The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda Packet City Council - 02/25/2020City Council City of Corpus Christi Meeting Agenda - Final-revised 1201 Leopard Street Corpus Christi, TX 78401 cctexas.com Council Chambers11:30 AMTuesday, February 25, 2020 Addendums may be added on Friday. A.Mayor Joe McComb to call the meeting to order. B.Invocation to be given by Pastor Rob Bailey, Southside Community Church. C.Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States and to the Texas Flag to be led by Alma Casas, Interim Director of Finance and Business Analysis. D.City Secretary Rebecca L. Huerta to call the roll of the required Charter Officers. E.Proclamations / Commendations 1.20-0260 Proclamation declaring February 25, 2020, "City-Wide Bluesday Tuesday Honoring Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi Homecoming". Proclamation declaring March 6th, 13th, and 20th, 2020, "Fill-the-Boot for the Muscular Dystrophy Association Days". Proclamation declaring March 2020, "Brain Injury Awareness Month". Swearing-In Ceremony for Newly Appointed Board, Commission, Committee and Corporation Members. F.PUBLIC COMMENT - APPROXIMATELY 12:00 P.M. If you choose to speak during this public comment period regarding an item on the agenda, you may do so. You will not be allowed to speak again, however, when the Council is considering the item. Citizen comments are limited to three minutes. If you have a petition or other information pertaining to your subject, please present it to the City Secretary. Any electronic media (e.g. CD, DVD, flash drive) that the Public would like to use while they speak MUST be submitted a minimum of 24 hours prior to the Meeting. Please contact the Communication department at 361-826-3211 to coordinate. This is a public hearing for all items on this agenda. G.CITY MANAGER’S COMMENTS / UPDATE ON CITY OPERATIONS: a.OTHER H.MINUTES: 2.20-0269 Regular Meeting of February 11, 2020. Page 1 City of Corpus Christi Printed on 2/24/2020 February 25, 2020City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised I.BOARD & COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS: 3.20-0266 Reinvestment Zone No. 3 Board (4 vacancies) Committee for Persons with Disabilities (5 vacancies) J.EXPLANATION OF COUNCIL ACTION: K.CONSENT AGENDA: (ITEMS 4 - 15) Consent - Second Reading Ordinances 4.20-0134 Ordinance accepting a grant in the amount of $10,000 from The Hartford to be used to support fire safety education efforts and programming; and appropriating the funds into the FY2020 Fire Grant Fund. Sponsors:Fire Department 5.20-0136 Ordinance authorizing acceptance of a grant from the Texas Division of Emergency Management in the amount of $54,887.82 for the 2019 Emergency Management Performance Grant with a City cash match of $54,887.82 from the FY2020 Emergency Management General Fund; and appropriating $54,887.82 in the FY2020 Emergency Management Grants Fund. Sponsors:Fire Department 6.20-0173 Ordinance accepting a $180,000 donation for the Games of Texas from the P.A.L.S. Fund (Parks, Arts, Leisure and Seniors Fund), a Texas nonprofit corporation; and appropriating in the General Fund. Sponsors:Parks and Recreation Department 7.19-1631 Ordinance amending City Code of Ordinances, Chapter 12, Section 12-10, establishing a 200-foot restricted zone as required by Texas Commission on Environmental Quality through Texas Administrative Code Title 30 Chapter 290, Section 290.41(e) (2) (C) at the City’s raw water intake on the Nueces River; and providing penalties. Sponsors:Utilities Department 8.20-0168 Ordinance approving a five-year Business Incentive Agreement between the Type B Corporation and LiftFund Inc. in the amount of $100,000 for the Dream Makers Fund, a revolving loan fund for small businesses within the city limits of Corpus Christi, effective upon signature of the City Manager or designee; appropriating funds in the amount of $100,000 from the Type B Economic Development Fund; and amending the budget. Sponsors:City Manager's Office Consent - Capital Projects Page 2 City of Corpus Christi Printed on 2/24/2020 February 25, 2020City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised 9.20-0112 Motion awarding a contract with LNV, Inc. for design, preparation of construction documents and related construction phase services to install a new 24” water main and 8” gas main crossing the Ship channel at the Tule Lake Turning Basin in the amount of $937,160, located in City Council District 1, effective upon issuance of notice to proceed, with funding approved and available from FY 2020 Water and Gas Capital Improvement Program Budgets. Sponsors:Utilities Department, Gas Department, Engineering Services and Contracts and Procurement General Consent Items 10.20-0248 Resolution authorizing execution of an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement with Del Mar College for a 20-year participation in the North Beach Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone Number Four for a period ending December 31, 2039. Sponsors:Business Liaison 11.20-0176 Resolution authorizing a developer participation agreement with MPM Development, LP, to reimburse the developer up to $104,230.50 for the City’s share of the cost to extend Bill Witt Drive. (District 5) Sponsors:Development Services 12.20-0282 Resolution authorizing the submittal of a grant application in the amount of $919,500.00 to the Office of the Governor for funding from the Texas Military Preparedness Commission’s Defense Economic Adjustment Assistance Grant Program with in-kind services from the City for $92,000.00 to fund City staff time for grant administration services. Sponsors:Communications & Intergovernmental Affairs Consent - Resolutions of Support for Affordable Housing Projects 13.20-0286 Resolution of the City Council of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas identifying an affordable housing project known as Fishpond at Fitzgerald, to be developed by FishPond Development, LLC, as a project which contributes most significantly to the City’s concerted revitalization efforts in a designated area. Sponsors:Planning & Environmental Services and Housing and Community Development 14.20-0287 Resolution of the City Council of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas identifying an affordable housing project known as Village at McArdle to be developed by TG 110, Inc as contributing most significantly to the revitalization efforts within a designated area. Sponsors:Planning & Environmental Services and Housing and Community Development 15.20-0285 Resolution of the City Council of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas Page 3 City of Corpus Christi Printed on 2/24/2020 February 25, 2020City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised identifying an affordable housing project known as Washington Coles Apartments to be developed by Washington Coles Apts., LP as a project which contributes most significantly to the City’s concerted revitalization efforts in a designated area. Sponsors:Planning & Environmental Services and Housing and Community Development L.RECESS FOR LUNCH M.PUBLIC HEARINGS: (ITEMS 16 - 20) 16.20-0170 Zoning Case No. 0120-02, Grangerfield Development, LLC. (District 5). Ordinance rezoning property at or near 7702 Yorktown Boulevard from the “FR” Farm Rural District to the “RS-4.5” Single-Family 4.5 District and “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District. Planning Commission and Staff recommend Approval. Sponsors:Development Services 17.20-0171 Zoning Case No. 0120-03, Judy and Doyle E. Hobbs, High Ground Advisors, Texas Scottish Rite Hospital, and Texas A&M University Development Foundation (District 3). Ordinance rezoning property at or near 5102 Old Brownsville Road from the “IL” Light Industrial District and “RS-6” Single-Family 6 District to the “CG-2” General Commercial District. Planning Commission and Staff recommend Approval. Sponsors:Development Services 18.20-0172 Zoning Case No. 0120-01, Johnson Development (District 3). Ordinance rezoning property at or near 5101 Old Brownsville Road from the “RS-6” Single-Family 6 District to the “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District. Planning Commission and Staff recommend Approval. Sponsors:Development Services 19.20-0217 Ordinance adopting a new Southside Area Development Plan, an element of the Plan CC Comprehensive Plan; rescinding the former Southside Area Development Plan adopted on May 19, 1989; and amending the Plan CC Comprehensive Plan Sponsors:Planning & Environmental Services 20.20-0218 Ordinance adopting a new London Area Development Plan, an element of the Plan CC Comprehensive Plan; rescinding the former London Area Development Plan adopted on August 17, 1987; and amending the Plan CC Comprehensive Plan Sponsors:Planning & Environmental Services N.REGULAR AGENDA: (NONE) O.FIRST READING ORDINANCES: (ITEMS 21 - 23) Page 4 City of Corpus Christi Printed on 2/24/2020 February 25, 2020City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised 21.20-0182 Ordinance exempting Morton Meadows subdivision, located East of Flour Bluff Drive and South of Graham Road, from the payment of the wastewater lot or acreage fee under section 8.5.2.G.1 of the Unified Development Code conditioned upon a Sanitary Sewer Connection Agreement. (District 4) Sponsors:Development Services 22.20-0198 Ordinance closing, abandoning and vacating a 1.89 acre prescriptive easement known as Airline Road Extension between Yorktown Boulevard and Rodd Field Road pursuant to a land exchange agreement. Sponsors:Development Services 23.20-0214 Ordinance authorizing a Wastewater Collection Line Extension Construction and Reimbursement Agreement with Walker Holdings and Development, LLC to extend a 12-inch wastewater collection line for a planned residential subdivision located on IH-69 with a completion date of March 30, 2021; and appropriating $215,393.85 from the Sanitary Sewer Collection Line Trust Fund to reimburse the Developer per the agreement. (District 1) Sponsors:Development Services P.BRIEFINGS: (ITEMS 24 - 25) 24.19-1409 Alternative Utility Financing Study Update / Impact Fee Study and Implementation Plan. Sponsors:Development Services 25.20-0283 Proposed Bond 2020 Overview Sponsors:Engineering Services Q.EXECUTIVE SESSION: (ITEMS 26 - 27) 26.20-0297 Executive Session pursuant to Texas Government Code § 551.071 and Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 1.05 to consult with attorneys concerning legal issues related to a Chapter 380 Economic Development Incentive Agreement with Upper Padre Partners, LP and North Padre Waterpark Holdings, Ltd., a Developer Agreement for Park Road 22 Bridge and Village Canal with Padre Island Holdings, LLC and Diamond Beach Holdings, LLC and pursuant to Texas Government Code § 551.087 to discuss confidential commercial or financial information pertaining to the aforesaid business prospect(s) that the City seeks to have locate, stay or expand in or near the territory of the City and with which the City may conduct economic development negotiations and/or deliberate possible economic development issues concerning said business prospect(s). 27.20-0298 Executive Session pursuant to Texas Government Code § 551.071 Page 5 City of Corpus Christi Printed on 2/24/2020 February 25, 2020City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised and Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 1.05 to consult with attorneys concerning legal issues related to a potential lease and/or acquisition of property in or near Morris Street and pursuant to Texas Government Code § 551.072 to discuss and deliberate the potential purchase, exchange, lease, and/or value of real property interests in or near Morris Street when deliberation in open meeting would have a detrimental effect on the position of the governmental body in negotiations with third person(s). R.IDENTIFY COUNCIL FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS S.ADJOURNMENT Page 6 City of Corpus Christi Printed on 2/24/2020 1201 Leopard Street Corpus Christi, TX 78401 cctexas.com City of Corpus Christi Meeting Minutes City Council 11:30 AM Council ChambersTuesday, February 11, 2020 Addendums may be added on Friday. Mayor Joe McComb to call the meeting to order.A. Mayor McComb called the meeting to order at 11:31 a.m. Invocation to be given by Pastor Claude Axel, Mount Pilgrim Baptist Church.B. Pastor Claude Axel gave the invocation. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States and to the Texas Flag to be led by Rudy Bentancourt, Director of Housing/Community Development. C. Rudy Bentancourt led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States and the Texas Flag. City Secretary Rebecca L. Huerta to call the roll of the required Charter Officers.D. City Secretary Rebecca L. Huerta called the roll and verified that a quorum of the City Council and the required Charter Officers were present to conduct the meeting. Charter Officers: City Manager Peter Zanoni, City Attorney Miles K. Risley and City Secretary Rebecca L. Huerta. Mayor Joe McComb,Council Member Roland Barrera,Council Member Rudy Garza,Council Member Paulette Guajardo,Council Member Gil Hernandez,Council Member Michael Hunter,Council Member Ben Molina,Council Member Everett Roy, and Council Member Greg Smith Present:9 - Proclamations / CommendationsE. 1.Proclamation declaring February 12, 2020, "Outstanding Community Leader Honorees for National LULAC Week 2020". Check Presentation by Rotary Club of Corpus Christi to Parks and Recreation Department. Swearing-In of Aaron Munoz, Esquire, by Council Member Roland Barrera. Swearing-In Ceremony for Newly Appointed Board, Commission, Committee and Corporation Members. The Proclamation was presented, the check presentation was made, and the Page 1City of Corpus Christi Printed on 2/21/2020 February 11, 2020City Council Meeting Minutes Swearing-In ceremonies were conducted. CITY MANAGER’S COMMENTS / UPDATE ON CITY OPERATIONS:G. Mayor McComb referred to City Manager's Comments. City Manager Peter Zanoni reported on the following topics: OTHERa. 1) Public Works community meetings in each City Council District will be held in the coming weeks to obtain public input regarding streets and stormwater. 2) The April 28, 2020 regular City Council meeting is canceled and the April 28, 2020 TIRZ #3 meeting is rescheduled to April 21, 2020 because certain members of Council and staff will be attending the Coastal Bend to Washington D.C. trip. 3) City Manager Zanoni discussed rip tide awareness and beach safety, including the City's use of warning signs on area beaches and that additional lifeguards will be stationed on area beaches. At the request of City Manager Zanoni, Kiwana Denson spoke regarding beach and water safety. MINUTES:H. 2.Regular Meeting of January 28, 2020. A motion was made by Council Member Guajardo, seconded by Council Member Molina, that the Minutes be passed. The motion carried by a unanimous vote. PUBLIC COMMENT - APPROXIMATELY 12:00 P.M. If you choose to speak during this public comment period regarding an item on the agenda, you may do so. You will not be allowed to speak again, however, when the Council is considering the item. Citizen comments are limited to three minutes. If you have a petition or other information pertaining to your subject, please present it to the City Secretary. Any electronic media (e.g. CD, DVD, flash drive) that the Public would like to use while they speak MUST be submitted a minimum of 24 hours prior to the Meeting. Please contact the Communication department at 361-826-3211 to coordinate. This is a public hearing for all items on this agenda. F. Mayor McComb deviated from the agenda and referred to comments from the public. City Attorney Miles K. Risley read the Rules of Decorum for the Council Chambers. City Secretary Rebecca L. Huerta conducted the public comment period. Elva Estrada, 4805 FM 1889, Robstown, TX; Pat Eisenhauer, 7457 Hwy 361; Mark Stewart, 6101 Elmdale St.; Danice Obregon, 445 Delaine Dr.; Nick Adame, 4022 Capitol Dr.; William Pullam, 402 Poenisch Dr.; Monica Chavez Lozano, 1614 Mary St.; Cecilia Garcia Akers, 2014 Encino Vista St., San Antonio, TX; Peggy Duran, 4022 Congressional Dr.; Terry Mills, 5019 N. Chaparral St.; Chris Kuehn, 7838 Pharaoh Dr. spoke in support of Patricia Canales Bell being appointed to Port of Corpus Christi Authority of Nueces County, Texas. Gloria Scott, 4422 S. Alameda St., spoke regarding black history month. Rick Valls, 201 Leming Ave., provided an update on funding related to the Port of Page 2City of Corpus Christi Printed on 2/21/2020 February 11, 2020City Council Meeting Minutes Corpus Christi. Adam Carrington, 2949 Riverbend Ct., spoke in support of Patricia Canales Bell being appointed to the Port of Corpus Christi Authority of Nueces County, Texas; and in support of affordable housing in the Washington Coles area. Tom Strubble, 902 Ayers St., spoke regarding environmental concerns; the negative effects of heavy industry and dumping brine from desalination plants in the bay; and recommended that a scientist be appointed to the Port of Corpus Christi Authority of Nueces County, Texas. C. J. Johnson, 509 S. Carancahua St., spoke regarding shootings related to mental illness. Jack Gordy, 4118 Bray Dr., spoke regarding illegal signs and related enforcement efforts. Ray Madrigal de Pancho Villa, 4253 Dody St., spoke regarding potential conflicts of interest related to contributions to city council members from individuals seeking to be appointed to the Port of Corpus Christi Authority of Nueces County, Texas. Tony Hartwell, P.O. Box 18785, spoke in support of legislation that would allow for revenue from the Texas Lottery Commission to go to homeless initiatives; and concerns regarding Animal Care Enforcement efforts. Wayne Lundquist, 700 Everhart Rd.; Jo Krueger, 1220 Sea Secret St., Port Aransas, TX, spoke in support of Al Jones being appointed to Port of Corpus Christi Authority of Nueces County, Texas. Susie Luna Saldana, 4710 Hakel Dr., spoke regarding the process of appointing an individual and in support of Al Jones being appointed to the Port of Corpus Christi Authority of Nueces County, Texas. Carrie Meyer, 4401 Gulfbreeze Blvd., North Beach Community Association; Bob Catalano, 201 Surfside Blvd., North Beach Community Association; Ron Graban, 202 Surfside Blvd.; and Dennis Berry, 4550 River Park Dr., spoke in support of demolishing the bath houses on North Beach. Margareta Fratila, 3606 Tripoli Dr., spoke regarding certificate of occupancies and related code enforcement efforts; and in support of Patricia Canales Bell being appointed to Port of Corpus Christi Authority of Nueces County, Texas. Dick Messbarger, 14901 Windward Dr.; and Phillip Ramirez, 322 Santa Monica Pl., spoke in support of agenda item 13 related to an affordable housing agreement with the Salvation Army. Debbie Lindsey-Opel, 700 Everhart Rd., spoke in support of rip tide awareness at Bob Hall Pier; and regarding the upcoming Leadership Corpus Christi Alumni Association Roast. Daniel Pena, 2813 Hulbirt St., spoke regarding concerns related to water quality, dirt in homes, the process of flushing fire hydrants and concerns regarding the condition of streets in the Hillcrest neighborhood. BOARD & COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS:I. 3.Port of Corpus Christi Authority of Nueces County, Texas (1 Vacancy) Mayor McComb referred to Item 3. Port of Corpus Christi Authority of Nueces County, Texas Council Member Barrera nominated Al Jones. Council Member Guajardo nominated Patricia C. Bell. Council Member Hernandez nominated R. Bryan Page 3City of Corpus Christi Printed on 2/21/2020 February 11, 2020City Council Meeting Minutes Gulley. Al Jones was appointed with Mayor McComb and Council Members Barrera, Hunter, Smith and Roy voting for Al Jones, Council Members Guajardo, Molina and Garza voting for Patricia C. Bell and Council Member Hernandez voting for R. Bryan Gulley. EXPLANATION OF COUNCIL ACTION:J. EXECUTIVE SESSION: (ITEM 27)Q. Mayor McComb deviated from the agenda and referred to Executive Session Item 27. The Council went into executive session at 1:33 p.m. The Council returned from executive session at 2:32 p.m. 27.Executive Session pursuant to Texas Government Code § 551.071 and Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 1.05 to consult with attorneys concerning legal issues related to a proposed Agreement between the Corpus Christi B Corporation and TG110 Village at Greenwood GP, LLC for developer reimbursement of up to $1,250,000 for construction of 30 affordable housing rental units within a 60 unit multi-family housing development at 5992 Greenwood Drive and pursuant to Texas Government Code § 551.087 to discuss confidential commercial or financial information pertaining to the aforesaid business prospect(s) that the City seeks to have locate, stay or expand in or near the territory of the City and with which the City may conduct economic development negotiations and/or deliberate possible economic development issues concerning said business prospect(s). This E-Session Item was discussed in executive session. RECESS FOR LUNCHL. The recess for lunch was held during Executive Session Item 27. CONSENT AGENDA: (ITEMS 4 - 17)K. Approval of the Consent Agenda Mayor McComb referred to the Consent Agenda. Council members requested that Items 7, 10, 13, 15, 16, and 17 be pulled for individual consideration. There were no comments from the Council or the public. A motion was made by Council Member Molina, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve the Consent Agenda. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Mayor McComb, Council Member Barrera, Council Member Garza, Council Member Guajardo, Council Member Hernandez, Council Member Hunter, Council Member Molina, Council Member Roy and Council Member Smith 9 - Abstained:0 Page 4City of Corpus Christi Printed on 2/21/2020 February 11, 2020City Council Meeting Minutes Consent - Second Reading Ordinances 4.Ordinance renewing the Corpus Christi curfew for minors ordinances as mandated every three years per the Local Government Code. This Ordinance was passed on second reading on the consent agenda. Enactment No: 032013 5.Ordinance amending the London Area Wastewater Master Plan, an element of the Comprehensive Plan, to provide wastewater service to approximately 144 acres of land located immediately west of the existing London Area Wastewater Master Plan Area; amending related elements of the Comprehensive Plan; and providing for publication. (Located near Council District 3) This Ordinance was passed on second reading on the consent agenda. Enactment No: 032014 Consent - Contracts and Procurement 6.Motion authorizing a five-year supply agreement with American Kennel Club Companion Animal Recovery Corporation from Raleigh, North Carolina, in an amount not to exceed $194,500.00 for pet microchips and scanners for Animal Care Services, with funding in the amount of $22,691.67 available in the FY 2020 Animal Control General Fund. This Motion was passed on the consent agenda. Enactment No: M2020-043 7.Motion authorizing a three-year service agreement with Pro Tech Mechanical, Inc., of Corpus Christi, Texas for a total amount not to exceed $156,750.00 for Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning system maintenance and repairs for the Corpus Christi International Airport, effective upon issuance of notice to proceed, with funding in the amount of $39,187.44 available through the FY 2020 Airport Fund. Mayor McComb referred to Item 7. A council member and Director of Contracts and Procurement Kim Baker discussed adding language to the agreement related to the vendor providing information to be input into Maximo. There were no comments from the public. Council Member Hernandez made a motion to approve the motion, seconded by Council Member Garza. This Motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Page 5City of Corpus Christi Printed on 2/21/2020 February 11, 2020City Council Meeting Minutes Aye:Mayor McComb, Council Member Barrera, Council Member Garza, Council Member Guajardo, Council Member Hernandez, Council Member Hunter, Council Member Molina, Council Member Roy and Council Member Smith 9 - Abstained:0 Enactment No: M2020-044 8.Motion authorizing a one-year supply agreement with Rehrig Pacific Company of Vernon, California for a total amount of $409,237.20 to purchase 7,618 refuse carts and 2,264 recycling carts for a total of 9,882 carts to be utilized by Solid Waste Services’ customers, effective upon issuance of notice to proceed, with FY 2020 funding in the amount of $238,721.70 available in the General Fund. This Motion was passed on the consent agenda. Enactment No: M2020-045 9.Motion authorizing a six-month service agreement with Total Protection, Incorporated, of Corpus Christi, Texas, in an amount not to exceed $79,625.00 to continue on-call maintenance and repair services for security access control systems at 21 locations for Water, Wastewater, and Gas Operations, while Information Technology secures a new longer-term service agreement for all City facilities that have security access, effective upon issuance of notice to proceed, with funding in an amount of $79,625.00 through the FY 2020 Water, Wastewater, and Gas Funds. This Motion was passed on the consent agenda. Enactment No: M2020-046 Consent - Capital Projects 10.Motion awarding an engineering design and related services contract to Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. in an amount not to exceed $100,000 for preliminary design services for the Cole Park Pier and to authorize the City Manager to negotiate a future contract amendment for the remaining professional services to furnish the design, permitting, bid documents and construction phase services, located in City Council District 2, effective upon notice to proceed, with funding approved and available from Bond 2018 Proposition C. Mayor McComb referred to Item 10. A council member, City Manager Peter Zanoni and Assistant City Manager Keith Selman discussed public engagement in the Cole Park Pier project. Council Member Molina made a motion to approve the motion, seconded by Council Member Garza. Page 6City of Corpus Christi Printed on 2/21/2020 February 11, 2020City Council Meeting Minutes A council member, City Manager Zanoni and Assistant City Manager Selman discussed funding sources for design work; keeping project costs within budget; and obtaining public input via a survey. There were no comments from the public. This Motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Aye:Mayor McComb, Council Member Barrera, Council Member Garza, Council Member Guajardo, Council Member Hernandez, Council Member Hunter, Council Member Molina, Council Member Roy and Council Member Smith 9 - Abstained:0 Enactment No: M2020-047 General Consent Items 11.Resolution authorizing submission of a grant application to the State of Texas, under the Victims of Crime Act for $104,013.20 with city cash match of $2,643.37 and $23,360.00 in-kind services. This Resolution was passed on the consent agenda. Enactment No: 032015 12.Resolution authorizing submission of a grant application to the State of Texas under the Violence Against Women Act for $48,211.68 with city cash match of $13,702.00 and $6,960.00 in-kind services. This Resolution was passed on the consent agenda. Enactment No: 032016 13.Motion authorizing an Affordable Housing agreement with the Salvation Army in the amount of $500,000 for a new $6.3 million facility to be used for transitional housing for homeless individuals, families, and veterans with single room and family occupancy; with funding available from Corpus Christi B Corporation Affordable Housing Funds. Mayor McComb referred to Item 13. A council member expressed support for this Item and discussed his having been homeless. There were no comments from the public. Council Member Hernandez made a motion to approve the motion, seconded by Council Member Molina. This Motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Aye:Mayor McComb, Council Member Barrera, Council Member Garza, Council Member Guajardo, Council Member Hernandez, Council Member Hunter, Council Member Molina, Council Member Roy and Council Member Smith 9 - Page 7City of Corpus Christi Printed on 2/21/2020 February 11, 2020City Council Meeting Minutes Abstained:0 Enactment No: M2020-048 14.Resolution authorizing a Memorandum of Understanding by and between the City of Corpus Christi, City of Kingsville, City of Port Aransas, City of Portland, City of Rockport, San Patricio County, Nueces County, the Regional Transportation Authority, and the Corpus Christi Port Authority to collaborate to develop a master plan for a Public Safety Radio System that will be utilized across multiple member jurisdictions. This Resolution was passed on the consent agenda. Enactment No: 032017 Consent - Resolutions of Support for Affordable Housing Projects 15.Resolution of the City Council of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas in support of the proposed 9% Housing Tax Credit affordable housing project known as Village at McArdle to be developed by TG 110, Inc. Mayor McComb referred to Items 15 -17. Council members, City Manager Peter Zanoni and Director of Housing and Community Development Rudy Bentancourt discussed the following topics: choosing projects to recommend; if the city council should vote in favor of all projects and what impact that has on the State of Texas selecting a particular project(s); the recommendation process and related rules; if the rules for the recommendation process were changed and if so when in the process; the history of previous project approval processes and previous resolutions of support; what other Texas cities are doing with respect to supporting specific projects or making blanket recommendations of support for all projects; and the location of affordable housing units in the city and their proximity to amenities. Director Bentancourt presented information on the following topics: housing tax credits; proposed project locations; Village at McArdle and its proposed location; FishPond Fitzgerald and its proposed location; and Washington Coles Apartments and its proposed location. Council members, City Manager Zanoni, Director Bentancourt, and Assistant City Manager Keith Selman discussed the following topics: supporting certain projects versus others; the City's past practice of providing blanket approval of proposed projects versus this year's approach of selecting specific proposed projects to support; the City's recommendation to the state to consider a waiver of the restriction relating to projects within two miles of a refinery and the city's subsequent retraction of said recommendation; the reasons why a resolution of support is not being recommended for the Washington Coles Apartments; that amenities are not in close proximity to the Washington Coles Apartments; and why an applicant would apply for state housing tax credits if amenities are not in close proximity to the proposed development. In response to a council member's question, Anita Daniels with Washington Page 8City of Corpus Christi Printed on 2/21/2020 February 11, 2020City Council Meeting Minutes Coles Apartments, LP discussed the following topics: that the proposed project is a mixed use development with amenities on site; the proximity of amenities to the proposed development in relation to the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs' guidelines; and revitalization of the Washington Coles and Hillcrest neighborhoods. Council members discussed the following topics: the Sea Gulf Villa revitalization; the Sea District; committing to a 40 year project in the Sea District; support for the resolution in support of the FishPond development; similar past projects in the Calallen area; and the process by which the projects were reduced in number from the original 7 projects. In response to a council member's question, David Fournier with Fish Pond Development, LLC stated that the property on which the development is proposed has a deed restriction which does not allow for the construction of a hotel. Council members and City Manager Zanoni discussed the following topics: the reason the city's Housing and Community and Development Department is handling Items 15-17 and when the City's Homeless and Housing Division will begin handling such items; the City establishing a fair playing field for all developers versus choosing projects to support; the idea that the City should support all projects equally; how resolutions of support and resolutions of no objection impact a project's score with the State of Texas; the competitiveness of the project selection process at the state level; that the City of Corpus Christi shares Texas Housing and Community Affair's Region 10 with Victoria, Texas; and a council member's request to have a workshop on housing tax credits and affordable housing. In response to a council member's questions, Mr. Fournier discussed the following topics: proximity of proposed affordable housing projects to downtown, other affordable housing projects and to schools, including the grade of schools; the effect of a resolution of no objection on Items 15-17; and the effect on Items 15-17 if tabled. In response to a council member's question, Executive Director of Prospera Housing Community Services Gilbert Piette discussed the following topics: availability of after school programs; necessity for proximity to amenities immediately after a development is completed and not at some later time; and proximity to Regional Transportation Authority stops. City Manager Zanoni introduced the city's new Homeless and Housing Administrator Barton Bailey. In response to a council member's question, Ms. Daniels, Mr. Fournier and Vice President of Prospera Housing Community Services Ryan Sweeney described the composition of each company's board of directors. In response to a council member's question, Ms. Daniels discussed the following topics: an art scape planned for the Washington Coles project; the State of Texas' self-scoring process; and that the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs wants to know why the city retracted its recommendation relating to a waiver regarding proximity of the planned project to refineries. Page 9City of Corpus Christi Printed on 2/21/2020 February 11, 2020City Council Meeting Minutes Council members discussed the following topics: use of odd shaped properties for affordable housing developments; why there are not more local affordable housing developers; and creating a city council policy regarding blanket approval of affordable housing projects. Council Member Hunter made a motion of blanket support of Items 15-17 such that each of the resolutions in Items 15-17 are in support of each project, seconded by Council Member Hernandez. Council members, City Manager Zanoni, and City Attorney Miles K. Risley discussed the following topics: that the Washington Coles project is not within the Hillcrest neighborhood; the Port of Corpus Christi's northside relocation process and funding and what impact the City's decision on Items 15-17 will have on said process; and tourism versus affordable housing. Council Member Hernandez made a motion to approve Item 15, to amend Item 16 to read, "Resolution of the City Council of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas in support of the proposed 9% housing tax credit for an affordable housing project known as FishPond Fitzgerald to be developed by FishPond Development, LLC" and to amend Item 17 to read "Resolution of the City Council of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas in support of the proposed 9% housing tax credit for an affordable housing project known as Washington Coles Apartments to be developed by Washington Coles Apts., LP", seconded by Council Member Hunter and passed with the following vote: Mayor McComb and Council Members Hernandez, Hunter, Molina, Roy, Garza and Guajardo voting "Aye" and Council Members Smith and Barrera "No". Council Member Hunter made a motion to approve Items 16 and 17 as amended, seconded by Council Member Hernandez. The Mayor called for comments from the public. Gloria Scott, 4422 S. Alameda St., spoke regarding having a workshop on affordable housing. Ms. Daniels spoke regarding having a workshop on affordable housing and the consequences of a recommendation of approval for all three projects. Lamont Taylor, 522 Hancock Ave., spoke regarding his service as chairman of the TG 110, Inc.'s board of directors; and that affordable housing is needed in the downtown and Washington Coles area. Claude Axle, 741 Crestview Dr., spoke regarding the history of the Washington Coles neighborhood, how it has declined over the years and a desire to see the area revitalized. Council members discussed if a blanket recommendation of approval for all three projects results in any one of the projects being favored, by the State of Texas, over another. Resolution 15 was passed and approved and Resolutions 16 and 17 were passed and approved as amended by one vote: Aye:Mayor McComb, Council Member Garza, Council Member Guajardo, Council Member Hernandez, Council Member Hunter, Council Member Molina and Council Member Roy 7 - Nay:Council Member Barrera and Council Member Smith2 - Abstained:0 Page 10City of Corpus Christi Printed on 2/21/2020 February 11, 2020City Council Meeting Minutes Enactment No: 032018 16.Resolution of the City Council of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas having no objection to in support of the proposed 9% Housing Tax Credit affordable housing project known as FishPond Fitzgerald to be developed by Fish Pond Development, LLC. This Resolution was passed and approved as amended by one vote (see Item 15). Aye:Mayor McComb, Council Member Garza, Council Member Guajardo, Council Member Hernandez, Council Member Hunter, Council Member Molina and Council Member Roy 7 - Nay:Council Member Barrera and Council Member Smith2 - Abstained:0 Enactment No: 032019 17.Resolution of the City Council of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas having no objection to in support of the proposed 9% Housing Tax Credit affordable housing project known as Washington Coles Apartments to be developed by Washington Coles Apts., LP. This Resolution was passed and approved as amended by one vote (see Item 15). Aye:Mayor McComb, Council Member Garza, Council Member Guajardo, Council Member Hernandez, Council Member Hunter, Council Member Molina and Council Member Roy 7 - Nay:Council Member Barrera and Council Member Smith2 - Abstained:0 Enactment No: 032020 PUBLIC HEARINGS: (ITEMS 18 - 22)M. 18.Zoning Case No. 1119-03, Morteza Shafinury and Abdolrhim Aminzadeh (District 5). Ordinance rezoning property at or near 7121 Saratoga Boulevard (State Highway 357) from the “RM-1” Multifamily 1 District and “CG-2” General Commercial District to the “IL” Light Industrial District. Planning Commission and Staff recommend Denial and in lieu thereof approval of the “CG-2/SP” General Commercial District with a Special Permit with conditions. Mayor McComb referred to Item 18. Director of Development Services Al Raymond stated that the purpose of this Item is the construction of showroom warehouses. Director Raymond presented information on the following topics: aerial overview; zoning pattern; and Planning Commission's and staff's Page 11City of Corpus Christi Printed on 2/21/2020 February 11, 2020City Council Meeting Minutes recommendation to deny the "IL" Light Industrial District and in lieu thereof, approval of the "CG-2/SP" General Commercial District with a Special Permit. Mayor McComb opened the public hearing. Miguel Saldana, 4553 Moonlake Ridge Dr., on behalf of the applicant, discussed restrictions related to the "CG-2/SP" General Commercial District with a Special Permit with conditions; and recommended that City Council deny the "IL" Light Industrial District and in lieu thereof approve the "CG-2/SP" General Commercial District with a Special Permit with conditions. Mayor McComb closed the public hearing. Council Member Hernandez made a motion to approve the ordinance rezoning the subject property to "CG-2/SP" General Commercial District with a Special Permit with conditions, seconded by Council Member Molina. This Ordinance was passed on first reading and approved with the following vote: Aye:Mayor McComb, Council Member Barrera, Council Member Garza, Council Member Guajardo, Council Member Hernandez, Council Member Molina, Council Member Roy and Council Member Smith 8 - Absent:Council Member Hunter1 - Abstained:0 19.Zoning Case No. 1219-02, Zeba, Inc. (District 3). Ordinance rezoning property at or near 4938 Moody Drive from the “RS-6” Single-Family 6 District to the “RM-1” Multifamily 1 District. Planning Commission recommends approval. Staff recommends Denial and in lieu thereof, approval of the “RS-TF” Two Family District. Mayor McComb referred to Item 19. Director of Development Services Al Raymond discussed the following topics: the history of the subject property; that the applicant desires to construct multi-family dwellings on the subject property; changing the zoning designation in relation to protecting the surrounding neighborhood; the number of units allowed per acre in various zoning designations and that, although the applicant prefers the "RM-1" Multifamily 1 District, the applicant is willing to accept the "RS-TF" Two-Family District in lieu thereof. Council members and Director Raymond discussed the following topics: concern regarding additional traffic associated with the "RM-1" Multifamily 1 District; how city parkland that is sold by the city can be used; that the neighborhood in which the subject property is located is zoned "RS-6"; and the impact on traffic of various zoning designations. Mayor McComb opened the public hearing. The applicant, Mohammad Motaghi, 2921 Ocean Dr., spoke regarding the following topics: the type of development to be constructed; that he wants to construct a development where the tenants do not have to maintain the property; additional cost to the developer related to the "RS-TF" Two-Family District zoning designation; and traffic considerations of various zoning designations. A council member and Director Raymond discussed the following topics: that Page 12City of Corpus Christi Printed on 2/21/2020 February 11, 2020City Council Meeting Minutes the applicant is requesting that the subject property be rezoned to "RM-1" Multifamily 1 District; that the change in zoning is for the property and not related to the proposed project; and the number of surrounding property owners that returned notices in favor of and in opposition to the proposed zoning change. James Skrobarczyk, 714 Oriole St., spoke regarding the possible use of a "cluster" or "cottage" concept for the subject property. Council members and Director Raymond discussed the following topics: the number of acres per zoning designation; protecting the interests of the surrounding neighborhood, and the limited capacity of neighborhood streets. Mayor McComb closed the public hearing. Council members and Director Raymond discussed the following topics: use of a special permit; the size of the subject property; and reducing the number of units to be constructed on the subject property. Council Member Hernandez made a motion to table this Item, seconded by Council Member Guajardo. Council members and Director Raymond discussed the following topics: the number of units that could be constructed in various zoning designations; the number of units proposed for the subject property in comparison to the number of units on surrounding properties. This Item was tabled with the following vote: Aye:Mayor McComb, Council Member Barrera, Council Member Garza, Council Member Guajardo, Council Member Hernandez, Council Member Hunter, Council Member Molina and Council Member Smith 8 - Abstained:Council Member Roy1 - 20.Zoning Case No. 1219-03, MVR Construction Company (District 4). Ordinance rezoning property at or near 2301 Flour Bluff Drive from the “RS-6” Single-Family 6 District and “CG-2” General Commercial District to the “RS-4.5” Single-Family 4.5 District. Planning Commission and Staff recommend Approval. Mayor McComb referred to Item 20. Council members and Director of Development Services Al Raymond discussed the following topics: that Planning Commission and staff recommend approving the ordinance; the density of development as set out in the Area Development Plan in relation to the density of the zoning being recommended in this Item; flooding problems on Glenoak Dr.; to where water from the proposed development will drain; and the lack of provision for parks in the proposed development. Council Member Smith made a motion to approve the ordinance, seconded by Council Member Barrera. Mayor McComb opened the public hearing. James Skrobarczyk, 714 Oriole St., Page 13City of Corpus Christi Printed on 2/21/2020 February 11, 2020City Council Meeting Minutes spoke regarding flooding on Glenoak Dr. A council member and Director Raymond discussed the following topics: that the purpose of this Item is to rezone the subject property; that issues relating to runoff from the subject property will be addressed at the platting stage of the development process; and maintenance of drainage ditches in the area. Mayor McComb closed the public hearing. This Ordinance was passed on first reading and approved with the following vote: Aye:Mayor McComb, Council Member Barrera, Council Member Garza, Council Member Guajardo, Council Member Hernandez, Council Member Hunter, Council Member Molina, Council Member Roy and Council Member Smith 9 - Abstained:0 21.Ordinance amending the Urban Transportation Plan map of MobilityCC, a transportation element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan, to adjust the location of the future Oso Parkway relative to the Oso Creek flood zones; to eliminate a north-south Collector street that becomes unnecessary when Oso Parkway is shifted westward; to adjust the connection between CR 43 East and Oso Parkway; and to connect CR 20A with Oso Parkway. (Located near Council District 5) Mayor McComb referred to Item 21. Director of Planning and ESI Daniel McGinn presented information on the following topics: vicinity map; current transportation plan; proposed amendment; amended plan; HikeBikeCC-"Lakes Loop", before and after; and the Planning Commission's, Transportation Advisory Commission's and staff's recommendation to approve. Council members and Director McGinn discussed the following topics: the width of the planned roadway; utilizing a "Parkway" road standard; developer versus City funding of the planned roadway; the difference between the Developer Trust Funds and Developer Participation Fund; and the condition of existing roads in the area. Mayor McComb opened the public hearing. There were no comments from the public. Mayor McComb closed the public hearing. Council Member Hernandez made a motion to approve the ordinance, seconded by Council Member Smith. The Ordinance was passed on first reading and approved with the following vote: Aye:Mayor McComb, Council Member Barrera, Council Member Garza, Council Member Guajardo, Council Member Hernandez, Council Member Hunter, Council Member Molina, Council Member Roy and Council Member Smith 9 - Abstained:0 Page 14City of Corpus Christi Printed on 2/21/2020 February 11, 2020City Council Meeting Minutes 22.Ordinance authorizing a Wastewater Force Main and Lift Station Construction and Reimbursement Agreement with Tamez Development Corporation to construct wastewater force main and lift station for a planned residential subdivision located on CR-43 with a completion date of February 28, 2022; transferring $300,000 from the Sanitary Sewer Collection Line Trust Fund and $200,000 from the 4030 Water Distribution Main Trust Fund to the Sanitary Sewer Trunk System Trust Fund; and appropriating $1,965,620.00 from the Sanitary Sewer Trunk System Trust Fund to reimburse the Developer per the agreement. (District 5) Mayor McComb referred to Item 22. Director of Development Services Al Raymond stated that the purpose of this ordinance is to execute a wastewater force main and lift station construction and reimbursement agreement with the Tamez Development Corporation for the installation of 2,300 linear feet of 6-inch force main and a wastewater lift station and to transfer $300,000 from the Sanitary Sewer Collection Line Trust Fund and $200,000 from the Water Distribution Main Trust Fund to the Sanitary Sewer Trunk System Trust Fund and appropriate $1,965,620 from the Sanitary Truck System Trust Fund to reimburse the Developer per this agreement. Director of Development Services Al Raymond presented information on the following topics: location map; vicinity map; and recommendation of approval. Council Member Hunter made a motion to approve the ordinance, seconded by Council Member Guajardo. The Ordinance was passed on first reading and approved with the following vote: Council members, Director Raymond and Development Services Department Contract/Funds Administrator Michael Johnston discussed the following topics: the future rerouting of the proposed lift station to the Greenwood Wastewater Treatment Plant (GWTP); the time necessary to build out the proposed development; other developments proposed in the area; the various phases of this proposed project; the capacity of the proposed wastewater force main and lift station to accommodate additional anticipated development in the area when a force main to the GWTP will be needed; and impact fees. Mayor McComb opened the public hearing. There were no comments from the public. Mayor McComb closed the public hearing. Aye:Mayor McComb, Council Member Barrera, Council Member Garza, Council Member Guajardo, Council Member Hernandez, Council Member Hunter, Council Member Molina, Council Member Roy and Council Member Smith 9 - Abstained:0 N. REGULAR AGENDA: (NONE) FIRST READING ORDINANCES: (ITEMS 23 - 24)O. Page 15City of Corpus Christi Printed on 2/21/2020 February 11, 2020City Council Meeting Minutes 23.Ordinance authorizing a Type B Affordable Housing agreement with TG 110 Village at Greenwood GP, LLC in the amount of $1,250,000 for a $12.7 million dollar development with 30 affordable housing rental units out of a total of 60 multi-family, mixed income units to be paid over two years; appropriating funds in the amount of $625,000 from the Type B Affordable Housing Fund; and amending the budget. Mayor McComb referred to Item 23. Administrator of Homeless and Housing Barton Bailey presented information on the following topics: TG 110 Village at Greenwood request for funding; details of village at Greenwood at 5992 Greenwood Dr.; aerial views; architectural rendering; funding details; and income restrictions. Council members, Administrator Bailey, City Manager Peter Zanoni and Ray Lucas of TG 110 Village at Greenwood GP, LLC discussed the following topics: the number of units eligible for Type B funding; the large amount of funding being requested per unit and the related precedent that may be set by approving this Item; the number of bedrooms per unit; the Section 8 components of projects; the percentage of project costs covered by grants; the percentage of project costs to be covered by Type B funds; considerations relating to debt service coverage by the developer’s lending institution; the maximum amount of debt on the proposed property; the percentage of total available Type B funds requested to be committed to this project; comparing this project to other similar projects; the number of years the developer will manage the proposed development and related costs; the proximity of the subject property to amenities and Regional Transportation Authority stops; the current appraised value of the property; the amount of ad valorem taxes that will come from the proposed development once complete; if the requested investment constitutes a “good deal”; that the project will not move forward if this Item is not approved; if the $1,250,000 is the requested exact amount or if it is an “up to” amount; funding sources other than Type B funding; that state funding is from Hurricane Harvey-related monies from the Texas General Land Office; depleting Type B funding; subsidizing green field development; reconstruction versus new development; concerns regarding the large amount of funding requested in this Item; the cost-per-unit of similar projects; if the amount requested is too much per unit; and why construction costs for this project are greater than private sector construction costs for similar projects. Council Member Barrera made a motion to approve the ordinance, seconded by Council Member Smith. The Ordinance was passed on first reading and approved with the following vote: There were no comments from the public. A council member discussed the contribution to the local economy for renters on the proposed development. Aye:Mayor McComb, Council Member Barrera, Council Member Hunter, Council Member Molina, Council Member Roy and Council Member Smith 6 - Nay:Council Member Garza, Council Member Guajardo and Council Member Hernandez 3 - Page 16City of Corpus Christi Printed on 2/21/2020 February 11, 2020City Council Meeting Minutes Abstained:0 24.Ordinance authorizing a purchase from Twincrest Technologies, of Fort Worth, Texas for the Wavetronix Radar Detection System for a total amount of $1,102,665 for Public Works/Street Operations Department to be used for traffic signal vehicle detection and funded by the Streets Fund; and amending the budget to appropriate $1,102,665 in Street Operation Reserves. Mayor McComb referred to Item 24. There were no comments from the Council or the public. Council Member Barrera made a motion to approve the ordinance, seconded by Council Member Smith. The Ordinance was passed on first reading and approved with the following vote: Aye:Mayor McComb, Council Member Barrera, Council Member Garza, Council Member Guajardo, Council Member Hernandez, Council Member Hunter, Council Member Molina, Council Member Roy and Council Member Smith 9 - Abstained:0 P. BRIEFINGS: (ITEM 25) 25.Corpus Christi Seawater Desalination Siting and Permitting Project Update Mayor McComb referred to Item 25. Water Utilities Department Water Resources Manager Steve Ramos presented information on the following topics: seawater desalination update objectives and timeline; seawater desalination permit application submitted and next steps; seawater desalination Texas Water Development Board loan application submitted and next steps; and land acquisition and power requirements; seawater desalination project update summary. Council members, Manager Ramos, and Executive Director of Water Utilities Dan Grimsbo discussed the following topics: land acquisition options versus purchases; costs to be covered by the industry surcharge; the cost per 1,000 gallons; that the costs in the presentation are only for design and construction, not operating costs; the source and cost of data obtained by a council member; a World Bank report on desalination; time spent on desalination to date; and if proposed desalination plants will be enclosed by a structure or open to the elements. EXECUTIVE SESSION: (ITEM 26)Q. 26.Executive session pursuant to Texas Government Code 551.071 Page 17City of Corpus Christi Printed on 2/21/2020 February 11, 2020City Council Meeting Minutes and Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 1.05 to consult with attorneys concerning the lawsuit of Salinas Construction Technologies, Ltd. and Salinas and Sons, Inc. v. City of Corpus Christi and the potential approval of attorney’s fees, expert fees, and expenses in said case. Mayor McComb referred to Executive Session Item 26. The Council went into executive session at 6:04 p.m. The Council returned from executive session at 6:36 p.m. The Council considered the following motion: Motion to authorize the City Manager or his designees to execute an amendment to the City's professional services agreement for attorney services with McKibben, Martinez, Jarvis, and Wood LLP for representation of the City in Salinas Construction Technologies, Ltd. and Salinas and Sons, Inc. v. City of Corpus Christi to increase the maximum amount of said contract by $190,000. Council Member Guajardo made a motion to approve the motion, seconded by Council Member Garza. The motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Aye:Mayor McComb, Council Member Barrera, Council Member Garza, Council Member Guajardo, Council Member Hernandez, Council Member Hunter, Council Member Molina, Council Member Roy and Council Member Smith 9 - Abstained:0 Enactment No: M2020-049 IDENTIFY COUNCIL FUTURE AGENDA ITEMSR. Mayor McComb referred to Identify Council Future Agenda Items. No items were discussed or identified. ADJOURNMENTS. The meeting was adjourned at 6:38 p.m. Page 18City of Corpus Christi Printed on 2/21/2020 Duties Composition Member Size Term Length Term Limit 9 2 years 6 Years Name District Term Appt. date End date Appointing Authority Position Status Attendance *Melanie R Gomez District 2 1 7/17/2018 2/1/2020 City Council Seeking reappointment 12/12 meetings 100% *Marshall Burns District 2 3 5/14/2013 2/1/2020 City Council Vice-Chair Met the six-year service limitation *Anthony M Navarrette District 3 1 1/17/2017 2/1/2020 City Council Seeking reappointment 10/12 meetings 83% (2 excused absences) *James (T.C.) Chadden District 2 1 2/19/2019 2/1/2020 City Council Resigned **Sabrina Ramirez District 1 2 10/17/2017 2/1/2021 City Council Seeking re-instatement 5/12 meetings 42% (2 excused absences) Dr. Anthony Zoccolillo District 4 2 3/8/2016 2/1/2021 City Council Active Mary C Bustos District 3 3 4/15/2014 2/1/2021 City Council Active Vanessa P Nisbet District 2 1 2/19/2019 2/1/2021 City Council Active Richard Balli District 2 3 11/12/2013 2/1/2021 City Council Chair Active Parks and Recreation Director N/A N/A N/A Ex-Officio, Non-voting Active Building Official N/A N/A N/A Ex-Officio, Non-voting Active Human Relations Administrator N/A N/A N/A Ex-Officio, Non-voting Active COMMITTEE FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES *Five (5) vacancies with terms to 02-1-21 and 02-1-22. The Committee for Persons with Disabilities provides a program to encourage, assist and enable persons with disabilities to participate in the social and economic life of the City; to achieve maximum personal independence; to become gainfully employed; and to enjoy fully and use all public and private facilities available within the community. Nine (9) residents of the city who shall be appointed by the City Council. The membership of the committee shall be composed of individuals with disabilities and representatives of agencies and organizations functioning within the committee'’s area who are interested in the provision of services to persons with disabilities and others who are interested in the abilities and specific needs of persons with disabilities, subject to Council approval. The Human Relations Administrator, Director of Parks and Recreation, and Building Official shall serve as ex-officio non-voting members. The Chairperson of the Committee for Persons with Disabilities shall serve as an ex-officio voting member of the Human Relations Commission. **Ms. Ramirez exceeded the number of absences allowed by ordinance due to family issues. She says she can now attend the meetings and is requesting reinstatement.2-25-2020 Name District Michael J Brady District 5 Christina C Buttler District 2 Amanda I Lopez District 4 Edward Y Pettijohn Sr.District 3 Serita Porter District 4 Richard Rosa District 4 Huxley T Smith District 5 Lynn A Valley District 1 COMMITTEES FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES Applicants Duties Composition Member Size Term Length 12 2 years Name District Term Appt. date End date Appointing Authority Position Status Category *Michael T. Hunter 2 4/19/2016 2/28/2020 City Council Active City *Ben Molina District 5 2 12/20/2016 2/28/2020 City Council Active City *Joe McComb 2 12/20/2016 2/28/2020 City Council Active City *Al Jones District 4 1 2/14/2017 2/28/2020 City Council Resigned Downtown Management District Carolyn Vaughn 1 3/14/2018 2/28/2020 Nueces County Vice-Chair Active County Susan Hutchinson Partial 4/23/2019 2/28/2020 Del Mar College Active Del Mar Greg Smith District 4 2 12/20/2016 2/28/2021 City Council Active City The Reinvestment Zone No. 3 Board shall make recommendations to the City Council concerning the administration of the zone. (The zone area includes approximately 856 acres encompassing the City's Downtown area along the Bayfront from the SEA-Town complex at the north end, south to Morgan Avenue adjacent to the Christus Spohn Shoreline Hospital, and west to Tancahua Street.) The Board shall prepare and adopt a project plan and reinvestment zone financing plan for the zone and submit such plans to the City Council for its approval in accordance with Section 311.011, Texas Tax Code. The Board shall exercise other powers and responsibilities with respect to the zone only to the extent expressly granted by the City Council by ordinance or resolution. * Four (4) vacancies with terms to 02/28/2022 appointed by the City Council. Appointment of Chairman for one year term beginning January 1, 2020. (Historically, Council Members have been appointed to the board. Staff is recommending the postponement of the Downtown Management District Representative for futher recruitment by the DMD.) The Board shall consist of twelve (12) members. The members shall be appointed as follows: Pursuant to Sec. 311.009(a), Tax Code, the respective governing bodies of each taxing unit other than the City that levies taxes on real property in the zone, if the taxing unit has approved the payment of all or part of the tax increment produced by the unit into the tax increment fund for the zone, may appoint one (1) member of the Board. These entities include: Del Mar College and Nueces County. Each governing body may waive its right to appoint a Director. The remaining members of the board are appointed by the City Council. The City Council shall have the right to appoint at least ten (10) members, with one reserved for a representative from the Downtown Management District, and the board may exceed twelve (12) members if necessary for the City Council to make said ten (10) appointments. To be eligible for appointment an individual must be a qualified voter of the City; or be at least 18 years of age or older and own real property in the zone. Terms of Board members are for two years. Terms must be staggered with half of the Board members appointed every year. Officers must be appointed as provided in the Act. Each year the governing body of the municipality or county that created the zone shall appoint one member of the board to serve as Chairman for a term of one-year that begins on January 1 of the following year . The Board of Directors may elect a Vice- Chairman to preside in the absence of the Chairman or when there is a vacancy in the office of the Chairman. The board may elect other officers as it considers appropriate. REINVESTMENT ZONE NO. 3 BOARD 2-25-2020 Name District Term Appt. date End date Appointing Authority Position Status Category Paulette Guajardo 2 12/20/2016 2/28/2021 City Council Active City Everett Roy District 1 2 5/8/2018 2/28/2021 City Council Chair Active City Rudy Garza District 5 4 2/12/2013 2/28/2021 City Council Active City Roland Barrera District 3 1 1/15/2019 2/28/2021 City Council Active City Gil Hernandez 1 1/15/2019 2/28/2021 City Council Active City 2-25-2020 DATE: January 13, 2020 TO: Peter Zanoni, City Manager FROM: Robert Rocha, Fire Chief rrocha@cctexas.com 361-826-3938 CAPTION: Ordinance accepting a grant in the amount of $10,000 from The Hartford to be used to support fire safety education efforts and programming; and appropriating the funds into the FY2020 Fire Grant Fund. SUMMARY: This ordinance authorizes the City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to accept and appropriate one grant totaling $10,000 from The Hartford. The grant funds will support fire safety education efforts and programming. BACKGROUND AND FINDINGS: On November 22, 2019, the Corpus Christi Fire Department (CCFD) was awarded a grant in the amount of $10,000 from The Hartford. The Hartford is an insurance company headquartered in Hartford, Connecticut. The Hartford’s fire safety grant program, the Junior Fire Marshal program, began in 1947 and has since deputized more than 110 million Junior Fire Marshals. In 2017, The Hartford released The Hartford Home Fire Index, which ranks the top 100 cities in the U.S. based on their risk of home fires. As a result of the study, The Hartford made a pledge to donate $10,000 to both the public-school districts and local fire departments in each of the 100 cities. Due to the City’s #97 ranking in The Hartford’s Home Fire Index, the CCFD has been awarded $10,000 to support fire safety education efforts and programming. The Hartford grant fund uses include, but are not limited to, fire safety awareness and education within the community and local schools. Acceptance of a grant for $10,000 from The Hartford to support fire safety education efforts and programming AGENDA MEMORANDUM First Reading Ordinance for the City Council Meeting February 18, 2020 Second Reading Ordinance for the City Council Meeting February 25, 2020 ALTERNATIVES: Reject grant award and seek alternative funding. FISCAL IMPACT: Accepting $10,000 grant award from The Hartford and appropriating $10,000 to the FY2020 Fire Grant Fund. Funding Detail: Fund: 1062 – Fire Grant Fund Organization/Activity: 840019L Mission Element: Project # (CIP Only): Account: 520090 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of this ordinance to accept and appropriate grant award totaling $10,000. LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Ordinance Award Letter Ordinance accepting a grant in the amount of $10,000 from The Hartford to be used to support fire safety education efforts and programming; and appropriating the funds into the FY2020 Fire Grant Fund. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS: SECTION 1: The City Manager or designee is authorized to execute all documents necessary to accept a donation from The Hartford in the amount of $10,000 to be used to support fire safety education efforts and programming. SECTION 2: That $10,000 from The Hartford, is appropriated in the Fire Grant Fund No. 1062 to be used to support fire safety education efforts and programming. That the foregoing ordinance was read for the first time and passed to its second reading on this the _____ day of ___________, 2020, by the following vote: Joe McComb ________________ Michael Hunter______________ Roland Barrera ________________ Ben Molina ______________ Rudy Garza ________________ Everett Roy ______________ Paulette M. Guajardo ________________ Greg Smith ______________ Gil Hernandez ________________ That the foregoing ordinance was read for the second time and passed finally on this the _____ day of __________ 2020, by the following vote: Joe McComb ________________ Michael Hunter______________ Roland Barrera ________________ Ben Molina ______________ Rudy Garza ________________ Everett Roy ______________ Paulette M. Guajardo ________________ Greg Smith ______________ Gil Hernandez ________________ PASSED AND APPROVED on this the ______ day of _________________, 2020. ATTEST: _________________________ ________________________ Rebecca L. Huerta Joe McComb City Secretary Mayor © 2019 by The Hartford. Classification: Non-Confidential. No part of this document may be reproduced, published or used without the permission of The Hartford. November 22, 2019 Judy Villalon City of Corpus Christi Fire Department 1201 Leopard Street Corpus Christi, TX 78401 Dear Judy, The Hartford is pleased to support the City Corpus Christi Fire Department. In this capacity, The Hartford has committed $10,000 to support fire safety education efforts and programming. We ask that the funds from this grant be leveraged within one calendar year from the grant date of November 22, 2019 and to provide a formal report within this grant timeframe as how the funds were leveraged. The parameters of this grant can be customized to your individual needs, and may include, but are not limited to, fire safety awareness and education within the community and local schools. We ask that our company be referred to as The Hartford in any materials you publish regarding this commitment and to have the opportunity to review prior publication. Payment will be processed in the amount of $10,000 shortly. We look forward to our new partnership. On behalf of The Hartford and its Junior Fire Marshal program, thank you for your commitment to keeping children fire safe. Sincerely, Kathleen Weitz Corporate Sustainability The Hartford DATE: January 13, 2020 TO: Peter Zanoni, City Manager FROM: Robert Rocha, Fire Chief rrocha@cctexas.com 361-826-3938 CAPTION: Ordinance authorizing acceptance of a grant from the Texas Division of Emergency Management in the amount of $54,887.82 for the 2019 Emergency Management Performance Grant with a City cash match of $54,887.82 from the FY2020 Emergency Management General Fund; and appropriating $54,887.82 in the FY2020 Emergency Management Grants Fund. SUMMARY: The purpose of the grant is to support local comprehensive Emergency Management Programs to encourage improvements of mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery capabilities of all hazards. The funds will be used to distribute public information materials to the citizens of Corpus Christi pertaining to hurricane preparedness; develop and update emergency management plans; conduct full -scale exercises; staff training; and support of the dialogic system. BACKGROUND AND FINDINGS: On October 10, 1019, the City of Corpus Christi was awarded the Texas Division of Emergency Management 2019 Emergency Management Performance Grant (EMPG). The FY 2019 priority for this program is to advance “Whole Community” security and emergency management. Grant funds will be used to support local comprehensive emergency management programs to encourage improvement of mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery capabilities for all hazards. Acceptance of 2019 Emergency Management Performance Grant for $54,887.82 to Support Security and Emergency Management Activities AGENDA MEMORANDUM First Reading Ordinance for the City Council Meeting February 18, 2020 Second Reading Ordinance for the City Council Meeting February 25, 2020 The EMPG Program plays an important role in the implementation of the National Preparedness System by supporting initiatives including local implementation of the National Incident Command Systems, incorporation of appropriate references to the National Response Framework into local plans, homeland security assessment and strategy integration, and assessment of local emergency management programs. The EMPG is a cost match program, meaning participating jurisdictions are required to provide at least 50 percent in matching funds for expenses covered through this program. For every dollar of federal EMPG grant funding provided, local and state agency grant recipients must provide an equal amount of local or state cost share. The grant award is for $54,887.82 with a City cash match of $54,887.82. ALTERNATIVES: Not accepting the grant will hinder planning and preparedness for responding to emergencies related to man-made or natural disasters. FISCAL IMPACT: Accepting a grant in the amount of $54,887.82 and appropriating to the FY2020 Emergency Management Grants Fund. The City will provide a cash match of $54,887.82 from the FY2020 Emergency Management General Fund. Funding Detail: Fund: 1063 Organization/Activity: 820571F Mission Element: Project # (CIP Only): Account: RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approving the ordinance to appropriat e a grant in the amount of $54,887.82 from the Emergency Management Performance Grant Program. LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Ordinance Award Letter 1 Ordinance authorizing acceptance of a grant from the Texas Division of Emergency Management in the amount of $54,887.82 for the 2019 Emergency Management Performance Grant with a City cash match of $54,887.82 from the FY2020 Emergency Management General Fund; and appropriating $54,887.82 in the FY2020 Emergency Management Grants Fund. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS: SECTION 1. The City Manager or designee is authorized to execute all documents necessary to accept a grant from the Texas Division of Emergency Management, in the amount of $54,887.82 for the 2019 Emergency Management Performance Grant with a City match of $54,887.82 from the No. 1020 Emergency Management General Fund, for a total project cost of $109,775.64. SECTION 2. That $54,887.82 is appropriated from the Texas Division of Emergency Management, Emergency Management Performance Grant Program in the No. 1063 Emergency Management Grants Fund for improving mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery capabilities for the City of Corpus Christi. 2 That the foregoing ordinance was read for the first time and passed to its second reading on this the _____ day of ___________, 2019, by the following vote: Joe McComb ________________ Michael Hunter______________ Roland Barrera ________________ Ben Molina ______________ Rudy Garza ________________ Everett Roy ______________ Paulette M. Guajardo ________________ Greg Smith ______________ Gil Hernandez ________________ That the foregoing ordinance was read for the second time and passed finally on this the _____ day of __________ 2020, by the following vote: Joe McComb ________________ Michael Hunter______________ Roland Barrera ________________ Ben Molina ______________ Rudy Garza ________________ Everett Roy ______________ Paulette M. Guajardo ________________ Greg Smith ______________ Gil Hernandez ________________ PASSED AND APPROVED on this the ______ day of _________________, 2020. ATTEST: _________________________ ________________________ Rebecca Huerta Joe McComb City Secretary Mayor DATE: February 5, 2020 TO: Peter Zanoni, City Manager FROM: Jermel Stevenson, Director of Parks and Recreation JermelS@cctexas.com (361) 826-3042 CAPTION: Ordinance accepting a $180,000 donation for the Games of Texas from the P.A.L.S. Fund (Parks, Arts, Leisure and Seniors Fund), a Texas nonprofit corporation; and appropriating in the General Fund. SUMMARY: The Parks and Recreation Department seeks to accept and appropriate a $180,000 donation from Parks, Arts, Leisure and Seniors, Inc. (P.A.L.S.), a Texas nonprofit Corporation, established to raise funds to support the Corpus Christi Parks and Recreation Department, to be used towards the Games of Texas Event for FY2020 and 2021, thereby alleviating the financial burden to the City. BACKGROUND AND FINDINGS: The Games of Texas are a series of amateur Olympic-style events held each summer and winter in the State of Texas. They are organized by the Texas Amateur Athletic Federation (TAAF) and are part of the National Congress of State Games. Medalists from the Games qualify to participate in the State Games of America, a biennial multi-sport event. In July 2012 and 2013, the Parks and Recreation Department hosted the Summer Games of Texas. The two-year event had an estimated $15,000,000 economic impact for the City of Corpus Christi. Participants, family members, coaches, sponsors and spectators filled hotels, restaurants, beaches and all the entertainment venues that the City had to offer. Because the Games were so successful, the Parks & Recreation Department submitted an application to TAAF in 2016 to host the Games of Texas for Summer 2020 and 2021 and was selected to host once again. The department is excited to once more represent the City of Corpus Christi as host of this premier athletic event. ALTERNATIVES: City Council may choose not to approve this item, however, approval will benefit the City by Accepting and Appropriating $180,000 Donation from P.A.L.S. for the 2020 and 2021 Games of Texas Events AGENDA MEMORANDUM First Reading Ordinance for the City Council Meeting February 18, 2020 Second Reading Ordinance for the City Council Meeting February 25, 2020 defraying the cost of hosting the Games. FISCAL IMPACT: With acceptance of this donation, the General Fund will receive $180,000 to help defray the City’s costs of hosting the Summer Games of Texas which will be taking place from July 30 through August 2, 2020. The Corpus Christi Convention and Visitors Bureau also provides some financial support for the events. Funding Detail: Fund: 1020 General Fund Organization/Activity: 13012 Texas Amateur Athletic Federation Mission Element: 888 Revenue Project # (CIP Only): n/a Account: 340000 Contributions and Donations RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends acceptance and appropriation of a $180,000 donation from P.A.L.S. to be used towards the Games of Texas Event, to help defray the costs to the City of hosting the event this summer. LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Ordinance Ordinance accepting a $180,000 donation for the Games of Texas from the P.A.L.S. Fund (Parks, Arts, Leisure and Seniors Fund) a Texas nonprofit corporation; and appropriating in the General Fund. Whereas, the City of Corpus Christi has been selected to host the Games of Texas in Summer 2020 and 2021; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS: SECTION 1. The City Manager or designee is authorized to execute all documents necessary to accept a donation from the P.A.L.S. Fund, a Texas nonprofit corporation, in the amount of $180,000 to be used in support the Games of Texas. SECTION 2. That $180,000 is appropriated in the No. 1020 General Fund to be used to support the Games of Texas. Any unspent proceeds as of September 30, 2020 will be committed in the fund balance of the General Fund for the Games of Texas in future years. SECTION 3. This ordinance takes effect upon passage. That the foregoing ordinance was read for the first time and passed to its second reading on this the day of _, 2020, by the following vote: Joe McComb Michael Hunter Roland Barrera Ben Molina Rudy Garza Everett Roy Paulette M. Guajardo Greg Smith Gil Hernandez That the foregoing ordinance was read for the second time and passed finally on this the day of 2020, by the following vote: Joe McComb Michael Hunter Roland Barrera Ben Molina Rudy Garza Everett Roy Paulette M. Guajardo Greg Smith Gil Hernandez PASSED AND APPROVED on this the day of , 2020. ATTEST: Rebecca Huerta Joe McComb City Secretary Mayor DATE: December 10, 2019 TO: Peter Zanoni, City Manager FROM: Kevin Norton, Director of Water Utilities KevinN@cctexas.com (361) 826-1874 CAPTION: Ordinance amending City Code of Ordinances, Chapter 12, Section 12-10, establishing a 200- foot restricted zone as required by Texas Commission on Environmental Quality through Texas Administrative Code Title 30 Chapter 290, Section 290.41(e) (2) (C) at the City’s raw water intake on the Nueces River; and providing penalties. SUMMARY: The purpose of this Agenda item is to establish a 200-foot restricted zone at Nueces River Pump Station Raw Water Intakes as required by Texas Commission on Environmental Quality regulation. BACKGROUND AND FINDINGS: The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) through the Texas Administrative Code, Title 30, Part 1, Chapter 290, Subchapter D, Rule 290.41 (e) (2) (C) requires establishment of a restricted zone of 200-foot radius from the raw water intake works and all recreational activities and trespassing shall be prohibited in this area. This amendment to City Code of Ordinances, Chapter 12, Section 12-10, which was originally adopted by Ordinance No. 641 on 08/25/1936, would establish a restricted zone of 200-foot radius from the raw water intakes at Nueces River Pump Station and prohibit recreational activities and trespassing in this restricted area, which shall be designated with signs regarding these restrictions. ALTERNATIVES: An alternative would be to file a request for exception of this requirement with TCEQ. Amendment to City Code of Ordinances, Chapter 12, Section 12-10, Establishing a 200-foot Restricted Zone at Nueces River Pump Station Raw Water Intakes on City Property AGENDA MEMORANDUM First Reading Ordinance for the City Council Meeting February 18, 2020 Second Reading Ordinance for the City Council Meeting February 25, 2020 FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact for this ordinance change. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of this ordinance. LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Ordinance amending City Code of Ordinances, Chapter 12, Section 12-10. GULLEY FAMILY INVESTMENTS, LTD 1.25 ACRES CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI MARY & DONG PHAM .25 ACRES Ordinance amending City Code of Ordinances, Chapter 12, Section 12-10, establishing a 200-foot restricted zone as required by Texas Commission on Environmental Quality through Texas Administrative Code Title 30 Chapter 290, Section 290.41(e) (2) (C) at the City’s raw water intake on the Nueces River; and providing penalties Whereas, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality through the Texas Administrative Code, Title 30, Part 1, Chapter 290, Subchapter D, Rule 290.41(e) (2)(C) requires establishment of a restricted zone of 200 feet radius from the raw water intake works and all recreational activities and trespassing shall be prohibited in this area; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS, that: SECTION 1. Section 12-10 of the Corpus Christi Code of Ordinances, is amended to read as follows: Sec. 12-10. - Restrictions pertaining to area surrounding Nueces River raw water intake. As required by the Texas Administrative Code, Title 30, Environmental Quality, Part 1, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Chapter 290, Public Drinking Water, Subchapter D, Rules and Regulations for Public Water Systems, Rule 290.41 (e ) (2) (C), there is hereby established a restricted zone within the two hundred (200) feet radius from the raw water intake works of the City on the Nueces River and recreational activities and trespassing in this restricted area are prohibited. SECTION 2. This ordinance takes effect after official publication. A violation of this ordinance is declared to be a nuisance in accordance with Texas Local Government Code Section 217.042. Penalties for violation of Section 12-10 shall be in accordance with Section 1-6 of the City Code of Ordinances. SECTION 3. 