Min CC 05/06/1982 CIBOLO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 6 1982
1. CALL TO ORDER: 7 p.m. Mayor Ed Ling
- 2. INVOCATION: Mayor Ling
3. QUORUM CHECK: Mayor Ling, Councilmembers: Nirider, Smith, Niemietz, Swenson, Little.
City Secretary Barbara Glenewinkel.
4. MINUTES: Sig Swenson (Marge Smith) moved the minutes of the ApFil 15th Council meeting
be approved. All approved.
5. NEW BUSINESS:
A. Mr. Frank Hamm of Green Valley Trailer Park attended the meeting to
discuss the possibility of the city help with the re-location of GVEC
poles in the street easement of his property. The easement is evident-
ly not recorded. When GVEC checked for property lines for the location
of the poles the property line was shown to be 5 feet into the street
easement. This occured when Mr. Hamm and the people he sold parts of
his property to gave 5 ft. for a wider road. After a discussion it
was decided to consult GVEC.
B. Land Use Symposium
Marge Smith, Councilmember (and Claude Smith, P. & Z. Board Chm.)
recently attended a Land Use Symposium in San Marcos. Each council®
- member received a report of the symposium andalso a summary by
Marge and Claude concerning their feelings on the ETJ of Cibolo and
i what other cities were doing to solve the problems created by a
large ETJ. The subject was tabled for further discussion at a later
meeting.
C. Mayor Ling reported on his telephone meeting with Mr. Vaughan
regarding the easements in Cibolo North Unit Threes and with GVEC.
Mr. Vaughan stated he had no problems with the city wanting the
ea.semitnt to be in the ffront. GVEC was not in favor and stated
several reasons. Among them were 1) GVEC does not want the res-
ponsibility of extending the underground lines from easement to
house; 2) GVEC doesnot want the meters underground;3) The pedestals
in front are objectionable to some; 4) GVEC doesnot want to put
the meters on front of house. The best solution it seemed is to
put up a fence across easement with gates and therefore everyone
would know it is an easement granted to utility companies and not
an alley for public use.
D. Cibolo North Unit Three Plat
Jo Nirider (Sig Swenson) moved the council approve the Cibolo North
Unit Three Subdivision plat subject to the engineer's recommendation
that an 81t sewer line be installed instead of 61r line. It was
stated that if there is a problems it can be re-submitted to P & Z.
E. Drainage Problem on North Main
Mr. Ling reported that he had spoken with Andrew Tolle about the drain-
age problem on North Main and that Mr. Tolle stated he could give him
a breakdown on the costs but not at the present time since he will be
on a job in San Antonio most of the time; but that his equipment would
not •be tied up, so as soon as possible he will have the cost. Mr.
Mullins is to establish the appropriate size culvert needed. Mr. Ling
stated he contacted an attorney concerning the water drainage across .
the property east of the Bowling Alley and was told that since this is
a natural drainage the attorney did not feel it was necessary to con-
tact the owners concerning it but that he would investigate further and
if this was necessary that he would contact Mr. Ling. Mr. Ling said if
the council prefered he would ask the attorney to put his opinion in
writing.
F. WATER RATES again were discussed. No action was taken. Mr.Ling
�. discussed water rate data supplied by Garcia & Wright,Engineers.
Mr. Wright had given a figure of .98/1000 gal. for water furnished
by Green Valley Water Supply Corp. Mr. Ling stated he would like to
discuss this matter further before the contracts are finialized be-
tween the GVWS or the Cityof Schertz.
G. Jo Nirider (Marge Smith) made a motion the city pass Resolution
#1049 in support of the Hospital to be built in Live Oak,Tx.
All approved. -
May 6, 1982 council meeting, cont. . .. .
H. An Ordinance establishing and Extra-Territorial Jurisdiction line
between the cities of Cibolo and Schertz was read by Mayor Ling.
Marge Smith (Fred Niemietz) moved the council approved Ordinance
#293 establishing the ETJ lines on the east side of FM 1103 north of
Green Valley Road. A copy of the ordinance is attached to the original
minutes in the Minute Book.
All approved.
