• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
City Council May 17, 2011 Agenda Packet
 

City Council May 17, 2011 Agenda Packet

on

  • 1,734 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,734
Views on SlideShare
1,702
Embed Views
32

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
9
Comments
0

3 Embeds 32

http://www.sanangelotexas.org 14
http://sanangelotexas.us 9
http://www.sanangelotexas.us 9

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    City Council May 17, 2011 Agenda Packet City Council May 17, 2011 Agenda Packet Document Transcript

    • NOTICE OF A PUBLIC MEETING AN AGENDA OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL THE CITY OF SAN ANGELO, TEXAS 9:00 A.M. - Tuesday, May 17, 2011 McNease Convention Center, South Meeting Room 500 Rio Concho DriveTHE MCNEASE CONVENTION CENTER IS ACCESSIBLE TO PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES.ACCESSIBLE ENTRIES AND SPECIALLY MARKED PARKING SPACES ARE AVAILABLE AT BOTHMAIN ENTRANCES AT SURBER DRIVE AND RIO CONCHO DRIVE. IF ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCEIS NEEDED TO OBSERVE OR COMMENT, PLEASE NOTIFY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK,ROOM 202, CITY HALL, 657-4405, AT LEAST 24 HOURS PRIOR TO THE MEETING.City Council meetings are broadcast on Channel 17-Government Access at 10:30 A.M. and 6:30 P.M. everyday for two weeks beginning on the Thursday after each meeting. As a courtesy to those in attendance, please place your cell phone on “Silent” or “Vibrate” Thank You!I. OPEN SESSION (9:00 A.M.) A. Call to Order B. Prayer and Pledge "Honor the Texas flag; I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state under God, one and indivisible.” C. Proclamation “Building Safety Month, May 2011,” to be accepted by Al Torres, Building Official for the City of San Angelo and Dan Vardeman, Fire Marshal D. Recognitions Rio Vista Neighborhood Blitz Partners: Habitat for Humanity, West Texas Organizing Strategy, Angelo State University, St Mary’s Catholic Church, and Segundo Iglesia Bautista; and Team Leaders Employees providing assistance on the Wildcat Fire: Operations Administration: Ricky Dickson and Shane Kelton; Lake Operations: James Alley, Jason Franco, Patrick Lawhon; Parks Department: Dennis Arhelger, Jason Campbell, Stephen Conley, John Francis, Rodney Halfmann, Roger Havlak, Sean McCallum, and Gilbert Pedroza; Street & Bridge: Gary Ayers, Edward Bara, Ismael Flores, Narciso Garcia, Alfredo Garivay, Joe Gomez, Antonio Gonzales, Roberto Heredia, Jesus Hernandez, David Jones, Bobby Keesee, Manuel Martinez, Antonio Mendoza, Manuel Pineda, Raul Rojas; Storm Water Department: Jake Alberts, Cody Blaylock, Arthur Gonzales, Jason (Kelly) Haines, Fidel Hernandez, Douglas Kirkham, and Abel Villarreal; Lorenzo Rubio, and Joe Lee Ynojosa; Traffic Department: Mark Clifton, Ike Eisenbach, Roy Torres; Vehicle Maintenance: Kevin Buck, Adam Cervantes, Gabriel Esquivel, Patrick Frerich, William Hamilton, Reynald Manuel, Freddy Marcilliotte, Chris Pippin, and John Tucei E. Public Comment The Council takes public comment on all items in the Regular Agenda. Public input on a Regular Agenda item will be taken at its appropriate discussion. Public input on an item not on the Agenda or Consent Agenda may be identified and requested for consideration by the Council at this time. The Council may request an item to be placed on a future agenda, or for a Consent Agenda item, to be moved to the Regular Agenda for public comment.City Council Agenda Page 1 of 4 MAY 17, 2011
    • II. SPECIAL AGENDA 1. Administration of Oaths of Office for Mayor, Single Member District Representatives 2, 4, and 6, and presentation of Certificates of Election (Administered by City Clerk Alicia Ramirez and presentation by Mayor New) 2. Consideration of appointment of Mayor Pro-Tempore for the 2011-12 City CouncilIII. CONSENT AGENDA 3. Consideration of approving the May 3, 2011 City Council Regular meeting minutes 4. Consideration of adopting a Resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute a Resolution authorizing sale of Tax Lot Next to 3502 Clark Drive, (Morales), Lot 15, Block 2, Clar-Mor Heights Addition, in the amount of $2,600, Suit No. B-007-0210-T 5. Consideration of authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute Amendment No. 1 to Task Order No. 12, and all related documents, between the City of San Angelo and KSA Engineers for architectural/engineering services in the amount of $55,833 at San Angelo Regional Airport 6. Consideration of authorizing the City of San Angelo to apply for the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) grant in the amount of $1,250,639 and authorizing the City Manager to execute any related grant documents 7. Consideration of approving a recommendation by the City of San Angelo Development Corporation (COSADC) to authorize the City Manager to negotiate terms of a professional services agreement with CasaBella Architects for design and construction oversight of the Business Resource Center, and authorizing the President of COSADC to sign the agreement on behalf of the corporation 8. Consideration of approving a proposed utility easement by AEP Texas North Company for underground electrical lines and equipment at new Fire Station #5 9. Consideration of accepting donations in the amount of $222,000.00 for development enhancements for Producers Park and authorizing the City Manager to approve a change order for the project up to $222,000.00 10. Second Hearing and consideration of adoption of an Ordinance amending Chapter 2, Administration, Article 2.2000 of the City of San Angelo Code of Ordinances related to accepting credit card payments and providing for a processing fee AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 2, ADMINISTRATION, ARTICLE 2.2000, MUNICIPAL COURT FEES, BY ADDING SECTION 2.2007 AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF CREDIT CARDS AS PAYMENT FOR FEES, FINES, COURT COST, OR OTHER CHARGE ON BEHALF OF THE CITY, PROVIDING FOR A PROCESSING FEE, PROVIDING SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATEIV. REGULAR AGENDA: F. EXECUTIVE/CLOSED SESSION Executive Session under the provision of Government Code, Title 5. Open Government; Ethics, Subtitle A. Open Government, Chapter 551. Open Meetings, Subchapter D. Exceptions to Requirement that Meetings be Open, Section 551.072 to discuss the purchase, sale, exchange, lease, or value of real property Executive Session under the provision of Government Code, Title 5. Open Government; Ethics, Subtitle A. Open Government, Chapter 551. Open Meetings, Subchapter D. Exceptions to Requirement that Meetings be Open, Section 551.087 to discuss an offer of financial or other incentive to a company or companies with whom the City of San Angelo is conducting economic development negotiations and which the City of San Angelo seeks to have, locate, stay or expand in San AngeloCity Council Agenda Page 2 of 4 MAY 17, 2011
    • G. PUBLIC HEARING AND COMMENT 11. Presentation of the 1st Quarter 2011 Report by Downtown San Angelo, Inc. (Presentation by DSA President Brenda Gunter) 12. Second Public Hearing and consideration of adoption of an Ordinance amending Chapter 12, Exhibit “A” (Zoning Ordinance) of the Code of Ordinances, City of San Angelo Z 11-04: Sherri and John Jones, Jr. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 12, EXHIBIT “A” OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, CITY OF SAN ANGELO, TEXAS, WHICH SAID EXHIBIT “A” OF CHAPTER 12 ADOPTS ZONING REGULATIONS, USE DISTRICTS AND A ZONING MAP, IN ACCORDANCE WITH A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, BY CHANGING THE ZONING AND CLASSIFICATION OF THE FOLLOWING PROPERTY, TO WIT: 6005-6007 Knickerbocker Road at southwest corner of Red Bluff and Knickerbocker Roads, specifically on Lot 2 in Block 2 of Lake Nasworthy Addition Group Twenty-One, changing the zoning classification from Neighborhood Commercial (CN) to General Commercial (CG) District; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING A PENALTY (Presentation by Planning Manager AJ Fawver) 13. Consideration of appeal from Planning Commission’s decision on April 18, 2011 to deny requested variance from restrictions on where off-site signs (a.k.a. billboards) are allowed in CG and CG/CH zoning districts, to permit a single such sign at 1003-1011 Caddo Street (eastbound frontage road for Houston Harte Expressway) at its intersection with North Park Street, specifically on Lots 1 thru 3 in Block 57 of Angelo Heights Addition to San Angelo (Presentation by Planning Manager AJ Fawver) 14. First public hearing and consideration of introduction of an Ordinance amending Article 5.902 of the City of San Angelo Code of Ordinances related to the maximum number of garage sales held by an owner of property AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 5 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, CITY OF SAN ANGELO, TEXAS, OF WHICH ARTICLE 5.900 ADOPTS GARAGE SALE REGULATIONS, SPECIFICALLY BY AMENDING SUBSECTION 5.902(b) TO STIPULATE THAT THE NUMBER OF GARAGE SALES ALLOWED ANNUALLY MAY BE LIMITED TO A MAXIMUM NUMBER; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (Requested by Councilmember Morrison and presentation by Code Compliance Manager James Flores and Planning Manager AJ Fawver) 15. First public hearing and consideration to introduce an Ordinance to repeal Article 1.1000, Section 1.1002 related to reconsideration of an ordinance by City Council AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 1, GENERAL PROVISIONS, ARTICLE 1.1000 ENTITLED “ORDINANCES”, BY REPEALING SECTION 1.1002 ENTITLED “RECONSIDERATION”; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (Requested by Councilmember Morrison) 16. First Public Hearing and consideration of introduction of an Ordinance amending the Animal Services Advisory Committee residency requirement AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 2, ENTITLED “ANIMAL SHELTER ADVISORY COMMITTEE”, ARTICLE 2.3803 ENTITLED “COMPOSITION”, OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF SAN ANGELO, TEXAS TO REQUIRE THAT ALL VOTING ANIMAL SHELTER ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS BE CITY RESIDENTS, TO WIT: BY DELETING THE PORTION OF THE SENTENCE IN 2.3803(1)(D) THAT READS “WHO ARE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF SAN ANGELO”; AND ADDING A PORTION OF A SENTENCECity Council Agenda Page 3 of 4 MAY 17, 2011
    • THAT READS “AND WHO ARE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF SAN ANGELO” TO THE FIRST PARAGRAPH TO FOLLOW THE WORDS “SEVEN (7) OF WHOM SHALL BE VOTING MEMBERS”; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE (Presentation by Health Services Manager Sandra Villarreal) 17. Consideration, discussion, and possible action, of amending the set-back requirements currently in Article 3.800 Requirements Governing Hoofed Animals (a) it shall be unlawful for any person to keep cows, horses, goats or other hoofed animals in a pen or enclosure, or to keep or park a trailer or vehicle which contains such animals., within one hundred feed (100’) of any residence, business, or institution other than the residence, business, or institution of the owners of such animals (Requested by Councilmember Morrison and Presentation by Health Services Manager Sandra Villarreal) 18. First public hearing and consideration of introduction of an Ordinance amending the 2010-2011 Budget for grants and incomplete projects which necessitate budget amendments AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN ANGELO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2010, AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2011, FOR GRANTS, CAPITAL PROJECTS AND INCOMPLETE PROJECTS (Presentation by Finance Director Michael Dane) 19. Discussion and update on the Master Developer Committee (Presentation by Assistant City Manager Elizabeth Grindstaff) H. FOLLOW UP AND ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUES 20. Consideration of matters discussed in Executive/Session, if needed 21. Consideration of Future Agenda Items 22. Adjournment Given by order of the City Council and posted in accordance with Title 5, Texas Government Code, Chapter 551, Wednesday, May 11, 2011, at 5:00 P.M. /s/________________________ Alicia Ramirez, City ClerkCity Council Agenda Page 4 of 4 MAY 17, 2011
    • PROCLAMATIONWHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Angelo, Texas recognizes our continuing efforts to address critical safety issues in the built environment that affect our citizens, regardless of age or occupation, both in everyday life and in times of natural disaster; andWHEREAS, building safety and fire prevention officials, architects, engineers, builders, and others in the construction industry work year round to ensure the safe construction of buildings. These dedicated members of the International Code Council develop and implement the highest quality codes to protect Americans in the buildings where we live, learn, work, and play; andWHEREAS, Building Safety Month, sponsored by the International Code Council, seeks to remind the public about the critical role local code officials play in public safety by preventing fires, accidents, and ensuring structures are safe;NOW THEREFORE, I, Alvin New, Mayor of the City of San Angelo, Texas, onbehalf of the City Council, do hereby proclaim the month of May 2011 as “Building Safety Month”in San Angelo, and urge the appropriate recognition thereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the City to be affixed this 17th day of May, 2011. THE CITY OF SAN ANGELO __________________________ ALVIN NEW, MAYOR
    • Commending Lake Operations Department James Alley, Jason Franco, and Patrick Lawhon For doing more, doing it better, and exceeding our expectations. Your high standards inspire us all._____________ ____________ Mayor Date
    • Commending Ricky Dickson and Shane Kelton of Operations Administration For doing more, doing it better, and exceeding our expectations. Your high standards inspire us all._____________ ____________ Mayor Date
    • Commending Parks Department Dennis Arhelger, Jason Campbell, Stephen Conley, John Francis, Rodney Halfmann, Roger Havlak, Sean McCallum, and Gilbert Pedroza For doing more, doing it better, and exceeding our expectations. Your high standards inspire us all._____________ ____________ Mayor Date
    • Commending Street & Bridge Department Gary Ayers, Edward Bara, Ismael Flores, Narciso Garcia, Alfredo Garivay, Joe Gomez, Antonio Gonzales, Roberto Heredia, Jesus Hernandez, David Jones, Bobby Keesee, Manuel Martinez, Antonio Mendoza, Manuel Pineda, Raul Rojas Lorenzo Rubio, and Joe Lee Ynojosa For doing more, doing it better, and exceeding our expectations. Your high standards inspire us all._____________ ____________ Mayor Date
    • Commending Storm Water Department Jake Alberts, Cody Blaylock, Arthur Gonzales, Jason (Kelly) Haines, Fidel Hernandez, Douglas Kirkham, and Abel Villarreal For doing more, doing it better, and exceeding our expectations. Your high standards inspire us all._____________ ____________ Mayor Date
    • Commending Traffic Department Roy Torres, Mark Clifton, and Ike Eisenbach For doing more, doing it better, and exceeding our expectations. Your high standards inspire us all._____________ ____________ Mayor Date
    • Commending Vehicle Maintenance DepartmentKevin Buck, Adam Cervantes, Gabriel Esquivel, Patrick Frerich, William Hamilton, Reynald Manuel, Freddy Marcilliotte, Chris Pippin, and John Tucei For doing more, doing it better, and exceeding our expectations. Your high standards inspire us all._____________ ____________ Mayor Date
    • CITY COUNCIL MINUTE RECORDThe City of San Angelo Page 651Tuesday, May 3, 2011 Vol. 102 OPEN SESSIONBE IT REMEMBERED City Council convened in a regular meeting at 9:14 A.M., Tuesday, May 3, 2011, inthe San Angelo McNease Convention Center, 500 Rio Concho Drive, San Angelo, Texas. All duly authorizedmembers of the Council, to-wit: Mayor, Alvin New Councilmember Paul Alexander Councilmember Dwain Morrison Councilmember Johnny Silvas Councilmember Fredd B. Adams, II Councilmember Kendall Hirschfeld Councilmember Charlotte Farmerwere present and acting, with the exception of Councilmembers Morrison and Adams, thus constituting aquorum. Whereupon, the following business was transacted:An invocation was given by Rev. Ellen King of the United Church of Christ and pledge was led by DavidMartinez, Jacob Sanchez, and Rebecca Deanda, 5th graders at Ft. Concho Elementary.PROCLAMATIONS“Child Care Provider Appreciation Day”, May 6, 2011, was accepted by Dora Hendricks, President of theAssociation of Registered Child Care Homes, and Janet Reeves, Vice President of the Association of RegisteredChild Care Homes.“Police Week”, week of May 15, 2011, and “Peace Officers Memorial Day”, May 15, 2011, was accepted byTim Vasquez, Chief of Police, and David Howard, Lieutenant, of the City of San Angelo.Chief Vasquez announced the Flag Raising Ceremony to be held on May16, 2011 and …“San Angelo Christian Home School Month”, May 2011, was accepted by Jim and Claudia Marrs, President ofthe San Angelo Christian Home School Association.“National Preservation Month, May 2011”, was accepted by Genora Young, Executive Director of DowntownSan Angelo, Inc.Councilmember Adams arrived to the meeting at 9:32 A.M.“National Women Build Week”, week of May 1-7, 2011 and “Habitat for Humanity Month”, the month of May2011, was accepted by Patsy Kneller, Executive Director for Habitat for Humanity.Mayor introduced Cindy Jordan. Ms. Jordan announced the Children’s sing a long event to promote friendshipin San Angelo to be held on May 15, 2011. She also sang God Bless America.PUBLIC COMMENTCouncilmember Alexander commented on calls received from his constituents regarding the trash left behindduring the Easter weekend at Lake Nasworthy and South Concho Park. Mr. Alexander advocated for citizens totake responsibility for their actions and utilize the trash receptacles.Police Chief Tim Vasquez stated based on officer’s reports, he suggested additional receptacles be placed at theparks during such weekend events.
