HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/26/2008 - Workshop Agenda Packet - City CouncilTraditional Values, Progressive Thinking
In the Research Valley
Mayor Councilmembers
Ben White John Crompton
James Massey
Dennis Maloney
Lynn McIlhaney
City Manager Lawrence Stewart
Glenn Brown David Ruesink
Agenda
College Station City Council
Workshop Meeting
Thursday, June 26, 2008 2:00 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Texas Avenue
College Station, Texas
1. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on items listed on the consent agenda.
2. Presentation, possible action and discussion on an update from the Arts Council of Brazos Valley.
3. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an update from a representative of the Texas
Municipal Retirement System, including its current status.
4. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on the Strong & Sustainable Neighborhood Report and its
implementation.
5. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the proposed Community Development 2008-09
Action Plan.
6. Presentation, possible action, and discussion approving Zero-Rise for Developments with Floodplain
Encroachments.
7. Presentation, possible action and discussion on an update of the FY09 Outside Agency review process
and funding policy.
8. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding various proposed public facility and district
identity improvements in the Northgate District.
9. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a discussion of the City Council’s expectations for
the Council retreat scheduled for June 30 and July 1.
10. Council Calendar
June 27 Coffee with the Mayor at the Lincoln Center 8:00 a.m.
June 28 “Green Night” at Brazos Valley Bombers Baseball Game 6:00 p.m.
June 30-July 1 City Council Annual Retreat 8:30 a.m., Sugarland
July 2 Special Council Meeting 3:00 p.m.
July 4 City Closed – Holiday
July 10 Council Workshop / Regular Meeting 3:00 p.m. & 7:00 p.m.
1
Council Workshop Meeting Thursday, June 26, 2008 Page 2
Traditional Values, Progressive Thinking
In the Research Valley
11. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on future agenda items: A Council Member may inquire
about a subject for which notice has not been given. A statement of specific factual information or the
recitation of existing policy may be given. Any deliberation shall be limited to a proposal to place the
subject on an agenda for a subsequent meeting.
12. Discussion, review and possible action regarding the following meetings: Arts Council of the Brazos
Valley, Audit Committee, Brazos County Health Dept., Brazos Valley Council of Governments, Brazos
Valley Wide Area Communications Task Force, Cemetery Committee, Design Review Board, Historic
Preservation Committee, Interfaith Dialogue Association, Intergovernmental Committee, Joint Relief
Funding Review Committee, Library Committee, Metropolitan Planning Organization, National League
of Cities, Outside Agency Funding Review, Parks and Recreation Board, Planning and Zoning
Commission, Sister City Association, TAMU Student Senate, Research Valley Partnership, Regional
Transportation Committee for Council of Governments, Texas Municipal League, Transportation
Committee, Wolf Pen Creek Oversight Committee, Wolf Pen Creek TIF Board, Zoning Board of
Adjustments (Notice of Agendas posted on City Hall bulletin board).
13. Executive Session will immediately follow the workshop meeting in the Administrative Conference
Room.
Consultation with Attorney {Gov’t Code Section 551.071}; possible action. The City Council may seek
advice from its attorney regarding a pending or contemplated litigation subject or settlement offer or
attorney-client privileged information. Litigation is an ongoing process and questions may arise as to a
litigation tactic or settlement offer, which needs to be discussed with the City Council. Upon occasion the
City Council may need information from its attorney as to the status of a pending or contemplated litigation
subject or settlement offer or attorney-client privileged information. After executive session discussion, any
final action or vote taken will be in public. The following subject(s) may be discussed:
a. Application with TCEQ for permits in Westside/Highway 60 area, near Brushy Water Supply
Corporation.
b. Sewer CCN permit requests.
c. Water CCN permit requests.
d. Water service application with regard to Wellborn Special Utility District.
e. Bed & Banks Water Rights Discharge Permits for College Station and Bryan
f. Legal aspects of Water Well and possible purchase of or lease of water well sites.
g. JK Development v. College Station.
h. Taylor Kingsley v. College Station.
i. State Farm Lloyds as Subrogee of Mikal Klumpp v. College Station.
j. TMPA v. PUC (College Station filed Intervention).
k. Legal issues and advice on Brazos Valley Solid Waste Management Agency Contract, on proposed
methane gas contract, on proposed Franchise with City of Bryan for B.T.U. Electric, on proposed pole use
for College Station and Bryan electric lines, and update on legal proceedings for Grimes County Landfill site
and on contract for site acquisitions.
Real Estate {Gov’t Code Section 551.072}; possible action The City Council may deliberate the purchase,
exchange, lease or value of real property if deliberation in an open meeting would have a detrimental effect
on the position of the City in negotiations with a third person. After executive session discussion, any final
action or vote taken will be in public. The following subject(s) may be discussed:
2
Council Workshop Meeting Thursday, June 26, 2008 Page 3
Traditional Values, Progressive Thinking
In the Research Valley
a. Land exchange involving property adjacent to Carter Creek near State Highway 6 in the vicinity of the
Varsity Ford Dealership.
b. Possible purchase of land for roadway near Eisenhower Street.
c. Possible purchase of land for the extension of Corsair Drive from Corsair Circle to Emerald Parkway.
d. Targeted Mixed Used Project.
c. Land Acquisition regarding Southwest Portion of Northgate.
Personnel {Gov’t Code Section 551.074}; possible action The City Council may deliberate the appointment,
employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal of a public officer. After executive
session discussion, any final action or vote taken will be in public. The following subject(s) may be
discussed:
a. Planning and Zoning Commission
b. Zoning Board of Adjustments
c. Construction Board of Adjustments and Appeals
d. Parks and Recreation Board
Economic Incentive Negotiations {Gov’t Code Section 551.087}; possible action The City Council may
deliberate on commercial or financial information that the City Council has received from a business
prospect that the City Council seeks to have locate, stay or expand in or near the city with which the City
Council in conducting economic development negotiations may deliberate on an offer of financial or other
incentives for a business prospect. After executive session discussion, any final action or vote taken will be
in public. The following subject(s) may be discussed:
a. Hotel and Conference Center
14. Action on executive session, or any workshop agenda item not completed or discussed in today’s
workshop meeting will be discussed in tonight’s Regular Meeting if necessary.
15. Adjourn.
APPROVED:
______________________________
City Manager
Notice is hereby given that a Workshop Meeting of the City Council of the City of College Station, Texas
will be held on the 26th day of June, 2008 at 2:00 pm in the City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Texas
Avenue, College Station, Texas. The following subjects will be discussed, to wit: See Agenda
Posted this 23rd day of June, 2008 at 1:30 pm
__
E-Signed by Connie Hooks
VERIFY authenticity with ApproveIt
__________________________
City Secretary
I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that the above Notice of Meeting of the Governing Body of the City of
College Station, Texas, is a true and correct copy of said Notice and that I posted a true and correct copy of
3
Council Workshop Meeting Thursday, June 26, 2008 Page 4
Traditional Values, Progressive Thinking
In the Research Valley
said notice on the bulletin board at City Hall, 1101 Texas Avenue, in College Station, Texas, and the City’s
website, www.cstx.gov . The Agenda and Notice are readily accessible to the general public at all times.
Said Notice and Agenda were posted on June 23, 2008 at 1:30 pm and remained so posted continuously for
at least 72 hours proceeding the scheduled time of said meeting.
This public notice was removed from the official board at the College Station City Hall on the following
date and time: _______________________ by ___________________________.
Dated this _____day of _______________, 2008.
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
By____________________________________
Subscribed and sworn to before me on this the ______day of _________________,
___________________Notary Public – Brazos County, Texas
My commission expires:________
This building is wheelchair accessible. Handicap parking spaces are available. Any request for sign
interpretive service must be made 48 hours before the meeting. To make arrangements call (979) 764-3517
or (TDD) 1-800-735-2989. Agendas may be viewed on www.cstx.gov. Council meetings are broadcast live
on Cable Access Channel 19.
4
June 26, 2008
Workshop Agenda Item #2
Arts Council of Brazos Valley Presentation
To: Glenn Brown, City Manager
From: Jeff Kersten, Chief Financial Officer
Agenda Caption: Presentation, possible action and discussion on an update from the Arts
Council of Brazos Valley.
Recommendation(s): Staff recommends Council receive the information and provide any
desired direction or feedback to the Arts Council of Brazos Valley.
Summary: Mr. Padraic Fischer, Executive Director of the Arts Council of Brazos Valley will
present a brief report updating the City Council on the status of the Arts Council.
The Arts Council of Brazos Valley is one of 3 Contract Partner Agencies per the Outside
Agency Policy adopted by the City Council on February 8, 2007. The other 2 contract
partners are the Convention and Visitor's Bureau, and the Research Valley Partnership.
These 2 contract partners made presentations to the City Council earlier this Spring.
Budget & Financial Summary: In FY 2008 the City Council allocated $440,000 to the
Arts Council. OF this amount $240,000 is for operations and maintenance of the
organization. $200,000 is for Arts Council Affiliate funding.
Attachments: N/A
5
June 26, 2008
Workshop Agenda Item #3
Texas Municipal Retirement System Update
To: Glenn Brown, City Manager
From: Mark Marquez, Interim Human Resources Director
Agenda Caption: Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an update from a
representative of the Texas Municipal Retirement System, including its current status.
Recommendation(s): N/A
Summary: The Texas Municipal Retirement System is the retirement plan for municipal
employees in the City of College Station. This workshop item is being presented because
there are substantial changes occurring within TMRS which will affect the City’s funding into
the System for Fiscal Year 2009.
Mr. Anthony Mills of TMRS will make a brief presentation on the System’s current status.
Budget & Financial Summary: Any adjustments to the City’s contribution to TMRS will
have budget implications.
Attachments:
1. TMRS in Transition
6
TMRS in Transition
Winter – Spring 2008
TMRS is not in a crisis, and TMRS benefits are not in danger of becoming underfunded.
The changes the System is undergoing are being made to ensure that member benefits continue to
be soundly funded and to preserve benefit levels for future retirees.
In TMRS, cities have control of the level of benefits they offer their members.
City Contribution Rates
The ultimate cost of benefits is not changing. What is changing is the schedule upon which these
benefits are funded.
Many TMRS cities will see higher annual contribution rates if they retain their current benefit
choices. If a city sees an increase of greater than 0.5% of payroll, the increase due to these changes
will be phased in evenly over an eight-year period, beginning in 2009.
A change in TMRS’ Actuarial Cost Method will provide advance funding of annually repeating
benefits – Updated Service Credit (USC) and Annuity Increases – that have historically been
funded one year at a time.
Some cities may choose to turn off annually repeating benefits and adopt USC and Annuity
Increases one year at a time, on an ad hoc basis. Although turning off annually repeating benefits
will result in a lower contribution rate for 2009, ad hoc benefits will not be advance-funded, and
cities will see contribution rates continue to rise each year they choose this approach.
TMRS will help cities evaluate the effects on future Contribution Rates of any benefits changes
they wish to consider.
Investments
TMRS is gradually diversifying its investment portfolio from its current fixed income strategy
(bonds) to a more diversified portfolio that will contain both stocks and bonds, with a target of 6%
in domestic and 6% in foreign indexed stocks by the end of 2008.
If TMRS remained entirely invested in bonds, the interest credited to members’ accounts and the
discount rate used to calculate annuities for future retirees would fall below 5% in just a few years.
For More Information
The best source of up-to-date information on TMRS changes is the “Breaking News for Cities”
section of the TMRS Website at www.TMRS.com. Cities may request a Communications Packet
containing information on TMRS and the changes that are taking place by e-mailing
communications@tmrs.com.
7
June 26, 2008
Workshop Agenda Item #4
Implementation of Strong & Sustainable Neighborhood Program
To: Glenn Brown, City Manager
From: Bob Cowell, AICP, Director of Planning and Development Services
Agenda Caption: Presentation, possible action, and discussion on the Strong &
Sustainable Neighborhood Report and its implementation.
Recommendation(s): Staff recommends that the Council adopt the proposed
implementation program and provide staff with direction on the related items.