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. That the foregoing ordinance was read for the first time and passed to its second reading on this the _____ day of ___________, 2020, by the following vote: Joe McComb ________________ Michael Hunter______________ Roland Barrera ________________ Ben Molina ______________ Rudy Garza ________________ Everett Roy ______________ Paulette M. Guajardo ________________ Greg Smith ______________ Gil Hernandez ________________ That the foregoing ordinance was read for the second time and passed finally on this the _____ day of __________ 2020, by the following vote: Joe McComb ________________ Michael Hunter______________ Roland Barrera ________________ Ben Molina ______________ Rudy Garza ________________ Everett Roy ______________ Paulette M. Guajardo ________________ Greg Smith ______________ Gil Hernandez ________________ PASSED AND APPROVED on this the ______ day of _________________, 2020. ATTEST: _________________________ ________________________ Rebecca Huerta Joe McComb City Secretary Mayor DATE: January 27, 2020 TO: Peter Zanoni, City Manager FROM: Mike Culbertson (361) 882-7448 mculbertson@ccredc.com CAPTION: Ordinance approving a five-year Business Incentive Agreement between the Type B Corporation and LiftFund Inc. in the amount of $100,000 for the Dream Makers Fund, a revolving loan fund for small businesses within the city limits of Corpus Christi, effective upon signature of the City Manager or designee; appropriating funds in the amount of $100,000 from the Type B Economic Development Fund; and amending the budget. SUMMARY: This ordinance authorizes a contract with LiftFund Inc. to create a Dream Makers Fund for small business loans in Corpus Christi. The Dream Makers Fund of $100,000 will provide extra and dedicated loan funds to help small businesses grow and create and retain jobs and help the economy of the City grow. BACKGROUND AND FINDINGS: LiftFund Inc. supports small and start-up companies with loans when businesses are turned down by banks due to lack of credit history or business history. Since 2004, LiftFund has loaned $9,587,804 in funds and assisted over 592 small businesses in Corpus Christi. Since 2015, small businesses helped by LiftFund have created 224 new jobs and have retained 288 jobs. To enhance services, LiftFund is requesting a one-time $100,000 grant to be used exclusively as loan funds for small businesses within the city limits of Corpus Christi, Texas. The fund will be called The Dream Makers Fund and will act as a permanent revolving fund that replenishes itself from payments on loans to eligible Corpus Christi small businesses. In case of default from any potential loans, LiftFund Inc. will provide funds to ensure The Dream Makers Fund is capitalized at $100,000 level. The Corpus Christi Regional Economic Development Corporation (CCREDC) received an application from LiftFund Inc. and the application was vetted and presented to CCREDC Board on January 9, 2020. A motion was passed forwarding the application to the Type B Board recommending approval of the grant. The Type B Board unanimously passed a motion to grant AGENDA MEMORANDUM First Reading Ordinance for the City Council Meeting of February 18, 2020 Second Reading Ordinance for the City Council Meeting of February 25, 2020 $100,000 Type B Economic Development Grant for LiftFund Inc. small business loans LiftFund $100,000 on January 27, 2020. The Corpus Christi Business and Job Development Corporation (Type A) has provided funding for a loan interest buy-down program for LiftFund, Inc. since 2004. Type A funds are used to pay part of the interest payments on a loan which in turn essentially lowers the loan interest rate as much as 7%. For example, a loan of 12% annual percentage rate (not atypical in today’s financing environment) can be paid down to 5.5% using through the Type A sponsored LiftFund program. On a $10,000 loan this can save a small business $842 over the course of the loan and make loan payments manageable. The loan fund is required to create jobs with these loans. ALTERNATIVES: The City Council may choose to lower the amount Type B grant amount or not pass the ordinance. This would not provide more help to small businesses within the city. FISCAL IMPACT: This item will expend a one-time amount of $100,000 of the Type B Incentive Economic Development funds. There are no funds budgeted for Small Business Incentives in FY2020, which is why this item also requests a budget amendment. As of December 31, 2019, there is an FY2020 Economic Development fund balance of $459,443. This item will encumber $100,000 and bring the available balance to $359,443. The Economic Development fund balance increases monthly with sales tax revenue. Funding Detail: Fund: 1145- Type B Fund Organization/Activity: NA Mission Element: NA Project # (CIP Only): NA Account: 251850 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of a grant of $100,000 to LiftFund Inc. for The Dream Makers Fund to be used as a revolving loan fund for small businesses in the city of Corpus Christi. This fund would help small businesses grow and help the economy of the city thrive. LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Ordinance Agreement Page 1 of 2 Botanical Gardens Ordinance approving a five-year Business Incentive Agreement between the Type B Corporation and LiftFund Inc. in the amount of $100,000 for the Dream Makers Fund, a revolving loan fund for small businesses within the city limits of Corpus Christi, effective upon signature of the City Manager or designee; appropriating funds in the amount of $100,000 from the Type B Economic Development Fund; and amending the budget. Whereas, the Corpus Christi B Corporation (“Type B Corporation”) has budgeted funds to assist small businesses in the City of Corpus Christi, Texas ("City"). Whereas, the Type B Corporation has requested proposals that will aid small businesses within the City, and determined that the proposal from LiftFund Inc. for a revolving loan fund will best satisfy this goal; Whereas, City Council deems that it is in the best interest of the City and citizens to approve the business incentive agreement for LiftFund Inc. for a revolving loan fund between the Type B Corporation and LiftFund Inc. for a revolving loan fund Whereas, the Board of the Directors of the Type B Corporation (the “Board”) approved an agreement with LiftFund for an incentive of up to $100,000 at its meeting on January 27, 2020. Now , therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas: SECTION 1. That the business incentive agreement between the Type B Corporation and LiftFund, Inc., which will create the Dream Makers Fund to loan to small business is approved. SECTION 2. That funds in the amount of $100,000 are appropriated from the unreserved fund balance in the No. 1145 Type B Fund for a business incentive grant from the Type B Corporation to LiftFund Inc., which will create the Dream Makers Fund to loan to small business. SECTION 3. That Ordinance No. 031870, which adopted the FY 2019-2020 Operating and Capital Budget, is amended to increase proposed expenditures in the No. 1145 Type B Fund by $100,000 for a business incentive grant from the Type B Corporation to LiftFund Inc., which will create the Dream Makers Fund to loan to small business. Page 2 of 2 Botanical Gardens That the foregoing ordinance was read for the first time and passed to its second reading on this the _____ day of ___________, 2020, by the following vote: Joe McComb ________________ Michael Hunter______________ Roland Barrera ________________ Ben Molina ______________ Rudy Garza ________________ Everett Roy ______________ Paulette M. Guajardo ________________ Greg Smith ______________ Gil Hernandez ________________ That the foregoing ordinance was read for the second time and passed finally on this the _____ day of __________ 2020, by the following vote: Joe McComb ________________ Michael Hunter______________ Roland Barrera ________________ Ben Molina ______________ Rudy Garza ________________ Everett Roy ______________ Paulette M. Guajardo ________________ Greg Smith ______________ Gil Hernandez ________________ PASSED AND APPROVED on this the ______ day of _________________, 2020. ATTEST: _________________________ ________________________ Rebecca Huerta Joe McComb City Secretary Mayor Project No: 18156A 1 PM: Lj Francis, P.E Legistar No.: 20-0112 Rev. 3 – 2/6/2020 AGENDA MEMORANDUM Action Item for the City Council Meeting of February 25, 2020 DATE: February 3, 2020 TO: Peter Zanoni, City Manager THRU: Michael Rodriguez, Chief of Staff michaelrod@cctexas.com (361) 826-3732 FROM: Jeff H. Edmonds, P. E., Director of Engineering Services jeffreye@cctexas.com (361) 826-3851 Dan Grimsbo, Executive Director of Water Utilities Department dang@cctexas.com (361) 826-1718 Kim Baker, Director of Contracts and Procurement kimb2@cctexas.com (361) 826-3169 CAPTION: Motion awarding a contract with LNV, Inc. for design, preparation of construction documents and related construction phase services to install a new 24” water main and 8” gas main crossing the Ship channel at the Tule Lake Turning Basin in the amount of $937,160, located in City Council District 1, effective upon issuance of notice to proceed, with funding approved and available from FY 2020 Water and Gas Capital Improvement Program Budgets. SUMMARY: This professional services contract provides for design and preparation of construction documents to install a new 24” water main and 8” gas main crossing the Ship channel at the Tule Lake Turning Basin to prepare for future dredging of the ship channel. BACKGROUND AND FINDINGS: The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Port of Corpus Christi is widening and deepening the Ship Channel. On April 23, 2018 USACE notified the City to remove the existing twin 16” water mains crossing the ship channel by January 1, 2019, due to conflict with proposed improvements. The City responded to the directive on June 13, 2018, stating the deadline was unrealistic due to multiple reasons and requested an extension. The extension was granted, and the mains must now be removed by January 1, 2021. The removal of the main will be performed Professional Services Contract Ship Channel Water and Gas Main Crossing Project No: 18156A 2 PM: Lj Francis, P.E Legistar No.: 20-0112 Rev. 3 – 2/6/2020 under a separate contract. This Contract provides professional services for design and preparation of construction documents to install a new 24” water main and a new 8” gas main crossing at Tule Lake Turning Basin. City staff is preparing an interlocal cooperation agreement (ILA) with the Port of Corpus Christi to address costs incurred with relocation of the water main that is creditable to the City per Federal law. The new gas main is being included in this project to provide redundancy to gas customers north of the ship channel and provide significant cost savings to the City by installing the two mains at the same time. The scope of services includes preliminary and final designs, preparation of plans and specifications, permit processing through various jurisdictional agencies, survey, easement acquisition, limited services on Phase II Environmental Site Assessment & Environmental Issues, geotechnical services, meetings and coordination with stakeholders, bid phase services, and construction administration phase services. PROJECT TIMELINE: 2020 2021-2022 F M A M J J A S O N D Jan-Mar Design Bid / Award Construction Projected schedule reflects City Council award in February 2020 with design completion in September 2020. Construction is anticipated to begin in January 2021 with a duration of fourteen months and completion in March 2022. COMPETITIVE SOLICITATION PROCESS: LNV, Inc. was selected for the FY 2018-2019 Capital Improvement Projects and BOND 2018 Remaining Projects, Group B- Utility Projects in June 2019 under RFQ 2018-10. ONSWTP Ship Channel Utility Relocations was one of seven selections that were announced under the Utilities Projects Category of the RFQ. LNV, Inc. was selected from ten applicants for this project. The selection committee was comprised of representatives from the Utilities and Engineering Services Departments. The final evaluation ranked LNV, Inc. the highest recommended firm and most qualified based on five factors: 1) experience of the firm, 2) experience of the key personnel with specific experience in utility relocations within navigable channels, 3) project approach and management plan, 4) capacity to meet the project requirements and timelines, and 5) past performance. ALTERNATIVES: An alternative is to not award the professional services contract to the LNV, Inc. Not awarding a contract at this time could delay the City’s ability to meet the Port’s directive and time schedule. It also would delay the needed utility replacement and result in the City not being able to provide a reliable supply of water and gas utility service to customers north of the ship channel. Project No: 18156A 3 PM: Lj Francis, P.E Legistar No.: 20-0112 Rev. 3 – 2/6/2020 FISCAL IMPACT: This contract will award design, bid and construction phase services for the installation of a new 24” water main and 8” gas main crossing the Ship channel at the Tule Lake Turning Basin in the amount of $937,160, with the project located in City Council District 1, the contract effective upon issuance of notice to proceed, and funding approved and available from FY 2020 Water and Gas CIP Funds. The City is working with the Port on a Relocation Agreement to accommodate the Channel Improvement Project, providing a reimbursement from the Port to the City for 50% of the actual costs in performing the relocation of the City’s waterline. USACE informed the Port verbally at their meeting on December 17 that those costs for demolition and installation are creditable per 33 USCA 2211 (a)(4). The cost would include the work necessary to relocate the waterline(s) to accommodate the Channel Im provement Project, including, but not limited to, removal, demolition, planning, engineering and design costs, project management, geotechnical and engineering studies, surveying, regulatory approvals, permitting, scheduling, material procurement, construction, construction management, installation, inspection, non-destructive testing, and site restoration (collectively, the "Relocation Work"). Funding Detail: Fund: Water 2020 CIP Fund (Fund 4099) Mission Elem: Distribute Water (ME 041) Project No.: Ship Channel Water Lines Relocation (Proj 18156A) Account: Outside Consultants (Acct 550950) Activity: 18156-A-4099-EXP Amount $590,411 Fund: Gas Capital Reserve Fund (Fund 4560) Mission Elem: Gas Distribution System (ME 022) Project No.: Gas Lines Extension Program (Proj E12132) Account: Outside Consultants (Acct 550950) Activity: E12132-01-4560-EXP Amount $346,749 RECOMMENDATION: City Staff recommends award of the professional services contract in the amount of $937,160 to LNV, Inc. The design phase is planned to begin in February 2020 with completion estimated 7 months after notice to proceed. The construction phase is planned to start in January 2021 and end in March 2022. LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Location and Vicinity Maps Contract 37 37 181 37 N CITY COUNCIL EXHIBIT CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING SERVICES SHIP CHANNEL WATER & GAS CROSSING LOCATION MAP NOT TO SCALE PROJECT NUMBER: 18156A PROJECT LOCATION PROJECT LOCATION LOCATION MAP NOT TO SCALE N CITY COUNCIL EXHIBIT CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING SERVICES SHIP CHANNEL WATER & GAS CROSSING VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE Project Number: 18156A Project Location TULE LAKE TURNING BASIN N E W W A T E R L I N E CIT G O P R O P E R T Y PORT PR OPERTY N E W G A S L I N E Contract for Professional Services Page 1 of 11 SERVICE AGREEMENT NO. 2797 CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR PROJECT (No./Name) 18156A – Ship Channel Waterline & Gas Line Crossings The City of Corpus Christi, a Texas home rule municipal corporation, P.O. Box 9277, Corpus Christi, Nueces County, Texas 78469-9277 (City) acting through its duly authorized City Manager or Designee (Director) and LNV, Inc., 801 Navigation, Suite 300, Corpus Christi, Nueces County, Texas, 78408 (Consultant), hereby agree as follows: TABLE OF CONTENTS ARTICLE NO. TITLE PAGE ARTICLE I SCOPE OF SERVICES ...................................................................2 ARTICLE II QUALITY CONTROL .......................................................................3 ARTICLE III COMPENSATION ............................................................................3 ARTICLE IV TIME AND PERIOD OF SERVICE ..................................................4 ARTICLE V OPINIONS OF COST ......................................................................5 ARTICLE VI INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS ......................................................5 ARTICLE VII INDEMNIFICATION .........................................................................5 ARTICLE VIII TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT ..................................................6 ARTICLE IX RIGHT OF REVIEW AND AUDIT ....................................................7 ARTICLE X OWNER REMEDIES .......................................................................7 ARTICLE XI CONSULTANT REMEDIES .............................................................8 ARTICLE XII CLAIMS AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION ..........................................8 ARTICLE XIII MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS ...................................................9 EXHIBITS Contract for Professional Services Page 2 of 11 ARTICLE I – SCOPE OF SERVICES 1.1 City and Consultant agree that the services provided are properly described in the Scope of Services, which is incorporated herein and attached to this Agreement as Exhibit A. The Scope of Services shall include all associated services required for Consultant to provide such Services, pursuant to this Agreement, and any and all Services that would normally be required by law or common due diligence in accordance with the standard of care defined in Article XIII of this Agreement. The approved Scope of Services defines the services to be performed by Consultant under this Agreement. 1.2 Consultant shall follow City Codes and Standards effective at the time of the execution of the contract. At review milestones, the Consultant and City will review the progress of the plans to ensure that City Codes and Standards are followed unless specifically and explicitly excluded from doing so in the approved Scope of Services attached as Exhibit A. A request made by either party to deviate from City standards after the contract is executed must be in writing. 1.3 Consultant shall provide labor, equipment and transportation necessary to complete all services agreed to hereunder in a timely manner throughout the term of the Agreement. Persons retained by Consultant to perform work pursuant to this Agreement shall be employees or subconsultants of Consultant. Upon request, Consultant must provide City with a list of all subconsultants that includes the services performed by subconsultant and the % of work performed by subconsultant (in dollars). Changes in Consultant’s proposed team as specified in the SOQ or Scope of Services must be agreed to by the City in writing. 1.4 Consultant shall not begin work on any phase/task authorized under this Agreement until they are briefed on the scope of the Project and are notified in writing to proceed. If the scope of the Project changes, either Consultant or City may request a review of the changes with an appropriate adjustment in compensation. 1.5 Consultant will provide monthly status updates (project progress or delays) in the format requested by the City with each monthly invoice. 1.6 For design services, Consultant agrees to render the professional services necessary for the advancement of the Project through Final Completion of the Construction Contract. Consultant acknowledges and accepts its responsibilities, as defined and described in City’s General Conditions for Construction Contracts, excerpt attached as Exhibit D. 1.6.1 The Consultant agrees to serve as the City’s Designer as defined in the General Conditions and will consult and advise the City on matters related to the Consultant’s Scope of Services during the performance of the Consultant’s services. 1.6.2 The Consultant agrees to prepare plans, specification, bid and contract documents and to analyze bids and evaluate the documents submitted by bidders. 1.6.3 The Consultant agrees to assist the City in evaluating the qualifications of the prospective contractors, subcontractors and suppliers. 1.7 For projects that require subsurface utility investigation: 1.7.1 The Consultant agrees to prepare and submit to the City prior to the 60% submittal a signed and sealed report identifying all utilities within the project area at the Quality Level specified in Exhibit A. It is assumed that all utilities will be identified using Quality Level A exploratory excavation unless stated otherwise. Contract for Professional Services Page 3 of 11 1.7.2 Utilities that should be identified include but are not limited to utilities owned by the City, local franchises, electric companies, communication companies, private pipeline companies and 3rd party owners/operators. 1.8 For project with potential utility conflicts: 1.8.1 The Consultant agrees to coordinate the verification and resolution of all potential utility conflicts. 1.8.2 The Consultant agrees to prepare and submit a monthly Utility Coordination Matrix to the City. 1.9 The Consultant agrees to complete the Scope of Services in accordance with the approved project schedule and budget as defined in Exhibit A, including completing the work in phases defined therein. ARTICLE II – QUALITY CONTROL 2.1 The Consultant agrees to perform quality assurance-quality control/constructability reviews (QCP Review). The City reserves the right to retain a separate consultant to perform additional QCP services for the City. 2.2 The Consultant will perform QCP Reviews at intervals during the Project to ensure deliverables satisfy applicable industry quality standards and meet the requirements of the Project scope. Based on the findings of the QCP Review, the Consultant must reconcile the Project Scope and the Opinion of Probable Cost (OPC), as needed. 2.3 Final construction documents that do not meet City standards in effect at the time of the execution of this Agreement may be rejected. If final construction documents are found not to be in compliance with this Agreement, Consultant will not be compensated for having to resubmit documents. ARTICLE III – COMPENSATION 3.1 The Compensation for all services (Basic and Additional) included in this Agreement and in the Scope of Services for this Agreement shall not exceed $937,160.00. 3.2 The Consultant’s fee will be on a lump sum or time and materials (T&M) basis as detailed in Exhibit A and will be full and total compensation for all services and for all expenses incurred in performing these services. Consultant shall submit a Rate Schedule with their proposal. 3.3 The Consultant agrees to complete the Scope of Services in accordance with the approved project schedule and budget as defined in Exhibit A, including completing the work in phases defined therein. 3.4 The Director of Engineering Services may request the Consultant to undertake additional services or tasks provided that no increase in fee is required. Services or tasks requiring an increase of fee will be mutually agreed and evidenced in writing as an amendment to this contract. Consultant shall notify the City within three (3) days of notice if tasks requested requires an additional fee. 3.5 Monthly invoices will be submitted in accordance with the Payment Request as shown in Exhibit B. Each invoice will include the Consultant’s estimate of the proportion of the contracted services completed at the time of billing. For work performed on a T&M Basis, the invoice shall include documentation that shows who worked on the Project, the number of hours that each individual worked, the applicable rates from the Rate Schedule and any reimbursable expenses associated with the work. City will make prompt monthly payments in response to Consultant’s monthly invoices in compliance with the Texas Prompt Payment Act. 3.6 Principals may only bill at the agreed hourly rate for Principals (as defined in the Rate Schedule) when acting in that capacity. Principals acting in the capacity of staff must bill at applicable staff rates. Contract for Professional Services Page 4 of 11 3.7 Consultant certifies that title to all services covered by a Payment Request shall pass to City no later than the time of payment. Consultant further certifies that, upon submittal of a Payment Request, all services for which Payment Requests have been previously issued and payments received from City shall, to the best of Consultant’s knowledge, information and belief, be free and clear of liens, claims, security interests or encumbrances in favor of Consultant or other persons or entities making a claim by reason of having provided labor or services relating to this Agreement. CONSULTANT SHALL INDEMNIFY AND HOLD CITY HARMLESS FROM ANY LIENS, CLAIMS, SECURITY INTERESTS OR ENCUMBRANCES FILED BY ANYONE CLAIMING BY, THROUGH OR UNDER THE ITEMS COVERED BY PAYMENTS MADE BY CITY TO CONSULTANT. 3.8 The final payment due hereunder shall not be paid until all reports, data and documents have been submitted, received, accepted and approved by City. Final billing shall indicate “Final Bill – no additional compensation is due to Consultant.” 3.9 City may withhold compensation to such extent as may be necessary, in City’s opinion, to protect City from damage or loss for which Consultant is responsible, because of: 3.9.1 delays in the performance of Consultant’s work; 3.9.2 failure of Consultant to make payments to subconsultants or vendors for labor, materials or equipment; 3.9.3 damage to City; or 3.9.4 persistent failure by Consultant to carry out the performance of its services in accordance with this Agreement. 3.10 When the above reasons for withholding are removed or remedied by Consultant, compensation of the amount withheld shall be made within 30 days. City shall not be deemed in default by reason of withholding compensation as provided under this Agreement. 3.11 In the event of any dispute(s) between the Parties regarding the amount properly compensable for any phase or as final compensation or regarding any amount that may be withheld by City, Consultant shall be required to make a claim pursuant to and in accordance with the terms of this Agreement and follow the procedures provided herein for the resolution of such dispute. In the event Consultant does not initiate and follow the claims procedures as required by the terms of this Agreement, any such claim shall be waived. 3.12 Request of final compensation by Consultant shall constitute a waiver of claims except those previously made in writing and identified by Consultant as unsettled at the time of final Payment Request. 3.13 All funding obligations of the City under this Agreement are subject to the appropriation of funds in its annual budget. The City may direct the Consultant to suspend work pending receipt and appropriation of funds. The right to suspend work under this provision does not relieve the City of its obligation to make payments in accordance with section 3.5 above for services provided up to the date of suspension. ARTICLE IV – TIME AND PERIOD OF SERVICE 4.1 This Agreement shall be effective upon the signature of the City Manager or designee (Effective Date). 4.2 This service shall be for a period of ____ years beginning on the Effective Date. The Agreement may be renewed for up to _____ one-year renewal options upon mutual agreement of the parties to be evidenced in writing prior to the expiration date of the prior term. Any renewals shall be at the same terms and conditions, plus any approved changes. Contract for Professional Services Page 5 of 11 4.3 The Consultant agrees to begin work on those authorized Services for this contract upon receipt of the Notice to Proceed from the Contracts and Procurement Department. Work will not begin on any phase or any Additional Services until requested in writing by the Consultant and written authorization is provided by the Director of Engineering Services. 4.4 Time is of the essence for this Agreement. Consultant shall perform and complete its obligations under this Agreement in a prompt and continuous manner so as to not delay the Work for the Project, in accordance with the schedules approved by City. The Consultant and City are aware that many factors may affect the Consultant’s ability to complete the services to be provided under this agreement. The Consultant must notify the City within ten business days of becoming aware of a factor that may affect the Consultant’s ability to complete the services hereunder. 4.5 City shall perform its obligations of review and approval in a prompt and continuous manner so as to not delay the project. 4.6 This Agreement shall remain in force for a period which may reasonably be required for completion of the Project, including any extra work and any required extensions thereto, unless terminated as provided for in this Agreement. For construction design services, “completion of the Project” refers to acceptance by the City of the construction phase of the Project, i.e., Final Completion. ARTICLE V – OPINIONS OF COST 5.1 The Opinion of Probable Cost (OPC) is computed by the Consultant and includes the total cost for construction of the Project. 5.2 The OPC does not include the cost of the land, rights-of-way or other costs which are the responsibility of the City. 5.3 Since Consultant has no control over a construction contractor’s cost of labor, materials or equipment, or over the contractor’s methods of determining prices, or over competitive bidding or market conditions, Consultant’s opinions of probable Project Cost or Construction Cost provided herein are to be made on the basis of Consultant’s experience and qualifications and represent Consultant’s best judgment as a design professional familiar with the construction industry, but Consultant cannot and does not guarantee proposals, bids or the construction cost shall not vary from the OPC prepared by Consultant. ARTICLE VI – INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS 6.1 Consultant must not commence work under this Agreement until all insurance required has been obtained and such insurance has been approved by the City. Consultant must not allow any subcontractor to commence work until all similar insurance required of any subcontractor has been obtained. 6.2 Insurance Requirements are shown in EXHIBIT C. ARTICLE VII – INDEMNIFICATION Consultant shall fully indemnify and hold harmless the City of Corpus Christi and its officials, officers, agents, employees, excluding the engineer or architect or that person’s agent, employee or subconsultant, over which the City exercises control (“Indemnitee”) from and against any and all claims, damages, liabilities or costs, including reasonable attorney fees and court costs, to the extent that the damage is caused by or results from an act of negligence, intentional tort, intellectual property infringement or failure to pay a subcontractor or supplier committed by Consultant or its agent, Consultant under contract or another entity over which Consultant exercises control while in the exercise of rights or performance of the duties under this Contract for Professional Services Page 6 of 11 agreement. This indemnification does not apply to any liability resulting from the negligent acts or omissions of the City or its employees, to the extent of such negligence. Consultant shall defend Indemnitee, with counsel satisfactory to the City Attorney, from and against any and all claims, damages, liabilities or costs, including reasonable attorney fees and court costs, if the claim is not based wholly or partly on the negligence of, fault of or breach of contract by Indemnitee. If a claim is based wholly or partly on the negligence of, fault of or breach of contract by Indemnitee, the Consultant shall reimburse the City’s reasonable attorney’s fees in proportion to the Consultant’s liability. Consultant must advise City in writing within 24 hours of any claim or demand against City or Consultant known to Consultant related to or arising out of Consultant’s activities under this Agreement. ARTICLE VIII – TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT 8.1 By Consultant: 8.1.1 The City reserves the right to suspend this Agreement at the end of any phase for the convenience of the City by issuing a written and signed Notice of Suspension. The Consultant may terminate this Agreement for convenience in the event such suspension extends for a period beyond 120 calendar days by delivering a Notice of Termination to the City. 8.1.2 The Consultant must follow the Termination Procedure outlined in this Agreement. 8.2 By City: 8.2.1 The City may terminate this agreement for convenience upon seven days written notice to the Consultant at the address of record. 8.2.2 The City may terminate this agreement for cause upon ten days written notice to the Consultant. If Consultant begins, within three days of receipt of such notice, to correct its failure and proceeds to diligently cure such failure within the ten days, the agreement will not terminate. If the Consultant again fails to perform under this agreement, the City may terminate the agreement for cause upon seven days written notice to the Consultant with no additional cure period. If the City terminates for cause, the City may reject any and all proposals submitted by Consultant for up to two years. 8.3 Termination Procedure 8.3.1 Upon receipt of a Notice of Termination and prior to the effective date of termination, unless the notice otherwise directs or Consultant takes action to cure a failure to perform under the cure period, Consultant shall immediately begin the phase-out and discontinuance of all services in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Within 30 calendar days after receipt of the Notice of Termination, unless Consultant has successfully cured a failure to perform, Consultant shall submit a statement showing in detail the services performed under this Agreement prior to the effective date of termination. City retains the option to grant an extension to the time period for submittal of such statement. 8.3.2 Consultant shall submit all completed and/or partially completed work under this Agreement, including but not limited to specifications, designs, plans and exhibits. 8.3.3 Upon receipt of documents described in the Termination Procedure and absent any reason why City may be compelled to withhold fees, Consultant will be compensated for its services based upon a Time & Materials calculation or Consultant and City's estimate of the proportion of the total services actually Contract for Professional Services Page 7 of 11 completed at the time of termination. There will be no compensation for anticipated profits on services not completed. 8.3.4 Consultant acknowledges that City is a public entity and has a duty to document the expenditure of public funds. The failure of Consultant to comply with the submittal of the statement and documents, as required above, shall constitute a waiver by Consultant of any and all rights or claims to payment for services performed under this Agreement. ARTICLE IX – RIGHT OF REVIEW AND AUDIT 9.1 Consultant grants City, or its designees, the right to audit, examine or inspect, at City’s election, all of Consultant’s records relating to the performance of the Work under this Agreement, during the term of this Agreement and retention period herein. The audit, examination or inspection may be performed by a City designee, which may include its internal auditors or an outside representative engaged by City. Consultant agrees to retain its records for a minimum of four (4) years following termination of the Agreement, unless there is an ongoing dispute under this Agreement, then such retention period shall extend until final resolution of the dispute. 9.2 Consultant’s records include any and all information, materials and data of every kind and character generated as a result of and relevant to the Work under this Agreement (Consultant’s Records). Examples include billings, books, general ledger, cost ledgers, invoices, production sheets, documents, correspondence, meeting notes, subscriptions, agreements, purchase orders, leases, contracts, commitments, arrangements, notes, daily diaries, reports, drawings, receipts, vouchers, memoranda, time sheets, payroll records, policies, procedures, and any and all other agreements, sources of information and matters that may, in City’s and Consultant’s reasonable judgment, have any bearing on or pertain to any matters, rights, duties or obligations under or covered by any Agreement Documents. 9.3 City agrees that it shall exercise the right to audit, examine or inspect Consultant’s Records only during Consultant’s regular business hours. Consultant agrees to allow City’s designee access to all of Consultant’s Records, Consultant’s facilities and Consultant’s current employees, deemed necessary by City or its designee(s), to perform such audit, inspection or examination. Consultant also agrees to provide adequate and appropriate work space necessary to City or its designees to conduct such audits, inspections or examinations. 9.4 Consultant shall include this audit clause in any subcontractor, supplier or vendor contract. ARTICLE X – OWNER REMEDIES 10.1 The City and Consultant agree that in the event the City suffers actual damages, the City may elect to pursue its actual damages and any other remedy allowed by law. This includes but is not limited to: 10.1.1 Failure of the Consultant to make adequate progress and endanger timely and successful completion of the Project, which includes failure of subconsultants to meet contractual obligations; 10.1.2 Failure of the Consultant to design in compliance with the laws of the City, State and/or federal governments, such that subsequent compliance costs exceed expenditures that would have been involved had services been properly executed by the Consultant. 10.1.3 Losses are incurred because of errors and/or omissions in the design, working drawings, specifications or other documents prepared by the Consultant to the extent that the financial losses are greater than the City would have originally paid had there not been errors and/or omissions in the documents. 10.2 When the City incurs non-value added work costs for change orders due to design errors and/or omissions, the City will send the Consultant a letter that includes: Contract for Professional Services Page 8 of 11 (1) Summary of facts with supporting documentation; (2) Instructions for Consultant to revise design documents, if appropriate, at Consultant’s expense; (3) Calculation of non-value added work costs incurred by the City; and (4) Deadline for Consultant’s response. 10.3 The Consultant may be required to revise bid documents and re-advertise the Project at the Consultant’s sole cost if, in the City’s judgment, the Consultant generates excessive addenda, either in terms of the nature of the revision or the actual number of changes due to the Consultant’s errors or omissions. 10.4 The City may withhold or nullify the whole or part of any payment as detailed in Article III. ARTICLE XI – CONSULTANT REMEDIES 11.1 If Consultant is delayed due to uncontrollable circumstances, such as strikes, riots, acts of God, national emergency, acts of the public enemy, governmental restrictions, laws or regulations or any other causes beyond Consultant’s and City’s reasonable control, an extension of the Project schedule in an amount equal to the time lost due to such delay shall be Consultant’s sole and exclusive remedy. The revised schedule should be approved in writing with a documented reason for granting the extension. 11.2 The City agrees that the Consultant is not responsible for damages arising from any cause beyond Consultant’s reasonable control. 11.3 If Consultant requests a remedy for a condition not specified above, Consultant must file a Claim as provided in this Agreement. ARTICLE XII – CLAIMS AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION 12.1 Filing of Claims 12.1.1 Claims arising from the circumstances identified in this Agreement or other occurrences or events, shall be made by Written Notice delivered by the party making the Claim to the other party within twenty- one (21) calendar days after the start of the occurrence or event giving rise to the Claim and stating the general nature of the Claim. 12.1.2 Every Claim of Consultant, whether for additional compensation, additional time or other relief, shall be signed and sworn to by a person authorized to bind the Consultant by his/her signature, verifying the truth and accuracy of the Claim. 12.1.3 The responsibility to substantiate a claim rests with the party making the Claim. 12.1.4 Within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of notice and supporting documentation, City will meet to discuss the request, after which an offer of settlement or a notification of no settlement offer will be sent to Consultant. If Consultant is not satisfied with the proposal presented, Consultant will have thirty (30) calendar days in which to (i) submit additional supporting data requested by the City, (ii) modify the initial request for remedy or (iii) request Mediation. 12.1.5 Pending final resolution of a claim, except as otherwise agreed in writing, Consultant shall proceed diligently with performance of the Agreement, and City shall continue to make payments in accordance with this Agreement. 12.2 Mediation 12.2.1 All negotiations pursuant to this clause are confidential and shall be treated as compromise and Contract for Professional Services Page 9 of 11 settlement negotiations for purposes of applicable rules of evidence. 12.2.2 Before invoking mediation, the Parties agree that they shall first try to resolve any dispute arising out of or related to this Agreement through discussions directly between those senior management representatives within their respective organizations who have overall managerial responsibility for similar projects. This step shall be a condition precedent to the use of mediation. If the parties’ senior management representatives cannot resolve the dispute within thirty (30) calendar days after a Party delivers a written notice of such dispute, then the Parties shall proceed with the mediation process contained herein. 12.2.2.1 In the event that City or Consultant shall contend that the other has committed a material breach of this Agreement, the Party alleging such breach shall, as a condition precedent to filing any lawsuit, request mediation of the dispute. 12.2.2.2 Request for mediation shall be in writing, and shall request that the mediation commence no less than thirty (30) or more than ninety (90) calendar days following the date of the request, except upon agreement of both parties. 12.2.2.3 In the event City and Consultant are unable to agree to a date for the mediation or to the identity of the mediator or mediators within thirty (30) calendar days of the request for mediation, all conditions precedent in this Article shall be deemed to have occurred. 12.2.2.4 The parties shall share the mediator’s fee. Venue for mediation shall be Nueces County, Texas. Any agreement reached in mediation shall be enforceable as a settlement agreement in any court having jurisdiction thereof. No provision of this Agreement shall waive any immunity or defense. No provision of this Agreement is a consent to suit. 12.3 In calculating the amount of any Claim or any measure of damages for breach of contract, the following standards shall apply both to claims by Consultant and to claims by City: 12.3.1 In no event shall either Party be liable, whether in contract or tort or otherwise, to the other Party for loss of profits, delay damages or for any special incidental or consequential loss or damage of any nature arising at any time or from any cause whatsoever; 12.3.2 Damages are limited to extra costs specifically shown to have been directly caused by a proven wrong for which the other Party is claimed to be responsible. 12.4 In case of litigation between the parties, Consultant and City agree that neither party shall be responsible for payment of attorney’s fees pursuant to any law or other provision for payment of attorneys’ fees. Both Parties expressly waive any claim to attorney’s fees should litigation result from any dispute between the parties to this Agreement. 12.5 In case of litigation between the parties, Consultant and City agree that they have knowingly waived and do hereby waive the right to trial by jury and have instead agreed, in the event of any litigation arising out of or connected to this Agreement, to proceed with a trial before the court, unless both parties subsequently agree otherwise in writing. 12.6 No Waiver of Governmental Immunity. NOTHING IN THIS ARTICLE SHALL BE CONSTRUED TO WAIVE CITY’S GOVERNMENTAL IMMUNITY FROM LAWSUIT, WHICH IMMUNITY IS EXPRESSLY RETAINED TO THE EXTENT IT IS NOT CLEARLY AND UNAMBIGUOUSLY WAIVED BY STATE LAW. ARTICLE XIII – MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS Contract for Professional Services Page 10 of 11 13.1 Assignability. Neither party will assign, transfer or delegate any of its obligations or duties under this Agreement contract to any other person and/or party without the prior written consent of the other party, except for routine duties delegated to personnel of the Consultant staff. This includes subcontracts entered into for services under this Agreement. If the Consultant is a partnership or joint venture, then in the event of the termination of the partnership or joint venture, this contract will inure to the individual benefit of such partner or partners as the City may designate. No part of the Consultant fee may be assigned in advance of receipt by the Consultant without written consent of the City. The City will not pay the fees of expert or technical assistance and consultants unless such employment, including the rate of compensation, has been approved in writing by the City. 13.2 Ownership of Documents. Consultant agrees that upon payment, City shall exclusively own any and all information in whatsoever form and character produced and/or maintained in accordance with, pursuant to or as a result of this Agreement, including contract documents (plans and specifications), drawings and submittal data. Consultant may make a copy for its files. Any reuse by the City, without specific written verification or adaptation by Consultant, shall be a City’s sole risk and without liability or legal exposure to Consultant. The City agrees that any modification of the plans will be evidenced on the plans and be signed and sealed by a licensed professional prior to re-use of modified plans. 13.3 Standard of Care. Services provided by Consultant under this Agreement shall be performed with the professional skill and care ordinarily provided by competent licensed professionals practicing under the same or similar circumstances and professional license; and performed as expeditiously as is prudent considering the ordinary professional skill and care of a competent engineer or architect. 13.4 Licensing. Consultant shall be represented by personnel with appropriate licensure, registration and/or certification(s) at meetings of any official nature concerning the Project, including scope meetings, review meetings, pre-bid meetings and preconstruction meetings. 13.5 Independent Contractor. The relationship between the City and Consultant under this Agreement shall be that of independent contractor. City may explain to Consultant the City’s goals and objectives in regard to the services to be performed by Consultant, but the City shall not direct Consultant on how or in what manner these goals and objectives are to be met. 13.6 Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire and integrated Agreement between City and Consultant and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either oral or written. This Agreement may be amended only by written instrument signed by both the City and Consultant. 13.7 No Third Party Beneficiaries. Nothing in this Agreement can be construed to create rights in any entity other than the City and Consultant. Neither the City nor Consultant intends to create third party beneficiaries by entering into this Agreement. 13.8 Disclosure of Interest. Consultant agrees to comply with City of Corpus Christi Ordinance No. 17112 and complete the Disclosure of Interests form. 13.9 Certificate of Interested Parties. For contracts greater than $50,000, Consultant agrees to comply with Texas Government Code section 2252.908 and complete Form 1295 Certificate of Interested Parties as part of this agreement. Form 1295 must be electronically filed with the Texas Ethics Commission at https://www.ethics.state.tx.us/whatsnew/elf_info_form1295.htm. The form must then be printed, signed and filed with the City. For more information, please review the Texas Ethics Commission Rules at https://www.ethics.state.tx.us/legal/ch46.html. 13.10 Conflict of Interest. Consultant agrees, in compliance with Chapter 176 of the Texas Local Government Code, to complete and file Form CIQ with the City Secretary’s Office. For more information and to determine if EXHIBIT “A” CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS SHIP CHANNEL WATER & GAS CROSSING PROJECT NO. 18156A I. SCOPE OF SERVICES A. BASIC SERVICES For the purpose of this Contract, Preliminary Phase may include Schematic Design and Design Phase services may include Design Development as applicable to Architectural/Engineering services. 1. Preliminary Phase. The Architect/Engineer (A/E), also referred to as Consultant, will: a) Attend Project Kick-off Meeting and distribute meeting minutes to attendees within five working days of the meeting. b) Provide recommended geotechnical investigations scope and coordination efforts with LNV’s geotechnical Consultant. Proposed sites shall be approved by the City Project Manager prior to performing geotechnical investigation. c) Provide recommended SUE locations to City Staff for coordination with City’s SUE Consultant. d) Request and review available reports, record drawings, utility maps and other information provided by the City pertaining to the project area. e) Develop preliminary requirements for utility relocations, replacements or upgrades. Coordinate with the City’s Project Manager and identify Operating Departments potential Project needs. f) Identify preliminary easement acquisition requirements and illustrate on a schematic strip map. g) Prepare preliminary opinions of probable construction costs for the recommended improvements. h) Identify electric and communication utility companies and private pipeline companies that may have existing facilities and must be relocated to accommodate the proposed improvements. Submit a list of identified companies to the City. i) The AE will participate in discussions with the Operating Department; Development Services and other agencies (such as the Texas Department of Transportation (TXDOT) and Texas Commission of Environmental Quality (TCEQ) as required to satisfactorily complete the Project. Any directions or changes to scope provided by the Operating Department or other agencies shall be reviewed with the City Engineering Department PM prior to including/excluding from the scope of work. j) Identify and analyze requirements of governmental authorities having jurisdiction to approve design of the Project including permitting, environmental, historical, construction, and geotechnical issues; upon request or concurrence of the Project Manager, coordinate with agencies such as RTA, USPS, affected school districts (CCISD, FBISD, etc.), community groups, etc. k) Identify and recommend public outreach and community stakeholder requirements. l) Prepare an Engineering Letter Report (20 – 25 page main-body text document with supporting appendices) that documents the analyses, approach, opinions of probable construction costs, and document the work with text, tables, schematic- level exhibits and computer models or other applicable supporting documents required per City Plan Preparation Standards (CPPS). The Engineering Letter Report to include: EXHIBIT A Page 1 of 10 1. Provide a concise presentation of pertinent factors, sketches, designs, cross-sections, and parameters which will or may impact the design, including engineering design basis, preliminary layout sketches, construction sequencing, alignment, cross section, geotechnical testing report, sealed survey including topographic, right-of-way and utilities location information (per scope in Topographic and Right-of-Way (ROW) Survey services), right-of-way requirements, conformance to master plans, identification of needed additional services, identification of needed permits and environmental consideration, existing and proposed utilities, existing electric and communication utility companies and private pipeline companies, identification of quality and quantity of materials of construction, and other factors required for a professional design. 2. Include existing site photos with location key map. 3. Provide opinion of probable construction costs. 4. Identify and analyze requirements of governmental authorities having jurisdiction to approve design of the Project including permitting, environmental, historical, construction, and geotechnical issues; meet as City agent or with City participation and coordinate with agencies such as TCEQ, RTA, CDBG, USPS, CCISD, community groups, TDLR, etc. 5. Summary of Geotechnical Report findings. 6. Provide preliminary index of anticipated drawings and specifications. 7. Provide a preliminary summary table of anticipated required ROW easement parcels m) Submit one (1) copy in an approved electronic format, and two (2) hard copies of the Draft Engineering Letter Report. n) Initiate ELR submittal discussion with City PM to brief PM on any concerns or issues prior to distribution of ELR submittal. o) Participate in Project review meeting with City staff and others on the Draft Engineering Letter Report as scheduled by City Project Manager. p) Address review comments and questions and provide written responses to the City PM. q) Assimilate all City review comments into the Final Engineering Letter Report (ELR). Provide one (1) electronic and one (1) hard copy using City Standards as applicable and suitable for reproduction. City staff will provide electronic copies of the following information (as applicable and requested through the City PM): a) Electronic index and database of City’s Record Drawing and record information. b) Record Drawings and record information as available from City Engineering files. b) The preliminary budget, specifying the funds available for construction. c) A copy of existing studies and plans (as available from City Engineering files). Note: Applicable Master Plans and GIS mapping are available on the City’s website. The records provided for A/E’s use under this Contract are proprietary, copyrighted, and authorized for use only by A/E, and only for the intended purpose of this project. Any unauthorized use or distribution of the records provided under this Contract is strictly prohibited. 2. Design Phase. Upon approval of the preliminary phase, designated by receiving authorization to proceed from the City Project Manager, the A/E will: EXHIBIT A Page 2 of 10 a) Provide coordination with electric and communication utility companies and private pipeline companies that may have existing facilities and must be relocated to accommodate the proposed improvements. Inform private utility and pipeline owners whose facilities fall within the project limits of the proposed improvements. Identify areas of potential conflicts. Coordinate with private utility and pipeline owners to obtain needed locations of their respective utility/pipeline, including Level A SUE by private utility/pipeline owner as necessary. Coordinate necessary adjustments and provide a project schedule to utility/pipeline owner. Provide utility/pipeline relocation schedule to the City and update monthly. b) Identify the approximate locations and areas of existing utilities and pipelines that may have a significant potential impact on the proposed features or utilities and for which the existing location(s) cannot be adequately determined by the SUE investigation up to and including Level B, and which require a Level A exploratory excavation during the design phase. These critical locations and their basis of potential impact are to be clearly provided on a layout for the City PM. c) Provide assistance to identify potential needs for testing, handling and disposal of any hazardous materials and/or contaminated soils that may be discovered during construction (to be included under additional services). d) Prepare Construction Documents in City standard format for the work identified in the approved ELR. Construction plans to include improvements or modifications to gas within the Project limits, per the Project scope. Include standard City of Corpus Christi detail sheets and specifications as applicable to the Project. 1. Prepare construction plans in compliance with CPPS using English units on 11” x 17”. 2. Provide temporary Traffic Control parameters, sequencing and performance requirements for the Contractors to develop the construction TCP. 3. Provide pollution control measures and BMP layout for the Contractor’s Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan, using the City Standard Notes and BMP Detail Sheets as applicable. 4. Include computer model results and calculations used to analyze drainage. e) Submit two (2) sets of the interim plans (60% submittal) in electronic and half- size (11” x 17”) hard copies using City Standards as applicable to City staff for review and approval purposes with 60% estimates of probable construction costs. Identify distribution list for plans and bid documents to all affected franchise utilities and stakeholders. 1. Required with the interim plans is: a. Design Submittal Packet Checklist b. Executive Summary of the 60% submittal,” which will identify and briefly summarize the Project by distinguishing key elements of the Project, decisions made, outstanding issues, items TBD, Opinion of Probable Construction Costs (OPCC) compared to construction budget and the schedule with changes identified. c. Project Submittal Checklist d. Drawing Review Checklist e. OPCC f. Drawings g. Draft Table of Contents with specification list 2. Initiate 60% submittal discussion with City PM to brief PM on any concerns or issues prior to distribution of 60% submittal. f) Participate in Project 60% review meeting. Prepare and distribute meeting meetings to attendees within five working days of the meeting. Assimilate all EXHIBIT A Page 3 of 10 review comments, as appropriate, and upon confirmation from the City PM proceed to the 90% design. g) Submit two (2) sets of the pre-final plans and bid documents (90% submittal) in electronic and half-size hard copies using City Standards as applicable to City staff for review and approval purposes. Include the 90% estimate of probable construction costs, 90% submittal Executive Summary, Submittal Packet, Project, and Drawing Checklists, responses to previous review comments and the Contract Document Book with in-line Track Changes in red to identify all proposed edits to the City Construction Contracts. h) Participate in Project 90% review meeting. Prepare and distribute meeting meetings to attendees within five working days of the meeting. Assimilate all review comments, as appropriate, and proceed to the pre-ATA submittal. i) Provide one (1) set of the pre-ATA plans (100% unsealed and unstamped) in electronic and half-size hard copy using City Standards as applicable for City’s Pre-ATA review. Include the pre-ATA OPCC and written responses to previous review comments. The pre-ATA (100%) submittal will not include a full distribution and review unless in the opinion of the City Project Manager the questions from the previous review have not been adequately addressed or resolved in the pre- ATA submittal. If this occurs, the PM may request additional distribution, meeting, review and related revisions at no additional cost to the City. See item (l) below. j) Assimilate all pre-ATA comments, as appropriate, and provide one (1) set of the final plans and contract documents (signed and sealed, electronic and half-size hard copy using City Standards as applicable) suitable for reproduction. Said bid documents henceforth become the shared intellectual property of the City of Corpus Christi and the Consultant. The City agrees that any modifications of the submitted final plans (for other uses by the City) will be evidenced on the plans and be signed and sealed by a professional engineer prior to re-use of modified plans. k) Provide Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) measures to ensure that all submittals accurately reflect the percent completion designated and do not necessitate an excessive amount of revision and correction by City. Additional revisions or design submittals are required (and within the scope of Consultant’s duties under this Contract) if, in the opinion of the City Engineer or designee, Consultant has not adequately addressed City-provided review comments or provided submittals in accordance with City standards. l) Prepare and submit Monthly Status Reports to the Project Manager no later than the last Wednesday of each month with action items developed from monthly progress and review meetings. The City staff will: a) Designate an individual to have responsibility, authority, and control for coordinating activities for the Project. b) Provide the budget for the Project specifying the funds available for the construction contract. c) Provide electronic copy the City’s Standard Specifications, Standard Detail sheets, Front End Contract Documents, and forms for required bid documents. 3. Bid Phase. The A/E will: a) Participate in the pre-bid conference to discuss scope of work and to answer scope questions b) Review all questions concerning the bid documents and prepare any revisions to the plans, specifications and bid forms that may be necessary. EXHIBIT A Page 4 of 10 c) Attend bid opening and assist with the evaluation of bids. d) Assist with the review of the Contractor’s Statement of Experience and confirm it meets Contract requirements. e) For bids over budget, the A/E will confer with City staff and, if necessary, make such revisions to the bid documents as the City staff deems necessary to re- advertise the Project for bids. f) Provide two (2) hard copy sets and one (1) electronic set of conformed drawings and conformed Contract Documents (PDF and original [CAD/Word/etc.]) to the City. The City staff will: a) Advertise the Project for bidding, maintain the list of prospective bidders, issue any addenda, prepare bid tabulation and conduct the bid opening. b) Coordinate the review of the bids with the A/E. c) Prepare agenda materials for the City Council concerning bid awards. d) Prepare, review and provide copies of the Contract for execution between the City and the Contractor. 4. Construction Administration Phase. The A/E will perform contract administration to include the following: a) Participate in pre-construction meeting conference and provide a recommended agenda for critical construction activities and elements impacting the project. b) Review Contractor submittals and operating and maintenance manuals for conformance to Contract Documents. c) If requested by the City, review and interpret field and laboratory tests. d) Provide interpretations and clarifications of the Contract Documents for the Contractor and authorize required changes, which do not affect the Contractor’s price and are not contrary to the general interest of the City under the Contract as requested by the Owner’s Authorized Representative (OAR). e) Make periodic visits to the site of the Project to confer with the City Project Inspector and Contractor to observe the general progress and quality of work, and to determine, in general, if the work is being done in accordance with the Contract Documents. This will not be confused with the project representative observation or continuous monitoring of the progress of construction. f) Provide interpretations and clarifications of the plans and specifications for the Contractor and recommendations to the City for minor changes which do not affect the Contractor’s price and are not contrary to the general interest of the City under the Contract as requested by the OAR g) Attend final inspection with City staff, provide punch list items to the City’s Construction Engineers for Contractor completion, and provide the City with a Certificate of Completion for the Project upon successful completion of the Project. h) Review Contractor-provided construction “red-line” drawings. Prepare Project Record Drawings and provide a reproducible set and electronic file (both PDF and AutoCAD r.14 or later) within one (1) month of receiving the Contractor’s red-line drawings. All drawings shall be CADD drawn using dwg format in AutoCAD, and graphics data will be in .dxf format with each layer being provided in a separate file. Attribute data will be provided in ASCII format in tabular form. All electronic data will be compatible with the City GIS system. The Record Drawings should incorporate the Contractor’s red-lines and identify all changes made during construction. The Drawing Cover and each sheet should be clearly identified as the Record Drawing and should indicate the basis and date. EXHIBIT A Page 5 of 10 i) When requested by the OAR, assist in addressing Request for Information (RFI) submitted by the Contractor. The City staff will: a) Prepare applications/estimates for payments to Contractor. b) Conduct the final inspection with the Engineer. B. ADDITIONAL SERVICES This section defines the scope of additional services that may only be included as part of this contract if authorized by the Director of Engineering Services. A/E may not begin work on any services under this section without specific written authorization by the Director of Engineering Services. Fees for Additional Services are an allowance for potential services to be provided and will be negotiated by the Director of Engineering Services as required. The A/E shall, with written authorization by the Director of Engineering Services, perform the following: 1. Permit Preparation. Furnish the City all engineering data and documentation necessary for all required permits. The A/E will prepare this documentation for all required signatures. The A/E will prepare and submit identified permits as applicable to the appropriate local, state, and federal authorities, including: a) Union Pacific Railroad, Missouri Pacific Railroad, or any other railroad operating in the area b) TxDOT ROW and/or Utility Permits c) Wetlands Delineation and Permit d) Temporary Discharge Permit e) NPDES Permit/Amendments (including SSC, NOI, NOT) f) Texas Commission of Environmental Quality (TCEQ) Permits/Amendments g) Nueces County h) Texas Historical Commission (THC) i) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) j) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) k) United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) l) Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation (TDLR) 1. Register the project with the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation (TDLR) and pay associated fee. 2. Provide copy of Contract Documents along with appropriate fee to TDLR for review and approval of accessibility requirements for pedestrian improvements by a Registered Accessibility Specialist (RAS). 3. Coordinate RAS inspection services at the end of construction and pay associated fee. m) Texas General Land Office (TGLO) n) Other agency project-specific permits 2. Topographic All work must comply with Category 1-A, Condition I specifications of the Texas Society of Professional Surveyors’ Manual of Practice for Land Surveying in the State of Texas, latest edition. All work must be tied to and in conformance with the City’s Global Positioning System (GPS) control network. All work must comply with all TxDOT requirements as applicable. Include references tying Control Points to a minimum of two (2) registered NGS Benchmark Monuments in the vicinity of the Project that will not be disturbed by construction. Survey sheets shall be sealed, provided to the City and included in the bid document plan set. EXHIBIT A Page 6 of 10 a) Establish Horizontal and Vertical Control. b) Establish both primary and secondary horizontal/vertical control. c) Set project control points for Horizontal and Vertical Control outside the limits of area that will be disturbed by construction. d) Horizontal control will be based on NAD 83 State plane coordinates (South Zone), and the data will have no adjustment factor applied – i.e. – the coordinate data will remain in grid. e) Vertical control will be based on NAVD 88. f) All control work will be established using conventional (non-GPS) methods. Perform topographic surveys to gather existing condition information. g) Locate proposed soil/pavement core holes as drilled by the City’s Geotechnical Engineering Consultant. h) Obtain x, y, and z coordinates of all accessible existing wastewater, storm water, water, IT and gas lines as well as any other lines owned by third-parties and locate all visible utilities, wells and signs within the apparent ROW width along project limits. Survey shall include utility marking from the Texas 811 request. i) Open accessible manholes and inlets to obtain information on structure invert, type, and size; and all related pipe size, type, invert, orientation, and flow direction. j) Everything up to and including Level B subsurface engineering (SUE) is to be included in Topographic Survey. Surveying services related to Level A SUE are not included in Topographic and ROW Survey services, but shall be provided as part of the scope of work for SUE below, if needed. k) Locate existing features within the apparent ROW. l) Locate and identify trees, at least five inches in diameter, and areas of significant landscape or shrubs within the apparent ROW. m) Generate electronic planimetric base map for use in project design. n) Obtain finished floor elevations of critical and habitable structures along the roadway corridor as needed to certify drainage design criteria are met. o) The survey should not stop at the property line but should extend beyond the property line as needed to pick up features and surface flow patterns in the vicinity of the Project that could potentially impact the design or be impacted by the construction. This includes features such as existing swales or ditches, foundations, loading docks/overhead doors, driveways, parking lots, etc. p) Research plats, ROW maps, deed, easements, and survey for fence corners, monuments, and iron pins within the existing ROW and analyze to establish existing apparent ROW. q) Provide a preliminary base map containing apparent ROW, which will be used by the A/E to develop the proposed alignment and its position relative to the existing and proposed ROW. This preliminary base map must show lot or property lines, addresses, and significant business/facility names. 3. ROW/Easement Acquisition Survey and Parcel Descriptions. All work must be tied to and conform with the City’s Global Positioning System (GPS) control network and comply with Category 6, Condition I specifications of the Texas Society of Professional Surveyors’ Manual of Practice for Land Surveying in the State of Texas, latest edition. a) Set property corners and prepare right of way strip parcel map depicting all parcels proposed for acquisition. Metes and bounds descriptions must indicate parent tract areas based on the most accurate information available. Strip map will show entire parent tracts at a representative scale and for information only. All existing easements within the parcels to be acquired and those within adjacent parcels must be shown. EXHIBIT A Page 7 of 10 b) Prepare Metes and Bound Instrument with supporting exhibits as required and agreed upon, subsequent to ELR acceptance for ROW parcels, utility easements and temporary construction easements. c) Prepare individual signed and sealed parcel maps and legal descriptions for the required right of way acquisition for parcels and easements. A strip map showing all parcels required will be submitted along with parcel descriptions. If boundary conflicts between Owners are identified, additional fees may be authorized if needed. A/E shall submit parcel maps and legal descriptions prior to the 60% submittal. d) A/E must obtain Preliminary Title Reports from a local title company and provide copies of the title reports to the City. Preliminary Title Report shall identify title ownership and any title encumbrances to all right-of-way to be acquired. 4. Limited Phase II Environmental Site Assessment & Environmental Issues. Perform a limited Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) along length of the new waterline construction (on land) to determine if materials detrimental to the new waterline are present. The limited ESA will include field investigations, field borings, installation of temporary monitoring wells, collection of soil and groundwater samples, laboratory testing and analysis of gathered samples, and review of analytical results. Engineer will: a) Provide the results of the limited environmental site assessment and recommendations in a report. b) Identify and develop a scope of work for any testing, handling, and/or disposal of hazardous materials and/or contaminated soils or groundwater that may be discovered during construction. 5. Geotechnical Services. LNV will provide through a local Geotechnical Engineering & Testing Laboratory the following geotechnical services: • Five (5) borings to include 3-25’, 1-125’ & 1-250’ (south side) and 2-25’ & 1-250’ (north side); • Soil sampling and environmental sampling for hazardous materials (including decontamination procedures); • Three (3) temporary monitoring wells; and, • Report preparation. Conditions & Exclusions: 1. It is assumed that an agreement will be arranged for access and use of Citgo’s dock road in order to reach bore sites close to the south side of the Ship Channel. 2. All bore locations will be accessible to boring trucks. 3. “Swamp rigs” or other specialty vehicles to access bore locations are not included in the scope of services, but can be added for additional fees, if necessary. 6. Warranty Phase. (To Be Determined.) Provide a maintenance guaranty inspection toward the end of the one-year period after acceptance of the Project. Note defects requiring contractor action to maintain, repair, fix, restore, patch, or replace improvement under the maintenance guaranty terms of the contract. Document the condition and prepare a report for the City staff of the locations and conditions requiring action, with its recommendation for the method or action to best correct defective conditions and submit to City Staff. Complete the inspection and prepare the report no later than sixty (60) days prior to the end of the maintenance guaranty period. EXHIBIT A Page 8 of 10 7. Meetings and Coordination (T&M): Given the high-profile nature of this Project, the number of stakeholders, and the number of jurisdictional agencies, LNV anticipates a significant amount of effort will be required for meetings, minutes and coordination. LNV will attend meetings (outside of normal City Review Meetings covered in the PRELIMINARY and DESIGN Phases) as requested by City staff and provide subsequent minutes and coordination. Meetings and coordination services, excluding attendance at submittal review meetings, will be provided on a Time and Materials basis up to a Not-to- Exceed fee established below under Section III. Fees. The Not-to-Exceed fee is based upon two (2) meetings per month during the Preliminary and Design Phases (assumed 7 months) with the LNV PM and EIT attending the meetings. Provide the services above authorized in addition to those items shown on Exhibit “A-1” Task List, which provides supplemental description to Exhibit “A”. Note: The Exhibit “A-1” Task List does not supersede Exhibit “A”. II. SCHEDULE Date Activity Upon Receipt of Signed Contract and NTP Commence work on Project 8 Weeks after Receipt of NTP Draft ELR submittal 2 Weeks City Review 2 Weeks after Receipt of City Comments Final ELR submittal 6 Weeks after Receipt of Design NTP 60% Design Submittal 2 Weeks City Review 3 Weeks after Receipt of City Comments 90% Design Submittal 2 Weeks City Review 2 Weeks after Receipt of City Comments 100% Pre-ATA Submittal 1 Week City Review 1 Week after Receipt of City Comments Final Sealed Bid Package 3 Weeks after Sealed Submittal Advertise for Bids 3 Weeks after Advertise Pre-Bid Conference 1 Week after Pre-Bid Conference Receive Bids 2 Months after Bid Date Contract Award 1 Month After Award Begin Construction Estimated 13 Months After Begin Construction Complete Construction III. FEES A. Fee for Basic Services. The City will pay the A/E a fixed fee for providing all “Basic Services” authorized as per the table below. The fees for Basic Services will not exceed those identified and will be full and total compensation for all services outlined in Section I.A.1-4 above, and for all expenses incurred in performing these services. The fee for this project is subject to the availability of funds. The Engineer may be directed to suspend work pending receipt and appropriation of funds. EXHIBIT A Page 9 of 10 For services provided, A/E will submit monthly statements for services rendered. The statement will be based upon A/E’s estimate (and with City’s concurrence) of the proportion of the total services actually completed at the time of billing. City will make prompt monthly payments in response to A/E’s monthly statements. B.Fee for Additional Services. For services authorized by the Director of Engineering Services under Section I.B. “Additional Services”, the City will pay the A/E a not-to-exceed fee as per the table below: EXHIBIT A Page 10 of 10 EXHIBIT ‘A-1’ (Provides supplemental description to Exhibit 'A'. Task List does not supersede Exhibit 'A'.) CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS SHIP CHANNEL WATER & GAS CROSSING PROJECT NO. 18156A Project Background The U.S Army Engineering District, Galveston (USAED) will soon commence construction of the deepening and widening of the Corpus Christi Ship Channel. The City’s water system currently consists of two (2) locations where waterlines cross the Corpus Christi Ship Channel. One (1) location consists of twin 16-inch waterlines crossing parallel to and just east of the existing Harbor Bridge. A second location is at Cantwell Lane at Avery Point Pipeline Crossing and consists of twin 16-inch waterlines. The waterlines crossing at Avery Point were installed at a depth that will conflict with the deepening and widening of the channel and need to be removed and replaced. An initial feasibility study was performed by LNV to evaluate alternatives to provide redundancy to the existing twin 16-inch waterlines crossing just east of the existing Harbor Bridge. Alternatives were evaluated to install a new waterline at four (4) different locations to provide improved pressures, capacity, and water quality (minimizing dead- ends) on the north side of the Ship Channel, and Alternative 3 – Tule Lake Turning Basin Crossing (approx. 6,500 LF) was selected as the preferred option. The scope of services in this Contract include engineering services for the installation of a new 24” waterline and a new 8” gas line crossing at the Tule Lake Turning Basin. The scope of services includes permit processing through various jurisdictional agencies, easement delineation and preparation, preliminary and final designs, preparation of plans and specifications, meetings and coordination with stakeholders, bid phase services, and assisting the City during construction. TASK LIST I. SCOPE OF SERVICES A. BASIC SERVICES 1. Preliminary Phase a. Perform Preliminary Phase Services as indicated in Exhibit ‘A’. Services struck through are not part of the scope of services of this Contract. b. Removal of the City’s existing 16” waterline crossing at Avery Point is covered under a separate Contract. Engineering services related to the removal of the 16” waterline are not included in the scope of services of this Contract. 2. Design Phase a. Perform Design Phase Services as indicated in Exhibit ‘A’. Services struck through are not part of the scope of services of this Contract. EXHIBIT A-1 Page 1 of 3 3.Bid Phase a.Perform Bid Phase Services as indicated in Exhibit ‘A’. 4.Construction Administration Phase a.Perform Construction Phase Services as indicated in Exhibit ‘A’. B.ADDITIONAL SERVICES 1a. Permit: RR Permitting * a.Services include coordinating and permitting with Union Pacific Railroad for the installation of the new waterline and new gas line beneath their railway on the south side of the Ship Channel. 1b. Permit: Wetland Delineations, Archeological Survey & Endangered Species Survey * a.Services include determination and delineation of wetlands along the proposed route of the new water and gas lines and performing archeological and endangered species surveys within the areas along the proposed waterline route requiring a USACE permit. 1c. Permit: USACE Permitting (Including TCEQ, THC, USFWS & TxGLO) * a.Services include preparation and processing of the appropriate USACE permit(s) required for the installation of the new water and gas lines across the Tule Lake property and beneath the Ship Channel. b.Disturbances of jurisdictional areas, if necessary, will be restored to pre-construction conditions. It is assumed that these disturbances will be considered temporary and mitigation will not be required. Preparation of a mitigation plan and associated efforts are not included in the scope of services of this Contract. 2.Topographic Survey * a.Perform Services as indicated in Exhibit ‘A’. 3.Easement Acquisition Survey and Parcel Descriptions * a.Services include the preparation of easements that cover the installation of the new water and gas lines across POCCA and CITGO properties. 4.Limited Phase II Environmental Site Assessment & Environmental Issues * a.Perform Services as indicated in Exhibit ‘A’. 5.Geotechnical Services * a.Perform Services as indicated in Exhibit ‘A’. 6.Warranty Phase (To Be Determined) a.Warranty Phase Services are not included in the scope of EXHIBIT A-1 Page 2 of 3 services of this Contract. If determined necessary, a Contract Amendment will be executed to provide funds for the agreed upon services. 7. Meetings and Coordination (T&M) * a. Perform Services as indicated in Exhibit ‘A’. (* Additional Service to be authorized with execution of the Contract.) C. CONTRACT EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS 1. Engineering services not listed in this Contract are excluded from the scope of work of this Contract. 2. The Contract scope of services includes the preparation of one (1) set of bid documents (i.e. construction plans, specifications and contract documents) for the installation of Project improvements and one (1) bid process. 3. Excluded services can be provided, if required, for additional fees. EXHIBIT A-1 Page 3 of 3 Summary of Fees Large AE Contract Total Contract Basic Services Fees Street Storm Wtr WW Water (63%) Gas (37%) 1.Preliminary Phase $ 107,358.00 $ 63,052.00 $ 170,410.00 2.Design Phase $ 204,832.00 $ 120,298.00 $ 325,130.00 3.Bid Phase $ 13,091.00 $ 7,689.00 $ 20,780.00 4.Construction Administration Phase $ 62,559.00 $ 36,741.00 $ 99,300.00 Subtotal Basic Services Fees $ 387,840.00 $ 227,780.00 $ 615,620.00 Additional Services Fees Street Storm Wtr WW Water Gas 1a. Permit: RR Permitting * $ 8,341.00 $ 4,899.00 $ 13,240.00 1b. Permit: Wetland Delineations, Archeological Survey & Endangered Species Survey * $ 28,879.00 $ 16,961.00 $ 45,840.00 1c. Permit: USACE (Incl: TCEQ, THC, USFWS & TxGLO) * $ 27,392.00 $ 16,088.00 $ 43,480.00 2. Topographic Survey *$ 23,512.00 $ 13,808.00 $ 37,320.00 3.Easement Acquisition Survey and Parcel Descriptions *$ 15,070.00 $ 8,850.00 $ 23,920.00 4.Limited Phase II ESA & Environ. Issues *$ 24,835.00 $ 14,585.00 $ 39,420.00 5.Geotechnical Services *$ 62,950.00 $ 36,970.00 $ 99,920.00 6.Warranty Phase (TBD)TBD TBD TBD 7.Meetings and Coordination (T&M) *$ 11,592.00 $ 6,808.00 $ 18,400.00 Subtotal Additional Services Fees $ 202,571.00 $ 118,969.00 $ 321,540.00 Total Fee $ 590,411.00 $ 346,749.00 $ 937,160.00 *Additional Services authorized in coordination with the notice to proceed for Basic Services.SUMMARY OF FEESEXHIBIT A-2 Page 1 of 1 Sample form for: Payment Request AE Contract Revised 02/01/17 COMPLETE PROJECT NAME Project No. XXXX Invoice No. 12345 Invoice Date 01/01/2017 Total Current Previous Total Remaining Percent Basic Services:Contract Amd No. 1 Amd No. 2 Contract Invoice Invoice Invoice Balance Complete Preliminary Phase $1,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $0.00 100.0% Design Phase $2,000.00 $1,000.00 $0.00 $3,000.00 $1,000.00 $500.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 50.0% Bid Phase $500.00 $0.00 $250.00 $750.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $750.00 0.0% Construction Phase $2,500.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $3,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3,500.00 0.0% Subtotal Basic Services $6,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,250.00 $8,250.00 $1,000.00 $1,500.00 $2,500.00 $5,750.00 30.3% Additional Services: Permitting $2,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,000.00 $500.00 $0.00 $500.00 $1,500.00 25.0% Warranty Phase $0.00 $1,120.00 $0.00 $1,120.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,120.00 0.0% Inspection $0.00 $0.00 $1,627.00 $1,627.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,627.00 0.0% Platting Survey TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD O & M Manuals TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD SCADA TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Subtotal Additional Services $2,000.00 $1,120.00 $1,627.00 $4,747.00 $500.00 $0.00 $500.00 $4,247.00 10.5% Summary of Fees: Basic Services Fees $6,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,250.00 $8,250.00 $1,000.00 $1,500.00 $2,500.00 $5,750.00 30.3% Additional Services Fees $2,000.00 $1,120.00 $1,627.00 $4,747.00 $500.00 $0.00 $500.00 $4,247.00 10.5% Total of Fees $8,000.00 $2,120.00 $2,877.00 $12,997.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $3,000.00 $9,997.00 23.1% Notes: If needed, update this sample form based on the contract requirements. If applicable, refer to the contract for information on what to include with time and materials (T&M).Exhibit BPage 1 of 1 1 Rev 09/19 EXHIBIT C Insurance Requirements 1.1 Consultant must not commence work under this agreement until all required insurance has been obtained and such insurance has been approved by the City. Consultant must not allow any subcontractor to commence work until all similar insurance required of any subcontractor has been obtained. 