HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes City Council - 03/21/2006I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the minutes of the
Regular Meeting of the Corpus Christi City Council of March 21, 2006, which were approved by the
City Council on March 28. 2006.
WITNESSETH MY HAND AND SEAL, on this the 28th day of March, 2006.
Armando Chapa
City Secretary
SEAL
PRESENT
Mayor Henry Garrett
Mayor Pro Tem Bill Kelly
Council Members:
Brent Chesney
* Melody Cooper
Jerry Garcia
Rex Kinnison
John E. Marez
Jesse Noyola
Mark Scott
MINUTES
CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS
Regular Meeting
March 21, 2006 — 10:00 a.m.
City Staff:
City Manager George K. Noe
City Attorney Mary Kay Fischer
City Secretary Armando Chapa
Mayor Garrett called the meeting to order in the Council Chambers of City Hall.
The invocation was delivered by Priest Anantha Kalyana Kumar Paramkusam of Sri
Venkateswara Temple, and the Pledge of Allegiance to the United States flag was led by
Council Member Jerry Garcia.
Mayor Garrett called for approval of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of March
21, 2006. A motion was made, seconded, and passed to approve the minutes as presented.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
Mayor Garrett referred to Item 2 and the following board appointments were made:
Building Standards Board
Frank Hastings (Reappointed)
Ted M. Stephens (Appointed)
Leadership Committee for Senior Services
Apolonia Cantu (Reappointed)
Barbara Dequzis (Reappointed)
Anna Gonzales (Reappointed)
Jerry Wagoner (Reappointed)
Hope Franklin (Reappointed)
Mary Garana Allen (Appointed)
Trinidad Benavides (Appointed)
Lupita Jimenez (Appointed)
Miltan A. Martiz (Appointed)
Joan Veith (Appointed)
(* Melody Cooper arrived at 10:05 a.m.)
Mechanical/Plumbing Advisory Board
Mody K. Boatright (Reappointed)
James Norman (Reappointed)
Mike Wanzer (Reappointed)
John Tucker (Reappointed)
Vincent Doyle (Appointed)
Elvin P. O'Bryan (Appointed)
*************
Minutes — Regular Council Meeting
March 21 2006 — Page 2
Mayor Garrett called for consideration of the consent agenda (Items 3 - 28). City
Secretary Chapa announced that staff was withdrawing Item 19. He also stated that Council
Member Noyola would be abstaining from the vote and discussion on Item 22.
There were no comments from the public. A motion was made, seconded, and passed
to approve Items 3 through 28, constituting the consent agenda, except for Item 19, which were
pulled for individual consideration City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes as
follows
3 MOTION NO. 2006-073
Motion approving a supply agreement with Marshall J. Brown Company, of Stafford,
Texas for approximately 48 ball valves ranging in size from 2" to 8" in accordance with
Bid Invitation No. BI -0079-06, based on only bid for an estimated annual expenditure of
$27.375. The term of the contract will be twelve months with an option to extend for up
to two additional twelve month periods, subject to the approval of the supplier and the
City Manager or his designee. Funds have been budgeted by the Gas Department in FY
2005-2006.
The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Garrett,
Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez, Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
MOTION NO. 2006-074
Motion approving the purchase of playground equipment from Gametime Total
Recreation, of Cypress, Texas for the total amount of $44,153.15. The award is based
on the cooperative purchasing agreement with the Texas Local Government
Cooperative. The Parks and Recreation Department will place these items in five local
parks. Funds are available through the Parks and Recreation Capital Improvement
Program Fund.
The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Garrett,
Chesney. Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez, Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
MOTION NO. 2006-075
Motion approving the purchase of playground equipment from Childs Play, Inc., of
Dallas, Texas for the total amount of $26,950. The award is based on the cooperative
purchasing agreement with the Texas Local Government Cooperative. The Parks and
Recreation Department will place these items in Billish Park. Funds are available
through the Parks and Recreation Capital Improvement Program Fund.
The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Garrett,
Chesney. Cooper, Garcia, Kelly. Kinnison, Marez, Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
Minutes — Regular Council Meeting
March 21, 2006 — Page 3
6 MOTION NO. 2006-076
Motion approving a supply agreement with Bay, Ltd., of Corpus Christi, Texas for
approximately 10,000 tons of hot mix asphalt -type D in accordance with Bid Invitation
No. BI -0093-06 based on low bid for an estimated semi-annual expenditure of $476,900.
The term of the agreement shall be for six months with an option to extend for up to four
additional six month periods, subject to the approval of the supplier and the City
Manager or his designee. Funds have been budgeted by Street Services in FY 2005-
2006.
The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Garrett,
Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez, Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
7 MOTION NO. 2006-077
Motion approving the purchase of an audio video system for the Police Department
executive conference room from Visual Innovations Company, Inc., of San Antonio,
Texas in accordance with the State of Texas Cooperative Purchasing Program for a total
amount of $36,668.03. Funds are available from the Police Department Justice
Assistance Grant.
The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Garrett,
Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez, Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
8.a. ORDINANCE NO. 026671
Ordinance appropriating $146,524.60 from the State Homeland Security Grant Program
in Fire Grants Fund No. 1062 for the purchase of a building access and security system
for City Hall, the Police Administration Building and the Marina.
An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved
with the following vote: Garrett, Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez,
Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
8b. MOTION NO. 2006-078
Motion approving the purchase of two new security systems and an upgrade to the City
Hall security system from Total Protection Systems, of Corpus Christi, Texas for a total
amount of $146,524.60. The award is based on the cooperative purchasing agreement
with the State of Texas. Two new security systems will be installed at the Police
Department and Marina. Funds are available from the State Homeland Security Grants
Program.
The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Garrett,
Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez, Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
Minutes — Regular Council Meeting
March 21 2006 — Page 4
9.a. RESOLUTION NO. 026672
Resolution authorizing the City Manager or his designee to accept a grant from the
Texas Department of Public Safety in the amount of $13,000 for hazardous materials
emergency preparedness planning activities in the No. 1062 Fire Grants Fund.
The foregoing resolution was passed and approved with the following vote: Garrett,
Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez, Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
9.b. ORDINANCE NO. 026673
Ordinance appropriating $13,000 from the Texas Department of Public Safety in the No.
1062 Fire Grants Fund for hazardous materials emergency preparedness planning
activities.
An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved
with the following vote: Garrett, Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez,
Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
10. RESOLUTION NO. 026674
Resolution amending Resolution 026649 which approved submission of a grant from the
State of Texas, Criminal Justice Division for Year 7 funding available from the Victims of
Crime Act Fund for the Police Department Family Violence Unit, adding that in the event
of the loss or misuse of the funds, the City of Corpus Christi assures that the funds will
be returned in full to the State of Texas, Office of the Governor, Criminal Justice
Division.
The foregoing resolution was passed and approved with the following vote: Garrett,
Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez, Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
11. RESOLUTION NO. 026675
Resolution authorizing the submission of a grant application in the amount of $113,674
to the State of Texas, Criminal Justice Division for Year 7 funding available under the
Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) Fund for the Police Department's Family Violence
Unit with a City match of $27,611, $10,320 in-kind services, for a total project cost of
$151,605 and authorizing the City Manager or his designee to apply for, accept, reject,
alter or terminate the grant
The foregoing resolution was passed and approved with the following vote: Garrett,
Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez, Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
12. ORDINANCE NO. 026676
Ordinance appropriating $33,841.99 from the State of Texas in the No. 1061 Police
Grants Fund - Law Enforcement Officer Standards and Education for training of police
personnel and purchase of training equipment.
An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved
with the following vote: Garrett, Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez,
Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
Minutes — Regular Council Meeting
March 21 2006 — Page 5
13. ORDINANCE NO. 026677
Ordinance appropriating $28,242.50 from the sale of seized vehicles in the No. 1061-
821005 Fund for purchase of equipment and training of police officers.
An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved
with the following vote: Garrett, Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez,
Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
14.a. RESOLUTION NO. 026678
Resolution authorizing the City Manager or his designee to accept an amendment to a
grant from the Department of State Health Services in the amount of $50,000 for
personnel costs and other expenses relating to a plan for responding to an act of
terrorism.