Summary: In 2007 Council requested staff to devise a program to address multiple
neighborhood integrity issues in a more holistic manner. The details of this program
were presented and endorsed by Council in late 2007. In early 2008 a team of City
staff worked with a task force of community members and participated in a series of
workshops facilitated by a consultant that specializes in neighborhood issues to
develop a proposed comprehensive neighborhood integrity program. Since the
presentation to Council the staff has been working with the City Manager and the
various stakeholders to devise an implementation program. Attached is the original
report delivered to Council annotated with the proposed actions, responsible parties,
and projected timelines. Staff will present additional information at the Council
workshop.
Budget & Financial Summary: It is anticipated that the FY09 Budget request will
include $450,000+ in requests related to the implementation of this program.
Additional financial resources may be necessary as the plan is fully implemented.
Attachments:
1. Annotated Strong and Sustainable Neighborhoods Report
8
Page 1
Strong and Sustainable Neighborhoods
An Action Plan for Neighborhood Integrity
Introduction
Neighborhood Integrity or perhaps more to the point, the desire for strong neighborhoods
meeting the demand for housing and contributing positively to the quality of life
experienced in College Station, has been at the forefront of community discussions for
some time. Indeed, one could argue that the desire to build and maintain strong
neighborhoods closely integrated with the University was the very basis for the formation
of the city itself.
As the home of Texas A&M University, College Station is home to thousands of
university students. As the University continues its growth and expansion, the community
has the opportunity to accommodate an increasing number of students in off campus
housing. Our challenge is to welcome the increasing number of students while retaining
the strength and vitality of our neighborhoods.
Among the challenges before us are; first our housing stock is aging resulting in
maintenance requirements and often leading to investment ownership and renter
occupation in traditional single family neighborhoods. Second, there are issues which
manifest themselves in our residential neighborhoods as a result increased number of
units being available for rent – parking, trash, poorly maintained housing, and noise.
Third, homeowners view the transition of homes in their neighborhoods into rentals as
intrusive and unwelcome change. Finally, current market conditions will likely see
additional housing constructed to accommodate the student rental market.
Objective of this Action Plan
Strong and Sustainable Neighborhoods – An Action Plan for Neighborhood Integrity has
a threefold objective:
1. Gain an understanding of the issues and present a policy rationale for strong and
sustainable neighborhoods.
2. Identify existing neighborhood integrity efforts employed in the City of College
Station.
3. Recommend specific policy initiative(s) to enhance existing efforts.
Rationale for Strong and Sustainable Neighborhoods
Neighborhoods are the basic building blocks of our city. Neighborhoods are where we
live, raise our families, and socialize with our friends and neighbors. In many ways our
city is only as strong and sustainable as our neighborhoods. Our neighborhoods are a
collection of varying housing types with an increasingly diverse occupancy composition.
There are greater than 34,000 dwelling units (including all housing types except “group
quarters”) in College Station. The majority of these dwelling units are renter occupied,
though the majority of single family homes remain owner occupied.
9
Page 2
In 2000 it was estimated that nearly 75% of the single family homes located in College
Station were owner occupied. Still more than 5,000 single family homes are occupied by
renters. Further, the majority of dwelling units are occupied by non-family households,
that is households functioning as a family but nor related to one another. In 2000 it was
estimated that approximately 60% of all households were composed of non-related
individuals.
College Station citizens have been clear in their desire to promote strong and sustainable
neighborhoods. Throughout the Comprehensive Plan update, citizens voiced their
support for efforts that protect neighborhood integrity. The Comprehensive Plan
Advisory Committee (CPAC) has addressed this specifically through establishing
working goals for the Comprehensive Plan update that state “Strong, unique
neighborhoods…” and “Long-term viability and appeal of established neighborhoods”.
For the purposes of this action plan we have adopted the working goal of
Protect and Strengthen College Station neighborhoods resulting in distinct
neighborhoods that welcome homeowners, renters, students and others, maintain their
viability over time and enhance the overall quality of life for our citizens.
Strong and sustainable neighborhoods are too important to leave to piece-meal solutions
implemented to address what is portrayed as the current crisis. Strong and sustainable
neighborhoods demand the best we have to offer; that is a thoughtful and comprehensive
policy approach that contributes positively to the quality of life for all that call College
Station home.
The City Council directed the City Manager at its November 19, 2007 Council meeting to
proceed with developing a holistic response to issues being confronted by College Station
neighborhoods. Since receiving direction from the Council, the following actions have
been undertaken:
· Convened a 35+ member engagement panel consisting of homeowners, students,
realtors/investors, TAMU administration and city staff
· Conducted two – day long engagement sessions to identify issues and possible
solutions
· Conducted a review of best practices from other major university communities
· Conducted a review of existing codes, ordinances, and organizational practices of the
City of College Station to identify gaps, inconsistencies, and potential areas of
modification
· Established an interactive web page discussing neighborhood integrity
10
Page 3
Challenges Before Us
Given the current and anticipated future environment, the City government is being
called to provide leadership in the critical area of Neighborhood Integrity. The Council
has recognized the need to be proactive articulating through its Strategic Plan several
policy directives and initiatives related to neighborhood integrity. This proposed Plan of
Action attempts to quantify and offer the Council and community specific direction to
move the organization and community towards a positive response to our present and
future conditions.
As we address the challenges presented by enhancing the quality of our neighborhoods,
providing protection to homeowners, and providing a welcoming home to our university
students, we must acknowledge it is a shared responsibility by the entire community –
City government, resident homeowners, students, investor-property mangers, and
University administration. We will not be successful without the full involvement of
each key stakeholder to contribute towards the solution.
The City government must take a leadership role to bring together the key stakeholders.
We must position ourselves to implement strategies and programs to enhance the quality
of life and stabilize neighborhoods in transition. There must be a full recognition that we
have limitations. We must strike a clear balance between actions appropriately belonging
with City government and actions which more appropriately belong to other key
stakeholders.
The proposed Plan of Action should be viewed as a beginning point and not an end unto
itself. The proposed plan presents several key strategies, programs, and actions which
represents our best efforts to understand the problem and offer meaningful responses to
address the identified problems.
Emphasis Areas, Proposed Strategies and Actions
Emphasis Areas
§ Adapt current service delivery system (planning, code enforcement, outreach, etc)
to have a greater orientation toward neighborhoods.
§ Enhanced use of regulatory and enforcement tools currently available to the City
§ Full engagement of all stakeholders in the solution
1.0 Strategy
Improve the capacity of neighborhoods to deal with a myriad of planning and quality of
life issues including those resulting from an aging housing stock and an increase in the
number of rental units.
One of the many challenges we face is the recognition that we have aging housing stock
in the community. As the housing stock ages, it is frequently converted to rental units in
previously owner occupied single family neighborhoods or falls into disrepair. Our
strategy suggests that we should be proactive in addressing this issue through multiple
actions.
11
Page 4
1.1 Action Re-establish the neighborhood planning program and ensure that
the efforts compliment the comprehensive plan and are closely aligned with
City objectives to stabilize and enhance neighborhoods. Our Neighborhood
Planning efforts should focus on developing neighborhood specific strategies
and protections to promote neighborhood stabilization, appearance, public
infrastructure, and compatible land use. Re-assign Neighborhood
Coordinator to Planning & Development Services Department, reporting to
the Assistant Director of Community & Neighborhood Planning. It may
also be necessary to secure the services of an intern to aid the Coordinator.
Initial action projected in July 2008.
Begin the development and implementation of neighborhood and small-area
plans immediately following the adoption of the comprehensive plan. Initial
action projected in fall of 2009.
1.2 Action Promote home ownership through various programs managed by
the City for first time home buyers to increase homeownership in targeted
neighborhoods. Home ownership is a key to neighborhood stabilization. Re-
alignment of programs as outlined by the Economic and Community
Development Department. Initial action projected in June 2008
1.3 Action Use adopted property maintenance codes and ordinances to
enhance property maintenance. We need to better use existing legislation to
promote neighborhood pride and appearance. Develop a more consistent
approach to enforcement of the property maintenance code. Initial action
taken by Code Enforcement Division projected in beginning of 2009.
2.0 Strategy Orient service delivery toward neighborhoods and enhance the City’s
enforcement tools to better address the rental market.
2.1 Action Establish a single point of responsibility in the City organization
oriented to addressing neighborhood issues and coordination of all City
programs. One of the weaknesses identified through this process was the
identification of multiple points of entry into the City processes. This can be
both confusing and time consuming for citizens with legitimate concerns. Re-
assign code enforcement personnel (code and residential parking
enforcement) to Planning & Development Services Department, reporting to
the Building Official (and Assistant Director – Development Services).
Initial action projected to begin Fall 2008 (See attached information). Also
should include dedicated law enforcement resources for noise and other
“party-related” violations.
2.2 Action Conduct intensive neighborhood enforcement programs in select
neighborhoods for code compliance. This is a multi-functional approach to
address transitional neighborhoods. If a neighborhood association is not
present work to develop an association. Provide education programs as well as
12
Page 5
enforcement activities. Bring together key stakeholders to identify needs of
the neighborhood and use the array of tools provided in this plan to address
the concerns. Assign code enforcement personnel and neighborhood
services personnel to specific residential neighborhoods exclusively. Initial
action projected in beginning of 2009 (See attached information).
2.3 Action Promote the formation and registration of neighborhood
associations and enhance their effectiveness. Perhaps one of the best ways that
a neighborhood can partner with the city and others ensuring that
neighborhoods remain strong and sustainable is to form a neighborhood
association and to get it registered with the city. This organizational structure
allows us to address issues in a systematic manner and enables the city to
readily engage neighborhood. Certain services offered by the city can only be
reasonably offered at this level. Continued work by neighborhood services.
Action currently underway.
2.4 Action Implement Universal Rental Registration Program. All single
family rental properties should be registered at no cost to the property owner.
The registration should be minimally intrusive and should be easy to
complete. The information collected should include a mandatory local point
of contact and the current number and names of tenants on the lease.
Registrations should be renewed annually and should coincide with the
University calendar. This always creates an opportunity to present
information to tenants about city codes, neighborhood activities, and the
educational programs offered by the city. Planning & Development Services
will work with stakeholders to devise program and begin its implementation
January 2009.
2.5 Action Landlords and property investors should be encouraged to adopt
model leases which provide protections to landlords to deal with difficult
situations. The model lease is in place with a number of properties already in
the city with good results. The City and Landlord Associations should through
its education efforts strongly suggest the adoption of the model lease to
provide landlords with the tools to address problem properties. Planning &
Development Services will work with industry representatives to develop
model leases and incentives for their use and to distribute information.
Projected implementation in summer 2009.
2.6 Action Enhance development standards. Dense small lot development
(i.e., developments that are susceptible to conversion to rental units) should
have higher development standards including no parking zones concurrent
upon recording of the plat, designated overflow parking areas, mandatory
alleys, off-street parking tied to # of bedrooms, maximum lot coverage, etc.
These standards could be lessened or waived if the development is subjected
to a zoning prohibition against two or more unrelated individuals residing in
13
Page 6
the homes. Planning & Development Services will work with stakeholders,
appointed boards and commissions, and elected officials to revise UDO
requirements. Projected code adoption beginning 2009.
2.7 Action Improve data collection on neighborhood problems and challenges.
Better use of the city’s web site and GIS to collect data on neighborhood
problems should be implemented. Better collection of data related to
violations, including mapping, data bases, etc. to aid in identifying trends and
“hot spots” to permit proactive action by the City in addressing the issues and
concerns. Community and Neighborhood Planning Division will work with
IT, Neighborhood Services, Police, etc. to initiate and maintain data
collection and analysis efforts. Currently underway.
3.0 Strategy Educate key stakeholders and community. One of the critical needs is to
provide continuous education of key stakeholders on the need to have strong viable
neighborhoods.
3.1 Action Fully implement the Aggieland Solution program presented by
TAMU student leadership. This is a proactive program which benefits the
entire community. Neighborhood Services and the City’s University Liaison
will meet with stakeholders from both the University and the neighborhoods
to finalize a program and begin its implementation. Initial action to begin
in July 2008 with completion and implementation projected by Fall 2009.
3.2 Action Work with University Administration to apply the Aggie Code of
Honor and other codes of conduct and behavior to off campus activities. This
will provide an additional support system to assist students in transitioning to
life in the community at large and promote good citizenship. Neighborhood
Services and the City’s University Liaison will meet with stakeholders from
the University to devise a program and begin its implementation. Initial
action to begin in July 2008 with completion and implementation projected
by Fall 2009.
3.3 Action Work with University Administration to educate students upon
arrival on Campus to understand community standards and expectations.