1.2 Consultant must furnish to the Director of Contracts and Procurement with the signed agreement a copy of Certificates of Insurance (COI) with applicable policy endorsements showing the following minimum coverage by an insurance company(s) acceptable to the City’s Risk Manager. The City must be listed as an additional insured on the General liability and Auto Liability policies, and a waiver of subrogation is required on all applicable policies. Endorsements must be provided with COI. Project name and or number must be listed in Description Box of COI. TYPE OF INSURANCE MINIMUM INSURANCE COVERAGE 30-written day notice of cancellation, required on all certificates or by applicable policy endorsements Bodily Injury and Property Damage Per occurrence - aggregate Commercial General Liability including: 1.Commercial Broad Form 2.Premises – Operations 3.Products/ Completed Operations 4.Contractual Liability 5.Independent Contractors 6.Personal Injury- Advertising Injury $1,000,000 Per Occurrence $2,000,000 Aggregate AUTO LIABILITY (including) 1. Owned 2.Hired and Non-Owned 3. Rented/Leased $500,000 Combined Single Limit PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY (Errors and Omissions) $1,000,000 Per Claim If claims made policy, retro date must be prior to inception of agreement, have extended reporting period provisions 2 Rev 09/19 and identify any limitations regarding who is insured. 1.3 In the event of accidents of any kind related to this agreement, Consultant must furnish the City with copies of all reports of any accidents within 10 days of the accident. 1.4 Consultant shall obtain and maintain in full force and effect for the duration of this Contract, and any extension hereof, at Consultant's sole expense, insurance coverage written on an occurrence basis, by companies authorized and admitted to do business in the State of Texas and with an A.M. Best's rating of no less than A- VII. Consultant is required to provide City with renewal Certificates. 1.5 In the event of a change in insurance coverage, Consultant shall be required to submit a copy of the replacement certificate of insurance to City at the address provided below within 10 business days of said change. Consultant shall pay any costs resulting from said changes. All notices under this Article shall be given to City at the following address: City of Corpus Christi Attn: Contracts and Procurement P.O. Box 9277 Corpus Christi, TX 78469-9277 1.6 Consultant agrees that with respect to the above required insurance, all insurance policies are to contain or be endorsed to contain the following required provisions: 1.6.1 List the City and its officers, officials, employees and elected representatives as additional insured by endorsement, as respects operations, completed operation and activities of, or on behalf of, the named insured performed under contract with the City with the exception of the professional liability/Errors & Omissions policy; 1.6.2 Provide for an endorsement that the "other insurance" clause shall not apply to the City of Corpus Christi where the City is an additional insured shown on the policy; 1.6.3 If the policy is cancelled, other than for nonpayment of premium, notice of such cancellation will be provided at least 30 days in advance of the cancellation effective date to the certificate holder; 1.6.4 If the policy is cancelled for nonpayment of premium, notice of such cancellation will be provided within 10 days of the cancellation effective date to the certificate holder. 1.7 Within five (5) calendar days of a suspension, cancellation or non-renewal of 3 Rev 09/19 Exhibit C coverage, Consultant shall notify City of such lapse in coverage and provide a replacement Certificate of Insurance and applicable endorsements to City. City shall have the option to suspend Consultant's performance should there be a lapse in coverage at any time during this contract. Failure to provide and to maintain the required insurance shall constitute a material breach of this contract. 1.8 In addition to any other remedies the City may have upon Consultant's failure to provide and maintain any insurance or policy endorsements to the extent and within the time herein required, the City shall have the right to withhold any payment(s) if any, which become due to Consultant hereunder until Consultant demonstrates compliance with the requirements hereof. 1.9 Nothing herein contained shall be construed as limiting in any way the extent to which Consultant may be held responsible for payments of damages to persons or property resulting from Consultant's or its subcontractor’s performance of the work covered under this agreement. 1.10 It is agreed that Consultant's insurance shall be deemed primary and non- contributory with respect to any insurance or self-insurance carried by the City of Corpus Christi for liability arising out of operations under this agreement. 1.11 It is understood and agreed that the insurance required is in addition to and separate from any other obligation contained in this agreement. Excerpt from FORM 00 72 00 GENERAL CONDITIONS for Construction Projects related to design services Table of Contents Page Article 1 – Definitions and Terminology ....................................................................................................... 2 Article 2 – Preliminary Matters ..................................................................................................................... 8 Article 3 – Contract Documents: Intent, Requirements, Reuse ................................................................... 8 Article 4 – Commencement and Progress of the Work ................................................................................ 9 Article 5 – Availability of Lands; Subsurface, Physical and Hazardous Environmental Conditions .............. 9 Article 6 – Bonds and Insurance ................................................................................................................. 10 Article 7 – Contractor’s Responsibilities ..................................................................................................... 10 Article 8 – Other Work at the Site ............................................................................................................... 10 Article 9 – Owner’s and OPT’s Responsibilities ........................................................................................... 10 Article 10 – OAR’s and Designer’s Status During Construction .................................................................. 11 Article 11 – Amending the Contract Documents; Changes in the Work .................................................... 13 Article 12 – Change Management .............................................................................................................. 13 Article 13 – Claims ....................................................................................................................................... 14 Article 14 – Prevailing Wage Rate Requirements ....................................................................................... 16 Article 15 – Cost of the Work; Allowances; Unit Price Work ...................................................................... 16 Article 16 – Tests and Inspections; Correction, Removal, or Acceptance of Defective Work .................... 16 Article 17 – Payments to Contractor; Set-Offs; Completion; Correction Period ........................................ 16 Article 18 – Suspension of Work and Termination ..................................................................................... 16 Article 19 – Project Management ............................................................................................................... 16 Article 20 – Project Coordination ................................................................................................................ 16 Article 21 – Quality Management ............................................................................................................... 17 Article 22 – Final Resolution of Disputes .................................................................................................... 17 Article 23 – Minority/MBE/DBE Participation Policy .................................................................................. 17 Article 24 – Document Management .......................................................................................................... 17 Article 25 – Shop Drawings ......................................................................................................................... 17 Article 26 – Record Data ............................................................................................................................. 20 Article 27 – Construction Progress Schedule .............................................................................................. 21 Article 28 – Video and Photographic documentation ................................................................................ 21 Article 29 – Execution and Closeout ........................................................................................................... 21 Article 30 – Miscellaneous .......................................................................................................................... 22 Excerpt from FORM 00 72 00 GENERAL CONDITIONS for Construction Projects related to design services EXHIBIT D Page 1 of 22 ARTICLE 1 – DEFINITIONS AND TERMINOLOGY 1.01 Defined Terms A.Terms with initial capital letters, including the term’s singular and plural forms, have the meanings indicated in this paragraph wherever used in the Bidding Requirements or Contract Documents. In addition to the terms specifically defined, terms with initial capital letters in the Contract Documents may include references to identified articles and paragraphs, and the titles of other documents or forms. 1.Addenda - Documents issued prior to the receipt of Bids which clarify or modify the Bidding Requirements or the proposed Contract Documents. 2.Agreement - The document executed between Owner and Contractor covering the Work. 3.Alternative Dispute Resolution - The process by which a disputed Claim may be settled as an alternative to litigation, if Owner and Contractor cannot reach an agreement between themselves. 4.Application for Payment - The forms used by Contractor to request payments from Owner and the supporting documentation required by the Contract Documents. 5.Award Date – The date the City Council of the City of Corpus Christi (City) authorizes the City Manager or designee to execute the Contract on behalf of the City. 6.Bid - The documents submitted by a Bidder to establish the proposed Contract Price and Contract Times and provide other information and certifications as required by the Bidding Requirements. 7.Bidding Documents - The Bidding Requirements, the proposed Contract Documents, and Addenda. 8.Bidder - An individual or entity that submits a Bid to Owner. 9.Bidding Requirements - The Invitation for Bids, Instructions to Bidders, Bid Security, Bid Form and attachments, and required certifications. 10.Bid Security - The financial security in the form of a bid bond provided by Bidder at the time the Bid is submitted and held by Owner until the Agreement is executed and the evidence of insurance and Bonds required by the Contract Documents are provided. A cashier’s check, certified check, money order or bank draft from any State or National Bank will also be acceptable. 11.Bonds - Performance Bond, Payment Bond, Maintenance Bond, and other Surety instruments executed by Surety. When in singular form, refers to individual instrument. 12.Change Order - A document issued on or after the Effective Date of the Contract and signed by Owner and Contractor which modifies the Work, Contract Price, Contract Times, or terms and conditions of the Contract. 13.Change Proposal - A document submitted by Contractor in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents: a.Requesting an adjustment in Contract Price or Contract Times; Excerpt from FORM 00 72 00 GENERAL CONDITIONS for Construction Projects related to design services EXHIBIT D Page 2 of 22 b. Contesting an initial decision concerning the requirements of the Contract Documents or the acceptability of Work under the Contract Documents; c. Challenging a set-off against payment due; or d. Seeking a Modification with respect to the terms of the Contract. 14. City Engineer - The Corpus Christi City Engineer and/or his designated representative as identified at the preconstruction conference or in the Notice to Proceed. 15. Claim - A demand or assertion by Owner or Contractor submitted in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. A demand for money or services by an entity other than the Owner or Contractor is not a Claim. 16. Constituent of Concern - Asbestos, petroleum, radioactive materials, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), hazardous wastes, and substances, products, wastes, or other materials that are or become listed, regulated, or addressed pursuant to: a. The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. §§9601 et seq. (“CERCLA”); b. The Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, 49 U.S.C. §§5101 et seq.; c. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. §§6901 et seq. (“RCRA”); d. The Toxic Substances Control Act, 15 U.S.C. §§2601 et seq.; e. The Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. §§1251 et seq.; f. The Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. §§7401 et seq.; or g. Any other Laws or Regulations regulating, relating to, or imposing liability or standards of conduct concerning hazardous, toxic, or dangerous waste, substance, or material. 17. Contract - The entire integrated set of documents concerning the Work and describing the relationship between the Owner and Contractor. 18. Contract Amendment - A document issued on or after the Effective Date of the Contract and signed by Owner and Contractor which: a. Authorizes new phases of the Work and establishes the Contract Price, Contract Times, or terms and conditions of the Contract for the new phase of Work; or b. Modifies the terms and conditions of the Contract, but does not make changes in the Work. 19. Contract Documents - Those items designated as Contract Documents in the Agreement. 20. Contract Price - The monetary amount stated in the Agreement and as adjusted by Modifications, and increases or decreases in unit price quantities, if any, that Owner has agreed to pay Contractor for completion of the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents. 21. Contract Times - The number of days or the dates by which Contractor must: a. Achieve specified Milestones; Excerpt from FORM 00 72 00 GENERAL CONDITIONS for Construction Projects related to design services EXHIBIT D Page 3 of 22 b. Achieve Substantial Completion; and c. Complete the Work. 22. Contractor - The individual or entity with which Owner has contracted for performance of the Work. 23. Contractor’s Team - Contractor and Subcontractors, Suppliers, individuals, or entities directly or indirectly employed or retained by them to perform part of the Work or anyone for whose acts they may be liable. 24. Cost of the Work - The sum of costs incurred for the proper performance of the Work as allowed by Article 15. 25. Defective - When applied to Work, refers to Work that is unsatisfactory, faulty, or deficient in that it: a. Does not conform to the Contract Documents; b. Does not meet the requirements of applicable inspections, reference standards, tests, or approvals referred to in the Contract Documents; or c. Has been damaged or stolen prior to OAR’s recommendation of final payment unless responsibility for the protection of the Work has been assumed by Owner at Substantial Completion in accordance with Paragraphs 17.12 or 17.13. 26. Designer - The individuals or entity named as Designer in the Agreement and the subconsultants, individuals, or entities directly or indirectly employed or retained by Designer to provide design or other technical services to the Owner. Designer has responsibility for engineering or architectural design and technical issues related to the Contract Documents. Designers are Licensed Professional Engineers, Registered Architects or Registered Landscape Architects qualified to practice their profession in the State of Texas. 27. Drawings - The part of the Contract that graphically shows the scope, extent, and character of the Work. Shop Drawings and other Contractor documents are not Drawings. 28. Effective Date of the Contract - The date indicated in the Agreement on which the City Manager or designee has signed the Contract. 29. Field Order - A document issued by OAR or Designer requiring changes in the Work that do not change the Contract Price or the Contract Times. 30. Hazardous Environmental Condition - The presence of Constituents of Concern at the Site in quantities or circumstances that may present a danger to persons or property exposed to Constituents of Concern. The presence of Constituents of Concern at the Site necessary for the execution of the Work or to be incorporated in the Work is not a Hazardous Environmental Condition provided these Constituents of Concern are controlled and contained pursuant to industry practices, Laws and Regulations, and the requirements of the Contract. 31. Indemnified Costs - All costs, losses, damages, and legal or other dispute resolution costs resulting from claims or demands against Owner’s Indemnitees. These costs include fees for engineers, architects, attorneys, and other professionals. Excerpt from FORM 00 72 00 GENERAL CONDITIONS for Construction Projects related to design services EXHIBIT D Page 4 of 22 32. Laws and Regulations; Laws or Regulations - Applicable laws, statutes, rules, regulations, ordinances, codes, and orders of governmental bodies, agencies, authorities, and courts having jurisdiction over the Project. 33. Liens - Charges, security interests, or encumbrances upon Contract related funds, real property, or personal property. 34. Milestone - A principal event in the performance of the Work that Contractor is required by Contract to complete by a specified date or within a specified period of time. 35. Modification - Change made to the Contract Documents by one of the following methods: a. Contract Amendment; b. Change Order; c. Field Order; or d. Work Change Directive. 36. Notice of Award - The notice of Owner’s intent to enter into a contract with the Selected Bidder. 37. Notice to Proceed - A notice to Contractor of the Contract Times and the date Work is to begin. 38. Owner - The City of Corpus Christi (City), a Texas home-rule municipal corporation and political subdivision organized under the laws of the State of Texas, acting by and through its duly authorized City Manager and his designee, the City Engineer (the Director of Engineering Services), and the City’s officers, employees, agents, or representatives, authorized to administer design and construction of the Project. 39. Owner’s Authorized Representative or OAR - The individual or entity named as OAR in the Agreement and the consultants, subconsultants, individuals, or entities directly or indirectly employed or retained by them to provide construction management services to the Owner. The OAR may be an employee of the Owner. 40. Owner’s Indemnitees - Each member of the OPT and their officers, directors, members, partners, employees, agents, consultants, and subcontractors. 41. Owner’s Project Team or OPT - The Owner, Owner’s Authorized Representative, Resident Project Representative, Designer, and the consultants, subconsultants, individuals, or entities directly or indirectly employed or retained by them to provide services to the Owner. 42. Partial Occupancy or Use - Use by Owner of a substantially completed part of the Work for the purpose for which it is intended (or a related purpose) prior to Substantial Completion of all the Work. 43. Progress Schedule - A schedule prepared and maintained by Contractor, describing the sequence and duration of the activities comprising the Contractor’s plan to accomplish the Work within the Contract Times. The Progress Schedule must be a Critical Path Method (CPM) Schedule. 44. Project - The total undertaking to be accomplished for Owner under the Contract Documents. Excerpt from FORM 00 72 00 GENERAL CONDITIONS for Construction Projects related to design services EXHIBIT D Page 5 of 22 45. Resident Project Representative or RPR - The authorized representative of OPT assigned to assist OAR at the Site. As used herein, the term Resident Project Representative includes assistants and field staff of the OAR. 46. Samples - Physical examples of materials, equipment, or workmanship representing some portion of the Work that are used to establish the standards for that portion of the Work. 47. Schedule of Documents - A schedule of required documents, prepared, and maintained by Contractor. 48. Schedule of Values - A schedule, prepared and maintained by Contractor, allocating portions of the Contract Price to various portions of the Work and used as the basis for Contractor’s Applications for Payment. 49. Selected Bidder - The Bidder to which Owner intends to award the Contract. 50. Shop Drawings - All drawings, diagrams, illustrations, schedules, and other data or information that are specifically prepared or assembled and submitted by Contractor to illustrate some portion of the Work. Shop Drawings, whether approved or not, are not Drawings and are not Contract Documents. 51. Site - Lands or areas indicated in the Contract Documents as being furnished by Owner upon which the Work is to be performed. The Site includes rights-of-way, easements, and other lands furnished by Owner which are designated for use by the Contractor. 52. Specifications - The part of the Contract that describes the requirements for materials, equipment, systems, standards, and workmanship as applied to the Work, and certain administrative requirements and procedural matters applicable to the Work. 53. Subcontractor - An individual or entity having a direct contract with Contractor or with other Subcontractors or Suppliers for the performance of a part of the Work. 54. Substantial Completion - The point where the Work or a specified part of the Work is sufficiently complete to be used for its intended purpose in accordance with the Contract Documents. 55. Supplementary Conditions - The part of the Contract that amends or supplements the General Conditions. 56. Supplier - A manufacturer, fabricator, supplier, distributor, materialman, or vendor having a direct contract with Contractor or with Subcontractors or other Suppliers to furnish materials or equipment to be incorporated in the Work. 57. Technical Data - Those items expressly identified as Technical Data in the Supplementary Conditions with respect to either: a. Subsurface conditions at the Site; b. Physical conditions relating to existing surface or subsurface structures at the Site, except Underground Facilities; or c. Hazardous Environmental Conditions at the Site. 58. Underground Facilities - All underground pipelines, conduits, ducts, cables, wires, manholes, vaults, tanks, tunnels, other similar facilities or appurtenances, and encasements containing these facilities which are used to convey electricity, gases, Excerpt from FORM 00 72 00 GENERAL CONDITIONS for Construction Projects related to design services EXHIBIT D Page 6 of 22 steam, liquid petroleum products, telephone or other communications, fiber optic transmissions, cable television, water, wastewater, storm water, other liquids or chemicals, or traffic or other control systems. 59. Unit Price Work - Work to be paid for on the basis of unit prices. 60. Work - The construction of the Project or its component parts as required by the Contract Documents. 61. Work Change Directive - A directive issued to Contractor on or after the Effective Date of the Contract ordering an addition, deletion, or revision in the Work. The Work Change Directive serves as a memorandum of understanding regarding the directive until a Change Order can be issued. 1.02 Terminology A. The words and terms discussed in this Paragraph 1.02 are not defined, but when used in the Bidding Requirements or Contract Documents, have the indicated meaning. B. It is understood that the cost for performing Work is included in the Contract Price and no additional compensation is to be paid by Owner unless specifically stated otherwise in the Contract Documents. Expressions including or similar to “at no additional cost to Owner,” “at Contractor’s expense,” or similar words mean that the Contractor is to perform or provide specified operation of Work without an increase in the Contract Price. C. The terms “day” or “calendar day” mean a calendar day of 24 hours measured from midnight to the next midnight. D. The meaning and intent of certain terms or adjectives are described as follows: 1. The terms “as allowed,” “as approved,” “as ordered,” “as directed,” or similar terms in the Contract Documents indicate an exercise of professional judgment by the OPT. 2. Adjectives including or similar to “reasonable,” “suitable,” “acceptable,” “proper,” “satisfactory,” or similar adjectives are used to describe a determination of OPT regarding the Work. 3. Any exercise of professional judgment by the OPT will be made solely to evaluate the Work for general compliance with the Contract Documents unless there is a specific statement in the Contract Documents indicating otherwise. 4. The use of these or similar terms or adjectives does not assign a duty or give OPT authority to supervise or direct the performance of the Work, or assign a duty or give authority to the OPT to undertake responsibilities contrary to the provisions of Articles 9 or 10 or other provisions of the Contract Documents. E. The use of the words “furnish,” “install,” “perform,” and “provide” have the following meanings when used in connection with services, materials, or equipment: 1. Furnish means to supply and deliver the specified services, materials, or equipment to the Site or other specified location ready for use or installation. 2. Install means to complete construction or assembly of the specified services, materials, or equipment so they are ready for their intended use. Excerpt from FORM 00 72 00 GENERAL CONDITIONS for Construction Projects related to design services EXHIBIT D Page 7 of 22 3. Perform or provide means to furnish and install specified services, materials, or equipment, complete and ready for their intended use. 4. Perform or provide the specified services, materials, or equipment complete and ready for intended use if the Contract Documents require specific services, materials, or equipment, but do not expressly use the words “furnish,” “install,” “perform,” or “provide.” F. Contract Documents are written in modified brief style: 1. Requirements apply to all Work of the same kind, class, and type even though the word “all” is not stated. 2. Simple imperative sentence structure is used which places a verb as the first word in the sentence. It is understood that the words “furnish,” “install,” “perform,” “provide,” or similar words include the meaning of the phrase “The Contractor shall...” before these words. 3. Unless specifically stated that action is to be taken by the OPT or others, it is understood that the action described is a requirement of the Contractor. G. Words or phrases that have a well-known technical or construction industry or trade meaning are used in the Contract Documents in accordance with this recognized meaning unless stated otherwise in the Contract Documents. H. Written documents are required where reference is made to notices, reports, approvals, consents, documents, statements, instructions, opinions or other types of communications required by the Contract Documents. Approval and consent documents must be received by Contractor prior to the action or decision for which approval or consent is given. These may be made in printed or electronic format through the OPT’s project management information system or other electronic media as required by the Contract Documents or approved by the OAR. I. Giving notice as required by the Contract Documents may be by printed or electronic media using a method that requires acknowledgment of the receipt of that notice. ARTICLE 2 – PRELIMINARY MATTERS ARTICLE 3 – CONTRACT DOCUMENTS: INTENT, REQUIREMENTS, REUSE 3.01 Intent B. Provide equipment that is functionally complete as described in the Contract Documents. The Drawings and Specifications do not indicate or describe all of the Work required to complete the installation of products purchased by the Owner or Contractor. Additional details required for the correct installation of selected products are to be provided by the Contractor and coordinated with the Designer through the OAR. 3.02 Reference Standards Comply with applicable construction industry standards, whether referenced or not. 1. Standards referenced in the Contract Documents govern over standards not referenced but recognized as applicable in the construction industry. Excerpt from FORM 00 72 00 GENERAL CONDITIONS for Construction Projects related to design services EXHIBIT D Page 8 of 22 2. Comply with the requirements of the Contract Documents if they produce a higher quality of Work than the applicable construction industry standards. 3. Designer determines whether a code or standard is applicable, which of several are applicable, or if the Contract Documents produce a higher quality of Work. 3.03 Reporting and Resolving Discrepancies 3.04 Interpretation of the Contract Documents Submit questions regarding the design of the Project described in the Contract Documents to the OAR immediately after those questions arise. OAR is to request an interpretation of the Contract Documents from the Designer. Designer is to respond to these questions by providing an interpretation of the Contract Documents. OAR will coordinate the response of the OPT to Contractor. C. OPT may initiate a Modification to the Contract Documents through the OAR if a response to the question indicates that a change in the Contract Documents is required. Contractor may appeal Designer’s or OAR’s interpretation by submitting a Change Proposal. ARTICLE 4 – COMMENCEMENT AND PROGRESS OF THE WORK ARTICLE 5 – AVAILABILITY OF LANDS; SUBSURFACE AND PHYSICAL CONDITIONS; HAZARDOUS ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS 5.01 Availability of Lands 5.02 Use of Site and Other Areas 5.03 Subsurface and Physical Conditions 5.04 Differing Subsurface or Physical Conditions OAR is to notify the OPT after receiving notice of a differing subsurface or physical condition from the Contractor. Designer is to: 1. Promptly review the subsurface or physical condition; 2. Determine the necessity of OPT’s obtaining additional exploration or tests with respect the subsurface or physical condition; 3. Determine if the subsurface or physical condition falls within one or more of the differing Site condition categories in Paragraph 5.04.A; 4. Prepare recommendations to OPT regarding the Contractor’s resumption of Work in connection with the subsurface or physical condition in question; 5. Determine the need for changes in the Drawings or Specifications; and 6. Advise OPT of Designer’s findings, conclusions, and recommendations. C. OAR is to issue a statement to Contractor regarding the subsurface or physical condition in question and recommend action as appropriate after review of Designer’s findings, conclusions, and recommendations. Excerpt from FORM 00 72 00 GENERAL CONDITIONS for Construction Projects related to design services EXHIBIT D Page 9 of 22 5.05 Underground Facilities The Designer is to take the following action after receiving notice from the OAR: 1. Promptly review the Underground Facility and conclude whether the Underground Facility was not shown or indicated in the Contract Documents, or was not shown or indicated with reasonable accuracy; 2. Prepare recommendations to OPT regarding the Contractor’s resumption of Work in connection with this Underground Facility; 3. Determine the extent to which a change is required in the Drawings or Specifications to document the consequences of the existence or location of the Underground Facility; and 4. Advise OAR of Designer’s findings, conclusions, and recommendations and provide revised Drawings and Specifications if required. D. OAR is to issue a statement to Contractor regarding the Underground Facility in question and recommend action as appropriate after review of Designer’s findings, conclusions, and recommendations. ARTICLE 6 – BONDS AND INSURANCE ARTICLE 7 – CONTRACTOR’S RESPONSIBILITIES ARTICLE 8 – OTHER WORK AT THE SITE ARTICLE 9 – OWNER’S AND OPT’S RESPONSIBILITIES 9.01 Communications to Contractor A. OPT issues communications to Contractor through OAR except as otherwise provided in the Contract Documents. 9.02 Replacement of Owner’s Project Team Members A. Owner may replace members of the OPT at its discretion. 9.03 Furnish Data A. OPT is to furnish the data required of OPT under the Contract Documents. 9.04 Pay When Due 9.05 Lands and Easements; Reports and Tests A. Owner’s duties with respect to providing lands and easements are described in Paragraph 5.01. OPT will make copies of reports of explorations and tests of subsurface conditions and drawings of physical conditions relating to existing surface or subsurface structures at the Site available to Contractor in accordance with Paragraph 5.03. Excerpt from FORM 00 72 00 GENERAL CONDITIONS for Construction Projects related to design services EXHIBIT D Page 10 of 22 9.06 Insurance 9.07 Modifications 9.08 Inspections, Tests, and Approvals A. OPT’s responsibility with respect to certain inspections, tests, and approvals are described in Paragraph 16.02. 9.09 Limitations on OPT’s Responsibilities A. The OPT does not supervise, direct, or have control or authority over, and is not responsible for Contractor’s means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures of construction, or related safety precautions and programs, or for failure of Contractor to comply with Laws and Regulations applicable to the performance of the Work. OPT is not responsible for Contractor’s failure to perform the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents. 9.10 Undisclosed Hazardous Environmental Condition A. OPT’s responsibility for undisclosed Hazardous Environmental Conditions is described in Paragraph 5.06. 9.11 Compliance with Safety Program A. Contractor is to inform the OPT of its safety programs and OPT is to comply with the specific applicable requirements of this program. ARTICLE 10 – OAR’S AND DESIGNER’S STATUS DURING CONSTRUCTION 10.01 Owner’s Representative A. OAR is Owner’s representative. The duties and responsibilities and the limitations of authority of OAR as Owner’s representative are described in the Contract Documents. 10.02 Visits to Site A. Designer is to make periodic visits to the Site to observe the progress and quality of the Work. Designer is to determine, in general, if the Work is proceeding in accordance with the Contract Documents based on observations made during these visits. Designer is not required to make exhaustive or continuous inspections to check the quality or quantity of the Work. Designer is to inform the OPT of issues or concerns and OAR is to work with Contractor to address these issues or concerns. Designer’s visits and observations are subject to the limitations on Designer’s authority and responsibility described in Paragraphs 9.09 and 10.07. B. OAR is to observe the Work to check the quality and quantity of Work, implement Owner’s quality assurance program, and administer the Contract as Owner’s representative as described in the Contract Documents. OAR’s visits and observations are subject to the limitations on OAR’s authority and responsibility described in Paragraphs 9.09 and 10.07. Excerpt from FORM 00 72 00 GENERAL CONDITIONS for Construction Projects related to design services EXHIBIT D Page 11 of 22 10.03 Resident Project Representatives A. Resident Project Representatives assist OAR in observing the progress and quality of the Work at the Site. The limitations on Resident Project Representatives’ authority and responsibility are described in Paragraphs 9.09 and 10.07. 10.04 Rejecting Defective Work A. OPT has the authority to reject Work in accordance with Article 16. OAR is to issue a Defective Work Notice to Contractor and document when Defective Work has been corrected or accepted in accordance with Article 16. 10.05 Shop Drawings, Modifications and Payments A. Designer’s authority related to Shop Drawings and Samples are described in the Contract Documents. B. Designer’s authority related to design calculations and design drawings submitted in response to a delegation of professional design services are described in Paragraph 7.15. C. OAR and Designer’s authority related to Modifications is described in Article 11. D. OAR’s authority related to Applications for Payment is described in Articles 15 and 17. 10.06 Decisions on Requirements of Contract Documents and Acceptability of Work A. OAR is to render decisions regarding non-technical or contractual / administrative requirements of the Contract Documents and will coordinate the response of the OPT to Contractor. B. Designer is to render decisions regarding the conformance of the Work to the requirements of the Contract Documents. Designer will render a decision to either correct the Defective Work, or accept the Work under the provisions of Paragraph 16.04, if Work does not conform to the Contract Documents. OAR will coordinate the response of the OPT to Contractor. C. OAR will issue a Request for a Change Proposal if a Modification is required. OAR will provide documentation for changes related to the non-technical or contractual / administrative requirements of the Contract Documents. Designer will provide documentation if design related changes are required. D. Contractor may appeal Designer’s decision by submitting a Change Proposal if Contractor does not agree with the Designer’s decision. 10.07 Limitations on OAR’s and Designer’s Authority and Responsibilities A. OPT is not responsible for the acts or omissions of Contractor’s Team. No actions or failure to act, or decisions made in good faith to exercise or not exercise the authority or responsibility available under the Contract Documents creates a duty in contract, tort, or otherwise of the OPT to the Contractor or members of the Contractor’s Team. Excerpt from FORM 00 72 00 GENERAL CONDITIONS for Construction Projects related to design services EXHIBIT D Page 12 of 22 ARTICLE 11 – AMENDING THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS; CHANGES IN THE WORK ARTICLE 12 – CHANGE MANAGEMENT 12.01 Requests for Change Proposal A. Designer will initiate Modifications by issuing a Request for a Change Proposal (RCP). 1. Designer will prepare a description of proposed Modifications. 2. Designer will issue the Request for a Change Proposal form to Contractor. A number will be assigned to the Request for a Change Proposal when issued. 3. Return a Change Proposal in accordance with Paragraph 12.02 to the Designer for evaluation by the OPT. 12.02 Change Proposals A. Submit a Change Proposal (CP) to the Designer for Contractor initiated changes in the Contract Documents or in response to a Request for Change Proposal. 1. Use the Change Proposal form provided. 2. Assign a number to the Change Proposal when issued. 3. Include with the Change Proposal: a. A complete description of the proposed Modification if Contractor initiated or proposed changes to the OPT’s description of the proposed Modification. b. The reason the Modification is requested, if not in response to a Request for a Change Proposal. c. A detailed breakdown of the cost of the change if the Modification requires a change in Contract Price. The itemized breakdown is to include: 1) List of materials and equipment to be installed; 2) Man hours for labor by classification; 3) Equipment used in construction; 4) Consumable supplies, fuels, and materials; 5) Royalties and patent fees; 6) Bonds and insurance; 7) Overhead and profit; 8) Field office costs; 9) Home office cost; and 10) Other items of cost. d. Provide the level of detail outlined in the paragraph above for each Subcontractor or Supplier actually performing the Work if Work is to be provided by a Subcontractor or Supplier. Indicate appropriate Contractor mark-ups for Work Excerpt from FORM 00 72 00 GENERAL CONDITIONS for Construction Projects related to design services EXHIBIT D Page 13 of 22 provided through Subcontractors and Suppliers. Provide the level of detail outline in the paragraph above for self-performed Work. e. Submit Change Proposals that comply with Article 15 for Cost of Work. f. Provide a revised schedule. Show the effect of the change on the Project Schedule and the Contract Times. B. Submit a Change Proposal to the Designer to request a Field Order. C. A Change Proposal is required for all substitutions or deviations from the Contract Documents. D. Request changes to products in accordance with Article 25. 12.03 Designer Will Evaluate Request for Modification A. Designer will issue a Modification per Article 11 if the Change Proposal is acceptable to the Owner. Designer will issue a Change Order or Contract Amendment for any changes in Contract Price or Contract Times. 1. Change Orders and Contract Amendments will be sent to the Contractor for execution with a copy to the Owner recommending approval. A Work Change Directive may be issued if Work needs to progress before the Change Order or Contract Amendment can be authorized by the Owner. 2. Work Change Directives, Change Orders, and Contract Amendments can only be approved by the Owner. a. Work performed on the Change Proposal prior to receiving a Work Change Directive or approval of the Change Order or Contract Amendment is performed at the Contractor’s risk. b. No payment will be made for Work on Change Orders or Contract Amendments until approved by the Owner. B. The Contractor may be informed that the Request for a Change Proposal is not approved and construction is to proceed in accordance with the Contract Documents. ARTICLE 13 – CLAIMS 13.01 Claims 13.02 Claims Process A. Claims must be initiated by written notice. Notice must conspicuously state that it is a notice of a Claim in the subject line or first sentence. Notice must also list the date of first occurrence of the claimed event. B. Claims by Contractor must be in writing and delivered to the Owner, Designer and the OAR within 7 days: 1. After the start of the event giving rise to the Claim; or 2. After a final decision on a Change Proposal has been made. Excerpt from FORM 00 72 00 GENERAL CONDITIONS for Construction Projects related to design services EXHIBIT D Page 14 of 22 C. Claims by Contractor that are not received within the time period provided by section 13.02(B) are waived. Owner may choose to deny such Claims without a formal review. Any Claims by Contractor that are not brought within 90 days following the termination of the Contract are waived and shall be automatically deemed denied. D. Claims by Owner must be submitted by written notice to Contractor. E. The responsibility to substantiate a Claim rests with the entity making the Claim. Claims must contain sufficient detail to allow the other party to fully review the Claim. 1. Claims seeking an adjustment of Contract Price must include the Contractor’s job cost report. Provide additional documentation as requested by OAR. 2. Claims seeking an adjustment of Contract Time must include native schedule files in Primavera or MS Project digital format. Provide additional documentation as requested by OAR. F. Contractor must certify that the Claim is made in good faith, that the supporting data is accurate and complete, and that to the best of Contractor’s knowledge and belief, the relief requested accurately reflects the full compensation to which Contractor is entitled. G. Claims by Contractor against Owner and Claims by Owner against Contractor, including those alleging an error or omission by Designer but excluding those arising under Section 7.12, shall be referred initially to Designer for consideration and recommendation to Owner. H. Designer may review a Claim by Contractor within 30 days of receipt of the Claim and take one or more of the following actions: 1. Request additional supporting data from the party who made the Claim; 2. Issue a recommendation; 3. Suggest a compromise; or 4. Advise the parties that Designer is not able to make a recommendation due to insufficient information or a conflict of interest. I. If the Designer does not take any action, the claim shall be deemed denied. J. The Contractor and the Owner shall seek to resolve the Claim through the exchange of information and direct negotiations. If no agreement is reached within 90 days, the Claim shall be deemed denied. The Owner and Contractor may extend the time for resolving the Claim by mutual agreement. Notify OAR of any actions taken on a Claim. K. Owner and Contractor may mutually agree to mediate the underlying dispute at any time after a recommendation is issued by the Designer. Excerpt from FORM 00 72 00 GENERAL CONDITIONS for Construction Projects related to design services EXHIBIT D Page 15 of 22 ARTICLE 14 – PREVAILING WAGE RATE REQUIREMENTS ARTICLE 15 – COST OF THE WORK; ALLOWANCES; UNIT PRICE WORK ARTICLE 16 – TESTS AND INSPECTIONS; CORRECTION, REMOVAL, OR ACCEPTANCE OF DEFECTIVE WORK ARTICLE 17 – PAYMENTS TO CONTRACTOR; SET-OFFS; COMPLETION; CORRECTION PERIOD ARTICLE 18 – SUSPENSION OF WORK AND TERMINATION ARTICLE 19 – PROJECT MANAGEMENT ARTICLE 20 – PROJECT COORDINATION 20.01 Work Included 20.02 Document Submittal 20.03 Communication During Project A. The OAR is to be the first point of contact for all parties on matters concerning this Project. B. The Designer will coordinate correspondence concerning: 1. Documents, including Applications for Payment. 2. Clarification and interpretation of the Contract Documents. 3. Contract Modifications. 4. Observation of Work and testing. 5. Claims. 20.04 Requests for Information A. Submit Request for Information (RFI) to the Designer to obtain additional information or clarification of the Contract Documents. 1. Submit a separate RFI for each item on the form provided. 2. Attach adequate information to permit a written response without further clarification. Designer will return requests that do not have adequate information to the Contractor for additional information. Contractor is responsible for all delays resulting from multiple document submittals due to inadequate information. 3. A response will be made when adequate information is provided. Response will be made on the RFI form or in attached information. B. Response to an RFI is given to provide additional information, interpretation, or clarification of the requirements of the Contract Documents, and does not modify the Contract Documents. C. Designer will initiate a Request for a Change Proposal (RCP) per Article 12 if the RFI indicates that a Contract Modification is required. Excerpt from FORM 00 72 00 GENERAL CONDITIONS for Construction Projects related to design services EXHIBIT D Page 16 of 22 ARTICLE 21 – QUALITY MANAGEMENT ARTICLE 22 – FINAL RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES ARTICLE 23 – MINORITY/MBE/DBE PARTICIPATION POLICY ARTICLE 24 – DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT ARTICLE 25 – SHOP DRAWINGS 25.01 Work Included A. Shop Drawings are required for those products that cannot adequately be described in the Contract Documents to allow fabrication, erection, or installation of the product without additional detailed information from the Supplier. B. Submit Shop Drawings as required by the Contract Documents and as reasonably requested by the OPT to: 1. Record the products incorporated into the Project for the Owner; 2. Provide detailed information for the products proposed for the Project regarding their fabrication, installation, commissioning, and testing; and 3. Allow the Designer to advise the Owner if products proposed for the Project by the Contractor conform, in general, to the design concepts of the Contract Documents. 25.02 Quality Assurance 25.03 Contractor’s Responsibilities 25.04 Shop Drawing Requirements A. Provide adequate information in Shop Drawings and Samples so Designer can: 1. Assist the Owner in selecting colors, textures, or other aesthetic features. 2. Compare the proposed features of the product with the specified features and advise Owner that the product does, in general, conform to the Contract Documents. 3. Compare the performance features of the proposed product with those specified and advise the Owner that the product does, in general, conform to the performance criteria specified in the Contract Documents. 4. Review required certifications, guarantees, warranties, and service agreements for compliance with the Contract Documents. Excerpt from FORM 00 72 00 GENERAL CONDITIONS for Construction Projects related to design services EXHIBIT D Page 17 of 22 25.05 Special Certifications and Reports 25.06 Warranties and Guarantees 25.07 Shop Drawing Submittal Procedures 25.08 Sample and Mockup Submittal Procedures 25.09 Requests for Deviation 25.10 Designer Responsibilities A. Shop Drawings will be received by the Designer. Designer will log the documents and review per this Article for general conformance with the Contract Documents. 1. Designer’s review and approval will be only to determine if the products described in the Shop Drawing or Sample will, after installation or incorporation into the Work, conform to the information given in the Contract Documents and be compatible with the design concept of the completed Project as a functioning whole as indicated by the Contract Documents. 2. Designer’s review and approval will not extend to means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures of construction or to safety precautions or programs incident thereto. 3. Designer’s review and approval of a separate item as such will not indicate approval of the assembly in which the item functions. B. Comments will be made on items called to the attention of the Designer for review and comment. Any marks made by the Designer do not constitute a blanket review of the document submittal or relieve the Contractor from responsibility for errors or deviations from the Contract requirements. 1. Designer will respond to Contractor’s markups by either making markups directly in the Shop Drawings file using the color green or by attaching a Document Review Comments form with review comments. 2. Shop Drawings that are reviewed will be returned with one or more of the following status designations: a. Approved: Shop Drawing is found to be acceptable as submitted. b. Approved as Noted: Shop Drawing is Approved so long as corrections or notations made by Designer are incorporated into the Show Drawing. c. Not Approved: Shop Drawing or products described are not acceptable. 3. Shop Drawing will also be designated for one of the following actions: a. Final distribution: Shop Drawing is acceptable without further action and has been filed as a record document. b. Shop Drawing not required: A Shop Drawing was not required by the Contract Documents. Resubmit the document per Article 26. Excerpt from FORM 00 72 00 GENERAL CONDITIONS for Construction Projects related to design services EXHIBIT D Page 18 of 22 c. Cancelled: This action indicates that for some reason, the Shop Drawing is to be removed from consideration and all efforts regarding the processing of that document are to cease. d. Revise and resubmit: Shop Drawing has deviations from the Contract Documents, significant errors, or is inadequate and must be revised and resubmitted for subsequent review. e. Resubmit with corrections made: Shop Drawing is “Approved as Noted,” but has significant markups. Make correction and notations to provide a revised document with markup incorporated into the original document so that no markups are required. f. Returned without review due to excessive deficiencies: Document does not meet the requirement of the Specifications for presentation or content to the point where continuing to review the document would be counterproductive to the review process or clearly does not meet the requirements of the Contract Documents. Revise the Shop Drawing to comply with the requirements of this Section and resubmit. g. Actions a through c will close out the Shop Drawing review process and no further action is required as a Shop Drawing. Actions d through f require follow up action to close out the review process. 4. Drawings with a significant or substantial number of markings by the Contractor may be marked “Approved as Noted” and “Resubmit with corrections made.” These drawings are to be revised to provide a clean record of the Shop Drawing. Proceed with ordering products as the documents are revised. 5. Dimensions or other data that does not appear to conform to the Contract Documents will be marked as “At Variance With” (AVW) the Contract Documents or other information provided. The Contractor is to make revisions as appropriate to comply with the Contract Documents. C. Bring deviations to the Shop Drawings to the attention of the Designer for approval by using the Shop Drawing Deviation Request form. Use a single line for each requested deviation so the Status and Action for each deviation can be determined for that requested deviation. If approval or rejection of a requested deviation will impact other requested deviations, then all related deviations should be included in that requested deviation line so the status and action can be determined on the requested deviation as a whole. D. Requested deviations will be reviewed as possible Modification to the Contract Documents. 1. A Requested deviation will be rejected as “Not Approved” if the requested deviation is unacceptable. Contractor is to revise and resubmit the Shop Drawing with corrections for approval. 2. A Field Order will be issued by the Designer for deviations approved by the Designer if the requested deviation is acceptable and if the requested deviation will not result in a change in Contract Price or Contract Times. Requested deviations from the Contract Documents may only be approved by Field Order. 3. A requested deviation will be rejected if the requested deviation is acceptable but the requested deviation will or should result in a change in Contract Price or Contract Times. Excerpt from FORM 00 72 00 GENERAL CONDITIONS for Construction Projects related to design services EXHIBIT D Page 19 of 22 Submit any requested deviation that requires a change in Contract Price or Contract Times as a Change Proposal for approval prior to resubmitting the Shop Drawing. E. Contractor is to resubmit the Shop Drawing until it is acceptable and marked Approved or Approved as Noted and is assigned an action per Paragraph 25.10.B that indicates that the Shop Drawing process is closed. F. Information that is submitted as a Shop Drawings that should be submitted as Record Data or other type of document, or is not required may be returned without review, or may be deleted. No further action is required and the Shop Drawing process for this document will be closed. ARTICLE 26 – RECORD DATA 26.01 Work Included 26.02 Quality Assurance 26.03 Contractor’s Responsibilities 26.04 Record Data Requirements 26.05 Special Certifications and Reports 26.06 Warranties and Guarantees 26.07 Record Data Submittal Procedures 26.08 Designer’s Responsibilities A. Record Data will be received by the Designer, logged, and provided to Owner as the Project record. 1. Record Data may be reviewed to see that the information provided is adequate for the purpose intended. Record Data not meeting the requirements of Paragraph 26.02 may be rejected as unacceptable. 2. Record Data is not reviewed for compliance with the Contract Documents. Comments may be returned if deviations from the Contract Documents are noted during the cursory review performed to see that the information is adequate. 3. Contractor’s responsibility for full compliance with the Contract Documents is not relieved by the review of Record Data. Contract modifications can only be approved by a Modification. B. Designer may take the following action in processing Record Data: 1. File Record Data as received if the cursory review indicates that the document meets the requirements of Paragraph 26.02. Document will be given the status of “Filed as Received” and no further action is required on that Record Data. 2. Reject the Record Data for one of the following reasons: a. The document submittal requirements of the Contract Documents indicate that the document submitted as Record Data should have been submitted as a Shop Excerpt from FORM 00 72 00 GENERAL CONDITIONS for Construction Projects related to design services EXHIBIT D Page 20 of 22 Drawing. The Record Data will be marked “Rejected” and “Submit Shop Drawing.” No further action is required on this document as Record Data and the Record Data process will be closed. Resubmit the document as a Shop Drawing per Article 25. b. The cursory review indicates that the document does not meet the requirements of Paragraph 26.02. The Record Data will be marked “Rejected” and “Revise and Resubmit.” Contractor is to resubmit the Record Data until it is acceptable and marked “Filed as Received.” When Record Data is filed, no further action is required and the Record Data process will be closed. c. The Record Data is not required by the Contract Documents nor is the Record Data applicable to the Project. The Record Data will be marked “Rejected” and “Cancel - Not Required.” No further action is required and the Record Data process will be closed. C. Contractor is to resubmit the Record Data until it is acceptable and marked “Filed as Received.” ARTICLE 27 – CONSTRUCTION PROGRESS SCHEDULE ARTICLE 28 – VIDEO AND PHOTOGRAPHIC DOCUMENTATION ARTICLE 29 – EXECUTION AND CLOSEOUT 29.01 Substantial Completion A. Notify the Designer that the Work or a designated portion of the Work is substantially complete per the General Conditions. Include a list of the items remaining to be completed or corrected before the Project will be considered to be complete. B. OPT will visit the Site to observe the Work within a reasonable time after notification is received to determine the status of the Project. C. Designer will notify the Contractor that the Work is either substantially complete or that additional Work must be performed before the Project will be considered substantially complete. 1. Designer will notify the Contractor of items that must be completed before the Project will be considered substantially complete. 2. Correct the noted deficiencies in the Work. 3. Notify the Designer when the items of Work in the Designer’s notice have been completed. 4. OPT will revisit the Site and repeat the process. 5. Designer will issue a Certificate of Substantial Completion to the Contractor when the OPT considers the Project to be substantially complete. The Certificate will include a tentative list of items to be corrected before Final Payment will be recommended. 6. Review the list and notify the Designer of any objections to items on the list within 10 days after receiving the Certificate of Substantial Completion. Excerpt from FORM 00 72 00 GENERAL CONDITIONS for Construction Projects related to design services EXHIBIT D Page 21 of 22 29.02 Final Inspections A. Notify the Designer when: 1. Work has been completed in compliance with the Contract Documents; 2. Equipment and systems have been tested per Contract Documents and are fully operational; 3. Final Operations and Maintenance Manuals have been provided to the Owner and all operator training has been completed; 4. Specified spare parts and special tools have been provided; and 5. Work is complete and ready for final inspection. B. OPT will visit the Site to determine if the Project is complete and ready for Final Payment within a reasonable time after the notice is received. C. Designer will notify the Contractor that the Project is complete or will notify the Contractor that Work is Defective. D. Take immediate steps to correct Defective Work. Notify the Designer when Defective Work has corrected. OPT will visit the Site to determine if the Project is complete and the Work is acceptable. Designer will notify the Contractor that the Project is complete or will notify the Contractor that Work is Defective. E. Submit the Request for Final Payment with the closeout documents described in Paragraph 29.06 if notified that the Project is complete and the Work is acceptable. ARTICLE 30 – MISCELLANEOUS END OF SECTION Excerpt from FORM 00 72 00 GENERAL CONDITIONS for Construction Projects related to design services EXHIBIT D Page 22 of 22 AGENDA MEMORANDUM City Council Meeting of February 25, 2020 DATE: February 10, 2020 TO: Peter Zanoni, City Manager FROM: Arlene Medrano, Business Liaison arlenem@cctexas.com 361-826-3356 CAPTION: Resolution authorizing execution of an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement with Del Mar College for a 20-year participation in the North Beach Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone Number Four for a period ending December 31, 2039. SUMMARY: The City and Del Mar College desire to participate in the Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone Number Four for the purposes of development in the reinvestment zone area, commonly known as North Beach, for their mutual benefit and the benefit of their citizens. BACKGROUND AND FINDINGS: Del Mar College agrees to participate in TIRZ #4 by contributing into the Tax Increment Fund one hundred percent (100%) of its tax increment each tax year from 2020 through 2028 and seventy-five percent (75%) of its tax increment each tax year f rom 2029 through 2038 during the term of this Agreement on the Captured Appraised Value of real property within the Reinvestment Zone. The first tax year (2019) of Del Mar’s participation sets the base values from which future increment property revenue will be based. The agreement becomes effective as of the date of the final signature , and remains in effect through December 31, 2039, or the date on which the TIRZ #4 Project and Financing Plan has been fully implemented and all Project Costs paid in full. The first payment of tax increment by Del Mar under this agreement is based upon the tax increment base for the property within the Zone being determined as of January 1, 2019 (tax year 2019 – which is the most recent certified roll), and the payment shall be based upon those taxes as levied in tax year 2020. The last payment of tax increment by the taxing units under this Agreement is for those taxes levied in the tax year 2038. Authorizing Interlocal Cooperation Agreement with Del Mar College for 20-year participation in North Beach Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone Number Four (TIRZ #4) As a contributing taxing unit, Del Mar College shall have the right to appoint one member to the Reinvestment Zone Board of Directors. At their February 4, 2020 Regular Meeting, the Del Mar College Board of Regents appointed chairman, Carol A. Scott, to the TIRZ #4 Board. As such and under the authority of Texas Tax Code Chapter 311.009, Mrs. Scott is a member of the TIRZ #4 Board by appointment of the Del Mar Board of Regents, and no action is required on this topic from either the TIRZ #4 Board or the City Council. Following City Council’s approval of the TIRZ #4 Interlocal Agreement with Del Mar College, City staff will present to the TIRZ #4 Board and to City Council an amendment to the Project & Financing Plan to increase the projected increment revenue and projected project costs to include Del Mar’s participation. This amendment will be presented in March to the TIRZ #4 Board first for approval, and then to City Council. ALTERNATIVES: City Council could choose not to authorize this interlocal agreement, but then Del Mar College would not be authorized to participate in the TIRZ #4, and the Zone’s ability to complete projects will be decelerated. FISCAL IMPACT: Del Mar College will participate at a rate of 100% of its tax increment for the first nine years and 75% of its tax increment for the next ten years. The projected total contribution from Del Mar College over the life of the TIRZ is $9,372,143. This amounts to 22% of the total anticipated revenue of $42,139,811 over the life of the reinvestment zone. The City’s twenty-year contribution is capped at $20 million, and Nueces County’s contribution is estimated to be $12,767,668 for a total TIRZ #4 estimated increment of $42,139,811. Funding Detail: Fund: 1114 - TIF No. 4 North beach Organization/Activity: 11020 – General Government Revenue Mission Element: 888- Revenue Project # (CIP Only): N/A Account: 300040- RIVZ current taxes- Del Mar RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement with Del Mar College. The participation of Del Mar College in the Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone is crucial for the success and implementation of the TIRZ #4 Project and Financing Plan ; and thus, the revitalization of North Beach. LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution Interlocal Cooperation Agreement Resolution authorizing execution of an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement with Del Mar College for a 20-year participation in the North Beach Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone Number Four for a period ending December 31, 2039. Be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas: SECTION 1. That the City Manager or designee is authorized to execute an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement with Del Mar College for contribution to the Reinvestment Zone No. 4, City of Corpus Christi, Texas tax increment fund. SECTION 2. This Resolution shall take effect and be in full force immediately after its adoption by the City Council. PASSED AND APPROVED on the ______ day of _________, 20 20: Joe McComb _______________________ Roland Barrera _______________________ Rudy Garza _______________________ Paulette M. Guajardo _______________________ Gil Hernandez _______________________ Michael Hunter _______________________ Ben Molina _______________________ Everett Roy _______________________ Greg Smith _______________________ ATTEST: CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI Rebecca Huerta Joe McComb City Secretary Mayor DATE: January 16, 2020 TO: Peter Zanoni, City Manager FROM: Al Raymond, Director Development Services alraymond@cctexas.com (361) 826- 3575 CAPTION: Resolution authorizing a developer participation agreement with MPM Development, LP to reimburse the developer up to $104,230.50 for the City’s share of the cost to extend Bill Witt Drive approximately 398 linear feet. (District 5) SUMMARY: MPM Development, LP is developing a new residential subdivision and is required to construct a new residential street. The new street will be named Bill Witt Drive and in order to provide greater access to Bill Witt Park the developer, at the city’s request, has agreed to enter into a developer participation agreement to oversize the planned street and extend a linear park to allow for greater access to Bill Witt Park. The estimated one-time cost of the oversizing portion of the new street, including curb and gutter, and a linear park is $104,230.50. BACKGROUND AND FINDINGS: The Developer, MPM Development, LP has requested reimbursement through a developer participation agreement for the oversizing construction of a new street named Bill Witt Drive. The new street is being constructed in conjunction with the residential subdivision named Crosswind Estates Unit 2. The developer is required to construct Bill Witt Drive to meet the requirements of a residential cross section street. After a meeting with the Assistant Director of Parks Department and Assistant Director of Development Services Department, the developer agreed to oversize the new street to C-1 standards and construct a linear park that will connect to the subdivision’s internal streets and will allow for greater access to the recreation fields at Bill Witt Park. The developer agreed to the oversizing of portions of the project provided the cost for the oversizing would be reimbursed by the city. The estimated one-time cost for the oversizing portion of the new street and the linear park is $104,230.50 and the oversizing portion of Bill Witt Drive and the linear park improvements are eligible for reimbursement of the construction costs per UDC Section 8.4. UDC Section 8.3.11.C.3 provides that the City may require any local access street Participation Agreement with MPM Development, LP AGENDA MEMORANDUM Resolution for the City Council Meeting 2/25/2020 built adjacent to a park to be constructed to collector width along the park frontage to ensure access and prevent traffic congestion, and the developer is entitled to oversize participation in such situations. The proposed residential collector street will provide access to and is adjacent to Bill Witt Park. It will adjoin a new linear park section along the drainage channel being dedicated by the developer (3,678 square feet). ALTERNATIVES: This project will extend a new street and will provide greater access to Bill Witt Park. An alternative to utilizing Developer Participation funds from Bond 2012 to construct the required street improvements would be to construct the new street under a CIP project. This option would most likely delay the new street construction until the required funding for the street improvements could be programmed into the CIP budget, and would most likely impact the developer’s ability to build out his planned residential subdivision in a timely manner. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The $104,230.50 in funding for this developer participation agreement come from funds that have been earmarked during a City Bond indicative to improve existing or construct new city streets and other related improvements. Funding Detail: Fund: Bond 2012 Organization/Activity: 11000 Management & Budget (Ops) Mission Element: 052 – Expansion of street system Project # (CIP Only): 20244 Pier K Bill Witt Drive Account: 550910 – Construction Contract RECOMMENDATION: The request in in accordance with UDC Section 8.4 City Participation in Streets and Drainage Crossings. The oversizing improvements to the Bill Witt Drive and other improvements will provide greater access to Bill Witt Park and will allow citizens who live south of the park the ability to easily access the parks recreation fields. Staff recommends approval. LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution (with exhibit) Presentation Location Map Page 1 of 2 Resolution authorizing a developer participation agreement with MPM Development, LP, to reimburse the developer up to $104,230.50 for the City’s share of the cost to extend Bill Witt Drive approximately 398 linear feet WHEREAS, the City has determined the agreement will carry out the purpose of the Unified Development Code; BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS: SECT ION 1. The City Manage r, o r de sig nee, is authorize d to execute a developer part icipat io n agreemen t (“Agreement”) with MP M Developmen t, LP ., (“De ve loper”), f o r the City’s port io n of the cost o f B ill Whitt Drive in cludin g a ll rela ted appurt enan ce s fo r d eve lopmen t o f Cro sswind E sta te s Unit 2 Subd ivision, Co rpus Ch risti, Nuece s County, Texas. PASSED AND APPROVED on the ______ day of _________, 2020: Joe McComb Rudy Garza Paulette Guajardo Michael Hunter Debbie Lindsey-Opel Ben Molina Everett Roy Lucy Rubio Greg Smith ATTEST: THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI Rebecca Huerta Joe McComb City Secretary Mayor PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT For Oversizing Streets and Drainage Crossing Per UDC §8.4 STATE OF TEXAS § § COUNTY OF NUECES § This PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is entered into between the City of Corpus Christi ("City"), a Texas home-rule municipal corporation, acting by and through its City Manager, or designee, and MPM Development LP, ("Developer"), a Texas Limited Partnership. WHEREAS, the Owner owns certain real property located in Corpus Christi, Nueces County, Texas, being a portion out of Lots 28 and 29, Section 21, Flour Bluff and Encinal Farm and Garden Tracts (the "Property"), and the Owner desires to develop and plat the Property designated on Exhibit 1 of this Agreement, which exhibit is attached to and incorporated in this Agreement by reference, to be known as Crosswind Estates Unit 2 ("Plat"); WHEREAS, as a condition of the Plat, the Developer/Owner is required to expand, extend, and construct Bill Witt Drive approximately 398 linear feet and associated appendas depicted on and in accordance with the improvement requirements (the "Roadway Extension") set forth in Exhibit 2, which exhibit is attached to and incorporated in this Agreement by reference; WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the City to have the public street infrastructure installed by the Developer in conjunction with the Owner's final Plat; WHEREAS, Section 212.071 of the Texas Local Government Code authorizes a municipality to make a contract with a developer of a subdivision or land in the municipality to construct public improvements related to the subdivision or land; and WHEREAS, this Agreement is made pursuant to Section 212.071 & 212.072 of the Texas Local Government Code and Article 8, Section 8.4.1, of the Unified Development Code of the City of Corpus Christi NOW, THEREFORE, in order to provide a coordinated public street construction and improvement project, the City and the Developer agree as follows: Section 1. RECITALS. The parties agree that the language contained in the preamble of this Agreement is substantive in nature, is incorporated into this Agreement by reference, and has been relied on by both parties in entering into and executing this Agreement. Section 2. DEVELOPER PARTICIPATION. Subject to the terms of this Agreement, Exhibit 1, and Exhibit 2, the Developer will construct the Roadway Extension for and on behalf of the City in accordance with the plans and specifications approved in advance of construction by City Council Presentation February 18, 2020 Participation Agreement for Crosswind Estates Unit 2 1 2 Aerial Overview Bill Witt ParkBill Witt Drive 3 Street Cross Section Oversizing portion of Bill Witt Drive Linear Park Portion N Approval This request is in accordance with Section 8.4 of the UDC and the applicant has paid the $610.00 application fee. 4 Staff Recommendation DATE: February 14, 2020 TO: Peter Zanoni, City Manager FROM: Tammy Embrey, Director Intergovernmental Relations tammye@cctexas.com 361-826-3622 CAPTION: Resolution authorizing the submittal of a grant application in the amount of $919,500.00 to the Office of the Governor for funding from the Texas Military Preparedness Commission’s Defense Economic Adjustment Assistance Grant Program with in-kind services from the City for $92,000.00 to fund City staff time for grant administration services. SUMMARY: The Defense Economic Adjustment Assistance Grant (DEAAG) funded portion of the project is to construct and stripe a 30-foot wide concrete roadway (two 12-foot travel lanes and two 3- foot shoulders) and restripe the helicopter parking and landing areas in the flight line to ensure flight/ground safety and efficient use of available area to meet a wide range of mission requirements. BACKGROUND AND FINDINGS: The Texas Legislature appropriated $30 million in this biennia to the Texas Military Preparedness Commission DEAAG fund to assist defense communities that have been impacted by a past or future Base Realignment and Closure action. The DEAAG application period is now open with$15 million available for this round. The deadline for submission of grant applications to the TMPC is Friday, February 28, 2020. The Corpus Christi Army Depot (CCAD) is one of 40 tenant commands within Naval Air Station Corpus Christi with more than 75 plus buildings on the base. Because of the sensitive homeland security activities performed at CCAD, it is imperative to further protect CCAD buildings with increased security technology and fencing to limit access to active duty, civilian and contractor personnel. The current pavement markings in Corpus Christi Army Depot’s flight line, which do not meet the Department of Defense’s Unified Facilities Criteria for Airfield and Heliport Planning and Design, are faded and create potential safety concerns for aircraft operations. The flight line has a failing security system that can no longer preclude/deny entry to critical facilities by unauthorized persons. This impacts CCAD legal and operational risk level, mitigating theft and criminal behavior and improving Resolution to submit DEAAG Grant Application to the Office of the Governor AGENDA MEMORANDUM Action Item for the City Council Meeting February 25, 2020 employee safety and security. The proposed project is to construct and stripe a roadway and restripe the helicopter parking and landing areas in the flight line to ensure flight/ground safety and efficient use of available area to meet a wide range of mission requirements. Also, the proposed project is to install the security elements along the flight line with new fencing and gates to impede, channel or stop unauthorized pedestrian and vehicular traffic. The new security enhancements funded by CCAD as match for this project will continue the security improvements of CCAD facilities funded by the 2019 DEAAG-funded project and force protection initiatives funded at Naval Air Station Corpus Christi through the Texas Military Value Revolving Loan Fund, DEAAG and Navy funds. The entire project is an important force protection measure taken to mitigate hostile actions against DoD personnel (to include family members), resources, facilities, and critical information. Improving the safety and security of the flight line is critical as CCAD begins to ramp up its repair and maintenance work on new Army aircraft platforms, such as the UH60V helicopter, and seeks to attract additional workload, such as CH47. The security enhancement initiative, funded in part by DEAAG in 2019 and proposed to continue in this application, ensures the security of key military equipment and personnel. Aged markings and flight line infrastructure degrade CCAD’s ability to ensure safe aircraft and equipment movement and poses a challenge to surging aircraft numbers, if required. In the future, as the Army evaluates locations for additional aircraft workload, issues such as safe movement and security of assets are likely to be essential facility requirements, especially for programs with newer technologies. To adequately prepare for the potential surge in maintenance and repair workload that may come to CCAD in the future, the optimum time to implement the flight line security enhancement project is now in 2020. This project is a continuation of the strong partnership between the City, the Navy and the Army to make security improvement at the base. Perimeter fencing and a commercial vehicle inspection station were funded through a Texas Military Preparedness Commission loan. Security Enclave fencing of CCAD facilities and the extension of a redundant water line into NASCC along Ocean Drive from the university was funded by a previous DEAAG award. The community is committed to sustaining and growing the missions of both NASCC and CCAD and staff believes this application will be an important tool to make that happen. PROJECT COST LEVERAGE DOLLARS PERCENTAGE DEAAG $ 919,500 30.650 CCAD $ 1,950,000.00 65.000 NASCC $ 38,275.00 1.276 CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI $ 92,000.00 3.067 ALTERNATIVES: Council may choose to not approve the resolution resulting in a need for CCAD to find alternative funding for this project. FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact for FY2020 includes in-kind services from the City for $92,000.00 to fund City staff time which will cover Engineering services and grant administration for the project. Funding Detail: Fund: 3542-ST2007A-ITMPCGO Organization/Activity: Mission Element: Project # (CIP Only): 500030 Account: RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the resolution. LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Aerial View of Preliminary Site plan Aerial View of Proposed project vs previous Enclave Project Resolution authorizing the submittal of a grant application totaling $919,500 to the Office of the Governor for funding from the Texas Military Preparedness Commission’s Defense Economic Adjustment Assistance Grant Program with and in-kind contribution from the city of $92,000 to fund City staff time for grant administration services. WHEREAS, With 15 major installations and the Army Futures Command, numerous headquarters, open spaces for realistic training, low cost of living and outstanding support to military and families, Texas has a long, significant and proud history of partnership with the defense of our nation; and WHEREAS, active duty and reserve installations across the branches of service in Texas have an economic impact of roughly $150 billion to the Texas economy per year and 255,000 uniformed and civilian employees which generates a significant amount of sales tax revenue for the State; and WHEREAS, these military installations are also part of the fabric of many communities and are a source of great pride, provide skilled workforce, add to population growth, and have significant economic impact; and WHEREAS, Naval Air Station Corpus Christi (NASCC) and the Corpus Christi Army Depot (CCAD) have an estimated employment of more than 9,400 full-time and contract employees making CCAD the largest employer in the City and NASCC the sixth largest; and WHEREAS, CCAD is the premiere rotary wing aircraft and component repair facility in the world which was established in 1961 to ensure aviation readiness through overhaul, repair, modification, retrofit, testing, recapitalization, and modernization of helicopters, engines and components using the expertise of civilian artisans who take aging aircraft and transform them into practically new, fully-modernized helicopters packed with additional capabilities and cutting-edge technologies to handle anything on the battlefield; and WHEREAS, CCAD is designated as a Center of Industrial and Technical Excellence for rotary wing aircraft, CCAD has completed world-class maintenance on more than more than 544 aircraft; approximately 3,000 engines and nearly 112,000 helicopter components since 2003 for the UH-60 Black Hawk, CH-47 Chinook, AH-64 Apache, OH-58 Kiowa and the Air Force HH- 60 Pave Hawk. This effort includes world-wide, on-site field maintenance teams, analytical crash investigations and chemical material process facilities; and WHEREAS, CCAD serves as a depot training base for active duty Army and reserve units. CCAD is a valuable resource for aviation and a critical part of the Army's Organic Industrial Base (OIB) as its personnel not only repair damaged aircraft, but extend the lives of existing aircraft by restoring and customizing each aircraft, engine, or part to meet the unique requirements of every mission. CCAD’s helicopters and components are critical to bases around the U.S., including Forts Bliss, Campbell, Carson, Hood, and Rucker, and bases around the world, including Afghanistan, Korea, and Germany; and WHEREAS, CCAD is one of 40 tenant commands within Naval Air Station Corpus Christi with more than 75 plus buildings on the base. Because of the sensitive homeland security activities performed at CCAD, it is imperative to enclave CCAD buildings to limit access to active duty, civilian and contractor personnel. Currently, there is no perimeter fencing, controlled access gates, and limited security cameras to secure the CCAD flight line. Besides the economic value of the components, parts and equipment, the greater concern is preserving national defense activities; and WHEREAS, the current flight line pavement markings in CCAD’s flight line are faded and create potential safety concerns for aircraft operations. Also, the flight line has a failing security system that can no longer preclude/deny entry to critical facilities by unauthorized persons. There have been three significant incidences of authorized base access in the past two years. This impacts CCAD legal and operational risk level mitigating theft and criminal behavior and improving employee safety and security; and WHEREAS, the Texas Legislature appropriated $30 million in the FY20-FY 21 biennia to the Texas Military Preparedness Commission (TMPC) Defense Economic Adjustment Assistance Grant (DEAAG) fund to assist defense communities that have been, or may potentially be, impacted by a past or future BRAC action, to obtain economic assistance to mitigate or prevent or otherwise positively affect their local economy through funded projects. The DEAAG application period is now open and $15 million is available for this round. The TMPC deadline for submitting DEAAG applications is February 28, 2020; and WHEREAS, CCAD is aggressively leveraging this project with one million nine hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($1,950,000) for additional safety and security improvements at CCAD facilities and hangars and Naval Air Station Corpus Christi is contribution more than $38,000 in kind services to the project. The City of Corpus Christi will make an in-kind contribution of approximately $92,000 in engineering service costs and grant administration services. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS: The City Manager, or designee, is authorized to submit a grant application totaling up to nine hundred nineteen thousand five hundred dollars ($919,500) to the Office of the Governor for funding from the Texas Military Preparedness Commission’s Defense Economic Adjustment Assistance Grant Program for the Corpus Christi Army Depot Flight Line Security Enhancement Project. PASSED AND APPROVED on the ______ day of _________, 2020: Joe McComb _______________________ Roland Barrera _______________________ Rudy Garza _______________________ Paulette M. Guajardo ______________________ Gil Hernandez _______________________ Michael Hunter _______________________ Ben Molina _______________________ Everett Roy _______________________ Greg Smith _______________________ ATTEST: CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI Rebecca Huerta Joe McComb City Secretary Mayor 76' (TYP) 111'113'110' R50' 24' (TYP)245' 225'255'U:\Corpus Christi\200035 Bond 2020 MSA-Feasibility Studies\010 TA 1-CCAD DEAAG Flight Line Roadway\20-Drawings\Exhibits-Imagery\CCAD New Flight Line Roadway 02-18-2020.dwgTuesday February 18, 2020, 4:19pm, P.E.DATE:81986LICENSE NO.:D. SCOTT JONESBY:2/18/2020THIS DOCUMENT IS FOR INFORMATION ONLYAND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION,BIDDING, PERMIT OR OTHER UNAUTHORIZEDPURPOSES. THESE DOCUMENTS/PLANS WEREAUTHORIZED TO BE RELEASEDDATEDATECITY PROJECT # RECORD DRAWING NO. SHEET REVISION NO.ofBYDESCRIPTIONREVISION NO.DESCRIPTIONBY20245ACORPUS CHRISTI ARMY DEPOTDEAAG FLIGHT LINE SAFETYCORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS801 NAVIGATION, SUITE 300CORPUS CHRISTI, TX 78408PH. (361) 883-1984FAX (361) 883-1986TBPE FIRM NO. F-366TBPLS FIRM NO. 10126500WWW.LNVINC.COMengineerssurveyorsarchitects11EXHIBIT 'B'PRELIMINARY SITE PLANFLIGHT LINE ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS 20' 25'30'30'30'30'30'30' NEW CAMERA POLE ON CONCRETE PAD 40' 20' 40' 40' 30' 40' IT1 IT2 T1 T2 T3 C1 G4 G1 IT3 IT4 IT5 IT6 IT7 IT8IT9IT10IT11 T4 T5 T6T7 T8T9 C2C3 G2 G3 G5 G6 G7 G8 G9 G10 G11G12 PP-A-1 G25 G24 PDP-2 G29 G28 ASRS G33 G32 CO R P U S CHRIS T I A RMY D E P O T PREVIOUS DEAAG PROJECT NEW PROPOSED ENCLAVE (CCAD CONTRIBUTION) NOTES: FENCING SHALL BE SECURITY TYPE FENCING WITH TOP GUARD IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE UFC. Boundary of New Proposed Enclave (CCAD Contribution) Boundary of Previous 2019 DEAAG Project AGENDA MEMORANDUM Action Item for City Council Meeting February 25, 2020 DATE: 2/19/2020 TO: Peter Zanoni, City Manager FROM: Daniel McGinn, AICP, Director of Planning and ESI DanielMc@cctexas.com 361-826-7011 Rudy Bentancourt, Director of Housing and Community Development RudyB@cctexas.com 361-826-3021 CAPTION: Resolution of the City Council of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas identifying an affordable housing project known as Fishpond at Fitzgerald, to be developed by FishPond Development, LLC, as a project which contributes most significantly to the City’s con certed revitalization efforts in a designated area SUMMARY: The purpose of the Resolution is to satisfy a requirement set forth by the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs’ 2020 Qualified Allocation Plan Section 11.9(d)(7) for 9% Housing Tax Credits, which indicates that maximum points are given for a resolution from the Governing Body of a municipality (City of Corpus Christi) which identifies a project which contributes most significantly to the City’s concerted revitalization efforts in the designated area – TIRZ #3. BACKGROUND AND FINDINGS: The City of Corpus Christi’s Housing and Community Development Department has received a request for a Resolution to the application and development of an affordable rental housing project. The development is hereby requesting a resolution which identifies the proposed project as one which will contribute most significantly to the City’s concerted revitalization efforts in TIRZ #3. The Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs’ (TDHCA) 2020 Qualified Allocation Plan’s Section 11.9(d)(7) for 9% Housing Tax Credits indicates that in order to receive two (2) points for the application, a Resolution identifying this area is required. FishPond at Fitzgerald, once constructed, will be an Affordable Housing Development located on the Southwest corner of Fitzgerald and North Chaparral, Corpus Christi, TX 78401. Fish Pond Development, LLC. proposes the construction of approximately 100 apartments of which 86 units would serve families at or below 60% of the Area Median Income. On February 11, 2020, the City Council passed a Resolution of Support for the FishPond at Fitzgerald project, Resolution identifying an Affordable Housing development as contributing most significantly to the revitalization efforts of a designated area to satisfy the requirement set forth by the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs (TDHCA) allowing it to receive maximum points for the support category. ALTERNATIVES: Denying the Resolution. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact for this item. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Resolution as written. LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution – FishPond at Fitzgerald Resolution of the City Council of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas identifying an affordable housing project known as Fishpond at Fitzgerald, to be developed by FishPond Development, LLC, as a project which contributes most significantly to the City’s concerted revitalization efforts in a designated area Whereas, FishPond Development, LLC. (the "Applicant") has proposed a development project to construct approximately 100 apartments of which 86 will provide affordable housing that is to be located at approximately the Southwest corner of Fitzgerald and North Chaparral, Corpus Christi, Texas 78401 and named Fishpond at Fitzgerald ("Fishpond at Fitzgerald Project"); and Whereas, the Applicant intends to submit an application to the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs ("TDHCA") for 2020 Housing Tax Credits for the FishPond at Fitzgerald Apartments Project. Whereas, on February 11, 2020 the City Council by resolution acknowledged support for the proposed FishPond at Fitzgerald Project located at approximately the Southwest corner of Fitzgerald and North Chaparral, Corpus Christi, Texas. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS: Section 1. The City Council for the City of Corpus Christi herby supports the development and has selected the FishPond at Fitzgerald Apartments Project located at approximately the Southwest corner of Fitzgerald and North Chaparral, Corpus Christi, Texas as the proposed Tax Credit Application for 2020 that contributes most significantly to the city’s concerted revitalization efforts in the designated area of the TIRZ #3. PASSED AND APPROVED this _____ day of __________________, 2020. Joe McComb _______________________ Roland Barrera _______________________ Rudy Garza _______________________ Paulette M. Guajardo _______________________ Gil Hernandez _______________________ Michael Hunter _______________________ Ben Molina _______________________ Everett Roy _______________________ Greg Smith _______________________ ATTEST: CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI Rebecca Huerta Joe McComb City Secretary Mayor AGENDA MEMORANDUM Action Item for City Council Meeting February 25, 2020 DATE: 2/19/2020 TO: Peter Zanoni, City Manager FROM: Daniel McGinn, AICP, Director of Planning and ESI DanielMc@cctexas.com 361-826-7011 Rudy Bentancourt, Director of Housing and Community Development RudyB@cctexas.com 361-826-3021 CAPTION: Resolution identifying an affordable housing project known as Village at McArdle to be developed by TG 110, Inc as contributing most significantly to the revitalization efforts within a designated area SUMMARY: The purpose of the Resolution is to satisfy a requirement set forth by the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs’ 2020 Qualified Allocation Plan Section 11.9(d)(7) for 9% Housing Tax Credits, which indicates that maximum points are given for a resolution from the Governing Body of a municipality (City of Corpus Christi) which identifies a project which contributes most significantly to the City’s concerted revitalization efforts in the designated area as described in the Southeast Area Development Plan. BACKGROUND AND FINDINGS: The City of Corpus Christi’s Housing and Community Development Department has received a request for a Resolution to the application and development of an affordable rental housing project. The development is hereby requesting a resolution which identifies the proposed project as one which will contribute most significantly to the City’s concerted revitalization efforts as described in the Southeast Area Development Plan. The Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs’ (TDHCA) 2020 Qualified Allocation Plan’s Section 11.9(d)(7) for 9% Housing Tax Credits indicates that in order to receive two (2) points for the application, a Resolution identifying this area is required. Village at McArdle, once constructed, will be an Affordable Housing Development located at 5314 McArdle Rd., Corpus Christi, TX 78411. TG 110, Inc. proposes the construction of approximately 82 apartments of which 74 units would serve families at or below 60% of the Area Median Income. On February 11, 2020, the City Council passed a Resolution of Support for the Village at McArdle project, allowing it to receive maximum points for the support category. Resolution identifying an Affordable Housing development as contributing most significantly to the revitalization efforts of a designated area to satisfy the requirement set forth by the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs (TDHCA) ALTERNATIVES: Denying the Resolution. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact for this item. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Resolution as written. LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution – Village at McArdle Resolution of the City Council of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas identifying an affordable housing project known as Village at McArdle to be developed by TG 110, Inc as contributing most significantly to the revitalization efforts within a designated area Whereas, TG 110, Inc (the "Applicant") has proposed a development project to construct approximately 82 apartments of which 70 will provide affordable housing that is to be located at 5314 McArdle Rd., Corpus Christi, Texas 78401 and named Village at McArdle Apartments (“Village at McArdle Project”); and Whereas, the Applicant intends to submit an application to the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs ("TDHCA") for 2020 Housing Tax Credits for the Village at McArdle Apartments Project. Whereas, on February 11, 2020 the City Council by resolution acknowledged support for the proposed Village at McArdle Apartments Project located at 5314 McArdle Rd., Corpus Christi, Texas NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS: Section 1. The City Council for the City of Corpus Christi herby supports the development and has selected the Village at McArdle Apartments Project located at 5314 McArdle Rd., Corpus Christi, Texas as the proposed Tax Credit Application for 2020 that contributes most significantly to the city’s concerted revitalization efforts within the designated area of the Southeast Area Development Plan area. PASSED AND APPROVED this _____ day of __________________, 2020. Joe McComb _______________________ Roland Barrera _______________________ Rudy Garza _______________________ Paulette M. Guajardo _______________________ Gil Hernandez _______________________ Michael Hunter _______________________ Ben Molina _______________________ Everett Roy _______________________ Greg Smith _______________________ ATTEST: CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI Rebecca Huerta Joe McComb City Secretary Mayor AGENDA MEMORANDUM Action Item for City Council Meeting February 25, 2020 DATE: 2/19/2020 TO: Peter Zanoni, City Manager FROM: Daniel McGinn, AICP, Director of Planning and ESI DanielMc@cctexas.com 361-826-7011 Rudy Bentancourt, Director of Housing and Community Development RudyB@cctexas.com 361-826-3021 CAPTION: Resolution of the City Council of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas identifying an affordable housing project known as Washington Coles Apartments to be developed by Washington Coles Apts., LP as a project which contributes most significantly to the City’s concerted revitalization efforts in a designated area SUMMARY: The purpose of the Resolution is to satisfy a requirement set forth by the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs’ 2020 Qualified Allocation Plan Section 11.9(d)(7) for 9% Housing Tax Credits, which indicates that maximum points are given for a resolution from the Governing Body of a municipality (City of Corpus Christi) which identifies a project which contributes most significantly to the City’s concerted revitalization efforts in the designated area as described in the Downtown Area Development Plan. BACKGROUND AND FINDINGS: The City of Corpus Christi’s Housing and Community Development Department has received a request for a Resolution to the application and development of an affordable rental housing project. The development is hereby requesting a resolution which identifies the proposed project as one which will contribute most significantly to the City’s concerted revitalization efforts as described in the Downtown Area Development Plan. The Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs’ (TDHCA) 2020 Qualified Allocation Plan’s Section 11.9(d)(7) for 9% Housing Tax Credits indicates that in order to receive two (2) points for the application, a Resolution identifying this area is required. Washington Coles Apartments, once constructed, will be an Affordable Housing Development located at 1124 Martin Luther King Dr., Corpus Christi, TX 78401. Washington Coles Apts, LP. proposes the construction of approximately 86 apartments of which 56 units would serve families at or below 60% of the Area Median Income. Resolution identifying an Affordable Housing development as contributing most significantly to the revitalization efforts of a designated area to satisfy the requirement set forth by the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs (TDHCA) On February 11, 2020, the City Council passed a Resolution of Support for the Washington Coles Apartments project, allowing it to receive maximum points for the support category. ALTERNATIVES: Denying the Resolution. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact for this item. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Resolution as written. LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution – Washington Coles Apartments Resolution of the City Council of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas identifying an affordable housing project known as Washington Coles Apartments to be developed by Washington Coles Apts., LP as a project which contributes most significantly to the City’s concerted revitalization efforts in a designated area Whereas, Washington Coles Apts., LP. (the "Applicant") has proposed a development project to construct approximately 86 apartments of which 5 6 will provide affordable housing that is to be located at 1124 Martin Luther King Dr., Corpus Christi, Texas 78401 and named Washington Coles Apartments ("Washington Coles Apartments Project"); and Whereas, the Applicant intends to submit an application to the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs ("TDHCA") for 2020 Housing Tax Credits for the Washington Coles Apartments Project. Whereas, on February 11, 2020 the City Council by resolution acknowledged support for the proposed Washington. Coles Apartments Project at 1124 Martin Luther King Dr., Corpus Christi, Texas. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS: Section 1. The City Council for the City of Corpus Christi herby supports the development and has selected the Washington Coles Apartments Project located at 1124 Martin Luther King Dr., Corpus Christi, Texas 78401 as the proposed Tax Credit Application for 2020 that contributes most significantly to the city’s concerted revitalization efforts in the designated area of the Downtown Area Development Plan. PASSED AND APPROVED this _____ day of __________________, 2020. Joe McComb _______________________ Roland Barrera _______________________ Rudy Garza _______________________ Paulette M. Guajardo _______________________ Gil Hernandez _______________________ Michael Hunter _______________________ Ben Molina _______________________ Everett Roy _______________________ Greg Smith _______________________ ATTEST: CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI Rebecca Huerta Joe McComb City Secretary Mayor DATE: January 14, 2020 TO: Peter Zanoni, City Manager FROM: Al Raymond, AIA, Director Development Services Department AlRaymond@cctexas.com (361) 826-3575 CAPTION: Zoning Case No. 0120-02, Grangerfield Development, LLC. (District 5). Ordinance rezoning property at or near 7702 Yorktown Boulevard from the “FR” Farm Rural District to the “RS-4.5” Single-Family 4.5 District and “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District. SUMMARY: The purpose of the zoning request is to allow for the construction of a single-family residential subdivision and commercial properties. BACKGROUND AND FINDINGS: The subject property is 20.01 acres in size. According to the applicant the purpose of the request is to construct a single-family residential subdivision with approximately 65 homes and 8 lots for commercial development. Conformity to City Policy The subject property is located within the boundaries of the Southside Area Development Plan and is planned for a medium density residential use. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan (Plan CC) and warrants an amendment to the Future Land Use Map. It is compatible with the adjoining properties and does not have a negative impact upon the adjacent properties. Public Input Process Number of Notices Mailed 36 within 200-foot notification area 5 outside notification area As of January 3, 2020: In Favor 0 inside notification area 0 outside notification area In Opposition 0 inside notification area 0 outside notification area Rezoning a property at or near 7702 Yorktown Boulevard AGENDA MEMORANDUM Public Hearing & First Reading Ordinance for the City Council Meeting 02/25/20 Second Reading Ordinance for the City Council Meeting 03/17/20 Totaling 0.00% of the land within the 200-foot notification area in opposition. Commission Recommendation Planning Commission approval of the change of zoning from the “FR” Farm Rural District to the “RS-4.5” Single-Family 4.5 District and “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District on January 8, 2020. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Denial of the change of zoning from the “FR” Farm Rural District to the “RS-4.5” Single- Family 4.5 District and “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this item. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the zoning request. Planning Commission recommended approval of the change of zoning from the “FR” Farm Rural District to the “RS-4.5” Single-Family 4.5 District and “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District with following vote count. Vote Count: For: 9 Opposed: 0 Absent: 0 Abstained: 0 LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Ordinance Presentation - Aerial Map Planning Commission Final Report Zoning Case No. 0120-02, Grangerfield Development, LLC. (District 5). Ordinance rezoning property at or near 7702 Yorktown Boulevard from the “FR” Farm Rural District to the “RS-4.5” Single-Family 4.5 District and “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District. WHEREAS, with proper notice to the public, a public hearing was held during a meeting of the Planning Commission during which all interested persons were allowed to appear and be heard; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has forwarded to the City Council its final report and recommendation regarding the application for an amendment to the City of Corpus Christi’s Unified Development Code (“UDC”) and corresponding UDC Zoning Map; WHEREAS, with proper notice to the public, a public hearing was held during a meeting of the City Council, during which all interested persons were allowed to appear and be heard; WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that this rezoning is not detrimental to the public health, safety, or general welfare of the City of Corpus Christi and its citizens; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this rezoning will promote the best and most orderly development of the properties affected thereby, and to be affected thereby, in the City of Corpus Christi. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS: SECTION 1. The Unified Development Code (“UDC”) and corresponding UDC Zoning Map of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas is amended by changing the zoning on the subject property described as being 20.01 Acre Zoning Tract, out of Lot 11, Section 25, Flour Bluff and Encinal Farm and Garden Tracts, a map of which is recorded in Volume A, Page 41-43, Map Records of Nueces County, Texas and being a portion of a 20.00 Acre Tract, referenced in a Warranty Deed recorded in Document No. 2017042252 Official Public Records of Nueces County, Texas as shown in Exhibit “A”: from the “FR” Farm Rural District to the “RS-4.5” Single-Family 4.5 District and “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District. The subject property is located at or near 7702 Yorktown Boulevard. Exhibit A, which is the Metes and Bounds of the subject property with an associated map attached to and incorporated in this ordinance. SECTION 2. The UDC and corresponding UDC Zoning Map of the City, made effective July 1, 2011 and as amended from time to time, except as changed by this ordinance, Page 2 of 6 both remain in full force and effect including the penalties for violations as made and provided for in Article 10 of the UDC. SECTION 3. To the extent this amendment to the UDC represents a deviation from the City’s Comprehensive Plan, the Comprehensive Plan is amended to conform to the UDC, as it is amended by this ordinance. SECTION 4. All ordinances or parts of ordinances specifically pertaining to the zoning of the subject property that are in conflict with this ordinance are hereby expressly repealed. SECTION 5. A violation of this ordinance, or requirements implemented under this ordinance, constitutes an offense punishable as provided in Article 1, Section 1.10.1 of the UDC, Article 10 of the UDC, and/or Section 1-6 of the Corpus Christi Code of Ordinances. SECTION 6. 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. This ordinance shall become effective upon publication. Page 3 of 6 That the foregoing ordinance was read for the first time and passed to its second reading on this the _____ day of ___________, 2020, by the following vote: Joe McComb ________________ Michael Hunter______________ Roland Barrera ________________ Ben Molina ______________ Rudy Garza ________________ Everett Roy ______________ Paulette M. Guajardo ________________ Greg Smith ______________ Gil Hernandez ________________ That the foregoing ordinance was read for the second time and passed finally on this the _____ day of __________ 2020, by the following vote: Joe McComb ________________ Michael Hunter______________ Roland Barrera ________________ Ben Molina ______________ Rudy Garza ________________ Everett Roy ______________ Paulette M. Guajardo ________________ Greg Smith ______________ Gil Hernandez ________________ PASSED AND APPROVED on this the ______ day of _________________, 2020. ATTEST: _________________________ ________________________ Rebecca Huerta Joe McComb City Secretary Mayor Page 4 of 6 Exhibit A Page 5 of 6 CN-1 Page 6 of 6 CN-1 PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL REPORT Case No. 0120-02 INFOR No. 19ZN1040 Planning Commission Hearing Date: January 8, 2020 Applicant & Legal Description Owner: Grangerfield Development LLC. Applicant: Munoz Engineering Location Address: 7702 Yorktown Boulevard Legal Description: 20.01 Acre Zoning Tract, out of Lot 11, Section 25, Flour Bluff and Encinal Farm and Garden Tracts, a map of which is recorded in Volume A, Page 41-43, Map Records of Nueces County, Texas and being a portion of a 20.00 Acre Tract, referenced in a Warranty Deed recorded in Document No. 2017042252 Official Public Records of Nueces County, Texas, being located along the north side of Yorktown Boulevard, south of Los Rancheros Drive, and east of Rodd Field Road. Zoning Request From: “FR” Farm Rural District To: “RS-4.5” Single-Family 4.5 District and “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District Area: 20.01 acres Purpose of Request: To allow for the construction of a single-family residential subdivision and commercial properties. Existing Zoning and Land Uses Existing Zoning District Existing Land Use Future Land Use Site “FR” Farm Rural Vacant Medium Density Residential North “RS-4.5” Single-Family 4.5 Drainage and Medium Density Residential Medium Density Residential South “RS-4.5” Single-Family 4.5 Medium Density Residential Medium Density Residential East “FR” Farm Rural Vacant Medium Density Residential West “FR” Farm Rural Vacant Medium Density Residential ADP, Map & Violations Area Development Plan: The subject property is located within the boundaries of the Southside Area Development Plan and is planned for a medium density residential use. The proposed rezoning to the “RS-4.5” Single-Family 4.5 District and “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District is consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan (Plan CC). Map No.: 041030 Zoning Violations: None Staff Report Page 2 Transportation Transportation and Circulation: The subject property has approximately 670 feet of street frontage along Yorktown Boulevard which is designated as a “A3” Primary Arterial Street. According to the Urban Transportation Plan, “A3” Primary Arterial Streets can convey a capacity between 30,000 and 48,000 Average Daily Trips (ADT). Street R.O.W. Street Urban Transportation Plan Type Proposed Section Existing Section Traffic Volume Yorktown Boulevard “A3” Primary Arterial 130’ ROW 79’ paved 166’ ROW 90’ paved N/A Staff Summary: Requested Zoning: The applicant is requesting a rezoning from the “FR” Farm Rural District to the “RS-4.5” Single-Family 4.5 District and “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District to allow for the construction of a single-family residential subdivision with approximately 65 homes and 8 pad sites for commercial development. Development Plan: The subject property is 20.01 acres in size. The applicant has not submitted any specific plans concerning the future commercial development. Existing Land Uses & Zoning: The subject property is currently zoned “FR” Farm Rural District, consists of vacant property, and has remained since annexation in 1995. To the north and south are single-family homes zoned “RS-4.5” Single-Family 4.5 District. Additionally to the north is Master Channel 31 (Drainage Ditch). To the east and west are vacant properties zoned “FR” Farm Rural District. AICUZ: The subject property is not located in one of the Navy’s Air Installation Compatibility Use Zones (AICUZ). Plat Status: The property is not platted. Utilities: Water: 12-inch C900 line located along Yorktown Boulevard. Wastewater: 12-inch PVC FM line located along Yorktown Boulevard. Gas: 8-inch Service Line located along Yorktown Boulevard. Storm Water: Roadside ditches located along Yorktown Boulevard. Plan CC & Area Development Plan Consistency: The subject property is located within the boundaries of the Southside Area Development Plan and is planned for a medium density residential use. The proposed rezoning to the “RS-4.5” Single-Family 4.5 District and “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District is consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan (Plan CC). The following policies should be considered: Staff Report Page 3 • Encourage orderly growth of new residential, commercial, and industrial areas (Future Land Use, Zoning, and Urban Design Policy Statement 1). • Promote a balanced mix of land uses to accommodate continuous growth and promote the proper location of land uses based on compatibility, locational needs, and characteristics of each use (Future Land Use, Zoning, and Urban Design Policy Statement 1). • Encourage residential infill development on vacant lots within or adjacent to existing neighborhoods. (Future Land Use, Zoning, and Urban Design Policy Statement 3). • Encourage convenient access from medium-density residential development to arterial roads. (Future Land Use, Zoning, and Urban Design Policy Statement 3). Department Comments: • The proposed rezoning is consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan (Plan CC), compatible with the adjoining properties, and does not have a negative impact upon the adjacent properties. Planning Commission and Staff Recommendation (January 8, 2020): Approval of the change of zoning from the “FR” Farm Rural District to the “RS-4.5” Single- Family 4.5 District and “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District. Public Notification Number of Notices Mailed – 36 within 200-foot notification area 5 outside notification area As of January 3, 2020: In Favor – 0 inside notification area – 0 outside notification area In Opposition – 0 inside notification area – 0 outside notification area Totaling 0.00% of the land within the 200-foot notification area in opposition. Attachments: A. Location Map (Existing Zoning & Notice Area) B. Public Comments Received (if any) https://corpuschristi.sharepoint.com/sites/DevelopmentServices/DevelopmentSvcs/SHARED/ZONING CASES/2020/0120-02 Grangerfield Development LLC/Council Documents/Report - Grangerfield Development LLC.docx Staff Report Page 4 Grangerfield Development, LLC. Rezoning for a Property at 7702 Yorktown Boulevard From “FR” To “RS-4.5” and “CN-1” N Zoning Case #0120-02 City Council February 25, 2020 2 Aerial Overview 3 Zoning Pattern 4 Approval of the “RS-4.5” Single-Family 4.5 District and “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District Planning Commission and Staff Recommendation 5 Public Notification 36 Notices mailed inside 200’ buffer 5 Notices mailed outside 200’ buffer Notification Area Opposed: 0 (0.00%) In Favor: 0 6 UDC Requirements Buffer Yards: N/A Setbacks:RS-4.5 CN-1 Street: 20 feet 20 feet Side & Rear: 5 feet 0 feet Parking: 2 per unit (Residential) 1:250 (Commercial) Landscaping, Screening, and Lighting Standards Uses Allowed: Retail, Offices, Multifamily *Bars/Nightclubs Not Allowed in “CN-1” 7 Utilities Water: 12-inch C900 Wastewater: 12-inch PVC FM Gas: 8-inch Service Line Storm Water: Roadside ditches DATE: January 14, 2020 TO: Peter Zanoni, City Manager FROM: Al Raymond, AIA, Director Development Services Department AlRaymond@cctexas.com (361) 826-3575 CAPTION: Zoning Case No. 0120-03, Judy and Doyle E. Hobbs, High Ground Advisors, Texas Scottish Rite Hospital, and Texas A&M University Development Foundation (District 3). Ordinance rezoning property at or near 5102 Old Brownsville Road from the “IL” Light Industrial District and “RS -6” Single-Family 6 District to the “CG-2” General Commercial District. SUMMARY: The purpose of the zoning request is to allow for the construction of a medical clinic. BACKGROUND AND FINDINGS: The subject property is 31.03 acres in size. According to the applicant the purpose of the request is to construct a medical clinic. Conformity to City Policy The subject property is located within the boundaries of the Westside Area Development Plan and is planned for a commercial use. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan (Plan CC), compatible with the adjoining properties, and does not have a negative impact upon adjacent properties. Several properties to the west have been rezoned to commercial zoning districts indicating a pattern towards commercial development Public Input Process Number of Notices Mailed 23 within 200-foot notification area 5 outside notification area As of January 3, 2020: In Favor 0 inside notification area 0 outside notification area In Opposition 0 inside notification area 0 outside notification area Rezoning a property at or near 5102 Old Brownsville Road AGENDA MEMORANDUM Public Hearing & First Reading Ordinance for the City Council Meeting 02/25/20 Second Reading Ordinance for the City Council Meeting 03/17/20 Totaling 0.00% of the land within the 200-foot notification area in opposition. Commission Recommendation Planning Commission approval of the change of zoning from the “IL” Light Industrial District and “RS-6” Single-Family 6 District to the “CG-2” General Commercial District on January 8, 2020. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Denial of the change of zoning from the “IL” Light Industrial District and “RS-6” Single- Family 6 District to the “CG-2” General Commercial District. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this item. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the zoning request. Planning Commission recommended approval of the change of zoning from the “IL” Light Industrial District and “RS-6” Single-Family 6 District to the “CG-2” General Commercial District with following vote count. Vote Count: For: 8 Opposed: 0 Absent: 0 Abstained: 1 LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Ordinance Presentation - Aerial Map Planning Commission Final Report Zoning Case No. 0120-03, Judy and Doyle E. Hobbs, High Ground Advisors, Texas Scottish Rite Hospital, and Texas A&M University Development Foundation (District 3). Ordinance rezoning property at or near 5102 Old Brownsville Road from the “IL” Light Industrial District and “RS-6” Single-Family 6 District to the “CG-2” General Commercial District. WHEREAS, with proper notice to the public, a public hearing was held during a meeting of the Planning Commission during which all interested persons were allowed to appear and be heard; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has forwarded to the City Council its final report and recommendation regarding the application for an amendment to the City of Corpus Christi’s Unified Development Code (“UDC”) and corresponding UDC Zoning Map; WHEREAS, with proper notice to the public, a public hearing was held during a meeting of the City Council, during which all interested persons were allowed to appear and be heard; WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that this rezoning is not detrimental to the public health, safety, or general welfare of the City of Corpus Christi and its citizens; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this rezoning will promote the best and most orderly development of the properties affected thereby, and to be affected thereby, in the City of Corpus Christi. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS: SECTION 1. The Unified Development Code (“UDC”) and corresponding UDC Zoning Map of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas is amended by changing the zoning on the subject property described as being a 31.03 Acre Zoning Tract, out of Lot 8, Section 5, Range VIII, Gugenheim and Cohn Farm Lots, a map of which is recorded in Volume A, Page 53, Map Records of Nueces County, Texas and being a portion of a 37.10 Acre Tract, referenced in a Warranty Deed of Gift from Ima Lee Sorenson to Judy S. Hobbs and Doyle E. Hobbs, Sr., recorded in Document No. 2012050921, Official Public Records of Nueces County, Texas; being the same property described in a Closing Independent Administration document recorded in Document No. 1997026152, Official Public Records of Nueces County, Texas as shown in Exhibit “A”: from the “IL” Light Industrial District and “RS-6” Single-Family 6 District to the “CG- 2” General Commercial District. The subject property is located at or near 5102 Old Brownsville Road. Exhibit A, which is the Metes and Bounds of the subject property with an associated map attached to and incorporated in this ordinance. Page 2 of 6 SECTION 2. The UDC and corresponding UDC Zoning Map of the City, made effective July 1, 2011 and as amended from time to time, except as changed by this ordinance, both remain in full force and effect including the penalties for violations as made and provided for in Article 10 of the UDC. SECTION 3. To the extent this amendment to the UDC represents a deviation from the City’s Comprehensive Plan, the Comprehensive Plan is amended to conform to the UDC, as it is amended by this ordinance. SECTION 4. All ordinances or parts of ordinances specifically pertaining to the zoning of the subject property that are in conflict with this ordinance are hereby expressly repealed. SECTION 5. A violation of this ordinance, or requirements implemented under this ordinance, constitutes an offense punishable as provided in Article 1, Section 1.10.1 of the UDC, Article 10 of the UDC, and/or Section 1-6 of the Corpus Christi Code of Ordinances. SECTION 6. 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. This ordinance shall become effective upon publication. Page 3 of 6 That the foregoing ordinance was read for the first time and passed to its second reading on this the _____ day of ___________, 2020, by the following vote: Joe McComb ________________ Michael Hunter______________ Roland Barrera ________________ Ben Molina ______________ Rudy Garza ________________ Everett Roy ______________ Paulette M. Guajardo ________________ Greg Smith ______________ Gil Hernandez ________________ That the foregoing ordinance was read for the second time and passed finally on this the _____ day of __________ 2020, by the following vote: Joe McComb ________________ Michael Hunter______________ Roland Barrera ________________ Ben Molina ______________ Rudy Garza ________________ Everett Roy ______________ Paulette M. Guajardo ________________ Greg Smith ______________ Gil Hernandez ________________ PASSED AND APPROVED on this the ______ day of _________________, 2020. ATTEST: _________________________ ________________________ Rebecca Huerta Joe McComb City Secretary Mayor Page 4 of 6 Exhibit A Page 5 of 6 Page 6 of 6 PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL REPORT Case No. 0120-03 INFOR No. 19ZN1041 Planning Commission Hearing Date: January 8, 2020 Applicant & Legal Description Owner: Judy and Doyle E. Hobbs, High Ground Advisors, Texas Scottish Rite Hospital, and Texas A&M University Development Foundation Applicant: Urban Engineering Location Address: 5102 Old Brownsville Road Legal Description: Being 31.03 Acre Zoning Tract, out of Lot 8, Section 5, Range VIII, Gugenheim and Cohn Farm Lots, a map of which is recorded in Volume A, Page 53, Map Records of Nueces County, Texas and being a portion of a 37.10 Acre Tract, referenced in a Warranty Deed of Gift from Ima Lee Sorenson to Judy S. Hobbs and Doyle E. Hobbs, Sr., recorded in Document No. 2012050921, Official Public Records of Nueces County, Texas; being the same property described in a Closing Independent Administration document recorded in Document No. 1997026152, Official Public Records of Nueces County, Texas, located along the north side of Old Brownsville Road, east of South Padre Island Drive (State Highway 358), and west of Cliff Maus Drive. Zoning Request From: “IL” Light Industrial District and “RS-6” Single-Family 6 District To: “CG-2” General Commercial District Area: 31.03 acres Purpose of Request: To allow for the construction of a medical clinic. Existing Zoning and Land Uses Existing Zoning District Existing Land Use Future Land Use Site “IL” Light Industrial and “RS-6” Single-Family 6 Vacant Commercial North “IL” Light Industrial Vacant and Drainage Commercial South “RS-6” Single-Family 6 Vacant Medium Density Residential East “IL” Light Industrial Vacant and Light Industrial Commercial West “IL” Light Industrial and “CG-2” General Commercial Drainage, and Medium Density Residential, Professional Office, and Public/Semi-Public Commercial ADP, Map & Violations Area Development Plan: The subject property is located within the boundaries of the Westside Area Development Plan and is planned for a commercial use. The proposed rezoning to the “CG-2” General Commercial District is consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan (Plan CC). Map No.: 050041 Zoning Violations: None Staff Report Page 2 Transportation Transportation and Circulation: The subject property has approximately 1,300 feet of street frontage along Old Brownsville Road which is designated as a “A1” Minor Arterial Street. According to the Urban Transportation Plan, “A1” Minor Arterial Streets can convey a capacity between 15,000 and 24,000 Average Daily Trips (ADT). Street R.O.W. Street Urban Transportation Plan Type Proposed Section Existing Section Traffic Volume Old Brownsville Road “A1” Minor Arterial 95’ ROW 64’ paved 120’ ROW 70’ paved N/A Staff Summary: Requested Zoning: The applicant is requesting a rezoning from the “IL” Light Industrial District and “RS-6” Single-Family 6 District to the “CG-2” General Commercial District to allow for the construction of a medical clinic. Development Plan: The subject property is 31.03 acres in size. The applicant has not submitted any specific plans concerning the medical clinic. Existing Land Uses & Zoning: The subject property is currently zoned IL” Light Industrial District and “RS-6” Single-Family 6 District, consists of vacant land, and has remained since annexation in 1954. To the north are vacant properties zoned “IL” Light Industrial District. To the south is a vacant property zoned “RS-6” Single-Family 6 District. To the east are businesses zoned “IL” Light Industrial District. To the west is a drainage ditch and businesses zoned “IL” Light Industrial District and “CG-2” General Commercial District. AICUZ: The subject property is not located in one of the Navy’s Air Installation Compatibility Use Zones (AICUZ). Plat Status: The property is unplatted. Utilities: Water: 12-inch C900 line located along Old Brownsville Road. Wastewater: 12-inch PVC line located along Cliff Maus Drive. Gas: 6-inch Service Line located along Old Brownsville Road. Storm Water: 42-inch line located along Old Brownsville Road. Plan CC & Area Development Plan Consistency: The subject property is located within the boundaries of the Westside Area Development Plan and is planned for a commercial use. The proposed rezoning to the “CG-2” General Commercial is consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan (Plan CC). The following policies should be considered: Staff Report Page 3 • Encourage orderly growth of new residential, commercial, and industrial areas (Future Land Use, Zoning, and Urban Design Policy Statement 1). • Promote a balanced mix of land uses to accommodate continuous growth and promote the proper location of land uses based on compatibility, locational needs, and characteristics of each use (Future Land Use, Zoning, and Urban Design Policy Statement 1). Department Comments: • The proposed rezoning is consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan (Plan CC), compatible with the adjoining properties, and does not have a negative impact upon adjacent properties. • Several properties to the west have been rezoned to commercial zoning districts indicating a pattern towards commercial development. Planning Commission and Staff Recommendation (January 8, 2020): Approval of the change of zoning from the IL” Light Industrial District and “RS-6” Single- Family 6 District to the “CG-2” General Commercial District. Public Notification Number of Notices Mailed – 23 within 200-foot notification area 5 outside notification area As of January 3, 2020: In Favor – 0 inside notification area – 0 outside notification area In Opposition – 0 inside notification area – 0 outside notification area Totaling 0.00% of the land within the 200-foot notification area in opposition. Attachments: A. Location Map (Existing Zoning & Notice Area) B. Public Comments Received (if any) https://corpuschristi.sharepoint.com/sites/DevelopmentServices/DevelopmentSvcs/SHARED/ZONING CASES/2020/0120-03 Hobbs, Highground Advisors, Texas Scottish Rite, and TAMU/Council Documents/Report - Hobbs et al.docx Staff Report Page 4 Hobbs, High Ground Advisors, Texas Scottish Rite Hospital, and TAMU Rezoning for a Property at 5102 Old Brownsville Road From “IL” and “RS-6” To “CG-2” Zoning Case #0120-03 City Council February 25, 2020 2 Aerial Overview 3 Zoning Pattern 4 Approval of the “CG-2” General Commercial District Planning Commission and Staff Recommendation 5 Public Notification 23 Notices mailed inside 200’ buffer 5 Notices mailed outside 200’ buffer Notification Area Opposed: 0 (0.00%) In Favor: 0 6 UDC Requirements Buffer Yards: CG-2 to IL: Type A: 10’ & 5 pts. Setbacks: Street: 20 feet Side & Rear: 0 feet Parking: 1:225 Square feet Landscaping, Screening, and Lighting Standards Uses Allowed: Multifamily, Offices, Medical, Restaurants, Retail, Bars, and Hotels. 7 Utilities Water: 12-inch C900 Wastewater: 12-inch PVC Gas: 6-inch Service Line Storm Water: 42-inch Line DATE: January 14, 2020 TO: Peter Zanoni, City Manager FROM: Al Raymond, AIA, Director Development Services Department AlRaymond@cctexas.com (361) 826-3575 CAPTION: Zoning Case No. 0120-01, Johnson Development (District 3). Ordinance rezoning property at or near 5101 Old Brownsville Road from the “RS-6” Single-Family 6 District to the “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District. SUMMARY: The purpose of the zoning request is to allow for the construction of a medical clinic. BACKGROUND AND FINDINGS: The subject property is 11.48 acres in size. According to the applicant the purpose of the request is to construct a medical clinic. Conformity to City Policy The subject property is located within the boundaries of the Westside Area Development Plan and is planned for a medium density residential use. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan (Plan CC) and warrants an amendment to the Future Land Use Map. It is compatible with the adjoining properties and does not have a negative impact upon adjacent properties. If the “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District is approved, the development will need to abide all requirements of the Unified Development Code (UDC). Additionally, the “CN-1” District does not allow bars, pubs, taverns, or nightclubs. Public Input Process Number of Notices Mailed 10 within 200-foot notification area 5 outside notification area As of January 3, 2020: In Favor 0 inside notification area 0 outside notification area In Opposition 0 inside notification area 0 outside notification area Rezoning a property at or near 5101 Old Brownsville Road AGENDA MEMORANDUM Public Hearing & First Reading Ordinance for the City Council Meeting 02/25/20 Second Reading Ordinance for the City Council Meeting 03/17/20 Totaling 0.00% of the land within the 200-foot notification area in opposition. Commission Recommendation Planning Commission approval of the change of zoning from the “RS-6” Single-Family 6 District to the “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District on January 8, 2020. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Denial of the change of zoning from the “RS-6” Single-Family 6 District to the “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this item. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the zoning request. Planning Commission recommended approval of the change of zoning from the “RS-6” Single- Family 6 District to the “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District with following vote count. Vote Count: For: 8 Opposed: 0 Absent: 0 Abstained: 1 LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Ordinance Presentation - Aerial Map Planning Commission Final Report Zoning Case No. 0120-01, Johnson Development (District 3). Ordinance rezoning property at or near 5101 Old Brownsville Road from the “RS-6” Single-Family 6 District to the “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District. WHEREAS, with proper notice to the public, a public hearing was held during a meeting of the Planning Commission during which all interested persons were allowed to appear and be heard; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has forwarded to the City Council its final report and recommendation regarding the application for an amendment to the City of Corpus Christi’s Unified Development Code (“UDC”) and corresponding UDC Zoning Map; WHEREAS, with proper notice to the public, a public hearing was held during a meeting of the City Council, during which all interested persons were allowed to appear and be heard; WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that this rezoning is not detrimental to the public health, safety, or general welfare of the City of Corpus Christi and its citizens; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this rezoning will promote the best and most orderly development of the properties affected thereby, and to be affected thereby, in the City of Corpus Christi. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS: SECTION 1. The Unified Development Code (“UDC”) and corresponding UDC Zoning Map of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas is amended by changing the zoning on the subject property described as being a 11.48 Acre Zoning Tract, out of Lot 8, Section 5, Range VIII, Gugenheim and Cohn Farm Lots, a map of which is recorded in Volume A, Page 53, Map Records of Nueces County, Texas and being a portion of a 37.10 Acre Tract, referenced in a Warranty Deed of Gift from Ima Lee Sorenson to Judy S. Hobbs and Doyle E. Hobbs, Sr., recorded in Document No. 2012050921, Official Public Records of Nueces County, Texas; being the same property described in a Closing Independent Administration document recorded in Document No. 1997026152, Official Public Records of Nueces County, Texas, as shown in Exhibit “A”: from the “RS-6” Single-Family 6 District to the “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District. The subject property is located at or near 5101 Old Brownsville Road. Exhibit A, which is the Metes and Bounds of the subject property with an associated map attached to and incorporated in this ordinance. Page 2 of 5 SECTION 2. The UDC and corresponding UDC Zoning Map of the City, made effective July 1, 2011 and as amended from time to time, except as changed by this ordinance, both remain in full force and effect including the penalties for violations as made and provided for in Article 10 of the UDC. SECTION 3. To the extent this amendment to the UDC represents a deviation from the City’s Comprehensive Plan, the Comprehensive Plan is amended to conform to the UDC, as it is amended by this ordinance. SECTION 4. All ordinances or parts of ordinances specifically pertaining to the zoning of the subject property that are in conflict with this ordinance are hereby expressly repealed. SECTION 5. A violation of this ordinance, or requirements implemented under this ordinance, constitutes an offense punishable as provided in Article 1, Section 1.10.1 of the UDC, Article 10 of the UDC, and/or Section 1-6 of the Corpus Christi Code of Ordinances. SECTION 6. 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. This ordinance shall become effective upon publication. Page 3 of 5 That the foregoing ordinance was read for the first time and passed to its second reading on this the _____ day of ___________, 2020, by the following vote: Joe McComb ________________ Michael Hunter______________ Roland Barrera ________________ Ben Molina ______________ Rudy Garza ________________ Everett Roy ______________ Paulette M. Guajardo ________________ Greg Smith ______________ Gil Hernandez ________________ That the foregoing ordinance was read for the second time and passed finally on this the _____ day of __________ 2020, by the following vote: Joe McComb ________________ Michael Hunter______________ Roland Barrera ________________ Ben Molina ______________ Rudy Garza ________________ Everett Roy ______________ Paulette M. Guajardo ________________ Greg Smith ______________ Gil Hernandez ________________ PASSED AND APPROVED on this the ______ day of _________________, 2020. ATTEST: _________________________ ________________________ Rebecca Huerta Joe McComb City Secretary Mayor Page 4 of 5 Exhibit A Page 5 of 5 PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL REPORT Case No. 0120-01 INFOR No. 19ZN1039 Planning Commission Hearing Date: January 8, 2020 Applicant & Legal Description Owner: Johnson Development Applicant: Urban Engineering Location Address: 5101 Old Brownsville Road Legal Description: Being 11.48 Acre Zoning Tract, out of Lot 8, Section 5, Range VIII, Gugenheim and Cohn Farm Lots, a map of which is recorded in Volume A, Page 53, Map Records of Nueces County, Texas and being a portion of a 37.10 Acre Tract, referenced in a Warranty Deed of Gift from Ima Lee Sorenson to Judy S. Hobbs and Doyle E. Hobbs, Sr., recorded in Document No. 2012050921, Official Public Records of Nueces County, Texas; being the same property described in a Closing Independent Administration document recorded in Document No. 1997026152, Official Public Records of Nueces County, Texas, located along the south side of Old Brownsville Road, east of South Padre Island Drive (State Highway 358), and west of Cliff Maus Drive. Zoning Request From: “RS-6” Single-Family 6 District To: “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District Area: 11.48 acres Purpose of Request: To allow for the construction of a medical clinic. Existing Zoning and Land Uses Existing Zoning District Existing Land Use Future Land Use Site “RS-6” Single-Family 6 Vacant Medium Density Residential North “RS-6” Single-Family 6 Low Density Residential Commercial South “RM-1” Multifamily 1 Public/Semi-Public Government East “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial, “RM-1” Multifamily 1, and “RS-6” Single-Family 6 Vacant and Public/Semi-Public Medium Density Residential and Government West “IL” Light Industrial Drainage, Commercial, and Public/Semi-Public Permanent Open Space, Commercial, and Government Staff Report Page 2 ADP, Map & Violations Area Development Plan: The subject property is located within the boundaries of the Westside Area Development Plan and is planned for a medium density residential use. The proposed rezoning to the “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District is consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan (Plan CC) and warrants an amendment to the Future Land Use Map. Map No.: 050041 Zoning Violations: None Transportation Transportation and Circulation: The subject property has approximately 1,140 feet of street frontage along Old Brownsville Road which is designated as a “A1” Minor Arterial Street and has approximately 880 feet of street frontage along Cliff Maus Drive which is designated as a “C1” Minor Collector Street. According to the Urban Transportation Plan, “A1” Minor Arterial Streets can convey a capacity between 15,000 and 24,000 Average Daily Trips (ADT). Street R.O.W. Street Urban Transportation Plan Type Proposed Section Existing Section Traffic Volume Old Brownsville Road “A1” Minor Arterial 95’ ROW 64’ paved 120’ ROW 70’ paved N/A Cliff Maus Drive “C1” Minor Collector 60’ ROW 40’ paved 62’ ROW 37’ paved N/A Staff Summary: Requested Zoning: The applicant is requesting a rezoning from the “RS-6” Single- Family 6 District to the “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District to allow for the construction of a medical clinic. Development Plan: The subject property is 11.48 acres in size. The applicant has not submitted any specific plans concerning the medical clinic. Existing Land Uses & Zoning: The subject property is currently zoned “RS-6” Single- Family 6 District, consists of vacant land, and has remained since annexation in 1954. To the north are vacant properties zoned “RS-6” Single-Family 6 District. To the south is a church zoned “RM-1” Multifamily 1 District. To the east are vacant properties zoned “CN- 1” Neighborhood Commercial District and an elementary school zoned “RM-1” Multifamily 1 and “RS-6” Single-Family 6 District. To the west are offices zoned “IL” Light Industrial District. AICUZ: The subject property is not located in one of the Navy’s Air Installation Compatibility Use Zones (AICUZ). Plat Status: The property is unplatted. Utilities: Water: 12-inch C900 line located along Old Brownsville Road. Staff Report Page 3 Wastewater: 12-inch PVC line located along Cliff Maus Drive. Gas: 6-inch Service Line located along Old Brownsville Road. Storm Water: 42-inch line located along Old Brownsville Road. Plan CC & Area Development Plan Consistency: The subject property is located within the boundaries of the Westside Area Development Plan and is planned for a medium density residential use. The proposed rezoning to the “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial is consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan (Plan CC) and warrants an amendment to the Future Land Use Map. The following policies should be considered: • Encourage orderly growth of new residential, commercial, and industrial areas (Future Land Use, Zoning, and Urban Design Policy Statement 1). • Promote a balanced mix of land uses to accommodate continuous growth and promote the proper location of land uses based on compatibility, locational needs, and characteristics of each use (Future Land Use, Zoning, and Urban Design Policy Statement 1). • Promote interconnected neighborhoods with appropriate transitions between lower-intensity and higher-intensity land uses. (Future Land Use, Zoning, and Urban Design Policy Statement 3). Department Comments: • The proposed rezoning is consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan (Plan CC), compatible with the adjoining properties, and does not have a negative impact upon adjacent properties. • If the “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District is approved, the development will need to abide all requirements of the Unified Development Code (UDC). Additionally, the “CN-1” District does not allow bars, pubs, taverns, or nightclubs. Planning Commission and Staff Recommendation (January 8, 2020): Approval of the change of zoning from the “RS-6” Single-Family 6 District to the “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District. Public Notification Number of Notices Mailed – 10 within 200-foot notification area 5 outside notification area As of January 3, 2020: In Favor – 0 inside notification area – 0 outside notification area In Opposition – 0 inside notification area – 0 outside notification area Totaling 0.00% of the land within the 200-foot notification area in opposition. Attachments: A. Location Map (Existing Zoning & Notice Area) B. Public Comments Received (if any) https://corpuschristi.sharepoint.com/sites/DevelopmentServices/DevelopmentSvcs/SHARED/ZONING CASES/2020/0120-01 Johnson Development RS-6 to CN-1/Council Documents/Report - Johnson Development.docx Staff Report Page 4 Johnson Development Rezoning for a Property at 5101 Old Brownsville Road From “RS-6” To “CN1” N Zoning Case #0120-01 City Council February 25, 2020 2 Aerial Overview 3 Zoning Pattern 4 Approval of the “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District Planning Commission and Staff Recommendation 5 Public Notification 10 Notices mailed inside 200’ buffer 5 Notices mailed outside 200’ buffer Notification Area Opposed: 0 (0.00%) In Favor: 0 6 UDC Requirements Buffer Yards: CN-1 to RM-1: Type B: 10’ & 10 pts. Setbacks: Street: 20 feet Side & Rear: 0 feet Parking: 1:225 Square feet Landscaping, Screening, and Lighting Standards Uses Allowed: Retail, Offices, Multifamily *Bars/Nightclubs Not Allowed in “CN-1” 7 Utilities Water: 12-inch C900 Wastewater: 12-inch PVC Gas: 6-inch Service Line Storm Water: 42-inch Line DATE: February 6, 2020 TO: Peter Zanoni, City Manager FROM: Daniel McGinn, AICP, Director of Planning & ESI DanielMc@cctexas.com (361) 826-7011 CAPTION: Ordinance adopting a new Southside Area Development Plan, an element of the Plan CC Comprehensive Plan, rescinding the former Southside Area Development Plan adopted on May 19, 1989; and amending the Plan CC Comprehensive Plan. SUMMARY: The Southside Area Development Plan (ADP) is an element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan, designed to provide guidance and direction for the future development of this area. This planning effort will replace the previous ADP for the Southside area of the community, which was adopted in 1989 and amended in 1995 and 2000. This document also updates the Southside District boundaries and future land use map in Plan CC, which was adopted in 2016. BACKGROUND AND FINDINGS: The City engaged the Freese and Nichols consultant team to evaluate current conditions, future opportunities, and identify a path forward that will direct public investment and facilitate future development in the Southside area. Summary of Project Timeline: The planning process took approximately one year to develop the Southside ADP:  Winter of 2018/2019 – Developing Baseline Analysis o Community Survey (December 15, 2018 – February 15, 2019) o First Advisory Committee Meeting (January 11, 2019) o First and Second Student Advisory Committee Meetings (January 16 and February 27, 2019) o First Community Meeting (January 28, 2019)  Spring 2019 – Drafting the Plan o Planning Commission Briefing (March 20, 2019) o Joint Advisory and Student Advisory Committee Meeting (March 22, 2019) o Community Think Tank (April 1-4, 2019) o Fourth Student Advisory Meeting (April 24, 2019)  Summer 2019 – Drafting the Plan Southside Area Development Plan AGENDA MEMORANDUM Public Hearing/First Reading for the City Council Meeting of February 25, 2020 Second Reading Ordinance for the City Council Meeting of March 17, 2020 o Third Advisory Committee Meeting (July 12, 2019)  Fall 2019 – Review of Draft Plan o First Draft Plan Released (October 29, 2019) o Fourth Advisory Committee Meeting (November 1, 2019) o Second Draft Plan Released (November 18, 2019) o Community Meeting (December 5, 2019)  Winter 2019/2020 – Community Review and Plan Adoption o Community Survey (November 26, 2019 – January 12, 2020) o Planning Commission Briefing (December 18, 2019) o Third Draft Plan Released (January 14, 2019) o Fifth Advisory Committee Meeting (January 24, 2020) o Fourth Draft Plan Released (January 28, 2020) o Planning Commission Public Hearing (February 5, 2020) Southside ADP Content: The major goals, policies, and implementation elements of the Southside ADP address the following: Introduction  Development of the Plan  Demographics  Engagement Process  Online Survey Results  Community Open House Future Land Use Map The Southside Future Land Use Map serves as a guide to future zoning and development decisions and provides a foundation to support the vision and recommendations of the plan. Vision Themes  Celebrate Our Safe, Family-Oriented Neighborhoods  Improve Transportation Conditions  Enhance Parks and Trails  Promote the Oso Creek and Bay as a Community Amenity Policy Initiatives and Implementation  Create safe, attractive, and efficient transportation corridors.  Improve pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular connectivity and safety.  Expand and improve infrastructure and city facilities as population and demand for services grow.  Utilize Oso Creek and Bay for sustainable recreation and ecotourism.  Promote land development that enhances the character and opportunities in the Southside.  Focus park enhancement efforts on existing park facilities.  Reduce and Improve stormwater runoff. Public Investment Initiatives  Short-term (next 5 years)  Mid-term (6-10 years)  Long-term (More than 10 years) Public Engagement: To develop the Southside ADP, the planning team gathered public input during community meetings and open houses on January 28 and April 1 through 4, 2019, as well as from an online survey instrument. In addition, an Advisory Committee and Student Advisory Committee provided guidance on the process and content of the documents throughout. Staff also briefed Planning Commission on March 20, 2019 and December 18, 2019. The planning team released a public review draft of the Southside Area Development Plan and hosted a Community Meeting and Open House on December 5, 2019. In addition, an online survey gathered community feedback on the draft document. Document Updates: The current Southside ADP was developed through an iterative process with the Advisory Committee and the public. Previous drafts of the Southside ADP were released on October 29, 2019; November 18, 2019; and January 14, 2020. The current document incorporates Advisory Committee, Planning Commission, and public input provided to the planning team. ALTERNATIVES: Staff believes that the current draft reflects broad community consensus due to the robust public engagement and document revision process incorporated into this planning initiative. No other alternatives were considered. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact associated with this item. RECOMMENDATION: Staff and Planning Commission recommend adoption of the Southside Area Development Plan LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Ordinance January 28, 2020 Draft Southside Area Development Plan January 23, 2020 Southside MetroQuest Survey Summary Presentation Ordinance adopting a new Southside Area Development Plan, an element of the Plan CC Comprehensive Plan; rescinding the former Southside Area Development Plan adopted on May 19, 1989; and amending the Plan CC Comprehensive Plan WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has forwarded to City Council its reports and recommendations concerning the adoption of the Southside Area Development Plan. WHEREAS, with proper notice to the public, public hearings were held on Wednesday, February 5, 2020, during a meeting of the Planning Commission, and on Tuesday, February 25, 2020, 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; WHEREAS, City Staff invited the public to workshops and public meetings that were held on January 28, 2019, April 1, 2019, April 2, 2019, April 4, 2019, and December 5, 2019 to give input to help develop a Southside Area Development Plan for Corpus Christi, and to receive public feedback. WHEREAS, an Advisory Committee provided guidance and assistance throughout the process and staff coordinated with various community agencies. WHEREAS, the City shall use the Southside Area Development Plan as a guideline for urban growth, implementation of policy initiatives and public investments, and to facilitate other plans that the city considers necessary for systematic growth and development. WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that these amendments would best serve public health, safety, necessity, convenience, and 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 Southside Area Development Plan, adopted by City Council by Resolution #020678 on May 19, 1989 and amended by City Council Ordinances #022166 on February 28, 1995 and #023938 on February 8, 2000, is hereby rescinded. SECTION 2. That the Southside Area Development Plan, as shown in Exhibit A, which is attached and incorporated by reference, is adopted as an element of the Plan CC Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 3. To the extent that the amendment made by this ordinance represents a deviation from the Comprehensive Plan, the Comprehensive Plan is amended to conform to the amendment made by this ordinance. The Comprehensive Plan, as amended from time to time and except as changed by this ordinance, remains in full force and effect. SECTION 4. The City Council intends that every section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase, word or provision hereof shall be given full force and effect for its purpose. Therefore, if any section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase, word or provision of this ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction, that judgment shall not affect any other section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase, word or provision of this ordinance. That the foregoing ordinance was read for the first time and passed to its second reading on this the _____ day of ___________, 2020, by the following vote: Joe McComb ____________ Michael Hunter ____________ Roland Barrera ____________ Ben Molina ____________ Rudy Garza ____________ Everett Roy ____________ Paulette M. Guajardo ____________ Greg Smith ____________ Gil Hernandez ____________ That the foregoing ordinance was read for the second time and passed finally on this the _______ day of _______________, 2020, by the following vote: Joe McComb ____________ Michael Hunter ____________ Roland Barrera ____________ Ben Molina ____________ Rudy Garza ____________ Everett Roy ____________ Paulette M. Guajardo ____________ Greg Smith ____________ Gil Hernandez ____________ PASSED AND APPROVED on this the _______ day of _______________, 2020. ATTEST: ________________________________ _________________________ Rebecca Huerta Joe McComb City Secretary Mayor DRAFT JANUARY 28,2020 SouthsideArea Development Plan Southside City of Corpus Christi Exhibit A CITY COUNCIL Joe McComb Mayor Rudy Garza Jr. Council Member At-Large Paulette M. Guajardo Council Member At-Large Michael T. Hunter Council Member At-Large Everett Roy Council Member District 1 Ben Molina Council Member District 2 Roland Barrera Council Member District 3 Greg Smith Council Member District 4 Gil Hernandez Council Member District 5 PLANNING COMMISSION Carl E. Crull Chairman Jeremy Baugh Vice Chairman Marsha Williams Commission Member Heidi Hovda Commission Member Kamran Zarghouni Commission Member Sheldon Schroeder Commission Member Michael M. Miller Commission Member Daniel M. Dibble Commission Member Michael York Commission Member Benjamin Polak Navy Representative STUDENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE Ben Bueno Harold T. Branch Academy Estevan Gonzalez London High School Grace Hartridge Veterans Memorial High School Sara Humpal London High School Ciara Martinez Richard King High School Katie Ngwyen Collegiate High School Damian Olvera Texas A&M Corpus Christi Natasha Perez Del Mar College Emily Salazar Mary Carroll High School ACKNOWLEDEGMENTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE Charles Benavidez Texas Department of Transportation Donna Byrom London Resident Marco Castillo Southside Resident Joseph Cortez Corpus Christi Association of Realtors Carl Crull Planning Commission Rabbi Ilan Emanuel Corpus Christi Clergy Alliance Dr. Mark Escamilla Del Mar College Gil Hernandez Corpus Christi City, District 5 Dr. Roland Hernandez Corpus Christi ISD Casandra Lorentson Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee Wayne Lundquist London Area Landowner Robert MacDonald Corpus Christi Metropolitan Planning Organization Moses Mostaghasi Coastal Bend Homebuilders Association Benjamin Polak Naval Air Station Corpus Christi Jay Reining Oso Creek I-Plan Coordination Committee Kara Rivas Young Business Professionals of the Coastal Bend Gordon Robinson Corpus Christi Regional Transit Authority Eloy Salazar United Corpus Christi Chamber of Commerce Steve Synovitz Oso Creek I-Plan Coordination Committee John Tamez London Area Landowner Judi Whitis London ISD CONSULTANT TEAM Freese and Nichols, Inc. 11200 Broadway Street, Offices West Suite 2320 Pearland, TX 77584 HOLD FOR ORDINANCE HOLD FOR ORDINANCE HOLD FOR ORDINANCE HOLD FOR ORDINANCE TABLE OF CONTENTS March 22, 2019 INTRODUCTION2 March 22, 2019 FUTURE LAND USE MAP12 March 22, 2019 VISION THEMES18 March 22, 2019 POLICY INITIATIVES AND IMPLEMENTATION28 March 22, 2019 PUBLIC INVESTMENT INITIATIVES38 1 SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28,2020 INTRODUCTION DEVELOPMENT OF THE PLAN The Southside Area Development Plan (SADP) is an element of the Plan CC Comprehensive Plan. The SADP is intended to provide an analysis of the Southside Area and create strategic recommendations to guide future development. As the community grows, the City should have plans in place to guide the anticipated growth. By understanding development patterns and the impact it has on the community, the City will be better prepared for the future. This plan serves as a guide for City leadership to make regulatory and policy decisions as well as prioritize infrastructure improvements to increase the quality of life. The Southside Area of Corpus Christi is located south of South Padre Island Drive (SPID), east of the Crosstown Expressway, and is bounded by Oso Creek and Bay to the south and east. The Southside is experiencing most of the recent development in the City, and the growth is anticipated to continue. The SADP was developed through a comprehensive public engagement process that integrated the examination of the existing conditions and the vision of the community. An Advisory Committee was created to assist in guiding the planning process and provide a representation of the area’s residents, business owners, students, and stakeholders. The committee’s participation was essential to the development of the final plan. Although the Advisory Committee championed the process, the community was involved throughout the process and participated in multiple engagement events and activities. Residents and stakeholders gave their input regarding the future of the Southside through online surveys and various community engagement events, including a Community Open House and a four-day Community Think Tank. Many of the recommendations identified in this plan are a direct result of the input received, resulting in a community-driven plan. 3 INTRODUCTION SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28,2020 DEMOGRAPHICS *Projected Population 19.5% 15 - 34 13.8% 5 - 14 7.0% 0 - 4 36.9% 35 - 64 11.4% 65 - 84 1.4% 85+ 34.8 Median Age POPULATION1 AGE (2018)1RACE & ETHNICITY (2018)1 4.8% Black 0.7% American Indian 4.1% Asian 0.1% Pacific Islander 2.7% Two or More 9.5% Some Other Race 78.2% White61.3% Hispanic Origin of Any Race 81,588 99,997 117,029 126,288 Population Growth by Year 2000 2010 2018 2023*0.99% Corpus Christi 2.04% Southside Average Annual Growth Rate 2000-2018 4 INTRODUCTION CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 COMMUNITY DEMOGRAPHICS The snapshot of the current demographics of Southside paints a picture of the level of growth and diversity in the area based on Census data and estimates. EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT (2018)1 9% 26% 37% 29% No High School Diploma High School Graduate Some College Bachelor’s/Grad/Professional Degree HOUSING (2018)1 $167,519 Median Home Value 2.63 Average Household Size Occupied 94.9% Vacant 5.1% Occupied 89.6% Vacant 10.4% Citywide2 Southside 1Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2018 and 2023. 2Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Occupied Housing Units Renter Occupied41.9% Owner Occupied53.0% 5 INTRODUCTION SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28,2020 ENGAGEMENT PROCESS Advisory Committee Meeting 1 The Advisory Committee met at the Oso Bay Wetlands Preserve and Learning Center to identify issues and opportunities for the area.January 11, 2019Community Think Tank The four-day event involved a series of meetings and presentations, input on future land uses, and draft recommendations based on community feedback. April 1-4, 2019MetroQuest Survey Launched An online survey was available to the public, allowing for input to be received regarding the draft plan.November 26, 2019toJanuary 12, 2020Student Advisory Committee Meeting 4 The Committee reviewed public input from April 1-4 Community Think Tank and provided feedback.April 24, 2019Advisory Committee Meeting 4 The Advisory Committee met to review the draft plan and provide feedback before presenting it to the community.November 1, 2019Advisory Committee Meeting 3 The Advisory Committee met at City Hall to verify the Future Land Use Map, Vision, and Key Elements.July 12, 2019Student Advisory Committee Meeting 1 The Student Advisory Committee met to identify issues and opportunities for the area.January 16, 20196 INTRODUCTION CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 ABOUT THE ADVISORY COMMITTEES The Advisory Committees consisted of 31 community representatives including residents, business owners, students, City Council, the Metropolitan Planning Organization, London and Corpus Christi Independent School Districts, TxDOT, the Regional Transit Authority, environmental stakeholders, Young Business Professionals, Del Mar College, Naval Air Station - Corpus Christi, and Nueces County. Community Meeting 2 The draft plan was presented to the community, allowing for feedback from the public in an open house setting.December 5, 2019Online Survey Launched An online survey was available to the public, allowing for input to be received regarding the current conditions and vision for the area.December 15, 2018toFebruary 15, 2019Advisory Committee Meeting 5 The Advisory Committee met to recommend the draft plan move forward to be presented to Planning Commission and City Council.January 24, 2020Adoption Adoption Date Joint Advisory Committee Meeting 2 and Student Advisory Committee Meeting 3 The Advisory Committee met to begin drafting the Future Land Use Map.March 22, 2019Community Meeting 1 Over 100 people attended the community meeting at Kaffie Middle to learn about the Area Development Plan process and give input related to the area’s future growth.January 28, 2019Student Advisory Committee Meeting 2 The Student Advisory Committee reviewed public input from the January 28 Community Meeting and provided feedback.February 27, 20197 INTRODUCTION SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28,2020 ONLINE SURVEY RESULTS ABOUT THE SURVEY Community members had an opportunity to participate in an online survey available from December 5th, 2018 to February 15th, 2019 to give their feedback on the future of the Southside. 389 people responded. Below is a snapshot of the results. WHAT IS YOUR FAVORITE THING ABOUT THE SOUTHSIDE AREA? 0.87%15.99% 19.77% 9.88% 6.98% 12.21% Job opportunities Other Parks Safe neighborhoods Schools Convenient access to shopping, dining, and entertainment Selection of housing/housing prices34.30% 389Total respondents289Live in Southside 8 INTRODUCTION CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 WHAT ARE THE GREATEST ISSUES FACING THE SOUTHSIDE TODAY? WHAT DOES THE SOUTHSIDE LOOK LIKE IN 10-20 YEARS? 189 Responses 124 Responses 132 128 Beautiful community brimming with personality, character and a coastal charm. ““ A multi-generational neighborhood integrated with small, locally-owned businesses & shops within walking distance; gardens & more habitat for birds; protection of Oso Creek & Bay; more kayaking, fishing, cycling & other outdoor activities. “ “ 0 50 100 150votesvotesvotesvotesvotesvotesvotesvotesvotes42 46 47 76 96 96 104 168 181 Crime / perception of crime Inability to walk or ride a bike places Lack of variety in shopping, dining & entertainment Not enough parks & trails Not enough shade/trees Poor street pavement conditions Traffic Flooding & water quality Water and sewer infrastructure WHAT NEEDS TO BE IMPROVED? WHAT’S MISSING IN THE SOUTHSIDE THAT NEEDS TO BE BUILT? Enhanced parks & trails Entertainment Dining Traffic conditions ResponsesResponses 9 INTRODUCTION SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28,2020 COMMUNITY OPEN HOUSE ABOUT THE OPEN HOUSE A joint Community Meeting and Open House was held at Kaffie Middle School on January 28, 2019. The purpose of the meeting was to educate residents and stakeholders about the Area Development Plan planning process and gather input from attendees about the future of the Southside and London areas. The following is a snapshot of the feedback from the event regarding the Southside Area. WHAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT FACTOR WHEN CONSIDERING FUTURE DEVELOPMENT Economic Development Tax Generation Development of Oso Creek Tourism Cost impacts on City Services Public Safety Transportation Network Impacts 0.9%21.2% 2.7% 4.4% 16.8% 6.2%10.6% 3.5% 7.1% 9.7% 7.1% 9.7% Other • Oso Creek bike trails • Accessible sidewalks with curb ramps • School zone signage • Accessible and bike-safe connectivity to common services • Drainage design Quality of Life Community Aesthetics Impact on Oso Creek and Bay Drainage Impacts Preservation of Open Space OTHER RESPONSES 10 INTRODUCTION CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 HOW CAN WE ENSURE OUR NEIGHBORHOODS THRIVE? WHAT IS MISSING MOST IN THE SOUTHSIDE? MY VISION FOR SOUTHSIDE IS... MY FAVORITE PART ABOUT SOUTHSIDE IS... More walking trails and park connecting commercial and neighborhood areas. ““ Diverse in housing, jobs, entertainment, etc. We don’t all need or want to live in the same type of homes/neighborhoods. Improve traffic visibility when entering main roadways. Preserve, protect and enhance Oso Creek. Sidewalks lined with trees and flowers. ““ ““““ ““ 9.6%16.3%4.8%7.7%26.9%9.6%6.7%18.3% Restaurants Easy access to shopping, dining, & services Mixed-Use Housing Choices EntertainmentParks & Trails Shopping OfficeOther 31% High performing jobs & schools5.9% Aesthetic Improvements5.9% Enhanced Parks8.8% Sustainable urban amenities & growth patterns14.8% 17.6% 23.5% 23.5% New shopping & lifestyle centers Infrastructure improvements Traffic improvements & safe pedestrian facilities 11 INTRODUCTION SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28,2020 FUTURE LAND USE MAP FUTURE LAND USE MAP The use of land is a critical ingredient in determining the way people live and work. There are two factors to consider when designating land use, how land is currently being used and potentially could be used in the future. In many cases, the existing active land use on property remains unchanged. For undeveloped property, there are opportunities to shape the way land can be developed in the future. In both cases, the most direct tool cities have to guide the development of land is through zoning. Zoning is the prescribed legal use of a parcel of land based on city regulations. Zoning is, in large part, influenced by the designations identified on the Future Land Use Map. The Plan CC Comprehensive Plan identified future land uses for the entire city and provided guidelines for development. The Area Development Plan process is intended to go into further detail about land uses and development patterns specific to the Southside planning area. The future land use designations for Southside have been revised to reflect community input, anticipated development, and best practices. The Southside Future Land Use Map serves as the guide for future zoning and development decisions and provides a foundation to support the vision and recommendations of the plan. This is accomplished by setting a land use framework that influences regulatory mechanisms and policy decisions that shape the built environment. Each of the designations presented on the Southside Future Land Use Map correlates with the designations identified in Plan CC. ABOUT THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP The Future Land Use Map serves as a guide for zoning regulations and influences new development and redevelopment within the City. The Future Land Use Map for the City was adopted with Plan CC and has been revised though the SADP based on feedback from the community. 13 FUTURE LAND USE MAP SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28,2020 FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES AGRICULTURE/RURAL ENTERPRISE This category includes farms and other enterprises that serve the rural population. RESIDENTIAL USES The predominant residential land use in the City of Corpus Christi is the single-family dwelling at a range of densities. All residential categories also include schools, churches, and neighborhood-serving public uses. • Low-density residential: up to 3 units per acre • Medium-density residential: 4 to 13 units per acre (including two-family dwellings) • High-density residential: more than 13 units per acre COMMERCIAL USES Commercial land uses include retail, services, hotel, and office uses that are typically open to the public at large. High-density residential uses, such as townhomes, cottage housing, apartments, and condominiums are considered compatible with commercial uses. Other commercial uses, such as wholesale and distribution businesses, are included in the light industry category because they have similar impacts, such as high volumes of trucking. Schools, churches, and neighborhood-serving public uses can be included in commercial land use areas. INDUSTRIAL USES Most of the industrial uses within the city limits of Corpus Christi are light industrial; heavy industry is generally located in the industrial districts outside the city limits. 