budget. He said the proposed FY 2004 CIP guide including the following project categories and costs: streets - $488,375,000; ADA improvements - $124,000,000; public facilities - $7,421,000; public health and safety - $33,190,000; parks and recreation - $99,286,000; storm water - $48,000,000; for a total of $800,272,000. Mr. McDaniel discussed the following bond sizing considerations: large vs. small; affordability; project management; market saturation; utility rates; and bond rating/interest rate. He reviewed the Bond 2004 tentative timeline/process. He highlighted the following process considerations: citizen involvement; project development; timing; and information campaign. Finally, he noted that on December 9, the Council was scheduled to consider the first reading of the CIP, followed by the second reading on December 16. Mr. Garrett asked if the airport was able to accommodate all large aircraft now. Mr. Dave Hamrick, Director of Aviation, replied negatively, saying that the runway was too short to accommodate large cargo aircraft. Mr. Kinnison remarked that the current proposed Bond 2004 was only meeting 30 percent of the city's short-term needs over 17 years, which he did not think would be attractive to the voters. He noted that this estimate assumed no tax increase and 3 percent growth. He felt it was time to raise the bar and ask the voters to pick and choose the projects. He also said the city needed to be candid with voters and inform them that other tax increases would follow in order to meet the operational and capital costs. Mayor Neal asked staffto arrange a workshop at noon on December 16 meeting to discuss Bond 2004 in more detail. Mayor Neal referred to Item 21, and a motion was made, seconded and passed to open the public hearing on the following item: 21. Public hearing on FY 2003-2004 Capital Budget and CIP Guide There were no comments from the audience. A motion was made, seconded and passed to close the public hearing. Mayor Neal called for a brief recess. The Council returned from recess. Mayor Pro Tem Chesney referred to Item 22, and a motion was made, seconded and passed to open the public hearing on the following item: 22.a. Public hearing to consider adopting the Mustang-Padre Island Area Development Plan, an element of the Comprehensive Plan, for purposes of defining the City's Comprehensive Plan Policies on Mustang and Padre Island for protection of the environment, future land use, transportation, public services, dune protection, beach access, Packery Channel, and capital improvements. Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 18, 2003 - Page 18 Mr. Gunning asked Mr. Bob Payne, Senior City Planner, to provide a brief presentation on the plan highlights. Mr. Payne said the overall goal of the plan was to assist in transforming Mustang and Padre Islands into a world-renowned tourist, resort and residential community. Mr. Payne explained that a Stakeholders Group was formed to assist in developing this plan. He noted that two of the members, a representative from the Padre Island Business Association and Planning Commissioner Richard Smith, were in the audience today. He stated that the Stakeholders Group was composed of residents, business leaders, environmentalists and others. The role of the Stakeholders Group was to help identify the issues the plan should address in this area. A drafl plan was created, and the Stakeholders Group was invited to assist in drafting the plan. He said that Planning Commission and various city boards were also asked to review the plan and make recommendations. Mr. Payne commented that the plan covered the entire island area, including the causeway. He said it was 48 square mile area with an abundance of wetlands, tidal flats and other environmentally sensitive areas. He stated that the area was probably the fastest growing area in the community, averaging a 12 percent annual growth rate. Staff believes the area could ultimately support a population of 40,000 to 50,000. Mr. Payne provided the following age characteristics of the area: 0-20 years of age (yoa) - 16 percent; 21-64 yoa - 70 percent; and 65 and over yoa - 14 percent. The median income for the area is $60,200 versus $36,400 citywide. The median home value is approximately $216,000. Mr. Payne discussed the following plan highlights regarding the environment: 62 percent of this area is publicly held and cannot be developed; site plan review; and encourage voluntary protection of wetlands through incentives, including higher development densities. Regarding land use, Mr. Payne stated that the plan would support the following futura land use patterns: commercial with good access and high visibility; protection of residential activities from incompatible activities; higher intensity activities at major arterial intersections; medium intensity activities at arterial/collector intersections; prohibit industrial uses on the island; and wherever practical, place utilities underground. With regard to urban design elements, Mr. Payne stated the plan encouraged high quality of development for the island, comparable to the downtown area. Council Member Garrett asked what criteria was used to select the members of the Stakeholders Group. Mr. Payne ~eplied that staff sought representation from residents, developers, engineers and property owners. Mr. Garrett asked who was responsible for selecting the members of the group. Mr. Payne replied that staffcontacted the individuals. Mr. Noe added that staffalso sought out representatives from the Padre Island Property Owners Association and similar organizations. Mr. Garrett asked why the Asset Development Corporation was not included in the group. Mr. Payne replied that they were the first organization that staffcontacted and had provided a draft proposal. Mr. Payne stated that there must have been a misunderstanding, however, because the corporation representative they spoke with declined to discuss the plan, saying it was too Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 18, 2003 - Page 19 premature. He said the corporation had expressed interest in participating recently and staff was involving them. He noted that staff had spoken with the group in the summer and had made an effort to accommodate their needs in the plan. Mr. Garrett expressed concern that staffdid not make more of an effort to involve the Asset Development Corporation. City Manager Noe replied that staff did make an effort to contact them and provided a draft to the designated consultant for the group several months ago in an effort to get their input. Mr. Garrett again expressed concern that the Council was being asked to approve this plan without including the input of one of the largest landholders in the area. Mr. Noe replied that he had told Mr. Schexnailder that staff certainly wanted his comments and feedback. He said during the process, he had asked staff on a number of occasions about the compatibility of the plan with Mr. Schexnailder's development plans. Mr. Noe stated that any suggestions Mr. Schexnailder had could be incorporated into the second reading of the ordinance. Mr. Garrett said he appreciated that, because he could not vote to approve the plan if he did not feel certain that everyone had been involved, especially a large property owner like Mr. Schexnailder. Mayor Pro Tem Chesney asked if the meetings were publicized. City Manager Noe replied affirmatively. Mr. Pa)me clarified that notices were published in the paper for the presentations to the boards and commissions. Mayor Pro Tern Chesney stated that he was also concerned that Mr. Schexnailder's group was not involved in the discussions, but he appreciated staff's comments today that they would make an effort to do so. Mayor Pro Tem Chesney asked for public comment. Mr. Paul Schexnailder, principal of Asset Development Corporation, said that he had met with staff yesterday and the meeting went well. He stated that he did not receive a copy of the plan nor did his representative, although his representative acknowledged that he receives many plans. He expressed concern that the plan would be approved prior to his group finishing the first level for the rest of the island. He also noted the following concerns about the canal site, the service road and the mixed use zoning. He asked that his consultant group Cooper Robertson be allowed to complete their plan before the Council finalize the city's plan. Mayor Pro Tem Chesney asked how much time Mr. Schexnailder would need. Mr. Schexnailder replied that at a minimum, he would need approximately 45 to 60 days. Mr. Scott spoke in favor of giving Mr. Schexnailder this amount of time. City Manager Noe recommended adopting the plan on first reading and then make any changes before the second reading in 60 days. Mayor Pro Tern Chesney called for a brief recess to allow for petitions from the audience. Mayor Pro Tem Chesney called for petitions from the audience. Mr. John Arguell, 4940 Shadow Bend, spoke regarding his concerns about the city's retiree insurance administrator, Benefits Advantage. Ms. Dee Huber, 1311 15th Street, spoke regarding her concerns about utility rate increases. Mr. Leo Vrana, 4210 Courthouse Oak Court, spoke about the possibility of changing the name of the Harbor Bridge to the Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge. Mr. Ram Chavez, 1642 Sandalwood, spoke in support of Mr. Vrana's idea. Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 18, 2003 - Page 20 Mayor Pro Tem Chesney resumed the public hearing on the Mustang Padre Island Area Development Plan. Mr. Richard Smith, 13849 Doubloon, spoke in support of the plan, saying it was a fair representation of the Island's needs. He also spoke in support of postponing the final reading of the plan to allow for Mr. Schexnailder's input. A motion was made, seconded and passed to close the public hearing. Mr. Gunning stated that staffhad looked at Mr. Schexnailder's plan and did not want the development plan to have nay adverse effects on his development. Mr. Scott made a motion was made, seconded by Mr. Garrett, to adopt the first reading and bring the plan back for a second reading in no more than 60 days. The motion passed unanimously (Neal and Cooper were absent). City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes as follows: 22.b. FIRST READING ORDINANCE Amending the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Corpus Christi ("The City") by adopting the Mustang-Padre Island Area Development Plan; defining the City's Comprehensive Plan Policies on Mustang and Padre Island for protection of the environment, future land use, transportation, public services, dune protection, beach access, Packery Channel and capital improvements. The foregoing ordinance was passed and approved on its first reading with the following vote: Chesney, Colmenero, Garrett, Kelly, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott, voting "Aye"; Neal and Cooper were absent. Mayor Pro Tem Chesney deviated from the agenda and opened discussion on Item 29, regarding the Water System Interactive Hydraulic Model. Assistant City Manager Massey introduced Mr. Dan Leyendecker with LNV Engineering, to provide a presentation. Mr. Leyendecker stated that the overall project goal was to develop hydraulic modeling tools to do the following: support macro decision making in response to new major water users; support decision making with regard to other utility projects; assist with system performance diagnostics; support responses to management questions; system operation optimization; support emergency responses; ASR feasibility evaluation and potential furore operational control; and provide water quality prediction. Mr. Leyendecker stated that the hydraulic modeling sof~ware had a GIS based user interface and was EPANET compatible. There were no comments from the audience. A motion was made, seconded and passed unanimously (Neal, Cooper and Garrett were absent) to approve the following motion: 29. MOTION NO. 2003-420 Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a consultant contract with Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 18, 2003 - Page 21 LNV Engineering, of Corpus Christi, Texas for a total fee not to exceed of $507,157 for the Water System Interactive Hydraulic Model and Analysis Project. Before moving to the next item on the agenda, Mayor Pro Tem Chesney made a motion directing the City Manager to prepare and schedule the necessary public hearings and consideration by the Planning Commission amendments to the City's Zoning Ordinance to increase the size of temporary non-illuminated signs pertaining to the lease, hire, or sale of improved residential properties from four (4) square feet to six (6) square feet, which would include any riders; to allow the use of letter-sized flyer boxes on improved and vacant residential properties; to allow the use of temporary non-illuminated signs pertaining to the lease, hire, or sale of vacant residential lots that are less than three (3) acres if the sign is not larger than six (6) square feet, which would include any riders; to allow the use of temporary non-illuminated signs that are not larger thanl6 square feet pertaining to the lease, hire, or sale of vacant residential lots that are at least three (3) acres but less than five (5) acres; and to allow the use of temporary non-illuminated signs that are not larger than 32 square feet pertaining to the lease, hire, or sale of vacant residential lots that are at least five (5) acres. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously (Neal and Cooper were absent). Mayor Pro Tem Chesney referred to the rest of the presentations on the day's agenda. It was decided that Item 24, a Street Services update, could be postponed to a future meeting due to the late hour. Mayor Pro Tem Chesney referred to Item 25, a Utility Re-Engineering Update. Assistant City Massey stated that the water and wastewater plants had made progress in the last six months in the following areas: started skill-based pay pilot and continued improving work management processes. He also stated that the water department is holding controllable costs to 1995 levels. He noted that the O.N. Stevens Plant had cut its overtime by more than 50 percent in 2002 and was keeping overtime at the new, lower level. He also said the Water Department was improving backlog management by planning more work in advance. He stated that wastewater treatment was holding staff costs at 1994-95 levels and improving documentation and practices (balancing completed and new work orders). Mr. Massey discussed the following progress made in distribution, collection, storm water and gas over the last six month: went "live" on integrated GIS and MAXIMO and other processes. He said ongoing activities were integrating HTE (billing) with MAXIMO and integrating PeopleSof~ Inventory with MAXIMO. He said that as of the last update in June 2003, new SCADA, GIS and WMS integration had been implemented and intranet access was available. Mr. Massey said the next steps in the Re-engineering Program were in the following areas: Call Center; streets and solid waste collection; facility management; park and recreation; integration with utility SCADA; and piloting computers in the field. Mr. Colmenero asked if there were any security measures to protect the confidentiality of the information. Ms. Nancy Learner, Managing Partner with EMA, Inc., replied that all the users have private passwords and the database had security measures built in. Mr. Noyola asked if positions were being eliminated by attrition. Mr. Massey answered affirmatively. Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 18, 2003 - Page 22 Mayor Pro Tem Chesney opened discussion on Item 26 regarding a contract for a Computerized Maintenance Management System. There were no comments from the audience. A motion was made, seconded and passed unanimously (Neal and Cooper were absent) to approve the following motion: 26. MOTION NO. 2003-418 Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute Amendment No. 2 to the contract with EMA, Inc., of Tucson, Arizona in the amount of $1,090,000 for next phase implementation of the Computerized Maintenance Management System. Mayor Pro Tem Chesney opened discussion on Item 27 regarding the Multi Purpose Arena seating package. City Secretary Chapa announced that Mr. Kelly would be abstaining from the vote and discussion on this item. City Manager Noe noted that the seating package bid was under the estimate of $1.8 million. Mr. Kinnison asked about the quality of the seats. Mr. Noe replied that there were three types of seating. The bulk of the seating has a plastic seat while the premium seating is padded. He said the seating in the suites is larger and has wooden arms. He said the premium seating and the club seats had cup holders. Mr. Kevin Stowers added that cup holders could be added to all the seats later if the Council wished. A motion was made, seconded and passed unanimously (Neal and Cooper were absent; Kelly abstained) to approve the following motion: 27. MOTION NO. 2003-419 Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a seating package contract with Irwin Seating Company, of Grand Rapids, Michigan in an amount not to exceed $1,230,504.75 for the Corpus Christi Bayfront Multi-Purpose Arena Seating Package. Mayor Pro Tem Chesney noted that Item 30 had been withdrawn. 30. WITHDRAWN Minutes - Regular Council Meeting November 18, 2003 - Page 23 Mayor Pro Tem Chesney called for the City Manager's report. City Manager Noe stated that staff would be briefing the County Commissioners on the status of Packery Channel. He said the next Council meeting would be on December 9 beginning at 2:00 p.m. He said the following items were scheduled on the agenda: animal control, Southside area Development Plan, the ADA transition plan and the capital budget. He said that on December 16, the Council would be considering the coliseum re-use plans and the second reading for the capital budget. Mayor Pro Tem Chesney asked if staffwould be providing a report on the county's request regarding the jail funding. City Manager Noe replied that staffmet this morning to discuss the final meeting of the joint committee this Thursday. He said staff would provide a report in December on the county's proposal and staff's recommendation. Mayor Pro Tern Chesney wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving. Mayor Pro Tem Chesney called for Council concerns and reports. Council Member Garrett spoke regarding the new Fire Station No. 16. He asked if TXDoT could put up some signage to inform the public that they were approaching a fire station. Mr. Kinnison said that everyone's thoughts and prayers were with the wounded police officers and their families, as well as the entire police force. Mr. Colmenero stated that it appeared the issue regarding the construction on Ayers adversely affecting the merchants in the area had been resolved. Mr. Escobar replied that the construction would be completed to a point before Thanksgiving, and then resume after the first of the year. He also thanked staff for keeping the Council informed on the neighborhood initiative program. There being no further business to come before the Council, Mayor Pro Tem Chesney adjourned the Council meeting at 6:45 p.m. on November 18, 2003. 2 NO ATTACHMENT FOR THIS ITEM 3 NO ATTACHMENT FOR THIS ITEM 4 AGENDA MEMORANDUM RECOMMENDATION: Motion approving a supply agreement with National Water Works, Corpus Christi, Texas for approximately 2,974 ductile iron mechanical joint, flanged and swivel fittings and approximately 5,100 related accessories in accordance with Bid Invitation No. BI- 0015-04, based on low total bid for an estimated annual expenditure of $26,182.95. The term of the contract is for twelve months with options to extend for up to two additional twelve-month periods, subject to the approval of the contractor and the City Manager, or his designee. These items are purchased into the Warehouse Inventory and charged out to the Water and Wastewater Departments. BACKGROUND: Purpose: These items are used by the Water and Wastewater Department for construction and maintenance of utility lines. Previous Contract: The option to extend the current contract was not exercised due to supplier's inability to maintain contract pricing, requiring new bids to be received. Bid Invitations issued: Fifteen Bids Received: Four Price Analysis: Pricing has decreased 16% since the last contract of 2001. Award Basis: Low Total Bid. Funding: Warehouse Dept. Procur~mXent and Get 119010-5010-00000 Services Manager $ 26,182.95 BID TABULATION BI-0015-04 DUCTILE IRON MECHANICAL JOINTS, FLANGED OR SWIVEL FITTINGS AND MECHANICAL JOINTS ACCESSORIES 2,974 ductile iron mechanical joint, flanged and swivel fittings 5,100 accessories CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI PURCHASING DIVISION BUYER: GABRIEL MALDONADO Descdption 1. FLANGED FITTINGS (all ends flanged) 2. SWIVEL JOINT HYDRANT Ftl~*INGS 3. BENDS 4. OFFSETS (nominal diameter x offset) 5. MJ CAPS and PLUGS 6. REDUCERS 7. MJ x MJ SOLID SLEEVES (pipe size x length) 8. MJ TEES (all ends MJ) (run x branch) 9. MJ DUCTILE IRON RETAINER GLANDS for ductile iron pipe. EBAA Iron Sales series 100 or equal. 10. MJ ACCESSORIES Accessory pack consists of gasket, gland, bolts and nuts. ~lafional Waterwod~s 3orpus Chdsti, Texas Extended Price $31210 3,463.79 3,834.63 969.79 1,621.14 94.50 2,489.35 280.00 5,45515 7,662.50 Hughes Supply, Inc. San Antonio, Texas Extended Price $374.50 1,945.30 113.40 2,987.25 336.00 6,551.65 Ferguson Enterprises In Corpus Christi, Texas Extended Pdce $741.40 4,220.24 4,598.09 1,318.13 2,984.80 335.76 6,544.00 9,261.15 Titan Pipe & Supply 3orpus Chdsfi, Texas Extended Pdce $380.50 4,069.70 4,977.60 953.50 1,974.55 117.75 3,031.50 341.20 10,244.25 Total Low Bid ~26~182.95 $30,815.41 $32,060.58 $32,751.55 5 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM RECOMMENDATION: Motion approving a supply agreement for hot tap fittings in accordance with Bid Invitation No. BI-0010-04 with T. D. Williamson, Tulsa, Oklahoma, based on sole source, for an estimated annual expenditure of $26,306. The term of the supply agreement will be for twelve months with an option to extend for up to two additional twelve- month periods subject to the approval of the supplier and the City Manager or his designee. Funds are available from the warehouse inventory account for FY03-04. Purpose: Previous Contract: Pricing Analysis: The fittings are inventoried at the warehouse and used by the Gas Department. They are used to tap into existing pressurized natural gas lines to block offa section of line in need of repair or to add an additional line for a new gas service. The option to extend the previous contract was not exercised due to the vendor's inability to maintain contract pricing. Pricing has increased approximately 5% since the last contract of 2002. According to the supplier, the increase is due to the rising cost of materials. Award Basis: Sole Source T. D. Williamson is the only manufacturer that satisfies the Gas Department's safety requirements for hot tap fittings. The reliability of the fittings is a critical factor in the overall function of the product. The fittings are installed under hazardous conditions, which could result in an unexpected explosion. Installation of fittings, which have an unreliable history, jeopardizes the lives of employees and compromises the integrity of the gas distribution system. T. D. Williamson fittings have been field tested and installed throughout the gas distribution system and have proven to be a highly reliable, quality product. Funding: Warehouse Inventory 119400-5010-40000 pMrioCchua; m ~ean~a~acl CGff~eMr ~l~e rvice s Manage r $26,306 CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI PURCHASING DIVISION BID TABULATION 9/5/03 Bid Invitation No. BI-0010-04 Hot Tap Fittings Buyer: Maria Garza ITEM DESCRIPTION QTY UNIT 1.1 2" Shortstop 192 each 1.2 4" Shortstop 36 each 1.3 6" Shortstop 12 each 1.4 8" Shortstop 2 each 1.5 2" Three Way Stopple 180 each T. D. VVILLIAMSON, INC. TULSA, OK UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE $25.00 $4,800.00 184.00 6,624.00 332.00 3,984.00 589.00 1,178.00 54.00 9,720.00 $26.306.00 TOTAL: T. D. Williamson is the only manufacturer that satisfies the Gas Department's safety requirements for hot tap fittings. The reliability of the fittings is a critical factor in the overall function of the product. The fittings are installed under hazardous conditions, which could result in an unexpected explosion. Installation of fittings, which have an unreliable history, jeopardizes the lives of employees and compromises the integrity of the gas distribution system. T. D. Williamson fittings have been field tested and installed throughout the gas distribution system and have proven to be a highly reliable, quality product. 6 AGENDA MEMORANDUM RECOMMENDATION: Motion approving a maintenance agreement with Medtronic Physio- Control Corporation, Redmond, Washington, for testing and calibrating of automatic extemai defibrillators for the Fire Department-EMS, based on sole source, for a total amount of $30,602. Funds have been budgeted by the Fire Department in FY03-04. BACKGROUND: The maintenance agreement is for testing and calibrating forty- three (43) Lifepak automatic external defibrillators for the Fire Department - EMS. Price Analysis: The maintenance cost per unit has remained stable since the last contract of 2003. Award Basis: Sole Source Medtronic Physio-Control Corporation is the manufacturer of the Lifepak series of cardiac defibrillator/monitors and the sole maintenance provider of the equipment. Fire Dept.-EMS 530230-4680-35100 $30,602 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Corpus Christi Fire Department EMS Division Memorandum Mike Barerra, Purchasing Agent John Murray, EMS Director October 29, 2003 Maintenance Agreement for Monitor/Defibrillators and AEDs Attached is a Technical Service Support Agreement and a requisition for the proposed renewal of our current maintenance agreement for all the electronic monitors utilized by the Corpus Christi Fire Department. The maintenance agreement is for the per/od January 15, 2004 through January 14, 2005. The schedule of equipment includes four LifePak 12 monitor/defibrillators, eight LifePak 10 monitor/defibrillators, twenty LifePak 300 Automatic External Defibrillators, and ten L_~fePak 500 Automatic External Defibrillators being utilized with the EMS Division of the Corpus Christi Fire Department. The total cost of this agreement is $30,602.00. Medtronic Physio-Control is the original equipment manufacturer and provides the only factory authorized service on the covered equipment. As such, we would content that this proposal represents a sole source service agreement. The funding to cover the expense of this agreement is available in the approved budget (Fund//4680, Organization #35100, Account #530230 Equipment Maintenance). Their are two copies of the agreement, one for Medtronic Physio-Control and one for the City. The packet contains a self addressed, postage paid envelop to permit one of the originals to be mailed to Medtronic Physio-Control. We would appreciate your forwarding a copy of the agreement for our files. Should you require additional information, please contact me at your convenience. Corpus Christi Fire Department 7 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM RECOMMENDATION: Motion approving a supply agreement with Miller Environmental Services, Corpus Christi, Texas for storm water inlet cleaning in accordance with Bid Invitation No. BI-0005-04, based on only bid for an estimated annual expenditure of $447,258. The term of the contract will be for twelve months with an option to extend for up to two additional twelve- month periods, subject to the approval of the supplier and the City Manager or his designee. Funds have been budgeted by the Storm Water Department in FY 03-04. Purpose: This contract will contribute towards providing a proactive approach to maintaining the storm water drainage system throughout the City. Ten predefined areas will be covered under this contract. The contractor will be required to clean debris that has accumulated in the storm water inlets and up to ten feet of lateral pipe that connects to the inlets. Removing the debris will allow for adequate drainage during heavy rains. City crews will concentrate their efforts on other areas of the City ensuring the entire system remains clean and clear of debris. Previous Contract: The option to extend the previous contract was not exercised due to revisions made to the specifications. Bid Invitations Issued: 4 Bids Received: Pricing Analysis: Pricing has increased from $46.50 to $69 per inlet. The increase is partially due to new specification requirements regarding the contractor assuming the responsibility of disposing of the mud, silt, and debris removed from the inlets, and an increased number of inlets covered under the contract. Award Basis: Only Bid Of the three other bidders on the list, one does not do this type of work, the other is no longer in business and the third failed to return our call. Miller Environmental Services was the successful bidder under the last contract awarded in 1999 and their service under the contract was excellent. Fundine: Storm Water Mich~a~era: C~>.M~. Procurement and Gen~ Se~ices M~ager $447,258 CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI PURCHASING DEPARTMENT BID TABULATION 09/24/2003 Bid Invitation No. BI-0005-04 Storm Water Inlet Service Buyer: Maria Garza Vendor QTY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE Miller Environmental Services, Inc. Corpus Christi, Texas Standby Rate: $41.25 per 15 minute interval 6,482 Inlets $69.00 $447,258.00 8 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM RECOMMENDATION: Motion approving the purchase of an IP telephone system for the new Animal and Vector Control Facility from Logicalls, Houston Texas in accordance with the State of Texas Cooperative Purchasing Program for a total amount of $46,694.39. Funds have been budgeted by the MIS Department in FY03-04. Purpose: This contract will include the supply and installation of twenty-six IP telephones, fax lines, and data connections to the City's network. Basis of Award: State of Texas Cooperative Purchasing Program-Catalog Information Systems Vendor. Funding: MIS Oper~ing Budget 550050-5210-40480 550050-5210-40450 pMr ioCch~a-;lm~Be na~r ~a~C~ne~; a~ 'S e r vic e s Manager $22,694.39 24,000.00 9 AGENDA MEMORANDUM City Council Action Date: December 9, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Motion authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to execute a construction contract with Jhabores Construction Company of Corpus Christi, Texas, in the amount of $67,707.50 for the Clarkwood Road Gravity Sewer Extension for Base Bid B. ISSUE: This project is necessary to comply with city policy governing provision of wastewater service. It will provide requested service through cost effective and efficient means to several residents who live within I00 feet of an existing sanitary sewer line. FUNDING: Funding is available through the FY 02-03 Wastewater Capital Improvement Budget. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the motion as presented so a construction contract may be issue and work may begin. ,~6ge~ R. Escobar, P.E., ' 'Director of Engineering Services Director of Wastewater Services Additional Support Material: Exhibit "A" Background Information Exhibit "B" Project Budget Exhibit 'C" Bid Tab Exhibit "D" Location Map AGENDA MEMORANDUM ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION SUBJECT: Clarkwood Road Gravity Sewer Extension for Base Bid B (Project #7171) PRIOR COUNCIL ACTION: 1. December 17, 2002 - Ordinance approving the FY 2002-2003 Capital Improvement Program (Ordinance No. 025144). PRIOR ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION: None FUTURE COUNCIL ACTION: None PROJECT BACKGROUND: City policy requires the extension of existing sanitary sewer lines to residents who live within 100 feet of an existing line and request service. The City is obligated to extend the nearest line if the residents meet the criteria of current platting requirements and the project is technically and economically feasible. This project will provide for the extension of an existing line on Clarkwood Road to accommodate several residents who are not currently served by city sanitary sewer service. The installation of a collection line on the east side of Clarkwood Road, between just south of State Highway 44 and the proposed by-pass around Clarkwood Road will allow the City to facilitate the cost-effective and efficient delivery of sanitary sewer service to several homeowners who reside within the 100 foot boundary and meet eligibility requirements. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project consists of two base bids. BASE BID A: Consists of conventional installation of: · approximately 430 linear feet of eight (8) inch PVC; · 3 manholes; · pavement; · driveway · curb and gutter removal and replacement; · service house connections and all necessary appurtenances. BASE BID B: Consists of boring installation of: · approximately 430 linear feet of eight (8) inch HDPE pipe; · 2 manholes; · pavement repair; deep cut service house connections and all necessary appurtenances EXHIBIT "A" Page 1 of 2 BID INFORMATION: This project consisted of two base bids. On November 19, 2003 the City received two (2) proposals for this project. The bids ranged from: Base Bid A: $70,214.50 to $114,231.00 Base Bid B: $67,707.50 to $ 79,325.00 The Engineer's construction estimate was $48,000. (See Exhibit "C") The City has decided to award Base Bid B, and utilize boring installation rather than conventional installation to minimize disruption to the residents due to the fact the utility easement is directly adjacent to their homes. CONTRACT TERMS: The contract specifies that the project will be completed in 60 calendar days, with completion anticipated by March 2004. FUNDING: Funds for this project are available in the Wastewater Capital Improvement Budget. EXHIBIT "A" Page 2 of 2 PROJECT BUDGET CLARKWOOD SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION BASE BID B December 9, 2003 FUNDS AVAILABLE: Wastewater Capital Improvement Program .................................... 85,107.50 FUNDS REQUIRED: Construction (Jabores Construction) .................................................. Contingencies ............................................................................... Construction Inspection .................................................................. Engineering Reimbursements .......................................................... Finance Reimbursements ............................................................... Testing ........................................................................................ Printing, Advertising, etc ................................................................. 67,707.50 6,700.00 2,700.00 2,000.00 1,000.00 3,500.00 1,500.00 Total ........................................................................................... $85,107.50 EXHIBIT B Page 1 of 1 COYM, REHMET & GUTIERREZ ENGINEERING, INC. TABULATED BY: J. Don Rehmet, P.E., R.P.L.S. DATE: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 CLARKWOOD ROAD SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 7171 ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: $48,000.00 TIME OF COMPLETION: 60 Calendar Days JHABORES CONSTRUCTION KING -ISLES, INC. 4645 Arlene 1641 Goldston Corpus Christi, TX 78411 Corpus Christi, TX 78409 ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION CITY. UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT BASE BID "A" 0 8" PVC 4'-6' Depth 75 L.F. $75.00 $5,625.00 $58.00 $4,350.00 A-2 8" PVC 6'-8' De th 355 L.F. $95.00 $33,725.00 $56.00 $19,880.00 A-3 4' Dia. Manhole, 4'-6' Depth w/8" Stubout 1 EACH $4,500.00 $4,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 A4 4' Dia. Manhole, 6'-8' De th 1 EACH $5,500.00 $5,500.00 $2,800.00 $2,800.00 A-5 5' Dia. Drop Manhole, 12'-14' De th 1 EACH $16,500.00 $16,500.00 $11,250.00 $11,250.00 A-6 Service Connections Per Detail "A" Sheet 5 6 EACH $1,000.00 $6,000.00 $400.00 $2,400.00 A-7 Asphalt Pavement Remove & Replace Class II 45 S.Y. $55.00 $2,475.00 $75.00 $3,375.00 A-8 6" Curb & Gutter Remove and Replace 15 L.F. $30.00 $450.00 $65.00 $975.00 A-9 Concrete Driveway Remove & Replace 36 S.F. $100.00 $3,600.00 $28.00 $1,008.00 A-10 Fence, Remove & Reinstall 40 L.F. $100.00 $4,000.00 $33.00 $1,320.00 A-11 Silt Control Fence 430 L.F. $3.50 $1,505.00 $3.30 $1,419.00 A-12 Trench Safety Plan 1 L.S. $3,500.00 $3,500.00 $1,400.00 $1,400.00 A-13 Traffic Control Plan 1 L.S. $3,500.00 $3,500.00 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 A-14 Topsoil and Grass Seeding 3,950 S.F. $3.38 $13,351.00 $1.25 $4,937.50 A-15 Wastewater Utility Allowance 1 L.S. $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 A-16 Shrubs and Trees, Remove & Dispose of 1 L.S. $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $3,600.00 $3,600.00 TOTAL BASE BID "A' $114,231.00 $70,214.50 �m � x CD = � 07 O --1 2, _ fV 0 CR&G Project No.: 9025c Page 1 of 2 COYM, REHMET & GUTIERREZ ENGINEERING, INC. -0m vx CD C_ N 07 CR&G Project No.: 9025c O —{ Page 2 of 2 N n BASE BID "B" B-1 4' Dia. Manhole, 4'-6' Depth w/8" Stubout 1 EACH $3,295.00 $3,295.00 $5,100.00 $5,100.00 B-2 5' Dia. Drop Manhole, 12'-14' De th 1 EACH $11,500.00 $11,500.00 $15,500.00 $15,500.00 B-3 Service Connections Per Detail "A" Sheet 5 6 EACH $1,000.00 $6,000.00 $1,450.00 $8,700.00 B-4 Asphalt Pavement Remove & Replace Class II 45 S.Y. $54.50 $2,452.50 $75.00 $3,375.00 B-5 Trench Safety Plan 60 L.F. $10.00 $600.00 $25.00 $1,500.00 B-6 8" HDPE In Place By Boring 430 L.F. $102.00 $43,860.00 $105.00 $45,150.00 TOTAL BASE BID "B" ON $67,707.50 $79,325A0 -0m vx CD C_ N 07 CR&G Project No.: 9025c O —{ Page 2 of 2 N n File : \ Mproject \ councilexhibits \ exh 7171. dwg RO4D PROdECT ST_TE / HWY 44 / , AGN E"'"~~'~" v× l' I/ o ~ ~ CORPUS ~ ~ CHRISTI ~ g INTERNATIONAL ~ ~ ~oc~o~ ~ ~ CITY PROJECT No. 7171 NOT TO SCALE~ ~ EXHIBIT "O" CZTY COUNCIL EXHZB~T CLARKWOOD RO~ G~VJTY SEWER EXTENSJON o~a~g~r or z~c~R~O sz~.c[s PAGE: I o¢ 1 CI~ OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS DATE: 12-04-2005 10 AGENDA MEMORANDUM DATE: December 9, 2003 SUBJECT: Alta Plaza Drainage Improvements (Project No. 2168) AGENDA ITEM: Motion authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to award a construction contract to IHS Construction, Inc. from Corpus Christi, Texas in the amount of $238,345 for the Alta Plaza Drainage Improvements. ISSUE: This project consists of the removal and replacement of a deteriorated cracked storm sewer pipe that extends from Ocean Drive upstream along Alta Plaza for a distance of approximately 650 linear feet, curb inlets, manholes and pavement repair. Also included are pipe extensions to drain an alley within Hewitt Estates and the intersection at Alta Plaza. FUNDING: Funds to finance the proposed project are available in the Storm Water Capital Improvement Budget. RECOMMEND.~TIOI~I: Staff recommends approval of the Motion as presented. Va~elie Gray, I~E. I \ -- -- /~n{lel R. Escobar, P. E., Dir~tor of Stoh~ Water Department Director of Engineering Services Additional Support Material: Exhibit"A" Background Information Exhibit "B" Bid Tabulation Exhibit "C" Project Budget Exhibit "D" Location Map BACKGROUND INFORMATION SUBJECT: Alta Plaza Drainage Improvements (Project No. 2168) PRIOR COUNCIL ACTION: 1. December 17, 2002 - Ordinance approving the FY 2002-2003 Capital Improvement Program (Ordinance No. 025144). PROJECT BACKGROUND: The proposed project consists of the removal and replacement of a deteriorated cracked storm sewer pipe that extends from Ocean Drive upstream along Alta Plaza for a distance of approximately 650 linear feet, curb inlets, manholes and pavement repair. Also included are pipe extensions to drain an alley within Hewitt Estates and the intersection at Alta Plaza. A Change Order in the amount of $24,510 was issued on November 24, 2003 to IHS Construction as part of the South Staples Street Re-Construction Project. The Change Order allows IHS Construction to begin work on the Alta Plaza Drainage Improvements Project by December 1, 2003. IHS Construction was originally instructed to shut-down work on the Staples Street Re-Construction Project on November 18, 2003 due to holiday vehicular traffic; however, due to unusually heavy traffic prior to this date, the Contractor was shut-down mid-October 2003. In order to avoid potential contractor liability claims, the Change Order was issued to begin work on the Alta Plaza Drainage Improvements Project to allow construction crews of IHS Construction to continue working. The Change Order will be cancelled after awarding the construction contract on the Alta Plaza Drainage Improvements Project. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This project consists of the removal and replacement of approximately 500 linear feet of 24-inch RCP storm water pipe, installation of 135 linear feet of 18-inch HDPE pipe by boring, installation of one new fiberglass manhole, two inlets, remove and replace sidewalks, curb and gutter and pavement repair as necessary to complete the work in accordance with the plans, specifications and contract documents. BID INFORMATION: The City received proposals from five (5) bidders on November 12, 2003. See Exhibit "B" Bid Tabulation. The bids range from $238,345 to $328,731.75. The Engineer's estimated construction cost for the project is $250,000. The City's staff recommends that based on Iow Total Base Bid, the Total Base Bid be awarded in the amount of $238,345 to IHS Construction of Corpus Christi, Texas for the Alta Plaza Drainage Improvements. CONTRACT TERMS: The contract specifies that the project will be completed in 60 calendar days, with completion anticipated by mid-April, 2004. FUNDING: Funds for this project are available in the FY 2002-2003 Storm Water Capital Improvement Budget. EXHIBIT "A" Page 1 of 1 TABULATION OF BIDS Page 1 of 2 DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING - CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TERAS TABULATED BY: Angel R.Escobar, P.E., Director of Engineering Services DATE: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 TIME OF COMPLETION: 60 Calendar D _ ay, ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: $250,000 Alta Plaza Drainage Improvements Project No. 2168 IHS Construction Inc. 2410 Bevecrest Dr. CC, TX 78415 R.S.Parker Construction LLC 455 Hereford Rd. C.C., TX 78408 Jhabores Const.Co. Inc. 4645 Arlene C.C., TX 78411 ITffi4 DESCRIPTION QTY. UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 Remove and replace 24" RCP New 18" HDPE, installed by boring Remove and replace 4' DIA manhole 4'x5' (Storm) curb inlet 6'X7' (Storm curb inlet New, standard grate inlet Remove 6" curb 5 gutter Remove 4" rolled curb 6 gutter New 6" curb s gutter Remove and replace 4' concrete sidewalk Remove and replace 5' tied concrete sidewalk 500 135 3 1 1 1 210 290 500 1,300 775 LF LF EA FA EA EA LF LF LF SF SF $70. $540.00 $3,500.00 $4,500.00 $6,000.00 $3,000.00 $12.00 $10.00 $13.00 $13.00 $15.00 OD $35,000.00 $72,900.00 $10,500.00 $4,500.00 $6,000.00 $3,000.00 $2,520.00 $2,900.00 $6,500.00 $16,900.00 $11,625.00 $146.00 $300.00 $9,500.00 $4,500.00 $8,500.00 $3,500.00 $5.00 $5.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $73,000.00 .$40,500.00 $28,500.00 $4,500.00 $8,500.00 $3,500.00 $1,050.00 $1,450.00 $5,000.00 $13,000.00 $7,750.00 $75.00 $833.00 $12,500.00 $7,500.00 $8,500.00 $3,500.00 $16.84 $12.19 $15.00 $13.50 $13.50 $37,500.00 $112,455.00 $37,500.00 $7,500.00 $8,500.00 $3,500.00 $3,536.40 $3,535.10 $7,500.00 $17,550.00 $10,962.50 12 13 HMAC Sawcut s Pavement repair Sawcut, remove and replace existing asphalt pavement at alley with 2" HMAC 200 750 SY SF $60.00 $11.00 $12,000.00 $8,250.00 $25.00 $20.00 $5,000.00 $15,000.00 $50.00 $5.56 $10,000.00 $4,170.00 on 8" limestone base, meeting TxDOT requirements, sloped to drain 14 15 16 17 18 Trench safety for drainage improvements Ozone Action Day Traffic Control Remove 6 replace paver bricks Directional ramps to ADA standards 500 1 1 1,000 11000 LF EA LS SF SF - $6.00 $750.00 $5,000.00 $22.00 $15.00 $3,000.00 $750.00 $5,000.00 $22,000.00 $15,000.00 $40.00 $100.00 $5,000.00 $7.50 $8.50 $20,000.00 $100.00 $5,000.00 $7,500.00 $8,500.00 $5.00 $1.00 $5,000.00 $10.00 $15.00 $2,500.00 $1.00 $5,000.00 $10,000.00 $15,000.00 TOTAL BASE BID (ZTEMB 1-18), $238,345.00 $247,850.00 $296,210.00 TABULATION OF BIDS Page 2 of 2 + DEPARTt4ENT OF ENGINEERING - CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS TABULATED BY: Angel R.Esoobar, P.E., Director of Engineering Services DATE: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 TIME OF COMPLETION: 60 Calendar Days ENGIHEER'S ESTn&=: $250,000 Alta Plaza Drainage Improvements Project No. 2168 ITEM DESCRIPTION QTY. UNIT W.T.Young Construction LP P.O.Box 9197 .. CC, TX 78469 UNIT PRICE AMUNT DMB Construction LLC P.O.Box 71118 C.C., TX 78467 UNIT PRICE AMOUNT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 1 Remove and replace 24" RCP 500 LF $120.00 $60,000.00 $114.47 $57,235.00 $0.00 2 New 18" HDPE, installed by boring 135 LF $440.09 $59,400.00 $1,020.63 $137,785.05 $0.00 3 Remove and replace 4' DIA manhole 3 EA $3,600.00 $10,800.00 $5,523.00 $16,569.00 $0.00 4 4'x5' (Storm) curb inlet 1 EA $3,200.00 $3,200.00 $7,652.00 $7,652.00 $0.00 5 6'X7' (Storm curb inlet 1 EA $5,250.00 $5,250.00 $8,893.00 $8,893.00 $0.00 6 New, standard grate inlet 1 EA $3,140.00 $3,140.00 $5,370.00 $5,370.00 $0.00 7 Remove 6" curb & gutter 210 LF $5.00 $1,050.00 $2.32 $487.20 $0.00 8 Remove 4" rolled curb & gutter 290 LF $5.00 $1,450.00 $2.25 $652.50 $0.00 9 New 6" curb & gutter 500 LF $24.40 $12,200.00 $27.50 $13,750.00 $0.00 10 Remove and replace 4' concrete sidewalk 11300 SF $9.40 $12,220.00 $11.67 $15,171.00 $0.00 11 Remove and replace 5' tied concrete 775 SF $10.90 $8,447.50 $10.64 $8,246.00 $0.00 sidewalk 12 HMAC Sawcut & Pavement repair 200 SY $72.00 $14,400.00 $57.54 $11,508.00 $0.00 13 Sawcut, remove and replace existing 750 SF $16.00 $12,000.00 $6.52 $4,890.00 $0.00 asphalt pavement at alley with 2" HMAC on 8" limestone base, meeting TxDOT requirements, sloped to drain 14 Trench safety for drainage improvements 500 LF $8.00 $4,000.00 $9.79 $4,895.00 $0.00 15 Ozone Action Day 1 EA $600.00 $600.00 $3,521.00 $3,521.00 $0.00 16 Traffic Control 1 LS $18,000.00 $18,000.00 $9,437.00 $9,437.00 $0.00 17 Remove & replace paver bricks 1,000 SF $32.00 $32,000.00 $10.94 $10,940.00 $0.00 18 Directional ramps to ADA standards 1,000 SF $45.00 $45,000.00 $11.73 $11,730.00 $0.00 TUMU BABE BID !ITEM.. 1-18): $303,157.50 $328,731.75 $0.00 PROJECT BUDGET ALTA PLAZA DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS (Project No. 2168) December 9, 2003 FUNDS AVAILABLE: Storm Water ....................................................................... $280,700.50 FUNDS REQUIRED: Construction (IHS Construction) ............................................. Contingencies (10%) ............................................................ Land Acquisition Activity ......................................................... Engineering Reimbursements ................................................ Construction Inspection Activity ................................................ Testing ................................................................................ Misc. (Printing, Advertising, etc.) ............................................. Total ................................................................................. $238,345.00 23,834.50 521.00 2,500.00 8,500.00 5,000.00 2,000.00 $280,700.50 Rle : exh216&dwg I H~7 NUECES BAY CORPUS CHRISTI BAY N LOCATION MAP F.M. 4,3 CAYO DB. NAS FM 2444 PROJECT # 2168 LOCATION MAP NOT TO SCALE ALTA PLAZA STORM DRAINAGE PROJECT CiTY OF CORPUS CH~STI, ~ EXHIBIT "D" CITY COUNCIL EXHIBIT DEPAR~ENT OF ENGINEERING SERVICES PAGE: I ol= 1 DATE: 11-21-2003 11 AGENDA MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Cayo Del Oso Bridge Rehabilitation on Ocean Drive TxDOT Off-State-System Federal-Aid Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program AGENDA ITEM: Motion authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to issue payment to Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) for the bridge rehabilitation on the Cayo Del Oso Bridge on Ocean Drive (closest to the Naval Air Station) at a cost to the City not to exceed $86,843.83. ISSUE: Authorization for payment greater than $25,000 requires Council action. The payment allows TxDOT to let the project and is consistent with provisions of the Advanced Funding Agreement executed by the City and TxDOT. FUNDING: Funding for this improvement is available in the Storm Water Capital Improvement Program. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the motion as presented. The payment is necessary for the rehabilitation of the Cayo Del Oso Bridge. /~'~.~el R. Escobar, P.E., Director of Engineering Services ADDITIONAL SUPPORT MATERIAL: Exhibit "A" Background Information Exhibit "B" Location Map AGENDA MEMORANDUM Additional Background Information Proiect Description: The rehabilitation of the Cayo Del Oso Bridge was authorized by the Texas Transportation Commission Minute Order Number 107615 dated September, 1998 as part of the Off- State-System Federal-Aid Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program. The project improvements include bridge foundation repair, concrete riprap and approximately 1330 I.f. of hot mix overlay. The total estimated construction cost is $974,438 of which the City is required to contribute $86,843.83. This payment is consistent with the terms of the Advanced Funding Agreement executed between the City and TxDOT in January 19, 1999. This project is scheduled to let in January, 2004. 12 AGENDA MEMORANDUM City Council Action Date: December 9, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Ordinance appropriating a check from the United States Tennis Association in the amount of $2,500, and a check from the United States Tennis Association - Texas Section in the amount of $2,500 into Fund No. 3280 for the Al Kruse Tennis Center Court Improvements Project; amending capital budget adopted by Ordinance No. 025144 by increasing appropriations by $5,000; and declaring an emergency. ISSUE: The United States Tennis Association has provided funding assistance for resurfacing of three tennis courts at the Al Kruse Tennis Center. This agenda item is necessary to appropriate funds and reimburse project expenditures. FUNDING: Funding is available through the United States Tennis Association. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the ordinance so funds may be appropriated into the FY 2002-2003 Capital Improvement Budget. D~-vid Ondrias Acting Director of Park & Recreation 'A~g~l R. Escobar, P. E., Director of Engineering Services Additional Support Material: Exhibit "A" Background Information Exhibit "B" Location Map AGENDA MEMORANDUM ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION SUBJECT: Al Kruse Tennis Center Improvements (Project #3265) PRIOR COUNCIL ACTION: August 22, 2000 - Ordinance approving FY 2000-2001 Capital Improvement Budget (Ordinance No. 024162). PRIOR ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION: September 30, 20032 -Award of a small construction contract with Premier Courts, LTD Co. of San Antonio, Texas in the amount of $13,940 for the Al Kruse Tennis Center Improvements Project FUTURE COUNCIL ACTION: Nothing Anticipated. PROJECT BACKGROUND: The City of Corpus Chdsti was able to complete a number of improvements to the Al Kruse Tennis Center through the Bond Issue 2000 referendum pass by City voters on November 7, 2000. Three existing courts were not included in those improvements and the Parks and Recreation Department has been working to secure other funding sources to complete the resurfacing of the remaining courts at the center. Through the diligent work of Susan Torrance, the Al Kruse Tennis Center Professional, funding assistance in the amount of $5,000 was obtained from the United States Tennis Association to off-set cost of resurfacing the remaining three tennis courts. This project bid on September 17, 2003 and was awarded as a small construction contract to Premier Courts of San Antonio, Texas. A contract was issued on September 30, 2003 and the work was satisfactorily completed on November 13, 2003. EXHIBIT "A" Page 1 of I F~le : H:\HOME\Mproject\councilexhibits\exh3265.dwg NOT TO SCALE CITY PROdECT ~ 3265 EXHIBIT "B" CITY COUNCIL EXHIBIT ~ IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT PAGE: I of 1 CI~ OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS DATE: 12-03-2003 ~ ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING $2,500 FROM THE UNITED STATES TENNIS ASSOCIATION AND $2,500 FROM THE UNITED STATES TENNIS ASSOCIATION - TEXAS SECTION INTO FUND NO. 3280 FOR THE AL KRUSE TENNIS CENTER COURT IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT; AMENDING FY 2002-2003 CAPITAL BUDGET ADOPTED BY ORDINANCE NO. 025144 BY INCREASING APPROPRIATIONS BY $5,000; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS: SECTION 1. That $2,500 from the United States Tennis Association and $2,500 from the United States Tennis Association - Texas Section are appropriated into Fund No. 3280 for the Al Kruse Tennis Center Court Improvements Project. SECTION 2. That the FY 2002-2003 Capital Budget adopted in Ordinance No. 025144 is amended by increasing appropriations by $5,000. SECTION 3. That upon written request of the Mayor or five Council members, copy attached, the City Council (1) finds and declares an emergency due to the need for immediate action necessary for the efficient and effective administration of City affairs and (2) suspends the Charter rule that requires consideration of and voting upon ordinances at two regular meetings so that this ordinance is passed and takes effect upon first reading as an emergency measure this the __ day of ,2003. ATTEST: THE CITYOFCORPUS CHRISTI Armando Chapa City Secretary Samuel L. Neal, Jr, Mayor APPROVED: December 3, 2003 Lisa Aguilar ~' Assistant City Attorney for City Attorney 13 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMORANDUM City Council Action Date: AGENDA ITEM: Resolution authorizing the submission of a grant application in the amount of $42,633 to the State of Texas, Cdminal Justice Division for Year 5 funding available under the Victims of Cdme Act (VOCA) Fund for the Police Department's Family Violence Unit with a City match of $14,870 and $3,500 in-kind services and authorizing the City Manager or the City Manager's designee to apply for, accept, reject, alter or terminate the grant. ISSUE: Fifth year funding is available from the State of Texas, Criminal Justice Division, under the Victims of Cdme ACt (VOCA) that provides funds to projects with the primary mission of providing direct services to victims of crime. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The grant continues the Victim Assistance Program that provides assistance to victims and family members with the goal of lessening the short and long term trauma experienced as a direct result of victimization. Victims and their family members are provided with information, reassurance, and guidance for resolving problems and referrals to other social service agencies. The grant covers the salary/benefits for a Victim Case Manager, equipment, supplies, training, and mileage. The case manager provides services to victims including information and referral, criminal justice support and case information, assistance with filing forms for benefits available through the Cdme Victims' Compensation under the Texas Crime Victims Compensation Act, informing victims of their rights as victims, advocating on victims behalf with other agencies and within the criminal justice system, and transportation to shelter or to court. They also work with the Victims Advocates located at the Distdct and County Attorneys office. Primary and secondary victims of crime are assisted in an effort to stabilize their lives after victimization, help victims to understand and participate in the criminal justice system, and provide victims of crime with a measure of safety and security. The case manager also works closely through coalitions and with other agencies in an ongoing effort to identify needs and to improve the quality and continuity of services to victims in the community. Additionally, they provide training to community groups regarding victimization issues and available resources, thereby increasing community awareness. FUNDING: Funding is available 911104 - 8/31/05. The State provides $42,633 and the City $14,870. Volunteer hours provide $3,500 in-kind toward the match with the law enforcement trust fund providing $11,370 to purchase equipment, supplies, and provide training. The funding is not on a declining percentage or ending funding cycle, but is subject to the federal appropriation awarded to the State for distribution. REQUIRED COUNCIL ACTION: Approval to submit application. Chief of Poli(Y~...~ Attachments: Grant application GRANT APPLICATION CERTIFICATION FORM CI~MEqAL ~ DW~ON P.O. Box 12428 Am~m. TZy. A~ 78711 Appllcanta muir gomlMe~ a~l submit thll form before they will receive state and/or federal fund~. Reclplerltl of Irate Ind/or federal fundl mult read, agree, fufly underltand and comply with the requirements II,ted w'~tfn In each ~ of thb Gmflt Application Kit a~ dMalled below. Certify" Applicable, etc.) Determ/ne E//~b///f~ Form * [] [] 12/1/2003 * Critical: The grant applicant must complete the Determine Eligibility Form in its entirety and submit to C JO with the grant application kit If any portion of the form is left incomplete and the Authorized Official is unable to cethfy and/or submit the fo~rn, your projec~ will be considered Ineligible and will not be rewewed by CJD PART I1: ATTACH RE~L.UT'ION The Re~o~u~flo~ f~om the governing body must be subnY~ed al~g with the Grant Applic~fion Cer~flc~on Form to CJD, Please indicate Ihe status of this document b~ b) If you lelm:~ld ~lo', PROVfDE e bde~ explanation fo~ tbe delay mid the date f~at your [ t 2/9~2003 [ Date 'Fne Cly ~ C.o~pus Ch,'ti Co,.mci MenYoers meet twice pe~ rnonlh, due to Thanksglv~ Holday Ihe la~ ~ ~ ~. pART IIh 81~NATURJ The organlzatimfs Authorized Official hereby am~um~ am] ce~lfl~ thel~ authov.'--gion for the subml~alo~ of thi~ Drant appllca~o~ kit I~ Itl calumny to the Office of the Govem~', Crlmi~l Ju~ce DIv~lo~. Corpul Chrll~ Police Depa~me~t Victim. of Clime Act ~VOCA) 12/1/2003 ~.J'/ee~e Dm Grant Coversheet Form 1. ENTER ~ io~l ~ of ~ O~lan~t~n: 12. a) ENTER t~ Authorized Of~l In~t~n: City of Corpus Chdsit, Texas Title (Mr., Ms., Dr., Judge, etc.): Mr. 2. ENTER t~ ~ of t~ project: Na~: George K N~ V'~'tim s of Cdme Act (VOCA) Position: City Manager, City of Corpus Christi 3. ENTER the division or unit to administer the project: Address: =.0. Box 9277 Corpus Christi Police Department City/State/Zip: ~xpu$ Christi TX 178469 4. ENTER the egenc~s State Payee _Identification Number: Telephone: }61 ~80-3220 Fax:1361-880-3839 746000574 E-mail: ~ge~Qcctexas.com 5. a) Is the applicant organ[zadon delinquent on anyI No b) ENTER the Project Director Information: State or Federal debt? (SELECT One): I ~' Title (Mr., Ms., Dr., Judge, etc.): Mr. ;b) ENTER the date of the last audit: 9/1/2003 Name: ~ete Alvarez, Jr. ;) ENTER the agency fiscal year: 5th Position: 3hief of Police, City of Co~us Chdsti 3. SELECT the funding source: Address: P.O. Box 9016 Victims of Cdm® Act Fund (federal CFDA-16 575) City/Stata/Zip: ~.orpus Chdsti TX ?. ENTER the grant period (ex: mm/dd/yyyy): iTelephone: ~61 ~86-2604 Fax: ~61-88~.26o7 From: I7/1/2°°4 I To: I 30/2oo5 -'---mail: poticechiefpalvare~yahoo.com 3. ENTER the current grant number if a continuation project: c) ENTER the Financial Officer Information: VA-03-V30-15223-04 IT'file (Mr., Ms., Dr., Judge, etc.): MS. 9. Budget Informatiort (figures filled in from Budget Form): ~ame: Constance Saanchez CJOFu.d~I Cashllatch I In-Kind Total =osition: ~ctingOirectorofFi~nce. City of Coq3us Christi $42.633 $11,370 $3,500 $37,,~03 ~ddmss: P.O. Box 9277 !0. a) Is this a local or regional project? (SELECT I ~:)ne):i Yes __~' ~ity/StateflZip: Corpus Chdsti TX 78469 3) If yOU mad(ed 'Yes', for Step fO. a); is this~ reisphone: 361-880-3610 Fax: 361-882-7320 application subject to a regional COG priodtization i Yes ~)rocess? (SELECT One): -- E-mail: ~onstance~cctexas corn :) If yOU marked 'No', for Step 10. a) or b); then is 13. SELECT your organization type based on the list of eligible lhis application subject to the State's TRACSI applicants by fund source: ~)rocess pumuant to I T.A.C. ~5.191-5.2537 I No __ City SELECT One): :1) If you mad(ed 'Yes' for Step fO. a), SELECT the regional COG in 14. a) SELECT the headqua~tem county: ~nich this project is geographically located: Coastal BO~d Council Of Govemrnents- Reg~n 20O0 ~1 ~) LIST the cities and counties within the service area: 11. a) Is this grant application is response to a Request for Applications (RFA) as published in the I Yes ,~ Texas Register? (SELECT One):~ Corpus Christi, Texas ~)) If you mad(ed 'No', ENTER the name of the CJD staff member that you contacted for submission: n/a 15. FOR COG USE ONLY a) Is this application shared with another COG? (ENTER "Yes" or "No'): I I ~)CPTN#: I II d, COG ,~oplication ID: c) Priority #: I Grant Budget Form I. a) Le~lal Name of Or~anizatfon: ~,~ of Coqx~ Christi, Texas b) Title of Proiect: Victims of Cri~ Act (VOCA) c) Grant Period: From: I 711/2004 I TO: I 6~30/2005 ] d) Grant Number: VA-O3-V30-15223-04 2. ENTER Minimum Match Percentsg~ 3. ENTER CJD Requested Amount: (If Applicable) 20% $42,633 4. ENTER Program Income Applied to this Budgal (If Applicable) $6 5. Minimum Match Amount: $10,658 6. Total Project Cost Amount: $53,291 BUDGET DI TAIL PERSONNEL Salary % Applied to the Grant CJD Funds Cash Match In-Kind Match Total ~. Victim Case Manager-total salary of $33,110. Case manager provides crisis counseling, follow-up contact, personal advocacy, telephone contacts, information and refen'al. B. Fringe Benefits for total salary = $9,523 (1. 'IX Municipal Retirement System ~}11.75%=$3,890; 2. FICA ~}7.65%= $2,533; 3. Insurance=S3,100). 100.00°A $42,633 $0 $0 $42,633 C. Volunteer Staff (350 hra ~ $10.00/hr) will provide assistance with general office duties, computer infomnation input, mail-outs, and CVC applications. $~ $6 $3,500 $6,50~ CONTRACTUAL AND pROFESSIONAL SERVICES CJD Cash In-Kind Total Not Applicable $~ $6 $0 sg TRAVEL AND TRAINING CJD Cash In-Kind Total A. Local Mileage: 100 miles/month~ $0.365/mile ${~ $438 $0 $438 B. In-state Travel & Training Costs (1. Costs sending Advocate and Volunteers to in-state training conferences. At this time we ara unable to be specific on training opportunities and costs to be paid by grant funding. 2. Costs will be expanded using the City of Corpus Chdsti Travel Policy wich uses the Runzheimer Travel Index to provide per diem quotations: additional costs will include tuition, lodging, rental cars, & related fees.) $1,500 $1,50~ B. Out-of-state Travel & Training Costs - Same x)licies as In-state Travel $0 $1,00(3 $0 $t,00~ -.'QUlPMENT CJD Cash In-Kind Total ~lot Applicable $0 $13 $0 ${] 3UPPUES AND DIRECT OPERATING EXPENSES CJD Cash In-Kind Total ~,. Office Supplies - include general office supplies br the project staff. $0 $2,00(3 $6 $2,00(~ 3. Communications Cost will be used for the full time Victim Case Manager [1. Cellular phone airtime 1535.00 X 12months = $360); 2. Pager ($6.00 X 12 ~onths = $72) $432 $43; Page I of 2 Budget Form C. Pdnting Educational Literature end Public Service ~,nnouncements, Classroom Instructional Supplies, Educational Resource Matedal $0 $3,000 $0 $3,000 D. Postage $0 $1,000 ${~ St,000 E. Services & Other Costs $0 $2,000 $0 $2,000 INDIRECT CO.T8 (the Direct Co.ts Against CJD Direct Match Direct Which the Indirect Rate la Cha~ed) Costs Costs Indi~%'t Rate Total Not Applicable $0 $0 0.00% $0 BUDGET SUMMARY BUDGET CATEGORIES CJD CASH IN-KIND TOTAL PERSONNEL $42~633 $0 $3~500 $46,133 CONTRACTUAL AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 TRAVEL AND TRAINING $0 $2,938 $0 $2~938 EQUIPMENT $0 $0 $0 $0 SUPPLIES AND DIRECT OPERATING EXPENSES $0 $8~432 $0 $8~432 TOTAL DIRECT COSTS: $42:,633 S11~,370 $3r500 $57~$03 INDIRECT COSTS $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL: $427633 $117370 $37500 $571503 Total Match: $14,870 Actual Match Percentage Applied to this Budget: 25.9% Grant Number: IVA-0 -V30-15223-O Page 2 of 2 Budget Form Match & Generated Program Income (GPI) Form I. a) Legal Name of Organizati~: b)~: ~C~ c) Gm~ Pe~: From: I 7/1~ I To: I d) G~ ~ v~~ 2. a) EN~R ~ of ~sh Mat~ (ex: p~mm 2. b) EN~R 2. a) E~R ~ of ~sh Mat~ (ex: pr~ram ~, 2. b) ENTER ~e, ~, ~, ~c.): ~ou~: ~, ~, ~c.): ~: (1) C~ ~ ~s Ch~sfl (4) (~4) (s) (~) (8) (10) T~I ~h ~h $ 1 t,370 P~ I~E The info~a~on mqu~t~ ~low is not calcula~ in ~e comp~ions as ~K ~b g~ application. It is ~r ~King purp~ to ~D only. Even though so~ ~m income ~ ~ lis~ as "CASH MATCH" w~in t~ Budg~ Fo~, ~ program income on-hand must ~ shown ~low. 3. ENTER P~mm I~me ~HG~ as of ~ g~ ap~ ~mi~n date. I $11,370 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER, OR THE CITY MANAGER'S DESIGNEE, TO SUBMIT A GRANT APPLICATION TO THE STATE OF TEXAS, CRIMINAL JUSTICE DIVISION IN THE AMOUNT OF $42,633 FOR YEAR 5 FUNDING AVAILABLE UNDER THE VICTIMS OF CRIME ACT (VOCA) FUND FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT'S FAMILY VIOLENCE UNIT, WITH CITY MATCH OF $11,370 IN THE NO. 106'1 TRUST FUND AND $3,500 IN-KIND SERVICES; FOR A TOTAL PROJECT COST OF $57,503 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS: SECTION 1. The City Manager, or the City Manager's designee, is authorized to submit a grant application to the State of Texas, Criminal Justice Division in the amount of $42,633 for Year 5 funding available under the Victims of Crime Act Fund for the Police Department's Family Violence Unit. The City match for this grant is $11,370 in the No. 1061 Trust Fund, and $3,500 in kind services, for total project costs of $57,503. SECTION 2. The City Manager, or the City Manager's designee, may apply for, accept, reject, agree to alter the terms and conditions, or terminate the grant, if the grant is awarded to the City. SECTION 3. In the event of the loss or misuse of these Criminal Justice Division funds, the City of Corpus Christi assures that the funds will be returned to the Criminal Justice Division in full. ATTEST: THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI Armando Chapa City Secretary APPROVED: December 1,2003. Lisa Aguilar ~ Assistant City Attorney for City Attorney Samuel L. Neal, Jr. Mayor Dec 9 VOCA res.doc 14 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMORANDUM Date: December 9, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Motion adopting the timetable for the FY2004 Consolidated Plan/Annual Action Plan (CP/AAP) that is the planning and application process for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME), and Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) Programs. REQUIRED COUNCIL ACTION: Adopting the timetable for the FY2004 CP/AAP RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of the timetable for the FY2004 CP/AAP IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE: FY2004 CP/AAP Timetable Mary Do~lCnguez, Director ADDITIONAL ~UPPORT MATERIAL Background Information ~ FY2004 Schedule AGENDA MEMORANDUM BACKGROUND INFORMATION Each year the City Council approves the upcoming Community Planning and Development Grant Programs planning and implementation calendar. The Consolidated Plan/Annual Action Plan (CP/AAP) is the application for funding under the community planning and development formula grant programs administered through the U.S. Housing and Urban Development (HUD) that include the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME), and Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG). HUD regulations require the development of a five-year strategy entitled CP/AAP that will bring needs and resources together and must be developed to achieve the goals that will principally serve Iow to moderate income persons and to provide decent housing, a suitable living environment, and expand economic opportunities. The CP/AAP will be developed beginning January 2004 that will identify community needs with applicable resources to meet those needs through FY2007. The CP/AAP will describe the activities and projects to be assisted with funds received under the CDBG, HOME, and ESG Programs and other HUD Programs that help meet housing and community development objectives. The proposed schedule enclosed as Attachment "A" provides a list of activities. Key dates are: January 5,2004 Febmary18,2004 April20,2004 June 11 2004 - Proposals for CDBG, HOME, and ESG Programs Due Date - Planning Commission Public Hearing - City Council Public Hearing - CP/AAP submission to HUD As in the past, neighborhood, nonprofit and focus group meetings will be conducted in December. Meeting notices and requests for proposals will be published and mailed to interested organizations. Information will be forwarded to the local media to increase citizen participation. The adopted schedule will be also be added to the City's Internet Home Page. ATTACHMENT "A" NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM (CPD) CONSOLIDATED PLAN/ANNUAL ACTION PLAN SCHEDULE (CP/AAP) FOR FY2004 December 7 January 5 January 29 February 1 February 4 February 18 February 25 April 20 April 27 April 29 May 2 May 3 -June May 3 June 11 July 4 July 19 Publish Neighborhood/Agency Mtgs/FY2004 Request for Proposals Proposals Due Submit publication notice of Planning Commission/City Council Public Hearings on the Proposed FY2004 CP/AAP& Program Information, i.e., funds to be received, program income, activities to be undertaken and estimated amount of benefit to Iow/mod. income persons, to Caller-Times. Publication of Planning Commission/City Council Public Hearings on the Proposed FY2004 CP/AAP Forward Materials to Planning Commission Planning Commission - Public Hearing on Proposed FY2004 CP/AAP (special meeting) Planning Commission - Adoption of Final Recommendation City Council Public Hearing - Proposed FY2004 CP/AAP (Staff & Plan. Comm. Recommendations) Projects and facilities adopted tentatively by Council. City Council Adoption - FY2004 CP/AAP Submit Final FY2004 CP/AAP Summary & Proposed Use to Caller-Times Publication of Final FY2004 CP/AAP Summary/Request for Release of Funds 30 day Citizen Comment Period begins on FY2004 CP/AAP Notify Council of Governments (COG) of FY2004 CDBG Projects (Executive Order 12372 Requirement) Submit FY2004 CP/AAP to HUD (Due by June 16) Citizens Comment Period Starts for FY2004 CP/AAP Summary/Request for Release of Funds End of 15 day Comment Period for FY 2004 CP/AAP request for release of funds 15 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMORANDUM City Council Action Date: November 18, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Motion authorizing a three-year contract with two (2) one-year options to renew, between the City of Corpus Christi, Texas, and Dennis A. Joiner & Associates to perform professional services under this Agreement as an independent contractor for the City. ISSUE: The City of Corpus Christi's current contract for Promotional Examinations and Assessment Center Services for the Fire and Police Departments will expire on November 30, 2003. The Colletive Bargaining Agreement requires that assessment centers be conducted for the ranks of Lieutenant and Captain for Police, and District Chief and Assistant Chief for Fire. A Request for Proposals (RFP) was issued on October 10, 2003. Proposals were received on October 29, 2003 and were reviewed by the members of the evaluation team. As a result of the RFPs received and reviewed, Dennis A. Joiner & Associates is determined to be the best value for the City in providing these services. REQUIRED COUNCIL ACTION: Council approval is needed authorizing a contract for a three-year contract with two (2) one-year options to renew to provide promotional testing and assessment center services. FUNDING: Funding for this contract has been included in the proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2003-2004. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the motion authorizing a three-year contract with two (2) one-year options to renew between the City of Corpus Christi, Texas, and Dennis A. Joiner & Associates to provide promotional testing and assessment center services for Police and~re De artments. Cyntl~ia C, Garcia Director of Human Resources Attachments: ,~Ba, ckgrpund Informotion~ ~cneume A-Evaluation ~riteria Schedule B-Evaluation Summary BACKGROUND INFORMATION BACKGROUND In November of 2003, Requests For Proposals were issued for Fire and Police Promotional Examination and Assessment Center services. Of the twenty-nine vendors who received the RFP, four responded with proposals. Responses to the RFP were received on October 29, 2003 in the Procurement Division. The contract with the current provider will expire November 30, 2003. EVALUATION Initially, an evaluation team was chosen which was comprised of the Human Resources Director, the Senior Purchasing Analyst, the Risk Management Analyst and a Human Resources Analyst. The evaluation team reviewed proposals for responsiveness. None were eliminated for non- responsiveness to RFP requirements. The proposals were evaluated by the team using the following criteria: (1) risk 20%, (2) strategic need 30%, (3) technical solution 10%, and (4) cost 40%. The resulting matrix prioritized each vendor based on the point value assigned for each criterion component in the evaluation matrix. Vendor rankings based on this scoring method are shown in Schedule B. RECOMMENDATION As a result of this evaluation, Dennis A. Joiner & Associates is the highest ranking provider as shown in Schedule B. City staffrecommends City Council approval ora three-year contract with two (2) one-year options to renew with to perform professional services under this Agreement as an independent contractor for Fire and Police Promotional Examinations and Assessment Centers for the City. RFP: BI -0027-04 Opportunity Status: Critical "Fire and Police Promotional Assessment Analysis" Evaluation and Consensus Schedule A Supplier Risk Strategic Need Technical Solution Cost Total 20% 30% 10% 40% 100% —Weight 1. Vitae of Staff for Compliance 1. Accessibility to Staff and 1. Compliance with (3.1.3A) Facilities (3.5) Attachment I /45% /45% Requirements _ /90% 2. References (3.1.31D, 3.2) 2. Resume of Experience (3.1.4E) 2. Ad Hoc Reports _/45% _/45% /10% 3. Litigations and Lawsuits (3.4) 3. Human Relations Violations (3.1 B) _/10% /10% I I Schedule B CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI SUMMARY EVALUATION MATRIX POLICE AND FIRE PROMOTIONAL ASSESSMENT SERVICES Dennis Joiner Booth lOS CWH Evaluation Criteria Maximum I Points Points I Points Points Points[ Awarded Awarded[ Awarded Awarded Risk 20 points 19.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 Sbategic Need 30 points 21.0 28.5 30.0 21.0 Technical Solution 10 points 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Cost 40 points 40.0 27.2 20.0 25.2 TOTAL 90.0 85.7 80.0 76.2 ~;234,000.00 ~3421000.00 $468,000.00 $369,000.00 16 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMORANDUM City Council Action Date: December 9, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Resolution authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to execute an interlocal agreement with the Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) for the sharing of technology. Under this agreement the City will connect the RTA to the City's fiber optic network and provide high-speed access to the City's computer network and the Internet. The RTA will provide a secure room for the placement of City-owned disaster recovery equipment. ISSUE: The City operates and maintains a fiber optic network that runs along Bear Lane in front of the Administration Building of the RTA. This network connects the Police Department, the Emergency Operating Center and other City facilities and provides access to the Internet. Connecting the RTA to this network will improve communication between the two entities, assist in the integration of public transportation services with public safety, reduce operating expenses and provide the RTA with high-speed access to the City's computer network and the Internet. In addition, the City is in need of a secure Information Technology area for the placement of disaster recovery equipment and the RTA will provide space for this use at the Administration Building on Bear Lane. REQUIRED COUNCIL ACTION: The City Council is required to approve all interlocal governmental agreements. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: No prior Council action. FUNDING: No additional funding is required. The RTA will purchase all equipment needed and reimburse the City for installation of the fiber optic link. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve this interlocal agreement with the Regional Transportation Authority for the sharing of technology. Ogilvie F. Gericke, P.E. Director of Information Systems Attachments: INTERLOCAL AGREEMNT FOR SHARING OF TECHNOLOGY RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE AN INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT WITH THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (RTA) FOR THE SHARING OF TECHNOLOGY NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS: SECTION '1. The City Manager or his designee is authorized to execute an interlocal cooperation agreement with the Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) for the shadng of technology. Under the agreement the City will connect the RTA to the City's fiber optic network and provide high-speed access to the City's computer network and the Internet. A copy of the interlocal agreement is attached. ATTEST: THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI Armando Chapa City Secretary APPROVED: December 1, 2003 By: Lisa Aguilar (~ Assistant City Attorney for City Attorney Samuel L Neal, Jr, Mayor INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR SHARING OF TECHNOLOGY This Inte~local Agreement for Shadng of Technology is entered into by and between the Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) and the City of Corpus Christi, Texas, (City). WHEREAS, the RTA completed the construction of its Administration Building on Bear Lane in order to centralize its operations and administration at a single site; WHEREAS, the City maintains a fiber optic system on Bear Lane that provides high- speed, direct computer connections to the City's Police Department, Emergency Operations Center, and other facilities; WHEREAS, including lhe RTA in the City's fiber optic system will reduce operating expenses and improve communications between the two entities, particularly in the event of emergencies, assist in the integration of public transportation services with public safety services, and provide the RTA with access to the City's computer network and the intemet; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants in this Agreement, the participating local governments (the 'Parties'), authorized by appropriate actions of their governing bodies, agree as follows: I. Purpose~ The purpose of this Agreement is to provide the RTA with access to the City computer network to improve communications between the Parties. 2. Scope of Services. A. Purchase, installation and maintenance of equipment and hardware: (1) The RTA shall purchase the equipment and hardware identified on the attached Exhibit ('Items') to allow data to be communicated between various RTA and City computers. The RTA shall establish minimum of four flrewalls to assure security of the RTA and City computer systems. The RTA shall also purchase implementation services listed on the attached Exhibit to allow for the installation of the Items. The City reserves the right to approve of the vendor selected by the RTA to provide the Items and implementation services. (2) The City shall install and maintain the Items. (3) The RTA shall provide sufficient room within the RTA Information Technology area for placement of the Items and City-owned property for a disaster recovery site, minimum area of 10' x 10', with raised floor and secure access. Page 2 of 5 (4) The RTA shall provide full security for the Items and bears all risk of loss or theft of the Items. (5) The RTA shall ensure that the Items ara connected to the RTA emergency generator. (6) Upon the completion of installation, the RTA shall be responsible for the cost of maintenance of the Items, and also maintain any necessary softwara required for operation of the Items. B. Installation and maintenance of fiber optic cable link (1) The RTA shall reimburse the City all costs for City to install fiber optic line to link the RTA Administration Building with the City's existing fiber optic network on Bear Lane. (2) The RTA shall maintain the fiber optic line connecting the City's line in Bear Lane to the RTA's Administration Building. C. Utilization of City Fiber Optic System. The parties agree that for such pedod of time as the RTA maintains the equipment identified in the attached Exhibit and the fiber optic line connecting the City's Bear Lane line to the RTA Administration Building, lhe City will allow the RTA to utilize the City's fiber optic system in Bear Lane for connections to the Police Department, the Office of Emergency Management, and the intemet. D. Continuation of City's Fiber Optic System at Bear Lane. If there is a failure in the City's fiber optic system at Bear Lane, the City is under no obligation to provide maintenance, repair, or replacement. 3. Public Purpose. This Agreement is between the RTA and the City for the purpose of providing governmental services and not for the benefit of any third party or individual. 4. Umited ObliRation. This Agraement shall be limited solely to the transfer, installation and operation of the fiber optic system as described above. No obligation, whether expressed or implied, shall exist for funding any future projects, programs or efforts in subsequent years. S. Enforceability. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas, and it shall be performable in Nueces County, Texas. 6- Nofice~. Ail notices, requests or other communications related to this Agreement shall be made in writing and may be given by: (a) depositing same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, certified, return raceipt raquested, addrassed as set forth in this ~dmlnse~erl\Contracts~WORD~-~reernents~033 Intedocal .~greement for Sharing of TEdnnology~Revlsed RTA Intedocal, doc , .' Page 3 of 5 paragraph; or (b) delivering the same to the party to be notified. Notice given in accordance with (a) hereof shall be effective upon deposit in the United States mail. The notice addresses of the parties shall, until changed as provided herein, be as follows: RT.