    • Page 652 MinutesVol. 102 May 3, 2011CONSENT AGENDAAPPROVAL OF THE APRIL 19, 2011 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTESAWARD OF BID ES-02-11 FOR THE 2011 SEALCOAT PROGRAM TO BLACKTOPPER TECHNOLOGY, INC.(BLANCO, TX) ION THE AMOUNT OF $563,362.24 AND AUTHORIZATION FOR THE CITY MANAGEROR HIS DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT AND ANY NECESSARY RELATED DOCUMENTSADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A TAX DEED FOR THESALE OF A TAX LOT AT 415 N ADAMS, (MORALES), LOT 3, BLOCK 91, ANGELO HEIGHTSADDITION, SUIT NO. B-01-0144-T (ANNEX A, PAGE 659, RESOLUTION 2011-05-046)AUTHORIZATION OF THE SALE OF A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2462 FISHERMANSROAD (MECKLENBURG) FOR THE APPRAISED VALUE OF $102,000 AND AUTHORIZATION FORTHE MAYOR, CITY MANAGER, OR WATER UTILITIES DIRECTOR TO EXECUTE ALL NECESSARYLEGAL DOCUMENTS PERTAINING TO THE SALE OF SUBJECT PROPERTIES, SUBJECT TOCOMPLETION OF ALL CURATIVE REQUIREMENTSAPPROVAL OF A RECOMMENDATION BY CITY OF SAN ANGELO DEVELOPMENTCORPORATION (COSADC) TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT BETWEEN THE COSADC AND CITYOF SAN ANGELO STAFF SERVICES CONTRACT INCREASING THE PERCENTAGE OF THEDIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT’S SALARY PAID BY COSADC FROM51% TO 70%APPROVAL OF AMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL’S APPROVAL ON JANUARY 11, 2011 OF THEECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PROVIDING AD VALOREM PROPERTY TAX REBATESTOTALING $572,250.00 TO ETHICON, INC. ON THE IMPROVED VALUE OF REAL PROPERTY AT3348 PULLIAM STREET TO INCLUDE CAPITAL INVESTMENT IN BOTH REAL AND BUSINESSPERSONAL PROPERTY IN ORDER TO COORDINATE WITH THE TOM GREEN COUNTYAPPRAISAL DISTRICT TREATMENT OF REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY SEPARATELY FOR ADVALOREM TAX PURPOSES AND TO INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF THE REBATE TO $676,259APPROVAL OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN ANGELO AND THE SAN ANGELOSYMPHONY SOCIETY FOR IN-KIND SUPPORT FOR THE JULY 3RD POPS CONCERT, ANDAUTHORIZATION FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENTAUTHORIZATION FOR IN-KIND SUPPORT FOR AN APPRECIATION LUNCHEON FOR WILDCATFIRE RESPONDERS, WORKERS AND VOLUNTEERS AT EL PASEO DE SANTA ANGELA ON MAY22, 2011AUTHORIZATION FOR STAFF TO NEGOTIATE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SANANGELO AND GARY DONALDSON ARCHITECTURE FOR ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES FOR ANEW LIVESTOCK BARN ON THE SAN ANGELO FAIRGROUNDS (RFQ COL-01-11) ANDAUTHORIZATION FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENTSECOND HEARING AND ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING FIRE DEPARTMENTCLASSIFIED POSITIONS, SPECIFICALLY DRIVER POSITION (ANNEX B, PAGE , ORDINANCE 2011-05-047)AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 2 ENTITLED “ADMINISTRATION” OF THE CODE OFORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF SAN ANGELO BY AMENDING ARTICLE 2.1500, ENTITLED“CLASSIFIED SERVICE,” SECTION 2.1502, ENTITLED “CLASSIFICATION PLAN,” PARAGRAPH (b),ENTITLED “STAFFING LEVELS,” SUBPARAGRAPH (1)(A), ENTITLED “FIRE DEPARTMENT,” TOCHANGE THE NUMBER OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT BYDECREASING THE NUMBER OF FIRE ENGINEER (DRIVER) FROM SIXTY-SIX (66) TO THIRTY-THREE (33), AND INCREASING THE NUMBER OF FIRE FIGHTER FROM SIXTY-TWO (62) TO
    • Minutes Page 653May 3, 2011 Vol. 102NINETY-FIVE (95), SAID CHANGE TO BE EFFECTIVE ON MAY 3, 2011 AND; PROVIDING FORSEVERABILITY, AND PROVIDING EFFECTIVE DATESMotion, to approve the Consent Agenda, as presented, was made by Councilmember Hirschfeld and secondedby Councilmember Farmer. Motion carried unanimously.REGULAR AGENDA: PUBLIC HEARING AND COMMENTSECOND HEARING AND ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 10 (TRAFFICCONTROL) IN THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, CITY OF SAN ANGELO (ANNEX C, PAGE 663,ORDINANCE 2011-05-048)AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 10, ARTICLE 10.100 ENTITLED “PARKING RESTRICTEDIN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS,” SECTION 10.1005 ENTITLED “EXCEPTIONS,” OF THE CODE OFORDINANCES, CITY OF SAN ANGELO, TEXAS, BY AMENDING SECTION 10.1005 AND ADDINGSUBSECTION 10.1005(5) TO THE LIST OF EXCEPTIONS ALLOWED FROM THE GENERALPROHIBITION ON PARKING TRAILERS, SEMI-TRAILERS, POLE TRAILERS, COMMERCIALVEHICLES, TRUCK TRACTORS AND RECREATIONAL VEHICLES ON A STREET OR LOT IN ARESIDENTIAL DISTRICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVEDATECouncilmember Hirschfeld remarked on the parking of personal trailers and the clarity of the ordinance toaddress such.Community and Economic Development Director Shawn Lewis reviewed the exceptions that addresses personaltrailers. Sergeant Korby Kennedy clarified the state law provision states such trailers cannot be parked for morethan 24 hours.Mayor suggested staff work out further details based on Councilmember Hirschfeld concerns.Motion, to adopte the Ordinance, as presented, was made by Councilmember Farmer and seconded byCouncilmember Adams.Public comment was made by Citizen David Knowlin.A vote was taken on the motion on the floor. Motion carried unanimously.PRESENTATION OF THE FIRST QUARTER 2011 REPORT FROM THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCEECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL AND THE CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU (CVB)CVB Chairman Fred Key, CVB Vice President Pamela Miller, and Vice President for Economic DevelopmentJohn Dugan presented background information.General discussion was held on the report format and requested the following: adding an additional columnasking visitors if they drove or flew into San Angelo, and if they flew, which airline and from which city.DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON PROPOSED PARADE ROUTESPolice Chief Tim Vasquez presented background information. A copy of the presentation is part of thePermanent Supplemental Record.General discussion was held on the number of entries, associated cost to cover the Police Department’s expenseincurred from overtime; differential cost between the small, medium, and large parades; and how to define anentry.Motion, to authorize, as presented, was made by Councilmember Hirschfeld and seconded by CouncilmemberAdams. Motion carried unanimously.
    • Page 654 MinutesVol. 102 May 3, 2011RECESSAt 10:44 A.M., Mayor New called a recess.RECONVENEAt 10:58 P.M., Council reconvened, and the following business was transacted:FIRST PUBLIC HEARING AND INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 2,ADMINISTRATION, ARTICLE 2.2000 OF THE CITY OF SAN ANGELO CODE OF ORDINANCESRELATED TO ACCEPTING CREDIT CARD PAYMENTS AND PROVIDING FOR A PROCESSING FEEAN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 2, ADMINISTRATION, ARTICLE 2.2000, MUNICIPALCOURT FEES, BY ADDING SECTION 2.2007 AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF CREDIT CARDSAS PAYMENT FOR FEES, FINES, COURT COST, OR OTHER CHARGE ON BEHALF OF THE CITY,PROVIDING FOR A PROCESSING FEE, PROVIDING SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR ANEFFECTIVE DATEFinance Director Michael Dane and Judge Allen Gilbert presented background information. Judge Gilbertnoted Municipal Court will only charge fees based on what the credit card companies charge.Motion, to introduce Ordinance, as presented, was made by Councilmember Adams and seconded byCouncilmember Silvas. Motion carried unanimously.TIE VOTE OF A FIRST PUBLIC HEARING AND INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDINGAPPENDIX A, ENTITLED “FEE SCHEDULE” OF THE CITY OF SAN ANGELO CODE OFORDINANCES RELATED TO ACCEPTING CREDIT CARD PAYMENTS AND PROVIDING FOR APROCESSING FEEAN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX A, ENTITLED “FEE SCHEDULE”, OF THE CODE OFORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF SAN ANGELO, TEXAS BY ADDING A NEW ARTICLE 14.4000AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF CREDIT CARDS AS PAYMENT FOR CITY PROVIDEDSERVICES, PROVIDING FOR A PROCESSING FEE, PROVIDING SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDINGFOR AN EFFECTIVE DATEFinance Director Michael Dane presented background information and suggested postponing the approval ofthis item until technology improvements have been implemented and other avenues researched related to hardand soft costs.Discussion was held on the processing fees associated with using such services, cost of doing business,uncontrollable factors and fees passed down from the credit card companies, and cost related to other functionswithin the organization.Motion, to introduce Ordinance, as presented, was made by Councilmember Adams and seconded byCouncilmember Farmer.Public comment was made by Citizen Stuart Adkinson.A vote was taken on the motion on the floor. AYE: New, Adams, and Farmer NAY: Alexander, Silvas, andHirschfeld. Motion tied 3-3.ACCEPTANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN ANGELO’S FY2010 COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIALREPORT (CAFR) AS PRESENTED THROUGH THE CITY’S AUDIT COMMITTEEChief Accountant Bill Smith presented background information. A copy of the report is part of the PermanentSupplemental Record.Motion, to accept, as presented, was made by Councilmember Farmer and seconded by Councilmember Adams.Motion carried unanimously.
    • Minutes Page 655May 3, 2011 Vol. 102APPROVAL OF AN APPEAL FROM PLANNING COMMISSION’S MARCH 21, 2011 DECISION TOAPPROVE A CONDITIONAL USE ALLOWING SALES OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES FOR ON-PREMISE CONSUMPTION AT 6005-6007 KNICKERBOCKER ROAD ON SOUTHWEST CORNER OFRED BLUFF AND KNICKERBOCKER ROADS, SPECIFICALLY ON LOT 2 IN BLOCK 2 OF LAKENASWORTHY ADDITION GROUP 21Planning Manager AJ Fawver presented background information. A copy of the presentation is part of thePermanent Supplemental Record.Discussion was held on the proposed location in relation to future commercial growth,Motion, to affirm the Planning Commission’s the March 21, 2011 decision, as presented, was made byCouncilmember Hirschfeld and seconded by Councilmember Adams.Public comments were made by Citizens John Jones, Deon Aylor, Mack Roller, Jackie Cortese, Don Aylor, andSherri Jones.AYE: New, Alexander, Morrison, Silvas, Adams, and Hirschfeld. NAY: Farmer. Motion carried 5-1.FIRST PUBLIC HEARING AND INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 12,EXHIBIT “A” (ZONING ORDINANCE) OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, CITY OF SAN ANGELOZ 11-04: Sherri and John Jones, Jr.AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 12, EXHIBIT “A” OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, CITYOF SAN ANGELO, TEXAS, WHICH SAID EXHIBIT “A” OF CHAPTER 12 ADOPTS ZONINGREGULATIONS, USE DISTRICTS AND A ZONING MAP, IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACOMPREHENSIVE PLAN, BY CHANGING THE ZONING AND CLASSIFICATION OF THEFOLLOWING PROPERTY, TO WIT: 6005-6007 Knickerbocker Road at southwest corner of Red Bluff andKnickerbocker Roads, specifically on Lot 2 in Block 2 of Lake Nasworthy Addition Group Twenty-One,changing the zoning classification from Neighborhood Commercial (CN) to General Commercial (CG) District;PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING A PENALTYPlanning Manager AJ Fawver presented background information. A copy of the presentation is part of thePermanent Supplemental Record.Motion, to introduce the Ordinance, as presented, was made by Councilmember Alexander and seconded byCouncilmember Hirschfeld. AYE: New, Alexander, Morrison, Silvas, Adams, and Hirschfeld. NAY:Farmer. Motion carried 5-1.RECESSAt 12:53 P.M., Mayor New called a recess.EXECUTIVE/CLOSED SESSIONAt 1:21 P.M., Council convened in Executive Session under the provision of Title 5, Texas GovernmentCode, Section 551.087 to discuss an offer of financial or other incentive to a company or companies withwhom the City of San Angelo is conducting economic development negotiations and which the City of SanAngelo seeks to have, locate, stay or expand in San AngeloOPEN SESSION (continued)At 1:46 P.M. City Council concluded the Executive/Closed Session whereupon the following business wastransacted:RECESSAt 1:46 P.M., Mayor New called a recess.
    • Page 656 MinutesVol. 102 May 3, 2011RECONVENEAt 1:54 P.M., Council reconvened, and the following business was transacted:PUBLIC HEARING OF COMMENTS FOR AND AGAINST PROPOSED ANNEXATION OFAPPROXIMATELY 200 ACRES LOCATED SOUTHWEST OF SAN ANGELO’S EXISTING CITYLIMITS, ENCOMPASSING THE LAKE NASWORTHY POWER STATION AT 6465 KNICKERBOCKERROAD, AN ADJACENT ELECTRIC SUBSTATION, AN APPROXIMATELY 500-FOOT WIDE STRIP OFLAND OCCUPIED BY PARALLEL ARRAYS OF ELECTRIC POWER TRANSMISSION LINES, AND ANAPPROXIMATELY 0.34-MILE SEGMENT OF RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR RED BLUFF ROADPlanning Manager AJ Fawver presented background information. A copy of the presentation is part of thePermanent Supplemental Record.DISCUSSION OF MATTERS RELATED TO PARKING ON UNIMPROVED SURFACESAt the request of Councilmember Adams, he also presented background information.Discussion was held on various widths of streets within the city, specifically in relation to public safety; culturalelements in relation to property value,ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE DECLARING A LOCAL STATE OF DISASTER IN THE CITY OFSAN ANGELO AS AN EMERGENCY MEASURE PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION418.108 AND SECTION 2.113 OF THE CITY OF SAN ANGELO CODE OF ORDINANCES TOPROCLAIM A LOCAL STATE OF DISASTER AND ORDER AN IMPOSITION OF A BURN BANWITHIN THE CITY LIMITS AS A CONTROL ON ACTIVITIES WHICH TEND TO INCREASE THELIKELIHOOD OF FIRES IN ORDER TO PROTECT AND PRESERVE LIFE AND PROPERTY OF THECITY AND ITS INHABITANTS FOR AN INDEFINITE PERIOD WITH THE CONSENT OF THE CITYCOUNCIL AS AUTHORIZED UNDER TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 418.108 AND TOAUTHORIZE REMOVAL OF THE BURN BAN BY THE CITY MANAGER AS CONDITIONSWARRANT; AND TO PROVIDE FOR EXCEPTIONS TO THE BURN BAN FOR CERTAINCOMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS AND PUBLIC EVENTS AS APPROVED BY THE FIRE CHIEF ORHIS DESIGNEE; SAID ORDINANCE BEING AN EMERGENCY MEASURE PURSUANT TO CITYCHARTER SECTIONS 17 AND 18; AND PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY, AND PROVIDING FOR ANEFFECTIVE DATE (ANNEX D, PAGE , ORDINANCE 2011-05-049)Mayor New presented background information.Discussion was held on coordinating burn ban with the National Weather Service’s red flag warnings.Motion, to adopt the Ordinance, as presented, was made by Councilmember Farmer and seconded byCouncilmember Adams. Motion carried unanimously.FOLLOW UP AND ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUESCONSIDERATION OF MATTERS DISCUSSED IN EXECUTIVE/CLOSED SESSIONNo action was taken on matters discussed in Executive/Closed Session.APPROVAL OF VARIOUS BOARD NOMINATIONS BY COUNCIL AND DESIGNATEDCOUNCILMEMBERS:Animal Services: Susan Parker (SMD5) to a first full term January 2013Ft. Concho: Stephanie Harris (SMD6) to a first full term January 2014Motion, to approve various board nominations by Council and designated Councilmembers, was made byCouncilmember Hirschfeld and seconded by Councilmember Farmer. Motion carried unanimously.
    • Minutes Page 657May 3, 2011 Vol. 102APPROVAL OF RESCHEDULING THE JUNE 21, 2011 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO JUNE28, 2011CONSIDERATION OF FUTURE AGENDA ITEMSCity Manager Harold Dominguez distributed the proposed May 17, 2011 Agenda and solicited Councilcomments and suggestions.ADJOURNMENTMotion, to adjourn, was made by Mayor New and seconded by Councilmember Farmer. Motion carriedunanimously.The meeting adjourned at 2:47 P.M. THE CITY OF SAN ANGELO ___________________________________ Alvin New, MayorATTEST:_______________________________Alicia Ramirez, City ClerkAnnexes A-DIn accordance with Chapter 2, Article 2.300, of the Official Code of the City of San Angelo, the minutes of thismeeting consist of the preceding Minute Record and the Supplemental Minute Record. Details on Councilmeetings may be obtained from the City Clerk’s Office or a video of the entire meeting may be purchased fromthe Public Information Officer at 481-2727. (Portions of the Supplemental Minute Record video tape recordingmay be distorted due to equipment malfunction or other uncontrollable factors.)