The foregoing resolution was passed and approved with the following vote: Garrett,
Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez, Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
14.b ORDINANCE NO. 026679
Ordinance appropriating an amendment to a grant from the Department of State Health
Services in the amount of $50,000 in the No. 1066 Health Grants Fund for personnel
costs and other expenses relating to a plan for responding to an act of terrorism.
An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved
with the following vote: Garrett, Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez,
Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
15.a. RESOLUTION NO. 026680
Resolution authorizing the City Manager or his designee to accept a grant from the
Texas Commission of the Arts in the amount of $1,835 in the No. 1067 Arts and Cultural
Commission Grant Fund for the Festival of the Arts.
The foregoing resolution was passed and approved with the following vote: Garrett,
Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez, Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
15.b. ORDINANCE NO. 026681
Ordinance appropriating a $1,835 grant from the Texas Commission of the Arts in the
No 1067 Arts and Cultural Commission Grant Fund for the Festival of the Arts.
An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved
with the following vote: Garrett, Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez,
Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
Minutes — Regular Council Meeting
March 21. 2006 — Page 6
16.a ORDINANCE NO. 026682
Ordinance appropriating $294,000 from the Texas Department of Family and Protective
Services in the No. 1060 Community Youth Development Fund for the Community Youth
Development Program in the 78415 ZIP Code for FY 2005-2006, Contract Period March
1, 2006 through August 31, 2006.
An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved
with the following vote: Garrett, Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez,
Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
16.b. MOTION NO. 2006-079
Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a subcontract with
Communities in Schools, Corpus Christi, Inc. in the amount of $153,713 to provide
services for youth ages 5 to 17 in the 78415 ZIP Code.
The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Garrett,
Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly. Kinnison, Marez, Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
16.c. MOTION NO. 2006-080
Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a subcontract with the
Corpus Christi Housing Authority in the amount of $10,614 to provide services for youth
ages 6 to 17 in the 78415 ZIP Code.
The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Garrett,
Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez, Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
16.d. MOTION NO. 2006-081
Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a subcontract with
Corpus Christi Teen Court in the amount of $12,139 to provide services for youth ages
11 to 17 in the 78415 ZIP Code.
The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Garrett,
Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez, Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
16.e. MOTION NO. 2006-082
Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a subcontract with
Planned Parenthood of South Texas in the amount of $13,208 to provide services for
youth ages 12 to 17 in the 78415 ZIP Code.
The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Garrett,
Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez, Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
Minutes — Regular Council Meeting
March 21. 2006 — Page 7
16.f. MOTION NO. 2006-083
Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a subcontract with the
YMCA of Corpus Christi in the amount of $27,567 to provide services for youth ages 14
to 17 in the 78415 ZIP Code.
The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Garrett,
Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez, Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
16.g. MOTION NO. 2006-084
Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a subcontract with Youth
Odyssey in the amount of $16,507 to provide services for youth ages 12 to 17 in the
78415 ZIP Code.
The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Garrett,
Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez, Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
17 RESOLUTION NO. 026683
Resolution authorizing the City Manager or his designee to submit a grant application to
the Texas Department of Transportation in the amount of $967,535 for construction of
the Hike and Bike Trail along the Schanen drainage ditch to the Oso Parkway and
extending to the Botanical Gardens and Nature Center, with a City match of $194,507 in
the Community Enrichment Fund, from park accounts whose impact area fall within the
proposed trail route.
The foregoing resolution was passed and approved with the following vote: Garrett,
Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez, Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
18. MOTION NO. 2006-085
Motion authorizing the appointment of an ad hoc peer panel to the Arts and Cultural
Commission, consisting of arts professionals and community peers to make
recommendation for Northwest Library Expansion and Renovation "Percent for Art"
Project.
The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Garrett,
Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez, Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
19.a. WITHDRAWN
Litter Ordinance.
19.b WITHDRAWN
Minutes — Regular Council Meeting
March 21 2006 — Page 8
19.c. WITHDRAWN
amount of $10,380 for salary for a third year of grant funding for an Assistant
Compliance Officer.
19.d. WITHDRAWN
19.e. WITHDRAWN
amount of $4,500 to pay for disposal of scrap tires collccted during the City's
19.f. WITHDRAWN
19.g. WITHDRAWN
19.h WITHDRAWN
20. MOTION NO. 2006-086
Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a Right -of -Way and
Utility Easement instrument with Ronald S. Herndon and wife, Karen L. Herndon, for the
acquisition of Parcel 503 in the total amount of $86,135, containing a Utility, Right -of -
Way, and Temporary Construction Easement, necessary for the Southside Water
Transmission Main. Phase 5, Project #8391,and for other municipal purposes.
The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Garrett,
Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez, Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
Minutes — Regular Council Meeting
March 21. 2006 — Page 9
21. MOTION NO. 2006-087
Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a Right -of -Way and
Utility Easement instrument with the Corpus Christi Riding Center, Inc., for the
acquisition of Parcel 529 in the total amount of $62,100, containing a Utility, Right -of -
Way, and Temporary Construction Easement, necessary for the Southside Water
Transmission Main. Phase 5, Project #8391, and for other municipal purposes.
The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Garrett,
Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez, Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
22. RESOLUTION NO. 026884
Resolution authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute an Interlocal
Cooperation Agreement between the City of Corpus Christi and Del Mar College to
provide Small Business assistance and administration through August 31, 2006.
The foregoing resolution was passed and approved with the following vote: Garrett,
Chesney, Cooper, Garcia. Kelly, Kinnison, Marez, and Scott, voting "Aye"; Noyola
abstained.
23.a. ORDINANCE NO. 026685
Ordinance appropriating $1,146,544.86 in the City funds on the attached schedule from
the Federal Emergency Management Agency for payroll and other expenses incurred by
the City of Corpus Christi related to providing assistance to Hurricane Katrina evacuees;
amending FY 2005-2006 budget adopted by Ordinance No. 026385 to increase
estimated revenues and appropriations by $1,146,544.86 each.
An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved
with the following vote: Garrett, Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez,
Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
23.b. ORDINANCE NO. 026686
Ordinance appropriating $178,394.90 in Fund 1020 General Fund from the Federal
Emergency Management Agency for expenses incurred by outside contractors related to
providing assistance to Hurricane Katrina evacuees; amending FY 2005-2006 budget
adopted by Ordinance No. 026385 to increase estimated revenues and appropriations
by $178,394.90 each.
An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved
with the following vote: Garrett, Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez,
Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
Minutes — Regular Council Meeting
March 21, 2006 — Page 10
23.c. ORDINANCE NO. 026687
Ordinance appropriating $25,254.94 in Fund 1020 General Fund from the Federal
Emergency Management Agency for administrative services performed relating to the
assistance rendered regarding Hurricane Katrina evacuees; amending FY 2005-2006
budget adopted by Ordinance No. 026385 to increase estimated revenues and
appropriations by $25,254.94 each.
An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved
with the following vote: Garrett, Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez,
Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
23.d. ORDINANCE NO. 026688
Ordinance appropriating $96,414.77 in Fund 1020 General Fund from the Federal
Emergency Management Agency for housing costs provided relating to the assistance
rendered regarding Hurricane Katrina evacuees; amending FY 2005-2006 budget
adopted by Ordinance No. 026385 to increase estimated revenues and appropriations
by $96,414.77 each.
An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved
with the following vote: Garrett, Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez,
Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
23.e. ORDINANCE NO. 026689
Ordinance appropriating $200,090.61 in Fund 1020 General Fund from anticipated
funding from the Federal Emergency Management Agency for housing provided related
to the assistance rendered regarding Hurricane Katrina evacuees; amending FY 2005-
2006 budget adopted by Ordinance No. 026385 to increase estimated revenues and
appropriations by $200,090.61 each.