~ General Manager Regional Transportation Authority 5658 Bear Lane Corpus Christi, Texas 78405 CITY: City Manager City of Corpus Chdsti, Texas P. O. Box 9277 Corpus Chdsti, Texas 78469 7. Sevembility. If for any reason any section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase, word or provision of this Agreement shall be held invalid or unconstitutional by final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction, it shall not effect any other section, paragraph, subdivision, dause, phrase, word or provision of this Agreement, for it is the definite intent of the parties that every section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase, word or provision hereof be given full force and effect for its purpose. 8. Asslanment. This Agreement shall be binding on and inure to the benefit of the parties to this A~reernent and their respective successors and permitted assigns. This Agreement may not be assigned by any party without the w~i[[en consent of all of the other party. 9. Entire AqreemenL This Agreement expressed the entire agreement between the Parties. Any modification, amendment, or addition to this Agmament is not binding upon the Parties unless reduced to writing and signed by persons authorized to make such agreements on behalf of the respective party. 10. Implementation. 'rhe City Manager and RTA General Manager are authorized and directed to take all steps necessary or convenient to implement this Agreement, and shall cooperate in developing a plan for the implementation of the activities provided for in this Agreement. '1.'1. Warranty. The Agreement has been officially authorized by the governing body of each Party, and each signatory to this Agreement guarantees and warrants that the signatory has full authority to execute this Agreement and to legally bind their respective Party to this Agreement. '12. Exeendina Funds. Each Party which performs services under this Agreement shall do so with funds available from current revenues of the Party. No Party shall have any liability for the failure to expend funds under this Agreement. ~dmirtsewer1~Contm~s~WOR~reemeflts~033 Interiocal Agreement f~ Sharing o~ TEchnology~Revlsed RTA Interiocal. doc .- Page 4 of 5 13. Term of Aareement.. A. This Agreement shall become effective when approved and executed by all Parties. B. Once approved and executed by all Parties, this Agreement shall be for a term of one year, and shall be automatically renewed annually, unless any party terminates its participation by giving written notice to the other Party at least sixty days before the end of each annual term. 14. Oral and Written ARreements. All oral or written agreements between the Parties relating to the subject matter of this Agreement, which were developed pdor to the execution of this Agreement, have been reduced to writing and are contained in this Agreement. 15. Entire A,qreement. This Agreement, including any Attachments, represents the entire Agreement between the Parties and supersedes any and all pdor agreements between the parties, whether wrfften or oral, relating to the subject of this agreement. 16. Interlocal Cooperation Act. The Parties agree that activities contemplated by this Agreement are govemmental functions and services and that the Parties are 'local governments' as that term is defined in the Intedocal Cooperation Act. 17- Validity and Enforceability. If any current or future legal limitatlens affect the validity or enforceability of a provision of this Agreement, then the legal limitations are made a part of this Agreement and shall operate to amend this Agreement to the minimum extent necessary to bring this Agreement into conformity with the requirements of the limitations, and so modified, this Agreement continue in full force and effect. 18, Not for Benefit of Third Parties. This Agreement and all activities under this Agreement are solely for the benefit of the Parties and not the benetit of any third party. t9. Exercise of P. olice Power. This Agreament and all activities under this Agreement are undertaken solely as an exercise of the police power of the Parties, exercised for the health, safety, and welfare of the public generally, and not for the benefit of any particular parson or persons and the Parties shall not have nor be deemed to have any duty to any particular person or persons. 20. Immunity not waived. Nothing in this Agreement is intended, nor may it be deemed, to waive any governmental, official, or other immunity or defense of any of the Parties or their officers, employees, representatives, and agents as a result of the execution of this Agreement and the performance of the covenants contained in this Agreement. 21. Civil Uability to, Third parties. Each Party will be responsible for any civil liability for its own actions under this Agreement, and will determine what level, if any, of insurance or serf-insurance it should maintain for such situations. ~azlmlnserverfl~?,e,,~,,,ctsXWORD~2003U~greernentstf133 Interlocal Agreement for Sharing of TEchnoiogy~Revlsed RTA In~edocaLdoc Page 5 of 5 22. No Liability of Para, es to One Another. Each Party to this Agreement waives all claims against the other Parties to this Agreement for compensation for any loss, damage, personal injury, or death occurring as a consequence of the performance of this Agreement, except those caused in whole or in part by the negligence of an officer, employee, or agent of another Party. 23. Amendments to A.qreemenL A. This Agreement may not be amended except by written agreement approved by the governing bodies of the Parties. B. No officer or employee of any of the Parties may waive or otherwise modify the limitations in this Agreement, without the express action of the governing body of the Party. 24. Captions. Captions to provisions of this Agreement are for convenience and shall not be considered in the interpretation of the provisions. 25. Govemin.q Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Texas. Venue for an action adsing under this Agreement shall be in Corpus Christi, Texas. Executed on this the day of ,2003 in duplicate originals. Al-rEST: CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS By;. Armando Chapa, City Secretary By: , George K. Noel City Manager APPROVED as to form: 2003 Lisa Aguilar Assistant City Attorney for City Attorney By:~ General Manager ',Admlnserverl~,Contraclg~WORD12003V~reements~033 Interlocal Agreement for Sharing of TEchnology~Revlsed RTA Interlocal. doc , I.C)GIC I-. Omq. my: C~ ~c~ P'm)ne: 210.525.7970 F~x: 214.722.~ Dirge: 7/2/2003 Ship fo: Slme C~ #: Ceil phone: 214.725.5370 List Price Your Price Part Numbe~ Each Dis~ Each Extended Pdc~ Q~ pat Humber Description Grand Total $1~250.00I ~9,650.00 Your Total Da(e: P~ce Quotation Prepared ByEfrain Cuellar CCIE Note: The tnforrnaUon in this proposal is considered proprietary and CONPIDENTIAL to Logical. By acceptance of this information, your company agrees to maintain this confiden#slity and use such Ptfce$ quoted herein are valid for thirfy (30) days from the proposal date, CoCC Proposed RTA solution 1 O0 MB 100MB 3550 - 24 1 O0 MB PO ~ 2900 100 MB RTA Proposed 515E RTA Proposed 506E Municipal Court/Police Dept existing 6509 Gig Fiber 6509 Gig Fiber 100 MB GB RTA proposed 2950 I - I d 515E 100 MB Aviation existing 12G Gig Fiber c~ Service Center exiating 6509 City Hall existing 6513 Logical US by Mark A. Rodriguez Tuesday, August 26, 2003COCC RTA proposalVer4 17 CiTY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMORANDUM City Council Action Date: December 9, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Resolution authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to execute an interlocal governmental agreement with the Texas Department of Transportation (the State). This agreement will permit connection of the City's Fiber Optic Network (FON) to the State's FON and approve the use of the respective FON on the condition that such uses are in the public interest for transportation purposes. ISSUE: The City and the State each operate and maintain fiber optic networks for use as part of their respective systems within the boundaries of Nueces County. Allowing connection to their respective FON by the other party will improve communication between the two entities, provide for a broader and more robust network, improve redundancy, and assist in the integration of public transportation services. Both the City and State requested permission to allow for the connection of their respective FON. REQUIRED COUNCIL ACTION: The City Council is required to approve all interlocal governmental agreements. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: No prior Council action. FUNDING: No additional funding is required. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve this interlocal agreement with the State. Ogilvie F. Gericke, P.E. Director of Information Systems Attachments: Fiber Network Interconnection Agreement RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE AN INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT WITH THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORATION TO PERMIT CONNECTION OF THE CITY'S FIBER OPTIC NETWORK TO THE STATE'S FIBER OPTIC NETWORK BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS: SECTION 1. The City Manager or the City Manager's designee is authorized to execute an interlocal cooperation agreement with the Texas Department of Transportation to permit connection of the City's Fiber Optic Network to the State's Fiber Optic Network and approve the use of the respective fiber optic networks on the condition that the uses are in the public interest for transportation purposes. A copy of the Interlocal Agreement is attached. ATTEST: THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI Armando Chapa City Secretary Samuel L. Neal, Jr. Mayor APPROVED: December 1, 2003 Lisa Aguilar~ Assistant City Attorney for City Attorney Corpus Christi, Texas of ., 2003 The above resolution was passed by the following vote: Samuel L. Neal, Jr. Brent Chesney Javier D. Colmenero Henry Garrett Bill Kelly Rex A. Kinnison John Longoria Jesse Noyola Mark Scott 2 Dec 1 Interlocal Resolution TXDOT,doc Fiber Network Interconnection Agreement City of Corpus Christi and Texas Department of Transportation STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF TRAVIS § THIS FIBER NETWORK INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT ("Agreement") IS MADE BY AND BETWEEN the State of Texas, acting by and through the Texas Department of Transportation (the "State") and the City of Corpus Christi, acting by and through its duly authorized officials (the "Local Government"). WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the State and the Local Government (the uParties") each operate fiber optic networks for use as part of their respective systems within the boundaries of Nueces County; and WHEREAS, the Local Government has requested the State to permit connection to the State's Fiber Optic Network (FON); and WHERAS, the State has requested the Local Government to permit connection to the Local Government's Fiber Optic Network (FON); and WHEREAS, the State and Local Government have indicated its willingness to approve the use of its FON conditioned that each entity will enter into this Agreement with each other for the purpose of determining the respective responsibilities of the Local Government and the State with reference thereto, and conditioned that such uses are in the public interest for transportation purposes and will not damage the network intemonnection operation or fiber capacity derived through interconnection, all as determined from engineering studies conducted by the State or Local Government; and WHEREAS, on the .__ day of 20 , the governing body for the Local Government entered into an order herein after identified by reference, authorizing the Local Government participation in this Agreement with the State. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and of the mutual covenants and agreements of the Parties to this Agreement to be by them respectively kept and performed as hereinafter set forth, it is agreed as follows: l. TERM This Agreement becomes effective on the date of final execution and shall remain in force for a period of one year. It is understood by both Parties that at the end of the one-year period, the Agreement will be automatically renewed for one-year periods thereafter unless modified by mutual agreement by both parties. 1 HC fiber Agreement October 6, 2003 2. RIGHTS GRANTED AND PURPOSE The purpose of this Agreement is for the Parties to allow the connection to their respective FON by the other Party. Any and all connections shall have the approval of the FON's owner per the procedures set forth in this Agreement. Each Party authorizes and permits the other Party to enter upon its Right of Way and to attach, install, operate, maintain, remove, reattach, reinstall, relocate, and replace such connections of the entering Party's FON to the owning Party's FON pursuant to the procedures set forth in this Agreement. The Parties shall exchange unmodulated, single-mode fiber optic cable strands, hereafter referred to as "dark" strands, for transportation use only. The unit of capacity exchange shall be mutually agreed upon on a case-by-case basis. Capacity exchanges need not be on an equal basis. Any and all rights expressly granted to either Party to use the FON of the other Party shall be subject to the prior and continuing right of the Party to whom the FON belongs to use its FON for its own purposes under applicable laws and shall be further subject to all deeds, easements, dedications, conditions, covenants, restrictions, encumbrances, and claims of title of record which may affect the rights to use the FON. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to grant, convey, create, or vest in either Party a real property interest in land, including any fee, leasehold interest, or easement. 3. NOTICE OF CONNECTION Every connection to the other Party's network must have the prior written approval of the other Party prior to any work being done. ^ properly completed authorization form (Exhibit A) shall be submitted for approval. The other Party shall approve or disapprove such connection in writing within sixty (60) days. Upon the completion of installation, the connecting Party shall promptly furnish to the other Party suitable documentation showing the exact nature of the connection. The Party authorized to approve requests for connection to the City's FON is the Director of Municipal Information Systems or designee. The Party authorized to approve requests for connection to the State's FON is the District Engineer, Director of Traffic Operations or their designee. Any modification of a connection shall use the same approval process specified above. 4. RESPONSIBILITIES The State shall not be responsible for the following: A. Design, engineering, and installation of the Local Government's fiber optic network system and components within the Local Government's Right of Way. B. Operation and maintenance of the Local Government's fiber optic network system and components within the Local Government's Right of Way. C, Maintenance of all connections made by the Local Government to the State's fiber optic network. The Local Government shall not be responsible for the following: A. Design, engineering, and installation of the Local Government's fiber optic network system and 2 HC fiber Agreement October 6, 2003 components within the State's Right of Way. B. Operation and maintenance of the State's fiber optic network system and components within the State's Right of Way. C. Maintenance of all connections made by the State to the Local Government's fiber optic network. 5. INFORMATION EXCHANGE Each Party agrees to meet at a minimum of annually for the purpose of reviewing future plans and current status of their respective FONs. 6. TERMINATION OF AUTHORIZATIONS The Parties each acknowledge that should either Party determine that it is necessary for the proper operation of its FON, for the purposes of its respective governmental entity, to rescind a prior authorization, the Party may do so by at least ninety (90) day written notice to the other Party. Upon receipt of wdtten notice to rescind a prior authorization, the Party shall remove its facilities from the FON within time specified in the written notice at its sole costs and expense. If, in the opinion of the Party that owns the FON, the other Party's use of their FON interferes with or disrupts their FON, the Party who owns the FON may disconnect the other Party's equipment from its FON until the cause of the interference is corrected. 7. TERMINATION UPON NOTICE This Agreement is expressly made subject to the rights herein granted to both Parties to terminate this Agreement upon thirty (30) days written notice, and upon the exercise of any such right by either Party, all obligations herein to make improvements to said facility shall immediately cease and terminate. 8. MODIFICATION/TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT If in the judgment of either Party it is found at any future time that traffic conditions have so changed that the existence or use of the respective FONs facilities is impeding maintenance, damaging the highway facility, impairing safety or that the facility is not being properly operated, that it constitutes a nuisance, is abandoned, or if for any other reason it is the Party's judgment that such facility is not in the public interest, this Agreement may be: (1) modified if corrective measures acceptable to both Parties can be applied to eliminate the objectionable features or (2) terminated under article 7 and the use of the area as proposed herein discontinued. 9. SOLE AGREEMENT This Agreement constitutes the sole and only agreement between the Parties hereto and supersedes any prior understandings or written or oral agreements respecting the within subject matter. 10. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RESPONSIBILITY The Parties agree that no Party is an agent, servant, or employee of any other Party and agree that this Agreement shall not be construed as creating any responsibility or liability by one Party for the acts and deeds of the other Party or such other Party's contractors, employees, representatives, and agents. Each Party shall have a reasonable opportunity to repair any damage caused by its agent or employee prior to the other Party starting repairs. 3 HC fiber Agreement October 6, 2003 11. FUNDING Neither Party shall have any obligations to pay any costs related to the other Party connecting to its FON The determination to make connections to the other Party's FON is optional. If the Local Government is paying for the performance of services or equipment under this Agreement, those payments shall be made from current revenues available to the Local Government. 12. AMENDMENTS Any changes in the time frame, character or responsibilities of the Parties shall be enacted by a written amendment executed by both Parties. No officer or employee of the Local Government may waive or otherwise modify this Agreement, without the express action of the governing body of the Local Government. 13. LEGAL CONSTRUCTION In case one or more of the provisions contained in this Agreement shall for any reason be held invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect, such invalidity, illegality or unenforceability shall not affect any provision thereof and this Agreement shall be construed as if such invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision had never been contained in this Agreement. 14. ASSIGNMENT PROHIBITION The Parties agree that the rights conferred by this Agreement shall not be assigned to any third Party. 15. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS The State and the Local Government each binds itself, its successors, executors, assigns, and administrators to the other Party to this Agreement and to the successors, executors, assigns, and administrators of such other Party in respect to all covenants of this Agreement. 16. NONEXCLUSIVE USE Each Party understands that this Agreement does not provide it with exclusive use of the FON and that each Party shall have the right to permit other's use of its FON. 17. GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE This Agreement is governed by the laws of the State of Texas. Venue for an action arising under this Agreement shall be in accordance with the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. The Parties agree that venue for this Agreement is Travis County. 18. NOTICES All notices and requests for authorization required under this Agreement shall be mailed or hand delivered to the following respective addresses: Local Government: City of Corpus Christi At"tn: City Manager P.O. Box 9277 Corpus Christi, TX 78469 State: Texas Department of Transportation Attn: District Engineer P.O. Box 9907 Corpus Christi, TX 78469 Notices shall be deemed given upon receipt in the case of personal delivery, three (3) days after deposit in the mail, or the next day in the case of facsimile, email, or overnight delivery. Either Party may from time to time designate any other address for this purpose by written notice to the other Party delivered in the manner set forth above. 4 HC fiber Agreement October 6, 2003 19. PARTICIPATION NOTICE Each Party must notify the other Parties of its participation in this Agreement by furnishing an executed original of the attached Participation Notice (Attachment 1). 20. SIGNATORY WARRANTY This Agreement has been officially authorized by the governing body of each Party, and each signatory to this Agreement guarantees and warrants that the signatory has full authority to execute this Agreement and to legally bind their respective Party to this Agreement.. 21. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Each Party agrees to provide administrative services necessary to coordinate this Agreement, including providing the other Party with a current list of contact information for each Party. 22. INTERLOCAL COOPERATION ACT The Parties agree that activities contemplated by this Agreement are "governmental functions and services" and that the Parties are "local governments" as those terms are defined in the Interlocal Cooperation Act, Chapter 791 of the Texas Government Code and Transportation Code, Section 201.209. 23. IMMUNITY NOT WAIVED Nothing in this Agreement is intended, nor may it be deemed, to waive any governmental, official, or other immunity or defense of the Parties or their officers, employees, representatives, and agents as a result of the execution of this Agreement and the performance of the covenants contained in this Agreement. 24. CIVIL LIABILITY TO THIRD PARTIES Each Party shall be responsible for any civil liability for its own actions under this Agreement, and will determine what level, if any, of insurance or self-insurance it should maintain for such situations. 25. CAPTIONS Captions to provisions of this Agreement are for convenience, and shall not be considered in the interpretation of the provisions. HC fiber Agreement October 6, 2003 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, THE STATE AND THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT have executed duplicate counterparts to effectuate this agreement. THE STATE OF TEXAS Executed for the Executive Director and approved for the Texas Transportation Commission for the purpose and effect of activating and/or carrying out the orders, established policies or work programs heretofore approved and authorized by the Texas Transportation Commission. By: Title: Zane Webb Maintenance Division Director Date Recommended by: David B. Casteel, P.E. District Engineer, Corpus Christi Date Recommended by: Carlos A. Lopez, P.E. Director, Traffic Operations Division Date THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CRv of Corpus Christi Name of the Local Government By: Printed Name Title Date HC fiber Agreement 6 October 6, 2003 EXHIBIT A REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION OF FIBER NE'FWORK CONNECTION Requested by: Texas Department of Transportation __ City of Corpus Christi Section I - Ingress Fiber Access Location Information Ingress Location (e.g. control cabinet name) Identification Ingress Location (physical address) Address Fiber Interface Dark Fiber Splice __ Wave Division Multiplexer Connection Method Interface Quantity(e.g. # of fiber strands, # of WDM connections Interface Optical 850 nm __ 1310 nm 1550 nm Wavelength Other (Specify) Maximum T-1 __ NTSC __ 10Mbps __ 100 Mbps __ 1Gbps Interface Bandwidth DS-3 OC-3 OC-12 OC-48 Other (Specify) Special Ingress (e.g. routing, backup considerations, maximum path loss) Requirements and Comments Section B - Egress Fiber Access Location Information Egress Location (e.g. control cabinet name) Identification Egress Location (Physical address) Address Special Egress Requirements and Comments Contact Person: Activation Date Requested: Requested By: Phone No.: Date: Section C - Provider Review and Response Engineering Comments: Engineering Recommendation: Engineering Reviewed By: Approved by: Approve __ Do Not Approve Date: Date: ATTACHMENT 1 PARTICIPATION NOTICE I hereby notify the [other Party] that [Party] has approved participation in the Interlocal Agreement Fiber Network Interconnection Agreement City of Corpus Christi and Texas Department of Transportation, by lawful action of its governing body, a true copy of which is attached and incorporated in this Agreement. 18 CiTY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMORANDUM DATE: November 17, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Ordinance authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to execute a Use Privilege Agreement with Stabil Drill Corpus Christi for the right to construct, maintain, and alter approximately 200-linear feet of an 8-foot high chain link fence, adjacent to approximately 700- square feet of bedding and landscaping, and approximately 1,700-square feet of parking lot area, all within the South Navigation Boulevard street right-of-way (ROW); establishing a fee of $8,427.00; and declaring an emergency. ISSUE: Stabil Drill has submitted a request to install an 8-foot high chain link fence, expand their existing parking lot to allow for more parking spaces for the employees, and landscape the same area to comply with the city's beautification ordinances. REQUIRED COUNCIL ACTION: City Charter requires City Council approval for use of any portion of public right-of-way for private purposes. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the ordinance as presented. Attachments: Exhibit A - Background Exhibit B - Ordinance Exhibit C - Site Location Map e, Assistant City Manager Acting Director of Development Services AGENDA MEMORANDUM ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION Stabil Drill Corpus Christi ("Owner") has requested a Use Privilege Agreement (UPA) from the City to construct, maintain, and alter approximately 200 L. F. of an feet of an 8-foot high chain link fence, adjacent to approximately 700-sq. ft. of bedding and landscaping, and approximately 1,700-sq. fl. of parking lot area, all within the South Navigation Boulevard street right-of-way (ROW). Owner is expanding their facilities and has constructed a new building on their storage yard. In order to accommodate the expansion, their fence was moved to allow for the construction of additional parking lot space to allow for more parking spaces for their employees. Stabil Drill then had to comply with the City's Beautification Ordinance and provide landscaping around the existing chain link fence and the new parking lot. Stabil Drill had to request the UPA because the Use Privilege Improvements are now encroaching into the So. Navigation Blvd. street right-of-way. Stabil Drill had an existing chain link fence adjacent to the Navigation Blvd. street ROW prior to a 15-foot wide street dedication of that portion of Navigation Blvd. All City and private franchised utilities were contacted regarding this UPA. City Water Department had concerns and objected to the UPA because they felt the UPA would impede the extension of a water line that is planned to be built in the near future. City Water Department was made aware of "Paragraph D" in the UPA addressing the Water Department's concerns and they have agreed with the language in the UPA. Stabil Drill has been made aware of "Paragraph D" in the Use Privilege Agreement that states as follows: "Owner's use of the Use Privilege Improvements must not interfere with City's construction, operation, repair, replacement, or maintenance of any existing or future proposed sidewalks, utility lines, or other uses. If City (or any other franchisee with utilities currently located in said rights-of-way) needs access to the rights-of-way, Owner must pay for removing or relocating the Use Privilege Improvements to allow access to the utility lines for repair, replacement, or maintenance of the utility lines. The Owner must repair the Use Privilege Improvements to their original condition or remove the Use Privilege Improvements at which time this Agreement terminates immediately". The City Planning Department required the landscaping around the chain link fence to meet the city's beautification ordinances. The City Storm Water Department has no objections to the fencing of the city ROW, however will require that the Owner apply for a U PA for the fencing and cross-over of the City Drainage ROW adjacent to the Stabil Drill property located between 426 and 502 So. Navigation Boulevard. None of the other city departments and franchised utility companies had any objections, provided the applicant meets the specified conditions set out in the UPA. The applicant has been advised and concurs with all the conditions of the Use Privilege Agreement. A one-time fee of $8,427.00 is being recommended for the UPA. H ;\...~gen~agO3\upa~stbl-d d.m2 EXHIBIT A AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO EXECUTE A USE PRIVILEGE AGREEMENT WITH STABIL DRILL CORPUS CHRISTI FOR THE RIGHT TO CONSTRUCT, MAINTAIN AND ALTER APPROXIMATELY 200-LINEAR FEET OF AN 8-FOOT HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE, ADJACENT TO APPROXIMATELY 700-SQUARE FEET OF BEDDING AND LANDSCAPING AND APPROXIMATELY 1,700-SQUARE FEET OF PARKING LOT AREA, ALL WITHIN THE SOUTH NAVIGATION BOULEVARD STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY; ESTABLISHING A FEE OF $8,427.00; REQUIRING STABIL DRILL CORPUS CHRISTI TO COMPLY WITH THE SPECIFIED CONDITIONS; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. WHEREAS, in order to satisfy the requirements of Chapter 316 Texas Transportation Code, the City Council makes the following findings; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the chain link fence and landscaping will not be located on, or extend onto or intrude into the roadway portion of the South Navigation Boulevard right-of-way or the portion necessary for pedestrian use; WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the installation of the fence will not create a hazardous condition or obstruction of vehicular or pedestrian travel on South Navigation Boulevard; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the design and location of the fence includes all reasonable planning to minimize potential injury or interference to the public in the use of South Navigation Boulevard; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the use of the fence will not interfere with the public use of South Navigation Boulevard; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the use of the fence will not create a dangerous condition on South Navigation Boulevard; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1. That the City Manager, or his designee, is hereby authorized to execute a use privilege agreement with Stabil Drill Corpus Christi for the right to construct, install, operate, maintain and alter approximately 200 linear-feet of an eight (8) foot high chain link fence, adjacent to approximately 700 square feet of bedding and landscaping and approximately 1,700 square feet of parking lot area all within the South Navigation Boulevard street right-of-way. H:LLEG-DIRXJoseph\ORD-upa-StabDril.doc SECTION 2. That Stabil Drill Corpus Christi comply with the terms and conditions of the use privilege agreement, a copy of which is on file with the City Secretary, including payment of the fee of $8,427.00, and be subject to the following conditions as part of the use privilege agreement: Owner's use of the Use Privilege Improvements must not interfere with City's construction, operation, repair, replacement, or maintenance of any existing or future proposed sidewalks, utility lines, or other uses. If City (or any other franchisee with utilities currently located in said rights-of-way) needs access to the rights-of-way, Owner must pay for removing or relocating the Use Privilege Improvements to allow access to the utility lines for repair, replacement, or maintenance of the utility lines. The Owner must repair the Use Privilege Improvements to their original condition or remove the Use Privilege Improvements at which time this Agreement terminates immediately. City Storm Water Department has no objections to the fencing of the city ROW, however will require that the Owner apply for a UPA for the fencing and cross- over of the City Drainage ROW adjacent to the Stabil Drill property located between 426 and 502 South Navigation Boulevard. If Owner is to sell all or any portions of his lots at any time, (Lot 3, Block 6, Starcrest Place Unit 2, or the future Lot 1, Block 1, Stabil Tract or any portion of 8.818 acres of land of the north half of a 19.496 acre tract, [also known as Tract 9]) Owner shall be responsible for construction and installation in compliance with city standards, of an 8" wastewater line and an extension of a 12" water line according to City requirements of which Owner has been made aware. City will file and record this Use Privilege Agreement at the Nueces County Courthouse at Owner's expense, to ensure that public interests needing to use the right-of-way and any future owner of the property are aware of the agreement. SECTION 3. That upon written request of the Mayor or five council members, copy attached, the City Council (1) finds and declares an emergency due to the need for immediate action necessary for the efficient and effective administration of City affairs and (2) suspends the Charter rule that requires consideration of and voting upon ordinances at two regular meetings so that this ordinance is passed and takes effect upon first reading as an emergency measure this the 9th day of December, 2003. H:~LEG-DIR~Joseph\OP, D-upa-StabDril.doc F~le : ~M~roiect\councilexhibi~\exh~obildr~ll.dw~ AGNES N LOCATION IVIAP N PROJECT SITE VICINITY MAP NOT TO $C.4LE USE PRIVILEGE AGREEMENT STABIL DRILL CORPUS CHRISTI CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS EXHIBIT PAGE: I of X DATE: 07-12-2001 STREETYARD LIMI LINESTREETYARD LIMIT LINE S G� 5 F. KAY S T .SAE 45 DWRF. KATY'S T • .......... d, BOARD' dCREPE.MYRTLE' ° APE 1 CREPE MYRTLE. G x. 6' EDGE. •tl d tl W ° 10'W [1WNER TO:, PROVIDE, W ° CAR .ZTOPS° 0. BLD.ING W °AS RE<QI I.RED . °° J LIMIT. OF LAWN AREA 4 a n tl A 8. PROPOSED PARKING LOT 15' W E DEBICATIII el K IMAM IN LIN CITY ROW W a BED' WIDTH° d EN°CE ON,P.L. FENCEC /SLATS BUNSET BACK W ° L. d a ' CHAIN LINK FENCE 15' OW r3-1/2' HED HOSE BI AP SDAKER SINGLE CONNECTIO 3 CREPE MYRTLE PROPOSED LANDSCAPING W W i W W W W AROUND FENCE W W W W W W W W W W y W 'BEND A HE ARD' W W W W EDGE 2' x 4' DRAINAGE SWALE 33 PETITE OLEANDER 502 S, NAVIGATI LWN NOTE - SEEDING TO INSTALL ONE ROW OF SOAKER 15' WIDE HOSE 6 TO BE BURIED UNDER MULCH DEDICATION ROW (0' SS' 30' 60' k^•' LAWN o SEEDING 'L 2 PARKING LOT LANDSCAPE PLAN AREA EXHIBIT C 19 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMORANDUM City Council Action Date: December 9, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to execute a five year lease with Tejas Bowmen Archery Club to construct, maintain, and operate an archery range; providing for termination upon 30 days notice by either party; and providing for publication. ISSUE: Tejas Bowmen Archery Club is requesting a five-year lease renewal for the purpose of operating an archery range. REQUIRED COUNCIL ACTION: The City Council must approve all multi-year leases. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: The City Council previously approved a five-year lease with Tejas Bowmen Archery Club. FUNDING: No funding involved. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the five-year lease to Tejas Bowmen Archery Club for the use of approximately 40 acres of City property along Allison Drive, a substantial copy of which is attached as Exhibit "A". David Ondrias, Acting Director Park and Recreation Department Attachments: Background Information Map Lease Ordinance BACKGROUNDINFORMATION The Tejas Bowmen Archery Club has had an almost thirty year association with the City of Corpus Christi through the lease of City property along Allison Drive. The Tejas Bowmen Archery Club is a non-profit organization that has been in existence since 1938. Their activities are centered on promoting archery as a sport for the family. Their shooters range from toddlers to senior citizens. The archery range provides a fixed target range with "bulls eye" targets and a "wilderness trail" with game decoys. The Tejas Bowmen Archery Club hosts monthly archery tournaments in different venues that are open to the public. They have been a part of the Buccaneer Days celebration for over thirty years, and they co-host an annual state recognized event. Page 1 of 2 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO EXECUTE A FIVE YEAR LEASE WITH TEJAS BOWMEN ARCHERY CLUB TO CONSTRUCT, MAINTAIN, AND OPERATE AN ARCHERY RANGE; PROVIDING FOR TERMINATION UPON 30 DAYS NOTICE BY EITHER PARTY; AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS: SECTION 1. That the City Manager, or designee, is authorized to execute a five year lease with Tejas Bowmen Archery Club to construct, maintain, and operate an archery range. A copy of the lease is attached as Exhibit A and a copy of the lease shall be filed with the City Secretary. SECTION 2. The lease begins on the 61st day after final City Council approval of this ordinance and will have a term of five (5) years. SECTION 3. Publication shall be made in the official publication of the City of Corpus Christi as required by the City Charter of the City of Corpus Christi. I:\LEG-DIR\DoyleD.Curtis~VlYDOC S~2003\LEASE.ORD\Tejas. Bowmen. Lease. 111403DC .Ord.doc 20 AGENDA MEMORANDUM Date: October 31,2003 SUBJECT: Air Quality Monitor Lease Agreement Office of Environmental Programs AGENDA ITEM: Public hearing to hear citizen comments regarding execution of a five year lease with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to site continuous air quality monitors in Woodlawn Park and in H.J. Williams Park in consideration of TCEQ providing the air monitoring services. An ordinance authorizing the city manager, or designee, to execute a five year lease with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to site continuous air quality monitors in Woodlawn Park and in H.J. Williams Park in consideration of TCEQ providing the air monitoring services. ISSUE: The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality requested a lease to site two continuous air quality monitors on City Park property near the Port of Corpus Christi and associated industrial district. The monitors are two of a series of air quality monitors being funded out of a Supplemental Environmental Program grant resulting from a settlement between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Flint Hills Resources, formerly Koch Petroleum Group. The monitors will be operated by University of Texas reseamhers under contract to the TCEQ, and acquired data will be reported and posted by TCEQ. FUNDING: There are no funding requirements imposed upon the City nor the TCEQ by this lease agreement. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the ordinance. Attachments: 1. Summary of Lease 2. Lease Agreement C. I~im Mct3uii'e, CHMM Director, Office of Environmental Programs BACKGROUNDINFORMATION Subject: Air Quality Monitor Lease Agreement Project Description: The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) has been awarded funding from a Supplemental Environmental Project (SEP) grant resulting from a settlement between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Flint Hills Resources, formerly Koch Petroleum Group. The purpose of the grant is to establish a series of seven continuous air quality monitors in the area of the Port of Corpus Christi and associated industrial areas to monitor the concentration of specified chemical materials in the ambient air. The monitors will be purchased and operated by the University of Texas- Austin's Center for Energy and Environmental Resources. The term of the lease is five years with provisions to renew for an additional five years. The life of the monitoring program is estimated to last from seven to ten years. The lease provides a 40-foot by 40-foot enclosed space in Woodlawn Park and in Dr. H.J. Williams Park for the monitors and associated facilities. Each site will be enclosed in a six foot galvanized chain link fence. The Director of Parks and Recreation is granted approval authority for location of the monitors within the specified parks. There are no anticipated costs to the City of Corpus Christi for either the installation nor the operation of these monitors. The information generated in this program will be publicly available on the TCEQ website. The information will also be quite useful in the continuing research program studying ozone formation in the region. Prior Council Action: This is a new initiative and, therefore, there has been no prior Council action on this item. Future Council Action: No further Council action is anticipated on this item at this time. SUMMARY LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI AND THE TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Lease Provision - TCEQ is leasing a 40 x 40 foot site in Woodlawn Park and in Dr. H.J. Williams Park for the purpose of installing and operating two of seven continuous air quality monitors and associated facilities to monitor for concentrations of specified chemical materials in the ambient air. Responsibilities of Lessee - The Lessee shall: · Obtain site approval from the Director of Parks and Recreation (Director) for locating the monitoring facilities. · Obtain all necessary permits for construction. Construction is subject to ~nspection by the Director, City's Building Official, Director of Engineering Services, and their designated representatives. · Obtain consent from the Director prior to making any alterations, additions, or improvements. · Pay for all utilities related to the usage of the facilities. · Obtain consent from the Director for any signage associated with the facility. Payment - No payments are required under this lease. Term - The lease terminates five (5) years after execution of the agreement unless renewed per provisions of the lease agreement. ATTACHMENT #1 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER, OR DESIGNEE, TO EXECUTE A FIVE YEAR LEASE WITH THE TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY (TCEQ) TO SITE CONTINUOUS AIR QUALITY MONITORS IN WOODLAWN PARK AND IN H.J. WILLIAMS PARK IN CONSIDERATION OF TCEQ PROVIDING THE AIR MONITORING SERVICES; AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. WHEREAS, with proper notice to the public as described in Chapter 26 of the Parks and Wildlife Code, public hearing was held on Tuesday, November 11, 2003, during a meeting of the City Council, in the Council Chambers, at City Hall, in the City of Corpus Christi, during which all interested persons were allowed to appear and be heard; and WHEREAS, the City Council under Chapter 26 of the Parks and Wildlife Code finds that there is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of these lands for the air monitoring project and this project includes all reasonable planning to minimize harm to the land as a park and as a recreational facility. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS: SECTION ~1. That the City Manager, or designee, is authorized to execute a five- year lease, with the option to renew for five (5) additional years, with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to site continuous air quality monitors in Woodlawn Park and in H.J. Williams Park in consideration of TCEQ providing the air monitoring services. A copy of the lease is on file with the City Secretary. SECTION 2. Publication will be made in the official publication of the City of Corpus Christi as required by the City Charter of the City of Corpus Christi. H:~Joseph\ord-tceqLeas.doc 21 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMORANDUM PRESENTATION AGENDA ITEM: 15t" Annual "FEAST OF SHARING" H-E-B Holiday Dinner STAFF PRESENTER(S): Name Title/Position Department 1. Diana Zertuche Garza 2. Eisa Mu~oz Assistant to the Mayor Office of the Mayor Superintendent-Senior Community Svc Division OUTSIDE PRESENTER(S): Name 1. Debbie Lindsey-Opel 2. Gracie Herschbach Title/Position Or.clanization Regional Public Affairs & Ad Office HEB Coastal Bend Volunteer Center ISSUE: Announcement of the 15th Annual "Feast of Sharing" Holiday Dinner sponsored by H-E-B Grocery Company in partnership with the City of Corpus Christi. BACKGROUND: EVENT DESCRIPTION: The dinner will be held at the Bayfmnt Plaza Convention Center, on Christmas Eve Day, Wednesday, December 24, 2003 from 11:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. The dinner is free to all who attend. The preparation begins with the slicing of 1% tons (3,000 lbs.) of ham into 20,000 slices, and layering it in pans. In addition to the preparation of 10,000 tamales and the traditional ham entree, the menu will include the preparation of 500 gallons of mashed potatoes with gravy, 300 gallons of green beans, 10,000 bread rolls, 1,200 apple pies, soft drinks and coffee for 10,000 guests. REQUIRED COUNCIL ACTION: None Required Diana Zertu~ Garza, Assistar~o the Mayor Additional Background - Folder with additional information will be given out at the Council meeting. WHEREAS, H-E-B Grocery Company, in partnership with the City of Corpus C~aristi, will be hosting the 15Ch Annual "Feast of Sharing",Holiday Dinner for the City of Corpus Christi and surrounding areas on December 24th, 2003; an~d because the dinner, which will be held in Corpus Christi at the Bayfront Plaza Convention Center, is free to all who attend; and WHEREAS, The annual "Feast of Sharing" Holiday Dinner benefits the elderly, disabled, less fortunate, lonely, and family members of active military personnel; and because in addition to dinner, live entertainment and activities for the children will be provided; and WHEREAS, The preparation for the "Feast of Sharing" Holiday Dinner begins with the slicing of 1 Y: tons of ham, and preparing 10,000 tamaleg, 500 gallons of mashed potatoes with gravy, 300 gallons of green beans, 10,000 bread rolls, and 1,200 apple pies; and because over 1,200 volunteers will help make this year's dinner a success by assisting with food preparation, h6me deliveries, and children's activities. NOW, thet'efore, pursuant to the powers vested in me as Mayo.r of the City of Corpus Christi, I do hereby proclaim, December 24, 2003, as "15th Annual "FeaSt of Sharing" Holiday Dinner". In Corpus Christi, Texas, and encourage all citizens to recognize the contributions made by H-E-B, City of Corpus Christi staff, and the many volunteers who make this event possible each year. ~N~TESTIMONY THEREOF, I have hereunt~ set my hand, and caused to be affixed the Seal of the City of Corpus Christi on December 9, 2003 Samuel L. Neal, Jr. ' 22 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMORANDUM City Council Action Date: December 97 2003 AGENDA ITEM: (Caption as it should appear on the agenda) Presentation of the First Quarterly Update on the City's Title II Transition Plan under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). ISSUE: Under the City' Adopted ADA Title II Transition Plan, the City Council is to receive quarterly updates regarding the progress of transitioning from deficient areas of accessibility and barrier removal to barrier-free and ADA compliance in the City's public facilities, services, activities and programs. REQUIRED COUNCIL ACTION: None at this time. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: The City Council adopted the City's Title II Transition Plan under the Americans with Disabilities Act on February 11,2003. FUNDING: Approval of operating funds for accessibility and barrier removal in City public programs was effective August 1,2003. Capital funding for public City facilities was also effective August 1,2003. Funding for curb ramp barrier removal projects is pending voter approved bonds, beginning with the 2004 Bond Program. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: No further changes or recommendations at this time. L. David Ramos Director of Human Relations BACKGROUNDINFORMATION Progress in First Quarter In this first quarter, funding commenced for the removal and remedy of barders to accessibility in City public facilities and public programs. The recommended funding for the transition plan's facility improvements was through the City's FY 2003-04 Community Block Grants Program (CDBG), while funding of the program improvements funds were through the City's FY 2003-04 Operating Budget. Public Facilities A. Getting Started Financially During this first quarter, the Human Relations Department attended CDBG Training as a CDBG Recipient. This training was followed by Human Relations reviewing and entering into a formal agreement for the funding, procedures and other CDBG requirements in utilizing CDBG dollars, on behalf of the ADA transition plan's barder removal projects of public facilities. These CDBG funds were released for the City to use in October 2003. Preparfng the Groundwork The ADA transition plan facility improvement project work will be led by the City's Engineering Service Department. The City has hired the professional services of the firm of Chuck Anastos and Associates for design services necessary to review and prepare plans, specifications, and bid and contract documents, and provide updates and contract administration services. In following up with the Engineering Services, the Preliminary Phase has been completed, which was to field verify project scope with economic and technical evaluation of alternatives, and upon approval, proceed in a design memorandum which includes Preliminary designs, drawings, and written description of the project. Furthermore, appreximately 90 percent of the Design Phase as been completed by the firm with City review and acceptance pending. Timeframe The Anastos firm has provided a timeframe for the project work on the transition plan's public facility improvements, which is outlined below: PROPOSED PROJECT SCHEDULE DAY DATE ACTIVITY Wednesday 27 August 2003 Begin Preliminary Phase Monday 29 September 2003 Present Prelim Phase to City Monday 6 October Begin Design Phase Friday 7 November 2003 90% Design Submission City Review (2 weeks) Monday 24 November 2003 Begin Completion of Design Phase Wednesday 10 December 2003 Final 100% Submittal II. III. Additionally, the firm will prepare Construction Documents for bidding and construction purposes. Prepare cost estimate including benefits of the various alternatives considered; and once approved for bidding, submit plans to TDLR for accessibility review. Bids for Construction Work After the pre-bid conference and bid evaluations, construction contract awards are projected in February 2004. Construction work at the various facilities should then begin in March 2004. Programs A. Funding Funding for the ADA transition plan's program improvements were appropriated in the City's FY 2003-04 Operating Budget effective August 1, 2003. Work in Progress As the new fiscal year began, the Human Relations Departments issued letters to all of the pertinent departments to proceed with the applicable purchasing processes necessary to obtain the accessibility items as identified in the ADA transition plan for their respective areas. Follow-up calls and discussion meetings have been conducted with the departments regarding status in their respective efforts. Human Relations has been working on transition plan items with the following departments for the first quarter: City Secretary's Office, Health, Libraries, Museum, Public Information Office, Purchasing and Utility Business Office. Some bid processes and purchases have already been completed for fourteen audio/visual items and also closed captioning of videos for City museum services at the Corpus Christi Museum of Science and History. Other closed captioning is pending for the City Council Chambers and City public service announcements. The Human Relations has met with the City Secretary's Office, teleconferenced with existing vendor for other cities, and also contacted other agencies and vendor listings within Texas. Timeframe Additional vendor information and sample contracts are pending for closed captioning. Based on the information received thus far, the projected turnaround time upon contract award and site visit is approximately 6-7 weeks, including set-up and testing before live closed captioning. Curb Ramps The curb ramp projects listed under the ADA transition plan ramain as approved projects in the City's Capital Improvement Project Budget, which will be part of the City's upcoming proposed bond program in 2004. City of Corpus Christi ADA Title II Transition Plan First Quarterly Update December 2003 Areas for Accessibility and Barrier Removal City ADA Title II Transition Plan Public Facilities Public Programs Site Development Outreach Citywide Curb Ramps Individual Curb Ramp Requests of Adopted Short -Range Items Category Public Facility Sites Adopted Estimate EstimatedD Cte mpletion City Hall, Libraries, Facilities Health, Street/SWS, $59905 FY 2004-05 Rec. Centers, Sr. Centers STATUS: 08/14/03 CDBG Recipient Agreement Signed 08/19/03 Engineering A&E Contract Awarded 10/03/03 CDBG Funds Released Ongoing A&E Consultant Preparation Work for Barrier Removal Projects Citv of Corpus Christi 2 Architect/Engineer (A&E) Contractor's PROPOSED PROJECT SCHEDULE DATE ACTIVITY August 27, 2003 Begin Preliminary Phase September 29, 2003 October 6, 2003 November 7, 2003 November 24, 2003 December 10, 2003 Citv of Corpus Christi 3 Present Preliminary Phase to City Begin Design Phase 90% Design Submission City Review (2 weeks) Begin Completion of Design Phase Final 100% Submittal Additionally, the A&E contractor will: Prepare construction documents for bidding and construction purposes; Prepare cost estimates, including benefits of the various alternatives considered; and Once approved for bidding, submit plans to TX Department of Licensing and Regulations (TDLR) for accessibility review. After the bid processes, contract awards are anticipated in February 2004, with construction work projected to begin in March 2004. City of Corpus Christi 4 Adopted Short -Range Items Category Improvement Sites Adopted Estimate Estimated Completion Date Libraries, Museum, $1361730 Programs Closed Captioning and Year One, Annually Various Customer then Service Areas $1171480 STATUS: 08/01/03 Operating Budget Effective Date During the 1st Quarter: Purchased Museum & some Park and Rec items; Work in Process: (1) Libraries & Other Closed Captioning for Council Chambers and Public Service Announcements (PSA's), and (2) Review of internal olicies is ongoing. of Corpus Christi 5 Adopted Short -Range Items Category Improvement Sites Adopted Estimate Estimated Completion Date Training of Site Development $10,000 Annually Development Services Staff thru Unappropriated TX Accessibility Academy STATUS: Staff to possibly attend TDLR training in 3rd Quarter of FY 2003-04 due to funding and schedules. of Coraus Christi 6 Adopted Short -Range Items Category Improvement Sites Adopted Estimate Estimated Completion Date Outreach Citywide $5,000 Annually Unappropriated STATUS: Internal awareness training on Accessibility, Barrier Removal and ADA Compliance was provided to Departmental Directors during this first quarter. Awareness training for City employees at monthly Customer Service classes is ongoing. Three sessions have been conducted during this quarter. of Corpus Christi 7 Adopted Short -Range Items of Corpus Christi 8 Estimated Category Improvement Sites Estimated Completion Cost Date Citywide Curb Ramps Priority List $8 Million FY 2011-12 STATUS: No activity; Pending Bond Program in 2004 for Voter Approval. Individual Varies upon citizen $130,000 Annually Curb Ramp request and Requests urgency. STATUS: No citizen requests/emergencies in 1 st Quarter. of Corpus Christi 8 Questions, inquiries or complaints on accessibility within the City of Corpus Christi's services, activities, programs or facilities should be forwarded to the City's Human Relations Department at (361) 880-3190. Citv of Corous Christi 9 23 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMORANDUM PRESENTATION DATE: December 16, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Presentation by SMG CITY STAFF PRESENTER(S): Name Title Dept/Div OUTSIDE PRESENTER (S): 1. Marc Solis General Manager Corpus Christi Arena ISSUE: Mr. Solis will update the Council on the new arena and coliseum. REQUIRED COUNCIL ACTION: None. ssager 24 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMORANDUM PRESENTATION AGENDA ITEM: Presentation by Streets/Solid Waste Services staff regarding the status of services, capital requirements, and new initiatives provided by the Streets Department. STAFF PRESENTER(S): Name Title/Position Department 1. Jeffrey D. Kaplan 2. Andy Leal 3. John Sendejar Director, Streets & Solid Waste Services Assistant Director, Streets Department Superintendent of Administration, Streets/Solid Waste Services ISSUE: Council requested an update of services and options regarding the Streets Department and their current process for handling day-to-day operations as well as reports of damaged streets by area residents. Additional Background n Exhibits n (~a~ent H a~d Signature) STREETS POSITION PAPER FOR COUNCIL PRESENTATION DECEMBER 9, 2003 CURRENT ISSUES: Council requested an update of services and options regarding the Streets division and their current process for handling day to day operations as well as reports of damaged streets by area residents. STREETS RESPONSIBILITIES: There are three areas of operations in the street division. They are Traffic Signals, Signs, Markings & Striping, and Maintenance of Streets. TRAFFIC SIGNALS The Streets Division is responsible for maintaining 242 signalized intersections: 136 are steel mast arms, 70 are span wire, and 36 are pedestal mounted. 120 intersections are equipped with a total of 429 video detection cameras. 143 intersections are equipped with 1200 pedestrian signals (PED's). We also maintain 169 school warning flashers and 43 flashing warning beacons. Maintenance of these signals is performed with a staff of 12 employees (8 signal technicians, a signals coordinator, a fiber optic technician, an engineer's assistant, and a signals superintendent) with overall responsibilities of fielding trouble calls, intersection upgrades and repairs, preventative maintenance on the signal cabinets, cameras, and other intersection components, and signal coordination and optimization. The fiber optic technician also maintains several miles of optical fiber that interconnects several traffic signal systems. Traffic signal coordination on major thoroughfares continues to be priority. Approximately 35% (83) of the 242 signalized intersections are coordinated in 18 corridors as listed on Attachment 1. We are working with TxDot to incorporate several SPID signals into coordination with the City's system to help improve traffic congestion at these busy intersections. SPID/Airline, SPID/Staples, and SP1D/Everhart, have already been coordinated and we are presently working on SPID/Weber intersection. Theses coordination studies are very complex and take several months to complete and implement, and even after implementation the intersections have to be continuously monitored and adjusted for optimal performance. Presently the department (and City) has one person capable of performing these studies and his time is split among other work duties, including keeping all intersections timings optimized. The current FY budget for Traffic Signals is $1,516,846 and provides for the maintenance, replacement, and repair of the existing traffic signal components, and approximately $30k is provided for expansion of coordination signal systems through fiber optic installation. It is our goal and vision to have every major thoroughfare coordinated and the majority of signalized intersections in communication to a Traffic Contro~ Center (TOC) whereby traffic would be monitored and adjustments (timings, etc.) made from one central point. However, it is our opinion that this can only be done with continued Council support for CIP funding for new intersections, intersection upgrades (from span wire to hurricane proof mast arm), coordination projects, and TOC initiatives. SIGNS, MARKINGS, & STRIPING: The Streets Division maintains approximately 100,000 traffic signs, 400 miles of street striping, 507 school crosswalks, 514 pedestrian crosswalks, and curb painting throughout the City. Additionally, this operation provides implementation of Traffic Control Plans for special events, such as Beach to Bay, 4~ of July events/fireworks, Bayfest, Buccaneer's Parade/events, and other similar events. On call personnel is provided 24/7/365 for emergency calls to replace/repair regulatory traffic signs. The Signs operation is maintained by 6 employees (a sign shop foreman, a sign fabricator, and 4 sign technicians) who are responsible for all traffic sign (regulatory and warning), street name signs, school zone signs, and various specialty signs for the community. In FY 02-03 this operation manufactured approx. 4800 signs, and installed/repaired/replaced over 10,500 other signs. This operation is very efficient and responsive, and with the acquisition of two new sign trucks scheduled to be delivered early next year, we will have even more reliable service. There is one thing that needs to be considered as part of the CIP, that is that the current sign shop building has been condemned now for several years and is in need of replacement. The Markings operation is maintained by a crew of 3 employees (2 equipment operators and a signs and markings technician). Their responsibilities include maintenance of school and pedestrian crosswalks, lane designation markings, parking lot striping, curb marking/painting, and speed hump markings. These enormous responsibilities are hard to maintain at an acceptable level with as small a crew designated for this operation. Such is the case, this small crew focuses on crosswalk maintenance, primarily school crosswalks with other responsibilities provided as time permits or for safety issues. Current crosswalk conditions are listed below: School Crosswalks Pedestrian Crosswalks Overall Condition 343 Good - 68% 278 Good - 54% I00 Fair - 20% 65 Fair - 13% 64 Poor - 13 % 171 Poor - 33% Paint 190 Good 54% 153 Good - 43% 98 Fair - 28% 49 Fair - 14% 64 Poor - 18% 152 Poor- 43% Thermoplastic 153 Good- 96% 125 Good- 78% 2 Fair - 1% 16 Fair - 10% 4 Poor- 3% 19 Poor- 12% One of the major hindrances in trying to improve on these conditions is also the fact that we are using paint which is only good for up to a year and in some cases, depending on traffic conditions, only 6 months. The thermoplastic crosswalks are overall in better condition because it lasts up to 10 times longer than paint. Thermoplastic's initial cost is 2 to 3 times that of paint, however it pays for itself within a two year period. Our current budget provides for approx. $23K overall for thermoplastic tape for crosswalks and speed humps addressing only a small fraction of the overall need. Any opportunity needs to be pursued to increase the funding for thermoplastic and/or increasing crews. The Striping operation is maintained by a crew of 3 employees (2 equipment operators, and a signs and markings technician) and are responsible for all city roadway striping (approx. 400 miles). Due to ongoing operational and maintenance problems with the one (1) striping truck this crew was able to complete only 54% of the striping goals in FY 02-03. Last FY this truck had a major overhaul. We continue to have maintenance problems with this 13 year old track however, the current FY (1st Qtr) we have completed 22% of our goal and barring any further major problems we expect to meet or exceed the goal. As this vehicle ages and continues to have maintenance problems we will have to consider replacement and/or contracting this operation. The current budget for Signs, Markings & Striping is $861,001. Aside from issues discussed, the only other issue is the available FTE's for the Markings and Striping. With crew size of 3 FTE's each, normal employee absenteeism disrupts any plans for the day. An additional 2 FTE's would add flexibility and provide a more stable work environment. MAINTENANCE OF STREETS The Streets division maintains approximately 1108 miles of city streets, 33 miles of service drives, and 143 parking lots. Additionally, this division repairs all utility cuts done by city forces and performs construction and/or repair work for other city departments on a reimbursement basis (Reimbursements for FY02-03 were - $474,954 Utility cuts, $606,139 Street Recovery Charge, and $219,093 other work). The current budget for Maintenance of Streets is $6,104,188. The responsibility of the Street Maintenance division lies in the following areas: Preventive Maintenance, Reactive Maintenance, Utility Cuts, and Recycle/Reclamation (in-lieu of Reconstruction). This work is accomplished with 89 employees. 29 are assigned to seal coat work- I crew 20 are assigned to level-up - 3 crews, 3 are assigned to potholes- 1 crew 15 are assigned to base failures- 2 crews, 6 are assigned to utility cuts - 1 crew 15 are assigned to rework - 4 crews Preventative Maintenance - which is basically techniques used for preservation of the structural integrity of the pavement cross-section. The basic theory behind pavement preservation is to apply relatively inexpensive PM to pavements at regular intervals to avoid much more expensive repairs later (much like you do PM's on cars to keep them running reliably). These include: Seal Coating - leveling uneven areas, applying an asphalt emulsion and covering with aggregate rock providing for weather tight seal and a wear surface. This is exemplified by response to a CCAR where on Santa Fe street we are sealing the surface after a leveling up procedure. Overlaying - apply a minimum of 1.5 inches of asphalt to the street's surface after repairing distressed areas. Reactive Maintenance - which is the repair of failed or distressed pavement sections(s). These include: Pothole repairs - repair of localized failed areas in pavement Base Failure Repair - repair of failed areas in pavement Level-up - leveling of pavement depressions and settlements - This is exemplified by Councilman Scott's concern on Weber Road where the utility cut repair required cutting down the uneven surface and then leveling up for continuity. This is also exemplified by work we did on Angela Street in response to a CCAR where we leveled up the street. Utility cut repairs - repair of cuts in pavement done to repair underground utilities Recycle/reclamation - repair of large sections of street where the base material and surface layer are pulverized, re-compacted and a surface layer such as a double layer of seal coat is applied. This is exemplified by a response to a CCAR on Brawner Parkway between Ramsey and Kostoryz. Reconstruction - repair of large sections of street where the surface layer and base materials are removed (and sometimes portions of the subgrade also are remove), the subgrade is stabilized and compacted, new base material and surface layer (typically hot mix asphalt) is installed. We are spending more and more of our time on reactive maintenance due to the inability to properly fund our preventive maintenance needs furthermore, numerous drainage issues citywide only compound the problem as standing water on the street and along the curb & gutters seep into the base causing it to deteriorate. Surprising to many people, Street Services is not responsible for curb & gutters maintenance, it is the Storm Water Department responsibility. Many of the public's concerns perceived as street problems can be attributed to poor drainage and/or sunken/settled curb & gutters. It is therefore very important that as street repair work is performed, any street drainage issues need to be corrected otherwise the repair work will not last. This effort needs to be coordinated (between Departments) and priorities and funding realigned to achieve the desired result. Day to day complaints or request for service are handled through the administrative office and documented in a complaint tracking program. Every complaint/request for service is work ordered and given to an inspector which in turn physically inspects the problem area and makes a determination as to the type of work needed to repair the problem. This is done in order to effectively plan and deploy the right work crews for tbe job (an average citizen does not know the difference between a pothole or a base failure or the start of a cave-in). Citizen complaints are treated with priority and we strive to meet our response time goals as listed in Attachment 2. Internally identified work is prioritized based on severity and/or location proximity to other complaints. Weather also plays a big factor in our overall day to day operations and as you know extended periods of wet weather bring out the worst in the streets. Many more pothole and base failures occur during these wet periods than any other time, and because normal operations are suspended during this time most of the crews are assigned to pothole duty. After the last wet period, every crew was assigned to pothole duty for a period of about a week after we started to dry out in order to adequately respond to the many pothole complaints received. For longer term planning, the Streets division utilizes a computer software program called Micro- PAVER (PAVER for short) as part of our pavement managemem tools to help develop work strategies and plans on a network level, and assess the over all condition of the street network. The PAVER program was developed by the US Army Corps of Engineers, it is distributed and technically supported by APWA and is a widely use program throughout the country. Street Services has used this program for over 15 years. The City's street inventory network is set up in PAVER defining pavement sections for every street. As a statistical program, pavement sample sections are defined through PAVER on a random basis. The department street inventory inspectors, then go through and inspect the sample sections for the various defined pavement distresses. PAVER defines 19 distresses and 3 severity levels, which are documented for each sample section. The inspection information is then entered into PAVER for analysis. PAVER provides a quantitative street condition assessments based on inspection results on a scale between 0-100 which we call PCI or pavement condition index. The higher the PCI number, the better condition of the street. Based on the PCI a work strategy for that pavement section is developed. Street Services bas used the following to use as strategy: PAVER PCI 0 to 55 - Recycle 56 tO 85 - Level-up and Seal 80 to 82 - Overlay (Arterials Only) 86 to 100 - Seal eveW 5 - 7 yrs Based on this strategy the overall condition of the street network is determined. Using this process the street conditions are continuously being updated through inspections and maintenance work being performed. Although this is a continuous process, it should be realized that inspecting the entire street network takes approximately two years to complete and while the data is as accurate as possible some pavement sections have not been inspected for two years. The City's street network is approximately 18,626,000 square yards. The following two charts illustrate the work assessment needs over the past five years and a current needs assessment (provided during the budget process) vs. funded levels. STREET MAINTENANCE NEEDS Over Past Five Years 4,000,000 3,000,000 ~ Recycle/Reconst. 2,000,000 ~ Overlay-sy Seal-sy 1,000,000 0 Feb. 1999 Jan. 2000 Jan. 2001 Jan. 2002 'Mar. 2003 Recycre/Reconst. 512,171 647,312 884,306 1,238,134 /Overlay-sy 490,309 517,642 347,116 3z~i,625 335,225 ~Se~al-;~ 2,570,889 2,613,910 2,864,087 3,502,773 3,569,579 · Needs · Capabilities As shown in the in the first chart, over the past five years, the Seal Coat requirement have increased by 39%, Reworks have increased by 410%, and Overlays have decreased by 32% (due to 2000 Bond Projects). These increasing trends have come about as a result of under funding the overall maintenance needs as shown in the second chart thus the accumulation of unmet needs. Current budget funding addresses only 28% of the Seal Coat, 9% of the Reconstruction work, and none of the Overlay needs, as shown in the second chart. Our work crews cannot address the needs of the community. The really alarming trend is that of Reconstruction work which just in the past year has basically doubled and if you project the curve out it will double again next year. This indicated that there are many streets in the borderline category ready to cross over, and in fact we have identified approximately 1,794,000 square yards that are between a PCI of 56 to 65 which we believe are those borderline cases. Based on the aforementioned unmet needs, we estimate our current unfunded need at approximately $7.6 million for seal coats, $8.3 million for overlays and $95.1 million for reconstruction of City streets, and if you want to consider the borderline streets include an additional $89.7 million. We have already started to work with the Engineering Department to begin addressing these unmet needs though the CIP. We have submitted a list of approximately 1100 streets (approx. 245 miles) identified for Reconstruction consideration in the program. 6 Reliable equipment is also an important consideration in running an efficient operation. Street Services fleet has an average age of 10.6 years, some of the vehicles have outlived their useful life and are in need of replacement. No Street Services vehicles were funded for replacement in the current FY. Meeting Citizen's and Council's service expectation is an important part of our goals however, it is made that much harder with unreliable, unavailable equipment. CONCLUSION: Our City street infrastructure is deteriorating at a much more notable rate and is far exceeding the funding level and capabilities of Street Services. There are several recommendations in order to more aggressively address our deteriorating streets: Utilization of existing City bond programs to maximize area projects and associated streets, · Continue use of matching funds or areas with the State to effectively coordinate funds already being spend in the City, · Work closer with the utility departments to coordinate ongoing engineering projects and streets affected by the project, · Request additional funding through the supplemental funding request (SFR's) each fiscal year during the budget process and steady increase the operating budget. · Aggressively pursue new equipment, materials, and programs that add to overall life of our streets. · Other considerations: Review current platting ordinance will be reviewed to enhance the initial stages of development prior to the City taking responsibility for subdivision from developers. In many cases minimum street standards for new development need review, primarily because the majority of the street life is consumed during the building construction phase of the development and the City takes over maintenance of a fatigued street. ATTACHMENT 1 Traffic Signals System in Coordination System From To Airline Rd. Gollihar Saratoga Alameda Airline Ayers/Alameda All Downtown Coopers Alley Twigg Everhart McArdle Wooldrige Everhart Middlecoff Cedar Pass Home Ayers Greenwood IH 37 Mesquite Water Kostoryz Norton Holly Morgan Airport 19t~ Northwest Blvd. Wildcat Woodriver Park Rd. 22 Whitecap Hwy 361 Rodd Field Williams Wooldrige Staples Shopping Way Wooldrige Staples Mustang Trail Caramel Blvd. Staples Ayers/Alemeda Weber Staples Lipan Ayers/Alameda Staples Timbergate Yorktown Weber Gollihar Carravelle 8 Streets and Solid Waste Services Department City of Corpus Christi PUS Street Responsibilities ■ Traffic signals ■ Signs, Markings & Striping ■ Maintenance of Streets STREET SERVICES Total 125 FTE's Traffic Signals ■ 242 signalized intersections ■ 169 school zone flashers ■ 43 flashing warning beacons ■ Responsibilities: — Trouble calls — Intersection upgrades and repairs — Preventive maintenance (cabinets, camera's, other components) — Signal Coordination ■ 83 coordinated intersections (35%) ■ 100% optimization of intersections ■ Current Budget: $1,516,846 Signs, Markings &Striping ■ Approximately 100,000 traffic signs ■ 400 miles of street striping ■ 507 school crosswalks ■ 514 pedestrian crosswalks ■ Curb painting ■ Current Budget: $861,001 Maintenance of Streets ■ 1108 miles of streets ■ 33 miles of service drives ■ 143 parking lots ■ Repair of City Dept.'s Utility Cuts ■ Current Budget- $6,104,188 Maintenance of Streets ■ Preventive Maintenance: — Seal coating — Overlaying ■ Reactive Maintenance: — Pothole repairs — Base failure repairs — Level up ■ Utility cut repairs ■ Recycle/Reclamation -done in lieu of reconstruction ■ Reconstruction Pavement Management ■ PAVER Software program — Developed by US Army Corps of Engineers. — Distributed and technically supported by APWA. ■ Capabilities — Street inventory — Street inspection (19 — Provides quantitative on inspection results. distresses and 3 severity levels) street condition assessment based — Provides a PCI (pavement condition index), rating condition of pavement (0 to 100 scale). — Work Management/Planning tool Pavement Management Strategy ■ PAVER Software program ■ PAVER PCI — 86 to 100 — Seal every 5 — 7 yrs — 80 to 82 — Overlay (Arterials Only) — 56 to 85 — Level -up and Seal — 0 to 55 — Reconstruct/Recycle 7000000 S 6000000 q u 5000000 a r 4000000 e y 3000000 a r 2000000 d S 1000000 11 Needs vs. Budgeted Needs- Budget- Needs- Budget- Needs- Budget- Needs- Budget- Needs- Budget - 99 99 00 00 01 01 02 02 03 03 Recycle/Reconstruct 0 Overlays 0 Seal Coat Cumulative Unfunded Needs ■ Seal coat- $7,667,000 ■ Overlay- $8,381,000 ■ Reconstruction - $95,100,000 — (street pavement cost only) Street Services Potholes Repaired Response time goal — 3 days Performance FY 02-03 - 84% 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Street Services Base Failures Repaired FY01-02 FY02-03 FY03-04 ■ FY01-02' ■ FY02-03 p FY03-04 Response time goal — 10 days Performance FY 02-03 - 80% Street Services Utility Cuts Repaired Response time goal — 3 days Performance FY 02-03 - 84% ■ FY01-02 ■ FY02-03 FY03-04 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Street Services Speed Humps Installed FY01-02 FY02-03 FY03-04 ■ FY01-02 ■ FY02-03 p FY03-04 Maintenance of Streets ■ Preventive Maintenance: — Seal coating:— Partially Funded — Overlaying: -Unfunded ■ Reactive Maintenance: — Pothole repairs -Funded — Base failure repairs - Funded — Level up - Funded ■ Utility cut repairs — repair of cuts in pavement to repair underground utilities. - Funded ■ Recycle/Reclamation —done in lieu of reconstruction— Partially Funded ■ Reconstruction — removal of surface and base, stabilize an compact subgrade, install new base and asphalt surface. - Unfunded New Approaches ■ Use of Thermoplastic for speed humps and crosswalks (limited funding) ■ Use of wet weather pothole mix (limited funding) ■ New more efficient pothole vehicle (eta.- 12/03) ■ Re-engineering — Implementation of WMS (Maximo) will improve coordination effort with utility departments. Recommendations ■ Continue to utilize Bond Programs — Street Reconstruction Projects ■ Maximize State Projects ■ Seek increased funding each Fiscal Year ■ Review Current Street Construction Standards 25 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMORANDUM PRESENTATION AGENDA ITEM: (Caption/Title of Presentation as it should appear on the agenda) Presentation of the Draft South Central Area Development Plan STAFF PRESENTER(S): Name Title/Position Department 1. Michael N. Gunning 2. Robert E. Payne 3. Mic Raasch Assist. Director I Dir. Of Planning Senior Planner City Planner Dev. Services Dev. Services Dev. Services ISSUE: Update the South Central Area Development Plan BACKGROUND: A presentation of the draft plan will be provided to City Council on Tuesday, December 9, 2003 which includes Planning Commission recommendations. A draft of the South Central Area Development Plan is attached. For more information see the attached Additional Background Information. REQUIRED COUNCIL ACTION: None. Additional Background x Exhibits x PowerPoint Presentation ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND Subject: Draft South Central Area Development Plan: an Element of the Corpus Christi Comprehensive Plan Public Hearing - A City Council public hearing is scheduled for December 16, 2003. Planning Process - The planning process approved by the City Manager in January 2003 indicated a plan would be ready for City Council approval before the end of the year. A key element of the planning process was to formulate a detailed list of issues to be addressed in the plan with residents, business owners, developers, the Port of Corpus Christi, Regional Transportation Authority and the Downtown Management District. The South Central Stakeholders Group played a fundamental role in assisting City Staff in formulating an Issues Report and the draft plan. Staff met with the Stakeholders Group on seven occasions between May and September. Board and Commission Review ~ The South Central Area Draft Plan was presented for review, comment and endorsement to the Transportation, Park, and Water/Shore Advisory Committees. On November 19~, the Planning Commission conducted the second public hearing on the Plan and recommended City Council adoption of the plan with a number of policy revisions to the draft plan. Plan Mission Statement Excerpt- "The ultimate goal of this plan is to assist in transforming the City's South Central Area into an economic development focal point that will nourish the bayfront to flourish to its full potential through a series of redevelopment strategies and a make it a thriving central area neighborhood community." The City "... commits to doing its part to ensure the long-term success of the City's South Central Area." Exhibits Exhibit A: PowerPoint Presentation Exhibit B: Draft South Central Area Development Plan SOUTH CENTRAL AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN An Element of the Comprehensive Plan Draft Update December 9, 2003 South Central Area Development Plan Update December 9, 2003 Pa~e ll South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 111 SOUTH CENTRAL AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN Supersedes the Plan approved by City Council Ordinance #22166, February 28, 1995, which amended the original Plan adopted by City Council Resolution #021169, on May 21, 1991 The preparation of this document was financed in part by a Community Development Block Grant from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development and a Metropolitan Planning Organization grant from the Federal Highway Administration. Corpus Christi City Council 2003 Mayor Loyd Neal Melody Cooper Jessie Noyola At Large District 3 Henry Garrett Javier Colmenero Rex Kinnison At Large District 2 District 5 Brent Chesney Bill Kelly Mark Scott At Large District 1 District 4 South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page IV Corpus Christi Planning Commission November 19, 2003 David Berlanga, Chairman Shirley Mims, Vice chair Rober~ Zamora Elizabeth Chu Richter Richard Smith Eloy Salazar Bryan Stone Neill F. Amsler Michael Pusley South Central Area Stakeholders Group Norma Urban Bunny Arnim Brad Lomax Gordon Landreth Tim Clower Wayne Lundquist Dusty Dun'ill Larry Urban Elizabeth Chu Richter Brooke Sween-McGIoin David Seller Tom Niskala Greg Brubeck Bert Quintanilla Roy Pell Linda Hodge Neill Amsler Mohammad Farhan South Central ~4 rea Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Pagel South Central /lrea Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 2 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 4 POPULATION AND EXISTING LAND USE ......................................................................... 