Notes from Council Meeting on November 12, 2009
The Helotes City Council meeting was opened by Mayor Schoolcraft at 7 p.m. All the Council members were present. The City Attorney present at the meeting was Dick O’Neill.
The public hearing on the proposed amendments regarding building heights in residential and commercial districts was opened at 7:05 p.m. Ardie Garner, the President of the Helotes Economic Development Corporation Board of Directors, was the only speaker. She said that she thinks commercial buildings should certainly be taller than residential buildings. The plan in Old Town Helotes was to keep the buildings within the tree canopy. She also does not agree that buildings should be limited to two floors. What the owner does with the inside of their building shouldn’t matter as long as it complies with the height requirements.
The public hearing was closed at 7:10 p.m.
During Citizens to be Heard, Frank Thompson, a former Helotes Mayor, encouraged the Council to see that the Cornyval Parade continues, whether it is financed by the City or private or non-profit sponsors. The parade has been a tradition in Helotes for 43 years. It brings people to Helotes. He turned in a petition to City Hall containing the signatures of 400 people who want the parade to continue.
There was a woman present who signed up to speak but was told by the City Secretary (after she checked with the City Administrator and the Mayor) that she could not speak at the meeting because she is not a citizen of Helotes. (I still think this is a lousy policy. In my opinion, a person who lives in the area or drives through Helotes on a daily basis, or owns a business in Helotes, but doesn’t live within the city limits, can be profoundly affected by decisions of the City Council. They should be allowed to speak about their concerns, even if they don’t live in Helotes.)
The Mayor reported that Assistant Police Chief Rob Hunley had had another heart attack. Air Life was called to Helotes (as reported in the Herald article “Air Life Needed Again in Helotes“) to take him to the hospital. He is now out of Intensive Care, three stents have been placed in arteries in his heart, and he is expected to be in the hospital another week.
The Mayor also reported on the progress on the City Park and Playground. Volunteers from the Gateway Baptist Church have helped with this and other community projects in Helotes.
He gave a brief update on the construction of the fire and police stations.
The Mayor discussed the Strategic Traffic Enforcement Program (STEP). In June, he started this pilot program. As previously reported in the Herald, Mayor Schoolcraft initiated this program bringing off-duty police officers in for extra shifts and dedicating them solely to traffic enforcement, freeing the other police officers to patrol. These off-duty officers work 4-hour shifts, there are three 4-hour shifts a day, and they work solely on issuing tickets on traffic violations.
Items on the Consent Agenda unanimously approved by Council were:
Minutes of the last Council meeting.
Bi-weekly Revenue/Expenditure Report.
Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ending 9/30/09.
Designation of the Helotes Echo as the primary official newspaper and the San Antonio Express-News as the alternate official newspaper for the City.
Extension of the general authority requiring the approval by the Police and Fire Chiefs of intradepartmental budget adjustments and City Council approval of interdepartmental budget adjustments for their respective departments.
Resolution of the City Council exempting State n0n-profit and Federal tax-exempt organizations located within the City from certain license and permit fees.
Resolution approving the submittal of an Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant application to the State Energy Conservation Office authorizing the use of any and all available grant funds to assist in reaching the City of Helotes’ goal of energy efficiency within municipal facilities.
Change order for the modification of a sanitary sewer system to be installed by Middleman Construction Company for the expansion of municipal complex facilities and the betterment of surrounding commercial developments, directing that public funds expended for said modifications are reimbursed to the City by beneficiary Douglas B. Deptuch, owner of commercial property at 12682 FM 1560 W (directly adjacent to the municipal complex), and authorizing the Mayor to execute the change order and take all necessary steps to implement this resolution.
Council member Whitehead pulled the following item from the Consent Agenda for discussion: Acquisition of a new 2010 Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptor vehicle and related vehicle safety equipment to be used by the Helotes Police Department as a replacement vehicle for an amount NTE $30,000.
Whitehead said he was happy to see this item on the agenda, but he is frustrated by the manner in which it was brought to Council. They just approved the City’s FY 2010 budget approximately 6 weeks ago, and during the budget discussions, he had said several times that the Police Department was going to need a new vehicle and recommended that $30,000 be allocated for this purpose. Each time his recommendation was summarily dismissed. Instead of budgeting for this expenditure, as should have been done, they now have to get emergency funding from the City’s reserves. He further stated that there are some Council members who never differ from the Mayor’s wishes, and he thinks the citizens of Helotes deserve independent thinkers on Council. Buying this vehicle for the Police Department was the right thing to do then, and it’s the right thing to do now.