An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved
with the following vote: Garrett, Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez,
Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
24.a. ORDINANCE NO. 026690
Ordinance appropriating $32,063.77 in the City funds listed on the attached schedule
from the Federal Emergency Management Agency for payroll and other expenses
incurred by the City of Corpus Christi related to providing assistance to Hurricane Rita
evacuees; amending FY 2005-2006 budget adopted by Ordinance No. 026385 to
increase estimated revenues and appropriations by $32,063.77 each.
An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved
with the following vote: Garrett, Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez,
Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
Minutes — Regular Council Meeting
March 21. 2006 — Page 11
24.b ORDINANCE NO. 026691
Ordinance appropriating $43,197.17 in Fund 1020 General Fund from the Federal
Emergency Management Agency for expenses incurred by outside contractors related to
providing assistance to Hurricane Rita evacuees; amending FY 2005-2006 budget
adopted by Ordinance No. 026385 to increase estimated revenues and appropriations
by $43,197.17 each.
An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved
with the following vote: Garrett, Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez,
Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
24.c ORDINANCE NO. 026692
Ordinance appropriating $2,257.83 in Fund 1020 General Fund from Federal Emergency
Management Agency for administrative services performed relating to the assistance
rendered regarding Hurricane Rita evacuees; amending FY 2005-2006 budget adopted
by Ordinance No. 026385 to increase estimated revenues and appropriations by
$2.257.83 each.
An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved
with the following vote: Garrett, Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez,
Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
25. ORDINANCE NO. 026693
Ordinance abandoning and vacating a 330 -square foot portion of a 5 -foot wide utility
easement out of Lot D, Gardendale Gin Tract; located approximately 168 feet west of
South Staples Street right-of-way; subject to compliance with the specified conditions.
An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved
with the following vote: Garrett, Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez,
Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
26. ORDINANCE NO. 026694
Ordinance abandoning and vacating a 325 -square foot portion of a 15 -foot wide utility
easement out of Lot 13, Block 1, Queen's Crossing Unit 1; located at 6550 Picante
Street, approximately 75 feet west of the Salsa Drive and Picante Street intersection;
subject to compliance with the specified conditions.
An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved
with the following vote: Garrett, Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez,
Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
Minutes — Regular Council Meeting
March 21, 2006 — Page 12
27 ORDINANCE NO. 026695
Ordinance authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a Use Privilege
Agreement with Alpheus Communications, for the right to install, operate, repair,
replace, and maintain approximately 39 -linear feet of a private 4 -inch HDPE conduit with
fiber optic cable within the northern portion of the Leopard Street and North Carancahua
Street intersection; establishing a fee of $608.50.
An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved
with the following vote: Garrett, Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez,
Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
28. ORDINANCE NO. 026696
Ordinance granting a time extension of one year for a Special Permit for an Event
Center in an "R -1C" One -family Dwelling District, Lots 2 and 12, Block 1, Tyler
Subdivision, located approximately 400 feet north of Laguna Shores Drive between
Wyndale Drive and Claudia Drive.
An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved
with the following vote: Garrett, Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez,
Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
*************
Mayor Garrett called for a brief recess to hold a Corpus Christi Community Improvement
Corporation (CCCIC) meeting.
*************
Mayor Garrett referred to Item 30, and a motion was made, seconded, and passed to
open the public hearing on the following zoning case:
Case No. 0206-01, Southcorp Realty Advisors, Inc.: A change in zoning from a "B-1"
Neighborhood Business District to a "B-3" Business District. The property being 2.806
acres out of Lot 17, Forest Park Addition 2, located along Buffalo Street and 200 feet
east of Nueces Bay Boulevard.
City Secretary Chapa stated the Planning Commission and staff recommended the
approval of the "B-3" Business District.
No one spoke in opposition to the zoning change. A motion was made, seconded, and
passed to close the public hearing. City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes as
follows:
Minutes — Regular Council Meeting
March 21, 2006 — Page 13
30. ORDINANCE NO. 026697
Amending the Zoning Ordinance, upon application by Southcorp Realty Advisors, Inc.,
by changing the zoning map in reference to 2.806 acres out of Lot 17, Forest Park
Addition 2, located along Buffalo Street and 200 feet east of Nueces Bay Boulevard,
from "B-1" Neighborhood Business District to "B-3" Business District; amending the
Comprehensive Plan to account for any deviations from the existing Comprehensive
Plan.
An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved
with the following vote: Garrett, Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez,
Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
Mayor Garrett referred to Item 31, and a motion was made, seconded, and passed to
open the public hearing on the following zoning case
Case No. 0206-03, N.P. Homes: A change in zoning from a "F -R" Farm -Rural District to
a "R -1B" One -family Dwelling District. The property being 20 acres, Lot 18, Section 27,
Flour Bluff and Encinal Farm and Garden Tracts, located 600 feet southeast of the
intersection of Wooldridge Road and Rodd Field Road.
City Secretary Chapa stated the Planning Commission and staff recommended the
approval of a "R -1B" One -family Dwelling District.
No one spoke in opposition to the zoning change. Ms. Cooper made a motion to close
the public hearing, seconded by Mr. Scott, and passed. City Secretary Chapa polled the
Council for their votes as follows:
31 ORDINANCE NO. 026698
Amending the Zoning Ordinance, upon application by Staples Development, LLC, by
changing the zoning map in reference to 3.680 acres out of the Nueces River Irrigation
Park Annex No. 2, from "F -R" Farm Rural to "B-4" General Business District with a 0.801
acre 50 foot "B -1A" Buffer to the rear on Tract 1 and 16.16 acres from "F -R" Farm Rural
to "R -1C" One -family Dwelling District on Tract 2; amending the Comprehensive Plan to
account for any deviations from the existing Comprehensive Plan.
An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved
with the following vote: Garrett, Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez,
Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
Mayor Garrett referred to Item 32, and a motion was made, seconded, and passed to
open the public hearing on the following zoning case:
Case No. 0106-08, Staples Development, LLC: A change of zoning from a "F -R" Farm -
Rural District to a "B-4" General Business District on Tract 1 and "F -R" Farm -Rural
District to a "R -1C" One -family Dwelling District on Tract 2 resulting from Tract 1 -
agricultural use to commercial development; Tract 2 - from agricultural use to single
family residences on lots with a minimum area of 4,500 -square feet. The property is
located at Tract 1 being 4.48 acres and Tract 2 being 16.16 acres out of Nueces River
Minutes — Regular Council Meeting
March 21. 2006 — Page 14
Irrigation Park Annex No. 2, located north of Northwest Boulevard and 225 feet east of
Trinity River Drive/FM 1889. (Tabled 02/28/06)
City Secretary Chapa mentioned that this case had been tabled on February 28, 2006.
He stated that the Planning Commission and staff recommended the following zoning: Tract 1 -
Approval of the "B-4" General Business District along the front area of the subject property and
denial of the "B-4" General Business District along the rear 50 feet of the property and in lieu
thereof, approval of a "B -1A" Neighborhood Business District along the rear 50 feet of the
subject property; Tract 2 - Approval of the "R -1C" One -family Dwelling District.
No one spoke in opposition to the zoning change. Ms. Cooper made a motion to close
the public hearing, seconded by Mr. Kelly, and passed.
Mr. Kelly stated that when the Council first considered the case on February 28, he had
reservations about the proposed "R -1C" zoning on Tract 2 because the density could adversely
affect existing drainage problems in the river basin area. In addition, he said the plat for the
development did not show a connection to an arterial; rather, the traffic was routed through
existing neighborhoods, which could create an undue traffic burden. He asked if the developer
had addressed these concerns.
Assistant Director of Development Services Michael Gunning replied that the item was
tabled to allow staff to determine the number of lots in the proposed subdivision that would be
greater or less than 6,000 square -feet. He reported that the 69 lots in the proposed subdivision
were 6,500 square feet or larger. He consulted with the applicant, Mr. Ward, and advised him
that staff would be recommending the "R -1B" zoning. Mr. Gunning explained that the miscue
was that the application for the rezoning went through to the Planning Commission when the
initial request was "R -1C" but when they submitted the preliminary plat after the commission
made a recommendation, the minimum lot size did adhere to the "R -1C" zoning district lot size,
a minimum of 4,500 square feet. Therefore, staff was recommending the denial of the "R -1C"
district and in lieu thereof approval of an "R -1B". He said the applicant agreed with staff's
recommendation.