    • Page 658 MinutesVol. 102 May 3, 2011 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
    • City of San AngeloMemo Date: April 20, 2011 To: Mayor and Council Members From: Roger Banks, Purchasing Director Subject: Agenda Item for May 17, 2011 Council Meeting Contact: Diana Farris, Property Manager, Purchasing Department, 657-4212 Caption: Consent Item Consideration of adopting a Resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute a Resolution authorizing sale of Tax Lot(s): A. Next to 3502 Clark Drive, (Morales), Lot 15, Block 2, Clar-Mor Heights Addition, $2,600, Suit No. B-007-0210-T Summary: The subject properties were auctioned with no offers received. Subsequently, the properties were struck off to the City as Trustee for itself and the other taxing entities. The lot size, amount of offers, and what the offer will satisfy are as follows: SIZE OFFER OFFER WILL SATISFY… A. 62’/64’ x 153’ $ 2,600.00 Offer satisfies all court costs and a portion of the taxes History: Listed below are the breakdowns of amounts owed: A. Taxes: $ 4,346.00 B. Taxes: $ 0.00 C. Taxes: $ 0.00 Sheriff Fees $ 100.00 Sheriff Fees $ 0.00 Sheriff Fees $ 0.00 District Clerk $ 380.00 District Clerk $ 0.00 District Clerk $ 0.00 Attorney Fees $ 365.00 Attorney Fees $ 0.00 Attorney Fees $ 0.00 Administration $ 350.00 Administration $ 0.00 Administration $ 0.00 Municipal Liens $ 0.00 Municipal Liens $ 0.00 Municipal Liens $ 0.00 $ 5,541.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 Financial Impact: All Properties will be reinstated back onto tax roll. Other Information/Recommendation: It has been verified by all entities that no outstanding balance exist for the Prospective Buyers. It is recommended that the above offers be accepted. Attachments: Resolution, Tax-Resale Deed, and Property Location Map Presentation: N/A Reviewed by Service Area Director: Michael Dane, Administration Service Director
    • RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SALE OF REAL PROPERTY (Less than Adjudged Value or Judgment) WHEREAS, on the day of , 2011, at a regularly scheduled meeting ofthe City Council of the City of San Angelo, Texas, there was presented to said Council theproposal for the City to sell a parcel of land situated within the city limits of the City of SanAngelo, said parcel being described as follows: Lot 15, Block 2, Revised Clar-Mor Heights Addition, Section 1, City of San Angelo, Tom Green County, Texas, according to the map or plat thereof, recorded in Volume 2, Page 146, Plat Records of Tom Green County, Texas WHEREAS, said lot(s) are held by the City of San Angelo, as Trustee by virtue of Sheriff’sTax Deed, recorded on Instrument Number 690719, of the Official Public Records of RealProperty, Tom Green County, Texas; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City of SanAngelo as Trustee to sell said lot(s) for an amount that is less than the lesser of the market valuespecified in the Judgment of foreclosure or the amount of the judgment(s) against said property. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OFSAN ANGELO: That the Mayor of the City of San Angelo is hereby authorized in his capacityas representative of the City of San Angelo, Trustee to execute a Quitclaim Deed to the abovedescribedlot(s) to Sandra & Rosa Morales, single people, for the consideration of Two Thousand SixHundred and 00/100 Dollars ($2,600.00) and that the sale for said amount is also herebyauthorized and approved.APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE DAY OF , 2011. THE CITY OF SAN ANGELO ______________________________ Alvin New, MayorAttest:_____________________Alicia Ramirez, City ClerkApproved As to Form: Approved As to Content:______________________ ____________________________Lysia Bowling, City Attorney Roger S. Banks, Purchasing Managero:2011 agenda packets05-17-11pur tax lot (morales) resolution.doc
    • MEMORANDUMDate: May 3, 2011To: Mayor and CouncilmembersFrom: Luis Elguezabal, A.A.E., Airport DirectorSubject: Consideration for 05-17-11 meetingContact: Luis Elguezabal, A.A.E., Airport, extension-1010Caption: CONSENT AGENDA: CONSIDERATION OF AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO TASK ORDER NO. 12, AND ALL RELATED DOCUMENTS, BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN ANGELO AND KSA ENGINEERS FOR ARCHETECTUAL/ENGINEERING SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF $55,833 AT SAN ANGELO REGIONAL AIRPORT.History: Task Order No. 12 provides for the preparation of plans and technical specifications for the terminal building rehabilitation. The Task Order was approved by Council on December 7, 2010. The cost for the service was $339,070.Summary: Amendment No. 1 for Task Order No. 12 provides adjustments to the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) area to include added square footage (900 sf), revise HVAC to accommodate additional load as provided by new equipment and building area, revised baggage system design to accommodate new layout and equipment, adjust egress pathway, relocation of existing water line and wastewater cleanouts to accommodate additional building area, and structural column adjustments. Additional structural engineering is required for unforeseen conditions associated with adjustment of vertical members in frame not visible in images, and relocation of existing column in conference/training room. The cost for this service is $55,833. The Federal Aviation Administration has approved this amendment.Financial Impact: Total cost for Task Order No. 12 Amendment No. 1 is $55,833 for which the Federal Aviation Administration will fund 95% which is $53,041 and the City is responsible for 5% or $2,792. The City will fund its share with Passenger Facility Charges (PFC); no General Funds will be required.Related Vision Item: Adequately Maintain Infrastructure.Other Information/Recommendation: Staff recommends approval.Attachments: Task Order No. 12 Amendment No. 1 and Exhibit KPresentation: NonePublication: NoneReviewed by Director: Luis Elguezabal, A.A.E., Airport, 05-03-11
    • This is EXHIBIT K, consisting of 2 pages, referred to in and part of the Agreement between Owner and Engineer for Professional Services – Task Order Edition dated May 4, 2010.Amendment No. 1 To Task Order No. 12 –San Angelo Regional Airport Terminal Renovations Design Phase Services 1. Background Data: a. Effective Date of Task Order Agreement: December 7, 2010 b. Owner: City of San Angelo – San Angelo Regional Airport c. Engineer: KSA Engineers, Inc. d. Specific Project: Terminal Renovations 2. Nature of Amendment  Additional Services to be performed by Engineer  Modifications to Payment to Engineer 3. Description of Modifications See Attachment 1, “Modifications” Page 1 of 2 Exhibit K – Amendment to Task Order #12 EJCDC E-505 Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Engineer for Professional Services—Task Order Edition Copyright ©2003 National Society of Professional Engineers for EJCDC. All rights reserved.
    • This is Attachment 1, consisting of 1 page, to Amendment No. 1, dated , Terminal Renovations; Task Order No. 12..Modifications1. Engineer shall perform the following Additional Services: a. During the Preliminary Design Phase ENGINEER shall: Provide the services outlined in Paragraph A1.02 Preliminary Design Phase of the General Services Agreement in order to provide adjustments to the TSA area to include added square footage (900 sf), revise HVAC to accommodate additional heat load as provided by new equipment and building area, revised baggage system design to accommodate new layout and equipment, adjust egress pathway, relocation of existing water line and wastewater cleanouts to accommodate additional building area, and structural column adjustments. Additional structural engineering is required for unforeseen conditions associated with adjustment of vertical member in “X” frame not visible in images, and relocation of existing column in conference / training room. b. During the Final Design Phase ENGINEER shall: Provide the services as outlined in Paragraph A1.03 Final Design Phase of the General Services Agreement as associated with additional design described in (a.). c. During the Bidding or Negotiating Phase ENGINEER shall: Provide the services outlined in Paragraph A1.04 Bidding or Negotiating Phase of the General Services Agreement as associated with the additional design described in (a.).2. For the Additional Services or the modifications to services set forth above, Owner shall pay Engineer the following additional or modified compensation: Category of Services Compensation Method Fee Construction Document Lump Sum $55,833.00 Preparation Total $55,833.00 Page 1 of 1 Attachment 1 (Modifications) to Exhibit K – Amendment to Task Order #12 EJCDC E-505 Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Engineer for Professional Services—Task Order Edition Copyright ©2003 National Society of Professional Engineers for EJCDC. All rights reserved.
    • This is EXHIBIT K, consisting of 2 pages, referred to in and part of the Agreement between Owner and Engineer for Professional Services – Task Order Edition dated May 4, 2010.Amendment No. 1 To Task Order No. 12 –San Angelo Regional Airport Terminal Renovations Design Phase Services 1. Background Data: a. Effective Date of Task Order Agreement: December 7, 2010 b. Owner: City of San Angelo – San Angelo Regional Airport c. Engineer: KSA Engineers, Inc. d. Specific Project: Terminal Renovations 2. Nature of Amendment  Additional Services to be performed by Engineer  Modifications to Payment to Engineer 3. Description of Modifications See Attachment 1, “Modifications” Page 1 of 2 Exhibit K – Amendment to Task Order #12 EJCDC E-505 Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Engineer for Professional Services—Task Order Edition Copyright ©2003 National Society of Professional Engineers for EJCDC. All rights reserved.
    • This is Attachment 1, consisting of 1 page, to Amendment No. 1, dated , Terminal Renovations; Task Order No. 12..Modifications1. Engineer shall perform the following Additional Services: a. During the Preliminary Design Phase ENGINEER shall: Provide the services outlined in Paragraph A1.02 Preliminary Design Phase of the General Services Agreement in order to provide adjustments to the TSA area to include added square footage (900 sf), revise HVAC to accommodate additional heat load as provided by new equipment and building area, revised baggage system design to accommodate new layout and equipment, adjust egress pathway, relocation of existing water line and wastewater cleanouts to accommodate additional building area, and structural column adjustments. Additional structural engineering is required for unforeseen conditions associated with adjustment of vertical member in “X” frame not visible in images, and relocation of existing column in conference / training room. b. During the Final Design Phase ENGINEER shall: Provide the services as outlined in Paragraph A1.03 Final Design Phase of the General Services Agreement as associated with additional design described in (a.). c. During the Bidding or Negotiating Phase ENGINEER shall: Provide the services outlined in Paragraph A1.04 Bidding or Negotiating Phase of the General Services Agreement as associated with the additional design described in (a.).2. For the Additional Services or the modifications to services set forth above, Owner shall pay Engineer the following additional or modified compensation: Category of Services Compensation Method Fee Construction Document Lump Sum $55,833.00 Preparation Total $55,833.00 Page 1 of 1 Attachment 1 (Modifications) to Exhibit K – Amendment to Task Order #12 EJCDC E-505 Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Engineer for Professional Services—Task Order Edition Copyright ©2003 National Society of Professional Engineers for EJCDC. All rights reserved.
    • City of San AngeloMemo Date: 5/6/2011 To: Mayor and Councilmembers From: Tim Vasquez, Chief of Police Subject: Agenda Item for May 17, 2011 Council Meeting Contact: Chief Tim Vasquez, 657-4336 Caption: Consent Agenda Item Consideration of authorizing the Police Department to apply for the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) grant in the amount of $1,250,639 over 3 years and authorizing matching funds in the amount of $477,370 for 1 year and authorizing the City Manager to execute any related grant documents Summary: The Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) is accepting applications for the 2011 COPS Hiring Program. This is a competitive grant program that provides funding directly to law enforcement agencies. The FY2011 CHP grant will provide 100% funding for approved entry-level salaries and benefits for three years for newly-hired, full-time sworn officer positions (including filling existing unfunded vacancies) or for rehired officers who have been laid off or are scheduled to be laid off on a specific future date. After the three year grant period, the city must fund the position for 1 additional year. History: The San Angelo Police Department has utilized this grant in past years to fund positions for the duration of the grant. After the funds from the grant were deplenished, the positions were funded for 1 additional year by the City of San Angelo. Financial Impact: This grant will increase the Police Department’s budget by $1,250,639 to cover the salary and benefits for newly hired officers for 3 years. The Police Department budget will have to be increased at the end of the 3 years to cover the positions for 1 additional year. The total cost for year 4 is $477,370 for 8 officers hired with this grant. Related Vision Item (if applicable): N/A Other Information/Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the stated caption Attachments: COPS invitation letter Presentation: none Publication: N/A Reviewed by Service Area Director: Chief Tim Vasquez, Police Department, 5/06/11
    • April 18, 2011Dear Colleague: The Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) is pleased to announce that we will be accepting grantapplications for the Fiscal Year (FY) 2011 COPS Hiring Program (CHP). Subject to funding availability, approximately$200 million may be available under FY 2011 CHP for the hiring and rehiring of additional career law enforcementofficers. The FY 2011 CHP solicitation will open on May 2, 2011. The application deadline will be May 25, 2011, at 8:59PM, EDT. Please note that applications for this program must be submitted in two parts. First, applicants must applyonline via www.grants.gov to complete the SF-424, which is a government-wide standard form required for competitivegrant application packages. The SF-424 is intended to reduce the administrative burden to the Federal grants community,which includes applicants/grantees and Federal staff involved in grants-related activities. Once the SF-424 has beensubmitted, you will receive an e-mail from the COPS Office with instructions on completing the second part of the CHPapplication through the COPS Office Online Application System found on the COPS Office website atwww.cops.usdoj.gov. Applications must be submitted via the COPS Office Online Application System by 8:59 PM, EDT,on May 25, 2011 to be considered for FY 2011 CHP funding. CHP is a competitive grant program that provides funding directly to law enforcement agencies having primary lawenforcement authority to impact their community policing capacity and problem solving efforts. CHP grants provide 100 percent funding for approved entry-level salaries and benefits for 3 years (36 months) fornewly-hired, full-time sworn officer positions (including filling existing unfunded vacancies) or for rehired officers whohave been laid off, or are scheduled to be laid off on a specific future date, as a result of local budget cuts. There is nolocal match requirement or cap on the amount of funding that can be requested per officer position, but CHP grant fundingwill be based on your agency’s current entry-level salary and benefits packages. Any additional costs for higher thanentry-level salaries and fringe benefits will be the responsibility of the grantee agency. All agencies’ requests will becapped at no more than 5% of their actual sworn force strength reported in their application, up to a maximum of 50officers. The request of any agency with a sworn force strength less than or equal to 20 will be capped at one officer. At the conclusion of federal funding, grantees must retain all sworn officer positions awarded under the CHP grant fora minimum of one year (12 months). The retained CHP-funded position(s) should be added to the grantee’s lawenforcement budget with state and/or local funds, over and above the number of locally-funded positions that would haveexisted in the absence of the grant. The COPS Office looks forward to working with your agency. If you would like more information or requiretechnical assistance during the solicitation process, please contact the COPS Office Response Center at 1.800.421.6770. Sincerely, Bernard K. Melekian Director
    • Before Preparing Your Application The COPS Office wants to ensure that your agency has sufficient time to complete your FY 2011 CHP application once thesolicitation opens. We strongly recommend that your agency begin preparations for submitting your application at this time. Tominimize delays in submitting your application, please take some time now to address the following items. • Register at www.grants.gov to apply for federal funding. In order to apply for a grant, your organization must complete the Grants.gov registration process. The registration process can take between three to five business days or as long as four weeks if all steps are not completed in a timely manner. Therefore, you should register early. You must have a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number and be registered with the Central Contractor Registration (CCR) database to begin your application with Grants.gov. For additional instructions on how to register with Grants.gov please visit http://www.grants.gov/applicants/get_registered.jsp. • All Applicants must have a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number prior to submitting an application for COPS funding. A DUNS number is a unique nine or thirteen-digit sequence recognized as the universal standard for identifying and tracking entities receiving federal funds. Please note that obtaining a DUNS number may take one to two business days. To obtain or verify your DUNS number, please call 1.866.705.5711 or visit www.dnb.com/us. • All Applicants must be registered with the Central Contractor Registration (CCR) database prior to submitting an application for COPS funding. The CCR database is the repository for standard information about federal financial assistance applicants, recipients, and sub-recipients. Applicants must maintain an active CCR registration with current information at all times during the grant application process and, if awarded, the grant award period. If you have an active CCR registration that is set to expire before September 30, 2011, you must renew your CCR registration before completing the application. Please note that the CCR verification process may take up to two weeks to complete. To register or to verify that your CCR registration has not expired, please visit www.ccr.gov. • Applicants should note that all recipients of awards of $25,000 or more under this solicitation, consistent with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), will be required to report award information on any first-tier subawards totaling $25,000 or more, and, in certain cases, to report information on the names and total compensation of the five most highly compensated executives of the recipient and first-tier subrecipients. If applicable, the FFATA Subaward Reporting System (FSRS), accessible at www.fsrs.gov, is the reporting tool recipients under this solicitation will use to capture and report subaward information and any executive compensation data required by FFATA. The subaward information entered in FSRS will then be displayed on www.USASpending.gov associated with the prime award, furthering Federal spending transparency. Each applicant entity must ensure that it has the necessary processes and systems in place to comply with the applicable reporting requirements should it receive funding. • Visit the “Account Access” portion of the COPS web site at www.cops.usdoj.gov to determine if your agency currently has an active online account and/or how to create one. If you do not remember your password, you can use this site to have a password reminder sent to you. Please note that the COPS Agency Portal (“Account Access”) has recently been modified. Answers to frequently asked questions regarding the COPS Agency Portal can be found at: http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/Default.asp?Item=2566 or by contacting the COPS Office Response Center at 1.800.421.6770. • If your agency was never assigned a password or you need assistance creating an account and/or system access, or you would like to verify your agency’s correct ORI number, call 1.800.421.6770 between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time, or e-mail askcopsrc@usdoj.gov. • Once logged into “Account Access,” your agency will be able to add additional user accounts and also update your agency contact and address information. Please take this time to ensure that your agency’s Law Enforcement Executive, Government Executive, and point of contact information are current with our office. • You will be required to provide the unique Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) identification number assigned to your agency. The GNIS database is maintained by the U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Department of the Interior. To look up your GNIS Feature ID, please visit their website at: http://geonames.usgs.gov/domestic/index.html.
