Loading...
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. * * * * * * * * * * * * *