Mr. Kelly asked if Mr. Ward agreed with staff's recommendation on Tract 1 to create a
`B -1A" buffer zone between the business uses and the residential uses. Mr. Gunning replied
affirmatively, explaining that the "B -1A" district, at the rear of the subject property, would require
landscaping and a minimum 50 -feet buffer to protect the residential development.
Mr. Kelly spoke in support of staffs recommendation, but emphasized that he wanted
staff to be vigilant about monitoring the drainage issue. He asked if staff had received any
preliminary engineering reports. Mr. Gunning replied negatively, but said staff was aware of the
drainage issue, and the access issue to Northwest Boulevard. He said consulting engineers
were working with TxDOT to create another roadway entrance at Northwest Boulevard that
would ultimately revise the preliminary to show a road connection to F.M. 624 that would serve
the neighborhood and keep the business traffic out of the existing neighborhoods.
Mr. Kelly also pointed out that the proposed subdivision was located uphill from the
Wood River subdivision, which had a private drainage plan. The drainage ditches were owned
by the subdivision; therefore, if the developer planned to route drainage through the subdivision,
he would need to contact Wood River.
Mr. Garcia stated that he understood the developer knew he had to speak with the Wood
River subdivision about the drainage issue. Mr. Gunning replied that the staff had received an
Minutes — Regular Council Meeting
March 21 2006 — Page 15
approved preliminary plat. and had required the developer to address the drainage issues,
including the upstream drainage into Wood River. He believed the developer understood that
he would have to work with the Wood River subdivision, but he would clarify the issue with him.
Mr. Garcia emphasized that the outstanding issues needed to be addressed at the platting
ordinance stage, not afterwards.
Mr. Kelly added that the drainage right-of-way at the end of River Walk Drive was a
detention pond that could adequately handle drainage for the drive itself, but would be
overwhelmed with any additional drainage from the proposed development. Mr. Gunning
replied affirmatively, saying the developer would have to address this issue. Mr. Kelly
suggested that they could run an underground pipe to release the drainage to Northwest
Boulevard, and Mr. Garcia agreed. Mr. Gunning answered that TxDOT had restrictions on how
much water can drain back on the roadway. The preliminary plat identified a large tract of land
to be used for either a detention or retention pond, but he pointed out that staff had not received
the construction plans. Mr. Kelly replied that looking at the retention pond in the plat, he was
concerned that the developer planned to dump water into the private drainage system
downstream.
Mr. Kelly made a motion to amend the ordinance to reflect staffs recommendation for
the denial of the "R -1C" zoning and in lieu thereof, the approval of "R -1B" zoning on Tract 2,
seconded by Mr. Garcia, and passed. City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes
on the amended ordinance as follows:
32. ORDINANCE NO. 026699
Amending the Zoning Ordinance, upon application by Staples Development, LLC, by
changing the zoning map in reference to 3.680 acres out of the Nueces River Irrigation
Park Annex No. 2, from "F -R" Farm Rural to "B-4" General Business District with a 0.801
acre 50 foot "B -1A" Buffer to the rear on Tract 1 and 16.16 acres from "F -R" Farm Rural
to "R 1C" "R -1B" One -family Dwelling District on Tract 2; amending the Comprehensive
Plan to account for any deviations from the existing Comprehensive Plan.
An emergency was declared, and the foregoing ordinance was passed and approved as
amended with the following vote: Garrett, Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison,
Marez, Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
Mayor Garrett referred to Item 33 as follows:
Case No. 0206-02, Chili Pepper Properties, Inc., Gary Cadena, and Timothy Lawson :
A change in zoning from a "R -1B" One -family Dwelling District to an "A-2" Apartment
House District. The property being 11.4 acres out of West's Laguna Madre Place Tract
A, Lots 1-5, Tract B, Lots 1 and 4-8, Tract C, Lots 1-6 and 8-11, Tract 15 (replat),
Laguna Madre Acres Tracts 13 and 14, Volume 1363, Page 449, located west of Laguna
Shores Road and McNelly Street intersection and south of Glenoak Drive.
City Secretary Chapa stated the Planning Commission and staff recommended the
approval of an "A-2" Apartment House District.
Mr. Chapa also stated that the applicant had submitted a written request to table the
item until April 11. The applicant was requesting additional time to seek an amiable solution
with the neighbors and to answer any unresolved questions. Mr. Chesney made a motion to
table the item until April 11 and seconded by Ms. Cooper.
Minutes — Regular Council Meeting
March 21 2006 — Page 16
Mr. Scott apologized to the residents who were in attendance today for tabling the item,
but explained that the Council did not usually turn down a request to table an item. He thought
the opportunity for more dialogue was always beneficial, regardless of the outcome.
Mr. Chapa polled the Council for their votes on Mr. Chesney's motion to table, and it
passed unanimously.
33. TABLED UNTIL APRIL 11, 2006
*************
Mayor Garrett deviated from the agenda, and referred to Item 35, a presentation
regarding the Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) fare study and fare recommendations.
Director of Operations David Seiler stated the RTA fare study was initiated two years ago, and
had taken the proposed fare increases under close consideration. The RTA Board of Directors
had not officially taken a position on the final fare recommendations, but would do so in two
weeks. The Board had asked staff to initiate the study and move it forward, emphasizing that
public involvement was crucial to the process. Today's presentation was intended to share
staff's recommendations. He pointed out that the Board of Directors would not make the final
decision on the fare increase; rather, the Local Government Fare Review Committee, comprised
in part of five City Council members, would decide. Thus, the Council would be asked to make
appointments to the committee today as well.
Mr. Seiler explained why the RTA was considering a fare change. In the entire history of
the organization, the RTA had never initiated a fixed route fare increase, but did pass a fare
increase in 1999 for the "B -Line", a paratransit service. He said the RTA's expenses had risen,
particularly for fuel, yet sales tax revenues were relatively flat over the last three years. The
rider share of expenses was declining as the service has been increasing, saying that the
"farebox recovery ratio" was down from 10 percent to 6.3 percent. Finally, he said the RTA had
the lowest fares in the state; of any agency their size, he said they had practically the lowest
base fares in the country.
Mr. Seiler discussed the ways the RTA had adjusted to increasing costs without fare
increases over time as follows: electrical cooperative agreement; low administrative expenses
(9%); tightening of budget practices; service adjustments each year; more fuel-efficient vehicles;
cooperative bus purchasing; and coordinated capital improvements.
Mr. Seiler provided a chart comparison of U.S. and Canadian transit system fares,
pointing out that 50 percent of the fares were over $1.00, 27.5 percent were $1.00, and 10.4
percent were 75 cents. He said Corpus Christi was in the lowest fifth percentile for fares in the
U.S. and Canada.
Minutes — Regular Council Meeting
March 21, 2006 — Page 17
Mr. Seiler also referred to a chart comparing Corpus Christi's base, student, transfer,
and paratransit fares with other peer cities. Corpus Christi consistently had the lowest fares
across the board
Mr. Seiler also provided base fare comparisons in Texas and outside of Texas. In
Texas, the average rate for fixed routes was 88 cents, and $1.52 for paratransit routes; outside
Texas, the average rate for fixed routes was $1.06, and $1.39 for paratransit routes. The RTA,
by contrast, charged 50 cents for fixed routes and 75 cents for paratransit routes. Mr. Seiler
pointed out that the RTA's paratransit fee was $17.00 a trip.