There is a gap between students understanding local standards and
expectations which can be met during orientation sessions when they arrive on
campus to begin their college work. Neighborhood Services and the City’s
University Liaison will meet with stakeholders from the University to devise
a program and begin its implementation. Initial action to begin in July
2008 with completion and implementation projected by Fall 2009.
3.4 Action Develop and implement “Howdy Neighbor” program as a direct
outreach by neighborhood associations to welcome new residents to their
neighborhoods. There are several good examples already in place within the
community in which neighborhood associations provide new residents with
14
Page 7
informational packets to help them transition into the neighborhood. This
program needs to be expanded and implemented by Neighborhood
Associations. Neighborhood Services will work with stakeholders to identify
successful efforts and devise and maintain an ongoing program. Initial
action to begin in July 2008 with completion and implementation projected
beginning of 2009.
3.5 Action The City government should develop a comprehensive training and
education program to assist key stakeholders to address the many facets of this
Plan of Action. The city should become the reservoir of materials,
information, and programs to assist students, neighborhood associations,
individual citizens, and landlords to obtain information to assist them in
developing a positive response to Neighborhood Integrity issues.
Neighborhood Services will serve in the capacity of the central collection
point for all related materials and information. Initial action to begin July
2008.
3.6 Action Establish performance measures that address programmatic
accomplishments, outputs, and outcomes. These measures should be
grounded in this action plan and other adopted Council plans and policies and
should be use to determine the success of the various efforts identified in this
plan. The Planning & Development Services Department will work with
stakeholders to identify appropriate performance measures. These
measures should be formally included in departmental business plans and
individual performance reviews. Initial action to begin July 2008 with
implementation beginning 2009.
4.0 Strategy Provide for additional enforcement tools to address Neighborhood
Integrity issues. This plan suggests a number of specific proposals to address
Neighborhood Integrity.
4.1 Action Amend the City code to codify that any property that receives three
verified actions (i.e., written warnings, citations, etc) in a period of one year
(that is the registration cycle) will be considered a nuisance property and
procedures for enforcement as provided by Local Government Code will be
initiated by the City. Failure to have a property properly registered at the time
of a verified complaint shall constitute a verified action in itself. Once a
property has been declared a nuisance property a zero tolerance policy will be
employed for a period of at least one year, meaning that subsequent verified
actions will result in mandatory levying of applicable citations and fines.
Code enforcement personnel will work with the Legal Department to devise
and implement a program. Initial action to begin October 2008 with
implementation projected in January 2009.
4.2 Action Amend the City code to codify host responsibilities for parties in
residential areas. This should clearly outline who is responsible for what and
15
Page 8
what the potential consequences will be for failure to meet these expectations.
This information could be made a part of what is delivered to the tenants
during the rental registration process. Code enforcement personnel will work
with the Legal Department to devise and implement a program. Initial
action to begin October 2008 with implementation projected in January
2009.
4.3 Action Adopt a mediation procedure to resolve areas of disagreement
between various parties involving Neighborhood Integrity issues. The
mediation procedure is suggested by the Aggieland Solution and merits
implementation. Code enforcement personnel will work with the Legal
Department to devise and implement a program. Initial action to begin
October 2008 with implementation projected in Fall 2009
Unrelated Individuals
A great deal of discussion has centered around the issue of the permitted number of
unrelated individuals allowed to reside in a single dwelling unit. Currently the City
regulates this number at four per unit. It is the staff’s belief that the afore-described
action plan can succeed with or without adjustment in the permitted number of unrelated
individuals. If Council elects to reduce the permitted number of unrelated individuals,
staff continues to recommend all of the identified actions contained in this plan. If
Council elects to reduce the permitted number of unrelated individuals it is recommended
that such a provision apply only to neighborhoods that succeed in securing the support of
at least 60% of the property owners located in a plat or phase of a plat. It is also
important to remember that any such action will not eliminate the non-conforming (or
grandfathered) status of properties currently housing four unrelated individuals.
Conclusions
A real opportunity exists in College Station. An opportunity to demonstrate how a
community can welcome thousands of students, address an aging housing stock, and
build strong and sustainable neighborhoods. This opportunity will not be without its
challenges, but then few things that are worth doing come without challenges. This
opportunity requires a clear focus, tailored solutions, and the commitment of all partners.
Implementation of this action plan will result in strong and sustainable neighborhoods
that continue to make College Station a great place to call home for homeowner, renter,
and student alike!
16
Page 9
Re-Assignment Information
City Manager Initiative:
Re-assign personnel from Neighborhood Services from Communications to Planning &
Development Services and personnel from Community Enhancement (Code and
Residential Parking Facilities) to Planning & Development Services
Re-locate Neighborhood Coordinator to the Community & Neighborhood Planning
Division of the P&DS Department July 1, 2008. Position would report to the Assistant
Director – Community & Neighborhood Planning. The office would be physically
located in the P&DS Department library (currently housing Project HOLD). Project
HOLD would be required to relocate its operations. Propose to secure the services of an
intern to aid the Coordinator.
Re-locate Community Enhancement personnel from Fire Services to the Development
Services Division of the P&DS Department. The proposal would include a Supervisor,
responsible for the daily management of the inspectors. The Supervisor would report to
the Building Official and in turn to the Assistant Director – Development Services.
Additionally it is proposed that additional personnel be added sufficient to address an
increasing workload, to permit 24/7 enforcement, and to manage the rental registration
program.
It is proposed that CDBG funding be used exclusively to fund enforcement personnel
assigned to CDBG neighborhoods and to allow additional services by the Community
Development Department and not used to fund other enforcement personnel or
supervisors.
It is proposed that in addition to the assigned CDBG enforcement personnel, the
remaining residential areas be assigned to specific enforcement personnel.
It is proposed that a single enforcement officer be assigned to all non-residential areas of
the city to address code enforcement issues in these areas. It is proposed that parking and
code enforcement work on a schedule that includes evenings and weekends. This will
likely require additional personnel.
On-going transition discussions have are occurring with all parties involved to permit an
effective transition. The final organizational and logistic issues will be worked out as a
part of these discussions. It is expected that the enforcement and parking resources can
be re-assigned beginning in October 2008. Much of 2008 will be used to begin preparing
for implementation of the various items discussed.
17
June 26, 2008
Workshop Agenda Item #5
Draft 2008-09 Community Development Action Plan and Budget
To: Glenn Brown, City Manager
From: David Gwin, Director of Economic and Community Development
Agenda Caption: Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the proposed
Community Development 2008-09 Action Plan.
Recommendation(s): Review proposed Fiscal Year 2008-09 Action Plan and Budget and
provide any input and/or direction.
Summary: Staff will present the proposed FY 2008-2009 Action Plan and Budget for the
upcoming year’s community development programs, projects and activities. Included in the
Action Plan are the goals, objectives and funding recommendations for the proposed
projects, programs and related activities.
Each year, the City must submit to the U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development
(HUD), an Action Plan including descriptions of projects and activities to be funded with the
applicable grants. HUD requires that the Plan, budget and amendments be delivered by
August 15, 2008, therefore, the Action Plan and budget are presented prior to the overall
City budget.
Amounts available for programming in the upcoming year include $1,104,086 in Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds, $645,600 in HOME Investment Partnership Grant
(HOME) funds, and $507,760 in prior year program income including the proceeds from the
sale of the Cedar Creek Apartment Complex and the demolition of the Meridian Apartments.
The expenditure of CDBG and HOME funds must meet one or more of the following national
objectives: (1) benefit low and moderate-income persons; (2) aid in the elimination of slum
and blighting influences, and/or; (3) meet a particular urgent need. CDBG funds may be
used to meet local needs through a wide range of activities, while HOME funds may only be
used for affordable housing activities.
The proposed Action Plan and Budget were developed with input received from a series of
public hearings, program committee meetings, needs assessments, and citizen surveys.
The goals and objectives in the 2005-2009 Consolidated Plan were also followed in
preparing this year's plan. These goals and objectives have been prepared to meet the
needs of the City’s lower-income citizens, and to provide support for families working
towards self-sufficiency and improvement. Staff will return to Council at the July 24th
meeting to make available its final draft of the Action Plan, budget and to request approval.
Historically, the City has utilized these funds for a variety of programs and activities,
including: affordable housing programs (homebuyer assistance, security deposit assistance,
rehabilitation, replacement housing, new construction and emergency repairs); funding of
direct services to low-income families; demolition; commercial rehabilitation; and park,
street, infrastructure and public facility improvements in low-income areas of the City.
Budget & Financial Summary: See attached financial summaries for the proposed FY
2008-2009 Budget for CDBG and HOME funds. Staff will be prepared to answer questions
regarding the proposed Plan and Budget.