    • City of San AngeloMemo Date: May 11, 2011 To: Mayor and Councilmembers From: Shawn Lewis, Director of Community & Economic Development Subject: Agenda Item for May 17, 2011 Council Meeting Contact: Caption: Consent Item Approval of a recommendation by the City of San Angelo Development Corporation to authorize the City Manager to negotiate terms of a professional services agreement with CasaBella Architects for design and construction oversight of the Business Resource Center, and authorizing the President of COSADC to sign the agreement on behalf of the corporation. Summary: The Request for Qualifications to solicit architectural firms for design and renovation of the Business Resource Center yielded eight respondents. Of those respondents, three were interviewed. The selection committee unanimously selected CasaBella Architects to serve on the project. History: The BRC Architect Selection Committee included the following individuals: · Kendall Hirschfeld, City Council · Larry Teague, COSADC Board · Dave Ericson, SBDC · Donna Osborne, CVCED · John Dugan, Chamber of Commerce · Shawn Lewis, City of San Angelo (Co-Project Manager · David Knapp, City of San Angelo (Project Manager) The unanimous recommendation of CasaBella by the selection committee was based on CasaBella’s perceived ability to do the job, previous experience, local experience, ability to meet schedules and budgets, proposed approach to the project and professional references. Financial Impact: The total project cost for the BRC is $1.2 million including the fee for architectural services Related Vision Item Other Information/ Staff recommends that COSADC recommend the following action to City Council: Recommendation: Authorization for the City Manager to negotiate contract terms with CasaBella for architectural services for the Business Resource Center in a total project cost amount—including architectural fees—not to exceed $1.2 million. Attachments: Proposed contract and architect interview scoring sheets used by committee members Presentation: N/A Publication:
    • Reviewed by Shawn Lewis, Director of Community & Economic DevelopmentDirector:Approved by Legal: To be approved after negotiations result in finalization of guilding principles for a contract
    • City of San Angelo Proposal Acknowledgment * RFQ: CED-01-11/Architect Services for BRC Date: April 14, 2011 Proposals Received City, State 1 CasaBella Architects Austin, TX 2 Debra J. Dockery San Antonio, TX 3 Parkhill Smith & Cooper Lubbock, TX 4 IDG Architects Houston, TX 5 RW Gregonis Architects San Angelo, TX 6 Kinney Franke Architects San Angelo, TX 7 Gary Donaldson San Angelo, TX NO SUBMISSION 8 Grimes & Associates Wolfforth, TX 9 Beaty Palmer Architects San Antonio, TX RFQ Invitations Sent To: Brinkley Sargent Architects Dallas, TX Gary Donaldson Architecture San Angelo, TX Gregonis R W Architects San Angelo, TX GSBS Architects Richland Hills, TX Henry Schmidt Architect AIA San Angelo, TX J C McDurmitt Partners Ltd San Angelo, TX Jack E Meek Architect AIA San Angelo, TX JDMA Architects, Inc. Lubbock, TX Kinney Architects AIA San Angelo, TX MSB Group Austin, TX MWM Architects Inc Lubbock, TX NZ Architect Arlington, TX Parkhill, Smith & Cooper Inc Lubbock, TX Tittle Luther Partnership Abilene, TX Wiginton Hooker Jeffry Architects Plano, TXNOTE: Include this form with your Agenda MemoO:2011 Agenda Packets05-17-11BRC Architect Scoring Sheets
    • Proposal Acknowledgment * RFQ: CED-01-11/Architect Services for BRC Date: April 14, 2011 Committee Member #1 Kinney CasaBella Debra J. Parkhill Smith IDG RW Gregonis Franke Grimes & Beaty Palmer Category Max Pts Architects Dockery & Cooper Architects Architects Architects Associates Architects Capability 25 25 20 25 25 0 20 20 20 Previsous Experience 25 25 15 25 25 0 25 15 25 Local Experience 5 5 3 3 0 0 5 0 5 Ability to Meet schedules, Deadlines and Budgets 25 21 20 23 19 0 25 20 20 Proposed Approaches and Schedules 25 25 15 20 25 0 20 15 25 Professinal References 15 10 10 10 15 0 15 10 15 Total Score 120 111 83 106 109 0 110 80 110 Rank 1 6 5 4 8 2 7 2 Committee Member #2 Kinney CasaBella Debra J. Parkhill Smith IDG RW Gregonis Franke Grimes & Beaty Palmer Category Points Architects Dockery & Cooper Architects Architects Architects Associates Architects Capability 25 20 17 16 18 0 19 15 19 Previsous Experience 25 18 14 10 14 0 16 10 18 Local Experience 5 0 0 2 0 0 4 2 0 Ability to Meet schedules, Deadlines and Budgets 25 19 15 15 14 0 18 15 18 Proposed Approaches and Schedules 25 19 16 17 18 0 16 17 18 Professinal References 15 14 12 10 14 0 13 10 14 Total Score 120 90 74 70 78 0 86 69 87 Rank 1 5 6 4 8 3 7 2 Committee Member #3 Kinney CasaBella Debra J. Parkhill Smith IDG RW Gregonis Franke Grimes & Beaty Palmer Category Points Architects Dockery & Cooper Architects Architects Architects Associates Architects Capability 25 20 20 18 15 0 22 10 17 Previsous Experience 25 20 19 20 13 0 12 14 18 Local Experience 5 5 5 4 0 0 5 1 3 Ability to Meet schedules, Deadlines and Budgets 25 15 18 15 10 0 10 14 15 Proposed Approaches and Schedules 25 20 18 17 14 0 10 13 15 Professinal References 15 15 3 15 12 0 13 10 15 0 Total Score 120 95 83 89 64 0 72 62 83 Rank 1 3 2 5 6 4 7 3O:2011 Agenda Packets05-17-11BRC Architect Scoring Sheets Page 1 of 4
    • Proposal Acknowledgment * RFQ: CED-01-11/Architect Services for BRC Date: April 14, 2011O:2011 Agenda Packets05-17-11BRC Architect Scoring Sheets Page 2 of 4
    • Proposal Acknowledgment * RFQ: CED-01-11/Architect Services for BRC Date: April 14, 2011 Committee Member #4 Kinney CasaBella Debra J. Parkhill Smith IDG RW Gregonis Franke Grimes & Beaty Palmer Category Points Architects Dockery & Cooper Architects Architects Architects Associates Architects Capability 25 25 20 25 20 0 22 20 20 Previsous Experience 25 25 20 20 15 0 25 20 25 Local Experience 5 5 5 5 1 0 5 1 5 Ability to Meet schedules, Deadlines and Budgets 25 20 20 20 10 0 20 20 20 Proposed Approaches and Schedules 25 20 15 20 10 0 20 15 20 Professinal References 15 15 15 15 5 0 15 5 15 0 Total Score 120 110 95 105 61 0 107 81 105 Rank 1 5 3 7 8 2 6 3 Committee Member #5 Kinney CasaBella Debra J. Parkhill Smith IDG RW Gregonis Franke Grimes & Beaty Palmer Category Points Architects Dockery & Cooper Architects Architects Architects Associates Architects Capability 25 1 1 22 15 0 22 18 1 Previsous Experience 25 1 1 22 15 0 22 15 1 Local Experience 5 3 3 4 0 0 5 0 3 Ability to Meet schedules, Deadlines and Budgets 25 1 1 20 15 0 20 18 1 Proposed Approaches and Schedules 25 1 1 18 15 0 20 1 1 Professinal References 15 1 1 1 10 0 15 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Score 120 8 8 87 70 0 104 53 8 Rank 5 5 2 3 8 1 4 5 Committee Member #6 Kinney CasaBella Debra J. Parkhill Smith IDG RW Gregonis Franke Grimes & Beaty Palmer Category Points Architects Dockery & Cooper Architects Architects Architects Associates Architects Capability 25 20 15 22 15 0 22 0 22 Previsous Experience 25 20 15 22 15 0 25 15 22 Local Experience 5 1 0 3 0 0 5 0 1 Ability to Meet schedules, Deadlines and Budgets 25 18 18 18 18 0 18 18 18 Proposed Approaches and Schedules 25 20 15 15 15 0 22 15 20 Professinal References 15 8 8 8 8 0 14 8 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Score 120 87 71 88 71 0 106 56 95 Rank 4 5 3 5 8 1 7 2O:2011 Agenda Packets05-17-11BRC Architect Scoring Sheets Page 3 of 4
    • Proposal Acknowledgment * RFQ: CED-01-11/Architect Services for BRC Date: April 14, 2011 Committee Member Summary Kinney Total CasaBella Debra J. Parkhill Smith IDG RW Gregonis Franke Grimes & Beaty Palmer Category Points Architects Dockery & Cooper Architects Architects Architects Associates Architects Capability 150 111 93 128 108 0 127 83 99 Previsous Experience 150 109 84 119 97 0 125 89 109 Local Experience 30 19 16 21 1 0 29 4 17 Ability to Meet schedules, Deadlines and Budgets 150 94 92 111 86 0 111 105 92 Proposed Approaches and Schedules 150 105 80 107 97 0 108 76 99 Professinal References 90 63 49 59 64 0 85 44 72 Total Score 720 501 414 545 453 0 585 401 488 Average Score 120 83.5 69 90.8 75.5 97.5 66.8 81.3 Rank 3 6 2 5 8 1 7 4 Attach a Written Justification for each companys ranking and forward to Purchasing NOTE: Attached this form and the Written Justification to your Agenda Background MemoO:2011 Agenda Packets05-17-11BRC Architect Scoring Sheets Page 4 of 4
    • Proposal Acknowledgment * RFQ: CED-01-11/Architect Services for BRC Final Interview Evaluations, April 27, 2011Committee Member #1 CasaBella Parkhill Smith Kinney FrankeCategory Max Pts Architects & Cooper ArchitectsStaff/Subcontractor Experience & Qualifications 3 3 3 3Relevant Previous Experience 3 3 1 2Local Experience 3 2 1 3Ability to meet schedules and deadlines 3 3 1 2Proposed approaches and schedules 3 3 0 2 0 0 0 Total Score 15 14 6 12 Rank 1 3 2Committee Member #2 CasaBella Parkhill Smith Kinney FrankeCategory Points Architects & Cooper ArchitectsStaff/Subcontractor Experience & Qualifications 3 3 1 3Relevant Previous Experience 3 3 1 3Local Experience 3 3 0 3Ability to meet schedules and deadlines 3 3 2 3Proposed approaches and schedules 3 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 Total Score 15 15 6 13 Rank 1 3 2Committee Member #3 CasaBella Parkhill Smith Kinney FrankeCategory Points Architects & Cooper ArchitectsStaff/Subcontractor Experience & Qualifications 3 3 1 3Relevant Previous Experience 3 3 1 3Local Experience 3 3 1 3Ability to meet schedules and deadlines 3 3 2 2Proposed approaches and schedules 3 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 Total Score 15 15 7 12 Rank 1 3 2Committee Member #4 CasaBella Parkhill Smith Kinney FrankeCategory Points Architects & Cooper ArchitectsStaff/Subcontractor Experience & Qualifications 3 3 3 3Relevant Previous Experience 3 3 1 3Local Experience 3 3 1 3Ability to meet schedules and deadlines 3 3 2 3Proposed approaches and schedules 3 3 0 2
    • 0 0 0 0 Total Score 15 7 14 Rank 1 3 2Committee Member #5 CasaBella Parkhill Smith Kinney FrankeCategory Points Architects & Cooper ArchitectsStaff/Subcontractor Experience & Qualifications 3 3 1 3Relevant Previous Experience 3 3 1 2Local Experience 3 2 1 3Ability to meet schedules and deadlines 3 3 1 2Proposed approaches and schedules 3 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 Total Score 15 14 5 12 Rank 1 3 2Committee Member #6 CasaBella Parkhill Smith Kinney FrankeCategory Points Architects & Cooper ArchitectsStaff/Subcontractor Experience & Qualifications 3 3 1 3Relevant Previous Experience 3 3 1 3Local Experience 3 3 1 3Ability to meet schedules and deadlines 3 3 0 1Proposed approaches and schedules 3 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 Total Score 15 15 3 13 Rank 1 3 2Committee Member #7 CasaBella Parkhill Smith Kinney FrankeCategory Points Architects & Cooper ArchitectsStaff/Subcontractor Experience & Qualifications 3 3 3 3Relevant Previous Experience 3 3 1 2Local Experience 3 2 0 3Ability to meet schedules and deadlines 3 3 2 2Proposed approaches and schedules 3 3 2 3 0 0 0 0 Total Score 15 14 8 13 Rank 1 3 2Committee Member Summary Total CasaBella Parkhill Smith Kinney FrankeCategory Points Architects & Cooper ArchitectsStaff/Subcontractor Experience & Qualifications 21 21 13 21Relevant Previous Experience 21 21 7 18Local Experience 21 18 5 21Ability to meet schedules and deadlines 21 21 10 15Proposed approaches and schedules 21 21 7 14 0 0 0 0
    • Total Score 105 102 42 89 Average Score 15 14.6 6 12.7 Rank 1 3 2Attach a Written Justification for each companys ranking and forward to PurchasingNOTE: Attached this form and the Written Justification to your Agenda Background Memo
    • Texas Local Government Code - Chapter 2254Sec. 2254.004. CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES OF ARCHITECT, ENGINEER, OR SURVEYOR. (a) Inprocuring architectural, engineering, or land surveying services, a governmental entity shall: (1) first select the most highly qualified provider of those services on the basis of demonstrated competence and qualifications; and (2) then attempt to negotiate with that provider a contract at a fair and reasonable price. (b) If a satisfactory contract cannot be negotiated with the most highly qualified provider of architectural, engineering, or land surveying services, the entity shall: (1) formally end negotiations with that provider; (2) select the next most highly qualified provider; and (3) attempt to negotiate a contract with that provider at a fair and reasonable price. (c) The entity shall continue the process described in Subsection (b) to select and negotiate with providers until a contract is entered into.Sec. 2254.005. VOID CONTRACT. A contract entered into or an arrangement made in violation of this subchapteris void as against public policy.1. Each committee member should rank each company based on their evaluation of the proposal submitted vs.the Selection criteria2. The Project Manager must provide a written justification summary for each companys scoring3. Once a company has been selected, the project must submit to the City Council a request to negotiate onbehalf of the City to enter into a contract.4. All contracts must be approved by the Legal Department5. Upon finalizing the contract, the Project must request the City Council to Award the Contract before anyservice may be provided.
    • ARCHITECTURAL AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF SAN ANGELO AND CASABELLA ARCHITECTS This Agreement is entered into this ______ day of ______________, 2011 in Tom GreenCounty, Texas by and between the City of San Angelo, a Texas home rule municipal corporation(“City”) and CasaBella Architects, a Texas professional corporation, (“Architect”) for consultantservices for a new San Angelo Business Resource Center (The Premises). RECITAL A. City has issued a Request for Qualifications (“RFQ) for the provision ofArchitectural Services for a new San Angelo Business Resource Center (“Services”) andArchitect’s proposal (“Proposal”), in response thereto, has been selected as the most qualifiedproposal for the provision of the Services. The RFQ and the Proposal are sometimes referred toherein, collectively, as the Solicitation Documents, and are by this reference incorporated intoand made a part of this Agreement. B. On _____________, 201__, the City Council of City of San Angelo, approved theselection of Architect and authorized the City Manager to execute a contract, under the terms andconditions set forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises hereincontained, Provider and City agree as follows: TERMS:1. RECITALS:The recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated into and made a part of thisAgreement.2. ARCHITECT’S SERVICES (WORK):The Project consists of Professional Design Services for a new Business Resource Center. TheArchitect’s services will be divided into two phases: A. Pre-Design Phase, to include Needs Assessment, Space Programming, FeasibilityAnalysis Code Analysis, and Field Measurement of the existing building located at 69 N.Chadbourne, San Angelo, Texas. 1
    • B. Schematic Design Phase, to include preliminary design floor plans, cost estimatesand updated project schedule. C. Design Development, Construction Document, Bidding, and ConstructionObservation phases, based on the design chosen by the City.3. SCHEDULE OF SERVICES A. Architect shall commence the Pre-Design Phase and Schematic Design Phasewithin thirty (30) days of the effective date of this Agreement. B. Architect shall complete the Pre-Design Phase and Schematic Design Phase per Exhibit “A” C. Upon final approval of the selected design, Architect and City shall execute anAmendment to this Agreement for the subsequent phases. Amendment will detail the agreedupon Scope of Services, Schedule of Services, and fees based on Exhibits “A” and “B”. D. Amendment to Agreement is subject to City Council approval and City’sTermination Rights pursuant to Section 15; and Contingency Clause found in Section 23,including the availability of funds.3. SCOPE OF SERVICE: A. Architect agrees to provide the Services as specifically described under the Scopeof Work – Architectural Services for a new San Angelo Business Resource Center as set forth inAttachment “A” hereto, which by this reference is incorporated into and made a part of thisAgreement as if fully set forth herein. B. The standard of care of all professional architectural and related servicesperformed or furnished by Architect under this Agreement will be the care and skill ordinarilyused by members of Architects profession practicing under similar circumstances at the sametime and in the same locality. C Architect represents and warrants to City that Architect: (i) possesses allqualifications, licenses and expertise required for the performance of the Services; (ii) it is notdelinquent in the payment of any sums due the City, including payment of permit fees,occupational licenses, etc., nor in the performance of any obligations to the City, (iii) is andshall be, at all times during the term hereof, fully qualified and trained to perform the Services;and (iv) the Services will be performed in the manner described in Attachment “A”.4. COMPENSATION: A. The amount of compensation payable by City to Architect shall be based on therates and schedules described in Attachment “B” hereto, which by this reference is incorporatedinto this Agreement as if fully set forth herein. 2
    • B. Unless otherwise specifically provided in Attachment “B”, payment to Architectshall be made within thirty (30) days after receipt of Architect’s invoice, which shall beaccompanied by sufficient supporting documentation and contain sufficient detail, to allow aproper audit of expenditures, should City require one to be performed.5. CONTRACT DOCUMENTS: A. The following documents from the City of San Angelo are incorporated herein by-reference for all purposes, as if fully set out verbatim:- Request for Qualifications, Architectural Services For a New San Angelo Business Resource Center, No. CED-01-11 (“RFQ No. CED-01-11”) All of the documents, attachments, conditions, specifications, technical data, drawings, requirements and addenda comprising said RFQ No. CED-01-11 of the time this Agreement is entered by Architect and City, and specifically including Attachments “A” and B” as referenced under Sections 3 and 4 of this Agreement. B. CONFLICTS. This Agreement, the documents required to be provided, and theContract Documents constitute the entire agreement between the parties hereto and supersedeany prior written or oral agreements and understandings between the parties. If any provision ofthis Agreement, the General Conditions, the Specifications or any other provision containedwithin the Contract Documents conflicts, or is inconsistent, with any other provision of theContract Documents, then the conflict or inconsistency will be resolved first by reference to theterms of this Agreement, then to the General Conditions to this Agreement and then finally to theSpecifications therein, unless a federal law, regulation or restriction would require otherwise, inwhich case the federal provision would control.6. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS:Architect understands and agrees that any information, document, report or any other materialwhatsoever which is given by City to Architect or which is otherwise obtained or prepared byArchitect pursuant to or under the terms of this Agreement is and shall at all times remain theproperty of City. Architect agrees not to use any such information, document, report or materialfor any other purpose whatsoever without the written consent of City, which may be withheld orconditioned by City in its sole discretion.7. AUDIT AND INSPECTION RIGHTS: A. City may, at reasonable times, and for a period of up to three (3) years followingthe date of final payment by City to Architect under this Agreement, audit, or cause to beaudited, those books and records of Architect which are related to Architect’s performance underthis Agreement. Architect agrees to maintain all such books and records at its principal place ofbusiness for a period of three (3) years after final payment is made under this Agreement. Cityshall have the right to a copy of any document or report created as a result of this agreementduring the three (3) year term. City shall reimburse Architect reasonable expenses associatedwith reproduction of the report or document. 3
    • B. City may, at reasonable times during the term hereof, inspect Architect’s facilitiesand perform such tests, as the City deems reasonably necessary, to determine whether the goodsor services required to be provided by Architect under this Agreement conform to the termshereof, if applicable. Architect shall make available to City all reasonable facilities andassistance to facilitate the performance of tests or inspections by City representatives.8. AWARD OF AGREEMENT:Architect represents and warrants to City that it has not employed or retained any person orcompany employed by City to solicit or secure this Agreement and that it has not offered to pay,paid, or agreed to pay any person any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, or gift of anykind contingent upon or in connection with, the award of this Agreement.9. PUBLIC RECORDS:Architect understands that the public shall have access, at all reasonable times, to all documentsand information pertaining to City contracts, subject to the provisions of Texas Statutes, andagrees to allow access by City and the public to all documents subject to disclosure underapplicable law. Architect’s failure or refusal to comply with the provisions of this section shallresult in the immediate cancellation of this Agreement by City.10. COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL LAWS:Architect understands that agreements between private entities and local governments are subjectto certain laws and regulations, including laws pertaining to public records, conflict of interest,record keeping, etc. City and Architect agree to comply with and observe all applicable federal,state and local laws, rules, regulations, codes and ordinances, as they may be amended from timeto time.11. INDEMNIFICATION: A. GENERAL INDEMNIFICATION. ARCHITECT AGREES TOINDEMNIFY AND HOLD CITY ITS COUNCIL MEMBERS, OFFICIALS, ANDEMPLOYEES FREE AND HARMLESS FROM AND AGAINST ANY AND ALLCLAIMS, DEMANDS, PROCEEDINGS, SUITS, JUDGMENTS, COSTS, PENALTIES,FINES, DAMAGES, LOSSES, ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND EXPENSES ASSERTED BYANY PERSON OR PERSONS, INCLUDING EMPLOYEES OF ARCHITECT OR CITY,BY REASON OF DEATH OR INJURY TO PERSONS, OR LOSS OR DAMAGE TOPROPERTY, RESULTING FROM OR ARISING OUT OF AND TO THE EXTENTCAUSED BY , THE VIOLATION OF ANY LAW OR REGUATION ORATTRIBUTABLE TO ANY NEGLIGENT OR WILLFUL WRONGFUL ACT OROMISSION, NEGLIGENCE OR FAULT OF ARCHITECT, OR EMPLOYEES, , AS ACONSEQUENCE OF ITS EXECUTION OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS CONTRACTOR SUSTAINED IN OR UPON THE PREMISES. THIS INDEMNIFICATION SHALLSURVIVE THE TERM OF THIS CONTRACT AS LONG AS ANY LIABILITY COULD 4