Mr. Seiler covered the goals of fare study and fare increase as follows: to simplify the
fare structure; to minimize ridership Toss from fare increase; to keep fares proportionate to real
costs of services; to increase incentives from the "B -Line" to fixed route; provide alternatives to
paying base fares plus transfer with day passes; to minimize the need for future fare changes;
and to increase "fare recovery"
Mr. Seiler reviewed the proposed bus fares for fixed routes as follows: current adult
base fare — 50 cents, recommended fare — 75 cents; current student rate — 25 cents, proposed
rate — 35 cents; seniors and persons with disabilities would remain at 25 cents during peak
hours and 10 cents at midday and a 25 cent fare on Saturdays and Sundays. He stated that
transfers were currently free of charge, but staff was recommending a 10 -cent fee for all riders
except seniors and persons with disabilities to rectify abuses in the system. Finally, Mr. Seiler
explained that Saturday fares would change from 25 cents to 75 cents; Sunday fares from 50
cents to 75 cents.
In response to Mr. Noyola's concern about the proposed charge for transfers, Mr. Seiler
said if the rider traveled more than two round trips, the proposed $1.75 day pass would be less
expensive. The day pass would allow riders to ride the bus as many times as they wished for
the day.
Mr. Seiler reviewed the proposed bus fares for the trolley routes as follows: #79
Downtown Trolley — current: free, recommended: 25 cents; #94 Port A. trolley: current — free,
recommended — 25 cents; #75 Bayfront: current — 50 cents, recommended — 75 cents; and #78
Corpus Christi Beach: current — 50 cents, recommended — 75 cents. He explained that the
RTA was considering a charge for the downtown and Port Aransas trolley routes to address
problems with riders who rode primarily to escape the climate, with no real destination. In
response to Mr. Noyola's concern about downtown employees who ride the trolley, he said the
RTA was proposing a Lunch Trolley in the summer to transport riders from uptown to downtown.
Mr Seiler discussed proposed bus fares for the express routes as follows: Park and
Ride Routes to CCAD/NAS: over 20 miles - $1.00 to $1.25, under 20 miles — 75 cents to $1.25;
#67 Bishop/Driscoll/Gregory - $1.00 to $1.25; #65 Padre Island connector - $1.00 to $1.25; and
the Port A FLEXI-B — 50 cents to $1.25
Mr. Seiler covered the proposed bus fares for the "B -Line" as follows: within 3/4 mile — 75
cents to $1 25; surcharge would remain $2.00.
Mr. Seiler described the RTA's public outreach efforts, including public meetings, City
Council presentations, senior citizen center presentations, and passenger surveys at transit
stations. The results of the survey were as follows: 84 percent of respondents felt the existing
fares were about right. the fare structure was too confusing (39 percent), and the RTA should
raise fares to cover its expenses (32 to 74 percent).
Minutes - Regular Council Meeting
March 21. 2006 - Page 18
Mr. Seiler described the composition of the Local Government Fare Review Committee,
noting that state legislation prescribed the process as follows: five members from the City
Council selected by the Council; three members from Commissioners Court of the largest
county in the area, selected by the Commissioners Court; and three mayors of smaller
municipalities located in the authority, selected by either the mayors of all the municipalities
(except the principal municipality) or the mayor of the most populous municipality (other than the
principal municipality).
Mr. Seiler reviewed the proposed timeline to complete the rate fare study process as
follows: City Council and Commissioners Court presentations - March 2006; final public
outreach and public hearings - March/April 2006; final Board approval - April 2006; Local
Government Fare Review Committee final approval - late April 2006; print schedules/rider
education - May 2006: and implementation - May 29, 2006.
In conclusion, Mr. Seiler stated that the increased revenue from a fare increase would be
used to offset exceptional cost increases, minimizing the need for service reductions. He said
the fare increase would also add customer amenities.
Mr. Marez asked if the RTA had programs to assist riders who could not afford the fare
increases. Mr. Seiler answered affirmatively, stating that the RTA distributed free bus tokens to
65 community agencies to assist low-income and unemployed riders.
Mr. Marez spoke in support of encouraging citizens to use mass transit. Mr. Seiler
added that the RTA was promoting a "choice rider" program by expanding services into areas
that were "underserved".
Mr Garcia spoke in support of the city and RTA's joint venture to fund street
improvements, especially for shade structures and turnouts at bus stops.
Mr. Noyola asked how much extra revenue the RTA projected that they would receive
from the fare increase. Mr. Seiler replied the RTA anticipated an extra $200,000 in revenues.
Mr. Noyola joked that he was hoping the revenues would be higher so the RTA could provide
more assistance for street repairs. Mr. Seiler replied the RTA spends approximately $1.5 million
on city/RTA street improvement projects per year.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
Mayor Garrett opened discussion on Item 36 regarding appointments to the Local
Government Fare Review Committee. Mayor Garrett suggested appointing himself, and
Council Members Bill Kelly (District 1), John Marez (District 2), Jesse Noyola (District 3), and
Jerry Garcia (At large) to serve on the committee. Mr. Chesney made a motion to appoint as
recommended by Mayor Garrett, seconded by Mr. Scott, and passed.
36. MOTION NO. 2006-088
Motion appointing Henry Garrett, Jerry Garcia, Bill Kelly, John Marez, and Jesse Noyola
to serve on the Local Government Fare Review Committee.
The foregoing motion was passed and approved with the following vote: Garrett,
Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kelly, Kinnison, Marez, Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye".
*************
Minutes — Regular Council Meeting
March 21. 2006 — Page 19
Mayor Garrett referred to Item 34, a quarterly report from the Corpus Christi Regional
Economic Development Corporation (EDC). EDC Chairman of the Board Jim Barnette
presented on behalf of CEO Roland Mower. Mr. Barnette reported that the EDC was engaged
in four major initiatives as follows: a follow-up on the January Economic Summit; recruiting new
industries to relocate to the city; surveying the needs of existing industries; and working with
Forward Corpus Christi on a number of project.
Regarding the Economic Summit follow-up, the EDC had decided to hold mini -summits
with nine separate industries, such as the Port Industries, health care, and hospitality. He said
five mini -summits had already been held, and the remaining four would be held soon.
Mr. Barnette stated that he would like to reinforce comments he has made regarding the
EDC's opinion of the hospitality and tourism industries. Although it had been reported, based
on a consultant's remarks at the summit, that the EDC dismissed the importance of the
hospitality and tourism industries because of low wages, he said the EDC truly recognized the
importance of these industries to the city's economy. While these industries did not create the
highest paying jobs, they did not provide a substantial amount of revenue into the economy.
The consultant did point out, however, that to increase the area's average wage, the area
needed to recruit higher paying jobs. As a result, he said the consultant's report would include
suggestions on how to target specific industries that were compatible with the area and would
increase the average wage.
Mr Barnette reported that the consultant had also provided a new incentive matrix
providing criteria for the disbursement of 4A funds for job creation. He said the EDC would be
meeting with the 4A Board soon for discussion.
Mr. Barnette stated that a draft of the consultant's final report was due in June, but the
Board was trying to accelerate the deadline if possible. Once the report was completed, he said
the EDC would bring it to the appropriate authorities for approval.
Regarding the recruitment of new industries, Mr. Barnette stated the EDC received three
to five inquiries a week from major players in the industry. Staff reviewed the inquiries and
selected those that seemed the most feasible and then replied with a tailored response.
With regard to the existing industry survey, he said the EDC had received the survey
results and were following up with the respondents. He said the EDC would provide a report on
the survey results soon.
In conclusion, Mr. Barnette reported that Mr. Mower had been working with the Port of
Corpus Christi on the LaQuinta Port Container facility. He said the Regadas Company, the
largest toll road builder and owner in the world, had expressed interest in the project.
Additionally, Mr. Mower had been working with the BRAC Committee, most recently in San
Diego, to discuss the logistics involved in base closures, as well as any available development
funding.
Ms. Cooper asked for an update on a proposed trip to China for trade purposes. Mr.
Barnette replied he just received an invitation yesterday. Ms. Cooper added that the trip was
planned from May 20 to May 30, at a cost of $2,400. The goal was to match trade partners who
wished to do business together. She said Director of Economic Development Irma Caballero
was organizing the trip and could provide more information.