5 PLANNING PROCESS ............................................................................................................. 8 STAKEHOLDER AND CITIZEN INPUT ................................................................................ PLANNING ISSUES ................................................................................................................. 9 MISSION STATEMENT ........................................................................................................... 9 PLAN GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ......................................................................................... 9 A. ENVIRONMENT .................................................................................................................. 12 B. LAND USE ............................................................................................................................ 13 AREA A: BAYFRONT AND DOWNTOWN LAND USE POLICIES ................................. 14 AREA B: UPTOWN OFFICE AND GOVERNMENTAL CENTER ..................................... 20 AREA C: SOUTH BLUFF AREA ........................................................................................... 21 C. TRANSPORTATION ............................................................................................................ 24 D. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ............................................................................................ 28 E. PUBLIC SERVICES .............................................................................................................. 30 PARKS ..................................................................................................................................... 30 BAYFRONT PARK .............................................................................................................. 30 FESTIVAL PARK ................................................................................................................ 30 BLUCHER AND SOUTH BLUFF PARKS ......................................................................... 31 BLUFF BALUSTRADE ....................................................................................................... 32 DOWNTOWN PARKS ......................................................................................................... 32 MARINA ............................................................................................................................... 32 PUBLIC FACILITIES .............................................................................................................. 33 UTILITIES ............................................................................................................................ 34 WATER SYSTEM ............................................................................................................. 34 WASTEWATER SYSTEM ............................................................................................... 34 STORMWATER SYSTEM ............................................................................................... 34 OTHER PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES ........................................................... 34 F. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT NEEDS ................................................................................... 36 UTILITIES ............................................................................................................................... 366 MARINA .................................................................................................................................. 3 SHORT RANGE NEEDS ..................................................................................................... 36 MEDIUM RANGE PROJECTS ........................................................................................... 37 LONG RANGE PROJECTS ................................................................................................. 38 NORTH BASIN .................................................................................................................... 38 BAYFRONT ............................................................................................................................. 38 PARK AND RECREATION .................................................................................................... 39 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT .............................................................................................. 39 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ...................................................................................... 40 TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSIT ................................................................................... 40 G. PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ................................................................................................ 42 South Central .4 rea Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 3 FIGURES FIGURE 1: SOUTH CENTRAL AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN STUDY AREA ................... 5 FIGURE 2: EXISTING LAND USES IN THE SOUTH CENTRAL AREA ............................... 6 FIGURE 3: SUB-AREA BOUNDARY MAP ............................................................................ 11 FIGURE 4: FUTURE LAND USE .............................................................................................. 13 FIGURE 5: PEDESTRIAN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PLAN .......................................... 19 FIGURE 6: FUTURE TRANSPORTATION PLAN .................................................................. 25 TABLES TABLE 1: 2000 CENSUS POPULATION AND HOUSING ...................................................... 5 TABLE 2:2002 EXISTING LAND USE ACREAGE ................................................................. 7 APPENDICES APPENDIX A: ISSUES REPORT .............................................................................................. 44 APPENDIX B: HISTORICAL PLANS AND STUDIES ........................................................... 57 South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 4 South Central Area Development Plan INTRODUCTION The Comprehensive Plan is mandated by the City Charter. It requires the City Council to "...establish comprehensive planning as a continuous governmental function in order to guide, regulate, and manage future development..." and, that "all city improvements, ordinances, and regulations shall be consistent with the comprehensive plan." The Comprehensive Plan is a product of various plan titles such as Policy Statements, Area Development Plans, Capital Improvement Programs, and Master Utility Plans. The comprehensive planning process is a means whereby citizens and community leaders guide community development. The Comprehensive Plan, by definition, is general, long range, and broad in scope. To help formulate the Comprehensive Plan, City Council divided the city and its environs into l0 Area Development Plan (ADP) study areas. POR"f AIRPORT ~ FLOUR VIOLEt BLUFF SLOE//.,,,./ MUSIANG. SOUTHSIDE ISLAND Development plans for these areas will help resolve basic issues such as zoning and platting of properties, allocation of public services and facilities contained in the Capital Improvement Programs, and other area specific issues. In any case, follow-up programs are needed to implement the many policies in the Plan. Implementation of these plans will help assure the most appropriate land development and provision of public services. Coordination of the Capital Improvement Plan, various Area Development Plans, and day-to-day actions of line agencies responsible for implementing the Comprehensive Plan, will result in more cost effective development and tax dollar savings. The South Central Development Plan Area, located south of the ship channel, was originally part of a larger Central ADP area which included the Corpus Christi Beach area north of the ship channel. The "Central Area" was separated into "north" and "south" study areas to expedite formulation of a plan for the Corpus Christi Beach area when the Texas State Aquarium was being planned for development. The South Central study area embraces the downtown, uptown, waterfront, and is bordered by the Ship Channel to the north; Corpus Christi Bay to the east; Morgan Avenue to the south; and Crosstown Sooth Central Area Developmenr Plan Draft December 9, 2005 Page 5 Expressway/West Broadway to the west. (Figure 1). Historically, this area has been the most planned area of the City. A bibliography of maay of these plans is aC. ached to the South Central Area Development Plan as an appendix. FIGURE 1: SOUTH CENTRAL AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN STUDY AREA Plan Corpus Christi Ship Channel Corpus Christi \ tudy bee Boundary Map POPULATION AND EXISTING LAND USE According to the 2000 Census, the South Central area contains 7,270 residents and 3,111 housing units. The South Central area has experienced a significant decline in population over the last 40 years. In addition, the area has experienced a major exodus of retail businesses since the 1970s. The original South Central Area Development Plan (1991) identified the decline in resident population and retail businesses as major areas of concern. TABLE i: 2000 CENSUS POPULATION AND HOUSING Population Housing Units 1960 1980 1970 12,567 9,020 5,072 3,895 8,312 3,591 1990 12ooo 77906 7,270 2,941 3,111 South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 6 FIGURE 2: EXISTING LAND USES IN THE SOUTH CENTRAL AREA South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 7 TABLE 2:2002 EXISTING LAND USE ACREAGE Land Use Acreage % Low Density Residential 127.01: 1 'i % Medium Density Residential 78.3.~ 7% High Density Residential 8.25 1% Professional Office 65.27 6% Commercial 165.6(: 15% Light Industrial 153.7,~ 14% Heavy Industrial 4.91 0% Park 36.8~ 3% Public Semi Public 199.9,~ 18% Drainage Corridor 4.1(: 0% Right of Way 17.7 2% Vacant 243.6 22% Total 1,105.3,' 100% Over the last l0 to 15 years the downtown has emerged from a period of deterioration and loss of downtown residential and commercial usage to a healthy and attractive area for new entertainment, commercial, hotel and office businesses. In the last five years, the downtown has experienced several new residential redevelopments that are now in high demand. A series of proactive City Councils, the Downtown Management District and aggressive downtown property owners are largely responsible for the resurgence of the Downtown. Some of the small and large successes over that last 15 years which are now building the momentum for redevelopment in the downtown include: · Several major public projects approved by voters in 2001 include: o Convention Center Expansion O New Multi-purpose Arena o New Baseball Stadium o Seawall Repairs o Marina Improvements - includes renovation of bulk heading, slip repair and additional large boat slips · Night life entertainment, i.e. restaurant and night club development in Downtown · Small retail shops development primarily located on Chaparral Street · Concrete Street Amphitheater · Recreational Development of McCaughn Park and old City Hall Site · Miradores on Seawall · Selena Memorial · New Federal Courthouse · Gateway realignment and landscaping at 1-37 and Shoreline Boulevard. · Downtown Lighting with retro style lighting standards · Corpus Christi Art Center Expansion · South Texas Art Museum Expansion · Solomon Ortiz International Center · Asian Cultures Museum · Museum of Natural History expansions including the Columbus Fleet exhibit · Regional Transportation Authority's Downtown Trolley Circulator and Harbor Ferry Systems · Renourishment of McGee Beach Soutb Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 8 Other significant projects that may come to fruition are economic development of the marina landmasses, the South Wharf Project proposal, relocation of the Broadway Wastewater Treatment Plant, and the replacement of Harbor Bridge. PLANNING PROCESS The planning process for the South Central Area Development Plan consists of the following steps: 1. staff formulates planning process and schedule for plan update and begins inventory of land use, infrastructure, etc. 2. Creation of South Central Plan Stakeholder Group consisting of Downtown Management District, business and property owners and private and public entities with significant interests in Central Area and City Staff. 3. Staff and Stakeholders Group identifies issues of concern in the South Central area and produces Issues Report. 4.Staff drafts Plan to address issues of concern. 5. Staff presents draft Plan to Stakeholder Group and respective City Committees and other interested organizations for input. 6.Staff revises draft Plan based on input received. 7. Staff presents draft Plan to Stakeholder Group for review and comment. Staff revises draft Plan based on Stakeholder Group input. 8. The draft Plan presented to Planning Commission for public hearing input. The Planning Commission may recommend revisions to draft and then recommends City Council approval of Plan. 9. The revised draft Plan presented to City Council for public hearing input. The draft Plan revised based on recommendation by Council and Plan is approved. STAKEHOLDER AND CITIZEN INPUT A primary goal of the planning process is to obtain input from citizens interested in the South Central Area and from stakeholder groups. Stakeholder groups and professions that have been involved in the planning process include: Downtown Management District o Chamber of Commerce Regional Transportation Authority o Convention and Visitors Bureau o Port of Corpus Christi o Metropolitan Planning Organization o Landmark Commission Water Shore Advisory Committee o Architects o Engineers Commercial Realtors Restaurateurs Property Owners Residents City Staffe.g. Engineering Services, Park and Recreation, Marina, Public Works (Utilities), and Development Services. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 9 PLANNING ISSUES The identification of thc major issues related to the South Central Area was primarily derived from several meetings with the Stakeholders Group. The Issues Report (Appendix 1) identifies the major issues determined by the Stakeholders Group. Staff used those issues as a primary basis in formulating the draft South Central Area Development Plan. MISSION STATEMENT The mission of the South Central Area Development Plan is to facilitate redevelopment of the South Central Area over the next 20 years for creating a thriving central area neighborhood community in which to live, work, play, raise a family, invest and visit. The City will focus on implementing the City's South Central Area Development Plan in order to promote an exciting central business district, revitalized inner neighborhoods, expanded economic opportunities, and many more choices for recreation and entertainment, from outdoor activities ranging from sports to cultural events with in the area. PLAN GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The guiding goals and objectives for the entire City, ETJ, and all Area Development Plans including the South Central Area are contained in the Policy Statements adopted by the City Council in 1987. The policies encompassed by this Plan address not only current issues, but needs that the City and South Central residents, property owners, and businesses perceive will become pressing in future years. Recognizing that not all suggested implementations will take place immediately, it is important to foresee and note problems and opportunities, and develop a long term strategy to address them. The goals, objectives, and policies of this plan are consistent with the Bayfront Plan adopted in 1982 and amended in 1984, and the Project Plan for Reinvestment Zone No. I adopted in 1983. This plan supersedes all previous City plans for this area except for the Reinvestment Zone Project Plan which shall remain in force until State law provides for the termination of Reinvestment Zone No. t. In addition, this plan is an update to the original South Central Area Development Plan adopted May 21, 1991 and later updated in February 28,1995. Key goals, objectives, or policies of the Plan are printed in bold print. However, for a full understanding of each policy statement, refer to the entire text of that policy statement. The specific goal of the City and South Central Area Development Plan is to promote the South Central Area as a place of great vitality, with a mix of educational, residential, retail, office, service, government, arts and cultural, and entertainment development. The health and vitality of the area can contribute in a major way to the city, its local and regional image, and quality of life. It is a place where residents can live, work, learn, and play in the same neighborhood. A fully revitalized South Central Area will need a resurgence of residential and retail development activity. While a resurgence of retail activity has occurred during the last decade, resident population growth is needed to sustain and fully realize the retail commercial development potential in the central business district. Principal objectives of the Plan include: Sufficient Infrastructure Capacity - Infrastructure planning and design should be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Foremost of the principal objectives determined during the planning process was the critical need to continue immediate and short term improvements to the downtown stormwater system to prevent a repeat of the damages to businesses which occurred during several rain events in 2002. Other critical infrastructure needs include significant improvements to the wastewater and street systems. South Central A rea Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 10 · 24/7 Neighborhoods - Promote a uniquely attractive atmosphere for small and large-scale tourist attractions. Propose appropriate land use, with emphasis on increasing residential density and business intensity in the Central Business District. Pedestrian Friendly District - Emphasize conflict-free, ADA accessible pedestrian district to enhance connections between downtown and uptown, the bayfront, the Bayfront Arts and Science Park, and outlying areas, and maximize use of public areas. Create shade from sun and shelter from wind through structures, trees and palm plantings, and landscaping on private property and in public right of way. · Transportation network - Design transportation network and services to serve existing and future land uses with emphasis on unifying the downtown, uptown, bayfront, the Bayfront Arts and Science Park, Texas State Aquarium, and the expanding commercial/public complex at the Port of Corpus Christi. Promote efficient use of existing parking facilities balanced and coordinated with enhanced transit services and other intermodal choices in the Central Business District, Bayfront Arts and Science Park, and the Bayfront. · Parks and Recreation - Preserve and enhance public access and recreational opportunities along the Bayfront. Enhance public spaces and pedestrian movement in the area between 1-37 and the ship channel, and establish a clear and functional entryway to the Bayfront Arts and Science Park (BASP). Develop a Festival Park (or Parks). Expand Heritage Park to the east and west and promote pedestrian movement to, and through, the park grounds free from vehicular conflict. Economic Development - Maximize redevelopment opportunities for the Central Business District, the BASP and the Port. Provide for economic development and expansion of the existing Marina possibly including a public beach, cruise ship berths, anchorages, and commercial development in the North Marina. Unique Quality of District - Encourage a high level of urban design consistency and construction standards for public spaces and facilities to promote residential and tourist-oriented development. Incorporate urban design elements which are sensitive to the large number of historic structures and districts in the CBD (e.g. Bluff Balustrade, the historic 1914 County Courthouse, Furman Avenue, and Downtown) and the Bayfront. Downtown Management District - Recognize the unique role of the Downtown Management District, Regional Transportation Authority and Port of Corpus Christi in promoting development and enhancing the economy of the Downtown and encourage a dynamic process giving gruat latitude for these entities in managing their areas of responsibility. Since the late 1980s the Central Business District has experienced a revival that is continuing today. The City is committed to continuing this revival and making the Central Business District of the future a place of major public and private facilities of the highest quality. This Plan is a proactive redevelopment strategy, to maximize market opportunities, assure adequate public facilities, and remove barriers to redevelopment. Capitalizing on the market potential of the Central Area, the City's role must not be only one of regulator, but one of partner and active participant. The key to this role is to achieve community consensus on what should occur in the area, then to aggressively pursue this common vision. Many of the detailed policies in the following sections related to the entire study area while some of the policy statements pertain to one of the sub Areas illustrated on Figure 3. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 11 FIGURE 3: SUB-AREA BOUNDARY MAP A South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 12 A. ENVIRONMENT POLICY STATEMENT A.I Pollution prevention devices should be incorporated into stormwater outfalls to capture floating debris, sediments and other pollutants before entering the Bay system. Dozens of stormwater outfalls are located along the bayfront which deposit large volumes of floating debris and other urban pollutants along the seawall, beaches and shoreline areas. POLICY STATEMENT A.2 All public and private construction should be in accordance with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Compliance with these standards will ensure continued availability of flood insurance to the community through the National Flood Insurance Program. POLICY STATEMENT A.3 While preserving or increasing drainage capacity, the City will protect the flowing stream in Blucher Park which is overwhelmed during major rain events. Stormwater retention or detention facilities will be needed for drainage improvements in this area. They will not cause higher water levels in the park than presently experienced and will shorten the time of flooding. Where ever possible, the perennially flowing stream should be retained in its natural state and any channelization should be minimized. POLICY STATEMENT A.4 Maintain the one-mile minimum distance from the shoreline for any petroleum drilling operations. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 13 B. LAND USE POLICY STATEMENT B.I The City Council hereby adopts the Future Land Use Plan map and the accompanying text as a guide for future land use decisions (see Figure 4). The intent of the future land use and development plan is to encourage high intensity mixed use development and civic oriented development of the highest order within the South Central Area. The plan provides guidance for future land use including rezoning, platting, fiscal management, and capital improvement planning. Specific policies for the various South Cenwal Areas are grouped into sub-areas as illustrated in Figure 3. FIGURE 4: FUTURE LAND USE Illl South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 14 AREA A: BAYFRONT AND DOWNTOWN LAND USE POLICIES POLICY STATEMENT B.2 - PLANNING AREA A Promote a mix of tourist, retail, entertainment, residential, and civic uses in the Bayfront and Downtown Business District. The City should encourage a much higher density and intensity of uses than currently exists in Planning Area A. Development potential for Area A, will depend on a mutually supportive, planned, and coordinated effort between private development and public service entities, of which the provision of adequate utility infrastructure has become of paramount importance (See Public Service Section). Special lighting, signage, landscaping, and street furniture should be used to help visually and functionally integrate public and private development projects. POLICY STATEMENT B.A. 1 Establish a new zoning district for the rezoning of properties along Shoreline Boulevard. The highest and best use of these prime properties is tourist-related and residential uses - not office or non-tourism related business uses. These prime properties should be developed with high-rise hotels and residential uses with tourist-related retail uses occupying a majority of the ground floor. Drive-throughs and similar non-tourist uses should not be permi~ed on Shoreline Boulevard nor the ~A block nearest the bay along side streets. POLICY STATEMENT B.A.2 Increase the number of housing units and achieve higher housing densities in the Downtown Area. Incentives should be established, including financial and regulatory, to promote significant increases of quality residential development and compatible mixed uses in the CBD and surrounding residential neighborhoods e.g. conversions to loft apartments, specialty grocery stores, "liveaboard" facilities in the marina, and other residential serving uses and to create a sense of community in the Central Area. POLICY STATEMENT B.A.3 Pursue designation of Downtown as a targeted area within the Corpus Christi Housing Finance Corporation's Mortgage Credit Certificate Program if Federal requirements can be met. This would eliminate the first time buyer requirement and increase the home purchase price limitations. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 15 POLICY STATEMENT B.A.4 Encourage the Downtown Management District and City Staff to develop residential loan guarantee program proposal. The proposal should include possible foundations that could provide seed money and guidelines for guaranteed loans. POLICY STATEMENT B.A.S In order to create a significant resident population in the area, the City should consider incentive programs making residential development and redevelopment more attractive to property owners. Such program might provide Community Block Grant Funds (CDBG) for Iow interest loans, tax credits, etc. where a property owner agrees to rehabilitate a vacant building, with 25% percent of the building rehabilitation devoted to new downtown residential units. POLICY STATEMENT B.A.6 The 1-37Corridor from the Crosslown interchange to Shoreline Boulevard is the most important entrance to the City and should be as aesthetically appealing as possible. Recent improvements including the construction of the new federal Courthouse and the landscaping of the realigned 1-37 boulevard have begun the process to visually improve this important gateway entrance to the City, the Bayfront, and the Central Business District. However, remaining improvements which should be targeted for implementation include the following. · Deteriorating buildings along this entryway should be repaired, rehabilitated, or removed in order to make way for redevelopment (the restoration of the historical 1914 county courthouse is certainly a significant improvement); · Billboards should be removed; · The City's organization seals should be more tastefully presented or removed; and · Heavy landscaping should be added within the 1-37 right-of-way and existing landscaping should be properly maintained. POLICY STATEMENT B.A.7 Expand Convention Center grounds and take advantage of its bayfront location by creating a bayfront public park and plaza south of the Convention Center on Shoreline Boulevard medians and the Barge Dock. Creation of this public park plaza will complement the Convention Center expansion, the arena, enhance new hotel development on adjacent vacant lands and create a location for small festivals. POL1CY STATEMENT B.A.8 Trees and landscaping will be designed as a critical component of ail roadway projects in Area A. Trees and other plantings will be properly coordinated with utilities to avoid conflicts and competition for limited underground space on city-owned properties and right-of-ways. The city will fully consider the significant value of trees for shading pedestrians when resolving infrastructure conflicts; and plant appropriate tree species on public rights-of-way that maximize planting potential while protecting the safety of the public. POLICY STATEMENT B.A.9 Establish grand entrance features, i.e., special signage, landscaping, sculpture, fountains, etc., at key entrances lo the BASP and improve the entranceways leading to Resaca and Chaparral Streets. Grand entrance features are similar to "gateways" except gateways will use more land and be larger in scale. POLICY STATEMENT B.A.I 0 Develop a pedestrian walkway along the bayfront between the barge dock and the Solomon Ortiz International Center. The walkway would provide a special pedestrian way, or linkage, between barge dock and sea wall, to Solomon Ortiz International Center. Other special pedestrian ways should connect the bayfront with Heritage Park, festival areas, the BASP, and Solomon Ortiz International Center. These pedestrian ways would be constructed with attractively designed and consistent pavement, lighting, landscaping, and public signage. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 16 POLICY STATEMENT B.A.I 1 Enhance the seawall with special pavers or concrete imprinting, landscaping, increased lighting on steps, and creation of shade. POLICY STATEMENT B.A.12 Expand Heritage Park to the east side of Chaparral Street and to the west, up to the U.S. 18! right-of- way, between Fitzgerald and Hughes Streets with similar historic structures that exist in Heritage Park. This expansion will buffer Heritage Park from any future multilevel developments on the remaining portion of those blocks to the east. This will also create a more attractive entrance to the Bayfront Arts and Science Park. However, care should be taken that historic structures are not removed from original sites unless the structure is threatened by demolition. POLICY STATEMENT B.A.13 Promote visitor-oriented commercial activities including bed and breakfast uses, restaurants, coffee shops, gift shops, art galleries, and artisan working areas in Heritage Park. Activities that generate significant amounts of traffic and activity both from out of town visitors and residents are most desirable for this strategic location so that a high level of liveliness and interest is generated. · The first priority for obtaining greater use within the area should be to encourage high-quality local cultural restaurants (Mexican, Greek, German, Irish, etc.). · The City should aggressively encourage leases for gift shops, art galleries, artisan working areas and studios, and art and handicraft sales, etc. · Rental monies from Heritage Park activities should be used for the improvement of Heritage Park. POL1CY STATEMENT B.A.14 To promote views of Heritage Park and the Arena from Shoreline Boulevard plant palm trees on thirty foot centers along both sides of Resaca Street between Chaparral Street and Shoreline Boulevard. POLICY STATEMENT B.A.I$ Encourage development of parking structures to avoid costly surface parking lots on high value downtown properties. Outright prohibition of surface parking or monies in lieu of required parking are two options that should be considered. Monies in lieu of should be used for creation of parking structures. In all cases in the Central Business District, the first floor of any parking garage should be constructed to ultimately provide mixed commercial/office uses. In addition, a balance must be achieved between personal use vehicle parking, pricing controls, and a public transit system designed to minimize congestion and provide flexible movement of people to multiple destinations and attractions on the same trip. POLICY STATEMENT B.A.16 Consistent, high quality, metal halide and pedestrian-scaled lighting should be standardized along the Bayfront areas to tie the public waterfront and central business district together and provide high quality illumination. The "peach" colored lighting used in much of the marina does not emit a quality light conducive to the tourist oriented marina and bayfront, nor is it consistent with the new lighting downtown. POLICY STATEMENT B.A.17 The City will encourage pedestrian friendly retail, restaurant, and entertainment uses along street frontages combined with multi-family residential, hotel, office uses and parking garages on aboveground levels. POLICY STATEMENT B.A.I 8 Public and private signage requirements should promote a coordinated and cohesive design theme. Consideration should be given to minimizing the number and size of allowable signs and allowing limited- sized monument-type signs within the required setbacks. Where no setback is required, signs overhanging the sidewalk are permissible. Billboards and portable signs should be prohibited. South Central ,4rea Development Plan Draft Decetnber 9, 2003 Page 17 POLICY STATEMENT B.A.19 Replacing existing non-landscaped parking areas with public/private plazas and seating areas will be encouraged in combination with a reduction of required parking. Public/private plazas and seating shall contain landscaping, special light standards, fountains, and decorative paving materials. POLICY STATEMENT B.A.20 Urban Design guidelines will be developed for the following areas of the Central Business District: · Primary Entryways to the Bayfront Business District, the Bayfront, the Bayfront Arts and Science Park (i.e., 1H-37, Twigg Street, Leopard Street, Agnes/Kinney Street, Chaparral Street and Port Avenue). · Along Shoreline Boulevard and Ocean Drive. · All development and improvements in the Marina and on the Bayfront. · Along the Bluff Balustrade. · Bayfront Arts and Science Park. · Central Business District (Downtown and Uptown) POLICY STATEMENT B.A.21 Elements that will be considered for inclusion in any urban design guidelines for the CBD: · Higher density mixed-use development · Mixed-use compatibility · Pedestrian/cyclist amenities including bike racks, lighting, shade trees, landscaping, street furniture, sidewalk widening and texturing, grating, etc. for private and public development for pedestrian comfort · Architectural and design controls including greater signage control, site plan review, etc. · Public and private parking lots · "Compact" parking spaces and shared parking uses/sites for multi-modal transit facilities to accommodate parking and transfer people to multiple destinations · Prohibition of street closures and skywalks affecting the original grid street network in the downtown, uptown, Old lrishtown, BASP, and the area to the west of Shoreline Boulevard in the general vicinity of the Coliseum and Sherrill Park in order to promote a healthy pedestrian environment · View corridors maximizing views to the Bay · Great Streets Program · Requirements for provision of retail/restaurant uses for a majority of street level frontages of new and restored buildings · Restrictions or prohibitions on dumpsters, chainlink fencing, utility units, and other unsightly, utilitarian facilities along ground floor street frontages. · Relocation of traffic control boxes/panels to underground or to less visible locations. · Develop a master plan for public art POLICY STATEMENT B.A.22 The City will create a special zoning district for the area north of 1-37 and east of U.S. 181, to encourage high-density visitor/tourist related uses. Objectives for the area include: · Reduction in the amount of parking required for preferred uses and pedestrian amenities and public plazas; Preferred uses will include bed and breakfast, tourist shops, handy crat~ shops, hotels, motels, restaurants, museums, art galleries, sidewalk cafes, arenas, convention centers, festival areas, etc, · Minimum and maximum setbacks to create storefronts along the street. · Signage - controlled, low level · Reduction of billboards in the South Central Area especially the primary gateway into the CBD and the bayfront, that is, 1-37. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 18 POL1CY STATEMENT B.A.23 The City, in conjunction with the Downtown Management District, will propose changes to the sign ordinance in "B-5" and "B-6" zoning districts. The sign requirements for these districts should be carefully reviewed and changed to conform with the intent of the South Central Area Development Plan. The sign changes should help ensure development of an attractive and appealing atmosphere in the downtown area. At a minimum City regulations for the area should: do Prohibit off-premises signs (billboards). Require signs to be oriented and scaled for pedestrian traffic. Allowed signage should be calculated in proportion to linear feet of lot frontage, total building or site size. Allowing projecting or fin signs located in the public right-of-way, provided they do not extend beyond the curb. e. Allow wall signs. f. g. Prohibit portable signs. Control banner signs according to a standardized design and restrict to a temporary time period related to special events. POLICY STATEMENT B.A.24 The highest priorities for installation of new public art projects are at: a. 1-37 at Shoreline Boulevard; b. La Retama Park; c. Shoreline Boulevard in fi'ont of the Arena; d. L Heads and T Heads; e. Artesian Park; and f. Bayfront Park. These are very important gateways/entrances to the downtown area. Prominent, enlivening art should be made at these locations with the help of grant money and private donations. POLICY STATEMENT B.A.25 Relocation of the Broadway Wastewater Treatment Plant is a high capital improvement priority. Once the Plant is relocated out of the area, and any remediation completed, the site should be redeveloped with a public use supportive of the City's downtown redevelopment goals. Potential uses include, but are not limited to, parking, festival park, executive mini golf course, etc. The Broadway Wastewater Treatment Plant serves the Downtown Area, surrounding neighborhoods, and provides an essential function for development in the area. However, the Broadway Treatment Plant, in it current location, and as the downtown redevelops will become a detriment to reinvestment of surround properties. POLICY STATEMENT B.A.26 The City will pursue construction of strategic pedestrian linkages in the downtown, the marina, bayfront, the BASP, the Port's Cruise Ship Terminal. Pedestrian linkages will be heavily landscaped and include sidewalk widening, special sidewalk pavers or concrete imprinting, festive lighting, street furniture, public art, fountains, and small plaza areas along the routes. See Figure 5: Pedestrian Corridor Improvement Plan. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 19 FIGURE 5: PEDESTRIAN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PLAN Pedestrian Geet'jdoes with Existing and Proposed eayfront Arts and Sck~nc, e Park w$ - Water St. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 20 POLICY STATEMENT B.A.27 The City will encourage the long-term conversion of industrial business uses between the Broadway Wastewater Treatment Plant and US 181 to convert to visitor oriented or public uses. POLICY STATEMENT B.A.28 The City will work with the Port of Corpus Christi and the Union Pacific Rail Road to restrict storage of tank cars along West Broadway Street (between Port Avenue and Tancahua Street). Trackage in this area is used for storage of box and tank cars and is an incompatible use and potential safety hazard with the future use of the Wastewater Treatment Plant site, the Washington-Coles neighborhood and Concrete Street Amphitheater. AREA B: UPTOWN OFFICE AND GOVERNMENTAL CENTER POLICY STATEMENT B.3 Promote the Uptown Office Area as the City's premier location for mid- to high-rise office development. The existing concentration of high-rise office towers, between the bluff and Tancahua Street, and the extensive governmental and quasi-public complex adjacent to the Nueces County Courthouse and City Hall, could efficiently serve as the nucleus of a more expansive regional office district. Within this Uptown Office District there are a number of historic or potentially historic properties located on Leopard Street. Preservation of meritorious properties on Leopard should be pursued and efforts taken to minimize negative impacts of non-historical properties which are immediately adjacent. South Central ~4 rea Development Plan Draft December 9, 2005 Page 21 AREA C: SOUTH BLUFF AREA POLICY STATEMENT B.4 Redevelopment within the Low- to Mid-Rise Professional Office and Residential areas of Area C, (see the Land Use and Development Plan, Figure 2) should be encouraged as long as the redevelopment does not detract from the residential neighborhood. Much of this area is used for single-family or multi-family residential or for professional offices. Professional office uses are generally compatible with single- and multi-family development in this area. Neighborhood serving commercial uses of Iow intensity may be considered for the area however, 24-hour commercial uses, bars or clubs should not be allowed. POLICY STATEMENT B.C.I The existing industrial development in Planning Area C, should not be expanded in area. POLICY STATEMENT B.C.2 The commercial strips on Staples Street and on Morgan Avenue should not extend any farther into the adjacent residential areas than displayed on the Future Land Use Plan. POLICY STATEMENT B.C.3 Continue to protect the residential neighborhoods from encroachment of non-residential uses. POLICY STATEMENT B.C.4 The Landmarks Commission should evaluate areas in the South Central area for "historic district" designation and a property owner incentive program for areas to be designated historic. An incentive program encouraging property owners to preserve and restore designated structures should be developed. Restoration should allow for contemporary use and emphasize restoration of property exteriors. POLICY STATEMENT B.C.5 The City should establish historic preservation incentive programs to encourage property owners who are willing to restore historic structures. Such programs may include tax abatements, freezes on taxes, Iow interest loans for restoration, etc. These incentive programs create a greater public awareness of historic properties and provide a modest reward for property owners who wish to participate. Some cities have used Soutb Central ~4rea Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 22 annual events/tours of historic homes and districts and historic plaques to educate the public and generate interest in historic preservation. Examples of historic districts which could be focused on include Furman Avenue, Upper Broadway, Leopard Street between Port Avenue and thc Bluff, Downtown, and Old lrishtown. POLICY STATEMENT B.C.6 Establish development regulations to protect designated views from public rights-of-way and, to enhance scenic corridors and gateways. View corridors are defined as streets where the City wishes to preserve clear site to a natural or man-made feature. Those features might include the bay, harbor bridge, or an historic home, etc. Primary emphasis is on the view from the corridor to the point of interest with secondary emphasis on the attractiveness of the corridor. Scenic corridors are defined as streets where the City wishes to enhance highly traveled streets or entryways. The primary emphasis is on providing an attractive view from a vehicle or pedestrian passing. Gateways give a sense of place marking passage fxom one area to another. Important gateways in the South Central area include: · 1-37 and the Crosstown Expressway; · 1-37 and Shoreline Boulevard, · Shoreline Boulevard and Kinney Street; · Shoreline Boulevard and Furman Avenue; · Shoreline Boulevard and Resaca; · 1-37 and Chaparral/Mesquite Streets; and Agnes/Laredo and Tancahua/Carancahua Streets. Major landscaping, sculpture, and lighting are appropriate at gateways. When these improvements are made they create a distinct and memorable place. Design objectives along view and scenic corridors include: · Development adjacent to these scenic corridors will be required to provide a higher standard of landscaping than for non-scenic corridor streets. The City's Landscaping requirements in the Zoning Ordinance should be changed to require all street yards for multi-family, public-semi public, business and industrial uses to provide a minimum of 0.04 points of landscaping per square foot where property is developed adjacent to a designated scenic corridor. Note: street yards are areas between structures and the street right-of-way. · Along thc seawall creation of shade either through plant massing or shade structures is a high priority; · Private and public signage of all types should have stringent design controls consistent with the tourist and recreational theme of the Bayfront. Public signage should be standardized and billboards and portable signs should be eliminated; · Utilities should be placed underground; · The City should establish a facade restoration program for designated corridors; and · Public art projects could be placed at gateways and strategically located in scenic corridors, consistent with the Municipal Arts Commission's public art guidelines/plan. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 23 POLICY STATEMENT B.C.6 Promote pedestrian activity at street level throughout the South Central Area (see Figure 5.) The highest priority pedestrian corridors include the following. See Section F - Capital Improvements for more detail. Shoreline Boulevard from the Solomon Ortiz International Center to Cole Park; Water Street between 1-37 and Coopers Alley; Peoples Street, Lawrence Street, and Coopers Alley between the Bluff and the marina landmasses; Resaca Street between Shoreline Blvd. and Chaparral Street; Chaparral Street from the Ship Channel to Coopers Alley; Twigg Street between Shoreline Blvd. and Mesquite Street; Concrete/Belden Street, between Water Street and its dead-end west of North Tancahua Street; and Leopard Street between the Bluff and the Crosstown Expressway; POLICY STATEMENT B.C.7 Pedestrian corridors should link points of interest in the area, such as tourist destination points, historical, recreational, cultural, and retail activities. The Park and Recreation Department should have jurisdiction over public amenities and maintenance in these corridors. Design objectives for these corridors should include: · Functional and attractive paving materials required on all pedestrian corridors. The City should determine the types of paving materials that would comply with this policy. · Coordinate mass transit services with pedestrian corridor improvements (i.e., assure corridor improvements are placed at bus stop locations and lead up to any water taxi, or high speed water terminals). · Construct greater pedestrian amenities such as sidewalk widening, unified lighting and street furniture, drinking fountains, storefront awnings, and shade structures, pedestrian "bump-outs", and public informational signage especially for the pedestrian. · Make all pedestrian improvements in the CBD compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act POLICY STATEMENT B.C.8 Pedestrian improvements such as "bump-outs" at street intersections, sidewalk widening, street trees, etc (See Policy Statements B.C.6 and B.C.7) should be prioritized for construction in the Central Business District. The construction of these pedestrian improvements will address the core of needed pedestrian connections along the Bayfront, from Uptown through Downtown to the marina landmasses, along Water and Chaparral Streets, and on Resaca Street at the Arena and Heritage Park. POLICY STATEMENT B.C.9 The City's Zoning Ordinance and Codes should continue to prohibit sexually oriented businesses from operating in the South Central Area. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2005 Page 24 C. TRANSPORTATION POLICY STATEMENT C.I The City Council adopts Figure 6 as the guide for future transportation decisions in the South Central area. The transportation network of this Plan constitutes an amendment to the City Transportation Plan. Those changes requiring state or federal funding will be submitted for review and included in the Metropolitan Planning Organization Urban Transportation Plan. Changes to the City Transportation Plan include the following. a) Extend North Staples Street as a collector street (C1) between West Broadway and Fitzgerald Street b) Designate Fitzgerald Street as a collector street (C 1) between North Shoreline Boulevard and US 181 c) Extend Mesquite Street as a collector street (C1) between Brewster Street and Port Avenue d) Delete Brewster Street as a collector street between Chaparral Street and Tancahua Street e) Designate Cooper's Alley as a collector street (CI) between Tancahua Street and Shoreline Boulevard " POLICY STATEMENT C.2 A parking control policy with pricing controls recognizing the real costs of parking in the area and an equitable balance with transit services should be established. The underlying premise that the more economical parking is provided the less likely that transit services can be prudently provided. POLICY STATEMENT C.3 To ensure pedestrian safety, create a Shoreline Boulevard operations plan for temporary closure of travel lanes during large festival events such as Buccaneer Days and Bayfest. POLICY STATEMENT C.4 The City will pursue with TxDOT the relocation of the Power Street off-ramp from US 181 directly to Belden Street. As presently configured this off-ramp has a very short deceleration lane and a dangerous 90 degree turn onto Tancahua Street. TxDOT should evaluate the feasibility of extending this ramp to Belden Street and closing the current ramp at Power Street. POLICY STATEMENT C.$ Public signage for East Port Avenue and the U.S. 181 on-ramp north of Belden Street should be improved to make the public better aware of these streets as secondary routes to and from the Bayfront Arts and Science Park (BASP). POLICY STATEMENT C.6 Policy objectives in descending order of priority for street improvements should be projects which will: a) Facilitate pedestrian and multimodal access. b) Facilitate access to and along the bayfront; c) Minimize right-of-way to promote high intensity downtown uses and provide for flexible and innovative redevelopment opportunities; d) Facilitate access to the Bayfrnnt Arts and Science Park area including Solomon Ortiz International Center; and Facilitate creation of a traffic control center to better manage traffic during high use events. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 25 FIGURE 6: FUTURE TRANSPORTATION PLAN South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2005 Page 26 POLICY STATEMENT C.7 The following is a prioritized list of transportation improvement projects which meet policy objectives: Improve traffic control throughout the plan area with "real-time" traffic responsive signal and pedestrian activated controls. · Shoreline Boulevard See Bayfi'ont Park Policy (E.1) in Public Services section. · Creation of designated park and ride locations in the downtown and uptown areas for shuttling to the BASP, Marina, and other downtown attractions and the Port of Corpus Christi. · Extension of Shoreline Boulevard as a controlled access drive (for transit vehicles, etc.) to connect with Chaparral Street in the BASP. The conceptual master plan for the Bayfront Arts and Science Park envisions the extension of Shoreline Boulevard northward into the Water Garden area and terminating at Chaparral Street. This design would have a positive resolution to the dead end of the existing North Shoreline Boulevard and provide vital access to the future economic development of thc Corps of Engineers site. However, the design comes with several issues which would need to be resolved. The running water "brook" which connects thc Art Museum to the Water Garden should not be broken. Since the Water Garden and its "brook" connection was paid for by the Museum, any extension of Shoreline Boulevard should include participation in the planning and design by the museum. · Street improvements necessary for baseball stadium, arena and BASP access. · Enhanced public transportation system, including but not limited to a fixed alignment streetcar system. This system will provide improved opportunities for park and ride services to various destinations to the downtown, marina, BASP, and Port and city connectivity via the RTA's Staples Street Station. A fixed alignment streetcar system will provide an economic stimulus and, with its unique features, a regional attraction. · Extend Tancahua Street northward to Harbor Drive. This extension is needed to provide enhanced access to the Port's Solomon Ortiz International Center and proposed new baseball Stadium. POLICY STATEMENT C.8 The City's Traffic Engineering Division in cooperation with the RTA shall establish a parking monitoring and management program to assure sufficient parking availability as the South Central area becomes more intensively developed. This monitoring program shall apply to all areas zoned B-6 (no parking is required in B-6 zones) and other areas deemed appropriate by thc City. Currently, there is an oversupply, or "under demand" of available parking in South Central Area duc to the high percentage of vacant buildings. As these vacancies diminish and the need for additional parking arises, Staff will make recommendations to the City Council regarding specific parking projects and programs to meet the need. a) Emphasis shall be placed on encouraging the private sector to work out agreements with adjacent uses to share parking. b) Improve signage to public parking lots in thc South Central area. c) The City will support the provision of public satellite park and ride lots. POLICY STATEMENT C.9 The City in partnership with the RTA shall conduct a feasibility study to determine the most effective combination of on and off-street parking and RTA transit services with regard to serving the Bayfront Arts and Science Park including the arena and baseball stadium, the Central Business District (CBD), and marina development (existing and potential). Large increases in public parking in the vicinity of the South Central .4 rea Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 2 7 arena and convention center may have significant negative impacts on enhanced transit services planned to serve these facilities. Any increase of additional public parking in the area should be critically analyzed in relationship to RTA's proposed enhanced transit services to serve the area. Parking metering expansion and premium pricing for on-street parking in vicinity of BASP should be considered in conjunction with this overall scheme to encourage transit usage. POLICY STATEMENT C.10 The grid arterial system in the CBD should be preserved as much as possible. Street closures should be minimized in the CBD so that the grid system's efficiencies for serving high intensity land uses will be maintained. POLICY STATEMENT C.I 1 The City will conduct a feasibility study to investigate the feasibility of reverting one-way streets to two- way streets in the downtown. This study will consider the use of head-in parking to slow traffic and make it easier for motorists to get out of their cars and enjoy and benefit from the "downtown experience" POLICY STATEMENT C.12 The City will continue to support and participate in studies that address the need for a new higher bridge over the ship channel to accommodate larger ships. The City will also ensure that sufficient future ingress and egress is provided to the CBD from the new Harbor Bridge. Landscaped public rights-of-way at each ingress and egress points will be required. Reuse of the existing U.S. 181 bridge right-of-way will be considered for a new entrance/exit near the BASP. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 28 D. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT POLICY STATEMENT D.I Establish a continuous funding source and foster multiple partnerships for on-going capital improvements in the Central Business District. Possible funding mechanisms include tax increment financing, public improvement district, tax abatement / credits, or similar mechanisms. Thc Tlr funding mechanism has contributed approximately one million dollars annually for the last 20 years to pay for construction of the Texas State Aquarium. If another Tlr District is established these monies would be targeted for improvements in downtown and on the bayfront. If it is not feasible to establish another Tlr District then some other funding mechanism such as a public improvement district may be appropriate to provide a continuous source of funds for needed improvements in the Central Business District. In addition, multiple partnerships should include the Port of Corpus Christi, Regional Transit Authority, Nueces County, Metropolitan Planning Organization, Corpus Christi Independent School District, Downtown Management District, etc. POLICY STATEMENT D.2 Promote development of the marina landmasses with public/private joint ventures for retail, restaurant, entertainment, park, marina, residential, and/or hotel uses to generate monies for debt retirement of bonds used for construction of public facilities in the marina. It is clear that the significant demands for public improvements in other areas of the City balanced with scarce municipal funds available for debt retirement, funding for larger marina improvements may be best achieved through joint public/private ventures in the marina. This strategy serves at least two purposes. This funding mechanism provides 1) a mechanism to pay for needed marina improvements, and 2) new private development which injects renewed life and economic vitality and appeal into the marina. Such programs have been successful in other waterfront communities across the country which have found ways of revitalizing their waterfront areas. POLICY STATEMENT D.3 Marina boat slip rental rates should be assessed at least every two years and should be set at a level that is at least the median amount charged by gulf coast public and private marinas. Currently, marina boat slip rental rates are some of the lowest found in comparable marinas on the gulf coast. Marina slip rentals play a fundamental or even a critical role in paying for marina operations, marina maintenance, and marina capital improvements. POLICY STATEMENT D.4 To assure a sufficient supply of revenue producing marina boat slips, begin design for additional boat slips in the marina when the marina is 75% of capacity. Construction on new slips should be completed when the existing marina slip rentals are at 95% of slip rental capacity. POLICY STATEMENT D.5 Public/private ventures and public projecIs in the South Central Area including the marina should be designed and located according to the following criteria. a) Provides a public service or function that directly benefits the general public. b) Provides recreational, entertainment, retail, and/or other visitor and pedestrian-oriented types of activities available to the general public. A majority of ground floor uses should be of these visitor and pedestrian-oriented uses. These public uses should be accessible to the general public during peak daytime and evening hours and throughout the week. c) Improves the visual quality of the area. d) Leverages more privme sector investment than public monies invested. e) Combines disjointed uses to form a cohesive environment where uses can interact and benefit from their relationship to one another. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 29 POLICY STATEMENT D.6 In order to promote a significant resident population in the area, the City will provide a full range of incentive programs to make residential redevelopment more attractive to property owners and developers. Such programs might include Community Block Grant Funds (CDBG), Renewal Community incentives, tax abatements, etc. and revisions to the Building Code to reduce obstacles and barriers to adaptive reuse of existing buildings for residential purposes. POLICY STATEMENT D.7 Promote the arts and cultural resources in the ~lowntown to be engines of economic development through strategic funding and other forms of assistance. Many cities across the country have established successful arts and cultural programs and facilities as quality of life resources for the local citizenry as well as significant tourist attractions. Some of thc more successful examples include the Torpedo Factory Art Center in Alexandria, Virginia; the Louisiana Artworks in New Orleans; the Denver Performing Arts Complex in Denver; the West End Historic District and the Deep EIlum entertainment district in Dallas: and the Blue Star District in San Antonio. These successful programs and projects have created outstanding venues and incubator programs for the display of local/regional visual art forms and performing artists which otherwise would not have been available. In many cases older historic buildings and even entire historic districts have been put into productive use by creating art and cultural districts rich in a variety of entertainment and educational opportunities. Examples of assistance include limited property tax abatement, CDBG funding, and historic preservation funding assistance. Areas in downtown which may have potential in the creation of an arts and cultural district include in the vicinity of: a) Heritage Park/Old Irishtown, b) the old Frost Bros./Lichtenstein Building, c) the Ritz Theater, d) the Kress Building (the emerging "K-Space" visual art project currently operates on the 3ra floor) and e) the old the Montgomery Ward Building on Peoples Street. POLICY STATEMENT D.8 The City will work closely with the Downlown Management Dist'rict_to revitalize and redevelop the area in and adjacent to the District's Boundaries. ]n order for the Downtown to become more economically successful and to provide more quality of life experiences for the general public, it is appropriate for a private non-profit organization to focus on the vision for Downtown and implementation of that vision. POLICY STATEMENT D.9 Relocate the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers office to a site away from the Bayfront Arts and Science Park (BASP). This current use does not complement the BASP location and is an inappropriate use of this strategic site. Promote development on the BASP site with a public/private joint venture for retail, restaurant, entertainment, and/or hotel development to capitalize on the unique views and prime bayfront and harbor location. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 30 E. PUBLIC SERVICES PARKS BAYFRONTPARK POLICY STATEMENT E.I The City, in partnership with the Downtown Management District, the Port of Corpus Christi, the Regional Transit Authority and the Metropolitan Planning Organization will conduct a special communitywide planning process to determine the most acceptable manner in which to create a bayfront park. Shoreline Boulevard is a formidable barrier to pedestrians attempting to cross the six travel lanes from downtown to the bayfront especially during times of large festival events. In addition, large festival events either block through traffic or reduce the City's ability to operate large convention and arena events. The special study objectives are: · Identify the best location for a permanent festival site; · Determine the feasibility of reducing Shoreline Boulevard from six travel lanes to four taking into account existing and future traffic levels and street improvement projects; Determine if traffic calming devices including reduced speed limits and demarcated pedestrian crossings on the travel lanes should be planned on shoreline Boulevard; Determine if Shoreline Boulevard is an appropriate location for a fixed rail trolley: possible issues include the visual impact of overhead electrical lines and poles on the bayfront; economic benefits of a trolley line located along Shoreline Blvd. with private development located on only one side of the line versus the trolley line located on Water, Chaparral or Mesquite Streets with private development located on two sides of the line; etc.; Address the possibility of using Water Street as a relief route for downtown commuter traffic; · Make signalized pedestrian crossings one cycle; · Illustrate the visual impact of views from Shoreline Boulevard to the bay; Consider the AIA's 2003 concept plan to create a bayfi'ont park, as well as other plans which have been considered over the last twenty years, e.g. Bayfront Activities Committee (1985), the Gateway Project of 1996-97, etc.; · Implement a community consensus building process to determine the most acceptable bayfront park design. FESTIVAL PARK POLICY STATEMENT E.2 Develop a permanent festival park. The need for a permanent festival park (or parks) is obvious because of the success of Bayfest and Buccaneer Days carnival and other smaller festivals. However, due to unique characteristics of tl~ese festivals and their current sites several safety and efficiency of use issues have come the forefront. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 31 The new arena is under construction and scheduled to be completed in late 2004. The arena and convention center expansion projects are being constructed over the west portion of North Shoreline Boulevard north of Resaca S~'eet. And the federal courthouse has imposed restrictions on festivals on the Shoreline Blvd. median in front of it. With these two portions of Shoreline Blvd. eliminated from effective use for festivals such as Bayfest, the area along North Shoreline Boulevard bet~veen Power Street and the Convention Center may not be large enough to accommodate large festivals effectively. Alternative sites should be analyzed and a plan devised to develop a permanent festival site or sites. More than one festival park may be justified. One site could be for Iow impact type events and the other could be for high impact festivals. Possible sites include: 1) the medians north ofl- 37, 2) the Coliseum and adjoining parking lots and parks, 3) on what will become available land when the Broadway Wastewater Treatment Plan is relocated in conjunction with the adjacent Concrete Street Amphitheater. 4) the Kerr-McGee Tract, 5) South BluffPark, or 6) Corpus Christi Beach Park. POLICY STATEMENT E.3 Provide a much higher degree of maintenance of the landscaping improvements along IH-37 between the Crosstown Expresswa~ interchange and the Bayfront. The significant landscaping installed at the Crosstown/l-37 interchange and the US 181/1-37 interchange in the late 1990's are not receiving proper maintenance, especially when taken into the context of the highest traveled gateway into the City. POLICY STATEMENT E.4 Additional shade structures, lighting, trash receptacles, bicycle lanes, informational signage and kiosks, water fountains, and widened sidewalk should be provided on the seawall and adjoining walkway. POLICY STATEMENT E.5 The Park and Recreation Department will determine the feasibility for an amphitheater on the steps of the seawall with a stage floating in the marina or located on McGee Beach. POLICY STATEMENT E.6 Identify and provide high priority public facilities for McGee Beach e.g. outdoor showers, public toilets with high frequency of maintenance, shade structures, etc. The restrooms located at the base of the breakwater arc in need of substantial repair and regular maintenance and additional facilities. BLUCHER AND SOUTH BLUFF PARKS POLICY STATEMENT E.7 Improvements to Blucher and South Bluff Parks will be included in the Capital Improvement Program. Blucher Park is a City-designated wildlife sanctuary which restricts the amount of improvements that can be placed in the Park. However, environmentally sensitive improvements are needed such as marked birding trails, selective landscaping, and the old railroad bridge restored as an historic landmark. South Bluff Park has several recreational facilities serving the surrounding neighborhoods and thc City in general. Additional improvements such as playground equipment and improved lighting are needed. POLICY STATEMENT E.8 The City will continue to pursue the expansion and connection of Blucher Park to South Bluff Park. South Central ,4 rea Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 32 BLUFFBALUSTRADE POLICY STATEMENT E.9 The City in conjunction with the DMD will pursue the creation of public plazas along the Bluff Balustrade, Upper Broadway, "Middle" Broadway at Starr Street, and La Retama Park. The Bluff Balustrade ("Broadway Bluff')is only one often National Register properties in the City. This facility needs to be protected and supported with compatible improvements recognizing the historical integrity of this unique man-made resource. By the same token, War Memorial Park/Spohn Park duc to the sacredness of the memorial should not be altered by a plaza. POLICY STATEMENT E.10 The City in conjunction with the DMD will pursue ADA accessibility and retail uses in the Bluff Tunnel. This unique resource has much potential to provide cost effective ADA accessibility fi.om above to below the Bluff, as well as opportunities for limited commercial activities since it included commercial uses up until the t~me the tunnel was closed in the m d-1970 . DOWNTOWN PARKS POLICY STATEMENT E.I i Develop a series of highly usable and pedestrian friendly parks in the Central Business District to serve the resident population's needs. South Bluff, McCaughn, La Retama and Artesian Parks are likely candidates. POLICY STATEMENT E.12 Develop along the seawall an amphitheater with a "floating stage" in the marina and/or a permanent stage on McGee Beach for regular entertainment venues to increase variety of activities on bayfront. The steps of the seawall would serve as seating area for attendees &performances. POLICY STATEMENT E.13 The Park and Recreation Department will develop public lighting, signage, landscaping, and street furniture of a special design theme establishing McGee beach and McCaughn Park as a safe and uniquely attractive urban beach and park. Any adjacent private development should be required to install compatible features and lighting to achieve similar lighting levels and types. MARINA POLICY STATEMENT E.14 The potential of the marina will be maximized as a major destination to draw more visitors to the waterfront zone and the downtown area, from the metropolitan area and the City's tourist marketing area. A diverse and vital marina is key to a revitalized downtown and successful convention center. The recommendations of this Plan seek to identify and stimulate future growth, vitality, and economic development in the Marina for a wide spectrum of uses. Redevelopment objectives should include the addition of restaurants, retail activities, and public park and recreational uses and enhanced marina facilities and services to attract more people by providing more variety, color, life and activities to choose fi.om. POLICY STATEMENT E.15 Enhanced marina facilities will include expansion and improvement of the existing Marina facilities. Improvements should include additional boat slips, both large and small berths, transient and charter boat slips, restrooms with showers, pump out station and holding tank, fueling station, a ship's store, laundry, marina offices, etc. A more comprehensive and detailed capital improvement project list is listed in the Capital Improvements Chapter F. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 33 POLICY STATEMENT E.16 The area devoted to parking lots on the T and L-heads (landmasses) as permanent uses should be balanced with the need to provide park and open space uses. It has been observed that the existing landmasses are the most expensive, in terms of land value, surface parking lots on the Gulf coast. Existing parking areas on the landmasses should be balanced with the need to provide park and open space for use by the general public. Additional demand for parking to serve increased retail/restaurant and marina development should be provided by on-street parking on Shoreline Boulevard and downtown, and parking garages in the Central Business District with enhanced linkages via transit services and pedestrian corridors. POLICY STATEMENT E.17 Linkages to the landmasses from remote parking areas in the CBD should be significantly enhanced with transit service and pedestrian corridors. The landmasses should be used more efficiently for pedestrian oriented retail/restaurants and public park, recreation and marina uses. Much of the existing parking on landmasses can be used in the interim until alternative parking/transit service is provided for restaurant and retail uses. The ultimate use of the landmasses should be predominately for pedestrian friendly uses with strong transit and pedestrian linkages to downtown parking. Enhanced transit service should be required as a condition of doing commercial business on the bayfront by any private development. POLICY STATEMENT E.18 The Cooper's Alley landmass will be improved with more pedestrian friendly amenities and landscaping. The L-head beyond the stem is totally paved and primarily devoted to automobiles or boat service areas. It is devoid of any green open space and is visually unappealing. Even though the function of the L-head landmass is primarily a marina service area, it should be landscaped to visually soften its image and made more attractive. Thc boat storage area located on the L-head would be ideally relocated to an off-sita location, however, a less conspicuous location on the L-head with am-active screening may be acceptable. In addition, the boat ramp and associated parking area devoted to vehicles with boat trailers should be relocated to the north side of thc L- head to reduce congestion at the terminus of the L-head access stem and the bait shop. POLICY STATEMENT E.19 The City Code will be amended to permit "liveaboards" in the marina only when minimum improvements and services are provided to serve them. Minimum services needed to serve this population include a ship's store and a bathhouse with showers and restrnoms. This innovative concept will enhance security of the marina by adding thc presence of people on a 24 hour basis in the marina. POLICY STATEMENT E.20 Extend the concrete cap and add attractive metal halide lighting on the breakwater to the fairway opening. This will significantly expand an existing publicly accessible artificial shoreline for viewing and fishing and add a very attractive waterfront feature at night with appropriate lighting. PUBLIC FACILITIES POLICY STATEMENT E.21 Public amenities should be provided throughout the bayfront to make a more attractive and "people-friendly" activity center. These amenities should include design-integrated shade structures, street furniture, heavy landscaping, public parking, public restrooms, recreational facilities, drinking fountains, water fea~ares, attractive metal halide lighting, and pedestrian oriented informational signage. This would create a much more attractive "front door" to the City and provide needed pedestrian facilities. POLICY STATEMENT E.22 The Corpus Christi Independent School District should be lobbied to retain the George Evans Elementary School, and the Corpus Christi Catholic Diocese to retain Central Catholic Elementary South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page $4 School, to serve existing and future residents' children. Retaining existing schools to serve the South Central Area is a critical element of fostering residential development in the South Central Area. UTILITIES WATER SYSTEM POLICY STATEMENT E.23 The City will conduct critical analysis and needs assessment of the water distribution system in the Plan area for potable water and fire protection needs. This assessment should include a long-range improvement program which addresses not only existing and imminent uses, but projected long-range uses according to the proposed Land use and Development Plan. WASTEWATER SYSTEM POLICY STATEMENT E.24 The City will conduct critical analysis and needs assessment of the wastewater system in the Plan area. This assessment should include a long-range improvement program which addresses not only existing and eminent uses, but projected long-range uses according to the proposed Land Use and Development Plan, and specially the redevelopment of the marina. POLICY STATEMENT E.25 Remove silt and debris in the existing main trunk sewer in Water Street from Resaca to Furman Streets. This trunk was installed approximately 50 years ago and has never been cleaned. POLICY STATEMENT E.26 Determine the feasibility of providing treated wastewater (graywater) to the large expanse of (public and private) landscaped areas in the CBD. If found to be feasible, graywater should be provided to these very expansive landscaped areas. STORMWATER SYSTEM POLICY STATEMENT E.27 Significant stormwater system improvements will be implemented as soon as possible to protect the downtown area from localized rain event flooding. The City will conduct a critical analysis and needs assessment of the stormwater system in the plan area. Some of the stormwater system problems include siltation of pipes, inadequate design and sizing of stormwater lines, and deterioration of lines. This issue was determined by unified consensus of thc Stakeholders Group to be thc single most important short range issue for the Downtown area. The Group felt that the City should do everything possible to prevent the reoccurrence of the damages and loss of business due to the flood events of 2002. POLICY STATEMENT E.28 The City should establish long-term monitoring and maintenance programs for the stormwater and wastewater system and establish best management practices to keep the systems in good working order. OTHER PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES POLICY STATEMENT E.29 Consolidate electrical, fiber-optic, cable TV, telephone, and other compatible utility lines into shared conduits to minimize the many utility cuts incurred in the Central Business District. This will provide for a much more efficient and cost effective manner for thc provision of these type &services. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 35 POLICY STATEMENT E.30 The City should initiate programs to deal more effectively with the transient and homeless population and facilities in the South Central Area and adjacent area, The private agencies and organizations which provide services and facilities to the transient and homeless population are in serious need of governmental assistance. Innovative programs and services have been provided by other cities to assist in this important social service. POLICY STATEMENT E.31 Additional sources of funding should be aggressively pursued for the continuation of restoration and adaptive reuse of the 1914 Historic Nueces County Courthouse. This prominent public building has sat vacant and deteriorated at the entrance to the City and Bayfront for over 25 years. The first phase of restoration began in the fall of 2003. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page $6 F. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT NEEDS UTILITIES Additional stormwater system improvements are needed as soon as possible to protect the downtown area from heavy localized rain event flooding. Some of the stormwater system problems include siltation of pipes, inadequate capacity of stormwater lines and pump stations, and deterioration of drainage pipes and boxes. NOTE: Utilities item 1. was determined by unified consensus of the Stakeholders Group to be the single most important short-range issue for the Downtown area. Critical analysis and needs assessment of the water distribution system in the Plan area for existing and future potable water and fire protection demand. 3. Critical analysis and needs assessment of the wastewater system in the Plan area for existing and future wastewater demand. 