    • BE LEGALLY ASSERTED UNDER THE LAWS OF TEXAS . NOTHING HEREINSHALL REQUIRE ARCHITECT TO INDEMNIFY, DEFEND OR HOLD HARMLESSANY INDEMNIFIED PARTY FOR THE INDEMNIFIED PARTY’S OWNNEGILGENCE OR WILLFUL MISCONDUCT. B. PROSPECTIVE APPLICATION. ANY AND ALL INDEMNITYPROVIDED FOR IN THIS CONTRACT SHALL SURVIVE THE EXPIRATION OFTHIS CONTRACT AND THE DISCHARGE OF ALL OTHER OBLIGATIONS OWEDBY THE PARTIES TO EACH OTHER HEREUNDER AND SHALL APPLYPROSPECTIVELY NOT ONLY DURING THE TERM OF THIS CONTRACT BUTTHEREAFTER SO LONG AS ANY LIABILITY (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TOLIABILITY FOR CLOSURE AND POST CLOSURE COSTS) COULD LEGALLY BEASSERTED UNDER THE LAWS OF TEXAS IN REGARD TO ANY NEGLIGENTACTS OR OMISSIONS OF ARCHITECT IN PERFORMING UNDER THISCONTRACT.12. INSURANCE: A. General Conditions. The following conditions shall apply to all insurance policiesobtained by Architect for the purpose of complying with this Agreement: (1) Satisfactory Companies. Coverage shall be maintained with insurers and under forms of policies satisfactory to City and with insurers licensed to do business in Texas. (2) Named Insureds. All insurance policies required herein shall be drawn in the name of Architect, with City, its council members, board and commission members, officials, agents, invitees, consultants and employees named as additional insureds, except on Workers’ Compensation and Professional Liability coverage. (3) Waiver of Subrogation. Architect shall require its insurance carrier(s), with respect to all insurance policies, to waive all rights of subrogation against City, its council members, board and commission members, officials, agents, guests, invitees, consultants and employees. (4) Certificates of Insurance. At or before the time of execution of this Agreement, Architect shall furnish City’s Risk Manager with certificates of insurance as evidence that all of the policies required herein are in full force and effect and provide the required coverages and limits of insurance. All certificates of insurance shall clearly state that all applicable requirements have been satisfied. The certificates shall provide that any company issuing an insurance policy shall provide to City not less than thirty (30) days advance notice in writing of cancellation, non-renewal or material change in the policy of insurance. In addition, Architect and insurance company shall immediately provide written notice to City’s Risk Manager upon receipt of notice of cancellation of any insurance policy, or of a decision to terminate or alter any insurance policy. Copies of required endorsements will be attached to the certificate to confirm the required endorsements are in effect. Certificates of insurance and notices of cancellations, 5
    • terminations or alterations shall be furnished to City’s Risk Manager at City Hall, 106 S. Chadbourne, San Angelo, Texas 76903 or P.O. Box 1751, San Angelo, Texas 76902. (5) Architect’s Liability. The procurement of such policy of insurance shall not be construed to be a limitation upon Architect’s liability or as a full performance on its part of the indemnification provisions of this Agreement. Architect’s obligations are, notwithstanding any policy of insurance, for the full and total amount of any damage, injury or loss caused by or attributable to its activities conducted at or upon the premises. Failure of Architect to maintain adequate coverage shall not relieve Architect of any contractual responsibility or obligation. (6) Subcontractors’ Insurance. Architect shall cause each Subcontractor and Sub- subcontractor of Architect to purchase and maintain insurance of the types and in the amounts specified below. Architect shall require Subcontractors and Sub-subcontractors to furnish copies of certificates of insurance to Architect’s Risk Manager evidencing coverage for each Subcontractor and Sub-subcontractor B. Types and Amounts of Insurance Required. Architect shall obtain andcontinuously maintain in effect at all times during the term hereof, at Architect’s sole expense,insurance coverage as follows with limits not less than those set forth below: (1) Commercial General Liability. This policy shall be an occurrence-type policy and shall protect the Architect and additional insureds against all claims arising from bodily injury, sickness, disease or death of any person (other than the Architect’s employees) and damage to property of the City or others arising out of the act or omission of the Architect or its agents and employees. This policy shall also include protection against claims for the contractual liability assumed by Architect under the paragraph of this Agreement entitled “Indemnification”, including completed operations, products liability, contractual coverage, broad form property coverage, explosion, collapse, underground, premises/operations, and independent contractors (to remain in force for two years after final payment). Coverage shall not be less than: $1,000,000.00 General Aggregate $1,000,000.00 Products - Completed Operations Aggregate $1,000,000.00 Personal & Advertising Injury $1,000,000.00 Each Occurrence (2) Business Automobile Liability. This policy shall be written in comprehensive form and shall protect Architect and the additional insureds against all claims for injuries to members of the public and damage to property of others arising from the use of motor vehicles and shall cover operation on and off The Premises of all motor vehicles licensed for highway use, whether they are owned, non-owned or hired. Coverage shall not be less than: $ 500,000.00 Combined Single Limit 6
    • (3) Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability. If Architect hires any employees, Architect shall maintain Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability insurance, which shall protect the Architect against all claims under applicable state workers’ compensation laws and employer’s liability. The insured shall also be protected against claims for injury, disease or death of employees which, for any reason, may not fall within the provisions of a workers’ compensation law. Coverage shall not be less than: Statutory Amount Workers’ Compensation $ 100,000.00 Employer’s Liability, Each Accident $ 100,000.00 Employer’s Liability, Disease – Each Employee $ 500,000.00 Employer’s Liability, Disease – Policy LimitThe foregoing requirement will not be applicable if, and so long as, Architect qualifies as a self-insurer under the rules and regulations of the commission or agency administering the workers’compensation program in Texas and furnishes evidence of such qualification to City inaccordance with the notice provisions of this Agreement. (4) Professional Liability. This insurance shall include limited contractual liability inits coverage, and the coverage under this policy shall survive the term of this Agreement as longas any liability could be asserted. Coverage shall be as follows: $ 1,000,000.0013. DEFAULT: If Architect fails to comply with any term or condition of this Agreement, or fails to performany of its obligations hereunder, then Architect shall be in default. Upon the occurrence of adefault hereunder the City, in addition to all remedies available to it by law, may immediately,upon written notice to Architect, terminate this Agreement whereupon all payments, advances, orother compensation paid by the City to Architect while Architect was in default shall beimmediately returned to the City. Architect understands and agrees that termination of thisAgreement under this section shall not release Architect from any obligation accruing prior to theeffective date of termination. Should Architect be unable or unwilling to commence to performthe Services within the time provided or contemplated herein, then, in addition to the foregoing,Architect shall be liable to the City for all expenses incurred by the City in preparation andnegotiation of this Agreement, as well as all costs and expenses incurred by the City in the re-procurement of the Services, including consequential and incidental damages.14. RESOLUTION OF CONTRACT DISPUTES:Architect understands and agrees that all disputes between Architect and City, based upon analleged violation of the terms of this Agreement by City, shall be submitted to the City Managerfor its resolution prior to Architect being entitled to seek judicial relief in connection therewith.In the event that the amount of compensation hereunder exceeds $25,000.00, the City Manager’sdecision shall be approved or disapproved by the City Council. Architect shall not be entitled toseek judicial relief unless: (i) it has first received City Manager’s written decision, approved by 7
    • the City Council, if the amount of compensation hereunder exceeds $25,000.00; or (ii) a periodof sixty (60) days has expired, after submitting to the City Manager a detailed statement of thedispute, accompanied by all supporting documentation (90) days if City Manager’s decision issubject to City Council approval; or (iii) City has waived compliance with the procedure setforth in this section by written instruments, signed by the City Manager.15. CITY’S TERMINATION RIGHTS: A. City may, by written notice, terminate this Agreement in whole or in part at anytime, either for the City’s convenience or because of failure to fulfill the obligations containedwithin this Agreement. Upon receipt of such notice, services shall be immediately discontinued(unless the notice directs otherwise) and all materials as may have been accumulated inperforming this Agreement, whether completed or in progress, delivered to City. B. If the termination is for the convenience of City, an equitable adjustment in thecontract price shall be made for the services performed, but no amount shall be allowed foranticipated profit on unperformed services. C. If the termination is due to failure to fulfill the Architect’s obligations, City maytake over the work and prosecute the same to completion by contract or otherwise. In such case,the Architect shall be liable to City for any additional cost occasioned to the City thereby. D. If, after notice of termination for failure to fulfill contract obligations, it isdetermined that the Architect had not so failed, the termination shall be deemed to have beeneffected for the convenience of City. In such event, adjustment in the contract price shall bemade as provided in this section. E. The rights and remedies of the City provided in this section are in addition to anyother rights and remedies provided by law or under this Agreement.16. WORK DRAWINGS AND DOCUMENTATION:After performance and completion of the Services under this Agreement, and prior to finalpayment, the Architect shall deliver to City, all original documentation and drawings preparedunder this Agreement. Architect shall make available to City all basic survey notes and sketches,charts, computations and other data upon request of City and without restriction or limitation ontheir use. In the event City does not have proper storage facilities for the protection of theoriginal documentation and drawings, City may request Architect to retain the drawings with theprovision that they will be made available without restriction upon written request. In the eventany of the above documents are re-used by City, the nameplates will be removed and theArchitect released and held harmless of subsequent liabilities.17. NON-DISCRIMINATION:Architect represents and warrants to City that Architect does not and will not engage indiscriminatory practices and that there shall be no discrimination in connection with Architect’s 8
    • performance under this Agreement on account of race, color, sex, religion, age, handicap, maritalstatus or national origin. Architect further covenants that no otherwise qualified individual shall,solely by reason of his/her race, color, sex, religion, age, handicap, marital status or nationalorigin, be excluded from participation in, be denied services, or be subject to discriminationunder any provision of this Agreement.18. ASSIGNMENT:This Agreement shall not be assigned by Architect, in whole or in part, without the prior writtenconsent of City, which may be withheld or conditioned, in the City’s sole discretion.19. NOTICES:All notices or other communications required under this Agreement shall be in writing and shallbe given by hand-delivery or by registered or certified U.S. Mail, return receipt requested,addressed to the other party at the address indicated herein or to such other address as a partymay designate by notice given as herein provided. Notice shall be deemed given on the day onwhich personally delivered; or, if by mail, on the fifth day after being posted or the date of actualreceipt, whichever is earlier.CITY: ARCHITECT:City of San Angelo CasaBella ArchitectsAttn: Shawn Lewis Attn: Jaime Palomo, AIAP.O. Box 1751 3821 Juniper Trace, Suite 104San Angelo, Texas 76902 Austin, TX 78738Phone: (325) 657-4210 Phone: (512) 458-570020. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS: A. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced according to the laws of the Stateof Texas. B. Title and paragraph headings are for convenient reference and are not a part ofthis Agreement. C. No waiver or breach of any provision of this Agreement shall constitute a waiverof any subsequent breach of the same or any other provision hereof, and no waiver shall beeffective unless made in writing. D. Should any provision, paragraph, sentence, word or phrase contained in thisAgreement be determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or otherwiseunenforceable under the laws of the State of Texas or the City of San Angelo, such provision,paragraph, sentence, word or phrase shall be deemed modified to the extent necessary in order toconform with such laws, or if not modifiable, then same shall be deemed severable, and in eitherevent, the remaining terms and provisions of this Agreement shall remain unmodified and in fullforce and effect or limitation of its use. 9
    • 21. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS:This Agreement shall be binding upon the parties hereto, their heirs, executors, legalrepresentatives, successors, or assigns.22. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR: Architect has been procured and is being engaged to provide services to City as an independentcontractor, and not as an agent or employee of City. Architect further understands that TexasWorkers’ Compensation benefits available to employees of City are not available to Architect,and agrees to provide workers’ compensation insurance for any employee or agent of Architectrendering services to City under this Agreement.23. CONTINGENCY CLAUSE:Funding for this Agreement is contingent on the availability of funds and continued authorizationfor program activities and the Agreement is subject to amendment or termination due to lack offunds, reduction of funds and/or change in regulations, upon thirty (30) days notice.24. ENTIRE AGREEMENT: This instrument and its attachments constitute the sole and only agreement of the parties relatingto the subject matter hereof and correctly set forth the rights, duties, and obligations of each tothe other as of its date. Any prior agreements, promises, negotiations, or representations notexpressly set forth in this Agreement are of no force or effect. No modification or amendmenthereto shall be valid unless in writing and executed by properly authorized representatives of theparties hereto.25. COUNTERPARTS:This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall constitute anoriginal but all of which, when taken together, shall constitute one and the same agreement. [Signature Page to Follow] 10
    • IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to beexecuted by their respective officials thereunto duly authorized, this the day and year abovewritten. CITY City of San Angelo Development Corporation By: Larry Teague, Board PresidentATTEST:Alicia Ramirez, City Clerk(SEAL) ARCHITECT CasaBella Architects By: Jaime Palomo, AIA, PrincipalATTEST:________________________________(SEAL) 11
    • Approved as to Content: Approved as to Form:_____________________________ ________________________________Shawn Lewis, Lysia H. Bowling,Director of Community & Eco. Dev. City AttorneyApproved as to Content: Approved as to Insurance Requirements:David Knapp, R.A. John Seaton,Architect/Construction Manager Risk Manager 12
    • CERTIFICATION OF ARCHITECT I hereby certify that I am Jaime Palomo, AIA ____________________________, a dulyauthorized representative of the firm of CasaBella Architects, whose address is 3821 JuniperTrace, Suite 104, Austin, Texas 78738, and that neither I nor the above firm I here represent has: (a) Employed or retained for a commission, percentage, brokerage, contingent fee, orother consideration, any firm or person (other than a bona fide employee working solely for me)to solicit or secure this contract; (b) Agreed, as an express or implied condition for obtaining this contract, to employor retain the services of any firm or person in connection with carrying out the contract; or (c) Paid or agreed to pay to any firm, organization, or person (other than a bona fideemployee working solely for me or the above firm) any fee, contribution, donation, orconsideration of any kind, for, or in connection with, procuring or carrying out the contract;except as here expressly stated (if any). CasaBella Architects By: _______________________________ Date:______________________________ 13
    • Exhibit “A” SCOPE OF WORK SANANGELO BUSINESS RESOURCE CENTER The Architect shall render all professional architectural services necessary and customaryin the design, planning and construction of the Project improvements described herein and in anyWork-specific amendments attached hereto and incorporated herein.1. Basic Services: Architect’s Basic Services consist of those described herein and includeusual and customary structural, mechanical, and electrical engineering services. Services not setforth herein are Additional Services. 1.1 Architect shall manage the Architect’s services, consult with City, researchapplicable design criteria, attend Project meetings, communicate with members of the Projectteam and report progress to City. 1.2 Architect shall coordinate its services with those services provided by City andCity’s consultants. Architect shall be entitled to rely on the accuracy and completeness ofservices and information furnished by City and City’s consultants. Architect shall provideprompt written notice to City if the Architect becomes aware of any error, omission orinconsistency in such services or information. 1.3 As soon as practicable, but no less than thirty (30) days after the date of thisAgreement, Architect shall submit for City’s approval a schedule for the performance of theArchitect’s services. The schedule shall include anticipated dates for commencement of theDesign/CA Phase, to include: 1) Pre-Design Phase xx (xx) weeks 2) Schematic Design Phase xx (xx) weeks 3) Design and Development Phase xx (xx) weeks 4) Construction Document Phase xx (xx) weeks 5) Construction Bid & Award Phase xx (xx) weeks 6) Construction Observation/Mgmt. Phase xx (xx) monthsThe schedule shall include allowances for periods of time required for the City’s review, for theperformance of City’s consultants, and for approval of submissions by authorities havingjurisdiction over the Project. Once approved by City, time limits established by the scheduleshall not, except for reasonable cause, be exceeded by the Architect or City. With City’sapproval, Architect shall adjust the schedule, if necessary as the Project proceeds until thecommencement of construction. 1.4 The Architect shall not be responsible for City’s directive or substitution madewithout the Architect’s approval.2. Pre-Design Phase (Phase 1):2.1 Architect shall begin the process of evaluating the facility. 14
    • 2.1.1 Perform a needs assessment for the Business Resource Center, including all the departments within, identifying current deficiencies, critical needs as well as future trends for the industry 2.1.2 Provide space programming for the facility based on the needs assessment. 2.1.3 Provide a feasibility analysis and budget development of the known site conditions and the proposed design for the facility. Include a detailed cost analysis of the facility.3. Design/CA Phase (Phase 2) – Schematic Design through Construction Observation3.1 Schematic Design Phase: 3.1.1 Upon City’s acceptance of Architect’s work in the previous Phase and assumingCity has not delayed or terminated the Agreement, Architect shall: 1) Consult with City to define and clarify City’s requirements for the Work and available data. 2) Advise City as to the necessity of City’s providing data or services which are not part of Architect’s Basic Services, and assist City in obtaining such data and services. 3) Establish the scope of the Work, and advise City of any additional special investigations, field surveys, soil or foundation investigations which, in the opinion of the Architect, may be required; and arrange with City for the conduct of such investigations and tests. 4) Identify, consult with, and analyze requirements of governmental authorities having jurisdiction to approve the portions of the Work designed or specified by Architect, including but not limited to mitigating measures identified in the environmental assessment. 5) Identify and evaluate alternate solutions available to City and, after consultation with City, recommend to City those solutions which, in City’s judgment, meet City’s requirements for the Work. 6) Prepare, for approval by City, Schematic Design Documents detailing each phased unit of the Project which will contain schematic layouts, sketches and conceptual design criteria with appropriate exhibits to indicate the agreed-to requirements, considerations involved (including, but not limited to, the construction schedule and construction budget requirements), and those alternate solutions available to City which Architect recommends. The Schematic Design Documents should illustrate the scale and relationship of Project components. 7) The Architect shall submit as part of the Schematic Design Documents a preliminary detailed estimate of construction costs (Opinion of Probable Cost) for each phase of the Project. The Opinion of Probable Cost shall be based on current area, volume or other unit costs and indicate the cost of each category of work involved in constructing the Project, and shall make allowances for contingencies, estimated costs of 15