Minutes — Regular Council Meeting
March 21. 2006 — Page 20
Mr Garcia and Mr. Noyola both emphasized the importance of the tourism and
hospitality industries to the city's economy.
*************
Mayor Garrett called for public comment. Mr. Gabe Lozano, Jr., 4602 Mokry, spoke
against the dismissal of three Oso Golf Course employees, Brenda Gonzales, Dan Barder, and
Scott Gauisen.
follows:
*************
Mayor Garrett announced the executive session, which was listed on the agenda as
Executive session pursuant to Texas Government Code, Section 551.074, Personnel
Matters to deliberate the appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties,
discipline, or dismissal of Municipal Court Judge John Rank with possible action related
thereto in open session.
The Council went into executive session.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
The Council returned from recess. Mayor Garrett called for a brief recess to present
proclamations. He said the Council would return from recess to discuss Item 37 regarding the
proposed beach closure ordinance, which was posted for discussion at 1:30 p.m.
The Council returned from recess briefly to hear public comment from Mr. Tony Hartwell,
1000 Carmel Parkway, regarding his concern that the Animal Care and Police departments did
not respond to calls about hit-and-run accidents involving animals and vehicles. He also said
the Animal Control department was inadequately staffed. Finally, Mr. Hartwell stated that City
Manager Noe had refused to discuss the situation with him. Mr. Noe disagreed, saying he
speak briefly with Mr. Hartwell while they were on the elevator together, and asked him to make
an appointment with his assistant. Mr. Hartwell replied that this was false.
The Council went into recess.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
The Council returned from recess. Mayor Garrett opened discussion on Item 37
regarding the proposed beach closure ordinance. City Manager Noe stated the proposed
ordinance would be passed in two readings, the first being held today. His presentation
included information on the following issues:
Mr. Noe reviewed the order of the presentation as follows: ordinance highlights and
policy issues; improvements north of the seawall; development plans north of the seawall;
improvements south of the seawall; development plans south of the seawall; status of Packery
Channel TIF; projected improvement costs and funding; and other issues.
Minutes — Regular Council Meeting
March 21. 2006 — Page 21
Regarding the ordinance itself, Mr. Noe stated that it defined a "pedestrian safe beach",
designated certain areas as "pedestrian safe", identified requirements for implementation, and
called for a charter election to require a public vote on any future designations.
Mr. Noe further described the provisions of the pedestrian safe beach as follows: no
vehicles and limits on motor powered vehicles; fires, camping, mobile vending, and livestock
prohibited; dogs must be on a leash; adjoining owners may be exclusive vendor if they provide
maintenance and guards; and adjoining owners must provide assistance for parking, facilities,
and access for disabled.
Mr. Noe explained that three areas were designated pedestrian -safe beaches,
contingent upon specific requirements being met, as follows: north of the seawall, seaward of
the seawall, and south of the seawall.
Mr. Noe provided a status report on the area southward of the seawall. He said the
parking lot construction was complete, with final landscaping underway. Staff had opened bids
on the construction for ADA access to the beach. The only items pending for implementation
were the adoption of the ordinance and Texas General Land Office (GLO) approval.
Regarding the area north of the seawall to Packery Channel, Mr. Noe stated a number of
provisions would need to be met before the pedestrian safe beach could be implemented,
namely the adoption of this ordinance and subsequent GLO approval. The city had committed
to construct a 300 -space parking lot, to construct restrooms and showers, and to provide ADA
access. In addition, a development requirement provided that the resort development had to
receive financing and a building permit, and begin vertical construction of improvements valued
at $75 million.
Mr Noe stated staff had provided a revise ordinance adding one additional trigger to
both the north and south reaches, namely the development and approval of a master plan for
the entire resort community. He said the additional requirement had been discussed with the
developer
Mr. Noe displayed a map of the developer's scheme and development plan for the area.
The plan called for a number of condominium units running along the beach side. The only
subleased area called for in the plan was for a marina development.
Mr. Noe described a number of elements from the development plan, which called for a
major destination resort. The city and developer would continue to discuss and refine the plan
over time The need for additional public amenities (restrooms, shade structures, etc.) will be
considered as part of that plan. The overall plan currently called for $500 million in development
over a seven- to ten-year period.
Mr. Noe discussed the development plan for the seawall south to Padre Balli Park. He
said a number of provisions would need to be met before the pedestrian safe beach could be
implemented, namely the adoption of this ordinance and subsequent GLO approval. The plan
included the construction of a parking lot, restrooms and showers, and access. The
development requirement was the acceptance of infrastructure for 100 lots and hotel site plus
the initiation of building construction.
Finally, Mr. Noe reported that the south reach development plan included a beachwalk
village, individual housing units part of resort rental pool, and a boutique and hotel as part of the
development plan.
Minutes — Regular Council Meeting
March 21 2006 — Page 22
Mr Noe also discussed the charter election element of the ordinance. The charter
amendment election would be called on November 7, 2006, contingent upon a public
referendum to restrict vehicle access on any beach, except the area from Packery Channel to
Padre Balli, without a public referendum. Regarding the Packery Channel to Padre Balli
exemption, he noted that if any requirement for the 7,400 feet pedestrian only beach was not
implemented, then the ordinance or charter provision would not be effective.
Mr Noe covered the current status of the Packery Channel Tax Increment Finance (TIF)
zone. Mr. Noe explained that the TIF was a financing vehicle for the project, in which the
increase in value from the area was used to the support of the cost of the improvements.
Currently, Mr. Noe reported that the TIF had performed had substantially ahead of staffs
projections. The property values of the area were currently $173.6 million, over $20 million
above projections. The city had issued $9.1 million in TIF -related bonds, and anticipated
issuing another $2.9 million to complete the project, in accordance with the original plan. He
said the city was still working with the U.S. Corps of Engineers on finalizing the project, noting
that the channel sustained damage from a number of summer storms that could increase costs.
Mr Noe stated that the cost for the north reach improvements was estimated at
$990,000 and the south reach improvements were estimated at $670,000, totaling $1.66 million
to be funded through the TIF. Given the projected value of the proposed improvements
required through the project "trigger" mechanisms, he said the city expected to be able to pay
for the project costs. He noted, however, that the proposed improvements would require an
amendment to the TIF Plan since they were not part of the original plan.
Mr. Noe concluded by pointing out that the proposed improvements would require
additional, ongoing maintenance requirements. Throughout the city's discussions with the
development team, staff made it clear that the city did not usually provide resort -level
maintenance activities. As a result, he anticipated that the development team would create a
master development agreement as part of the overall development. He said the team would
seek opportunities to create a Public Improvement District (PID) and other municipal
management districts as vehicles for the development to tax itself to pay for the cost of
enhanced maintenance.
Mr Chesney stated that at the last town hall meeting, it became apparent that a portion
of the community felt that access to the south jetty was insufficient. He asked staff to work with
the development team on improving access, possibly by widening the boardwalk and
transporting people to the beach with a tram. He asked staff to present possible solutions at the
next reading. Mr. Noe stated staff would discuss this with the team, and mentioned that the use
of a tram had been discussed before. He said the team wished to communicate that there
would be opportunities for the plan to be adjusted based on the final development plan. He said
staff had articulated the legal and GLO requirements for the project. As long as those
requirements were met, staff could work with them on access issues. He pointed out that the
cost estimates provided today were based on the current plan.
Mr Chesney asked why the charter amendment provision was in the proposed
ordinance. He said he disagreed with the inclusion of a charter amendment because it would tie
the hands of future Councils. He also asked whether it was possible to amend the charter to
allow the Council to place any issue on the ballot that they deemed appropriate, such as the
smoking ordinance or this issue.
Minutes — Regular Council Meeting
March 21 2006 — Page 23
Mr Noe replied the charter amendment provision was in the ordinance because in prior
discussions with the Council, a number of Council members indicated that they would not
support any ordinance unless a charter amendment was attached. He indicated that the
Council could remove the provision if they wished, but he included it because he felt the majority
of council was in support of this provision based on previous discussions.