4. Relocate, expand and improve the efficiency of the Broadway Wastewater Treatment Plant. MARINA :T Enhanced marina facilities should include expansion, improvement and replacement of existing Marina facilities. Improvements should include new Marina Offices, additional boat slips, both large and small berths, transient boater slips and restrooms with showers, pump out station and holding tank, fueling station, a ship's store, laundry, etc. A more comprehensive and detailed capital improvement project list is listed below. SHORT RANGE NEEDS The following projects are grouped by highest priority to produce the highest quality of services and facilities for the marina. The time frame to implement these improvements realistically should be within the next two to three years. These improvements and maintenance of these facilities should be of the highest quality in order to accommodate large yachts and vessels. Quality facilities and services will be rewarded with positive referrals. A more comprehensive and detailed capital improvement project list is listed below. Relocate and expand boat ramp to northwest quadrant of L-head South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 37 · Boaters' Facilities and Public Restrooms on all landmasses (including boaters~ restrooms with showers and lounge, laundry facilities, lockers, etc.) · Four new piers with 240 boat slips and approximately 48 large boat slips on Peoples Street T-head · Marina administration office, with public restrooms, conference center, weather and sailing plan center, meeting facilities with television and satellite systems, and landscaping and lighting improvements · Boater's center with fuel station, pump-out facility, snack store and ship's store, lounge, sail library, intemet access, sailing promotion, and education center · Piling existing slip repair and replacement · Trash and litter dump sites · Security cameras and electronic gate controls · Landscaping entire marina · Lighting for security and special events · Sanitary pump-out boat and cart · Cable and satellite television at slips · Water toy area · Shade structures, picnic tables, barbecue grills · Extend concrete cap on breakwater to thc fairway opening and provide attractive pedestrian-scaled, metal halide lighting. MEDIUM RANGE PROJECTS The following projects are needed for the marina, however, are not as urgent as the above listed projects. They are medium range in timing (3 to 5 years out) and are generally needed to create more tourism and visitor activity such as national and international boating events, hosting of "tall sailing ships", and major restaurant and retail development. · Relocation and berthing of the Columbus Ships in the marina as a tourist attraction South Central Area Development Pla· Draft December 9, 2003 Page 38 U Boat sales office and showroom with retail and sailmaker, etc. Improvements to existing slips New state of the art boat repair and haul out facility, dry stack storage facility with large boat ramp for large events, and facilities for full service sailmakers, riggers, electricians, painters, boatwrights, etc. R-pier replacement, 128 covered slips Dry boat storage Parking improvements and asphalt overlay Seafood Market/Fisherman's Wharf and permanent mooring for shrimp boats Anchorage area for visiting boats LONG RANGE PROJECTS · Dredging of the marina NORTH BASIN Establish a master plan for the ultimate development of the north basin (generally north of Peoples Street Breakwater). The master plan should he done as soon as possible to determine if dredge from the ship channel deepening will be needed for Corpus Christi Marina improvements. Possible improvements could include new land masses, cruise ship berthing adjacent to the Ship Channel, beaches, anchorage for large water craft, etc. BAYFRONT The following projects are proposed for the bayfront. All of these projects should be compatible with the architectural elements of the seawall i.e. steps, cap, Miradores, and benches. m u Additional shade structures, lighting standards and type of lighting, trash receptacles, bicycle lanes, informational signage and kiosks, and water fountains should be provided on the seawall and adjoining walkway. Provide additional McGee Beach facilities, e.g. public showers, public toilets with high frequency of maintenance, shade structures, replacement of concession building and restrooms Develop a small amphitheater utilizing the seawall steps with a stage floating in the marina and/or on McGee Beach for regular musical venues/sports events to increase variety of activities on bayfront. South Central A rea Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 39 PARK AND RECREATION Expand Convention Center grounds and take advantage of its bayfront location by creating a bayfront public park and plaza south of the Convention Center on Shoreline Boulevard medians and the Barge Dock. Recreation park improvements for Blucher and South Bluff Parks. Possible expansion and connection of Blucher Park to South Bluff Park. Develop public plazas on the Bluff Balustrade and improvements to Upper Broadway and La Retama Park. Place public art at: · 1-37 at Shoreline Boulevard; · La Retama Park; · Shoreline Boulevard in front of the Arena and expanded Convention Center; · Bayfront landmasses; · Artesian Park; and · Bayfront Park ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Promote development of the marina landmasses with public/private joint ventures for retail, restaurant, entertainment, park, marina, residential, and/or hotel development to capitalize on the unique views and prime bayfront location. Establish a Tax Increment Financing District or equivalent mechanism to provide financing for capital improvements in the South Central Area Development Plan. Relocate the Army Corps of Engineer Offices to a site away from thc Bayfront Arts and Science Park. Promote development with a public/private joint venture for retail, restaurant, entertainment, and/or hotel development to capitalize on the unique views and prime bayfront and harbor location. Additional sources of funding should be aggressively pursued for the restoration and adaptive reuse of the 1914 Historic Nueces County Courthouse. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 40 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 1. Pollution prevention devices at all stormwater outfalls along the bayfront to capture stormwater debris and reduce pollution in the bay waters especially at the Marina. 2. Drainage improvements within Blucher Park to prevent periodic wash out of the Blucher Park stream and adjacent wildlife habitat. AMENITIES AND LANDSCAPING 1. Contract with a nationally recognized urban designer to provide comprehensive urban design guidelines for downtown, uptown, the BASP, the bayfront, and the marina. 2. IH-37 landscaping improvements need a higher degree of maintenance between the Crusstown Exchange and the Bayfront. 3. Establish grand entrance features to the Bayfront Arts and Science Park at Resaca Street and Shoreline Boulevard and Chaparral Street and 1-37. 4. Develop a pedestrian walkway along the bayfront between the barge dock and the Solomon Ortiz International Center. 5. Enhance the seawall with special pavers or concrete imprinting, landscaping, increased lighting on steps, and creation of shade. 6. Install consistent, high quality, metal halide lighting in the Marina including the breakwater, to tie the public waterfront and downtown together and provide high quality illumination. TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSIT Create a Shoreline Boulevard operations plan for temporary closure of travel lanes during large festival events such as Buccaneer Days, etc. to ensure pedestrian safety. Construction of pedestrian "bump-outs", sidewalk widening, planting of street trees, etc per Policy Statements B.C.6, B.C.7, and B.C.8. The construction of these pedestrian improvements will address the core of needed pedestrian connections in the Central Business District, on the bayfront, and the Bayfront Arts and Science Park. Construction of all pedestrian corridors shall be in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2005 Page 41 11. 12. Commission a transportation study to determine the feasibility of changing one-way streets downtown to two way for the purpose of creating better interconnectivity and enhanced access to storefront business in the downtown. Improve public signage for East Port Avenue and the U.S. 181 on-ramp north of Belden Street should be improved to make the public better aware of these streets as secondary routes to and from the Bay Front Arts and Science Park (BASP). Improve traffic control throughout the plan area with "real-time" traffic responsive signal and pedestrian activated controls. Creation of designated park and ride locations on the edge of the downtown for shuttle to the BASP, Marina, and other attractions in the downtown Extension of Shoreline Boulevard to connect with Chaparral Street in the BASP. Improve access from U.S. 181 (Harbor Bridge) to Padre Street (I-37 frontage road.) Street improvements necessary for baseball stadium, arena and BASP access. Extend Staples Street to Fitzgerald Street after the Broadway Treatment Plant is relocated. Enhanced public transportation system, including but not limited to a fixed alignment streetcar system. Relocation of the Power Street off-ramp from US 181 to Belden Street. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2005 Page 42 G. PLAN IMPLEMENTATION POLICY STATEMENT G.I This Plan constitutes the primary guide for the development and redevelopment of the South Central Area. The Plan provides the overall basis for which the City makes determinations concerning zoning, capital improvement projects and programs such as street improvements, park and marina improvements, and infrastructure improvements, and to a somewhat lesser degree building code issues. POLICY STATEMENT G.2 A Strategic Action Committee will be established by the City to implement this Plan. This group should consist of entrepreneurs and property owners with businesses or property located within the South Central area, professional architects and engineers, at-large citizens who have no financial interest in the Area, and representatives from governmental agencies which provide services to the Area, and representatives from the applicable City advisory committees, e.g. Watershorc, Parks, etc.. Thc primary charge to this ad hoc group is to aggressively pursue the implementation of this Plan. The committee shall develop specific strategies for implementation of thc Plan with specific timelines to implement thc respective strategies and a clear determination of which agency or individual is responsible to implement specific projects or programs. The highest priority projects for the Strategic Action Committee include: South Central Area Development Plan projects to be recommended for inclusion in the next City Bond Program; Implementation of sustainable new or additional funding sources for Central Business District improvements, i.e., Tax Increment Financing District, Public Improvement District, increase in marina slip rental rates to upper range of coastal marinas, or other mechanisms to fund projects. Identified funding sources should be in place within 12 months of adoption of the Somh Central Area Plan; a Final resolution of the "Bayfront Park" including funding for improvements and construction, if any is required. · Annual input into the City's Capital Improvements Program. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 43 APPENDIX A: ISSUES REPORT South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2005 Page 44 APPENDIX A: ISSUES REPORT Introduction A comprehensive plan is a long-range planning document that cities use to provide a guideline for the future use of public and private property (zoning and subdivisions) and as a guideline for the location of capital improvements, such as roads, utility lines, and other public infrastructure. The Corpus Christi City Charter, approved by voters in 1986, mandated that the City would have a comprehensive plan. The Comprehensive Plan and amendments to it are reviewed by the City Planning Commission and approved by the City Council. The Charter also required that any plan element must have ample opportunity for public citizen input. Background In 1987, City Council approved the first phase of the development of the City's Comprehensive Plan, the Corpus Christi Policy Statements. The Policy Statements document is a broad policy document including goals, objectives and policies regarding long-range growth and development of the City. The Policy Statements contain development policies on land use, transportation, public services, economic development, and protection of the environment. The second phase of the development of the City's Comprehensive Plan is the formulation of more detailed area plans for each large geographic area of the City. Since the adoption of the Policy Statements, 11 Area Development Plans have been adopted by the City. The original South Central Area Development Plan was adopted in 1991. Since 12 years has lapsed since the original plan was adopted and numerous changes have occurred in the South Central area, the need for the current plan update is apparent. Attached is the planning process (Exhibit A) for the update of the South Central Area Development Plan. As part of the process, an informal stakeholders group composed of public and private business leaders was formed to meet with staff and suggest planning issues to be addressed in the Plan update.(Exhibit B) After four meetings with the Stakeholder Group, staff developed this Issues Report. (Exhibit C) The Report was then submitted to the Stakeholder's Group for review and comment. After making Stakeholder revisions, the Issues Report will be presented to the City Planning Commission. The next step in the process will be for Staff and the Stakeholders Group to use the issues report as a basis for updating of the South Central Area Development Plan, taking into account the identified issues. The draft Plan will be presented to appropriate City Boards and Committees for review and comment. Staff-will incorporate suggestions into the draft Plan and then submit the draft Plan to the Planning Commission for public comment and public hearings. Recommendations by the Planning Commission will be incorporated into the draft Plan and then submitted to City Council at a public hearing for final approval. Environment Flood Hazard Areas - Much of the area below the uptown bluff is located in designated Flood Hazard Areas. The area bayward of the seawall including the Marina is within in a velocity zone. Areas within velocity or "V"- zones are subject to damaging wave action of greater than three feet in addition to the base storm elevation during a 100-year flood. Special care must be taken for all improvements bayward of the seawall to minimize damage by storm surges from the bay. Areas of very low elevation landward of the seawall and below the bluff are protected from storm surges by the 14-foot high seawall. These low areas are located in the FEMA "B"- zone (100 to 500 year flood), generally a very low risk flood area. However, because &these very low elevations below the bluff development is also dependent on the downtown drainage and pump system to keep those areas from flooding. In 2002 numerous businesses flooded twice during localized downpour rain events during the summer and fall. This has caused a South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 45 significant upgrade of the area's drainage system to be included in the short range portion of the City's Capital Improvement Program Issue: (See Stormwater issue under the Utilities section). Water Quality of Bayfront - Stormwater draining into the bayfrent marina and Magee and Emerald Beaches are impacted by downtown runoffpollutants i.e., trash, litter, street pollutants, etc. Issue: There are dozens of stormwater outfalls along the seawall and the beaches of the Plan area that deposit floating debris along the seawall at the comers of the T and L-Heads is evidence of this issue. Wetlands - The only wetlands within the Plan area are located within the natural drainageway in Blucher Park. Issue: Blucher Park Improvements. Existing and Future Land Use High intensity mixed use development (residential and commercial) and civic oriented development of the highest possible character is the vision for the South Central area. High visibility corridors might include. Issue: Provision of amenities for high-density developments and along high visibility corddom such as Shoreline Boulevard, 1H-37, and connecting streets to the Bayfront Arts and Science Park. Issue: Future land use for the Port area immediately west of the Harbor Bridge. Issue: Most appropriate use of the abandoned Broadway Wastewater Treatment Plant site. Housing - Issue: Incentives to promote significant increases of quality residential development and compatible mixed uses in the CBD and surrounding residential neighborhoods e.g. conversions to loft apartments, specialty grocery stores, and other residential serving uses. Issue: Future use of residential areas west, northwest, southwest, and south of the CBD. Issue: Incentives to a create sense of community in the Central Area. Issue: Identification of obstacles to redevelopment in the Central Area. Issue: Reduction or elimination of residential parking requirements. Urban Design Guidelines and Zoning Urban design is a term used to define how a community manages the physical and visual character of its built environment. Urban design has become an increasingly dominant issue in the South Central Area in response the City's desire to promote quality development in the City's most visible and accessible tourist district. The South Central Area Development Plan Dra~ December 9, 2003 Page 46 design quality of the built environment can have a profound effect on the economic and social health of a city. For example, the landscaped pedestrian intersection improvement along Chaparral Street, the new street lighting installed by the Downtown Management District throughout downtown and the landscaping and sidewalk improvements on Peoples Street help create a "sense of place". A high qusality visual environment is a fundamental requirement to attract long-term, high-quality investment. While the City has had some successes in creating public improvements with a unique high quality and character, the City has not adopted a set of Urban Design Guidelines to assure a consistent theme and high quality for public and private development. Issue: Possible areas of the CBD that should be subject to Urban Design guidelines: · Primary Entr3,ways to the Bayfront Business District, the Bayfront, the Bayfront Arts and Science Park (i.e., Port Avenue, IH-37, Twigg Street, Leopard Street, and Agnes/Kinney Street). · Along Shoreline Boulevard and Ocean Drive. · All development and improvements in the Marina and on the Bayfront. · Along the BluffBalustrade. · Bayfront Arts and Science Park. · Central Business District (Downtown and Uptown) Issue: Elements that could be considered for inclusion in any urban design guidelines: · Higher density mixed-use development · Mixed-use compatibility · Pedestrian amenities including lighting and landscaping for private and public development · Greater signage control · Architectural controls including preservation of historic facades and structures · Public and private parking lots · Compact parking spaces · View corridors · Great Streets Program Nco-traditional development is characterized by medium to high density, mixed use, pedestrian friendly design and amenities, small front yard setbacks, storefronts, narrow streets and urban design guidelines. Issue: The Plan may contain policies on where "neo-traditional" development in South Central inner neighborhoods would be appropriate. Issue: Reduction of billboards in the South Central area. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 47 Historic Preservation - Issue: Incentives for preservation and facade restoration. Zoning and Development Existing zoning district requirements and zoning district boundaries within the Central Area should be critically analyzed to assure that zoning will complement and encourage redevelopment of the area. Issue: Implementation of South Central objectives in the Unified Development Code. Issue: Rezoning requests and building permit approval contingent upon adequacy of infrastructure to handle the additional intensity of development. High-rise development on Shoreline Blvd. Issue: Establishment of "visual corridors" to protect views from the lower mid-rise development west of Water Street to the bayfront. Economic Incentives Issue: Provision of a full gamut of financial assistance to prospective development in the Central Business District, e.g., tax increment financing, renewal community tax incentives, tax abatements, crc. Transportation Three freeways, Interstate 37, U.S. 181, and the Crosstown Expressway serve the Central Area. Five arterial streets serve the area including: Staples, Morgan, Leopard, Agnes/Laredo and Shoreline Boulevard. The Regional Transit Authority has made a substantial investment in the South Central Area including: the Staples Street Station; Substations at Water StreeffSchatzell, Lawrence/Chaparral Street, Leopard/Tancahua Street; Water Taxi service stations at the Barge Dock and the Peoples Street T-Head. Shoreline Boulevard - Issue: Determination if a bayfront park thyough a specific community wide planning process is feasible. Issue: Reduction of traffic lanes on Shoreline Boulevard and traffic management techniques. Water Street - Issue: Pedestrian improvements on Water Street to enhance this highly traveled and highly visible corridor e.g., landscaping, pedestrian bump-outs, transil stations, unified lighting, etc. Terminus of North Shoreline Boulevard - The conceptual master plan for the new arena, the expanded convention center and the surrounding area envisions the extension of Shoreline Boulevard northward into the Water Garden area terminating at Chaparral Street. This design would have a positive resolution to the dead end of the existing North Shoreline Boulevard. However, the design comes with several issues which would need to be resolved. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 48 The running water "brook" which connects the Art Museum to the Water Garden would be broken, visually and physically separating the Museum from the Water Garden. Since the Water Garden and its "brook" connection was paid for by the Museum, any extension of Shoreline Boulevard should include participation in the planning and design by the museum. Issue: Vehicular and pedestrian circulation at the Bayfront Arts and Science Park (BASP). New Harbor Bridge - Issue: Future access to the CBD from the new Harbor Bridge and reuse of abandoned sections of the old Harbor Bridge right-of-way. Transit Services, Parking and Other Facilities - The Central Area due to its high-density development, with high concentrations of employment and government centers and the city's primary tourist aVa'actions and accommodations, has the highest demand for transit services. The new arena, baseball stadium, and the expanded convention center will add significantly to the demand for transit services in the area. The RTA is currently analyzing all feasible options to significantly enhance public transit services in the area. Issue: Determining the most effective combination of on and off-street parking and RTA services with regard to serving the Bayfront Arts and Science Park and the Central Business District (CBD). Issue: Zoning requirements consistent with plan objectives for parking and enhanced transit services. Issue: Provision of public parking vs. reliance on transit services. Issue: Parking metering expansion and pricing. Downtown/Uptown Grid Network - lssue: Preserving the grid arterial system in the CBD. lssue: Criteria and justification for street closures. Sidewalks - Issue: Maximizing pedestrian connectivity between the BayfronffDowntown/Uptown and Bayfront Arts and Science Park. Issue: Pedestrian comfort improvements in the BayfronffDowntown/Uptown and Bayfront Arts and Science Park. Public Services Utilities - Rehabilitation of aging and undersized infrastructure in the Central Business District. Water - Issue: Identification of water distribution system improvements for the Central Area. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 49 Wastewater - Issue: Identification of wastewater distribution system improvements for the Central Area. Stormwater - Sea Wall Improvements Phase One (Art Museum to Power Street) of four phases is approximately 50% completed with completion of this phase projected by November 2003. All of the remaining phases are projected to be completed by Fall of 2006. These repairs should provide adequate protection from storm surges for 60 to 70 years. To protect against localized flooding such as occurred in 2002, additional drainage improvements including significant upgrades to the pump stations and drainage boxes and piping in the downtown area will be needed in the short to medium term. Many of the stormwater lines in the area are also very old and are in an advanced state of deterioration and/or not providing the necessary capacity due to inadequate sizing or blockage due to buildup of silt. Issue: Stormwater system improvements to protect the Central Area from localized flooding. Issue: Long-term maintenance for the South Central storm water system. Issue: Best management practices for storm drainage in the South Central Area. Natural Gas - Issue: No issues identified. Other Utilities - Issue: Enhancement, coordination, and consolidation of private utility providers in public easements and right-of-way. Parks Bayfront Park - Issue: Creation of a bayfront park and associated Shoreline realignment. Magee and Emerald Beach - The current beach renourishment project will create significant wide.ning of Magee and Emerald beaches. Issue: Identification of high priority beach facilities, e.g. public showers, public bathrooms, etc. Blucher and South Bluff Parks - Blucher Park is a City-designated wildlife sanctuary and only minimal brick and mortar improvements can be constructed in the Park. Issue: Park improvements to Blucher and South Bluff Parks. Issue: Expansion and connection of Blucher to South BluffPark. Bluff Balustrade - Issue: BluffBalustrade, War Memorial Park and La Retama Park improvements e.g., opportunity for public plazas. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 50 Bayfront Recreational amenities - Marina - Issue: Specific public purpose redevelopment objectives. Issue: Marina livcaboards. Issue: Expansion of the existing Marina. Festival site location - The new arena is under construction and scheduled to be completed in late 2004. The area along North Shoreline Boulevard between Power Street and the Convention Center may not be large enough to accommodate Bayfest and other possible festivals. Issue: Permanent festival park location and facilities. Public Facilities Public facilities - Issue: Bayfront public facilities such as public parking, public restrooms, recreational facilities, shade sb-uctures, etc. Issue: Retaining public schools to serve the South Central Area. Historic Nueces County Courthouse - This prominent dilapidated building at the entrance to the City and Bayfront has been a source of much debate over the last 25 years. Restoration is scheduled to begin in the fall of 2003. Issue: Additional sources of funding and adaptive reuse. Public Safety Shoreline Boulevard and Pedestrian Crossings - lssue: Pedestrian safety for crossing of Shoreline Boulevard: between the Coliseum and the Seawall during the Buccaneer Days carnival; across from Shoreline Hotels primarily located at Twigg, Peoples, and Lawrence Streets. South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page51 EXHIBIT A: Revised Process Schedule 6-17-03 Planning Process and Schedule 2003 Dates Initiate dialog meeting: with the Downtown Management District (DMD) Long Range Planning Committee (LRPC). te identi.~' dc~;','ntc,;:'n i::ue.; and to, .g'~.r'~.l~.y a ";'ielc, n" for the do' Series of meetings with the Stakeholder Group to identify development issues and possible alternative courses of action, and re,qne the "dev.'ntcwn :'iaicn". Stakeholdem may include the DMD, Chamber of Commerce, RTA, TXDOT, CCISD, Convention and Visitors Bureau, Port of Corpus Christi, Economic Development Corporation, Convention Center/Heritage Park, Mea'opolitan Planning Organization, Coastal Bend Bays and Estuary Program, dc,':,'ntcwn :takehe!dcr: tc di:cuec '~ ........... '~-"~' ..... ': ...... May thru July A Downtown Issues Report will be presented to the Planning Commission. Staff will also forward an informational report to the City Council containing the issues identified by the Stakeholders Group. Staffwill formulate a ccm~lete th~ draft update to the South Central Area Development Plan by addressing the issues identified in the lssues Report. The Stakeholders will review and suggest changes to the draft plan. Staffwill revise the draft plan as necessary. August July thru August Staffwill review the Draft Plan and Stakeholder changes with City Management. After an)' required .... :~: .... ~ r~..r, m,- ix thk time). Planning Commission - presentation of the draft plan and the Commission provides comments and suggestions. Staff presents the Draft Plan to stakchc!der:: the DMD Long Rang Planning Committee, Landmarks Commission, RTA, Water Shore Advisory Board, Park and Recreation Advisory, Transportation Advisory Committee, etc. August/September September September - October 9. 10. Planning Commission public hearing/action. City Council presentation. City Council public hearing and approval. November November December South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page52 EXHIBIT B: Invitation Letter to Stakeholders April 29, 2003 Subject: Invitation to participate in an ad hoc committee to identify South Central (Central Business District) planning issues The City Council has placed a high priority on undertaking a comprehensive update of the South Central Area Development Plan adopted in 1991. An updated plan is needed to address expansion of the Convention Center, construction of the Arena and baseball stadium and development of the marina. Additionally, the City Charter requires periodic updating of Comprehensive Plans. The purpose of this letter is to invite you to participate in the South Central Stakeholders Group (SCSG). The City is forming a Stakeholder Group of 10 - 20 members from various segments of the Central Business District (CBD). We anticipate that the SCSG will meet no more than three times in the coming months to discuss and identify Central Business District planning issues. Each meeting will last approximately one and a half hours. The first two meetings will be informal exchanges of ideas on Central Business District (CBD) planning issues and general brainstorming on how the area should develop. By the third meeting, staff will present a draft Issues Report for the group to review. Staff will submit a final Issues Report based upon the group's discussion to the Planning Commission in June or July. The Issues Report will be a major basis Staffuses to formulate policies for the draft plan to be presented and public hearings held with the Planning Commission this summer. The Stakeholder Group meetings will be held at City Hall, 1201 Leopard Street in the 6th floor meeting room. The SCSG meeting schedule is as follows: Meeting 1 - Thursday, May 8, 2003, 6:00pm - 7:30pm Meeting 2 - Thursday, May 22, 2003, 6:00pm - 7:30pm Meeting 3 - Thursday, June 12, 2003, 6:00pm - 7:30pm South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 53 Your participation in this process is a great opportunity to help steer the City in the right direction concerning Central Business District redevelopment. Staff will be contacting each of you to determine if you would like to participate in the SCSG. If you have any questions about this letter, feel free to call Bob Payne, Senior Planner, or Mic Raasch, City Planner, at (361) 880-3560. Thank you in advance for your consideration of participating in these ve~ important stakeholder meetings for the South Central Area Development Plan. Sincerely, George K. Noe City Manager ce Margie C. Rose, Assistant City Manager Art Sosa, Director of Development Services Michael Gunning, Assistant Director of Development Services / Director of Planning South Central,4rea Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 54 EXttlBIT C: Issues Identified by Stakeholders Group South Central Stakeholder Group May 22~ 2003 Ranking Assets and Strengths A = High B= Medium Assets and Strengths C = Low (Ranked by Highest Number of Listings) A ~layfront ... Unique A Marina Development A Infraslrueture...Facilities Development B Historic Buildings...Connection to Past & Tourism $ B Port and Ship Channel...Partnership Opportunities B Availability of Vacant Land and BIdgs. For Development B Diversity of Uses B Marina...Activity B Bluff Balustrade and Seawall...Oppormnities for Unique Overlooks B Grid Transportation System...Choices of Development and Mobility B Business District on the Water B ¥iews...Protect B 2oncentration of Cultural Elements in Bayfront Arts and Science Park B 2ity Officials...Concerned with and Aware of Value of Area and Priorities C qatural Beauty (of Bay) C Lack of Traffic Congestion C ]imate C '.nvironment C Relaxed/Casual Nature C Directed Patrol Officers C ~.ceess to Waterfront C Hotels...Generate Revenue C Entertainment...24/7 Attractions C Abundance of/and Quality of Vacant Properties...Opportunity for City to Guide development C Ocean Drive/Shoreline Boulevard View...Unique Recreational Opportunities C Downtown Management District...Willing to Tax Self for Betterment of Area C Ships/Port...Economic Opportunities Fun to Watch Ships C Renewal Community Program C Lar[~est Concentration of Restaurants South Central ~4rea Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 55 Issues and Challenges Ranking A = High B= Medium Issues and Challenges C = Low (Ranked by Highest Number of Listings) ~,ging Infrastructure: A - Very Expensive to Repair/Rehabilitate · Creates Problems - Not Designed to Modem Standards - Substandard Sidewalks A Lack of Residential Units A Lack of Pedcs~ian Comforts...lncludin~ Public Transit Facilities and ADA Compliance A Derelict Buildings B Commuter Traffic along Seawall Multi-modal Transportation Facilities B - Drop off and Pick up (Water Taxi) B New Harbor Brid~e Shoreline Boulevard: B Public Safety Concerns Green Space Connection to Waterfront B Lack of Connectivi~ between Port and Downtown and Uptown Need to Retain Schools in Area B Necessary to Retain/Attract Residents B Historic Courthouse - Poor Condition B Lack of Parking; - Nowhere to put Cars B ISpecial Events...Location and Frequency Socioeconomic Conditions/Vacant Buildings C ~- Deters Population Growth C Limited Access to Some Areas C Vacant Property (Absentee Owners) C Traffic Flow - Exiting Area C Climate: Heat, 'Wind and Shade C Urban Design - Enhance Aesthetics C Lack of Color - Make Bolder C Concert Noise South Central .4rea Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 56 Ideas and Visions Ranking A = High B= Medium Ideas and Visions C -- Low (Ranked by Highest Number of Listings) ~.esidential/Mixed Uses - Variety of Opportunities A .,.g. Loft Apartments, "Liveaboards", etc. A N4ake Downtown, Uptown, and Bayfront to Port Area More Accessible to Pedestrian and Public Yransit Users with Trees and Lighting A blew and Improved Transit Services - Help Move People (more efficiently) - e.g. Trolley A Creation of Economic Incentives: Tax Abatement, Tax Increment Financing, etc. A World Class Marina B Upgraded and Rehabilitated Infrastructure B Landscaping/Signage - Beautification Upper Broadway Developed as Public Terrace Plaza with Cafes, B Retail, etc. B ~reservation of Existing Residential Neighborhoods B Z. elocate Commuter Traffic Away from Bayfront B Z.ehabilitate Vacant Structures C ?arking Garages - Coordinated with Transit System - with Ground Level Retail (along street frontages) C R. evitalization of Existing Architecture C Activities to At~ract People C Enhance Accessibility to Bayfront C Ereate Safe Bayfront Park C Create Festival Facility C Attract a Convention Center Hotel (Encourage Economic Activities) C This Plan to be Used as a Tool to Create a Vision C Enhance Accessibility to Bayfront - Improve Port Avenue C )ual Use Opportunities for 24/7 Activities C Expanded Entertainment Opportunities C Widen Sidewalks (in Downtown) C Park and Open Space Enhancements C Higher Education and Housinl~ Opportunities (Satellite Campus) C T-Head Development C Need to Focus on Downtown as Economic Engine Adaptive Reuse of Coliseum - Passive Uses with Arts and Crafts C Not Rides, etc. - Will Create New Activit~ Node South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 57 APPENDIX B: HISTORICAL PLANS AND STUDIES South Central Area Development Plan Draft December 9, 2003 Page 58 A comprehensive list of studies, plans, and reports concerning the Central Study Area was prepared as part of the original 1989 South Central Plan and has been attached to the following list. Since 1989, the following is a list of land use studies pertaining to the South Central Plan that have been developed by the City or other agencies: 1991 South Central Area Development Plan adopted by City Council on May 21, 1991. The first adopted comprehensive plan element specifically for the downtown area adopted by City Council since the 1956 Corpus Christ Comprehensive Plan. Est. 1991 Heart of Corpus Christi Vision Plan - an urban design follow up to the South Central Area Development Plan. The Vision Plan contains a number of public and private property recommendations pertaining to streetscape and park/plaza enhancements. 1996 Corpus Christi Community Cultural Plan - accepted by City Council in 1996. A blue print for community cultural development offering recommended goals and implementation strategies to guide public and private sectors. June 1996 Vision 2000 - a grassroots visioning process undertaken by citizens committees over a two year period from 1994 thru 1996. The process included input citizens and a number of public agencies including the City of Corpus Christ and a number of town hall style meetings and workshops. October 1998 Waterfront Master Plan for Cargo Docks 1 and 2 for the Port of Corpus Christi. This plan, consistent with the South Central Area Development Plan, addressed the adaptive reuse and redevelopment of industrial docks to tourist oriented developments next to the Bayfront Arts and Science Park. This plan area encompasses the Solomon Ortiz Center and proposed baseball stadium. October 2003 AIA's Bayfront Plan - an intensive one day charette of AIA members to illustrate a recommended bayfront park concept. LIST OF STUDIES, PLANS, AND REPORTS CONCERNING TM£ CENTRAL STUDY AREA DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING JANUARY 4, 1989 1. Bayfront Development Plan, Hare and Hare, 1944-45. Accepted. Graphic Design for Bayfront including Shoreline Boulevard, and four L and T-Heads. 2. Heliport Location Study, 1953-54. Staff study. Zoning and Planning Commission Proposed several alternative sites for the location of a 'heliport along the bayfront and in the downtown area. The study strongly supported the creation of a landmass at the end of what is now I.H. 37. As an interim heliport location the study recommended what is now the median of I.H. 37. The heliport today is located in the median of I.H. 37. 3. Comprehensive Plan for Corpus Christi Area, Harland Bartholomew and Associates, 1953. Adopted. The first and only Comprehensive Plan to be approved for the City of Corpus Christi. Reviews origin of traffic destined to the central business district (CBD), existing traffic patterns in CBD, and existing parking facilities. study placed a'great deal of emphasis on proposed parking. The Plan recommended the following improvements along the Bayfront. * Bathhouse at McCaughan Park - Pedestrian tunnel under E. Shoreline connecting McCaughan Park to Water. * Build L-Head - Complete original plan for Marinas. * off-shore parkway - Original concept. * Shrimp fleet - Provide new accommodations at present harbor entrance. * Arts Cor~ission - To determine appropriateness and adequacy of architectural design of buildings facing the bay. For Corpus Christi Beach the Plan recommended the removal of Bascule Bridge crossing - Proposed to replace Bascule Bridge with a tunnel under the harbor entrance. (The tunnel later proved to be unfeasible and the Harbor Bridge was created in its place.) The study also proposed to construct highway 181 west of Timon Blvd, where it now connects with the Harbor Bridge. North Beach Study, Price W. Armstrong, 1956. Accepted * Build a wide and elevated recreational beach and a protective seawall at North Beach. * Protect the area by reinforcing and vegetating the dune wall of Mustang, St. Joseph and Northern Padre Islands. 5. CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS Central Business District, A Panel study by the Urban Land Institute, 1965. Accepted. The Study includes an examination of the existing physical, economic, and social conditions within the City and their direct or indirect influences on the Central Business District. The study also reviews existing conditions within the Central Area itself, identifying both problems and opportunities. Recommendations provided in this study include: * Government Center - New office structures for the County, Federal, City governments and the Department of Education constructed as a new government cen~er complex immediately to the north of the retail core. * Blighted areas - Demolish and redevelop through the implementation of a Federal Urban Renewal Program. * Major retail core - Bounded by Water and Mesquite Streets between Schatzel and Laguna Streets. Refurbish through removal of parking on a three block section of Chaparral Street (between Schatzel and Laguna Streets), sidewalk widening, canopy construction, sign control, beautification and other face-lifting techniques. * Future traffic congestion - Avoid traffic congestion in the CBD through the construction of an off-shore highway or alternative inland route. 6. corpus Christi Beach Plan, Corpus Christi Zoning and Planning Commission, 1966. Adopted. * Beach access and parking along the beach. Provide at five locations * one-way loop system Shoreline Boulevard. Surfside, Timon, and North 7. Volume I and II, the Comprehensive Plan for Corpus Christi, Harland Bartholomew and Associates, 1967. Consultant report, Accepted. The study identifies existing land uses, evaluates existing utilities and discusses the overall existing condition of the central area. It also includes a review of the traffic conditions, parking facilities, public transportation and pedestrian circulation. Reconunendations of the plan include: * Government Center - Contains all major public buildings for Federal State, County and City functions and is located adjacent to the bluff near Leopard street providing a connection between the uptown and downtown areas. Office space, small scale retail outlets and service activities would surround the government center forming the core of the central area plan. * North of the central core, from I.H. 37 to the Bayfront Science Park, a mixed use neighborhood of high density residential, commerce, and controlled industry. * west of the central core area (above the Bluff) existing commercial uses along Leopard street would remain as a secondary commercial center. Redevelop the residential neighborhood south of the Leopard as a medium to high density residential area. * South of the central core area, proposes a high-density residential area in the neighborhood surrounding Blucher and South Bluff Parks. In this area below the Bluff, a small office and service commercial center is proposed along Carancahua and Tancahua Streets. same * Improvement of streets Addition of several new connections, and a solution to the complicated movements between uptown and downtown. A series of pedestrian walkways is also proposed in the area opened by the extension of Leopard Street to Shoreline Boulevard. * Shopping mall - Established on Chaparral Street between Cooper and Schatzel Streets by closing the street to vehicular movement. Appropriate a~enities provided. * Major tourist facilities - To be located in the central area: a convention center complex, the marina, and a new cultural.center. * Hotel, motel, and tourist complex - along Shoreline Boulevard. At the end of Shoreline Boulevard, the present Coliseum would be expanded into a convention center. Shoreline would be relocated to the west side - 3 - of the Coliseum/Convention Center in order to facilitate the improved recreational and tourist activities proposed in the immediate bayfront and marina areas. * Marina - should be enlarged. * Off-shore highway concept. * Restoration of North Beach - Enlargement of existing parks, acquisition of additional open space, and the development of tourist facilities to include sites for motel or hotel operations, restaurants, cruise boats, fishing piers, etc. * Residential development - Apartments. * Regional park North end of Corpus Christi beach. 8. Exploratory Evaluation, An Off-Shore Highway, Harland Bartholomew, 1967. Accepted. This study considered the feasibility of an off-shore highway in the Bayfront area, linking a series of man-made islands. 9. Corpus Christi Bayfront Study, Sasaki, Walker, and Associates, 1974. Accepted. Discusses possibility of reviving downtown by creating mall with shops, restaurants, entertainment, small parks, fountains etc. Recommends a bay to bluff connection via Peoples Street. * Shoreline - Phased out as a main arterial to provide a green park zone. Increase the amount of planting and create defined pedestrian walkways. * Ocean Drive - Consider in light of University expansion and increased tourist activity. An exclusive bike path interconnecting parks on the shoreline is highly recommended. * Peoples Street T-Head Developed with bandshell. * Corpus Christi Beach - new development would not compete with the main downtown area. Low rise, high density small scale, primarily residential. * Fishermen's wharf Tourist oriented complex/possible ports of call for pleasure crafts at south end. * Beach parking and Boulevard access - Acquire land - 4 - along east side of Highway 181 for public parking, link parking areas to beach by pedestrian sidewalk and develop old railroad right-of-way as green boulevard. * Connection of bayfront beach to Nueces Bay - across the northern end of peninsula. * Marina - At Rincon Point. 10. Choices Facing Corpus Christi, Goals for Corpus Christi, 1975. Not Completed. This goals program was the City's first concerted effort to determine goals and objectives for the improvement of the City. Extensive public hearings were held throughout the community by a 150 member Goals Committee. The program produced the above reference booklet which was actually a questionaire used to determine the "choices" facing Corpus christi. For numerous reasons the program was not completed. 11. Landmark Preservation Plan, Landmark Commission of the City of Corpus Christi, 1977. Adopted. Plan establishes criteria for judging historical and architectural significance. The plan also lists historic sites which have recognized markers, sites approved for markers by the Nueces County Historical Commission, and sites suggested by various citizens of Corpus Christi. Plan is implemented through the HC Historic zoning district and Landmark Commission. It is applicable to Central Area Plan due to the number of historic structures concentrated in the area. 12. Corpus Christi Beacht A Coastal Management Beach Access Pilot studym Planning Department and Texas A&M University, ~977. Accepted. * Timon and Surfside boulevards - Continue the theme of Ocean Drive. * Access to beaches - Strictly pedestrian. These walkways would accommodate necessary beach support facilities, such as bathhouses, restrooms and concession stands. Walks complimented with a system of bikeways and roadways. * Saltwater pool, or aquarium - At Rincon park. * Surfside park - Located between high and moderate density uses, provide passive recreational uses. Connect to Rincon park via an elevated walkway. * View corridors Maximize good exposure to the - 5 water and a maximum number of potential sites for development. 13. R/UDAT Corpus Christi, American Institute of Architects, 1978. Accepted. study describes existing conditions within the central business area, explains why these conditions exist, identifies deficiencies and problems occurring in the central area and proposes solutions that may help to revive the area. Suggested solutions include: * Develop a strong pedestrian connection with a Peoples Street pedestrian mall from Leopard Street on the Bluff to the Bay. * Rehabilitate Lower Broadway, Water Street and other appropriate locations. Provide a system of parking structures to in commercial and Bayfront areas. * Housing should be encouraged in a variety of types and at higher densities. * "Avenida" Widen, improve, and extensively landscape an "Avenida" from the Downtown core area to the heart of the Mexican-American community. A connection between the downtown and west side area. * Reserve the best sites along Shoreline Boulevard for hotels, but restrict the size and placement of towers to preserve the view to the water. * Expansion of transportation systems along Shoreline Boulevard. * Expand the marina * A water taxi service should be provided. 14. Corpus Christi Beach Department, 1978. Accepted. Assistance Grant. Redevelopment Study, Planning Completed for HUD-701 Planning Identified three factors that led to the decline of Corpus Christi Beach as, 1) the erosion of the recreational beach, 2) the destructive storm surges produced by hurricanes, and 3) the loss of commercial exposure resulting from the rerouting of U.S. 181 after the construction of Nueces Bay Causeway and Harbor Bridge. Recommendations include: * Corpus Christi Beach Park - Bath-houses, concessions, observation decks, fishing piers, an amusement park, salt 6 water swimming pool and large aquarium facility. * Entertainment District - Southern portion of Corpus Christi Beach. * Waterfront shuttle between Corpus Christi Beach and the Bayfront. * One way loop boulevard - Timon, Surfside and Shoreline Boulevard. 15. Marina Development Plan, SWA Associates, 1981. Accepted. * Bayfront amenities - Including landscape, lighting, benches, bollard, trash receptacles, signing, pedestrian plaza/crossing at Peoples Street and a median closure/crossing at Starr Street along Shoreline Boulevard. * Gateway arrival point at Shoreline Boulevard from the area between I.H. 37 and Mesquite to Water Street zone. * Development of a public on-the-water activity center on the Peoples Street T-Head, which includes tour boats, party boats, restaurants, waterfront shops, a maritime museum, and aquarium. * City adoption of more efficient standards and arrangement of boat slip construction and reduction of area devoted to parking lots on landmasses. 16. Nueces County Historical-Architectural Preservation Plan, Associated Planners, and Turner, Rome and Boultinghouse, 1982. Accepted by Nueces County Com~issioners Court. Report documents the cultural resources existing in Nueces County, placing emphasis on those properties or districts that may qualify for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. Numerous sites in the central area are identified in this report as historically significant. 17. An Assessment of the Appropriateness and Feasibility of using Tax Increment Financing to aid in the Revitalization the Bay Front Area in Corpus christi, Texas, Trkla, pettigrew, Allen and Payne, 1982. Accepted. Findings and recommendations for the feasibility of Tax Increment Financing in the bayfront area. 18. Bayfront Plan, Planning Commission, Adopted 1982, amended - 7 - 1984. This document utilizes together information from past plans, studies and reports for information on opportunities, constraints and specific recommendations. It carefully selects those proposals which work best together along with existing improvements, to most beneficially utilize the CBD and the bayfront. Goals, policies and strategies were developed to accommodate the desired proposals. The goals include: * GOAL - Encourage and assist high density development in the Central Business District consisting of a mixture of professional offices, motels, hotels, housing and specialty shops. * GOAL - Monitor and improve pedestrian and vehicular movement in the Central Business District, including promotion of parking facilities. * GOAL - Improve appearance and access to Shoreline Boulevard and Ocean Drive as major entrance to City. * GOAL - Promote hotels/motels along shoreline while maintaining visual corridors for property located west of Shoreline. * GOAL Encourage additional land masses. * GOAL - Expand activity in the Marina including boat slips and commercial activity. * Goal Encourage and assist in the development of Corpus Christi Beach primarily for hotel/motel facilities and high density housing plus attendant public facilities. * Goal Improve public access, physically and visually, to the full length of the beach and provide better circulation patterns in the beach area, including stronger transportation links across the ship channel. 19. Engineering Study and Recommendation for L-Head and T-Head and Breakwater Improvements, Goldston Engineering, Inc., 1982. Accepted and monies included in 1986 CIP. Two part engineering study to identify the existing conditions and problems relating to the T-Heads and L-Head and recommendations for additional breakwater structures north of Peoples street T-Head. 20. Project Plan for Corpus Christi Reinvestment Zone No.1, - 8 - Trkla, Pettigrew, Allen and Payne, Adopted 1983, amended in 1987. Plan describes existing uses and conditions, the framework for Reinvestment zone No. 1, Phased public improvements, and an economic feasibility Study. Plan describes existing uses and conditions, the fra3nework for Reinvestiment zone No. 1, Phased public improvements, and an economic feasibility Study. 21. Multicultural Center, A Report from Community UnitY, Community Unity, 1983. Accepted. Plan identifies the purpose of the Mul%icultural Center to provide space for cultural or ethnic activities, exchange cultural viewpoints and recount historical events in Corpus Christi. Lists specific strategies to complete the Center. 22. Study of Erosion at Corpus Christi Beach, Goldston Engineering, Inc., 1983. Accepted Study discusses the pros and cons of an offshore breakwater or a terminal groin to reduce the erosion problems at Corpus Christi Beach. The study recommends the offshore breakwater as the best solution to the erosion problems. The study states the if money is not available for the breakwater then the groin should provide satisfactory results. The City opted for the use of the groin. 23. 1985. Task Corpus Christi '90, Final Report, Corpus Christi '90, Accepted. Force I, Culture/Axts/Landscaping/Paxks/Recreation/Marina * Staples Street - Staff incorporates the landscaping of Staples Street into the capital improvement program. * Design Committee Areas of existing or potential scenic value, of historical note, architectural merit, or of interest to tourist will be placed in the D Zone and subject to review by the Design Committee. The Committee has the authority to require changes in appearance of proposed building, structure, alteration or use of land and impose conditions of development. Develop the Marina and Shoreline Boulevard areas with amenities and people-use areas. The development will change the Shoreline Boulevard and seawall areas to emphasize people-friendly spaces in lieu of the current thru traffic usage. - 9 * Shoreline circulation - Graphic Plan. * Design Committee - See page 5 * Water/shore commission Advise and make recommendations to the City Council and the Planning Commission regarding the development, use and preservation of water/shore areas. * Coordinate I.H. 37 landscape with Shoreline landscape. Develop the full recreational potential of Corpus Christi Beach. Put in motion a process that will lead to optimum development of public/private recreational and tourism opportunities on Corpus Christi Beach. * Park on north end of C.C. Beach. * Recreational vehicle park on the north boundary of park. Task Force II, Economics, Business Development and Central City Development. * Low interest revolving loan - Promote redevelopment of downtown through construction and rehabilitation of existing structures by the private sector. Task Force VII, Tourism/Conventions. * Multi-purpose arena - Initiate action on a feasibility study of a multi-purpose arena with additional exhibit space to attract larger conventions. * Private sector investors and merchants carry out the expansion of high quality retail development along the Bayfront and within the downtown area. * Horse and buggy rides on seawall. 24. Bayfront Activities Committee Final Report, Bayfront Activities Committee (ad hoc coh~,ittee of the Park and Recreation Board). Accepted 1985, revised 1987. The committee was established to analyze the bayfront activity situation and recoh~,ends which site or sites are best suited to hosting such activities as they exist or as may be expected to exist in the future. Two sites were selected based on accessibility, bayfront location, and acreage. The sites included Bayfront Arts and Science Park/Shoreline Medians and McCaughn Park/Coliseum/City Hall/Sherrill Park Area. The 1987 revision identifies the Bayfront Festival - 10 - Park at McCaughn Park/Coliseum/City Hall/Sherrill Park Area. 25. The Feasibility of a New Arena and Multi-purpose Facility, Kenneth Leventhal and Company 1985. Contracted ~nd accepted by the South Texas Chapter of the Associated General Contractors. for The report analyzed the feasibility of constructing an arena and a replacement for Exposition Hall. The report recommended locating the arena at Bayfront Plaza if more detailed investigations indicate that an arena could be incorporated satisfactorily with the Exhibit Hall. The report also stated that "there does not appear to be any reason to delay the construction" of the arena and the multi-purpose building. 26. A Planning and Restoration Evaluation Study of the Bluff BalUstrade, Retaining wall and Related Facilities Along Upper and Lower Broadway Streets, Govind and Associates, Inc. and John Wright Architect, 19~6. Accepted and monies included in 1986 CIP. The Report includes the history and a description of Balustrade and the other bluff facilities, investigation and analysis on the existing condition of the facilities, recommended plan for restoration, and cost estimates. 27. Analysis of Market Support for Dock One Marke~, Economic Research Associates, 1987. Contracted for and accepted by the Port of Corpus Christi. The report analyzed the existing and near term market support for the proposed Dock One Market. The Dock One Market concept proposed the conversion of two Inner Harbor cargo docks into restaurants, shops, galleries, and public areas. However, the Report found that the proposed project would not be feasible as envisioned, given the current and near term market support and sales potential. 28. Historical Evolution of Corpus Christi Bayfront 1900-1987, (for Downtown Retreat) Corpus Christi Ar~a Economic Development Corporation and Shiner, Mosley and Associates, May 1987. Accepted. Document produced as a reference for the May 1987 Downtown Retreat. Reviewed major planning issues addressed in various reports and plans regarding Downtown. 29. Project 2001 A Strategic Planning Process Aime~ at Facilitating Decision-making, Port of Corpus Christi, - 11 - 1987. Accepted by the Port. Represents a formalization of the Port of Corpus Christi's traditional planning process into a strategic business plan in identifying new and different businesses, technologies and markets the Port should create or utilize its long range plans of development and service. in 30. Action Agenda 1987-1989, Corpus Christi City Council, 1987, reaffirmed 1988. 31. Downtown/Bayfront Data Collection "Fact Book," Parsons Brinkerhoff, 1988. Accepted by RTA. Discusses historical'evolution of the Bayfront and CBD from 1900 to 1987. Lists some of the studies and reports created for this area in the past and the issues they addressed. 32. Heart of Corpus Christi, Inc. Business Plan, Hyett-Palma, Inc., October 1988. Accepted. The Plan provides a two year action agenda for the initiation and completion of projects in the area designated as the Heart of Corpus Christi. It establishes a "focus area" in which revitalization efforts are to be promoted. It also prescribes specific actions and a time schedule for the initiation and completion of these projects. Some of these proposed actions are listed as follows * Streetscape improvements throughout the "focus area"; * Developing design guidelines to set the standard of quality for the rehabilitation and adaptive use of the Downtown's older buildings in addition to targeted rehabilitation and demonstration projects. * Study to determine potential for privatization of trash collection and street cleaning; * Study to determine need to continue the one-way street system in the "focus area"; and * Designate historically significant buildings on the National Register. - 12 - Draft South Central Area Development Plan an element of the Corpus Christi ~ Plan Highlights * Environment * Future Land Use * Transportation * Economic Development * Public Services * Capital Improvements * Implementation Strategies Draft South Centra~ December 9, 2003 Area Development Plan in part, have addressed the bayfront and central business district. The Development Services Department has approximately 40 of these documents in its library. (See the Plan Appendix for a list) Draft South Central December 9, 2003 Area Development Plan 3 Bayfront Study - 1974 (Sasaki, Walker Assoc.) Marina Development Plan - 1981 (SWA Group) Draft South Central December 9, 2003 Area Development Plan 4 2 Vision 2000 - 1996 (Vision 2000 Committee) Bayfront Plan - 2003 (Corpus Christi Chapter of the AIA) Draft South Central December 9, 2003 Area Development Plan September * Residents, entrepreneurs, architects, engineers, public agencies Advisory Committees (9/03 thru 11/03) Planning Commission Public Hearings 11/05/03 and 11/19/03 Draft South Central December 9, 2003 Area Development Plan 6 Council public hearing 12/16/03 Council adoption 1/13/03 Draft South Central December 9, 2003 Area Development Plan 7 2.2 7,270 3,111 December 9, 2003 incorporated into stormwater outfalls to capture floating debris, sediments and other pollutants before they enter the Bay system. (Policy Statement A.1, page 12) Draft South Central December 9, 2003 Area Development Plan 9 5 6 increased steps, and (B.A.11, II Existing and Proposed ? December9 2003 7 Area C - Redevelopment to Low- to Mid-Rise Professional Office and Residential (B.4, Page21) December 9, 2003 Draft South Central Area Development Plan Future Plan December 9, 2003 8 Increment District, public improvement district, etc. (D.1, Page 28) Promote development of the marina with public/private joint ventures for retail, restaurant, entertainment, park, marina, residential, and/or hotel uses. (D.2, Pa: Draft South Central December 9, 2003 Area Development Plan 17 in the downtown to be engines of economic development through strategic funding and other forms of assistance. (D. 7, Page 29) Draft South Central December 9, 2003 Area Development Plan 18 9 Marina Draft South Central December 9, 2003 Area Development Plan 19 long history ~ 1974 Bayfront Study * 1984 Bayfront Plan * 1985 Bayfront Activities Committee ~ 1996-97 Gateway Proposal * 2003 AIA GatEway Proposal December 9, 2003 Draft South Central Area Development Plan 2O l0 Management District, Regional Transit Authority, Port and the Metropolitan Planning Organization will conduct a special communitywide planning process to determine an appropriate design for a bayfront park. (E.I, Page 30) Draft South Central December 9, 2003 Area Development Plan 21 permanen ; ~asibility of reducing Shoreline Blvd. lentify pros / cons of placing a fixed rail trolley on the bayfront; Draft South Central December 9r 2003 Area Development Plan 22 11 Shoreline Boulevard; flement a community survey and consensus building process to detfdi~i~ the best design. Draft South Central December 9, 2003 Area Development Plan 23 lighting, trash rece lanes, informational signage and kiosks, water fountains, and widened sidewalk should be provided on the seawall and adjoining walkway. (E.7, Page 31) Decemberg, 2003 Draft South Central Area Development Plan 24 12 Existing Conditions Past Plans Proposed Policies December 9, 2003 Drat[ South Central Area Development Plan 25 1986 Bond Program repaired two thirds of bulkheads. 2000 Bond Program will repair remaining bulkheads. Draf[ South Central December 9, 2003 Area Development Plan 26 13 Based on a 2003 survey of public boat slip rental rates second lowest of 18 Texas marinas surveyed. Annual Budget for Marina Operations and debt service: $968,000. Draft South Central December 9~ 2003 Area Development Plan 27 Past Plans- 1981 Marina Plan Draft Soutb Central December 9, 2003 Area Development Plan 28 14 Draft South Central December 9, 2003 Area Development Plan 29 wa areas. Page 32) Redevelopment objectives include additional: * restaurants, retail activities: * residential uses, hotel uses; ~ public park and recreational uses; and ~ enhanced marina facilities and services. Draft South Centrai December 9, 2003 Area Development Plan 30 15 *additional boat slips, both large and small berths, transient and charter boat slips; *restrooms with showers, pump out station and holding tank, fueling station, a ship's store, laundry, marina offices, etc. (E.15, Page 32) Draft South Central December 9, 2003 Area Development Plan 31 *On street parking in CBD *Vacant business parking during peak tourist hours *.Public and private shuttle services (E.16, Page 33) Draft South Central December 9, 2003 Area Development Plan 32 16 rom ng areas in Enhanced transit service should be required as a condition of doing commercial business on the bayfront by any private development. (E.17, Page 33) Draft South Central December 9, 2003 Area Development Plan 33 with more pedestrian friendly amenities and landscaping. *The boat storage area in the middle of the L-head should be relocated to an off-site location. *Relocate boat ramp and associated parking area devoted to vehicles and boat trailers. (E.18, Page 33) Draft South Central December 9, 2003 Area Development Plan 34 17 m~mmum ~mprovemenls are prov! : *Ship's store and *Bathhouse with showers and restrooms. This unique concept can add an additional housing type to an area which would benefit from 24 hour presence of people. (E.19, Page 33) Draft South Central December 9, 2003 Area Development Plan 35 on the breakwater. with appropriate lighting. (E.20, Page 33) Draft South Central December 9, 2003 Area Development Plan 36 18 Financing * Bond Programs * Tax Increment Financing District * Public Improvement District * Grants (G.1, Page 42) Drafl South Central December 9, 2003 Area Development Plan 37 Draft South Central Area Development Plan an element of the Corpus Christi _Qo_ m p_r~_e_q sj y~ ~.La_n 19 26 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMORANDUM City Council Meeting - December 9, 2003 AGENDAITEM: Presentation of the Risk Management Fund Report for the period ended July 31, 2003 and October 31, 2003. ISSUES: This presentation gives an overview of the status of the Risk Management funds for Fiscal Year 2003 as of July 31, 2003 and also presents the status of the fund for first quarter of Fiscal Year 2004. Financial summaries are given as well as review of the City's experiences in Workers' Compensation, General Liabilities and Health Benefits. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: · None needed. Director, Human Resources City of Corpus Christi Risk Management Report For the Period Ended July 31, 2003 City of Corpus Christi, Texas Department of Human Resources Risk Management Fund Report For Period Ended July 31, 2003 Health Benefits Risk Management * Workers' Compensation * General Liabilities Financial Information Health Benefits On the following pages, select graphs previously presented in the April 30, 2003 quarterly report are updated through the end of the 2003 fiscal year. These graphs reflect the continuing impact of higher medical costs. (Note: in both graphs, "D&V" refers to Citicare Dental and Vision claims) In addition, Tables H-1 through H-4 provide the claims counts and dollars paid in claims for the Fiscal Year by both Plan level and Participation level. The growth in medical costs is expected to continue into the foreseeable future. According to Express Scripts' 2002 Drug Trend Report, prescription costs are expected to increase by 15% to 16% annually over the next four years. Ingredient costs on a per member per month basis are expected to more than double over the next five years, going from $585.60 in 2002 to $1,212.45 in 2007. The expected increase in prescription costs matches the percent increase expected for medical costs as a whole according to industry experts. In the 2002 National Survey of Employer-Sponsored Health Plans produced by Mercer Human Resource Consulting (based on results from 2,889 entities), the average increase in employees' health benefits costs was 14.7% in 2002. According to the survey, this was 7 times the rate of general inflation. The survey reports that the total cost for health care benefits (medical, dental and other health care benefits) averaged $5,646 per employee. (The City's average cost to provide employees medical insurance alone, as reported in the FY2003 operations performance measures, was $4,774.47 per employee.) While employers answering the survey predicted an average cost increase in health care benefits for 2003 of 14.0%, twenty-two percent of the respondents anticipate an increase of 20% or higher. In other words, the increase in health care costs that was experienced by the City in FY2003 is part of a nationwide trend and that trend is not expected to diminish over the next five years. Number of Claims Flied by Plan 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 lO00 $1,200,000 $1,000,000 SBO0,O00 $600,000 $400,000 $200,000 Aug 01 Graph H-2 Claims Count by Plan Plan Aug02 Sep02 Oct02 Nov02 Dec02 Jan03 Feb03 Mar03 Apr03 May03 Jun03 Jul03 To[al Cificare & QPlus 3,108 3,384 5,134 2,925 4,975 4,883 3,866 5,370 3,671 3,745 5,272 4,360 50,693 Fire 723 789 1,221 80I 1,160 1,276 918 1,406 819 770 1,129 930 11,942 Police 797 886 1,486 897 1,511 1,513 1,069 1,346 1,048 952 1,320 1,169 13,994 Dental&Vision 271 213 233 150 157 200 194 156 137 201 1,912 Galaxy I I I I I 2 I 1 1 1 l 1 Rx 4 4 3 3 3 5 3 3 3 3 3 4 41 All Plans 4,645 5,070 8,269 4,890 7,940 7,877 6,062 8,397 5,822 5,683 7,902 6,736 79,293 & G~axy 4,640 5,065 8,266 4,886 7,936 7,871 6,059 8,392 5,818 5,679 7,898 6,731 79,241 Table H-1 Table H-2 Claims Count by Participation Levd Aug02 Sep02 Oct02 Nov02 Dee02 Jan03 Feb03 Mar03 A~'~3 MayiB JunO0 Jul03 Total EE only 1,145 1,201 1,822 1,147 1,700 1,938 1,314 1,676 1,222 1,209 1,690 1,654 17,808 EE &child 563 619 1,173 591 1,134 1,025 859 1~76 769 790 1,020 800 10,619 I~ &spouse 1,375 1,368 2,163 1,386 2,031 2,100 1,582 2,287 1,669 1,694 2,379 1,762 21,796 EE & Family 1,467 1,782 2,847 1,605 2,819 2,611 2,175 2,946 1,981 1,742 2,658 2,338 26,971 O0~er 95 100 264 161 256 203 132 212 181 158 155 182 2,099 Table H-3 flag,Il Sep0l Oct~ Novtll l~e~l .lan~ Feb~ lVlw0~ .s.W~, lVhy~ Jun~ aul~ Total EEmly 532,2tY3 504,093 538,456 778,487 551,911 801,680 517,369 639,272 528,149 424,620 554,596 650,959 7,021,797 EE&d,ild 133,2fi7 119,973 359,932 86,653 2tlZ, 176 157,0e~0 215,648 218,728 422,999 242,765 351,816 129,308 2,640,355 EE&si~use 237,599 247,561 345,726 251,573 386,894 294,993 259,511 379,344 355,2~5 317,967 319,640 3~0,176 3,~ EE&Fmily 261,1~0 3~2t12 391,773 312,782 499,768 541,844 361,785 434,328 458,654 274,950 387,882 497,(189 4,728,197 Other 6,767 6,885 18,945 10,891 2~,(:ff/ 14,826 10,877 21,465 17,875 19,210 34,813 24,832 207,993 Table H-4 A 5-year history of employee contributions by Plan to the Health Benefits premiums is shown in Table H-5, followed by a brief summary of the benefits in effect for each Plan during Fiscal Year 2003 (Table H-6) as well as proposed changes for Fiscal Year 2004 (Table H-7). Finally, Table H-8 gives a summary of the City's Health Benefits contracts in place effective as of August 1, 2003. 5 Year Rate History For Employee Contribution Aug -99 Mar -00 Au -00 Avoi 601 Nov -01 Mar -02 Au 2 Au Emp. $ Emp. $ % Inc. Em . $ % Inc. Em . $ % Inc. Emp. $ % Inc. Emp. $ % Inc. Emp. $ % Inc. Emp. $ % Inc. Citicare Basic Spouse only NIA $ 9.73 $ 9.73 0.00% $ 10.02 2.98% $ 10.02 0.00% $ 10.02 0.00% $ 10.32 2.99% $ 12.38 19.96% Children only N/A 7.74 7.74 0.00% 7.97 2.97% 7.97 0.00% 7.97 0.00% 8.20 2.89% 9.84 20.00% Spouse & Children N/A 15.74 15.74 0.00% 16.21 2.99% 16.21 0.00% 16.21 0.00% 16.71 3.08% 20.05 19.99% Citicare Employee only 0.46 0.46 0.00% 10.00 2073.91% 10.00 0.00% 10.00 0.00°k 10.00 0.00% 10.00 0.00% 10.00 0.00% Employee & Spouse 39.37 49.10 24.71% 58.64 19.43% 60.10 2.49°,6 60.10 0.00% 60.10 0.00% 61.60 2.50% 71.92 16.75% Employee & Children 31.41 39.15 24.64% 48.69 24.37% 49.85 2.380); 49.85 0.00% 49.85 0.00% 51.05 2.41% 59.26 16.08% Employee, Spouse & Children 63.43 79.18 24.83% 88.72 12.05% 91.08 2.665 91.08 0.00% 91.08 0.00% 93.51 2.67% 110.21 17.86% Citicare Q -Plus Employee only 113.52 97.49 -14.12% 97.49 0.00% 100.12 2.70% 100.12 0.00% 100.12 0.00% 102.83 2.71% 121.40 18.06% Employee & Spouse 291.65 265.89 -8.83% 265.89 0.00% 273.57 2.89% 273.57 0.00% 273.57 0.00% 281.47 2.89% 335.76 19.29% Employee & Children 255.40 231.64 -9.30% 231.64 0.00% 238.29 2.87% 238.29 0.00% 238.29 0.00% 245.13 2.87% 292.16 19.19% Employee, Spouse & Children 401.64 369.87 -7.91% 369.87 0.00% 380.67 2.92% 380.67 0.00% 380.67 0.00% 391.79 2.92% 468.16 19.49% Citicare Police Employee only - - - - - - - - Employee & Spouse 48.41 60.51 24.99% 60.51 0.00% 60.51 0.00% 70.43 16.39% 70.43 0.00% 70.43 0.00% 89.61 27.23% Employee & Children 38.53 48.16 24.99% 48.13 -0.06% 48.13 0.00% 56.05 16.46% 56.05 0.00% 56.05 0.00% 71.07 26.80% Employee, Spouse & Children 78.32 97.90 25.00% 97.90 0.00% 97.90 0.00% 113.94 16.38% 113.94 0.00% 113.94 0.00% 145.23 27.46% Citicare Fire` Employee only 5.75 5.75 0.00% 5.75 0.00% 5.75 0.00°k 5.75 15.72 173.39% 15.72 0.00% 26.17 66.48% Employee & Spouse 50.51 50.51 0.00% 50.51 0.00% 50.51 0.00% 50.51 0.00% 72.54 43.62% 72.54 0.00% 96.75 33.37% Employee & Children 41.35 41.35 0.00% 41.35 0.00% 41.35 0.00% 41.35 0.00% 60.91 47.30% 60.91 0.00% 82.30 35.12% Employee, Spouse & Children 78.14 78.14 0.00% 78.14 0.00% 78.14 0.00% 78.14 0.00% 107.61 37.71% 107.61 1 0.00% 140.31 1 30.39% Table H-5 0 FISCAL YEAR 2003 HEALTH PLAN BENEFITS COMPARISON Clticare-Publlc Benefit Citlcare-Baslc Citlcare Cltlcam-Fire Safety 100 Individual Deductible Physician Services $15 Co-Pay $15 Co-Pay ~hen 85/15% $15 Co-Pay $300 Family Deductible ~hen 85/15% t00 Individual Deductible Lab Services $10 Co-Pay $10 C~-Pay Then 85/15% $10 Co-Pay $$00 Family Deductible ~hen 05/15% X-Ray Services 100 Individua~ Deductible Physician's Office $10 Co-Pay $10 Co-Pay !hen 85/15% $10 Co-Pay 5300 Family Deductible X-Ray Facilities/Spohn Hospital $15 Co-Pay $15 Co-Pay !hen 85/15% $15 Co-Pay Hospital Services Out-Patient ;200Deductible $200 Deductible ther lO01ndividuaIDeductible $100 Deductible Individual then 80~20% 80120% :hen 85/15% then 85/15% ;600 Deductible $600 Deductible ther $300 Family Deductible $250 Deductible Family then 80~20% 80/20% :hen 85/15% then 85/15% In-Patiect ;200Deductible $200 Deductible ther 1001ndividualDeductible $200 Deductible Individual then 80/20% 80/20% :hen 85/15% then 85115% ;600 Deductible $600 Deductible ther $600 Deductible Family then 80/20% 80/20% then 85/15% $50 Co-Pay then $50 Co-Pay then 100 Individ ual Deductible $15 Co-Pay then Emergency Room 80/20% 80/20% :hen 85/15% 85/15% l;300 Family Deductible [hen 85/15% Prescriptions No Brand Name Rx $30 or 30%, Brand Available whichever is greater $10 $20 No Brand Name Rx Bir~h Control Available $15 N/A N/A Generic $5 Co-Pay ~5 Co-Pay $0 $5 Annual Out-of-Pocket $1,000 excluding Cc ~1,000 excluding Co. 1525 excluding Co-Pays 50 excluding Co- Individual Pays and Ded. Pays and Ded. and Ded. :~ays & Ded. $3,000 excluding Cc $3,000 excluding Co- $1,575 exc. Juding Co-Pays $1,250 excluding Family Pays and Ded. Pays and Ded. and Ded. 3o-Pays & Ded. Annual Maximum Per Plan Year $5,000 N/A N/A N/A Table H-6 HEALTH PLAN BENEFITS COMPARISON PROPOSED PLAN CHANGES FOR FY04 HI-LIGHTED Citicere-Publlc Benefit Clficere-Basle CitJcare Clflcere-Fl~e Safety ~ ~ $100 Individual Deductible Physician Services then 85/15% $15 Co-Pay $300 Family Deductible Lab Services Then 85/15% $10 Co-Pay $300 Family Deductible then 85/15% X-Ray Services l / $100 Individual Deductible Physician's Office then 85/15% $10 Co-Pay $300 Family Deductible X-Ray Facilities/Spohn Hospital then 85/15% $15 Co-Pay Hospital Services Out-Patient ,200 Deductible ~200 Deductible then $100 Individual Deductible $100 Deductible Individual ~hen 80/20% 80120% then 85/15% then 85/15% ,600 Deductible $600 Deductible then $300 Family Deductible $250 Deductible Family then 80/20% 80~20% then 85/15% then 85/15% In-Patient 200 Deductible ;200 Deductihle then ;1001ndividualDeductible $200 Deductible Individual [hen 80/20% 80/20% then 85/15% then 85/15% 600 Deductible ;600 Deductible then $300 Family Deductible $600 Deductible Family ~hen 80/20% 80/20% then 85/15% then 85/15% $50 Co-Pay then $50 Co-Pay then H 00 Individual Deductible $15 Co-Pay then Emergency Room E~0/20% 80/20% then 85/15% 85/15% $300 Family Deductible then 85/15% Prescriptions No Brand Name Rx ~ Brand ~,vailableI $10 $20 No Brand Name Rx Birth Control ~vailable N/A N/A Generic ~ $0 $5 Annual Out-of-Pocket $1,000 excluding Co ~ $525 excluding Co-Pays $500 excluding Co. Individual Pays and Ded./ and Ded, Pays & Ded. $3,000 excluding Co $1,575 excluding Co-Pays $1,250 excluding Family Pays and Ded. and Ded. Co-Pays & Ded, Annual Maximum Per Plan Year $5,000 N/A N/A N/A Table H-7 /I// $25.30 TPA for PMPM Health, 7/31/2006 med/vision, Vision & w/2 1-yr $4.25 Dental 8/1/2003 ext. Dental claims. 7/31/2006 w/2 1-yr (incl. In 8/1/2003 ext. TPA fees) $20 PMPM Specific/$1 .23 PMPM Stop Loss 8/1/2003 7/31/2004 A~regate Insurance 8/1/02 Till termed (voluntary) 8/1/03 Till termed (voluntary) 8/1/02 Till termed (voluntary) 8/1/02 Till termed (voluntary) 8/1/02 Till termed (voluntary) Average $10,148 per Life 8/1/02 Till termed month Insurance Long Term Average Disability, $10,318 per ShortTerm 8/1/02 Till termed month Rider Table H-8 Workers' Compensation The following tables and charts provide summary statistics on the City's performance in Workers' Compensation for a number of fiscal years. Some data previously provided on a calendar basis has been revised to reflect data based on a fiscal year basis. Claims As shown in Table WC-1 and Graph WC-1 below, the total number of Workers' Compensation claims made in Fiscal 2003 is the lowest reported in 6 years. Claims dropped from 1,234 in Fiscal 2002 to 1,117 in Fiscal 2003. This reflects a roughly 9% drop in claims, including those that incurred injuries and those that were "near misses." Although the total number of claims filed decreased, the number of cases which incurred a cost increased by 4.1%. Additionally, the proportion of Indemnity cases (those involving 7 or more days of lost time) among cases incurring a cost increased by a nominal .5% from 19.47% in Fiscal 2002 to 19.97% in Fiscal 2003. WORKERS' COMPENSATION (}-YEAR CLAIMS HISTORY (Fiscal Year Basis) Year FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 l'otal number of Claims 1,358 1,350 1,416 1,285 1,234 1,117 l'otailncurred , $2,160,844 $2,457,591 $ 3,947,702 $ 2,776,441 $ 2,825,145 $ 2,135,258 l'otaIPald $2,160,844 $2,385,235 $ 3,785,002 $ 2,586,003 $ 2,458,159 $ 1,220,310 Number of Claims Not Paid On 874 760 554 638 551 406 Number of Claims Paid > $1.00 484 590 862 647 683 711 Number of Indemnity Cases 162 197 141 134 133 142 Number of MO Cases Paid On 353 416 732 527 559 595 % Indemnity Cases &Paid- on Cases 33.47°A 33.39% 16.36°A 20.71~ 19.47% 19.97% Number of CCFD Claims 136 175 193 207 196 143 Number of CCFD Response Calls n/a n/a n/a 25,435 27,489 33,833 CCFD Claims per Call 0.0081 0.0071 0.0042 Number of CCPD Claims 294 292 301 338 346 320 Number of CCPD Response Calls n/a n/a n/a 165,373 167,448 162,009 CCPD Claims per Call 0.002C 0.0021 0.0020 Table WC-1 800 6OO 4OO 20O Total Number of Workem' Compensation Claims FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 [INo Dollars Paid [3Indemnity Cases DMsd. Only Cases Paid Graph WC-1 Graph WC-2 below shows Incurred and Paid costs for the past 6 years. Where cases still remain open the Incurred Cost is greater than the Paid. This Graph shows that, except for Fiscal Year 2000, dollars paid for Workers' Compensation have remained fairly consistent. lncurred Costs vs Paid Costs $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $- FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 Fiscal Year I lITotal Incurred ·Total Paid Graph WC-2 Claims by Department The following tables and charts show the history of claims made by department for the nine highest claim-rate departments on both a total and per FTE basis. Virtually all of the nine departments had a decrease in claims in Fiscal Year 2003. DEPARTMENT CLAIMS Department FY95 FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 Solid Waste Services 160 175 240 274 228 267 188 197 162 Police 171 281 300 294 292 301 338 346 320 Fire 118 186 171 136 175 193 207 196 143 Parks 37 102 106 62 67 83 56 56 56 Wastewater 43 77 77 76 94 99 80 79 60 Street 52 85 49 58 57 43 43 48 34 Water 51 109 95 90 121 89 43 26 48 Gas 38 43 73 75 68 74 58 62 61 Other 365 392 297 293 248 267 272 224 233 Total 1,035 1,450 1,408 1,358 1,350 1,416 1,285 1,234 1,117 Table WC-2 Claims per Department 1600 1400 1200 1000 8oo 600 400 200 FY95 FY96 BSolidWaste Services FY97 FY98 FY99 FYO0 FY01 FY02 FY03 FiscalYear IPolice E]Fire DParks IWastewater IStreet IWater BOther IGas Graph WC-7 10 DEPARTMENT CLAIMS PER FTE Department FY97 FY9$ FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 Solid Waste Services Police Fire Parks Wastewater Street Water Gas Other Total 1.030 1.186 0.983 1.094 0.764 0.801 0.786 0.502 0.482 0.455 0.441 0.593 0.607 0.519 0.525 0.418 0.537 0.593 0.637 0.603 0.429 0.855 0.500 0.540 0.669 0.452 0.452 0.447 0.345 0.330 0.395 0.434 0.408 0.403 0.337 0.327 0.414 0.383 0.285 0.326 0.407 0.258 0.448 0.410 0.516 0.372 0.213 0.129 0.267 0.519 0.512 0.440 0.476 0.384 0,411 0.412 0.244 0.236 0.198 0.214 0.184 0.156 0.161 0.437 0.415 0.403 0.416 0.375 0.366 0.332 Table WC-3 Claims per Full-time Employee 1.40 1.20 1.00 0.80 LU ~ 0.60 o 0.40 0.20 0.00 FY97 FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 Solid Waste Se~ces --a- Police ~. Fire Parks )1( Wastewater --.~-- Street Water --~- Other © Gas Graph WC-8 11 Police and Fire Departments As reflected in Table WC-1 on the previous page and shown graphically in the next series of graphs, the number of claims filed by the Police and Fire Departments decreased slightly in Fiscal 2003 compared to the previous year, although neither departments' claims were as high as their peak numbers in Fiscal 2001. As previously reported, despite the number of claims made by the Police and Fire Departments, the percentage of claims to number of response calls is still well below 1%. Police Department Number of Claims 360 340 320 300 280 260 FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 Fiscal Year IEI Number of CCPD Claims~ Graph WC-3 Police Department Claims per Call 0.0021 0.0021 0.0020 0.0020 0.0019 FY01 FY02 Fiscal Year [I~IccPD Claims per CallI FY03 Graph WC-4 12 Fire Department Number of Claims 250 200 150 100 5O FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 Fiscal Year Number of CCFD Claims Graph WC-5 Fire Department Claims per Call 0.0100 0.0080 0.0060 0.0040 0.0020 0.0000 FY01 FY02 FY03 Fiscal Year IE]CCFD Claims per Call Graph WC-6 In the May 27, 2003 Risk Management Report to City Council, it was noted that police officers and fire fighters perform very dangerous duties in protecting our citizens. The number of claims that the City experiences in its public safety functions is directly related to the number and severity of the calls they respond to. Firefighters' injuries are directly related to the number of calls they respond to, and ultimately, the condition of the City's housing and commercial properties stock. Properties not kept up to code standards are at greater risk for fire. Police officers' injuries are directly related to crime statistics and the calls for assistance. 