    • design, professional, and related services provided by Architect, costs for various recommended solutions and other information furnished or requested by City. 8) Furnish five (5) final copies of the Schematic Design Documents to City. 9) The duties and responsibilities of Architect during the Schematic Design Phase may be amended and supplemented as indicated in any Project Amendments to this Agreement. 3.1.2 Architect’s services under the Schematic Design Phase are complete on the date when the final copies of the Schematic Design Documents have been delivered to City. Timelines for said completion shall be determined as set forth in Section 1.3 hereinabove.3.2 Design Development Phase: Upon City’s acceptance of Architect’s work in the Schematic Design Phase and the mostrecent Detailed Statement of Probable Construction Costs, and assuming City has not delayed orterminated the Agreement, Architect shall: 3.2.1 Prepare for approval by the City three (3) sets of Design Development Documentsconsisting of final design criteria, preliminary drawings, outlined specifications and otherdocuments to fix and describe the size and character of the Project as to architectural, structural,mechanical and electrical systems, materials and such other elements as may be appropriate,which shall comply with all applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, codes and regulations.Notwithstanding City’s approval of the Documents, Architect warrants that the Documents andspecifications will be sufficient and adequate to fulfill the purposes of the Project. 3.2.2 The Architect shall advise City of any adjustments to the preliminary Opinion ofProbable Cost by providing for review and approval by City a Detailed Statement of ProbableConstruction Costs that includes the information required in Section 3.1.1 (7). 3.2.3 Architect’s services under the Design Development Phase are complete on thedate when copies of the Design Development Report documents have been delivered to City.Timelines for said completion shall be determined as set forth in Section 1.3 hereinabove.3.3 Construction Documents Phase: 3.3.1 Upon City’s acceptance of Architect’s work in the Design Development Phaseand the most recent Detailed Statement of Probable Construction Costs, and assuming City hasnot delayed or terminated the Agreement, and upon written authorization from City, Architectshall: 1) Prepare, for approval by City, Construction Documents consisting of drawings and specifications setting forth in detail requirements for the Construction Phase, which shall comply with all applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, codes and regulations. The specifications prepared shall not include any general contractual 16
    • provisions of any kind. Contractual language will be prepared by City for inclusion in the Agreement. 2) Provide technical criteria, written descriptions, and design data for City’s use in filing applications for permits from or obtaining approvals of governmental or regulatory authorities and assist City in consultations with appropriate authorities. Submit to appropriate governmental or regulatory authorities, if required, advance copies of the plans and specifications and Cost estimates for review. Architect will make any additions, changes or clarifications necessary to respond to comments by any governmental or regulatory authorities. 3) Revise the Detailed Statement of Probable Construction Costs, if necessary. 4) Prepare and furnish three (3) sets of Final Construction Documents and a revised Detailed Statement of Probable Construction Costs for review and approval by City and assist City in the preparation of other related documents. Additional sets shall be considered as Additional Costs and charged in accordance therewith. 3.3.2 Architect’s services under the Construction Documents Phase are complete on thedate when the Final Construction Documents have been delivered to City. Timelines for saidcompletion shall be determined as set forth in Section 1.3 hereinabove.3.4 Construction Bid & Award Phase: 3.4.1 Upon City’s acceptance of Architect’s work in the Construction Documents Phaseand the most recent Detailed Statement of Probable Construction Costs, and assuming City hasnot delayed or terminated the Agreement, and upon written authorization from City, Architectshall: 1) Furnish the number of copies of the Bid Documents as required by prospective bidders and furnishers of material and equipment. 2) Assist City in advertising for and obtaining bids or negotiating proposals for the Work and attend pre-Bid conferences. 3) At the request of City, draft addenda as appropriate to clarify, correct, or change the Bid Documents. 4) Consult with City as to the acceptability of subcontractors, suppliers, and other individuals and entities proposed by contractor for those portions of the Work as to which such acceptability is required by the Bid Documents. 5) Consult with City concerning determination of the acceptability of substitute materials and equipment proposed by prospective contractor(s) when substitution prior to the award of contracts is allowed by the Bid Documents. 17
    • 6) Attend the Bid opening, prepare Bid tabulation sheets, and assist City in evaluating Bids or proposals and in assembling and awarding contracts for the Work. 7) Provide a written recommendation of award based upon the apparent lowest bidder’s qualifications, proposed subcontractor’s qualifications, references, list of equipment and past performance. Architect shall attend the city council meeting at which award of the bid is scheduled to be heard and be able to respond to questions regarding Architect’s award recommendation. 8) The duties and responsibilities of Architect during the Bidding Phase may be amended and supplemented as indicated in any Project Amendments to this Agreement. 3.4.2 The Bidding Phase is complete upon commencement of the Construction Phase orupon cessation of negotiations with prospective contractors. Timelines for said completion shallbe determined as set forth in Section 1.3 hereinabove.3.5 Construction Observation & Management Phase: 3.5.1 Upon City’s acceptance of Architect’s work in the Bidding Phase, and assumingCity has not delayed or terminated the Agreement, and upon written authorization from City,Architect shall provide the services listed below: 1) Perform the duties and discharge the responsibilities stated in the Work’s specifications after receiving authorization to proceed with construction from City. Architect shall advise and counsel City’s construction manager in the accomplishment of his duties. 2) Make visits to The Premises at intervals appropriate to the various stages of construction, as Architect deems necessary, in order to observe as an experienced and qualified design professional, the progress and quality of the Work. At a minimum, the Architect or his qualified representative will visit the site of the Work on the average of once during each fourteen (14) working days of the construction period. These visits should be scheduled to coincide with each new phase of construction, scheduled inspections, and other times when appropriate. Architect or his qualified representative will be available at all times Work is in progress for telephone contact by City. Such visits and observations by Architect, will not be exhaustive or extend to every aspect of Contractors or Subcontractor’s work in progress or involve detailed inspections of Contractors work in progress beyond the responsibilities specifically assigned to Architect in this Agreement and the Contract Documents, but will be limited to spot checking, selective sampling, and similar methods of general observation of the Work based on Architect’s exercise of Architect’s professional responsibilities. Based on information obtained during such visits and such observations, Architect will determine if Contractors work is proceeding in accordance with the Agreement, and Architect shall keep City informed of the progress of the Work and any noted deficiencies. 18
    • 3) Architect shall inform City immediately should Contractors work be disapproved or rejected by Architect while it is in progress, if on the basis of observations or after evaluation requested by City, Architect believes that such work will not produce a completed Project that conforms to the Agreement or that it will prejudice the integrity of the design concept of the completed Work as a functioning whole as indicated in the Agreement. 4) Architect shall issue necessary clarifications and interpretations of the Agreement as appropriate to the orderly completion of Contractors work. Such clarifications and interpretations will be consistent with the intent of and reasonably inferable from the Agreement. Architect may issue Field Orders authorizing minor variations from the requirements of the Agreement. 5) Evaluate and determine the acceptability of substitute materials and equipment proposed by Contractor. 6) Coordinate with the City’s construction observers to insure that all material tests required for construction are scheduled and accomplished in a manner that will not delay the Contractor unnecessarily and will meet specification requirements as to location and frequency. 7) When authorized by City, prepare change orders in the Work from that originally shown on the Plans and Specifications. 8) The duties and responsibilities of Architect during the Construction Phase may be amended and supplemented as indicated in any Project Amendments to this Agreement. 3.5.2 Architect’s responsibility to provide Construction Phase Services commences with the award of the Contract for Construction and terminates on the date Architect issues the final Certificate for Payment or sixteen (16) months after the start of Construction, whichever occurs first.4. Additional Services: 4.1 Additional Services listed below are not included in Basic Services but may be required for the Project. The Architect shall provide the listed Additional Services only if specifically designated in the table below as the Architect’s responsibility, and City shall compensate Architect as provided in Exhibit “B”. 19
    • Responsibility Location of (Architect, Owner Service Additional Services or Not Provided) Description Civil Engineering Architect See 4.2 below Landscape Design Architect See 4.2 below Telecommunications/data design Architect See 4.2 below Furniture, Furnishings, and Equipment Design Potential architect Owner additional service 4.2 Additional Service designated in Section 4.1 as the Architect’s responsibility. 4.2.1 Preliminary Design Schemes: 1) Pre-Design Phase (Phase 1) – up to two (2) layouts for the facility; 2) Design/CA Phase (Phase 2) – Schematic – up to two (2) for the facility 4.2.2 Existing facility field measured drawings and surveys will not be utilized for Phase 1 services. 4.2.3 Field measured drawings and existing facility equipment (HVAC and Electrical) surveys will be included within the basic service fee. However, hazardous material survey and testing, site utility and topography survey will be provided as an additional service 4.2.4 Building Information Modeling: Architect may, at their sole discretion, utilize BIM while fulfilling their scope of services at no cost to the Owner. 4.2.5 Landscape Architectural services will be provided as an Additional Service based upon the Phase 1 site selection. 4.2.6 Independent Construction Cost Estimator for Phase 1 is for square foot cost projections. Phase 2 includes detailed cost estimator and 3 design phase estimates in basic services. 4.2.7 As-Constructed Record Drawings will be provided as additional services. For those professional disciplines not included in basic services (i.e.: Landscape Architect, Civil Engineer, IT/Data) their record drawings effort will be negotiated as part of the additional service. The record drawings will be developed in B.I.M./CAD based upon General Contractor’s field mark-ups for as-built locations defined within the GC’s close-out submission documents. 4.2.8 Post Occupancy Evaluation. Architect and MEP engineer will assist City during up to three (3) post occupancy site visits during the one (1) year GC’s warranty period to aid City and General Contractor in building’s physical plant operation adjustments. 4.2.9 Telecommunications/Data Design will be provided as an additional service for the Phase 2 effort. 4.3 Any services not otherwise within the Architect Basic Services as defined withthis Agreement may be agreed upon by City and Architect and included within the Cost Estimatefor the Work and compensated at the Additional Services rate set forth in Exhibit “B” herein. 4.4 When directed by City, Architect will assist as expert witness in litigation arisingfrom the development or construction of the Work. 20
    • 4.5 Architect shall provide Construction Phase services exceeding the limits set forthbelow as Additional Services. The Architect shall notify the City when these limits below arereached. 4.5.1 Two (2) reviews of each shop drawing, Product Data item, sample and similar submittal of the contractor. 4.5.2 Thirty (30) visits to the site by the Architect over the duration of the Project during construction. 4.5.3 Two (2) inspections for any portion of Work to determine if it is Substantially Complete in accordance with the Construction Documents 4.5.4 One (1) inspection for any portion of work to determine Final Completion 4.6 If the Services covered by this Agreement have not been completed within thetime period set forth in this Agreement, through no fault of Architect, extension of Architect’sservices beyond that time shall be compensated as Additional Services. In addition, Servicesprovided by the Architect under Section 3.5 herein, “Construction Phase Services” are basedupon a sixteen (16) month Construction Phase. Should Architect be required to provide servicesbeyond this timeframe or quantity of trips, Architect shall be compensated in accordance withArticle 4.1 for these Additional Services.. END OF EXHIBIT 21
    • Exhibit “B”Architecture Fees1. Pre-Design Phase (Phase 1) Payment to Architect for Basic Services of Pre-Design Phase (reference Exhibit “A”) shall be a stipulated sum as follows: Architectural Service Per Exhibit A $ _______ Construction Cost Estimator $ _______ Civil Engineer Site Analysis $ _____ TOTAL PRE-DESIGN PHASE SERVICES $ _______ (plus reimbursable expenses)2. Design/CA Phase (Phase 2) – Schematic through Construction Observation Payment to Architect for Basic Services of Design/CA Phase (Phase 2) (reference Exhibits “A” and “C”) shall be stipulated sum developed from the City Approved Construction Budget for the Project upon completion of Pre-Design Phase (Phase 1) services. If Project involves a renovation and addition project, basic services (architect, structural engineer and MEP engineer) shall be a stipulated sum based upon nine percent (9%) of Approved Construction Budget.OR Payment to Architect for Basic Services of Design/CA Phase (Phase 2) (reference Exhibits “A” and “C”) shall be based on a stipulated sum percentage of the Cost of the Work, the compensation for each phase of services shall be as follows: WORK DESCRIPTION PERCENT % San Angelo Business Resource Center 1. Schematic Design Phase Fifteen (15%) 2. Design Development Phase Thirty-Five (35%) 3. Construction Documents Phase Twenty-Five (25%) 4. Bidding or Negotiation Phase Five (5%) 5. Construction Phase Twenty (20%) TOTAL FEE3. Additional Services 3.1 For any Additional Services required and agreed upon in writing by City, City shall pay Architect for time at the actual rates in effect during the performance of the services. Architect will be paid a separate fixed fee for these services. Payment for these services will be made monthly, based on statements submitted by Architect to City and shall be based on the following hourly Billing Rates: Employee or Category Rate
    • Sr. Principal Principal Sr. Project Manager Project Manager Sr. Project Designer Project Designer Sr. Const. Administrator Construction Administrator Project Architect/Coordinator Intern/CADD Operator 3 Intern/CADD Operator 2 Intern/CADD Operator 1 Specification Writer Clerical 3.2 Compensation for additional Services of the Architects consultants when not included in 3.1, shall be the amount invoiced to the Architect plus twenty percent (20%) or mutually agreed negotiated rate.4. Reimbursable Expenses. Are in addition to compensation for the Basic Services and Additional Services fees set forth above and include expenses incurred by Architect and Architects employees and consultants in the interest of the work as follows: 4.1 Expense of transportation in connection with the work; expenses in connection with authorized out-of-town travel; and fees paid for securing approval of authorities having jurisdiction over the project 4.2 Expense or reproductions, postage and handling of drawings, specifications and other documents. 4.3 Reimbursable Expenses as set forth hereinabove shall not exceed _________ unless otherwise agreed upon in writing by City. Architect shall inform City of Reimbursable Expenses in a timely manner so as to allow for effective management of the Project. Architect shall make available to City records of Reimbursable Expenses and expenses pertaining to Additional Services and services performed for inspection and copying during normal business hours for three (3) years after the date of Final Certificate of Payment or until litigation related to the Project is final, whichever date is later. 4.4 For Reimbursable expenses the compensation shall be the expenses incurred by the Architect and the Architect’s consultants plus ten percent (10%) of the expenses incurred. END OF EXHIBIT 23
    • City of San Angelo Parks & RecreationMemorandum Date: May 12, 2011 To: Mayor and Councilmembers From: Carl White, Parks and Recreation Director Subject: Agenda Item for May 17, 2011, Council Meeting Contact: Carl White, Parks and Recreation Director, 657-4450 or 234-1724 Caption: Consent Agenda Item Consideration of accepting donations of $222,000 for development enhancements for Producers Park and authorizing the City Manager to approve a change order for the project up to $222,000. Summary: Staff recommends accepting private donations in the amount of $222,000 for development enhancements for Producers Park and authorizing the City Manager to approve a change order for the contracted construction project up to $220,000. Approval of this request would allow for the development of the following enhancements: extension of Schroeder Street from Rick’s Drive to Magnolia Street, the addition of some trail lights, a ¼ mile nature trail, a small uncovered basketball court, two washer and horseshoe playing areas, and 24 additional shade trees. These improvements will make the park more accessible to the neighborhood to the immediate south, will make the park more attractive and will add additional recreation opportunities that can also be used by Holliman Elementary School. History: • The City is in the process of constructing Producers Park. We anticipate being able to open the park to the public late this summer and having a grand opening later this fall. Financial The cost of the enhancements would be totally funded by the donated monies. Impact: Annual maintenance costs increases are estimated at about $6,000/year. Attachments: None. Presentation: None. Publication: N/A Reviewed by: Rick Weise, Assistant City Manager, May 10, 2011 Approved by N/A Legal:
    • City of San AngeloMemo Date: 4/21/11 To: Mayor and Councilmembers From: Finance Department, Michael Dane Subject: Agenda Item for (5/03/11) Council Meeting Contact: Michael Dane, Finance Department, Phone# 657-4268 Caption: Regular Item First public hearing and introduction of an Ordinance amending Chapter 2, Administration, Article 2.2000 of the City of San Angelo Code of Ordinances related to accepting credit card payments and providing for a processing fee. Summary: Credit Cards are currently utilized by Municipal Court for payment of Fees and Fines. Processing charges associated with credit card usage have been paid by the City since the inception of this process. The proposed ordinance amendment will allow a processing fee to be applied to credit card users. History: None Financial Impact: Credit card fees paid by the City will be between $80,000 and $100,000 this year. Approving an amendment of this ordinance will allow these charges to be paid by the credit card users. Related Vision Item (if applicable): None. Other Information/Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of this ordinance amendment. Attachments: 2011 Ordinance Credit Card Fees – Municipal Court Presentation: No special equipment is required. Michael Dane will present additional information on this ordinance. Publication: none Reviewed by Service Area Director: Michael Dane, Finance, 4/27/11 Approved by Legal: Legal provided ordinance amendment 4/5/11. Adopted: 5/30/03 Revised: 1/16/08
    • AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 2, ADMINISTRATION, ARTICLE 2.2000, MUNICIPAL COURT FEES, BY ADDING SECTION 2.2007 AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF CREDIT CARDS AS PAYMENT FOR FEES, FINES, COURT COST, OR OTHER CHARGE ON BEHALF OF THE CITY, PROVIDING FOR A PROCESSING FEE, PROVIDING SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Chapter 132.002(b)(1) Texas Local Government Code gives thegoverning body of a municipality the authority to authorize a municipal official tocollect fees, fines, court cost or other charge by acceptance of payment by creditcard; and WHEREAS, Chapter 132.002(b)(2) Texas Local Government Codeauthorizes the municipal official to collect a fee for processing the collection of fees,fines, court cost or other charge by credit card, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THECITY OF SAN ANGELO, TEXAS: 1) THAT, the following Section will be added to Chapter 2, Article 2.2000 ofthe Code of Ordinances of the City of San Angelo, Texas:Section 2.2007 Credit Card Processing Fees(a) Payment of Fees or Costs by Credit Card or Electronic Means. The municipalcourt clerk and any other municipal officer collecting fees, fines, court cost and othercharge for the municipal court for the City are hereby authorized to accept paymentby credit card of such fees, fines, court cost or other charge and to collect a fee forprocessing the payment by credit card.(b) Processing or Handling Fee. The municipal court clerk and any other municipalofficer is hereby authorized and directed to assess a processing fee not to exceedfive (5%) percent of the amount of the fee, fine, court cost, or other charge beingpaid by the use of a credit card, as an amount reasonably necessary and related tothe expense incurred by the City, as authorized by Section 132.003(b), Texas LocalGovernment Code.(c) Service Charge. If for any reason a payment by credit card is not honored by thecredit card company on which the funds are drawn, the municipal officer shall collecta service charge from the person who owes the fee, fine, court cost, or other chargeto the City. The service charge is in addition to the original fee, fine court cost, orother charge and is for the collection of that original amount. The amount of theservice charge shall be the same amount as the fee charged for the collection of acheck drawn on an account with insufficient funds, as authorized by Section132.004, Texas Local Government Code.
    • (d) Encumbrance of Credit Cards. The Presiding Judge is hereby authorized toenter into agreements with companies which issue credit cards to collect and seizecredit cards issued by the company that are outdated or otherwise unauthorized andthe Judge is further authorized to charge the company a fee for the return of saidcredit cards, as authorized by Section 132.005, Texas Local Government Code.(e) Disposition of Fees and Charges. Processing fees and service charges collectedpursuant to this ordinance shall be deposited in the general fund of the City, asprovided by Section 132.006(b), Texas Local Government Code. SEVERABILITY: That the terms and provisions of this Ordinance shall be deemed to beseverable in that if any portion of this Ordinance shall be declared to be invalid, thesame shall not affect the validity of the other provisions of this Ordinance. 3) THAT, this Ordinance shall be effective on, from and after the date ofadoption. INTRODUCED on the 3rd day of May, 2011, and finally PASSED,APPROVED and ADOPTED on this the 17th day of May, 2011. CITY OF SAN ANGELO, TEXASATTEST: Alvin New, MayorAlicia Ramirez, City ClerkApproved as to Content: Approved as to Form:Allen Gilbert, Municipal Court Judge Lysia H. Bowling, City Attorney
    • City of San AngeloMemo Meeting Date: May 17 2011 To: Mayor and City Council members From: Bradley Stone, Principal Planner Subject: appeal to City Council, concerning Planning Commission’s denial of variance from restrictions on locations where off-site signs (billboards) are allowed in CG and CG/CH zoning districts, to permit installation of a single such sign on the subject property in a CG/CH District Location: 1003-1011 Caddo Street (eastbound frontage road for Houston Harte Expressway) at southwest corner of its intersection with North Park Street, specifically on Lots 1 thru 3 in Block 57 of Angelo Heights Addition to San Angelo Contacts: Dan O’Bryan of Arrow Sign Consultants 658-7224 Bradley Stone, Principal Planner and AJ Fawver, Planning Manager 657-4210 Caption: Consideration of appeal from Planning Commission’s recent (04-18-2011) decision to deny requested variance from restrictions on locataions where off-site signs (a.k.a. billboards) are allowed in CG and CG/CH zoning districts, to permit a single such sign at 1003-1011 Caddo Street (eastbound frontage road for Houston Harte Expressway) at its intersection with North Park Street, specifically on Lots 1 thru 3 in Block 57 of Angelo Heights Addition to San Angelo Summary: On behalf of the subject property’s owner, the applicant is seeking to install an off-site or billboard-type sign at a location where such signs are generally prohibited. San Angelo’s Sign Regulations do allow off-site signs in CG and CG/CH zoning districts, but only along specific segments of certain major thoroughfares. Although the subject property adjoins Houston Harte Expressway, this property is not located on or near a specific segment (of the expressway) where Sign Regulations allow an off-site sign. The applicant is thereby seeking a variance or exception from those restrictions on locations where off-site signs are allowed in CG or CG/CH Districts.
    • The Planning Commission recently denied the applicant’s request for variance. That denialwould ordinarily be the final decision, except for the fact that the applicant (Arrow Signs) hasappealed the matter to San Angelo’s City Council. Arrow Signs and the subject property’sowner are asking City Council to reconsider the Planning Commission’s previous denial ofthe requested sign variance. In doing so, City Council may: • reverse the Planning Commission’s previous action to deny the variance, thereby effectively approving the variance, exactly as requested; • reverse the Planning Commission’s previous action to deny the variance, thereby effectively approving the variance, but making such approval subject to certain limiting conditions intended to minimize any potentially adverse impacts of allowing the proposed sign at its planned location; • affirm the Planning Commission’s previous action to deny the variance.History and Background:According to Section 12.605 in San Angelo’s Sign Regulations, off-site signs are generallyallowed in certain nonresidential zoning districts, as follows: Heavy Manufacturing (MH), Light Manufacturing (ML), Heavy Commercial (CH) and Office Warehouse (OW) Districts.Off-site signs are generally prohibited from Office Commercial (CO), NeighborhoodCommercial (CN) and Central Business (CB) zoning districts.In CG and CG/CH Districts, off-site signs are allowed but only along specific segmentsof certain designated thoroughfares, as follows: • North Bryant Boulevard, from West 14th Street north to City limits; • North Chadbourne Street, from 37th Street north to City limits; • Pulliam Street, from North Bell Street east to City limits; • South Chadbourne Street, from Avenue N south to City limits; • Loop 306 from Sherwood Way east to City limits; • Sherwood Way, from Clare Drive southwest to City limits; and • Arden Road, from Sherwood Way west to City limits.The General Commercial (CG) and General Commercial/Heavy Commercial (CG/CH)zoning classifications are used most frequently for retail trade aimed toward householdconsumers. The CG and CG/CH zoning classifications are also possibly the mostgeographically extensive commercial zoning districts, covering significant stretches of manymajor thoroughfares in San Angelo.By closely examining the list of locations (in CG and CG/CH Districts) where off-site signsare allowed, it becomes clear these locations are all at the periphery of San Angelo and notin its older urban core. The apparent reasoning for these restrictions on allowed locations inCG and CG/CH Districts is that off-site or billboard signs are believed to be most useful 2
    • when directing out-of-town visitors to points-of-interest, lodging, restaurant andentertainment opportunities, and the most effective location for such signs will be atthe periphery of San Angelo. The proliferation of off-site signs at retail locations in the citycenter might otherwise result in unnecessary visual clutter and distraction.Above-stated restrictions on off-site signs in CG and CG/CH Districts have been in effectsince 1986. Some older nonconforming off-site signs remain in CG and CG/CH Districts ofcentral San Angelo, from before 1986. During the years since 1986, though, quite a fewsuch signs have disappeared due to obsolescence or expiration of lease agreements.The subject property of this requested variance is located in a CG/CH District and on amajor thoroughfare, Houston Harte Expressway. However, this subject property is locatednot very far (ten blocks) from the center of San Angelo. The subject property is thereby notin one of those designated CG/CH Districts where off-site signs are generally allowed.If the requested variance is approved and an off-site sign generally allowed on this subjectproperty, City staff believes the proposed sign’s specific location (shown on accompanyingsite plan) will meet all other applicable standards of sign regulations. This includes theminimum required separation from streets, as well as the minimum separation required fromnearby residential lots.Analysis and Recommendation:Section 12.614 in San Angelo’s Sign Regulations does authorize the Planning Commissionto hear and decide requests for variance from the provisions of these regulations, to lessenpractical difficulties and prevent unnecessary hardship. Section 12.614 goes on to statethat, in approving such variances, one must make several findings-of-fact that include eachof the following: • The presence of special circumstances or conditions inherent to the subject property or its surroundings, which would substantially restrict the effectiveness of the sign in question, and that are unique to that subject property. • That granting the variance will be in general harmony with the purpose or intent of Sign Regulations.At its meeting on April 18 of 2001, San Angelo’s Planning Commission denied the currentrequest for sign variance at 1003-1011 Caddo Street, based on City staff’srecommendation. Neither the Planning Commission nor City staff could discern anyspecial conditions about the subject property or its surroundings, that make itsubstantially different from hundreds of other similarly-situated properties in CG andCG/CH Districts and which are subject to the same prohibition on off-site signs.Approving the requested variance at this particular location may give the appearance ofgranting this one property owner a special privilege not generally available to owners ofthese other similarly-situated properties in CG and CG/CH Districts. 3
    • Approving the requested variance also seems contrary to the apparent intent and purpose of limiting off-site signs (in CG and CG/CH Districts) to locations at the periphery of San Angelo and not within its older urban core. An applicant for sign variance, dissatisfied with an action of the Planning Commission, has the right of appeal to San Angelo’s City Council. On May 3, 2011, Planning Division staff received a formal appeal from Arrow Signs, on the matter of its requested variance earlier denied by the Planning Commission. In considering such an appeal, City Council is deemed to have all the powers of the decision-making body from whom the appeal was taken,* including the power to impose reasonable conditions. Related Vision Items: Consistent application of development regulations. Compatibility of adjoining commercial and neighborhood districts. Appropriate regulations to protect neighborhoods. Fiscal Impact: not applicable Notification: none required Attachments: excerpt from zoning map, highlighting subject property of requested sign variance; site plan of features on subject property, highlighting planned location of proposed off-site sign; application form furnished by applicant, including his response to criteria required for approving sign variances; and formal statement of appeal by Arrow Signs April 18, 2011 Minutes from Planning Commission Presentation: AJ Fawver, Planning Manager Reviewed by: AJ Fawver, Planning Manager (5/9/11)* in this case, San Angelo’s Planning Commission 4
    • 6
    • 7
    • 8
    • 9
    • 10
    • VI. Request for approval of variance from Sign Regulations. [Planning Commission makes final decision; appeals may be directed to City Council.] A. SV 11-02: Arrow Signs request for approval of variance from restrictions on locations where off-site signs (a.k.a. billboards) are allowed in CG and CG/CH zoning districts, to permit installation of a single such sign in a CG/CH District on the following property: 1003-1011 Caddo Street (eastbound frontage road for Houston Harte Expressway) at the southwest corner of its intersection with North Park Street, specifically on Lots 1 thru 3 in Block 57 of Angelo Heights Addition Brad Stone, Principal Planner, came forward to present this case, consistent with the staff recommendation of denial. Several photos were shown of the area and the specific proposed site for the sign. The applicant is seeking to install a billboard sign at a location where they are generally prohibited. While billboards are allowed in some CG and CG/CH districts, they are only allowed in specific sites of thoroughfares around the city. This location is not one of those. If one closely examines the list of thoroughfares where off-site signs are allowed, one will notice that they are all at the periphery of the city, not near the historic core of the city. Billboard signs are generally suited to the specific nature of out- of-town visitors and are used to direct people to points of interest; thus they are more useful at the outside edges of San Angelo. Allowing these might result in unnecessary clutter and distraction within the core of the city. Since 1986, these rules have applied to off-site signage. Since 1986, several signs have disappeared that were previously non-conforming, thus eliminating clutter, as was the intent. This location is only about 10 blocks from the center of San Angelo, and backs up to a residential neighborhood. City ordinance outlines specific criteria to be used when deciding requests for sign variances. These include findings of fact that there are special circumstances or conditions that are unique to the subject property and would substantially restrict the effectiveness of the sign. Staff can detect nothing which sets this particular property apart from all other properties within CG or CG/CH properties which fall under this prohibition. Allowing this here permits a special exception to this property owner that others do not have available. It also contradicts the theory of limiting signage to areas outside the historic urban core. Mr. Stone explained to the Commission that sign regulations are addressed in both the sign ordinance and the zoning ordinance; because of this, the proponent must obtain a variance from both the Planning Commission and the Zoning
    • Board of Adjustment for this to happen. The Zoning Board of Adjustment willhear this at their May meeting.Dan O’Bryan, with Arrow Signs, came forward to speak in favor of the request.He stated that this property is unique because it is one of the few properties thatcould meet the setback standards. Also, this part of Houston Harte was not inplace when the 1986 ordinance was written. It is an entrance point to the city.Joe Grimes asked how tall the sign would be. Mr. O’Bryan stated that the signwould be available for lease. The sign could be between 40 and 50 feet inheight. They are unsure at this time. Bill Lawrence asked if this would be anelectronically illuminated sign. The standard size for a billboard is 12’ x 24’.Andrew Lay came forward to speak in favor. He owns this property. He stated itis unique because it is level with the highway. Money is now being spent torevitalize the downtown area and he felt this could help. He feels this is the bestarea for this sign. He could request a rezoning of the property to get the sign, hesaid. He felt this was the best way to go.Ben Jenkins asked that, if the property was zoned CH, could the sign be placedthere as proposed. Mr. Stone answered that it could; however, there is noguarantee that a CH zoning district is appropriate for this location. The Chairmanasked Mr. Stone to point out the nearby residences, and discussed his concernsabout the brightness of the sign and its effect on those residences.Joe Grimes stated that he felt there would be a need that this sign could serve.No one else came forward to speak.Mr. Grimes continued to say that he sees a need this could meet. When theExpressway was built, it was done to pull traffic and handle it more efficiently.This would allow those businesses to pull in business.Bill Lawrence stated that he comes into contact with many national andinternational visitors to the city. The impression of the city is sometimes formedby the trip along Houston Harte. The visitors can decide whether or not to investin the city by that experience. Also, once a sign like this goes up, there is nocontrol over what goes on the billboard – however, it has the consequence ofsending out messages which are not controlled. He personally has betterresponses on value in cities that carefully control signage. Houston HarteExpressway has been in the plans since 1968, and there was a great awarenessthat it would be placed here, so he felt sure that it was knowledge in place at thetime these specific areas were chosen to allow billboards. David Eatondiscussed the issue of illumination and brightness affecting the residences in thatarea. A tall sign has an effect on many buildings in the vicinity of its placement.
    • Ben Jenkins made the motion to deny, which Bill Lawrence seconded. Themotion passed by a 4-1 vote, with Bill Wynne voting in opposition. The motioncarried and the variance was denied.
    • City of San AngeloMeeting Date: March 1, 2011To: Mayor and City Council membersFrom: AJ Fawver, Planning ManagerSubject: first public hearing of an amendment related to the allowed number of garage sales, as requested by CouncilContacts: AJ Fawver, Planning Manager 657-4210 James Flores, Code Manager 657-4409 Shawn Lewis, Director of Development Services 657-4210Captions:First public hearing and introduction of an Ordinance amending Article 5.902 of the City ofSan Angelo Code of Ordinances changing the maximum number of garage sales held byan owner of propertyAN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 5 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, CITY OFSAN ANGELO, TEXAS, OF WHICH ARTICLE 5.900 ADOPTS GARAGE SALEREGULATIONS, SPECIFICALLY BY AMENDING SUBSECTION 5.902(b) TOSTIPULATE THAT THE NUMBER OF GARAGE SALES ALLOWED ANNUALLY MAY BELIMITED TO A MAXIMUM NUMBER; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; ANDPROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATESummary: Based on discussions on September 21st, January 11th, and February 15th, staffis now bringing back a proposed amendment to the number of garage sales allowed at thedesire of the Council.History and Background:On April 19, 2011, Councilmember Morrison requested the reconsideration of saidordinance under Chapter 1, Section 1.1002. Reconsideration was approved 5-2.On March 22, 2011, Council approved the ordinance limiting the maximum number ofgarage sales to two per year.The following reflects a historical account prior to the adoption of said ordinance:
    • Section 5.900 of the Code of Ordinance addresses the regulations for garage saleswithin San Angelo, and originates from 1959. After discussions on September 21st andJanuary 11th, the Council directed staff to draft a revised version of Section 5.900.After some dialogue, 3 of the 7 Council members (Adams, Hirschfeld, and Farmer)advised staff that they would like to see the maximum number of garage sales per yearto be reduced to 3. Council member Alexander suggested it be changed to 2 per year.Council member Silvas stated he thought 4 per year (1 per quarter) was appropriate.Council member Morrison stated he thought the current number of 6 should be kept, orthat it should even be increased if changed. The mayor was not in attendance at theJanuary 11th meeting.Since a majority of the group did not agree on a single number and the direction wasnot clear-cut, staff includes all these suggestions as options. The caption for this itemspecifically requires that the Council select a final, singular number in this first publichearing, and the draft ordinance will incorporate this number accordingly. The draftordinance attached herein is written to embrace this change.It is important to note that Article 5.900 includes a restriction on the length of a garagesale (three consecutive calendar days). Staff is not proposing a change to thisrequirement.Fiscal Impact: N/ARelated Vision Items: Establish appropriate regulations to protect neighborhoods.Attachments: draft ordinance amending text of Subsection 5.902.bPublication: N/APresentation: AJ Fawver, Planning Manager & James Flores, Code Manager Page 2 of 4
    • AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 5 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, CITY OF SAN ANGELO, TEXAS, OF WHICH ARTICLE 5.900 ADOPTS GARAGE SALE REGULATIONS, SPECIFICALLY BY AMENDING SUBSECTION 5.902(b) TO STIPULATE THAT THE NUMBER OF GARAGE SALES ALLOWED ANNUALLY BE LIMITED TO THE NUMBER TWO (2); PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATERE: amending the regulations of Section 5.900 as to the maximum number of garage sales allowed to be held by an owner of property within the City of San Angelo WHEREAS, the City Council for the City of San Angelo, after a public hearing at ameeting on February 15, 2011, has recommended the following amendment to the text ofChapter 5, Subsection 5.902(b) of the Code of Ordinances, City of San Angelo, Texas,which said Subsection 5.902 is otherwise known as the “Conditions Under WhichPermitted”; and WHEREAS, the governing body for the City of San Angelo, in compliance with thecharter and the state law with reference to ordinance amendments, have given requisitenotice by publication and otherwise, and after holding hearings and affording a full and fairhearing to all persons interested, generally, is of the opinion that amendment to the text ofthe Code of Ordinances for the City of San Angelo should be made as set out herein;NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF SAN ANGELO:1) THAT Chapter 5, Section 5.900, Subsection 5.902(b) of the Code of Ordinances of the City of San Angelo, Texas shall be and is hereby amended insofar as an addition to the “Conditions Under Which Permitted”, to read as follows: “There shall not be more than two (2) sales per year by the same property owner or on the same premises. Such sales may last a maximum of three (3) consecutive calendar days.”2) THAT the following severability clause is adopted with these amendments: SEVERABILITY: That the terms and provisions of this Ordinance shall be deemed to be severable in that, if any portion of this Ordinance shall be declared to be invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of the other provisions of this Ordinance.3) THAT this Ordinance shall be effective from and after the date of its adoption. Page 3 of 4
    • INTRODUCED on the 1st day of March, 2011, and finally PASSED, APPROVED andADOPTED on this the 22nd day of March, 2011. CITY OF SAN ANGELO by:_______________________________ Alvin New, MayorATTEST:by:_________________________________ Alicia Ramirez, City ClerkApproved As to Form: Approved As to Content:_________________________ ____________________________Lysia H. Bowling, City Attorney AJ Fawver, Planning Manager Page 4 of 4
    • AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 5 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, CITY OF SAN ANGELO, TEXAS, OF WHICH ARTICLE 5.900 ADOPTS GARAGE SALE REGULATIONS, SPECIFICALLY BY AMENDING SUBSECTION 5.902(b) TO STIPULATE THAT THE NUMBER OF GARAGE SALES ALLOWED ANNUALLY BE LIMITED TO THE NUMBER TWO (2); PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATERE: amending the regulations of Section 5.900 as to the maximum number of garage sales allowed to be held by an owner of property within the City of San Angelo WHEREAS, the City Council for the City of San Angelo, after a public hearing at ameeting on February 15, 2011, has recommended the following amendment to the text ofChapter 5, Subsection 5.902(b) of the Code of Ordinances, City of San Angelo, Texas,which said Subsection 5.902 is otherwise known as the “Conditions Under WhichPermitted”; and WHEREAS, the governing body for the City of San Angelo, in compliance with thecharter and the state law with reference to ordinance amendments, have given requisitenotice by publication and otherwise, and after holding hearings and affording a full and fairhearing to all persons interested, generally, is of the opinion that amendment to the text ofthe Code of Ordinances for the City of San Angelo should be made as set out herein;NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF SAN ANGELO:1) THAT Chapter 5, Section 5.900, Subsection 5.902(b) of the Code of Ordinances of the City of San Angelo, Texas shall be and is hereby amended insofar as an addition to the “Conditions Under Which Permitted”, to read as follows: “There shall not be more than two (2) sales per year by the same property owner or on the same premises. Such sales may last a maximum of three (3) consecutive calendar days.”2) THAT the following severability clause is adopted with these amendments: SEVERABILITY: That the terms and provisions of this Ordinance shall be deemed to be severable in that, if any portion of this Ordinance shall be declared to be invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of the other provisions of this Ordinance.3) THAT this Ordinance shall be effective from and after the date of its adoption. INTRODUCED on the 1st day of March, 2011, and finally PASSED, APPROVED andADOPTED on this the 22nd day of March, 2011.