Regarding Mr. Chesney's second question, City Attorney Fischer explained that if the
referendum process was already underway, the Council did not have the authority to bypass the
referendum process prior to completion and place an issue on the ballot. The Council could
propose an amendment, however, allowing them to place an issue on the ballot. Mr. Chesney
stated that he felt the Council should have the power to place an issue on the ballot if they felt it
was controversial.
In response to Mr Garcia's question about the south jetty parking lot, Mr. Noe stated
that as the developer reviewed the final plan, there would be opportunities to adjust and refine
the plans, as long as they complied with the required elements. The developer had agreed to
provide ADA parking to meet legal requirements, but any additional requirements would need to
be negotiated. He said the developer has asked for flexibility to move the parking lot if needed
based on how the master plan developed. He said the statute provided that the access roads at
the north and south end of the seawall could be moved 1,000 feet.
Mr. Garcia asked if it would be possible to begin construction on the north side of the
development first. He said if the south side was started first, then the whole area would be
cordoned off to vehicles. Mr. Paul Schexnailder, representing the developer, replied that the
current plan called for construction to begin on the south end first because it was the lower
density project, and it would provide a flow for market penetration. Mr. Noe added that the
presumption was that when the construction was completed, the city was required to abide by
state statutes. If the construction was completed before the ordinance or GLO approval
became effective, then the city would adhere to the law and the beach would remain open to
vehicular traffic.
Mr. Noyola asked questions about the beach access to the south jetty. Mr. Noe replied
that the total distance from the access road to the south jetty was 1,800 feet; adjusting for the
width of the parking lot, he said the total distance was 1,500 feet from the parking lot to the
south jetty. He said the parking lot would be free to the public. He asked if vehicles would be
allowed to park on the side of the road if the lot were full. Mr. Noe replied the access road was
public property, but he questioned whether the road was wide enough to accommodate
roadside parking. Mr. Noyola also asked if roadside parking would be allowed on Whitecap
Boulevard at the south end. Mr. Noe replied affirmatively, until the parking lot was developed.
Once the parking lot was in place, he said the plan was that the 1,200 -foot stretch from
Whitecap Boulevard to Access Road 4 would become a pedestrian safe beach. The master
plan for development called for another roadway that would connect Whitecap Boulevard to
Access Road 4 if the public wished to drive on the beach southward.
Mr. Noyola spoke in support of the charter amendment provision in the ordinance
because it would give the public the power to decide. He suggested that the developer could be
asked to pay for the cost of the election.
Mr. Kinnison thanked staff for including the "trigger" requirements in the ordinance. He
said he had assumed, however, that the north end of the resort by the Packery Channel would
be developed first. Mr. Schexanailder replied that the development team saw the project as a
singular unit, and did not consider it to have a south or north end. If the Council wished to
Minutes — Regular Council Meeting
March 21 2006 — Page 24
stipulate that the beach would not be closed to vehicular traffic unless both ends of the project
were developed, he would have no objection. He pointed out that the critical portion of the
project with regard to traffic patterns, as far as the state was concerned, was the north end of
the development. He believed that the south end of the project was farther along, so they
proposed beginning construction at this point. He said the development team had agreed to
provide a comprehensive master plan before the Council approved any action. Mr. Noe added
that if the Council wished, staff could include a provision to tie the north and south end projects
together.
Mr Kinnison asked if it would be possible to separate the charter amendment issue from
the current ordinance so it could be voted on separately. City Attorney Fischer answered
affirmatively, saying that he could make a motion today to adopt the ordinance except for
provisions related to the charter amendment election. Staff could then prepare two separate
ordinances, one on the charter amendment election and one on the beach ordinance, for
consideration next week. Mr. Kinnison stated that he would make a motion to that effect at the
appropriate time.
Mr. Kinnison felt it was important to separate the issues because he strongly disagreed
with the charter amendment provision. He felt it was bad public policy to bind future Councils on
these issues. He stated that the city had a good referendum process in place so this charter
amendment was not needed. He said he did not want to be the only city in the U.S. where
developers would have to engage in this process.
Mayor Garrett called for public comment. The following individuals spoke in support of
the proposed ordinance: Mike Carranco; Gail Hoffman, 3442 Paradise; Marco Gamboa, 314
Lakeridge, San Antonio, TX; Gladys Choyke, 15231 Cartagena; Bill Pettus, 102 Alta Plaza; Tom
Schmid, 319 Long Port; Dick Smith; Colleen McIntyre, 13714 Three Fathoms; Jimmy B.
Johnston, 15896 Punta Espada; Jack White, North Padre Island; Mikki Senkarik, 14226 Punta
Bonaire; Abel Alonzo; unidentified woman; Gail Boyton, 247 Rosebud; Juanita Keiko; Cathy
Banderwall; John Chandler; Damon Gibson; Kim Erwin, 13957 Dasmarinas; Billy Holmes,
14121 Jackfish; Kevin Kieschnick; Linda Walsh, 15350 Isabella Court; Linda Dasmares, 15366
Yardarm; Bob Shulte; Pat Kelly, 3701 Matthew; Alex Harris, 2138 Hwy. 286; Gene Guernsey,
6133 Tarafaya; unidentified gentleman; and John Trice, 13706 Tajamar.
The following individuals spoke against the proposed ordinance: Carlos Truan, 6902 Sir
Geraint; Cliff Slovik, 142 Whiteley; Lamest West, 13941 Man o' War; Pat Suter, 1002
Chamberlain; David Ryan, 14010 Rutter Court; Mr. Garcia, 1617 Woodmont; Carolyn Moon,
4902 Calvin; Joseph Farrah, 3242 Azores; Johnny French, 4417 Carlton; John Adams, 207
Katherine; Joe Lynch, 237 Mullet; Keeton Barnard, Austin, TX; Ellis Pickett, 405 Bowie, Liberty,
TX; Mike Murphy, 13521 Camino Plaza; Brian McCool; Wayne Ebbert, 13830 Seahorse; and
Michael McKutchon, 203 Jackson.
Mr John Bell spoke against the provision for a charter amendment in the ordinance,
saying it was bad public policy.
Mr. Neil McQueen, 4213 Estate, spoke in favor of the provision for a charter amendment
in the ordinance, but was opposed to the beach closure aspects.
Ms. Crystal Lyons, 13901 Cabana North, spoke in favor of improving ADA access to the
south jetty
Minutes — Regular Council Meeting
March 21, 2006 — Page 25
Mr Bill Kopecky, 3609 Topeka, spoke in favor of holding the charter amendment
election in April 2007 rather than November 2006.
Mr Paul Schexnailder commented that the proposed restrictions applied to resortgoers
as well as the citizens. Without restrictions, he said tourists could take their cars onto the 7,400 -
feet of beach, overcrowding the beach. He said the resort was concerned about beach usage,
maintenance, and appearance. The resort would be taxing itself to improve the roadways,
provide maintenance, and to supplement the city's efforts in those areas. He emphasized that
this was a public beach, not the resort's beach; thus, the development team was looking at
ways to provide public transportation to the south jetty. He said the method of transportation
would be an area of compromise and publicly discussed.
Mayor Garrett asked for Council comments. Ms. Cooper spoke in support of the
proposed ordinance. She said the creation of a pedestrian -only beach and economic
development was not mutually exclusive. She especially like the development "triggers" in the
ordinance that ensured that the developer had to meet certain requirements before the beach
could be closed to vehicles. Regarding the charter amendment provision, she said she was
ambivalent. She was not opposed to splitting the charter amendment issue from the beach
closure ordinance.
Mr Scott referred to Ms. Pat Suter's public comment regarding the status of Polliwog
Pond, near the O.N. Stevens Plant. Mr. Noe answered affirmatively, stating that Polliwog Pond
was not a commitment to mitigate another project.
Mr. Scott referred to Mr. John Bell's public comment regarding a number of loopholes in
the ordinance's charter amendment provision. City Attorney Fischer replied the language could
be amended to state "permanent" or "temporary" before the words "restricting" or "restricted".
Mr. Noe added the language could be added for the second reading.