13 Severity As Table WC-4 and Graph WC-9 shown next illustrates, as of July 31, 2003, the number of cases with incurred costs greater than $50,000 has decreased over the past 4 years, from a high of 18 in Fiscal Year 2000 to 6 in Fiscal Year 2003. Additionally, the current valuation of incurred costs for these 6 cases is the lowest calculated in the past 8 years. Current valuation of incurred costs greater than $50,000 for Fiscal Year 2003 show a significant improvement over Fiscal Year 2002 numbers, however, this situation may change as the progress of the cases continues. SEVERITY REPORT (CASES IN EXCESS OF S$0,000 INCURRED COST) 19965 1998 0 1999 8 12 18 14 2002 8 2003 6 423,849 1,457,134 782,183 852,775 1.994,720 1,139,831 858,948 417,832 106,597 110,818 Table WC-4 Number of Cases FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 [. Number of Cases ] Graph WC-9 14 Accident Types Graph WC-11 below gives the distribution of claims by injury type for the past 11 fiscal years. For purposes of this Graph, the category "Miscellaneous" incorporates all accident types not otherwise identified and includes distinct accident types such as "Rubbed/Abraded on," "Misc. - robbery or criminal assault," "foreign body in eye," "absorption, ingestion, inhalation," and other accident types. Accidents classified as "Strain/injury by movement" show a distinct increase over the past year, but these accident types had previously been classified under "Miscellaneous." The number of injuries associated with being caught between items, bums and scalds, or cuts/scrapes are significantly reduced from Fiscal Year 2002 numbers. Strains, or injuries caused by movement, incorporated in this Graph under "Miscellaneous," were the single most common type of accident in Fiscal Year 2003. 1600 1400 1200 t000 800 600 4OO 200 Workers' Compensation Claims By Type of Accident FY92/93 FY93194 FY94195 FY95196 FY96/97 FY97198 FY98/99 FY99/O0 FYO0/01 FY01/02 FY02/03 · Burns/scalds · Falls/Slips [] Strain/Injury by [3 Caught Between · Motor vehicles la Striking agaigstJstepping on *Prior to FY2002, "Strains/Injury by" accidents were frequently classified as "Miscellaneous." Graph WC-11 [] Cuts/Scrapes [] Struck/injured by [] Other 15 Injury Tvoes Graph WC-12 shows the types of injuries reported for Workers' Compensation over the past 8 fiscal years. Strains continue be the single most frequent single type of injury followed Contusions (Braising). As shown, sprains and lacerations are also frequent injury types. Injury types covered under "All other trauma" include crashing, fractures, heat prostration, dislocations, electric shock, and other types of injuries with low occurrence rates which were combined into one group for purposes of this report. Workem' Comp Injuries 1,400 1,200 00o 600 400 2O0 Flecal Year lull other trauma 1Bum lContusion (bruise) DForeign bedy BLacerafion I~Puncture IISprain lStrainJ Graph WC-12 16 Claims Activity Table WC-5 shown next tabulates the month to month activities with regard to Workers' Compensation as reported at the end of each month of the fiscal year. 17 ~id$ $ 5,786,484 $ 5,012,880 $ 4,946,607 $ 5,273,732 $ 9,231367 $ 7,482,287 109 79 106 84 89 60 87 82 93 107 117 121 193,404 90,139 111,331 162,857 133,637 95,516 121,073 97,311 92,995 135,943 133~07 126,638 224 325 273 267 298 260 258 ).62 239 302 2~2 333 420,854 258,995 305,765 292,48) 329,006 407,256 379,798 303,734 316,327 388,136 167,504 360,964 18l 132 107 81 121 130 137 133 154 1~9 187 235 353,167 789,918 1,045,~05 460,059 827,828 1,381,555 1,~8,892 3,96~448 717,460 1,076,837 2,069,435 3,247,731 I 2 I I 1 52,375 69,071 39,023 37,522 25,570 227 222 270 3~2 335 290 310 343 340 348 311 313 5,012,880 4,946,607 5,273,732 9,231,367 7,,~2,287 8,975,381 9,413,2~2 9,157,630 8,914,158 8,313,771 8,375,737 8,941,786 60 58 80 99 100 89 94 86 83 75 77 80 4,377,272 4,272,469 6,731,435 8,523394 9,232,642 8,189,291 8,512,728 8,220,053 8,008375 7399,250 7,583,220 8,095,839 1CO 96 1 i9 143 162 144 159 153 155 138 136 149 127 126 151 159 173 146 151 190 184 210 174 163 Table WC-5 18 General Liability As previously reported, the City of Corpus Christi is self-insured for general and automobile liability. Risk Management employs two claims adjusters who, in conjunction with City attorneys, process liability claims for the City. Shown below in Graph GL-1 are the claims for the past 6 calendar years and calendar 2003 through September 9, 2003. The two most frequently occurring types of claims are for property damage and vehicle damage, although there has been a significant improvement in the number of property damage claims since 1999. 1,200 Types of Liability Claims t,000 800 600 4OO 200 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Calendar Year · Vehicle Damage [] Police-related · WaterNVaste damage-related · Property Damage-related · Personal Injury-related · Miscellaneous Graph GL-1 Shown next are the incurred costs (Graph GL-2) and paid costs (Graph GL-3) for liability claims by department for Fiscal Years 1997 through 2003. With incurred costs valued as of September 9, 2003, the claims exposures for Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003 show a distinct improvement over previous years. In particular, incurred costs for Police Department claims have dropped significantly. 19 Incurred Costs by Department $3,000,000 $2,500,000 $2,000,000 '~ $1,500,000 _c $1,000,000 $500,000 FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 Fire · Police [] Sanitation · Wastewater · Water [] Park Maintenance~j Graph GL-2 1,400,000.00 Liability Paid Costs For Select Departments 1,200,000.00 11000,000.00 800,000.00 600,000.00 400,000.00 200,000.00 FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 Fiscal Year Fire [] Park Maintenance · Police · Sanitation · Wastewater · Water] Graph GL-3 2O Ci~ Vehicle Accidents Table WC-5 shown next gives a 13-year history of the number of city vehicle accidents. This is followed by Graph WC-13 that shows the number of accidents per year versus the number of preventable accidents. CITY VEHICLE ACCIDENTS FISCAL YEARS 1990 THRU 2003 % Number of Number of Preventables Year Accidents* Preventables of Total 1993 295 145 49.15% 1994 227 120 52.86% 1995 222 121 54.50% 1996 186 88 47.31% 1997 217 98 45.16% 1998 266 113 42.48% 1999 266 116 43.61% 2000 264 99 37.50% 2001 244 105 43.03% 2002 255 100 39.22% 2003 292 120 41.10% Average 249 111 45.08% *Excludes Non421assifiable Incidents Table GL-1 City Vehicle Accidents 350 3O0 200 150 ° 1°° ITB ITa ITa H 0 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Fiscal Year I Number of Accidents* [] Number of Preventables 1 Graph GL-4 On average, 45% of the accidents incurred by city vehicles are preventable. The lowest rate experienced was 37.5% in Fiscal Year 2000 and the highest was 54.5% in Fiscal Year 1995. Fiscal Year 2003 was just slightly lower than average at 41.1% of city vehicle accidents being 21 preventable. Table WC-7 below shows the monthly statistics for city vehicle accidents for Fiscal Year 2003. CITY VEHICLE ACCIDENTS Monthly for Fiscal Year 2003 Number of Number of Month Acciden~ NO's* August 30 2 September 22 0 October 32 5 November 22 2 December 31 0 January 26 2 February 23 2 March 17 3 April 19 2 May 38 1 June 25 0 July 26 0 Number of Preventables 13 5 12 7 13 11 8 5 5 18 11 12 311 19 120 *"NCI" = Non-dass~fiable Incident Table GL-2 22 Conclusion The City's Safety staff continues to develop programs to reduce the number of claims made by high-claims-incidence departments. One program, a City employee driving safety course, is designed to reduce the number of traffic accidents experienced by the City's Police, Fire, Solid Waste, Gas, Park and Recreation and Streets departments. This particular program has a multifaceted impact in that reducing the nmnber of traffic accidents through safer driving improves the City's experience in Auto and General Liability, and also reduces the Workers' Compensation experience. Fewer accidents necessarily mean fewer soft-tissue injuries associated with those accidents and, thus, reduced Workers' Compensation claims and costs. Additionally, this emphasis on driving safety will be strengthened by a soon to be developed policy requiring new employees who operate City vehicles to attend a driving safety course. Further, a safety hot-line is in the process of being activated so that employees can notify Risk Management of any unsafe driving conditions before accidents are incurred. There is a direct relationship between the physical condition of an employee and the likelihood that employee will sustain a so,tissue injury due to an accident on the job. Additionally, there is a correlation between the costs of workers' compensation and health benefits. In the September 2003 issue of "Professional Safety," an article on injury prevention in an aging workforce states that half of all healthcare costs are associated with unhealthy lifestyles while half of all workers' compensation injuries are related to cumulative trauma disorders. A daily flexibility and strength program using all core processes, together with safety leadership training was implemented. Subsequent to the implementation of the program, musculoskeletal injuries dropped by 50% and all injuries dropped by 75%. This program is an example of a system that enhances employee wellness and safety significantly with minimal cost to the employer. The results with regards to workers' compensation costs far exceed the costs of implementation. With such a significant impact on job-related injuries, one must conclude that non-job related injuries were dramatically improved as well. Both the Fire Department and the Police Department understand the correlation between their employees' physical conditions and the likelihood of injuries while on the job. The Fire Department is implementing prevention education with a focus on wellness and the Police Department is currently administering a health and wellness survey to its officers to better understand the needs regarding equipment and training. Risk Management is also working to incorporate Safety Training in the Del Mar Supervisors' Training course and will be working with our Occupational Health Services supplier to develop and implement a pre-employment, job-specific safety analysis for high risk positions within the City. This analysis will identify a job applicant's physical suitability to the job for which they are applying. 23 CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS RISK MANAGEMENT FUND INSURANCE CON1RACTS AND POLICIES Prope~-,/& Casualt~ Contracts ! - Table GL-3 24 CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS RISK MANAGEMENT FUND INSURANCE CONTRACTS AND POLICIES Propert7 & Casualt~ Contracts Current Effec~ve Renewal dates ~ Premium TYPE OF CONTRACT Carrier Broker/Contact Dates E~raflon Comte Coverege ~500,0oo Each ~ccuffence; General Liability Texas Municipal ~100,000 Columbus ShipsSvlu seum League 'lMl_/Georgina Yparra 11/4/200: 11141200: 2,241 3educfible ~500,000 Bodily njur//Property 3mg. $25,000 ~tedical Payments; ~ctual Cash Value- ~.utornobile Policy Texas Municipal ~hysical Damage; T.B. Clinic Van League TMtJGeo~ina Yparra 11/4/200~ 11/4/200; 89.~ 250 Deducfibie ; I,(X)0,000 per Table GL-3 (cont.) 25 Risk Management Fund Financial Results Tables F-1 and F-2 below provide Current Asset/Liability and Total Asset/Liability results for the Risk Management Fund's four cost centers for the period ended July 31, 2003. CURRENT ASSETS TO CURRENT LIABILITIES COMPARISON YEAR ENDED JULY 31, 2003 WORKERS' Net Due HEALTH LIABILITY COMP ADMIN to/From 2003 Current Assets $ 2.460.121 $ 8.684.360 $ 4.364.363 $ (199.495) $ (62.262) $ 15.247.087 Current Liabilities (2.460.121) (3.890~4061 (3r993~574) (121~277) 62.262 (10r403~116) Net Current Assets 4.793.954 370.789 (320.772) 4,843,971 Table F-1 TOTAL ASSETS TO TOTAL UAI~ILITIES COMPARISON YEAR ENDED JULY 31, 2003 WORKERS' Net Due HEALTH LIABILITY COMP ADMIN to/From 2003 TotalAssets $ 2.460.121 $ 8.684.360 $ 4.364.363 $ (199.495) $ (62,262) $ 15.247.08; Total Liabilities (2~460.121) (10.010.291) (6.777.144) (171r117) 62.262 (19~356.411', Net (1.325.931) (2.412.781) (370.612) (4.109.324'. Table F-2 Tables F-3 and F-4 below give the end-of-year balances for each of the four cost centers that are incorporated into the Risk Management Fund. These numbers reflect adjustments through July 31, 2003 and should reflect figures in the audit to be distributed at the end of December 2003. Following these two tables are 10-year histories of published CAFR Balance Sheets and Statements of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Accumulated DefteR. 26 COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXFENSES, AND CHANGES 1N ACCUMULATED DEFICIT July 31, 2003 WORKER'S HEALTH LIABILITY COMP ADMIN #5610 g5611 #5612 #5613 claims (expenses): Operating transfers: Operating transfers out Net income (loss) Ret. earnings(accum.deficit) at beginning of year Residual equity transfer to other funds Retained earnings(accumulated deficit) at end of year 2003 2002 4,453,552 3,596,768 8,050,320 7,622,949 180,723 180,723 591,481 19,869,496 19,869,496 16,557,073 136,159 136,159 382,244 3.968 563.245 567.213 451.590 253 110.825 111.078 150.323 1.156.885 129.468 670.935 1.957,288 1.792.974 35.997 233.520 269.517 185,492 1.233,086 969,267 119.676 2,322.029 2.930.608 17.364.840 17,364.840 14,196.044 3.084,415 3.084.415 5.426.935 5.229.924 5.229.924 4.068,363 145.631 145.631 106.210 103.603 103.603 141.480 191894r411 413331002 5.3491600 11578.525 311155t538 291450t019 291.967 120.550 (1,752.832) (132.813) (1.473.128) {3.031.802) 80,584 104,753 165,115 304 350,756 511,984 034,382) (I34,382) 100,415 (15,810) (3,654) (2,643) (22,107) (32,328) 8,830 116,093 124,923 32,147 533 533 52,943 822 801 1,623 1,809 74.426 221.379 27r079 (1.538) 321,346 666.970 366.393 341~929 (I.725.753) (134.351) (1.151.782) (2,364t832) (15,956) (15,956) (8,809) (15,956) (151956) (8,809) 366,393 341,929 (1,725,753) (150,307) (1,167,738) (2,373,641) (366,393) (I.667.860) (687.028) (220.305) (2.941.586) (567.945) (0) 11,325t931) (2,412,781) (370,612) (4,109,324) (2~941r586) Table F-1 27 LIABILITY/EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND COMBINING BAI~kNCE SHEETS July 31, 2003 ASSETS Current assets: Equity in pooled c.~h and equivalents Equity in pooled invesRnents Receivables: Accounts Accrued interest Due from employees Miscellaneous Due from other funds Prepaid items LIABILHiIgS AND FUND EQUITY Current liabilities: Accounts payable Accumulated unpaid compensated Estimated liability claims - current portion HEALTH LIABILITY COMP ADMflq T~/Due From 2003 2002 #5610 #5611 #5612 #5613 Total Total (5,589,879) 3,900,000 940,294 38,230 48 3,171,428 Estimated health insurance claims payable 2,391,069 Current portion of advance from Utility System Fd Liability to claimants - escheat property 13,574 Due to other funds 9,182 Total current liabilities Longderm Liabilities: Accumulated Co~ated Absences (net of current) Estimated liability claims (net of current portion) Total long-term liabilities Total liabilities Retained earnings/accumulated deficit: Reserved for operations and improvements Retained earnings/accumulated deficit Total accumulated deficit Total liabilities and fund equity 5,452,410 3,130,586 2,961,211 1,138,260 12,257 28,326 6,509 6,731 242~413 70,020 2~460~121 81684~360 473641363 (1991495~ 2,793,195 928,140 7,999,471 12,559,2~2 952,551 73,065 427 475 127,567 314,655 382 28,894 (62,262) 3,115,897 3121433 425t688 15t2471087 14~3841608 34,386 62,979 34,290 11,910 671,598 29,931 3,061,918 3,964,419 2,181 93,069 29,155 842 54,875 2~460~121 3~890~406 3~993~574 121,277 (62,262) 131,655 341,552 713,439 101,503 2,181 32,348 7,026,337 6,571,623 2,391,069 2,276,258 135,798 96,789 2z637 3,817 10~403t116 97423~893 6~119~885 2t783t570 - 6~119~885 2~783,570 2~460~121 10,010~291 6~777t144 49,840 49~840 49,840 8~953r295 71902t301 19r356,411 17~326t194 9,593 (1~335,524) (2,412,781) (3707612) (1,325,931) (2~412t781) (370,612) 2~460~121 8~6847360 4~364~363 (1997495~ 9,593 769,596 (4ri 181917) (3~711r182) (4~109~324) (2~941~586) 15t247t087 14r384r608 Table F-2 28 CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS RISK MANAGEMENT FUND HISTORIC SCHEDULE OF BALANCE SHEET RESULTS LIABMITIES AND FUND EQUITY Currant liebilieba Account; payable 1994 1995 19% 199] 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 ASSETS - 27,763 - - - - 455 18,852 101,503 713,439 Cu.. - - - - - - - 28,633 32,348 2,181 Cash and cash equivalmn S - $ - S - 8 - 5 - $ - S - S - $ - - EquiryiipooWd and aoh equivdents - - 422,505 350,000 95,110 1220,853 321069 - 928,140 2,793,195 Equity m pooled lnvesmimm 7,963,833 7,522,443 6,225,000 3,10,000 6,347,816 6,199,922 9,134594 13,275,192 12,559,282 7,999,471 Reuivabloa - - - - 1,100,338 1,16;406 1,236,092 - - - Accmmta 9,449 197,531 32,906 1,436 - 60,604 1,120,392 134,929 127,567 952,551 A trued interert 123,450 89,589 340,774 94,456 93,250 78,514 191,988 118,748 314,655 73,065 Now 665,284 - 41,917 - - - - - - - DueSomevq+byea - - - - - - - 193 382 475 IvEseellenmus - - - - - - - 28,894 - Due fiomotherfmds 562,056 11,961 223,644 51,440 50,405 2,80,569 - - - 3,115,807 Premium deposit 113,173 113,173 113,173 113,173 13,173 - - - - - Prepaid nems 83,920 20,103 212,242 877,871 204,645 31,329 189,728 349,039 425,688 312,433 Total assay 5,855,881 8,138,800 7,612,061 4,588,376 7,258,399 10,932,091 10,957,771 13978,101 14,384,608 15,247,087 LIABMITIES AND FUND EQUITY Currant liebilieba Account; payable 74,643 111,297 948,730 94,646 213,336 176,061 301,412 202,564 341,552 131.655 A.eci eeruer - 27,763 - - - - 455 18,852 101,503 713,439 Accumshtad unpaid ooe ed abaencer - - - - - - - 28,633 32,348 2,181 Conti r barest and retainage payable 13,125 - - - - - (6,227,042) (567,945) (2,941,586) (4,10932) Fsli of habiky clears - anent portion 3,030,333 5,487,984 4,469,507 5,578,000 5,765,000 5,835,925 5,835,925 5,153,563 6,571,626 7,026,337 Esomted health bmtan. ch®e payable 1,349,260 1380,051 494,278 10,916 - 1,374,945 1797,WO 1,787,000 2,276,258 2,391,069 Cuoan orPon of advance Som Utility System Fwd - - - - 1,100,338 1,16;406 1,236,092 - - - lisbilby,' imeete- Met property - - - - 24,292 134,271 259,492 91,570 96,789 135.798 Deposits payable I"'no 120,300 125,364 130,609 - - - - - Metoothmfimds 665,284 1,761,555 9,210 2,30,742 592 753,574 123,028 1,694,486 3,817 2,637 Total cunt liebJiuea 5,2P,525 8,861,187 6,047,089 8,270,813 7,103,558 9,437,182 9,543,394 8,976,968 9,423,893 10,403,116 Long -tam liabdrta: Accomuhted Compeeseted Abeences(no of current) - - - - - - 49.840 Advenee Sam Utility Sync. Fund - - - - 2,390,381 1,227,975 - - - - Estinvtedliabilitycleies(net of currant portion) 8,137,805 4,880,154 5,898,631 6,921,000 7,335,000 7,059,143 7,641,419 5,469,078 7,902,301 8,903,455 Total bole -term fiebilities 8,137,805 4,880,154 5,898,631 6,921,000 9,725,381 8,287,118 7,641,419 5,469,078 7,902,301 8,953,295 Total Iibifines 13,415,330 13,741,341 11,945,720 15,191,813 16,828,939 17,724,300 17,18,813 14,44,046 17,326,194 19,356,411 AcwmWawI rerebed earnbg/accumWaced defica: Reserved for operations and bipmveasann - 27,763 5,W0 2,500 14,462 115,056 182 107,990 769,596 9,593 Auumibted de5cB (4,539,449) (5,630304) (4,338,659) (10,605,937) (9,585,002) (6,625,465) (6,227,224) (675,935) (3,711,182) (4,118,917) ToW RE./accuvmhted defid (4,539,449) (5,602,541) (4,333,659) (10,603,437) (9,570,540) (6,510,409) (6,227,042) (567,945) (2,941,586) (4,10932) TOW habMes and fiord equity 8 8,855,881 S 8,138,800 S 7,612,061 _$ _ 4,588,376 S 7258,399 S 11,213,891 S 10,957,771 S 13,878,101 S 14,38,608 15247,087 Table F-3 29 Opemtb{revwvw: Chuew for urvwm Opum[Yg expmaea: Puwnvl fervbea Metcrisl ovd wpplba Covtrncroslamviwa Othu opmmg expmua Immswe vwmiema Groep heJH Jsms Hugh mebtemvw ory.vmuov Geemvl libigty anima WohCs wmpemutbe cYoty Uvempbymeu wmpvvutbv cYima Uow0ectibb 4ccouem Reimburaemevta Toul opmrmtiag wpeowa Opewtme mwme (lou) Nonopumtime revmoos (expemws): fatuous, wee Chmge'm fv verve of bvwtmmu Inmwat expnnac Rcwvnry ofvrbr R.ra expenses Re6edo(prio eoeea RemW ofdwege cY'® Set[bmmY M.11maemmawmeea ToW moopemtm8 revwvee (eWmus) Iwmme (baa) befom oP..i" mmmm Opewtb{ truafm: OpmmYg tmmta out Total operumg [mm6ns Not bcome (bu) Accumulntmd d06ch st be{mvimg ofy CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS RISK MANAGEMENT FUND HISTORIC SCHEDULE OF THE STATEMENTS OF REVENUES, EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN ACCUMULATED DEFICIT 1994 1995 1996 1997' 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 8 19,347,940 5 161182,922 S 19,962,959 S 16,069,476 $ 18,266,378 S 22,311,612 $ 25,029,392 $ 25,316,897 $ 26,418,217 S 29,682,410 431,893 480,601 355,765 85,218 - - - 565,293 451,590 567.213 9,850 109,002 101,270 98,54! 99,706 102,515 99,754 102,121 150,3D 111,070 478,004 483,495 462,918 693,500 832,478 1,128,732 1,560,414 1,667,032 1,392,974 1,957,288 - - 943 1,000 1,246 1,433 389 125,02 185,492 269,517 1,925,905 2,05,433 5,380,015 9,964,544 10,954,091 8,466,324 3,284,601 3,122,629 2,930,608 2,322,028 9,026,361 9,002,534 6,363,096 - 18,630 4,815,393 13,131,688 12,366,953 94,196,0" 17,354,840 396,245 728,901 413,528 1043 9,622 - - 2,403,05 2,379,724 1,993,527 7,783,308 1,562,174 1,925,316 2,692,464 1,613,008 5,426,935 3,084,415 2,696,614 2,942,104 2,443,219 2,235,192 3,379,512 2,284,882 3,115,030 3,540,555 4,068,363 5,229,924 149,556 171,270 232,761 140,333 124,813 115,727 161,385 1D,269 106,210 145,631 - - - - - 5,370 135,000 13,800 141,480 103,603 - - - - 7,500 - - 21,299 52,943 (21,813) 17,922,063 18,343,344 17,551,042 21,014,979 16,982,312 18,949,366 24,220,725 23,269,379 29,450,019 31,155,538 1,425,677 (160,422) 411,917 (4,945,503) 1,284,066 3,469,246 808,667 2,049,518 (37531902) (1,473,128) 382,576 431,959 459.467 306,804 3T3,826 415,114 514,469 729,867 511,984 350,756 591,229 1,018,617 - - (394) (24,694) 9,672 49,33 10,415 (134,382) - - - (214,799) (164,915) (162,555) (20,656) (32,321) (22.107) - 1,031,005 115,954 270,260 154,076 149,962 3,220,900 32,147 124,923 (55.471) - (3,319) (1,204) (35,540) (1,05) (294,763) - - - - - - 7,500 - - 21,299 52,943 533 83 700,000 - - - - D2 1,472 6,748 12,373 5,480 9,940 829 1109 1023 980,892 2,095,837 1,491,994 426,187 40,572 349,321 514,013 3,705.848 666,970 321,346 2,406,369 1,935,415 1,903,861 (4,519,316) 1,731,639 3,816,367 1,322,680 5,755,366 (2,364,832) (1,151 782) (643,839) (2,975,917) (630,844) (1,750,462) (698,741) (336,638) (984,302) (11,269) (8,109) (15,956) (643,09) (2,975,917) (630,1") (1,350,462) (698,741) (336,630 (984,502) (11,269) (1,809) (13956) 1,762,890 (1 7540,502) 1,273,017 (6,269,778) 1,032,897 3,082,129 331,118 5,7",097 (2,333,641) (1,167,730 (6,34339) (4.559,449) (5602,541) (4,333,659) (10,603,437) (9,570,540) (6,510,409) (6,227,042) (567,945) (2,941,586) RoaWeslw ay tuatI mother foods (2,590) ({135) (21998) (9401) (15"o) 0 R.ElA umnvlsud deficit at rod ofy S (4,539,449) S (5,602,541) $ (4,333,639) S (10,603,437) S (9,570,540) S (6,510,409) $ (6,223,042) $ (50,945) S (2,941,556) S (4109,324) 'Gwvp Hw9h CY®a K Yc1vdMm Gwer81 LmbiHyCYima. Table F-4 cl City of Corpu~ Christi Workers Compensation & Self-Insared Liability Recommended Rewnu, Collation Fiscal Periods Beginning 8/1/2003, 8H/2004, 8/1/2005, and 8/1/2006 ~ Pelod ] 8~1/84 -7/3Y05 ] 8~t/0~-7/31106 ] 8/~ -7/31/~ (5~ (~ (7) Sde~dbaa~{ ~ ~txl~ ~ (~) [(l)+~] Table F-5 31 Risk Management Fund Report to City Council 4th Quarter - Fiscal Year 2003 (w/ 1st Quarter FY04 Updates) Presented December 9, 2003 Risk Management Fund Health Benefits Risk Management — Workers' Compensation — General Liability Financials Health Benefits 9000 8000 7000 6000 a 5000 ruU O 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 Au Health Benefits Number of Claims Filed by Plan --o— Basic CC & Q+ -.— Fire --X-- Police --)K— D&V Total Claims Filed w/o Rx, Galaxy — Linear (Total Claims Filed w/o Rx, Galaxy) Health Benefits Dollars Paid by Plan Including Prescriptions $2,000,000 $1,800,000 $1,600,000 x d $1,400,000 v o $1,200,000 a. °•' $1,000,000 Ci $800,000 ad U $600,000 U $400,000 $200,000 Aug 01 Nov 01 Feb 02 May 02 Aug 02 Nov 02 Feb 03 May 03 Aug 03 -4- Basic -a- CC & Q+ -j- Fire -.- Police --x- D&V -•- Rx Total Paid w/ RX & Galaxy — Linear (Total Paid w/ RX & Galaxy) Health Benefits Claims Filed by Participation Level 2,500 E 2,000 U w :0 1,500 1,000 4I, Aug 01 Nov 01 Feb 02 May 02 Aug 02 Nov 02 Feb 03 May 03 Month -� EE only EE + child --*- EE + spouse Family $900,000 $800,000 $700,000 $600,000 $500,000 �a 0 o $400,000 $300,000 $200,000 $100,000 Health Benefits Total Paid by Participation Level Aug 01 Nov 01 Feb 02 May 02 Aug 02 Nov 02 Feb 03 May 03 Month t EE only EE + child --A-- EE + spouse Family Health Benefits Cost Control Measures • New Health Benefits Section • Going forward — Transition to Humana — Monitor claims (diagnosis codes, high claim amounts, case management) — Network usage — Rx costs — Plan design adjustments for future years • City manager has authorized employee committee for input/discussion on plans Workers' Compensation and Liabilities 1,600 1,400 1,200 cc 1,000 0 800 E soo z 400 200 Workers' Compensation Claims per Department FY95 FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 ■ Solid Waste Services ■ Police o Parks ■ Wastewater 0 Water ® Other 11 Fire ■ Street 0 Gas I MIN IN III I 1 111 11 i 11 III 11 11 111 111 11 11 FY95 FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 ■ Solid Waste Services ■ Police o Parks ■ Wastewater 0 Water ® Other 11 Fire ■ Street 0 Gas Workers' Compensation Claims per Full-time Employee 1.40 0.00 FY97 FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 —+--Solid Waste Services Police —*-- Fire Parks --)K— Wastewater Street —+—Water t Other 1.20 0 1.00 a E 0.80 L 0.60 0.40 U 0.20 0.00 FY97 FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 —+--Solid Waste Services Police —*-- Fire Parks --)K— Wastewater Street —+—Water t Other $4,500,000 $4,000,000 $3,500,000 $3,000,000 L ca $2,500,000 c $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $500,000 Workers' Compensation Incurred Costs by Department FY95 FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 Solid Waste Services i Police 11 Fire ® Parks ■ Wastewater ■ Street ■ Water M Other ■ Gas 1600 1400 116 FYI c 1000 a 800 0 m E 600 z 400 200 I❑ Workers' Compensation Workers' Compensation Claims By Type of Accident FY92/93 FY93/94 FY94/96 FY95196 FY96197 FY97/98 FY98/99 FY99/00 FY00/01 FY01/02 FY02/03 ■ Bums/scalds ❑ Caught Between ❑ Cuts/Scrapes ■ Falls/Slips ■ Motor vehicles ® Strucklinjured by • Strain/Injury by E Striking against/stepping on ■ Other `Prior to FY2002, "Strain/Injury by' accidents were frequently classified under "Miscellaneous." 1,600 1,400 1,200 N 1,000 0 c 800 d E z' 600 400 200 Workers' Compensation Workers' Comp Claims by Type of Injury FY95/96 FY96/97 FY97/98 FY98/99 FY99/00 FY00/01 FY01/02 FY02/03 All other trauma ■ Burn 0 Contusion (bruise) ❑ Foreign body 11 Laceration ® Puncture 0 Sprain 0 Strain Workers' Compensation Claims Count History 1,600 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 - - - . FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 No Dollars Paid Indemnity Cases 0 Med. Only Cases Paid Workers' Compensation 1st Quarter `04 Update i�C 200 0 100 0 Workers' Compensation Claims Count Comparison 282 281 FY03 FY04 1 st Qua rte r FY03 to FY04 ■ Gas Other ■ Water ■ Street ® Wastewater ❑ Parks ❑ Fire ■ Police o Solid Waste Services Workers' Compensation Incurred Costs Comparison $600,000 $500,000 N $400,000 L $3007000 0 $200,000 $100,000 R FY03 FY04 ■ Gas Other ■ Water ■ Street ■ Wastewater ci Parks ❑ Fire ® Police p Solid Waste Services 300 200 c 150 100 50 v FY03 Workers' Compensation Injury by Type 1 st Quarter FY04 ■ Strain ■ Sprain ■ Puncture ❑ Laceration ❑ Foreign body ® Contusion (bruise) ■ Burn ■ All other trauma 1,200 1,000 800 a E m V 600 m a E 0 z 400 200 0 General Liability Types of Liability Claims 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Calendar Year Police -related ■ Water/Waste damage -related ■ Property Damage -related ■ Personal Injury -related E Miscellaneous 400 350 300 E 250 U c 200 m a E Z 150 100 50 0 Vehicle Damage Claims 1997 1998 1999 2000 Calendar Year General Liability 2001 2002 2003 General Liability (Including Auto) $3,000,000 1 Incurred Costs by Department $2,500,000 $2,000,000 0 U m $1,500,000 0 c $1,000,000 $500,000 FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 ® Fire 0 Police ■ Sanitation ■ Wastewater m Water 0 Park Maintenance Workers' Compensation & General Liability • Accident Prevention Activities —Training • Targeting departments/injury types • Policy and procedure • Driving range • Web -site utilization — Assessments • On-site response • Immediate feedback Workers' Compensation & General Liability • Accident Prevention Activities (cont.) — Inspections • Identification of potential hazards —Analysis • Department -specific reports — Wellness • Nutrition & exercise assessments • Diabetes screening • Health Fair Financial Information Current Assets/Liabilities CURRENT ASSETS TO CURRENT LIABILITIES COMPARISON YEAR ENDED JULY 31, 2003 HEALTH LIABILITY Current Assets I $ 21460,121 $ 816847360 Current Liabilities (21460,121) (318907406) Net Current Assets] - 4,793,954 WORKERS' COMP $ 41364,363 (31993,574) 370,789 Total Assets/Liabilities YEAR ENDED JULY 31, 2003 HEALTH Current Assets $ 2,460,121 Total Assets $ 22460,121 Current Liabilities $ Long Term Liability Total-- — Liabilities -'- Net (21460,121) 1460,121) WORKERS LIABILITY COMP 81684,360 $ 473645363m 816845360 $ 4,364,363 (398907406)i $ (399939574) (6,119, 885) 1 (21783,570) (%0101291) (6, 777,144) 1,325,931)1 (21412,781 Health Benefits • Forecasts from internal review and third party actuary anticipated $18.1 M cost for FY 2003 • Year end actual cost is $17.3M, or $800K better than forecast • Year end audit adjustment for FY03 and prior year of $2.95 M FY 2003 Budget April 2003 YTD FY 2003 Actual Yr End Beg. Balance $ (366,393) $ (366,393) $ (366,393) Revenue 19,441,278 13,006,630 17,329,481 Expenses Claims (15,363,721) (13,501,275) (17,250,029) Other (4,060,336) (2,092,910) (2,660,192) Rev - Exp 17,221 (2,587,555) (2,580,740) Y E Adjustment 2,947,133 Ending Balance $ (349,172) $ (2,953,948) - 0 - Workers' Compensation (July 31, `03) REVENUES AND EXPENSES YEARENDED JULY 31, 2003 __ _--- - i ...,,.. ,. .._..... _.__. ..... ..........________. . ...... ..... ------ .____.. a_— _ WORKERS' COMP FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 Total peratinq revenues 3,144,722 3,596,768 4,567,614_ TotalOperatinc ex enses 4,181,692 5,349,600 3,964,419 Operatin Income _ _ X1,036,970 (1,752,832); 603,195 Non-operating revenues expenses li 330,879 27,079 Income before operating transfers (706,091) X725,753) 603,195 Total operating transfers - - - Net income loss �---_-�_-----_.-(__-_ 706,091 1 725,753 � ,72 603,19 603,195 _� __)! --- Ret. Earnings (accum. Deficit) at j be innin of ear_ 19,064 687,028 ,' 2,412,781 Ret. Earnings (accum. Deficit) at end of year (687,027)1 (2,412,781); (1.809.586) Average Cost Per Claim 2,289.00 1 1,911.60 General Liability (July 31, `03) REVENUES AND EXPENSES YEAR ENDED JULY 319 2003 Total Operating revenues Total Operating expenses Operating Income Non-operating revenues expense Income before operating transfers Total operating transfers Net income (loss) Ret. Earnings (accum. Deficit) at beqinninq of year Ret. Earnings (accum. Deficit) at end of year FY2_. 4,478,227 6,448,470 1,970,243 291,775 1,678,468 1.678.468 10 .IAB ILITY FY2003 4,453,552 4,333,002 120,550 221,379 341,929 341,929 FY� - 3,393,361_ 3,061,918 331,443 331.443 1 331,443 1.667.860)1 (1.325.931) 11667,860)1 (11325,931 27 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMORANDUM PRESENTATION AGENDA ITEM: Presentation on the 78415 Community Youth Development Program, funded by the Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services (PRS). STAFF PRESENTER(S): Name Title/Position 1. David Ondrlas Acting Director 2. Chris Semtner Superintendent 3. Monica Corona CYD Project Coordinator Department Park and Recreation Park and Recreation Park and Recreation OUTSIDE PRESENTER(S): NONE ISSUE: Presentation on the 78415 Community Youth Development (CYD) Program, funded by the Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services (PRS). BACKGROUND: In 1995, TDPRS developed a program to fund local grass roots efforts in the highest juvenile crime areas of the state by ZIP Code. The 78415 ZIP code was one of the designated ZIP codes. The 78415 CYD program sought to create activities that were not currently available within the local 78415 ZIP Code area. These activities were made available to youth 5 to 17 years of age. Eligible activities must fall within the following categories: mentoring, activities, employment or education. On May 20, 2003, the City Council approved the 4 programs for Fiscal Year 2003-2004 totaling $426,000. These programs are: the After- school& Summer Youth Program with the Boys and Girls Club; the Mentoring, Activities, and Employment Program with Communities In Schools'; the Summer Youth Recreation Program with Park and Recreation Department; and the Youth Leadership Program with YMCA. REQUIRED COUNCIL ACTION: None Required / /~ David Ondrias, Acting Director Park and Recreation Department Additional Background X (self evaluation reports) Exhibits X (copy of presentation) 70415 Community Youth Development (CYD) Program IgA Dff&WW- ftowON oePWbr0Kt"o °tar�ab*4*ard MM ft"WWWysW*" VW y-,"-.45 lel ko.4 • The Steering Committee consists of 11 members. • Two youth serve on the Committee • At least 51 % of the CYD Steering Committee members must live in 78415 • Reviews service provider proposals • Recommends service providers to the City Council ANNUAL S rMMUMMN R_EPURT Addresses the overall accomplishments of the program during the fiscal year. • Program established with funds authorized by the 14'" State Legislature in an effort to reduce youth crime • The 78415 ZIP code was one of fifteen identified areas in Texas • Youth ages 17 and younger and their families, living in or attending school In 78415 are eligible to receive CYD services, free of charge CYD SERVICE PROVIDERS Enter into a contractual agreement with the City, as a subcontractor, to provide CYD services free to all eligible participants Receive reimbursement for budgeted expentditutes related to CYt3 services provided Must provide an annual self evaluation at conclusion of contract year CYD SUB010INTRACTORS FY 3001-2002 i IF 2003 Zit04 • Boys and Okla Club •Boys and GO • Communities In Schools Club • Park and Recreation ,.Communities • Youth Odyssey In Schools FY 20024003 Park and • Communities In Schools ' Recreation • Park and Recreation YMCA.. • Youth Odyssey Oommuritles itS'dtoaft� t and are p ed u hg a school year and In the summer, for youth ages 5-17 • Services are provided at 5 school sites located In the 78415 ZIP code area • ProAllrrs include academic tutoring, mring, after-school activities, drug, gaI1g' and violence preventlon, career aaSlaten6e and expiPrCrc stion, enrichment activities and field trips, peer pressure, self esteem and anger management Communities In Schools (conYd) FY 2001,9002 98.2% of case managed students improved In academics, attendance andlor behavior 92.4%.case managed students promoted to the need grade FY 2902.2003 98.9% of case managed students improved in academics attendance andlor behavior 93.3% case managed students promoted to the next grade Park and Recreation FY 2001.2002 1 FY 2002 -MO 3,839 participant visits 14,689 participant visits FY 20M4M 1,137 students enrolled in activities 564 students enrolled in case management 1,701 total registrations FY 2002.21M 1,305 students enrolled in activities 644 shudants enrolled in case management 1,949 total registrations Park ertd Rlecrtilt to • Provides a 8 -week summer vouch rtecreaho • Provides for a positive, safe, ;yMI super vl ed enviioolnentforIn ty elemeirtary youth to ploy and lesm skips during a summer • Some of the activities include karate, dance, fishing, swimming, field trips, drug education, and other special, events Youth Odyssey, Inc. Outdoor Challenge Program Stationary and Portable Ropes. Challerioe Course (Low and Nigh Elements) — Focuses on enhancing self-reliance, sef - confidence, leadership and communication skills —Emphasizes team and individual challenge and: accomplishments F Youth OdyssWt Adventure Wilderness Trip Program — 3 day trip with caring adults who teach youth basic camp craft, hiking and backpacking —Facilitated outdoor activities such as rockc9mbing, canoeing, kayaking Youth Odyssey, Inc. (awed) FY 2001.3002 • 83% gained self- confidence • 88% learned teamwork skills • 85% learned to trust FY 2002-2003 • 100% gained self- cardidence • 96% teamed teamwork skills • 94% learned to test Biwa on Pn ab Pon ♦MYp n P�tkgrb Over the past few years, would you say that Ovirjo In this 7e43S nP code tray become: FY 20012002 • Better -26% • Worse -11% • About the Same- 57% • Don't Know -6% FY 2002-2003 Better- 42% Wase -11 % About the Same- 46% • Don't KrKYW-1 % Youth Odyssey, Inc. FY Yo0141M • 82% loomed communication skills • 85% learned leadership skills • 85% learned problem-sohring skills FY MU 2003 • 91% learned communication skills • 96% loomed leadership skills • 65% learned problem solving skills e WA Wdvan Twa•vol Ptlkp, Flog Yew 2002-20M X15 Community Yquth Development (CM)"m w A VAb-&Mf AN D asf WW ;•e;. ray Reg"My SONWN 3 28 Memorandum Office of the City Manager Corpus Christi 20O3 Date: December 4, 2003 To: Board Members, Corpus Christi Industrial Development Corporation From: George K. Noe, City Manager Subject: CCIDC - Special Meeting, December 9, 2003 Re: Corpus Christi Industrial Development Corporation (CCIDC) The Corpus Christi Industrial Development Corporation needs to conduct a brief Board meeting on December 9 in order to address the following two issues: Election of Treasurer Since the last meeting of the Board of Directors of the Corporation, changes in City staff have resulted in a vacancy in the position of Treasurer for the Corporation. Traditionally, the Treasurer has been the City's Director of Finance. I recommend that Cindy O'Brien be elected as Treasurer for the CCIDC. Medical Plaza Associates Bonds On December 18, 1984, the CCIDC issued Industrial Revenue Bonds in the mount of $9,550,000 for the purpose of constructing a multi-story medical office building located at 1521 S. Staples Street just north of Six Points. The Bonds were sold to MBank Corpus Christi, N.A. and several private investors. The office building was constructed in accordance with the plans and specifications and has been operating since 1986. Over the years due to changing market interest rates, the Bonds have been amended at various times to adjust the interest rate. The last amendment was approved in 1997 reducing the interest rote to 7% per annum. Medical Plaza Associates and the bondholders have received an offer from American Bank, N.A. to acquire all of the Bonds and further reduce the interest rate to 4.25% per annum. Currently, less than $5,000,000 remains outstanding on this Bond issue. Medical Plaza Associates has making regular principal and interest payments on the Bonds, and the indebtedness has been amortized as originally scheduled. The Bonds originally were to be paid off in 2011, but with the lower interest rate Medical Plaza Associates will increase their principal payments and pay offthe Bonds by 2010. Under the terms of the Bond documems and applicable federal tax regulations, each change in the interest rate on these Bonds must be approved by a Resolution adopted by the CCIDC. Subject to the Board's approval, the new interest rate will go into effect on December 15, 2003. Medical Plaza Associates, led by Dr. William Swan, and American Bank, N.A. have requested that the Board approve this change. The various Bond documents for this transaction, including the Resolution to be approved by the Board, have been prepared by Mr. Jeffrey Leuschel, at McCall, Parkhurst & Horton, the City's Bond Counsel. City Manager DATE: TIME: PLACE: AGENDA CORPUS CHRISTI INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION SPECIAL MEETING Tuesday, December 9, 2003 During the meeting of the City Council beginning at 12 p.m. City Council Chambers 1201 Leopard St. Corpus Christi, TX 78401 President Henry Garrett calls meeting to order. Secretary Armando Chapa calls roll. Board of Directors Henry Garrett, President Jesse Noyola, Vice President Javier Colmenero Brent Chesney Melody Cooper Bill Kelly Rex A. Kinnison Mark Scott Samuel L. Neal Jr. Officers George K. Noe, General Manager Armando Chapa, Secretary Mary Juarez, Asst. Secretary Vacant, Treasurer Constance P. Sanchez, Asst. Treasurer Approval of Minutes of May 13, 2003. Election of Treasurer to fill vacancy. Financial Report. Consideration of the following resolution to approve amendments to the resolution adopted in 1984 in connection with financing the Medical Plaza building located on S. Staples Street north of Six Points: RESOLUTION AMENDING A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF CORPUS CHRISTI INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1984 (MEDICAL PLAZA ASSOCIATES PROJECT) Public Comment. 8. Adjournment. MINUTES CORPUS CHRISTI INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION May 13, 2003 o 3:38 p.m. PRESENT Board of Directors Henry Garrett, President Jesse Noyola, Vice President Brent Chesney Javier Colmenero Melody Cooper Bill Kelly Rex A. Kinnison Mark Scott Samuel L. Neal, Jr. Officers Armando Chapa, Secretary Mary Juarez, Assistant Secretary Lee Ann Dumbauld, Treasurer President Garrett called the meeting to order in the Council Chambers of City Hall. City Secretary Chapa called the roll and verified that the necessary quorum of the board was present to conduct the meeting and that notice of the meeting had been duly posted. President Garrett opened discussion on Item 3, election of officers. A motion was made, seconded, and passed unanimously to re-elect the following officers: Henry Garrett - President; Jesse Noyola - Vice President; Armando Chapa - Secretary; Mary Juarez - Assistant Secretary; and Lee Ann Dumbauld - Treasurer. Mayor Neal made a motion to appoint Mr. George K. Noe as General Manager and Ms. Constance Sanchez as Assistant Treasurer, seconded by Mr. Scott, and it passed unanimously. President Garrett called for approval of the minutes of the April 30, 2002 meeting. Mr. Kinnison made a motion to approve the minutes as presented, seconded by Mr. Colmenero, and it passed unanimously. President Garrett called for discussion of the financial report. Mr. Noe reported that the fund balance for the corporation had changed by the interest earned. President Gan'eR called for the General Manager's annual report. Mr. Noe reported that this corporation was different from the other corporations in that the industrial bonds were backed exclusively by the credit of the industry. He said now the requirements mandate an inducement through the state. He said the only revenues the corporation had received were from the fee charged for the issuance of the bonds. In the past, Mr. Noe stated the corporation had been used to fund a number of hotel projects (listed in a report distributed to the Council) and industrial projects, including Williams Distributing and the De Dietrich facility. He also said the proceeds from the funds were used as the city's share for the cost of the Killis- Almond study of the old Nueces County Courthouse. Mr. Noe reported that the last issuance of bonds was the Airborne Freight Corporation facility at the airport in the amount of $1.1 million, a very successful project. President Garrett called for discussion of Item 7, the appointment of George K. Noe as Registered Agent. A motion was made, seconded and passed unanimously to appoint Mr. Noe. President Gm'rea called for public comment, and there was none. There being no fu~er business, he adjourned the corporation meeting at 3:40 p.m. on May 13, 2003. Corpus Christi Industrial Development Corporation Balance Sheet November 30, 2003 Assets Current assets: Cash Investments Receivables: Accounts Accrued Interest Total assets $ 4,950.00 46,968.23 141.97 ~20 Liabilities and Fund Balance Liabilities: Accounts payable Total liabilities Fund balance: Designated Undesignated Total fund balance 52,060.20 52,060.20 Total liabilities and fund balance $ 52,060.20 Corpus Christi Industrial Development Corporation Summary of Transactions For four months ended November 30, 2003 Fund balance at August 1, 2003 $ 46,806.23 Revenues: Interest earned Change in fair value of investments Issuer's annual fee Total revenues 162.00 5,091.97 5,253.97 $ 52,060.20 Expenditures: Grant Miscellaneous Total expenditures Fund balance at November 30, 2003 RESOLUTION AMENDING A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF CORPUS CHRISTI INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1984 (MEDICAL PLAZA ASSOCIATES PROJECT) WHEREAS, on December 18, 1984, the Board of Directors (the 'Board') of Corpus Christi Industrial Development Corporation (the 'Issuer') adopted a 'Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of Corpus Christi Industrial Development Corporation Revenue Bonds, Series 1984 and the Execution of a Trust Indenture (Medical Plaza Associates Project)' (the 'Initial Bond Resolution'); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of the Initial Bond Resolution, on December 28,1984, the Issuer delivered its Corpus Christi Industrial Development Corporation Revenue Bonds, Series 1984 (Medical Plaza Associates Project), in the aggregate principal amount of $9,550,000 (the 'Initial Bonds'); and WHEREAS, the proceeds from the sale of the Bonds were loaneclto Medical Pb2a Associates, a Texas general partnership (the 'User') in accordance with the terms of a Loan Agreement, dated as of December 1,1984, between the Issuer and the User (the 'Agreement'); and WHEREAS, the Issuer has been advised by the User that all of the proceeds loaned to the User have been expended thereby on the Project (as defined in the Agreement); and WHEREAS, the Issuer assigned certain of its rights under the Agreement, and various funds established by the Initial Bond Resolution, to MBank Corpus Christi, N.A., as trustee, in accordance with the terms of a Trust Indenture, dated as of December 1, 1984, between the Issuer and said trustee (the ~Trust Indenture'); and WHEREAS, on December 30, 1986, the Board adopted a 'Resolution Authorizing the Amendment to Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of Corpus Christi Industrial Development Corporation Revenue Bonds, Series 1984, and the Execution of a Trust Indenture (Medical pla~a Associates Project)' (the '1986 Resolution'); and WHEREAS, the 1986 Resolution authorizedmakingcertainchanges to the terms of the Initial Bonds, and such changes were duly incorporated therein; and WHEREAS, on May 19, 1992, the Board adopted a 'Resolution Amending a Resolution Authori2ing the Issuance of Corpus Christi Industrial Devdopment Corporation Revenue Bonds, Series 1984, and the Execution of a Trust Indenture (Medical pla~ Associates Project); and Approving the Execution and Delivery of a Second Amendment to Loan Agreement and First Supplemental Trust Indenture~ (the '1992 Resolution'); and WHEREAS, the 1992 Resolution authorized making certain changes to the terms of the Initial Bonds; and WHEREAS, substitute bonds in denominations o~ $250,000 and $50,000 were attached to the 1992 Resolution (the 'Rephcement Bonds'); and WHEREAS, the Trustee exchanged the Replacement Bonds for the Initial Bonds in accordance with the terms of the 1992 Resolution; and VqHEREAS, as used herein, the term 'Bonds' means the Replacement Bonds unless a different meaning or intent dearly appears from the context in which the term is used; and WHEREAS, on July 23, 1996, the Board adopted a 'Resolution Amending a Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of Corpus Christi Industrial Development Corporation Revenue Bonds, Series 1984, and the Execution of a Trust Indenture (Medical Plaza Associates Project); and Approving the Execution and Delivery of a Second Supplemental Trust Indenture' (the '1996 Resolution'); and WHEREAS, the 1996 Resolution authorized making certain chan4~es to the terms ef the Initial Bonds; and WHEREAS, the Initial Bond Resolution; as amended by the 1986 Resolution, the 1992 Resolution and the 1996 Resolution, is hereinafter referred to as the 'Bond Resolution'; and WHEREAS, in connection with the changes effected by the 1986 Resolution; the Issuer and the User executed and delivered a First Amendment to Loan Agreement, dated as of December 1, 1986 (the 'First Amendment'); and VqHEREAS, in connection with the changes effected bythe 1992 Resobation; the Issuer and the User executed and delivered a Second Amendment to Loan Agreement, dated as of May 15,1992 (the uSecond AmendmentU); and VqHEREAS, the Ag~.ment, as amended by the First Amendment and the Second Amendment, is hereinafter referred to as the 'Loan Agreement ~; and WHEREAS, in connection with the changes effected by the 1992 Resolution, the Issuer and Ameritrust Texas NationalAssociation; as trustee, execut ed and de!ivered a First SupplementalTmst Indenture, dated as of May 15, 1992 (the ~First Supplemental Indenture'); and WHEREAS, in connection with the changes effected by the 1996 Resolution, the Issuer and Texas Commerce Bank National Association; as trustee, executed and delivered a Second Supplemental Trust Indenture, dated as of November 15, 1996 (the 'Second Suppkmental In&nture'); and WHEREAS, the Trust Indenture, as amended by the First Supplemental Indenture and the Second Supplemental Indenture, is hereinafter referred to as the 'Indenture'; and WHEREAS, the Issuer has been advised tl~t JPMorgan Chase Bank has assumed all of the rights, duties and obligations of MBank Corpus Christi, N.K, Ameritrust Texas NationalAssociation and Texas Commerce Bank National Association as trustee under the Indenture, and is hereinafter referred as the 'Trustee'; and WHEREAS, the User and 100% of the owners of the Bonds (the 'Bondholders') have requested that the Issuer agree to make certain changes that affect the interest rate at which the Bonds bear interest; and WHEREAS, the User has present ed to the Issuer evidence that 100% of the Bondholders have consented to the change in the interest rate at which the Bonds bear interest as set forth in this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the Issuer has been advised that the owners of a majority in principal amount of the Bondholders have taken steps in accordance with the Indenture to rephce JPMorgan Chase Bank as trustee with American Bank, NA., Corpus Christi, Texas, a financialinstitution that would qualify to act as trustee under the Indenture; and WHEREAS, the Issuer hereby agrees to amend the Bonds and the Bond Resolution to accomplish said request and to acknowledge the change in the Trustee under the Indenture in accordance with the actions taken by the Bondholders. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF CORPUS CHRISTI INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: Section L That the FORM OF BOND contained in Section 5 of the Bond Resolution which follows the table of principal installments shall be amended to read as follows: 'and to pay interest thereon, from December 28, 1984, the initial date of delivery of the Bonds, calculated on the basis of a 360-day year composed of twelve months of 30 days each, unless such calculation would result in the payment of interest in excess of the maximum interest rate in which event interest on this Bond shall be calculated on the basis of a 365-day or 366-day year, as the case may be, at a per annum rate equal to seventy percent (70%) of the 'Prime Rate' of NationsBank of Texas, N.K (the 'Bank')(the rate announced from time to time by the Bank from its principal office as the Prime Rate of the Bank), and at a rare of 15% per annum on overdue principal and, to the extent legally permissible, on overdue interest. Any change in the Prime Rate shall automatically, and without notice to the Issuer, be effective for the purpose of changing the rate of interest which this Bond bears as of the opening of business on the date of any such change in the Prime Rate. Notwithstandingthe foregoing interest rate calculations, from December 28,1984 to December 15, 1985, the rate of interest on this Bond will be fixed at 9% per annum. Furthermore, (i) from December 15, 1985 through August 15,1987, the interest rate resulting from the calculations as hereinabove provided shall never be lower than 10%, (ii) from August 16, 1987 to November 15, 1996, the interest rate from the calculations as hereinabove provided shall never be lower than 8.50%, (iii) from November 16,1996 through October 15,1997, the rate of interest on this Bond will be fixed a 5_50% per annum, (iv) from October 16,1997 through December 14, 2003, the interest rate from the calculations as hereinabove provided shall never be lower than 7% per annum, and (v) commencing on December 15, 2003, the interest rate shall no longer be calculated on the basis of the percentage of the Prim e Rate specified above, and that the Bonds shall bear interest at the fixed rate of 4.25% per annum. Furthermore, the interest rate from the calculations as hereinabove provided shall never exceed a rate which would cause the net effective interest rate (as defined and calculated in accordance with Chapter 1204, Texas Government Code (the successor statutory provision to Article 717k~2, v.A.T.C.S.), as it existed on December 28,1984) for this Bond as of any date to exceed 15%. Interest on this Bond shall be payable on July 15, 1985 and on the fifteenth day of each month thereafter while this Bond is outstanding (each such date being an 'interest payment date~).' Section 2. That the Issuer acknowledges that the current Bondholders are expected to tender their bonds to JPMorgan Chase Bank, as tender agent for the User, in consideration of payment therefor made by American Bank, N.K, Corpus Christi, Texas. Section 3. That the Trustee is hereby authorized to transfer to and exchange Bonds purchased from each of the current owners of the outstanding Bonds, upon receipt of written consent to the amendment herein contained from American Bank, N./c, as 100% owner of such Bonds, in substitution for the Bonds issued to the Bondholders, with such substitute Bonds to be in substantially the forms attached hereto and made a part hereof for all purposes. It is specifically provided that such substitute Bonds constitute 'Bonds' as such term is defined In the Bonds, the Bond Resolution as amended, the Loan Agreement and the Indenture. The President and Secretary of the Board are hereby authori2ed to execute, deliver, attest, and affix the seal of the Issuer to, such substitute Bonds. Section 4. That the Third Consent Agreement, in substantially the form attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby approve& The President and Secretary of the Board are hereby authorized to execute, deliver, attest, and affix the seal of the Issuer to, such Third Consent Section 5. That this Resolution shall be effective immediately upon its adoption- ~4t 29 AGENDA MEMORANDUM PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING (City Council Action Date: October 28, 2003) Case No.: 1003-01~ John Butler: A change of zoning from an "F-R" Farm-Rural District to a "B4" General Business District on Flour Bluff and Encinal Farm and Garden Tracts, being 1.953 acres out of the east one-half of Lot 14, Section 21, located north of Yorktown Boulevard and 11'700 feet east of Cimarron Road. Planning Commission's Recommendation (10/22/03): Denial of the "B-4" District, and in lieu thereof, approval of a "B-1' Neighborhood Business District with a Special Permat for a mini-storage facility subject to five (5) conditions. StafFs Recommendation (10/08/03: Approval. Requested Council Action: Denial of the "B-4" District, and in lieu thereof, approval of a "B-I" Neighborhood Business District with a Special Permit for a mini-storage facility subject to five (5) conditions and adoption of the attached ordinance. Purpose of Request: For a mini-storage facility. Summary: The applicant has requested a change of zoning from "F-R" Farm-Rural District to a "B-4" General Business District, in order to develop the property as a mini-storage facility. The subject property consists of 1.953 acres and is undeveloped. Property to the north, east and west is zoned an "F-R" District and is primarily undeveloped with the exception of a single-family residence to the west. Further to the west along Yorktown Boulevard is a large tract zoned an "F-R" District and developed with a mini-storage facility. The mini-storage facility existed prior to annexing this corridor iu 1995. South of the subject property, across Yorktown Boulevard, is Bill Witt Park owned by the city and zoned an "R-lB" District. Development plans for the mini-storage indicate that the use is proposed within two (2) one (1) story buildings. One building will consist of 24,000 square feet with the other being 9,600 square feet. Hours of operation are planned from 7:00am t o 9:00 p m d ally with o ne ( 1 ) e mphiyee o n site. Access t o t he subject property i s proposed a long Yorkrtown Boulevard, an arterial. A mini-storage facility would generate a low volume of t~affic with minimal impact to the adjacent street system. The subject property is in the corridor that the Southside Area Development Plan recommends as low-density residential uses. However, with the scattered sites of commercial along this section of Yorktown Boulevard and Yorktown Boulevard being an arterial, the requested "B4" District could be supported. Applicant's Position: The applicant concurs with Planning Commission's recoramendation. Notification: Of the nine (9) notices mailed to the surrounding property owners, none were returned in favor or in opposition. The 20% rule is not in effect. This case is considered noncontroversial. Michal~l N. Gmhaing, AICP O Assistant Director of Development Services/ Planning Section MG/FGM/er Attachments: 1) Zoning Report 2) Planning Comrmssion Minutes 3) Ordinance H 5P LN-DIR~ERMA\WORD~AGENDM EM~2003\ 1003 -01AGENDAMEMO.DOC CITY COUNCIL ZONING REPORT Case No.: Planning Commission Hearine Date: Map No.: Applicant: Leeai Description/Location: 1003-01 October 8, 2003 G16C John Butler Flour Bluffand Encinal Farm and Garden Tracts, being 1.953 acres out of the east one-half of Lot 14, Section 21, located north of Yorktown Boulevard and 1,700 feet east of Cimarron Road. 1.953 acres Same as above. "F-R" Farm-Rural District "B-4" General Business District Agricultural land. Mini-storage facility. Area of Request: Lot(s} Area: Current Zoning: Request: Current Use of Property: Purpose of Request: Zoning Change Requested Due to Notice of Violation: Adjacent Zoning: Not applicable. North, East, West - "F-R" Farm-Rural District South - (across Yorktown Blvd.) "R-lB" One-family Dwelling District Adjacent Land Use: North, East - Undeveloped land. West - Single-family residence. South - (across Yorktown Blvd.) City park. Zoning Report Case No. 1003-01 (John Butler) Page 2 Number of Residential Units Allowed: "F-R" - 0 unit (1 dwelling unit per 5 acres of land) "B-4" - 70 units (36.30 dwelling units per acre) Estimated Traffic Generation: Specialty retail center- 40.67 average weekday vehicle trip ends per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area x 2,030 square feet of gross floor area (average floor area per ITE Manual) = 83 average weekday vehicle trip ends. Adiacent Streets/Classification: a) Yorktown Blvd. arterial Right-of-Way Desitin Current: a) 100-foot right-of-way with a 24-foot wide rural paved section. Planned: a) 120-foot right-of-way with a 100-foot back-to-back paved section. Traffic Count (24-hour~ weekday, non-directional): a) 11,760 vehicles per day Zoning History of Property: The subject property was annexed July 1995 and designated with a "F-R" District. Recent Surrounding Zoning Cases: November 2001, property west of Cimarron Road was rezoned to an "A-I" Apartment House District. Property southeast of Yorktown Boulevard and Cimarron Road was rezoned from a "B-4" General Business District to "R-lC" One-family Dwelling District for single-family development in 2003. Zoning Report Case No. 1003-01 (John Butler) Page 3 Planning Staff Analysis: · General Characteristics and Background: The applicant has requested a change of zoning from "F-R" Farm-Rural District to a "B-4" General Business District, in order to develop the property a s a m ini-storage facility. T he subject property consists o f 1.953 acres and is undeveloped. Property to the north, east and west is zoned an "F-R" District and is primarily undeveloped with the exception ora single-family residence to the west. Further to the west along Yorktown Boulevard is a large tract zoned an "F-R" District and developed with a mini-storage facility. The mini-storage facility existed prior to annexing this corridor in 1995. South of the subject property, across Yorktown Boulevard, is Bill Witt Park owned by the city and zoned an "R-lB" District. Development plans for the mini-storage indicate that the use is proposed within two (2) one (1) story buildings. One building will consist of 24,000 square feet with the other being 9,600 square feet. Hours of operation are planned from 7:00am to 9:00 pm daily with one (1) employee on site. Access to the subject property is proposed along Yorktown Boulevard, an arterial. A mini-storage facility would generate a low volume of traffic with minimal impact to the adjacent street system. The subject property is in the corridor that the Southside Area Development Plan recommends as low-density residential uses. However, with the scattered sites of commercial along this section of Yorktown Boulevard and Yorktown Boulevard being an arterial, the requested "B4" District could be supported. · Potential Housing Density: The "F-R" District permits a density of one dwelling unit for every five (5) acres or zero (0) unit on the subject property. A "B-4" District allows a density 36.30 dwelling units per acre or 70 units on the subject property. · Height/Bulk/Setbacks/Etc.: There are no required setbacks or building height limitations in the "F-R" District. The "B-4" District requires a front yard setback of twenty (20) feet and no side or rear yard setback unless adjacent to a residential district where a minimum setback often (10) feet is required along that adjacency. Building heights are also unlimited in the "B-4" District. · Signage: The "F-R" District permits one non-illuminated temporary freestanding sign to advertise products sold at the temporary sales stand. This sign is limited to a sign area of forty (40) square feet and a height of 35 feet. Wall signs and freestanding signs in the"B-4" District are unlimited as to size height and number provided the signs are located behind the front yard setback. Freestanding signs in the front yard are limited to one sign per street frontage with an area not to exceed forty (40) square feet and a height of 25 feet. · Traffic: Access for the property is proposed along Yorktown Boulevard, an arterial. A mini- storage use generates a Iow volume of traffic and will minimally impact the street system. Zoning Report Case No. 1003-01 (John Butler) Page 4 Pros: (Ideas in support of the request.) a) The subject property has adjacency to Yorktown Blvd, an arterial. Cons: (Ideas in support of maintaining the current zoning.) a) The requested "B-4" District is inconsistence with the Southside Area Development Plan's future land use map. Staff Recommendation: Approval Special Permit Option Forwarded to Planning Commission Hearing 10/22/03. The "F-R" District requires a minimum lot size of five (5) acres. The subject property contains 1.953 acres of unplatted property. With the subject property being less than five (5) acres, platting of the property could not occur with an "F-R" District or "F-R' District with a Special Permit designation. Therefore, to meet the lot requirement the following Special Permit option is forwarded to Planning Commission for consideration. Denial of the "B-4" Neighborhood Business District, and in lieu thereof, approval ofa "B-I" Neighborhood Business District with a Special Permit for a mini- storage facility subject to the following five (5) conditions: 1. USES: The only use permitted by this Special Permit other than those uses permitted by right in the "B-I" Neighborhood Business District is a mini-storage facility. 2. FENCING: A six (6) foot screening fence shall be located along the north, east and west property lines. LANDSCAPING: Landscaping of the subject property shall be provided in accordance with the requirements contained in Article 27B, Landscape Requirements, as in the "B-4" General Business District. All plant material must be maintained in a healthy growing condition at all times. All landscaping must be installed as part ofanybuilding and parking lot construction. 4. LIGHTING: All security lighting must be directional and shielded. Lighting must be directed away from the surrounding residences and public rights-of-way. TIME LIMIT: Such Special Permit shall be deemed to have expired within one (1) year of the date of this ordinance unless the property is being used as outlined in Condition #1 and in compliance with all other conditions. Attachment: Zoning Map H :LP LN-DIR~ERMA\WO RD~ZONRPTS\1003 -01 REPORT,DOC B-5 F-R SUBJECT PARCEl F-R R-1 B 2 FLOUR BLUFF & ENCINAL FARM & GARDEN TRACT R-1 B RODD FIELD INDUSTRIAL Sep 2~, 2005 - AS ~0 -- -- CASE ZlO03 O1 F'-~ FormRurol Dist. R-lB One-F~nily Dwelling Dist. R-lC One-f'crnil¥ Dwelling Dist. B--3 Business Dist. I-2 Light industrial Dist. Planning comrmssion Minutes October 8, 2003 1003-01 John Butler REQUEST: "F-R" Farm-Rural District to "B-4" General Business District on property described as Flour Bluff and Encinal Farm and Garden Tracts, being 1.953 acres out of the east one-half of Lot 14, Section 21, located north of Yorktown Boulevard and 1,700 feet east of Cimarron Road. Ms. Goode-Macon provided a computerized slide illustration of the subject property and the surrounding area. She stated that the applicant has requested a change of zoning from "F-R" Farm-Rural District to a "B-4" General Business District, in order to develop the property as a mini-storage facility. The subject property consists of 1.953 acres and is undeveloped. Property to t he north, east and w est i s zoned a n "F-R" District a nd i s primarily undeveloped with t he exception of a single-family residence to the west. Further to the west along Yorktown Boulevard is a large tract zoned an "F-R" District and developed with a mini-storage facility. The mini-storage facility existed prior to annexing this corridor in 1995. South of the subject property, across Yorktown Boulevard, is Bill Witt Park owned by the city and zoned an "R-lB" District. Development plans for the mini-storage indicate that the use is proposed within two (2) one (1) story buildings. One building will consist of 24,000 square feet with the other being 9,600 square feet. Hours of operation are planned from 7:00am to 9:00 pm daily with one (1) employee on site. Access to the subject property is proposed along Yorktown Boulevard, an arterial. A mini-storage facility would generate a low volume of traffic with minimal impact to the adjacent street system. The subject property is in the corridor that the Southside Area Development Plan recommends as low-density residential uses. However, with the scattered sites of commercial along this section of Yorktown Boulevard and Yorktown Boulevard being an arterial, the requested "B4" District could be supported. Staffrecommends approval. There were nine (9) notices mailed to property owners within a 200-foot radius of which none were returned in favor or opposition. There was discussion regarding zoning districts in the area and uses associated with each parcel of property. Discussion also included approving a Special Permit on the subject property for the mini-storage use. Public hearing was opened. Jamie Pyle, 418 Cape Cod, representing the owner, stated that she did not believe her client would be opposed to a Special Permit. Public hearing was closed. Mr. Gunning requested the Commission to continue the case to allow Staff an opportunity to meet with the applicant and create Special Permit language that would be appropriate for the use. Planning Comnussion Minutes October 8, 2003 Page 2 Motion by Richter, seconded by Zamora, to continue the case for two weeks. Motion by passed with Amsler, Mims, and Stone being absent. DRAFT Planmng Comrmssion Minutes October 22, 2003 Continued Zoning John Butler: 1003-01 Request: "F-R" Farm-Rural to "B-4" General Business District on property described as Flour Bluff and Encinal Farm and Garden Tracts, being 1.953 acres out of the east one-half of Lot 14, Section 21, and located north of Yorktown Boulevard and 1,700 fcct east of Cimarron Road. Ms. Goode-Macon stated that at the last Commission meeting, the case was continued to allow Staff an opportunity to meet with the applicant to discuss Special Permit options. A suggestion from the Commission was a Farm-Rural District with a Special Permit; however, the "F-R" District requires a 5-acre lot minimum. The subject property does not meet the requirement. After considering other alternatives, Staff and the applicant decided to pursue a "B-I" Neighborhood District with a Special Permit for a mini-storage use. The Special Permit includes landscaping, fencing, and non-directional lighting. Ms. Goode-Macon explained that "B-1" District signage is limited to 40 square foot for a free-standing sign and unlimited wall signage. Public hearing was opened. John Butler, 6652 Yorktown, stated that he agreed with the zoning and Special Permit conditions. Public hearing was closed. Motion by Pusley, seconded by Smith, to forward a recommendation for approval of a "B-I" District with a Special Permit. Motion passed with Richer being absent. Page 1 of 4 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE, UPON APPLICATION BY JOHN BUTLER, BY CHANGING THE ZONING MAP IN REFERENCE TO `1.953 ACRES OUT OF LOT 14, SECTION 2'1, FLOUR BLUFF AND ENClNAL FARM AND GARDEN TRACTS, (CURRENTLY ZONED "F-R" FARM-RURAL DISTRICT) BY GRANTING A "B-I" NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT WITH A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A MINI- STORAGE FACILITY SUBJECT TO FIVE (5) CONDITIONS; AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO ACCOUNT FOR ANY DEVIATIONS FROM THE EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has forwarded to the City Council its reports and recommendations concerning the application of John Butler for amendment to the City of Corpus Christi Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map; WHEREAS, with proper notice to the public, public hearings were held on Wednesday, October 8, 2003 and October 22, 2003, during a meeting of the Planning Commission, and on Tuesday, December 9, 2003, during a meeting of the City Council, in the Council Chambers, at City Hall, in the City of Corpus Christi, during which all interested persons were allowed to appear and be heard; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that this amendment would best serve public health, necessity, and convenience and the general welfare of the City of Corpus Christi and its citizens. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS: SECTION `1. That the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas, is amended by granting a "B-I' Neighborhood Business District with a Special Permit for a mini-storage facility on 1.953 acres out of Lot 14, Section 21, Flour Bluff and Encinal Farm and Garden Tracts, (currently zoned "F-R" Farm-Rural District), located north of Yorktown Boulevard and 1,700 feet east of Cimarron Road, as shown on the attached Exhibit A. (Map G16C) SECTION 2. That the"B-l" Neighborhood District with a Special Permit granted in Section 1 of this Ordinance is subject to Exhibit A and the following five (5) conditions: 1. USES: The only use permitted by this Special Permit, other than those uses permitted by right in the "B-l" Neighborhood Business District, is a mini-storage facility. 2. FENCING: A six (6) foot screening fence shall be located along the north, east and west property lines. H:~LEG-DIRUOSE PH~ZONING\1003-01S P,DOC Page 2 of 4 3. LANDSCAPING: Landscaping of the subject property shall be provided in accordance with the requirements contained in Article 27B, Landscape Requirements, as in the "B-4" General Business District. All plant material must be maintained in a healthy growing condition at all times. All landscaping must be installed as part of any building and parking lot construction. 4. LIGHTING: All security lighting must be directional and shielded. Lighting must be directed away from the surrounding residences and public rights-of-way. 5. TIME LIMIT: Such Special Permit shall be deemed to have expired within one (1) year of the date of this ordinance unless the property is being used as outlined in Condition #1 and in compliance with all other conditions. SECTION 3. That the official Zoning Map of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas, is amended to reflect the amendment to the Zoning Ordinance made by Section 1 of this ordinance. SECTION 4. That the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas, approved on the 27th day of August, 1937, as amended from time to time, except as changed by this ordinance and any other ordinances adopted on this date, remain in full force and effect. SECTION 5. That to the extent that this amendment to the Zoning Ordinance represents a deviation from the Comprehensive Plan, the Comprehensive Plan is amended to conform to the Zoning Ordinance, as amended by this ordinance. SECTION 6. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with this ordinance are hereby expressly repealed. SECTION 7. That publication shall be made in the official publication of the City of Corpus Christi as required by the City Charter of the City of Corpus Christi. SECTION 8. That upon written request of the Mayor or five Council members, copy attached, the City Council (1) finds and declares an emergency due to the need for immediate action necessary for the efficient and effective administration of City affairs and (2) suspends the Charter rule as to consideration and voting upon ordinances at two regular meetings so that this ordinance is passed upon first reading as an emergency measure on this 9th day of December, 2003. ATTEST: THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI Armando Chapa City Secretary Samuel L. Neal, Jr. Mayor, The City of Corpus Christi H:~LEG-DIRUOSEPH~ZONING\1003-O1SP,DOC Page 3 of 4 APPROVED ~,,~.~ Joseph Harney Assistant City Attorney For City Attorney 2003 H:%EG-DIR~JOSEPH~.ONING\1003-01SP,DOC Page 4 of 4 Corpus Christi, Texas __day of ,2003 TO THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL Corpus Christi, Texas For the reasons set forth in the emergency clause of the foregoing ordinance, an emergency exists requiring suspension of the Charter rule as to consideration and voting upon ordinances at two regular meetings. I/we, therefore, request that you suspend said Charter rule and pass this ordinance finally on the date it is introduced, or at the present meeting of the City Council. Respectfully, Respectfully, Samuel L. Neal, Jr. Mayor, The City of Corpus Christi Council Members The above ordinance was passed by the following vote: Samuel L. Neal, Jr. Brent Chesney Javier D. Colmenero Melody Cooper Henry Garrett William Kelly Rex A. Kinnison Jesse Noyola Mark Scott H:~EG-DIR~JOSEPH~ZONING~1003-01S P.DOC 1, I-2~-20~ 3:BOPM FROM PLANNING B12 88~ 3B90 STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF NUECES CASE: 1003-01 EXHIBIT A FIELDNO'I'~ DESCRIPTION FOR ZONING USES BEING A 1.95~ ACRE TRACT OF LAND OUT OF THE EAST ONE HALF OF LOT 14, SECTION 21, lilBO1O~ BLUFF AND ENCINAL FARM AND GARDEN TRACTS, A MAP OF WHICH IS RECORDED IN VOLUME A, PAGES 41 THRU 43, OF THE MAP RECORDS OF NUECES COUNTY, TEXAS, THIS TRACT BEING IYJ[ORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED BY METES AND BOUNDS AS FOLLOWS: Bearings are based on the ~'corded map of Flour Bluff& Encinal Farm & Garden Tracts and referenced to the monumented centerline of Yorktown BlVd. monumented same line being the south ~etion line of Section 21, Flour Bluff & Enciual Farm & G-arden Tracts. Beginning at a point on the east boundaxy line ora met known as Lot 14-B, Section 21, Flour Bluff and Eneinal Farm and Garden Tracts, a map of which is recorded in Volume 37, Page 164 of the Map Records of Nueces County, Texas, for tho southwest corner of this tract, from whicla point a fence post found on the north right-of-way line of an 80.00 foot wide road know as Yorktown Boulevard, for the southezzt comer of said Lot 14-B, bears SOuth 28~57'37'' West (plat ~ South 29'00'00" West) a distance of 25.00 feet; Thence, North 28°$7'3T' East, (plat = North 29°00'00'' Ea,nt).with said east boundary line of Lot 14-B, a distance of 610.00 feet to a point for the northwest comer of this tract; Thence, South 61002'23'' East, a distance of 140.00 feet, to a poim, for the northeast comer of this tra~t; Thence, South 28057'37' West, a di*tance of 575.10 feet, to an angle poim, for the northern most southeast comer of this tract; .Thence, South 58°38'38" West, a distance of 40.27 feet, to a point, for the southcnm most southeast corner of this travt; Thence, North 61000'00" West, parallel to and 25.00 feet distant therefrom measured at fight angles thereto the north fight-of-way line of aforementioned Yorktown Boulevard, a distance of 120.06 feet, to the Point of Beginning and containing 1_953 aerer485,058.13 sq. R.) of land. Pyle& Associates, Inc. ~ Jamie Jo Pyle, R.P.L.S. #4700 il Page 1 of 3 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE, UPON APPLICATION BY JOHN BUTLER BY CHANGING THE ZONING MAP IN REFERENCE TO 1.95:3 ACRES OUT OF LOT 14, SECTION 21, FLOUR BLUFF AND ENCINAL FARM AND GARDEN TRACTS, FROM "F-R" FARM-RURAL DISTRICT TO "B-4" GENERAL BUINESS DISTRICT; AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO ACCOUNT FOR ANY DEVIATIONS FROM THE EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has forwarded to the City Council its reports and recommendations concerning the application of John Butler for amendment to the City of Corpus Christi Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map; WHEREAS, with proper notice to the public, public hearings were held on Wednesday, October 8, 2003 and October 22, 2003, during a meeting of the Planning Commission, and on Tuesday, December 9, 2003, during a meeting of the City Council, in the Council Chambers, at City Hall, in the City of Corpus Christi, during which all interested persons were allowed to appear and be heard; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that this amendment would best serve public health, necessity, and convenience and the general welfare of the City of Corpus Christi and its citizens. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS: SECTION 1. That the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas, is amended by changing the zoning on 1.953 acres out of Lot 14, Section 21, Flour Bluff and Encinal Farm and Garden Tracts, located north of Yorktown Boulevard and 1,700 feet east of Cimarron Road, from "F-R" Farm-Rural District to "B-4" General Business District. (MapG16C) SECTION 2. That the official Zoning Map of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas, is amended to reflect the amendment to the Zoning Ordinance made by Section 1 of this ordinance. SECTION 3. That the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas, approved on the 27th day of August, 1937, as amended from time to time, except as changed by this ordinance and any other ordinances adopted on this date, remain in full force and effect. SECTION 4. That to the extent that this amendment to the Zoning Ordinance represents a deviation from the Comprehensive Plan, the Comprehensive Plan is amended to conform to the Zoning Ordinance, as amended by this ordinance. H:\LEG-DIRUOSEPH~ZONING\1003-01REGU LAR.DOC Page 2 of 3 SECTION 5. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with this ordinance are hereby expressly repealed. SECTION 6. That publication shall be made in the official publication of the City of Corpus Christi as required by the City Charter of the City of Corpus Christi. SECTION 7. That upon written request of the Mayor or five Council members, copy attached, the City Council (1~) finds and declares an emergency due to the need for immediate action necessary for the efficient and effective administration of City affairs and (2) suspends the Charter rule as to consideration and voting upon ordinances at two regular meetings so that this ordinance is passed upon first reading as an emergency measure on this 9TM day of December, 2003. ATTEST: THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI Armando Chapa City Secretary APPROVED Joseph I-I~rney Assistant City Attorney For City Attorney 2003 Samuel L. Neal, Jr. Mayor, City of Corpus Christi H:\LEG-DIRUOSEPH~ZONING\1003-01 REGULAR. DOC Page 3 of 3 Corpus Christi, Texas day of ,2003 TO THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL Corpus Christi, Texas For the reasons set forth in the emergency clause of the foregoing ordinance, an emergency exists requiring suspension of the Charter rule as to consideration and voting upon ordinances at two regular meetings. I/we, therefore, request that you suspend said Charter rule and pass this ordinance finally on the date it is introduced, or at the present meeting of the City Council. Respectfully, Respectfully, Samuel L. Neal, Jr. Mayor, City of Corpus Christi Council Members The above ordinance was passed by the following vote: Samuel L. Neal, Jr. Brent Chesney Javier D. Colmenero Melody Cooper Henry Garrett William Kelly Rex A. Kinnison Jesse Noyola Mark Scott H:\LEG~DIR~JOSEPH~ONING\I003-01REGULAR.DOC 30 AGENDA MEMORANDUM December 4, 2003 AGENDAITEM: Public headng to consider amending the 1982 Storm Drainage Plan for the area West of Calallen (Five Points) to transfer about 8 acres from Basin "E" to an unidentified basin neighboring on the east. Ordinance amending the 1982 Storm Drainage Master Plan for the Area West of Calallen (Five Points) to transfer about 8 acres from Basin "E~ to an unidentified basin neighboring on the east as better described in the attached exhibit; and declaring an emergency. ISSUE: The developer of subject property, New River Hills Subdivision, proposes to develop a single-family subdivision within a 23-acre site located north of Northwest Boulevard and east of River Hills Ddve. The existing River Hill Subdivision and existing River Hills Country Club are located downstream and restdct access to the Nueces River. Amendment to the Storm Water Master Plan is required because the storm water drainage is being diverted to the neighboring basin. REQUIRED COUNCIL ACTION: City Charter requires City Council approval of the amendment to the Master Storm Drainage Plan. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the ordinance as presented. Assistant City Manager/Interim Director Development Services ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Background Information Location Map F_x~sting Before Diversion -"A" Subdivision Area Detail -"B' Proposed After Divemion -~C' Drainage Exhibit New River Hills Subdivision AGENDA MEMORANDUM ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION BACKGROUND: The Storm Drainage Plan for the Area West of Calailen (Five-Points) was adopted by the City Council of Corpus Chdsfi per Ordinance # 16927 on March 10, 1982. The plan was prepared by Naismith Engineers, Inc. of Corpus Christi, Texas. The subject property, New River Hills Subdivision, is a 23-acre site located north of Northwest Boulevard and east of River Hills Drive and located within the city limits. Amendment to the Storm Water Master Plan is required because the storm water drainage is being diverted to the neighboring basin. Both the existing River Hill Subdivision and River Hill Country Club golf course are developed downstream and obstruct the extension of an outfall toward the Nueces River. The engineering consultant for the developer of this subdivision has satisfactorily worked with staff to document the hydraulic analysis and design of the detention pond to provide storage for a 100 year rainfall event and to discharge at no more than a 10 cfs. The detention pond will divert the run-off that now flows toward the south of the existing River Hill Subdivision. The pond will discharge eastward via an open channel to the roadside ditch along the Hazel Bazemore Road north toward the Nueces River. Contact has been mede with the Nueces County Engineer's office to describe the proposed outfall to the detention pond and no objection was expressed. The terms of the meintenance, design and outfall improvements are proposed to be included in an agreement with the developer that will be required prior to the recording of the plat for the subdivision, Planning Commission on December 3, 2003 approved the amendment to the Master Storm Drainage Plan. Exhibit A FM 62~ F,~IV Er CANY:DN LOCATION MAP Not to Scale Exhibit B 145 4 EXISTING BEFORE DIVERSION Exhibit C Exhibit D PROPOSED AFTER DIVERSION'-"C" Exhibit E DRAINACE EXHIBIT NEP/RIVER HILLS SUBDIVISION CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS O' $00' 600' 900' EXHIBIT F Page 1 of 3 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 1982 STORM DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN FOR THE AREA WEST OF CALALLEN (FIVE POINTS) TO TRANSFER APPROXIMATELY EIGHT (8) ACRES FROM BASIN "E" TO AN UNIDENTIFIED BASIN NEIGHBORING ON THE EAST AS DESCRIBED IN THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has forwarded to the City Council its reports and recommendations concerning the amendment to the Storm Drainage Plan of the City of Corpus Christi; WHEREAS, with proper notice to the public, public hearings were held on Wednesday, December 3, 2003, during a meeting of the Planning Commission, and on Tuesday, December 9, 2003, during a meeting of the City Council, in the Council Chambers, at City Hall, in the City of Corpus Christi, during which all interested persons were allowed to appear and be heard; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that this amendment would best serve public health, necessity, and convenience and the general welfare of the City of Corpus Christi and its citizens. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS: SECTION t. That the Storm Drainage Plan of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas, is amended, for the area west of Calallen, to transfer approximately eight (8) acres from Basin "E" to an unidentified basin neighboring on the east, by incorporating the attached Exhibit "A" into the Storm Drainage Plan. SECTION 2. That the Storm Drainage Pan is an element of the Comprehensive Plan and the Comprehensive Plan is amended to conform to the Storm Drainage Plan, as amended by this ordinance. SECTION 3. That ali ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with this ordinance are hereby expressly repealed. SECTION 4. That publication shall be made in the official publication of the City of Corpus Christi as required by the City Charter of the City of Corpus Christi. SECTION 5. That upon written request of the Mayor or five Council members, copy attached, the City Council (l) finds and declares an emergency due to the need for immediate action necessary for the efficient and effective administration of City affairs and (2) suspends the Charter rule as to consideration and voting upon ordinances at two regular meetings so that this ordinance is passed upon first reading as an emergency measure on this 9th day of December, 2003. H:\LEG-DIRUOSEPH\ORD-STRMDRPLN,DOC Drainage Master Plan Amendment To: Planning Commission Members or City Council From: Vernon A Wueusche PE Da~e: 12/2J3 Re: Master Drainage Plan - Amendment The proposed text for the amendment to the plan is as follows: Amending the Storm Dralnage Plan for the Area West of Calallen ($-Ponts) to transfer about 8 aere~ from Basin 'E' to an unidentified basin neighboring on the east. Bae&m'ound The Storm Drainage Plan for the Area West of Calallen (5-Ponts) was adopted by the City Council of Corpus Christi per Ordinance It 16927 on March 10, 1982. The plan was prepared by Naismith Engineers, Inc. of Corpus Christi, Texas. This revision was necessitated by the proposed subdivision improvements, which would transfer drainage of about 8 acres out of Basin E-A- 1 to the unidentified basin bordering on the east Reenmmendation It is staff's recommendation that the Planning Commission recommend the proposed Amendment as presented for City Council action SuD orfiag Documentation A ~wiew of the hydraulics reveals that area A (8 acres), the area that would be diverted into the Hazel Bazemore Basin, plus area B (15 acres), the area inside the Hazel Bazemore Basin and including the detention pond, would be combined for a total 23 acres.(Subdivision Area Detail 'B') Subdivision Area Detail 'B' The predevelopment Q based on a 2-year for the area with a time of concentration of 50 minute~ would be Q--CIA Where C = 0.2, I = 2.45 cfs/acre, A = 23 acres Q = 0.2(2.45)2~ = 11.3 els Let the peak discharge Q be 90% of the value determined above or 10.17 and round off to 10. Use Q = 10 cfs as the maximum allowable discharge from the pond. · P~e2 Sizing the pond, consider 100-year storm, C = 0.6, and a total basin area of 23 acres including the pond the pond is sized using the two methods tabulated below. Cumulative Total Flow Flow Req Runoff Rainfall Flow rate Out out of Storage Duration Area ex)eft. 100 yr Into Pond of Pond Pond of Pond (cubic (cubic On's) (acres) (inches) (cubic feet) (CFS) feet) feet) 0.5 23 0.6 3.6 180,338 10 18000 162,338 I 23 0.6 4.6 230,432 10 36000 194,432 2 23 0.6 5.9 295,555 10 72000 223,$$$ 3 23 0.6 6.5 325,611 10 108000 217,611 6 23 0.6 8 400,752 10 216000 184,752 12 23 0.6 9.8 490,921 10 432000 58,921 Detention Pond Sizing Cumulative Rainfall Method Durati on Area Runoff Peak Flow Into Flow rate Flow out Required ex)eft. Discharge Out of of Pond Storage Basin of Pond (min) (acres) (CFS per (cubic feet) (CFS) (cubic feet) (cubic feet) Acre) 30 23 0.6 6.8 168,912 10 18000 150,912 60 23 0.6 4.5 223,560 10 36000 187,560 120 23 0.6 3.4 337,824 10 72000 265,824 180 23 0.6 2.2 327,888 10 108000 219,888 240 23 0.6 1.8 357,696 10 144000 213,696 Detention Pond Sizing Peak Discharge Method As shown in the tables above total cumulative rainfall method yidds a minimum required pond storage volume of 224,000 cubic feet and the peak discharge method yields a minimum required pond storage volume of 267,000 cubic feet. Let ~he minimum size of detention pond be 270~000 cubic feet ®P~e3 Consider the impact on the basin into which the water is being diverted Un-Diverted condition per master plan (Existing before Diversion - 'A') Existing before Diversion - 'A' The total area of the basin draining to thc Hazel Bazemore Ditch at the park entrance would be about 74 ac~es. · Page4 Un-diverted peak flow rate w/o dive~sion, Q~/o, would be: Q,#o = c I A C=0.6 A = 74 acres I = intensity So, Qw/o = 0.6(74) x I or 44x I Eql Diverted condition as propose (Proposed ARer Diversion - C) Proposed ARer Divexsion - C ePee5 The total area of the basin draining to the Hazel Bazemore Ditch at the park entrance would be the original 74 acres plus the 8 acres diverted into the basin, being 82 acres total. The area to be contained within the detention pond, including the pond would be 23 acres. (Subdivision Area Detail - 'B') If we divide the drainage basin into two components, (one) the 59- acre area that is to be drained by the main channel (82 acres - 23 acres = 59 acres) and the 23 acre area that is to be handled by the pond, we could determine the peak discharge as follows: Dive~ted peak flow rate w/diversion, Qw/, would be: Qw~ C IAn+Qp C=0.6 A~ = 59 acres I = intensity Qp = 10 cfs, Peak discharge fi'om the detention pond So, Q~=0.6x(59)xI+O. por(35xI)+10 Eq 2 If we let the Peak Discharge without diversion (Eq 1) grater than the Peak discharge with diversion (Eq 2) we obtain: 44xi >(35xi)+ 10 Solving for I, the critical intensity, we obtain I > 1.1 cfs p~r acre Considering a 2-year storm and TXDOT hydrology equation: I = b/(t+d)c Eq 3 I -- 1.1, the critical intensity (cfs per acre) b = 71, d --9.4, e =0.824, the standard coefficients t -- time of concentration (minutes) Substituting and solving Eq 3 for t we obtain t = 150 minutes or 2 % hours If we make a conservative estimation that the time of concentration to the most remote point in the basin would be 60 minutes this would yield a flow time in the main channel of 90 minutes or 5,500 seconds. With the maximum channel length being about 6,000 feet, the channel flow rote would be about 1 foot per second. Based on the observation above, the detention pond with diversion into the Hazel Bazemore Basin in a worst situation could yield detrimental results for very small storms but this would occur when flooding is unlikely. And this is due to the uniformly discharged 10 cfs that is assumed to facilitate the computations. Not only would the peak discharge along Hazel Bazemore Road be reduced but the overland flow that is now flowing into the existing River Hills Subdivision to the north would be significantly reduced, by the proposed improvements. Specific provisions are recommended to be included in a separate agreement after construction plans are submitted for review to be executed and approved by the City prior to filing of the plat These provisions include the following: The two vary imnortant parameters that must be understood and agreed for the recommendation to be valid are (one) the do~t,~ntJon pond shah have a miniml.m volume of 270~000 cubic feet and the maximum discharge from the pond shall be 10 cfa. The detention pond should be considered temporary, but necessar~ until a properly sized ouffall can be built along Hazel Bazemore Road. The ponds discharge structure must be used to conirol the discharge rate of the pond and not the ouffall pipe. The ponds outfali Dine shall be desioaed for a 25-year event and 100 year swale from the pond to the roadside ditch along the west side of Hazel Bazemore Road. The detention pond and outfali up to the roadside ditch along the west side of Hazel Bazemore Road shall be privately maintained. The cost of removal of the detention pond at such time as it becomes necessar~ shah be borne by the property owner. The removal of the detention pond shall only be initiated upon approval by the City of Comus Christi and at which time an underground outfall along Hazel Bazemore Road is in place. Removal and replacement of existing pipe culverts on Hazel Bazemore Road ditch to ensure a positive slope toward the outfall. Placement of any velocity reduction structures or controls at the outfall of Hazd Bazemore Road to reduce erosion. oP~o7 31 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMORANDUM City Council Action Date: December 9, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Waiving the 60-day waiting period and publication of legal notice; renaming the park at 701 St. Pius Drive from Meadowbrook Park to Dan Whitworth Park; and providing for severance. ISSUE: The City has established a formal policy for naming parks and recreation facilities. The City has received a renaming request from the Park and Recreation Advisory Committee for Meadowbrook Park located at 701 St. Plus Drive. BOARD/COMMITTEE REVIEW: The Park and Recreation Advisory Committee voted unanimously at their November 19, 2003, specially-called meeting to recommend that the City Council consider waiving the 60-day waiting period and the newspaper publication for this renaming request related to Meadowbrook Park. The Committee is also asking the City Council to approve the requested renaming of the park as Dan Whitworth Park. REQUIRED COUNCIL ACTION: The City Council must approve the naming of all City facilities, parks, and recreation facilities and that 3rocess is finalized by the adoption of an ordinance. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: It ~s recommended that the renaming of Meadowbrook Park as Dan Whitworth Park be approved and the waivers granted as requested. David Ondrias, Acting Director Park and Recreation Department Attachments: Map Drawing of park sign Copy. Request for Naming of Parks and Facilities Copy - Council Policy Information BACKGROUNDINFORMATION In February of 2002, a similar ordinance and waiver was approved by the City Council, requested by the Park and Recreation Advisory Committee, in the renaming of Gypsy Park as Don and Sandy Billish Park. Meadowbrook Park at, Plus X Catholic Church DAN WHITWORTH PARK CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI PARK & RECREATION REQUEST FOR THE NAMING OF PARKS AND FACILITIES PARK AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT CITY OF COPRUS CHRISTI, TEXAS l~.--Type u[ a~ua u~ ra~;ility (pu~k, building, pool, etc.): Park Currently named, Meadowbrook Park 2. Location: 701 St. Plus - Meadowbrook and St. Plus 2,. Suggested Name: Dan Whitworth Park 4. Please describe why you feel this name to be appropriate. He was well known in our community as Dan Whitworth. It will be a symbolic leqacy to honor his career including his term as Director of Park & Recreation. The park is located adiacent to St. Plus Church where Dan was a proud member. Dan's family, friends, and colleagues support this request. 5. Name and address of person making request. Name: Park & Recreation Department Address: 1201 Leopard St., Corpus Christi, TX 78401 Phone: 361 880-3464 6. Do you represent an organization with respect to this request? yes If'yes', name organization: Park & Recreation Department 7. Date of this request: November 12, 2003 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: Request: Approved Rejected __ Tabled Date of Committee Action ///./~. ~ ~ ~~ Date of Council Action Legal Notice- Newspaper Notice to Appropriate Councilmember Public Notice - Neighborhood COUNCIL POLICIES due deliberation ac~ in the be~t interest of all the citizens. Council Members and the Mayor ~i~l! be referred to by title end/or title with sur~-~e. k. All remark3 shall be addreasec[ to the Mayor and City Council and not to the Council Members as in~viduals. I. Cit/ze~s are authorized and encoura~d to present the/r views to the Council on a~enda action items, or dur/n~ the p~tit/ons part on n~-a~nda City-relat2d matters. How- ever, such -h~uld be done in a factual, precise presentation allowed. m. Persolls hi the immed/at2 v/e/nlty of the City Council while in sass/on sB~l! ref~i,~ from any d/sturbing noise, demon- stration, or other act disruptin~ to the City Council busi- These rules are not meant t~restrs/n a dt/zeu's first amendment (Res. No. 21901, § 1, 3-22-94) N~iz~ of City parks smd reet~attonM fac/lit/es. Do~/~/o~. Upen d~t/en of at least 51 percent of the of the Park and P,~cr~en Advisory C~mmlttee, th2 ~ity Cmmcil ma~ .,-.,,~ the park or park facility as the by thn Pa~k and R~c~nt~m Advi~ry ~, No ~ proposals whm~by the --~e of a park or park facility wu~id be ,4-.~_~ed. However. under extreme c/rcumsUmc~ $upp. No. 51 139 §6 CORPUS CHRISTI CODE the Park and R~cr~atimi Advisory Committee will consider the request. The n.ming of an .nn~ed new park or park facitity is pre~erred and ~s recommended. The follo~tng deflm'tive steps shall be tekea reLmrfllng a proposed name chanfe. (1) P~r~, ~*otlp~, or or~mni~n~l~t d~ ~te nnmq ~hmn~9 qhmll ~11 OUt a l~[Ue~tt for ll&~le ~l~mn~ Mid (2) l~me ~l~.n**e requests thai! be submitted to the Park Mid Recreatim Advisory Committee. No action may be taken by the Bo~ For a ~i~;mvxu of 60 ~ays after receipt o~ the propo~ (3) Dur~ the 60~ wait~ pe~ legal notice shall be pubX~h,,~i ~ in a nm~lmpm* o~ ~ circtd~m (4) Written co~,~e~ts sre to be submittmt to the Park anit- vid--l,, are invited to come I~re tim Board to add~ms No. 61 COUNCI~ §9 sh~ll arrange statable t'~*m;nE ceremonies. Costs sio~ of m~m, pla~, ~ mem~ sh~ be borne by ~e en~ p~smg ~e nme ch~ge. D. S~c~ Co~. ~ ~ ~"~ ~ m~du- ~, co~idera~ may ~ ~v~ m ~ H~g or de~. S~ co~id~ ~hmll ~ ~ ~ ~e c~bu~o~ ~e ~n ~ ~e ~ ~ Ci~, S~, or Co~. A fa~ or p~k ~y not ~ .~m~ ~ ~ ~"~d~ ~ m pu~c o~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ of a ~ ~on ~m p~c ~ ~ m~ employ- m~t b ~d~ ~a~. N~ ~a~ ~ d~omlna~o~ ~ ~ne~y not ~ favor~ly c~id~ ~s ~ ~ of ~na~on ~ly. ~put ~ n~r- (~. No. 21~1, ~ 1, ~) The City Cauncil h~reby ~tabli-i~,~ a policy of deoli.l.g to CR~. Bio. 21901, § 1, 3-22-94) 8. Nxming of City faeilitie~. (~. No. 21~1, ~ 1, ~-~) Through the Co~,,~vnity Development Block Grant Program, the City Council provides for the development and Preservatim of a viable urban community, a suitable living environment, decent housing and expanded economic opportunities, principally for persons of low and moderate income, ~nd aids in the prevent/c~ No. ~! 141 AN ORDINANCE WAIVING THE 60-DAY WAITING PERIOD AND PUBLICATION OF LEGAL NOTICE; RENAMING THE PARK AT 701 ST. PlUS DRIVE FROM MEADOWBROOK PARK TO DAN WHITWORTH PARK; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERANCE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1. Pursuant to Policy No. 6 of Council Policies, Resolution No. 21901, adopted March 22, 1994, upon unanimous recommendation of the Park and Recreation Advisory Committee, the City Council waives the 60-day waiting period and publication of legal notice. SECTION 2. The name of the park at 701 St. Plus Drive, currently known as Meadow- brook Park, is hereby renamed Dan Whitworth Park. SECTION 3. If, for any reason, any section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase, word or prevision of this ordinance shall be held invalid or unconstitutional by final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction, it shall not affect any other section, para- graph, subdivision, clause, phrase, word or provision of this ordinance, for it is the def- inite intent of the City Council that every section, paragraph, subdivision, phrase, word and provision hereof shall be given full force and effect for its purpose. 32 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMORANDUM City Council Action Date: December 9, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: (Caption as it should appear on the agenda) An ordinance amending the Code of Ordinances Chapter 24, Human Relations, by adding Article V, Discrimination Against Individuals With Disabilities, establishing procedure and implementation; providing publication; providing for severance; and providing for penalties. ISSUE: This is the Second Reading of the proposed ordinance amendment on disability non-discrimination that the City's advisory board of the Committee for Persons with Disabilities (CFPWD) had requested the City Council to consider to ensure persons with disabilities have accessibility to facilities, services, activities and programs by the City, and/or those contracted for on behalf of the City, and also within the community with some application of the proposed ordinance amendment applying to privately-owned businesses/organizations that serve the public. Although training and public awareness of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and accessibility issues could potentially increase with a local non-discrimination ordinance, the significance of this ordinance is to provide local enforcement and investigation of inaccessibility issues through the City and/or those contracted for on behalf of the City. The City's pdmary responsibilities would be administration, research, investigation, enforcement and monitoring of non-compliance under the ADA and this proposed ordinance amendment. REQUIRED COUNCIL ACTION: The City Council's approval is required for the City to accept the disability non- discrimination ordinance amendment as proposed by the CFPWD. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: The First Reading of this proposed ordinance amendment of disability non-discrimination was passed on July 22, 2003, with the Second Reading deferred until the first City Council Meeting in December 2003. The City Council gave City Staff and the Committee for Persons with Disability directives for additional information to address during the interim period. FUNDING: Funding of the estimated costs to begin implementing this proposed disability non- discrimination ordinance amendment is not currently appropriated in the City's annual operating budget. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: Addressing accessibility complaints/reasonable accommodations and providing technical assistance on ADA related matters have been an ongoing function of the City. More recently the City Council adopted the City's ADA Title II Comprehensive Evaluation and Transition Plan in February of 2003. Aisc, in its greater commitment toward accessibility, the City Council recommended that the City maintain ADA compliance as a high priority. Although the City recognizes and supports efforts to deter discrimination against persons with disabilities, City Staff is unable to recommend the existing proposed disability non- discrimination ordinance for adoption at this time due to the current legal interpretation that this proposed ordinance requires more, undefined accessibility than the existing State and Federal requirements. The CFPWD and City Staff have participated in community meetings and also special meetings to discuss various ordinance-related issues toward improving the proposed ordinance amendment. Much input, time and resources have been made, by both the CFPWD and City Staff. L. David Ramos Director of Human Relations Attachments: 1. Proposed Ordinance Amendment of Disability Non-Discrimination, as revised. 2. List of Local Associations/Organizations for Public Input 3. Summary of Public Comments related to the proposed ordinance amendment. 4. Survey of Other Cities. BACKGROUND INFORMATION At its July 2003 Monthly Meeting, the Committee for Persons with Disabilities (CFPWD) recommended by motion to submit its non-discrimination ordinance to the City Council for consideration. Between July 2003 through December 2003, the following efforts were made: Gathering Public Input A. The CFPWD set four (4) additional public meetings to give the public an opportunity for public input. City Staff posted public notices in the Caller- Times newspaper and on the City's website. The proposed ordinance was made available for viewing at City Hall, the City public libraries and on the City's website. City Staff contacted twenty-nine (29) associations and organizations for public input and to schedule discussion meetings regarding the proposed ordinance. The City had provided copies of the proposed ordinance to these associations and organizations and attended 19 group meetings. Some CFPWD Members also attended. In all, 20 of these association/organizations provided public comments. II. Collecting Related Information from Other Cities City Staff contacted the top U.S. cities to survey for similar types of disability non- discrimination ordinances. Of the 25 cities, 12 cities indicated that they have disability non-discrimination ordinance language or contract language, whether in one separate or multiple documents. Another six cities indicated that they do not have this type of ordinance. The remaining seven cities did not provide a response. III. Ordinance Review Meetings After the last public meeting on November 4, 2003, the CFPWD called four Special Meetings, with City Staff, to review the incoming public comments and to discuss possible changes to improve the proposed ordinance. A. Special Meeting of 11/10/03 - Review draft summary of public comments and identify major concerns and begin preparing for the proposed ordinance's Second Reading. B. Special Meeting of 11/17/03 - Members present considered some non- substantive revisions. City Staff assisted by updating the CFPWD's draft ordinance. The CFPWD also asked that City Staff bring any further recommendations to the 12/2/03 meeting. C. Special Meeting of 12/02/03 - CFPWD considered City Staff's recommendations. D. During the CFPWD's Regular Monthly Meeting on 12/3/03, the Committee held further discussion on the proposed ordinance. The Committee set another Special Meeting for 12/8/03 with City Staff for further discussion and consideration of incorporating other possible changes. ATTACHMENT I AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES CHAPTER 24, HUMAN RELATIONS, BY ADDING ARTICLE V, DISCRIMINATION AGAINST INDMDUALS WITH DISABILITIES, ESTABLISHING PROCEDURE AND IMPLEMENTATION; PROVIDING PUBLICATION; PROVIDING FOR SEVERANCE; AND PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI: SECTION 1. That the Code of Ordinances, City of Corpus Christi, Chapter 24, Human Relations is amended by adding Article V, Discrimination Against An Individual With A Disability to read as follows: ARTICLE V: DISCRIMINATION AGAINST AN INDIVIDUAL WITH A DISABILITY Sec. 24-84 Declaration of Policy (a) It is hereby declared to be the policy of the City to bring about through fair, orderly and lawful procedures, that no qualified individual with disabihty shall, on the basis of such disability, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or otherwise be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity operated or contracted for by the City. Cb) It is further declared that such policy is established upon the recognition of the inalienable rights of each qualified individual with a disability to participate fully and receive the benefits of, all programs and activities of the City. It is further recognized that the denial of such rights through considerations based on disability is detrimemal to the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the City and constitutes an unjust denial or deprivation of such inalienable rights which is within the power and responsibility of govermnent authority to prevent. Sec. 24-85 Definitions For the purpose of this article the following definitions shall apply unless the context clearly indicates or requires a different meaning. Auxiliary Aid includes: Services or devices as qualified interpreters, assistive listening headsets, television captioning and decoders, telecommunications devices for deaf persons (TDD's), videotext displays, readers, texts on tape, materials in braille, and large print materials. This list is not exclusive and functional equivalents may be substituted for any auxiliary aid. CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance City Manager means the City Manager of Corpus Christi or his/her designee. Director means the Director of the Human Relations Department or his/her designee. Disability means, with respect to an individual, a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more maior life activities of such individual; a record of such an impairment; or being regarded as having such an impairment. Physical or mental impairment means any physiological disorder or condition, cosmetic disfigurement, or anatomical loss affecting one or more of the following body systems: neurological; musculoskeletal; special sense organs; respiratory (including speech organs) cardiovascular; reproductive, digestive; genitourinary; hemic and lymphatic; skin; and endocrine. Mental impairment also includes any mental or psychological disorder, such as mental retardation, organic brain syndrome, emotional or mental illness, and specific learning disabilities. (2) Ma/or life activities means functions such as caring for one's self, performing manual tasks, walking, seeing, heating, speaking, breathing, learning, and working. (3) Has a record of such impairment means a history of, or has been misclassified as having a mental or physical impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities. Is regarded as having an impairment means has a physical or mental impairment that does not substantially limit maior life activities but that is treated by another as constituting such limitation. Being regarded as having an impairment also means has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits major life activities only as a result of the attitudes of others toward such impairment; or has none of the impairments defined above but is treated by others as having such an impairment. Discrimination means any direct or indirect exclusions, distinctions, segregation, limitation, refusal, denial, or any other differentiation in the treatment of an individual or individuals with disabilities on account of a disability. FacifitV means all or any portion of buildings, structures, equipment, roads, walks, parking lots, or other real or personal property. Financial assistance means the receint, fzom the City. of any snecific grant, loan, lease, contract (other than ~ontracts for eoods, zr :. :zn~azt zf insurance or guaranty, or services uvon navment of full and fair comnensation or unon obtainine a lease, license, or use nrivileee aereement uvon ~avment of fair CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance 2 market value or the oavment of fees reauired bv City ordinance), or the use of City oersonnel or oronertv without the ~avment of fair market value or full and fair comnensation. :.ny z~zr :rr:.::?,z:r. zn: ~-,- ;vkizk tk: C!:y 7rz;':-~zz zr th: C'~' zhxz: zf:.tz fair m---!:zt -:a!'az iz nat rzt-_~.zg tz 'Az Cig.'. Person with disabilities means any person who has a disability as defined in "disability" above. Qualified individual with a disability means an individual with a disability who, with or without reasonable modifications to roles, policies, or practices, the removal of architectural, communication, or transportation barriers, or the provision of auxiliary aids and services, meets the essential eligibility requirements of the receipt of services or the participation in programs or activities provided by the City, or entities using City facilities. Readily achievable means easily accomplishable and able to be carded out without much difficulty or expense. Determining if barrier removal is readily achievable is, by necessity, a case-by-case judgment. Factors to consider include: (1) The nature and cost of the action; (2) The overall financial resources of the site or sites involved; the number of persons (3) (4) (5) employed at the site; the effect on expenses and resources; legitimate safety requirements necessary for safe operation, including crime prevention measures; or any other impact of the action on the operation of the site; The geographic separateness, and the administrative or fiscal relationship of the site or sites in question to any parent corporation or entity; If applicable, the overall financial resources of any parent corporation or entity; the overall size of the parent corporation or entity with respect to the number of its employees; the number, type, and location of its facilities; and If applicable, the type of operation or operations of any Parent Corporation or entity, including the composition, structure, and functions of the workforce of the Parent Corporation or entity. Reasonable Accommodation means any chanee or adinstment to the service, activity or nroaram for the known ohvsical or comaitive limitation(s~ of an otherwise Clualifi_ed ~erson with a disability unless it can be demonstrated that the accommodation would imoose an undue hardshio on the oaeration of the oro~ram. Any oarticular chan~e or adiustment would not be reonired if. under cimumstances involved, it would result in an undue hardshin. CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance 3 Sec. 24-86 Communications The City shall take appropriate steps to ensure that communications with applicants, participants, and members of the public with disabilities are as effective as communications with others. (b) (1) The City shall famish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in, and enjoy the benefits of, a service, program, or activity conducted by the City. (2) In determining what type of auxiliary aid and service is necessary, the City shall give primary consideration to the requests of the individuals with disabilities. The City and its contractors in considering reasonable accommodations must provide auxiliary aids and services when they are necessary to ensure effective communication with individuals with hearing, vision, or speech impairments. Auxiliary aids that would result in an undue burden or in a fundamental alteration in the nature of the goods or services are not required by the regulation. See. 24-87 Prohibited Practices The City in providing any aid, benefit, or service zkx!! mav not. directly or through contractual, licensing, or other arrangements, on the basis of disability (1) Deny a qualified individual with a disability the oppommity to participate in or benefit from the aid, benefit, or service. (2) Afford a qualified individual with a disability an opportunity to participate in or benefit from the aid, benefit, or service that is not equal to that afforded others; (3) Provide a qualified individual with a disability with an aid, benefit, or service that is not as effective in affording equal opportunity to obtain the same result, to ga'm the same benefit, or to reach the same level of achievement as that provided to others; (4) Provide different or separate aids, benefits, or services to individuals with disabilities or to any class of individuals with disabilities than is provided to others unless such action is necessary to provide qualified individuals with disabilities with aids, benefits, or services that are as effective as those provided to others; CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance 4 Aid or perpetuate discrimination against a qualified individual with a disability by providing significant assistance to any agency, organization, or person that discriminates on the basis of disability in providing any aid, benefit, or service to beneficiaries of the City's programs; (6) Deny a qualified individual with a disability the opportunity to participate as a member of planning or advisory boards and commissions; (7) Otherwise limit a qualified individual with a disability in the enjoyment of any right, privilege, advantage, or oppommity enjoyed by others receiving an aid, benefit, or service. The City zkall may not deny a qualified individual with a disability the opportunity to participate in services, programs, or activities that are not separate or different, despite the existence of permissibly separate or different programs or activities. The City ehet4-mav not. directly or through contractual or other arrangement, utilize criteria or methods of administration that: Have the effect of subjecting a qualified individual with a disability to discrimination on the basis of such disability; (2) Have the purpose or effect of defeating or substantially impairing accomplishment of the objectives of the City's program with respect to individuals with disabilities. In determining the site or location of a facility, the City and its contractors zk:.!! mav not make selections that: (2) Have the effect of excluding individuals with disabilities from, denying them the benefits of, or otherwise subjecting them to discrimination under any program or activity; or Have the purpose or effect of defeating or substantially impairing the accomplishment of the objectives of the service, program or activity with respect to individuals with disabilities. The City ~4-mav not administer a financial assistance program in a manner that subjects qualified individuals with disabihties to discrimination on the basis of such disability, nor may the City provide financial assistance to programs or activities that subject qualified individuals with disabilities to discrimination on the basis of such disability. CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance 5 The aid, benefit, or service provided under a program or activity receiving or benefiting from City financial assistance includes any aid, benefit, or service provided in or through a facility that has been constructed, expanded, altered, leased or rented, or otherwise acquired, in whole or part, with City funds. Sec. 24-88 Personal Devices and Services Nothing required in this Ordinance is to include, or be construed to include, a requirement that the City provide to indiv?hml~ with disabilities personal devices, such as wheelchairs, individually prescribed devices, such as prescription eyeglasses or hearing aids; readers for personal use of study; or services of a personal nature including assistance in eating toileting or dressing. Nothing in this Ordinance is to be construed as a requirement that a City service be fundamentally altered. Sec. 24-89 Undue Burden of Applicants for Contractual Financial Assistance ~)_Integration of individuals with disabilities into the mainstream of society is fundamental to the purposes of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Companies providing goods and services to the public need to take certain limited steps to improve access tO existing places of business. This mandate includes the obligation to remove barriers from existing buildings when it is readily achievable to do so. Rz.a~-:.!y azk:'z-,'aS:: ~::..':z :az:.!y :.zz.z~.r.::.z~:2:2: :.::~ ~u~ ~ ,A u~ ~--:' ~a ...... -',~- ........ ~. a:~_.L~, zr :::F~-z:. Removing barriers by constructing a curb ramp, widening an entrance door, installing visual alarms, or designating an accessible parking space is often essential to ensure equal opportunity for people with disabilities. Because removing these and other common barriers can be simple and inexpensive in some cases and difficult and costly in others, therefore a flexible approach to compliance should be practical. A business or other private entity that serves the public must ensure equal opportunity for people with disabilities. (b~ The requirement to remove barriers in existing buildings applies only to a private entity that owns, leases, leases to or operates a place of public accommodation. Further, barriers must be removed only where it is readily achievable to do so. Re~'2y (c~A public accommodation must provide auxiliary aids and services when they are necessary to ensure effective communication with individuals with hearing, vision, or speech impairments. Auxiliary aids that would result in an undue burden or in a fundamental alteration in the nature of the goods or services are not required by the regulation. dLd~..If your business provides goods and services to the public, you are required to remove barriers if doing so is readily achievable. Such a business is called a public accommodation because it serves the public. If your business is not open to the public but is only a place of employment like a warehouse or manufacturing facility, then there is no requirement to CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance 6 remove barriers. Such a facility is called a commercial facility. While the operator of a commercial facility is not required to remove barriers in existing facilities, you must comply with the ADA Standards for Accessible Design when you alter, renovate or expand your facility. Sec. 24-90 Affidavit of Compliance by Applicants for Contractual Financial Assistance An applicant for contractual financial assistance from the City, other than procurement contract or a contract o_f insurance or guaranty, shall submit an assurance of compliance, on a form specified by the Director, that the program will be operated in compliance with this chapter. An applicant may incorporate this assurance by reference in subsequent applications to the City. Sec. 24-91 City to Evaluate Itself Annually (a) The City shall annually: (1) Evaluate, with the assistance of interested persons, including people with disabilities or organizations representing persons with disabilities, its current policies and practices and the effects thereof that do not or may not meet the requirements of this article; (2) Modify, after consultation with interested persons, including persons with disabilities or organizations representing persons with disabilities, any policies that do not meet the requirements of this article; and (3) Take, after consultation with interested persons, including persons with disabilities or organizations representing persons with disabilities, appropriate remedial steps to eliminate the effects of any discrimination that result from adherence to these policies and practices. (b) The City shall maintain on file and make available for public inspection: (1) A list of the interested persons consulted; (2) A description of areas examined and any problems identified; and (3) A description of any modifications made and of any remedial steps taken. CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance 7 See. 24-92 CO) City Adoption of Designated Coordinator and Grievance Procedure The City shall designate at least one person to coordinate its efforts to comply with this article. The City shall adopt grievance procedures that incorporate appropriate due process standards and that provide the prompt and equitable resolution of complaints alleging any action prohibited by this article. Sec. 24-93 City's Non-Discrimination Notice regarding Individuals with Disabilities (a) The City shall take appropriate and continuing steps to notify participants, beneficiaries, employees, or applicants, including those with impaired vision or hearing, and unions or professional organizations holding professional agreements with the City that it does not discriminate on the basis of disability. The notification shall state, where appropriate, that the City does not discriminate on the basis of disability. The notification shall also include an identification of the person and department responsible for investigating complaints of discrimination. Co) If the City publishes or uses materials or publications containing general information that it makes available to participants, beneficiaries, employees, or applicants, it shall include in those materials or publications a statement of the policy described in subsection (a) above. Sec.24-94 Requirements to Insure Accessibili ,ty (a) No qualified individual with a disability shall, because of inaccessibility to or unusability of the City or its contractors, facilities, be denied the benefits of, be excluded fi.om participation in, or otherwise be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity to which this section applies. Co) The City and its contractors shall operate each program or activity to which this section applies so that the program or activity, when viewed in its entirety, is readily accessible to individuals with disabilities. This subsection does not require that every existing facility or ever~ part of a facility be made accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities. Procedures will be adopted and implemented to ensure that interested persons, including persons with impaired vision or hearing, can obtain information as to the CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance 8 Cd) existence and location of services, activities, and facilities that are accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities. Each facility or part of a facility constructed by, on behalf of, or for the use of the City or its contractors shall be designed and constructed in such manner that the facility or part of the facility is readily accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities in compliance with ADA and regulatory standards. Each facility or part of a facility which is altered by, on behalf of, or for the use of the City or its contractors in a manner that affects or could affect the usability of the facility or part of the facility is readily accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities. Design, construction, or alteration of facilities in conformance with Texas Accessibility Standards of the Architectural Barriers Act, Article 9102, Texas Civil Statutes shall constitute compliance with this section. Sec. 24-95 Administration As a means of implementing and enforcing this article, the Director will serve as the City's focal point for coordinating the implementation this article as well as coordinating the implementation of any relevant new and existing laws and ordinances. The Director will have the following responsibilities: (a) Coordinate the investigation and/or conciliation procedure outlined in Sec. 24-97 and assist in resolving grievances to assure prompt solutions; Prepare and disseminate information regarding disability rights to the public, City departments, and community agencies; Research administrative policies and procedures to identify for City management, modifications required for accessibility to individuals with disabilities; Monitor City activities related to individuals with disabilities and conduct periodic compliance reviews to assure that all City departments are providing services that are accessible to individuals with disabilities; Recommend training programs for various groups of the City organization in which accessibility and emplownent related needs are provided to assure that all City services are available to the disability community; Provide technical assistance and consultation to all City deparanents in areas related to accessibility as defined by law; and, CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance 9 (g) Assist in the development of long-range planning activities to accomplish compliance. Sec. 24-96 General Enforcement Guidelines Any individual who believes that he/she has been discriminated against because of his/her disability may file with the Director a request to have the Director investigate and/or mediate his/her complaint. Nothing in this axticle shall create a civil cause of action for damages against the City or preclude any aggrieved person from seeking any other remedy provided by law. Nothing herein shall authorize criminal enforcement of this article against the City or its agents, employees, and officials. (c) Filing a complaint with the Director is not a prerequisite or a bar to the filing of some other legal complaint or to the pursuit of any other remedy provided by law. The pendency of a complaint before the Director shall not bar any aggrieved party from seeking civil action, but a final iudgment in any civil action shall bar any further investigation of a pending complaint on the same alleged act of discrimination. In connection with any investigation of a charge filed under this article, the Director or designated investigator shall at all reasonable times have access to, for the purposes of examination and the fight to copy, any evidence of any person being investigated or proceeded against that relates to the charge under investigation and is not privileged as provided by law. No person shall knowingly, intentionally or recklessly obstruct, or prevent compliance with this article or hinder or interfere with the performance of the proper exercise of a duty, obligation, right or power of the Human Relations Department or its representative, or other officials with duties, obligations, rights and powers established by ordinance. Where appropriate and not in violation of conflicts of interest or other ethical rules of the State Bar of Texas, the City Attorney shall assign counsel to assist the Human Relations Department in the performance of its functions. The City Manager shall make such other administrative arrangements as are normal and necessary for the functioning of the Human Relations Department. CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance 10 Sec. 24-97 Filing/Investigation of Comnlaints on City of Cornus Christi Services. Activities and Pro~rams- under Grievance on Accessibility Cl."; Y:2:y C 7 The City of Corpus Christi strives to provide quality customer service to all persons, regardless of race, color, religion, age, gender or disability. In the event any individual with a disability has a complaint regarding accessing City services, programs or activities, the City of Corpus Christi has formulated a policy as a Title II Entity under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to address such issues. (a) Any person who claims to have been iniured by an activity prohibited by this article may file a complaint with the Director of Human Relations. Such complaints will be in the form established by the Director and shall identify the person(s) alleged to have committed or alleged to be committing a discriminatory practice are based. In situations where the gfievant's disability requires assistance to submit a complaint, the Director will make reasonable effort to assist the person in filing a complaint. The City shall provide complaint forms and furnish them without charge to any person, upon request. (b) All complaints must be filed within 180 days following the occurrence of an alleged discriminatory practice. As soon as practicable, but no more than 15 calendar days, the Director will meet with the complainant to discuss the complaint and possible resolutions. Within 15 calendar days after meeting with the Complainant the Director will respond in writing, and where appropriate, in a format accessible to the complainant, such as large print, Braille, or audio tape. The response will explain the position of the City and offer options for substantive resolution &the complaint. (c) If the response by the Director does not satisfactorily resolve the issue the complainant may appeal the Director's decision to the City Manager. Such an appeal must be filed within 15 calendar days after receipt of the response. Within 15 calendar days of the appeal, the City Manager or his/her designee will meet with the Complainant to discuss the complaint and possible resolutions. Within 15 calendar days after the meeting, the City Manager or his/her designee will respond in writing, and where appropriate, in a format accessible to the Complainant, with a final resolution of the complaim. (d) All formal complaints received by the Director, the responses to the complaints and the record of appeals to the Human Relations Commission, shall be retained by the City of Corpus Christi for at least three years. CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance 11 Sec. 24-98 l~iing/lnvestigation of Comnlaints a~ainst Non-City Entities- Places of Public Accommodation Procedure (a) Upon the filing or referral of a complaint as herein provided, the Director shall cause to be made a prompt and full investigation of the matter stated in the complaint. Provided, however, that before any charge becomes accepted for investigative purposes the Director shall have personally reviewed with the charging party the allegations contained therein and shall have determined that said complaint comes within the provisions of this article. In the event such review results in the (b) determination that the charge does not come within the provisions of the article, the charging pmty shall be given a clear and concise explanation of the reasons why the complaint fails to come within the ordinance. All complaints filed under this Section will proceed in accordance with the procedures set forth in ~Article 1I of Chanter 24. Discrimination in Places of Public Accommodations; except: (1) All determinations of the Director to whether discrimination occurred shall (2) be made as promptly as possible or no later than thel00 day after the date the complaint is filed, or if unable to complete the investigation within the 100-day period, the Director shall notify the complainant and the respondent in writing of the reasons for delay. Appeals of the Director's decision will be to the Corpus Christi Human Relations Commission. Such an appeal must be filed with/n 15 calendar days of the receipt of the Director's decision. The Human Relations Commission will conduct a hearing on the appeal during the next available meeting. Complainants, and Respondents will have the fight to appear in person to explain their respective positions to the Commission. Sec. 24-99 Retaliation or Coercion (a) The City and its contractors sh~,14-mav not discriminate against any individual because that individual has opposed any act or practice made unlawful by this article, or because that individual made a charge, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or heating under this article or the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. (b) The City and its contractors :~:.!! may not coerce, intimidate, threaten, or interfere with any individual in the exercise or enjoyment of, or on account of his or her having exercised or enjoyed, or on account of his or her having aided or encouraged any other CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance 12 individual in the exercise or enjoyment of, any right granted or protected by this article or the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Sec. 24-100 Remedial and/or Voluntary Action (a) If the outcome of the investigation process under Sec. 24-97 finds that a City program or activity has discriminated against persons on the basis of disability in violation of this article, the responsible program area shall take such remedial and/or voluntarf action(s) as may be appropriate and necessary to rectif3, the problem. (b) All appeals of a grievance will follow established appeal procedures through the City grievance accessibility procedure for program participants/citizens. (c) Where a City program or activity is found to have discriminated against an individual on the basis of disability and where a contractor of a program area has discriminated, the City Manager may require either or both Parties to take appropriate action to rectify the problem. (d) The City Manager may, where necessary to overcome the effects of discrimination, require a City program or activity to take corrective action that may include actions: (1) With respect to an individual with a disability who no longer participates in the City's programs but who were participants in the program when such discrimination occurred; or (2) With respect to an individual with a disability who would have been a participant in the program had the discrimination not occurred. (3) The City may take steps, in addition to any action that is required by this article, to overcome the effects of conditions that resulted in limited participation in the City's program or activity by qualified persons with disabilities. If the outcome of the investigation process under Sec. 24-98 finds that a place of public accommodations has discriminated against persons on the basis of disability in violation of this article, the person(s} violating shall be punished by a fine of~ ~ ,~.~_ ,..._ ~..._~__.~ ~.~.. ~_,~_~ r~, ,~,~ ^r,~ ....... '~- uo to the m~imum provided in section 1-6 of ~e Code of ~n~ces of ~e City of Cocus C~sti ("City Code"}. Violations of Section 24-22(a) of~iele ~ mag be founded to the appropriate gove~ental body to enforce such conduct to the extent ~d m~er prescribed bv state law. Sec. 24-101 Status Reports to the City Council Annually after passage of this article, the Director shall submit to the City Council a status report on the implementation of this article. CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance 13 SECTION 2. If for any reason any section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase, word or provision of this ordinance shall be held invalid or unconstitutional by final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction, it shall not affect any other section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase, word or provision of this ordinance, for it is the definite intent of this City Council that every section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase, word or provision hereof be given full force and effect for its purpose. SECTION 3. Publication shall be made one time in the official publication of the City of Corpus Christi as required by the City Charter of the City of Corpus Christi. SECTION 4. Penalties are as provided in this ordinance and in Sec. 1-6 Code of Ordinances. CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance 14 That the foregoing ordinance was read for the first time and passed to its second reading on this the __ Samuel L. Neal, Jr. Brent Chesney Javier D. Colmenero Henry Garrett Bill Kelly day of ,2003, by the following vote: Rex A. Kinnison Melody Cooper Jesse Noyola Mark Scott That the foregoing ordinance was read for the second time and passed finally on this the __ day of Samuel L. Neal, Jr. Brent Chesney Javier D. Colmenero Henry Garrett Bill Kelly ,2003, by the following vote: Rex A. Kinnison Melody Cooper Jesse Noyola Mark Scott PASSED AND APPROVED, this the day of ,2003. ATTEST: CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI Armando Chapa City Secretary Approved as to legal form only this the __ By: Joseph Harney Assistant City Attorney For City Attomey Samuel L. Neal, Jr. Mayor day of a 2003; CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance 15 ATTACHMENT II City of Corpus Christi Proposed Non-Discrimination Ordinance Local Associations and Organizations Contacted for Public Input Name of Association (Alphabetical Order) Accessibility Coalition American General Contractors American Institute of Architects American Society of Civil Engineers Associated Builders and Contractors Black Chamber of Commerce Blind Leaders BOMA-Building Owners and Managers Association Builders Association of the Corpus Christi Area CC Chamber of Commerce (Public Policy Task Force) CC Hispanic Chamber of Commerce CC Restaurant Association Corpus Christi Independent School District Consulting Engineers Council -Texas Corpus Christi Chapter Council of Government Del Mar College Hard of Hearing Center (Consumer Board) Hispanic Contractors Hotel/Motel/Condo Association Minority Business Council MR Advisory Committee of BHMR Nueces County Regional Transportation Authority RTA Advisory Board Texas AM - Corpus Christi TX Commission for the Blind TX Society of Professional Engineers Various Sport Leagues Westside Business Association ATTACHMENT III City of Corpus Christi Draft Summary of Public Input on Proposed Non -Discrimination Ordinance Working Document - Human Relations Department The proposed ordinance of non-discrimination, to amend the existing Human Relations Ordinance, was recommended to the City Council by the Committee for Persons with Disabilities (CFPWD), after resolutions of support by the CFPWD and the Corpus Christi Human Relations Commission. This summary represents public comments received through interested citizens and organizations/associations, which had different levels of knowledge of accessibility guidelines and how to address issues for persons with disabilities. DATE SOURCE OF INPUT PUBLIC INPUT 7/17/2003 Public Meeting 1. Public Comment on why have this proposed non-discrimination ordinance instead of a Resolution by the City Council. 2. Public Comment on the definition of disability. 3. Public Comment on who is being discriminated and who is not. 4. Public Comment about solutions. 5. Public Comment that some meeting attendees know the ADA and are trying to comply, so what is the goal of this ordinance and who is the target. 6. Public Comment about losses and whose loss is it. 7. Public Comment that there is understanding about "holes in the net" but remarked that it is hard to understand why another law is needed since the ADA has enforcement element. 8. Public Comment on what is to be done if a business is not accessible, and if this would mean litigation. 9. Public Comment on if this is a communication tool, what is being done for enforcement. 10. Public Comment on a restaurant as an example and about enforcement. 11. Public Comment on if the City will be going out looking for contractors who are not complying. 12. Public Comment on having a checklist for business to comply. 13. Public Comment on who will make judgment calls on compliance. 14. Public Comment that if the City is monitoring and policing than this is more than a communication tool. 15. Public Comment of appreciation of "readily achievable" but believes that p.2 #4 is opening up the City and citizens to a lot. 16. Public Comment that anyone can claim any disability and this would be bad for tax payers and gave an example of how believes that a person could "ridiculously" use the ordinance as it is. 17. Public Comment about any other city the size of Corpus having an ordinance like this. 18. Public Comment that in order to make this work in the community, the City will have to enforce. 19. Public Comment on if there is anticipation of lawyers participating in legal litigation. 20. Public Comment that people can already contact TX Dept. of Licensing and Regulations (TDLR) for non- compliance. WORKING DRAFT 1 of 23 12/5/2003 City of Corpus Christi Draft Summary of Public Input on Proposed Non -Discrimination Ordinance Working Document - Human Relations Department The proposed ordinance of non-discrimination, to amend the existing Human Relations Ordinance, was recommended to the City Council by the Committee for Persons with Disabilities (CFPWD), after resolutions of support by the CFPWD and the Corpus Christi Human Relations Commission. This summary represents public comments received through interested citizens and organizationslassociations, which had different levels of knowledge of accessibility guidelines and how to address issues for persons with disabilities. DATE SOURCE OF INPUT PUBLIC INPUT 7/172003 Public Meeting - Cont. 21. Public Comment about why it is needed to state compliance again locally when the State already has something in place, yet acknowledges the we have to improve. 22. Public Comment about clarification that this ordinance applies to contractors that do not currently have a contract with the City. 23. Public Comment on fears and concerns and believes that the City never complies with 504 but that the City is totally responsible. 24. Public Comment that we should work together otherwise lawsuits will be brought. 25. Public Comment on toleration for many years and that the City is guilty. 26. Public Comment that City is doing, but it takes money. 27. Public Comment that people with disabilities represent 20 percent of the community. 28. Public Comment for more awareness and be more responsible. 29. Public Comment that this is like putting a gun to a person's head or else will sue. 30. Public Comment on if the City Code will change making City staff responsible to see that everything is ADA compliant. 31. Public Comment about the final decision will be made by the City Manager and what if this decision differs from the Texas Accessibility Standards (TAS). 32. Public Comment on why the City should prevent lawsuits if the state does not feel that it is important to do so. 33. Public Comment for clarification that the day's discussions have included two separate ordinances: the proposed non-discrimination ordinance and the accessibility chapter in the building code. 34. Public Comment of support on the proposed ordinance and that it is welcomed by the staff of Accessible Communities Inc. and also ACI's consumer control board. 35. Public Comment that remedy could mean many things and not just a lawsuit. 36. Public Comment that mediation is a choice versus litigation and noted that the process through the US Department of Justice DOJ is time-consuming of approximately two years. 37. Public Comment on the pros of this ordinance as being education, work out solution locally, and remedies for both sides. WORKING DRAFT 2of23 121512003 City of Corpus Christi Draft Summary of Public Input on Proposed Non -Discrimination Ordinance Working Document - Human Relations Department The proposed ordinance of non-discrimination, to amend the existing Human Relations Ordinance, was recommended to the City Council by the Committee for Persons with Disabilities (CFPWD), after resolutions of support by the CFPWD and the Corpus Christi Human Relations Commission. This summary represents public comments received through interested citizens and organizations/associations, which had different levels of knowledge of accessibility guidelines and how to address issues for persons with disabilities. DATE SOURCE OF INPUT PUBLIC INPUT 711712003 Public Meeting - Cont. 38. Public Comment of thanks to the Committee for Persons with Disabilities and City staff for showing ex ectation to do the right thing. 7/24/2003 Public Meeting 1. Public Comment that the proposed non-discrimination ordinance is a target for the City and/or contractors/lessors. 2. Public Comment on where does this ordinance go beyond the City, such as addressing fast food restaurants. 3. Public Comment on grievances on activities and services. 4. Public Comment that there appears to be no penalty on services, but yes on physical barriers. 5. Public Comment that a few things could be added to make the ordinance more clearer. 6. Public Comment in support of intent of ordinance, but not on the current draft. 7. Public Comment that the City should take a stand and show by example, and to do so not by mandate but by encouragement. 8. Encouraged staff to have a formal mechanism to be in place. 9. Public Comment in favor of the proposed ordinance. 10. Public Comment about the scrutiny of this ordinance. 11. Public Comment on were every ordinance having to go through such close scrutiny. 12. Public Comment on the ground work and budgeting of staff. 13. Public Comment regarding budgetary impact and that every ordinance could be traced back to the budget. 14. Public Comment to not dissect the ordinance on the basis of why not do the ordinance, and not base it on financial reasons and hopes that the determination on the ordinance is not made on cost. 15. Public Comment that there are holes or open areas in the ordinance and encouraged that the ordinance be viewed from the perspective of persons with disabilities. 16. Public Comment that services by the City or contractors have gaps and Public Comment on how exactly would it be handled by what mechanism. 17. Public Comment in offering to assist the Committee for Persons with Disabilities on this ordinance. 18. Public Comment for good results and thanks for good work. WORKING DRAFT 3of23 12/5/2003 City of Corpus Christi Draft Summary of Public Input on Proposed Non -Discrimination Ordinance Working Document - Human Relations Department The proposed ordinance of non-discrimination, to amend the existing Human Relations Ordinance, was recommended to the City Council by the Committee for Persons with Disabilities (CFPWD), after resolutions of support by the CFPWD and the Corpus Christi Human Relations Commission. This summary represents public comments received through interested citizens and organizations/associations, which had different levels of knowledge of accessibility guidelines and how to address issues for persons with disabilities. DATE SOURCE OF INPUT PUBLIC INPUT 7242003 Public Meeting - Cont. 19. Public Comment that Federal and State laws already exist so why do this locally, and believes that it is not needed as a third level. 20. Public Comment of support of this ordinance and wants doors opened not closed. 8/21/2003 Public Meeting 1. Public Comment that a restaurant chain's local establishment is an embarrassment [regarding accessibility for persons with disabilities]. 2. Public Comment that this proposed ordinance is preventative and also needed. 3. Public Comment on the need to remove architectual and program barriers. 4. Public Comment that passage of this ordinance would be proactive. 8/22/2003 Council of Government Regular Meeting 1. Members were encouraged to also attend an upcoming public meeting to give input, due to the late meeting hour. Officers mentioned possibly inviting the City back for any further discussion. 2. Public Comment that the ordinance could be used for punitive damages, as in Florida. 3. Public Comment to formally support the ordinance, however the day's discussion did not include the ordinance as an agenda action item for the Council of Governments (COG). 4. A Resolution of Support on this proposed ordinance was later passed by the COG at its October 2003 meeting. 9/3/2003 Regional Transportation Authority Board Meeting 1. During the public comments period of the board meeting's agenda, there was Public Comment of support of this ordinance. 2. Public Comment on the board's willingness to collaborate with the City on projects for accessibility. 3. Public Comment on requirements and compliance for places of public accommodations. 5. Public Comment about the City of Corpus Christi's compliance and its facilities being accessible, while enforcing this ordinance. 6. Regarding the City's transition plan, Public Comment about the duration to complete the citywide accessible curb ramps. 7. Public Comment on having a mechanism in place for individual curb ramp requests. WORKING DRAFT 4of23 1215/2003 City of Corpus Christi Draft Summary of Public Input on Proposed Non -Discrimination Ordinance Working Document - Human Relations Department The proposed ordinance of non-discrimination, to amend the existing Human Relations Ordinance, was recommended to the City Council by the Committee for Persons with Disabilities (CFPWD), after resolutions of support by the CFPWD and the Corpus Christi Human Relations Commission. This summary represents public comments received through interested citizens and organizations/associations, which had different levels of knowledge of accessibility guidelines and how to address issues for persons with disabilities. DATE SOURCE OF INPUT PUBLIC INPUT 9/3/2003- Regional Transportation Continued Authority Board Meeting 8. Public Comment of appreciation for efforts by City's ADA Coordinator, Mr. Ramos. 9. A Resolution of Support on this proposed ordinance was later passed by the RTA Board of Directors. 9/3/2003 CC Area Builders Association Members 1. Public Comment on existing ADA compliance. 2. Public Comment about modifying model homes for ADA compliance, and also those model homes that are used as offices, and associated expenses. 3. Public Comment on prior information/interpretation that a builder received from a governmental agency regarding model homes' ADA compliance; Public Comment on clarification per Department of Justice determination. 4. Public Comment expressing their desire to do the right thing and be in compliance. 9/4/2003 Westside Business Association Members 1. Public Comment about why the protected class of "disability" was left out of the original ordinance's provision for penalties. 2. Public Comment on if there was a set number of employees that require a business to meet ADA requirements. 3. Public Comment on the dollar limit for renovations that triggers the ADA requirements. 4. Public Comment about what the financial burden will be to the City and/or businesses. 5. Public Comment on how an undue burden or financial hardship would be determined. 6. Public Comment about businesses having to disclose financial information and about those documents becoming public documents; Confidentiality concerns were raised about a business' right to privacy. 7. Public Comment about alternatives, such as lawsuits, and the use of "financial burden" as an excuse, and on available funding sources. 8. Public Comment that it would be good to see how many have used "undue burden" as an excuse in the past. 9/512003 CEC-Texas C.C. Chapter Meeting 1. Public Comment about the members' responsibilities regarding leased space. 2. Public Comment about the requirements regarding auxiliary aids, and the impact of these on businesses. 3. Public Comment on if there will be local ADA reviews. WORKING DRAFT 5of23 12/5/2003 City of Corpus Christi Draft Summary of Public Input on Proposed Non -Discrimination Ordinance Working Document - Human Relations Department The proposed ordinance of non-discrimination, to amend the existing Human Relations Ordinance, was recommended to the City Council by the Committee for Persons with Disabilities (CFPWD), after resolutions of support by the CFPWD and the Corpus Christi Human Relations Commission. This summary represents public comments received through interested citizens and organizations/associations, which had different levels of knowledge of accessibility guidelines and how to address issues for persons with disabilities. DATE SOURCE OF INPUT PUBLIC INPUT 9/52003 CEC-Texas C.C. Chapter Meeting - Continued 4. Public Comment on Page 2, Item 4: 7 of 8 members present voted to recommend deletion of Item 4 verbiage. The concern was that the definition was too broad in scope. It was pointed out that this was straight out of the ADA, but persons present Public Comment on if either it could be deleted or a different definition given. Additional comment: 1, 2, and 3 are good, but wanted to know if it can be done without 4. 5. Public Comment regarding enforcement and the purpose of this ordinance and if this is the only way to do it. 6. Public Comment on what started this all and how much will it cost. 7. Public Comment on how much staff will work on this. 8. Public Comment on the fiscal impact to the City budget. 9. Public Comment on what jurisdiction does this cover. 9/4/2003 CC Restaurant Association Board Meeting 1. Public Comment on mediation/settlement locally through this ordinance's processes, and if the Department of Justice DOJ accepts such favorably. 2. Public Comment that the board is willing to include ordinance information in its newsletter. 3. Public Comment on fees for inspections regarding accessibility. 4. Public Comment that some board members are very familiar with the ADA and have provided consultations, and wanted to know what more will this ordinance do than the ADA requires. 5. Further Public Comment on promotion/awareness. 6. Public Comment on examples of non-compliance in and of local restaurants. 7. Public Comment on triggering events for accessibility improvements and corrections, including TX Dept. of Licensing and Regulations' DLRprocess and how to know if a business is in compliance or not. 8. Public Comment on examples of physical barrier removals, i.e.: restrooms, turnaround space. 9. Public Comment that it would also be good to contact architects regarding this ordinance. 10. Public Comment that board will share ordinance summary with its general membership. 11. Public Comment of compliance in smaller "mom/pop" businesses. WORKING DRAFT 6of23 1215/2003 City of Corpus Christi Draft Summary of Public Input on Proposed Non -Discrimination Ordinance Working Document - Human Relations Department The proposed ordinance of non-discrimination, to amend the existing Human Relations Ordinance, was recommended to the City Council by the Committee for Persons with Disabilities (CFPWD), after resolutions of support by the CFPWD and the Corpus Christi Human Relations Commission. This summary represents public comments received through interested citizens and organizations/associations, which had different levels of knowledge of accessibility guidelines and how to address issues for persons with disabilities. DATE SOURCE OF INPUT PUBLIC INPUT 9/9/2003 Del Mar College Board of Regents Regular Meeting 1. Due to time constraints, Del Mar College DMC will forward Public Comments. 9/912003 Meeting with Nueces 1. Public Comment about the meaning of the ordinance and suggested that comments come from others as well County ADA Liaison in the County who handle contracts. 9/10/2003 Hotel/Motel/Condo 1. Public Comment that this ordinance does not add more requirements but is adding another layer of Assoc. Board Meeting enforcement. 2. Public Comment on who handles (determines) exceptions to ordinance. 3. Public Comment on the benefit of having association members check with on compliance in advance of this ordinance for protection and clarification on such as triggering events & possible violations. 4. Public Comment that smaller operators (businesses) may not have information/resources. (Information on tax incentivesprovided.) 5. Public Comment on where this ordinance addresses Places of Public Accommodations. 6. Public Comment on forwarding this ordinance to Texas Hotel Lodging Association's Council and association members. 9/10/2003 CC Hispanic Chamber of Commerce Ambassadors' Meeting 1. Public Comment of support and help for all citizens. 2. Public Comment on grandfathering for older establishments. 3. Public Comment on who is enforcing the ADA law now. 4. Public Comment on if there is an ADA complaint against a governmental entity, where does the money come from to address (remedy), and is this from taxpayer dollars. 5. Public Comment on if this ordinance holds for (apply) to the City's programs also, after the person stated that they experienced an inability to access a City swimming program at the Natatorium for her child who has a co nitive disability; and on the availability of and meeting of accommodations, such as inyouth/recreation. WORKING DRAFT 7of23 12/5/2003 City of Corpus Christi Draft Summary of Public Input on Proposed Non -Discrimination Ordinance Working Document - Human Relations Department The proposed ordinance of non-discrimination, to amend the existing Human Relations Ordinance, was recommended to the City Council by the Committee for Persons with Disabilities (CFPWD), after resolutions of support by the CFPWD and the Corpus Christi Human Relations Commission. This summary represents public comments received through interested citizens and organizations/associations, which had different levels of knowledge of accessibility guidelines and how to address issues for persons with disabilities. DATE SOURCE OF INPUT PUBLIC INPUT 9/10/2003- CC Hispanic Chamber of Continued Commerce Ambassadors 6. Public Comment that some disabilities are obvious, but other are not, such as mental disabilities. 7. Public Comment for copy of the ordinance itself, for possible Chamber Chairperson review. 9/11/2003 Public Meeting 1. Public Comment on ordinance regarding accessibility to festivals, carnivals andparades; such as "Buc Days" 2. Public Comment of interest in receiving copy of any public comments 3. Public Comment of support and movement in a positive direction. 4. Public Comment of support and where does local college fit in regarding this ordinance. 5. Public Comment about contracts with City and where the parties interlink. 6. Public Comment of providing an assurance, in contracting with City, that ALL areas are compliant. 7. Public Comment on enforcement of this ordinance. 8. Public Comment that relationship with the City does not change a party's ADA responsibilities. 9. Public Comment of clear goal/objective for facilities, then services, activities, programs and to what extent being equal and meeting special accommodations. 10. Public Comment on broadness of #7 on page 4 and where located in the ADA. 11. Public Comment of lack of ADA awareness for some businesses. 12. Public Comment about any grandfather clause(s). 13. Public Comment that places (businesses) have the money for accessibility. 14. Public Comment of curb ramps and lack thereof around police department. 15. Public Comment on ideas/projects for juveniles and how to go about them. 16. Public Comment on how to get more information as a person using a wheelchair. 9/17/2003 Minority Business Council Board Meeting 1. Public Comment of opinion that 2/3 of restaurants within City do not comply. 2. Public Comment about what happens to those who cannot prove accessibility. 3. Public Comment that fines could be cumbersome. 4. Public Comment on customers switching to another restaurant for greater accessibility. WORKING DRAFT 8of23 1215/2003 City of Corpus Christi Draft Summary of Public Input on Proposed Non -Discrimination Ordinance Working Document - Human Relations Department The proposed ordinance of non-discrimination, to amend the existing Human Relations Ordinance, was recommended to the City Council by the Committee for Persons with Disabilities (CFPWD), after resolutions of support by the CFPWD and the Corpus Christi Human Relations Commission. This summary represents public comments received through interested citizens and organizations/associations, which had different levels of knowledge of accessibility guidelines and how to address issues for persons with disabilities. DATE SOURCE OF INPUT PUBLIC INPUT 9117/2003- Minority Business Coundl Continued Board Meeting 5. Public Comment on clarification on restaurants being a public facility; Undue burden. 6. Public Comment for examples on why there is a need for this ordinance. 7. Public Comment on fine amounts. 6. Public Comment on what they need to know about this ordinance. 9. Public Comment about subcontractors in relationship to this ordinance. 10. Public Comment on contracts that are issued on an "as needed" basis to persons or businesses. 9/22/2003 CC Black Chamber of Commerce Board Meeting 1. Public Comment about smaller "mom -pop" businesses and their ADA responsibilities. 2. Public Comment about accessibility in churches. 3. Public Comment about accessibility requirements for home -businesses. 10/11/2003 Public Meeting No public attendance. 10/13/2003 Various Sports League Representatives 1. Public Comment on leagues by ages, facilities/field locations broken out by ages. 2. Public Comment on Participation/Evaluations in that normally any applicant is included. Exception: Football must have a physical by a doctor, who states if the individual can play. 3. Public Comment that no one is turned down for little league. They even have helmets with masks and heart padding covers. 4. Public Comment of not having started to build new concession stand and restrooms due to increased cost. Have to do additional fund raising. 5. Public Comment about what type of access is needed; example of one League having 34 Acres and 21 fields, bridge access. 