    • CITY OF SAN ANGELO by:_______________________________ Alvin New, MayorATTEST:by:_________________________________ Alicia Ramirez, City ClerkApproved As to Form: Approved As to Content:_________________________ ____________________________Lysia H. Bowling, City Attorney AJ Fawver, Planning Manager Page 2 of 2
    • City of San AngeloMemo Date: May 12, 2011 To: Mayor and Councilmembers From: Alicia Ramirez, City Clerk Subject: Agenda Item for May 17, 2011 Council Meeting Contact: Councilmember Morrison Caption: Regular Item First public hearing and consideration to introduce an Ordinance to repeal Article 1.1000, Section 1.1002 related to reconsideration of an ordinance by City Council AN ORDINANCE REPEALING CHAPTER 1, ARTICLE 1.1000, SECTION 1.1002 ENTITLED “RECONSIDERATION”; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE Summary: At the April 19, 2011 City Council meeting, Councilmember Morrison requested the Reconsideration ordinance be repealed. History: In May 2009, Council adopted a Reconsideration ordinance that would require four members to vote to place consideration of an ordinance which has been effective less than six months. Financial Impact: N/A Related Vision Item N/A (if applicable): Other Information/ Staff seeks direction from City Council. Recommendation: Attachments: Draft Ordinance Presentation: Councilmember Morrison Publication: n/a Reviewed by Director: Approved by Legal:
    • AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 1, GENERAL PROVISIONS, ARTICLE 1.1000 ENTITLED “ORDINANCES”, BY REPEALING SECTION 1.1002 ENTITLED “RECONSIDERATION”; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATEBE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF SAN ANGELO: 1) THAT Chapter 1, General Provisions, Article 1.1000, entitled “Ordinances” ofthe Code of Ordinances, City of San Angelo, Texas, is hereby amended by repealingSection 1.1002, entitled “Reconsideration”. 2) THAT the following severability clause is adopted with this amendment: SEVERABILITY: That the terms and provisions of this Ordinance shall be deemed to be severable inthat, if any portion of this Ordinance shall be declared to be invalid, the same shall notaffect the validity of the other provisions of this Ordinance. 3) THAT this Ordinance shall be effective from and after the date of its adoption. INTRODUCED on the day of , 2011, and finally PASSED,APPROVED and ADOPTED on this the day of , 2011. CITY OF SAN ANGELOATTEST: BY: Alvin New, MayorAlicia Ramirez, City ClerkApproved as to form:Lysia H. Bowling, City Attorney
    • . City of San AngeloMemo Date: May 12, 2011 To: Mayor and Councilmembers From: Sandra J. Villarreal Subject: Agenda Item for May 17, 2011 Council Meeting Contact: Sandra Villarreal or Rick Weise Caption: Regular Item Consideration of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 2, Entitled “Animal Shelter Advisory Committee:, Article 2.3803 Entitled “Composition”, of the Code of Ordinances of the City of San Angelo, Texas to require that all voting Animal Shelter Advisory Committee Members be city residents to wit: by deleting the portion of the sentence in 2.3803(A)(4) that reads “who are residents of the City of San Angelo”; and adding a portion of a sentence that reads “and who are residents of the City of San Angelo” to the First Paragraph to follow the words “seven (7) of whom shall be voting members”; and by adding “Professional Veterinarians serving on the Animal Shelter Advisory Committee may reside outside the City of San Angelo Corporate Limits, with the requirement that they operate their veterinary hospital or clinic business within the Corporate Limits of the City”; Providing for Severability; and, Providing for an effective date. Summary/History: On December 7, 2010, Council adopted an Ordinance amending and replacing Chapter 2, Article 2.3800 “Animal Services Board” with a New Article 2.3800, entitled “Animal Shelter Advisory Committee”. On review, the adopted Article inadvertently does not contain a City of San Angelo residency clause for the members of the Animal Shelter Advisory Committee. The original Chapter 2, Article 2.3800, Sec. 2.3801, clearly states “All members shall be residents of the City of San Angelo”. The newly adopted ordinance mentions City of San Angelo residency for only two (2) of the seven (7) voting members: Sec. 2.3803 Composition, (A) Voting Members, specifies two (2) individuals who are residents of the City of San Angelo who are not affiliated with, members of, or associated with an animal organization. It is the intent that Voting Members of the Animal Shelter Advisory Committee be Residents of the City of San Angelo since they recommend and make suggestions on Ordinances applicable to the City of San Angelo. Professional Veterinarians serving on the Advisory Committee may be allowed to reside outside the City of San Angelo corporate limits, only if they operate their Veterinary Hospital or Clinic within the corporate limits of the City. Financial Impact: None Related Vision Item Neighborhood Vision (if applicable): Other Information/ Staff recommends . . .Approval Recommendation:
    • Attachments: Original Article 2.3800, Animal Services Board, Sec. 2.3801, Created; Members; Terms, (for Historical Reference) Article 2.3800 Animal Shelter Advisory Committee (Adopted 12/7/10)Presentation: YesPublication:Reviewed by Rick WeiseDirector:Approved by Legal:
    • 5/12/2011 City Council Meeting May 17, 2011 Animal ServicesHISTORY:• D 7, 2010 – C Dec. 7 Council adopted new Article 2.3800, il d t d A ti l 2 3800 Animal Shelter Advisory Committee (ASAC)• New Article – inadvertently does not contain a City of San Angelo Residency Clause for the members of ASAC. ( l f t ASAC (only for two (2) of th seven (7) f the 1
    • 5/12/2011 Animal ServicesPROPOSAL:• ASAC members be residents of the City of San Angelo b b id t f th Cit f S A l (they recommend and make suggestions on Ordinances applicable to the City)• Professional Veterinarians serving on ASAC may be allowed t reside outside city li it only if th ll d to id t id it limits, l they operate a veterinary hospital or clinic inside the city limits Animal ServicesSec. 2.3803 Composition shall read:The Animal Shelter Advisory CTh A i l Sh lt Ad i Committee shall b itt h ll be appointed by City Council and shall be composed of nine (9) members, seven (7) of whom shall be voting members and who are residents of the City of San Angelo. Professional Veterinarians serving on the Animal Shelter Advisory Committee may reside outside the City of San Angelo Corporate Limits, with the requirement that they operate their veterinary hospital or clinic business within the Corporate Limits of the City. 2
    • City of San AngeloMemo Date: May 12, 2011 To: Mayor and Councilmembers From: Sandra J. Villarreal Subject: Agenda Item for May 17, 2011 Council Meeting Contact: Sandra J. Villarreal Caption: Regular Item Consideration, Discussion and any action thereto, of amending the set-back requirements currently in Article 3.800 Requirements Governing Hoofed Animals (a) it shall be unlawful for any person to keep cows, horses, goats or other hoofed animals in a pen or enclosure, or to keep or park a trailer or vehicle which contains such animals., within one hundred feed (100’) of any residence, business, or institution other than the residence, business, or institution of the owners of such animals. (Requested by Mr. Dwain Morrison) Summary: Tino Cabello, Animal Control Officer, was dispatched to check on food, water and rd shelter of a horse located at the 300 Blk of E. 43 Street on July 2, 2010. Mr. Cabello discovered a distance violation; the horse is out of compliance per Chapter 3: Animal Control, Article 3.800, which requires a 100’ distance from the next residence. Animal Control was asked to hold off on enforcing the ordinance per Mr. Dwain Morrison. Mr. Morrison has requested this matter come before City Council for discussion and consideration of changing the set-back requirements of the ordinance. History: The horse is located in a RS-1 zone, a residential zone. According to Ms. AJ Fawver, Planning Manager, as long as the horse is only for the personal use of the resident, there is no zoning violation, from a Zoning perspective. The horse is out of compliance with Animal Control Ordinance Article 3.800 Requirements Governing Hoofed Animals (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to keep cows, horses, goats or other hoofed animals in a pen or enclosure, or to keep or park a trailer or vehicle which contains such animals, within one hundred feet (100’) of any residence, business, or institution other than the residence, business, or institution of the owners of such animals. There is a residence to the left and one to the right of the address in question. In speaking to Mr. Tino Cabello, the Animal Control Officer working this case, he nd also discovered the same violation at the 400 Blk of 42 Street. That person had three (3) horses, was asked to remove them within 14 days, and came into compliance in 10 days by removing the three horses. As recently as February rd 2011, an officer was dispatched to the 300 Blk of 23 Street for possible rooster violations. Once there, the officer found roosters, chickens, a horse and a cow, all in violation of 100 ‘distance requirements. The owner came into compliance within the allotted time. Animal Control has enforced Article 3.800 in this area, in the city limits, and citizens do usually come into compliance. For reference, Article 3.1200 Distances Required for New Construction Near Livestock, another Animal Control Ordinance, states “The specified distances herein established shall apply as well when new construction in the nature of
    • homes or businesses is affected adjacent to the place where livestock is being kept. When such new construction is occupied, the livestock owner shall have 30 days to remove said livestock to his required distances as prescribed”. rd Therefore, even if the horse on 43 Street had been there prior to the subdivision being built, according to Article 3.1200, this horse would have had to be removed.Financial Impact:Related Vision Item Neighborhood Vision – Establish appropriate regulations to protect neighborhoods(if applicable):Other Information/ Staff recommends . . . keeping the 100 foot distance requirement as is currentlyRecommendation: written in Article 3.800.Attachments: Memo Letter set to Mr. Morrison dated January 17, 2011.Presentation: YesPublication: NoneReviewed by Rick WeiseDirector:Approved by Legal:
    • 5/12/2011 City Council Meeting May 17, 2011 Animal ServicesHISTORY/SUMMARY:• ACO dispatched to 300 Blk E. 43rd Street on 7/2/10• ACO discovered violation to Article 3.800 Requirements Governing Hoofed Animals a) it shall be unlawful for any person to keep cows, horses, goats or other hoofed animals in a pen or enclosure, or to keep or park a trailer or vehicle which contains such animals within one hundred hi h t i h i l ithi h d d (100”) of any residence, business, or institution other than the residence business, or institution of the owners of such animals. 1
    • 5/12/2011 Animal ServicesHISTORY/SUMMARY:• Horse located in RS-1 (Residential)• R id Residence t th left and residence to the right to the l ft d id t th i ht• Similar violation at similar time at 400 Blk of 42nd (came into compliance-3 horses removed w/in 14days)• Most recent incident of Enforcement and Compliance with Article 3.800 – February 2011 – 300 Blk 23rd (Roosters, Chi k (R t Chickens, H Horse and Cow – removed within dC d ithi allotted time because of distance violation) Animal ServicesSUMMARY:• Councilperson Morrison requested issue be brought to City Council for discussion discussion. 2
    • 5/12/2011ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS:• Article 3.1200 Distances Required for New Construction Near Livestock “The specified distances herein established shall apply as well when new construction in the nature of homes or businesses is affected adjacent to the place where livestock is being kept. When such new construction is occupied, the livestock owner shall have 30 days to remove said livestock to his required distances as prescribed.”• Allowing Hoofed Animals only in Zoned-Ranch & Estate with City LimitsRECOMMENDATION:• Staff does not recommend approval of change in set- back requirements to Article 3 800 3.800. 3
    • City of San Angelo Finance DepartmentMemo Date: March 28, 2011 To: Mayor and Councilmembers From: Morgan Trainer, Budget Analyst, Sr. Subject: Agenda Item for May 17, 2011 Council Meeting Contact: Morgan Trainer, Budget Analyst, Sr. 653-6291 Caption: st nd Regular (1 reading) Consent (2 reading) First public hearing and introduction of an Ordinance amending the 2010-2011 Budget for grants, capital projects and incomplete projects. Summary: This proposed amendment contains the following items (additional information attached): • Police Services at Lake Nasworthy and Twin Buttes • Congregate Meals Program • Emergency Management Maintenance of Facility • Lake Entrance Supplies • Producers Park Improvements History: See attached Budget Amendment Request memorandums. Financial Impact: $607,063 (see attached detail on Exhibit A of the Ordinance) Related Vision Item (if applicable): N/A Other Information/Recommendation: Staff recommends approval. Attachments: Ordinance including Exhibit A; Department request memos Presentation: N/A Publication: N/A Reviewed by Service Area Director: Michael Dane
    • AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN ANGELO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2010, AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2011, FOR GRANTS, CAPITAL PROJECTS AND INCOMPLETE PROJECTS.WHEREAS the City of San Angelo has determined that new projects not included in thecurrent budget should begin, andWHEREAS the City of San Angelo has determined that certain budgeted amounts shouldbe amended due to project changes and unforeseen circumstances, andWHEREAS the resources necessary for these changes are available;NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OFSAN ANGELO, TEXAS THAT:The City’s budget for fiscal year 2010-2011 be amended by the amounts contained inExhibit A.INTRODUCED on the 17th day of May, 2011, and APPROVED and ADOPTED on thisthe 7th day of June, 2011. CITY OF SAN ANGELO, TEXAS __________________________________ Alvin New, MayorATTEST:__________________________________Alicia Ramirez, City ClerkApproved as to Content and Form:__________________________________Michael Dane, Finance Director
    • City of San AngeloProposed Budget AmendmentExhibit A Total Total Net Fund Revenue Expenditure Benefit/Number Fund Name Amendment Amendment (Cost) 101 General Fund 336,823 336,823 0 103 Intergovernmental Fund 29,533 42,740 (13,207) 260 Water Fund 35,000 5,500 29,500 601 Designated Revenue Fund 222,000 222,000 0 Totals 623,356 607,063 16,293
    • City of San AngeloProposed Budget AmendmentAdditional Information 75 Day Net Fund Benefit/ Fund BalanceProject/Need Source of Funding Revenue Expense (Cost) Balance GoalPolice Services at Lake Nasworthy and Twin Water Fund – Operating 336,823 336,823 0 998,432 11,162,706Buttes Budget and Fund BalanceCongregate Meals Program Concho Valley Council of 29,533 29,533 0 338,946 0 Governments Area Agency on AgingEmergency Management Maintenance of General Fund – Fund Balance 0 13,207 (13,207) 338,946 0FacilityLake Entrance Supplies Lake Entrance Fees and 35,000 5,500 29,500 1,515,232 3,302,703 Camping FeesProducers Park Improvements Private donation 222,000 222,000 0 0 0
    • City of San AngeloMemo To: Michael Dane, Director of Finance From: Carl White, Parks & Recreation Director Date: May 12, 2011 Re: Budget Amendment Request Purpose of Budget Amendment Request: to allow for the acceptance of $222,000 from a private donation for the development of Producers Park along with some smaller donations for trees. Source of Funding: the source of the revenues is a single large private donation along with a few smaller private donations. Funding previously approved? No, these funds have not been previously approved. ProposedProject/Budget to be amended Original Budget Proposed Change Revised BudgetProducers Park development 0 $222,000 $222,000(note that these donated funds shouldnot be placed in the current fundingsource for the development of thepark which is federal funding; thesefunds should be placed in adesignated revenue and expenditureaccount.) Additional Comments: These funds will allow for the following additional enhancements to the park development: extension of Schroeder Street from Rick’s Drive to Magnolia Street, the addition of some trail lights, a ¼ mile nature trail, a small uncovered basketball court, two washer and horseshoe playing areas, and 24 additional shade trees.