14 FUTURE LAND USE MAP CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 MIXED-USE AREAS Mixed-use centers include residential, retail, hotel, and office uses. Mixed-use centers are pedestrian-friendly with buildings oriented towards the street. Residential uses are generally of a higher density, including apartments, condominiums, townhomes, cottage housing, and small-lot single-family residential. The mixture can be vertical, with different uses on different floors of a building, and horizontal, with different uses side by side. Churches, schools and public uses are included in mixed-use areas. INSTITUTIONAL Hospitals, colleges, universities, schools, large churches, and similar institutions, whether public or private, are designated as separate land uses because of their campus-like character, which requires special attention to edges and relationships with adjacent areas. TRANSPORTATION Airports, railroads, highway and interstate rights-of-way. GOVERNMENT Government uses include federal, state, county, regional and municipal government facilities and installations, except for government-owned institutions. PERMANENT OPEN SPACE Parks and playgrounds, recreational fields and facilities, greenways, and other green areas managed for public access and recreation. FLOOD PLAIN CONSERVATION Lands within the 100-year flood plain, preferably preserved for environmental reasons. Note: For more information about categories included in the Future Land Use Map, please refer to pages 55-57 of Plan CC. 15 FUTURE LAND USE MAP SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28,2020 FUTURE LAND USE MAP LAND USE ACRES PERCENTAGE Mixed-Use 210 1.3% Agriculture/ Rural Enterprise 7 0.0% Commercial 1,968 10.1% Government 350 1.8% Institutional 674 3.5% Heavy Industrial 25 0.1% Light Industrial 691 3.6% Low-Density Residential 280 1.4% Medium- Density Residential 6,997 36.0% High-Density Residential 1,506 7.8% Transportation 3,548 18.3% Permanent Open Space 1,248 6.2% Flood Plain Conservation 1,716 8.8% Water 209 1.1% Total 19,428 100.0% Corpus Christi Bay Oso Bay Oso Creek UV286 UV358 Trojan Dr Ayers StLipes Ave Sokol Dr Betty Jean DrNile DrS Oso PkwyOso Pkwy Dr FM 43 CimarronBlvdS Praire Rd Lexington RdKostoryz RdCarroll LnPaul Jones AveBrawner P kwyWeber RdBoston Dr FM 2444 Co Rd 22 Co Rd 41ACo Rd 43Co Rd 43Holly Rd Airline RdFlour Bluff DrOsoP k wy Rodd Field RdLipesBlvd Co Rd 41Everhart RdCo Rd 20A Holly RdAyers StSaratoga Blvd Staples StCimarron BlvdCo Rd 18 Williams Dr Ocean Dr WooldridgeRd Everhart RdCo Rd 45Saratoga Blvd G reenwoodDr Yorktown Blvd Mc Ardle Rd Southside Future Land Use Mixed-Use Agriculture/Rural Enterprise Commercial Government Institutional Heavy Industrial Light Industrial Low-Density Residential Medium-Density Residential High-Density Residential Transportation Permanent Open Space Flood Plain Conservation Water Existing Roadway Proposed Roadway Southside Boundary Corpus Christi City Limits Note: A comprehensive plan shall not constitute zoning regulations or establish zoning district boundaries. E1 Miles 16 FUTURE LAND USE MAP CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 Corpus Christi Bay Oso Bay Oso Creek UV286 UV358 Trojan Dr Ayers StLipes Ave Sokol Dr Betty Jean DrNile DrS Oso PkwyOsoPkwy Dr FM 43 CimarronBlvdSPraireRd Lexington RdKostoryz RdCarroll LnPaul Jones AveBrawner P kwyWeber RdBoston Dr FM 2444 Co Rd 22 Co Rd 41ACo Rd 45Co Rd 43Co Rd 43Holly Rd Airline RdFlour Bluff DrOsoP k wy Rodd Field RdLipesBlvd Co Rd 41Everhart RdCo Rd 20A Holly RdAyers StSaratoga Blvd Staples StCimarron BlvdCo Rd 18 Williams Dr Ocean Dr WooldridgeRd Everhart RdSaratoga Blvd GreenwoodDr Yorktown Blvd Mc Ardle Rd Southside Future Land Use Mixed-Use Agriculture/Rural Enterprise Commercial Government Institutional Heavy Industrial Light Industrial Low-Density Residential Medium-Density Residential High-Density Residential Transportation Permanent Open Space Flood Plain Conservation Water Existing Roadway Proposed Roadway Southside Boundary Corpus Christi City Limits Note: A comprehensive plan shall not constitute zoning regulations or establish zoning district boundaries. E1 Miles 17 FUTURE LAND USE MAP SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28,2020 VISION THEMES Although development is generally impacted by a variety of regulatory factors, market influences, and budgetary availability; a community with a clear vision can better focus the goals for the future. The vision for the community should be a high level overarching idea of the future that maintains a singular path for the future. To achieve that vision, the City must make an effort to direct development and make improvements that align with the vision. Through the public engagement process, four themes began to emerge related to the residents desires for the future. The following are the vision themes identified: • Celebrate Our Safe, Family-Oriented Neighborhoods • Improve Transportation Conditions • Enhance Parks and Trails • Promote the Oso Creek and Bay as a Community Amenity VISION THEMES MY VISION IS... 19 VISION THEMES SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28,2020 VISION Southside prides itself on being a welcoming place for families to live and grow. With nearby outdoor amenities and easy access to daily necessities, residents experience a high quality of life. The development of additional family-friendly entertainment to serve multiple generations creates a community that residents can continue to enjoy at any age. The new Del Mar College Southside Campus will create an opportunity for an urban village with a mix of shopping, restaurants, and services in a walkable environment. Southside will continue to be a safe place that attracts new families by ensuring high-quality development, attractive neighborhoods, and efficient development patterns. The vision for Southside is to continue to provide quality goods and services that meet the needs of the community. CELEBRATE OUR SAFE, FAMILY-ORIENTED NEIGHBORHOODS 20 VISION THEMES CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 COMMUNITY INPUT The following community input supports the vision theme: “Promote multi-use development” “More walking trails and parks connecting commercial and neighborhood areas” “Community gathering place” “Diversity in both housing options, jobs, entertainment, etc.” “More shopping and innovative businesses” KEY ELEMENTS • Mix of commercial retail, restaurants, and services • Walkable area that creates a sense of place and destination • Connection between Bill Witt Park and Del Mar College Southside Campus • Improved streetscape • Community gathering space • Entertainment options 21 VISION THEMES SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 VISION Maintaining a quality transportation network is essential to meet current demands and prepare for the future needs of a growing community. The existing roadway infrastructure must be improved and maintained to support the increasing level of development in the area. The transportation network features a transportation system that considers all users and provides safe, convenient access to jobs, housing opportunities, and regional transportation facilities. The transportation network should be designed to safely and efficiently accommodate transportation options, including pedestrians, cyclists, vehicles, and public transportation. A comprehensive transportation network provides not only different transportation methods but also supports seamless connectivity between modes. IMPROVE TRANSPORTATION CONDITIONS 22 VISION THEMES CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 COMMUNITY INPUT The following community input supports the vision theme: ”Improve traffic and traffic visibility when entering main roadways” ”Sidewalks lined with trees and flowers and better sidewalks near schools” ”Maintenance of streets and trails” ”Improve aesthetics along major corridors” KEY ELEMENTS • Separated sidewalks and bike lanes • Wide sidewalks • Mid-block crossings • Pedestrian refuge areas • Xeriscaped median • Shade trees along roadways • Masonry residential screening walls • Commercial landscaping • Storefronts facing closer to the street 23 VISION THEMES SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 VISION Parks and trails contribute to the quality of life by providing opportunities for active and passive recreation. Community parks are important in providing spaces for residents to gather and socialize. Investing in this resource is vital for maintaining a high quality of life. An interconnected trail system supports healthy living and enhances the connectivity of the community. The vision for parks and trails in Southside is to create an integrated system that encourages a healthy lifestyle, promotes arts and culture, and incorporates amenities that help residents utilize the facilities. ENHANCE PARKS AND TRAILS 24 VISION THEMES CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 COMMUNITY INPUT The following community input supports the vision theme: ”Recreational spaces that include green spaces, dog parks, a tennis center, indoor ski slopes, hiking, good water park, intergenerational activities, plants, trees, and vegetables” ”Enhance Bill Witt Park” ”More walking trails and parks connecting commercial and neighborhood areas” ”More parks and trails” KEY ELEMENTS • Shade Trees • Shade structures • Splash pad • Sports fields • Benches • Walking path • Location along drainage channel 25 VISION THEMES SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 VISION The vision for Southside is to enhance and capitalize on Oso Creek and Bay as a unique amenity for the City and especially for the Southside area. With easy accessibility to Oso Creek and Bay and opportunities to facilitate outdoor recreation, the Oso Creek and Bay will be a destination for the entire community to use and enjoy. Oso Creek and Bay will receive improvements, including improved water quality, the construction of a continuous trail, educational features, and water access to make this feature inviting and beneficial for all ages. As the Southside continues to grow, special care will be taken to preserve and protect the Oso Creek and Bay from the negative impacts of development. In the future, Oso Bay and Creek will serve as a resource for education, recreation, and overall enhancement of the quality of life for residents. PROMOTE THE OSO CREEK AND BAY AS A COMMUNITY AMENITY 26 VISION THEMES CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 COMMUNITY INPUT The following community input supports the vision theme: ”Preserve, protect, and enhance Oso Creek” ”Maintain Oso riparian areas and incorporate TCEQ’s plan for Oso Creek.” ”Better walking trails along Oso Creek” ”Add things that will improve quality of life and healthy living.” KEY ELEMENTS • Kayak launch • Hike and bike trail • Pier • Restored riparian (native vegetation) areas • Educational signage • Trail head and access point 27 VISION THEMES SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 POLICY INITIATIVES AND IMPLEMENTATION POLICY INITIATIVES VISION THEMES CELEBRATE OUR SAFE, FAMILY- ORIENTED NEIGHBORHOODS ENHANCE PARKS AND TRAILS IMPROVE TRANSPORTATION CONDITIONS PROMOTE THE OSO CREEK AND BAY AS A COMMUNITY AMENITY 1 Create safe, attractive, and efficient transportation corridors. 2 Improve pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular connectivity and safety. 3 Expand and improve infrastructure and city facilities as population and demand for services grow. 4 Utilize the Oso Creek and Bay for sustainable recreation and ecotourism. 5 Promote land development that enhances the character and opportunities in the Southside. 6 Focus park enhancement efforts on existing park facilities. 7 Reduce and improve stormwater runoff. POLICY INITIATIVES Seven policy initiatives were established to focus on implementation efforts to achieve the visions described in this plan. Policy initiatives are not exclusive and may further the goal of one or more vision themes. For each policy initiative, strategies are identified to support the implementation of the efforts. These strategies are the actions taken by the City that lead to the successful implementation of the plan. 29 POLICY INITIATIVES AND IMPLEMENTATION SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28,2020 CREATE SAFE, ATTRACTIVE, AND EFFICIENT TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS 1.1. Implement xeriscaping and other water- efficient plantings as a low maintenance solution for median plantings and corridor beautification. 1.2. Amend the Unified Development Code (UDC) to require enhanced landscaping and standards for improved aesthetics along major transportation corridors. a. Develop a Tree Plantings Policy within the ROW. 1.3. Where conflicts occur, improve vehicular and pedestrian visibility and safety at intersections through redesign, signage, and improved crosswalks. a. Explore adding staff for Development Services to inspect new construction for landscaping and potential safety hazards and conflicts. 1.4. Develop or enhance codes to require higher quality and durable residential fences adjacent to major transportation corridors to reduce maintenance and improve aesthetics. 1.5. Increase public education and outreach activities regarding roadway safety and sharing the road with pedestrians and bicyclists. HOW WE GET THERE Example of High Quality Residential Fencing Example of Median on Yorktown Boulevard 1 30 POLICY INITIATIVES AND IMPLEMENTATION CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 IMPROVE PEDESTRIAN, BICYCLE, AND VEHICULAR CONNECTIVITY AND SAFETY 2.1. Develop a variety of standardized street designs that accommodate various types of transportation for all street types. (Complete Streets) 2.2. Continue to incorporate bicycle and pedestrian facilities along stormwater drainage channels. 2.3. Create buffer zones to separate pedestrian and bicycle paths from vehicular traffic on major transportation corridors to help protect pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists. 2.4. Coordinate and partner with the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), Corpus Christi Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), and the Corpus Christi Regional Transportation Authority (CCRTA) on major roadway projects to coordinate improvements and increase efficiency in project planning. 2.5. Develop regulations and incentives to connect commercial parking lots of adjacent buildings to reduce traffic congestion and improve safety. 2.6. Explore requiring smaller block sizes and a minimum number of intersections per acre to promote street connectivity and safer speeds in residential neighborhoods. 2 HOW WE GET THERE Sidewalk with Buffer Zone Schanen Hike/Bike Trail 2.7. Ensure streets, sidewalks, and bike paths connect through and between neighborhoods, and to destinations with improved crosswalks and pedestrian signage. 2.8. Encourage residential street layouts that promote walkability and create ease of access to collector roads. 31 POLICY INITIATIVES AND IMPLEMENTATION SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28,2020 EXPAND AND IMPROVE INFRASTRUCTURE AND CITY FACILITIES AS POPULATION AND DEMAND FOR SERVICES GROW 3.1. Ensure adequate utility infrastructure to serve growing development. a. Monitor the Oso and Greenwood Wastewater Treatment Plants’ existing capacity and initiate expansion designs if warranted. 3.2. Plan for expanding police and fire protection services with growing population. a. Plan for a future full-service Police substation in the Southside area. b. Ensure adequate tax-base is in place to support police and fire operations. 3.3. Explore the possibility of a shared campus for City services such as a Police substation, a community recreation center, and other City services and amenities. 3.4. Add sweepers for streets and paved hike/bike trails as City operating budget permits. 3.5 Explore enhanced or additional inspection programs. a. Investigate creating commercial and residential inspection programs to identify leaking or broken wastewater laterals. HOW WE GET THERE Fire Station 17 3 Master Channel 29 Storm Water Ditch b. Enhance functions to the City’s existing Cross Connection program. c. Continue to support the City’s efforts to improve grease trap standards and inspections program. 3.6 Research opportunities for wastewater reuse, including possible habitat enhancement programs. 32 POLICY INITIATIVES AND IMPLEMENTATION CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 UTILIZE THE OSO CREEK AND BAY FOR SUSTAINABLE RECREATION AND ECOTOURISM 4.1. Create recreational opportunities along Oso Creek and Bay through the development of a network of parks, open space, trails, and access points. a. Develop a preferred alignment for the Oso hike/bike trail and design standards for the path. b. Incorporate marked pedestrian crosswalks and bicycle paths at gateways in trail design. c. Complete Oso Bay Nature Learning Center and Preserve (Phase III). d. Convert the Oso Bay Railroad Trestle to a Hike and Bike trail connecting to Flour Bluff and amend the Urban Transportation Plan (UTP) to remove the planned arterial. e. Connect Bill Witt Park to the Oso Creek Trail. f. Develop a unique logo and design theme to promote and designate the Oso Creek and Bay as a scenic and recreational area. 4.2. Preserve and protect riparian habitat along the Oso Creek and Bay. a. Identify a specific location to strategically preserve open space and conservation zones along Oso Creek and Bay. HOW WE GET THERE b. Permit dedication of land and hike/bike trail construction along Oso Creek and Bay to fulfill park dedication requirements. c. Partner with or create an entity to purchase property along the Oso Creek and Bay for conservation, protection, and trail development. d. Create an ordinance to prevent mowing within a certain distance of Oso Creek and Bay. e. Require a site plan review process for all developments within the vicinity of Oso Creek and Bay when a permit is requested. 4.3 Explore possible amendments to the Unified Development Code (UDC) that would preserve riparian corridors and vegetated buffer strips, while establishing setbacks along creeks and drainage channels in the Oso Bay and Creek watershed. 4 Oso Creek 33 POLICY INITIATIVES AND IMPLEMENTATION SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28,2020 PROMOTE LAND DEVELOPMENT THAT ENHANCES THE CHARACTER AND OPPORTUNITIES IN THE SOUTHSIDE 5.1. Promote efficient use of real estate where there is a surplus in public right- of-way. (ex. Saratoga Boulevard and Rodd Field Road) 5.2. Explore Business Improvement District Models and business community interest in establishing such districts for enhanced corridor aesthetics, parking coordination, and increased safety and cleaning services. 5.3. Encourage mixed-use development, where appropriate, to increase walkability and create community gathering places. a. Review and implement desired elements in the recommended updates to the City’s Unified Development Code (UDC) as recommended on pages 47 and 48 of the 2019 UDC Evaluation prepared by Kendig Keast Collaborative: i. Consolidate mixed-use options in the UDC into a single mixed- use zoning district. ii. Make the mixed-use zoning district a special purpose or base zoning district to eliminate perceptions of additional regulations. HOW WE GET THERE iii. Do not require vertical mixed- use buildings but create incentives such as increased density allowances, reduces parking requirements, reduced outdoor open space requirements, reduce or eliminate indoor open space requirements, allow a higher percentage of the building to be devoted to nonresidential use instead of the current 50 percent maximum limit. iv. Increase the overall residential density or nonresidential intensity than what is currently permitted in the mixed-use overlay district since it is based on the underlying zoning district. Example of Horizontal Mixed Use 5 34 POLICY INITIATIVES AND IMPLEMENTATION CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 5.4. Attract diverse, new, commercial development to vacant, non-residential, infill parcels. a. Work with neighborhoods and districts on targeted Future Land Use Map updates and possible rezoning if desired. b. Review and implement desired elements in the recommended updates to the City’s Unified Development Code (UDC) as recommended on pages 53 through 57 of the 2019 UDC Evaluation prepared by Kendig Keast Collaborative: i. Create an Established Neighborhood Zoning District. ii. Develop a Contiguous Infill Lot Bonus. iii. Apply parking requirement reductions for redevelopment projects. iv. Make the Cottage Housing Overlay a housing type, rather than an overlay district. v. Integrate the cluster overlay provisions into the base district as a development type that is either permitted by-right or permitted subject to limitations. vi. Build more housing types into residential zoning districts. Residential Neighborhood - Bordeaux Subdivision Vacant Parcels for Future Residential and Commercial Development Tree-lined Residential Neighborhood on Yorktown Boulevard 35 POLICY INITIATIVES AND IMPLEMENTATION SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28,2020 FOCUS PARK ENHANCEMENT EFFORTS ON EXISTING PARK FACILITIES 6.1 Incorporate park features to support activities for multiple generations. 6.2. Upgrade Bill Witt Park to include better access to amenities, such as a track or loop trail, a water feature, and trail access to Oso Creek. 6.3. Encourage Homeowner Association (HOA)-maintained parks and open space. 6.4 Strategically incorporate park elements that encourage arts and entertainment for residents. 6.5. In the longer-term, establish a community recreation center in the Southside area that includes a community pool. a. Explore a partnership with Corpus Christi ISD. HOW WE GET THERE Soccer Fields at Bill Witt Park Various Amenities at Oso Wetlands Preserve 6 36 POLICY INITIATIVES AND IMPLEMENTATION CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 REDUCE AND IMPROVE STORM WATER RUNOFF 7.1 Incorporate green infrastructure elements in public projects where cost- effective (Low-Impact Development). 7.2 Educate interested stakeholders and the broader public about economic tools for reducing and treating stormwater runoff. (ex. Oso Wetlands Preserve cistern) a. Continue to offer a rain barrel program. 7.3. Encourage xeriscape gardens requiring little to no irrigation. a. Educate residents on how xeriscape gardens can reduce runoff of stormwater and irrigation water that carries topsoils, fertilizers, and pesticides into lakes, rivers, and streams while also reducing costs and maintenance requirements for homeowners. b. Explore incentives for developers to install xeriscape gardens in new developments. 7.4. Develop retention ponds upstream along Oso Creek and drainage channels to capture stormwater to help reduce downstream effects. a. Investigate the use of parks as stormwater detention/retention facilities. HOW WE GET THERE 7.5. Incorporate pocket prairies, where appropriate, along hike and bike trails. 7.6 Promote proper management of pet waste. a. Provide more pet waste disposal stations at parks and trails. b. Enhance the City’s public information campaign on proper pet waste disposal. Example of Bioswale Example of Pocket Prairie 7 37 POLICY INITIATIVES AND IMPLEMENTATION SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28,2020 PUBLIC INVESTMENT INITIATIVES The built environment is the physical interpretation of the vision for the community. The following public investment projects represent improvements that directly support the implementation of the vision and goals. These projects should inform the capital improvement program (CIP) by prioritizing projects identified here for future CIP planning. Some identified projects are currently planned capital improvements by the City. Others are proposed projects for implementation based on feedback from the community. The public investment projects are divided into three time frames: • Short-Term (Next 5 Years) • Mid-Term (6-10 Years) • Long-Term (More Than 10 Years) Short-term projects can begin soon after adoption. These projects are considered “low hanging fruit.” They are more attainable and do not require large amounts of funding. These projects are generally planned CIP projects in the next five years. Mid-term projects are not as attainable within the first five years. They require planning or funding to prepare but should be implemented in six to ten years. Long-term projects may not currently have an anticipated time frame for implementation or may require prerequisite planning before implementation. Long-term projects should be revisited to assess the status of the project and determine if implementation can be accomplished sooner. PUBLIC INVESTMENT INITIATIVES 39 PUBLIC INVESTMENT INITIATIVES SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28,2020 SHORT-TERM (1-5 YEARS) REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY R1 Del Mar Southside Campus Bus Stop HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS H1 Fire Station #17 - Add Ambulance H2 J.C. Elliott Landfill Improvements PARKS AND TRAILS P1 Bill Witt Park Master Plan (underway) P2 Bill Witt Park Improvements (underway) P3 St. Andrews Neighborhood Park Improvements P4 Paul Jones Sports Facilities - Drainage Improvements (underway) P5 Oso Bay Wetlands Preserve Phase III - Administrative Offices Building P6 Crossgate Trail P7 Schanen Hike & Bike Trail Phase III (underway) P8 Oso Creek Trail - Planning* STREET IMPROVEMENTS S1 SH 358 Ramp Construction (TXDOT) S2 SPID Ramp Reversal (TxDOT) S3 Pedestrian Connectivity - Extend Sidewalk S4 Yorktown Boulevard Street Improvements S5 Rodd Field Road Expansion (underway) S6 Everhart Road Street Improvements (underway) S7 Slough Road Street Improvements (underway) S8 Holly Road Street Improvements (underway) S9 Lipes Boulevard Street Improvements (underway) S10 Wooldridge Drive Street Improvements S11 Rodd Field Road Extension S12 Holly Road Street Improvements S13 Safety Steel Drive Extension S14 Pavo Real Street Connection S15 Traffic Signal Coordination & Intersection Improvements* UTILITY/INFRASTRUCTURE U1 Storm Water Master Plan* U2 Yorktown Boulevard Water Line Extension U3 Williams Lift Station Force Main (Line A) U4 Oso WWTP Improvements U5 Greenwood WWTP Improvements * Projects Not Mapped ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Corpus Christi Bay P5 P4 P3 P7 P6 S9 S10 S7 S6 S8 S5 S1 S2 U4 U5 U3 U2 H2 H1 S3 R1 S11 S12 S14 P1 & P2 S13 S4 UV286 UV358Naples StLipes AveAyers StSokol Dr Betty Jean DrNile DrTrojan Dr S Oso PkwyFM 43 S Praire Rd OsoPkwy DrCimarronBlvd Lexington RdKostoryz RdCarroll LnPaul Jones AveWeber RdBostonDr FM 24 44 Co Rd 22 Co Rd 41ACo Rd 45Co Rd 43Co Rd 43Holly Rd BrawnerPkwy Airline RdOso Pk w y Rodd Field RdLipesBlvd Flour Bluff DrCo Rd 41Everhart RdCo Rd 20 A Holly Rd Saratoga Blvd Ayers StStaples StCimarron BlvdCo Rd 18 Williams Dr WooldridgeRd Everhart RdSaratoga Blvd Ocean Dr Greenwood DrYorktown Blvd Mc Ardle Rd Sho rt-Term Proje cts Regional Transportation Authority Health and Safety Imp rovements Pa rk Improvements Trail Improv em ents Street Improvements Utility/Infrastr ucture Im provements So uthside Boundary Corpus Christi City Limits !Project Limits E1 Miles 40 PUBLIC INVESTMENT INITIATIVES CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Corpus Christi Bay P5 P4 P3 P7 P6 S9 S10 S7 S6 S8 S5 S1 S2 U4 U5 U3 U2 H2 H1 S3 R1 S11 S12 S14 P1 & P2 S13 S4 UV286 UV358Naples StLipes AveAyers StSokol Dr Betty Jean DrNile DrTrojan Dr S Oso PkwyFM 43 SPraireRd OsoPkwy DrCimarronBlvd Lexington RdKostoryz RdCarroll LnPaul Jones AveWeber RdBostonDr FM 2444 Co Rd 22 Co Rd 41ACo Rd 45Co Rd 43Co Rd 43Holly Rd BrawnerPkwy Airline RdOso Pk w y Rodd Field RdLipesBlvd Flour Bluff DrCo Rd 41Everhart RdCo Rd 20A Holly Rd Saratoga Blvd Ayers StStaples StCimarron BlvdCo Rd 18 Williams Dr WooldridgeRd Everhart RdSaratoga Blvd Ocean Dr Greenwood DrYorktown Blvd Mc Ardle Rd Short-Term Projects Regional Transportation Authority Health and Safety Improvements Park Improvements Trail Improvements Street Improvements Utility/Infrastructure Improvements Southside Boundary Corpus Christi City Limits !Project Limits E1 Miles 41 PUBLIC INVESTMENT INITIATIVES SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28,2020 MID-TERM (5-10 YEARS) HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS H3 Community Policing Multi-Purpose Facilities - Full Substation* (Location to be Determined) PARKS AND TRAILS P9 Schanen Hike and Bike Trail Phase IV P10 Drainage Channel Trail Development Program Phase I** P11 Oso Creek Trail - Phase I** STREET IMPROVEMENTS S16 Wooldridge Drive Street Improvements S17 Williams Drive Street Construction and Drainage Improvements S18 Lipes Boulevard Street Improvements S19 Rodd Field Road Extension S20 Oso Parkway S21 Traffic Signal Coordination & Intersection Improvements* S22 Ayers Street Sidewalk UTILITY/INFRASTRUCTURE U6 Williams Drive Channel Improvements *Projects Not Mapped **Oso Creek Trail and Drainage Channel Trail projects are intended to show general location and do not represent final alignment. Corpus Christi Bay P9 S16 P10 P11 U6 S17 S18 S19S20 P10 S22 UV286 UV358 Gollihar Rd Naples StLipes AveGreenwood DrSokol Dr Betty Jean DrNile DrS Oso PkwyOsoPkwy DrCimarronBlvd Lexington RdAyers StKostoryz RdCarroll LnPaul Jones AveWeber RdBostonDr FM 43 S Praire Rd Trojan Dr FM 2444 Co Rd 22 Co Rd 41ACo Rd 45Co Rd 43Co Rd 43Holly Rd Airline RdOso Pk w y Rodd Field RdBrawnerPkwy LipesBlvd Flour Bluff DrCo Rd 41Everhart RdCo Rd 20A Holly RdAyers StStaples StSaratoga Blvd Cimarron BlvdWilliams Dr Co Rd 18 WooldridgeRd Everhart RdSaratoga Blvd Ocean Dr GreenwoodDr Mc Ardle Rd Yorktown Blvd Mid-Term Pro jects He alth and Safety Improvements Park Improvements Trail Impr ovem ents Str eet Improvem ents Utility/Infrastructure Im provements Southside Boundary Corpus Christi City Limits E1 Miles 42 PUBLIC INVESTMENT INITIATIVES CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 Corpus Christi Bay P9 S16 P10 P11 U6 S17 S18 S19S20 P10 S22 UV286 UV358 Gollihar Rd Naples StLipes AveGreenwood DrSokol Dr Betty Jean DrNile DrS Oso PkwyOsoPkwy DrCimarronBlvd Lexington RdAyers StKostoryz RdCarroll LnPaul Jones AveWeber RdBostonDr FM 43 SPraireRd Trojan Dr FM 2444 Co Rd 22 Co Rd 41ACo Rd 45Co Rd 43Co Rd 43Holly Rd Airline RdOso Pk w y Rodd Field RdBrawnerPkwy LipesBlvd Flour Bluff DrCo Rd 41Everhart RdCo Rd 20A Holly RdAyers StStaples StSaratoga Blvd Cimarron BlvdWilliams Dr Co Rd 18 WooldridgeRd Everhart RdSaratoga Blvd Ocean Dr GreenwoodDr Mc Ardle Rd Yorktown Blvd Mid-Term Projects Health and Safety Improvements Park Improvements Trail Improvements Street Improvements Utility/Infrastructure Improvements Southside Boundary Corpus Christi City Limits E1 Miles 43 PUBLIC INVESTMENT INITIATIVES SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28,2020 LONG-TERM (10+ YEARS) PARK AND TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS P12 Oso Creek Kayak Launch P13 Oso Bay Railroad Trestle - Hike and Bike Trail P14 Regional Recreation Center - 25,000 sq. ft.* (including Library and Technology Facilities in Recreation Center) P15 Drainage Channel Trail Development Program Phase II** P16 Oso Creek Trail Phase II** STREET IMPROVEMENTS S23 Oso Parkway Bridges* S24 Paul Jones Avenue Street Improvements S25 Rodd Field Bridge and Extension S26 Williams Drive Street Construction and Drainage Improvements (Lexington Rd. to Ennis Joslin Rd.) S27 Williams Drive Street Construction and Drainage Improvements (Ennis Joslin Rd. to Paul Jones Ave.) S28 Cimarron Boulevard Street Improvements S29 Civitan Drive Street Improvements UTILITY/INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS U7 Drainage Channel Excavation - Master Channel 29 U8 Drainage Channel Excavation - Master Channel 31 U9 Reflections Park Drainage Improvements U10 Schanen Ditch Improvements U11 Brighton Village Drainage Improvements U12 Cimarron Drainage Concrete Pilot Channel *Projects Not Mapped **Oso Creek Trail and Drainage Channel Trail projects are intended to show general location and do not represent final alignment. ! Corpus Christi Bay P15 P12 S26 S27 S29 S24 U12 U11 U10 U9 P13S28 U7 U8P16 S25 UV286 UV358Naples StLipes AveAyers StSokol Dr Betty Jean DrNile DrTrojan Dr S Oso PkwyFM 43 S Praire Rd OsoPkwy Dr Lexington RdKostoryz RdCarroll LnPaul Jones AveWeber RdBostonDr FM 24 44 Co Rd 22 Co Rd 41ACo Rd 45Co Rd 43Co Rd 43Holly Rd BrawnerPkwy Airline RdOso Pk w y Rodd Field RdLipesBlvd Flour Bluff DrCo Rd 41Everhart RdCo Rd 20 A Holly Rd Saratoga Blvd Ayers StStaples StCimarron BlvdCo Rd 18 Williams Dr WooldridgeRd Everhart RdSaratoga Blvd Ocean Dr GreenwoodDr Yorktown Blvd Mc Ardle Rd Long-Te rm Projects Health and Safety Imp rovements Pa rk Improvements Trail Improv em ents Street Improvements Utility/Infrastr ucture Im provements So uthside Boundary Corpus Christi City Limits E1 Miles 44 PUBLIC INVESTMENT INITIATIVES CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 ! Corpus Christi Bay P15 P12 S26 S27 S29 S24 U12 U11 U10 U9 P13S28 U7 U8P16 S25 UV286 UV358Naples StLipes AveAyers StSokol Dr Betty Jean DrNile DrTrojan Dr S Oso PkwyFM 43 SPraireRd OsoPkwy Dr Lexington RdKostoryz RdCarroll LnPaul Jones AveWeber RdBostonDr FM 2444 Co Rd 22 Co Rd 41ACo Rd 45Co Rd 43Co Rd 43Holly Rd BrawnerPkwy Airline RdOso Pk w y Rodd Field RdLipesBlvd Flour Bluff DrCo Rd 41Everhart RdCo Rd 20A Holly Rd Saratoga Blvd Ayers StStaples StCimarron BlvdCo Rd 18 Williams Dr WooldridgeRd Everhart RdSaratoga Blvd Ocean Dr GreenwoodDr Yorktown Blvd Mc Ardle Rd Long-Term Projects Health and Safety Improvements Park Improvements Trail Improvements Street Improvements Utility/Infrastructure Improvements Southside Boundary Corpus Christi City Limits E1 Miles 45 PUBLIC INVESTMENT INITIATIVES SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28,2020 SouthsideArea Development Plan Southside City of Corpus Christi METROQUEST SURVEY SUMMARY DRAFTJANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY SUMMARY SURvEY TRAFFIC AND DEMOGRAPHICS DATA 663 Participants 2 METROQUEST SURvEY SUMMARY CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 SCREEN 2 | vISION THEMES Based on the public input, four vision themes have been created for Southside. Renderings accompany each vision theme to illustrate the vision. Identify if you agree with the following vision themes. Vision Theme 1: Celebrate Our Safe, Family-Oriented Neighborhoods Vision Theme 2: Improve Transportation Conditions Vision Theme 3: Enhance Parks and Trails Vision Theme 4: Promote the Oso Creek and Bay as a Community Amenity SCREEN 3 | POLICY INITIATIvES PRIORITY RANKING ORDER POLICY INITIATIvE AvERAGE RANKING 1 Park Enhancements 2.69 2 Expand Infrastructure 2.82 3 Storm Water Improvements 2.84 4 Transportation Corridors 2.88 5 Oso Creek and Bay 3.07 6 Improve Connectivity 3.2 7 Land Development 3.51 OVER ALL PRIORITY RANKING Rate how important each policy initiative is to achieve the vision for Southside. Choose the five most important policy initiatives for future development to create a high quality of life. 3SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY SUMMARY SCREEN 4 | KEY ELEMENTS The following recommended strategies are methods to achieve the vision for the Southside. The strategies are organized by the prioritized policy initiatives identified on the previous slide. Review and rate the importance of each strategy. 4 METROQUEST SURvEY SUMMARY CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 5SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY SUMMARY 6 METROQUEST SURvEY SUMMARY CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 GENERAL COMMENT THEMES FEEDBACK Improve engagement process Build a larger library for the community Create a safe environment Encourage arts in the community Encourage sustainable growth Encourage variety of businesses Expand Parks and Trails Improve access and connectivity Improve Bill Witt Park Improve community aesthetics Improve Drainage Improve infrastructure Improve public facilities Improve Streets and Sidewalks Improve Traffic Signals No supportive of development Not supportive of the planning process Partner/coordinate with other governmental organizations Promote small business Supportive of low density residential Supportive of mixed use development Supportive of the planning process Utilize native landscaping Would like to see the plan in action 7SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY SUMMARY METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS USER TYPE INPUT % Participants 663 64% Visitors (to the Survey)1179 36% Total 1842 100% PLATFORM TYPE INPUT % Online 161 24% Mobile 502 76% Total 663 100% SURvEY TRAFFIC DATA SURVEY PARTICIPATION SURVEY PARTICIPATION BY PLATFORM SURVEY PARTICIPATION BY PLATFORM 8 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 SURVEY PARTICIPATION BY DATE SURvEY TRAFFIC DATA 9SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS SCREEN 2 | vISION THEMES Based on the public input, four vision themes have been created for Southside. Renderings accompany each vision theme to illustrate the vision. Identify if you agree with the following vision themes. Vision Theme 1: Celebrate Our Safe, Family-Oriented Neighborhoods Vision Theme 2: Improve Transportation Conditions Vision Theme 3: Enhance Parks and Trails Vision Theme 4: Promote the Oso Creek and Bay as a Community Amenity 10 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 RATING INPUT % Agree 506 86% Disagree 81 14% Total 587 100% vISION THEME 1 FEEDBACK 1 Need more information on what is meant by "Celebrate". It appears that "Safe, Family-Oriented Neighborhoods" is somewhat of a misnomer given all the illegal/violent activities that have been occurring. 2 Graphic associated with Vision Theme 1 does NOT portray a safe, family-oriented neighborhood but a commercial property developer's dream! 3 I don't know what this vision will actually do. 4 Family oriented is keeping big BOX stores out! They can stay where they are. There is no sense in moving them. All you end up with is vacant big building!! 5 More parks fenced in with shade coverings and better ground cover! Bark chips aren't great for falls. 6 All I see are commercial buildings in your picture, completely disagree with that for the London area 7 I don't feel like the neighborhoods are all that safe, so how can we celebrate that without establishing it first? 8 Put the homeless shelter on the southside 9 Why am I going or downing something before I see all the choices? 10 Define safe and family oriented 11 Police need to start tackling the crime sprees in our neighborhoods, especially late at night, or this one will be another lie. 12 Unsure if corpus is truly going to be safe. 13 This is less important to me than good parks and nature trails. 14 There are not enough safeguards in place regarding child safety even in the streets of our neighborhoods. Bike paths are not present consistently and people go way to fast even when there are speed tables present or school zones. More crossing guards are needed at most schools when the kids are walking to school. 15 This does not look like a family oriented neighborhood. We need communities of small affordable family homes in neighborhoods with small stores and churches in the center, instead of large strip malls and big highways. Family centered communities where you can safely walk or bike to the store without fear of getting run over. 16 I’d like to see the other choices first 17 celebration may be a required cultural phenomena, but it is foreign to my policy experience VISION THEME 1: CELEBRATE OUR SAFE, FAMILY-ORIENTED NEIGHBORHOODS SCREEN 2 | vISION THEMES 11SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS vISION THEME 1 FEEDBACK 18 Safe: sidewalks with crosswalks and bike lanes lead to parks and other places of gathering 19 What is defined as family? Single grandparents? 20 Higher density is needed! 21 Higher density 22 Not just families. Need to have places to shop and work that are not a 10 minute drive. 23 The neighborhoods can be family oriented but we also need to be able to walk to shopping and jobs so they can't be real spread out. 24 What will be the source of the funds for these improvements? 25 What does this mean? 26 Is this a picture of the north beach vision? Why is there a canal? 27 Define family. Are single adults excluded 28 Need higher density 29 We need more resources and playgrounds for disabled children and families with disabilities 30 This picture has no context so I’m unsure of where this actually is. 31 I agree, but it will need to be kept clean. 32 Nice in theory. But 30 years behind the planning curve for this. Failure to maintain infrastructure has caused once great neighborhoods to decline. Selling off neighborhood parks and green space was shortsighted. 33 Of course residents want safe communities. This is a base line theme for any community, not something that needs to be agreed upon. Fund the police department with more officers to patrol residential areas at night. 34 All the resources put into the south side, the fact that you’re advertising this on Facebook, I feel like that’s where all the resources go. Why not give that side of town some government housing? Oh that’s right the wealthy don’t want that in their neighborhood. Is that part of your vision? 35 I would agree if there was clarity on the vision that you Are wanting to celebrate. 36 This should remain within City Limits, not the London area. London is rural and should remain rural for the country feel, not the city feel. This would be ideal in Yorktown. 37 Don’t commercialize London 38 Would have to disagree if this means excluding low-income housing, shelters, and apartments. Seems to invite fear of others. 39 I don’t understand how the rendering illustrates either a safe or a family oriented neighborhood. It looks like a commercial neighborhood...? 40 I like the idea, but wit regular car break-ins and such, I don’t feel like it’s honest. 41 Cars are broken into every night in driveways. Does seem super safe and I don’t really get what this theme would do. VISION THEME 1: CELEBRATE OUR SAFE, FAMILY-ORIENTED NEIGHBORHOODS SCREEN 2 | vISION THEMES 12 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 RATING INPUT % Agree 538 90% Disagree 62 10% Total 600 100% vISION THEME 2 FEEDBACK 1 "There is an area on Cimmarron, Cimmarron Crossing that seems to have been forgotten. There are sidewalks up and down except for this area in which there are still ditches. It’s the area just past Mireles Elementary. Finish what needs to be finished first! This ditch , looks horrendous, is a safety issue and is affecting our property values." 2 Where can I read the vision theme 3 There is no efficient way to get from Yorktown to SPID, and the more Southside gets built up, the worse it is getting. 4 Improve public transportation! Bike Lanes and sidewalks need attention too! 5 Dedicated bike lanes on sidewalks should be established. Also, the sidewalk on Wooldridge Rd between Adkins and North Oso Parkway needs to be extended. 6 Bike lanes should not be on county roads in London. Speed limits have already dropped and bike lanes would make it slower. Support this for city roads 7 Mass trans such as dart like system takes years of planning. RTA busses too large and routes few and far between. Takes hours to get where you need to go 8 Like I said before all you people have forgotten about the disabled children and families in these communities 9 With an emphasis on street and pothole maintenance. 10 With an emphasis on street and pothole maintenance. Also more Cross walks are needed near our children’s bus stops and schools at commonly used crossing areas. 11 Corpus can become a touristic place, but one of the less attractive things it has is that it doesnt have a good collective transportation. Will love to be able to have options different than my own vehicle. 12 The roads here are worse than any other in any City I've ever lived in, and it seems it's taking extremely long to repair the ones being worked on. 13 Dont put the bike lanes on the sidewalks. Cyclists ride to fast for the bumpy sidewalks yall out on the new ennis joslin and pedestrians keep walking in front of cyclists because they have head phones on. 14 What will be the source of the funds for these improvements? 15 The roads need fixing before we build new ones. And when you're fixing them make sure you put sidewalks and bike trails. Don't build New roads for developers. Let them build them themselves. VISION THEME 2: IMPROVE TRANSPORTATION CONDITIONS SCREEN 2 | vISION THEMES 13SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS vISION THEME 2 FEEDBACK 16 Fix all of our existing roads before we build New roads or sewers. if the developers want roads and sewers they should pay for it and not get reimbursed. We need sidewalks and bike trails. start building neighborhoods like they used to where all the streets are connected in squares not stub streets. 17 No more medians! 18 I basically agree, however, I worry about the safety in the bicycle lanes on major streets like Staples. I think a better idea could be found. 19 Mobility CC and long range plans need to be enacted. Stricter regulations requiring developers to help build infrastructure. 20 Connectivity more than just transportation ... 21 City needs infrastructure for the growth. Synchronized lights needed to prevent unnecessary traffic. 22 Work on this for the entire town, not just lavish roads for you touch people 23 Again this does not constitute safely. We need smaller communities where you can get to know your neighbors instead of huge highways. 24 Transportation system is already in place and appears to be functioning properly. 25 Also include walking distance activities 26 This is less important to me than good parks and nature trails. 27 In the long run or short? 28 Again all I see in your picture is commercial property, completely disagree with this for London area 29 I wish it was safe to ride my bike to work 30 Enforce laws and ordinances already on the books 31 Most important 32 Wooldridge needs to be widened with gutter and sidewalks east from Rodd Field to make access to Adkins MS safer for kids. For the same reason Victoria Parkway needs curbs and sidewalks. 33 The graphic is an insult to Corpus Christi taxpayers. No more water-hungry, landscaped medians! How stupid are we?? 34 More safe bike lanes. It would be great to be able to bike around the city. We need to cut down on our carbon footprint! VISION THEME 2: IMPROVE TRANSPORTATION CONDITIONS SCREEN 2 | vISION THEMES 14 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 RATING INPUT % Agree 554 92% Disagree 51 8% Total 605 100% vISION THEME 3 FEEDBACK 1 When our City sells off park properties that it can't afford to maintain, one must wonder about the viability of such a vision. 2 Not enough safe space for families. 0 good walking areas. 3 Yes yes! We need lots of this and a sports complex 4 The Oso Bay Wetlands needs a Hike/Bike bridge across Holly to Flour Bluff with a corresponding park on the Flour Bluff side. 5 Very much so. 6 The parks are absolutely horrendous here. We NEED splash pads. 7 This is 100% necessary if you want to say the south side is family oriented and safe. The parks around here are rusting and so unsafe and out of date - Oso Bay is the only decent play place and we need more. Other cities have very nice, clean, update parks and playgrounds in nearly every subdivision. Swings, play places for toddlers and older kids, properly kept up and created, etc. Families need parks and trails that are safe and well maintained to create a sense of “safe and family oriented” neighborhoods! 8 If city parks can actually keep the parks maintained 9 Shaded splash pad for infants/toddlers and older children 10 The city of Corpus Christi is so far behind than other cities when it comes to parks. It is so sad, because we should have parks in every neighborhood. Especially on North Beach, downtown, the island, and the beach. We should have a work out park on the beach! 11 Less housing and improved parks 12 Parks are beautiful. But corpus can’t mow the ones they have now. 13 We need more city pools on the south side!! 14 Splash pads, covered playgrounds 15 No more tearing down trees!! Leave the coastal wetlands alone (people trash the trails, including photographers - perhaps the city needs to create a process in which for-profit individuals/ companies that use these public parks/trails must register w/the city in an effort to bring awareness to them & their cliets). 16 Signage and wayfinding at parks. Adequate open space for organized free gathering of organized sports. (soccer, football, quidditch, etc.) 17 I like the walking paths. VISION THEME 3: ENHANCE PARKS AND TRAILS SCREEN 2 | vISION THEMES 15SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS vISION THEME 3 FEEDBACK 18 I live next to South Bay Park and have seen it decline over the past 5 years. Neighbors would paint the swing set, but when it became rusty and old the city removed it and didn't replace it. When people are trying to help take care of the city, that should be your focus. The park had a small playscape, a baseball back, a sprinkler system, swings, and a waterfront bulkhead. None of that exists now and the bulkhead is crumbling and a makeshift fence that was put up is crumbling now as well. 19 we should be able to go everywhere we need to buy bicycle and most of the trip should not be on a road with cars and trucks and the crazy drivers we have here. 20 What will be the source of the funds for these improvements? 21 Make bike trails also 22 Corpus Christi needs a multi-purpose sports complex with turf soccer fields, inside basket ball facilities etc. please refer to Round Rock, Texas multi-sport complex as an example. 23 Unrealistic 24 Make long bike trails. Riding in the street...the traffic is too close to bikers and not paying attention (looking on their phones) and they hit the bike. Need a space of grass between the traffic and the bike lane as they do in Ohio. 25 This especially needs to happen. Huge lush field in the Schanen Estates area, yet the playground equipment is rusted beyond safe playing. 26 There is sooo much potential for better, much more trails 27 I would like to see mixed use trails. There are no equestrian trails around and along the Oslo marked as such. In fact there’s not one single horse trail in the city however there is a strong horse community that would support them. Also all running trails should have lighting for safety and better trail head access for families with strollers or bikes. 28 Make these parks handicap accessible and ready for children with disabilities and autism 29 Trails yes, parks no 30 More areas for children and family’s to spend time outdoors. Covered playground 31 A better larger natural dog park 32 Then why did city sell the neighborhood parks? For a quick buck? 33 Please incorporate as much shade as possible with the parks...they become unusable in the summer sun 34 Fully support for southside Corpus Christi (Yorktown, Oso, and London) 35 I love Oso Bay Wetlands Preserve. The visitors center is great and the trails are awesome, very well kept. The playground is wonderful as well. 36 I really really wish CC had more bike trails. Long ones, where you can actually cycle vs a 1-mile route. VISION THEME 3: ENHANCE PARKS AND TRAILS SCREEN 2 | vISION THEMES 16 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 vISION THEME 3 FEEDBACK 37 Fewer but better parks. Falcon Park was used a lot by me and friends. When they took the old stuff down they replaced it with terrible choice. Nobody goes anymore. It is useless to little kids and my 6 yr old is bored with the play structure after 5 minutes. Mow the area down to prevent snakes and please put decent playgrounds in that kids can use. I get it is ada compliant but now nobody goes. I’m so sad about that park. Shoreline got a decent playground. It isn’t convenient for Southside to drive way over there. One GOOD one on this side is needed. Falcon park is near a LOT of families. The Lakes and kings crossing and surrounding houses...and we pay a ton of taxes. It would be nice to have a decent park for that. 38 AGREE! But with existing financial resources not new bonds or tax increases. Even if that means a slower roll out. VISION THEME 3: ENHANCE PARKS AND TRAILS SCREEN 2 | vISION THEMES 17SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS RATING INPUT % Agree 516 84% Disagree 95 16% Total 611 100% vISION THEME 4 FEEDBACK 1 I live close by and come here often. It is a gem! Wonderful! 2 Cautiously agree... The city is a messy group. Trash is always left behind from any size group of people enjoying the outdoors. 3 Fully support 4 Again, of course, this is a base line theme. The waterways and ditches are lined with trash any time there is rain. This is horrifying. 5 We’d to keep it a nature habitat. Also have a maintenance plan. I live near hike and bike trail, it needs maintenance. 6 As long as it's safe and there is some kind of security or watch that goes on there. All we need is more sex crimes because of these secluded paths and what have you 7 Our Communities aren’t safe. If they were we all wouldn’t need to spend money on security systems 8 Too much vandalism here. 9 With a view towards conserving the existing ecosystem and minimizing human disruption. 10 Picture is fake. Cyclists are not allowed to ride in the park so this one is fake 11 Redeveloped the Kings Crossing Golf Corse as a public course in conjunction with the HOA developer trying to work with the neighborhoods and the property owner. 12 What will be the source of the funds for these improvements? 13 this should only be a community amenity as long as there is habitat protected that is the same as the oso Bay and Creek. And it needs to be permanently protected nearby. 14 Love this. 15 Not until the water quality is improved. 16 Isn’t it already promoted? 17 There is so much trash in this area already when there should be none. Who is cleaning up & who will clean up after this development plan? It's a shame folks can't clean up after themselves, including after their dogs. 18 I live near the oso. It doesn’t need anymore promoting. 19 Kayaking would be a great amenity VISION THEME 4: PROMOTE THE OSO CREEK AND BAY AS A COMMUNITY AMENITY SCREEN 2 | vISION THEMES 18 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 vISION THEME 4 FEEDBACK 20 This needs to be protected - so many areas in corpus become trashed without proper security and maintenance. Protect the nature and resources, then promote it as a community amenity where everyone comes together to help keep it nice. 21 Let's be careful not to do too much development here. Protect the environment 22 Connect Oso Bey Wetlands with a hike/bike bridge across Holly with a corresponding park on the Flour Bluff side. 23 Walking and biking trails would be nice. Include policing of these areas. 24 This may be expensive and not worth the cost. 25 It would be better if it were cleaned up more. Possibly even add kayaking/canoeing trails 26 Don’t limit density or commercial growth. High density is preferable! 27 Oso Creek is long-polluted and flood prone. As TCEQ continues to allow out-flows from chemical industry and NO efforts are made to impose flood controls, such a vision is a very expensive, grotesque fantasy. VISION THEME 4: PROMOTE THE OSO CREEK AND BAY AS A COMMUNITY AMENITY SCREEN 2 | vISION THEMES 19SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS SCREEN 3 | POLICY INITIATIvES PRIORITY RANKING ORDER POLICY INITIATIvE AvERAGE RANKING 1 Park Enhancements 2.69 2 Expand Infrastructure 2.82 3 Storm Water Improvements 2.84 4 Transportation Corridors 2.88 5 Oso Creek and Bay 3.07 6 Improve Connectivity 3.2 7 Land Development 3.51 OVER ALL PRIORITY RANKING Rate how important each policy initiative is to achieve the vision for Southside. Choose the five most important policy initiatives for future development to create a high quality of life. RANK INPUT % 1 122 30% 2 84 20% 3 67 16% 4 72 18% 5 65 16% Total 410 100% PARK ENHANCEMENTS PARK ENHANCEMENTS FEEDBACK 1 Add dog parks and walking trails 2 More wetlands management and set asides 3 infomercials, education mixed with citizen science training make excursions more than just "a walk in the park" 4 Our current parks are sad and need improved!!!! 5 Make the parks more family friendly 6 More handicap and disability parks 7 Yes to help kids get off the the iPads and phones to make them more healthy 8 We do not have enough nice clean parks with fishing ponds in them. 20 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 PARK ENHANCEMENTS FEEDBACK 9 Focus on making smaller parks like Cedar Ridge Park with updated play grounds like a small jungle gym for families and children to come out and play and spend less time on screen time and more time outdoors. Also, that park could use a walking bridge so that kids could use their bikes, skateboards or scooters at Shannen Walking trail. There Is no access from Cedar Ridge Park, kids and families have to cross Yorktown which could be dangerous for children. 10 This has to include actually updating play equipment at parks. Nearly every neighborhood park hasn’t been updated since the 90s and they are rusty, unsafe, and unused. We need more than mowed parks - we need ones young families can actually use safely with their children. 11 Shade please! 12 Each new residential development should have access to parks/playgrounds within a mile. 13 I wanted to pay for a tree and a bench through the parks dept. because the walking trail/sidewalk behind Pennine Way doesn't have any trees but the prices were increased so much that it just doesn't seem reasonable to pay about 1,000 for a tree and bench. Please install signs at the parks and walking trails indicating city ordinances so police officers can issue citations to people violating them. 14 We have too many parks at this time, we need to do an overview of which parks to keep and which to repurpose. Too many parks are causing a financial burden on the city and taxpayers. The are not being utilized by the community so why have so many, usage does not justify the number that we currently maintain. 15 Shaded rest areas 16 Oso bay nature preserve is the only Paul I can think of in corpus that has large shade sails. It's hard to be out long, especially in the summer if there's no shade in parks! 17 Increase diversity of foliage. Attractiveness of roadways. Ensure trees and shrubs are cut appropriately. 18 Bill Witt Park needs to be enhanced with improved soccer fields, baseball fields, kick ball and a Tennis Center with a multipurpose building to help manage all the sports and a swimming pool. 19 Yes 20 We have too many parks at this time, we need to do an overview of which parks to keep and which to repurpose. Too many parks are causing a financial burden on the city and taxpayers. The are not being utilized by the community so why have so many, usage does not justify the number that we current maintain. 21 Corpus Christi sold off many of its parks for lack of funds to maintain those neighborhood parks. That was a disservice to the community and resources should be reallocated to improve parks. SCREEN 3 | POLICY INITIATIvES PARK ENHANCEMENTS 21SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS RANK INPUT % 1 122 30% 2 84 20% 3 67 16% 4 72 18% 5 65 16% Total 410 100% EXPAND INFRASTRUCTURE EXPAND INFRASTRUCTURE FEEDBACK 1 Bring sewer and water to the London area. Encourage high density. Master plan the area. Commercial all along Highway 286 in London. 2 The southside is very congested. Streets need to be improved; water pressure is not great; 3 To expand city infrastructure in this area for anything other than natural drainage flood protection and green infrastructure is an invitation to more destruction where hard scape and residential structures are concerned. Infrastructure has many definitions and uses/dedication. "Yes" to green infrastructure for natural wetland and natural feature preservation. "NO" to hard infrastructure to put residential investment in this flood prone area. 4 Land maintenance and policing are badly needed 5 This city needs to do a better job of planning infrastructure replacement by set up schedules of when to renovate and upkeep on a timely manner, current process of waiting until all infrastructure is falling apart is too costly and is a constant burden on the taxpayers because to wait to repair creates a massive collapse of streets, drainage, and other such needed infrastructures. Such is the case now- where everything is collapsing and in need of replacement and repairs which has become unaffordable. 6 Our city should be focusing on promoting redevelopment of our downtown. Growth should push outward from downtown with higher to lesser densities of population(in general). 7 A must 8 make all canals and long ditches in subdivisions more beauitful with walking path around them 9 Expanding infrastructure should be top priority. This city needs to focus on better street maintenance and brighter street lighting. 10 Make it safer to walk and ride bikes for families and children 11 Interesting choices, didn't you just ask me that question previously? 12 Yes make it more bigger and better looking 13 urban wilderness is currently under-utilized; no need to expand just improve what is already present 14 Enhance our natural resources 15 3. Definitely need to upgrade roads and transportation as the city grows. SCREEN 3 | POLICY INITIATIvES 22 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 EXPAND INFRASTRUCTURE FEEDBACK 16 Please incorporate more shade options on the parks. They become unusable in the summer sun... 17 You should be working with Army Corp of engineers to dig deeper and wider canals to take water out toward the west to limit future flooding. I can’t believe this has never been part of a plan EXPAND INFRASTRUCTURE SCREEN 3 | POLICY INITIATIvES 23SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS RANK INPUT % 1 93 22% 2 95 22% 3 91 22% 4 76 18% 5 68 16% Total 423 100% STORM WATER IMPROVEMENTS STORM WATER IMPROvEMENTS FEEDBACK 1 The “ forgotten “ area on Cimmarron past Mireles Elementary. Sidewalks all around us, except for this small area. 2 Definitely need to do something about street flooding when it rains. 3 Improve the foul smell around the city! 4 Yes water more often to make corpus look more alive and groomed 5 No more flooding 6 We need safe roads! 7 Residents continue to have flooding issues in their streets/neighborhoods. Simple measures like not blowing your grass into the street (which end up in storm drains) would help. Can there be an initiative to educate our citizens and landscapers to stop doing this? 8 With all the new construction this should take priority. Where all the runoff from all the current land being developed will run off too should be a huge concern as runoff contains extreme amounts of pollutants. If you will promote oso bay as a community enhancement with parks and rec activities you don’t want folks in environmentally unsafe area. As much as the south side needs a way to get in and out of the area storm runoff should be a huge concern and enhanced before covering all the land with homes, roads and businesses 9 Please at the end of Slough Rd make the creek wide and deep enough for the runoff water flow freely, the brush and small trees the grew in the creek keep the water from running into the Oslo bay. 10 Set up priority schedules of replacement and then once pipes are replaced, set up calendar replacement schedules to continue periodically future replacements so that they all do not collapse at one time. Maintenance schedules are see, tp be not place or are not being followed by staff. I constantly see too many people at job sites where there is only a couple of people actually doing the work while 6-10 other employees are just standing and watching. Not very efficient practices being utilized. More training for staff and supervising directors needs to be implements so there is not so much waste of man hours. Reduction of wasted time and manhours can be repurposed to other needed projects. Since personnel budget usually make up 80 to 85 percent of most budgets, I think city leaders need to recover wasted dollars currently used for not very efficient use of manpower and repurpose funding to streets and other needed infrastructure projects. SCREEN 3 | POLICY INITIATIvES 24 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 STORM WATER IMPROvEMENTS FEEDBACK 11 Collection ponds and better drainage. 12 "Not real sure what some of these items mean to the city. I would bet they do not mean the same thing to me. Like- improving connectivity??? Land development??? Is this apartments??? Items in here or wait to vague. " 13 The area needs a cohesive storm water drainage plan 14 My friends have houses and yards that flood on Southside! You can't develop if there still runoff isn't exquisite! Also it keeps the mosquitoes from getting out of control. All other things being equal between 2 cities, people will move away if sirms instill fear of flodding and mosquitoes are bad. 15 Storm water management is existential to safe development. Residential development and community investment in the low reaches of this area are risky and not wise. 16 Encourage retention and detention ponds. STORM WATER IMPROVEMENTS SCREEN 3 | POLICY INITIATIvES 25SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS RANK INPUT % 1 102 24% 2 80 19% 3 81 19% 4 79 19% 5 78 19% Total 420 100% TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS FEEDBACK 1 Southside transportation corridors are now a nightmare. Please improve traffic movement in this area 2 "I think that who ever planned the city medians in the past did a terrible job and created a sinkhole for city maintenance dollars. I have lived in many different cities in Texas do have better medians which are very attractive but require very little maintenance. Ours medians are a very unattractive, dangerous, and very expensive to maintain. Our city lighting throughout our city is terrible, dangerous in that there is no adequate lighting with I am sure has contributed to the many people who have been killed and hurt by being run over. The type lighting is very inefficient and sub standard. I bet we are wasting an enormous amount of electrical cost by the type of old lighting that we currently have. Our street are currently made of asphalt and even though they are cheaper they do not last as long as concrete. Other cities have bitten the bullet and replace streets especially major thoroughfares with concrete so that last longer and provide a safe surface for our vehicles. " 3 Traffic enforcement 4 Well maintained streets 5 Improve fenceing along major roads (i.e. Airline starting at Holy working to Yorktown 6 The improvements on Yorktown Blvd between Cimarron and Everhart are really nice. We're looking forward to the improvements at Rodd Field. More trees, instead of groundcover should be included. 7 Make it safer to travel for pedestrians and bikes SCREEN 3 | POLICY INITIATIvES 26 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS FEEDBACK 8 The "attractive" corridor on Yorktown between Everhart & Staples isn't so attractive. Lanscapers (i.e. contractors) planted hundreds of cheap individual plants that will die quickly. Not to mention it took them months after completion of thw road to plant. The stretch of Yorktown between Staples & Cimarron has seen dead vegetation over the last couple of years. Grass becomes overgrown too. Why aren't we xyroscaping and/or planting mature trees in these medians? We need shade, low water plants, and beauty in this South Texas weather. Also: not related to beautification, but related to these stretches of Yorktown, are the open areas of the median a drive-thru (for cars to directly cross Yorktown), a u-turn lane, or a left turn lane? At any given time you can have all 3 going on, a breeding ground for accidents. I can't tell you how many times folks u-turn against the shoulder while someone is trying to make a left turn from the opposite direction. Painting (yellow & white) on the road should be considered in these areas. San Antonio & Austin streets have the paint. 9 We MUST improve our infrastructure first and foremost; otherwise we’re going to have an urban sprawl problem the likes of which we have never seen before! 10 Let kids know that food grows in the ground; does not always come out of a box in the grocery store 11 This is a City wide problem! Newly paved streets are rutted and bumpy in no time. Make contractors accountable, improve inspection process and do not repeat past mistakes! Ocean Drive is a perfect example! Embarrassing to take out of town guests on it. 12 Significant improvement ongoing 13 Make sure to add bike lanes. Lots of people have expressed a desire to ride to work but corpus has horrible unsafe roads so they drive 14 Yes make sure all areas have side walks to keep walkers safe 15 The lack of sidewalks is unsatisfactory. Persons that are disabled and children are forced to walk or ride in the roadways .far too many people have been killed because of this. 16 2 The roads suck because of potholes. Fix the streets before anything else. 17 The roads suck because of potholes. Fix the streets before anything else. 18 No bus stops. No RTA. Get the damn signals lights synchronized. Limit number of signal lights and stop signs. 19 I don’t care about attractive. I care about safe and efficient. TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS SCREEN 3 | POLICY INITIATIvES 27SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS RANK INPUT % 1 55 16% 2 76 22% 3 73 21% 4 66 19% 5 72 21% Total 342 100% OSO CREEK AND BAY OSO CREEK AND BAY FEEDBACK 1 Support and help finance the Oso Creek hike and bike trail. 2 This will add to the quality of life for those in our entire community. 3 Need to make oso more exercise friendly like with bike lanes 4 These are all equally important. The differences between them are 0.000001 5 I think this would be a far more cost effective way of using existing land to repurpose for parks and walking nature trails instead of having so many parks I our city. By doing a comprehensive remodeling of the Oso Creek and Bay is a cheaper way to provide resident with that type of environment and getting rid of many of our existing parks throughout the city. The reduction of city parks will greatly reduced the maintenance dollars now being allocated and used to maintain all parks. By ridding yourself of these excessive parks can recover money to do work on Oso Creek and Bay recovery and still save the city many dollars in maintenance expense budgets. 6 The creek behind Pennine Way needs to be redone so when it rains it won't flood the surrounding homes, make it deeper with higher dirt mounts to contain the overflow of rainwater and have it clearly marked with sign indicating no motorized vehicles, no mopeds, no golf carts, no motor cross,etc juveniles go muddling with their trucks on the areas surrounding the creek, there was a major crash between a 4wheeler and a pocket motorcycle one of the juveniles cracked his head open major head injuries because there are no signs prohibiting the vehicles. 7 preserve it, protect it! 8 This is a natural resource that has so much potential! Trails, viewpoints, etc. But these trails need to connect to other trails that can get us there safely. 9 "This should only be done if someone with knowledge on ecosystems is in charge - if a park is built or other tourist area without proper management, it will destroy the natural wildlife in our area and make our waters even dirtier. A fishing pier with safe parking, well lit trails, regular patrolling and cleaning efforts, etc would be awesome. " 10 A potential tourist Mecca and recreational treasure for locals is being over developed by commercial interests. SCREEN 3 | POLICY INITIATIvES 28 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 OSO CREEK AND BAY FEEDBACK 11 Realisiticly, I don't think Corpus has enough money to do this right. 12 It is critical to the south side that the kings crossing golf course watershed area is maintained as such and green space continue to be incorporated to help the drainage system. The area floods and little regard to this issue is being addressed. The south side needs smart growth not just neighborhoods with small strip malls cut in with no character. The zoning should also be established in line with other communities in Texas. Developers need to be held accountable to community planning. 13 My family loves nature, please preserve it. 14 Could make it a nice vacation getaway 15 ecoprotection and economy, mixed: mutual support :) 16 Just keep spreading and destroying natural habitats. More concrete, one more shopping strip, one more road to convenience people. 17 Oso is amazing! The opportunity to be exposed to wildlife and be active could add such character to the community but it is so often marred by garbage and debris. OSO CREEK AND BAY SCREEN 3 | POLICY INITIATIvES 29SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS RANK INPUT % 1 49 12% 2 81 20% 3 95 23% 4 106 26% 5 77 19% Total 408 100% IMPROVE CONNECTIVITY IMPROvE CONNECTIvITY FEEDBACK 1 See previous comments about safety around Adkins MS. Improve traffic control at Quebec and Wooldridge before new construction is completed. 2 Safety and leisure use! 3 Create the infrastructure before developing the neighborhoods. 4 Installs signs and more signs to tell people what they can and cannot do, people need to be educated about city ordinances and they need to be enforced, the quality of life is diminished when the police cannot enforce the ordinances because people claim ignorance. 5 As the baby boomers age, many will need the option of public transit as at some point they won't be able to drive. 6 Ok 7 Better parks are completely necessary. One major park in this town is absurd. 8 With all the construction and new roads I think run off and flooding will be an enormous issue as roads will flood and cut off the enormous neighborhoods being created south of Yorktown. The road on Rodd field already looks to be very low and does not appear to be safe from heavy rains being a major artery from flour bluff to London area. I also disagree with developing so much land especially for commercial and light industrial use so near to the bay. This will pollute the also sanctuary and cause great damage to the area. 9 Trails the connect to each other and to different parts of our community are essential 10 What will be the source of the funds for these improvements? 11 Put a bike lane separate from the street as invtge picture above. 12 Love all the new bike trails 13 Make our city safer to walk, ride a bike or jog and not get hit by cars! SCREEN 3 | POLICY INITIATIvES 30 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 IMPROvE CONNECTIvITY FEEDBACK 14 Much of those goes hand in hand as the area is being expanded and worked on. Having places to walk dogs and be able to clean up after them would be great. 15 Sidewalks -standard in the rest of the Country- would be nice! Some jogging/bike trails should be a mandatory feature of any new Plan. 16 No RTA. Stop putting signals lights, stops signs and speed humps everywhere. Do not allow police department to have a say in signal light synchronization. Lights should allow traffic to continue to move not stopping at every single light. Does anyone at the City realize how bad it is to travel down any street with the lack of signal synchronization? There are also a number of intersections where a dedicated right hand turn lane needs to be built. Saratoga East bound are Everhart and at Staples. No dedicated right hand turn lane. Everyone is just backed up all the time which points out to poor planning and management. 17 You need bike lanes on Everhart and Airline. IMPROVE CONNECTIVITY SCREEN 3 | POLICY INITIATIvES 31SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS RANK INPUT % 1 24 10% 2 35 15% 3 52 22% 4 43 18% 5 79 34% Total 233 100% LAND DEVELOPMENT LAND DEvELOPMENT FEEDBACK 1 The roads. The roads. The roads. First, main and only priority. This seems to be the main priority for most residents I speak to. Fix the roads correctly and expeditiously for the long term. Don’t try and tackle eight different projects that will take several years to complete. Focus your energy into the roads. Current residents will move away and potential residents (residents college graduates) will not look to Corpus as a viable city to plant permanent roots in. 2 Would love to see more business but I feel we need to fix what we have up already 3 Many of these options go hand in hand is things are being upgraded. 4 Require developers to install concrete streets so there is a decent life span for streets. Tour Beaumont/Houston for similar neighborhoods built in 1970s with concrete streets and compare to the crap streets of Corpus Christi. 5 I think you leave this up to the developers/ builders now. Why would you change? 6 This has to include nature areas with trees, flower gardens, trails, etc. The south side’s reputation of building apartments and car washes on every block is making it less and less appealing and family friendly. 7 We need more affordable income based apartments in the south side area for the working poor. 8 I disagree with putting so many businesses and light industry so close to the oso Bay Area. This will lead to environmental degradation of the bay from all the pollutants and run off from parking areas etc. 9 Please Require more green areas instead of allowing developers to concrete over all the land. 10 Slow it down and stop the sprawl!!! 11 Any new development should be built on smaller city blocks with mixed-use development. 12 Do not mix an existing single home area by allowing a large apartment complex next to a residential area, we home owners are willing to pay more to stay away from the noisy apartment complex areas and shopping centers. SCREEN 3 | POLICY INITIATIvES 32 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 LAND DEvELOPMENT FEEDBACK 13 The roads are in really bad shape and traffic is getting worse with all the increased housing developments. Roads lanes on Yorktown need to increase to 2 lanes each way. 14 We like our rural area, dont want it over developed 15 In the low elevations of the Oso area further development is not wise. Hurricane and tropical storm surges that converge surges from the bay side and the creek side, when flooded, preclude further development in this area...that's simply the topographical truth. The Oso area should be devoted to nature preservation in the form of wetlands and storm water management. Those features are valuable and can be cultivated for recreation. 16 I would like to see more business shopping areas and more bank satellite offices situate to the southside, I really do not like that all malls and businesses are located off of the SPID corridor, the current concept creates too much congestion in those areas. By creating a more wide spread businesses will spread out the traffic to other parts of the city. The city should also do a better job of Planning for funding future city streets and infrastructure replacement. The process currently in place put a lot of stress on the taxpayers which is causing a lot of residents and taxpayers to begin leaving the city. 17 High density and encourage development now. 18 Let's focus on improving and maintaining what we already have before encouraging more sprawl. LAND DEVELOPMENT SCREEN 3 | POLICY INITIATIvES 33SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS EXPAND INFRASTRUCTURE SCREEN 4 | KEY ELEMENTS ADD SWEEPERS FEEDBACK 1 Use decomposed granite for hiking trails - no sweepers needed. Don't mix hike and bike trails. No need to have bike/ pedestrian collisions. 2 For streets not trails 3 Use as community service (small offense punishment). Enforce anti-begging laws and sweep up beggars to work for their daily support instead of harassing drivers. Use as prison "reward" incentives; getting out to work. Also involves citizen science training 4 Anything to create new jobs meanwhile making this city beautiful! 5 This is the first city where I have lived that does not have sweepers for the main and side streets. We need to keep our roads free of debris. Not only does this add to the aesthetics but it also keeps the cost down of repairing personal vehicles (i.e. shattered windshields,busted tires) 6 All roads & highways 7 This especially! I cannot put into words how many times I have replaced my windshield because rocks and other debris have cracked or shattered it. It is a running joke that you're not in Corpus until your window has a long horizontal crack in it. Not good. 8 Does the City own ANY sweepers? Given the crumbling state of many of the residential streets, don't know how effective street sweepers would be?!? 9 Yes there is trash all along the streets here! It’s really something that should be done The following recommended strategies are methods to achieve the vision for the Southside. The strategies are organized by the prioritized policy initiatives identified on the previous slide. Review and rate the importance of each strategy. 34 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 ADEQUATE INFRASTRUCTURE FEEDBACK 1 Make sure developers pay the installation costs. 2 Bring sewer and water 3 But businesses shouldn't get this for free. We need to recoup coast through new businesses. 4 High density EXPAND POLICE AND FIRE FEEDBACK 1 Don’t overburden the system, expand 2 Again, yes this is basic and we need it as the city grows 3 They can do a little more training. Please. And hire some more. 4 Just a reality. Southside isn't exempt from crime or vandalism anymore than any other area. 5 Pathetically little law enforcement presence on our streets 6 Star feature not working 7 There are never enough police officers, we need more 8 To the extent possible, use impact fees for the infrastructure improvements required, additional fire house construction or police stations. 9 Only inside the city limits unless there are charges to cover the costs. EXPAND INFRASTRUCTURE SCREEN 4 | KEY ELEMENTS ADEQUATE INFRASTRUCTURE FEEDBACK 5 take care of existing areas prior to building new. Plenty of abandoned buildings decreasing existing priority values- winter texans are appalled & would not consider investing in such dilapidated communities 6 Charge impact fees to developers rather than saddling existing residential cusomers! Impact fees don't discourage development anywhere else. One might wonder how has the real estate cabal here has managed to avoid such fees. 7 This is critical to ensure current conditions are not repeated. 8 Infrastructure is always important to meet growth challenges 9 I hope that the lack of functionality of this survey isn't an indication of our cities ability to execute these plans 10 Seriously? Duh... 11 Quit turning down good companies who want to be in corpus 12 This is a no brainer. I mean with the fast growth it needs to be addressed 13 Create before the need, not afterwards 35SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS WASTEWATER REUSE FEEDBACK 1 Use reuse water whenever it is available. 2 Credits for detention and retention ponds 3 Research opportunities Very Important Science projects for creative instructors...citizen science awareness 4 Lots of research already done. Costs are knowable from previous water reuse projects here and elsewhere in Texas. What's the ROI?? 5 People should be allowed to collect and use runoff from their own roofs in their gardens, etc... 6 I'm always concerned about environmental issues EXPAND INFRASTRUCTURE SCREEN 4 | KEY ELEMENTS 36 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 ACCESS AND WALKABILITY FEEDBACK 1 Again, a thriving health community has this as a given. When need smart community growth. 2 I am elderly and enjoy walking for my health. Let's do this. 3 First city I've lived in where sidewalks are not a priority. If we improve our sidewalks, many more may be inclined to walk to their destination (weather permitting) This will also add to the overall health of Corpus Christi residents. 4 Promote??? Do not mandate or institute local laws, suggest and give tax incentives. 5 And then actually mow the tall grass in those areas so people can use them! IMPROVE CONNECTIVITY SCREEN 4 | KEY ELEMENTS CREATE BUFFER ZONES FEEDBACK 1 Yes!!! 2 Houston has these 3 Yes Yes Yes !!!! Safety first !!!!!! 4 Not needed 5 We need this the way people drive and hit pedestrians in corpus 6 Yes! The sidewalks that are touching or near the streets with 45+ MPH are a joke. That is not family friendly at all. 7 again, too many already DRAINAGE CHANNEL TRAILS FEEDBACK 1 This is an awesome idea! 2 No not needed. 3 But actually let bikes ride on the trails. Not like oso creek across from the bluff. 4 Consider mixed use and equestrian trails along drainage ditches. 37SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS INCLUSIvE STREET DESIGN FEEDBACK 1 Sadly this should be a given and it isn’t. This is critical to a thriving healthy community. 2 Not those terrible green walk/bike sidewalks. As a current cyclist, those are horrible for anything but kids 3 Pot holes are a major problem. What can be done to build better streets? 4 Current bike routes have so much road debris and trash that makes it difficult to safely ride. Maybe run the road sweeper every so often! 5 I like this idea, but, that bicycle lane at Staples and Saratoga is dangerous !!! Perhaps a wider sidewalk for high vehicle traffic areas maybe. Bicycle lanes in residential areas or moderate traffic areas are a plus though. 6 5 stars 7 It would be nice to see corpus become more pedestrian-and-biker-friendly 8 Not needed and the city would not upkeep and would use the most incompetent contractors anyway. 9 "Not needed and the city would not upkeep and would use the most incompetent contractors anyway. Do not use any kind of eminent domain!!!!" 10 With the amount of traffic in this area already putting pedestrian and bicycle paths close to these future highways is asking for trouble and accidents. 11 No because people will still get hit by drivers who are not paying attention or distracted driving 12 I would like to see a similar bike trail on the Southside similar to the one on Alameda. 13 too many bike paths/trials that nobody uses, no need for them on high traffic streets when nobody uses them! 14 Most bike paths are seldom used. IMPROVE CONNECTIVITY SCREEN 4 | KEY ELEMENTS REDUCE TRAFFIC CONGESTION FEEDBACK 1 There's plenty of examples where shopping centers and hotels are within walking distance to one another, but there's no safe path to get to each. 2 There's plenty of examples where multiple shopping centers, hotels , and restaurants are within walking distance to one another, but there's no safe path to get to each. 3 But also reduce areas of exiting parking lots. For example, the mall and H-E-B shopping centers on staples St should not allow for exiting onto Staples St during rush hour, except at the light at H-E-B. I have spent a half hour trying to get from McArdle to the SPID on Staples St during rush hour and most of it is due to 1. cars exiting the mall and other cars letting them in and 2. people not keeping the intersection at the SPID clear and being stopped in the intersection when the light goes red so others cannot get through during their green light. 4 5 stars 38 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 IMPROVE CONNECTIVITY SCREEN 4 | KEY ELEMENTS REDUCE TRAFFIC CONGESTION FEEDBACK 5 Not needed!!! This is a property rights issue and the city should stay out of taking is tax paying citizens rights away!!! 6 Yes!!!! 7 Just crossing to get mail is dangerous! High volume traffic 8 And put parking garages up especially downtown. There is not enough parking. 9 Parking lots should not be the city’s concern. Quit reducing the amount of lanes and traffic won’t be a problem. 39SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS EFFICIENT DEvELOPMENT 1 Only if NO TIRZ or other City financial inducements are offered. 2 Put walking areas and bike trails near drainage canals 3 Add more green space in between subdivisions. Clear Northside neighborhoods near the refineries and plant trees there instead. 4 Higher density 5 What specifically is this looking to do? 6 Higher density LAND DEVELOPMENT SCREEN 4 | KEY ELEMENTS ENCOURAGE MIXEDUSE 1 Only if NO TIRZ or other City financial inducements are offered. 2 Eliminating zoning laws and allowing multi-purpose use of land with local stores and services would encourage neighborhoods—families, walking, green areas, multigenerational education, neighborhood safety, etc. etc. NEW DEvELOPMENT 1 We have enough commercial areas - we need more family oriented areas for recreation. Parks, trails, courts, community nature gardens, etc. Commercial needs to stop infiltrating our residential areas. 2 Only if NO TIRZ or other City financial inducements are offered. 3 Only if there is demand by private money. 4 Offer no-tax introductory periods for projects that would breathe life into an inactive commercial zone. SPECIAL DISTRICTS 1 Too many half-empty strip centers already. Careful on additional commercial building. 2 Only if NO TIRZ or other City financial inducements are offered. 40 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 LAND ASSEMBLY 1 Are you saying build a wall? 2 Please create a hike/bike bridge along Holly Rd connecting Oso Bay Wetlands with a corresponding park on the Flour Bluff side. 3 Absolutely!! Should be the number one priority 4 4 stars 5 ???????? I'm not sure what you are asking here. If it is just another government control entity, then NO. 6 Great idea. However Advisory Committee Summary Nov 1, 2019, page 4 bottom line is very alarming "does not want to show cost estimates or potential funding sources in the plan".....does not sound kosher nor transparent 7 Keep development out of the flood plain. 8 No 9 This is intensely critical and perhaps almost too late. Please hold the builders accountable to the riparian demands and the drainage issues. OSO CREEK AND BAY SCREEN 4 | KEY ELEMENTS OSO CREEK/BAY AMENITIES 1 Yes! Yes! Yes! 2 non-motorized, please 3 Oso Creek is an opportunity waiting to happen. 4 As long as the recreational activities don’t have too much of an environmental impact 5 As long as the recreational activities don’t have too much of an environmental impact.. would need to know what kind of activities first 41SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS PRESERvE OSO CREEK/BAY 1 I'd think this a non issue. As protected lands...wouldn't the city have to, by law, continue preservation? I'd hope so. 2 Extremely important 3 5 stars 4 Based on Kings Crossing, habitat will survive even with development for recreation. 5 But don’t limit development 6 As long as development is not limited! We need high density! 7 Yes, but make it as accessible as possible. I come from San Marcos home to the wild rice and other endangered species but we could still swim up to the wild rice, we could kayak at the headwaters, the preservation was high but so was public access. Oso bay needs that too! As a science teacher, I would love to see more families get to fully interract with nature. PREvENT MOWING 1 The areas need to be kept clean not overgrown. Education on how to keep areas clean seems more appropriate. 2 That is outside my area of expertise but seems a compromise is needed. High grass equals snakes and limits usage. We want to use the area not keep it 100% natural 3 Mowing may serve to protect and encourage some wildlife + decrease vermin 4 I'm not sure I like this idea. I like effective mosquito control much better. Let's come up with a happy compromise. 5 What needs to be prevented is the damage people create with their golf carts and motorcycles tearing up the parks and the areas along the Oso creek, there are off road vehicles along the Oso all the time with their loud motors and mufflers nobody paid 300,000 to spend the weekend hearing gulf carts and motorcycles all day long going up and down the street and sidewalks along the Oso. 6 Yeah try to keep it as natural as possible 7 Yeah. Good luck. If homes are built, people are going to mow. 8 2 stars 9 Don't know enough about this- what is the impact of mowing? 10 Need to mow to cut down on water moccasins OSO CREEK/BAY AMENITIES 6 As long as the recreational activities don’t have too much of an environmental impact.. would need to know what kind of opportunities first 7 5 stars OSO CREEK AND BAY SCREEN 4 | KEY ELEMENTS 42 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 ARTS AND ENTERTAINMENT 1 No, already have other areas for entertainment on Shoreline 2 I have been here 5 years and never gone to anything at the outdoor stage in Cole park so guess it’s just not my thing 3 add education to this list & it becomes a five star rating 4 2 stars 5 Not needed!!!! 6 Like murals and sculptures? Because I would love those two additions 7 Like murals and sculptures? Because I would love more of those two features in parks PARK ENHANCEMENTS SCREEN 4 | KEY ELEMENTS HOA MAINTAINED PARKS 1 I would love it if The HOA fees we pay went to this, our subdivision has an HOA, but no park in our area. 2 Not needed!!! 3 Unsure how the city is going to regulate this. But ok? 4 Push parks adaptions 5 Kings Crossing is trying to do this with St Denis Park. Very difficult to work with city on this! 6 2 stars 7 I disagree with this statement. I don't live at the Lakes, but I don't think their pool should be open to the whole community. It can be a liability of someone gets hurt at one of those similar areas and there is not enough parking at that location. 8 As long as others not living in the neighborhood are allowed to utilize all city parks 43SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS HOA MAINTAINED PARKS 9 HOA's have become very restrictive. Sometimes counterproductive. Not sure that's the way to go. 10 While HOA should maintain green areas and play areas, keep in mind they need to abide city policies. They shouldn’t be able to develop their rules which go against city ordinances. 11 mandate; enforce 12 That’s a good idea but probably will never happen 13 No can’t afford HOAs fees- that would hit retirees hard 14 HOAs won't do this. It costs them money. I am supposed to have these amenities. As a former developer in the DFW area, I can tell you that when the developers houses are sold, they let the green areas go. Best not to have it at all. 15 No, no hoa anything MULTIGENERATIONAL PARKS 1 Allow kayaks at the Oso bay but no motorized boats please the noise would be unbearable to those of us living long the Oso. 2 Not needed!!!! 3 Not needed 4 Fix and improve the parks we already have!!! 5 4 stars 6 I think it would be great to have upgraded basketball courts, sand volleyball areas, more swings for teens and adults, and better slides and playground areas for kids. Also, shade is needed at some parks. Wales park needs some shaded trees, and Breckenridge park currently has missing equipment (tire swing). We love using the exercise equipment at Breckenridge along the Hike and Bike trail. I think it's great to incorporate all age groups. 7 "Splash pads like in San Antonio. And Fitness trails" 8 Large grassy dog park 9 Yes. Better parks for littles and bigger kids together. Some big stuff and small. 10 Great for London! Many new subdivisions (off Staples) with no parks. 11 That would be a great idea however. We have a salty air which will compromise metal, we have termites that will effect wood structures, and our long beautiful hot days will naturally degrade plastic. If the park is able to adapt to those conditions. Shade will be a huge plus for all people. PARK ENHANCEMENTS SCREEN 4 | KEY ELEMENTS 44 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 RECREATION CENTER 1 I am still upset that my taxpayer dollars built the Flour Bluff ISD natatorium and the public can't use it! 2 These are not sustainable and should not be placed on the backs of taxpayers 3 Not needed!!!! 4 We need a pool!!! 5 Southside would greatly benefit from a pool or splash pad 6 3 stars 7 Splash pad better than pool. 8 I love this idea! While we already have access to the Natatorium, this would be great to allow the public more access to a pool on the weekends. Currently, we are limited because Middle and High Schools are holding swim meets at the Natatorium on Saturdays. 9 A poor idea at best. 10 While there are red centers with pools, the centers are dated. Pools need updates. Corpus Christi should be offer neighborhood pools to encourage citizens to get and have kids swim while they are walking around the park. 11 No, Nauditorium already nearby 12 Yes! We need pools and splash pads! 13 They gave beautiful recreation buildings with pools, tennis courts, splash areas for kids and wonderful playgrounds whee I lived in Cleveland suburbs. 14 Too costly. 15 City should take over vacant pool at Country Club Park on Congressional and Pebble Beach. If not economically feasible to keep as pool, then fill it in and make it a green space or expand playground and picnic area. UPGRADE BILL WITT PARK 1 Big play scapes, lots of bench seating for all, splash pads 2 special funding opportunity here; integrate park may be better term than upgrade 3 Upgraded soccer facilities are desperately needed in the Corpus Christi area. 4 5 stars 5 About 1 million dollars needed...suggest be put on the 2020 Bond Issue 6 "Dog Park Walking trails" 7 A pool would be nice! 8 Not needed 9 Not needed!!!! PARK ENHANCEMENTS SCREEN 4 | KEY ELEMENTS 45SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS UPGRADE BILL WITT PARK 10 If this includes ramps and handicap swings and other things for people with disabilities then I am 100% for it. 11 If this includes ramps and handicap swings and other features for people with disabilities then I am 100% for it. PARK ENHANCEMENTS SCREEN 4 | KEY ELEMENTS 46 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 ENCOURAGE XERISCAPING 1 While I love the aesthetic aspect I would rather this money be used in other ways & for other park needs as I don't want to see tax increases and more bond elections either. Let nature be nature & if we are going to plant something may it help by feeding the community and teaching them to garden and allow them to harvest it. 2 Will there be incentive for business and home owners to change over to this? 3 Only no watering is the requirement consistent with Desal. 4 I Xeriscape in my front yard and I really like the idea of not having to spend money watering my flowerbeds. I believe this is a good and cost effective solution toward beautification and sustainability. 5 Not sure what this means?? You want to continue building flower beds that no one maintains like all the ones on Yorktown. If you going to make beds you have to maintain them!! Hello!! Yorktown looks like crap!! 6 Xeriscaping has very little impact on storm water improvement, but does have impact on water use. 7 Do not install landscaping that you cannot afford to maintain 8 Yes!! I’d love to see more of this!!!! STORM WATER IMPROVEMENTS SCREEN 4 | KEY ELEMENTS GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE 1 Has very little impact on storm water improvement, but does have impact on water use. 2 Green infrastructure has very little impact on storm water improvement, but does have impact on water use. 3 "TREES TREES TREES" 47SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE 4 Like the ones they put In by the dump entrance that no one is taking care of. Those look like garbage!!! 5 Just make it “green” despite the initial startup cost. It pays for itself 6 Only where it is cost effective. 7 when considered for long term, it becomes cost-effective. Remember Harvey? 8 Fine, as long as we can reduce water usage for maintenance. 9 While I love the aesthetic aspect I would rather this money be used in other ways & for other park needs as I don't want to see tax increases and more bond elections either. Let nature be nature & if we are going to plant something may it help by feeding the community and teaching them to garden and allow them to harvest it. POCKET PRAIRIE 1 While I love the aesthetic aspect I would rather this money be used in other ways & for other park needs as I don't want to see tax increases and more bond elections either. Let nature be nature & if we are going to plant something may it help by feeding the community and teaching them to garden and allow them to harvest it. 2 Let it grow up naturally. 3 No standing water! Mosquito issues in this city already! 4 Yet another another fantasy. These mosquito breeding facilities are lovely, but to resolve the Oso flooding issues a FAR larger prairie is required. 5 Considering auto drivers care little about the safety of cyclists, bike/hike trails are a great idea 6 When left alone an environment usually takes care of itself. Be careful when adding plants to the area. 7 In order to properly do this requires controlled burns and grazing animals. POCKET PRAIRIE 1 While I love the aesthetic aspect I would rather this money be used in other ways & for other park needs as I don't want to see tax increases and more bond elections either. Let nature be nature & if we are going to plant something may it help by feeding the community and teaching them to garden and allow them to harvest it. 2 Let it grow up naturally. 3 No standing water! Mosquito issues in this city already! 4 Yet another another fantasy. These mosquito breeding facilities are lovely, but to resolve the Oso flooding issues a FAR larger prairie is required. 5 Considering auto drivers care little about the safety of cyclists, bike/hike trails are a great idea STORM WATER IMPROVEMENTS SCREEN 4 | KEY ELEMENTS 48 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 POCKET PRAIRIE 6 When left alone an environment usually takes care of itself. Be careful when adding plants to the area. 7 In order to properly do this requires controlled burns and grazing animals. PROPER WASTE MANAGEMENT 1 And regular clean ups of grass areas - it’s disgusting when they mow, leave clippings in the street and sidewalk, then all the grass is littered in trash. Makes our city look gross 2 You could do this. But among the rest of luxuries like little free libraries people will damage them. So it’s pointless 3 I live on Oso Parkway, the convenience of doggie poop bags being available for pet owners is highly utilized. Can't hurt to have the same convenience as the city expands the south side. People use them if they are accessible 4 This element has little to do with storm water improvement. 5 Pet waste should be controlled. I highly agree. Could we design in some areas where people can use the facilities when needed. I am elderly and have had accidents before while walking. Perhaps some well maintained, decorative Skid-O-Cans or something along the way. Please ??? 6 Public Health would benefit Immensely from extreme education along these lines...in the last week I have seen more than a dozen disposable diapers in different parking lots- what do people's kitchens look like? Do they flush? Common sense left at the drive thru window?? 7 Start writing tickets for pet waste. 8 Get tired of neighbors not picking up after dogs and dogs NOT on a leash! 9 Would be nice but people never use them. Just throw them down anywhere. 10 This is a great idea for trails. Especially when I watch people walk their animals and DO NOT cleanup after them. But I don't see how this affects storm water. We need to look at why streets flood. STORM WATER RETENTION 1 This is what Florida uses - works great 2 5 stars 3 This should take priority to help with keeping oso clean. 4 The ONLY viable input element offered for storm water improvement. Where are others, e.g., rechannelization, dikes? 5 This by far the most important aspect of growth in this area. Nobody likes flooding. That needs to be the number 1 design issue. Afterward, we need to address mosquito control in those areas where storm water is collected until it can be safely drained away. 6 Edumercial: Ponds such as these Absorb CO2 from atmosphere; net carbon sinks STORM WATER IMPROVEMENTS SCREEN 4 | KEY ELEMENTS 49SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS STORM WATER RETENTION 7 Water has been flowing into Oso Creek for years unmanaged 8 Give credits to those landowners that provide detention and/or retention ponds to encourage them. 9 Give landowners credits for ponds. 10 Will this help streets that flood? And what kind of adverse effects will this have on the Oso. We need to make sure they flow naturally and not man made so that they do not break free and cause flooding for people who live near them. I seen adverse effects from the diversion of arroyo's in New Mexico that owners who never had a flossed house, now get flooded out multiple times a year. 11 Flood zone area 12 Kings crossing golf course is not being maintained and the drainage is impacted because of it. It must be resolved to manage flooding and run off. Smart planning can prevent the flooding of main king ponds are used and builders are held accountable to a plan. STORM WATER IMPROVEMENTS SCREEN 4 | KEY ELEMENTS 50 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 AMEND THE UDC 1 "No no no! This is a Republic!!!! This Republic is upheld with Capitalism! Capitalism does not work using Mandates!!!!" 2 Only if landscaping is xeriscape friendly and doesn't distrub line of sight for commuters and signage. 3 Regulate ugly? What would be considered as "enhanced landscaping and aesthetics" in Corpus Christi? An absence of real estate open-house, buy your house, or auction signs? Two, less than three feet in height native, evergreen plants within every 12 feet of road facing property? No on property area lighting producing more than 10 foot candles of illumination at the property line? 4 Minimal landscape (aka xyroscape) & large, mature trees. 5 like litter fine enforcements: via those traffic cams- isn't that a HUGE funding opportunity? TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS SCREEN 4 | KEY ELEMENTS IMPLEMENT XERISCAPING 1 Use concrete medians like Staples from Oso Parkway to Saratoga. Eliminate suicide lanes. Makes no sense to put in medians requiring any watering when considering a Water Desalination project. Absolutely senseless. 2 Xeriscaping, not Zero scaping. Done by competent firms who have the knowledge, education and experience to do it right, 3 None of these choices deal with efficiency. I don’t care about aesthetics. Help me get to SPID in an efficient manner please. 51SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS IMPLEMENT XERISCAPING 4 Requires a major change in City policy or firing the City Engineer. When asked why the new Yorktown median was NOT xeriscaped (and required installation of an expensive sprinkler system), the City Engineer replied "Its a matter of policy." 5 With such little rain annually, we should all be encouraged to do this. 6 5 stars 7 It’s the way of the future!!! 8 Only were it is cost effective across all aspects of expenditures. IMPROvE AESTHETICS 1 That seems like a good idea for the aesthetic reasons as well as safety.. 2 Legal citizens need to vote. 3 "Brick walls?? With our soil conditions?? Having had to twice rebuild such a wall adjacent to my previous residence, once due to soil displacement and once due to collision by an uninsured vehicle, I'm now quite happy with my well-maintained wooden fence." 4 Upon moving here, one of my first observations was the multitude of delapadated fencing. 5 Pass a law that every fence in tge city must be kept up. Driving down main streets here, most of the fences in people's yards are falling apart. Looks like crap!!! 6 shorten the corridors for increased connectivity 7 You should be "requiring" anything that you won't pay for. 8 That’s more cost to developer. City must give a credit for that. INCREASE PUBLIC EDUCATION 1 Pedestrians we already watch for. Bicycles are just a hazard in Texas. We are too car oriented. 2 Driver education in all areas is needed in Corpus Christi. 3 This is important! 4 Wouldn’t that just come with improved corridors? 5 Put bike lanes with a separation next to the road. 6 "Put bike lanes with a separation next to the road. Also teach people down here that when you merge onto a highway the Cars on the highway have the right of way...not the merging car. I have been told by many down here that I, on the highway, have to yield to Them coming onto the highway. Driving here is a free for all and I grew up and lived in Cleveland Ohio." 7 Public service announcements and better enforcement of crossing double lines, signling lane changes, etc. TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS SCREEN 4 | KEY ELEMENTS 52 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 INCREASE PUBLIC EDUCATION 8 I feel anyone who has a driver's license already has the resources needed to ensure our public is safe if we all obey existing laws. 9 Yes, keeping the public education is important 10 I don't know if that would do any good in CC 11 "Many drivers still do not know the rules for right of way on U-turns or median turns. Countless times, I have witnessed drivers... - Performing U-turn on red. - Not yielding to the car doing the median U-turn when turning out of a neighbourhood or a parking lot. - Not yielding to the car doing a U-turn on a green arrow or light by turning right on their red. - Turning left on a median while hugging the curb rather than pulling up to turn. All of these have caused near accidents or caused an accident because some drivers don't have any idea who is yielding to who. " 12 "No no no! This all part of getting a Texas driver’s license already! If a legal citizen wishes they can obtain a Texas driver’s license. " 13 Definitely need more public education on the subject TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS SCREEN 4 | KEY ELEMENTS PEDESTRIAN SAFETY 1 This is easily accomplished if you guys would ever synchronize the lights in this damn town. The cities lack of action has caused way too many accidents and dangerous situations to continue because people are having to stop at one intersection after another and eventually are forced to speed up to make the next intersection. I know you guys really don’t care about this but it is the solution to a lot of problems. 2 Streetlights are lacking along so many areas on Saratoga j⁵ 3 At some intersections, trying to turn out of a neighbourhood, the landscaping, tall grass/weeds, or fences obstructs the view of the oncoming traffic. 4 Yes, this is a top priority. 5 Investigate and let legal citizens vote. 6 How many people have to die, by getting hit by vehicles, in order for the city to make improvements? 7 Improve Staples St from McArdle to Williams especially during rush hour!! 53SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS WHERE DO YOU LIVE? SCREEN 5 | DEMOGRAPHICS RESPONSE INPUT % I do not live in Southside 60 11% I go to school in Southside 13 2% I live in Southside 376 70% I work in Southside 92 17% Total 541 100% WHAT IS YOUR AGE? RESPONSE INPUT % 21 to 35 133 32% 36 to 50 175 42% 51 to 65 81 19% 66 and over 31 7% Total 420 100% 54 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 FEEDBACK 1 Send out noticed to meetings earlier. 2 Build a high quality safe environment and the people will come. 3 The south side should not be developed. 4 Oso Creek flooding imperils a Billion dollars in Southside real estate yet we get to watch the City throw money at North Beach! 5 Leave the area alone. I plan to move there to escape the high taxes in CC. Now I will have to move our family further away. 6 Part 4 of the survey, "key elements" did not appear for me. 7 I love how the plan turned out, especially the focus on Oso Bay/Creek & stormwater! I really look forward to seeing these things implemented. 8 In regards to the plants mentioned in several parts of this surveys, please make sure to choose plants native to Texas. 9 This plan is far overdue. Bill Witt Park needs to be enhanced to take care of the health and recreational needs of those citizens residing not only on the southside, but our entire community. 10 I have lived here for 8 years now. My major thing about Corpus Christi is its streets 11 I hope this survey is helpful to safe, cost effective planning. However, after City policy makers (City Council) shelved the last effort to create a Master Plan for the City, I am not optimistic. That Plan generated enthusiastic community input and support. I personally attended several public meetings and viewings of the plan and was stunned to see the City Council put it into the garbage can. Developers must bear more of the social overhead costs for expansion in the form of "impact fees," a fee modern, growing communities fairly impose. The CC Board of Realtors vowed in speaking before the City Council that they would defeat any Master Plan that contained such rational fees. Apparently, the Plan's proposed impact fees resulted in the political defeat of the Plan, in spite of Community Support. That outcome convinces me that builders, developers, and other real estate interests will have more to say about future southside development than persons like myself who answer your survey. Thank you for allowing me to say that and I do hope this survey results in better planning than to put more houses in flood prone areas and continuing to shift risks to taxpayers. 12 A larger library for the community would be nice. The existing library has very little room with no space for the teens, and not enough space for adults and children. 13 I believe the Del Mar South Campus will provide a huge economy boost to the Southside if the surrounding land is used correctly. More new eateries not the normal Whataburger etc... But new trendy places. OvERALL COMMENTS 55SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS FEEDBACK 14 I own 9 different properties within the city, these are up scale rental properties and I pay an allot of property taxes to all of the taxing entities. I would like for the city, school, county, and other taxing entities to do a better job of coordinating when trying to pass bond referendums. This is the first city that I have lived in that does not work as closely with the other governmental partners to provide taxpayer relief. Since move here i have seen as many as three taxing entities tying to pass tax referendums and have had no empathy for the taxpayer. I have seen many tax patrons leave our city for London, Portland and other area cities inorder to reduce their tax burdens. I for one have really been looking to possibly move because of this. We pay too many taxes for what we get, terrible streets, terrible lighting, terrible infrastructure (drainage,water,etc.) for what we pay. City leader must improve on trying to improve in this area or I really anticipate more people leaving this city which in turn will deplete your tax base. I cant see why current city leaders are not seeing this, this city has the potential for so much more but population reduction if status quo continues. 15 I moved here from California in 2018. I see lots of housing growth-a sea of roof tops, but no planning. Lack of parks, very few green spaces. 16 No 17 This survey is not functioning correctly, I would hope that you fix it. It is a direct reflection of our cities capabilities. 18 I live in Flour Bluff along Yorktown and connectivity to the Southside is super important to me. Please create a hike/bike bridge along Holly Rd connecting Oso Bay Wetlands with a corresponding park on the Flour Bluff side. 19 Appreciate the opportunity to provide feedback. 20 These are all great ideas and would make CC. much better place to live. 21 Need attention to drainage & wastewater runoff! Street conditions as well 22 Please stop showing all these "great" renderings of what it "could look like". you show great improvements on private property that those owners will never do and it give people FALSE sense of what the CITY is going to do and when it doesn't happen, people are disappointed! 23 Thank you for putting thought and actions together 24 Please encourage working with Kings Crossing HOA on Saint Denis Park. 25 Your page 4 does not load so I could not do that part of the survey 26 Business minded people need to have more input into this big picture 27 Always. 28 Penn Place on Aaron and Weber still does not have a sidewalk to Weber. ONLY street on Weber that does NOT connect to a Major thorough fare via sidewalk, yet we have Grant MS two blocks in the opposite direction. 29 No OvERALL COMMENTS 56 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 FEEDBACK 30 We need better streets faster and to plan for future growth rather than waiting til it is upon us. 31 1 house per 1/2 acre minimum only. No more than that! 32 Starting to see a rise in homeless in south side, And getting too comfortable also at the stop light they are walking up to vehicles more. 33 Don't want to see multiple layers of bureaucracy created to support any new planning. Let's apply the tax monies to the actual work. 34 I'm frequently on Southside for errands and Oso bay preserve. We decided against moving to southside because of poor design 35 I live in Gardendale. I hope to organize my neighbors in the future 36 Task 4 was not working. 37 Invest in synced traffic lights. I am tired of hitting every light on the south side! 38 I did not see anything to improve our animal shelter. How we can turn Corpus into a no kill shelter. 39 Thank you for the survey. 40 Improve fences along major roads 41 Please consider improving our streets as the most vital concern for our city. 42 Better recreation/parks/splash pad is number one to me. I moved here last year and I am appalled at the conditions and lack of decent parks. Landscaping is also a joke here. Pretty embarrassing to bring guests... we quickly leave and head to the beach! 43 "Development" that is based on "infrastructure" is a long-term disaster. The creation of a livable environment by encouraging local neighborhoods to increase their density through multiple use of buildings while creating more shaded area would encourage living neighborhoods instead of houses occupied only at night. 44 Thanks for the effort to update the Southside Area Development Plan! It's growing too fast here with a new residential development breaking ground every few months. My concern is all of the additional streets that will be connecting to Yorktown, east of Rodd Field. They are so close to other existing streets that it is a safety concern. Also, there was nothing in the Key Elements tab of the survey. It was blank. 45 Would love to see parks or a community center that has playgrounds for multiple age levels, that are safe/acceptable for very small children and have larger structures or activities for older children. Also HOA parks. I live in a lovely new neighborhood and there is no plan for a park/playground or a neighborhood pool. 46 Fix traffic along Staples St. 47 I don't live on the Southside but spend a great deal of time in that area of town OvERALL COMMENTS 57SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS FEEDBACK 48 Corpus Christi needs to expand and spread its business profile. There are smaller city communities with more amenities and available businesses to serve their populations. Moore Plaza and La Palmera is saturated with cars and people. We are a < 2 hr drive from San Antonio, yet cities such as McAllen offer more business amenities than CC. With the growth and up coming growth of CC, and to draw more young, business professionals, we need more amenities in conjunction with our very easy sell... the ocean. 49 "Need to work on a waste water plan to handle the current and impending development on the south side. This Needs to be Priority one. Second come up with a master plan now before things get parceled off. In the London area we have the opportunity to create something to be proud of. Look at communities in larger cities, we have the opportunity to emulate what they have done. " 50 I think the Southside needs unique, locally owned businesses to bring people together. It needs soul, not more box stores and chains. I hope the Southside can develop its own identity & uniqueness like Downtown is trying to do. It needs to encourage more arts and ways the community can connect. 51 Continue with the street improvements and notifying the business owners of the changes so that they may better strategize how to manage their business stress 52 Keep section 8 or low income living out of the southside 53 Southside is growing too fast along with the crime. Need to stop building and fix what is already here, streets, electric grid, street flooding, traffic 54 I used to live in the Southside, but moved due to overgrowth and congestion. 55 Just more planning up front before allowing developers to do whatever is it cheapest for them. 56 Just to reiterate, I think it’s important to include a pool on this side of town. We have a lot of neighborhoods over here that don’t have a pool to go to over the summer and having one would give us way more connectivity to our community! 57 Work on other area besides the Southside. 58 Corpus could be a beautiful city and has so much potential. We are in dire need of parks and playgrounds. Please beautify our city and make it fun and safe. 59 I really hope to see this actually happen and not just talked about or surveyed. 60 Fix our streets and make sure that the company building roads stand behind their work. Some parts of Yorktown suck 61 What are you going to do for the rest of the town? 62 All expenditures the city makes needs to be voted on by the “Legal” documented citizens, that means a real budget. Corpus Christi is a tourist city and needs to pull taxes from the none citizens and none Local Citizens since they abuse and create a lot of wear and tear on the local infrastructure. All laws need to be enforced including vagrancy laws. OvERALL COMMENTS 58 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 FEEDBACK 63 "Yes Sustainable small business integration into existing residential areas will alleviate the current food desert situations. Preserving riparian corridors will, as stated in the drafts, protect existing infrastructure as well as encourage ecotourism. Section 6.5a suggests exploring partnership with CC ISD; I would discourage that idea most strongly due to their own politically self-sustaining procedures. Please provide further information about 7.2a, the rain barrel program. Good luck! Nice synopses" 64 Please fix the expressway lights on 358 and 286 65 Thank you for reaching out. Would love a large dog park to happen Southside 66 Quality dog park is needed. Shade structures in Bill Witt and other red areas are needed. 67 We need more grocery stores on the Southside. Also, a 4 way traffic light on Yorktown/ Loire with the huge increase that has already occurred in traffic on Yorktown. 68 We really need to focus on the crazy amount of potholes we have all over corpus. Its ridiculous. We pay you guys so much money in taxes and yet you still cant enhance the community. Why would I give you more money when you can properly handle the amount I already give you. There is more to cc than the southside. There is so many places that would clean up nice if you invested in them as much ad you invested in the in the nice parts of town 69 NO MORE HUD PROJECTS SOUTH OF SARATOGA. 70 I have seen cities like Tucson, Arizona go from ugly to beautiful with implementations such as these. Hope Corpus Christi can too. 71 Please see my optional comment on Vision Theme 3. Thank you 72 "Before we expand too much, fix the existing infrastructure. Streets are in terrible shape in Kings Crossing. They were not designed for the automated double axle garbage trucks. When major changes are being evaluated, understand the issues before implementing the changes. Do the engineering. Remember - do a few things well rather many things poorly. Infrastructure (streets), public safety, legal requirements are the items to prioritize." 73 I thought that infill was already encouraged. Whatever we need to do to develop those vacant parcels we need to do. If that means giving incentives, give incentives. It's stupid to keep expanding out that just costs more for everybody because of the sewer and water lines and roads. why in the world would we keep doing that when there's vacant land inside? 74 I grew up in CC Southside. Graduated from Mary Carroll. 75 I would love to see an increase in walkability on the southside. Of course with proper safety education and awareness of cyclists and pedestrians. I love the idea of more parks and trails and safer, new roads. 76 Our parks are constantly flooded and terribly neglected. Unsafe equipment and tall grass make our parks unenjoyable. OvERALL COMMENTS 59SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS FEEDBACK 77 Try to incorporate these surveys in each city facility. City hall information center. Utility bill insert and it can be dropped off at CH. Libraries. 78 Not at this time. 79 I cycle all over the south side. 80 Please update smaller parks on the Southside. For example, the Cedar Ridge Park could use a modern jungle set and a walking bridge. 81 We desperately need updated and shaded parks for our kids to play 82 The south side is been forgotten even tho we pay high taxes. We need our streets and side walks to be renewed. We need better more parks. 83 Housing communities are going up quicker and the current traffic situation is becoming unsustainable for the area. 84 I’d love to see some focus on the Flour Bluff area that is attracting lots of new growth as well. 85 We need more to do in the Southside for all ages. Updated retail and restaurant developments. Would love to see things similar to Houston and San Antonio. 86 I support splash pads on the Southside! 87 Great job beautifying Corpus Christi. 88 Yes. We need a sidewalk on Victoria Park Dr. Kids walk to middle school on the side of the road every day. It’s a tragedy waiting to happen! The city did not answer our request saying there’s no one to pay for the sidewalk. Do we really need to wait for someone to get hurt before something is done? 89 I look forward and am excited to see positive changes in the future! 90 We love living on the Southside! Oso Creek Wetlands was a spectacular idea - such a (still) hidden gem out here. 91 Please put something at falcon park. I heard the neighborhood must raise money and maintain a kids playground if we want one back. After paying our $9000 in taxes like most of my neighborhood I think a decent park isn’t too much to ask for. Thanks. 92 Southside is the way to grow the city. More restaurants, retail and entertainment need to come to the Southside where majority of residents LIVE. Brewsters Southside was a GREAT opportunity for the south. Residents no longer have to travel so far to go downtown and be stuck in tourist destinations. More restaurants/ entertainment like brewsters need to come to Yorktown and Deep South where the city has so much opportunity for growth. Oso bay wetlands is an amazing gem in the south, this would be great for near the botanical gardens! Do not commercialize London. 93 Yes, enhance parks and trails, protect our wetlands, improve storm drainage, and increase safety for roads. 94 Need more playgrounds with shade 95 Roads have to be maintained before any of these great things can continue OvERALL COMMENTS 60 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JANUARY 23, 2020 FEEDBACK 96 Let's be more intentional in creating more access for the public, open to creative community cooperation and cut out some traditional money-zapping things for the better things. 97 We need bike trails with a separate pedestrian walk way. Also wider streets 2 vehicles should be able to pass simultaneously on a residential street 98 You guys need to quit worrying about bushes trees and plants you need to get the lights synchronized so traffic moves along better. There are also school zones that need to be removed and the times readjusted. You also should be building mini overpasses at future intersections that you build on the southside to try and keep traffic moving. 99 As our city grows, we hope that officials will be more watchful of heavy industry that can pollute our bay and area. Please no more tax abatements and water giveaways to wealthy corporations. Thank you. 100 N/A 101 One of my primary concerns is the continued reduction in efficiency is getting from Yorktown to SPID. It keeps getting worse. Please figure out how to help manage traffic flow. I’d also like to see CC become more cycle friendly. Bike lanes are a start, but no longer very safe in the mobile phone, distracted driving era. 102 Please look into covering up the ditch, adding sidewalks on Cimmarron just past Mireles Elementary. 103 More sidewalks are needed near Adkins. The new apartment complex has an entrance and exit on the two lane wooldridge road between the stop sign. It is going to be a dangerous situation for kids walking to school. Also the traffic is going to be horrible. Something has to be done about easing the congestion. 104 I am curious about how to fund all of the great ideas discussed in this plan. 105 I like the rural feel of our Southside area (London). I prefer to keep it as rural as possible. OvERALL COMMENTS 61SOUTHSIDE AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 23, 2020 METROQUEST SURvEY RESULTS Southside Area Development Plan City Council Presentation February 25, 2020 Area Development Plans 2 Area Development Plans (ADP) are an initiative of the Plan CC Comprehensive Plan An ADP goes into more detail about future development of each area ADPs have been in place for several years and are in the process of being updated Timeline of Events and Activities 3 Engagement Process 4January 24, 2020 Introduction 5 Demographics Online Survey Results Community Open House Input Future Land Use Map 6 Vision Themes 7 CELEBRATE OUR SAFE, FAMILY-ORIENTED NEIGHBORHOODS Vision Themes 8 IMPROVE TRANSPORTATION CONDITIONS Vision Themes 9 ENHANCE PARKS AND TRAILS Vision Themes 10 PROMOTE THE OSO CREEK AND BAY AS A COMMUNITY AMENITY Policy Initiatives 11 Public Investment Initiatives 12 Public Investment Initiatives 13 Public Investment Initiatives 14 MetroQuest Survey Summary 15 Recommendation 16 Staff and Planning Commission Recommend Adoption www.cctexas.com/southsideandlondon DATE: February 6, 2020 TO: Peter Zanoni, City Manager FROM: Daniel McGinn, AICP, Director of Planning & ESI DanielMc@cctexas.com (361) 826-7011 CAPTION: Ordinance adopting a new London Area Development Plan, an element of the Plan CC Comprehensive Plan; rescinding the former London Area Development Plan adopted on August 17, 1987; and amending the Plan CC Comprehensive Plan SUMMARY: The London Area Development Plan (ADP) is an element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan, designed to provide guidance and direction for the future development of this area. This planning effort will replace the previous ADP for the London area of the community, which was adopted in 1987. This document also updates the London District boundaries and future land use map in Plan CC, which was adopted in 2016. BACKGROUND AND FINDINGS: The City engaged the Freese and Nichols consultant team to evaluate current conditions, future opportunities, and identify a path forward that will direct public investment and facilitate future development in the London area. Summary of Project Timeline: The planning process took approximately one year to develop the London ADP:  Winter of 2018/2019 – Developing Baseline Analysis o Community Survey (December 15, 2018 – February 15, 2019) o First Advisory Committee Meeting (January 11, 2019) o First and Second Student Advisory Committee Meetings (January 16 and February 27, 2019) o First Community Meeting (January 28, 2019)  Spring 2019 – Drafting the Plan o Planning Commission Briefing (March 20, 2019) o Joint Advisory and Student Advisory Committee Meeting (March 22, 2019) o Community Think Tank (April 1-4, 2019) o Fourth Student Advisory Meeting (April 24, 2019)  Summer 2019 – Drafting the Plan London Area Development Plan AGENDA MEMORANDUM Public Hearing/First Reading for the City Council Meeting February 25, 2020 Second Reading Ordinance for the City Council Meeting March 17, 2020 o Third Advisory Committee Meeting (July 12, 2019)  Fall 2019 – Review of Draft Plan o First Draft Plan Released (October 29, 2019) o Fourth Advisory Committee Meeting (November 1, 2019) o Second Draft Plan Released (November 18, 2019) o Community Meeting (December 5, 2019)  Winter 2019/2020 – Community Review and Plan Adoption o Community Survey (November 26, 2019 – January 12, 2020) o Planning Commission Briefing (December 18, 2019) o Third Draft Plan Released (January 14, 2019) o Fifth Advisory Committee Meeting (January 24, 2020) o Fourth Draft Plan Released (January 28, 2020) o Planning Commission Public Hearing (February 5, 2020) London ADP Content: The major goals, policies, and implementation elements of the London ADP address the following: Introduction  Development of the Plan  Demographics  Engagement Process  Online Survey Results  Community Open House Future Land Use Map The London Future Land Use Map serves as a guide to future zoning and development decisions and provides a foundation to support the vision and recommendations of the plan. Vision Themes  Celebrate Our Community Character  Promote Sustainable Growth  Promote the Oso Creek and Bay as a Community Amenity Policy Initiatives and Implementation  Expand and improve infrastructure and city facilities.  Promote land development that enhances the character and opportunities in London.  Provide outdoor recreation amenities  Utilize Oso Creek and Bay for sustainable recreation and ecotourism.  Reduce and Improve stormwater runoff. Public Investment Initiatives  Short-term (next 5 years)  Mid-term (6-10 years)  Long-term (More than 10 years) Public Engagement: To develop the London ADP, the planning team gathered public input during community meetings and open houses on January 28 and April 1 through 4, 2019, as well as from an online survey instrument. In addition, an Advisory Committee and Student Advisory Committee provided guidance on the process and content of the documents throughout. Staff also briefed Planning Commission on March 20, 2019 and December 18, 2019. The planning team released a public review draft of the London Area Development Plan and hosted a Community Meeting and Open House on December 5, 2019. In addition, an online survey gathered community feedback on the draft document. Document Updates: The current London ADP was developed through an iterative process with the Advisory Committee and the public. Previous drafts of the Southside ADP were released on October 29, 2019; November 18, 2019; and January 14, 2020. The current document incorporates Advisory Committee, Planning Commission, and public input provided to the planning team. ALTERNATIVES: The November 18, 2019 draft of the London ADP reflected lower-density development along the Staples Street / FM 2444 corridor. Feedback from the community was to increase residential density in this area and increase commercial uses along the corridor. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact associated with this item. RECOMMENDATION: Staff and Planning Commission recommend adoption of the London Area Development Plan. LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Ordinance January 28, 2020 Draft London Area Development Plan January 23, 2020 London MetroQuest Survey Summary PowerPoint Ordinance adopting a new London Area Development Plan, an element of the Plan CC Comprehensive Plan; rescinding the former London Area Development Plan adopted on August 17, 1987; and amending the Plan CC Comprehensive Plan WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has forwarded to City Council its reports and recommendations concerning the adoption of the London Area Development Plan. WHEREAS, with proper notice to the public, public hearings were held on Wednesday, February 5, 2020, during a meeting of the Planning Commission, and on Tuesday, February 25, 2020, 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; WHEREAS, City Staff invited the public to workshops and public meetings that were held on January 28, 2019, April 1, 2019, April 2, 2019, April 4, 2019, and December 5, 2019 to give input to help develop a London Area Development Plan for Corpus Christi, and to receive public feedback. WHEREAS, an Advisory Committee provided guidance and assistance throughout the process and staff coordinated with various community agencies. WHEREAS, the City shall use the London Area Development Plan as a guideline for urban growth, implementation of policy initiatives and public investments, and to facilitate other plans that the city considers necessary for systematic growth and development. WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that these amendments would best serve public health, safety, necessity, convenience, and 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 London Area Development Plan, adopted by City Council Ordinance #19975 on August 17, 1987, is hereby rescinded. SECTION 2. That the London Area Development Plan, as shown in Exhibit A, which is attached and incorporated by reference, is adopted as an element of the Plan CC Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 3. To the extent that the amendment made by this ordinance represents a deviation from the Comprehensive Plan, the Comprehensive Plan is amended to conform to the amendment made by this ordinance. The Comprehensive Plan, as amended from time to time and except as changed by this ordinance, remains in full force and effect. SECTION 5. The City Council intends that every section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase, word or provision hereof shall be given full force and effect for its purpose. Therefore, if any section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase, word or provision of this ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction, that judgment shall not affect any other section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase, word or provision of this ordinance. That the foregoing ordinance was read for the first time and passed to its second reading on this the _____ day of ___________, 2020, by the following vote: Joe McComb ____________ Michael Hunter ____________ Roland Barrera ____________ Ben Molina ____________ Rudy Garza ____________ Everett Roy ____________ Paulette M. Guajardo ____________ Greg Smith ____________ Gil Hernandez ____________ That the foregoing ordinance was read for the second time and passed finally on this the _______ day of _______________, 2020, by the following vote: Joe McComb ____________ Michael Hunter ____________ Roland Barrera ____________ Ben Molina ____________ Rudy Garza ____________ Everett Roy ____________ Paulette M. Guajardo ____________ Greg Smith ____________ Gil Hernandez ____________ PASSED AND APPROVED on this the _______ day of _______________, 2020. ATTEST: ________________________________ _________________________ Rebecca Huerta Joe McComb City Secretary Mayor DRAFT JANUARY 28, 2020 LondonArea Development Plan City of Corpus Christi Exhibit A CITY COUNCIL Joe McComb Mayor Rudy Garza Jr. Council Member At-Large Paulette M. Guajardo Council Member At-Large Michael T. Hunter Council Member At-Large Everett Roy Council Member District 1 Ben Molina Council Member District 2 Roland Barrera Council Member District 3 Greg Smith Council Member District 4 Gil Hernandez Council Member District 5 PLANNING COMMISSION Carl E. Crull Chairman Jeremy Baugh Vice Chairman Marsha Williams Commission Member Heidi Hovda Commission Member Kamran Zarghouni Commission Member Sheldon Schroeder Commission Member Michael M. Miller Commission Member Daniel M. Dibble Commission Member Michael York Commission Member Benjamin Polak Navy Representative STUDENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE Ben Bueno Harold T. Branch Academy Estevan Gonzalez London High School Grace Hartridge Veterans Memorial High School Sara Humpal London High School Ciara Martinez Richard King High School Katie Ngwyen Collegiate High School Damian Olvera Texas A&M Corpus Christi Natasha Perez Del Mar College Emily Salazar Mary Carroll High School ACKNOWLEDEGMENTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE Charles Benavidez Texas Department of Transportation Donna Byrom London Resident Marco Castillo Southside Resident Joseph Cortez Corpus Christi Association of Realtors Carl Crull Planning Commission Rabbi Ilan Emanuel Corpus Christi Clergy Alliance Dr. Mark Escamilla Del Mar College Gil Hernandez Corpus Christi City, District 5 Dr. Roland Hernandez Corpus Christi ISD Casandra Lorentson Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee Wayne Lundquist London Area Landowner Robert MacDonald Corpus Christi Metropolitan Planning Organization Moses Mostaghasi Coastal Bend Homebuilders Association Benjamin Polak Naval Air Station Corpus Christi Jay Reining Oso Creek I-Plan Coordination Committee Kara Rivas Young Business Professionals of the Coastal Bend Gordon Robinson Corpus Christi Regional Transit Authority Eloy Salazar United Corpus Christi Chamber of Commerce Steve Synovitz Oso Creek I-Plan Coordination Committee John Tamez London Area Landowner Judi Whitis London ISD CONSULTANT TEAM Freese and Nichols, Inc. 11200 Broadway Street, Offices West Suite 2320 Pearland, TX 77584 HOLD FOR ORDINANCE HOLD FOR ORDINANCE HOLD FOR ORDINANCE HOLD FOR ORDINANCE TABLE OF CONTENTS March 22, 2019 INTRODUCTION2 March 22, 2019 FUTURE LAND USE MAP12 March 22, 2019 VISION THEMES18 March 22, 2019 POLICY INITIATIVES AND IMPLEMENTATION26 March 22, 2019 PUBLIC INVESTMENT INITIATIVES34 1 LONDON AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 INTRODUCTION DEVELOPMENT OF THE PLAN The London Area Development Plan (LADP) is an element of the Plan CC Comprehensive Plan. The LADP is intended to provide an analysis of the London Area and create strategic recommendations to guide future development. With anticipated growth in the London Area, the City should be prepared to balance the needs of existing and new development. New construction in the London Area occurring both inside and outside of city limits will have an impact on other areas of the City. The plan includes new future land uses for the area, a vision of the future based on public input, specific actions to achieve the vision, and infrastructure initiatives for the implementation of the plan. This plan will serve as a guide for City leadership to make educated regulatory and policy decisions. This plan will also help prioritize infrastructure improvements to increase the quality of life for the community and ensure sustainable growth. The London Area is primarily located outside of Corpus Christi city limits south of Oso Creek with some areas within the city limits. The area extends south to County Road 18 and west to County Road 51. Development in the London Area is mostly undeveloped with some residential subdivisions. The LADP was created through a comprehensive public engagement process that integrated the examination of the existing conditions and the vision of the community. An Advisory Committee was created to assist in guiding the planning process and provide a representation of the area’s residents, business owners, students, and stakeholders. The committee’s participation was essential to the development of the final plan. Although the Advisory Committee championed the process, the community was involved throughout the process and participated in multiple engagement events and activities. Residents and stakeholders gave their input regarding the future of the London through online surveys and various community engagement events, including a Community Open House and a four-day Community Think Tank. Many of the recommendations identified in this plan are a direct result of the input received, resulting in a community-driven plan. 3 INTRODUCTION LONDON AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 DEMOGRAPHICS 2000 2010 2018 2023* 464 1,293 1,756 1,997 *Projected Population POPULATION1 AGE (2018)1 89.5% White 10.5% Other 2.4% Asian 2.2% Two or More Races 1.8% Black 3.6% Other Race 0.1% Pacific Islander 0.4% American Indian/ Alaska Native RACE AND ETHNICITY (2018)1 49.9% Hispanic Origin of Any Race 43.8% 35 - 64 16.6% 20 - 34 9.4% 15 - 19 14.7% 5 - 14 5.0% 0-49.8% 65 - 84 0.7% 85+ 39.4 Median Age Average Annual Growth Rate 2000-2018 0.99% Corpus Christi 7.29% London 4 INTRODUCTION CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 1Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2018 and 2023. 2Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT (2018)1 5.3% 21.6% 19.2%46.9% No High School Diploma High School Graduate Some College Bachelor’s/Grad/Professional Degree HOUSING (2018)1 $438,830Median Home Value COMMUNITY DEMOGRAPHICS The current demographics of the London Area provide a baseline for growth and diversity in the area based on Census data and estimates. 86.4% Owner Occupied Associate Degree 6.9% Occupied94.0% Vacant6.0% Occupied89.6% Vacant10.4% Citywide2 London Occupied Housing Units 3.48 Average Household Size 5 INTRODUCTION LONDON AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 ENGAGEMENT PROCESS Advisory Committee Meeting 1 The Advisory Committee met at the Oso Bay Wetlands Preserve and Learning Center to identify issues and opportunities for the area.January 11, 2019Community Think Tank The four-day event involved a series of meetings and presentations, input on future land uses, and draft recommendations based on community feedback. April 1-4, 2019MetroQuest Survey Launched An online survey was available to the public, allowing for input to be received regarding the draft plan.November 26, 2019toJanuary 12, 2020Student Advisory Committee Meeting 4 The Committee reviewed public input from April 1-4 Community Think Tank and provided feedback.April 24, 2019Advisory Committee Meeting 4 The Advisory Committee met to review the draft plan and provide feedback before presenting it to the community.November 1, 2019Advisory Committee Meeting 3 The Advisory Committee met at City Hall to verify the Future Land Use Map, Vision, and Key Elements.July 12, 2019Student Advisory Committee Meeting 1 The Student Advisory Committee met to identify issues and opportunities for the area.January 16, 20196 INTRODUCTION CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 ABOUT THE ADVISORY COMMITTEES The Advisory Committees consisted of 31 community representatives including residents, business owners, students, City Council, the Metropolitan Planning Organization, London and Corpus Christi Independent School Districts, TxDOT, the Regional Transit Authority, environmental stakeholders, Young Business Professionals, Del Mar College, Naval Air Station - Corpus Christi, and Nueces County. Community Meeting 2 The draft plan was presented to the community, allowing for feedback from the public in an open house setting.December 5, 2019Online Survey Launched An online survey was available to the public, allowing for input to be received regarding the current conditions and vision for the area.December 15, 2018toFebruary 15, 2019Advisory Committee Meeting 5 The Advisory Committee met to recommend the draft plan move forward to be presented to Planning Commission and City Council.January 24, 2020Adoption Adoption Date Joint Advisory Committee Meeting 2 and Student Advisory Committee Meeting 3 The Advisory Committee met to begin drafting the Future Land Use Map.March 22, 2019Community Meeting 1 Over 100 people attended the community meeting at Kaffie Middle to learn about the Area Development Plan process and give input related to the area’s future growth.January 28, 2019Student Advisory Committee Meeting 2 The Student Advisory Committee reviewed public input from the January 28 Community Meeting and provided feedback.February 27, 20197 INTRODUCTION LONDON AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 47.13% 4.14% 17.52% 3.82% 3.82% 11.15% Other Safe neighborhoods Schools Convenient access to shopping, dining, and entertainment No city taxes Selection of housing/ housing prices Convenient commute to work 12.42% ONLINE SURVEY RESULTS ABOUT THE SURVEY Community members had an opportunity to participate in an online survey available from December 5th, 2018 to February 15th, 2019 to give their feedback on the future of the London Area. 365 people responded. Below is a snapshot of the results. WHAT IS YOUR FAVORITE THING ABOUT THE LONDON AREA? 365Total respondents129Live in London 8 INTRODUCTION CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 Integrated neighborhoods, with small retail businesses, safe streets for autos, pedestrians, and cyclists, and plenty of parks, protected natural areas, and public spaces for play and events. WHAT ARE THE TOP THREE ISSUES LONDON IS FACING TODAY? WHAT’S MISSING IN LONDON? Other Parks & trails Manufacturing Entertainment Restaurants Retail & Shopping Office Urban Living Senior Housing Apartments Single-Family Homes Nothing is missing 120 98 79 votes votes votes Water and sewer infrastructure Lack of variety in shopping, dining & entertainment Flooding & water quality 11.50%42 . 8 1 % 1.92% 27.48%39.62%3 8 . 9 8% 5.43% 13.74% 5.75%6.39%12.46%25.88%WHAT DOES THE LONDON AREA LOOK LIKE IN 10-20 YEARS? A planned, aesthetically pleasing growth corridor with continued high quality school system and increased options for medium to high value single family residences with large lots, interspersed with quality retail and entertainment offerings that would attract highly qualified business and industry leaders. “ “It’s an upscale area with large lots and an amazing small school district.““““A development that contributes positive improvements to the overall cleanliness & usability of the Oso Creek and watershed.““ 9 INTRODUCTION LONDON AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 COMMUNITY OPEN HOUSE ABOUT THE OPEN HOUSE A joint Community Meeting and Open House was held at Kaffie Middle School on January 28, 2019. The purpose of the meeting was to educate residents and stakeholders about the Area Development Plan planning process and gather input from attendees about the future of the Southside and London Areas. The following is a snapshot of the feedback from the event regarding the London Area. WHAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT FACTOR WHEN CONSIDERING FUTURE DEVELOPMENT Economic DevelopmentTax GenerationDevelopment of Oso Creek TourismCost impacts on City ServicesPublic SafetyTransportation Network Impacts0.9% 21.2% 2.7% 4.4% 16.8% 6.2% 10.6% 3.5% 7.1% 9.7% 7.1% 9.7%OtherQuality of LifeCommunity AestheticsImpact on Oso Creek and BayDrainage ImpactsPreservation of Open Space10 INTRODUCTION CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 WHAT IS MISSING MOST IN LONDON? MY FAVORITE PART ABOUT LONDON IS... 4.7% 10.3% 10.3% 3.4% 3.4% 20.7% 6.9% 44.8% 17.2%4.7%7.8%28.1%15.6%3.1%18.8% RestaurantsMixed-Use HousingEntertainmentParks & Trails Shopping OfficeOther MY VISION FOR LONDON IS... Urban village. London ISD with multiple campuses. Improved drainage.Access for recreation and nature. ““ ““ ““ ““ Development with accessible sidewalk connectivity to parks, schools, etc. Develop or improve roads. Master planned community. Oso Creek preservation. ““““““““ Future potential Low Traffic Oso Creek Parks & Trails Rural Community Safe Community Schools TO THRIVE, AREAS NEED...23.5%14.7%8.8%17.6%5.9%23.5%5.9%Infrastructure improvementsSustainabilityEnhanced parksShopping & lifestyle centersHigh performing jobs & schoolsVehicular & pedestrian improvementsAesthetic improvements11 INTRODUCTION LONDON AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 FUTURE LAND USE MAP FUTURE LAND USE MAP The most direct tool cities have to guide the development in city limits is through zoning. Zoning is the prescribed legal use of a parcel of land based on city regulations. Although zoning is influenced by the designations identified on the Future Land Use Map, zoning only applies to areas located within city limits. Most of the London Area is located in the ETJ. While there is no zoning in the ETJ, the future land use designations can help influence development patterns. The Plan CC Comprehensive Plan identified future land uses for the entire city and planning areas to provide guidelines for development. The Area Development Plan process is intended to go into further detail about land uses and development patterns specific to the London planning area. Through this process, the future land use designations for the London Area have been revised to reflect community input, anticipated development, and best practices. The London Future Land Use Map serves as the guide for future development decisions and provides a foundation to support the vision and recommendations of the plan. This is accomplished by setting a framework that influences regulatory mechanisms and policy decisions that shape the built environment. Each of the designations presented on the London Future Land Use Map correlates with the classifications identified in Plan CC. ABOUT THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP The Future Land Use Map serves as a guide for zoning regulations and influences new development and redevelopment in the city limits. In the extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ), the Future Land Use Map helps plan for future development and infrastructure. The Future Land Use Map for the City was adopted with Plan CC and has been revised though the LADP based on feedback from the community. 13 FUTURE LAND USE MAP LONDON AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES AGRICULTURE/RURAL ENTERPRISE This category includes farms and other enterprises that serve the rural population. RESIDENTIAL USES The predominant residential land use in the City of Corpus Christi is the single-family dwelling at a range of densities. All residential categories also include schools, churches, and neighborhood-serving public uses. • Low-density residential: up to 3 units per acre • Medium-density residential: 4 to 13 units per acre (including two-family dwellings) • High-density residential: more than 13 units per acre COMMERCIAL USES Commercial land uses include retail, services, hotel, and office uses that are typically open to the public at large. High-density residential uses, such as townhomes, cottage housing, apartments, and condominiums are considered compatible with commercial uses. Other commercial uses, such as wholesale and distribution businesses, are included in the light industry category because they have similar impacts, such as high volumes of trucking. Schools, churches, and neighborhood-serving public uses can be included in commercial land use areas. INDUSTRIAL USES Most of the industrial uses within the city limits of Corpus Christi are light industrial; heavy industry is generally located in the industrial districts outside the city limits. 14 FUTURE LAND USE MAP CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 MIXED-USE AREAS Mixed-use centers include residential, retail, hotel, and office uses. Mixed-use centers are pedestrian-friendly with buildings oriented towards the street. Residential uses are generally of a higher density, including apartments, condominiums, townhomes, cottage housing, and small-lot single-family residential. The mixture can be vertical, with different uses on different floors of a building, and horizontal, with different uses side by side. Churches, schools and public uses are included in mixed-use areas. INSTITUTIONAL Hospitals, colleges, universities, schools, large churches, and similar institutions, whether public or private, are designated as separate land uses because of their campus-like character, which requires special attention to edges and relationships with adjacent areas. TRANSPORTATION Airports, railroads, highway and interstate rights-of-way. GOVERNMENT Government uses include federal, state, county, regional and municipal government facilities and installations, except for government-owned institutions. PERMANENT OPEN SPACE Parks and playgrounds, recreational fields and facilities, greenways, and other green areas managed for public access and recreation. FLOOD PLAIN CONSERVATION Lands within the 100-year flood plain, preferably preserved for environmental reasons. Note: For more information about categories included in the Future Land Use Map, please refer to pages 55-57 of Plan CC. 15 FUTURE LAND USE MAP LONDON AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 FUTURE LAND USE MAP LAND USE ACRES PERCENTAGE Mixed-Use 776 6.2% Agriculture/ Rural Enterprise 5 0.0% Commercial 1,015 8.1% Government 323 2.6% Institutional 135 1.1% Low-Density Residential 1,783 14.2% Medium- Density Residential 6,317 50.3% Transportation 535 4.3% Permanent Open Space 650 5.2% Flood Plain Conservation 984 7.8% Water 48 0.4% Total 12,571 100.0% Oso Creek UV286 Williams DrCarroll LnEverhart RdWeber RdSokol Dr S Oso PkwyCo Rd 26 Boston Dr Cimarron BlvdYorktown Blvd W o oldr i dgeRd FM 2444S Staples St Co Rd 22 Co Rd 35Co Rd 22 Co Rd 41ACo Rd 45Co Rd 43Co Rd 43S Praire RdFM 763LipesBlvdCo Rd 33Mc Ardle Rd Oso P k w y Saratoga Blvd Co Rd 41Co Rd 20A FM 43 Ayers StStaples StSaratoga Blvd G r e e nw oodDr Everhart RdCo Rd 18Co Rd 47London Future Land Use Mixed-Use Agriculture/Rural Enterprise Commercial Government Institutional Heavy Industrial Light Industrial Low-Density Residential Medium-Density Residential High-Density Residential Transportation Permanent Open Space Flood Plain Conservation Water Existing Roadway Proposed Roadway London Boundary Corpus Christi City Limits Note: A comprehensive plan shall not constitute zoning regulations or establish zoning district boundaries. E1 Miles16 FUTURE LAND USE MAP CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 Oso Creek UV286 Williams DrCarroll LnEverhart RdWeber RdSokol Dr S Oso PkwyCo Rd 26 Boston Dr Cimarron BlvdYorktown Blvd W o oldr i dgeRd FM 2444S Staples St Co Rd 22 Co Rd 35Co Rd 22 Co Rd 41ACo Rd 45Co Rd 43Co Rd 43S Praire RdFM 763LipesBlvdCo Rd 33Mc Ardle Rd Oso P k w y Saratoga Blvd Co Rd 41Co Rd 20A FM 43 Ayers StStaples StSaratoga Blvd G r e e nw oodDr Everhart RdCo Rd 18Co Rd 47London Future Land Use Mixed-Use Agriculture/Rural Enterprise Commercial Government Institutional Heavy Industrial Light Industrial Low-Density Residential Medium-Density Residential High-Density Residential Transportation Permanent Open Space Flood Plain Conservation Water Existing Roadway Proposed Roadway London Boundary Corpus Christi City Limits Note: A comprehensive plan shall not constitute zoning regulations or establish zoning district boundaries. E1 Miles 17 FUTURE LAND USE MAP LONDON AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 VISION THEMES Although development is generally impacted by a variety of regulatory factors, market influences, and budgetary availability; a community with a clear vision can better focus the goals for the future. The vision for the community should be a high level overarching idea of the future that maintains a singular path for the future. To achieve that vision, the City must make an effort to direct development and make improvements that align with the vision. Through the public engagement process, four themes began to emerge related to the residents desires for the future. The following are the vision themes identified: • Celebrate Our Community Character • Promote Sustainable Growth • Promote the Oso Creek and Bay as a Community Amenity VISION THEMES MY VISION IS... 19 VISION THEMES LONDON AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 VISION The London Area has been characterized by having a tight-knit community character that features large residential lots, low levels of development, and open spaces. Those living in the London Area seek an area that does not have the hustle and bustle of the City. As anticipated growth occurs, it is essential to ensure that the sense of community in the London Area is maintained and enhanced. By encouraging low- and medium-density residential and commercial development, incorporating unique design elements into the streetscape, and integrating public trails, open spaces, and gathering areas throughout the London Area, existing neighborhoods will blend seamlessly with future development. CELEBRATE OUR COMMUNITY CHARACTER 20 VISION THEMES CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 27, 2020 COMMUNITY INPUT The following community input supports the vision theme: ”Connectivity to parks, schools, etc.” ”Developed or improved roads” ”Rural community” ”Large lots and homes” ”Master planned community” KEY ELEMENTS • Low- and medium-density residential development • Preserved open space along Oso Creek • Low-density commercial development • Storm water drainage infrastructure 21 VISION THEMES LONDON AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 27, 2020 VISION Growth and development can be signs of a healthy community. The speed of growth must not exceed the capacity of the City to provide necessary services and overwhelm the natural environment. Development in the London Area should occur intentionally and sustainably while following planned infrastructure and maintaining the desired low- to medium-density of the area. Utilize planned infrastructure to create public spaces and amenities for the community. Ensure that new development is built in concert with the environment to preserve the natural landscape and protect adequate drainage areas and create a sustainable community. PROMOTE SUSTAINABLE GROWTH 22 VISION THEMES CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 27, 2020 COMMUNITY INPUT The following community input supports the vision theme: ”Access for nature recreation” ”Parks and trails” ”Improved drainage” ”Drainage design” KEY ELEMENTS • Drainage channel for new development • Trail located along drainage channel • Pocket prairie • Trail amenities • Workout equipment • Benches • Educational signage 23 VISION THEMES LONDON AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 27, 2020 VISION Oso Creek and Bay are a unique amenity for the City and especially for the London area. With easy accessibility and opportunities to facilitate outdoor recreation, the Oso Creek and Bay could be a unique destination for the entire community. Improvements to Oso Creek and Bay, including improved water quality, the construction of a continuous trail, educational features, and water access, will make this feature inviting to all ages. As London continues to grow, special care will be taken to preserve and protect the Oso Creek and Bay from the negative impacts of development. In the future, Oso Bay and Creek will serve as a resource for education, recreation, and overall enhancement of the quality of life for residents. PROMOTE THE OSO CREEK AND BAY AS A COMMUNITY AMENITY 24 VISION THEMES CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 27, 2020 COMMUNITY INPUT The following community input supports the vision theme: ”Access for nature recreation” ”Oso Creek preservation and enhanced riparian areas” ”Better walking trails along Oso Creek” ”Oso Creek kayak access and bike trail” KEY ELEMENTS • Kayak launch • Hike and bike trail • Pier • Restored riparian (native vegetation) areas • Educational signage • Trail head and access point 25 VISION THEMES LONDON AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 27, 2020 POLICY INITIATIVES AND IMPLEMENTATION POLICY INITIATIVES VISION THEMES CELEBRATE OUR COMMUNITY CHARACTER PROMOTE SUSTAINABLE GROWTH PROMOTE THE OSO CREEK AND BAY AS A COMMUNITY AMENITY 1 Expand and improve infrastructure and city facilities. 2 Promote land development that enhances the character and opportunities in London. 3 Provide outdoor recreation amenities. 4 Utilize the Oso Creek and Bay for sustainable recreation and ecotourism. 5 Reduce and improve stormwater runoff. POLICY INITIATIVES To achieve the vision for the London Area, five policy initiatives were established that are related to different aspects of development. Policy initiatives are not exclusive and may further the goal of one or more vision themes. For each policy initiative, strategies are identified to support the implementation of the efforts. These strategies are the actions taken by the City that lead to the successful implementation of the plan. 27 POLICY INITIATIVES AND IMPLEMENTATION LONDON AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 EXPAND AND IMPROVE INFRASTRUCTURE AND CITY FACILITIES 1.1. Coordinate with Nueces County to encourage roadway standards and designs that promote the safe and efficient movement of vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. 1.2. Ensure adequate utility infrastructure to serve growing development a. Monitor the Greenwood Wastewater Treatment Plant’s existing capacity and initiate expansion designs if warranted. 1.3. Develop Master Wastewater, and Drainage Plans to encourage orderly growth and minimize the effects of future flooding. 1.4 Plan for expanding police and fire protection services with growing city limits and population. a. Identify appropriate sites for future Fire Stations and Police Substations and obtain property either through purchase or donation. b. Ensure adequate tax-base is in place to support police and fire operations. 1.5 Investigate the possibility of constructing a FEMA dome in the London Area in partnership with London ISD. HOW WE GET THERE Wastewater Treatment Plant Example of Protected Bike Lane 1 28 POLICY INITIATIVES AND IMPLEMENTATION CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 PROMOTE LAND DEVELOPMENT THAT ENHANCES THE CHARACTER AND OPPORTUNITIES IN LONDON 2.1. Establish community nodes that reflect London’s character to serve as community gathering places. 2.2. Promote new commercial, retail, and residential development while maintaining a tight-knit community character. 2.3. Encourage the development of small commercial nodes throughout the London Area to help reduce vehicular trips and to provide convenience to its residents. 2.4. Encourage residential street layouts that promote walkability and create ease of access to collector roads. 2.5. Encourage compatible and appropriate land uses for long-term and sustainable growth patterns. 2.6. Encourage low-impact land uses along Oso Creek and flood zones. 2.7. Incorporate green spaces and trails into master-planned residential developments that provide connectivity throughout the London Area. 2 HOW WE GET THERE Example Neighborhood Layouts Example of Public Space with Character Enhancements More Connectivity: Traditional Grid Pattern Less Connectivity: Conventional Cul-De-Sac 29 POLICY INITIATIVES AND IMPLEMENTATION LONDON AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 PROVIDE OUTDOOR RECREATION AMENITIES 3.1. Develop park and trail facilities. 3.2. Encourage pedestrian and bicycle facilities that are naturally aligned with drainage channels, floodways, and future stormwater drainage infrastructure. 3.3. Incorporate recreation features to support activities for multiple generations. 3.4. Strategically incorporate park elements that encourage arts and entertainment for residents. HOW WE GET THERE 3 Example of Pocket Park with Art and Recreational Amenities Schanen Hike/Bike Trail 30 POLICY INITIATIVES AND IMPLEMENTATION CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 UTILIZE THE OSO CREEK AND BAY FOR SUSTAINABLE RECREATION AND ECOTOURISM 4.1. Create recreational opportunities along Oso Creek and Bay through the development of a network of parks, open space, trails, and access points. a. Develop a preferred alignment for the Oso hike/bike trail and design standards for the path. b. Incorporated marked pedestrian crosswalks and bicycle paths at gateways in trail design. c. Develop a unique logo and design theme to promote and designate the Oso Creek and Bay as a scenic and recreational area. 4.2. Preserve and protect riparian habitat along the Oso Creek and Bay. a. Identify specific locations to strategically preserve open space and conservation zones along Oso Creek and Bay. b. Permit dedication of land and hike/bike trail construction along Oso Creek and Bay to fulfill park dedication requirements. c. Partner with or create an entity to purchase property along the Oso Creek and Bay for conservation, protection, and trail development. HOW WE GET THERE d. Create an ordinance to prevent mowing within a certain distance of Oso Creek and Bay. 4.3 Explore possible amendments to the Unified Development Code (UDC) that would preserve riparian corridors and vegetated buffer strips, while establishing setbacks along creeks and drainage channels in the Oso Bay and Creek watershed. 4 Oso Creek 31 POLICY INITIATIVES AND IMPLEMENTATION LONDON AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 REDUCE AND IMPROVE STORM WATER RUNOFF 5.1. Incorporate green infrastructure elements in public projects where cost- effective. (Low-Impact Development) 5.2. Educate interested stakeholders and the broader public about economic tools for reducing and treating stormwater runoff. a. Continue to offer a rain barrel program. 5.3. Encourage xeriscape gardens requiring little to no irrigation. a. Educate residents on how xeriscape gardens can reduce runoff of stormwater and irrigation water that carries topsoils, fertilizers, and pesticides into lakes, rivers, and streams while also reducing costs and maintenance requirements for homeowners. b. Explore incentives for developers to install xeriscape gardens in new developments. 5.4. Incorporate pocket prairies, where appropriate, along hike and bike trails. 5.5. Develop retention ponds upstream along Oso Creek and drainage channels to capture stormwater to help reduce downstream effects. a. Investigate the use of parks as stormwater detention/retention facilities. HOW WE GET THERE 5 Oso Wetlands Preserve Rainwater Cistern 5.6 Promote proper management of pet waste. a. Provide more pet waste disposal stations at parks and trails. b. Enhance the City’s public information campaign on proper pet waste disposal. 5.7 Work with partner organizations, such as Texas A&M AgriLife Extension, to pursue grants that would offer free or low-cost On-Site Sewer Facilities (OSSF) evaluations and assist property owners with addressing identified OSSF issues. 