I. Sig Swenson (Bill Little) made a motion that Mayor Betty Jean Jones
of Seguin receive the City vote for the board of the Alamo Area Council
of Governments. All approved.
J. Marge Smith (Jo Nirider) made a motion that a public hearing be set
for June 3, 1982 at 6:30 p.m. for the purpose of input into the dis-
annexation of the Tudyk, Jasek, and Wehe property on Wiederstein Road.
All approved.
K. Fred Niemietz (Sig Swenson) made a motion that Resolution #1050 and
the Service Plan be approved on the proposed annexation of property
on Green Valley Road. The property to be annexed is 41.174 acres of
land belonging to Stark, Barr, and Roberts. ,
All approved.
L. The final reading of Ordinance #292 annexing 46.074 acres of land on
Green Valley Road belonging to Pfeil, Pfeil, and Dean was held.
Sig Swenson (Fred Niemietz) moved that Ordinance #292 be approved.
All approved.
' M. Mayor Ling read a proclamation proclaiming May 10-15 as City
Secretary's Week.
N. Sig Swenson suggested that the water deposits be refunded to water
customers after 2 years of unblemished water bill payment records.
This was discussed by the Council.
Jo Nirider (Marge Smith) moved the matter be tabled until the next
work session.
All approved.
0. A workshop was set for May 13, 1982 at 7 p.m. with the city attorney
in attendance if possible.
6. BILLS TO BE APPROVED:
Sig Stenson (Jo Nirider) moved the bills be approved for payment.
All approved.
7. ADJOURNMENT: 10:30 p.m. by Mayor Ling.
ED
LING, YOR, C -OF CIBOLO
BARBARA GLENEWINKEL, CITY SECRETARY
R
Motes on Land-Use Control Symposium for Local Governments
The following are notes on a symposium on Land Use Control Problems of Local Governments
in areas of rapid economic development sponsored by Southwest Texas State University
and Region 7 & 8, Texas Eity Management Association on April 17, 1782, 11th Floor, J.C.
Kellam Building, Southwest Texas State University, San Marcos, Tx. A list of topics and
speakers is attached.
Submitted by
Marge Smith, City Councilmember
Claude Smith, Chairman, Planning & Zoning Comm.
The keynote of the symposium was set by the City Manager of San Marcos, who related
their own experience in regard to being sued over planning and subdivision decisions.
Much of the information given during the symposium related to how to prevent cities
from being taken to court. In the case of San Marcos, they were taken to court be-
cause they were accused of acting irresponsibly- by disapproving a plat of minimum stan-
dards and changing the standards after the developer had already done his work on the
plat. The City of San Marcos and the city council and the planning & zoning members
individually were cited in the suit. The vote had been unanimous, therefore, they were
all cited. Settlement was made out of court for $15,000.00 - damages to the builder
for expenses incurred.
The first panel in the symposium consisted of "The Political, Social & Economic
Context of Land Use Control."
Decisions by Planning & Zoning members and by the City Council can be influenced
by four different groups:
1. Political action groups (such as COPS or environmental groups)
2. Developers-Builders (if you do not have developers moving & developing property,
you do not have a city.
3. Planning & Zoning members (unpaid members who are thrown into highly complex
situations)
4. Council members (same as above.)
Planning & Zoning members and Councils need to be aware of the realities of their
present situations including dealing with neighborhood groups, environmental factors,
inflationary factors (housing markets., etc.).
In line with the above, the characteristics of the housing market over the last
ten years includes the followings
1. Growth
2. Price of housing has gone up faster than inflation
3. Increase in town houses and condominiums
4. Increase in interest rates.
There has been a large incR°ease of consumers for housing and at the same time
housing prices have increased to the point where the majority of people can not afford
the traditional single residence house on a large lot, etc. Town houses and. similar
housing are the types of housing of the future. Planning & Zoning and Councils need
to be aware of these trends and update their ordinances accordingly.
As cities get larger city officials have to deal with citizen action groups ranging
from those interested in the protection of the neighborhood (these push for the enact-
ment and enforcing of new ordinances) to those interested in growth for the city
(sometimes accusing the city with its traditional Planning & Zoning Ordinances of a.
"no growth stance").
The second panel in the symposium was on "The Environmental Factors Influencing Land
Use Control Efforts." This discussion included state requirements and enforcement from
the viewpoint of the state. It was very technical and difficult to follow in so far as
local city governments were concerned. This entire discussion was aimed at the pre-
sei,vation-of lands for environmental reasons such as saving the Texas Wild Rice in the
San Marcos River and preserving lands over the acquifer . Some cities located in stra-
tegic areas will have environmental groups interested in preserving land for environ-
mental reasons and cities have to deal with these problems also.
2 s
The third panel was on It The Legal Context of Land Use Control." The following is a,
discussion concerning legal problems in land use control.
Cities were originally given the power to allocate land use by the legislature. It
was- suggested that cities should be aware of the original intent of the right of cities
to done. The original intent was that zoning can be done for the good of theu� blit,
not for the good of private intgrests. Zoning should be a reflection of the community's
values. It was suggested that zoning has deteriorated into the latter almost exclusively
due to emotional and financial factors involving individuals. Decisions are constantly
made on the basis of such things as "I want or do not want this zoning because it will
increase the value of my property or decrease the value of my property." This type of
zoning is for private interests and not to the public good.
Zoning for public interest demands that land use should be determined by the long run
picture. What is best for theup blit in the long run? The public is everyone, not just
a few Iriva.te individuals.
In; regard to the legality of zoning and subdivision decisions, the trend becoming
popular in the courts is that the courts are demanding that cities set out clear standards
and that everyone live by the same rules. The keynote appears to be: 't Is what is being
done reasonable? ' Are the objectives and standards reasonable or are they intended to
exclude particular groups? Are they aimed at the public good?'tt For instance, there
must be a mix of housing in a, community.
It is difficult to draft land use ordinances that will pass muster in criminal court,
that is, it is difficult to prosecute violations through municipal court. The drafting
and enforcing of land use ordinances is a. manpower problem. We have to rely on citizen
complaints because we do not have the staff or money to enforce them. It is necessary
to have reasonable standards in ordinances, not arbitrary control:
The fourth panel was on "The Efficacy of Present Planning & Zoning Processes in
Achieving Effective Land Use Control.
In this regard, the traditional approach to zoning and subdivision is in a state of
change. If the pace of growth is slow, traditional land use controls ca:n still be
effective. If there is moderate change in the rate of growth of a city, the traditional
approach is not effective.
Inherent problems of traditional land use controls inclue the following:
1. Confusion about the basic use. Is it for public purpose or private purpose?
(We tend to believe in zoning as it protects property, which is economic and for
private use.)
2. Problem with standards (not specific enough) . An example of this is vague wording
such as "zoning to enhance the beauty of the neighborhood; or ttzoning to maintain
a good quality of Life."
3. If controls exist they should be a reflection of community values. (Whose values
are they? Has change occurred and is it reflected in the ordinance?)
4. Confusion between the master plan and zoning ordinance. The master plan is usually
vague and out of date. (It is not a legal prerequisite to have a, master plan) .
Many master plans are not very useful as they are done by outside agencies who
gather information from the cities and correlate this information into a. whole
which often does not reflect the community's values. It is usually an ideal type
situation, not the reality of a situation. A more feasible master plan is one
with citizen input. If a city has a thoroughfare plan ,and a water system analysis,
they have the nucleus of a Master Plan. (As one attorney siad, the best Master
Plan he had seen was written on the back of a. poster -- however, it was relevant
and reflected the values of the community and could be used effectively.)
5. Process of regulating use of land (there may be a real problem understanding what
honing is about -- personal vs. public purposes.
Traditional zoning and subdivision ordinances are being pressured for change:
1. Pressures on local government to reduce housing costs -- for example, changing
standards of lot size. We have a vision of what a. single residence house should be
0 bedroom, 2 bath, brick, large lot, etc.). We have a stereotyped idea. of high density
residences as being undesirable. We have to be more flexible in our thinking. If there
are problems with high density, it is up to us to attempt to solve them.