18
Attachments:
Attachment 1 - Proposed 2008 - 2009 Community Development Budget Summary
Attachment 2 – Plan Development Process Summary
Attachment 3 - Proposed FY 2008 - 2009 Public Service Funding Recommendations
Attachment 4 – 2008 - 2009 Community Development Goals
Attachment 5 – Unencumbered Community Development Funds Available
Attachment 6 – 2008 Median Income Limits
Attachment 7 – Map of Eligible Community Development Target Areas
Attachment 8 – Community Development Program Descriptions
Attachment 9 – Prior Year’s Community Development Accomplishments
Hard Copy of Proposed Action Plan (Delivered with Council Agenda packets)
19
Attachment 1: Proposed 2008 – 2009 Community Development Budget Summary
PROJECT CDBG & HOME
CARRY-OVER
NEW CDBG & HOME
ALLOCATIONS
CDBG & HOME
TOTAL PROPOSED
Owner-Occupied
Rehabilitation $142,496 $56,718 $199,214
Demolition $10,000 $0 $10,000
Acquisition * $1,124,879 $579,939 $1,704,818
Interim Assistance $5,000 $0 $5,000
Homebuyer Assistance $60,000 $66,000 $126,000
CHDO $465,758 $96,840 $562,598
New Construction $160,858 $300,920 $461,778
Code Enforcement $0 $116,000 $116,000
Tenant Based Rental
Assistance $0 $50,000 $50,000
CHDO Operating
Expenses $62,532 $32,280 $94,812
Public Service Agency
(See Attachment 3) $0 $165,612 $165,612
Affordable Housing –
Cedar Creek Proceeds $250,091 $0 $250,091
TOTAL $4,031,300
* Includes Cedar Creek Transaction Proceeds and Recaptured Meridian Apartment Demolition Funds
20
Attachment 2: Plan Development Process Summary
EVENT DATE
Pre-Application Workshop for Agencies Feb. 22nd
1st Public Hearing on Plan & Budget March 24th
Agency Applications Due April 11th
JRFRC CDBG Public Service Application Review Meetings April 17th
May 1st
May 9th
May 15th
May 23rd
May 30th
June 2nd
June 3rd
Begin 30-Day Public Comment Period June 19th
2nd Public Hearing on Plan & Budget June 25th
Council Presentation of Plan and Budget June 26th a
Adoption of Plan and Budget by Council July 24th
Deadline for Submission to HUD Regional Office August 16th
21
Attachment 3: Proposed FY 2008 – 2009 Public Service Funding Recommendations
2008 – 2009 CDBG Public Service Funding Summary & Recommendations
Agency Program Requested Recommended
Funding Funded Items Client #’s /Cost
per Client
Funding
City
Voices for Children Court Appointed
Special Advocates $25,172 $23,735 Personnel & Printed
Material 145 / 163.61 CS
Brazos Maternal & Child
Health Clinic
The Prenatal Clinic $27,000 $25,000 Ultrasounds & Medical
Supplies 1,300 / $15.23 Bryan
Scotty’s House
Counseling Program $25,000 $23,223 Personnel 150 / $154.83 Bryan
MHMR Authority of BV Mary Lake Drop-In
Center $16,000 $16,000 Van 35 / $457.14 CS
Unity Partners
Supervised Visitation
Program $25,000 $20,436 Personnel, Security,
Rent, Phone 500 / $40.87 Bryan
Twin City Mission
The Bridge Case
Management $36,206 $27,300 Personnel 550 / $49.64 CS & Bryan
Brazos Valley Food
Bank
Backpack Program $30,042 $22,236 Food Supplies 423 / $52.57 CS
Junction Five-O-Five On-Going Employment
Support $35,305 $22,195 Personnel 74 / $299.93 CS
Brazos Valley
Rehabilitation Center
Charitable Services
Program $25,000 $14,500 Charitable Services $56 / $258.93 CS
Big Brothers Big Sisters BV Program $25,000 $12,695 Personnel 205 / $61.33 CS
Sexual Assault
Resource Center Counseling Program $26,662 $14,400 Counseling 135 / $106.67 Bryan
United Way of the BV Financial Stability
Partnership $19,053 $0 N/A N/A N/A
Family Promise of BCS BV Innkeepers Case
Mgmt $25,000 $0 N/A N/A N/A
Aggieland Pregnancy
Outreach
The Momma Club $24,000 $0 N/A N/A N/A
Total $339,268 $221,720
City Department Programs
Kids Klub Subsidized Tuition $21,000 $21,000 N/A 182 / $115.38 N/A
Lincoln Center Summer Program $19,082 $17,082 N/A 800 / $21.35 N/A
22
Attachment 4: 2008 – 2009 Community Development Goals
Housing Goals
v Ensure Adequate Affordable Rental Housing Opportunities for Lower Income Individuals
and Families
v Ensure adequate Affordable Housing Opportunities for Lower Income Special Needs
Populations
v Ensure Adequate Housing Assistance for Lower Income Home Owners
v Ensure Adequate Affordable Housing Opportunities for Lower Income Home Buyers
v Ensure Affordable, Safe and Secure Housing Opportunities for Lower Income Occupants
Homeless Goals
v Help low-income families avoid becoming homeless
v Reach out to homeless persons and assess their individual needs
v Address the emergency shelter and transitional housing needs of homeless persons
v Help homeless persons make the transition to permanent housing and independent living
Non-Housing Goals
v Encourage the Delivery of Human Services to Assist Families in Reaching Their Fullest
Potentials
v Support Public Facilities and Infrastructure to Provide Safe, Secure and Healthy
Environments for Families
v Expand Economic Opportunities for Development of Strong and Diverse Economic
Environment to Break Cycle of Poverty
v Revitalize Declining Neighborhoods in Support of Well Planned Neighborhoods for
Development of Families
23
Attachment 5: Unencumbered Community Development Funds Available
UNENCUMBERED CDBG TOTALS AVAILABLE, FY 2008 – 2009
Projects
Current Year
Carry-Over Not
Encumbered
Proposed CDBG
FY 2008 – 2009
Allocation
Total Unencumbered
FY 2008 – 2009
Allocation
Housing Assistance/Rehab $75,911 $21,718 $97,629
Demolition $10,000 $0 $10,000
Acquisitions $1,124,879 $579,939 $1,704,818
Interim Assistance $5,000 $0 $5,000
Public Service Agencies $0 $165,612 $165,612
Administrative $0 $220,817 $220,817
Code Enforcement $0 $116,000 $116,000
TOTALS $1,215,790 $1,104,086 $2,319,876
UNENCUMBERED HOME TOTALS AVAILABLE, FY 2008 – 2009
Projects
Current Year
Carry-Over Not
Encumbered
Proposed
FY 2008 – 2099
HOME
Allocation
Total Unencumbered
FY 2008 – 2009
Allocation
Housing Assistance/Rehab $66,585 $35,000 $101,565
Homebuyer’s Assistance $60,000 $66,000 $126,000
CHDO $0 $96,840 $96,840
New Construction $160,858 $300,920 $461,778
Administrative $0 $64,560 $64,560
TBRA $0 $50,000 $50,000
CHDO Operating Expenses $0 $32,280 $32,280
TOTALS $287,443 $645,600 $933,043
24
Attachment 6: 2008 Median Income Limits
2008 MEDIAN INCOME LIMITS
City of College Station
Community Development
Household 30% 50% 80% 100%
1 $11,750 $19,550 $31,250 $39,100
2 $13,400 $22,300 $35,700 $44,600
3 $15,100 $25,100 $40,200 $50,200
4 $16,750 $27,900 $44,650 $55,800
5 $18,100 $30,150 $48,200 $60,300
6 $19,450 $32,350 $51,800 $64,700
7 $20,750 $34,600 $55,350 $69,200
8 $22,100 $36,850 $58,950 $73,700
The left column (Household) refers to the number of people in the household. The highlighted
column (80%) refers the maximum income allowed per year by HUD guidelines.
.
Source: http://www.huduser.org/datasets/il/il2008/2008summary.odn?inputname=METRO17780M17780*College+Station-
Bryan%2C+TX+MSA&selection_type=hmfa&year=2008
25
Attachment 7: Map of Eligible Community Development Target Areas
26
Attachment 8: Community Development Program Descriptions
Owner-Occupied Rehabilitation:
Funds will be used for the processing of all housing assistance applications, homeownership and credit
counseling for all applicants, CDBG minor home repairs at a maximum of $3,000 per household and HOME
rehabilitations at a maximum of $25,000 per household. Assistance will be provided to a deferred, 0%-
interest loan.
Demolition:
CDBG will be utilized for the demolition of dilapidated structures to eliminate unsafe and blighting
influences in low- to moderate-income areas of the City.
Acquisition:
CDBG funds and prior year program income received from the Meridian Apartments Demolition Project and
proceeds received from the sale of the Cedar Creek Apartments will be utilized for the purchase of land for
future development to primarily benefit low- to moderate-income residents of the City.
Interim Assistance:
CDBG funds are available to address an urgent community development need.
Down-payment Assistance Program (DAP):
HOME funds will be utilized to assist low- to moderate-income homebuyers with down payment and closing
cost assistance. DAP offers maximum assistance in the amount of $10,000 for non-city owned property
through a deferred, 0%-interest loan with a minimum 5-year affordability period. It also offers a maximum
of $14,999 for City-developed properties or large, 5+-member households.
Community Housing Development Organization (BVCAA):
Federal regulations require that 15% of the HOME grant is set-aside for allocation to an eligible CHDO.
BVCAA is currently the only eligible CHDO partnered with the City of College Station. Funds are to be
used for the development of affordable housing units.
New Construction:
HOME funds will be utilized by the City to develop affordable housing either by the City or through the
leveraging of additional community resources.
Code Enforcement:
CDBG funds are utilized to fund the position of 2.5 code enforcement positions to concentrate code
compliance efforts in the City’s CDBG Target Areas.
Tenant Based Rental Assistance:
HOME funds are provided to Twin City Mission to administer a security deposit assistance program for
residents moving into units in existing Housing Tax Credit apartment complexes in College Station.
CHDO Operating Expenses:
HOME funds are provided to our eligible CHDO, BVCAA, to support the development of affordable housing
units in College Station.
27
Public Service Agency:
Federal regulations allow for 15% of CDBG to be allocated to local non-profits providing health and human
service programs that primarily benefit low- to moderate-income residents of College Station. The Joint
Relief Funding Review Committee reviews the applications received for funding and provides
recommendations for City Council consideration.
Administration:
CDBG and HOME funds are utilized to administer the City’s community development program in
compliance with all applicable federal regulations. Expenses also include administrative support provided
by local service contractor, Project Unity.
28
Attachment 9: Prior Year’s Community Development Accomplishments
The accomplishments for FY 2006 - 2007 include:
v Processed twenty-nine (29) applications for housing assistance;
v Provided homebuyer counseling to fifty-four (54) individuals;
v Completed repairs on one (1) house;
v Completed temporary relocation, demolition and reconstruction for one (1) household;
v Completed the acquisition of two (2) lots for future affordable housing development;
v Completed the demolition of two (2) dilapidated structures;
v Processed a total of 4,848 code enforcement transactions in CDBG Target Areas;
v Completed five (5) public facility projects including the spray park, reception desk, and
parking lot awning at the Lincoln Center; basketball pavilion at Lions Park; and Central
Park Life Trails;
v Provided funding to seven (7) public service programs that served 6,274 unduplicated
clients;
v Completed the construction of three (3) new affordable single-family homes;
v Provided down payment assistance to six (6) eligible families;
v Provided security deposit assistance to eighty-seven (87) households.
29
June 26, 2008
Workshop Agenda Item #6
Zero-Rise for Developments with Floodplain Encroachments
To: Glenn Brown, City Manager
From: Mark Smith, Director of Public Works
Agenda Caption: Presentation, possible action, and discussion approving Zero-Rise for
Developments with Floodplain Encroachments
Recommendation(s): Staff is seeking direction so that proposed ordinances can be
developed that will fulfill the goals of Council.
Summary: At the May 22, 2008 Council Workshop Meeting, City Council voted
unanimously requesting staff to bring this subject item to the June 26th Council Meeting.
This item was also discussed at the June 19th Planning and Zoning Commission. No action
was taken.
Currently, the City of College Station Code of Ordinances, Ch. 13: Flood Hazard Protection
Ordinance, Section 5.G Special Provisions for Floodways (attached) prohibits
encroachments into Floodways unless an engineering report is provided demonstrating no
increase in water surface elevation (zero-rise). In addition to this minimum requirement set
out by FEMA, College Station requires that the Zoning Board of Adjustments considers
specific criteria and prerequisites before granting this associated variance as described in
Section 6: Variances (attached).
This item discusses modifying city regulations to apply these regulations to the Floodplain or
more specifically the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) which is commonly Zones AE and A
as depicted on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs).
Budget & Financial Summary: N/A
Attachments:
1. Ch. 13: Flood Hazard Protection Ordinance, Section 5.G. Special Provisions for
Floodways and Section 6: Variances.
30
G. SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR FLOODWAYS
Located within Areas of Special Flood Hazard established in Section 5-B are areas designated as
floodways. The floodway is an extremely hazardous area due to the velocity of flood waters
which carry debris, potential projectiles, and the potential for erosion; therefore, the following
provisions shall be required:
(Ordinance No. 1728 of October 22, 1987)
(1) Encroachments shall be prohibited, including fill, new construction, substantial
improvements of existing construction, structures, manufactured homes, or other
development. Variances requested on this standard shall be accompanied by a complete
engineering report fully demonstrating that the encroachments shall not result in any
increase in water surface elevation or flood hazard upstream, within, or downstream of
the encroachment location. The engineering report shall conform to the requirements of
the Bryan/College Station Unified Design Guidelines, Standard Details, and Technical
Specifications and shall bear the dated seal and signature of a registered professional
engineer.
(Ordinance No. 2950 of January 11, 2007)
(2) Exemptions for the requirements of Section 5-G may be made in the following cases:
(a) Customary and incidental routine grounds maintenance, landscaping and home
gardening which does not require a building permit, zone change request, or
variance from the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance;
(b) Emergency repairs of a temporary nature made on public or private property
which are deemed necessary for the preservation of life, health, or property, and
which are made under such circumstances where it would be impossible or
impracticable to obtain a development permit.
(c) Temporary excavation for the purpose of maintaining, or repairing any public
street, public utility facility, or any service lines related thereto;
(Ordinance No. 1740 of February 25, 1988)
(d) Proposed street and public utility encroachments shall be exempt from the
requirement of a variance provided that the proposal is accompanied by a
complete engineering report fully demonstrating that the encroachments shall not
result in any increase in water surface elevation or flood hazard upstream, within,
or downstream of the encroachment location. The engineering report shall
conform to the requirements of the Drainage Policy and Design Standards and
shall bear the dated seal and signature of a registered professional engineer.
(Ordinance No. 2939 of November 20, 2006)
(3) All new construction or substantial improvements of existing construction shall be subject
to the methods of flood hazard reduction outlined in Section 5.
(Ordinance No. 1728 of October 22, 1987)
(4) When a regulatory floodway has not been designated, no new construction, substantial
improvements, or other development, including fill, shall be permitted within zones
designated Al-A30 and AE on the community's FIRM, unless it is demonstrated that the
cumulative effect of the proposed development, when combined with all other existing
and anticipated development, will not increase the water surface elevation of the base
flood more than one foot at any point within the community.
(Ordinance No. 1740 of February 25, 1988)
31
SECTION 6: VARIANCES
A. GENERAL
The Zoning Board of Adjustments may authorize a variance to the provisions and requirements of
this chapter when, in their opinion, undue hardship on the owner will result from strict compliance
with those requirements, and when either of the following criteria are met:
(1) There are special circumstances or condition affecting the land involved such that strict
compliance with the provisions and requirements of this chapter will deprive the applicant
of the reasonable use of his land; or,
(2) The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property
right of the applicant; or,
(3) Variances may be issued for the reconstruction, rehabilitation, or restoration of structures
listed on the National Register of Historic Places or the State Inventory of Historic Places,
without regard to the procedures set forth in the remainder of this section.
(Ordinance No. 2277 of November 13, 1997)
B. PREREQUISITES FOR GRANTING OF VARIANCES
Upon consideration of the factors noted above, the specific provisions and requirements of this
chapter, and the intent of this chapter, the Board may grant variances subject to the following
prerequisites:
(1) A variance shall only be granted upon a determination that the variance is the minimum
necessary, considering the flood hazard, or potential flood damage, to afford relief to the
applicant;
(2) The effect of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or
injurious to other property in the City;
(3) The effect of the variance will not increase water surface elevations, flow velocities, or
alter drainage pathways to the extent that there will be any threat to public safety,
extraordinary public expense, increase in nuisance flooding, or be detrimental to other
portions of the major or minor drainage systems;
(4) The effect of the variance will not prevent the orderly subdivision of other land, upstream
or downstream of the subject property, in the City, and;
(5) No variance shall be allowed within any designated floodway if any increase in water
surface elevation would occur during the base flood discharge.
(6) Variances may be issued for new construction and substantial improvements and for
other development necessary for the conduct of a functionally dependent use provided
that (i) the criteria and procedures outlined in this Section for obtaining a variance are
met, and (ii) the structure or other development is protected by methods that minimize
flood damage during the base flood and create no additional threats to public safety.
C. VARIANCE PROCEDURES
The granting of variances shall be subject to and in conformance with the following procedures
and requirements:
(1) The Zoning Board of Adjustments shall hear and render judgment on any requests for
variances from the requirements of this chapter.
32
(2) The Administrator shall maintain a record of all actions involving appeals, and variance
requests, and shall report all variances to the requirements of this chapter to the Federal
Insurance Administration upon request.
(3) Upon consideration of the above criteria, and prerequisites, and the intent of this chapter,
the Board may attach such conditions to the granting of any variance as it deems
necessary to further the purpose and objectives of this chapter.
(4) All requests for variance shall be judged solely on the merits and special conditions of the
case. The granting of a variance based upon the facts and evidence of one request for
variance shall have no bearing on the consideration of any other request for variance.
(5) Before consideration by the Board, a formal request for variance shall be submitted to the
office of the Administrator. The request shall contain sufficient information to:
(a) define specifically which provision or requirement according to this chapter that
allegedly causes the undue hardship;
(b) detail specifically what measures shall be taken to obtain the minimum relief from
said hardship;
(c) define specifically the effects of the variance in terms of water surface elevations,
flood velocities, etc. which pertain to the prerequisites required by this chapter;
and
(d) identify any special conditions which should be considered as criteria for granting
said variance.
After review of the request, the Administrator may require additional information which
he/she deems necessary to fully document the prerequisites required by this chapter for
the granting of a variance. This information shall be provided by the applicant prior to
placement of the variance request on the agenda for consideration by the Board.
(6) Any applicant to whom a variance is granted shall be given written notice that the
structure will be permitted to be built with a lowest floor elevation no more than 3 feet
below the base flood elevation, and that the cost of flood insurance will be commensurate
with the increased risk resulting from the reduced lowest floor elevation.
(7) Any person or persons aggrieved by the decision of the Zoning Board of Adjustments
may appeal such decision to the courts of competent jurisdiction.
33
June 26, 2008
Workshop Agenda Item #7
FY09 Outside Agency Funding Update
To: Glenn Brown, City Manager
From: Jeff Kersten, Chief Financial Officer
Agenda Caption: Presentation, possible action and discussion on an update of the FY09
Outside Agency review process and funding policy.
Recommendation(s): Staff recommends Council receive the information and provide any
desired direction on the Outside Agency Funding Policy.
Summary: On February 8, 2007 the City Council approved a resolution adopting the
Outside Agency Funding Policy. This policy identified 4 categories of outside agencies.
These categories are Contract Partner Agencies, Department Budget Agencies, OAFRC
Reviewed Outside Agencies (non-CDBG), and CDBG Agencies. Council may consider
amending or revising the Outside Agency Funding policy as necessary.
Non-CDBG Outside Agency requests are reviewed by the 7 member Outside Agency Funding
Review Committee (OAFRC) appointed by the City Council. A total of 7 applications were
received for FY09 funding requesting an overall total of $156,131.50. The agencies that
applied are: the Children's Museum, Dispute Resolution Center, Northgate District
Association, RSVP, Sister Cities, TAMU Challenge Works Program, and the TAMU
Cooperative Wildlife Collection. The OAFRC is in the process of reviewing these applications
and will be making a recommendation to City Council as part of the FY09 Budget process.
At the May 22 City Council Meeting, the City Council requested an item to discuss their
policy on funding outside agencies.
Contract Partner Agencies are: the Convention and Visitor's Bureau, the Research Valley
Partnership, and the Arts Council of Brazos Valley. These agencies have submitted budget
requests for FY09 and these requests will be reviewed by staff and presented to the City
Manager and City Council in the near future.
The adopted policy allows that agencies, which provide programs that directly support City
departmental goals and objectives, can be designated Department Budget Agencies. There
are 4 department budget agencies that have submitted budget requests to the City staff.
These agencies are: the George Bush Library and Museum, Keep Brazos Beautiful, Noon
Lions Club - 4th of July Fireworks, and the Brazos Valley Veteran's Memorial. City staff is in
the process of working with these agencies and funding recommendations will be presented
to City Management and City Council as part of the FY09 budget process.
CDBG eligible agencies have been reviewed by the Joint Relief Funding Review Committee
and those budget recommendations will be presented to the City Council as part of the
Community Development budget.
Budget & Financial Summary: Funding for Outside Agencies will be included for Council
consideration in the FY09 Proposed Budget. Final approval of all agency funding will be
determined by Council as part of the approved FY09 Budget.
Attachments:
1. Outside Agency Policy Adopted February 8, 2007
34
Page 1
Outside Agency Funding Policy
Approved by City Council February 8, 2007
Resolution No. 2-08-2007-5
35
Page 2 Outside Agency Funding Policy
City of College Station
Table of Contents
Introduction................................................................................................................................... 3
Section 1 – Policy Statement ...................................................................................................... 4
1.00 Policy Statement .................................................................................................................. 5
1.01 Policy Objectives.................................................................................................................. 5
1.02 Public Purpose Test............................................................................................................. 6
1.04 Enforcement and Implementation .................................................................................... 6
1.05 Amendments and Changes................................................................................................ 6
Section – 2 Contract Partner Agencies .................................................................................... 7
2.01 Contract Partner Agencies Funding Process................................................................... 8
2.02 Contract Partner Agencies Contracts................................................................................ 8
2.03 Reports and Monitoring ..................................................................................................... 9
Section 3 – Outside Service Agencies (Non CDBG)........................................................... 10
3.00 Outside Service Agencies (non CDBG) .......................................................................... 11
3.01 General Eligibility Criteria for Outside Service Agencies (non CDBG)..................... 11
3.01.1 Program Based Funding................................................................................................ 11
3.01.2 Funding Request to Other Public Entities................................................................... 11
3.01.3 Sustainability Test .......................................................................................................... 11
3.01.4 Unified Pre‐Application Workshop............................................................................. 11
3.01.5 Single Source Funding Application............................................................................. 12
3.01.6 Grant Applications......................................................................................................... 12
3.01.7 Funding Period............................................................................................................... 13
3.01.8 Hotel Occupancy Tax Funds Limitation..................................................................... 13
3.02 Outside Social Service Agencies (non‐CDBG eligible)................................................. 14
3.03 Tourism Development and Marketing Agencies.......................................................... 14
3.04 Arts and Culture Agencies............................................................................................... 15
3.04.1 Cultural Arts Agencies (Non ACBV Affiliates) Funding Criteria........................... 15
3.05 Historic Preservation Projects and Museums................................................................ 16
Section 4 – CDBG / Joint Relief Funding Review ............................................................... 17
4.00 CDBG Funded Agencies................................................................................................... 18
4.01 CDBG / Joint Relief Funding Review Criteria............................................................... 18
4.02 CDBG Joint Relief Funding Review Process.................................................................. 18
Section 5 – Outside Agency Funding Review Process ....................................................... 19
5.00 Outside Agency Funding Review Process..................................................................... 20
5.01 Outside Agency Funding Review Committee Evaluation Criteria............................ 20
5.02 Outside Agency Funding Review Committee Recommendations............................. 20
5.03 Funding Outside Agency Requests................................................................................. 20
5.04 Funding Sources................................................................................................................ 21
36
Page 3 Outside Agency Funding Policy
City of College Station
Introduction
This proposed policy presents a comprehensive policy statement by the College Station City
Council in connection with funding for Outside Agencies and programs. The proposed policy
replaces all previous policies adopted by the Council except as specifically noted within this
policy statement. The proposed policy has been divided into five (5) Sections.
Section 1 – General Policy Statement. This Section describes the scope of the Outside Agency
policy, Policy Objectives, Definition of terms used in the policy, and types of Agencies addressed
in the policy.
Section 2 – Contract Partner Agencies. This Section deals with specific agencies that provide
services to the City of College Station. Because of the magnitude of the funding and the unique
nature of the services provided by the Contract Partner Agencies, they are treated on a separate
policy basis from other Outside Service Agencies.
Section – 3 Outside Service Agencies. This section addresses Outside Service Agencies funded
by the City of College Station from city sources other than Community Development Block Grant
Funds.
Section – 4 CDBG Public Service Agencies. This section addresses Outside Public Service
Agencies funded by CDBG funds through the Joint Relief Funding Review process between the
City of College Station and the City of Bryan.
Section – 5 Outside Agency Review Process. This final section describes the review process for
Outside Agency funding.
37
Page 4 Outside Agency Funding Policy
City of College Station
Section 1 – Policy Statement
This Section describes the scope of the Outside Agency Policy, Policy
Objectives, Definition of terms used in the policy, and types of
Agencies addressed in the policy.
38
Page 5 Outside Agency Funding Policy
City of College Station
1.00 Policy Statement
It is the policy of the City of College Station, as adopted by its City Council, to provide funding in
the form of grants to Community organizations and agencies that provide specific services and
programs that support at least one of the following service objectives of the City:
1) Provides a vital social service that is not duplicated by other organizations in the
community or region.
2) Provides a needed cultural or arts amenity to the community that is not duplicated in the
community or region.
3) Provides the City government with a specific economic development or tourism benefit
that is consistent with the Council adopted Strategic Plan.
4) Provides a unique service or program that is better delivered by a Community
organization rather than City government itself.
This policy applies to any Community organization, agency, program, or activity that operates as
a non profit organization and requests a grant of funds from the City of College Station to deliver
the program, service, or activity to College Station citizens.
1.01 Policy Objectives
Community organizations enrich College Station as a community and assist the City government
in achieving its mission … On behalf of the citizens of College Station, home of Texas A&M University,
we will continue to promote and advance the community’s quality of life. Providing public funding to
community organizations require the achievement of public purposes through the statement of
fair and equitable policies.
The use of public money must meet clearly defined standards as mandated by the Texas
Constitution, state statutes, and federal regulations. Those standards demand public funds be
spent for public purposes and not for private benefit. This policy establishes a clear standard to
provide grants to various Community organizations that provide a public purpose by delivering
programs and activities to the citizens of College Station.
This policy has three (3) objectives:
1. To provide a comprehensive statement of policy for funding Community organizations.
2. To provide specific guidance to Community organizations to evaluate their eligibility to
receive public funds from the City of College Station.
39
Page 6 Outside Agency Funding Policy
City of College Station
3. To establish clear guidelines and procedures to be administered by the City Manager
and the City Council appointed review body to evaluate requests for funding from
Community organizations.
1.02 Public Purpose Test
The Texas Constitution, state statutes, and federal regulations establish clear standards for the
use of public money. The standards require cities to spend taxpayer money for public purposes
and prohibit the use of public money for private purposes. The application of this mandate, for
the purposes of this policy, will be accomplished on the basis that the City will fund those
agencies and programs that fully meet the requirements of this policy. Every agency must serve a
public purpose by delivering services that the City government could provide itself but chooses
to deliver the services through a non‐profit entity.
1.03 Definitions
For the purposes of this policy, the following definitions will apply.