32 POLICY INITIATIVES AND IMPLEMENTATION CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 33 POLICY INITIATIVES AND IMPLEMENTATION LONDON AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 PUBLIC INVESTMENT INITIATIVES The built environment is the physical interpretation of the vision for the community. The following public investment projects represent improvements that directly support the implementation of the vision and goals. These projects should inform the capital improvement program (CIP) by prioritizing projects identified here for future CIP planning. Some identified projects are currently planned capital improvements by the City. Others are proposed projects for implementation based on feedback from the community. The public investment projects are divided into three time frames: • Short-Term (Next 5 Years) • Mid-Term (6-10 Years) • Long-Term (More Than 10 Years) Short-term projects can begin soon after adoption. These projects are considered “low hanging fruit.” They are more attainable and do not require large amounts of funding. These projects are generally planned CIP projects in the next five years. Mid-term projects are not as attainable within the first five years. They require planning or funding to prepare but should be implemented in six to ten years. Long-term projects may not currently have an anticipated time frame for implementation or may require prerequisite planning before implementation. Long-term projects should be revisited to assess the status of the project and determine if implementation can be accomplished sooner. PUBLIC INVESTMENT INITIATIVES 35 PUBLIC INVESTMENT INITIATIVES LONDON AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 SHORT-TERM (1-5 YEARS) PARKS AND TRAILS P1 Greenbelt/Storm Water Master Plan* STREET IMPROVEMENTS S1 FM 2444 - Construct 5 Lane Curb and Gutter Roadway (TxDOT) S2 South Oso Parkway Street Improvements S3 County Road 33 Street Improvements UTILITY/INFRASTRUCTURE U1 SH 286 Water Line Replacement U2 Greenwood Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements *Projects Not Mapped S2 S1 U2 U1 S3 UV286 O l d B r o w n s v i l l e R d Kostoryz RdWilliams DrCarroll LnBetty Jean DrS Oso PkwyCo Rd 26 Co Rd 26 Holly Rd Weber RdBostonDr FM 2444S Staples S t Co Rd 22 Co Rd 35Co Rd 22 Co Rd 41ACo Rd 43Co Rd 43S Praire RdFM 763Everhart RdWooldridgeRd Yorktown BlvdCo Rd 33Oso P k w y Cimarron BlvdLipesBlvd Saratoga Blvd Co Rd 41Co Rd 20A FM 43 Ayers StStaples StGre e n woo dDrEverhart RdSaratoga Blvd Co Rd 45Co Rd 18Co Rd 47Sho rt-Term Projects Health and Safety Improvem ents Park Imp rovements Trai l Improv ements Street Im provements Utility/Infrastruc ture Im provements London Boundary Corpus Christi Ci ty Limits E1 Miles 36 PUBLIC INVESTMENT INITIATIVES CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 S2 S1 U2 U1 S3 UV286 Old Brownsville Rd Kostoryz RdWilliams DrCarroll LnBetty Jean DrS Oso PkwyCoRd26 Co Rd 26 Holly Rd Weber RdBostonDr FM 2444S Staples St Co Rd 22 Co Rd 35Co Rd 22 Co Rd 41ACo Rd 43Co Rd 43S Praire RdFM 763Everhart RdWooldridgeRd Yorktown BlvdCo Rd 33Oso P k w y Cimarron BlvdLipesBlvd Saratoga Blvd Co Rd 41Co Rd 20A FM 43 Ayers StStaples StGre e n woo dDrEverhart RdSaratoga Blvd Co Rd 45Co Rd 18Co Rd 47Short-Term Projects Health and Safety Improvements Park Improvements Trail Improvements Street Improvements Utility/Infrastructure Improvements London Boundary Corpus Christi City Limits E1 Miles 37 PUBLIC INVESTMENT INITIATIVES LONDON AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 MID-TERM (5-10 YEARS) HEALTH AND SAFETY H1 Fire Station #19 - Building and Ambulance* (Vicinity of SH 286 and FM 43) PARKS AND TRAILS P2 Drainage Channel Trail Development Phase I** P3 Oso Creek Trail Phase I** P4 Oso Creek Trail Phase II** STREET IMPROVEMENTS S4 Crosstown Extension to FM 2444 (TxDOT) *Projects Not Mapped **Oso Creek Trail and Drainage Channel Trail projects are intended to show general location and do not represent final alignment. P2 P4 P3 S4 P2 P2 UV286 O l d B r o w n s v i l l e R d Kostoryz RdWilliams DrCarroll LnBetty Jean DrS Oso PkwyCo Rd 26 Co Rd 26 Holly Rd Weber RdBostonDr FM 2444S Sta ples St Co Rd 22 Co Rd 35Co Rd 22 Co Rd 41ACo Rd 43Co Rd 43S Praire RdFM 763Everhart RdWooldridgeRd Yorktown BlvdCo Rd 33Oso P k w y Cimarron BlvdLipesBlvd Saratoga Blvd Co Rd 41Co Rd 20A FM 43 Ayers StStaples StGre e n woo dDrEverhart RdSaratoga Blvd Co Rd 45Co Rd 18Co Rd 47Mid-Term Proje cts Health and Safety Improvem ents Parks Improvem ents Tr ail Improvements Street Im pr o vem ents Utility/Infrastruc ture Improvements London Boundary Corpus Christi City Limits E1 Miles 38 PUBLIC INVESTMENT INITIATIVES CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 P2 P4 P3 S4 P2 P2 UV286 Old Brownsville Rd Kostoryz RdWilliams DrCarroll LnBetty Jean DrS Oso PkwyCoRd26 Co Rd 26 Holly Rd Weber RdBostonDr FM 2444S Staples St Co Rd 22 Co Rd 35Co Rd 22 Co Rd 41ACo Rd 43Co Rd 43S Praire RdFM 763Everhart RdWooldridgeRd Yorktown BlvdCo Rd 33Oso P k w y Cimarron BlvdLipesBlvd Saratoga Blvd Co Rd 41Co Rd 20A FM 43 Ayers StStaples StGre e n woo dDrEverhart RdSaratoga Blvd Co Rd 45Co Rd 18Co Rd 47Mid-Term Projects Health and Safety Improvements Parks Improvements Trail Improvements Street Improvements Utility/Infrastructure Improvements London Boundary Corpus Christi City Limits E1 Miles 39 PUBLIC INVESTMENT INITIATIVES LONDON AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 LONG-TERM (10+ YEARS) HEALTH AND SAFETY H2 Fire Station #19 - New Fire Truck and Ladder Truck* (Vicinity of SH 286 and FM 43) H3 Fire Station #20 - New Fire Station* (Vicinity of SH 286 and FM 2444) PARKS AND TRAILS P5 Oso Creek Trail Phase III** P6 Drainage Channel Trail Development Phase II** STREET IMPROVEMENTS S5 FM 43 Street Improvements (TxDOT) *Projects Not Mapped **Oso Creek Trail and Drainage Channel Trail projects are intended to show general location and do not represent final alignment. S14 P6 P6 S5 P5 UV286 O l d B r o w n s v i l l e R d Kostoryz RdWilliams DrCarroll LnBetty Jean DrS Oso PkwyCo Rd 26 Co Rd 26 Holly Rd Weber RdBostonDr FM 2444S Sta ples St Co Rd 22 Co Rd 35Co Rd 22 Co Rd 41ACo Rd 43Co Rd 43S Praire RdFM 763Everhart RdWooldridgeRd Yorktown BlvdCo Rd 33Oso P k w y Cimarron BlvdLipesBlvd Saratoga Blvd Co Rd 41Co Rd 20A FM 43 Ayers StStaples StGre e n woo dDrEverhart RdSaratoga Blvd Co Rd 45Co Rd 18Co Rd 47Long-Term Projec ts Health and Safety Improvem ents Parks Improvem ents Tr ail Improvements Street Im pr o vem ents Utility/Infrastruc ture Improvements London Boundary Corpus Christi City Limits E1 Miles 40 PUBLIC INVESTMENT INITIATIVES CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 S14 P6 P6 S5 P5 UV286 Old Brownsville Rd Kostoryz RdWilliams DrCarroll LnBetty Jean DrS Oso PkwyCoRd26 Co Rd 26 Holly Rd Weber RdBostonDr FM 2444S Staples St Co Rd 22 Co Rd 35Co Rd 22 Co Rd 41ACo Rd 43Co Rd 43S Praire RdFM 763Everhart RdWooldridgeRd Yorktown BlvdCo Rd 33Oso P k w y Cimarron BlvdLipesBlvd Saratoga Blvd Co Rd 41Co Rd 20A FM 43 Ayers StStaples StGre e n woo dDrEverhart RdSaratoga Blvd Co Rd 45Co Rd 18Co Rd 47Long-Term Projects Health and Safety Improvements Parks Improvements Trail Improvements Street Improvements Utility/Infrastructure Improvements London Boundary Corpus Christi City Limits E1 Miles 41 PUBLIC INVESTMENT INITIATIVES LONDON AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN [DRAFT] JANUARY 28, 2020 LondonArea Development Plan City of Corpus Christi METROQUEST SURVEY SUMMARY DRAFT JANuARy 23, 2020 METROQuEST SuRvEy SuMMARy SuRvEy TRAFFIC AND DEMOGRAPHICS DATA 198 Participants 2 METROQuEST SuRvEy SuMMARy CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JanUaRY 23, 2020 SCREEN 2 | vISION THEMES Based on the public input, three vision themes have been created for the London area. Renderings accompany each vision theme to illustrate the vision. Identify if you agree with the following vision themes. Vision Theme 1: Celebrate Our Community Character Vision Theme 2: Promote Sustainable Growth Vision Theme 3: Promote the Oso Creek and Bay as a Community Amenity SCREEN 3 | POLICy INITIATIvES PRIORITy RANKING ORDER POLICy INITIATIvE AvERAGE RANKING 1 Storm Water Improvements 2.37 2 Expand Infrastructure 2.8 3 Outdoor Recreation 3.12 4 Oso Creek and Bay 3.17 5 Land Development 3.35 Rate how important each policy initiative is to achieve the vision for the London area. Prioritize the five policy initiatives based on how important the initiative is for future development to create a high quality of life. 3LOnDOn aREa DEVELOPMEnT PLan JanUaRY 23, 2020 METROQuEST SuRvEy SuMMARy SCREEN 4 | KEy ELEMENTS The following recommended strategies are methods to achieve the vision for the London area. The strategies are organized by the prioritized policy initiatives identified on the previous slide. Review and rate the importance of each strategy. 4 METROQuEST SuRvEy SuMMARy CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JanUaRY 23, 2020 5LOnDOn aREa DEVELOPMEnT PLan JanUaRY 23, 2020 METROQuEST SuRvEy SuMMARy GENERAL COMMENT THEMES FEEDBACK Prefer low density residential development Concerns about infrastructure supporting growth Encourage sustainable growth London needs sewer infrastructure There is great opportunity for new commercial along 286 Prefer small town character Ensure proper drainage Plans need consistency London will incorporate Ensure Sustainable Growth and Development Create quality development Not supportive of growth Supportive of the planning process Provide housing for multiple income levels General distrust of the government Improve Roadways Improve aesthetics with landscaping 6 METROQuEST SuRvEy SuMMARy CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JanUaRY 23, 2020 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 7LOnDOn aREa DEVELOPMEnT PLan JanUaRY 23, 2020 METROQuEST SuRvEy SuMMARy METROQuEST SuRvEy RESuLTS uSER TyPE INPuT % Participants 198 30% Visitors (to the Survey)455 70% Total 653 100% PLATFORM TyPE INPuT % Online 54 27% Mobile 144 73% Total 198 100% SuRvEy TRAFFIC DATA SURVEY PaRTICIPaTIOn SURVEY PaRTICIPaTIOn BY PLaTFORM 30% Visitors 70% Online 27% Mobile 73% 8 METROQuEST SuRvEy RESuLTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JanUaRY 23, 2020 SURVEY PaRTICIPaTIOn BY DaTE SuRvEy TRAFFIC DATA 9LOnDOn aREa DEVELOPMEnT PLan JanUaRY 23, 2020 METROQuEST SuRvEy RESuLTS SCREEN 2 | vISION THEMES Based on the public input, three vision themes have been created for the London area. Renderings accompany each vision theme to illustrate the vision. Identify if you agree with the following vision themes. Vision Theme 1: Celebrate Our Community Character Vision Theme 2: Promote Sustainable Growth Vision Theme 3: Promote the Oso Creek and Bay as a Community Amenity 10 METROQuEST SuRvEy RESuLTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JanUaRY 23, 2020 RATING INPuT % Agree 108 62% Disagree 66 38% Total 174 100% vISION THEME 1 FEEDBACK 1 This sounds nice, but what is our "Community Character"? 2 Small rural community that exists in London will disappear with the growth if it is not limited to low density housing. LISD is the lowest paying school district in the region. It can not keep up with growth. Faculty can not afford to stay with the low wages. The school can not accommodate current students in buildings that are up to standards. The high school currently has only 2 science classrooms that were designed for a middle school science class. This plan will continue to overcrowd a school and ruin the one item that draws people to London at over 44% favored feature. London ISD can not support the growth. 3 “Celebrate Community Character” is incredibly vague. 4 As long as area residents keep their private life and large land plot sizes. That is the London Community Character. 5 The City is annexing these areas as Commercial/Multifamily and RS 4.5 Zoning. This is far from the Rural Living that the City and Developers are promoting. Especially when the RS 4.5 zoning allows 13 houses per square acre lot. It would be helpful if the City follows the plan that is selling versa annexing & Zoning it in per the developers request. What's the point if the plan isn't being followed? 6 What do you mean by this? I like the rural feel we had. It’s getting to be something different than what I wanted when we moved here. 7 Proper development in keeping with the Unified Development Code for our city. Annexation is important. Stop the septic tank developments by providing access to city sewage infrastructure and drainage outfalls. 8 No one can answer why does the city needs to expand into London when it cannot fully support it's current footprint. 9 Not enough information 10 No new subdivisions. Revitalize older areas near downtown. 11 I have no idea what this entails so I must disagree. A completely vague vision statement that has no objectivity. 12 Too vague. What does this mean? 13 Community character is and always has been RURAL! Not the city. KEEP LONDON RURAL! Look at all the commercial shopping centers in Corpus Christi, majority of tenants are vacant majority of shopping centers are vacant. There is no need for commercial shopping centers in London when the city cannot even to fill the shopping center they currently have in the city limits. 14 Need higher density 15 In this vision do you see planting more trees? So sad the city keep growing with all new subdivisions, and the city allowed new neighborhoods with any environmental payback for our city to look better, 16 Need higher density VISIOn THEME 1: CELEBRaTE OUR COMMUnITY CHaRaCTER SCREEN 2 | vISION THEMES 11LOnDOn aREa DEVELOPMEnT PLan JanUaRY 23, 2020 METROQuEST SuRvEy RESuLTS RATING INPuT % Agree 131 74% Disagree 46 26% Total 177 100% vISION THEME 2 FEEDBACK 1 What is the true definition of “sustainable growth”? 2 A vision and or reality ? Adding more trees ! Come on people ... 3 Higher density 4 Keep residential as 1/2 - 1 acre homes! Keep values high! There’s a reason London is Sought after. London has status and by creating sustainable growth toward people and just anybody can come live in London is not making it any different than the city of Corpus Christi. London needs gentrification! 5 What is the commitment from the city to promoted planting more trees? 6 What does sustainable growth mean to the city? This is another vague vision statement. We would like to have sidewalks and parks added to promote activity and growth to our community. 7 Revitalize areas near downtown. 8 Public spaces and parks are a wonderful addition. Given the climate (hot and sunny), consideration for covered parks and access to splash pads and swimming pools are paramount. 9 No septic! Need high density! Need sewer. Credits for detention and retention plans. 10 Growth should be organic and natural, not taxpayer funded. 11 Again, achieve a good mix of commercial, single and multifamily zoning and city services through annexation and infrastructure for well planned sewage and drainage. 12 Large areas, parks, trees, nature areas need to stay. No compact houses, no small land area plots. 13 How will the growth be sustained? When it floods, school has been delayed and canceled. The restrooms at LISD have been temporarily shut down due to the septic systems being full due to flooding. With developments. The farm land that currently serves as flood plane and drainage will be gone and create more issues. This issue has not been addressed sufficiently. The Oso floods easily and already adversely affects current residents. Growth will just cause more issues. Making parks while removing the majority of the open drainage in the farm land will cause more issues. The road ways are also an issue. The 3 lane road in front of LISD does not have room for expansion. There are already issues with traffic during school hours. Growth will only create more issues. VISIOn THEME 2: PROMOTE SUSTaInaBLE GROWTH SCREEN 2 | vISION THEMES 12 METROQuEST SuRvEy RESuLTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JanUaRY 23, 2020 RATING INPuT % Agree 149 79% Disagree 39 21% Total 188 100% vISION THEME 3 FEEDBACK 1 The area needs attention to address the issue of drainage and flooding. 2 Access to creek and bay by everyone, not just one neighborhood. 3 The City already owns a good amount of frontage at the north end of CR 33 and east toward SH 286. Why not dedicate it to a regional park for the citizens of the London area and areas north to enjoy? 4 If the London community wants parks, let them pay for them. Until corpus streets are no longer third world, streets before parks. 5 More human activity in an area = less nature activity in that area. Trash, pollution, and homeless will increase in this setting. 6 Revitalize areas near downtown. 7 This could be decent but the city always screws cyclists so this is a no, also 8 There needs to be a flood wall or some type of alterations to the creek to help with flooding. 9 For the love of God. Get all this new subdivisions developers for every house the is build they need to plant trees, our taxes are getting higher depending on the price of the house, when the entire subdivision is bare bake to tree to beautify our city ... think :) VISIOn THEME 3: PROMOTE THE OSO CREEK anD BaY aS a COMMUnITY aMEnITY SCREEN 2 | vISION THEMES 13LOnDOn aREa DEVELOPMEnT PLan JanUaRY 23, 2020 METROQuEST SuRvEy RESuLTS RANK INPuT % 1 29 31% 2 23 25% 3 24 26% 4 12 13% 5 5 5% Total 93 100% STORM WaTER IMPROVEMEnTS SCREEN 3 | POLICy INITIATIvES STORM WATER IMPROvEMENTS FEEDBACK 1 I support regional water detention. Oso Creek Hike and Bike 2 Encourage detention ponds. 3 As with first one, we don’t want Corpus involved. In Fact we are start a incorporating drive to effectively eliminate Corpus ETJ. 4 This always a plus it important 5 Reducing potential flooding is always good 6 All 5 of these seem equally important. 7 If it floods, they won't come. Control flooding and also control mosquitos. 8 Give credits for retention and detention ponds 9 Credits for retention and detention ponds. 10 Fix the storm water areas PRIORITy RANKING ORDER POLICy INITIATIvE AvERAGE RANKING 1 Storm Water Improvements 2.37 2 Expand Infrastructure 2.8 3 Outdoor Recreation 3.12 4 Oso Creek and Bay 3.17 5 Land Development 3.35 OVER aLL PRIORITY RanKInG Rate how important each policy initiative is to achieve the vision for the London area. Prioritize the five policy initiatives based on how important the initiative is for future development to create a high quality of life. 14 METROQuEST SuRvEy RESuLTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JanUaRY 23, 2020 RANK INPuT % 1 20 23% 2 26 30% 3 10 11% 4 16 18% 5 16 18% Total 88 100% EXPanD InFRaSTRUCTURE EXPAND INFRASTRuCTuRE FEEDBACK 1 Need sewer and water. No septic. Give credits for retention and detention ponds. 2 Maybe 3 Adding more city units may be harmful to the ecotourism 4 Infrastructure (SEWER)south of Oso Creek 5 Need more sewer and water 6 Heavy emphasis on long term planning for traffic management and upkeep of existing roadways. This is paramount. 7 All are important however infrastructure (streets, sanitary sewer and drainage are the key to proper growth. 8 Recommending London Incorporating, to eliminate any future. Development by Corpus 9 City water for rural homes. 10 Bring sewer, limit septic. SCREEN 3 | POLICy INITIATIvES 15LOnDOn aREa DEVELOPMEnT PLan JanUaRY 23, 2020 METROQuEST SuRvEy RESuLTS RANK INPuT % 1 12 13% 2 21 23% 3 20 22% 4 24 26% 5 16 17% Total 93 100% OUTDOOR RECREaTIOn OuTDOOR RECREATION FEEDBACK 1 Baseball fields for kids to practice. 2 Splash pad more outdoor play areas for kids 3 By adding outdoor amenities this encourages young families to visit 4 None of the plans address the issues that will impact London ISD 5 No outdoor Recreation 6 Make few parks but make them great. RANK INPuT % 1 18 19% 2 11 12% 3 22 24% 4 21 23% 5 21 23% Total 93 100% OSO CREEK anD BaY OSO CREEK AND BAy FEEDBACK 1 I tend to think the Botanical Gardens already do this in a sustainable way. I wouldn't want to invite too much human intrusion into these wetlands as they are easily disrupted. 2 Ecotourism- 3 I am very excited for the ecotourism potential 4 Community park needed. SCREEN 3 | POLICy INITIATIvES 16 METROQuEST SuRvEy RESuLTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JanUaRY 23, 2020 RANK INPuT % 1 16 18% 2 16 18% 3 15 17% 4 30 34% 5 11 13% Total 88 100% LanD DEVELOPMEnT LAND DEvELOPMENT FEEDBACK 1 Many families invest and sacrifice to live in the London community because it is small community that is close enough to businesses. More development will change what many families have invested in and love about London. 2 There is no need to rush to develop this area when we have not adequately developed and maintained the central city. 3 London ISD is busting at the seams. Please don't ruin a wonderful little school district with development. 4 Yes 5 High density needed. 6 We in London do not want expansion 7 City Water for rural homes. 8 Small, local businesses, unique restaurants should be developed. We don't need anymore chain stores and restaurants in the community or Corpus 9 I support King’s Lake project 10 I'm not overly keen in seeing strip malls and a lot of businesses in London 11 Corpus could easily spend less of our hard earned money on nice to have but unnecessary things. I need to see the money trail here. Pretty certain someone's uncle is getting set to be rich at the public trough 12 No more septic. SCREEN 3 | POLICy INITIATIvES 17LOnDOn aREa DEVELOPMEnT PLan JanUaRY 23, 2020 METROQuEST SuRvEy RESuLTS IMPROVE InFRaSTRUCTURE SCREEN 4 | KEy ELEMENTS The following recommended strategies are methods to achieve the vision for the London area. The strategies are organized by the prioritized policy initiatives identified on the previous slide. Review and rate the importance of each strategy. ADEQuATE INFRASTRuCTuRE FEEDBACK 1 First fix the present communities in need of repair 2 By agreeing here, I do NOT mean that we are looking to replace aerobic septic systems with central sewage. Frankly, I think the septic systems, at least on large enough lawns, have better long term environmental impacts than central sewage. 3 Bring in infrastructure at no cost to developers to encourage development 4 We need well planned out lift stations and trunk lines for sewage capacity. The Sanitary sewer trust fund allocation assessments should be increased 5 Concerned about needed increased resources for London school due to new construction 6 Adequate water outflow is imperative, too much gutter flooding and stagnant water on roads currently 7 Whoever approved septic systems on 0.5 acre lots should be ashamed of themselves. Every home in and around this city should be on city sewer! 8 Having an school district on septic has had many issues for many years. Flooding causes the septic system to fill with water and causes issues in the schools. With the growth, crowing in the schools has caused issues will most of the utilities. 18 METROQuEST SuRvEy RESuLTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JanUaRY 23, 2020 EMERGENCy FACILITIES FEEDBACK 1 Definitely not!! 2 Who will finance this? London ISD doesn't have the funding to have adequate classrooms for their students. How can LISD pay for something such as the dome? LISD is the lowest paying district in the region. They can not afford such a project. 3 Too early for this. Again, drive times to emergency facilities is not too long. 4 I'm not quite sure what this is so I will withhold comment. 5 That’s not eye-appealing to look at or live next to. Take it far out. 6 Everyone is going to need to come to grips with the fact that if this area gets a direct hit from a class 3 or larger, there's going to be little to nothing that's salvageable. EXPAND POLICE AND FIRE FEEDBACK 1 use Weber Fire dept instead of Flour Bluff. Weber is closer to London 2 That would be nice adding more body’s not expending the territory for a limited amount of First responders in that area.. and not having to wait log a long time when emergency’s arrived 3 County is just fine- no need for city. 4 Within reason. We do not need to rush with a fire station and branch police dept building until density within the area justifies it. The drive time is minimal thanks to TxDot extensions of SH 286 5 The closest fire station that dispatches to London is the Nueces County fire station, but the closest station is on Weber (WOW). Need additional support for both police and fire. 6 make sure response time is consistent across all areas of the city 7 Being told London does not have fire or police protection is not entirely true as I have witnessed several wrecks in the area (outside city limits) and police and EMS have shown up quickly and adequately. I believe telling people that this area isn’t served is more of a scare tactic than the truth. It may not be “city” personnel, but they do have service. IMPROVE InFRaSTRUCTURE WASTEWATER DRAINAGE PLANS FEEDBACK 1 Flooding causes issues with the roads. School has been shut down and closed due to flooding in the neighborhoods and concerns for student and staff safety. As more. Farm land is developed, runoff and flooding will become a bigger issue. Not being able to use the restroom during the school days because the septic system is full is unacceptable and has increased with the growing student population. 2 Whoever approved septic systems on 0.5 acre lots should be ashamed of themselves. Every home in and around this city should be on city sewer! 3 septic works just as well 4 There is already poor drainage in the London neighborhood, what will be done to help with this? SCREEN 4 | KEy ELEMENTS 19LOnDOn aREa DEVELOPMEnT PLan JanUaRY 23, 2020 METROQuEST SuRvEy RESuLTS WORK WITH NuECES COuNTy 1 The current roadways can barely handle current traffic 2 Needed immediately!! 3 lessen traffic on FM 43, wider roads/more lanes. Sidewalks for students to walk safely to school 4 Petition the Court for incorporating 5 Considering London ISD is in the middle of these developments and 1100 students attend, the traffic and roadways must be addressed. 6 Very concerned about the traffic for London school with the added homes being built 7 Very concerned about the traffic for London school due to new construction 8 Yes, the county should participate with county road improvements to help meet the demands of increased traffic within the study area. Even though drainage outfalls are normally constructed by the developer, some monies should be invested by the City and County for major outfalls to assist in proper drainage. 9 CofCC annexed this, people built in a non incorporated area and were fine with the infrastructure. CC saw $$$ and annexed it. Just another way to funnel tax dollars to developers and cronies. 10 Build new roads in Chapman Ranch area 11 Be transparent on how any fins are going to be spend ... 12 Alert the county to be more involved IMPROVE InFRaSTRUCTURE WASTEWATER DRAINAGE PLANS FEEDBACK 5 Increase the per acres assessments flr the water and sewer Trust funds (paid by the development community) to assist in major trunk line extensions. 6 If it floods, they won't come. If the mosquitos are there, they won't come either. Both are solvable issues. 7 No! Wastewater is the HIGHEST priced item on the utility bill. As a previous city of Corpus Christi resident who sold my home to live in London to avoid paying these high prices, waste water will just rack up the bills to those with the service! 8 focus on city water ditches the flooding and water draining into the bay with grass clippings oil and other debris SCREEN 4 | KEy ELEMENTS 20 METROQuEST SuRvEy RESuLTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JanUaRY 23, 2020 LanD DEVELOPMEnT COMMuNITy NODES FEEDBACK 1 Not commercial! 2 Involve the residents 3 Need water pads for kids, skate parks things for kids and teens to do. 4 Lower property taxes 5 The character is just now evolving with city growth. It's a new area of our community and represents true in-fill is a city already 39 miles long. 6 London is a rural area and over development will take the entire character away from it. SCREEN 4 | KEy ELEMENTS INCORPORATE GREEN SPACES FEEDBACK 1 And add more tree Into the plans, 2 No cycling areas are included even though they are used to sell this junk 3 Very important 4 lower property taxes 5 Of Course. Who doesn't like "green"? Let the UDC apply as to landscape requirements. 6 Respect nature, keep trees, parks natural areas without developing everything just for tax income 7 So far the plans that I have seen from the developers don't have any parks - just houses. 8 Moses already stated he offered to build a park in his development and give it to parks & rec but they supposedly declined because they didn't have the resources to maintain it. Parks & rec can already barely maintain the current city parks. 21LOnDOn aREa DEVELOPMEnT PLan JanUaRY 23, 2020 METROQuEST SuRvEy RESuLTS LOW IMPACT LAND uSES FEEDBACK 1 Low impact denotes a lesser use and therefore a lower land value. The current zoning and platting methods should exist across all areas of our city. Otherwise some are compromised for having water front property without the ability to develop it properly. 2 Are the low-impact areas determined by the water and therefore developers can't build anyways. This is clearly and quickly becoming about the number of houses that can be jammed into the London area versa developing the area accordingly. 3 lower property taxes 4 Need high density 5 Don’t mess around with Oso bay .. just add more trees! PROMOTE NEW DEvELOPMENT FEEDBACK 1 What's tight-knit? The city is annexing County land into the city. I don't have a problem with growth but the City is not following this plan and allowing the builders to have free reign of the developments. For those of us who actually live in the county, RS 4.5 is hardly rural - it will be tight knit when the builders are allowed to build up to 13 houses per square acre lot. So tight - can reach out and touch your neighbors house..... 2 keep the large home land plot areas. No 1/2 acre or less plots allowed 3 When developing a such a large capacity as what's going on, there is no longer a tight knit feel about the community. No longer small town feel! 4 A tight knit community can not be sustained with the proposed growth. There is no infrastructure to support it. The school is currently holding the community together. If the school balloons in accordance with the proposed growth, the sense is a rural, small school will disappear. 5 "Tight Knit" was frightful at a recent zoning and planning meeting. The few 1/2 acre homeowners on septic systems already there do not represent the thousands of acres owned by long time land stake holders or developers with at risk capital invested. We should strive for "normal urbanization". 6 The description of this sounds nice, but what the council has started with Mr. Mostaghasi feels like they are only looking to cash in on a new tax base. That wasn’t about sharing London, it was about money. I’m not arguing with it, this is America, but it was about the money. 7 lower property taxes 8 No, need high density 9 "Anything that MOSES/MPM isn’t a part of... NOT COMMERCIAL or small lots " 10 I don't know what this actually means. LanD DEVELOPMEnT SCREEN 4 | KEy ELEMENTS 22 METROQuEST SuRvEy RESuLTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JanUaRY 23, 2020 PROMOTE WALKABILITy FEEDBACK 1 Will bring homeless into area 2 How? It’s county roads... no thanks! Keep MPM away. 3 Add more trees... 4 Lower property taxes 5 UDC codes are fine for street layouts 6 Need sidewalks to access schools and parks safely. Too much traffic on FM 43 currently LanD DEVELOPMEnT SCREEN 4 | KEy ELEMENTS 23LOnDOn aREa DEVELOPMEnT PLan JanUaRY 23, 2020 METROQuEST SuRvEy RESuLTS OSO CREEK anD BaY SCREEN 4 | KEy ELEMENTS LAND ASSEMBLy FEEDBACK 1 I hadn't considered this, but it is actually a very good idea! 2 With construction comes the disruption of the natural setting of the land and creek/bay. 3 Condemnation without proper value paid is a mistake. Pay for it and then use it. OSO CREEK BAy AMENITIES FEEDBACK 1 Select viewing stations in Regional parks would be desirable. 2 With recreational things comes littering therefore harming rather than preserving. No matter how many trash can/recycle bins are put out there will still be those who do not care. 3 Is a habitat for so many birds don’t destroyed beautiful land PRESERvE OSO CREEK BAy FEEDBACK 1 Development will adversely affect the current ecosystem 2 Where feasible we should protect endangered species. Again careful not to penalize owners with water front property. 24 METROQuEST SuRvEy RESuLTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JanUaRY 23, 2020 PREvENT MOWING FEEDBACK 1 Proper land use requires some mowing. Most all the land along the Creek has been farmed and used for crops for generations. What is the meaning and purpose of "no mowing"? 2 How else will you enjoy the creek if you can’t walk along it. 3 Depends on the native/local fauna that live in the area. If there is not a disturbance to the local animal population, then mowing is good - keeps the snakes, chiggers, rats, and mosquitoes due to standing water. If it will disturb the local habitats, then we need to consider the affects of the mowing and make an environmentally beneficial decision. 4 Mixed feelings here. For those who own private property abutting these waterways, I'm not sure we have the right to tell them what they can and cannot do on their property. That said, I'm all for not selling water-front property for private development where-ever possible, so these environments can be conserved. OSO CREEK anD BaY SCREEN 4 | KEy ELEMENTS 25LOnDOn aREa DEVELOPMEnT PLan JanUaRY 23, 2020 METROQuEST SuRvEy RESuLTS OUTDOOR RECREaTIOn SCREEN 4 | KEy ELEMENTS ART AND ENTERTAINMENT FEEDBACK 1 Finally, a great idea... 2 With lots of tree. 3 Lower property taxes 4 Never to the scale of the recent Destination Bay Front failure. PARK AND TRAIL FACILITIES FEEDBACK 1 Yes for the regional park land the city owns along the Oso Creek south of the Landfill and across the Creek to the south. CR 33 to SH 286 2 Let the community HOA do these things. It's unfair for lower income taxpayers to pay for nice things in a rich neighborhood while their own continues to crumble and doesn't even have sidewalks for kids to walk to school. 3 Include cycling stuff that can actually be used by cyclists 4 Finally, another great idea. Let’s hope Moses isn’t the one who wants to develop this. 5 Don’t forget the tree .... PEDESTRIAN AND BIKE FEEDBACK 1 Lower property taxes 2 Put it in the regional park RECREATION FACILITIES FEEDBACK 1 Not sure what this means???? 2 Lower property taxes 3 London needs a park like the Oso Bay Wetlands Preserve... maybe near Botanical 26 METROQuEST SuRvEy RESuLTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JanUaRY 23, 2020 STORM WaTER IMPROVEMEnTS SCREEN 4 | KEy ELEMENTS ENCOuRAGE XERISCAPING FEEDBACK 1 No ON-SITE SEWER FACILITIES FEEDBACK 1 We cannot continue the sprawling septic system community already developed. Please no more. 2 If you are talking about private septic systems, then YES I support it. 3 No Septic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 4 Current septic systems at LISD can barely handle the current student population. 5 No septic! Bring sewer infrastructure! 6 Didn't the city just vote yes, to annexing property in London off of CR43 with one of the main reasons being that septic is not safe? So why would you want to now use this form of sewer now to benefit your project? NO, I disagree!! GREEN INFRASTRuCTuRE FEEDBACK 1 Need to make sure developers of homes put at least two trees per yard. Need more trees! POCKET PRAIRIES FEEDBACK 1 No STORM WATER RETENTION FEEDBACK 1 Isn't this addressed in the UDC? Most developers are familiar with good engineering practices and would comply. Please don't make it harder to develop than anywhere else in the City. 2 Retention ponds will be ineffective since the area already floods 27LOnDOn aREa DEVELOPMEnT PLan JanUaRY 23, 2020 METROQuEST SuRvEy RESuLTS WHERE DO YOU LIVE? SCREEN 5 | DEMOGRAPHICS RESPONSE INPuT % I do not live in the London area 47 34% I go to school in the London area 21 15% I live in the London area 62 44% I work in the London area 10 7% Total 140 100% WHaT IS YOUR aGE? RESPONSE INPuT % 21 to 35 25 24% 36 to 50 55 52% 51 to 65 20 19% 66 and over 6 6% Total 106 100% 28 METROQuEST SuRvEy RESuLTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JanUaRY 23, 2020 FEEDBACK 1 none 2 Would like to keep low density housing instead of high to medium density 3 How will London be able to accommodate growth and what will happen to the current 40% transfers. How will growth impact the Lago Vista zoning in the future and how can the school manage all of these changes? 4 All the open lots within the city limits that can be used to create a tax base but the city wants to expand into London and increase it's footprint and then catch up with the infrastructure. CC is primary a service industry and college grads leave and yet the council approved to build 1400 homes in the $320+ range to attract who? Can't even maintain the current streets, manage homeless, and control crime but we're going to expand out! 5 Sustainable growth based on smart growth principles should be utilized. Developers should have to pay for adding additional infrastructure added into the area. Urban sprawl, which has generally been embraced by developers should be discouraged. 6 I do not correctly live or work in the London area, but wil do so in the next five years. 7 "Whoever approved septic systems on 0.5 acre lots should be ashamed of themselves. Every home in and around this city should be on city sewer! London ISD is busting at the seams...please don't ruin such a wonderful school district with rapid growth! " 8 Only low density housing development should be allowed. Bringing in too much population is not sustainable by the school and will change the area’s dynamics with probable negative impacts 9 The city of Corpus Christi has a great opportunity to grow beautiful out Crosstown down to London. With so much land there is so much space to build great places for the people of London and the Southside. This part has the potential to build like the Whitestone area in Austin between Cedar Park and Leander on 183. Beautiful new buildings with shopping centers and restaurants. 10 You are killing our small community school feel... 11 The drainage channel along Oso creek downstream of the greenwood treatment plant has changed dramatically in the last 40 years. Reduced salt water despiser upstream and increased freshwater flows from green wood have spawned increased trees and vegetation which reduce flow capacity in floods. Look at google earth and use maps from the 50’s and 60’s. The trees should be removed/trimmed to enhance drainage flows and enhance the aesthetics. 12 Plans need consistency . Not just work for several builders. 13 London will Incorporate OvERALL COMMENTS 29LOnDOn aREa DEVELOPMEnT PLan JanUaRY 23, 2020 METROQuEST SuRvEy RESuLTS FEEDBACK 14 I am very concerned that the whole thing is being sold & promoted to the public but the plan is already not being followed or the limits are being pushed. I want to be clear, I am not against the growth. I am against over development. 15 I live adjacent to the London area, right on the other side of the Oso Creek. I may not live in the designated area, but it does effect us. 16 I and my family own farmland and improvements in the London area for over 100 yrs. 17 I believe a lot of my neighbors lost hope that the city council will respect our input. It was a bad look to go against the zoning commission’s recommendation for the MPM property. It seemed like they wanted that tax base so badly, that MPM got everything he wanted with no concessions. It’s funny that he played the compassion card with allowing new families into the district via “affordable housing”. A large number of these homes will be nearly as expensive on a per month basis, due to the higher cost of property taxes, now that it will be annexed, and a higher per month cost for utilities. Also, this large influx of children into the school will likely put a serious slowdown on transfers into the district, as well as impact the ability of the district to keep their high level of education excellence. Of course the school will go along with it because of....... money! Thank you. 18 I just want the best that would be good for the city a place where people would feel a good place to spend their time and the community. 19 No 20 No 21 Stay out of London area. The city of CC can't keep up with the area they already have. Stay out and fix the current area first! 22 I’m a new professional (orthopedic surgeon) that moved to the London area. Initiatives like this make the area much more enticing to live in and stick around. These certainly allow for development of a vibrant and healthy community. 23 Create a community where all ranges of people live ..not only rich but middle and lower Class. 24 No because i think the city never actually takes anyone's input into account because we don't put side money into people's pockets downtown. 25 That area is prone to flooding. Housing development should not continue. These areas should be available the whole community and not private individuals OvERALL COMMENTS 30 METROQuEST SuRvEy RESuLTS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI JanUaRY 23, 2020 FEEDBACK 27 Recent land / lot development approved by council is going to put a significant burden on London ISD and those of us that have children at LISD are concerned and worried about the boundary lines being changed for subdivisions like Lago Vista and Botanical Gardens. 28 I would really appreciate the repair of Ocean Drive as it is tearing up my cars. 29 Stop MPM Homes greed!!!! Keep London rural! There’s a big reason to moving outside city limits, to avoid being in the city limits. As a previous city resident, I sold my home to go outside because services are horrible, tax structures are horrible, utility bills are high, CCISD is the worst. Don’t infringe that for those who CHOSE to get away from it. Keep Moses out of London! He is bad news. If people can’t afford London, WORK HARDER! 30 Need more trees at these homes, areas, and around town. 31 Let’s make our city more beautiful by adding more trees, in all this new subdivision is a shame and sad to see how is not a priority for the city to do something about this problem! OvERALL COMMENTS 31LOnDOn aREa DEVELOPMEnT PLan JanUaRY 23, 2020 METROQuEST SuRvEy RESuLTS London Area Development Plan City Council Presentation February 25, 2020 Area Development Plans 2 Area Development Plans (ADP) are an initiative of the Plan CC Comprehensive Plan An ADP goes into more detail about future development of each area ADPs have been in place for several years and are in the process of being updated Timeline of Events and Activities 3 Engagement Process 4January 24, 2020 Introduction 5 Demographics Online Survey Results Community Open House Input Future Land Use Map 6 Vision Themes 7 CELEBRATE OUR COMMUNITY CHARACTER Vision Themes 8 PROMOTE SUSTAINABLE GROWTH Vision Themes 9 PROMOTE THE OSO CREEK AND BAY AS A COMMUNITY AMENITY Policy Initiatives 10 Public Investment Initiatives 11 Public Investment Initiatives 12 Public Investment Initiatives 13 MetroQuest Survey Summary 14 Recommendation 15 Staff and Planning Commission Recommend Adoption www.cctexas.com/southsideandlondon DATE: January 10, 2020 TO: Peter Zanoni, City Manager FROM: Al Raymond, Director, Development Services AlRaymond@cctexas.com (361) 826 - 3275 CAPTION: Ordinance exempting Morton Meadows, located East of Flour Bluff Drive and South of Graham Road, from the payment of the wastewater lot or acreage fee under section 8.5.2.G.1 of the Unified Development Code. (District 4) SUMMARY: Brister Surveying, Inc., on behalf of Gary and Dinah Morton, property owners, submitted a request for an exemption from the Wastewater Lot/Acreage fee under Section 8.5.2.G of the UDC. The applicant is requesting an exemption from the wastewater acreage fee due to the existing wastewater collection line being located more than 1,000 feet from the property. Under the authority granted by the Unified Development Code (UDC), the Planning Commission granted the wastewater construction and fee waiver on October 30, 2019. A waiver from wastewater construction constitutes the approval of an on-site septic facility (OSSF). BACKGROUND AND FINDINGS: Brister Surveying, Inc., on behalf of Gary and Dinah Morton, property owners, submitted a request for an exemption from the Wastewater Lot/Acreage fee under Section 8.5.2.G of the UDC for their planned residential subdivision named Morton Meadows. The property totals 6.024 acres, consists of five (5) lots, is zoned “RS-6” and “RM-1” Multifamily, and is in the Flour Bluff Independent School District. The plat was approved by Planning Commission on October 30, 2019 and the property is located East of Flour Bluff Drive and South of Graham Road inside City limits. Morton Meadow’s plans to develop single-family homes on lots greater than one half acres in size. The maximum density allowed by the zoning districts are 7.26 du/ac (RS-6) and 22 du/ac (RM-1). Based on the acreage WASTEWATER FEE EXEMPTION FOR MORTON MEADOWS AGENDA MEMORANDUM First Reading Ordinance for the City Council Meeting of 2/25/20 Second Reading Ordinance for the City Council Meeting of 3/17/20 of the property, this equates to approximately 43 apartment units with 30 single family homes or 44 single-family homes. The property owners submitted a request for an exemption from the payment of wastewater acreage fees in accordance with UDC Section 8.5.2.G.1. The potential wastewater acreage fee is $9,463.71, based on the rate of $1,571 per acre. The Planning Commission recommended a waiver to the requirement to connect to sanitary sewer, finding that the subdivision was not reasonably accessible to a public wastewater facility of sufficient capacity as determined by adopted City wastewater standards and wastewater master plan. The subdivision properties will provide on-site sewage facilities (septic) in conformance with the Corpus Christi and Nueces County Health District. The proposed Morton Meadows subdivision property is not “reasonably accessible” to a public wastewater infrastructure as defined by the UDC. “Reasonably accessible” means (i) master plan facilities (including trunk mains and lift stations) currently exist in the designated service area, and such facilities can be extended to serve the subdivision; and (ii) collection lines of adequate capacity to service the proposed development are within 1,000 feet of the subdivision and can be extended. Per Section UDC 8.5.2.G.1, areas exempt from the payment of lot or acreage fee shall be determined by the City Council to likely be served by City Wastewater services within the next 15 years. Staff anticipates availability of service to this property within the 15-year term with development of the properties south on Flour Bluff Drive. Although, the planned subdivision is in a wastewater master plan designated service area, the nearest wastewater collection line is approximately 2,200 feet away from the applicant’s property, located near Oak Terrace and Compton Road. However, this wastewater connection is not deemed suitable, due to being at a depth of 4-feet and will not provide the required slope suitable for a wastewater collection line without major capital improvements including a lift station and force main. While the property is located approximately 1.43 miles from Truax Field (Naval Air Station-Corpus Christi) and approximately 0.32 miles from the nearest Air Installation Compatibility Use Zone (AICUZ), the Navy encourages reduced density within areas in proximity to flight installations ALTERNATIVES: Require the owner to pay the applicable wastewater acreage fee in the amount of $9,463.71 prior to the recording of the plat. If wastewater services are not available within 10 years from the date of the filing of the plat, the property owners may request a refund. FISCAL IMPACT: Approved of the wastewater acreage fee exemption would lessen the funds available to reimburse developers for the construction and extension of sanitary sewer trunk main lines, lift stations, and force main lines. Wastewater lot or acreage fees along with 75 percent of the wastewater surcharge fee are deposited in the Sanitary Sewer Trunk System Trust Fund (4220- 21800-777). RECOMMENDATION: On October 30, 2019, the Planning Commission recommended that City Council approve the exemption of the wastewater acreage fee subject to a Sanitary Sewer Connection Agreement. In order to waive the wastewater acreage fee, City Council must approve the fee waiver. The Planning Commission has already approved the waiver of wastewater line construction. Staff recommends disapproval of this fee waiver request due to the high probability that new sewer lines fronting this property will be installed within the next 15 years. The landowner may request a refund of the lot acreage fee, after 10 years if the sewer line is not extended, per UDC Section 8.5.2.G.1. LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Ordinance (with exhibit) Presentation Location Map Ordinance exempting Morton Meadows subdivision, located East of Flour Bluff Drive and South of Graham Road, from the payment of the wastewater lot or acreage fee under section 8.5.2.G.1 of the Unified Development Code conditioned upon a Sanitary Sewer Connection Agreement WHEREAS, Morton Meadows located East of Flour Bluff Drive and South of Graham Road is not currently served by the City wastewater system. WHEREAS, the owner/developer has submitted a written request that the Subdivision be exempt from the payment of wastewater lot or acreage fees based on the determination that it is not likely that the area will be served by the City wastewater system within the next fifteen (15) years; and WHEREAS, based on Section 8.5.2.G.1 of the Unified Development Code of the City of Corpus Christi, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council that it is not likely that the area will be served by the City wastewater system within the next fifteen (15) years and that the Subdivision be exempt from the payment of wastewater lot or acreage fees at this time. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1. Pursuant to the request of Dinah & Gary Morton (“owner”), Morton Meadows subdivision is exempt from wastewater lot or acreage fees in the accordance with Section 8.5.2.G.1 of the Unified Development Code of the City of Corpus Christi. SECTION 2. The exemption from the payment of wastewater lot or acreage fees pursuant to Section 8.5.2.G.1 of the Unified Development Code of the City of Corpus Christi is conditioned upon owner/developer compliance with the following: a. That the owner/developer of the Subdivision enter into a Sanitary Sewer Connection Agreement. b. That the Sanitary Sewer Connection Agreement be recorded in the Office of the Nueces County Clerk’s Office prior to the recordation of the plat. That the foregoing ordinance was read for the first time and passed to its second reading on this the _____ day of ___________, 2020, by the following vote: Joe McComb ________________ Michael Hunter______________ Roland Barrera ________________ Ben Molina ______________ Rudy Garza ________________ Everett Roy ______________ Paulette M. Guajardo ________________ Greg Smith ______________ Gil Hernandez ________________ That the foregoing ordinance was read for the second time and passed finally on this the _____ day of __________ 2020, by the following vote: Joe McComb ________________ Michael Hunter______________ Roland Barrera ________________ Ben Molina ______________ Rudy Garza ________________ Everett Roy ______________ Paulette M. Guajardo ________________ Greg Smith ______________ Gil Hernandez ________________ PASSED AND APPROVED on this the ______ day of _________________, 2020. ATTEST: _________________________ ________________________ Rebecca Huerta Joe McComb City Secretary Mayor City Council Presentation February 25, 2020 Wastewater Acreage Fee Exemption for Morton Meadows 2 Vicinity Map NCR 43 CR 41 FM 2444 Morton Meadows 3 Aerial of Master Plan-Required Wastewater Construction FM 2444 Oso Creek N Nearest Active Manhole Morton Meadows 4 Recommendation Denial of Wastewater Acreage Fee Exemption, subject to Sanitary Sewer Connection Agreement Per UDC 8.5.2.G.1 5 Plat: Morton Meadows N DATE: January 15, 2020 TO: Peter Zanoni, City Manager FROM: Albert Raymond III, AIA, CBO, Director, Development Services alraymond@cctexas.com (361) 826 - 3276 CAPTION: Ordinance closing, abandoning and vacating a 1.89 acre prescriptive easement known as Airline Road Extension between Yorktown Boulevard and Rodd Field Road pursuant to a land exchange agreement. SUMMARY: The City of Corpus Christi is requesting the closing of the prescriptive easement known as Airline Road located Between Rodd Field Rd and Yorktown Boulevard. The prescriptive easement is being abandoned in conjunction with the CIP project to widen Rodd Field Road. The City entered into a land conveyance agreement with the property owner and the closure of the prescriptive easement is required as part of agreement. BACKGROUND AND FINDINGS: City of Corpus Christi (Owner) is requesting the closing, vacation and abandonment of a 1.89- acre existing prescriptive easement on Lot 15 and 16, Section 25, Flour Bluff and Encinal Farm and Garden Tracts, known as Airline Road. This portion of Airline Road, between Rodd Field Road and Yorktown Boulevard, was built many years ago without any right-of-way dedication and by law this section of Airline Road became a prescriptive easement. This abandonment and vacation of the prescriptive easement is being requested by the City due to the Rodd Field Road Expansion and the subsequent closure of this section of Airline Road. The Nuss Family Partnership, the owners of the property, is dedicating a 1.2969-acre tract for a right-of-way along Rodd Field Road and Yorktown Boulevard for the Rodd Field Road Expansion in exchange for the prescriptive easement that is being closed. An appraisal was obtained by the City on July 21, 2017 regarding the value of the prescriptive easement and the right-of-way dedication. The Appraiser determined the closure and dedication to be of an equal value at $530,000. A land conveyance agreement was approved by City Council on May 15, 2018. The agreement enabled the City to obtain land for a public right of way via a land swap instead of by way of a cash payment. Ordinance closing, abandoning, and vacating a 1.89-acre prescriptive easement AGENDA MEMORANDUM First Reading Ordinance for the City Council Meeting of February 25, 2020 Second Reading Ordinance for the City Council Meeting of March 17, 2020 ALTERNATIVES: Denial of the proposed prescriptive easement closure will go against the provisions outlined in the approved land conveyance agreement. The City has already taken possession of the additional land required for the Rodd field Road Expansion per the agreement. The city in return committed the property under the prescriptive easement to the owner, which they will be prohibited from any use without the vacation of the easement. The only alternative to closing the prescriptive easement would be for the City to default on the executed land conveyance agreement and pay the Nuss Family Partnership fair market value for the additional land the City acquired for the additional right of way for the Rodd Field Road improvements. FISCAL IMPACT: There are no financial impacts associated with closing the Street prescriptive easement. The prescriptive easement property is being swapped for a dedicated right of way of equal value that is required to complete the roadway improvements of Rodd Field Road. Funding Detail: Fund: Organization/Activity: Mission Element: Project # (CIP Only): N/A Account: RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the prescriptive easement closure. This request was initiated by City in order to complete the Rodd Field Roadway improvements. LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Ordinance (with exhibit) Presentation Location Map Agreement with Nuss Family partnership dated March 7, 2018 Ordinance closing, abandoning and vacating a 1.89 acre prescriptive easement known as Airline Road Extension between Yorktown Boulevard and Rodd Field Road pursuant to a land exchange agreement. WHEREAS, the City of Corpus Christi is initialing the closure, vacation, and abandonment of a previously developed and surfaced prescriptive easement consisting of 1.89 acres; WHEREAS, the City has an agreement approved on May 15, 2018, by City Council, exchanging this prescriptive easement for a right-of-way along the north side of the abutting property to complete the Rodd Field Road expansion. WHEREAS, upon approval by the City Council, the completion of the Rodd Field Road expansion, and issuance of the ordinance, all grants of the easement closure will be recorded, at the City expense in the real property Official Deed and Map Records of Nueces County, Texas, in which the subject portion of the property is located, and with a copy of the recording retained by the City: WHEREAS, it has been determined that it is feasible and advantageous to the City of Corpus Christi to close, vacate, and abandon the subject portion of the previously developed and surfaced prescriptive easement, subject to compliance by the with the conditions specified in this ordinance; BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS: SECTION 1. Pursuant to Article X, Sec.1 (a) (11) of the City Charter, the previously developed and surfaced prescriptive easement consisting of 1.89 acres is closed, abandoned and vacated by the City of Corpus Christi (“City”), subject to abutting Owner compliance with the conditions specified in Section 2 of this ordinance. Exhibit “A” which is the metes and bounds description of the subject portion, Exhibit “B” which is the graphical representation for the metes and bounds description, and Exhibit “C”, which is the location map, are attached to and incorporated in this ordinance by reference as if each were fully set out herein in their entireties. SECTION 2. The closure, abandonment and vacation of the prescriptive easement described in Section 1 of this ordinance is expressly conditioned upon the abutting Owner compliance with the following requirements: a.A 15-foot utility easement for 12” wastewater line near the north end of this property is retained in favor of the City. Pipe is centered in this easement. b.A 15-foot utility easement around the 8” waterline near the north end of this property is retained in favor of the City. Pipe is centered in this easement. c.A 15-Foot Utility Easement around 12” Waterline parallel to Yorktown Blvd is retained in favor of the City. Pipe is centered in this easement. d.A 15-Foot Drainage Easement at the north end of the property is retained in favor of the City. e.Failure to comply with all the conditions outlined in this Ordinance will hereby make the ordinance null and void. SECTION 3. This ordinance takes effect upon passage. 1 That the foregoing ordinance was read for the first time and passed to its second reading on this the _____ day of ___________, 2020, by the following vote: Joe McComb ________________ Michael Hunter______________ Roland Barrera ________________ Ben Molina ______________ Rudy Garza ________________ Everett Roy ______________ Paulette M. Guajardo ________________ Greg Smith ______________ Gil Hernandez ________________ That the foregoing ordinance was read for the second time and passed finally on this the _____ day of __________ , 2020, by the following vote: Joe McComb ________________ Michael Hunter______________ Roland Barrera ________________ Ben Molina ______________ Rudy Garza ________________ Everett Roy ______________ Paulette M. Guajardo ________________ Greg Smith ______________ Gil Hernandez ________________ PASSED AND APPROVED on this the ______ day of _________________, 2020. ATTEST: _________________________ ________________________ Rebecca Huerta Joe McComb City Secretary Mayor Sketch to Accompany Exhibit B Exhibit C YORK T O W N AIRLINERODD FIELDELVISGREYSTONEPRISCILLASYDN E Y PRES I D E N T GEIGERTALD O R AAIRLINE RODD FIELDYORK T O W N B L V D RAMF I E L D R D YORK T O W N CIMARRON BLVDEVERHART RDRODD FIELD RDSARA T O G A B L V D SH 35 8 WOO L D R I D G E R D YOR K T O W N CIMARRON BLVDFM 2444OS O P K W Y µ 0 1,000500Feet LOCATION MAP Date Created: 1/17/2020Prepared By: ReyRDepartment of Development Services SUBJECTPROPERTY Airline Road City Council Presentation February 25, 2020 Prescriptive Easement Closure Between Rodd Field Rd and Yorktown Blvd Vicinity Map N 2 Airline Rd Conveyance Agreement Highlights 3 The City entered into an agreement with the NUSS FAMILY PARTNERSHIP, LTD., GSC HOLDINGS, LTD. and WAYNE LUNDQUIST, JR. (“Owners") to convey a 1.2969 acre property to the City in exchange the City will relinquish rights to a 1.939 acre prescriptive easement out of a 9.8005 acre tract. The City is constructing a new intersection at Rodd Field Road and Yorktown Boulevard and requires the acquisition of a 1.2969-acre property to complete the new intersection. The City maintains a two roadway easement (Airline Road extension) in the 1.939-acre portion of the property. The Airline Road easement will not be required once the Rodd Field Road intersection project is complete. The owners agree to convey the surface interest of the 1.2969 acre parcel to the City and the City agrees to relinquish its rights, title and interest in the Airline Road easement to the property owners once the new intersection is completed. Aerial Overview N 4 Future Del Mar College Campus Future Development Retained Easements 5Airline Rd1. Drainage Easement 2. Wastewater Easement 3.Water Easement 4. Water Easement Staff Recommendation Approval 6 Street Improvements 7 Rodd Field RdYorktown BlvdBay Dr Geiger Dr Saratoga BlvdN DATE: January 17, 2020 TO: Peter Zanoni, City Manager FROM: Al Raymond, Director, Development Services AlRaymond@cctexas.com (361) 826 - 3276 CAPTION: Ordinance authorizing a Wastewater Collection Line Extension Construction and Reimbursement Agreement with Walker Holdings and Development, LLC to extend a 12-inch wastewater collection line for a planned residential subdivision located on IH-69 with a completion date of March 30, 2021; and appropriating $215,393.85 from the Sanitary Sewer Collection Line Trust Fund to reimburse the Developer per the agreement. (District 1) SUMMARY: Walker Holdings and Development, LLC is required to construct 1,551 linear feet of 12-inch wastewater collection line to the applicant’s property from the existing sewer main line located in the city’s drainage easement north of the property in order to provide wastewater service for a planned residential subdivision named Calallen South Unit 1. The installation of the new wastewater utilities will extend service to the planned residential subdivision which includes 23.145 acres of undeveloped property. The developer has requested a reimbursement agreement in accordance with UDC Section 8.5.2 Wastewater Trust Fund. The planned subdivision phase will total approximately 73 single-family homes located in the Calallen Independent School District. BACKGROUND AND FINDINGS: Walker Holdings and Development, LLC plans to install 1,551 linear feet of 12-inch wastewater collection line in order to provide wastewater service to a planned residential subdivision named Calallen South Unit 1 that will be constructed within City limits located along IH-69, south of Northwest Boulevard. The property encompasses 23.145 acres of property that is zoned RS-6. The planned subdivision phase will total approximately 73 single-family homes located in the Calallen Independent School District. The wastewater collection line will connect to the existing wastewater collection line located in the city’s drainage easement north of the property. Additionally, the installation of the new wastewater Agreement and appropriating funds for the Walker Holdings and Development, LLC for a Wastewater Collection Line Extension Construction and Reimbursement Agreement AGENDA MEMORANDUM First Reading Ordinance for the City Council Meeting of February 25, 2020 Second Reading Ordinance for the City Council Meeting of March 17, 2020 utilities will provide wastewater service to the surrounding properties that are located in the Calallen South Wastewater Service Area. City Council gave direction to staff at the August 13, 2019 meeting to reexamine the trust funds and to provide recommendations on policies that govern the priority, order, reimbursement rate and fees charged by the trust funds. City Council directed staff return within 75 days and present their recommendations. Due to the intensive process involved with this study, the department will not meet the 75 days as requested. The plan is to present staff’s findings to the Trust Fund Stakeholders and City Council with a tentative date of mid-February 2020. ALTERNATIVES: Based upon the current UDC language in section 8.5.2 Wastewater Trust Fund the developer requested reimbursement for the installation of a wastewater collection line that that will serve the planned subdivision and surrounding area. If the request were to be denied and the developer had to assume the costs associated with the installation of the collection line to serve the property, the project will become cost prohibitive. Another alternative is to identify the project as a capital improvement project to be constructed by the city, establish public improvement taxing district (PID), or impact fees to fund the installation of new utilities infrastructure in this area. This alternative may delay this project in the short term but would establish a viable long-term funding option for the installation of new water and wastewater utilities infrastructure without burdening the taxpayers. FISCAL IMPACT: The total amount requested for the reimbursement agreement is $215,393.85 and as of December 31, 2019 the Sanitary Sewer Collection Line Trust Fund has an available balance of $713,989.32. If the applicants request is approved the Sanitary Sewer Collection Line Trust Fund will have a remaining available balance of $498,595.47. The expenditures for this project are a one-time cost and are not associated with any other projects. The Utility Trust Funds receive monthly deposits generated from Lot and Acreage Fees, Pro-rata Fees and Surcharge Fees that are charged during the platting process. Over time the fees collected and deposited will replenish the Trust Funds and enable other developer-initiated water infrastructure projects to be reimbursed. The trust fund balances listed are current as of December 31, 2019. Funding Detail: Fund: 4220 Sanitary Sewer Collection Line Trust Fund Organization/Activity: 21801 Sanitary Sewer Collection Line Trust Mission Element: 777 Project # (CIP Only): N/A Account: 540450 Reimbursement to Developers RECOMMENDATION: The request is in accordance with UDC Section 8.5.2 Wastewater Trust Fund. The installation of this wastewater collection line will provide wastewater service to the planned residential subdivision and will make available wastewater service to the surrounding undeveloped property. The newly installed public utilities will help foster the development of this area within this area of Corpus Christi. Staff recommends approval of the applicant’s request. LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Ordinance (with exhibit) Presentation Location Map Ordinance authorizing a Wastewater Collection Line Extension Construction and Reimbursement Agreement with Walker Holdings and Development, LLC to extend a 12-inch wastewater collection line for a planned residential subdivision located on IH-69 with a completion date of March 30, 2021; and appropriating $215,393.85 from the No.4220-21801 Sanitary Sewer Collection Line Tr ust Fund to reimburse the Developer per the agreement. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS: SECTION 1. The City Manager or designee is authorized to execute a W astewater Collection Line Construction and Reimbur sement Agreement (Agreement) attached hereto, with Walker Holdings and Development, LLC for the construction and installation of 1,557 linear feet of 12-inch wastewater collection line, to provide wastewater service for the planned residential subdivision named Calallen South Unit 1, Corpus Christi, Texas. SECTION 2. Funding in the amount of $215,393.85 is appropriated from the No.4220- 21801 Sanitary Sewer Collection Line Trust Fund, to reimburse the Developer for the construction of a 12-inch wastewater collection line, and construction improvements in accordance with the Agreement. That the foregoing ordinance was read for the first time and passed to its second reading on this the _____ day of ___________, 2020, by the following vote: Joe McComb ________________ Michael Hunter______________ Roland Barrera ________________ Ben Molina ______________ Rudy Garza ________________ Everett Roy ______________ Paulette M. Guajardo ________________ Greg Smith ______________ Gil Hernandez ________________ That the foregoing ordinance was read for the second time and passed finally on this the _____ day of __________ 2020, by the following vote: Joe McComb ________________ Michael Hunter _____________ Roland Barrera ________________ Ben Molina _____________ Rudy Garza ________________ Everett Roy _____________ Paulette M. Guajardo ________________ Greg Smith ______________ Gil Hernandez ________________ PASSED AND APPROVED on this the ______ day of _________________, 2020. ATTEST: ___________________ _____ ________________ Rebecca Huerta Joe McComb City Secretary Mayor City Council Presentation February 25, 2020 Calallen South Unit 1 Reimbursement Agreement Location Map N Vicinity Map N Calallen South Unit 1 Existing 12” Sewer Proposed 12” Sewer Recommendation Approval This request is in accordance with UDC Section 8.5.2.E.2 Collection Line Extensions Approved Plat DATE: February 17, 2020 TO: Peter Zanoni, City Manager FROM: Albert Raymond III, AIA, CBO, Director, Development Services alraymond@cctexas.com (361) 826 - 3276 STAFF PRESENTERS: Name Title/Position Department Al Raymond Director Development Services Michael Dice Assistant Director Development Services BACKGROUND: City Council gave direction to staff at the August 13, 2019 meeting to reexamine the trust funds and to provide recommendations on policies that govern the priority, order, reimbursement rate and fees charged by the trust funds. City Council directed staff return within 75 days and present their recommendations. Staff conducted detailed research into how the trust funds were created and the establishment of the lot and acreage, surcharge and pro-rata fees charged during the platting process as a means to reimburse developers for the installation of new utilities infrastructure that is required for new residential and commercial development. Additionally, staff contracted a third-party consultant to review the current trust fund model and provided recommendations for an alternative means of funding the installation of new water and wastewater utilities infrastructure. One of the recommendations was to examine impact fees as a way to fund new utilities infrastructure installation. Impact fees are utilized by several Cities of a size that is equal to or larger than Corpus Christi. The process for establishing impact fees is outlined in Texas Local Government Code Chapter 395, Financing Capital Improvements Required by New Development in Municipalities, Counties and Certain Other Local Governments. The Development Services Department held bi-monthly stakeholder meetings with local developers, design professionals, landowners and city staff. To discuss in detail the function and sustainability of the Trust Funds. On January 10, 2020, a briefing to this group on the findings of the consultant’s report and subsequent recommendation to transition away from the current trust Alternative Utility Financing Study Update / Impact Fee Study and Implementation Plan AGENDA MEMORANDUM City Council Meeting February 25, 2020 fund fee model to impact fees occurred. In response to the consultant’s report related to the recommendation of transiting to impact fees, DSD received requests by members of the stakeholder group for a more detailed briefing on impact fees. DSD engaged a consultant with extensive knowledge and technical expertise to assist municipalities in impact fee implementation. This consultant gave an excellent impact fee presentation to our stakeholders group on January 27, 2020. DSD gave a briefing to City Council on January 28, 2020, on the status of the Trust Funds, background and history as well as an update on the Alternative Utility Financing Study. Council requested that DSD work on implementing impact fees in the City of Corpus Christi in 18 months. DSD has taken on the challenge and is working to establish an implementation timeline and a rough order of magnitude of costs. Solicitation of professional services for the City of Corpus Christi is a three to six month process, thus impacting the overall timeline. Additionally, the review and selection process is another one to three months. Due to the Council’s direction of an expedited timeline, DSD has consulted Pape-Dawson Engineers to be sole sourced to lead the master planning and impact fee study effort. Pape-Dawson Engineers is one of the largest and most respected engineering firms in Texas. Being in business for more than 50 years with offices across the state of Texas, Pape-Dawson has completed numerous public improvement projects such as, SAWS Medio Creek, US 281 feasibility study, Alamo plaza master plan, complete streets study for San Antonio, and the TxDot US 290 corridor study. After consultation with Pape-Dawson, DSD has the confidence that they can meet the Council’s expedited timeline in the most cost effective and efficient manner. Therefore, the February 25, 2020 presentation will briefly review the background and history of the Trust Funds, however the primary focus will be on establishing an implementation timeline. DSD will request Council consideration in an upcoming City Council meeting and approval of the finalized Pape-Dawson proposal for $700,000 for the master planning and impact fee study for roads, wastewater, water, and stormwater utilities with the deliverable date of December 2021. LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Report - Alternative Utility Financing Study Presentation (Not Included) ALTERNATIVE UTILITY FINANCING STUDY UPDATE City of Corpus Christi, Texas prepared by January 2020 Public Review Draft Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..................................................................................................................... 1 Utility Rates ................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Development Fees ......................................................................................................................................................... 2 Impact Fees .................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Stormwater Utility Fee .................................................................................................................................................. 4 Recommended Action Plan ........................................................................................................................................... 5 GROWTH CONTEXT ......................................................................................................................... 6 CAPITAL FINANCING ALTERNATIVES ............................................................................................... 8 Utility Rate Revenue ...................................................................................................................................................... 8 Stormwater Utility Fees ................................................................................................................................................. 8 Revenue and General Obligation Bonds ........................................................................................................................ 9 Development Fees ....................................................................................................................................................... 10 Impact Fees .................................................................................................................................................................. 10 Evaluation of Alternative Financing Techniques.......................................................................................................... 11 TEXAS UTILITY FEE SURVEY ............................................................................................................ 13 Major Funding Sources for Capital Improvements ...................................................................................................... 13 Utility Rate Comparisons ............................................................................................................................................. 14 CURRENT UTILITY FINANCING ....................................................................................................... 16 Utility Enterprise Funds ............................................................................................................................................... 16 Utility Capital Improvement Plan ................................................................................................................................ 17 Development Fees ....................................................................................................................................................... 18 Impact Fees .................................................................................................................................................................. 23 Stormwater Utility Fees ............................................................................................................................................... 25 APPENDIX ...................................................................................................................................... 27 List of Tables Table 1. Summary of Major Capital Funding Sources .............................................................................. 13 Table 2. Single-Family Utility Rate Comparison ........................................................................................ 15 Table 3. Commercial Utility Rate Comparison .......................................................................................... 15 Table 4. Utility Fund Revenues and Expenditures, FY 2019 ................................................................... 16 Table 5. Stormwater Share of Water Fund Expenditures, FY 2017-2019 ............................................. 16 Table 6. Planned Utility Fund Capital Improvements, 3-Year CIP ........................................................ 17 Table 7. Changes in Development Fees, 1982 to Present ........................................................................ 19 Table 8. City Utility Development Fee Summary ...................................................................................... 20 Table 9. Distribution of City Utility Development Fees ........................................................................... 20 Table 10. Developer Reimbursement Trust Fund Activity, FY 2014-2018 ........................................... 21 Table 11. Impact Fees, Texas Cities ............................................................................................................. 23 Table 12. Potential Annual Impact Fee Revenue ....................................................................................... 24 Table 13. Water Rate Survey ......................................................................................................................... 27 Table 14. Wastewater Rate Survey ............................................................................................................... 30 Table 15. Stormwater Rate Survey ............................................................................................................... 32 Table 16. Capital Funding Survey ................................................................................................................ 