• 2. Resistance to mixed use development or what is called infill development (the
example given was a, vacant lot in the middle of a residential area - zoning usually
is not changed because of presonal economic reasons of surrounding residences, when it
might have been to the public good to change it because it is cheaper for the city/public
to approve zoning where utilities are already present than to install utilities to reach
an areafurther out).
3. Lack of ability of the traditional to permit energy conserving development. It
can't be done without a. variance - no flexibility.
3•
4. Inability of the traditional to deal with technical advance.
Marge Smith:
I have combined the remarks on Land Use Control in the ETJ along with my own comments
since we are faced with some special problems in this area.
It was reiterated that by law cities do not have zoning power in the ETJ. They do
have subdivision controls in the ETJ.
By Section 970A, Vernon's Civil Statutes of Texas, the annexation law passed by the
Legislature limits a city's ETJ to a. distance proportionately to their population
N mile for Cibolo). It was stated that this substantially limits the control of a city.
In addition, Cibolo has a. sprawling ETJ by letter of intent. This is a situation unique
to Cibolo and some other cities close to a larger city like San Antonio. The letters of
intent were submitted to prevent the larger cities from including people who did not
want to be a part of the larger city (primarily for financial reasons) . The legality
of ETJ by letters of intent has never been decided to date.
I see no problem with our controlling the subdivisions in our ig mile ETJ; however,
due to the large area, of rural ETJ by letter of intent, Cibolo is faced with a. special
problem. Since our ETJ by letter of intent extends to three miles at its furtherest
point, it is concieva,ble that our city could be asked to rule on a: subdivision at this
distance from the city in a. distinctly rural area. Keep in mind that in the event of a
law suit over control of subdivision in the ETJ, the emphasis of the court will be on the
reasonableness of what we are asking people to do and on the standards we set. Is
everyone treated the same?
If it is to, be the policy of this city to enforce the subdivision ordinance without
variance in this area of the ETJ, it is my opinion that we will probably be faced with
a law suit on the basis of the reasonableness of requesting strict adherence to the
subdivision ordinance in that area. In other words, is it reasonable to ask a. subdivider
to put in curbs and gutters in a rural area when the city itself has no curbs and gutters?
This very question was recently asked by the Lawyer of the Schuetzes when it appeared
we might turn down their request. There is no doubt in my mind that had the Council
turned down the request by the Schuetzes, we would have been involved in litigation.
Their lawyer was using the very words that were impresses on us at Saturday's seminar.
In addition, a law suit could also be filed on the basis that everyone be treated alike
in our ETJ (whatever is reasonable for one is reasonable for all). This again presents
a. problem in a city like Cibolo with such a large ETJ by letter of intent. Are we going
to ask a developer as far as three miles from the city to put in curbs and gutters, and
if we are not, can we ask the developer closer in to do so? If we do ask the developer
three miles out to put in curbs and gutters, can we win a-law suit on the basis of the
reasonableness of the request?
Being aware of Cibolo's special problem concerning ETJ by letter of intent, I talked
to Mr. Nias, Assistant City Attorney, City of Austin. Mr. Nia.s' first reaction to my
question of enforcing the subdivision ordinance in areas past the 3!5 mile was that we
would not want concrete and asphalt out in a, rural setting. When I explained that the
philosopy of some of our members was strict adherence to the subdivision ordinance, he
asked "Is it reasonable?"'
Therein appears to lie the answer.
f then asked him how one solves the problem of strict adherence to the ordinance when
one is faced with a large ETJ (much larger than the 3g mile). He said it was the policy
of Austin to look at their ETJ in two ways ® an urban area. and a suburban area. ® with
a. substantial decrease in requirements in the suburban area (treating everyone alike in
that area) .
As I percieve it, one of the main causes of the problem which faces us now is that
we have an ETJ five times larger than what the law would normally allow for a city our
size. (Perhaps this is why the law originally limited ETJ's by population o a small
city can not hope to enforce ordinances in a three mile ETJ as opposed to a: k mile ETJ).