Program. Refers to the smallest subpart of an organization or entity.
Capacity Building. Systematic efforts by an organization to develop organizational capabilities to
raise funds, build leadership and stewardship capacity, and increase service impacts.
General and Administrative expenses. Cost of goods and services designed to pay for
administrative services, management or general agency costs not directly attributable to the
delivery of services to clients.
Community Impact Statement. Compilation of data required by this policy that clearly
demonstrates the number of College Station citizens benefiting from the program being
considered for funding by the City of College Station.
Sustainability. The ability of the program being considered for funding to be sustained after City
funding has been exhausted.
1.04 Enforcement and Implementation
The City Manager will ensure this policy is equitably administered. Each agency that receives
City funding will be provided a copy of this policy and the necessary guidelines developed to
fully implement this policy.
1.05 Amendments and Changes
This policy may be amended by resolution of the City Council.
40
Page 7 Outside Agency Funding Policy
City of College Station
Section – 2 Contract Partner Agencies
This Section deals with specific agencies that provide services to
the City of College Station. Because of the magnitude of the
funding and the unique nature of the services provided by the
Contract Partner Agencies, they are treated on a separate policy
basis than other Outside Service Agencies.
41
Page 8 Outside Agency Funding Policy
City of College Station
2.00 Contract Partner Agencies
The City of College Station recognizes there are Community organizations that provide unique
services to the City through providing economic development, tourist development, marketing,
and coordination of cultural arts activities to College Station citizens. Contract Partner Agencies
will be required to follow a distinct and separate annual funding process from all other agencies
covered by this policy.
Agencies that fit the Contract Partner Agencies category are as follows:
Research Valley Partnership (Economic Development)
Convention and Visitors Bureau (Tourism Development and Marketing)
Arts Council of Brazos Valley (Arts and Culture )
The City of College Station also recognizes there are agencies providing programs that directly
support City departmental activities. Funding for these agencies will be included in the proposed
departmental budgets at the discretion of the City Manager. City Council will determine funding
levels for these agencies as part of the departmental budget review process. Agencies funded in
departmental budgets will conform to the same requirements of the Contract Partner agencies.
2.01 Contract Partner Agencies Funding Process
Contract Partner Agencies will use the following procedures for annual funding requests:
a) Submit budget requests to the City Manager by the deadline and in the format
established by the City Manager.
b) Budget requests beyond base budget amounts will be submitted as service level
adjustments to the City Manager for review and recommendation.
c) Agency funding requests will be reviewed during the departmental budget review
process and submitted to City Council at the same time all departmental requests are
submitted.
d) The City Manager will provide recommendations on each request from Contract Partner
Agencies.
e) City Council will approve funding levels for each Contract Partner Agency.
2.02 Contract Partner Agencies Contracts
Contracts will be required for all Contract Partner Agencies who are allocated funds by the City
Council. Contracts will be approved by the City Attorney and submitted to City Council for final
approval.
42
Page 9 Outside Agency Funding Policy
City of College Station
2.03 Reports and Monitoring
Quarterly Reports will be required of all Contract Partner Agencies. Quarterly Reports will
include quarterly financial statements that describe specifically how the funds from the City of
College Station are being utilized, a narrative of program activities for the organization, and
service levels and performance measures for each organization. The City will monitor Contract
Partner Agencies to ensure City funds are used in compliance with contract language and to
achieve public purposes.
a. Continued funding is contingent on the timely submission of required Quarterly Reports.
b. Organizations that receive funds from the Hotel Occupancy Tax Fund will meet the
requirements of this section and all of the requirements listed in the state law regarding the
proper reporting and accounting of Hotel Occupancy Tax funds.
c. An annual report will be prepared by all Contract Partner Agencies for City Council review
as a part of the budget review process.
The following requirements apply to the Contract Partner agencies per Council Motion on
February 8, 2007:
d. Contract Partner Agencies will allow for three (3) City of College Station City Council
appointees on the Agency Board of Directors.
e. Contract Partner Agencies are subject to the Open Records Act.
f. Contract Partner Agencies will post agendas on their website at least seven (7) days prior to
meetings.
g. Contract Partner Agency General Board Meetings will be open to the Public. Executive
sessions may be held for private matters such as personnel, competitive matters, and other
items deemed not to be in the best interest of the Agency to be discussed in public.
43
Page 10 Outside Agency Funding Policy
City of College Station
Section 3 – Outside Service Agencies (Non CDBG)
This section addresses Outside Service Agencies funded by the City
of College Station from city sources other than Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds.
44
Page 11 Outside Agency Funding Policy
City of College Station
3.00 Outside Service Agencies (non CDBG)
All agencies, except agencies funded as part of a City departmental budget, Contract Partner
Agencies and CDBG eligible Public Service programs, requesting program funding will be
required to follow the Outside Service Agency funding requirements established by this Section
of the Outside Agency Funding Policy.
Outside Service Agencies fall in four (4) categories:
Outside Social Service Agencies (non CDBG eligible)
Tourism Development and Marketing Agencies
Arts and Culture Agencies
Historic Preservation and Museums
3.01 General Eligibility Criteria for Outside Service Agencies (non CDBG)
Outside Service Agencies must meet the following criteria and standards to be eligible for
funding.
3.01.1 Program Based Funding
The City will fund Agency programs only. An agency must demonstrate a program serves a
public purpose and the program has a positive community impact with the funds provided by
the City.
3.01.2 Funding Request to Other Public Entities
Agencies are required to request and document in the application similar funding requests to the
City of Bryan and Brazos County, if their primary mission serves Brazos County. When an
agency also serves the Brazos Valley region, they must request and document similar funding
request from other regional entities.
3.01.3 Sustainability Test
An Outside Service Agency must be able to clearly demonstrate the ability to sustain the program
being submitted for funding beyond the three (3) year City funding period. The City of College
Station does not desire to fund programs that will only survive as long as City funding is
available. Applicants must submit full documentation and plans demonstrating the program can
be sustained beyond the three (3) year funding period.
3.01.4 Unified Pre‐Application Workshop
Outside Service Agencies must participate in a City sponsored Unified Pre‐Application
workshop to be eligible to submit an application for funding. During the required Unified Pre‐
Application Workshop, Outside Social Service Agencies will determine if their programs(s)
qualify for CDBG funding. Technical assistance will be provided during the Unified Pre‐
Application Workshop to assist agencies to qualify for CDBG funding. The Unified Pre‐
Application workshop will provide at minimum the following elements:
45
Page 12 Outside Agency Funding Policy
City of College Station
a. Distribution and discussion of the Council adopted policy on Outside Agency funding.
b. Discussion of eligibility requirements for funding.
c. Distribution of application form and required submittals with the application.
d. Presentation of application timetables and schedules.
e. Explanation of evaluation criteria and review process for applications.
f. Response to specific questions from potential applicants.
3.01.5 Single Source Funding Application
City funding will be provided from one source only. No Outside Service Agency will be
permitted to submit an application for City funding from more than one source of funds during a
funding cycle. Programs eligible to receive CDBG funding may not apply for other City funding
in addition to or in lieu of non‐CDBG funding. Applicants are required to attend the Unified Pre‐
application workshop to assist them in the selection of the best single source of funds.
City funding is limited by statutes and regulations for specific purposes. City sources of funding
to be granted to Outside Service Agencies are as follows:
- Hotel Occupancy Tax can be used for tourism development, arts, historic
preservation, activities encouraging tourists to visit historic sites or museums, and
event marketing.
- General Fund may be used for programs and activities that meet the public purpose
test for the expenditure of public funds.
3.01.6 Grant Applications
All applications for grants from the City must be in writing using the prescribed format and
schedule established by the City Manager. Grant applications will contain the following
elements:
a. The Applicant must clearly demonstrate how the program meets the mission, vision, and
values of the City of College Station.
b. The Applicant must demonstrate the program meets the Public Purpose Test for the
expenditure of public funds.
c. The Applicant must clearly demonstrate positive community impacts by submitting a
Community Impact Statement.
46
Page 13 Outside Agency Funding Policy
City of College Station
d. The Applicant must demonstrate capability to generate necessary funds to sustain operations
outside the grant funding requested from the City.
e. The Applicant must be able to demonstrate a 3 year past history and current request for
funding from the City of Bryan and Brazos County, if the grant request is represented to
serve Brazos County.
f. Grants to Agencies will be awarded on a program basis. The applicant must demonstrate the
program delivers a specified service or activity that can be segmented and measured for
results.
g. Grant applications must be submitted in writing using the application form and format
established by the City Manager. All applications must be submitted in hard copy at the
location designated by the City Manager to receive grant applications. Grant applications
will not be accepted via electronic transmission.
h. Applications must be submitted by the deadline date established by the City Manager.
Applications must be complete in all respects upon submittal. Incomplete or late applications
will be returned and denied processing for the grant period for which they are submitted.
i. Grant applications will be accepted for the upcoming funding cycle only. The City will not
accept grant applications for any future funding period.
3.01.7 Funding Period
The City of College Station provides an initial grant for a one‐year period. Outside Service
Agencies will receive funds for a single program for no more than three (3) years on a declining
funding bases. The City of College Station is not obligated to fund a program that is approved for
three consecutive years. Agencies must apply for program funding each year.
b. Year 1 100% of initial funding
c. Year 2 50% of initial funding
d. Year 3 25% of initial funding
Once an Outside Service Agency has exhausted program funding eligibility, the agency may
apply for funding of a different program. In no event will multiple programs or activities be
funded from the same agency during the same funding year.
3.01.8 Hotel Occupancy Tax Funds Limitation
The use of Hotel Occupancy Tax funds is restricted by state statutes and the priority needs of the
City of College Station. Hotel Occupancy Tax funds will be limited as follows:
47
Page 14 Outside Agency Funding Policy
City of College Station
a. In no event will more than 45% of Hotel Occupancy Tax funds collected by the City of
College Station be used to fund convention visitor, marketing, and tourism development
activities.
b. In no event, will more than 15% of Hotel Occupancy Tax funds collected by the City of
College Station be used for cultural arts programs in compliance with State statutes.
c. In no event will more than 1% of Hotel Occupancy Tax funds collected by the City of College
Station be used to fund historical restoration and preservation projects or activities or
advertising and conducting solicitations and promotional programs to encourage tourists
and convention delegates to visit preserved historic sites or museums.
d. The balance of the Hotel Occupancy Tax funds collected by the City of College Station will be
dedicated to other eligible expenses, including the development of the College Station
Convention Center and Hotel.
3.02 Outside Social Service Agencies (non‐CDBG eligible)
Outside Social Service Agencies that are not eligible for CDBG funding may submit an
application for City funding if the Outside Social Service Agency meets the following criteria:
a. The program must provide an essential service, serve a public purpose, and be the only
program providing such services in the College Station.
b. Requests for funding ongoing administrative costs will not be considered. Funding will only
be considered for program specific or capacity building activities.
c. Social service programs may only be granted funding from the City of College Station for a
maximum of three (3) years beginning in FY08 through the Outside Agency process.
d. The program must meet the Sustainability Test as required by this policy.
e. Clients served by a program must be primarily located in College Station. Client intake forms
or proof of clientele will be required.
f. No more than 25% of a program’s budget may be used for general and administrative
expenses. At least 75% of the Program’s budget must be dedicated to program specific
activity.
3.03 Tourism Development and Marketing Agencies
It is recognized that various community organizations provide excellent tourism development
and marketing programs beyond the comprehensive Bryan‐College Station Convention and
Visitors Bureau (CVB) programs. As such, the City will consider applications from Agencies that
desire program funding for tourism development and marketing community events and
activities consistent with the statutory requirements for the use of Hotel Occupancy Tax funds.
48
Page 15 Outside Agency Funding Policy
City of College Station
Tourism Development and Marketing Agencies may submit an application for Hotel Occupancy
Tax funding if the Agency meets the following criteria:
a. The program must provide a tourism development and marketing program consistent with
State statutes and not duplicated by the CVB programs.
b. Requests for funding of ongoing general and administrative costs will not be considered.
Funding will only be considered for program or capacity building activities.
c. Tourism development and marketing programs may only be granted funding from the City
of College Station for a maximum of three (3) years beginning in FY08 through the Outside
Agency process.
d. The program must primarily serve the College Station community. Programs that are
regional in focus will not be funded since they are likely to duplicate CVB programs and
activities.
e. The program must meet the Sustainability Test as required by this policy.
f. No more than 25% of a program’s budget may be used for general and administrative
expenses. At least 75% of the Program’s budget must be dedicated to program specific
activity.