6. Public Comment on the type of and extent of accessibility needed when going out to the field. 7. Public Comment on the number of available fields (i.e.: percentage) needed for accessibility, including the route, length of field, and both sides. WORKING DRAFT 9of23 12/5/2003 City of Corpus Christi Draft Summary of Public Input on Proposed Non -Discrimination Ordinance Working Document - Human Relations Department The proposed ordinance of non-discrimination, to amend the existing Human Relations Ordinance, was recommended to the City Council by the Committee for Persons with Disabilities (CFPWD), after resolutions of support by the CFPWD and the Corpus Christi Human Relations Commission. This summary represents public comments received through interested citizens and organizations/associations, which had different levels of knowledge of accessibility guidelines and how to address issues for persons with disabilities. DATE SOURCE OF INPUT PUBLIC INPUT 10/13/2003 Various Sports Leagues - Continued Continued 8. Public Comment that there is no set schedule or location to fields, it various by age and group, etc. 9. Public Comment of having any kind of courtesy review of the facility, and getting guidance on what is needed. 10. Public Comment on safety issue regarding having concrete/sidewalk on fields. 11. Public Comment that they do not have to pour sidewalk; possibly just make a level, cleared ground/path. 12. Public Comment on when there is a lot of rain, wet grounds do not allow for wheelchairs. 13. Public Comment that the grounds would be wet, muddy to any person attending. 14. Public Comment about the leagues being contacted or having representation when they [the Committee] were develo ing the ordinance. 15. Public Comment about not having any league members on the Committee. 16. Public Comment on the Santa Fe League is in a City Park and 7 fields crowded at one end. When it rains, parents watch from the sidewalk. Public Comment about this being a compliant. There are no designated spots. One field was moved to an elementary school because the old field is under water. Public Comment about whether the City will help the leagues or will they have to do it themselves. 17. Public Comment on whether the leagues are going to receive any funding on this or will it be at the league's expense. 18. Public Comment that some of the leagues are very small and do not have much funding. 19. Public Comment that these are City properties and concerned about if one accessible restroom is enough and the use of signage to direct people from the other non -accessible restroom. 20. Public Comment that the accessible restrooms that are kept locked, and concerned about how the leagues could use these with or without City staff person present. Possibly someone [in the league] can have the responsibility of unlocking and locking the restrooms. They are willing to help clean the restrooms. 21. Public Comment about lack of finance and lack of space being considered when looking at a situation. 22. Public Comment that one league was told to remove the skid -o -can. 23. Public Comment - Southside Little League is accessible, but the kickball, pop warner and soccer leagues are 1/2 a mile away and are not accessible. WORKING DRAFT 10 of 23 1215/2003 City of Corpus Christi Draft Summary of Public Input on Proposed Non -Discrimination Ordinance Working Document - Human Relations Department The proposed ordinance of non-discrimination, to amend the existing Human Relations Ordinance, was recommended to the City Council by the Committee for Persons with Disabilities (CFPWD), after resolutions of support by the CFPWD and the Corpus Christi Human Relations Commission. This summary represents public comments received through interested citizens and organizationslassociations, which had different levels of knowledge of accessibility guidelines and how to address issues for persons with disabilities. DATE SOURCE OF INPUT PUBLIC INPUT 10/13/2003 Various Sports Leagues - Continued Continued 24. Public Comment on who is the decision maker on this and if the determination can change on a case -by - case basis. 25. Public Comment about leagues being allowed a grace period to comply. 26. Public Comment on the effective date when the ordinance is implemented and for those contracts already in effect. 27. Public Comment about Price Field's restroom is kept lock, but possibly the City could let them use the restroom. 28. Public Comment on about Accessible Parking and the responsibility of enforcing it. Public Comment that in the past, the Corpus Christi Police Department (CCPD) has not addressed it. Public Comment that they [the leagues] cannot remove the violator and that it is not the leagues responsibility, but rather it should be CCPD. 29. Public Comment about having a grandfather clause. 30. Public Comment about the leagues being responsible for Auxiliary Aides, interpreters and TTY equipment. 31. Public Comment about the Press Box having to be accessible. 32. Public Comment on Parking lot problems, such as grass build up, no accessible parking, lines must be clear, sign must be so high or tickets will be dismissed), etc. 33. Public Comment about the feasibility of getting each field inspected, to see what is needed to be compliant. 34. Public Comment about the City sending information on the minimum requirements, something to start on what the leagues are looking at [facing]. 35. Public Comment that by conducting a study to identify all the deficiencies, we [the leagues] possibly could apply for a federal grant to make the necessary changes. Bottom line - funds. 36. Public Comment about any ADA funds that the Leagues could apply for. 37. Public Comment that in the past, the leagues have been told they cannot use CDBG funds for cement, black tops, etc. CDBG has some restrictions. 38. Public Comment on Little League safety issue that they cannot have concrete or sidewalks to close to the field, etc. WORKING DRAFT 11 of 23 12/512003 City of Corpus Christi Draft Summary of Public Input on Proposed Non -Discrimination Ordinance Working Document - Human Relations Department The proposed ordinance of non-discrimination, to amend the existing Human Relations Ordinance, was recommended to the City Council by the Committee for Persons with Disabilities (CFPWD), after resolutions of support by the CFPWD and the Corpus Christi Human Relations Commission. This summary represents public comments received through interested citizens and organizationslassociations, which had different levels of knowiedge of accessibility guidelines and how to address issues for persons with disabilities. DATE SOURCE OF INPUT PUBLIC INPUT 10/13/2003 Various Sports Leagues - Continued Continued 39. Public Comment that something is needed, a safe route - not a designated walk -way. Just a designated area where reasonable, smooth path to get there. Need to be without barrier, a path free of holes. 40. Public Comment about the parking lots being in compliance and having to be paved all the way around to the other fields. 41. Public Comment on having to level routes of some fields that were put in later than others. Need to look at options and possibly schedule around it to assist with accommodation issues. 42. Public Comment that each league caters to group by field, age and group. The City needs to set some monies aside for it. 43. Public Comment on compliance for level accessible routes in not having to build sidewalks if there is a flat area, or make the area flat. 44. Public Comment that you need to do this on a one by one situation. 45. Public Comment about assessing locations for compliance through possibly appointments with the City and then tell the league how long it has to comply. We will need Park and Recreation's assistance. 46. Public Comment about the timing issue and period of time for transition. 47. Public Comment about before the ordinance and how much time is available to fix this. 48. Public Comment that this is a great ordinance, but 60 days to fix any problems would be hard. 49. Public Comment about getting the leagues trained to do assessments, and comment that they are willing to o for training. 50. Public Comment about what triggered this ordinance and if it was a complaint. 51. Public Comment on parking at tournaments, and comment on the need to consider issues that may arise during tournaments. 10114/2003 MR Advisory Committee of MHMR 1. Public Comment about how this ordinance is different from the ADA. 2. Public Comment on expanding summer programming [with City]. Public Comment on why this ordinance has come and if it is to assure accessibility to programs. 3. Public Comment to clarify that this ordinance is not just for the City but also for those it contracts with. WORKING DRAFT 12 of 23 12/5/2003 City of Corpus Christi Draft Summary of Public Input on Proposed Non -Discrimination Ordinance Working Document - Human Relations Department The proposed ordinance of non-discrimination, to amend the existing Human Relations Ordinance, was recommended to the City Council by the Committee for Persons with Disabilities (CFPWD), after resolutions of support by the CFPWD and the Corpus Christi Human Relations Commission. This summary represents public comments received through interested citizens and organizations/associations, which had different levels of knowledge of accessibility guidelines and how to address issues for persons with disabilities. DATE SOURCE OF INPUT PUBLIC INPUT 1011412003 - MR Advisory Committee of Continued MHMR 4. Public Comment that reasonable accommodations should be done within regular programs; full spectrum of responses to persons with disabilities wanting to participate in programs. 5. Public Comment that the City's Park & Recreation is making adjustments and moving in the right direction; Public Comment on who to contact to work with on having a vehicle in place to act before complaints come in. 6. Public Comment about if modifications required, Le.: sidewalk, will passage of this ordinance make people do something reasonable. 7. A Resolution of Support was later passed by the Nueces County MHMR Board of Trustees. 10/16/2003 CC Chamber of Commerce's Public Policy Task Force Meebnq 1. Public Comment about applying this ordinance to public utilities contracts with businesses, gasoline, Downtown Business Zone; Because every business has a contract for utilities. 2. Public Comment about homes that are not for the public. 3. Public Comment on the term "contractors" and the need for clarification. 4. Public Comment that they understand the intent, but concerned about looking at it if a complaint is made. 5. Public Comment about extremely broad language without a clearer definition and any attempt to clean up that language. 6. Public Comment that "contractor" could be defined and an example given of "Quid Pro Quo" on utility verbiage. 7. Public Comment on why the ADA is not sufficient. 8. Public Comment about why is this at a higher standard than ADA. 9. Public Comment about who is considered to be a contractor, and if it applies when the City hires a lawyer, business utilities, purchases gas, car washes, etc. Public Comment that it imposes standards on all. Public Comment about what is considered to be outside of procurement; and possibly define procurement. 10. Public Comment that it might be better if some language could be added to definitions. 11. Public Comment on wording if providing services, then give some examples, such as the Arena, Home Services, etc. WORKING DRAFT 13 of 23 12/5/2003 City of Corpus Christi Draft Summary of Public Input on Proposed Non -Discrimination Ordinance Working Document - Human Relations Department The proposed ordinance of non-discrimination, to amend the existing Human Relations Ordinance, was recommended to the City Council by the Committee for Persons with Disabilities (CFPWD), after resolutions of support by the CFPWD and the Corpus Christi Human Relations Commission. This summary represents public comments received through interested citizens and organizationslassociations, which had different levels of knowledge of accessibility guidelines and how to address issues for persons with disabilities. DATE SOURCE OF INPUT PUBLIC INPUT 10/1fv2003 CC Chamber- Public Policy Continued Task Force Continued lcommunity 12. Public Comment on the impact this ordinance has on any home that is remodeled, and whether they all have to be designed for persons with disabilities. 13. Public Comment about multiple dwellings. 14. Public Comment about first time home buyers. 15. Public Comment about home improvement loans. 16. Public Comment about Non -Profit Groups in that all types of things, such as the Jazz Society and those receiving various monies must be accessible. 17. Public Comment that if going to have an ordinance, get rid of the ambiguity and have clearer definitions. 18. Public Comment about why we need this. 19. Public Comment about the reason of imposing another additional burden on the City. 20. Public Comment that there appears to be a lot of confusion; why we have not been making progress with ADA; and knowing what are some examples of missing the mark. 21. Public Comment about whether this is to put the City in a proactive position for enforcement. 22. Public Comment about the City already having specific penalties in place for discrimination. 23. Public Comment on whether we already have a mediation process. 24. Public Comment about the number of time that we have to enforce or have they been enforced. 25. Public Comment on the reason of having to enforce it. 26. Public Comment on whether the present ordinance be modified. 27. Public Comment about knowing if the City gets DOJ funds for enforcement. 28. Public Comment that in theory, this ordinance is good, but does it put them in place as a mediator or having to monitor for enforcement; Or do they have to go out and look for problems with each of them. 29. Public Comment about small businesses and if this requires that they have items such as TTY; and if this is required, what would be the level of requirement. 30. Public Comment that what you are trying to accomplish is wonderful. But it may not be seen by the and businesses as such. They may think you are out to get them. 31. Public Comment in favor of a possible Public Education/Outreach Program. 32. Public Comment about why not just change the existing ordinance. WORKING DRAFT 14 of 23 12/5/2003 City of Corpus Christi Draft Summary of Public Input on Proposed Non -Discrimination Ordinance Working Document - Human Relations Department The proposed ordinance of non-discrimination, to amend the existing Human Relations Ordinance, was recommended to the City Council by the Committee for Persons with Disabilities (CFPWD), after resolutions of support by the CFPWD and the Corpus Christi Human Relations Commission. This summary represents public comments received through interested citizens and organizations/associations, which had different levels of knowledge of accessibility guidelines and how to address issues for persons with disabilities. DATE SOURCE OF INPUT PUBLIC INPUT 1011612003 CC Chamber- Public Policy Continued Task Force Continued 33. Public Comment that it would be good to have some helpful books/fact sheets about ADA, the authority to enforce and promote it, instead of a new ordinance. It might be difficult to get into all the unknown issues. 34. Public Comment that it might be better to get a separate Compliance Officer for only disability and ADA related issues. 35. Public Comment on that would not appear to make it a higher level of requirement. 36. Public Comment about why we could not add disability to the existing enforcement clause. 37. Public Comment that this ordinance will make it more difficult and confusing for the City and others. Go at it from a better information tool and go after it by looking at it from that perspective and be proactive. 38. Public Comment about how to move forward in a positive way without the negatives. 39. Public Comment on whether the goal is to affect change. 40. Public Comment about the current ordinance not having a penalty for disability related discrimination. 41. Public Comment that does not all City contracts have boiler plate language about compliance. 42. Public Comment that even if not in the contract, they would still have comply. 43. Public Comment about using the example of the Ice Rayz, and would it not be sufficient if we just changed the existing ordinance. 44. Public Comment that if we just imposed language on penalties, this could deal with it. 45. Public Comment about whether the Human Relations Ordinance is referenced in contract language. 46. Public Comment that if this is passed, will it be referenced in contract language. 47. Public Comment on whether this will be enforced if this is done [passed]. 48. Public Comment that if this would be generated by complaints, why wouldn't there be compliance. We could still enforce it at the local level. 49. Public Comment about the ordinance's impact on a complaint if it is an employee who says or does something inappropriately or in opposition to company or entities position regarding ADA accessibility, etc. 50. Public Comment that the City have an employee policy and/or orientation process to train staff on ADA related issues. WORKING DRAFT 15 of 23 12/512003 City of Corpus Christi Draft Summary of Public Input on Proposed Non -Discrimination Ordinance Working Document - Human Relations Department The proposed ordinance of non-discrimination, to amend the existing Human Relations Ordinance, was recommended to the City Council by the Committee for Persons with Disabilities (CFPWD), after resolutions of support by the CFPWD and the Corpus Christi Human Relations Commission. This summary represents public comments received through interested citizens and organizations/associations, which had different levels of knowledge of accessibility guidelines and how to address issues for persons with disabilities. DATE SOURCE OF INPUT PUBLIC INPUT 1011('x2003 CC Chamber -Public Policy 51. Public Comment on the need for close captioning for the Council Meeting, and whether a person with a Continued Task Force disability would really want to listen to the Council Meeting. Continued 52. Public Comment on why a would a person with a disability want to go to a Doctor's Office or Dentist Office or place of business, if they had to file a complaint in the first place to get the service. They could just go somewhere else. They would not have to wait the one or two years for DOJ to make a determination. 10/17/2003 Accessibility Coalition Regular Meeting 1. Public Comment on if the assurance form/language was yet available and deadline. 2. Public Comment on if persons with disabilities [citizens] can attend the City Manager's business meetings with the various associations. 3. Public Comment on the City's position on Sec.24-84(a) - last part of sentence, regarding the difference(s) between this and how the ordinance would apply to ANY entity that contract with the City. 4. Public Comment that the definition of "financial assistance" would not mean or apply to just any entity that does business with the City. 5. Public Comment that this City position was not discussed with the Committee for Persons with Disabilities and came up after the City Council presentation in July 2003. 6. Public Comment that if a business is not providing a service or program on behalf of the City or is not a Place of Public Accommodation, then the ordinance should not apply. 7. Public Comment on about implication that this ordinance applies to "all entities and contractors" in having to make all of their facilities comply, especially for those contractors whose facilities are not opened to the general public. 8. Public Comment to reword language to clarify. 9. Public Comment about how this ordinance is more than the ADA. 10. Public Comment that the City's "what you should know" information sheet does not match the proposed non- discrimination ordinance, and that City staff should just cite the ordinance language during its presentation meetings in the community. 11. Public Comment to include education/awareness to increase dialogue. 12. Public Comment of support of this ordinance and intent of a Resolution of Support. WORKING DRAFT 16 of 23 12/5/2003 City of Corpus Christi Draft Summary of Public Input on Proposed Non -Discrimination Ordinance Working Document - Human Relations Department The proposed ordinance of non-discrimination, to amend the existing Human Relations Ordinance, was recommended to the City Council by the Committee for Persons with Disabilities (CFPWD), after resolutions of support by the CFPWD and the Corpus Christi Human Relations Commission. This summary represents public comments received through interested citizens and organizations/associations, which had different levels of knowledge of accessibility guidelines and how to address issues for persons with disabilities. DATE SOURCE OF INPUT PUBLIC INPUT 10/28/2003 CC Independent School District's Sr. Management 1. Public Comment about the intent of this ordinance. 2. Public Comment that this ordinance appears to repeat federal requirements. 3. Public Comment on how this ordinance relates to older versus new facilities. 4. Public Comment on programs and the difference for compliance if an organization does not have a contract with the City. 5. Public Comment about if the ordinance applies only to that service/program that is under contract with the City, or does the ordinance apply in a "wide open door" for that contractor's other programs, services, facilities, etc. 6. Public Comment on the ordinance bringing "teeth" to what agencies should already being doing for accessibility. 7. Public Comment on if the intent of the ordinance is to go beyond the ADA; including an example of on facility having multiple sets of restrooms in that they all have to be accessible. 8. Public Comment on for the City's point of view in the ordinance applying to just the contracted organization's one program or applies to all of the organization's programs and buildings. 9. Public Comment on if there is a willingness to amend the ordinance to change wording, as the school district may have some suggestions. 10. Public Comment on enforcement and fines; what are the maximum fine amounts. 11. Public Comment that the District is sensitive and wants to be compliant, yet concerned about timeframe of implementing the ordinance due to constraints of time and money. 12. Public Comment on once the ordinance is adopted, will there be any lead time or grace period to comply with the ordinance requirements. 13. Public Comment to reiterate that the District wants to be compliant. 14. The District sent a letter as a statement of opposition to the proposed ordinance, (dated 11/24/03). 15. Public Comment of already existing certain federal and state laws prohibiting public entities from discrimination against individuals with disabilities. WORKING DRAFT 17 of 23 12/5/2003 City of Corpus Christi Draft Summary of Public Input on Proposed Non -Discrimination Ordinance Working Document - Human Relations Department The proposed ordinance of non-discrimination, to amend the existing Human Relations Ordinance, was recommended to the City Council by the Committee for Persons with Disabilities (CFPWD), after resolutions of support by the CFPWD and the Corpus Christi Human Relations Commission. This summary represents public comments received through interested citizens and organizationstassociations, which had different levels of knowledge of accessibility guidelines and how to address issues for persons with disabilities. DATE SOURCE OF INPUT PUBLIC INPUT CCISD - Continued 16. Public Comment that this proposed ordinance does not appear to create any new coverage in connection with any aspect of the activities of local governmental units such as the school district. 17. Public Comment that the ordinance will not provide any new rights fro students or other individuals using the District's activities/prog activities/prorams and that it could likely create new and costly burdens on the District. 18. Public Comment that the District is committed to complying with all existing state and federal laws on non- discrimination against individuals with disabilities. 19. Public Comment that the ordinance should be revised to excluded those classes of entities that are already thoroughly regulated by state and federal law, such as the District. 20. Public Comment requesting that governmental entities that contract with the City be excluded. 11/4/2003 Public Meeting 1. Public Comment of highly supporting the passage of this ordinance by a person who stated that they had resented a document on accessibility to the City Council back in the late 1980's or early 1990's. 2. Public Comment of full support by CCISD for the rights of individuals with disabilities and compliance with the ADA law. 3. Public Comment that CCISD is currently conducting a comprehensive study of its facilities and plans to address accordingly; This proposed ordinance has been a benefit in that its highlighted the need to include an ADA accessment. 4. Public Comment of support for compliance under Title II of the ADA. 5. Public Comment on the applicability of this ordinance to the school district and the potential of additional litigation, costs and time expended in response to complaints and also the cost of complaints. 6. Public Comment that this ordinance is duplicative of Title II of the ADA and its enforcement, and therefore respectfully requests that the ordinance be amended to create an exception for governmental entities that have contracts with the City because Title II provides a comprehensive and sufficient avenue for enforcement. 7. Public Comment to applaud the CFPWD's and City's efforts in pursuing this ordinance, especially for private entities that may fall through the loop holes in the ADA. 8. Public Comment that unsure if we have not address the issue of Corpus Christi's tourism dollars that includes those coming from many older tourists. The aging population who are less able but do not consider themselves as having a "disability" -just older; Since the body slowly loses ability as it ages, they [aging population] need an accessible environment also. WORKING DRAFT 18 of 23 12/512003 City of Corpus Christi Draft Summary of Public Input on Proposed Non -Discrimination Ordinance Working Document - Human Relations Department The proposed ordinance of non-discrimination, to amend the existing Human Relations Ordinance, was recommended to the City Council by the Committee for Persons with Disabilities (CFPWD), after resolutions of support by the CFPWD and the Corpus Christi Human Relations Commission. This summary represents public comments received through interested citizens and organizationslassociations, which had different levels of knowledge of accessibility guidelines and how to address issues for persons with disabilities. DATE SOURCE OF INPUT PUBLIC INPUT 11/4/2003- Public Meeting - Continued 9. Public Comment that this ordiance benefits not only citizens but tourists also. Continued 10. Public Comment to school districts and others that many parent do not know that the ordinance [existing Human Relations Ordinance on the books] does not cover "disabilities'; parents of children and those with disabilities know that the Citys existing ordinance does not cover "disability". 11. Public Comment that although there's knowledge of the ADA, it has been 13 year - even the City is not in compliance yet. 12. Public Comment that the proposed ordinance needs to be done, it needs to show that Corpus Christi supports its disabled citizens. 11/20/2003 RTA Advisory Board 1. Public Comment of being a proud member of the Committee for Persons with Disabilities and is a favorite committee. 2. Public Comment to mention that the RTA Board of Directors had passed a resolution in support of the proposed ordinance. 3. Public Comment commending the part that the City has taken on the proposed ordinance. 4. Public Comment in acknowleding that transportation service issues are important to the City's Human Relations Director. 11/20/2003 Hard of Hearing Centers Consumer Board 1. Public Comment that the Human Relations presentation and ordinance were "singing to the choir". 2. Public Comment on the importance of program accessibility for children with hearing loss/impairments. 3. Public Comment on whether businesses are willing to adhere to accessibility. 4. Public Comment on the minimum number of employees (15) that a business must have in order to fall under the federal requirements of the ADA. 5. Public Comment about hiring persons with disabilities after the ADA was passed and possibly obtaining statistics. WORKING DRAFT 19 of 23 12/5/2003 City of Corpus Christi Draft Summary of Public Input on Proposed Non -Discrimination Ordinance Working Document - Human Relations Department The proposed ordinance of non-discrimination, to amend the existing Human Relations Ordinance, was recommended to the City Council by the Committee for Persons with Disabilities (CFPWD), after resolutions of support by the CFPWD and the Corpus Christi Human Relations Commission. This summary represents public comments received through interested citizens and organizations/associations, which had different levels of knowledge of accessibility guidelines and how to address issues for persons with disabilities. DATE SOURCE OF INPUT PUBLIC INPUT 8/15/2003 Citizen Public Comment: Telge 1. Public Comment on if the City identifies staffing levels and budget implications for all ordinances. 2. Public Comment on if the City provides mechanisms to generate revenue to support appropriate staffing levels for other ordinances. 3. Public Comment that implementation of this ordinance, as all ordinances, should provide remedy and relief for the public, as well as protection. If implemented correctly, it would not pose unreasonable administrative or financial burden. 4. Suggested an annual budget for the City's Human Relations Department to implement this ordinance: One additional staff person, 100% dedicated to ADA & Ordinance education, compliance & resolution - $60,000 Printing of notices, educational sheets, hand-outs - $20,000 Training of City staff - $10,000 Mediation Fees (market rate) - $20,000 $110,000 5. Pubic Comment offerring a scenario of compliance and also non-compliance of a Place of Public Accommodation that has a contract with the City. 6. Public Comment also offerring a draft remediation process to address a Place of Public Accommodation that has a contract with the City. 9/18/2003 Citizen Public Comment: Pursley 1. Public Comment on the definition of "City" versus "city". 2. Public Comment to make this ordinance a correct document to include all titles of the ADA. 3. Public Comment on what are the "areas" that need to be communicated to the community for areas of accessibility. 4. Public Comment about the "need" for the non-discrimination ordinance. 5. Public Comment about what laws are we [the City] enforcing: ADA, TAS, and Chapter 11. 6. Public Comment that when the City levies a fine, it is doing enforcement. WORKING DRAFT 20 of 23 12/5/2003 City of Corpus Christi Draft Summary of Public Input on Proposed Non -Discrimination Ordinance Working Document - Human Relations Department The proposed ordinance of non-discrimination, to amend the existing Human Relations Ordinance, was recommended to the City Council by the Committee for Persons with Disabilities (CFPWD), after resolutions of support by the CFPWD and the Corpus Christi Human Relations Commission. This summary represents public comments received through interested citizens and organizations/associations, which had different levels of knowledge of accessibility guidelines and how to address issues for persons with disabilities. DATE SOURCE OF INPUT PUBLIC INPUT 9/18/2003 Citizen Public Comment: 7. Public Comment that the City needs to adopt a code that addresses accessibility. Pursley - Continued 8. Public Comment about what the City of Austin is doing on this ordinance. 9. Public Comment on how Austin is enforcing Title III of the ADA legally. 10. Public Comment about if there is a real need for the non-discrimination ordinance. 11. Public Comment of wanting to know what standards are used for enforcement. 12. Public Comment that the best standard is Chapter 11. 9/19/2003 Citizen Public Comment: McGovern 1. Public Comment to define the word "qualified" in Sec. 24-84 - Declaration of Policy. 2. In Sec. 24-84(b) on page 1, comment to add wording to the end of last sentence after "City": "in the most integrated setting". 3. Public Comment to add word "recreating" to list of major life activities. 4. Public Comment to add a new section after definitions as "Sec. 24-86" entitled "Requesting Reasonable Modifications or Accommodations" to discuss how the City will proceed and incorporate case law (Anderson) and the statute under 28CFR35. 5. Public Comment to add the wording "extra staff' to list under the definition of Qualified individual with a disability - after "practices". 6. Public Comment that the "readily achievable" test is not used in Title 11 - Public Entities but only Title III - Places of Public Accommodations; for CC and other cities, barrier removal is decided by the Program Access test (see 28CFR35.149,150). 7. Public Comment that under Communications, it imposes requirements for 911 systems too and it may be appropriate to reference that in Sec. 24-86 Communications. 8. Public Comment that Sec 24-89 on undue burden does not seem to describe the text. 9. Public Comment that there should be some discussion about the transition plan after Sec. 24-91 regarding identifying barriers and removal. WORKING DRAFT 21 of 23 121512003 City of Corpus Christi Draft Summary of Public Input on Proposed Non -Discrimination Ordinance Working Document - Human Relations Department The proposed ordinance of non-discrimination, to amend the existing Human Relations Ordinance, was recommended to the City Council by the Committee for Persons with Disabilities (CFPWD), after resolutions of support by the CFPWD and the Corpus Christi Human Relations Commission. This summary represents public comments received through interested citizens and organizations/associations, which had different levels of knowledge of accessibility guidelines and how to address issues for persons with disabilities. DATE SOURCE OF INPUT PUBLIC INPUT 9/19/2003 Citizen Public Comment., 10. Public Comment that under Sec. 24-92 on designated coordinator and grievance procedure that City McGovern -Continued departments with significant public contact such as Police, Parks & Rec and others shall designate one employee to coordinate departmental efforts to comply with this article. 11. Public Comment under the requirements to insure accessibility Sec.24-94(f) that if TAS has been certified by USDOJ as being equal to or more stringent than ADAAG, this section is okay. If not, then ADAAG should be reference too. 12. Public Commented that Sec.24-96 (g) is "good". 12/2/2003 American Institute of 1. Public Comment that this ordinance would be unfair to group private enterprise into a category that must and 12/3/03 Architects - CC Chapter comply with ALL of the same requirements that government entities do just because we do business with those entities; This ordinance is just another step in that direction. Commented against the proposed ordinance 2. Public Comment dated 12/02/03 of not being in favor of passage of this ordinance as written. 3. Public Comment that ordinances are supposed to improve/create a better situation for some citizens, but many times these ordinance have the opposite effect; They put up more barriers than they take down. 4. Public Comment that the ADA legislation has been in place over 10 years and has had a positive impact in many areas. However, in looking closely at the legislation, you will find that the term" Disability' has a broad meaning from both a physical and mental aspect. 5. Public Comment that the ADA legislation uses the term "accommodation" when it discusses how to address the various circumstances that existing facilities must address to accommodate various types of disabilities. 6. Public Comment of dealing with these issues daily as an architect and can testify first hand that this legislation has assisted a small group of folks with physical disabilities and a larger, broader group of mentally disabled people. 7. Public Comment that there is currently federal law in place that addresses the same issues and provides various means of remedies; and of the opinion that the city does not need another Ordinance that basically covers the same area; If passed, there would be another level of government added that will just increase the cost of operations. WORKING DRAFT 22 of 23 12/5/2003 City of Corpus Christi Draft Summary of Public Input on Proposed Non -Discrimination Ordinance Working Document - Human Relations Department The proposed ordinance of non-discrimination, to amend the existing Human Relations Ordinance, was recommended to the City Council by the Committee for Persons with Disabilities (CFPWD), after resolutions of support by the CFPWD and the Corpus Christi Human Relations Commission. This summary represents public comments received through interested citizens and organizations/associations, which had different levels of knowledge of accessibility guidelines and how to address issues for persons with disabilities. DATE SOURCE OF INPUT PUBLIC INPUT 12/2&3/03 Archftects' Comments - 8. Public Comment that if the city wants to pass an ordinance, it should take the issue back to the committee Continued and develop a more in dept approach and take away the many gray areas in the ordinance. EX: Current guidelines dealing with making buildings accessible for the physically handicapped are over 80 pages long and there are still many gray areas that come under interpretation each day. 9. Public Comment that if the city wants to do the right thing, then more work is required prior to any passage of an ordinance of this magnitude. 10. Public Comment the we understand the proposed ordinance to be an unnecessary piece of legislation due to the current stringent requirements by the state, federal and city. 11. Public Comment that the present legislation in place adequately covers the needs of persons with disabilities. 12. Public Comment that there are new IBC Building Code requirements and revised TX Dept. of Insurance Windstorm requirements now in effect and would be a consideration in adding additional requirements. 13. Public Comment hoping that the City Council will not adopt this ordinance since it would appear to be unnecessa in view of the voluminous ordinances and rules now in place. WORKING DRAFT 23 of 23 12/5/2003 ATTACHMENT IV ADA NON DISCRIMINATION ORDINANCE SURVEY SUMMARY OF TOP 25 CITIES BY SIZE AND POPULATION QUESTION POSED: DO YOU HAVE A NDO THAT ADDRESSES ADA AND DISABILITY RELATED ISSUES? QUESTION POSED: DO YOU HAVE CONTRACT LANGUAGE TO ENSURE ADA COMPLIANCE BY CONTRACTORS? NOTE: BEGAN INITIAL CALLS TO CITIES ON JULY 17 2005 AND CONTINUED WITH FOLLOW-UP CALLS CITY TOP CITY RANKING ORDINANCE New York, NY 1 Unknown RESPONSE Left message. Response pending. CITY TOP CITY RANKING ORDINANCE Los Angels, CA 2 YES RESPONSE Ordinances in City Charter, under Admin. Code, Div. 8, Chap. 20 1. The City has some ordinances and coverage in this area. 2. They have contract provision in all city contracts about non-discrimination and the requirement to adhere to ADA. 3. The City has building and safet review plan checks and inspections for compliance with CA State(Title 24 Code Enforcement, which is stricter than ADA. 4. ADA compliance was made through funding by the General Fund. 5. Now the annual bud et sets aside funding for "Additional ADA Work" as identified. CITY TOP CITY RANKING ORDINANCE Chicago, IL 3 YES RESPONSE 1. Human Rights Ordinance established in 1988 covering Fair Housing, Public Accommodation and Employment. There are 13 other areas presently covered by ADA related ordinances or policies. 2. Additionally, ADArritle 111 compliance Ian ua a is in numerous location, they review all new construction plans and advise on remodeling or modifications. 3. Contract Compliance - Yes, they have language in contracts requiring ADA compliance. Revised: 11-25-03 ADA NON DISCRIMINATION ORDINANCE SURVEY SUMMARY OF TOP 25 CITIES BY SIZE AND POPULATION CITY TOP CITY RANKING ORDINANCE Houston, TX 4 NO - USE CITY POLICIES RESPONSE T. A C' Poli Policy Number 114), rather than an ordinance that covers employment only. 2. They have an Affirmative Action Office, that also addresses employment, EEO, and ADA trainin . 3. However, theycreated the Office of Inspector General, where discrimination complaints are referred. 4. Pending return call from manager of Contracts Section of City Legal Department reg ardin Contract Language. CITY TOP CITY RANKING ORDINANCE Philadel ha, PA 5 YES RESPONSE 1. They have an ordinance that addresses Employment, Fair Housing, Public Accommodation, Pr rams/Services/Activities, Building Code - Disability Review Committee who work with the Zoning Board, etc. 2. They have the Philadelphia Fair Practices Ordinance, which is enforced by the Philadelphia Human Relations Commission. 3. In addition to the Human Relations Department, they have an ADA Coordinator, a Cit Accessibility Compliance Office, and a Mayor's Committee for Persons with Disabilities. 4. Many overlapping ordinances and/or executive orders, etc. pertaining to ADA related issues. CITY TOP CITY RANKING ORDINANCE Phoenix, AZ 8 YES RESPONSE 1. They do have Human Relations ordinances. Disability is inclusive. Additionall , the City Manager has issued letters and regulations for internal processes, etc. They do consider undue burden factors. 2. They do not address ADA or Title III complaints, they are referred to the DOJ. 3. They do take fair housing and em to ment comptaints. Tney do comply with Title 11 and contracts ensure compliance. 4. Their building code is stricter than ADAAG. 5. They have a strong advocacy community, which has resulted in alternate formats of communication and information b each department, inclusive of, but not limited to use of sin language, interpreters, braille, large print, etc. 8. There is an internal ADA Title I complaint process. 7. The City of Phoenix has a full time em o ee dedicated to handling requests for information to be provided in braille and/or alternate formats. I r- 8. They have developed a "Disability Resource Pool" of various individuals who may or may not have cross disabilities, but who have experience or expertise with cross disabilities. They are called in to assist with reviews, obtain input on various Ideas, projects, etc. They are utilized for training purposes. Revised: 11-25-03 ADA NON DISCRIMINATION ORDINANCE SURVEY SUMMARY OF TOP 25 CITIES BY SIZE AND POPULATION CITY TOP CITY RANKING ORDINANCE San Diego, CA 7 NO - USE ADM. REGS / POLICIES RESPONSE 1. They have Administrative Regulations Policies pertaining to public accommodation and pregrams/sarvices/activities regarding acoessibit~. They have a Disabilities Services Department. They conduct reviews. 2. Federal and State compliance language in contracts. They have their own section on ADA Compliance in contracts. They require completion of certification of compliance forms and they have similar forms for all City leases, etc. CITY TOP CITY RANKING ORDINANCE Dallas, TX 8 UNKNOWN RESPONSE Left Message. Response pending. CITY TOP CITY RANKING ORDINANCE San Antonio, TX 9 NO - NOT SEPARATE ORD. RESPONSE 1. They have incor~rated ADA into their Code of Ordinances under the Building Code, Health Code, and sidewalk/ physical banier issues. 2. They had looked at implementing an ordinance and had started to do it (mirroring Austin's), but at the last minute they said, no. They said this is already a law. 3. They include ADA compliance language in contracts. They always include language of compliance with federal, state and local laws. Leases have verbiage on lessor responsibilities for compliance with ADA guidelines. They use boiler plate language. I 4. They do consider reasonable accommodations, CITY TOP CITY RANKING ORDINANCE Detroit, MI 10 UNKNOWN RESPONSE Left Mesaa~e. No response - pending. I Revised: 11-25-03 3 ADA NONDISCRIMINATION ORDINANCE SURVEY SUMMARY OF TOP 25 CITIES BY SIZE AND POPULATION CITY TOP CITY RANKING ORDINANCE San Jose, CA 11 YES RESPONSE 1. Yes the City has a non-aiscrimination ordinance. 2. There is no policy or ordinance on third party contractors. 3. They do have a Human Relations policy, which addressed Title VII, Disability, Em toment, Fair Housing and Public Accommodation. 4. The Council adopted a policy on City services, pro rams and activities to not discriminate a ainst persons with disabilities. CITY TOP CITY RANKING I ORDINANCE Indianapolis, IN 12 YES RESPONSE 1. Language throughout their ordinance discussin I non-discrimination in various places, including contracts, construction, employment, purchases, etc. CITY TOP CITY RANKING ORDINANCE San Francisco, CA 13 YES RESPONSE 1. They have numerous non-discrimination laws, but they just adopted the ADA. 2. Their State Law is more comprehensive than ADA, and that is the governing one that is used. 3. They definitely include disability verbiage in their contracts. 4. Their enforcement is largely complaint driven. CITY TOP CITY RANKING ORDINANCE Jacksonville, FL 14 YES - LIMITED ORDINANCE RESPONSE 1. There is a provision under the ordinance of a 90 day wamin , then it is $100.00 per da after that. Ordinance 2002-869 2. They have an ordinance that requires all existin businesses must have accessible rkin and an accessible route to facilities and services. 3. Florida's Building Code is more stringent, at least parallel or more than ADA. 4. one of the latest ADA stepstupdates the City did was to purchase a braille embosser - now they can provide information in an alternate format instantaneously. This is of tremendous benefit to them, they got tired of having to outsource it and the lengthly time dela 5. They mainly follow state laws. Revised: 11-2503 ADA NON DISCRIMINATION ORDINANCE SURVEY SUMMARY OF TOP 25 CITIES BY SIZE AND POPULATION CITY TOP CITY RANKING ORDINANCE Columbus, OH 15 UNKNOWN RESPONSE Left message. Return call and left message. Response pending. CITY TOP CITY RANKING ORDINANCE Austin, TX 16 YES RESPONSE 1. Corpus Christi utilized their ordinance to develop draft. 2. Mr. Ramos and Ms. Taylor -Butler went to Austin and met with various City represent ives; regarding their ADA Ordinance and enforcement. 3. The City of Austin's NDO was re -ADA. 4. They do have contract language and contract assurance for ADA compliance. 5. Annual mandatory meeting with Contractors to review contract compliance requirements. 6. They don't go out into the community - it is complaint driven. No formal complaints, any inquiries. CITY TOP CITY RANKING ORDINANCE Baltimore, MD 17 YES - NOT SEPARATE RESPONSE 1. They do not have a separate ordinance for ADA related issues - it is all encom assin. 2. Housing- there is not a separate ordinance. 3. Address Public Accommodation by enforcement and investigations, and penaltiestremedies are accessed by H.R. Comm. 4. Language in contracts - no. The ordinance is standard - covers age, sex, race, disabilities, and sexual orientation. 5. No certificate of assurances. No different ste in monitoring - just usual for all contracts. CITY TOP CRY RANKING ORDINANCE Memphis, TN 18 NO - USE CITY POLICIES RESPONSE 1. They have a policy for employees, under Title I and Title ll, and are now in the rocess of creating a Transition Plan to address Title Il. Revised: 11-25-M ADA NONDISCRIMINATION ORDINANCE SURVEY SUMMARY OF TOP 25 CITIES BY SIZE AND POPULATION CITY TOP CITY RANKING ORDINANCE Milwaukee, WI 19 YES RESPONSE 1. The City's Ordinance is - Ordinance Section 109-9 of the City's Code of Ordinances. 2. Many separate areas, and they don't overlap. There is a City ADA Coordinator. 3. Contracts are( b Purohasin Procurement Administration. 4. The City has an ADA Policy and they lust worked on a new Diversity, Affirmative Action and EEO Ordinance. 5. The contract verbiaga has just been revised. CITY TOP CITY RANK/NG ORDINANCE Boston, MA 20 YES RESPONSE 1. They have a Human Rights Ordinance that covers 13 areas. 2. City's HR Ob. 2.76 H.R. Ordinance - number of sections. Section 2.76100 - Covenant for new contracts. 3. There is enforcement with the HR Commission and there are penalties. 4. Primarily complaint driven; Purchasing Dept. monitors contracts that covenant language is there. 5. Fairly well established in Civil Rights Laws - complaint driven. Federal ADA - U.S. DOJ doesn't go out to all businesses - its complaint driven. To expect or imply the responsibiltly responsibilitywith inspection of everyone is not realistic. Consider DOJ. 6. In the process of pro)osing an ordinance re: removal of physical barriers when readil achievable. CITY TOP CITY RANKING ORDINANCE Washington, DC 21 UNKNOWN RESPONSE Called - left messa e. esponse pendIng. CITY TOP CITY RANKING ORDINANCE Nashville -Davidson, TNI 22 UNKNOWN RESPONSE Called - left message. Response pending. Revised: 11-2503 6 ADA NON DISCRIMINATION ORDINANCE SURVEY SUMMARY OF TOP 25 CITIES BY SIZE AND POPULATION CITY TOP CITY RANKING ORDINANCE EI Paso, TX 23 UNKNOWN RESPONSE Called - left message esponse pending. CITY TOP CITY RANKING ORDINANCE Seattle, WA 24 NO - USE CLEAR ADA POLICIES RESPONSE 1. They comply with ADA and there are clear Policies. 2. They have a unique department that provides services to specialized populations for the whole community. 3. City's Park and Recreation Department - Title II addressed. 4. They are being careful to ensure meeting and/or exceeding ADA. 5. Pending return call from the Office of Civil Rights and Legal Department. CITY TOP CITY RANKING 1 ORDINANCE Denver, CO 25 NO RESPONSE 1. They do not have a special ordinance. They address it by Title II of the ADA. 2. They have a Contract's Compliance Officer who does monitor - some of it is complaint driven. All contracts include standard boiler plate language, in exam le:"must comply with Federal, State and Local Laws". Facilities are in compliance. When they contract with anyone, they must be in compliance in programs, food, services, etc. Section 504 is included). 3. They recently revised various Court ordered programstservices to be accessible, in example: Court Ordered Therapy, Driver's Education Program, to comply withrovision of services, alternate formats, etc. Most agencies are federal) funded so the must corn anyway. 4. They have accommodations for services with the Police Department and Municipal Courts. Revised: 11-25-03 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES CHAPTER 24, HUMAN RELATIONS, BY ADDING ARTICLE V, DISCRIMINATION AGAINST INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES, ESTABLISHING PROCEDURE AND IMPLEMENTATION; PROVIDING PUBLICATION; PROVIDING FOR SEVERANCE; AND PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI: SECTION 1. That the Code of Ordinances, City of Corpus Christi, Chapter 24, Human Relations is amended by adding Article V, Discrimination Against An Individual With A Disability to read as follows: ARTICLE V: DISCRIMINATION AGAINST AN INDIVIDUAL WITH A DISABILITY Sec. 24-84 Declaration of Policy (a) It is hereby declared to be the policy of the City to bring about through fair, orderly and lawful procedures, that no qualified individual with disability .qhall~ on the ba.qi~ of such disability, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or otherwise be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity operated or contracted for by the City. It is further declared that such policy is established upon the recognition of the inalienable fights of each qualified individual with a di~hility to participate fully and receive the benefits of, all programs and activities &the City. (c) It is further recognized that the denial of such rights through considerations based on disability is detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the City and constitutes an unjust denial or deprivation of such inalienable rights which is within the power and responsibility of government authority to prevent. Sec. 24-85 Definitions For the purpose of this article the following definitions ~hall apply unless the context clearly indicates or requires a different meaning. AuxiliarF Aid includes: Services or devices as qualified interpreters, assistive listening headsets, television captioning and decoders, telecommnnlcations devices for deafperson~ (TDD's), videotext displays, readers, texts on tape, materials in braille, and large print materials. This list is not exclusive and fimctional equivalents may be substituted for any auxiliary aid. Cit~ Manager means the City Manager of Corpus Christi or his/her designee. CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance 1 Director means the Director of the Human Relations Department or his/her designee. Disability means, with respect to an individual, a physical or mental impaimaent that substantially limits one or more major life activities of such individual; a record of such an impairment; or being regarded as having such an impairment. (1) Physical or mental impairment means any physiological disorder or condition, cosmetic disfigurement, or anatomical loss affecting one or more of the following body systems: neurological; musculoskeletal; special sense organs; respiratory (including speech organs) cardiovascular; reproductive, digestive; genitourinary; hemic and lymphatic; skin; and endocrine. Mental impairment also includes any mental or psychological disorder, such as mental retardation, organic brain syndrome, emotional or mental illness, and specific learning disabilities. (2) Ma/or life activities means functions such as caring for one's self, performing manual tasks, walking, seeing, hearing, speaking, breathing, learning, and working. (3) Has a record of such impairment means a history of, or has been misclassified as having a mental or physical impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities. (4) Is regarded as having an impairment means has a physical or mental impairment that does not substantially limit maior life activities but that is treated by another as constituting such limitation. Being regarded as having an impairment also means has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits maior life activities oni¥ as a result of the attitudes of others toward such impairment; or has none of the impairments defined above but is treated by others as having such an impairment. Discrimination means any direct or indirect exclusions, distinctions, segregation, limitation, refusal, denial, or any other differentiation in the treatment of an individual or individuals with disabilities on account of a disability. Facility means all or any portion of buildings, structures, equipment, roads, walks, parking lots, or other real or personal property. Financial assistance means any grant, loan, contract (other than procurement contract or a contract of insurance or guaranty), or any other arrangement by which the City provides or otherwise makes available assistance in the form of: funds; services of City personnel; or real or personal property or any interest in or use of such property, including transfers or leases of such property for less than CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance 2 fair market value or for reduced consideration; and proceeds fi.om a subsequent transfer or lease of such property if the City share of its fair market value is not returned to the City. Person with disabilities means any person who has a disability as defined in "disability" above. Qualm[;ed individual with a disability means an individual with a disability who, with or without reasonable modifications to rules, policies, or practices, the removal of architectural, communication, or transportation barriers, or the provision of auxiliary aids and services, meets the essential eligibility requirements of the receipt of services or the participation in programs or activities provided by the City, or entities using City facilities. Readily achievable means easily accompli.qhah!e and able to be carried out without much difficulty or expense. Determining if barrier removal is readily achievable is, by necessity, a case-by-case judgment. Factors to consider include: (1) The nature and cost of the action; (2) The overall financial resources of the site or sites involved; the number ofperson~ employed at the site; the effect on expenses and resources; legitimate safety requirements necessary for safe operation, including crime prevention measures; or any other impact of the action on the operation of the site; (3) The geographic separateness, and the administrative or fiscal relationship of the site or sites in question to any parent corporation or entity; (4) If applicable, the overall financial resources of any parent corporation or entity; the overall size of the parent corporation or entity with respect to the number of its employees; the number, type, and location of its facilities; and (5) If applicable, the type of operation or operations of any Parent Corporation or entity. including the composition, structure, and functions of the workforce of the Parent Corporation or entity. Sec. 24-86 Communieationa The City shall take appropriate steps to ensure that communications with applicants, participants, and members of the public with disabilities are as effective as communications with others. The City shall fumish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary_ to afford an individual with a disability an equal oppommity to participate in, and enjoy the benefits of,, a service, program, or activity conducted by the. CiW. CFPWD Non-Disc~ination Ordinance 3 (2) In determining what type of auxiliary aid and service is necessary, the City shall give primary consideration to the requests of the individuals with disabilities. The City and its contractors in considering reasonable accommodations must provide auxiliary aids and services when they are necessary to ensure effective communication with individuals with hearing, vision, or speech impairments. Auxiliary aids that would result in an undue burden or in a fundamental alteration in the nature of the goods or services are not required by the regulation. Sec. 24-87 Prohibited Practices (a) The City in providing any aid, benefit, or service shall not, directly or through contractual, licensing, or other arrangements, on the basis of disability Deny a qualified individual with a disability the opportunity to participate in or benefit from the aid, benefit, or service. (2) Afford a qualified individual with a disability an opportunity to participate in or benefit fi'om the aid, benefit, or service that is not equal to that afforded others; (3) Provide a qualified individual with a disability with an aid, benefit, or service that is not as effective in affording equal opportunity to obtain the same result, to gain the same benefit, or to reach the same level of achievement a~q that provided to others; (4) Provide different or separate aids, benefits, or services to individuals with disabilities or to any class of individuals with disabilities than is provided to others unless such action is necessary to provide qualified individuals with disabilities with aids, benefits, or services that are as effective as those provided to others; Aid or perpetuate discrimination against a qualified individual with a disability by providing significant assistance to any agency, organization, or person that discriminates on the basis of disability in providing any aid, benefit, or service to beneficiaries of the City's programs; (6) Deny a qualified individual with a disability the opportunity to participate as a member of planning or advisory boards and commissions; (7) Otherwise limit a qualified individual with a disability in the enjoyment of any fight, privilege, advantage, or opportunity enjoyed by others receiving an aid, benefit, or service. CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance 4 (b) (d) (e) The City shall not deny a qualified individual with a disability the opportunity to participate in services, programs, or activities that are not separate or different, despite the existence of permissibly separate or different programs or activities. The City shall not, directly or through contractual or other arrangement, utilize criteria or methods of administration that: (1) Have the effect of subjecting a qualified individual with a disability to discrimination on the basis of such disability; (2) Have the purpose or effect of defeating or substantially impairing accomplishment of the objectives of the City's program with respect to individuals with disabilities. In determining the site or location of a facility, the City and its contractors shall not make selections that: (1) (2) Have the effect of excludmg individuals with disabilities fi'om, denying them the benefits of, or otherwise subiecfing them to discrimination under any program or activity; or Have the purpose or effect of defeating or substantially impairing the accomplishment of the objectives of the service, program or activity with respect to individuals with disabilities. The City shall not administer a financial a~e.qi~tance program in a manner that subjects qualified individuals with disabilities to discrimination on the basis of such disability, nor may the City provide financial assistance to programs or activities that subject qualified individuals with disabilities to discrimination on the basis of such dl.qahility. The aid, benefit, or service provided under a program or activity receiving or benefiting fi.om City financial assistance includes any aid, benefit, or service provided in or through a facility that has been constructed, expanded, altered, leased or rented, or otherwise acquired, in whole or part, with City funds. Sec. 24-88 Personal Devices and Services Nothing required in this Ordinance is to include, or be construed to include, a requirement that the City provide to individuals with disabilities personal devices, such as wheelchairs, individually prescribed devices, such as prescription eyegla.q.qes or heating aids; readers for personal use of study; or services of a personal nature including assistance in eating toileting CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance 5 or dressing. Nothing in this Ordinance is to be construed as a requirement that a City service be fundamentally altered. Sec. 24-89 Undue Burden of Applicants for Contractual Financial Assistance Integration of individuals with disabilities into the mainstream of society is fundamental to the proposes of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Companies providing goods and services to the public need to take certain limited steps to improve access to existing places of business. This mandate includes the obligation to remove barriers t~om existing buildings when it is readily achievable to do so. Readily achievable means easily accomplishable and able to be carried out without much difficulty or expense. Removing barriers by constructing a curb ramp, widening an enla-ance door, installing visual alarms, or designating an accessible parking space is often essential to ensure equal opportunity for people with disabilities. Because removing these and other common barriers can be simple and inexpensive in some cases and difficult and costly in others, therefore a flexible approach to compliance should be practical. A business or other private entity that serves the public must ensure equal opportunity for people with disabilities. The requirement to remove barriers in existing buildings applies only to a private entity that owns, leases, leases to or operates a place of public accommodation. Further, barriers must be removed only where it is readily achievable to do so. Readily achievable means easily accomplishable and able to be carried out without much difficulty or expense. A pubhc accommodation must provide auxiliary aids and services when they are necessary to ensure effective communication with individuals with hearing, vision, or speech impairments. Auxiliary aids that would result in an undue burden or in a fundamental alteration in the nature of the goods or services are not required by the regulation. If your business provides goods and services to the public, you are required to remove barriers if doing so is readily achievable. Such a business is called a public accommodation because it serves the public. If your business is not open to the public but is only a place of employment like a warehouse or manufacturing facility, then there is no requirement to remove barriers. Such a facility is called a commercial facility. While the operator of a commercial facility is not required to remove barriers in existing facilities, you must comply with the ADA Standards for Accessible Design when you alter, renovate or expand your facility. Sec. 24-90 Affidavit of Compliance by Applicants for Contractual Financial Assistance An applicant for contractual financial assistance from the City, other than procurement contract or a contract of insurance or guaranty, shall submit an assurance of compliance, CFPVVD Non-Discrimination Ordinance on a form specified by the Director, that the program will be operated in compliance with thin chapter. An applicant may incorporate this assurance by reference in subsequent applications to the City. Sec. 24-91 City to Evaluate Itself Annually (a) The City shall annually: (1) Evaluate, with the assistance of interested persons, including people with disabilities or organizations representing persons with disabilities, its current policies and practices and the effects thereof that do not or may not meet the requirements of this article', (2) Modify, after consultation with interested persons, including persons with disabilities or organizations representing persons with disabilities, any policies that do not meet the requirements of this article; and (3) Take, after consultation with interested persons, including persons with disabilities or organizations representing persons with disabilities, appropriate remedial steps to eliminate the effects of any discrimination that result from adherence to these policies and practices. (b) The City shall maintain on file and make available for public inspection: (1) A list of the interested persons consulted; (2) A description of areas examined and any problems identified; and A description of any modifications made and of any remedial steps taken. Sec. 24-92 City, Adoption of Designated Coordinator and Grievance Procedni-;, (a) The City shall designate at least one person to coordinate its efforts to comply with this article. (b) The City shall adopt grievance procedures that incorporate appropriate due process standards and that provide the prompt and equitable resolution of complaint.~ alle.m.'n ,. any action prohibited by this article. CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance Sec. 24-93 City's Non-Discrimination Notice regarding Individuals with Disabilities The City shall take appropriate and continuing steps to noti~ participants, beneficiaries, employees, or applicants, including those with impaired vision or hearing, and unions or professional organizations holding professional agreements with the City that it does not discriminate on the basis of disability. The notification shall state, where appropriate, that the City does not discriminate on the basis of disability. The notification shall also include an identification of the person and department responsible for investigating complaints of discrimination. Co) If the City publishes or uses materials or publications containing general information that it makes available to participants, beneficiaries, employees, or applicants, it shall include in those materials or publications a statement of the policy described in subsection (a) above. Sec.24-94 Requirements to Insure Accessibility No qualified individual with a disability shall, because of inaccessibility to or unusability of the City or its contractors, facilities, be denied the benefits of, be excluded from participation in, or otherwise be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity to which this section applies. Co) The City and its contractors shall operate each program or activity to which this section applies so that the program or activity, when viewed in its entirety, is readily accessible to individuals with disabilities. This subsection does not require that every existing facility or ever,/part of a facility be made accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities. Procedures will be adopted and implemented to ensure that interested persons, including persons with impaired vision or hearing, can obtain information as to the existence and location of services, activities, and facilities that are accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities. (d) Each facility or part of a facility constructed by, on behalf of, or for the use of the City or its contractors shall be designed and constructed in such manner that the facility or part of the facility is readily accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities in compliance with ADA and regnlator~ standards. Each facility or part of a facility which is altered by, on behalf of, or for the use of the City or its contractors in a manner that affects or could affect the usability of the CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance 8 facility or part of the facility is readily accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities. Design, construction, or alteration of facilities in conformance with Texas Accessibility Standards of the Architectural Barriers Act, Article 9102, Texas Civil Statutes shall constitute compliance with this section. Sec. 2,~-95 Administration As a means of implementing and enforcing this article, the Director will serve as the City's focal point for coordinating the implementation this article as well as coordinating the implementation of any relevant new and existing laws and ordinances. The Director will have the following responsibilities: (a) Coordinate the investigation and/or conciliation procedure outlined in Sec. 24-97 and assist in resolving grievances to assure prompt solutions; Prepare and disseminate information regarding di,qahility rights to the public, City departments, and community agencies; (c) Research administrative policies and procedures to identify for City management, modifications required for accessibility to individuals with disabilities; (d) Monitor City activities related to individuals with disabilities and conduct periodic compliance reviews to assure that all City departments are providing services that arc accessible to individuals with disabilities; (e) Recommend training programs for various groups of the City organization in which accessibility and employment related needs are provided to assure that all City services are available to the disability community; Provide technical assistance and cnnmfltation to all City departments in areas related to accessibility as defined by law; and, Assist in the development of long-range planning activities to accompli~qh compliance. Sec. 24-96 General Enforcement Guidelines ~ny individual who believes that he/she has been discriminated againat because of his/her disability may file with the Director a request to have the Director investigate and/or mediate his/her complaint. CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance Nothing in this article shall create a civil cause of action for damages again.qt the City or preclude any aggrieved person from seeking any other remedy provided by law. Nothing herein shall authorize criminal enfomement of this article againgt the City or its agents, employees, and officials. Filing a complaint with the Director is not a prerequisite or a bar to the filing of some other legal complaint or to the pursuit of any other remedy provided by law. The pendency of a complaint before the Director shall not bar any aggrieved party from seeking civil action, but a final judgment in any civil action shall bar any further investigation of a pending complaint on the same alleged act of discrimination. In connection with any investigation of a charge filed under this article, the Director or designated investigator shall at all reasonable times have access to, for the purposes of examination and the right to copy, any evidence of any person being investigated or proceeded against that relates to the charge under investigation and is not privileged as provided by law. No person shall knowingly, intentionally or recklessly obstruct, or prevent compliance with this an/cle or hinder or interfere with the performance of the proper exercise of a duty, obligation, right or power of the Human Relations Department or its representative, or other officials with duties, obligations, rights and powers established by ordinance. Where appropriate and not in violation of conflicts of interest or other ethical rules of the State Bar of Texas, the City Attorney shall assign counsel to assist the Human Relations Department in the performance of its functions. The City Manager shall make such other administrative arrangements as are normal and necessary for the, functioning of the Human Relations Department. Sec. 24-97 Filing/Investigation under Grievance on Accessibility, City Policy G-7 The City of Corpus Christi strives to provide quality customer service to all persons, regardless of race, color, religion, age, gender or disability. In the event any individual with a disability has a complaint regarding accessing City services, pro?am.q or activities, the Ci_ty of Corpus Christi has formulated a policy as a Title I1 Entity under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to address such issues. Any person who claims to have been injured by an activity prohibited by this article may file a complaint with the Director of Human Relations. Such complaint~ will be in the form established by the Director and shall identify the person(s) alleged to have committed or alleged to be committing a discriminatory practice are based. In CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance 10 situations where the gfievant's disability requires assistance to submit a complaint. the Director will make reasonable effort to assist the person in filing a complaint. The City shall provide complaint forms and furnish them without charge to any person, upon request. All complaints must be filed within 180 days following the occurrence of an allege~t discriminatory practice. As soon as practicable, but no more than 15 calendar days, the Director will meet with the complainant to discuss the complaint and possible resolutions. Within 15 calendar days after meeting with the Complainant the Director will respond in writing, and where appropriate, in a format accessible to thc. complainant, such as large print, Braille, or audio tape. The response will explain the position of the City and offer options for substantive resolution of the complaint. If the response by the Director does not satisfactorily resolve the issue th,: complainant may appeal the Director's decision to the City Manager. Such an appeal must be flied within 15 calendar days after receipt of the response. Within lq calendar days of the appeal, the City Manager or his/her designee will meet with the Complainant to discuss the complaint and possible resolutions. Within 15 calendar days after the meeting, the City Manager or his/her designee will respond in writing and where appropriate, in a format accessible to the Complainant, with a final resolution of the complaint. All formal complaints received by the Director, the responses to the complaints and the record of appeals to the Human Relations Commission, shall be retained by the City of Corpus Christi for at least three years. Sec. 24-98 (a) Filing/Investigation Places of Public Accommodation Procedure Upon the filing or referral of a complaint as herein provided, the Director shall caus,, to be made a prompt and full investigation of the matter ntatcd in the complaint Provided, however, that before any charge becomes accepted for investigative purposes the Director shall have personally reviewed with the charging party thc. allegations contained therein and shall have determined that said complaint comes within the provisions of this article. In the event such review results in the determination that the charge does not come within the provisions of the article, the, charging ~artv shall be given a clear and concise explanation of the reasons why the complaint fails to come within the ordinance. All complaints filed under this Section will proceed in accordance with the procedures set forth in City Policy G-7; except: (1) All determinations of the Director to whether discrimination occurred shall CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance 11 (2) be made as promptly as possible or no later than thel00th day after the date the complaint is filed, or if unable to complete the investigation within the 100-day period, the Director shall notify the complainant and the respondent in writing of the reasons for delay. Appeals of the Director's decision will be to the Corpus Christi Human Relations Commission. Such an appeal must be filed within 15 calendar days of the receipt of the Director's decision. The Human Relations Commission will conduct a hearing on the appeal during the next available meeting. Complainants, and Respondents will have the right to appear in person to explain their respective positions to the Commi.qsion. Sec. 24-99 Retaliation or Coercion (a) The City and its contractors shall not discriminate against any individual because that individual has opposed any act or practice made unlawful by this article, or because that individual made a charge, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing under this article or the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. (b) The City and its contractors shall not coerce, intimidate, threaten, or interfere with any individual in the exercise or enioyment of, or on account of his or her having exercised or enjoyed, or on account of his or her having aided or encouraged any other individnal in the exercise or enioyment of, any right granted or protected by this article or the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Sec. 24-100 Remedial and/or Voluntary Action If the outcome of the investigation process under Sec. 24-97 finds that a City program or activity has discriminated against persons on the basis of disability in violation of this article, the responsible program area shall take such remedial and/or vohmtary action(s) as may be appropriate and necessary to rectify the problem All appeals of a grievance will follow establi~qhed appeal procedures through the City grievance accessibility procedure for program participants/citizens. Where a City program or activity is found to have discriminated agaimt an indivld, ml on the basis of disability and where a contractor of a program area has diseriminate~d, the City Manager may require either or both Parties to take appropriate action to rectify the problem. CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance 12 {d) (e) The City Manager may, where necessary to overcome the effects of discrimination, require a City program or activity to take corrective action that may include actions: (1) With respect to an individual with a disability who no longer participates in the City's programs but who were participants in the program when such discrimination occurred; or (2) With respect to an individual with a disability who would have been a participant in the program had the discrimination not occurred. (3) The City may take steps, in addition to any action that is required by this article, to ovemome the effects of conditions that resulted in limited participation in the City's program or activity by qualified persons with disabilities. If the outcome of the investigation process under Sec. 24-98 finds that a place of public accommodations has discriminated against persons on the basis ofdlnahility in violation of this article, the person(s) violating shall be punished by a fine of no less than two hundred fifty dollars ($ 250.00) nor more than the maximum provided in section 1-6 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Corpus Christi ("City Code"). Violations of Section 24-22(a) of Article II may be forwarded to the appropriate governmental body to enforce such conduct to the extent and manner prescribed by state law. Sec. 24-101 Status Reports to the City Council Annually after passage of this article, the Director shall submit to the City Council a status report on the implementation of this article. SECTION 2. If for any reason any section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase, word or provision of this ordinance shall be held invalid or unconstitutional by final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction, it shall not affect any other section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase, word or provision of this ordinance, for it is the definite intent of this City Council that ever7 section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase, word or provision hereof be given full fome and effect for its purpose. SECTION 3. Publication shall be made one time in the official publication of the City of Corpus Christi as required by the City Charter of the City of Corpus Christi. SECTION 4. Penalties are as provided in this ordinance and in Sec. 1-6 Code of Ordinances. CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance 13 That the foregoing ordinance was read for the first time and passed to its second reading on this the Samuel L. Neal, Jr. Brent Chesney Javier D. Colmenero Henry Garrett Bill Kelly day of ,2003, by the following vote: Rex A. Kinnison Melody Cooper Jesse Noyola Mark Scott That the foregoing ordinance was read for the second time and passed finally on this the Samuel L. Neal, Jr. Brent Chesney Javier D. Colmenero Henry Garrett Bill Kelly __ day of ,2003, by the following vote Rex A. Kinnison Melody Cooper Jesse Noyola Mark Scott PASSED AND APPROVED, this the day of .,2003. ATTEST: CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI Armando Chapa City Secretary Samuel L. Neal, Jr. Mayor Approved as to legal form this the //c~ day of ~-9 ,2003; By: Joseph ~ey Assistant City Attorney For City Attomey CFPWD Non-Discrimination Ordinance 14 33 AGENDA MEMORANDUM City Council Action Date: December 9, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Ordinance appropriating $11,356.56 from the unappropriated interest earnings from Street 1990CIP Fund No. 3534; and appropriating $11,350.48 from the unappropriated interest earnings in Street 1995 CIP Fund No. 3537; and appropriating $233,960.46 from the unappropriated interest earnings in Street 1995B ClP Fund No. 3538; and appropriating $160,642.35 from the unappropriated interest earnings in Street 2001CIP Fund 3549; amending capital budget adopted by Ordinance No. 025144 by increasing appropriations by $417,309.85; and declaring an emergency. Motion authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to execute a construction contract with Haas-Anderson Construction Company of Corpus Christi, Texas, in the amount of $2,999,999.99 for Horne Road from Ayers Street to Kostoryz Road Street Improvements project. (Bond Issue 2000) ISSUE: This project was approved November 7, 2000 in the Bond Issue 2000 Package under Proposition No. 1 Street Improvements. This construction contract is necessary to complete the work. FUNDING: Funding is available through the FY 02-03 Street Capital Improvement budget, street bond fund unappropriated interest earnings and the Water, Storm Water and Wastewater Commercial Paper Programs CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: St~e~ommen~s~ approval of the motion as pres'~nted so a c~nstrj ction contract may be is~r~nd wlrk ~:Jin. V~ie Gray, P~. Dir~'ctor of Storm~/Vat, r Services Director of Water Services ~g~l R. Escobar, P.E., Foster Crowell Director of Engineering Services Director of Wast~water Services Additional Support Material: Exhibit "A" Background Information Exhibit "B" Project Budget Exhibit "C" Bid Tab Exhibit "D" Location Map AGENDA MEMORANDUM ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION SUBJECT: Horne Road from Ayers Street to Kostoryz Road Street Improvements (Bond Issue Project No, C-7) November 14, 2000 - Ordinance canvassing returns and declaring the results of the Special Election held on November 7, 2000, in the City of Corpus Christi for the adoption of seven propositions; adopting and levying a sales and use tax pursuant to Section 4A of The Development Corporation Act as approved by the voters in Propositions 4 and 5 (Ordinance No. 024269). March 27, 2001 - Motion authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to award an engineering agreement to Govind & Associates in the amount of $319,630 for the Horne Road from Ayers to Kostoryz Street Improvements Project (Motion 2001-121 ) PRIOR ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION: 1. October 18, 2000 - Distribution of Request For Qualifications (RFQ) No. 2000-08 - (Public Health and Safety, Parks and Recreation, Street Improvement Projects) to 73 local architectural and engineering firms. 