Howe-ger, as mentioned before, due to the situation that Cibolo is in in regard to ETJ by
letter of intent, it behooves us to take some action to determine a fair policy for en-
forcing the subdivision ordinance in our ETJ by letter of intent. I suggest that this be
done as quickly as possible, because due to the rapid growth in our area., we will be faced
again and again with determining the strict enforcement of the subdivision ordinance in
outlying areas.
It would be my recommendation that we consider a solution similar to the City of Austin's
A SYMPOSIUM
r � ON
LAND USE CONTROL PROBLEMS
OF
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
IN
AREAS OF RAPIDECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Sponsored By
SOUTHWEST TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY
and
REGION 7 AND 8 , TEXAS CITY MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION
APRIL 17 , 1982
11th Floor , J. C. Kellam Building
Southwest Texas State University
San Marcos, Texas
8:00 - 8:45 REGISTRATION (Coffee and Rolls)
11th Floor, J. C. Kellam Building
8:45 - 9:15 OPENING SESSION
Presiding: Dr. Francis M. Rich, Jr.
SWPSU/TCM& Faculty Liaison
Mr. Robert Hardesty, President, Southwest
Texas State University
L-Mr. Cecil Massey, President, Region 7, TCMA
City Manager, Lockhart, Texas
V�Ir. Don Savage, President, Region 8, TCMA
City Manager, Pleasanton, Texas
9:15 - 9:45 THE SCENARIO FOR THE CONFERENCE
Mr. A. C. Gonzalez, City Manager, San Marcos, Texas
9:45 -11:00 PANEL: The Political, Social and 'Econoniie Factors
Moderator: Dr. J G. Corbett, Department o37o itica1 Science
Southwest Texas State University
11:00- 12:15 PANEL: The Environmental Factors Influencing Land Use Control
- Moderator-: Dr. He-rbert' R. an, Chairr9n, Biology Department,
' Southwest Texas State University
12:30- 1:45 LUNCH: Fault Line Room, (LBJ Student Center)
Presiding: Mr. Cecil Massey, City Manager, Lockhart, Texas
2:00 - 3:15 PANEL: The Legal Parameters of Land Use Control.
Moderator: Dr. Charles Aman, Department of Political Science,
Southwest Texas State University
3:15 - 4:45 PANEL: The Efficacy of Present Planning and Zoning Processes
iii 'E ective ' an se 'Control.
Moderator: DF, Richardowe, D-iv_1_s-1o_n___oT Environmental Studies,
University of Texas at San Antonio
X- s
PANEL
ON
THE POLITICAL, SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONTEXT OF
LAND USE CONTROL
Moderator: Dr. Jack Corbett, Department of Political Science, Southwest
Texas State University
1. "The Neighborhood Movement" Dr. Hugh Moore, Department of Political
Science, Southwest Texas State University
2. "The Economic Forces" Dr. Patricia Shields, Department of
Political Science, Southwest Texas State
University
3. "The Traditional Patterns of Mr. Daniel E. Faplow, Department of
Politics - in Transition" Political Science, Southwest Texas State
University
Recorder: Dr. Maurice Dutton, Southwest Texas State�University
PANEL
ON
THE ENVIORMENTAL FACTORS INFLUENCING
LAND USE CONTROL EFFORTS
Moderator: Dr. Herbert H. Hannan, Chairman, Department of Biology, Southwest
Texas State University
'Surface and Ground Problems" hir. Paul Seals, Assistant General Counsel,
Texas Department of Water Resources,
Austin, Texas = ,
2. 'Biotic Factors" Dr. Glenn Longley,Edwards Aquifer Researc'.:
Center, Southwest Texas State University
3. "Abiotic Factors" Dr. James F. Petersen, Department of
Geography and Planning, Southwest Texas
State University
4. "General Evaluative, Managerial
and Planning Topics" Dr. Maureen McReynolds, uDirector
Enviormental Department, City of
Austin, Texas
Recorder: Dr. Mitchell F. Rice, Southwest Texas State University
PANEL
ON
r., THE LEGAL CONTEXT OF
LAND USE CONTROL
Moderator: Dr. Charles Chapman, Department of Political Science, Southwest Texas
State University
1. Dedication of parkland and Mr. J, Bruce Aycock, City Attorney,
rights of way in subdivision Corpus Christi, Texas .
platt approval.