3.04 Arts and Culture Agencies
Arts and Culture programming is vital to the College Station community. While the City of
College Station provides funding through ACBV to support arts and culture coordination
activities, funding will be considered for Arts and Culture Agencies that do not qualify or
participate in the Arts Council Affiliate program. Funding for agencies that are not participants in
ACBV funding will be administered using the criteria set forth in this policy. If an agency
receives funds as an Arts Council Affiliate, they will not be eligible to receive funds from any
other City source of funds.
3.04.1 Cultural Arts Agencies (Non ACBV Affiliates) Funding Criteria
a. The program must provide a cultural arts program consistent with State statutes regulating
the use of Hotel Occupancy Tax funds and not duplicate programs funded through ACBV.
b. Requests for funding of ongoing general and administrative costs will not be considered.
Funding will only be considered for program specific activities.
c. Cultural Arts programs may only be granted funding from the City of College Station for a
maximum of three (3) years beginning in FY08 through the Outside Agency process.
d. The program must meet the Sustainability Test as required by this policy.
e. The program must primarily serve the College Station community. Programs that are
regional in focus will not be funded as they are likely to duplicate ACBV programs and
activities.
f. No more than 25% of a program’s budget may be used for general and administrative
expenses. At least 75% of the Program’s budget must be dedicated to program specific
activity.
49
Page 16 Outside Agency Funding Policy
City of College Station
3.05 Historic Preservation Projects and Museums
It is recognized that various community organizations provide excellent historic preservation and
museum programs. As such, the City will consider applications from Agencies who desire
program funding for historic preservation or activities encouraging tourists to visit preserved
historic sites or museums consistent with the statutory requirements for the use of Hotel
Occupancy Tax funds.
Historic preservation agencies and museums may submit an application for program funding
from the Hotel Occupancy Tax if the Agency meets the following criteria:
g. The program must provide programs or activities encouraging historical restoration,
preservation, or tourists to visit preserved historic sites or museums consistent with State
statutes and not duplicated by City programs or other City funded agencies.
h. Requests for funding of ongoing general and administrative costs will not be considered.
Funding will only be considered for program or capacity building activities.
i. Historic Preservation projects and Museums may only be granted funding from the City of
College Station for a maximum of three (3) years beginning in FY08 through the Outside
Agency process.
j. The program must primarily serve the College Station community.
k. The program must meet the Sustainability Test as required by this policy.
l. No more than 25% of a program’s budget may be used for general and administrative
expenses. At least 75% of the Program’s budget must be dedicated to program specific
activity.
50
Page 17 Outside Agency Funding Policy
City of College Station
Section 4 – CDBG / Joint Relief Funding Review
This section addresses Outside Public Service Agencies funded with
CDBG funds through the Joint Relief Funding Review process
between the City of College Station and the City of Bryan.
51
Page 18 Outside Agency Funding Policy
City of College Station
4.00 CDBG Funded Agencies
Agencies may qualify for CDBG funding based on criteria and guidelines established by the US
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Joint Relief Funding Review
guidelines established by the cities of College Station and Bryan. Programs who qualify for Public
Service funding under CDBG guidelines may not apply for City of College Station funding.
4.01 CDBG / Joint Relief Funding Review Criteria
The following criteria will be used to determine if a program is eligible for CDBG funding:
a. The program must be located within the City limits of Bryan or College Station;
b. The program or agency must have a non‐profit status;
c. The program must serve and be able to document that a minimum of 51 percent of the
requested funded program’s clientele is at or below 80 percent of the median income for
Bryan/College Station (as defined by HUD);
d. The program must provide evidence of ability to understand and comply with all
applicable city, state, and federal regulations.
4.02 CDBG Joint Relief Funding Review Process
Agencies who have qualified programs for consideration of CDBG funding will participate in the
Joint Relief Funding Review (JRFR) process.
The cities of College Station and Bryan have established a policy that requires all programs
submitting proposals for CDBG funds must participate in the Joint Relief Funding Review (JRFR)
Process. By reference, this policy adopts the JRFR polices as amended February 23, 2006 and
requires all agencies seeking CDBG funds to participate in the JRFR process.
52
Page 19 Outside Agency Funding Policy
City of College Station
Section 5 – Outside Agency Funding Review Process
This final section describes the review process for Outside Agency
funding.
53
Page 20 Outside Agency Funding Policy
City of College Station
5.00 Outside Agency Funding Review Process
All applications for public funding, except as exempted by this policy, will be presented to the
Council appointed Outside Agency Funding Review Committee. The Committee Chair, in
coordination with the City Manager, will establish the review schedule for all completed
applications to conduct public meetings for the purpose of preparing recommendations for
funding to the City Council.
5.01 Outside Agency Funding Review Committee Evaluation Criteria
The Council appointed Outside Agency Funding Review Committee (OAFRC) will use the
following criteria to evaluate applications coming before the Committee.
a. The public purpose to be served by the program proposed for funding. Each program funded
by the City of College Station must meet the purpose test established in this policy.
b. Community impact. The program must have a substantive impact on the College Station
community consistent with the mission and priorities established by the City Council.
c. Compliance with requirements of the Outside Agency Funding Policy. The Committee will
consider both the completeness and timeliness of the application in adherence to the
requirements of this policy.
d. Essential Service. The program must provide an essential service, serve a public purpose,
and is the only program providing such services in the College Station.
e. Sustainability Test. The Agency must demonstrate sufficient plans and capabilities to
continue the program after City funding has expired. Programs that fail to meet the
Sustainability Test will not be funded.
f. Availability of funds. The Committee will be provided each year the total funding available
to be allocated to Outside Service Agencies. The Committee will allocate funds to programs
that are determined to best serve the public interest and are consistent with this policy.
5.02 Outside Agency Funding Review Committee Recommendations
The Outside Agency Funding Review Committee (OAFRC) will prepare recommendations for
City Council that identify programs recommended for funding and funding amounts
recommended. The OAFRC will also provide the City Council a written narrative that explains
its rationale for its recommendations.
5.03 Funding Outside Agency Requests
The City Manager is required by Charter to develop an annual budget that estimates the
revenues and expenses for College Station city government. The City Manager will prepare an
estimate of available funding to support the Council’s Outside Agency Funding Policy. The City
54
Page 21 Outside Agency Funding Policy
City of College Station
Council and Outside Agency Funding Review Committee will be provided the available funding
estimate in writing together with the total dollar request from Outside Agencies.
5.04 Funding Sources
The City Manager will have the following sources of funds to fund the Council’s Outside Agency
Funding Policy.
Community Development Block Grant Funds limited to 15% of the total funds as required by
HUD regulations.
Hotel Occupancy Tax Funds limited by statutory restrictions and funds required for the
City’s planned Convention Center and Hotel. No more than 45% of Hotel Occupancy Tax
funds collected by the City of College Station will be used to fund convention visitor,
marketing, and tourism development. No more than 15% of the Hotel Occupancy Tax funds
collected by the City of College Station will be used for cultural arts programs in compliance
with State statutes. No more than 1% of Hotel Occupancy Tax funds collected by the City of
College Station will be used for historic preservation or activities encouraging tourists to visit
preserved historic sites or museums.
General Fund limited to 0.5% of General Fund revenues less Return on Investment dollars
remitted to General Fund.
The total funds allocated from the General Fund to fund Outside Service Agencies will not
exceed 85% of the available funds. The balance of these funds (15%) will be available for use
by the City Council to support Council corporate sponsorship activities.
55
June 26, 2008
Workshop Agenda Item #8
Additional Proposed Northgate Public Improvements
To: Glenn Brown, City Manager
From: David Gwin, Director of Economic and Community Development
Agenda Caption: Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding various proposed
public facility and district identity improvements in the Northgate District.
Recommendation(s): Staff recommends approval of the proposed public facility and
identity infrastructure improvements in Northgate. Staff also recommends that the residual
funding be retired.
Summary: At the January 10, 2008 City Council Workshop, staff received direction from
Council to initiate the planning, design and construction of a public restroom facility on the
Patricia Street Promenade in Northgate. During that discussion, Council also instructed staff
to explore alternative projects that might be better suited for Northgate in order that they
could replace the planned entry-way and water feature projects
Staff has identified several public facility improvements and identity-supporting features
that are visible, affordable and could be implemented in a timely manner. They are:
1. District Unique Signage
Propose to install district-unique signage at approximately forty-two (42) intersections.
Potentially host a design competition to select a design for the entire District. Depending on
the final design, this project would either mount the new sign atop the current posts or fully
replace all signs and posts to protect against theft and/or vandalism.
Initial analysis indicates that the project as outlined above would very conservatively cost
approximately $50,000 for materials and labor and would take approximately two to three
months to fully implement. This effort would include a very attractive and Northgate-
appropriate signage system.
2. Patricia Street Parking Lot Refurbishing
Re-dig and replace the limited and waning landscaping around the perimeter of the surface
parking lot. Staff also proposes to install eight (8) large planters that will be placed
between the parking meters along the center island in the surface lot to soften the parking
area and make it more attractive. Finally, staff proposes that the parking area be re-striped
and curbing re-painted.
The estimated cost for the removal, purchase and installation of the perimeter plantings and
center island planters would total approximately $13,972. It is anticipated that both of
these will be completed between September and October 2008. The parking lot re-painting
is estimated to cost $3,500 for materials and labor and would plan to be completed prior to
the beginning of school.
3. Second Street Bike Racks and New Trash Receptacles
Purchase and install approximately ten (10) new bike racks to be placed along the Second
Street Promenade to alleviate existing bicycle clutter and congestion. Staff has initiated
contact with the management of Traditions Dormitory and they have indicated interest in a
cost-sharing arrangement with the City on this project. Staff is also recommending the
56
purchase and installation of ten (10) additional 36-gallon decorative trash receptacles to be
placed throughout the area surrounding both promenade areas. Several of these are to
replace damaged or missing receptacles and the balance would be new service.
The estimated total cost for the bicycle racks is $7,000 and the total estimated cost for the
trash receptacles is $9,295.
4. Traffic Control Bollards
Purchase and install twenty-three (23) traffic control bollards to be regularly deployed
during the late evening hours on Thursday, Friday and Saturday for overall pedestrian
safety. These hydraulically-assisted, traffic control devices would be placed at four (4)
intersections: 1) University and College Main; 2) College Main and Patricia Street, 3)
University and Lodge Street; and 4) a half closure at College Main and Church, which would
only allow traffic to exit the immediate area and thus help to alleviate traffic congestion
during these periods of intense pedestrian usage.
The total estimated cost for delivery and installation of the units is approximately $87,200.
5. Promenade Cleaning, Repair and Re-Painting
In addition to the above proposed projects, the City’s Facilities Maintenance staff has
already contracted with Jamail Smith Contractors to clean, repair and re-paint all of the
prominent structural features in the Patricia Street Promenade area.
This project is currently scheduled to be completed this Summer at a cost of approximately
$40,000, which is being paid for with currently budgeted funds.
Budget & Financial Summary: With Council’s decision to retire the entry way and water
feature projects, $321,161 was potentially made available for other projects. Staff
recommends reallocating a portion of this funding for the identity and improvement projects
outlined above. The identity and improvement projects, not including those that have
already been contracted by Facilities Maintenance are estimated to cost approximately
$175,892 – this includes an estimated $5,000 for contingencies in addition to the estimates
outlined above. If approved, this would leave an estimated balance of $145,269 that could
be retired or allocated to another project.
Attachments:
Attachment 1 – Proposed Project Details
Attachment 2 – Map of Proposed Projects
57
Attachment 1: Northgate Identity and Facility Improvements Detail Analysis
Project 1. District Unique Signage
Includes the design and installation of district unique street sign blades that are to be
mounted on existing sign poles at approximately forty-two (42) intersections throughout
the district. These signs could also replace the current signage that depicts the former
City Logo. Due to limited staff resources, the production and installation would likely be
contracted out. TAPCO, Inc., which was used in the Copperfield/Crescent Pointe
signage project, has been recommended as a potential contractor for this project.