The Mayor countered by saying that once the proposed budget is handed over to Council it ceases to be the Mayor’s budget. At that point, Council could have done whatever they wanted to with the budget. (Of course, I think Whitehead’s point was that some Council members tend to always agree with the Mayor, and in their minds it remained the Mayor’s budget; it was what the Mayor wanted, and they did not want to differ from that.) The Mayor went on to say that the Police Chief thought that their vehicles were good for another 6 to 12 months, but the engine of one of their vehicles had failed requiring a $5,000 repair. Because the vehicle had high mileage, the Mayor, the City Administrator, and the Police Chief decided to just replace it. In addition, according to the Mayor, the Police Chief had asked that they not get a used vehicle because they had had bad luck with them in the past. If they had allocated money in the budget to buy the vehicle, it would have come out of reserves, and doing it now will also require taking the money out of reserves. Council voted unanimously to purchase the vehicle.
Council voted unanimously to cast the City’s seven votes for Jim Martin to serve on the Bexar County Appraisal District Board of Directors for a term ending in 2011.
The next item was discussion on the City assuming responsibility for the funding, promotion, and production of the Cornyval Parade beginning in May 2010. The Helotes Festival Association has decided to discontinue their involvement in the Cornyval Parade, which put an end to the parade after 43 years. Jim Benke, a long-time member of the Festival Association, told Council that the main reasons they decided to stop having the parade were concerns over public safety and the expense involved.
Council member Cynthia Massey asked Benke if there had ever been an injury due to parade activities, and he said that there had not. She then said it would be a shame to let it go when there hadn’t yet been a problem.
Council member Gary Johnson said he would hate to see it go as it contributes to our small town feel. He is OK with trying it for at least a year. If they cancelled it now they would really be the “bad guy.”
TXDoT requirements (barricades, traffic cones, and signage) result in the largest expenditures ($7,000 to $10,000), and the Mayor thinks they can work with TXDoT to reduce those expenses. The expense to the City could be between $8,000 and $15,000, but some of that cost could be reduced by obtaining sponsors.
Council member Legendre suggested that they might make it smaller to reduce some of the expense, maybe having it only on Old Bandera Road in Old Town Helotes. (I know that years ago the parade was held in Old Town, but it seems to me that having it there again would create far more problems than they already have.) Schoolcraft said that he didn’t think the current route was that big of a problem.
Johnson said they would need lots of volunteers to help, and the Mayor said they had received the first application to serve on the Parade Committee that day, and he has had four other commitments. (The plan is to have a 7-member planning/advisory committee). Council member Villanueva said that they need to get the committee working on the parade and getting sponsors.
Council member Whitehead feels that whether the City makes money on the parade or not, they need to do it to sustain our City’s image. There was a conflict last year with Market Place in Old Town, and he suggested that they could postpone Market Place activities in May to accommodate the parade.
Massey agreed that making money on the parade was not the point.
Council unanimously approved assuming the responsibility for the Cornyval Parade.
The next agenda item was discussion of the proposed amendments to the zoning ordinance regarding building heights in residential and commercial districts.
Some of these proposed amendments were:
Building height is to be defined as the vertical distance from the lowest point on the finished ground floor to the highest point of the roof structure, including parapet walls, heating and ventilation equipment, and other mechanical equipment located on the roof. Where the ground floor is at least 5 feet below the adjoining finished grade, the space shall be considered a basement and not considered the finished ground floor of the building. Other architectural details unrelated to a roof’s function, such as a church steeple, are not included in the calculation of building height.
Single-family homes can have a maximum height of 30 feet (previously 23 feet), a maximum of two floors at 15 feet each (previously 11.5 feet each).
In multi-family residential development, no building shall exceed 40 feet in height (previously 35 feet).
In townhouse and garden home single-family residential development, no building shall exceed 30 feet in height (previously 35 feet).
In two-family residential development (R-2), no building shall exceed 30 feet in height (previously 23 feet).
In office and professional development, no building shall exceed 40 feet in height (previously 23 feet).
No commercial accessory buildings shall be more than 15 feet in height (previously 11.5 feet).
No buildings in B-2, B-3, B-4, and I-1 zoning shall exceed 40 feet (previously 23 feet).
In the Old Town Helotes Special District, commercial accessory buildings are allowed to be 40 feet in height (previously 23 feet), and residential accessory buildings are allowed to be 30 feet in height (previously 23 feet).
For points of comparison, the tower at the end of the new building going up next to the new CVS is 40 feet tall. The lowest point on the finished ground floor to the top of the building (excluding the tower), measures 23 to 24 feet; the Helotes Crossing building (next to Public Storage) is 32 feet tall; the lighthouse-type tower at the Public Storage is 36 feet tall; the lighthouse tower of the new Children’s Lighthouse day care center is 32 to 33 feet tall.
Legendre said that he would rather measure at “plate height” not at “roof height.” Whitehead agreed saying that plate height should be 25 feet or roof height at 33 feet. Massey said that currently there is no restriction on roof height, and she thinks that 30 or 35 feet should be enough.
Whitehead made a motion to approve the amendments as presented except for changing the height of residential buildings from the recommended height of 30 feet to 35 feet at roof ridge height. The motion passed with Whitehead, Johnson, and Villanueva voting for and Massey and Legendre voting against.