2. "Legal Pitfalls in Drafting and Mr. James Nias, Assistant City Attorney,
Enforcing Land Use Ordinances" City of Austin
3. "Land Use Control in the ETJ" Mr. Robert K. Nordhaus, City Attorney,
Plano, Texas
4. " "Reasonable' Use of Police W. Barney Knight, City Manager, Temple,
Power in Land Use Control Texas
Ordinances"
Recorder: Dr. John McGee, Southwest"Texas State Universtiy.
PANEL
ON
THE EFFICACY OF PRESENT PLANNING
AND ZONING PROCESSES
IN ACHIEVING EFFECTIVE LAND USE CONTROL:
Moderator: Dr. Richard Howe, Division of Environmental Studies, University 'of Texas/
San Antonio
1. "The Master Plan as an Effective Mr. Craig Farmer, Freese and Nichols,
Control Tool" Austin, Texas
2. "Citizen And Community Input Dr, Donald Brandes, Department of Geography
Mechanisms -- Building Bridges' and Planning, .Southwest Texas Std'te:.University
3. "Inclusionary Planning" Mr. Richard Lillie, Planning Director, City of
Austin, Texas
4. "Can Traditional Approaches Mr. Robert R. Ashcroft, Division of .Environ-
Continue to be Effective in mental Studies, University of*Texas/
Land Use Control?" San Antonio
Recorder: Dr. Howard Balanoff, Southwest Texas State Universtiy
------------------ BILLS TO BE APPROVED MAY 6, 1982 -------------------
UTILITIES
G.V .E.0. PARK 32 .71
CITY HALL 58.96
- COM BLDG 34.27
125.91
CITY OF CIBOLO PARK (W) 29.25
CITY HALL 23.00
52.25
PROFESSIONAL FEES
W. H. MULLINS INC INSPECT CIBOLO NORTH UNIT 2 150.00
W. H. MULLINS INC INSPECT CIBOLO NORTH UNIT 3 200.00
OFFICE & ADMINISTRATION
WUESTS SUPPLIES 4.46
MARGE SMITH REIMBURSEMENT ATTENDANCE 35.64
LAND CONTROL SYMPOSIUM
REGISTRATION - $20.00
MILEAGE 68 mi @ .23= 15.61
HELPING HAND HARDWARE KEYS 1 .50
CIBOLO CITY PARK
MISSION SALES & JANITOR MULTIFOLD CABINETS & TISSUE 121 .50
SUPPLY DISPENSERS
ARNOLD MOOS CO . RESTROOM EXPENSES 839 .31
HELPING HAND HARDWARE RESTROOM EXPENSES 5.51
DR. A . W. MAYS ATTENDING HELMUTH BRA.UNE 45.00
CUT FINGER
CIBOLO LUMBER CO SUPPLIES FOR BLEACHERS 55.80
TEXAS SURPLUS PROPERTY BLEACHERS 216.00
T & F CONSTRUCTION HAUL BLEACHERS 376.00
SIPPELS HARDWARE GARBAGE CANS & CLOSET RODS 39.45
CITY AUTO
G-O's AUTO REPAIR STATE INSP & PARTS 9 .00
LONE STAR ICE GASOLINE 16.00
CIBOLO SELF SERVE GAS & BATTERY 13 .50
TRACTOR
CIBOLO SELF SERVE GAS 4.70
SIPPEL HARDWARE LUB. GREASE 2 .67
MOWER
CIBOLO SELF SERVE GAS 11 .92
POLICE
CITY OF SCHERTZ GAS 17 .51
DISPATCHER 150.00
DOG IMPOUND 15-00
182.51
LONE STAR GAS 124.07
CITY TRUCK
C IBO LO SELF SERVE GAS 58.40
WATER & SEWER
CITY OF SCHERTZ PURCHASED WATER 1 ,580.86
BRAUNTEX MATERIALS 1 3/4 T GRAVEL 21 .94
WATER LEAK SCHLATHER & N. MAIN