Estimated Cost: Materials: $150 per sign / $8,250 Total
Labor: $150 per location / $7,650 Total
Est. Total: $15,900
Project could entail completely replacing all current street signage with new decorative
blades and securing mechanisms. This would total approximately one hundred-ten
(110) blades and fifty-five mounting sets.
Estimated Cost: Materials: $178 per sign / $19,580 Total
Labor: $150 per location / $7,650 Total
Est. Total: $27,230
Project could also include several additional improvements including the installation of
decorative posts and bases.
Estimated Cost: Materials: $178 per sign / $19,580 Total
$ 90 per post / $4,590 Total
$255 per decorative base / $13,005 Total
Labor: $250 per location / $12,750 Total
Est. Total: $49,925
Timeline: Signs only: Approximately 3 -5 weeks delivery/install + bid time
Signs/Posts: 4 weeks to delivery / 2 weeks to install + bid time
Implementation Partner(s): Public Works (Streets & Traffic)
58
Project 2. Patricia Street Parking Lot Refurbishing
SURFACE LOT VEGETATION
Removal and replacement of Pyracantha plantings surrounding the surface parking lot
with five (5) gallon Buford Hollies. Of the 104 Pyracantha that were previously planted
only sixty-two (62) remain in place and, of those, most have outlasted their useful life.
The hollies, of which 104 would be planted would grow better in the limited space and
require much less maintenance. The price estimates and timeline are based on this
project being contracted out by the City’s Parks and Recreation Department.
Estimated Cost: Materials: $22 per plant / $2,288 Total
Labor: $620
Est. Total: $2,908
Timeline: Approximately 2 - 3 weeks for delivery and installation + bid time
(Installation anticipated for October to coincide with the end of the
growing season)
Implementation Partner(s): Parks and Recreation
SURFACE LOT MEDIAN PLANTERS
Installation of approximately eight (8) large planters to be evenly spaced between the
parking meters located in the center area of the surface lot. These planters are
expected to be approximately 36” in diameter would be self watering and hold a yet to
be determined tree or other shrubbery.
Estimated Cost: Materials/Labor: $1,383 per planter / $11,064 Total
Est. Total: $11,064
Timeline: Approximately 2 - 3 weeks for delivery and installation + bid time
(Installation anticipated for October to coincide with the end of the
growing season)
Implementation Partner(s): Parks and Recreation
SURFACE LOT STRIPING
Re-striping the parking area and re-painting curbs within the lot. Cost estimate provided
by the Facilities Maintenance Division with work performed by the City.
Estimated Cost: Materials/Labor: $3,500 Total
Timeline: Summer – Once an 8-hour timeframe can be arranged with the
various stakeholders.
Implementation Partner(s): Public Works (Facilities Maintenance & Streets)
59
Project 3. Second Street Promenade Bike Racks and Trash
Receptacles Bike Racks
BIKE RACKS
Installation of bike racks along the 2nd Street Promenade to alleviate existing congestion
and safety hazards. Currently, the bicycle racks that were installed by the Traditions
Dormitory as well as those near the parking garage are no longer sufficient in be able to
store the number of bicycles being used by residents and patrons of the area. This has
created a mass of bicycles strewn about the 2nd Street Promenade during the school
year and is not aesthetically pleasing. Staff recommends purchasing five (5) to ten (10)
new racks, each with a nine (9) bike capacity. Cost estimates are based on their
suggested supplier, UpBeat, Inc. There is also the potential for cost sharing with
Traditions Dormitory paying for half of the total amount.
Estimated Cost: Materials: $400 - $600 per rack
$4000 - $6000
Labor: $1000 installation / depending on rack type
Est. Total: $5,000 - $7,000
Timeline: 3 – 4 Weeks for Delivery / Installation + Bid Time
(Traditions Dormitory prefers to have them in prior to mid-August)
Implementation Partner(s): Parks and Recreation / Traditions Dormitory
DECORATIVE TRASH RECEPTACLES
Installation of ten (10) new decorative trash receptacles to match the current units in
place throughout the immediate Promenade area. Staff will be working with Facilities
Maintenance to establish where the additional receptacles will be most effective and
ultimately utilized. The trash receptacles are to be the ES-142 36-gallon receptacle
from Victor Stanley, Inc. They will come with a standard tapered formed lid and painted
Tavern Square Green.
Estimated Cost: Materials: $692 per receptacle / $6,920 total
Labor: $50 per receptacle / $500 total
Freight: $1,875
Est. Total: $9,295
Timeline: 3 – 4 Weeks Delivery / Installation + Bid Time
Implementation Partner(s): Public Works (Facilities Maintenance)
60
Project 4. Traffic Control Bollards
For many years, Police has been active in managing pedestrian and traffic safety in the
Northgate District. With general operational safety as a primary concern, Police and
Public Works have identified and recommended that the City install twenty-three (23)
traffic control bollards at four (4) intersections in the District: 1) University and College
Main; 2) College Main and Patricia Street, 3) University and Lodge Street; and 4) a half
closure at College Main and Church, which would only allow traffic to exit the immediate
area. Staff has identified a retractable manual bollard by Cal Pipe Manufacturing that
could be easily installed in the subject area and ultimately operated and managed by
the City’s Police officers.
Estimated Cost: Materials/Delivery: $1,800 per unit / $43,200 Total
Installation/Labor: $1,898 per unit / $44,000 Total
Est. Total: $87,200
Timeline: Mid-September
Implementation Partner(s): Public Works (Streets & Traffic) & Police
Total Cost Analysis for Projects 1 - 4
Initial Budgeted Items
Water Features: $171,161
Entry Ways: $150,000
Total: $321,161
Project Estimates
Signage: $15,900 - $49,925
Vegetation: $ 2,908
Planters: $11,064
Lot Striping: $ 3,500
Bike Racks: $ 5,000 - $ 7,000
Bollards: $87,200
Receptacles: $ 9,295
Contingency: $ 5,000
Total: $139,867 - $175,892
Residual Balance
Total: $145,269 - $181,294
61
Project 5. Promenade Cleaning, Repair, Re-Painting
Provided as general information, this project is already under contract by the City’s
Facilities Maintenance Division to be completed this Summer by Jamail Smith
Contractors. Funding for this project will be coming from the 2008 Facilities
Maintenance budget.
This project will include repair, preparation and painting of the south-entry and east-
entry pavilions; replacement of all rotted wood and preparation and painting of the
structures, tables and benches within the two central pavilions; preparation and painting
of bottle cap alley entryway, east-side entry arch, trash receptacles, dumpster area
enclosure, light poles, parking meters, clock, and metal sign poles. The project will also
include repair or removal of damaged bollards, non-functional electrical outlets and
installation of covers around the base feet of the pavilions. All painting and repair work
to be contracted out by Facilities Maintenance to Jamail Smith Contractors.
Estimated Cost: Materials/Labor: $40,000 Total
Timeline: Project already scheduled to be completed this Summer.
Likely Partner(s): Public Works (Facilities Maintenance)
62
Attachment 2 – Map of Proposed Projects
LEGEND
TIF Boundary
Bollard Locations
Signage Locations
Promenade Refurbish
Parking Lot Refurbish
Bike Rack Location
!H
63
June 26, 2008
Workshop Agenda Item #9
Pre-Retreat Discussion
To: Glenn Brown, City Manager
From: City Manager’s Office
Agenda Caption: Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a discussion of
the City Council’s expectations for the Council retreat scheduled for June 30 and July 1.
Recommendation(s): N/A
Summary: The City Council’s annual summer retreat has been scheduled for June 30 and
July 1 in Sugar Land, Texas. Mr. Ron Holifield will be facilitating the retreat, which will also
include a tour of the Sugar Land City Hall.
With this workshop item, Staff is seeking Council feedback on what they would like to
accomplish at the retreat and this information will be passed on to the facilitator.
Additional details of the retreat as well as Mr. Holifield’s biography are included in the
attachments.
Budget & Financial Summary: N/A
Attachments:
1. Retreat Description
2. Ron Holifield Biography
64
College Station City Council Retreat
Sugar Land, Texas
June 30 – July 1
DAY 1
The retreat will begin promptly at 11:00 a.m. with a working lunch. This will be followed
by a session led by the facilitator Ron Holifield and his associate Randy Mayeaux.
After a brief break, Ron will proceed into an overview of strategic visioning including the
following topics:
§ Barriers to creating a unified vision
§ What a meaningful strategic visioning process looks like?
§ What does it take to become unified?
§ How to avoid getting off track on your vision making your vision a reality
At this point the group will walk across the Town Square area to the Sugar Land City
Hall. The group will be welcomed by Mayor Pro Tem Dennis Parmer and a Presentation
on the Town Square Vision and Implementation will be provided by Economic
Development Director Regina Morales. The College Station contingent will then split
into groups and receive a tour of the City Hall. College Station Council and staff may
have the opportunity to interact with their Sugar Land counterparts.
The day will wrap up with dinner at 6:30 at P.F. Changs, which is also located in the
Sugar Land Town Square development. Afterwards, members are free to walk around the
development or proceed to activities on their own.
DAY 2
The second day of the retreat will begin at 8:00 a.m. with a continental breakfast and will
proceed into identifying the vision of the City Council for the City of College Station.
This will be accomplished by answering a number of questions such as the following:
o What should be the City Council’s primary concern right now?
o What needs the most attention inside the organization right now (problem,
challenge, improvement or opportunity)?
o Where should the city focus most discretionary resources in the next two
years?
o What is most threatened in College Station that we need to protect?
o What most needs to be added to College Station?
65
o What most needs to be improved?
o What kind of community do you want to be 10 years from now?
o What is the single greatest long term challenge that needs to be addressed
now to avoid problems 20 years from now?
o What are the secondary problems facing College Station?
o What are the greatest unused assets in College Station?
This portion of the retreat will last approximately half the morning. The City Council will
spend the second half of the morning after the break synthesizing the responses discussed
earlier into tangible categories including:
§ Major Themes and Trends
§ Major Vision Components
§ Prioritizing Goals
§ Practical Implementation
The portion of the retreat at the Sugar Land Marriott is concluded at this point. The
Management Team members will be dismissed and Council will travel to the La Centerra
development in Katy for lunch and a walking tour of the area led by Economic and
Community Development Director David Gwin. Further description of the trip to La
Centerra as well as a description of the development is provided on the following pages.
66
67
68
69
70
Ron Holifield joined GRS in 1996 after almost two decades in city management with six
different Texas cities. He has been active in legislative advocacy for almost 20 years,
having "learned the ropes" under the guidance of legendary Texas lobbyist Dick Brown,
when Mr. Brown served as Executive Director of the Texas Municipal League. Ron has
done extensive work on campaigns for a variety of candidates. He is active in the
Republican Party, but has excellent relationships with numerous Democratic office holders
as well.
Holifield served as City Manager in Garland, DeSoto, Farmersville and Sundown, and as
Assistant City Manager in Plano, where he created Plano's first legislative affairs program
in 1987. He also served on the City Manager’s staff in Lubbock. Although Ron left city
management to join GRS as a Principal, he has maintained a high profile in the city
management profession nationally, and is a recognized leader in innovation and in
initiatives to run government using private business principles. Most recently, his
leadership led "Texas Business Magazine" to name DeSoto as one of the "Best Managed
Cities in Texas," and Texas Outlook Magazine to recognize DeSoto as "One of the Top
Twenty Five Texas Cities for Business Relocation."
Mr. Holifield is a frequent speaker at city management conferences nationwide. He has
had a book published jointly by the International City Management Association, and the
Innovations Groups, Inc., and has contributed to a number of other publications and
articles. His authorship and speaking engagements have helped him develop a strong
network of city managers nationwide. In addition, he has a detailed understanding of how
to get decisions made (or prevented) within government bureaucracies.
Mr. Holifield has been particularly active in efforts to re-engineer government and in
pushing new public-private initiatives. He also serves on the Governmental Affairs
Committee of three Chambers of Commerce, and on the Dallas Fort Worth Film
Commission Board, as well as the Dallas County Parks and Open Space Board.
The organizations led by Mr. Holifield have received numerous state and national awards
in the areas of economic development, environmental stewardship, community policing,
organizational innovation, and financial management. He previously served on the
ICMA/Innovations Groups National Management Practices Panel, and on the Texas
Innovations Groups Executive Committee, as well as on numerous committees of the
Texas Municipal League. He remains active with the International City Management
Association, the Texas City Management Association, and the Innovation Groups, among
others.
71