2. November 10, 2000 - Addendum No. 1 to the Request For Qualifications (RFQ) No. 2000-08 - (Public Health and Safety, Parks and Recreation, Street Improvement Projects) to 73 local amhitectural and engineering firms. 3. January 10, 2001 - Addendum No. 2 to the Request For Qualifications (RFQ) No. 2000-08 - (Public Health and Safety, Parks and Recreation, Street Improvement Projects) to 73 local amhitectural and engineering firms. 4. September 10, 2001 - Administrative approval of a Testing Agreement with Rock Engineering and Testing Laboratory in the amount of $13,700 for sub-surface investigation and pavement recommendations. 5. Au.qust 28, 2003 - Administrative approval of Amendment No. 1 to an engineering agreement with MEI Govind Engineers and Consultants in the amount of $17,253 for a revised fee not to exceed $336,883. 6. September 30, 2003 - Administrative approval of a Testing Agreement with Rock Engineering and Testing Laboratory in the amount of $15,584 for construction material testing services. FUTURE COUNCIL ACTION: Nothing anticipated. PROJECT BACKGROUND: On Tuesday, November 7, 2000, the City of Corpus Christi held an election to consider a number of ballot propositions to fund major capital improvements for the community, Bond Issue 2000. The November 7, 2000 election was held jointly with Nueces County and coincided with the Presidential Election. EXHIBIT "A" 1 Page 1 of 2 The Bond Issue 2000 package includes $30.8 million in projects to be funded from ad valorem property taxes (a General Obligation Bond Issue) in Public Health and Safety, Parks and Recreation/Museum, and Street Improvement projects. The proposed projects target the City's most immediate needs to improve existing physical facilities, provide for growth, and protect the City's investment in its infrastructure. This is the last Bond Issue 2000 street project the City will bid. The remaining two street projects, McKinzie Road and FM 624, are pending TxDOT coordination and letting. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project consists of the removal of an existing roadway and the construction of approximately 5,077 linear feet of 41-foot back-to-back roadway, along with approximately 4,664 linear feet of storm water improvements, approximately 2,768 linear feet of water line improvements, and approximately 2,584 linear feet of sanitary sewer improvements together with all appurtenances. All work to be in accordance with the plans, specifications and contract documents. BID INFORMATION: The project consist of a base bid only. The City received proposals from six (6) bidders on November 12, 2003. (See Exhibit "C") The bids ranged from $2,999,999.99 to $3,184,315.80. The estimated cost of construction was $3,004,600. Haas-Anderson Construction of Corpus Christi, Texas was the lowest responsive bidder. The City's Consultant, MEI Govind & Associates and city staff, recommend that based on Iow bid and past satisfactory experience with City projects of this type, that a construction contract be awarded to Haas-Anderson Construction of Corpus Christi, Texas, in the amount of $2,999,999.99 for the Home Road from Ayers Street to Kostoryz Road Street Improvements project. CONTRACT TERMS: The contract specifies that the project will be completed in 390 calendar days with completion anticipated by March 2005. EXHIBIT "A" Page 2 of 2 PROJECT BUDGET BOND ISSUE PROJECT C-7 STREET IMPROVEMENTS HORNE ROAD (Project No. 6147) December 9, 2003 FUNDS AVAILABLE: Streets .............................................................................................. $2,052,309.00 Storm Water ...................................................................................... 995,000.00 Wastewater ....................................................................................... 354,000.00 Water ............................................................................................... 384,717.00 Total .....................................................................................................$3,786,026.00 FUNDS REQUIRED: Construction (Haas-Anderson) Streets .......................................................................... $1,605,811.82 Storm Water ................................................................... 795,661.07 Wastewater .................................................................... 283,234.80 Water ........................................................................... 315,292.30 Subtotal Construction (estimate) ............................................................... $2,999,999.99 Contingencies ......................................................................................... 250,000.00 Consultant (MEI Govind & Associates) ......................................................... 336,883.00 Project Management (Goldston Engineering) ................................................. 35,000.00 Construction Inspection ............................................................................. 10,000.00 Engineering Reimbursements ..................................................................... 60,000.00 Finance Reimbursements .......................................................................... 30,000.00 Testing ..................................................................................................30,000.00 Bond Issuance Costs .............................................................................. 24,142.38 Printing, Advertising, etc ............................................................................ 10,000.00 Total ..................................................................................................... $3,786,025.37 EXHIBIT B Page 1 of 1 vm cn X CD - �W TAeIIIATpN V eels pElM1MEM OF lXOamIM . CRY CI CONUIt CI W 311, Tptgd BASE BID TM Mll Y: Ronflimnln.PE CAM WY�rWv.Mwne�ti IDw ENWNEFRS ESTIMATE $3.OKSWA0 1K W COMLl1pN: iM pInYOM Hemp RwJ $Lb K..1 RQ.IYUMMnen llCwr PmFaaCl CwWUNm tdUt m T.MM7 .ylop Rw, PoW]INI Rwp FOWpEE W.T.Y Cgsbugbn LP. M1 HW MT Telae f+ratwWURlm PMNtiM,TOTMM LTD. Mlee. MT. .764le TIEM OIaCRF110N DT'. lart IMITPPoCi dMO1Mi 1MITMtlC! dWIMi Al S,eet Exwvatl mm 42090 SY $10.m N200W.m IC50 $199090.90 $7.50 W150W.W $13.M 55828m.90 $11m 118200.90Geopnd. A228350 wmPkle In pace per SY $2" $71614.0 $250 $]3375.0 T$7.71�.Mw $3.90 $10660.0 $2.60 273375.0 52.90 $8]50.90A3 20950 SY 513.51 $386518.50 3110 5981650.00 $12.25 $35853].50 $10.50 530175.0 $13.M 3W1M.W M2= Prtne Coat (0.15 Ga85Y), ro ;Iele in pace per 3.850 GAL $1.67 $8428.50 33.90 $1540.0 $1.84 57.469M $1.75 $6737.50 1 nw $BSSS.m 52.10 I j60M.W A5 P HRI (TYPE D), compete In pace per 25,550 SY $10.50 $20275.0 $11.0 $281OW.W 512.12 508605.00 $11.85 $302767.50 $13.90 M3ZiW.W $10.0 528550.90 AB Cmwe,t Cur, Ramp, wmplele in piens per 5,150 SF 25.87 WOM.W $8.50 343776.W $11.08 $57020 $W.w $154500.0 522.0 5113390.90 $10.80 156820.90 A7 Gonv Si0e8alk c Tele N para par 43"0 SF no $122035.20 $e.W $/30320.0 $4.83 $20815.20 $3.35 $165524.00 $4.70 $204188.0 S3.M $16$072.W ABSW, Cw Drinee . cenpete In pew per 16390 SF 54.05 $88015.0 $5.25 505575.W 18.20 $102527.W 55.30 50390.0 $580 W.W.W $1.60 $18240.00 AB UnelNMpeNd DrltsxaV RernovM, cornpeb Per 1m SF $13.47 51347.0 $S.W $50.00 54.84 $484.0 $3.50 $9W.W $100 $IW.W $3.W 5300.90 A10 UneMMpaMO SMaWMk Re ,wmpele Par §MZLfW 10 SF $13.47 $1347.90 U.W $490.W $262 $282.W $290 $230.90 $1.0 $1m.W $3.90 530.00 All 4' Chem UM Fern W Gales oxmiate In place W Lim, FM 202 IF $1280 $2505.60 $111 S242d.W $11.80 52383.80 $28.75 $$M7.50 $33.00 386W.W $10.0 szm.w Al2 6' We Fere WBh GMs. conglele M paw per 1L LF EW.88 $802.30 $22.W $2726.W $40.61 $0151.81 MIX 53720.W $42.0 $6.09M $40.90 $4960.90 A13 S Monument, complide In 2 1A 5194723 $26%.46 5590.0 lil.mm $1/1.37 $1554.74 $390.90 ]90.0 $690.90 $3190.90 5190.0 5320.90 A/4 OSaro Can 1 DY $1887.07 $1.99TV $1500.0 $1590.w $120.01 $1208.01 5390.0 Am.90 $5000 5500.90 $690.90 5690.90 A15 T HMACP OsrleY t Tack Code, complete in 1838 SY $5.39 E10095.Ot A.m $13552.90 $21.76 $421 WOO 510.35 52007.60 11.90 5135520 33.90 311 rM.W Tin M X ro = CD N W O -1 co C1 P2 of 9 RefloWn PevprorO Merkppp TY1 (W) PM An ARR M 25 EA $131.72 $3380.00 5110.0 $2150.00 11 120.99 02/,76 $110.00 ]30,00 510D.00 52500.00 SiT5.00 $9125.00 Roiflo a Pevament Mailing. Tri (W)('ONLY, A17 n J EA ST86.45 3808.35 !!30.00 $050.00 971.98 5725.04 zM.00 5880.00 $220.00 3800.00 5290.00 3897.97 RellixWe Pavxrlent MaftVs TY1 W, (41 Alf R N 120 LF 30.51 384.80 50.60 $97.00 JO.M 557.60 .SO 380.00 $9.a 318.00 10.50 380.00 RMkr.ve Pavement MNl m TY1(Y) (4*)(BRn, A19 In 1810 lF $0.51 .BO 30.50 920.00 50.18 380.1.20 50.50 2020.00 30.10 5798.00 $0.60 3020.0 Ref Wo Pavement Meiltlrgs TY1(W)(r A20 S blain 255 LF 51.35 M7.95 $1.10 $291.50 $0.97 $251.05 $1.10 $221.50 50.50 $132.50 $1.20 531ILM RSL Pannini i MMtV TYt(Y)(4)(SLD) AT1 1040 LF 51.08 81129.20 $0.w $938.00 $0.97 51008.80 $1.00 $1010.00 $0.70 $728.0 51.00 $1040.00 Re6egkm Pavement WMnpa TY1 (Y)(4-) (SLD), AU M ] 715 LF 50,1] f3 $26.05 $0,40 53088.00 $0.42 SJ 210.30 30,50 51857.60 30.50 $2,314 W 30.0 ".M.00 R~- M -WW TV1(1(12')(SLD). An In 188 LF W74 $1/3232 35.50 5824,00 50.05 1018.0 30.50 .W 37.00 $1176.00 38.00 5100$.00 Rere Pa�t MMkirpy TYt(W)(1 T) A24 SLD M 30 LF $8.15 $20250 35.M $165.00 $6.05 3181.50 35.50 $185.00 $7.00 5310.00 58.00 5180.00 Re6er.ue Pavement o#i,*h9p TYt (97)(241 A25 SLD, M 47 LF $13.47 5033.09 311.00 5517.0 $12.10 366870 311.00 3517.00 $7.00 SMIX) 51200 566/.00 ROF Pavement Merklnpa W1(W) (CROSSWALKS), c-plem i place w Lbnw A28 91 LF 547.15 $4 00.65 $30.00 3458.00 54295 fJ 859.85 538.50 33503.50 6!1.00 312]1.00 97.00 {3013.00 Type 6AA Ral.e6 Pevanient Marken, complete A2/ M H2 FA $1.12 32068.24 SCM $1788.00 $0.23 $1669.88 31.00 St ]86.00 34 W St 768.0 31.00 51188.00 Type IL Rome Pavement M M. cvnWNM In A28 35 EA 55.39 5188.85 55.00 $17&M U.BO 318940 51.$0 3158.00 H.W 3110.00 $5.00 6]5.00 Street Sin AssemNw. wmpiem In pM per A29 40 EA .a1 $13172.40 3210.00 510800.00 3]02./8 512080]0 5300.00 512000.00 330.00 510000.00 $500.97 it 000.00 ASO N0 In 48 LA 5289./6 i1 983.60 3210.00 510080.00 337223 1306].06 3260.00 $12000.00 3230.00 511010.00 5210.97 11520.00 AJ1 Sane ,cOm M r Escin 3 EA 5303.13 3808.98 5210.00 MOM $27223 SBta.e9 $2]5.00 $825.0 CM6.00 $79SW $250.0 3]50.00 A32 TmRc Cm winplii,li, in 1 LS 5150000.0 5150000.00 315000.0 515000.0 58016.88 58049.56 $24750.00 $24760.00 413,M.W $1300000 528000.0 26000.0 Subb6hl PartA' WOMs A1Mmu hA32 $1,605,811.52 $1,304459.50 $1,807,421.31 $1,572,621.10 $1,771,540.00 $1,579,027.80 Tin M X ro = CD N W O -1 co C1 P2 of 9 TYUAlpllpfpt MPMTMIRT �BlpNimw6-CR/p COPPIIf CMUlT, 1EAA9 BASE BID TAp1MMW: Pmammm PM MTM w�4mx4r. Nennartx. xeex ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: 53,004A" nM 9F mr4551gM as c.I.r ana ITEM xmx Re.e N+f.xm3o.mn f+4 a5.whgewnr4 p�M.�+xct fbM ouaaPTlox 9x. u5r rw wr..m aaaewlen tatwbw lw ]MtT WTP51a! ANOIMf roramx TmaTIIIT-iaM MSTPSAE ANOwII ma. rowaaq To1NM 9Mf PMaS Aa101wI w.r.r cwmsuwitr, ropw]w TW wN1 UMPSR AmaaT c..n cumuvlmn uwffrw.r Tm ipp uwrwa AM01wT ara Lm. roraaxp Tes INM 11S1wtlDE Sm01MT 81 18' RCP M 1428 LF 3{2.80 U9919.00 S]5.aa 1"100.00 "8." 385"7.92 583.00 $809".00 MDD 351281.00 51.00 $7 828.00 82 21' RCP can M 90 LF WAS 54083.50 $77.00 58930.00 $63.W 3{503.30 N DO 58210.00 S4S.00 $1050.00 $5].00 56130.00 B9 24' RCP, 918In a 121 LF 561.0 33]095.45 5105.00 37570500 $57.0 W1I81.IM oo 551]90.00 MOO "2539.00 587.00 518307.00 U 30" RCP can F 592 LF SW20 559912.10 $108.00598330.00 $7571 $70252.81 W.DO $7/504.00 MDO m8W.00 MOO 380858.00 B5 36- RCP, coml in 890 LF $W.10 578529.09 5145.00 3129550.00 Mn M.V010 $124.00 $110380.00 MOO 385"0.00 $110.00 $1032"1.00 M 42" RCP, letem 204 LF $110.25 529100.90 5190.90 550160,00 $125." 533110.18 Sim DO 538010.00 3122.00 $3220500 3142.D0 $3708.00 B7 48- RCP, bk In F 237 LF S12p.1S $30006.55 5253.00 2331.00 $151.03 3367".11 5185.00 $39105.00 $152.09 $38024.00 3180.00 W 850.9 88 5'Ct in ..W* In W EA $1955.00 3117300.00 51800.00 $98900.00 $1516.14 $91088.0 $1808.09 $119000.00 52600.00 SIWD00.00 $2200.00 $132800.00 B9 S IMBIT In 1 E4 S 334.60 3$4.50 59000.00 $300D.00 $1521.88 $1571.05 S 530.00 $2530.00 "500.00 51500.00 "000.00 "000.00 BID S MINT Bram In 1 EA 52334.50 52334.50 $2800.00 $2800.40 $1879." 51879.90 $3450.00 $300.00 $7200.D0 $7200.00 31800.00 S3800.00 811 TNbt Exbneuon,E&M$7 EA ST",95 529283.35 "BOD0 $28050.90 154KIII.30 $219B3.W 3833,00 $20889.00 $1000.00 53]990.00 5880,00 22"0.00 812 1' M9nIrokT gmfn b08n 21 EA 32]].60 588821.50 32000.00 "2000.00 $1"8.98 W"9.58 32000.00 $42000.00 51800.00 $37800.00 $2900.00 900.00 813 5' ManaabT A, mm h . > EA $34$70.00 22{4]200 $9]00.90$25900.00 381.45 $10530.15 32]60.00 2193211.00 52200.00 315900.00 $3000.00 321000.00 814 8' 4 Mug T & In 4 6A 35589.60 525358.00 0500 19 .00 32]95.0 511181.80 53100.00 512400.00 f3000.00 512000.00 "500.00 $15000.00 B15 Manhole Rha, oDn1IB18 in f Th 2 FA $1814.30 53719.00 31200.00 52400." SB".28 51288.60 S1"0.00 53800." si00.99 59$7$7.90 S $79$7,00 550$7$7,0$7 -0 m 2)x C_ wW o -i cm cj _0m vx CD C_ �W o -� to Cj 0e4of 9 PS Bib R Edwin GII& mm late 0 LF $11.50 S/BO.W 58.W .W 51]51 ]01.60 316.00 5720.W 510.00 3100.00 525,00 51000.00 UMV Mwftle Rin, B CpwrAqutemenb, B17 3 EA $676.00 $1726.00 417M. $2.11M.W 5761.63 52 BI.d9 SMS.W 521]5.00 .W $WO.W 3060.00 $2.M.W S01et7EMTea9nem(16')(4:1),c pkyin B18 EeM 2 EA 1b0.W $Z760.00 ]00.00 1100.00 i612t0 1681.20 $MO.W 11360.00 21900.W 39800.00 3700.00 $1100.00 EmWn Cantrd M Sodit, WmVlele In plop per 019 6116 5Y 34.72 390 62 19.50 06.W 52,12 515628.72 38.60 (661]7.80 32.W 31]96/.00 $3.60 SMASB,00 POeullon PAvanlion, compiele in Oiace perlf®Q 020 1 LS $18W2.00 $16002.00 58000,00 36000.0 3]6632.10 $3868210 39130.00 5900.W 525000.00 $26000.00 Sn,M.W $26000.00 821 SW.Wk Otaine, can in 4 EA 5134.13 $538.92 $800.00 57 200.00 IiV4,80 $1099.20 5465.W 1 B46W 5350.00 St 100.00 5126.00 5500.00 TnIocn Seth M Otalna,e, Wmpbb in gate per B22 3047 IS $2.89 SOIWA3 0 S $1529.50 $131 33668,87 $9.50 51060/.50 30.50 $1,523,W $7.W $21329.0 W Core 5 GMer, canpble In plain per Linmr am Em LF 1 $10.07 $125.119.75 $10.0 $124 .W $12.51 165436.76 510.95 5128 SH.76 1LW 31b615.W 11.00 $1366]5.00 Gnan6tlPn Cw 8 Ge R I. mmpbte B24 50 Is 1113.0 $874.W $1.00 5200,00 $12.15 006.W N.eo $290.00 510.0 5500.00 51200 1 W.W Panenynt Repep, Wmp*M In place per Sau 025 670 BY 350.31 $33641.70 MOO $allo.W Sb.10 $59027.W 567.50 W525.M $31.W =7W.W "SM Sb1W.W B26 Tnft COnpd cOmbb in 1 LS $10,M,W S10000.W SAM IN $Zi,"00 51197.12 $12197.12 5176W.W 5176W.W $13 WO.W f190W.W 522WO.W Y220W.013 Subfolel Part6' 1191fhpCu hB26 f788,001.07 (988,671.60 $808,820.78 $900,7"86 $813,88228 $984818.08 _0m vx CD C_ �W o -� to Cj 0e4of 9 TYIRATMNOFb CEPARIMEMf CR plOM9UM-CT-OICOItPe! CMNT,TIFPB BASE BID TABU MlllT: am cxminx PA wre: raenmm.. xo...s.. t: 40N ENGINEER'S ESTIWTE S3.0KMA0 19! V WlRltlOrt HaCW�YrOgP X ca CD = 003 CD 0 xen.9rar.�. aLm Matlgr. w.. aMtlnpmwn.i9rol.er4C1 lmA1 Im.rr..mcaMme9an 1,inb m Tm.rjM) rwsnc roWniM Tw TlIDaab a... roMNR Tes)1411 N.Lr carrv[tlen Lr. roae.. T.°rw a.n ca.mMbn 1w11wtlen.94 Tw IMM llA- roamw TerTNM fi@A OWCp1IIlON ox. IMr WtMM:C aMOWr UIIt M11CC 11MOWi uHl%aCE I$101Mf uHrPRICI aYOWI Uar PpCf IIMOIMr 1 1119C! MgIMf Cl 8'45' D.I. 1101KI, eMniiiiIgi N 42 EA $38].50 5164$5.00 Em szm.w 5315.51 $18191.42 $M.a 50100.00 $410.90 $4820.00 $440.00 55880.0 C2 W 45' D.I. Berg, ix,rripliit, m pl. $4 FA 3323.10 $10895.60 $1o5.00 535]0.0 $480.15 $1884e.10 $M.00 $8500.00 $155.00 $52]0.00 $M.0 $13,11M 0 C3 17 45' O.l Berl cOmphilbe, In 4 FA Sb07.15 52028.80 5160.00 5840.00 $920.02 $3811.28 $350.00 $1,,iixim $no.00 $B20.00 SW0.90 $1,7W.W Gw Fee HYErmM MaenlOy m-1), ppnWeY in plain Each 25 EA $3385.20 $04830.00 $3000.00 575000.00 $2713.22 $88580.50 $3000.00 $75000.0 $3600.00 W6.1M.00 $2700.0 28]500.0 CS FBe Hyd Aee bly (TY -2), ampbb in plea pw gem 2 FA $3558.50 57119.0 $2,11W.M $4600.00 $33W.21 58708.42 $3350.0 $8700.00 52300.00 14600.0 UXOM $4400.00 C6 6' 11 1/4' Bi n i, coin m 5 EA $282.50 $1 31250 $]000 5350.00 $378.84 31699.20 5200.00 $1 000.00 $110.00 $550.00 2170.00 51..00 C] 1Y 111/4'8 coineb in mimxt w $51030 $51030 $30000 $300.00 $923.55 $823.55 5550.00 $550.00 $385.00 $305.00 $430.0 5430.00 C6 8'x6"Tea N 2 E4 $315.0 3830.0 315200 $30{.00 SWIM $1883.88 3425.00 $850.00 $210.00 5420.00 5600.00 $1 00.00 09 12'x e'Teea bbm 4 FA $5T].50PU 0.00 $321.00 $128{.0 3885.]9 $3W3.16 S68].0 $2668.00 $410.00 $1610.00 5500.0 $ 000.0 C10 In 8'Tee coin in la 1 EA SST].50.% $365.00 $385.00 $1005.13 $tM.13 2]10.00 $]10.00 $450.0 $450.00 $5]000 wo.00 C11 e" Gab end VW. Box, amplide in plea per 7 FA 3830.00000 5440.00 $3000.00 $1855.15 511588.05 $950.00 $8050.00 5540.00 53780.00 $9w.w 50510.00 C12 C Gab and Valve e , ampbb In plea per EMb 5 EA $]4].0 33]38.00 $845.00 3322$00 5188].59 $8337.85 $1 00.00 58000.00 $800.00 51000.0 $1140.0 25]00.00 C13 1Y Gale ii M Valve Box, amplefe In plea par Each 1428.05 310009.35 $1200.00 $9400.00 $2438.08 31]058.88 52000.00 $14000.00 $1400.0 $0800.00 52100.00 1{]00.00 G{ 1Yxe'ReBum In 2 EA $420.0 SWB,00 5102.00 $2W.00 $]58.]4 ii b1BA8 $210.00 5420.00 5175.00 $350.00 5310.00 5880.00 C15 8" WabOine.am In n 1140 EA 591.50 595810.00 2]0.00 578800.00 515.00 21]191.20 22].00 $30780.00 $30.00 $$4200.00 $80.00 588400.00 X ca CD = 003 CD 0 -0m m k to = co _ MM 0 =i mn 3e6 of 9 Pal C19 8• W0ld. wm in lace 211 LF 71.86 $9506.05 375.00 $20 PS.w 321.55 28052.e6 SJ2.00 f8581.w 390.00 50310.00 559.00 511881.00 C17 IT Wela80ro wm M 1961 LF 571.50 $/2658.50 580.00 5106080.00 SJ2H 341788.8/ 9.00 362880.00 595.00 M]2B6w 336.00 518598.00 C18 8'TM-In wm In 25 LF 15]6.00 3903]5.00 3860.00 15260.00 SBZ0,68 51561/.w 31000.00 527 60.00 Y1000.00 550000,00 10.00 $20 .00 C10 e•TbJn wm M 19 EA 51280.00 518980.00 SBOO.W 37800.Op 1066.88 $19727.55 51050.00 519850.00 32000.00 328 OOO.w $810.00 $10630.00 Cm TPI C In lace 7 EA $25250 $1837.50 $5200 $751,00 31785.83 $12601.51 5110.00 57]0.00 30000 3030.00 570.00 SIBO.w Trercfl Safely far WeWiine, wmplape in place par 021 180 LF $0.53 $85.10 $0.50 i00.w $1.21 3217.80 39.50 1890.00 $0.50 $15.99 36.00 Seoo.ob C22 T2TCConw In as u 1 LS $10000.00 $1000000 518050.00 S180w.00 398287.35 S362B7,35 517800.00 517600.00 $19000.00 $19000.00 uzm,w $i2000.w CZa WaM ASoxa 1 LS $16000.00 $1500000 $16000.00 1 515000.00 115.m.m 315000.00 1b 000.00 11500000 Islawom. 515w0.w 5150w.00 i150w.00 Subtoh/Part 'C' C1 tbm h C2J #16,28290 $369,421.006322,9/9.71 5900,081.00 $2%300.00 $321,867, 0 -0m m k to = co _ MM 0 =i mn 3e6 of 9 TANAATgMOf �$ DPIMT.E1(!OF WOM®WO.CT' OFCONUS CIIR4i1. TIUf BASE BID TPBUAm W.. Mn Ow 14. .m WMx�Yv. NewMriz mm ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: S3A04AWAO laE V CO1N1101t MICa1wY6W� nom) X co _ CD OW 0 -� n Mm�64N AyeaMbRWwIZ M. &M MpownrxFIIC] HwN4 11bnMWw'e CpWulpn INIIWyM CC TmFiM11 }Ly M. Poiea 3IM1 TaTl7fl-0q Rrx CeMn Pob[LiR TOyIMN WT.Y CwbWIm V. PoN[1NY TIm HW GM CasYiWbn INWIWMC� 1mLiMp L10.' IOMM TO HIM REM OILCIITION OTY. NR UIf WOC! 1YOIWT YHTPbC[ IIWIM IMf MIB! WOBRI Ulel WtlC! IYg11R WRMIR YpIM IIIRMY aMTIM D1 8' 1 S-NWY Sewer (0•-6), opmpeb In pce par LMMLF= 319 LF 228.40 SB378.W saom 5520.0 $51.88 SI6543.34 $W.m 59570.W S30.m 58670.- .W jil.m.w D2 W 1 Santry Saxer I0•-97, ample in place pM Li.r Fnot 1.313 LF $3255 542738.15 s90.W $110170.W $54.81 $7170293 $350 24685500 $33.W 513329.0 $42.0 $551M.W 03 e-1 Sw t w Saxer (8-10), complete N place W UnMTFQoj 731 LF 538.75 528884.25 Stm.O $731W.00 $57.19 54/X6.89 S44.W $32/84.0 $37.W $27o47.W $51.W $37281.W W e"1S iy Saxer (10- 12),WmVbH In pace 141 LF 500.95 55773.85 5110.0 516510.0 385.89 W92W.49 571.0 $10011.0 1 $45.0 26J45.W $97.W $13677.W DS 1Y I SnMery Serer le• -107, OmpMH In place W Lirmr FtTtin n LF $37.80 5882.60 $170.W 54420.0 WAS $1075.08 550.0 $1508.W 1120.00 53120,0 $132W $3682W W 121 Sanbary Serer (10'.12), --plate In place 20 ix 549.05 $1118.30 $180.W 3408000 584.46 $1875.0 S82.W $2132.0 $125.W b W.W s150.W 53800.W D] 1r 4 SnftiT Saxer (12-14), wmp in plain 28 LF 554.80 $1528.00 5220.00 $810.0 01.02 51706.W SBB.W $27H.m $1300 SJB4OW $218.W Se104.W DB Manhole Ring and Cowes Replammanl, rn plebe N 14 FA $5250 $]35OW $00.0 $112m.W $711SW $11040.0 3683.0 $12W2.W $7W.00 S98W.W S1WO.W sa4m.w D9 Fbwgiael4in l (0- 67, mmplele in pace w Eai 9 EA 33675.W 599075.W 52800.00 $2520.00 32,294,77 52065283 $310.W 5 ,M.m S3WO.W 22]000.0 $4/W.W QBBW.W 010 5'# Rbingb44 Menti (0 - 6), complete in pace w Ego 3 FA $61%W $24W7.00 $9,000W $27000.W 55488.83 2164-.79 SO,0.W $1850.0 W640.W 51B20.W $7.MvW $210o.W 011 ENH D"M for 4' MWhobe(> ). complete in 4 w $189,W $7W.W $10.0 $400.0 5195.10 S78D.40 $880.0 $2780.W $250.W 21000.0 S3W.W 314m.m 012 ESIH Depth S S lit roB (ab), opmpb In 24 VF $210.W 35040.- s280.W SB24o.m I 5252.0 Sams)." ll.W.W 53900.0 PW.00 584m.m 5510.0 SIZ24.W D13 8' Dmp DMIIeB9n Aeeemdy (10'-12), compble in 1 EA 342-.0 3420,0 i2 WO.W 52500.0 5210283 52102.83 5230.0 $23- 00 523-.0 i23m.0 32 o00.m S 00.0 D14 V DM Cnnedbn Aesem0ly (14' -18), mnpbte in 7 FA 54410.W 530070.- $31-.00 526800.00 5210283 514]20.51 $14W.W 5306m.m 52400.0 51660.0 SS ]m.W 525000.0 015 17 DMP Connetllon AlW" (12'-14), Dain bie in 1 EA $4515.00 54515.00 33000 5300.0 3243].85 5243].85 $50W.W $sm0.- 5320.0 5320.0 56500.0 5650.0 nom) X co _ CD OW 0 -� n 1, Reese$ PrOpOs81 had one enor in tiro eMenaion of their tmfflc aonbol cost, The ermr reaueed M the addition of M.75 to Mair overall MJect costa. -0m vx Q_ C_ 00 0 pee of 9 it DMP COWwCdOn AaaMnbty (11'. 16) Pe D16 rteln 1 EA 55365.00 55355.00 31500.00 51500.00 51651A1 1851A1 35800.00 55800.00 S]g00.00 SJ 400.00 55000.00 16000.00 tr O W Cwn@dM AN6mby (16'.167, D17 in 1 EA $377500 $57M.00 $5 Soo.00 $5500,00 31851.11 1&51.11 Se 30000 $3300.Oo 53800.00 53800.00 56800.00 $3800.00 1' SanRary Sewer Servke CorBrotYmn, oOmprtR I D18 43 WA 5787.50 9388250 5600.00 521500.00 SBJ6.51 .B3 51060.00 315150.00 51100.00 SM 300.00 $870.00 $37410.00 e" VCP m PVC Connectbn, canpbte M phce Per D18 7 FA 5103.00 $]36.00 5100.00 00.00 $335.68 1818.78 5850.00 SS 860.00 5110.00 $no.w 510000 $70000 1rVCP m PVC Connec5on, celelempIn place 0p 1 EA $310.00 $210.00 $120.00 512000 $804.28 Sa0/.28 51050.00 51050.00 5158.70 3158.70 5130.00 $13000 rro m m Etl3tlia Menhde, canpbMM pace Per D21 2 EA tB4s.00 31880.00 $300.00 idao.6o Se5].51 5171502 51300.00 $3000.00 51000.00 52000.00 51000.00 $2 0m. 0 FlOxede FlR Martial, mmplete in place par 0M 147 LF 513.66 00865 $5.00 MOM 31282 S188B34 510.50 51513.50 522.00 59231.00 $37.00 $5438.00 T,endl $aklY for Sanibry Sewer, oOmpkpa In 023 2,238 LF $2.10 $1701.80 1.00 2$3.00 51.21 ]08.18 M.00 $15 BM.00 11.00 i2 x58.00 110.00 JB0.00 D2d MO TraCOnbd, com M i LS 510000.00 $1x000.00 $16000.W 516000.00 S38267.3e $1]600.00 51780o,CO SiJ 000.00 513000.00 3 000.00 S 000.00 Wubwabr U6BIy Albwallce, oanpble m place 025 1 LS Mo 000.00 520000.00 120 000.00 S20 000.00 $20000.00 MO OOO. W 320000.00 520 000.00 520 000.00 320 000.00 520 OOO.W 520 000.00 Subtotal Part v, s D9th]ou hD25 $28$211.80 1130,691.00 f982,292.60 t279,903.70 1378$3200 1, Reese$ PrOpOs81 had one enor in tiro eMenaion of their tmfflc aonbol cost, The ermr reaueed M the addition of M.75 to Mair overall MJect costa. -0m vx Q_ C_ 00 0 pee of 9 TANI Ml wllba rrwMk4,y1„rneia aRee new Aweta Nea,rall6 aeeeaw�RaReaaW."+wT IB V a,eera,o P,eFe N. and BASE BID bolt 3 -lanes R—I Awnw. 1. Reeso's Proposal had one ermr In the enenwon of their trams control coat. The anor ms,, a in the addition of $7.75 to their overall project msa. CD O y CO Pape 9 of 9 Nre Ma�em Cashuwon JWONe New Ca,betlea. Inc W.t.YnwOGroN . 11M WnMaMon terLm 51.111 AL BASE BID rkecRlFl Pert -N Sana Al Tl Wh M2 $1,805,811.87 $1,701,159.66 51,607,/11.71 51,572,877.10 $1,771,510.00 $1,578,027.80 Part •B' nems Bt Thm hB26 $795,661.07 $956,521.50 $808,520.78 $900,76685 $817,652.30 $904,979.00 Pan'C. lama Cl Taa,gh CM $315,28130 $369,/21.00 $322,617.71 $300,081.00 $786,300.00 $721,807.00 Pat'd Items On Thro h D25 $283,230.80 $120,88600 $362,282.60 $279,907.70 $379,48200 TOTAL BABE BID (Pans X. 'B'. V AN 'my $2999,999.99 $3,051,096.00 53,135,759.45 $3,181,396.00 1 53,184,315.80 1. Reeso's Proposal had one ermr In the enenwon of their trams control coat. The anor ms,, a in the addition of $7.75 to their overall project msa. CD O y CO Pape 9 of 9 \ Mproject \ BondissueProject \ exh614 Z dwg CORPUS CHRISTI BAY Z PROJECT LOCATr_( F.M. 43 PROJECT tt 6147 EXH_TBIT "D" Ir czr~ cou~czL EX,~T HORNE ROAD STREET IMPROVEMENTS IIDEPARTM£NT OF ENClNEERING SERVICES FROM AYERS ST TO KOSTORYZ ST II PAGE: I of 1 CI~ OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS ~] DATE: ~2/04/2003 ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING $11,356.56 IN UNAPPROPRIATED INTEREST EARNINGS IN STREET 1990 CIP FUND NO. 3534; APPROPRIATING $11,350.48 UNAPPROPRIATED INTEREST EARNINGS IN STREET 1995 ClP FUND NO. 3537; APPROPRIATING $233,960.46 IN UNAPPROPRIATED INTEREST EARNINGS IN STREET 1995B CIP FUND NO. 3538; AND APPROPRIATING $160,642.35 IN UNAPPROPRIATED INTEREST EARNINGS IN STREET 2001 ClP FUND NO. 3540 FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS TO HORNE ROAD FROM AYERS TO KOSTORYZ (BOND ISSUE 2000); AMENDING FY 2002-2003 CAPITAL BUDGET ADOPTED BY ORDINANCE NO. 025144 BY INCREASING APPROPRIATIONS BY $417,309.85; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY BE I1' ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS: SECTION 1. That $11,356.56 unappropriated interest earnings from Street 1990 CIP Fund No. 3534; $11,350.48 unappropriated interest earnings in Street 1995 ClP Fund No. 3537; $233,960.46 unappropriated interest earnings from Street 1995B CIP Fund 3538; and $160,642.35 unappropriated interest earnings from Street 2001 ClP Fund 3540 ;are appropriated for Street Improvements at Horne Road from Ayers to Kostoryz (Bond Issue 2000). SECTION 2. That the FY 2002-2003 Capital Budget adopted in Ordinance No. 025144 is amended by increasing appropriations by $417,309.85. SECTION 3. That upon written request of the Mayor or five Council members, copy attachgd, the City Council (1) finds and declares an emergency due to the need for immediate action necessary for the efficient and effective administration of City affairs and (2) suspends the Charter rule that requires consideration of and voting upon ordinances at two regular meetings so that this ordinance is passed and takes effect upon first reading as an emergency measure this the __ day of ., 2003. ATTEST: THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI Armando Chapa City S~;cretary APPROVED: December 4, 2003 Lis~ Aguilar ~) Assistant City Attorney for Cit~ Attorney Samuel L. Neal, Jr. Mayor 34 AGENDA MEMORANDUM December 9, 2003 SUBJECT: Multi-Purpose Arena - (Project No. 4235 & 4236) AGENDA ITEM: Motion to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute a contract in the amount of $1,219,122.00 with KIS-$$1, LLC, Joint Venture (Kitchen Installation Services/Stafford- Smith, Inc.), of Houston Christi, Texas, for the Multi-Purpose Arena and Convention Center Food Service Equipment. FUNDING: Funding is available from the Arena and Convention Center CIP Funds. RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the motion as presented. /~gef R. Escobar, P. E. Director of Engineering Services ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Exhibit A. Exhibit B. Exhibit D. Background Information Bid Tabulation Location Map H:~OME\KEVINS\GEN~,rena\Food SvcEquipmentV~.gendaMemo.doc ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SUBJECT: Multi-Purpose Arena & Convention Center Food Service Equipment BACKGROUND: Food Service Equipment for both facilities was originally programmed to be awarded as a separate contract to avoid markup by the general contractor. The equipment for the Convention Center consists of a new kitchen that will serve the Arena and Convention Center. The equipment for the Arena consists of concession stands, and associated equipment. BIDS: The project was bid as a base bid consisting of a pdce for Arena equipment and a pdce for Convention Center equipment. Bids were publicly opened on November 19, 2003. A total of eight bids were received ranging from $1,219,122 to $1,394,417.14. The bid tabulation is attached. See Exhibit C. The bids submitted by ABC Hotel and Restaurant Supply and Strategic Equipment of Texas, LP were determined to be non-responsive. ABC Supply did not have a power of attorney attached to their bid bond. Strategic Equipment did not submit a bid bond with originally signatures. This did not alter the priority of award. The Iow qualified bid was submitted by KIS-SSI, LLC, Joint Venture of Houston, Texas, in the amount of $1,219,122. The estimate cost of the equipment was $1,400,000. of the remaining in the Coliseum. The change order summary and change order are attached. See Exhibit B. FUNDING: The change order will be funded by the Arena CIP Fund. H:\HOME\KEVINS\G ENV~,rena\FoodSvcEquipment~AwardBkgExhA.doc IEXHIBIT "A" I Page I of 1 TABULATION OF BIDS Page 1 of 1 DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING - CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS TABULATED BY: Angel R.Escobar, P.E., Director of Engineering Services DATE: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 TIME OF COMPLETION: 62 Calendar Days (No Later Than Sept.30,2003) ENGINM'S ESTIMATE: $1,400,000 Corpus Christi Multi -Purpose Arena and KIS-SSI, LLC Kitchen Mission Restaurant Supply Edward Don 6 Company Tombell Corp dba Kirby Convention Center Food Service Equipment Installation Co 2005 McDaniel Restaurant Supply Cc Package - Project No. 4235-4236 Services/Stafford-Smith Inc 1227 S.St.Marys St. Carrollton, TX 75006 809 S.Eastman Road UNIT PRICE 5213 Brookglen,Ste C San Antonio, TX 78210 Arena Concession Longview, TX 75602 LS Houston, TX 77017 $449,445.00 $497,929.07 $497,929.07 ITEM DESCRIPTION QTY. UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 1. Arena Concession 1 LS $407,123.00 $407,123.00 es $378,470.00 $378,470.00 $414,000.00 $414,000.00 $432,979.00 $432,979.00 Drawings) Equipment (AFS 2. Convention Center Drawings) LS $917,852.00 $917,052.00 $896,488.07 $896,488.07 $908,174.00 $908,174.00 $907,000.00 $907,000.00 2. Convention Center 1 LS $811,999.00 $811,999.00 $841,836.00 $841,836.00 $885,000.00 $885,000.00 $910,711.00 $910,711.00 Drawings) Kitchen Equipment (FS - TOTAL BASE BZD: Drawings) $1,367,297.00 - - - - '$1,376,919.00 •$1,339,000.00 --- TOTAL BASE BID: Perf/Pay Bonds $13,674.00 $1,219,122.00 $1,220,306.00 $1,299,000.00 $1,343,690.00 Total ♦ Bonds serf/Fay Bonds $36,609.00 Total � Bonds Corpus Christi Multi -Purpose Arena and Convention Center Food Service Equipment Package - Project No. 4235-9236 Duray/JF Duncan Ind.Inc. 2875 W.Oxfoid Ave M7 Englewood, CO 80110 Tari Inc db. Jean's Restaurant Equip. qu p. 926 S.St apl es St Corpus Christi,TX 78401 'ABC Hotel 6 Restaurant 1 Su pp y 1122 East 51•` Street Austin, TX 78723 'Strategic Equip of Texas LP (Top of the Table Div) 2625 Broadway San Antonio, TX 78215 ITEM DESCRIPTION QTY. UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 1. Arena Concession 1 LS $449,445.00 $449,445.00 $497,929.07 $497,929.07 $468,745.00 $468,745.00 $432,000.00 $432,000.00 Equipment (AFS Drawings) 2. Convention Center 1 LS $917,852.00 $917,052.00 $896,488.07 $896,488.07 $908,174.00 $908,174.00 $907,000.00 $907,000.00 Kitchen Equipment (FS Drawings) TOTAL BASE BZD: $1,367,297.00 $1,394,417.14 '$1,376,919.00 •$1,339,000.00 Perf/Pay Bonds $13,674.00 Total ♦ Bonds ••.... ..�..p.....�a.c uiva - ew., uiu ,rvl VLUv ue Cowes at nLwruey aLcacnsa io inelr Did Dong) Strategic equip. did not Submit a bid bond with original signatures. F~le : councilexhibits\~ ~ . . ,. ~ ! / / ! ~HARBOR BRIDGE .~' ~. _ ~.:-~.~:.. ~/~ ~ ~ CZTY PROJECT No. 4235/4236 VICINITY MAP EXH[BZT "D" NOT TO S~E MUL TI- PURPOSE ARENA & CONVENTION CENTER CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS CITY COUNCIL EXHIBIT DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING SERVICES PAGE: I ol= 1 GATE: 12-09-2003 35 AGENDA MEMORANDUM December 9, 2003 SUBJECT: Professional Minor League Baseball Stadium - Project No. 4285 AGENDA ITEM: Motion authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to execute a engineering services contract in an amount not to exceed $32,500.00 with Wilbur Smith and Associates, Inc. of Dallas, Texas for a parking, roadway, and traffic study for the Professional Minor League Baseball Stadium. FUNDING: Funding will be supplied by the Corpus Christi Business and Job Development Corporation (4-A Board). 4-A Board proceeds do not require appropriation. RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the motions as presented. F~rPAngel R.'l~scobar, P.E. ' Director of Engineering Services ADDITIONAL SUPPORT MATERIAL Exhibit A. Background Information Exhibit B. Contract Summary Exhibit C. Site Map H:~HOME~KEVINS\GEN~Baseball\Traffic~AEMemo.doc BACKGROUNDINFORMATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The contract provides for a parking, roadway, and traffic study for the professional minor league baseball stadium. These services are necessa~ to provide information needed to ensure traffic and parking issues are identified and propedy address. The investigation will consider the impact of other developments in the area including the arena and convention center. The stadium will be configured to "AA" standards with a capacity for 6,000 attendees. The project will be located on the site of the current cotton compress warehouses owned by the Port of Corpus Christ west of the Harbor Bddge (U. S. 181 ). See Exhibit C. The facility will front on Port Avenue with a minimum of 1,500 parking to be provided by the Port of Corpus Chdsti west and south of the site. The site will include approximately parking spaced for V.I.P and team use. The City is committed to construction of the facility in the amount of $15,000,000. This amount includes the extension of Tancahua to Port Avenue. CONSULTANT SELECTION: Wilbur Smith has developed a model of traffic and parking conditions north of 1-37 for the Arena and Convention Center. The update of the model They have the greatest familiarity with conditions in the area. Wilbur Smith has worked with HKS on other projects, cCord requested the geotechnical investigation be assigned to Kleinfelder based on their prior working experience and the qualifications of Kleinfelder's local staff engineers. CONTRACT: A contract summaPJ is attached. See E~ibit B. FUNDING: Funding is provided by proceeds administered by the 4-A Board. The City acts as the agent on behalf of the 4-A Board. Funding will be advanced from the 1/8 cent sales tax pending the issuance of bonds by the Board. The Board has approved a reimbursement resolution to permit repayment of expenditures. H:\HOME~KEVINS\GEN~BasebalI~Traffic~,EBkgExhA.doc IEXHIBITA I Page 1 of 1 EXHIBIT B CONTRACT SUMMARY BASEBALL STADIUM PARKINGt ROADWAY AND TRAFFIC STUDY I. SCOPE OF SERVICES The Consultant will complete the following tasks upon receiving Notice to Proceed from the City. Task 1 - Project Coordination. Consultant will participate in a maximum of two (2) project progress meetings with City staff and/or other involved agencies or businesses. It is envisioned that one meeting will be held near the beginning of the project and will serve as the kick-off meeting to discuss project objectives, issues and data needs. Another project meeting is envisioned to be held near the end of the project to present preliminary study findings and recommendations. Consultant will provide the City staff with briefings on interim results as they are completed. Task 2 - Data Collection. Maximum use will be made of available data and information relating to area transportation and roadway conditions. Consultant will conduct field investigations and supplemental data collection efforts needed to determine existing and anticipated traffic and roadway conditions in the study area. The City will provide Consultant with available site/development plans, anticipated area development and estimated schedules, and other detailed information related to the proposed development associated within the project vicinity. Task 3 - Critical Concurrency of Events. The frequency of occurrence of types of events and multiple events are a major consideration for parking supply for facilities within walking distance of each other. The parking demand and the locations of parking in turn have a significant impact on traffic operations. Establishing the levels of event parking considerations is usually a matter of local policy based upon local user characteristics. Seasonal variations in event schedules at each venue should also be considered. Task 4 - Transit Service Concepts. The Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) is currently investigating concepts for enhancing its trolley service to provide a higher capacity service to the study area. This service may have an influence on how people arrive at the events, potentially reducing the number of vehicles parking in the vicinity of the venues. Consultant will coordinate with RTA and assess the potential for current public transportation concepts to move parking demand to peripheral locations and reduce traffic volumes in the vicinity of the events. Task 5 - Parkin,q Needs Durinq Critical Concurrent Events. The critical concurrent event attendance established in Task 3 will be translated into a number of vehicles destined for the event through the use of average occupancy values for the types of events involved. Typical vehicle occupancy values range from 2.0 to 3.5 persons per vehicle, depending on a wide range of factors including whether or not parking is free. Parking demand estimates will be modified to reflect the transit service provisions to develop an estimate of the parking demand in the vicinity of the event venues. The current supply of parking will be examined for its ability to accommodate parking demand within a reasonable walking distance to each venue. The parking contours of each venue will be graphically depicted, showing their overlapping influence. Target areas for parking development will be identified, as needed. Task 6 - Traffic Operations Durin,q Critical Concurrent Events. The critical concurrent event parking demand from Task 5 will be simulated using the CORSIM model developed for the previous traffic analysis of the new arena and expended convention center. Additional model enhancements will be added to consider the location of the baseball stadium and proposed street network modifications. The model will be used to identify potential undesirable conditions of excessive delay or queue lengths. Various traffic control treatments will be explored to mitigate modeled undesirable traffic conditions. Task 7 - Traffic Manaqement Plan. Based upon the results of Task 6, a traffic management plan will be developed to accommodate the critical concurrent events. The TMP will include a set of event traffic management measures, such as temporary closures, diversions and lane control for entry and exit travel patterns. Recommended transportation improvements could also include intersection operational/geometric, traffic controt and/or roadway type improvements. CONSULTANT will Exhibit B Page 1 of 2 H:',HOME\KEVINS\GEN~3aseball\TrafficV~ESummaryExh B.doc graphically illustrate the recommended improvements in schematic diagrams, in addition to representing the traffic operations in the CORSIM simulation. Task 8 - Future Traffic Operations with Relocated Harbor Bridoe. TxDOT is currently in the design development phase of a project to reconstruct the Harbor Bridge and relocate it further westward to line up with the Crosstown Expressway interchange with IH 37. When this project is complete, the access into the venues north of IH 37 will potentially be changed, and new opportunities for access, circulation and development will be available. CONSULTANT will work with the City planning and engineering staff to examine the implications of this condition and determine whether that future condition will have an implication on current improvement considerations. Consultant will modify the CORSIM model to represent the future year development, roadway network and traffic conditions as a tool for this assessment. Task 9 - Study Documentation and Presentation. A brief Traffic and Parking Study Report will be prepared summarizing data collection efforts, analyses, findings, and recommendations. The study report will include appropriate text, tables, illustrations and graphics. Three copies of the draft report will be submitted to the City. Following receipt of review comments on the draft report, five copies of the Final Report will be prepared and submitted to the City. CONSULTANT will make up to two (2) presentations in Corpus Christi to designated controlling entities, as directed by the City. II. SCHEDULE It is understood that this assignment must be completed in concert with the development of the plans for the baseball stadium. Given complete information is provided to CONSULTANT at the initiation of this Contract, Tasks 1 through 6 and a draft report of findings can be completed within six (6) weeks from receiving the notice to proceed from the City. The remaining tasks will be completed within six months of nofice to proceed with the project. III.FEES Fee for Basic Services. The City will pay the Consultant Engineer a fixed fee for providing all "Basic Services" of $32,500.00. Summary of Fees: Task Description Fee I.A.1 Project Coordination 2,200 I.A.2 Data Collection 2,500 I.A.3 Critical Currency of Events 3,500 I.A.4 Transit Service Concepts 1,500 I.A.5 Parking Needs during Critical Concurrent Events 4,000 I.A.6 Traffic Operations during Critical Concurrent Events 6,000 I.A.7 Traffic Management Plan 3,500 I.A.8 Future Traffic Operations with Relocated Harbor Bridge 6,500 I.A.9 Study Documentation Report & Presentation 2,800 Total Fee $32,500 Exhibit B I Page 2 of 2 I H:\HOME~KEVINS\GEN~Baseball\Traffic~AESummaryExhB.doc F~le : \Mproject\councilexhibits\exh4$10. dwg PROJECT N - CORPUS CHRISTI BAY LOOAT,.r,[ON MAP NOT TO SCALE ~. ~_ ~ I (MUSEUU) ~ ~/~///~ /~~~tt CORPUS ~RISTI VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE CZTY PROJECT No. 4310 EXHZBZT "C" PROFESSZONAL MZNOR LEAGUE CZTY COUNCZL EXHZBZT DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING SE~CES BASEBALL STADZUM PAGE: 1 of 1 CI~ OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS DATE: 12-09-2003 36 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMORANDUM City Council Action Date: 12/9/03 AGENDA ITEM: Amending the Code of Ordinances, City of Corpus Christi, Chapter 55 Establish procedures regarding security deposit, delinquent payments, late fees, and average billing; providing for penalties; providing for severance; and providing for publication. ISSUE: Collection on delinquent accounts has been an on-going problem for the City as noted in correspondence to the Council in recent months. Since September, 2003, enhanced collection efforts for both active and inactive accounts has made a significant impact on this problem, and the staff is now recommending changes in policy that will help to further address delinquent payment for utility service. Some of these policy changes require an Ordinance change by Council. This agenda item provides for an update on the status of delinquent collections and the adoption of an Ordinance to implement recommended policy changes. REQUIRED COUNCIL ACTION: Approval of the Ordinance. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: NONE CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Ordinance as presented. · ~icl~elle W°rk~ .... Utility Business Office Manager Attachments: Power Point Presentation Proposed Changes in Billing Cycle (Timeline Comparison) Ordinance BACKGROUND INFORMATION Since September 8, 2003, the Utility Business Office has significantly enhanced collect efforts and the results have been tremendous. Additional temporary staffwas hired to process accounts eligible for disconnection for non-payment, resulting in a marked increase in disconnections and reconnects after an account has been brought current. In addition, field personnel have been deployed to return a week after service disconnection to insure that the account has not been reconnected illegally. With regard to accounts that have been permanently closed after disconnect for non-payment, delinquent balances have been forwarded to an outside collection agency since June of this year. As a result, we are beginning to see some impact on our aged accounts receivable for inactive accounts and should have fewer that need to be written off at the end of the current fiscal year. To further improve our aged accounts receivable on utility receipts, the staff recommends: Billing Cycle Adjustments As noted on the attachment, changes to the billing cycle would include: Allowing the customer more time to pay before a bill is past due and a penalty is added, but shortening the time in which service may be terminated for non- payment (thus reducing the amount of tune the receivable may go unpaid); and, Adjusting the penalty for late payment to 5% of the amount past due rather than a flat $5 so that there is a progressive penalty for higher amounts in delinquent status (and greater incentive to pay in a timely manner on higher balances). Chan~es in the Practice for Char~in~ Denosits Currently, City OrdInance stipulates that a deposit may be charged in the event of poor credit history, but this provision has not been exercised. It is recommended that all accounts disconnected for non-payment or tampering be charged a deposit equal to 1/6 of their annual bill or 2 times their monthly bill. New accounts established by customers with poor prior payment history would also be required to pay this same deposit. Deposits would be automatically refunded after a good payment history is established. In the event a customer closes their account before the deposit is refunded, or service is terminated for non-payment, the final bill would be subtracted from the deposit and a refund check issued for any balance remaining. While tightening up our billing processes, it is recommended that we improve customer service and convenience for regular and timely paying customers at the same time. The aforementioned changes would give customers a little more time to pay and not add a penalty until a reasonable grace period. As an added value, we would also like to begin offering an average billing plan as provided in the Ordinance presented for your consideration and summarized in the attached presentation. Utility Business Office Collections Update Recent Collection Activi J v September, 2003 - began enhanced efforts o Hired temporary employees to work back log o Doubled the number of disconnects for non payment worked on a daily basis o Initiated more regular service off over 7 days checks on accounts o Increased number of reconnects and collections on active accounts 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 A Disconnect/Reconnect Orders _ry A N Disconnects ■ Reconnects $1,200,00 $1,000,00 $800,00 $600,00 00 $400 , $200,00 Value of Reconnect Orders Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun 1,039,8 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov m i I I Aged Accounts Receivable (Active Accounts) September 8, 2003 December 1, 2003 30 days $ 1,343,385 30 days 60 days $ 748,305 60 days 90 days $ 500,103 90 days 120 days $ 420,114 120 days $ 3,011,907 $ 964,844 $ 280,727 $ 121,358 $ 115,132 $ 1,482,061 Inactive Account Collection Activity 2003 Delinquencies End of year Write-off's Jan- Feb- Mar- Apr- May. Jun- Jul -03 Aug- Sep- Oct- Nov - 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 — 30 day 60 day --*— 90 day --X-120 day Inactive Account Collection Efforts o June, 2003: Sent first file of accounts to collection agency o Accounts sent after finalled at least 90 days o Amount sent: $ 21357,206 v Amount collected to date: $ 39,269 Recommended Billing Policy Changes o Adjust billing cycle o Require deposit in event of poor credit Billing Cycle Current Recommended Due Date 15 days 21 days $5.00 5% Late Fee (18th day) (30th) Disconnect for Non Pay 60 days 45 days Current Deposit Practice o Deposits are only routinely collected on construction meters at this time. (Deposits MAYalready be collected on accounts which have been disconnected for non payment or when the customer has a poor payment history.) Recommended Deposit Practice ■ Existing Accounts: Charge if disconnected for non-payment or tampering ■ New Accounts: Require if have prior poor payment history ■ Amount: 1/6th the annual bill, or 2 times the monthly average ■ Refund: Automatically, without interest after 12 months of good credit history Promote Greater Customer Convenience ■ Implement Average ■ Online Payment and ■ Automatic Draft Billing Query New Average Billing o Eligible if have 12 months of good credit history o Use average of the most recent 12 monthly utility bills o Customer initially billed the average billing amount, and the difference shall be deferred o Each month, approximately ten percent of the deferred amount applied to the customer's next monthly average bill Questions? Billing Cycle (Days) Current Proposed Late Notice + $5.00 2nd Late Notice + n:n ref. n'P narr late fee 2nd Bill Due Date $5.00 late fee Cut for Non -Pay AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTi, CHAPTER 55 TO ESTABLISH PROCEDURES REGARDING SECURITY DEPOSITS, DELINQUENT PAYMENTS, LATE FEES, AND AVERAGE BILLING FOR THE UTILITIES BUSINESS OFFICE; PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERANCE; AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS: SECTION 1. Article II of Chapter 55 of the Code of Ordinances is amended by revising the title to read as follows: "ARTICLE II. RULES AND REGULATIONS OF DEP~.RT.~E.~!T OF PU~_LIC U-T4L-IT4E-S THE UTILITIES BUSINESS OFFICE" SECTION 2. Section 55-22 of the Code of Ordinances, City of Corpus Christi is amended to read as follows: "Sec. 55-22. Application or contract for service. ...... , .............. ~ ..... ; ...................................... C'.".'~ C."' or pr-efe~ The Utility Business Office Manager s authorized to establish procedures to process and accept applications for utility service inside the city limits." SECTION 3. Section 55-25 of the Code of Ordinances is amended to read as follows: "Sec. 55-25. Security for the payment of bill and performance of other obligations by customer. "(a) The city may-request shall require that a security deposit be placed on the account (i) if an account has become delinquent, (ii) if the customer had a delinquent balance on a previous city utility account, or (iii) if the customer tampered with city equipment t~ receive city utility service. An account will be considered delinquent if two (2) delinquent bills are issued c.-.d/or if or disconnection of service for non-payment occurs once within a twelve-month period. "(b) The amount of the security deposit is one-sixth of the customer's last twelve utility bills. If the customer did not receive utility service for at least twelve months, then the security deposit is an average of all of the customer's monthly utility bills, multiplied by twO. Page 2 of 8 "~b) (c) The city will refund a security deposit, without interest, to a customer, upon the request of the customer, if the following conditions have been satisfied: "(1 ) The customer has maintained service for at least twelve (12) consecutive months. "(2) The customer's service was not disconnected during the preceding twelve (12) months. "(3) The customer has not been sent two (2) or more delinquent bills during the previous twelve (12) months. "(4) The account is not currently in arrears. "(c) (d) A customer may claim a refund of a deposit owed by the city no later than one (1) year after termination of service to the account to which the deposit applies. Thereafter, such deposit shall become city property." SECTION 4. Section 55-26 of the Code of Ordinances is deleted. "S:c. EE 2=~. _n=pcs!t c= d~=:c.",t!.".ucd :c.".'E:o. SECTION 5. Section 55-27 of the Code of Ordinances is amended to read as follows: "Sec. 55-27. Monthly bills. "(a) Bills for service will be rendered monthly unless otherwise specified. The term "monthly" for billing purposes shall mean the period between any two (2) consecutive readings of the meters by the city, such readings to be taken as near as practicable every thirty (30) days. "(b) Monthly bills are due when rendered and are payable, unless otherwise specified, on or before the date shown on the face of the bill. Bills not paid by this date are in default and service shall be discontinued for such default, after notice, in writing, to the customer, such notice to be sent by U.S. mail to the address shown on the customer's application. "(c) Failure to receive a bill in no way exempts a customer from payment of bills er~he "(d) When the city is unable to read a meter after reasonable effort due to a condition created by the customer or custodian of the premises, the customer will be billed at the same rate as the previous monthly bill and the billing adjusted when the meter is read." ~:\LEG-DIR\Lisa\ORD3\dec 2003 ubo,doc Page 3 of 8 SECTION 6. Section 55-33 of the Code of Ordinances is amended to read as follows: "Sec. 55-33. City's standard terms for application for utility service c.- cc.".t.'=ct "The city's standard terms for utility service include the following: "(a) The applicant ae~ees-te shall pay for s'~'ch services as bills are rendered therefer in accordance with the rates, rules and regulations as provided in the charter or by ordinances, or by the terms and conditions as set-fe~h established by the Dircctcr cf ~ Utilities Business Office Mana.qer, and approved by the City Manager, a copy of which may be obtained from the Public Utilities office, and is on file with the City Secretary, as now existing or as may hereafter be enacted and in effect at the time of delivery. "(b) The applicant further agrees to release and discharge the city from any liability for damages suffered: (1) By reason of water or gas or sewer service furnished to the premises; (2) By reason of interruption discontinuance, or disconnection of service hereunder from any cause other than negligence by the city; or (3) By reason of the condition, maintenance, location or systems located on or adjoining the property supplied, and by which such services are furnished or delivered. ".(_~. The applicant shall acknowledges that he the applicant is the owner or person entitled to possession of the premises, legally liable for payment for services, and may be required to provide documentation to establish applicant's ri.qht to possession of the premises. SECTION 7. Section 55-34 of the Code of Ordinances is amended to read as follows: "Sec. 55-34, Discontinuance of service. "(a) If water or .qas service is discontinued by the city on a certain property and service is then turned on without authorization, the record owner of the property involved is 'I:\LEG-DIR\Lisa\ORD3\dec 2003 ubo.doc Page 4 of 8 responsible for any water and gas metered during the perod water and .qas usage am unauthodzed. "(b) When any customer of the city department of public utilities pumhases any article from the city or is indebted for any appliance, connection or service anywhere in the city and the c=!d indebtedness or any installment themef is delinquent, the services of the customer may be disconnected at the location of the article or appliance and not reconnected until all delinquencies including penalties and reconnection charges have been paid and the account restored to a current nondelinquent status." SECTION 8. Section 55-37 of the Code of Ordinances is deleted. SECTION 9. Article II of Chapter 55 of the Code of Ordinances is amended by adding new section 55-39 to read as follows: "Sec. 55-39. Average billing. "A customer who has not had any delinquent payments for the previous twelve (12) months may request averaqe billing. To calculate the average billing amount, the city shall determine the average of the most recent twelve (12) monthly utility bills. Each month the city shall determine the customer's actual utility service charges. If the actual monthly utility service charge is different from the average billing amount, the customer shall be billed the average billing amount, and the difference shall be deferred. Ten percent of the previous monthly deferred amounts shall be applied to the customer's next month's average bill." SECTION 10. Article II of Chapter 55 of the Code of Ordinances is amended by adding new section 55-40 to read as follows: "Sec. 55-40. Delinquent notices, late fees; disconnection, charges for reconnecting and replacing meters. "(a) The city will mail a delinquent notice on or about the twenty-first day after the monthly bill was issued. The notice must advise the customer that service is subject to being disconnected on or after the forty-fifth day from the date the bill was issued if payment in full is not received. "(b) If payment for the delinquent bill has not been received in the utilities business office prior to 8:00 a.m. on the date specified in the notice, the customer's water and .qas meters are subject to being d sconnected, locked, sealed or removed without further notice. 'I:\LEG-DIR\Lisa\ORD3\dec 2003 ubo.doc Page 5 of 8 "(c) A late fee must be charred if customer does not make full payment by the, customer's next billin,q date. The late fee is five percent of the unpaid, overdue balance. "(d) The customer's failure to receive the notice does not exempt the customer from payin,q the delinquent bill or havin,q the customer's service disconnected; provided that the notice was re,clularly deposited in the United States mail, stamped and addressed to the delinquent customer at the address shown on the records of the utilities busines~ office. "(e) A service char.qe of thirty dollars ($30.00) per order must be paid if payment of the delinquency is not made in person at the utilities business office prior to 8:00 a.m., on the date which the customer has been previously notified that the customer's utility service is to be disconnected due to failure to pay a delinquent bill in order to obtain a reconnection. The customer's failure to receive notification of date to be disconnected does not exempt the customer from pa¥in.q the service char.qe. This service char.qe is necessary to cover all costs in handlin.q and collectin,q a delinquent account. For all meters reconnected after 5:00 p.m., and on Saturdays, Sundays and holidays an additional char.qe of fifteen dollars ($15.00) will be made and must be paid upon reconnection. "(f) Meters removed due to failure to pay a delinquent bill or service or penalty charRe- shall be replaced only upon payment of a fifteen dollar ($15.00) settin.q fee, plus an additional tamperin.q service char.qe. The payment must be made in person to the utilities business office of the city. "(.q) Meters, service connections, locks, valves or any other city property broken, damaqed or stolen while on the premises of the customer, or by the customer or someone actin.q in behalf of the customer, will be char.qed to the customer at a fair price based on the cost of the labor and materials necessary to repair or replace the dama.qes, destruction or stolen property. These char.qes must be paid in person to the public utilities office in order to authorize a reconnection of service. "(h) The breakin.q, dama~lin.q, adiustinq, chanqina, removal or takin.q of any meter, pip~. service connection, lock, seal, valve or any other city-owned property shall be unlawful and punishable as a misdemeanor. The turninR on of any valve so as to provide service from any utility service except by an authorized employee of the city is subject to an additional twenty-five dollar ($25.00) tamperin,q service charqe, unlawful, and punishable as a misdemeanor under the Texas Penal Code." SECTION 11. Section 55-51 of the Code of Ordinances is deleted. ~:\LEG-DIR\Lisa\ORD3\dec 2003 ubo.doc Page 6 of 8 SECTION 12. Section 55-62 of the Code of Ordinances is deleted. ~:\LEG-DIR\Lisa\ORD3\dec 2003 ubo.doc Page 7 of 8 SECTION 13. If for any reason any section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase, word or provision of this ordinance shall be held invalid or unconstitutional by final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction, it shall not affect any other section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase, word, or provision of this ordinance, for it is the definite intent of this City Council that every section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase, word or provision of this ordinance be given full force and effect for its purpose. SECTION 14. A violation of this ordinance or requirements implemented hereunder shall constitute an offense, punishable as provided in Section 1-6 of the City Code of Ordinances. SECTION 15. Publication shall be made in the official publication of the City of Corpus Christi as required by the City Charter of the City of Corpus Christi. {:\LEG-DIR~Lisa\ORD3\dec 2003 ubo.doc Page 8 of 8 Samuel L. Neal, Jr. Brent Chesney Javier D. Colmenero Melody Cooper Henry Garrett That the foregoing ordinance was read for the first time and passed to its second reading on this the day of ., 2003, by the following vote: Bill Kelly Rex A. Kinnison Jesse Noyola Mark Scott That the foregoing ordinance was read for the second time and passed finally on this the day of Samuel L. Neal, Jr. Brent Chesney Javier D. Colmenero Melody Cooper Henry Garrett PASSED AND APPROVED, this the AFl'EST: ,2003 by the following vote: Bill Kelly Rex A. Kinnison Jesse Noyola Mark Scott day of .,2003. Armando Chapa City Secretary APPROVED: L)~C.~./~ ~- Lisa Aguilar ~ Assistant City Attorney for City Attorney Samuel L. Neal, Jr. Mayor .,2003 {:~LEG-DIR\Lisa\ORD3\dec 2003 ubo.doc 37 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Neal and Council Members George K. Noe, City Manager FROM: Armando Chapa, City Secretary SUBJECT: Request for Vadance - Get Happy, L.L.C. DATE: November 25, 2003 Attached is a copy of a letter filed in my office on November 20, 2003 by Alan L. Yaffe, Attorney, on behalf of Frank D. Skelton, President of Get Happy, L.L.C., requesting a variance pursuant to City Code, Section 4-5(f), to allow an on-premise alcoholic beverage at 526 S. Staples, Get Happy, L.L.C. Mr. Skelton pumhased the property and the building located at 526 S. Staples and have intended to place an on-premise bar at this location. I am asking the City Manager and City Attorney to place this item on a future agenda for your consideration. Attachment City Secretary C: Jay Reining, Acting City Attorney Margie Rose, Assistant City Manager Michael Gunning, Planning Alan L. Yaffe ALAN L. YAFFE ATfORNEY AT LAW State Bar No. 22115800 ~-~L/ 618 s, STAPLES · CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS 78401, Mailing Address: P.O. Box 3067- CORPUS CHRISTI, TX 78463-3067 Bus: (361) S82-3361 · Fax: (361) 882-6617 November 18, 2003 Mayor and City Council City of Corpus Christi ATTN: Armando Chapa, City Secretary PO Box 9277 Corpus Christi, Texas 78469-9277 RE: Request for granting of variance under Corpus Christi City Code §4-5(0 to Get Happy, L.L.C., at 526 S. Staples Street, Corpus Christi, Texas Dear Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council by and through the City Secretary and Legal Staff: On behalf of Frank D. Skelton, the owner of that property located at the municipal address of 526 S. Staples Street in the City of Corpus Christi, Nueces County, Texas, and as President of Get Happy, L.L.C., we request that a resolution be proposed and passed by the Corpus Christi City Council under the authority granted to them pursuant to §109.33(a)(1) of the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code and of the Corpus Christi City Code §4-5(f) to allow a variance to the regulation otherwise prohibiting the sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premise consumption within 300 feet of a church. Mr. Skelton and his company have purchased that property and the building located at 526 S. Staples and have intended to place an on-premise bar on such premises. It would not otherwise be restricted and it is in the appropriate zoning for such save and except the church catercornered is within the prohibited area. Mr. Skelton plans quite a bit of improvements which will clean up the area and benefit the surrounding area and his neighbors as evidenced by their signature approving this as to form and substance and being in agreement with such. Mr. Skelton intends to invest considerable sums of money in the clean-up and improvement of both the exterior and interior of the otherwise abandoned building. To replace an abandoned building with an ongoing business with exterior and interior improvements will benefit the entire surrounding area and will not cause undue harm to .any other individuals or businesses or entities. We would request the Council to find that it is in the best interest of the commun/ty to grant such variance in that the enforcement of the regulation in this particular instance is not in Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council by and through the City Secretary and Legal Staff November 18, 2003 Page2 the best interest of the public, it would constitute waste or inefficient use of the land and other resources and does create undue hardship on the applicant for the license or permit and would not serve its intended purpose and is not effective or necessary. Additionally, the health, safety, and welfare of the public and the equities of the situation demonstrate that it is in the best interest of the community to grant this variance. We therefore respectfully re4uest that the proposed attached resolution be presented in accordance with the provisions and procedure provided by theCorpus Christi City Code and that it be voted upon and passed as provided by law. Please find at the end of this letter, designated as "approved to form and substance" the signatures of the surrounding neighbors of 526 S. Staples, including the signature of the Pastor of the Church at 601 S. Staples, along with a diagram showing their location to this proposed variance. Thanking you and with kindest regards, I remain, Sincerely, Alan L. Yaffe ALY:mlm Enclosure: copy of proposed resolution copy of signatures of all neighbors surrounding 526 S. Staples indicating their approval of the granting of the Variance diagram of neighbors Elizabeth Hundley Assistant City Attorney Legal Department PO Box 9277 Corpus Christi, Texas 78469-9277 Javier Colmanero The Honorable Councilman PO Box 9277 Corpus Christi, Texas 78469-9277 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND SUBSTANCE AND IN AGREEMENT WITH THE PASSAGE OF THE ABOVE REQUESTED VARIANCE GRANTING A PERMIT FOR THE SALE OF ON- PREMISES CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AT 526 S. STAPLES, CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS, TO FRANK D. SKELTON, AS THE OWNER OF SAID PROPERTY, AND ON BEHALF OF GET HAPPY, L.L.C., THE PROPOSED PERMITTEE, WE THE FOLLOWING NEIGHBORS SHOW OUR AGREEMENT THERETO BY OUR SIGNATURES BELOW: Portis Kountry Kitchen 525 S. Staples Corpus Christi, Texas (361) 887-8524 602 S. Staples Corpus Christi, Texas (361) 883-2428 Russell Can~las Advantage Electric 612-614 S. Staples Corpus Christi, Texas (361) 857-5979 David Tomsch~' Gold Key Auto Sales 620 S. Staples Corpus Christi, Texas (361) 883-4175 AI~a~L' Yaff¢ ~ Attorney at Law 618 S. Staples Corpus Christi, Texas (361) 882-3361 605 S. Staples Corpus Christi, Texas (361) 883-2428 Iglesea ~ 601 S. Staples Corpus Christi, Texas (361) 882-5732 ii/i5/2oos o~:i0 s618570es~ ADVANTAGE ELECTRIC SbNT ~,~,,,.~LAN L YAF~Ei 3818~88i7; NOV-13-0~ PAGE APPROVED AS TO FORM AND SUBSTANCE AND IN AGREEMENT WITH THE PAssAGE OF THE ABOVE REQUESTED VARIANCE GRANTING A PERMIT FOR T~E SALE OF ON- PREMISES CONSUMPTION OP ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AT 526 8. STAPLES, CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS, TO FRANK D. SKELTON, AS TIlE OWNER OF SAID PROPERTY, AND ON BEI4aM..F OF GET HAPPY, Li..C., THE PROPOSED PERMITTEE. WE THE FOLLOWING NEIGHBORS SHOW OUR AGREEMENT TI-[ERETO BY OUR SIGNATUREs BELOW: Portis Kou~try Kitchen 525 S. Staples Cor~us Cl'~'i~i, Te~s (361) $87~S524 R~II C az~l-a~ Advantage Electdc 61.2-614 ~. Staples Corp~ Cl~mi, Te~a~ (361) 857-5979 David TomSeh[ Gold Key Auto Sales 620 S. Staples Corpua Christi, Texas (361) 853-4175 618 S. Staples Corpus Christi, Texas (361) 882-3361 (361) 882-5732 605 S. Staples Corpus Clui~, Texas (36 l) 883-2428 Circle K Dr. Maurice G. Portis Portis Kountry Kitchen 525 S. Staples (887-8524)* 601 S. Staples Iglesia De Dios Pentecostal (8~-5732) 605 S. Staple Vacant Lot Vacant Building * Have signed MINGLES 526 S. Staples 602 S. Staples Alfred Whiteside Motors * (883-2428) 612-614 S. Staples Advantage Electric Russell Canales * (857-5979) 618 S. Staples Alan L. Yaffe, Attorney * (882-3361) 620 S. Staples Gold Key Auto Sales David Tomscha * (8834175) 624 S. Staples Paio Auto Mart (882-7587) ~ENT B.~: ALAN L YAFFE; 3618826817; DEC-t-O3 PAOE 2/3 December i, 2003 Mayor and City Council City of CorpUs Christi ATI'TN:. Ammndo Chapn, City Sec~e~_qr PO Box 9277 Corpus Christi, Texas 7~,69-9277 RE: Request for granting ofvnfiance under Corpus Christi City Code §4-5(0 to C-et Happy, L.L.C., at 526 S. Staples Street, Cmpus Christi, Texns Dear Honorable M~yor and Members of the City Council by and tlUoUgh thc City Secretary and Legal Staff: Enclosed here. in pl~se fred signature of Sam L. Susser, owner of Circle K:S~ 8r2115, located at 521 $. Staples, Cot, pus Christi, Texas as well as the entire chain in ~ Texns of Circle K Stot~s. Mr. Susser bas signed as agreeing to form and substance of our ~ for the granting ofisuch variance. His silF~arc on betizlf of Circle K Stores, and in [:~'ti~ulal' Store fY2115, is directly across the street from 526 S. Staples, Would you please add this approval to your list of neighbors. This sh0ul~ complete basically ~ entire circle of neighbot~ in all direction. Thaixking you and with kindest regards, I remai~ ALY:mlm: Enclosu~: signetu~ page 2 cc: Eliz~'b Humll~ Javi~r Colman~ Bill Kelly client Alan L. Yaffe 6ENT I~.: ALAN L YAFFE; 3618826617; DEC-I-03 I:4§PU PA~£ 3/3 C~pus Ck~, Te~s A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE, UNDER SECTION 4-5(F) OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, TO GET HAPPY, L.L.C. TO OPERATE AN ON PREMISES ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT LOCATED AT 526 SOUTH STAPLES STREET. WHEREAS, Get Happy, L.L.C. desires to develop an otherwise vacant abandoned building to establish an on-premise consumption alcoholic beverage business on the property located at 526 S. Staples Street, which is situated within the corporate limits of the City of Corpus Christi ("City"); VgltEREAS, Get Happy, L.L.C. desire to allow on-premises sales of alcoholic beverages at the location; WHEREAS, the location of Get Happy, L.L.C.'s proposed business is within 300 feet of a church; WHEREAS, as allowed under Section 109.33(a)(1) of the Texas Alcohol and Beverage Code ("TAB Code"), the City enacted Section 4-5(a) of the City's Code of Ordinances ("Code") to prohibit any person from maintaining a business for the dispensing and sale for on-premises consumption of alcoholic beverages within the corporate limits of the City within 300 feet of any church; WHEREAS, Section 109.33(e) of the TAB Code and Section 4-5(f) of the Code allow the City Council ("Council"), upon application of a business regulated by Section 4-5 of the Code, to grant a variance to the alcohol regulations contained within the section if the Council determines that enforcement of regulation in a particular instance is not in the best interest of the public, constitutes waste or inefficient use of land or other resources, creates an undue hardship on an applicant for a license or pen-nit, does not serve its intended purpose, is not effective or necessary, or for any other reason, and, after consideration of the health, safety, and welfare of the public and the equities of the situation, determines it is in the best interest of the community; WHEREAS, Get Happy, L.L.C. has formally applied to the City for a variance under Section 4-5(0; WHEREAS, Get Happy, L.L.C. believes and states that enforcement of the regulation, in this particular instance, is not in the best interest of the public; WHEREAS, Get Happy, L.L.C. believes and states that enforcement of the regulation, in this particular instance, constitute a waste and inefficient use of the land and other resources; and WHEREAS, Get Happy, L.L.C. requests that the Council grant the variance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1. The City Council has determined that enforcement of Section 4-5(0 of the Code of Ordinances, in this particular instance, is not in the best interest of the public and, after consideration of the health, safety, and welfare of the public, grant the variance in the best interest of the community. SECTION 2. The City Council has determined that enforcement of Section 4-5(a) of the Code of Ordinances, in this particular instance, constitutes a waste and inefficient use of land and other resources, after consideration of the health, safety, and welfare o£tbe public, grants the variance in the best interest of the community. ATTEST: CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI Armando Chapa City Secretary Samuel L. Neal, Jr. Mayor APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ,2003 Elizabeth R. Hundley Assistant City Attorney for the City Attorney 38 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMORANDUM City Council Action Date: 1219/03 AGENDA ITEM: An ordinance amending Section 4-5, Code of Ordinances, City of Corpus Christi, regarding the location of establishments serving on-premise alcoholic beverages; providing for severance; providing for penalties; and providing for publication. ISSUE: The current ordinance needs to be amended to accurately reflect State laws regarding the location of establishments serving alcoholic beverages that are intended for consumption on the premises of the establishments. State law has been expanded to include prohibitions against the location of on-premises alcoholic beverage establishments within 300 feet of day-care centers, child-care facilities, and private schools unless the local jurisdiction grants a variance allowing the establishment within the prohibited distance, and State law has been revised to change the parameters of the distance measurements in which on-premises alcoholic beverage establishments may operate. Additionally, while the current ordinance allows the City Council to grant a variance to on- premises alcoholic beverage establishments, the current ordinance does not provide an adequate mechanism for notice to and a public hearing for the surrounding property owners and affected entities when a variance is applied for by a proposed establishment. REQUIRED COUNCIL ACTION: Approval of amendment to current ordinance. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: None. FUNDING: None required. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: Approval of amendment to currant ordinance. R./J~y F~ining / Acting City Attorney Attachments: None AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 4-5, CODE OF ORDINANCES, CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, REGARDING THE LOCATION OF ESTABLISHMENTS SERVING ON-PREMISE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERANCE; PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES; AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS: SECTION 1. Section 4-5 of the Code of Ordinances is revised to read as follows: "Sec. 4-5. Prohibited location of on-premises alcoholic beverage establishments, etc. "(a) No person ch=!! may maintain a place of business for the dispensing and sale for on-premises consumption of alcoholic beverages within the corporate limits of the city within three hundred (300) feet of any church, child-care facility, day-cars center, public or private school, or public hospital. "(b) The r~u~s~me~t-ef4he-distance between any such place of business that dispenses and sells alcoholic beveraRes for on-premises consumption and a church,_ child-care facility, day-care center, or public hospital sh=!! must be measured-ale~-the- ...... ;,-*~-,~-~.-*; ...... "---~ *"'-" cccur under Section 109.33 and 109.331, Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code. "(c) The ~istance between any ..... place of business that dispenses and sells alcoho c beverages for on-premises consumption and a public o__r private school ch=!! must be measured .................. ~., v~..., .~ ......... ~. ..... ..... = ................ :n = ........................................... , ..... un r Sections 109.33, Texas Alcohol c Beverage Code. "(d) Any such establishment, which receives 3t less than fifty (50) per cent of its gross iR~eme-receipts from the sale or service of fccd_ alcoholic beverages and holds a food and bevera.qe certificat~ issued by the Texas Alcoholic Bevera.qe Commission....~,;~h ~,,,,.;,~,. ,,~ ~ .,~,u;~,, ~,,, ;~o .,~,,,~ ,,~,~ ,,,~ ..... , ....... ,,~ ~v;,~ ,~...,., ~.,.., ...... ~"~ ~*'""* °h"" ~'" !s excluded from the prohibition-herei~ in this section. "(e) As to any dealer who held a license or permit on September 1, 1983, in a location where a regulation under this section was in effect on that date, the measurement of the distance between the place of business of the dealer and a public school shall be along the property lines of the street fronts and from front door to front door, and in direct line across intersections. This subsection applies only as long as the place of business is R30542A3.doc 2 continuously in operation from-~.hat-date September 1, 1983, whether or not under the same license or permit. "(f) The city council may, upon application of a business regulated-hereir~ under this section, allow a variance to the regulation if the council determines that enforcement of the regulation in a particular instance is not in the best interest of the public, constitutes waste or inefficient use of land or other resources, creates an undue hardship on an applicant for a license or permit, does not serve its intended purpose, is not effective or necessary, or for any other reason, after consideration of the health, safety, and welfare of the public and the equities of the situation, determines it is in the best interest of the community. "(.q) Before granting a variance under subsection (f) of this section, the City Council will hold a public hearing to receive input from the public on the requested variance. The City Secretary shall publish a notice of the public hearing in the newspaper at least ten (10) days before the hearing date. Written notice of the public hearin,q before the City Council on the requested variance must be sent to the owners of real property within 300 feet of the property on which the variance is requested. Separate notices must be sent to any church, child-care facility, day-care center, public or pdvate school, or public hospital located within 300 feet of the property on which a variance is requested and to the superintendent of the school district in which the property requesting the variance is located. The notice may be served by its deposit, properly addressed with postage paid, in the United States mail. "(h) The applicant for the variance must reimburse the City for the costs of publishing the notice in the newspaper and mailing the wdtten notice to surrounding property owners, churches, child-care facilities, day-care centers, public or private schools, public hospitals, and school district superintendents before the public hearing is held." SECTION 2. If for any reason any section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase, word or provision of this ordinance shall be held invalid or unconstitutional by final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction, it shall not affect any other section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase, word, or provision of this ordinance, for it is the definite intent of this City Council that every section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase, word or provision of this ordinance be given full force and effect for its purpose. SECTION 3. A violation of this ordinance or requirements implemented under this ordinance constitutes an offense punishable under Section 1-6 of the City Code of Ordinances. SECTION 4. Publication shall be made in the official publication of the City of Corpus Christi as required by the City Charter of the City of Corpus Christi. R30542A3.doc Samuel L. Neal, Jr. Brent Chesney Javier D. Colmenero Melody Cooper Henry Garrett That the foregoing ordinance was read for the first time and passed to its second reading on this the day of 2003 by the following vote: Bill Kelly Rex A. Kinnison Jesse Noyola Mark Scott That the foregoing ordinance was read for the second time and passed finally on this the __ day of ,2003 by the following vote: Samuel L. Neal, Jr. Brent Chesney Javier D. Colmenero Melody Cooper Henry Garrett PASSED AND APPROVED, this the __ ATTEST: Bill Kelly Rex A. Kinnison Jesse Noyola Mark Scott day of ,2003. Armando Chapa City Secretary APPROVED: 3rd day of December, 2003: A~ting'City Attorney Samuel L. Neal, Jr. Mayor R30542.A3.doc ity of orpus Christi