34 Duncan Associates Clancy Mullen, Principal and Project Manager 17409 Rush Pea Circle, Austin, TX 78738 512-423-0480; clancy@duncanplan.com City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 1 January 7, 2020 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report explores alternative methods for financing the expansion and maintenance of water, wastewater, and stormwater facilities. It is an update of an analysis originally prepared for the City in 2007. The report addresses four main topics: ! Alternative utility financing options available to the City; ! Utility financing policies of similar Texas cities; ! The City’s current utility facility financing policies; and ! Recommendations based on the analysis. The City currently relies almost exclusively on water and wastewater utility rate revenue to fund utility costs (stormwater costs are funded through water rates). Revenue bonds backed by utility rates are issued to fund most capital projects. The primary alternatives to water/wastewater utility rates are impact fees and a separate stormwater utility fee. A particular focus of this study is methods for funding major growth-related infrastructure expansions. There are really only two revenue sources to fund growth-related expansion costs: utility rates paid by all current customers, or development fees or impact fees paid by new customers. The City currently relies on a combination of these approaches. The City relies on utility rates to fund system- wide components, including water supply, water and wastewater treatment, etc. The extension of major water and wastewater lines and associated lift stations are mostly paid for upfront by developers who need them to serve their projects, with reimbursement from city-wide fees on new development. Utility Rates The City’s combined utility rate (for water, wastewater, and stormwater) for a single-family home is among the highest of the ten major Texas cities, while the combined rate for a small commercial customer is below average. One reason for this imbalance is that the City assesses what are effectively stormwater rates through its water rate structure. Effective stormwater rates are about average for single-family homes, but are less than one-fifth the Texas average for commercial uses. It is likely that adopting a separate stormwater utility fee, based on impervious cover rather than water demand, would result in higher commercial and lower single-family stormwater rates, bringing total utility rates for both closer to the Texas averages. Under the current development fee approach to funding growth-related improvements, new development pays for the extension of water and wastewater lines through development fees, while existing utility customers pay for the rest of the system, such as water supply, treatment plants, and other centralized facilities, along with the associated debt. Implementing impact fees would result in lower rates by shifting some of the cost burden of growth-related infrastructure improvements and associated debt from the current rate base to new development. Executive Summary City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 2 January 7, 2020 Development Fees The City of Corpus Christi assesses utility development fees on all new plats and water and wastewater connections. These fees are used to reimburse developers for the full cost of installing major water and wastewater lines and associated facilities such as lift stations and force mains that are shown on the City’s master plan maps, and to reimburse developers for portion of the cost of minor line extensions that will also serve other developments. The City has two main types of development fees for water and wastewater. The first type is used to reimburse developer for master plan line extensions – these consist of “lot/acreage” fees and “surcharge” fees. The lot/acreage fees are assessed on all new subdivisions (including lot splits) on a per-acre basis, with a minimum fee per lot. The surcharge fees are assessed at a flat rate per new connection (or “tap”). The lot/acreage and surcharge fees are placed in a trust fund to reimburse developers who install major lines (water transmission/grid lines and wastewater trunk lines) identified on the City’s master plan maps, with the exception that 25% of the surcharge fees are placed in the fund for smaller distribution or collector lines. These development fees function much like impact fees, in that they are assessed on all new development (new plats and connections), and are earmarked to pay for the expansion of a set of major capital facilities. The main difference from impact fees is that they are only used to reimburse developers, and are therefore exempt from the requirements of the State impact fee statute. The City also assesses “pro-rata” fees, but these are intended to fund developer reimbursements for minor lines that do not provide system-wide benefit. These types of facilities are typically not covered by impact fees, because they provide only localized benefit and are typically installed by developers within their subdivisions. In most cities, pro-rata fees are structured quite differently: (1) they are assessed only on property that will benefit from the line extension, (2) they are calculated individually for each project based on the cost of the extension and the anticipated amount of benefitting development, (3) they are earmarked to repay the developer who installed the line. Some cities also establish a limited payback period. Reforming the City’s pro-rata fees along these lines would promote equitable cost-sharing among adjacent developments, while putting the financial risk of a long-payback on the developer, rather than all new development. Current development fees have not been comprehensively updated since they were established in 1982. They have been periodically adjusted, most recently in 2011, and current fees are more than double what they were in 1982. The fee increases, however, have not been consistent among the types of fees, indicating that they were not based on a cost inflation index. It appears that decisions to increase the fees have been made on an ad hoc basis reflecting the perceived need for revenue to fund reimbursements. For example, the wastewater fees were increased significantly in 2003, when the cost of lift station and force main improvements was made eligible for reimbursement, but the various wastewater fees were increased by percentages ranging from 77% to 183%. In short, the fees are based on a very old study that is no longer available, and the fees have been changed in ways that make them no longer proportional to the original fees. Given the enhanced scrutiny of monetary exactions by the courts in light of recent Supreme Court decisions, it would be advisable for the City Executive Summary City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 3 January 7, 2020 to either prepare an updated analysis to demonstrate that its development fees are reasonably proportional to the impact of new development, or to transition to impact fees. The City’s developer reimbursement trust fund has stayed solvent for many years, but this may be about to change. Utility line expansion costs are likely to increase as development begins to occur on the south side of Oso Creek, and this could cause the reimbursement funds to be inadequate in the future. The City’s development fees create a perverse incentive for developers to plat subdivisions that are not contiguous with existing served areas by providing reimbursement for the full cost of the line, even though it may be fiscally premature for the City. A pattern of scattershot development and premature infrastructure expansion is more costly because the improvements need to be maintained and begin to depreciate long before the customers they will ultimately serve begin paying rates. For example, the City maintains several lift stations that developers installed and for which they were reimbursed that have been mothballed for years because of lack of sufficient demand. Relying primarily on development fees to fund major infrastructure improvements through developer reimbursements does not provide any funding for investments in city-wide infrastructure expansion or long-range planning. The components of the system that are not covered by the development fees, such as treatment plants and supply, storage and disposal facilities, must be funded with utility rates. The development fees also cannot be used to fund long-range master plans needed to anticipate future needs and prioritize service extensions that are most cost effective, nor can they be used to fund City-initiated water grid mains or wastewater trunk main extensions or lift stations based on such planning. Impact Fees Corpus Christi has reached the size where most other Texas cities have adopted water and wastewater impact fees to fund growth-related infrastructure expansions. The City could develop and adopt water and wastewater impact fees without first preparing long-range master plans, although such plans would be desirable in their own right as well as an aid in impact fee development and administration. The City should consider moving from development fees to impact fees. As noted above, the City’s development fees are essentially impact fees, but differ in two major respects: (1) they can only be used to reimburse developers, and (2) they are limited to funding lines and lift stations. It is estimated that water and wastewater impact fees, if adopted at average rates for Texas, would generate in the neighborhood of $7 million annually (see Table 12), compared to about $1.5 million that the City has been collecting annually from development fees (see Table 10). If the City converts the development fees into actual impact fees, they could be used for City-initiated projects. Impact fees could fund City-initiated grid and trunk line projects that are now almost exclusively built by developers. Impact fees could also cover costs related to centralized or regional facilities, such as water supply, storage, treatment, pumping and elevated tanks; and wastewater treatment plants, storage, and disposal/recovery facilities. Executive Summary City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 4 January 7, 2020 Impact fees could be used to fund long-range master plans, which would allow the City to prioritize service extensions. Premature extensions entail additional maintenance costs for the utility that are not offset by similar increases in revenue. In sum, transitioning to impact fees would support a more comprehensive, planned approach to utility infrastructure expansion, shift more of the costs of growth onto new development, and lower utility rates for existing customers. If the City adopts impact fees that cover the cost of water grid and wastewater trunk lines, they would overlap with the City’s development fees. The City should eliminate the lot/acreage and surcharge fees on the effective date of the impact fees and move the reimbursement obligations to the impact fee fund. Developers would likely continue to install water grid and wastewater trunk mains through their projects, and would receive credit for the cost against their impact fees. Extensions of lines to connect their projects to the larger system would also potentially be eligible for credit or reimbursement, provided they meet certain conditions. Impact fees could also be considered for stormwater, but it would be preferable to first use new stormwater utility fees to fund a comprehensive long-range stormwater drainage master plan. Such a master plan would provide the City with the information to determine if there are major capital improvement needs attributable to anticipated growth that would warrant consideration of a stormwater impact fee. Stormwater Utility Fee Most other large Texas cities have created stormwater utilities and implemented stormwater utility fees. The City essentially has a stormwater utility fee, but it is buried within the water rate structure, and is not identified separately on the water utility bill. All drainage maintenance and capital improvement costs are currently paid for with water rate revenue. The lack of a funding source that is earmarked solely for stormwater management is likely to result in the under-funding of stormwater needs. Stormwater maintenance and capacity problems are much less visible on a daily basis than problems with the water system, so they are likely to be given lower priority. The adoption of a stormwater utility fee would reduce water rates, which would no longer need to fund stormwater, but would not necessarily reduce overall utility fees paid by consumers. However, overall monthly utility rates for single-family homes would likely be lower if the stormwater fees are based on impervious cover rather than water use. The City has considered but declined to enact a stormwater utility fee several times over the last couple of decades, but is considering it again. A formal stormwater utility fee would ensure a reliable funding source for stormwater management, more equitably assess fees based on demand, and likely result in lower total residential utility rates, which are now among the highest of major Texas cities. Executive Summary City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 5 January 7, 2020 Recommended Action Plan Transition from Development Fees to Impact Fees 1. Prepare water and wastewater impact fee studies and adopt impact fees. 2. Upon adoption of impact fees, repeal the lot/acreage and surcharge fees and transfer those obligations to the impact fee fund. Future line extensions or oversizing of major facilities by developers needed to serve their projects should be eligible for credit against the developer’s impact fees and/or reimbursement from the impact fee fund. However, eligibility should be subject to conditions to avoid premature and inefficient infrastructure investments. Such conditions could include being designated as priority projects in a long-range master plan, but would at a minimum be limited to the projects identified in the impact fee capital improvements plan. 3. Retain the City’s current pro-rata fees, which are designed to fund smaller lines not typically covered by impact fees, only until all outstanding reimbursement obligations for such improvements are paid. Any new developer agreements for such oversizing projects should be (a) calculated on a case-by-case basis, (b) assessed only on future developments that connect to the new line, and (c) remitted only to the developer who oversized the line. They could also have a limited pay-back period. 4. Prepare water and wastewater comprehensive long-range master plans. Ideally, this would be done in conjunction with the impact fee studies, in order to assist in the development of the 10-year impact fee capital improvements plan. If the City does not have upfront funding for such plans, develop a capital plan with current knowledge about what will likely be needed in the next ten years, put the anticipated cost of such plans in the 10-year impact fee list, and fund them with impact fees as a top priority once sufficient impact fee funds become available. Adopt Stormwater Utility Fees 1. Prepare a stormwater utility rate study and adopt stormwater utility fees. Update water utility rates to remove stormwater costs. 2. Use stormwater rate revenues to fund a comprehensive long-range drainage master plan. 3. Consider a stormwater impact fee if the long-range plan identifies major capacity improvements needed to serve anticipated growth. City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 6 January 7, 2020 GROWTH CONTEXT Corpus Christi is located on the southwest coast of Texas adjacent to the Gulf of Mexico (see Figure 1). The Port of Corpus Christi is the third-largest in the nation in terms of total tonnage. The City has been home to a U.S. Naval Air Station since 1941. The City is the county seat of Nueces County, and it also extends into Aransas, Kleberg, and San Patricio Counties. Corpus Christi is a home rule city with a mayor, an eight-member city council, and a city manager, who functions as the chief executive officer of the City. Figure 1. City Limits Map Growth Context City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 7 January 7, 2020 According to the United States Census Bureau, the City limits encompass a total area of 460 square miles, of which about a third is land and the rest is covered by water. The City's population was estimated to be 326,162 in 2019, making it the eighth-most populous city in Texas. The City has experienced remarkably steady growth over the last 50 years, as illustrated in Figure 2. It has been adding about 2,500 residents annually since 1970 – even through the period that included the Great Recession (June 2007 through December 2009). Growth projections for the Corpus Christi metropolitan area (Nueces, Aransas and San Patricio Counties) prepared by the Texas Demographic Center suggest continued steady growth for the future. The City accounts for over two-thirds of metropolitan area population, and the metropolitan area is projected to add about 5,300 new residents annually over the next decade. Figure 2. City Population Growth, 1970-2019 0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 Source: U.S. Census and Texas Demographic Center. City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 8 January 7, 2020 Capital Financing Alternatives Cities have several options for financing utility capital improvements. This section describes these options and presents advantages and disadvantages of the different strategies. A summary of how the alternative techniques fare on a number of pertinent criteria is presented at the conclusion of this chapter. Utility Rate Revenue Utility capital expansions can be financed from current revenues, which are derived from utility rate payments made during the current year. Current-year rate revenues are often accumulated in a carryover balance from one year to another that can be used to fund capital projects on a pay-go basis. The attractive aspect of using current rate revenues to finance utility expansions is that it avoids debt and associated interest costs, and thus represents a pay-as-you-go strategy. However, using current revenues to fund expansions imposes growth costs on current ratepayers for the benefit of future customers. Using impact fee revenues would achieve the same purpose, but would impose growth costs on new customers. On the other hand, the utility depreciates annually and each year some elements of the systems must be replaced or renovated. Use of current revenues for these purposes could be viewed as funding depreciation expenses, where renovation costs are roughly equivalent to annual depreciation. In this manner, current customers will maintain the system that is required for their service needs. For these reasons, it would be advisable to use current rate revenues primarily to fund renovation and replacement, and to use a combination of bonding and impact fees to finance growth-related infrastructure. In doing so, the costs of growth will be spread over a larger group of benefitting customers, while renovation costs will be assigned to those currently using the system. It should be noted, however, that in some instances it may be desirable to use current revenues for expansion, in order to maintain the utility=s financial standing with bonding authorities. Thus, any decision on use of current revenues must balance the desire for equity against the need to maintain a favorable bond rating and associated lower rates. Stormwater Utility Fees Drainage is generally the neglected step-child of municipal infrastructure. This is because it typically does not have a dedicated funding source, and problems associated with it are generally invisible except during exceptional storm events. Increasingly, cities in Texas and elsewhere are financing drainage maintenance and expansion costs with stormwater utility fees instead of general funds. Stormwater utility fees can be used for operating expenses, maintenance and growth-related capital improvements. Many stormwater systems are neglected and have existing deficiencies, making stormwater utility fees a good funding alternative to impact fees, which cannot be used to fund existing deficiencies. Capital Financing Alternatives City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 9 January 7, 2020 A stormwater utility is essentially an assessment district that generates revenue for stormwater services that are provided in a stormwater service area. The City must establish a boundary known as a service area where stormwater facilities are provided. Stormwater utility fees are equitable because those who do not benefit from stormwater service will not pay for utility improvements. The State of Texas authorizes municipalities to establish stormwater utilities.1 A public hearing is required before a city passes a stormwater ordinance and before a fee schedule is set. Drainage revenues must be located in a segregated account that is transparent to the public. Municipalities may charge a stormwater utility fee on any basis besides the value of the property; as long as the fee is directly related to the amount of drainage from the property. Cities have set up fees based on parcel size, land use, number of water meters, and impervious surface area (see Appendix). Impervious surface area is a common and particularly equitable assessment basis for stormwater utility fees, because it is directly related to runoff volumes, chronic flood control problems and pollutant loadings in stormwater. Revenue and General Obligation Bonds Water, wastewater and stormwater utilities are generally structured as enterprise funds intended to be self-supporting. Many cities finance utility expansions with revenue bonds that are retired solely through rate revenues from active customers over the life of the bonds. The use of revenue bonds generally ensures that only the beneficiaries of utility service (customers) pay for improvements. Moreover, payments are made by customers in amounts that are roughly proportional to the cost each imposes on the system. General obligation (GO) bonds are also sometimes used to fund utility improvements. GO bonds are tax-backed bonds. Cities may or may not transfer revenues from utility funds to retire utility- related general obligation bonds, but ultimately property owners assume the risk and often the cost of such bonds. If general obligation bonds are retired from property tax revenues, costs to individual property owners will be proportional to property values rather than utility use. Moreover, property owners who do not benefit from the service will pay for utility improvements through property taxes. Revenue bonds are an appropriate mechanism for funding enterprise fund facilities, such as utility expansions. Moreover, they recover the cost of expansion over a long period of time and thereby spread costs over current and future customers who benefit from the improvements. The use of general obligation bonds should be avoided, particularly if some customers are located outside the city limits or use private systems, such as on-site wells or septic tanks. The City currently uses rate revenue to retire revenue bonds that are issued to fund most of its capital projects. 1. Texas Local Government Code, Title 13. Water and Utilities, Subtitle A. Municipal Water and Utilities, Chapter 552. Municipal Utilities, Subchapter C. Municipal Drainage Utility Systems Capital Financing Alternatives City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 10 January 7, 2020 Development Fees Developer contributions come in many forms, including cash and in-kind contributions of on-site and off-site facilities. Contributions may be required as a condition of development approval or offered by a developer to secure service prior to the time that the city had originally scheduled service to an area. In some cases, contributions are secured through contracts between a city and one or more developers. For water and wastewater facilities, developers may be required to extend lines outside their development if necessary, to connect to the larger system, and may also be required to oversize lines or supporting facilities to serve future developments expected to be served by the new facilities. Generally, developers are required to fund the initial cost of the facilities, although there may be city cost participation, and are reimbursed based on some type of “pro rata” fee assessed on future developments that use those facilities. These pro rata fees are typically calculated on a project-by-project basis, often in the form of a fee per acre or per linear foot of line frontage, collected by the city and conveyed to the original developer. In doing so, the city in essence serves as a middleman to ensure that the original developer is compensated by other line users. In some cases, there is a cut-off date for subsequent user payments, such as ten years from the date of construction. The approach is attractive to cities because it places the potential risks of premature development on the original developer, while ensuring that risks to the original developer will be minimal if market forces support his or her judgement. Sometimes cities themselves oversize lines and collect subsequent pro rata fees. The City of Corpus Christi has a version of this fee system for reimbursing developers for line extensions and oversizing. The City’s system includes “lot/acreage” fees assessed on new plats, and “surcharge” and ”pro rata” fees on new service connections. These are described in the Current Utility Financing chapter. Impact Fees Impact fees are up-front payments for major capital improvements needed to serve new development. Impact fees may take the form of either cash or in-kind (facility) contributions. Texas in 1987 was the first state to pass legislation specifically authorizing the use of impact fees to fund growth-related capital improvements. Under the Texas statute, impact fees are authorized for road, water, wastewater and stormwater projects. Impact fees in Texas must be developed in accordance with Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code. The State law lays out very specific requirements for the technical development of these fees as well as the procedures necessary for enactment of such fee programs. The Texas statute defines impact fees as a charge imposed against new development in order to generate revenue for funding or recouping the cost of capital improvements or expansions attributable to new development. Capital Financing Alternatives City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 11 January 7, 2020 The Texas statute explicitly excludes acreage, lot, and pro-rata fees used to reimburse developers for water or wastewater line extensions or oversizing from the definition of impact fees. The statute does not define any of these terms, other than stating they are used for developer reimbursements. The Texas legislature made some significant amendments to Chapter 395 in 2001. The major change was on the issue of revenue credits. Credits against the impact fees for other taxes or fees that would be paid by new development and used for capital improvements of the same facility type as the impact fee are now required. As an alternative to performing a revenue credit calculation, cities can simply reduce the impact fees by fifty percent. Another change was to increase the time between mandatory updates from three to five years. The requirement that the fees be recalculated after the Capital Improvements Plan is completed based on actual costs and any overcharge refunded if the recalculated fees exceeded the fees being charged by more than ten percent was eliminated. Finally, the number of public hearings required before impact fees could be updated was reduced from two to one (two are still required for initial adoption). Revised impact fees do not apply to lots platted while the previous fee schedule was in place. Chapter 395 states that the impact fee schedule that is in effect at the time a lot is platted is the one that applies to the property, regardless of when development occurs. This occurs through a process called “assessment.” Assessment must occur at the time of plat recording, or, for property already platted or not required to be platted, at the time of development approval or building permit, whichever occurs first. The statute makes clear that no action by the local government is required for assessment to occur. Essentially, impact fee assessment locks in the fee schedule in place at the time assessment occurs. Any subsequent revision to the impact fee schedules does not affect the impact fees owed for the development. Many Texas cities charge fees that are some percentage less than the maximum fees calculated in the fee schedule, and adopt both maximum fees and currently assessed fees. With this approach, new subdivisions are locked in at the maximum fee, rather than at the lower fee that were being charged when the subdivision was recorded. Evaluation of Alternative Financing Techniques Alternative financing strategies can be evaluated according to a number of criteria. Although all of the criteria are examined as if they were of equal importance, in reality some are more critical than others. The following is a broad-brush overview. Implications for the City are discussed in the next chapter Legal Basis. It is essential that financing strategies adopted by the City have a sound legal basis. All the financing techniques discussed above are authorized under current law in Texas. However, developer exactions are under higher legal scrutiny these days based on recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions.2 Such exactions, including monetary exactions, must be based on analysis to show that they are roughly proportional to the need created by the development subject to the exaction. 2 Nollan V. California Coastal Commission (1987), Dolan v. City of Tigard (1994), Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District (2013). Capital Financing Alternatives City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 12 January 7, 2020 Growth Pays for Growth. The extent to which those who impose costs on utilities will pay their proportionate share of those costs is another important criteria. The focus of this evaluation is the extent to which new development bears the burden of the costs necessary to expand the capacity of the infrastructure to accommodate the increased demands generated by growth. Using current utility rate revenue to pay for growth-related costs puts much of the burden on existing customers through increased utility rates. Using revenue or general obligation bond debt to finance growth-related improvements allows future development to pay somewhat more of the cost by spreading the payments over time. Developer contributions and impact fees require new development to pay much of the cost up-front, reducing the need to increase utility rates or taxes. Housing Affordability. It is often asserted that the costs of development fees or impact fees are necessarily all passed on to the home buyer in the form of increased purchase price. Unlike taxes, however, development fees and impact fees must be used to expand infrastructure, which may increase the supply of buildable lots and drive down housing prices by increasing supply. In addition, there are two aspects to housing affordability: purchase price and operating costs (monthly payments). Generally, financing techniques that work to decrease purchase price by avoiding up-front housing costs such as developer exactions, acreage fees or impact fees tend to result in increased operating costs like utility rates or taxes to pay for growth-related infrastructure. In the long term, however, it is likely that development or impact fees will be reflected in at least somewhat higher home prices/rents or somewhat lower availability of lower-priced housing. Whether there is a net loss for housing affordability after higher monthly costs are factored in is difficult to determine. On balance, our judgement is that development fees and impact fees may have somewhat more negative effects on housing affordability than other funding techniques. However, such potential negative effects could be mitigated by exempting low-income and/or low- and moderate-income housing from impact fees, as some Texas cities, such as Houston, have done. Administrative Ease. Administrative ease refers to the initial and ongoing administrative effort and cost involved in the implementation and maintenance of each financing strategy. New financing strategies would obviously require some changes to current city practices, which would entail some additional initial administrative costs. They may require, for example, adjustments to the city=s billing system or accounting practices. A stormwater utility would require its own rate study, in addition to rate studies conducted periodically for water and wastewater utilities. Impact fees require an impact fee study. Development fees that operate much like impact fees would require a similar study. City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 13 January 7, 2020 TEXAS UTILITY FEE SURVEY This chapter compares facility financing techniques and monthly utility rates for water, wastewater and stormwater utilities for the ten largest Texas cities, including Corpus Christi. The survey presents the cities= various capital funding strategies and compares impact fees and monthly rates for water, wastewater and stormwater utilities. Detailed rate schedules for the ten cities are included in the appendix of this report. Major Funding Sources for Capital Improvements This section describes the various strategies that the cities employ to fund infrastructure improvements. Most of the cities rely primarily on impact fees and water, wastewater and stormwater rates to fund major capital facilities expansion for these utilities, as illustrated in Table 1. Table 1. Summary of Major Capital Funding Sources 2019 Growth City Population Rate Water Wastewater Stormwater Houston 2,338,187 1.23%Impact Fees and Rates Impact Fees and Rates Impact Fees/Utility Fees San Antonio 1,544,672 1.75%Impact Fees and Rates Impact Fees and Rates Stormwater Utility Fees Dallas 1,358,066 1.45%Water Utility Rates Wastewater Utility Rates Stormwater Utility Fees Austin 974,581 2.42%Impact Fees and Rates Impact Fees and Rates Stormwater Utility Fees Fort Worth 894,195 2.17%Impact Fees and Rates Impact Fees and Rates Stormwater Utility Fees El Paso 681,877 0.56%Impact Fees and Rates Impact Fees and Rates Stormwater Utility Fees Arlington 391,409 0.79%Impact Fees and Rates Impact Fees and Rates General Fund Corpus Christi 326,162 0.76%Rates and Dev't Fees Rates and Dev't Fees Water Utility Rates Plano 290,441 1.28%Water Utility Rates Wastewater Utility Rates Stormwater Utility Fees Laredo 268,057 1.46%Water Utility Rates Wastewater Utility Rates Stormwater Utility Fees Source: Population estimates for January 2019 from Texas Demographic Data Center (https://demographics.texas.gov/Data/TPEPP/Estimates/); growth rate is compounded annual growth rate from 2010 U.S. Census to January 2019, estimated to be 8.75 years; funding sources from survey tables in Appendix. Impact fees are used in six of the ten cities surveyed to offset the capital costs associated with water and wastewater facility expansions related to growth. Corpus Christi appears to be at the size where cities begin charging water and wastewater impact fees. With the exception of Dallas, all the other Texas cities besides Corpus with populations of 300,000 or more have enacted water and wastewater impact fees. A comparison of impact fees charged by Texas cities can be found in the Table 11 in the next chapter. The three other large Texas cities besides Corpus Christi that do not charge water and wastewater impact fees require developers to construct water and wastewater lines needed to serve the development and connect to the larger system. They don’t have development fees comparable to the City’s lot/acreage and surcharge fees, which are assessed on all new development and function much like impact fees (see discussion in next chapter). For this reason, no comparison of development fees is provided. Of the ten largest cities. Only Houston has implemented a stormwater impact fee. Stormwater impact fees tend to be less commonly-used nationally as well.3 This may be due to the 3 A 2019 internet survey of 233 U.S. jurisdictions outside California that charge impact fees conducted by Duncan Associates, in association with the University of Arizona and Georgia State University, found that about half imposed water and wastewater fees, compared to about one-fifth that assessed drainage fees. Texas Utility Fee Survey City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 14 January 7, 2020 complex nature of drainage infrastructure, which tends to be a mix of natural channels and man-made systems tied to topography. Another factor is that stormwater drainage infrastructure tends to be under-funded, and existing systems often have extensive deficiencies that cannot be funded with impact fees. Most major Texas cities rely on stormwater utility fees to fund major drainage improvements. Eight of the ten cities have established stormwater utility fees, which can fund maintenance as well as growth-related capital improvements. Corpus Christi and Arlington are the only two of the ten major Texas cities that have not implemented stormwater utility fees. Corpus funds stormwater projects with water utility rate revenue, while Arlington relies on the general fund. Utility Rate Comparisons Texas cities use various types of rate schedules in charging customers for utility service. Detailed tables comparing rate schedules for the ten Texas cities are included in the appendix to this report. Summary comparisons of the rates are provided in this section. The most common type of water or wastewater charge combines a flat fee for monthly service with a consumption charge or charge per unit (gallon/cubic foot) of water used or wastewater produced. Base charges may be a flat fee for residential and commercial service, or one that varies based on the size of water meter. Some communities charge different rates for commercial and residential use, and charge different rates for connections within the city limits as opposed to connections outside city limits. Many cities also have inverted rates that increase the more water consumed or wastewater produced. Most stormwater utility rates are allotted based on the amount of impervious area. This section of the report compares average water, wastewater and stormwater charges for a single- family detached unit and a small commercial development for the ten cities. Both land uses are assumed to use the smallest meter size, which is typically either 5/8”-by-3/4” or 3/4”, and consume 5,000 gallons of water per month (wastewater generation is typically not metered, and wastewater rates are generally based on water consumption). For stormwater fees, single-family units are assumed to have 3,000 square feet of impervious cover, accounting for 30% of the lot area; while commercial properties are assumed to have 15,000 square feet of impervious area, covering 75% of the lot area. Overall, Corpus Christi’s total combined utility rates are on the high end among the major cities for residential users (single-family homes), and below average for commercial users. Table 2 on the following page displays a comparison of single-family utility rates, ranked from lowest to highest total rate. Corpus Christi has among the highest residential water, wastewater, and total utility rates of the major Texas cities, despite not charging a stormwater utility fee. Actually, the City essentially does collect a stormwater fee, but it is embedded in the water utility fee – stormwater costs account for about 20% of water utility expenditures. In practice then, the City’s stormwater rate is about $6.35 per month and the remaining water rate is about $25.40, both of which are about average for the major cities. It is the City’s wastewater rate that makes its total single-family utility rate on the high end of the major cities. Texas Utility Fee Survey City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 15 January 7, 2020 Table 2. Single-Family Utility Rate Comparison Monthly Monthly Monthly Total Water Wastewater Stormwater Utility City Rate Rate Rate Rate Laredo $16.82 $21.23 $6.50 $44.55 San Antonio $21.15 $26.35 $4.94 $52.44 Dallas $16.77 $31.58 $6.21 $54.56 El Paso $24.50 $21.88 $8.51 $54.89 Fort Worth $25.24 $34.72 $5.40 $65.36 Arlington $21.94 $38.59 $7.77 $68.30 Plano $27.51 $37.87 $4.15 $69.53 Houston $30.39 $34.96 $8.00 $73.35 Corpus Christi $31.75 $42.35 n/a $74.10 Austin $32.01 $50.57 $7.20 $89.78 Average $24.81 $34.01 $6.52 $64.69 Corpus (actual)$25.40 $42.35 $6.35 $74.10 Average (actual)$24.17 $34.01 $6.50 $64.69 Source: Appendix Table 13 (water), Table 14 (wastewater), and Table 15 (stormwater); “actual” rates assume 20% of water rates are effectively stormwater rates, based on Table 5. Table 3 illustrates the comparisons of utility rates for small commercial uses, ranked from lowest to highest total rate. The City charges commercial utility rates that are about average for water, the highest for wastewater, and below average overall. Taking into account the actual use of water rates to fund stormwater, the effective water rate is below average, while the effective stormwater rate is only one-fifth the major-city average. Table 3. Commercial Utility Rate Comparison Monthly Monthly Monthly Total Water Wastewater Stormwater Utility City Rate Rate Rate Rate Dallas $23.98 $25.33 $31.50 $80.81 El Paso $33.46 $21.88 $32.55 $87.89 Plano $39.35 $37.87 $11.25 $88.47 Corpus Christi $33.85 $58.85 n/a $92.70 Fort Worth $30.08 $33.99 $31.15 $95.22 Arlington $26.30 $38.59 $38.84 $103.73 Laredo $47.71 $36.69 $23.00 $107.40 Houston $28.46 $42.27 $40.00 $110.73 San Antonio $22.91 $29.10 $78.25 $130.26 Austin $45.30 $55.80 $87.86 $188.96 Average $33.14 $38.04 $41.60 $108.62 Corpus (actual)$27.08 $58.85 $6.77 $92.70 Average (actual)$32.46 $38.04 $38.12 $108.62 Source: Appendix Table 13 (water), Table 14 (wastewater), and Table 15 (stormwater); “actual” rates assume 20% of water rates are effectively stormwater rates, based on Table 5. City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 16 January 7, 2020 Current Utility Financing This chapter describes and evaluates the City’s current approach to funding water, wastewater, and stormwater utilities, with particular focus on how growth-related capital improvements are funded. Utility Enterprise Funds The City’s water and wastewater utilities are enterprise funds that derive most of their revenue from utility rates charged to customers. The City also has a stormwater enterprise fund that receives all its revenue from the water utility fund. Budgeted revenues and expenditures for these three enterprise funds for the last fiscal year are summarized in Table 4. It is notable that almost one-fifth of water utility funds are transferred to the stormwater enterprise fund, and almost one-half of annual stormwater fund expenditures are for debt service payments. Table 4. Utility Fund Revenues and Expenditures, FY 2019 Water Wastewater Stormwater Total Revenues Rates and Fees $140,665,892 $77,768,655 $0 $218,434,547 Transfer from Other Utility Fund $226,315 $0 $28,827,451 $29,053,766 Intergovernmental Services $200,000 $0 $0 $200,000 Interest Earnings $300,000 $250,000 $98,000 $648,000 Miscellaneous Revenue $2,522,315 $24,000 $0 $2,546,315 Total Revenues $143,914,522 $78,042,655 $28,925,451 $250,882,628 % from Rates/Fees 97.7%99.6%0.0%87.1% Expenditures Personnel/Operating $93,625,988 $59,143,354 $13,719,398 $166,488,740 Capital Expense $1,446,996 $13,227,000 $355,000 $15,028,996 Debt Service $13,379,443 $21,172,843 $15,361,801 $49,914,087 Transfer to Stormwater Fund $28,827,451 $0 $0 $28,827,451 Internal Service Transfers $7,557,340 $4,528,980 $1,935,732 $14,022,052 Total Expenditures $144,837,218 $98,072,177 $31,371,930 $274,281,325 % to Debt Service 9.2%21.6%49.0%18.2% % Transfered to Stormwater Utility 19.9%0.0%0.0%10.5% Source: City of Corpus Christi, FY 2018-2019 Budget, adopted September 18, 2018. While the City does not formally have stormwater utility fees, it essentially does assess such fees through water utility rates. On average, over the last three years, the transfers from the water utility to the stormwater fund have amounted to 19.3% of water fund expenditures, as shown in Table 5 Table 5. Stormwater Share of Water Fund Expenditures, FY 2017-2019 Actual Estimated Adopted Total 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 FY 2017-19 Transfers to Stormwater Fund $26,681,938 $28,827,451 $28,827,451 $84,336,840 Total Water Fund Expenditures $145,690,163 $145,770,011 $144,837,218 $436,297,392 Stormwater Percent 18.3%19.8%19.9%19.3% Source: City of Corpus Christi, FY 2018-2019 Budget, adopted September 18, 2018. Current Utility Financing City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 17 January 7, 2020 Utility Capital Improvement Plan The City’s capital improvement plan (CIP) for water, wastewater and stormwater over the next three years is summarized in Table 6 below. A rough estimate of growth-related or capacity-expanding project costs was derived based on project descriptions in the CIP. This rough analysis assumes that 10 percent of utility support costs for street projects are attributable to capacity expansion, either in the form of extensions of major facilities along new roads or upgrading existing facility capacity when streets are widened or repaired. In addition, anticipated 3-year development fee collections based on recent history has been added, since these revenues will all be spent on growth-related improvements but are not reflected in the CIP. While this is just a short-term snapshot, it suggests that about 15% of capital expenditures over the next three years will be for growth-related improvements. This does not include debt service costs related to available excess capacity that will serve future growth, which if taken into consideration would bump up the growth share of capital expenditures. There may also be significant long-term growth-related needs that are currently going unfunded due to the need to use most available capital revenue to address existing capacity deficiencies or major maintenance issues. Other characteristics of the City approach to financing capital facilities are highlighted in the CIP summary below. Utility support for street projects consumes a significant share of utility capital funding. Street-related projects account for about 10% of water and wastewater capital funds, and about half of stormwater capital funds, amounting overall to just under 20% of utility capital expenditures. It is also apparent that the City’s current CIP relies heavily on revenue bonds, which are retired with water and wastewater utility rates. Revenue bonds provide about 90% of utility capital funds, with the rest coming from accumulated utility revenue. Table 6. Planned Utility Fund Capital Improvements, 3-Year CIP Water Wastewater Stormwater Total Growth-Related CIP Projects $29,922,350 $13,667,130 $8,839,357 $52,428,837 Avg. 3-Yr. Dev't Fees Collected $2,140,137 $2,522,758 $0 $4,662,894 Est. 3-Year Growth Expenditures $32,062,487 $16,189,888 $8,839,357 $57,091,731 ÷ Total Capital Expenditures $159,483,637 $156,768,058 $75,193,569 $391,445,263 Percent Growth-Related 20.1%10.3%11.8%14.6% Support for Street Projects $16,223,500 $19,671,300 $38,393,569 $74,288,369 ÷ Total Fund Capital Expenditures $157,343,500 $154,245,300 $75,193,569 $386,782,369 Percent of Street Project Support 10.3%12.8%51.1%19.2% Revenue Bonds $147,963,485 $128,117,300 $70,493,569 $346,574,354 ÷ Total Fund Capital Expenditures $157,343,500 $154,245,300 $75,193,569 $386,782,369 Percent Revenue Bonds 94.0%83.1%93.7%89.6% Source: Total fund capital expenditures, support for street projects and revenue bond funding for FY 2020 through FY 2022 from City of Corpus Christi, FY 2019-2020 Capital Budget & Capital Improvement Planning Guide.(CIP); growth-related CIP project costs are estimated based on the project descriptions in the CIP and the assumption that 10% of support for street improvements expands utility capacity; average 3-year development fees collected based on actual collections for FY 2014-2018 from City of Corpus Christi; estimated total 3-year capital expenditures is sum of total fund capital expenditures and average 3-year development fees collected. Current Utility Financing City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 18 January 7, 2020 Development Fees The City charges three types of water and wastewater development fees on all new subdivision plats and utility connections customers. These include “lot/acreage” fees (a fee per acre with a minimum per lot), “surcharge” fees (a fee per new utility connection), and “pro-rata” fees (a fee per linear foot of lot frontage). The fees lot/acreage and surcharge are used exclusively to reimburse developers for the cost of building major water or wastewater mains that are identified on the City’s master plan maps. Called water transmission or grid mains or wastewater trunk mains, these major lines are distinguished by their diameter and function in the line network. Wastewater lift stations and associated force mains are also eligible, but elevated water storage tanks are not. The cost of major lines, lift stations and force mains installed by developers is fully reimbursed, regardless of whether an existing line is being extended to reach the developer’s project or simply to go through it, as long as those facilities are shown on the relevant master plan map. The City’s development fees were originally adopted in 1982. According to a participant in the original calculation for the lot/acreage fees, the approach taken to calculate the fees was to lay out the water grid lines or wastewater trunk lines for several areas, estimate the cost of the improvements and number of acres that would be served, and divide the total cost by total acres served to arrive at an average fee per acre. The lot fees assumed four units per gross acre. It is not clear how the surcharge or pro-rata fees were calculated. Without those original fee calculations, it might be difficult to defend current development fees in the event of a legal challenge, given today’s legal standards for development exactions as discussed in the Capital Financing Alternatives chapter. If the City at some point desires to increase the development fees substantially (e.g., beyond inflation adjustments as in the past), it would be even more important to base the fees on a current fee calculation study. To our knowledge, the City has not recalculated the utility development fees since they were adopted 38 years ago. They were, however, adjusted periodically, most recently in 2011, as summarized in Table 7 on the following page. Because the increases were not uniform across the various fees, it does not appear that they were based on a construction cost index. The wastewater fees were not originally calculated to cover lift station and force main costs, and were increased when those were added in 2003, but the increases do not appear to have been based on a new cost analysis. The overall increases over the entire period are reasonably close to the change in the Engineering News-Record Construction Cost Index annual average from 1982 to 2018 most of the fee types. However, there are some obvious anomalies, such as the elimination of the water surcharge fee for commercial taps and the much larger increase in the wastewater lot fee compared to the wastewater acreage fee. Current Utility Financing City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 19 January 7, 2020 Table 7. Changes in Development Fees, 1982 to Present Utility Percentage Change Fund &Customer Fee Fee by Year of Change* 1982-2003-2007 1982- Fee Type Type Unit 1982 2003 2007 2011 2003 2007 2011 now Water Lot Resid.Lot $75 $92 $160 $182 23%74%9%143% Lot Comm.Lot $150 $186 $316 $359 24%70%20%139% Acreage Resid.Acre $300 $369 $632 $719 23%71%9%140% Acreage Comm.Acre $600 $741 $1,266 $1,439 24%71%9%140% Surcharge Resid.Tap $100 $173 $214 $243 73%24%9%143% Surcharge Comm.Tap $100 $125 $0 $0 25%-100%n/a -100% Pro-Rata All Ln. Ft.$5.00 $6.20 $10.72 $12.18 24%73%14%144% Wastewater Lot All Lot $100 $283 $345 $393 183%22%14%293% Acreage All Acre $600 $1,133 $1,382 $1,571 89%22%14%162% Surcharge All Tap $100 $200 $243 $277 100%22%14%177% Pro-Rata All Ln. Ft.$4.25 $7.53 $9.26 $10.53 77%23%14%148% Change in Engineering News-Record Construction Cost Index 77%18%13%189% * Fees were also increased in 2008, 2009 and 2010, although those fees are not shown. Source: City of Corpus Christi Development Services Department, December 20, 2019 Lot/Acreage Fees. The City assesses lot/acreage fees on all subdividers at time of plat based on an adopted fee schedule. The fee schedule for water has different fees per acre and per lot for residential (single-family and duplex) and commercial (including multi-family) plats (the commercial rates are roughly twice as high). The fee that applies is the greater of the lot fee or the acreage fee. These fees are used to reimburse developers for the cost of any water transmission and grid main extensions, and for their wastewater trunk line extensions they install to serve their projects. All lot/acreage fees are deposited in the water transmission and grid main trust fund or the sanitary sewer trunk system trust fund, and are paid out to reimburse developers in the order in which their eligible improvements were completed and accepted by the City. Surcharge Fees. The City assesses “surcharge” fees on new customers at time of connection (or “tap”) based on an adopted fee schedule. The fee per tap is the same for residential and commercial plats, but the water fee only applies to residential customers. The surcharge fees are split between the trust funds, with 75% going to the water transmission/grid main or sanitary sewer trunk system fund, and 25% going to the water distribution main or sanitary sewer collection main trust fund. They are paid out to reimburse developers in the order in which their eligible improvements were completed and accepted by the City. Pro-Rata Fees. The City’s “pro-rata” fees are similar to the lot/acreage and surcharge fees. They differ only in that they are assessed per linear foot of frontage and are intended to recover the cost of smaller distribution and collector lines that are typically installed by developers and not included in impact fees (otherwise a credit would need to be provided to every developer). They are a flat rate per foot of lot frontage assessed at time of service connection. Pro-rata fees are deposited in the trust Current Utility Financing City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 20 January 7, 2020 funds for smaller lines (the water distribution main trust fund or the sanitary sewer collection line trust fund), and are paid out to reimburse developers in the order in which their eligible improvements were completed and accepted by the City. Summary of Development Fees. Major characteristics of the City’s utility development fees are summarized in Table 8. Lot/acreage fees are collected from developers and property owners splitting a lot at time of subdivision plat. Surcharge and pro-rata fees are collected when a tap is made to connect an individual customer to the City system. To the extent that they primarily pay for extensions of major lines, the lot/acreage and surcharge fees function like quasi-impact fees, which pay for major lines (and other major system components). Pro-rata fees are structured much like the other development fees, but are used primarily for minor lines that would not be covered by an impact fee because they have limited system-wide benefit and are typically installed in every subdivision by the developers. For residential lots, the pro-rata fee accounts for about half the total development fee. Table 8. City Utility Development Fee Summary Time of Water Waste- Type of Fee Collection Resid.Comm.Water Acreage Fee (per acre)Subdivision $719 $1,439 $1,571 Lot Fee (min. acreage fee)Subdivision $182 $359 $393 Surcharge (per connection)Tap $243 $0 $277 Pro-Rata Fee (per front ft.)Tap $10.53 $10.53 $12.18 Lot and Surcharge Fee per Residential Lot $425 n/a $670 Pro-Rata Fee per Residential Lot*$527 n/a $609 Total Fee per Residential Lot $952 n/a $1,279 * assuming 50 feet of frontage Source: City of Corpus Christi Platting Ordinance and City staff. The distribution of fees collected into two trust funds for water and two for wastewater are summarized in Table 9 below. Lot/acreage fees are deposited in the funds for larger lines, while pro- rata fees go into the funds for smaller lines. Surcharge fees are split between the funds for larger and smaller lines. The names of the trust funds, however, do not necessarily determine how the revenues in each fund are spent. The City has periodically moved money between the trust funds as needed to fund a developer reimbursement, most recently in 2015 and 2018. In 2018, for example, the City transferred $2.7 million from the water trust funds and the wastewater collection line trust fund to the wastewater trunk system fund. Given this practice, there is essentially a single trust fund for all water and wastewater developer reimbursements. Table 9. Distribution of City Utility Development Fees Water Sanitary Sewer Transmission &Distribution Trunk System Collection Line Grid Main Trust Main Trust Trust Trust Lot & Acreage Fees Pro Rata Fees Lot & Acreage Fees Pro Rata Fees 75% of Surcharge 25% of Surcharge 75% of Surcharge 25% of Surcharge Source: City of Corpus Christi Platting Ordinance. Current Utility Financing City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 21 January 7, 2020 Activity in the utility developer reimbursement trust funds over the past five years is summarized in Table 10 (the major/minor line sub-funds are combined to show just the water and wastewater funds). At the beginning of the 5-year period, the water fund had about $2.5 million on hand. It took in about $3.5 million in fees over the five years, but the City Council transferred almost all of that to the wastewater fund. It paid out $1.3 million in reimbursements for water-related projects, and ended up with a lower balance than it started with. The wastewater fund collected somewhat more fee revenue and paid out somewhat more in reimbursements, but had an ending balance almost $5 million higher than it started with, thanks to the transfer of the water funds. The transfer was done to pay the outstanding reimbursement obligations of the wastewater fund. The experience of the last five years highlights the extent to which the trust funds operate in practice as a single fund to reimburse developers for water and wastewater line extensions. Table 10. Developer Reimbursement Trust Fund Activity, FY 2014-2018 Water Wastewater Total Beginning Balance $2,551,839 $817,284 $3,369,123 Fees Collected $3,566,894 $4,204,596 $7,771,490 Transfers -$3,016,284 $3,016,284 $0 Interest Earned $85,739 $95,084 $180,823 – Reimbursements Paid -$1,323,947 -$2,469,232 -$3,793,179 Ending Balance $1,864,242 $5,664,016 $7,528,257 – Outstanding Reimbursements -$109,354 -$4,047,898 -$4,157,252 Net Ending Balance $1,754,888 $1,616,118 $3,371,005 Source: City of Corpus Christi Development Services, December 2, 2019. The City’s developer reimbursement trust fund has stayed solvent for many years, but that may be about to change. The fees did not originally cover the cost of expensive lift station and force main improvements, and the fees were not increased when they were added. As development begins to occur on the south side of Oso Creek, extending service across the creek will be costly, and the reimbursement funds may be overwhelmed. Comparisons to Other Cities. Most cities that don’t charge impact fees collect some type of development fees from subsequent developments to reimburse developers who extend lines or install over-sized facilities that will benefit those developments. However, these fees function in a fundamentally different way from the City’s development fees. Generally, these fees are (a) calculated separately for each developer-installed improvement, (b) assessed only on other developments that benefit from that improvement, and (c) earmarked to reimburse the developer who made the improvement. In contrast, the City’s development fees are (a) based on a pre-determined fees schedule, (b) assessed on all new development (with the exception that the water surcharge fee is not assessed on nonresidential taps), and (c) pooled in trust funds that are drawn upon to repay developers in the order of completion of eligible projects. The three other large Texas cities besides Corpus Christi that do not charge water and wastewater impact fees are Dallas, Plano and Laredo. The City of Dallas has a utility development fee system most like Corpus Christi’s. Dallas has a predetermined schedule of lot/acreage fees and front-footage fees, but these are assessed only on benefitting property, rather than on all new plats or taps. As in Current Utility Financing City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 22 January 7, 2020 Corpus Christi, the fees are pooled and reimbursed to developers in the order in which the eligible improvements were made, rather than being reimbursed to the developer who made the specific improvement that benefits the fee-payer. Plano and Laredo offer examples of the more typical approach to pro-rata utility fees. In Plano, the City may decide to participate in the cost of a line extension or oversizing, but only if the off-site share is at least 30 percent of the cost. The City calculates pro-rata fees that other properties will be charged on a case-by-case basis. The pro-rata fees may be either per acre or per linear foot of frontage. The City then collects those fees as the benefitting property develops, and remits them to the developer who built the improvement. The City ceases collecting the fees after 10 years from acceptance of the improvement. The City of Laredo uses an approach similar to Plano’s. Pro-rata fees per linear foot are calculated for each eligible improvement project, and are collected by the City and used to reimburse the developer for up to 15 years. In addition to being more legally-defensible, these types of approaches put more of the economic risk involved with line extensions into unserved and undeveloped areas on the developer who decides to build there. Evaluation Summary. None of the three other large Texas cities without impact fees use development fees in the way that Corpus Christi does. Their fees do not function like quasi-impact fees. The other cities basically start from the position that it is the developer’s responsibility to install lines needed to serve their projects. If developers extend lines that will benefit other developments, or oversize lines for the benefit of other developments, any reimbursement of such costs comes from fees collected only from benefitting property, and is subject to City approval and/or meeting certain conditions. The City’s development fee approach essentially puts developers in the driver’s seat on infrastructure expansion, because none of the funding can be used to reimburse the City for improvements it might make. It also creates a perverse incentive for developers to plat subdivisions that are not contiguous with existing served areas, by providing reimbursement for the full cost of any line identified in the City’s master plan, even though it may be fiscally premature for the City. A pattern of scattershot development and premature infrastructure expansion is more costly, because the improvements need to be maintained and begin to depreciate long before the customers they will ultimately serve begin paying rates. For example, the City maintains several lift stations that developers installed and for which they were reimbursed that have been mothballed for years because of lack of sufficient demand. The City has the alternative of putting itself in the driver’s seat on infrastructure expansion. It could commission long-range master plans that would prioritize major system expansions based on growth projections and cost-efficiency. Such master plans are relatively expensive, and the City currently has no revenue source to draw on besides utility rates, which are already high. However, the City does have the option of adopting impact fees, which could be used not only to fund City-initiated projects, but also fund long-range master plans. Impact fees are the subject of the next section. Current Utility Financing City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 23 January 7, 2020 Impact Fees The Texas impact fee enabling act authorizes impact fees for water, wastewater, and stormwater facilities. Water and wastewater impact fees currently charged by a dozen other Texas cities are summarized in Table 11, along with Houston’s stormwater impact fee. Fees charged by six smaller Texas cities have been added to the six larger cities summarized in the survey in the Appendix to provide a larger sample. Impact fees tend to be lower in Texas than elsewhere in the country. The City’s development fees (sum of residential lot, surcharge and pro-rata fees) are roughly one-quarter the state’s combined average water and wastewater impact fees. Of the ten largest cities, only Houston has implemented stormwater impact fees, and their fees are quite low. Our 2019 national impact fee survey identified 36 jurisdictions outside of California that charge stormwater impact fees, accounting for about 15% of the 233 jurisdictions surveyed, compared to almost 50% that charge water and wastewater impact fees. The average stormwater impact fee from that survey is $1,261 per single-family detached unit. 4 Table 11. Impact Fees, Texas Cities Impact Fee per Single-Family Equivalent City Water Wastewater Drainage Total Corpus Christi Dev't Fees *$425 $670 n/a $1,095 Arlington $828 $418 n/a $1,246 McKinney $1,295 $162 n/a $1,457 El Paso $845 $713 n/a $1,558 Houston $791 $1,199 $33 $2,023 Fort Worth $1,758 $1,044 n/a $2,802 Colleyville $2,491 $643 n/a $3,134 College Station $500 $3,000 n/a $3,500 Allen $2,840 $1,644 n/a $4,484 Austin $4,700 $2,500 n/a $7,200 San Antonio $4,749 $3,451 n/a $8,200 Denton $4,853 $4,716 n/a $9,569 Georgetown $6,921 $3,115 n/a $10,036 Texas Average $2,714 $1,884 n/a $4,598 National Average (w/o CA)$3,603 $3,420 $1,261 $8,284 * sum of residential lot and surcharge fees from Table 8 Source: Table 16 in the Appendix for survey cities; Duncan Associates, 2019 national impact fee survey of 233 non-California jurisdictions for other cities and national average. 4 Based on a 2019 internet survey of 233 U.S. jurisdictions outside California that charge impact fees conducted by Duncan Associates, in association with the University of Arizona and Georgia State University. Current Utility Financing City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 24 January 7, 2020 Water and wastewater impact fees, if adopted at average rates for Texas, would bring in a combined total of about $4.7 million annually from new residential development alone based on the average number of new single-family permits issued annually over the last five years. Total impact fee revenue, including revenue from nonresidential development, would probably be on the order of 50% higher, or in the neighborhood of $7.1 million annually, as shown in Table 12. This would be considerably more than the approximately $1.5 million generated annually by the City’s current water and wastewater development fees. A stormwater impact fee adopted at the average national rate (excluding California) could generate another $1.9 million annually. Table 12. Potential Annual Impact Fee Revenue Average Annual Annual Annual Impact Fee per Single-Family Equivalent Single-Family Single-Family Single-Family Total Utility Impact Fee Permits Revenue Revenue* Water $2,714 1,020 $2,768,497 $4,200,000 Wastewater $1,884 1,020 $1,921,434 $2,900,000 Subtotal, Water and Wastewater $4,598 $4,689,931 $7,100,000 Stormwater $1,261 1,020 $1,286,220 $1,900,000 Total Potential Annual Revenue $5,976,151 $9,000,000 * estimate assuming total revenues are 50% more than single-family revenue Source: Texas average fees for water and wastewater from Table 11; stormwater fee is average non-California fee from Duncan Associates, 2019 national impact fee survey of 36 jurisdictions outside California; annual average single-family permits for 2014-2018 in Corpus Christi from U.S. Census Bureau website (https://www2.census.gov/econ/bps/Place/). In the 2007 report, we stated that impact fees would not be feasible in the short-term, because the City would first need to prepare comprehensive long-range master plans. What we meant by that was comprehensive studies that model where future development would occur over a 10-20 year period, and identify improvements and their costs that would need to be made to the system to accommodate the projected development. The City has master plans, but they are limited to maps that show the layout of a future system of lines. While having a long-range master plan is desirable, we no longer believe that it is a necessary prerequisite to developing impact fees under the Texas act. That effort would require an impact fee study, projections of land use over a 10-year period, and a list of future capital improvements with estimated costs, but not a comprehensive long-range master plan. Impact fees would recover growth-related costs from new development more comprehensively than development fees used to reimburse developers for line extensions they initiate. They could generate additional revenue to fund needed line improvements for which no developer is willing to upfront the cost. They could cover the cost of comprehensive master plans that would enable the City to prioritize both City-initiated improvements and credit eligibility for developer-initiated projects. They could also cover the cost of retiring debt on past investments in water production or wastewater treatment capacity that is available to serve new development but is now being paid by existing utility customers. The additional revenue generated by impact fees would relieve the City from the need to rely on utility rates for these purposes, which should result in lower utility rates than would otherwise be needed. Even if utility rates do not actually decline, they would be able to fund critical maintenance needs that may have been deferred due to a reluctance to raise rates. Current Utility Financing City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 25 January 7, 2020 Since impact fees typically do not cover smaller water distribution or wastewater collection lines, there would still be a place for some kind of pro-rata agreements that would spread the cost of developer- initiated line extensions more equitably among benefitting development. However, those fees should be calculated on a case-by-case basis, assessed only on benefitting development and used only to reimburse the developer who made the improvement. While impact fees do not have to cover water grid mains or wastewater trunk mains, which are addressed with the City’s current lot/acreage and surcharge fees, impact fees would provide a better system for funding reimbursements for such facilities. Impact fees could be updated much more easily, and would generate additional revenue to fund City-initiated grid and trunk line projects that developers are not positioned to make. The lot/acreage and surcharge fees could be eliminated upon adoption of impact fees, with outstanding reimbursement obligations transferred to the impact fee funds. Finally, impact fees typically cover centralized or regional facilities, such as water supply, storage, treatment, pumps and transmission lines; and wastewater treatment plants, storage, disposal/recovery facilities, and interceptors and associated lift stations. Impact fee revenue could be used to retire debt on facilities with excess capacity, pay directly for new capacity-expanding improvements, or retire new debt issued for capacity-expansion projects. Impact fees could also be considered for stormwater. However, it would be advisable to first use new stormwater utility fees to fund a comprehensive long-range stormwater master plan, and then determine if major capital improvements identified as attributable to anticipated growth would warrant an impact fee. Stormwater Utility Fees Most major Texas cities rely on stormwater utility fees to fund major drainage improvements. Eight of the ten largest cities have established stormwater utility fees, which can fund operations and capital maintenance as well as growth-related capital improvements. The City has an informal stormwater utility fee buried it its water utility rate, where it accounts for about one-fifth of expenditures. The question is whether to formally adopt a separate utility fee exclusively for stormwater purposes. Making such a change would not necessarily increase overall utility rates or revenues, although a stormwater rate study could potentially justify higher rates, in which case the City would have the option to assess higher stormwater rates. It is likely that a stormwater utility fee, which is generally based on impervious cover rather than water usage, would result in fees that are more like average stormwater fees for major Texas cities. Based on data presented earlier in Table 2 and Table 3, the City’s commercial fee would be about five times what the effective rate is now. Given current stormwater expenditure levels, stormwater rates for both residential and nonresidential would be lower than Texas average rates, and the total combined residential rate would be lower than it is now. Current Utility Financing City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 26 January 7, 2020 Given the likelihood that the City’s stormwater system has been historically under-funded because of the relative invisibility of problems on a day-to-day basis, stormwater rates might need to be increased to adequately fund existing maintenance needs and capacity deficiencies. Formal stormwater utility fees would ensure than any additional revenue is earmarked for stormwater purposes. The City has made several efforts to establish a stormwater utility. In 1993, the City Council adopted a resolution to take steps to create a stormwater utility. In 1994 the City developed a database model for a potential stormwater utility, and in 1995 developed a fee which amounted to $0.16 per month per 100 square feet of improved surface, drafted an ordinance, and took steps to notify the public of the changes. Towards the end of 1995, after numerous public meetings, the City Council appointed a Drainage Ad-Hoc Committee to determine a level of service standard and related rate structure to present to Council. In July of 1996, the Drainage Ad-Hoc Committee recommended that the Council not establish a stormwater utility, based primarily on the inability of the public to see the benefits of a stormwater utility. In 1997, the City Council established a Stormwater Management Advisory Committee (SWMAC) as a result of regulation review associated with the City=s Environmental Protection Agency permit compliance schedule to review technical issues. The committee originally was to be abolished in 1999. In 1999, the City Council identified several priority issues, which included establishing a stormwater utility. Staff prepared an action plan that proposed the initiation of charges by April 2000. In June 1999, the City Council amended the ordinance to continue the existence of the SWMAC and included the additional duty to advise the Mayor and Council on the establishment of a drainage utility. In 2002, the SWMAC delivered its opinion that the City should not establish a stormwater utility, and recommended alternatives including: additional bonding, utility rate increases, consideration of a Stormwater Capital Improvement Fee, and that the City impose higher drainage standards in the platting process. The City Council deferred action on the findings until the Drainage Master Plan was completed. Completion of the master plan was stymied due to disagreements over levels of protection and who should be responsible for funding deficiencies. To-date, the City has not implemented a formal stormwater utility fee. However, is again moving forward with a plan to consider doing so. Continued funding of drainage maintenance and improvement costs out of the water utility fund risks continuing to under-fund drainage needs, which are visible only in the aftermath of severe storm events. The current system is not proportional to the demand generated by a land use, which is related to impervious cover, not water demand. A formal stormwater utility fee would be more equitable, and would probably also result in a lower overall residential utility rate. City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 27 January 7, 2020 APPENDIX Table 13. Water Rate Survey City Basis Monthly Rate Basis Monthly Rate Inside City Houston Monthly gallons Base fee (5/8" meter)$5.76 <1,000 $5.54 ++ 1,000 - 1,999 $5.69 Usage Fee $4.54 2,000 - 2,999 $12.97 (per 1,000 gal.) 3,000 - 3,999 $13.41 4,000 - 4,999 $25.36 5,000 - 5,999 $30.39 6,000 - 6,999 $35.43 7,000 - 12,000 + $5.47 per 1,000 > 12,000 + $9.00 per 1,000 San Antonio Base fee (5/8" meter)$12.82 Base fee (5/8" meter)$13.86 ++++ Usage Fee (per 100 gal.)Usage Fee (per 100 gal.) 0 - 2,992 gallons $0.0740 Customer Base Use $0.1810 2,993 - 4,489 $0.1295 >100 - 125% Base $0.2084 4,490 - 5,985 $0.1665 >125 - 175% of Base $0.2717 5.986 - 7,481 $0.2034 >175% of Base $0.3171 7,482 - 10,473 $0.2405 10,474 - 14,962 $0.2775 14,963 - 20,199 $0.3329 > 20,199 gallons $0.4809 Dallas Base fee (5/8" meter)$5.33 Base fee (5/8" meter)$5.33 ++++ Usage Fee Usage Fee (per 1,000 gal.)(per 1,000 gal.) Up to 4,000 gal.$1.86 Up to 10,000 gal.$3.73 4,001 - 10,000 gal.$4.00 > 10,000 gal.$4.05 10,001 - 20,000 gal.$6.50 > 10,000 gal. & $6.15 20,001 - 30,000 gal.$9.30 1.4 x annual avg. > 30,000 gal.$10.70 monthly usage Austin Base fee (5/8" meter)$7.25 Base fee (5/8" meter)$7.25 ++++ Usage Fee Fixed Charge $8.75 (monthly gallons)++ 0 - 2,000 $1.25 2,001 - 6,000 $3.55 6,001 - 11,000 $9.25 11,001 - 20,000 $29.75 > 20,001 $29.75 ++ Volume Charge Volume Charge (per 1,000 gal.)(per 1,000 gal.) 0 - 2,000 $2.89 Nov - June $5.27 2,001 - 6,000 $4.81 July - October $5.66 6,001 - 11,000 $8.34 11,001 - 20,000 $12.70 > 20,001 $14.21 ++++ Single-Family (smallest meter)Commercial (smallest meter) continued on next page Appendix City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 28 January 7, 2020 Table 13. Water Rate Survey (continued) City Basis Monthly Rate Basis Monthly Rate Inside City Austin Community Community $0.15 (cont'd.)Benefit Charge $0.15 Benefit Charge (per 1,000 gal.)(per 1,000 gal.) ++++ Reserve Fund $0.05 Reserve Fund $0.05 Surcharge Surcharge (per 1,000 gal.)(per 1,000 gal.) Fort Worth Base fee (5/8" meter)$12.10 Base fee (5/8" meter)$12.10 ++++ Volume charge Volume charge (per 100 cu. ft.)(per 100 cu. ft.)$2.69 First 6 CCF $2.19 >6 - 18 CCF $3.07 >18 - 30 CCF $3.92 >30 CCF $4.73 (CCF = 100 cu. ft.) El Paso Base fee (<1" meter)$7.45 Base fee (<1" meter)$7.45 ++++ Usage Fee per CCF Usage Fee per CCF (usage > 400 cu. ft.)(all usage) Up to 150% of AWC $2.24 Up to 150% of AWC $2.24 150%-250% of AWC $5.31 150%-250% of AWC $5.31 Over 250% of AWC $7.59 Over 250% of AWC $7.59 (AWC = customer's Average Winter Consumption in prevous year) ++++ Water Supply Water Supply Replacement Charge $11.04 Replacement Charge $11.04 (if usage > 400 cu. ft.)(per meter) Arlington Base fee (5/8" meter)Base fee (5/8" meter)$10.30 < 2,000 gallons $7.10 > 2,000 gallons $10.30 ++++ Usage Fee Usage Fee (per 1,000 gal.)(per 1,000 gal.) 0 - 3,000 gal.$2.02 < 16,000 gal.$3.20 > 3,000-11,000 $2.79 > 16,000 gal.$3.38 >11,000-16,000 $4.02 >16,000-29,999 $5.63 > 30,000 gal.$6.78 Corpus Christi Base fee (5/8" meter)$12.70 Base fee (5/8" meter)$12.70 ++++ Usage Fee Usage Fee $7.05 (per 1,000 gal.(per 1,000 gal. over 2,000 gal.)over 2,000 gal.) Up to 6,000 gal.$6.35 6,000-15,000 gal.$7.30 Over 15,000 gal.$7.95 Single-Family (smallest meter)Commercial (smallest meter) continued on next page Appendix City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 29 January 7, 2020 Table 13. Water Rate Survey (continued) City Basis Monthly Rate Basis Monthly Rate Inside City Plano Base fee (3/4" meter)$24.51 Base fee (3/4" meter)$24.51 ++++ Usage Fee Usage Fee $3.71 (per 1,000 gal.(per 1,000 gal. over 1,000 gal.)over 1,000 gal.) 1,001 - 5,000 gal.$0.75 5,001 - 20,000 gal.$3.71 20,001 - 40,000 gal.$7.41 > 40,000 gal.$8.98 Laredo Base fee (5/8" meter)$10.52 Base fee (5/8" meter)$39.61 ++++ Usage Fee Usage Fee (per 1,000 gal.(per 1,000 gal. over 2,000 gal.)over 2,000 gal.) 2,001 - 4,000 $2.05 2,001 - 4,000 $2.51 4,001 - 10,000 gal.$2.20 4,001 - 10,000 gal.$3.08 10,001 - 20,000 gal.$2.27 10,001 - 40,000 gal.$3.88 20,001 - 30,000 gal.$2.41 40,001 - 150,000 gal.$4.10 30,001 - 40,000 gal.$2.57 150,001 - 300,000 gal.$4.43 40,001 - 50,000 gal.$2.69 300,001 - 600,000 gal.$4.89 > 50,000 gal.$5.35 600,001 - 1,000,000 gal.$5.78 > 1,000,000 gal.$5.92 Single-Family (smallest meter)Commercial (smallest meter) Source: Duncan Associates, November 2019. Appendix City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 30 January 7, 2020 Table 14. Wastewater Rate Survey Single-Family Monthly Rate Commercial Monthly Rate City Basis (in-city)Basis (in-city) Houston Base fee (5/8" meter)$11.77 Base fee (5/8" meter) $10.12 (includes usage ++ up to 1,000 gal.)Usage Fee $6.43 Sum of Base (per 1,000 gal.) and Usage Fees >1,000 gallons $11.96 2,000 gallons $12.35 3,000 gallons $12.67 4,000 gallons $29.04 5,000 gallons $34.96 6,000 gallons $43.57 > 6,000 gallons + $8.61 per 1,000 gal. San Antonio Base fee (5/8" meter) $14.53 Base fee (5/8" meter) $14.53 ++++ Usage Fee Usage Fee (per 100 gal.)(per 100 gal.) 1,496 gallons $0.0000 1,496 gallons $0.0000 1,497-2,992 gal.$0.3104 > 1,496 gallons $0.4159 > 2,992 gallons $0.4657 Dallas Base fee (5/8" meter) $4.78 Base fee (5/8" meter) $4.78 ++++ Usage Fee $5.36 Usage Fee $4.11 (per 1,000 gal.) (per 1,000 gal.) Austin Monthly Service $10.30 Monthly Service $10.30 Charge Charge ++++ Volume Charge Volume Charge $8.95 (per 1,000 gal.)(per 1,000 gal.) 0 - 2,000 gal.$4.85 >2,000 gal.$9.94 ++++ Community $0.15 Community $0.15 Benefit Charge Benefit Charge (per 1,000 gal.)(per 1,000 gal.) Fort Worth Monthly Service $6.85 Monthly Service $6.85 Charge Charge ++++ Volume Charge $4.17 Volume Charge $4.06 (per 100 cu ft.)(per 100 cu ft.) El Paso Base fee (<1" meter)$16.35 Base fee (<1" meter)$16.35 ++++ Usage Charge $2.06 Usage Charge $2.06 (per 100 cu.ft.(per 100 cu.ft. over 400 cu. ft.)over 400 cu. ft.) (usage based on 90% of customer's avg. winter use in previous year) continued on next page Appendix City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 31 January 7, 2020 Table 14. Wastewater Rate Survey (continued) Single-Family Monthly Rate Commercial Monthly Rate City Basis (in-city)Basis (in-city) Arlington Fixed Fee (5/8" meter)Fixed Fee (5/8" meter)$12.94 < 2,000 gallons $7.64 > 2,000 gallons $12.94 ++++ Volume Charge $5.13 Volume Charge $5.13 (per 1,000 gal.)(per 1,000 gal.) Corpus Christi Base Fee $32.60 Base Fee $44.75 ++++ Usage Fee Usage Fee $4.70 (per 1,000 gal. over 2,000)(per 1,000 gal. over 2,000) 2,001-6,000 gal.$3.25 6,001-15,000 gal.$4.85 > 15,000 gal.$7.25 One Family Maximum (up to 25,000 gal.)$161.75 Plano Base Rate (3/4" meter)$14.67 Base Rate (3/4" meter)$14.67 ++++ Volume Charge $5.80 Volume Charge $5.80 (per 1,000 gal. over 1,000)(per 1,000 gal. over 1,000) Laredo Base Rate $10.44 Base Rate $27.97 ++++ Volume Charge Volume Charge (per 1,000 gal. over 2,000)(per 1,000 gal. over 2,000) 2,001 - 4,000 gal.$3.58 2,001 - 4,000 gal.$2.89 4,001 - 10,000 gal.$3.63 4,001 - 10,000 gal.$2.94 10,001 - 20,000 gal.$3.82 10,001 - 40,000 gal.$3.37 > 20,000 gal.$4.11 40,001 - 150,000 gal.$3.48 150,001 - 300,000 gal.$4.45 300,001 - 600,000 gal.$4.45 600,001 - 1,000,000 gal.$5.09 > 1,000,000 gal.$6.18 Source: Duncan Associates, November 2019. Appendix City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 32 January 7, 2020 Table 15. Stormwater Rate Survey Single-Family Commercial City Basis Monthly Rate Basis Monthly Rate Houston Impervious Area Impervious Area $0.0027 (per sq. ft.)(per sq. ft.) Curb & Gutter $0.0027 Open Ditch $0.0022 San Antonio Impervious Area Base Fee $67.30 < 2,750 sq. ft.$3.75 ++ > 2,750 - 4,220 sq. ft.$4.94 Impervious Area > 4,220 sq. ft.$10.45 (per 1,000 sq. ft.) % Impervious < 20%$0.31 > 20-40%$0.45 >40-65%$0.58 >65%$0.73 Dallas Impervious Area Impervious Area $2.10 Up to 2,000 sq. ft.$3.90 (per 1,000 sq. ft.) 2,001 - 3,500 sq. ft.$6.21 3,501 - 5,500 sq. ft.$9.29 Minimum Charge $6.00 > 5,500 sq. ft.$15.19 Austin Base Monthly Rate per sf $0.00498 Base Monthly Rate per sf $0.00498 of Impervious Cover (IC)of Impervious Cover (IC) Actual Rate =Base Rate x Actual Rate =Base Rate x %IC x Adjustment Factor %IC x Adjustment Factor (1.5425 x %IC + 0.01933)(1.5425 x %IC + 0.01933) Example:Example: 30% Impervious Cover $0.0024 75% Impervious Cover $0.0059 Fort Worth Equiv. Residential Unit Impervious Area (based on living area and (per 2,600 sq. ft.)$5.40 no. of garage spaces) 0.5 ERU $2.70 1.0 ERU $5.40 1.5 ERU $8.10 2.0 ERU $10.80 El Paso Impervious Area Impervious Area < 1,200 sq, ft,$2.13 (per 2,000 sq. ft.)$4.34 1,201 - 3,000 sq. ft.$4.25 > 3,001 sq. ft.$8.51 Arlington Impervious Area $7.25 Impervious Area $7.25 (per 2800 sq. ft.)(per 2800 sq. ft.) Corpus Christi no fee n/a no fee n/a Plano Impervious Area Impervious Area $0.075 (sq. ft.)*(per 100 sq. ft.) < 4750 $3.10 4,750 - 6,450 $4.15 Minimum monthly bill $3.15 > 6,450 $5.60 continued on next page Appendix City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 33 January 7, 2020 Table 15. Wastewater Rate Survey (continued) Single-Family Commercial City Basis Monthly Rate Basis Monthly Rate Laredo Flat Fee per unit $6.50 Lot Size 0 - 10,000 sq. ft.$8.00 10,001 - 40,000 $23.00 40,001 - 75,000 $46.00 75,001 - 110,000 $70.00 > 110,000 sq. ft.$120.00 * 3,000 sq. ft added to house square feet to account for street, sidewalk and alley impervious cover Source: Duncan Associates, November 2019. Appendix City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 34 January 7, 2020 Table 16. Capital Funding Survey City Water Wastewater Stormwater Houston Water Impact Fee Wastewater Impact Fee Drainage Impact Fee $791 $1,199 avg. of watersheds: $11.13 per single-family equivalent per single-family equivalent per 1,000 sf impervious cover Fee = sum of flow, system Fee = sum of collection Stormwater Utility Fee development, and water and treatment Additional funding from Metro, supply impact fees components TxDOT, and ad valorem taxes San Water Impact Fee Wastewater Impact Fee Stormwater Utility Fee Antonio $4,749 $3,451 (see stormwater rate survey) per EDU (290 gpd, 5/8" meter)per EDU (200 gpd)Developer needs addressed through in Low Elevaton Zone in Upper Collection zone on-site detention, off-site mitigation, (EDU is equiv. dwelling unit)(EDU is equiv. dwelling unit)or payment of fee in lieu for participation in a regional stormwater project Dallas Water Utility Rates Wastewater Utility Rates Stormwater Utility Fee Developer extensons/oversizing Developer extensons/oversizing (see stormwater rate survey) reimbursed from fees paid reimbursed from fees paid by future connections by future connections from benefitting projects from benefitting projects Austin Water Impact Fee Wastewater Impact Fee Stormwater Utility Fee $4,700 $2,500 (see stormwater rate survey) per single-family equivalent per single-family equivalent called Capital Recover Fee called Capital Recover Fee Fort Water Impact Fee Wastewater Impact Fee Stormwater Utility Fee Worth $1,758 $1,044 (see stormwater rate survey) per single-family equivalent per single-family equivalent (5/8"x3/4" meter)(5/8"x3/4" meter) El Paso Water Impact Fee Wastewater Impact Fee Stormwater Utility Fee $845 $713 (see stormwater rate survey) (average fee for 3 areas)(average fee for 3 areas) per single-family equivalent per single-family equivalent (<1" water meter)(<1" water meter) Arlington Water Impact Fee Wastewater Impact Fee General Funds $828 $418 Smaller facilities exacted from per single-family equivalent per single-family equivalent developer, larger faciliites bonded and (5/8"x3/4" meter)(5/8"x3/4" meter)and repaid with general funds (property tax) Corpus Acreage Fee Acreage Fee Water Utility Rates Christi Residential: $719 per acre Stormwater projects funded (minimum $182 per lot)$1,571 per acre with water utility revenue Commercial: $1,439 per acre (minimum $393 per lot) (with minimum $359 per lot) Tap Surcharge Tap Surcharge Residential: $243 per tap Commercial: $0 per tap Pro Rata Fee Pro Rata Fee $10.53 per frontage lin. ft.$12.18 per frontage lin. ft. $277 per tap Improvements traditionally funded with property tax, but increasingly paid with utility rates. continued on next page Appendix City of Corpus Christi Duncan Associates Alternative Utility Finance Study Update 35 January 7, 2020 Table 16. Capital Funding Survey (continued) City Water Wastewater Stormwater Plano Water Utility Rates Wastewater Utility Rates Stormwater Utility Fee Water revenue used Wastewater revenue used (see stormwater rate survey) for pay-go funding for pay-go funding Laredo Water Utility Rates Wastewater Utility Rates Stormwater Utility Fee Water revenue used Wastewater revenue used (see stormwater rate survey) for pay-go funding for pay-go/bond funding, developers pay for lines developers pay for lines to serve their projects to serve their projects Source: Duncan Associates, November 2019. DATE: February 19, 2020 TO: Peter Zanoni, City Manager FROM: Jeff H. Edmonds, P.E., Director of Engineering Services JeffreyE@cctexas.com (361) 826-3851 STAFF PRESENTER(S): Name Title/Position Department 1. Constance Sanchez Chief Financial Officer Finance Department 2. Jeff Edmonds Director Engineering Services BACKGROUND: City staff is in the process of developing recommendations for the Bond 2020 Program. The proposed budget for the Bond 2020 Program is $110 million. City staff is proposing $70 million be allocated to Streets projects and the remaining $40 million to be allocated to Parks, Public Safety and Senior/Recreation Facilities projects. City staff is recommending a community input process that includes the implementation of two Community Bond Committees (CBCs) to engage the community and include them in the planning process. The CBCs will be composed of citizens appointed by the Mayor and City Councilmembers. The presentation will provide the proposed schedule/timeline, the proposed budget, and recommended steps moving forward to the 2020 Bond Election. LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: NA Bond 2020 Program AGENDA MEMORANDUM City Council Meeting of February 25, 2020