The last item on the agenda was an ordinance relating to restrictions on operating a motor vehicle near vulnerable road users (VRU) (meaning pedestrians and bicyclists) and creating an offense. This item was brought to the Council by Legendre and Villanueva.
Legendre started out by saying that 1-1/2 years ago he had no interest in this subject. However, now he is riding a bicycle, and recently someone almost hit him when he was riding on Scenic Loop Road. Now he thinks the driving public needs education. (OK. Is it just me or does he sound incredibly shallow? Now that it personally affects him, he has an interest in educating the public and keeping bicyclists safe. I’m sorry, but I think that he, as an elected official, should have an interest in everything that concerns Helotes citizens, especially health and safety issues, whether it personally affects him or not.)
Massey said that she walks/runs, but she stays off Hwy. 16 because of the danger. The laws in this ordinance are already on the books. The problem is how to enforce them. It is not always possible for drivers of commercial vehicles to clear a VRU by 6 feet on some of our smaller roads. As far as she knows there has not been an accident between a motor vehicle and a VRU in Helotes in at least the last 6+ years. This ordinance would only work if everyone knows about it. To educate drivers, the City would have to put up signs, and for that, TXDoT permission would have to be obtained.
(I agree with her about the laws already being on the books. The ordinance will be incredibly hard to enforce. I also don’t really think it is necessary.
(Do you really think that the driving public doesn’t already know that they should pass bicyclists safely and that they’re not supposed to intimidate or threaten bicyclists or pedestrians? Seriously, do you think that when motorists read this ordinance they’re going to say, “Well, now that I know it’s against the law to hit, scare, threaten or intimidate pedestrians and bicyclists, I won’t do it anymore. Who knew that was not an acceptable or legal thing to do?” Sorry. Pedestrians and, especially, bicyclists will still annoy and anger drivers who don’t want them on the road and in their way, especially when it interferes with where they want to drive or how fast they want to go. This ordinance is not going to give drivers more compassion or more patience, and the consequences of not complying with this ordinance, a fine of $25 to $500, will do little to change how drivers react to bicyclists. I’d venture to say that a fine will not deter some drivers. When you’re angry, you’re not thinking right anyway, and “Anyway, you have to get caught first.”
(There was a couple killed recently just north of Helotes by a pick-up truck driver. They were on a tandem bicycle riding on the shoulder of Hwy 16, and a driver “accidentally” swerved his vehicle and hit them, killing them both. He didn’t even get a ticket. He killed two people, and he didn’t even get a ticket! This happens a lot, so drivers know that not much, if anything, is going to happen to them. Why would they be concerned about this ordinance?)
Villanueva rides a motorcycle. He thinks this ordinance addresses a safety issue for the City. It’s about education. He doesn’t see why they couldn’t post signs along the highway. He is in favor of this ordinance.
Johnson thinks that enforcement is going to be an issue, but our police officers could use the ordinance to educate drivers. Helotes has lots of bike riders who bring money into our community.
Whitehead simply stated that he was not against the ordinance.
Schoolcraft said that some problems he sees are how to word the signs and where to put them. He thinks the ordinance needs some clarification, e.g., where do we require motor vehicles to vacate a lane, 50 feet from the bicyclist or maybe 75 feet? Motor vehicles can pass a bicyclist “when road conditions allow.” Who determines what that means? The Mayor feels that the ordinance needs to be looked at closer before it is passed to make sure it is enforceable.
City Attorney O’Neill disagrees with his colleague, Steve Pena, in that he doesn’t think they would be required to post signs. It could be published in the paper or there could be a campaign to educate the public about the new ordinance. He is not concerned about the wording “when conditions allow” because that will be a judgment call made by the police officer, which officers do all the time. The ordinance will require a lot of interpretation. He also suggested adding to the ordinance words to the effect that if conditions (whether that is road or weather) do not allow the safe passing of a bicyclist, the driver should slow down and only pass when conditions improve.
Helotes Police Chief Mort Ault wrote a letter to Mayor Schoolcraft and Council members telling them he could not support this proposed City Ordinance amendment. He wrote, “The term “vulnerable road user” as defined in the proposed ordinance would include a new class of user of roadways that overlaps classes that are already established by the Texas Transportation Code. Restrictions and regulations have already been put into place to maintain safety on the roadways regarding motorists and many of the “vulnerable road users. The way in which the Ordinance amendment is written places liability solely on the motor vehicle operator. Currently, liability rests on the party or parties acting recklessly. Being a strong proponent of the safest possible roadways in the City, [I believe] the ordinance would challenge too much of the Transportation Code that the Department must enforce as per state law.”
Legendre said he does not agree with the Police Chief. With this ordinance, he is trying to educate the driving public about what their responsibilities and options are, and it is not about creating revenue.
Johnson agreed with Legendre.
Council unanimously approved the ordinance as written without adding the statement about slowing down until conditions improve.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:10 p.m.