Mr. Scott agreed with Mr. Kopecky's comment that the charter amendment election
should be held in April 2007, not November 2006. He felt it would be preferable to combine
costs by holding the election in the spring, rather than holding the election alone in November.
He understood from Mayor Garrett that if the city held an election alone, the cost would be
approximately $200,000. He said previous discussions called for holding the Crime Control and
Prevention District election in November, but this issue could also be held in April.
Mr. Scott spoke in support of the proposed ordinance, saying it was an opportunity to
move the community toward greatness. He felt that a pedestrian only beach was crucial to
attracting the proposed resort development, providing an economic boon to the community.
Additionally, he felt that the community deserved to have a pedestrian only beach that would be
free to the public. He pointed out that currently, if a person chose to drive on the beach, they
would have to purchase a $12 pass. The proposed amenities were also a tremendous benefit,
and once again, would come at no cost to the citizens. Mr. Scott said the community could
have it all, a pedestrian only beach and the ability to drive on the beaches.
Mr Scott spoke in support of the charter amendment provision in the ordinance.
Mr Noyola spoke strongly in support of the charter amendment provision. He asked
staff to work with Mr. Bell to incorporate his suggestions. He said the proposed resort
development would benefit the community, which meant that District 3 would benefit. He took
exception to some of the public's statements that the Council was being bought by the
developers, saying that he could never be bought.
Minutes — Regular Council Meeting
March 21 2006 — Page 26
Mr. Chesney stated that he had admitted to making a mistake by not supporting the
beach closure on the first go -round. He took exception to misleading comments made by Mr.
McCutchon in his public comment. He said the proposed project would add much-needed
amenities to the area. He pointed out that he had issues with the access to the south jetty, and
he had asked staff to address the issue. Mr. Chesney stated that this issue was an opportunity
for the community to define itself, and becoming a world-class tourist destination was not an
objectionable thing. While the tourism industry itself did not attract high -paying jobs, he said it
could create jobs in construction and other areas to benefit the community.
Mr. Chesney spoke in support of the proposed ordinance, but said he was torn on the
charter amendment issue. At this point, he was leaning toward opposing the charter
amendment.
Mr. Kinnison spoke in support of creating the pedestrian -only beach because it promoted
public safety and economic development. He said the only thing that would allow future
Councils to deliver services and lower tax rates was through economic growth. He spoke
against the charter amendment because he did not feel it was good public policy. He preferred
to split the issues into two separate ordinances, and said he would make a motion to that effect.
Mr. Garcia spoke in support of the proposed ordinance because the development would
benefit the community financially. He said ten years from now, everyone will be saying that they
supported the project because it had been such a boon to the city. He said it was time for the
city to be in the forefront of growth. Regarding the charter amendment issue, he said he had
mixed feelings. He asked staff to continue discussing the access to the south jetty.
Mr. Marez stated that his primary concern was with preserving public access to the
beaches, and thus he was quite concerned with creating a private beach. He also expressed
concern that the parking lots were too far away from the jetties, and the developer needed to act
in good faith by addressing this issue.
With regard to the job development issue, Mr. Marez pointed out that he had been on
the job market more recently than the rest of the Council. While the resort was going to create
jobs in the community, they were not the types of jobs that would keep graduates in the area
Regarding the charter election, Mr. Marez asked Mr. Chapa how much it would cost the
city to hold a joint election for the county. He questioned the accuracy of the $200,000 figure
that Mr. Scott had quoted. Mr. Chapa replied that a stand-alone election would cost
approximately $200,000, while a joint election would cost approximately $500,000 for all the
entities involved. If four entities were involved, then the $500,000 cost would be split four ways,
totaling approximately $125,000. He said the county had recently provided these estimates, but
could change because there was no history with the new equipment being used. He said staff
did know that most election costs were doubling for stand-alone elections.
In conclusion, Mr. Marez stated that he supported economic development in the city, but
there were many unanswered questions remaining. Thus, he stated that he could not support
this issue because most of his constituents felt the project would not benefit them. He said he
looked forward to discussing the issue next week, especially addressing the charter amendment
issue. He spoke in support of holding the charter election in November, when more citizens
were likely to vote.
Minutes — Regular Council Meeting
March 21 2006 — Page 27
Mayor Garrett stated that he would like to put this issue to rest with the least amount of
hard feelings. He said people were dwelling on their differences regarding this issue, but he
said everyone could agree that they wanted a vibrant economy, more jobs, and more
development. He said there was no hidden agenda; council members were going to vote to as
their districts wished. Finally, he said he felt that it was worth giving up vehicular access to
400 feet of beach for the return the city would receive on its investment.
A discussion ensued on the cost of the election if it was held in April or in November.
Mr. Chapa replied that if the city held Council election in April 2007, they would spend $200,000.
If they also held a joint election on the charter amendment issue in November, then the city
would spend an additional $125,000. Mr. Noe added that the Council had discussed holding the
Crime Control District election in November.
Mr. Scott made a motion to amend the ordinance to move the charter amendment
election date to the first Saturday in April, 2007, seconded by Mr. Chesney.
Mr. Noyola asked that if the beach closure ordinance was passed on second reading
and then a referendum petition was initiated, when would the issue be placed on the ballot. Mr.
Chapa replied that if the petitioners submitted an eligible petition within 60 days, the next
uniform election date was in November. If the petitioners submitted the petition within 60 and
90 days, then the next uniform election date would be April 2007. Mr. Scott stated that if the
petitioners submitted the petition in time for the November election, the Council could amend
the ordinance to place the charter amendment issue on the November ballot, too.
Mr Chapa polled the Council for their votes on Mr. Scott's motion as follows: Garrett,
Cooper, Chesney, Garcia, Kinnison, Marez, Noyola, and Scott, voting "Aye"; Marez and Noyola
voting "No": Kelly abstained. The motion to amend passed.
Mr. Kinnison made a motion to amend the ordinance to separate the charter amendment
provision from the beach closure issue so it could be voted on separately. The motion died for
lack of a second.
Mr. Noe said staff would incorporate the changes submitted today in the second reading,
including the distance from the south jetty; tying the south and north ends of the development;
and including Mr. Bell's suggestions regarding the charter amendment.
City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes on the first reading ordinance as
amended as follows:
37. FIRST READING ORDINANCE
Amending the Code of Ordinances, City of Corpus Christi, Chapter 10, Beachfront
Management and Construction, regarding the elimination of vehicular traffic on the
beach seaward of the Padre Island seawall and between Packery Channel and Padre
Balli Park; the direction of travel between Whitecap Boulevard and Padre Balli Park;
establishing and regulating Pedestrian Safe Beach; establishing a Pedestrian Safe area;
ordering a Special Election to be held on November 7, 2006, in the City of Corpus Christi
on the question of amending the Charter of the City of Corpus Christi to provide for
restriction of vehicular access to the public beach after approval in a public referendum;
providing for procedures for holding such election; providing for notice of election and
publication thereof; providing for establishment of branch early polling places;
designating polling place locations: authorizing a joint election with Nueces County; and
Minutes — Regular Council Meeting
March 21. 2006 — Page 28
enacting provisions incident and relating to the subject and purpose of this ordinance;
providing for penalties; providing for severance; directing the City Manager to process
any changes to the Comprehensive Plan, other plans, or ordinances to make such
consistent with this ordinance; providing for publication; and providing for the effective
date of the sections of this ordinance.
The foregoing ordinance was passed and approved on its first reading as amended with
the following vote: Garrett, Chesney, Cooper, Garcia, Kinnison, Noyola and Scott,
voting "Aye"; Marez voting "No"; Kelly abstained.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
Mayor Garrett called for the City Manager's report. Mr. Noe stated he had no report
today.
Mayor Garrett reported that he had asked the City Manager to begin organizing the mid-
term Council retreat. He also said the City Manager was planning a tour of the new landfill site.
There being no further business to come before the Council, Mayor Garrett adjourned
the meeting at 5:07 p.m. on March 21. 2006.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *