J - City of New Braunfels

~:_,City of 

~~New Braunfels 

CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS, TEXAS 

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING 

CITY HALL - COUNCIL CHAMBERS 

424 S. CASTELL AVENUE 

MONDAY, JANUARY 10, 2011 at 6:00P.M. 

R. Bruce Boyer, Mayor 

Richard Zapata, Councilmember (District 1) 

Mark Goodner, Councilmember (District 2) 

Mike Ybarra, Councilmember (District 3) 

Sandy Nolte, Councilmember (District 4) 

Kathleen Krueger, Mayor Pro Tern (District 5) 

Steven Digges, Councilmember (District 6) 

Michael Morrison, City Manager 

MISSION STATEMENT 

The City of New Braunfels will add value to our community 

by planning for the future, providing quality services, encouraging 

Community involvement and being responsive to those we serve. 

AGENDA 

CALL TO ORDER: 

CALL OF ROLL: 

January 10, 2011 @6:00P.M. 

City Secretary 

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/SALUTE TO THE TEXAS FLAG 

INVOCATION: 

Mayor Boyer 

PROCLAMATION: Sanctity of Life Day Page 1 

REQUEST ALL PAGERS AND PHONES BE TURNED OFF, EXCEPT EMERGENCY ON 

CALL PERSONNEL. 

1. MINUTES 

Consider approving the minutes of the special meeting of November 30, 2010 and the 

special and regular meetings of December 13, 2010. 

{A. Smith, Interim City Secretary) Pages 3-14 

2. CITIZENS' COMMUNICATIONS 

This time is for citizens to address the City Council on issues and items of 

concern, not on this agenda. There will be no City Council action at this time. 

(Mayor Boyer) Page 15

City Council Agenda 

January 10, 2011 

Page 2 of6 

3. CONSENT AGENDA 

All items listed below are considered to be routine and non-controversial by the 

Council and will be approved by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of 

these items unless a councilmember or citizen so requests, in which case the item will 

be removed from the consent agenda and considered as part of the normal order of 

business. 

Resolutions & Action Items 

(A) 

(B) 

(C) 

(D) 

Approval of the appointment of Wayne Clark to the Landa Park Municipal Golf 

Course Advisory Board for a term ending December 31, 2013. 

(A. Smith, Interim City Secretary) Pages 17-20 

Approval of the purchase of accessories for police vehicles from GT 

Distributors, Inc and police video systems from Coban through the Buyboard 

Cooperative. 

(T. Wibert, Chief of Police I M. Quinones, Purchasing Manager) Page 21 

Approval of an interlocal agreement with the City of Fort Worth, Texas in 

accordance with Texas Government Code Chapter 791, Texas lnterlocal 

Cooperation Act, initially for credit card processing services. 

(M. Quinones, Purchasing Manager) Page 23 

Approval of purchase of supplies for City-wide use from Office Depot through 

the Texas Cooperative Purchasing Network (TCPN) contract. 

(M. Quinones, Purchasing Manager) Page25 

Ordinances 

(In accordance with Section 3. 10 of the City's Charter, a descriptive 

caption of each ordinance shall be read on two separate days.) 

(E) Approval of the second and final reading of an ordinance abandoning 0.379 

acres of public right-of-way, known as Jean Avenue and Fritz Koepp Street, 

located near the northeast terminus of McGar Street. 

(S. Mattingly, Planning and Community Development Director) Pages 27-40 

(F) 

Approval of the second and final reading of an ordinance rezoning 1.977 acres 

located at 1720 Gruene Road, from "R-2" Single and Two-Family District to "C- 

1A" Neighborhood Business District. 

(S. Mattingly, Planning and Community Development Director) Pages 41-70

(G) 




Approval of the second and final reading of an ordinance amending Section 

5.21-10(b), Non-Residential and Multifamily Design Standards Appeal 

Procedures, Chapter 144, Zoning Ordinance, establishing an application fee. 


(H) Approval of the first reading of an ordinance amending Ordinance Number 75- 

10 to approve installation of four way stop signs at the intersection of Hollyhock 

Lane at Larkspur and all way stop signs at Pahmeyer Road and Anna Lee 

Drive. 

(J. Klein, City Engineer) Pages 77-79 

(I) 

(J) 

(K) 

(L) 

Approval of the first reading of an ordinance amending the code of ordinances 

of the City of New Braunfels, Texas by amending section 126-346 (f) to add no 

parking zones along the northeast side of Stone Gate Drive in the 200 block and 

providing an effective date. 


Approval of the first reading of an ordinance amending the Code of Ordinances 

of the City of New Braunfels, Texas by modifying Section 126 to establish speed 

limits on SH 46 from Alves Lane to the New Braunfels city limits. 

( J. Klein, City Engineer) Pages 85-90 

Authorization for the City Manager to approve change order 4 to the contract 

with DNT Construction, LLC for construction services on Goodwin Lane as part 

of the Goodwin Lane Improvements Project. 


Approval of the second and final reading of an ordinance amending Ordinance 

Number 75-10 to approve installation of four way stop signs at the intersection 

of Divine Way and Angelina/Gaines Drive 

( J. Klein, City Engineer) Pages 93-95 

4. INDIVIDUAL ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION 

(A) 

(B) 

(C) 

Discuss and consider approval of a resolution supporting Guadalupe County 

Judge Mike Wiggins as representative on the South Central Texas (Region L) 

Regional Water Planning Group. 

(S. Ramsey, Public Works Director) Pages 97-101 

Discuss and consider approval of a resolution authorizing the City Manager to 

support the Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority's application for flood protection 

planning grant assistance filed with the Texas Water Development Board. 

(Nathan Pence, Watershed Program Manager & Tommy Hill, Guadalupe Blanco River 

Authority) Pages 103-109 

Discuss and consider the approval of locating a statue of Prince Carl Solms in 

front of the Civic/Convention Center. 





(D) 

(E) 

(F) 

(G) 

(H) 

(I) 

(J) 

(K) 

Discuss and consider the first reading of an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 

2009-50, continuing the enforcement of the Two Hour Parking Zone in 

Downtown New Braunfels. 


Discuss and consider an appeal to the Non-Residential and Multi-Family Design 

Standards Exterior Building Materials requirement for themed lodging and an 

additional outbuilding to be located within the Schlitterbahn Water Park. 


Public Hearing and first reading of an ordinance rezoning of 16.589 acres, 

located at 631 Lakeview Boulevard, from "R-3" Multifamily District to "PDD" 

Eden Hill Planned Development District. 


Public Hearing and first reading of an ordinance rezoning a portion of Rivercrest 

Heights Subdivision, from "C-1" Local Business District to "R-2A" Single and 

Two Family District. 


Discuss and consider a resolution of the City of New Braunfels, Texas 

requesting that State Highway 46 from Interstate Highway 35 to the East City 

Limit of New Braunfels in Guadalupe County be designated as the 

"Representative Edmund Kuempel Memorial Highway". 


Discuss and consider the second and final reading of an ordinance amending 

Chapter 106, Signs, of the Code of Ordinances, by amending Section 106-3 to 

define mobile billboards, parking and twenty-four hour period, amending Section 

106-11 to prohibit mobile billboards as off premise signs. 


Discuss and consider the second and final reading of an ordinance rezoning 

47.97 acres located on the west side of Oak Run Parkway, approximately 2,000 

feet north of Loop 337, from "R-1A-8" Single Family District with Restrictions to 

"Enclave at Westpointe Village Planned Development District" with Concept 

Plan. 


Public Hearing and first reading of an ordinance rezoning a portion of Mission 

Forest Subdivision from "R-3" Multi-Family District to "R-1A-6.6" Single Family 

District. 


(L) 

(M) 

(N) 




Public Hearing and first reading of an ordinance rezoning a portion of Gruene 

Road Subdivision, from "R-3" Multi-Family District, to "R-1A-8" Single Family 

District and "R-2A" Single-Family and Two-Family District. 


Public Hearing and first reading of an ordinance rezoning a portion of the 

Gruene Courtyard Subdivision, from "R-3" Multifamily District, to "R-1A-6.6" 

Single Family District and "R-2A" Single and Two Family District. 


Public Hearing and first reading of an ordinance rezoning a portion of the 

Garden Park Subdivision, from "R-1" Single Family District, "R-3" Multi-Family 

District, and "C-1" Local Business District to "R-2A" Single Family and Two 

Family District. 


(0) First public hearing regarding the annexation of 1984.098 acres of land on IH 35 

North between FM 1101 and FM 1102 adjacent to the existing City Limits. 


(P) 

(Q) 

First public hearing regarding the annexation of a 100.007 acre tract of land out 

of Subdivision No. 33 and Subdivision No.58 of the A.M. Esnaurizar Eleven 

League Grant Survey, and being a portion of Tract Three, a 112 acre tract of 

land, all of Tract Four, a 1.93 acre tract of land and all of Tract Five, an 88.5 

acre tract of land located east of FM 1101 and west of Westmeyer Road 

adjacent to the existing City Limits. 


Discuss and consider repealing the moratorium on Short Term Rental Specific 

Use Permits and registration of non-conforming uses. 

(Councilmember Steven Digges, District 6) Pages 359-362 

5. EXECUTIVE SESSIONS 

In accordance with Texas Government Code, Subchapter D, the City Council may 

convene in a closed session to discuss any of the following items; any final action or 

vote taken will be in public. 

(A) 

(B) 

Deliberate and consider the purchase, exchange, lease or value of real 

property, in accordance with Section 551.072, of the Texas Government Code. 

(A. Wayland, City Attorney) Page 363 

Deliberate issues regarding economic development negotiations in accordance 

with Section 551.087, of the Texas Government Code. 

(A. Wayland, City Attorney) Page 363




(C) 

Deliberate pending/contemplated litigation, settlement offer(s), and matters 

concerning privileged and unprivileged client information deemed confidential 

by Rule 1.05 of the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct in 

accordance with Section 551.071, of the Texas Government Code. 

(A. Wayland, City Attorney) Page 363 

NOTE: The City Council reserves the right to retire into executive session concerning any of 

the items listed on this Agenda whenever it is considered necessary and legally justified 

under the Open Meetings Act (Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code). 

ADJOURNMENT 

CERTIFICATION 

Ann Smith, lnterifllCitY Secretary 

ties who plan to attend this meeting and who may need auxiliary aids or services

.L 

City of !New CBraunjefs 

Proclallla tion 

THE STATE OF TEXAS § 

COUNTY OF COMAL § 

CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS § 

WHEREAS, Sanctity of Life Day, which began in 1984, was first proclaimed by President 

Ronald Reagan to remind us to build a culture of 'life'; and 

) 

WHEREAS, the citizens of New Braunfels and our community acknowledge that every 

human life has value; and 

WHEREAS, the value of an individual life as the primary source of love, identity, self-esteem 

and support leads to the very foundation of our community; and 

WHEREAS, for the last 26 years, Options for Women has been serving as New Braunfels 

Crisis Pregnancy Center. 

NOW, THEREFORE, I, R. BRUCE BOYER, by virtue of the authority vested in me as 

Mayor of the City of New Braunfels, Texas, do hereby proclaim, January 24th, 2011 as: 

Sanctity of Life Day 

In New Braunfels and urge all citizens to observe this day by focusing on sanctity - the very 

preciousness of life -young and old alike. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the City of 

New Braunfels to be affixed this 10th day of January, 2011. 


R. BRUCE BOYER, MAYOR 

)

---y· 

) 

)

MINUTES 

OF THE NEW BRAUNFELS CITY COUNCIL 

SPECIAL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 30,2010 

The City Council of the City of New Braunfels, Texas, met in Special Session on 

November 30, 2010. 

City Councilmembers present were: Mayor Bruce Boyer, presiding; Mayor 

Pro-tem Kathleen Krueger and Councilmembers Mike Ybarra, Sandy Nolte, and Steven 

Digges. 

City Staff present were: City Manager Michael E. Morrison, City Attorney Alan 

Wayland, Assistant City Manager Robert Camarena, Deputy City Secretary Danny S. 

Batts II, Support Services Director Deborah Korinchock, and Interim City Secretary Ann 

Smith. 

) 

The meeting was called to order by Mayor Boyer in the New Braunfels Municipal 

Building Council Chambers at 4:33 p.m. All Councilmembers were present. 

1. Discuss and consider approval of a resolution of the City Council of the 

City Of New Braunfels, Texas approving the issuance of the $7,000,000 

New Braunfels Development Authority Tax Increment Contract Revenue 

Notes, Series 2010, and containing other provisions relating to the 

foregoing subject. 

Councilmember Digges moved to approve the resolution as presented. 

Pro Tern Krueger seconded the motion. Vote was unanimous. 

Mayor 

2. Discuss and consider approval of a resolution by the City Council of the 

City of New Braunfels, Texas amending a tax increment participation 

inter/ocal cooperative agreement between the City of New Braunfels, 

Texas, the County of Coma/, Texas, Reinvestment Zone Number One, 

New Braunfels, Texas, and A-L 95 Creekside Town Center, L.P.; and other 

matters in connection therewith. 

Councilmember Digges moved to approve the resolution 

Councilmember Nolte seconded the motion. Vote was unanimous. 

as presented. 

Adjournment: This special meeting adjourned at 4:47p.m. 

) 

November 30, 2010 New Braunfels Special City Council Meeting 1

Date Approved: January 10, 2011 

By: 


Attest: 

ANN SMITH 

INTERIM CITY SECRETARY 

) 

) 

November 30, 2010 New Braunfels Special City Council Meeting 2

MINUTES 

OF THE NEW BRAUNFELS CITY COUNCIL 

SPECIAL MEETING OF DECEMBER 13,2010 

The City Council of the City of New Braunfels, Texas, met in Special Session on 

December 13, 2010. 

City Councilmembers present were: Mayor Bruce Boyer, presiding; and 

Councilmembers Richard Zapata, Mark Goodner, Mike Ybarra, Sandy Nolte, and 

Steven Digges. 

City Staff present were: City Manager Michael E. Morrison, City Attorney Alan 

Wayland, Assistant City Manager Robert Camareno, Deputy City Secretary Danny S. 

Batts II, Planning Manager Stacey Snell, Fire Chief John Robinson, and Planning and 

Community Development Director Shannon Mattingly. 

) 


Building Council Chambers at 4:04 p.m. 

After calling the meeting to order, Mayor Boyer announced that the City Council would 

recess into executive session. The Council returned to regular session at 4:19p.m. and 

began consideration of the individual items on the agenda. 

1. Workshop, presentation and discussion regarding a three-year annexation plan. 

The City Council received a presentation from Planning and Community Development 

Director Shannon Mattingly regarding the legal and technical aspects of adopting a three 

year annexation plan. After the presentation, the Council reviewed maps of the City and 

areas that might be included in a future annexation plan. 

2. Presentation and discussion regarding improvements to Farm to Market Road 

306. 

City Manager Michael Morrison briefly noted that the City had been in discussions with 

the Texas Department of Transportation regarding an opportunity to make 

improvements to F.M. 306, and that at some point the City would need to consider 

whether or not it would be willing to participate financially in the project. 

) 

At 5:31 p.m. the City Council recessed into executive session. The Council returned 

from executive session at 6:10p.m. 

December 13, 2010 New Braunfels Special City Council Meeting 1

Adjournment: This special meeting adjourned at 6:10p.m. 

Date Approved: January 10, 2011 

By: 


Attest: 

ANN SMITH 


) 

December 13, 2010 New Braunfels Special City Council Meeting 2

MINUTES 

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING 

DECEMBER 13, 2010 

The City Council of the City of New Braunfels, Texas, met in Regular Session on 

December 13, 2010. · 

City Councilmembers present were: Mayor Bruce Boyer, presiding; and 

Councilmembers Richard Zapata, Mark Goodner, Mike Ybarra, Sandy Nolte, and Steven 

Digges. 

City Staff present were: City Manager Michael E. Morrison, Assistant City 

Manager Robert Camarena, City Attorney Alan C. Wayland, Deputy City Secretary 

Danny S. Batts II, Planning and Community Development Director Shannon Mattingly, 

and Parks and Recreation Director Stacey Laird Dicke. 


Building City Council Chambers at 6:10 p.m. Mayor Boyer led the Pledge of Allegiance 

and the Salute to the Texas Flag and Councilmember Digges gave the invocation. 

) 

Recognition: Main Street National Recognition: Mayor _Boyer recognized George Ross, 

Craig Massouh, Jerry Sonier, and Laurie Hawkins for their work on the Main Street 

Advisory Board regarding the City's designation and a 2011 Main Street City by the Texas 

Historic Commission and The National Historic Trust. 

1. Minutes: Councilmembers considered approval of the minutes of the special meeting 

and the regular meetings of November 22, 2010. 

Councilmember Digges moved to approve the minutes as written. Councilmember 

Nolte seconded the motion which was unanimously approved by City Council. 

2. Citizens' Communications: 

Mayor Boyer announced that Item 4-1 had been pulled from the agenda and would 

not be discussed. 

Rittler Strahn of 229 Pennsylvania Blvd. spoke in opposition to certain proposed 

standards for the flow rates for Coma I Springs currently being considered by the 

Edwards Aquifer Authority. 

Gwen Karraker of 1249 Oleander spoke in opposition to the above referenced 

standards, and encouraged the City Council to formally request an increase in the 

proposed flow rates for Comal Springs. 

) 

Helen Clayton, Kevin Clayton, and Cole Clayton of 1224 Rivercrest Dr. came 

forward to express deep appreciation to City employees that had helped provide 

December 13, 2010 New Braunfels Regular City Council Meeting 1

lifesaving treatment to Cole Clayton after he sustained life threatening injuries 

during a kayaking accident earlier in the year. 

Steven Hanna of the New Braunfels Police Officers Association came forward to 

announce that the Association would begin collecting signatures in January in 

order to place adopting police officers civil service requirements on the May ballot. 

3. Consent Agenda: 

Mayor Boyer read Consent Agenda items (A-P) as listed below. Councilmember 

Digges made a motion to approve the consent agenda as listed below. Councilmember 

Notte seconded the motion which was approved unanimously. 

(A) 

Approval to authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract modification 

for changes in the professional services contract with Halff Associates, Inc. 

for the North Tributary Flood Control Project. 

Document No. 1720 

(B) 

Approval of the appointment of Laurie Hawkins, Kandace Tornquist, and 

Audrea Gibson to the Community Development Advisory Committee for terms 

ending December 13, 2013. 

(C) Approval of the appointment of Bruce Weldy to the Landa Park Municipal Golf ·.·) 


(D) 

(E) 

(F) 

(G) 

Approval of the appointment of Laurie Hawkins to the Main Street Advisory 

Board for a term ending December 31, 2013. 

Approval of Transportation of Traffic Advisory Board's recommendation to 

deny a request for the installation of speed humps on Dove Crossing Drive in 

the 2200 and 2600 blocks. 

Approval of Transportation and Traffic Advisory Board's recommendation to 

deny a request for additional stop signs for Lee Street and Stonewall Street at 

Chestnut Avenue. 

Approval of a resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into an 

agreement with Richard J. Leidl, P.C. for federal legislative services on behalf 

of the City of New Braunfels. 

Resolution No. 201 O-R63 

(H) 

Approval of a budget adjustment in the 2011 Certificates of Obligation Capital 

Improvement FY 2010-11 Adopted Budget. 

(I) Approval of the purchase of services for the New Braunfels Public Library ) 


from the Alamo Area Library System Vendor Discount list. 

(J) 

Approval of the purchase of vehicles for the New Braunfels Police 

Department from Bluebonnet Motors on the Lower Colorado River Authority 

(LCRA) contract and Caldwell Country Chevy on the State contract. 

Document No. 1721 

(K) 

(L) 

(M) 

Approval of the Mayoral re-appointment of Mark Goodner to serve as 

Chairman of the Board of Directors of Reinvestment Zone No. 1 until 


Approval for the purchase of occupational physicals for uniformed employees 

in the Fire Department. 

Approval of the 2011 Airport Rates and Charges as established by Chapter _ 

10 "Aviation" Section 10-101(b)(4)a. Lease Charge of the Code of 

Ordinances. 

) 

(N) Approve a resolution setting the schedule for public hearings to be held to 

consider annexation of a 100.007 acre tract of land out of Subdivision No. 33 

and Subdivision No. 58 of the A.M. Esnaurizar Eleven League Grant Survey, 

and being a portion of Tract Three, a 112 acre tract of land, all of Tract Four, 

a 1.93 acre tract of land and all of Tract Five, an 88.5 acre tract of land 

located east of FM 1101 and west of Westmeyer Road adjacent to the 

existing City Limits. 


(0) Approval of the first reading of an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 75-10 

to approve installation of all way stop signs at the intersection of Divine Way 

and Angelina/Gaines Drive. 

(P) Approval of a resolution recommended by the New Braunfels Industrial 

Development Corporation regarding a grant to Buc-ee's Ltd. to fund a portion 

of the cost of public infrastructure improvements in the area serving the 

southeast corner of IH-35 and F.M. 306 in an amount not to exceed 

$333,333.00. 


4. INDIVIDUAL ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION 

) 

Item 4-A: Mayor Boyer read the following caption: 


HI 

Discuss and consider second and final reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 86, 

Section 86-91 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of New Braunfels, Texas regarding ---4/· 

golf fees. 

After the reading of the Caption, Parks and Recreation Director Stacey Laird Dicke noted 

that this ordinance had been scaled back from the first reading, and had initially included 

fee changes for a variety of parks and recreation related fees. She noted that the 

ordinance now only addressed fees associated with the Golf Course. 

After the presentation, Councilmember Digges made a motion to approve the ordinance. 

Councilmember Nolte seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: 

Ayes: Councilmembers Zapata, Goodner, Ybarra, Nolte, and Mayor Boyer. Nays: None. 

Ordinance No. 2010-86 

Item 4-B: Mayor Boyer read the following caption: 

Discuss and consider an appeal to the Non-Residential and Multifamily Design Standards 

Exterior Building Materials requirement for a proposed commercial building to be located 

at 135 Conrad's Road. 

After the reading of the Caption, Planning and Community Development Director 

Shannon Mattingly gave a brief presentation regarding the failure of the owners of the 

above referenced property to provide a certain exterior finish on an accessory building as ·) 

required by City ordinance. She noted tha:t the building owners had been notified of the . 

requirement and had submitted plans with their application for a building permit that 

clearly showed the building with the required exterior finish. However, the owners then 

sought a certificate of occupancy without providing the building with the required exterior 

finish. Director Mattingly then stated that staff recommended that the owners appeal be 

denied. 

After the presentation, Councilmember Zapata made a motion to deny the appeal. 

Councilmember Nolte seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. 

Item 4-C: Mayor Boyer read the following caption: 

Public hearing and consider first reading of an ordinance rezoning 1.977 acres located at 

1720 Gruene Road, from "R-2" Single and Two-Family District to "C-1B" Neighborhood 

Business District. 

After the reading of the caption, Planning and Community Development Director Shannon 

Mattingly gave a brief presentation regarding the rezoning of 1720 Gruene Rd. She noted 

that the subject property was surrounded by agricultural land and abutted a railroad track. 

She further noted that the applicant intended to use the property for a restaurant with an 

outdoor music venue. Director Mattingly then noted that the Planning and Zoning 

Commission had recommended that the property be rezoned to a "C-1A" classification 

) 


ll 

instead of "C-1 B" in order to ensure that all of the potential uses allowed in the zoning 

classification would be appropriate for the surrounding land uses. She then noted that a 

zoning classification of "C-1A" would allow the applicant to build the planned restaurant 

and then apply for a special use permit for the outdoor music venue. 

After the presentation, Mayor Boyer opened the public hearing. There being no public 

input, Councilmember Digges moved to close the public hearing. The motion was 

seconded by Councilmember Nolte and approved unanimously. After the closing of the 

public hearing, Councilmember Digges moved to approve the first reading of the 

ordinance with the stipulation that the property be zoned "C-1A" instead of the "C-1 B" 

requested by the applicant. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Ybarra and 

carried unanimously. 

Item 4-D: Mayor Boyer read the following caption: 

Public hearing and consider first reading of an ordinance amending Section 5.21-10(b), 

Non-Residential and Multifamily Design Standards Appeal Procedures, Chapter 144, 

Zoning Ordinance, establishing an application fee. 

) 

After the reading of the caption, Planning and Community Development Director Mattingly 

· made a brief presentation on the proposed ordinance. She noted that the ordinance 

governing appeal procedures for the design standards did not include a fee to defray the 

City's cost associated with processing appeals arising under its provisions. She then 

stated that the proposed fee of $300.00 was selected because the review process for this 

type of appeal was substantially similar to that used for conditional sign permits, and 

those permits have a $300.00 application fee. 


input, Gouncilmember Digges moved to close the public hearing. The motion was 



ordinance. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Nolte and carried unanimously. 

Item 4-E: Mayor Boyer read the following caption: 

Public hearing and consider first reading of an ordinance abandoning 0.379 acres of 

public right-of-way, known as Jean Avenue and Fritz Koepp Street, located near the 

northeast terminus of McGar Street. 


gave a brief presentation regarding the requested right of way abandonment. She noted 

that the right of way was dedicated as a street, but a street had never been built nor was 

one planned in the future. She also noted that all of the property owners abutting the 

abandonment had been presented the opportunity to buy a portion of the right of way, as 

required by law, but that only one owner had elected to participate and would be 

purchasing the entire right of way. She further stated that staff recommended that the 


lL 

right of way abandonment be approved, subject to the following conditions: That the 

property be re-platted prior to development or within two years, whichever occurs first, 

and that a 20ft utility easement be provided along the front of the property adjacent to 

McGarSt. 


input, Councilmember Digges moved to close the public hearing. The motion was 



ordinance with the conditions recommended by staff. The motion was seconded by 

Councilmember Nolte and carried unanimously. 

Item 4-F: Mayor Boyer read the following caption: 

Discuss and consider the first reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 106, Signs, of 

the Code of Ordinances, by amending Section 106-3 to define mobile billboards and 

amending off-premise sign definition to include mobile billboards, and amending Section 

106-11 to prohibit mobile billboards. 


gave a brief presentation regarding the changes to the ordinance since it had last been 

discussed by council, noting that a definition for "mobile billboard" had been added along 

with a provision that makes property owners responsible for not allowing mobile billboards 

to be visible from their property. ) 

After the presentation, Bryce Tomlinson of 250 Fallen Oak spoke in opposition to the 

proposed ordinance. He noted that he owned several vehicles that would become 

prohibited should the ordinance pass, and felt that at the very least his company should 

be "grandfathered" and allowed to operate without restriction if the ordinance was passed. 

Next, Vince Koegle of 7 40 Rosemary Dr spoke in opposition to the proposed ordinance. 

He noted that he and Mr. Tom Iinson were business partners and had taken pains to 

ensure that their mobile billboard business was compliant with all City regulations before 

beginning operations. He stated that he did not feel it was fair to restrict their business 

after they had already begun operations under the current regulations. 

After public comments, the City Council began to discuss among themselves and with 

staff various interpretations of the proposed ordinance. After this discussion, 

Councilmember Zapata moved to approve the proposed ordinance with an amendment to 

create a "grandfather" clause that would apply to mobile billboards in operation before the 

effective date of the ordinance, and would have the following stipulations: 1. That no 

mobile billboard could be located on any property for more than 2 hours during any 24 

hour period; and that 2. the "grandfather" provision would expire on Labor Day, 2012, at 

which time all mobile billboards in the City, regardless of when the mobile billboard began 

being used as such, must come into compliance with the ordinance. The motion was 

seconded by Councilmember Digges and was passed by the following vote: Ayes: ) 


Councilmembers Zapata, Goodner, Digges, and Mayor Boyer; Nays: Councilmembers 

Ybarra and Nolte. 

After the'vote on Item 4-F, the City Council recessed for five minutes. 

Item 4-H: After returning from recess, Mayor Boyer announced that Item 4-H would be 

considered out of order and read the following caption: 

Discuss and consider a resolution denying the rate increase proposed by CenterPoint 

Energy Resources Corp. and requiring the reimbursement of municipal rate case 

expenses. 

After the reading of the caption, City Attorney Alan Wayland informed Council that 

CenterPoint Energy was seeking to increase the rates it charges customers within the 

City. He noted that the City had recently approved an amended franchise agreement with 

CenterPoint that would preclude the City from denying rate increases in the future, but 

that agreement would not become effective until the end of January, 2011. He also 

stated that since CenterPoint was seeking the rate increase before the effective date of 

the new franchise agreement, the City Council still had the right to deny the increase at 

this time. He further stated that a denial would result in the requested rate increase being 

adjudicated by the Texas Railroad Commission. 

) 

After Mr. Wayland's remarks, Councilmember Digges made a motion to approve the 

resolution and deny CenterPoint's request for a rate increase. The motion was seconded 

by Councilmember Zapata. 

After the motion and the second, Nelda Juarez, Regional Director for CenterPoint Energy, 

spoke in favor of the proposed rate increase and gave a brief presentation detailing the 

components of the rate increase .. 

After the presentation by Ms. Juarez, the City Council voted unanimously to approved the 

motion by Councilmember Digges. 

Item 4-G: Mayor Boyer read the following caption: 

Discuss and consider the first reading of an ordinance rezoning 47.97 acres located on 

the west side of Oak Run Parkway, approximately 2, 000 feet north of Loop 337, from "R- 

1 A-8" Single Family District with Restrictions to "Enclave at Westpointe Village Planned 

Development District" with Concept Plan. 

) 

After the reading of the caption, Mayor Boyer noted that this item had been tabled at a 

previous City Council meeting and would require an affirmative motion and vote to 

reconsider before it could be discussed. Councilmember Digges then made a motion to 

reconsider this item. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Zapata and approved 

unanimously. 


14 

Planning and Community Development Director Mattingly then gave a brief presentation 

regarding the proposed new development district zoning classification. She also } 

discussed improvements to the drainage plans for the development. 

After the presentation, Steve Drenner, a representative of the applicant, spoke in favor of 

the proposed rezoning. 

Ron Reaves of 525 Hunter's Creek Drive and Vice President of the Hunter's Creek Home 

Owners Association spoke in opposition to the proposed rezoning. 

After Mr. Reaves comments, Councilmember Digges made a motion to approve the 

ordinance on first reading. Councilmember Zapata then seconded the motion. 

After the motion and the second, Hunter's Creek resident David Whittaker spoke in 

opposition to the proposed rezoning. 

After Mr. Whittaker's comments, the Council voted unanimously to approve the ordinance 

on first reading. 

Adjournment: This Regular meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m. 

Date Approved: January 10 , 2011 

By: 


) 

Attest: 

ANN SMITH, 


) 

December 13, 201 0 New Braunfels Regular City Council Meeting 8

~-,City of 

~-.New Braunfels 

City Council Agenda Item Report 


Agenda Item No. 2 

Presenter/Contact - Mayor Boyer 

SUBJECT: CITIZENS' COMMUNICATIONS 

·' 

8ACKGROUND/RA TIONALE: 

This time is for citizens to address the City Council on issues and items of concern, not on this 

agenda. There will be no City Council action at this time. 

ADDRESSES A NEED/ISSUE IN A CITY PLAN OR COUNCIL PRIORITY: 

I City Plan/Council 

Priority: 

) 

FISCAL IMPACT: 

N/A 

BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: 

N/A 

STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 

N/A

lb 

·~ ) 

' .

1 ( 

"'_,City of 

'-._..New Braunfels 

..... ~ 

-l 



Agenda Item No. 3 -II 

Presenter/Contact- Ann Smith, Interim City Secretary 

Ph. 830-221-4006 I E-mail: asmith@nbtexas.org 

SUBJECT: 

Approval of the appointment of Wayne Clark to the Landa Park Municipal Golf 


BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: 

The ordinance creating the Landa Park Municipal Golf Course Advisory Board provides that the 

New Braunfels Golf Association is entitled to nominate one of the members of the board for City 

Council consideration and approval. The seat reserved for the Association's nominee is now 

open, and the Association has nominated Wayne Clark of 420 Mount Joy Dr. to represent them 

on the Board. 

Applicant's current & prior service on Boards and Commissions 

Wayne Clark has no previous boards or commissions experience. 

) 


I~ IN/A 


N/A 


N/A 


Staff recommends that the City Council consider appointing Mr. Clark to the Landa Park 

Municipal Golf Course Advisory Board for a term ending December 31, 2013.

lH 

December 3, 2010 

To whom it may concern, 

This letter is to inform that the New Braunfels Golf Association recommends and 

appoints Mr. Wayne Clark as our representative for the Landa Park Golf Course 

Advisory Board. If you have any questions please feel free contact me. 

Sincerely, 

,(}'1 

Doug Ferguson, President of the New Braunfels Golf Association 

830-625-0241

) 

BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS 

MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION 

NAME: 

LAST ____ CLA_R..:..l< _____ FIRST _ ___;.E_UG_,EN_, _E______ MIDDLE_----'W=A;.;;;.YNE="------- 

PHYSICAL ADDRESS 

STREET 

CITY, STATE, ZIP 

MAILING ADDRESS 

STREET 

CITY, STATE, ZIP 

CONTACT INFORMATION 

HOME PHONE 

WORK PHONE 

EMAIL ADDRESS 

}1PLOYMENT INFORMATION 

EMPLOYER 

ADDRESS 

PHONE 

TITLE 

RESIDENCY INFORMATION 

42Jl MOUNT JOY DR. 

NEW RRAUNFELS, TEXAS 78130 

SA"M& 

830-n43-Q.Q.40 

jawavl~l~sbcglobal.net 

R~TTRED 

ARE YOU A RESIDENT OF THE CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS 

(2(yEs 0 NO 

IF NO, ARE YOU A RESIDENT OF THE CITY'S EXTRA TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION 

DYES DNO ON/A 

ARE YOU A REGISTERED VOTER 

liTYES 0 NO 0 N/A 

BOARD/COMMISSION INFORMATION 

FOR WHICH CITY BOARD/COMMISSION ARE YOU APPLYING (LIST BOARDS IN ORDER OF PREFERENCE) 

GOLF AnVISORY BOARD 

ARE YOU CURRENTLY OR HAVE YOU EVER SERVED ON ANY CITY BOARD OR COMMISSION 0 YES IYNO 

IF YES, PLEASE LIST EACH BOARD AND DATES OF MEMBERSHIP 

PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS APPLICATION IS ONLY VALID FOR THE VACANCIES FOR WHICH YOU ARE APPLYING. IF YOU WISH TO 

APPLY FOR VACANCIES IN THE FUTURE, YOU WILL NEED TO FILE A NEW APPLICATION AT THAT TIME.

QUALIFICATIONS 

PLEASE GIVE A BRIEF RESUME, INCLUDING EDUCATION, PAST EMPLOYMENT, ANY SPECIAL BACKGROUND OR 

QUALIFICATIONS YOU HAVE FOR SERVING ON THIS BOARD/COMMISSION. USE ATTACHMENTS IF NECESSARY. 

1975 ~FADUA'l'E 

GRADUATE SCVnO~ 

Of ~A~T~G 

RETTRED - P.EART~~ 

STATE ~ANK 

~OA'R.D 

52. YEARS 1N BANTrH1G 

~ER 

CHAIRMAN, P~~STQBNT, 

C~O. 

PRESIDENT - B~AZORTA 

COUNTY ~A~ERS ASSOCIATION 

RO'l':ARIAN 30 "~(EARS - ~E'P~~..TEl) ll'l E!TB'FX O'ffTCE. 

~~----------------~~~~~~~~~--------------------------------------- 

PLEASE STATE WHY YOU WISH TO SERVE THE CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS AS A MEMBER OF A BOARD, 

COMMISSION, OR COMMITTEE. USE ATTACHMENTS, IF NECESSARY. 

A~ A-NOMTNF.F. op· THF. NF.Y RRATmFF.LS GOLF ASSOCIATION TO BE THEIR REPRESENTATIVE ON 

) 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 

DO YOU HAVE ANY RELATIVES THAT WORK FOR THE CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS DYES liJNO 

IF YES, WHAT ISTHEIRNAMEAND POSITION=--------------------~--------- 

Do YOU RECEIVE ANY DIRECT COMPENSATION OR GAIN FROM ANY GOVERNMENTAL BODY li2f YES 

IFSO,WHAT~E ___ ~S~OC~T~A~L~S~EC~T~~xJ~TY~AD~~~I~N~I~ST~RA~T~I~ON~--------------------------- 

SIGNATURE 

DATE 

)

~.,Cityof 

~U New Braunfels 

"'n e ~, 



Agenda Item No. 3-- !3 

Presenter/Contact- Tom Wibert, Chief of Police/Mary Quinones 

(830) 221-4100- twibert@nbtexas.org 

SUBJECT: Approval of the purchase of accessories for police vehicles from GT distributors and 

police video systems from Caban through the Buyboard cooperative. 


Police vehicles being replaced this budget year require additional equipment such as light bars, 

radios, cages, etc. before they are fully functional for Police Department use. These accessories 

have been priced and the best pricing is with GT Distributors through the Buyboard cooperative. 

The accessories for the 23 vehicles being purchased is $107,840.58. 

Also being purchased are 28 cameras for the new and five existing vehicles. Also recommended 

for purchase is the warranty for 44 cameras reaching their 4/5 year warranty. The 44 cameras 

were bought in 2007 when the large purchase of vehicles was made. The 28 new cameras will 

cost $126,000 and the warranty for the 44 cameras is $39,600. 


X 

N/A 

Yes 

City Plan/Council 

Priority: 

Strategic Priorities: Objective 2 - use a 

variety of funding sources for operational and 

capital needs 


A portion of the cost of this equipment is funded in the Vehicle Replacement Fund ($7,072). The 

remaining cost of $266,369 will come from the Police Department's General Fund FY 2010-11 

Adopted Budget. The total cost for GT Distributors is $107,840.58 and $165,600 for Caban. 

Sufficient funds are available in the adopted budget for this purchase. 


N/A 


Approval of the purchase of accessories for police vehicles from GT distributors and police video 

system from Caban through the Buyboard cooperative. 

Page I of I

LL 

~.)

I 

I 

I 

(J. Cityof 

·' 

"- ~ 

New Braunfels 



Agenda Item No. 3- c. 

Presenter/Contact -Mary Quinones 

(830) 221-4100- reverett@nbtexas.org 

SUBJECT: Approval of an interlocal agreement with the City of Fort Worth, Texas in accordance 

with Texas Government Code Chapter 791, Texas lnterlocal Cooperation Act, initially for credit 

card processing services. 


In accordance with Texas Government Code Chapter 791, "Texas lnterlocal Cooperation Act", 

this item requests approval for the City Manager to enter into an interlocal agreement with the 

City of Fort Worth. The City of New Braunfels entered into a similar agreement with Tarrant 

County and Ector County for various contracts. 

The initial use of the interlocal agreement with the City of Fort Worth is for competitively bid and 

established pricing for credit card processing services with JP Morgan Chase. These credit card 

services will provide a cost-effective method for City employees to use credit cards for their small 

) dollar and on-line purchases. 

This lnterlocal agreement has been reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. 


N/A 

Strategic Priorities: Objective 2- use a 

X Yes City Plan/Council Priority: variety of funding sources for operational and 

capital needs 


The purchases made with the credit cards are funded in each department's adopted budget. 


N/A 

STAFF RECOMMENDATION·: 

Approval of an interlocal agreement with the City of Fort Worth, Texas in accordance with Texas 

Government Code Chapter 791, Texas lnterlocal Cooperation Act. 

Page 1 of 1

'., City of 

~ ... New Braunfels 

L.J 


January 1 0, 2011 

Agenda Item No. 3- 7J 

Presenter/Contact -Mary Quinones 

(830) 221-4100- mquinones@nbtexas.org 

SUBJECT: Approval of the purchase of supplies for City-wide use from Office Depot through the 

Texas Cooperative Purchasing Network (TCPN) contract. 


The City has used a contract with Office Depot since 2006. This contract provides employees 

with the ability to order supplies on-line or at the local Office Depot store. This has proven to be 

a cost and time saving approach to buying supplies. 

Office Depot also provides a rebate based on volume purchasing. 

$1,000 rebate per year. 

The City has averaged a 


N/A 

Strategic Priorities: Objective 2 - use a 

X Yes City Plan/Council Priority: variety of funding sources for operational and 

capital needs 


The money spent using this interlocal is budgeted by each department in the FY2010-11 Adopted 

Budget. 


N/A 


Approval of the purchase of supplies for City-wide use from Office Depot through the Texas 

Cooperative Purchasing Network (TCPN) contract. 


L. r 

!" _, City of · 



JANUARY 1 0, 2011 

Agenda Item No. 3- £. 

Presenter/Contact- Shannon Mattingly, Planning Director 

(830) 221 s4055 - smattingly@nbtexas.org 

SUBJECT: Approval of the second and final reading of an ordinance abandoning 0.379 

acres of public right-of-way, known as Jean Avenue and Fritz Koepp Street, 

located near the northeast terminus of McGar Street. 

APPLICANT: 

OWNER: 

Gary Henry, registered agent for Liberty Partnership, Ltd. 

381 E. Austin 

New Braunfels, TX 78130 

City of New Braunfels 

424 S. Castell Avenue 


) 


City Council unanimously approved the first reading of the ordinance on 


The subject property is approximately 275 linear feet of right-of-way (0.379 acres) 

located southeast of McGar Street. It was dedicated with the McGar Subdivision plat 

but the street was never constructed. 

The applicant owns 601 and 603 Jean Avenue (Lots 4 and 5 McGar Subdivision). Both 

lots are currently vacant with no paved access. The applicant intends to replat the 

abandoned right-of-way with Lots 4 and 5 to create a single residential lot. The owners 

of the adjacent lots, the Henry tract owned by Robert Henry and Gary Henry and Lot 6 

owned by Timothy Hooker, have consented to the abandonment but have chosen not to 

take their proportionate share of land if the sale is approved. 

New Braunfels Fire and Police Departments have reviewed the request and have no 

objection. The City Engineer has stated that future development on the subject 

property cannot obstruct drainage from an existing drainage easement that runs 

between 604 and 608 Gloria Avenue toward Jean Avenue. If the abandonment is 

approved, this drainage will need to be accounted for on the subdivision plat when the 

property is replatted. 

New Braunfels Utilities will require a 20 foot wide utility easement along the front edge 

of the new lot adjacent to McGar Street when the property is replatted. 

A report was submitted by an independent appraiser indicating an estimated market 

value of $20,000 for the property. Connie Real, the City's Real Estate Manager, 

concurs with this appraisal. 

Page 1 of2

LO 

General Information: 

Case Number: 

Size: 

Surrounding Zoning 

and Land Use: 

Comprehensive Plan/ Future 

Land Use Designation: 

lmprovement(s): 

PZ 10-30 

0.379 acres 

North- "R-2" Single and Two Family District I Vacant 

South - "R-2" Single and Two Family District I 

Residential 

East- "R-2" Single and Two Family District I Large lot 

residential 

West - Across McGar Street "R-2" Single and Two 

Family District I Residential 

Low Density Residential 

None 

NOTIFICATION: 

NIA 



Priority: 

I nla 


Gain of $20,000 from sale of property; addition of 0.379 acres to tax base. 

) 


The Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 9, 2010, and 

recommended approval of the request with Staff's recommended conditions by a vote 

of 8-0-0. 


Staff recommends approval of the request with the following conditions: 

1. The property is replatted prior to development or within two years, whichever occurs 

first; and 

2. A 20-foot utility easement is provided across the front of the property adjacent to 

McGar Street, as requested by NBU. 

ATTACHMENTS: 

1. Application 

2. Zoning Map 

3. Aerial Map 

4. Survey 

5. Photograph 

6. Sec. 118-56. Closure, Abandonment, and Sale of Public Right-of-Way 

7. Excerpt from the Planning Commission Minutes of November 9, 2010. 

) 

Y:\CCagenda\Abandonments\Jean Ave 2nd 1-1 0-11.doc 


-~ 

~-_,City of 

~ ... Nevv Braunfels 

"" 

APPLICATION FOR CLOSURE/ABANDONMENT 

OF STREETS, ALLEYS OR PUBLIC WAYS 

Planning and Community Development 

424 S. Castell A venue, New Braunfels TX 78130 

Phone: (830) 221-4050 Fax: (830) 608-2109 

1. APPLICANT: ~L;...L.l...lt..

July 26, 2010 

We, the abutting property owners of the Jean Ave tract, do not object to the abandonment 

request by Liberty Partnership, Ltd. of the Jean Avenue tract that is east ofMcGar St.., 

New Braunfels, and join in that request. We do not desire to participate in the 

subdivision of the abandoned tract. 

91/~ 

aaryHenry 

) 

)

600 

(. 

1- 

Legend 

~ 

-i 

)> 

0 

:I: 

3: 

m 

z 

-i 

N 

ZONING 

DR-2 

-M-1 

Subject Property 

PZ10-30 

Liberty Partnership, Ltd. 

Jean Avenue Abandonment 

0 75 150 Feet 

I II I I I I I I 

October 29, 2009

-·-~-·--- ----·- ---- 

" f\ 

~ 

-1 

)> 

0 

:I: 

3!: 

m 

z 

-1 

w 

/ ',...._...., 

PZ10-30 

Liberty Partnership, Ltd. 

Jean Avenue Abandonment 

-_/' 

J) 

October 29, 2009

EXHIBIT PLAT 

TRACT 1, BEING A 0.337 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, ALL BEING OUT OF JEAN AVE., 

ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF MCGAR ADDITION TO THE CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS, 

RECORDED IN VOL. 109, PG. 158, DEED RECORDS, COMAL COUNTY, TEXAS. 

TRACT 2, BEING A 0.042 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, ALL BEING 

OUT OF FRITZ KOEPP ST., ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF 

MCGAR ADDITION TO THE CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS, RECORDED 

IN VOL. 109, PG. 158, DEED RECORDS, COMAL COUNTY, TEXAS. 

/ 

/ 

LEGEND: 

0 = SET 1 /2• IRON PIN WllH 

A PLASTIC CAP STAMPED 

•Ht.1T PROP. COR: 

e = FND 1 /2• IRON PIN 

R.O.W. = RIGHT-OF-WAY 

( ) = PLAT CALLS (109/158) 

[ ] = DEED CALLS [516/588] 

I 

SCALE 1"=50' 

S39'13'04"W 

60.00' 

(539'35'00"W)(60.00') 

lHIS SURVEY WAS PREPARED 'MlHOUT lHE 

BENEAT OF A lln.E REPORT 

lHIS SURVEYOR HAS NOT CONDUCTED A lln.E 

:! SEARCH TO DEPICT 01HER MATTERS OF' RECORD, 

"~ SUCH AS EASEMENTS, SElBACKS. RESlRICllONS 

OR 01HER ENCUMBRANCES lHAT MA 'f AFFECT 

lHIS PROPERTY 

j 

~ REFERENCE METES AND BOUNDS OF' lHIS 0.379 

~ ACRE lRACT PREPARED lHIS SAME DATE 

HENRY 

20.00 AC. 

986/929 

!H~T 

~ ENGINEERING& SURVEYING 

2 HOLLMIG • MOELLER •THORNHILL 

STATE OF TEXAS 

COUNTY OF COMAL 

THIS SURVEY IS CER11F1ED TO: 

GARY HENRY 

410 N. SEGUIN AVE. 

NEW BRAUNFELS, 

TEXAS, 78130 

www.HMTNB.com 

PH: (830)625-8555 

FAX: (830)625-8556 

SURVEYED ON lHE GROUND: 

lHIS 31ST DAY OF AUGUST 2010 

:, m~1/ Zdw{/( 

REGIS1ERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR NO. 61n 

ZZZ028.201 

ATTACHMENT 4

ATTACHMENT 5

JJ 

Platting Ordinance effective 9/27/06 

Sec.118-56. Closure, abandonment, and sale of public right-of-way. 

a. Procedures. All persons desiring to have the City Council exercise its powers under Article X, 

Section 10.05, Home Rule Charter, regarding the abandonment or closing of public streets, 

alleys, or other public ways, shall file their request in writing with the Planning Director, in writing, 

directed to the Planning Commission. Such request shall contain a legal description, including 

metes and bounds, of the street, alley or public way as well as a plan or survey showing the 

street, alley or public way and the surrounding property within 400 feet therefrom. If the 

property(s) abutting the street, alley or public way is under separate ownership, the applicant shall 

provide with such request, together with the last known address of all such owners joining in the 

request and a copy of the deed of said property. Unless all owners of abutting property(s) join in 

the request, a statement shall be attached giving reason for nonparticipation by those who have 

not signed the request. The Planning Commission shall forwards its recommendations to the City 

Council. 

b. Fee. Each request shall be accompanied by the payment of a nonrefundable application fee in 

the amount of $150.00 to cover the expense of administrative processing, notification, and legal 

publication incurred by the City. 

c. Sale or exchange. The City may sell or exchange the public street, alley, or other public way to be 

abandoned either to: 

1. abutting property owners in the same subdivision, if the land had been subdivided; or 

2. abutting property owners in proportion to their abutting ownership, provided that the 

apportionment among such abutting owners of the land to be sold or exchanged shall be 

made in an equitable manner. 

However, nothing in this section obligates the City to complete a proposed sale or exchange. 

) 

d. 

e. 

f. 

g. 

Appraisal. The sale or exchange price of tlie public street, alley, or other public way to be 

abandoned shall be the fair market value of the land, which price shall be conclusively determined 

by an appraisal obtained by the City. The applicant shall reimburse the City for the cost of the 

appraisal prior to consideration by the Planning Commission. To affect the sale or exchange, the 

City Council shall adopt an ordinance authorizing the Mayor or City Manager to execute the 

conveyance. 

Land Exchange. Any land acquired by the City in exchange for any portion of the public street, 

alley or other public way to be abandoned shall also be appraised at fair market value and shall 

be devoted to use for streets, rights-of-way or other similar public purposes after the exchange is 

completed. An exchange within the meaning of this Section may be accomplished by 

simultaneous dedication of other street, alley or public right-of-way designed to provide traffic 

circulation meeting the requirements of the City's Thoroughfare Master Plan or other street plan 

acceptable to the City. The City may also accept in exchange other land or easements, such as 

park land and drainage easements. 

Fund established. All payments received by the City pursuant to this section, other than 

administrative fees and expenses, shall be paid into a fund which is hereby established as the 

"street trust account" to be used for land acquisitions and improvements related to street projects 

in the City. 

Updating plat records. Upon the abandonment, closure or alteration of any public street, under 

the terms of this Section, the applicant shall be required to plat or replat the affected properties so 

that the plat records shall accurately reflect tne revised subdivision of the property. 

Y:\Subdivision Ordinance\Chapter 118 - final.doc 

ATTACHMENT 6

EXCERPT FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 9, 2010 

PUBLIC HEARINGS 

Case PZ10-30: The proposed abandonment and sale of 0.379 acres of public right-of-way, known 

as Jean Avenue and Fritz Koepp Street, located near the northeast terminus of McGar Street. 

(Liberty Partnership, Ltd.) 

Ms. Mullins briefed the Commission on the history of the property, stating that it was 275 feet of right-ofway 

that was dedicated with the McGar Subdivision plat but the street was never constructed. She 

explained that the applicant intended to replat the abandoned right-of-way to create a single residential lot 

and that the adjacent owners have consented to the abandonment but have not chosen to take their 

proportionate share of land should the sale be approved. Ms. Mullins stated that the Fire and Police 

Departments had no objection with the request and that the City Engineer pointed out that future 

development on the subject property cannot obstruct drainage from an existing drainage easement that 

runs between 604 and 608 Gloria Avenue toward Jean Avenue. She explained that if the abandonment is 

approved, this drainage will need to be accounted for when the property is replatted and that New 

Braunfels Utilities will require a 20 foot wide utility easement along the front edge of the new lot. Ms. 

Mullins stated that an independent appraiser indicated the property has an estimated market value of 

$20,000 which the City's Real Estate Manager concurs with. She concluded by stating that staff 

recommended approval of the proposed abandonment and sale of public right-of-way with two conditions, 

that the property will be replatted within 24 months or at the time of development, whichever comes first, 

and that the utility easements are provided as requested by New Braunfels Utilities. 

Chair Casteel asked if the applicant would like to add to what Staff had presented. The applicant's 

representative stated that they were available to answer questions. 

Motion by Commissioner Elrod, seconded by Commissioner Perez, that Case PZ10-30 be forwarded to 

City Council with a recommendation to approve and subject to staffs conditions. The motion carried 

unanimously. (8-0-0) 

J 

) 

ATTACHMENT 7

Jl 

ORDINANCE NO. 2011 -__ 

AN ORDINANCE ABANDONING 0.379 ACRES OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY, KNOWN AS 

JEAN AVENUE AND FRITZ KOEPP STREET, LOCATED NEAR THE NORTHEAST 

TERMINUS OF MCGAR STREET, ACCORDING TO THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 

253, SECTION 253.001 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE; REPEALING ALL 

ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; CONTAINING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND DECLARING AN 

EFFECTIVE DATE 

WHEREAS, the City of New Braunfels, Texas, has street rights to a 0.379 acre tract of land, more or 

less, being public street right-of-way known as Jean Avenue and Fritz Koepp Street, located near the 

northeast terminus of McGar Street, and said street right-of-way being in the City of New Braunfels, Texas; 

and 

WHEREAS, the City of New Braunfels, having received a request from Liberty Partnership, Ltd. 

petitioning the City of New Braunfels to consider the abandonment of said street right-of-way; and 

WHEREAS, after determining that there is no need for the City of New Braunfels or any other 

surrounding property owners to retain the street right-of-way, it is the decision of the City Council ofthe City of 

New Braunfels that action be taken to release same to Liberty Partnership, Ltd. in the proper and legal 

manner; and 

WHEREAS, there will be a need to retain easements for utility providers, and a 20-foot easement 

across the front of the property adjacent to McGar Street will be retained in the Deed Without Warranty and 

shown on a replat of the property under the ownership of said owners; and 

WHEREAS, Thomas D. Shirley has been appointed as the Appraiser to appraise the value of the 

interests of the City of New Braunfels in said property, the interest being in only the rights to the right-of-way 

and not to the fee simple title of the land; and 

WHEREAS, the said appraiser has determined that the fair market value of the rights to the land is 

TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS and NO CENTS ($20,000.00), and thus by making the sale of the land to 

the abutting property owners, the City of New Braunfels will be complying with all sections of said Chapter 253, 

Section 253.001, and that the sale of said land in this particular instance has been determined by a fair 

appraisal and is conclusive of the fair market value thereof; now , therefore: 

) 

1

.:JO 

BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS 

SECTION 1 

That the City of New Braunfels, acting by and through its City Manager shall execute a Deed Without 

Warranty to Liberty Partnership, Ltd., conveying all of its right, title and interest in and to the public right-of-way 

and all rights in and to a 0.379 acre tract of land, more or less, being public street right-of-way known as Jean 

Avenue and Fritz Koepp Street, located near the northeast terminus of McGar Street, and said street right-ofway 

being in the City of New Braunfels, Texas. A survey of the property to be conveyed is attached marked 

Exhibit "A". If said Deed Without Warranty is not executed within one hundred and twenty (120) days of the 

second and final reading of this ordinance, this ordinance shall become null and void and a new application for 

abandonment shall be required. 

SECTION 2 

That the property is replatted prior to development or within two years, whichever occurs first, and that 

a 20-foot utility easement across the front of the property adjacent to McGar Street be provided as requested 

by New Braunfels Utilities. 

SECTION 3 

That all provisions of the Code of Ordinances of the City of New Braunfels not herein amended or 

repealed shall remain in full force and effect. 

SECTION4 

That all other ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed to the extent 

that they are in conflict. 

SECTION 5 

That if any provisions of this ordinance shall be held void or unconstitutional, it is hereby provided that 

all other parts of the same which are not held void or unconstitutional shall remain in full force and effect. 

SECTION 6 

THIS ordinance will take effect upon the second and final reading of same. 

2

PASSED AND APPROVED: First Reading this the 13th day of December, 2010. 

PASSED AND APPROVED: Second and Final Reading this the 10th day of January, 2011. 

CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS 

ATTEST: 

R. BRUCE BOYER, Mayor 

ANN SMITH, Interim City Secretary 

APPROVED AS TO FORM: 

) 

ALAN C. WAYLAND, City Attorney 

) 

Y:\Ordinances\Abandonments\Jean Ave 201 O.ord.doc 

3

EXHIBIT PLAT 

TRACT 1, BEING A 0.337 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, ALL BEING OUT OF JEAN AVE., 

ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF MCGAR ADDITION TO THE CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS, 

RECORDED IN VOL. 109, PG. 158, DEED RECORDS, COMAL COUNTY, TEXAS. 

TRACT 2, BEING A 0.042 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, ALL BEING 

OUT OF FRITZ KOEPP ST., ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF 

MCGAR ADDITION TO THE CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS, RECORDED 

IN VOL. 109, PG. 158, DEED RECORDS, COMAL COUNTY, TEXAS. 

/ 

/ 

HENRY 

15.077 AC. 

516/588 

LEGENP: 

0 = SET 1/2• IRON PIN WITH 

A PLASTIC CAP STAMPED 

•HMT PROP. COR." 

e = FND 1 /2• IRON PIN 

R.O.W. = RIGHT-OF-WAY 

( ) = PLAT CALLS (109/158) 

[ ] = DEED CALLS [516/588] 

I 

) 

SCALE 1"=50' 

(S.39'.35'00"W)(60.00') 

THIS SURVEY WAS PREPARED WITHOUT THE 

BENEFIT OF A TilLE REPORT 

THIS SURVEYOR HAS NOT CONDUCTED A 11TLE 

SEARCH TO DEPICT OTHER MATTERS OF RECORD, 

SUCH AS EASEMENTS, SETBACKS, RESTRICTIONS 

OR OTHER ENCUMBRANCES THAT MAY AFFECT 

THIS PROPERTY 

REFERENCE METES AND BOUNDS OF THIS 0.379 

ACRE TRACT PREPARED THIS SAME DATE 

HENRY 

20.00 AC. 

986/929 

Ht!lT 

ENQINEERING & 

SURVEYINQ 

HOLLMIG • MOELLER •THORNHILL 

410 N. SEGUIN AVE. 

NEW BRAUNFELS, 

TEXAS, 78130 

www.HMTNB.com 

PH: (830)625-8555 

FAX: (830)625-8556 



SURVEYED ON THE GROUND: 

THIS 31ST DAY OF AUGUST 2010 

THIS SURVEY IS CERTIFIED TO: 

GARY HENRY 

17 I ~ /~1/ / 

ll!OR 1HORNAILL 

REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR NO. 6177 

ZZZ028.201 

) 

EXHIBIT "A"

P"'_, City of 


"-q 


JANUARY 10, 2011 

.... .L 

Agenda Item No. .3-P 

Presenter I Contact- Shannon Mattingly, Planning Director 

(830) 221-4055 - smattingly@nbtexas.org 

SuBJECT: Approval of the second and final reading of an ordinance rezoning 1.977 

acres located at 1720 Gruene Road, from "R-2" Single and Two-Family 

District to "C-1A" Neighborhood Business District. 

OWNER/APPLICANT: Charles W. Reger 

P.O. Box 310979 

New Braunfels, TX 78131-0979 




) 

The subject property is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Gruene 

Road and Rock Street, adjacent to the Union Pacific Rail Road track. There are 

currently two buildings located on the property; a tin barn and a brick, wood and metal 

storage building. The property owner intends to keep the tin barn. A mobile home was 

recently removed from the property. 

The rear of the property abuts the City Limits and the Union Pacific Rail Road track. On 

the other side of the railroad track, outside the City Limits, is a 30-plus acre agricultural 

property with a single-family residence. The subject property faces Gruene Road and 

another 30-plus acre agricultural tract of land is located across Gruene Road. The side 

lot line of the subject property abuts a 3.22 acre property that has an SUP to allow two 

structures to be used for short term rental or occupancy and a third structure to be used 

as a personal residence in the "R-3L" Residential Low Density District. 

The applicant's intended use of the land is a restaurant with an outside venue for live 

music. The applicant originally requested a zone change to "C-1 B" General Business 

District to accommodate the proposed use of the property. Restaurants are allowed in 

the "C-1A" Neighborhood Business District, which is a less intensive zoning district, but 

an outdoor entertainment venue could only be allowed in the C-1 B District or through 

the approval of a Special Use Permit (SUP). The Planning Commission conducted a 

public hearing November 9, 2010. At the meeting the applicant stated he did not object 

to Staff's recommendation of pursuing the C-1A District instead of the C-1B, 

understanding he would need to obtain an SUP in the future if he wanted to have 

outdoor music. Planning Commission voted to recommend C-1A instead of C-1 B to 

City Council. City Council amended the request and approved the first reading as C- 

1A. Mr. Reger will need to submit an application for a Special Use Permit if he decides 

to move forward with his plan to provide outdoor music entertainment. 


4L 

GENERAL INFORMATION: 

Case#: 

Size: 


And Land Use: 

PZ 10-43 

1.977 acres 

North - "R-3L" Multifamily Low Density with an SUP to 

allow two dwelling units for short term occupancy and a 

single-family dwelling for personal residency I Overnight 

rental and single-family residence 

South- "C-1" Local Business District (across Gruene Road I 

Vacant and Agricultural 

East- "R-2" Two-Family Residential District (across Gruene 

Road) I Vacant and Agricultural 

West- Outside City Limits (across railroad tracks) I Single 

Family Residential and Agricultural 




Commercial 

Two out buildings 

NOTIFICATION: 

Public hearing notices were sent to three property owners located within 200 feet. No 

responses were received in favor and one response in objection was received from #2. 

This property owner was not necessarily opposed to the proposed use, but had 

concerns that the property was too close to the railroad track in case of derailment. 

Property owner #2 constitutes 27% of the notification area; therefore, a super majority ) 

vote will be required by Council for the zone change request to pass. 


Yes 


Priority: 

2006 Comprehensive Plan 

Pros and Cons Based 

on Policies Plan 

Pros: 

Goal 11 Industrial and commercial development 

should be planned and designed to avoid truck 

access through residential neighborhoods. The 

property is located on Gruene Road, a collector 

that currently carries a great deal of commercial 

traffic to and from Gruene. 

Cons: 

Goal 1A Evaluate proposed zone changes to 

maintain land use compatibility, as well as the 

integration of mixed land uses as a component of 

achieving better places to live. 

The C-1 B zoning will allow for more intensive 

commercial uses than is currently established in 

the area. A C-1A District would be more 

compatible with the existing uses in the vicinity of ) 

Loop 337 and Gruene. " 



N/A 


The Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 9, 

unanimously recommended approval of the zone change to C-1A, (8-0-0). 

2010 and 


Staff does not recommend approval of a zone change to C-1 B but does support a 

rezoning classification to a C-1A District. 

ATTACHMENTS: 


2. Zoning Map 

3. Existing Land Use Map 

4. Future Land Use Map 

5. Aerial Map 

6. Notification Map 

7. Survey 

8. Property Photos 

9. Sec. 3.4-13 "C-1 B General Business District" 

10. Sec. 3.4-12 "C-1A Neighborhood Business District" 

11. Excerpt from Planning Commission Minutes of September 7, 2010. 

12. Ordinance 

U:\Pianning\CCagenda\ZoneChgs&SUP\2010 Cases\Reger 1720 Gruene C-1A 2nd.doc 


~ 

);! 

0 

:I: 

s:: 

m 

z 

-1 

N 

E:ZJsubject 

1::~ City Limits 

--+- Railroads 

ZONING DISTRICTS 

DISTRICT 

-c-1 

-c-1A 

-c-18 

-C-2 -C-3 -C-4 

CJPo -M-1 

-C-48 

-C-4A 

c:JR-1 

CJR-1A6.6 

CJR-2 

CJR-3 

liiiiJ R-3L 

c:JZHA 

-M-UA 

c:JZH 

PZ10-43 

1720 Gruene Rd. 

1 1-2 to C-1A 

' 

~ 

J 

0 0.05 0.1 Miles 

I 1 1 

,_Jrle

EZJsubject 

t:~ Clty Limits 

--+- Railroads 

0 Residential Low Density 

-Commercial 

~ 

~ 

0 

X 

35: 

m 

z 

~ 

w 

- Industrial 

-School 

-Government 

-Open Space 

~Drainage 

PZ10-43 


R-2 to C-1A 

W*E 

s 

Map Created On 1012· 

0 0.05 0.1 Mile 

i I I 

Scale

EZ::J. Subject 

t.::J City Limits 

-1--- Railroads 

-commercial 

~Drainage 

-Mixed Use 

:!:i 

):! 

(") 

:I: 

m 

- Open-ParkS 

~ Private Recreation 

CJ Residential Low Density 

CJ Residential Medium/High Density 

-Utilities 

s: ~-J . . Cityof 

PZ10-43 

~ 2:· New Braunfels 


.j::l. 

"" ,____ 1-2 to C-1A 

·..__,--" 

Map Created On 10/27/ 

0 0.05 0.1 Miles 

I 'I I 

·~-l-Jale

............ 

........... 

SUBJECT 

i i City Limits 

~ 

; 

0 

:I: 

~ r.·_, City of I 

~ ~~New Braunfels 

(JI 

PZ10-43 


R-2 to C-1A 

Map Created On 1 0/27 

0 50 100 F 

I I I 

Scale ___ -

PLANNING COMMISSION- NOVEMBER 9, 2010- 6:00PM 

New Braunfels Municipal Building, Council Chambers 

Applicant: 

Owner: 

Charles W. Reger 

Charles W. Reger 

Address/Legal Description: 1720 Gruene Rd. /1.997 acres out of the J M VERAMENDI SUR -1 A- 2 

REQUEST FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT- CASE #PZ10-43 

The circled numbers on the map correspond to the property owners listed below. All information is from the 

Comal Appraisal District Records. The property under consideration is marked as "SUBJECT". 

1. M A Anderson Real Estate LLC 

3. Magee, Pamela 

2. Noland Koepp TR et al 

SEE MAP ON REVERSE 

.) 

ATTACHMENT 6

I Notifc:at~~ R;sPonse Map I 

1656 

• 

1644 

• 1632 

• 

J ; 

- ' 

850 

• 

(.J 

1- 

83 

• 

Legend 

- Favor(O%) 

D Object (27%) 

951 

• 

______ No Response (48%) 

~SUBJECT 

c::J NotificationBuffer 

.......... 

=.. i City Limits 

....... 

~_,Cityof 

~-..New Braunfels 

PZ10-43 


R-2 to C-1A 

tE 

Map Created On 11/17/1 0

YIERAMEN1JI S:UR!vEY . NO. 1. · 

I , , , 

·1 · Al,1:STRACT NO-. 2 

·1 I COM~t . . . COUNTY , . TEXAS . 

I ·/. 

I 

·I 

I 

J 

j 

.I 

/ 

/ 

/ 

/ 

/ 

/ 

WAAB G. Hlllli'FM-«N 

·and£: 

V.OL ~~;·.:PG~ .. 3~-340 

3.22~ ·ACRES . 

';: 

'' :::: 

'/ 

/ 

A: . ' ' ' 

• I 

/ 

~ 

:X: 

!: 

m 

z 

-1 

...... 

·~- .:.-.--. .. . - -. .: . . . . -. . .. 

i~~~~!l!l~N.:.,.Wim.t

(.J 

"' 

~ 

:::t: 

3!: 

m 

z 

-1 

ClO 

r· ,Cityof 


........__~ 

PLANNING 

PZ10-043 

1720 Gruene Rd . 

R-2 to C-1A

) 

I 

I 

1.) 

z 

~ 

)

\J 

z 

:5 

c..

3.4-13. "C-.1 B" general business district. 

Purpose. The general business district is established to provide areas for a broad range of office and 

retail uses. This district should generally consist of retail nodes located along or at the intersection of 

major collectors or thoroughfares to accommodate high traffic volumes generated by general retail uses. 

The following regulations shall apply in all "C-1B" districts: 

(a) Authorized uses. Uses permitted by right shall be those set forth in the Land Use Matrix in Section 4 

of this Chapter. The allowed uses in the district, which are intended to be identical with those listed in the 

Land Use Matrix, are as follows 

( 1) Uses permitted by right 

Residential uses: 

Accessory building/structure 

Assisted living facility/retirement home 

Bed and breakfast inn 

Non-residential us·es: 

Accounting, auditing, bookkeeping, and tax 

preparations 

Adult day care (no ove~night stay) 

Adult day care (with overnight stay) 

All terrain vehicle (A TV) dealer I sales 

Ambulance service (private) 

Amphitheater 

Amusement devices/arcade (four or more 

devices) 

Amusement services or venues (indoors) 

Amusement services or venues (outdoors) 

Animal grooming shop 

Answering and message services 

Antique shop 

Appliance repair 

Armed services recruiting center 

Art dealer I gallery 

Artist or artisan's studio 

Assembly/exhibition hall or areas 

Athletic fields 

Auction sales (non-vehicle) 

Auto body repair, garages (see Sec. 5.1 0) 

Auto glass repair/tinting (see Sec. 5.1 0) 

Auto interior shop I upholstery (see Sec. 5.1 0) 

Auto leasing 

Auto muffler shop (see Sec. 5.10) 

Auto or trailer sales rooms or yards ((see Sec. 

5.11) 

Auto or truck sales rooms or yards - primarily 

new (see Sec. 5.11) 

Auto paint shop (see Sec. 5.1 0) 

Auto repair as an accessory use to retail sales 

(see Sec. 5.10) 

Auto repair garage {general) (see Sec. 5.1 0) 

Auto supply store for new and factory rebuilt 

parts 

Auto tire repair /sales (indoor) 

Community home (see definition) 

Hospice 

Automobile driving school (including defensive 

driving) 

Bakery (retail) 

Bank, savings and loan, or credit 

Barber/beauty college (barber or cosmetology 

school or college) 

Barber/beauty shop, haircutting (non-college) 

Barns and farm equipment storage (related to 

agricultural uses) 

Battery station 

Bicycle sales and/or repair 

Billiard I pool facility 

Bingo facility 

Bio-medical facilities 

Book binding 

Book store 

Bowling alley/center (see Sec. 5.12) 

Broadcast station (with tower) (see Sec. 5.6) 

Bus barns or lots 

Bus passenger stations 

Cafeteria I cafe I delicatessen 

Campers' supplies 

Car wash (self service; automated) 

Car wash, full service (detail shop) 

Carpenter, cabinet, or pattern shops 

Carpet cleaning establishments 

Caterer 

Cemetery and/or mausoleum 

Check cashing service 

Child day care/children's nursery (business) 

Church/place of religious Assembly 

Civic/conference center and facilities 

Cleaning, pressing and dyeing (non-explosive 

fluids used) 

Clinic (dental) 

Clinic (emergency care) 

Clinic (medical) 

Club (private) 

ATTACHMENT 9 

(~) 

C .. )

~( 

) 

) 

-·' 

Coffee shop 

Commercial amusement concessions and 

facilities 

Communication equipment- installation and/or 

repair 

Computer and electronic sales 

Computer repair 

Confectionery store (retail) 

Consignment shop 

Contractor's temporary on-site construction 

office (only with permit from_Building 

Official; see Sec. 5.9) 

Convenience store with gas sales 

Convenience store without gas sales 

Country club (private) 

Credit agency 

Curio shops 

Custom work shops 

Dance hall I dancing facility (see Sec. 5.12) 

Day camp 

Department store 

Drapery shop I blind shop 

Driving range 

Drug sales/pharmacy 

Electrical repair shop 

Electrical substation 

Exterminator service 

Farmers market (produce market- wholesale) 

Farms, general (crops) (see Chapter 6, 

Municipal Code and Sec. 5.8) 

Farms, general (livestock/ranch) (see Chapter 6, 

Municipal Code and Sec. 5.8) 

Feed and grain store 

Filling station (gasoline tanks must be below the 

ground) 

Florist 

Food or grocery store with gasoline sales 

Food or grocery store without gasoline sales 

Fraternal organization/civic club (private club) 

Frozen food storage for individual or family use 

Funeral home/mortuary 

Furniture sales (indoor) 

Garden shops and greenhouses 

Golf course (public or private) 

Golf course (miniature) 

Governmental building or use (state/federally 

owned and operated) 

Greenhouse 

Handicraft shop 

Hardware store 

Health club (physical fitness; indoors only) 

Heavy load (farm) vehicle sales/repair (see Sec. 

5.13) 

Home repair and yard equipment retail and 

rental outlets 

Hospital, general (acute care/chronic care) 

Hospital, rehabilitation 

Hotel/motel 

Hotels/motels- extended stay (residence hotels) 

Ice delivery stations (for storage and sale of ice 

at retail only) 

Kiosk (providing a retail service) 

Laundromat and laundry pickup stations 

Laundry, commercial (w/o self serve) 

Laundry/dry cleaning (drop off/pick up) 

Laundry/washateria (self serve) 

Lawnmower sales and/or repair 

Limousine I taxi service 

Locksmith 

Maintenance/janitorial service 

Major appliance sales (indoor) 

Martial arts school 

Medical supplies and equipment 

Micro brewery (onsite manufacturing and sales) 

Mini-warehouse/self storage units with outside 

boat and RV storage 

Mini-warehouse/self storage units (no outside 

boat and RV storage permitted) 

Motion picture studio, commercial film 

Motion picture theater (indoors) 

Motion picture theater (outdoors, drive-in) 

Motorcycle dealer (primarily new I repair) 

Moving storage company 

Municipal use owned or operated by the City of 

New Braunfels, including libraries 

Museum 

Needlework shop 

Nursing/convalescent home/sanitarium 

Offices, brokerage services 

Offices, business or professional 

Offices, computer programming and data 

processing 

Offices, consulting 

Offices, engineering, architecture, surveying or 

similar 

Offices, health services 

Offices, insurance agency 

Offices, legal services - including court reporting 

Offices, medical offices 

Offices, real estate 

Offices, security/commodity brokers, dealers, 

exchanges and financial services 

Park and/or playground (public or private) 

Parking lots (for passenger car only) (not as 

incidental to the main use) 

Parking structure I public garage 

Pawn shop 

Personal watercraft sales (primarily new I repair) 

Pet shop I supplies (10,000 sq. ft. or less) 

Pet store (more than 10,000 sq. ft.) 

Photographic printing/duplicating/copy shop or 

printing shop 


Photographic studio (no sale of cameras or 

supplies) 

Photographic supply 

Plant nursery 

Plant nursery (retail sales I outdoor storage) 

Plumbing shop 

Portable building sales 

Public recreation/services building for public 

park/playground areas 

Publishing/printing company (e.g., newspaper) 

Quick lube/oil change/minor Inspection 

Radio/television shop, electronics, computer 

repair 

Recreation buildings (private) 

Recreation buildings (public) 

Recycling kiosk 

Refreshment/beverage stand 

Research lab (non-hazardous) 

Restaurant 

Restaurant/prepared food sales 

Retail store and shopping center (more than 

50,000 sq. ft. bldg.) 

Retail store and shopping center without drive 

thru service (50,000 sq. ft. bldg. or more) 

Retirement home/home for the aged 

RVpark 

RV/travel trailer sales 

School, K-12 (public or private) 

School, vocational (business/commercial trade) 

Security monitoring company 

Security systems installation company (with 

outside storage) 

Shoe repair shops 

Shooting gallery- indoor (see Sec. 5.12) 

Shopping center 

Sign manufacturing/painting plant 

Specialty shops in support of project guests and 

tourists 

Storage - exterior storage for boats and RVs 

Studio for radio or television (without tower) 

Studios (art, dance, music, drama, reducing, 

photo, interior decorating, etc.) 

Tailor shop 

Tattoo or body piercing studio 

Taxidermist 

Telemarketing agency 

Telephone exchange buildings (office only) 

Tennis court (commercial) 

Theater (non-motion picture; live drama) 

Tire sales (outdoors) 

Tool rental 

Tourist court 

Travel agency 

Truck garden (no retail sales) 

University or college (public or private) 

Upholstery shop (non-auto) 

Used or second hand merchandise/furniture 

store 

Vacuum cleaner sales and repair 

Veterinary hospital (no outside animal runs or 

kennels) 

Video rental/ sales 

Waterfront amusement facilities- swimming I 

wading pools I bathhouses 

Water storage (surface, underground or 

overhead), water wells and pumping 

stations that are part of a public or 

municipal system 

Wholesale sales offices and sample rooms 

Woodworking shop (ornamental) 

) 

Any comparable business or use not included in or excluded from any other district described herein. 

(2) Conflict. In the event of conflict between the uses listed in the Land Use Matrix and those 

listed in subsection (1), the uses listed in this subsection shall be deemed those authorized in 

the district. 

(b) Maximum height, minimum area and setback requirements: 

(1) Height. 75 feet. 

(2) Front building setback. 25 feet. 

(3) Side building setback. No side building setback is required except that where a side line of 

a lot in this district abuts upon the side line of a lot in any residential zone, a side building 

setback of not less than six feet shall be provided. 

(4) Comer lots. Buildings on corner lots shall have 15-foot side building setbacks adjacent to 

the street where the rear lot lines of the corner lots coincide with the rear lot lines of the 

adjacent lots. Buildings on corner lots shall have 25-foot side building setbacks adjacent 

to the street where the rear lines of the corner lots coincide with the side lot lines of the 

) 


adjacent lots. Where a minimum 25-foot setback is required, a canopy at least eight feet 

in height, attached to the main building, may be built within 15 feet of the property line so 

long as such construction will not obstruct the vision of vehicular or pedestrian traffic. 

Garage setback. Where a driveway is located in front of a garage, the garage shall be 

setback 20 feet from the right-of-way or the driveway to the garage shall be at least 20 

feet long to provide enough space for a vehicle to pa~k without overhanging into the rightof-way, 

if the garage door is closed. (See illustration 8 in Sec. 5.1-1) 

(5) Residential setback. Effective November 8, 2006, where any building abuts a one or two 

family use or zoning district, the setback from the one or two family property line shall be 

at least 20 feet plus one foot for each foot of building height over 20 feet. 

(6) Rear building setback. 20 feet. 

(7) Width of lot. 60 feet. 

(8) Lot depth. 100 feet. 

(9) Parking. See Section 5.1 for permitted uses' parking. 

) 


Zoning Ordinance- effective Nov. 8, 2006 

C-1A 

3.4-12. "C-1A" neighborhood business district. 

Purpose. This district is established to provide office, business and professional services, and light retail } 

and commercial uses to serve adjacent neighborhoods. The uses found in the neighborhood business 

district are generally clustered at major intersections of collector streets near the perimeters of residential 

neighborhoods. No major shopping or office centers are included in this district. No use that is noxious or 

offensive by reason of vibration, noise, odor, dust, smoke or gas shall be included in this district. The 

following regulations shall apply in all "C-1A" districts: 

{a) Authorized uses. Uses permitted by right shall be those set forth in the Land Use Matrix in Section 4 



( 1) Uses permitted by right 




Bed and breakfast inn (see Sec. 5.5) 


Hospice 

Non-residential uses: 

Accounting, auditing, bookkeeping, and tax preparations 

Adult day care (no overnight stay) 

Adult day care (with overnight stay) 

Amusement devices/arcade (four or more devices) 

Animal grooming shop 

Answering and message services 

Antique shop 

Appliance repair 

Armed services recruiting center 

Art dealer I gallery 

Artist or artisan's studio 

Auto leasing 

Auto supply store for new and factory rebuilt parts 

Auto tire repair /sales (indoor) 

Bakery (retail) 

Bank, savings and loan, or credit union 

Barber/beauty shop, haircutting (non-college) 

Barns and farm equipment storage (related to agricultural uses) 

Battery station 

Bicycle sales and/or repair 

Bingo facility 

Book binding 

Book store 

Cafeteria I cafe I delicatessen 

Campers' supplies 

Caterer 


Check cashing service 

Child day care/children's nursery (business) 

Church/place of religious assembly 

Cleaning, pressing and dyeing (non-explosive fluids used) 

Clinic (dental) 

Clinic (emergency care) 

) 

) 

ATTACHMENT10

D.L 


C-1A 

) 

) 

Clinic (medical) 

Coffee shop 

Communication equipment - installation and/or repair 

Computer and electronic sales 

Computer repair 

Confectionery store (retail) 

Consignment shop 

Contractor's temporary on-site construction office (only with permit from Building 


Convenience store without gas sales 

Credit agency 

Curio shops 

Custom work shops 

Department store 

Drapery shop I blind shop 

Drug sales/pharmacy 

Electrical repair shop 


Farms, general (crops) (see Chapter 6, Municipal Code and Sec. 5.8) 

Farms, general (livestock/ranch) (see Chapter 6, Municipal Code and Sec. 5.8) 

Florist 

Food or grocery store without gasoline sales (50,000 sq. ft. or less) 

Frozen food storage for individual or family use 

Garden shops and greenhouses 

Golf course (public or private) 

Governmental building or use (state/federally owned and operated) 

Greenhouse (commercial) 

Handicraft shop 

Hardware store 

Health club (physical fitness; indoors only) 

Heating and air-conditioning sales I services 


Kiosk (providing a retail service) 

Laundromat and laundry pickup stations 

Laundry/dry cleaning (drop off/pick up) 

Laundry/washeteria (self serve) 

Lawnmower sales and/or repair 

Locksmith 

Martial arts school 

Municipal use owned or operated by the city of New Braunfels, including libraries 

Museum 

Needlework shop 

Nursing/convalescent home/sanitarium 

Offices, brokerage services 

Offices, business or professional 

Offices, computer programming and data processing 

Offices, consulting 

Offices, engineering, architecture, surveying or similar 

Offices, health services 

Offices, insurance agency 

Offices, legal services - including court reporting 

Offices, medical offices 

Offices, real estate 

Offices, security/commodity brokers, dealers, exchanges and financial services 

Park and/or playground (private) 

Park and/or playground (public)

Z 


C-1A 

Parking lots (for passenger car only) (not as incidental to the main use) 

Parking structure I public garage ~ 

Pawn shop } 

Pet shop I supplies (10,000 sq. ft. or less) 

Photographic printing/duplicating/copy shop or printing shop 

Photographic studio (no sale of cameras or supplies) 

Photographic supply 

Plant nursery 

Plant nursery (retail sales I outdoor storage) 

Public recreation/services building for public park/playground areas 

Quick lube/oil change/minor inspection 

Radio/television shop, electronics, computer repair 



Recycling kiosk 

Refreshment/beverage stand 

Restaurant 

Restaurant/prepared food sales 

Retail store and shopping center without drive thru service (50,000 sq. ft. bldg. or 

less) 

Retirement home I home for the aged 


School, vocational (business/commercial trade) 

Security monitoring company 

Security systems installation company 

Shoe repair shops 

Shopping center 

Specialty shops in support of project guests and tourists 

Studios (art, dance, music, drama, reducing, photo, interior decorating, etc.) ) 

Tailor shop 

Telemarketing agency 

Telephone exchange buildings (office only) 

Theater (non-motion picture; live drama) 

Tool rental 

Travel agency 



Vacuum cleaner sales and repair 

Veterinary hospital (no outside animal runs or kennels) 

Video rental/ sales 

Water storage (surface, underground or overhead), water wells and pumping stations 

that are part of a public or municipal system 

Woodworking shop (ornamental) 

Any comparable business or use not included in or excluded from any other district 

described herein. 


listed in subsection (1 ), the uses listed in this subsection shall be deemed those authorized in 

the district. 


( 1) Height. 35 feet. )


C-1A 

(2) Front building setback. 25 feet. 

(3) Side building setback. No side building setback is required except that where a side line of a 

lot in this district abuts upon the side line of a lot in any residential zone, a side building setback 

of not less than six feet shall be provided. 

Residential/nonresidential garage setback. Where a driveway is located in front of a garage, the 

garage shall be setback 20 feet from the right-of-way or the driveway to the garage shall be at 

least 20 feet long to provide enough space for a vehicle to park without overhanging into the rightof-way, 


(4) Rear building setback. 20 feet. 

(5) Residential setback. Effective November 8, 2006, where any building abuts a one or two 

family use or zoning district, the setback from the one or two family property line shall be at least 

20 feet plus one foot for each foot of building height over 20 feet. 

(6) Width of lot. 60 feet. 

) 

(7) Corner lots. Buildings on corner lots shall have 15-foot side building setbacks adjacent to the 

street where the rear lot lines of the corner lots coincide with the rear lot lines of the adjacent lots. 

Buildings on corner lots shall have 25-foot side building setbacks adjacent to the street where the 

rear lines of the corner lots coincide with the side lot lines of the adjacent lots. Where a minimum 

25-foot setback is required, a canopy at least eight feet in height, attached to the main building, 

may be built within 15 feet of the property line so long as such construction will not obstruct the 

vision of vehicular or pedestrian traffic. 

(8) Lot depth. 100 feet. 

(9) Parking. See Section 5.1 for permitted uses' parking. 

(10) Size. Any building on a lot shall be 50,000 square feet or less in size. 

)



Case PZ10-43: Public Hearing and recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed 

rezoning of 1.977 acres, located at 1720 Gruene Road, from "R-2" Single and Two-Family District 

to "C-1B" General Business District. (Charles W. Reger) 

Mr. Greene explained that the subject property is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of 

Gruene Road and Rock Street and is adjacent to the Union Pacific Rail Road track. Mr. Greene said that 

there are currently three buildings located on the property; a mobile home, tin barn and a brick, wood and 

metal storage building and that the property owner intends to remove all buildings with the exception of 

the tin barn. He explained that the applicant's intended use of the land is a commercial restaurant with an 

outside platform for live music. He stated that the zoning district C-1A, a less intensive zoning district than 

what was being requested, allows restaurants but that outdoor entertainment venues are not allowed in 

the C-1A district; therefore, he said the applicant was requesting the zone change to C-18. He explained 

that a zone change to a C-18 district would not limit the use of the property to a restaurant and that the 

Future Land Use designation of the property was "Commercial". He said public hearing notices were sent 

to three property owners located within 200ft.; no responses were received in favor and one in opposition 

(#2). Mr. Greene explained that this response constituted 20% of the notification area and would require a 

% majority vote at City Council. He concluded stating that staff did not recommend approval of a zone 

change to C-1 B but could support approval of a zone change to C-1A with a Special Use Permit to allow 

an outdoor entertainment venue as that would be more compatible with existing uses in the vicinity of 

Loop 337 and Gruene. 

Chair Casteel asked if the applicant had anything to add. 

Chuck Reger, 1720 Gruene Road, stated that he was the property owner and that his plan!:i were 

consistent with the Comprehensive Plan for the area. He said that the area was not desirable for 

residential use and that he hoped his development would add to the culture of Gruene. He stated that he 

had talked to several of the property owners nearby and they all seemed supportive of the idea. 

) 

Chair Casteel asked Mr. Reger if he objected to the staff's recommendation to which he replied that he 

did not. 

Chair Casteel asked if there was anyone present who wished to speak in favor of the rezoning. No one 

spoke. 

Chair Casteel asked those opposed to the rezoning to address the Commission. No one spoke 

Motion by Commissioner Myrick, seconded by Vice Chair Elrod, to close the public hearing. The motion 

carried unanimously. (8-0-0) 

Commissioner Myrick asked if the location of the driveways would be included in the SUP. Ms. Mattingly 

said it would depend upon which type of SUP was applied for. Discussion regarding the different types of 

SUPs followed. 

Commissioner Bearden stated that he was concerned that there was no real vision over how the area will 

develop other than commercially per the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Mattingly responded saying that the 

Comprehensive Plan is a guide but staff could look at adding parameters. 

Commissioner Namken asked what the factors were in the staff's decision to recommend C-1 A rather 

than the requested C-1 B. Ms. Mattingly replied that surrounding properties were looked at as well as 

location of the subject property along Gruene Road (i.e. proximity to neighborhoods). She stressed that 

once it is zoned C-1 B there would be a lot of other uses that would be allowed to go in that location. 

) 

ATTACHMENT 11

Commissioner Bearden asked if they were just addressing the C-1 B zoning rather than the C-1 A with the 

SUP for outdoor entertainment. Ms. Mattingly replied that the SUP would have to come back before the 

Commission but that they could decide to recommend approval of the zone change to C-1A at this 

meeting; the Commission could do less just not more. 

Chair Casteel asked the City Attorney if the public hearing could be reopened after a woman in the 

audience asked if she could speak. The City Attorney stated that it could. 

Julie Crouch, 1222 Bluff Creek, stated that she was opposed to the highest commercial use of the 

property and that the area did not need other outdoor music venues. She stated that her neighborhood 

was already being forced to listen to the other music venues in the area. 

Pat McGee, address, said that she was not aware until the meeting that the property was to also be used 

as an outdoor music venue. 

Chair Casteel asked Ms. Mattingly what constituted a music venue to which Ms. Mattingly replied that any 

type of outdoor music should have a C-1 B zoning classification and there was no district which truly 

defined outdoor entertainment. Discussion followed. 

Chair Casteel asked Mr. Reger what he envisioned for his restaurant and Mr. Reger replied that he 

envisioned soft music playing in the background while people ate barbeque outside at tables; generally 

light entertainment and no loud concerts. 

Ms. Snell assured the Commission that any request for a SUP would have to come before them along 

with new notifications. 

) 

The City's noise ordinance was discussed. 

Commissioner Namken moved to approve Case PZ10-43 with staff recommendations to rezone to C-1A 

with the option to come back before the Commission with a request for an SUP for an outdoor 

entertainment venue. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Benson Perez and passed 

unanimously. (8-0-0) 

_)

ORDINANCE NO. 2011- 

AN ORDINANCE REZONING 1.977 ACRES, LOCATED AT 1720 GRUENE ROAD, FROM "R- 

2" SINGLE AND TWO FAMILY DISTRICT TO "C-1A" NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS 

DISTRICT; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; CONTAINING A SAVINGS 

CLAUSE; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of New Braunfels has complied with all requirements of 

notice of public hearing as required by the Zoning Ordinance of the City of New Braunfels; and 

WHEREAS, in keeping with the spirit and objectives of the "C-1A" Neighborhood Business District, 

the City Council has given due consideration to all components of said district; and 

WHEREAS, it is the intent of the City Council to provide harmony between existing zoning districts 

and proposed land uses; and 

WHEREAS, the rezoning is in compliance with the Future Land Use Plan; and 

WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend the Zoning Map by changing a 1.977 acre tract of land 

located at 1720 Gruene Road, from "R-2" Single and Two Family District and to "C-1A" Neighborhood 

Business District; now, therefore; 

BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS: 

SECTION 1 

THAT Sections 1.2-1 and 1.2-2, Chapter 144, of the New Braunfels Code of Ordinances and 

particularly the Zoning Map of the City of New Braunfels, are amended by changing the following described 

tract of land from "R-2" Single and Two Family District to "C-1A" Neighborhood Business District: 

"A 1.977 acre tract of land located at 1720 Gruene Road, as delineated on Exhibit 'A' and 

described in Exhibit 'B'." 

) 

SECTION 2 

THAT all provisions of the Code of Ordinances of the City of New Braunfels not herein amended or 


SECTION 3 

THAT all other ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed to the extent 


) 

1

0{ 

SECTION4 

THAT if any provisions of this ordinance shall be held void or unconstitutional, it is hereby provided 

that all other parts of the same which are not held void or unconstitutional shall remain in full force and effect 

SECTION 5 


PASSED AND APPROVED: First Reading this the 13 1 h day of December, 2010. 

PASSED AND APPROVED: Second and Final Reading this the 10 1 h day of January, 2011. 


ATTEST: 



) 



,) 

U:\Pianning\Ordinances\Zone Changes\Reger 1720 Gruene C-1A.doc 

2

I 

,. 

,."' -~' .. ........._ . "' ·J.~. ViEJit;AJtENDI S.UIWEY .NO. 1. · 

. . 

AJ;:STRACT NO. 2 

COMA:£. CO-UNTY,. TEXAS 

/. 

/ 

_,60~ ,/ 

:""'-c~· / 

;o-~ ... . ~ t-~$-"' . rl: ~~ ift .•"3~.~ 

. 

. : / .'0!5'. . 

r.· 

WljRf!l G. loll!)~ 

and YIIF.£ . 

JS 'v. · HliffMAN 

V.Ot. 2:.~;:~~R~!i-::346 

~ ~;. 

~ :' _· 

/ 

m 

>< 

::I: 

tD 

=t 

~ 

/ 

- I 

\,· 

A:. . . I . 

/ )_1 ~~·~ 

:.·;·· 

'_.1 

~~~~,fm~~WI!il.ki.£Cla .l... 

~4-;{N·rf~Qiri~:~~ :n, -~~· JSB~t(Q,-:U5EJ~~;. 

·--:. 

--.-- -.---· ----. 

~-Of.-~"' 

t:iru;w·ll~ . . 

' . . 

. 

~N!BRQ~ 

.(R~ si: wi..v·\JAf!!ES} 

-.--·- .,...._ -.-..-.-· -=---;..... 

. TO :rn~ BEST Q.f' t,I.Y· I

P.O. BOX 310483 • NEW BRAUNFELS, TX 78131-0483 • Phone: (830) 606-3913 • Fax: (830) 625-2204 

LEGAL DESCRIPTION 

OF 

1.977 acres ofland in the City ofNew Braunfels, and being out of the J. M. Veramendi Survey No.1, 

Abstract No.2, Carnal County, Texas, and being the same land conveyed by Executor's Deed from 

Mark Skinner, Independent Executor of the Estate of Albert J. (Bill) Atkins, Deceased, bearing Cause 

No. 93-PC-9827 as on file in the Probate Records ofComal County, Texas, to Jerry (Johnny) Smith, 

executed on May 13, 1993 and recorded in Volume 886, Pages 673-674 of the Official Public 

Records ofComal County, Texas, said 1.977 acres ofland being more particularly described by metes 

and bounds as follow·s: 

) 

) 

BEGINNING: 

THENCE: (1) 

THENCE: 

(2) 

(3) 

THENCE: (4) 

LOIS M. SCHULTZ 

PRESIDENT 

at a set liz" iron pin with plastic cap in the Northwest Right of Way Line of 

Gruene Road (Old Austin Road) and being the Easternmost comer of this 

parcel and the Southernmost corner of a 3.222 acre tract as recorded in 

Volume 205, Pages 339-340 ofthe Deed Records ofComal County, Texas; 

SOUTH 47 deg. OS' 00" West, (said bearing being a reference bearing for all 

bearings in this description), a distance of 522.77 feet along the Southeast 

boundary line of this parcel and the Northwest Right ofWay Line of Gruene 

Road to a set Y2" iron pin with plastic cap being the Southernmost corner of 

this parcel and being a point of curvature at the intersection of the Northwest 

Right ofWay Line of said Gruene Road with the Southeast Right of Way Line 

of the Union Pacific Railroad; 

the following courses along the Northwest boundary line of this parcel and the 

Southeast Right ofWay Line of said Union Pacific Railroad: 

261.78 feet along the arc of a curve to the left having a radius of 3 846.40 feet 

and a central angle of03 deg. 53' 58", and whose chord bears North 15 deg. 

37' 12" East, a distance of261.73 feet to a selllz" iron pin with plastic cap; 

and 

NORTH 13 deg. 38' 00" East, a distance of363.91 feet to a found bolt at a 

comer post being the Northernmost comer of this parcel and the Westernmost 

corner of said 3.222 acre tract; 

SOUTH 42 deg. 13' 03 11 

East, a distance of337.22 feet along the Northeast 

boundary line of this parcel and the Southwest boundary line of said 3.222 

acre tract to a set W' iron pin with plastic cap being the POINT OF 

BEGINNI.i~G, containing 1.977 acres ofland. 

STEPHEN E. SCHULTZ. R.P.L.:3. t'OBBlE L. HAS[RT Pi= R Pi c. 

VICE·PRESIOENT 

CHIEF E~f 

CONSULTif'!G ENGINEERS . 11 .NO U\ND SURVEYORS 

EXHIBIT "B"

(t.l 

THIS LEGAL DESCRIPTION WAS WRITTEN IN CONJUNCTION WITH A SURVEY PLAT ---1 

PREPARED IN THIS OFFICE ON 5/31/01, JOB #05-06-2001. 

) 

F :·>.05060 I \)egaldesc. wpd 

)

.L 

r--, City of 



JANUARY 1 0, 2011 

Agenda Item No. 3- G 



SUBJECT: 

Approval of the second and final reading of an ordinance amending 

Section 5.21-10(b), Non-Residential and Multifamily Design Standards 

Appeal Procedures, Chapter 144, Zoning Ordinance, establishing an 

application fee. 




) 

An ordinance establishing non-residential and multifamily design standards became 

effective in August 2007. The ordinance requires minimum design requirements such 

as articulation, exterior building materials, building elements, entrance features, roof 

treatments and landscaping for metal buildings. Section 5.21-10(b) addresses the 

appeal process for the requirements of building design criteria, but does not include an 

application fee to file an appeal to City Council. The Planning Division has processed 

nineteen appeal applications since the implementation of the ordinance three years 

ago. Application fees are used to defray City expenses associated with the review of 

requests and reduce the dependence on the City's tax base. Since the appeal 

application process is identical to the application process for a Conditional Sign Permit, 

which has an application fee of $300, staff recommends amending Section 5.21-10(b) 

to add an application fee of $300. 

NOTIFICATION: 

Public hearing notice was posted in the newspaper and on the City's website. 



Priority: 

In/a 


The application fee will defray the City's cost associated with processing the 

application. A total of $5,700 could have been collected over the past three years. 

PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: 

The Planning Commission held a 

unanimously recommended approval 

application fee, by a vote of 8-0-0. 

public hearing on November 9, 2010 and 

to amend Section 5.21-10(b), establishing an

IL 


Staff recommends approval of amending Section 5.21-10(b) of the Zoning Ordinance 

by adding an application fee for appeals to the non-residential and multifamily design 

standards. } 

ATTACHMENTS: 

1. Section 5.21-1 O(b) Ordinance Markup 

2. Excerpt from Planning Commission minutes of November 9, 2010 

3. Ordinance 

U:\Pianning\CCagenda\Ordinance Amendments\Zoning Ord Bldg Dsgn Stds App Fee 1-1 0-11.doc 

) 

··"" 


Section 5.21-10(b) Markup 

5.21-10. Appeal Procedures. 

(a) Enforcement of this ordinance may be appealed to the City Council. 

(b) 

Appeal Actions. 

{1) All appeal actions for a site plan application denied by the Planning 

Director or his/her designee shall be submitted to and reviewed by the 

City Council, if requested by the applicant. 

.{61 An appeal must be made in writing on an application form available in 

the Planning Department. shall be accompanied by an application fee of 

$300 and shall include a site plan. building elevation plan and landscape 

plan. 

{2-t.@l 

The appeal shall be scheduled for consideration of the site plan on the 

regular agenda of the Council within 30 days after the submission is 

received, or, in the case of an incomplete submission, 30 days after the 

submission is deemed complete. 

{J)ffi The Council shall review the site plan and shall recommend approval, 

approval subject to certain conditions, or disapproval of the concept plan . 

or site plan. 

t41@ 

The City Council shall determine final approval or disapproval of all site 

plan appeals. 

) 

ATTACHMENT 1



Public Hearing and recommendation to the City Council regarding an ordinance amendment to 

Section 5.21-10(b), Non-Residential and Multifamily Design Standards Appeal Procedures, Chapter 

144, Zoning Ordinance, establishing an application fee. 

Mr. Greene stated that non-residential and multifamily design standards became effective in August 2007 

and the ordinance requires minimum design requirements. He explained that Section 5.21-10(b) 

addresses the appeal process for the requirements of building design criteria and that there is no 

application fee to file an appeal to the City Council. Mr. Greene explained that the Planning Division has 

processed nineteen appeal applications since the ordinance was implemented. He continued explaining 

that the appeal application process and procedure is identical to the application process for a Conditional 

Sign Permit, for which an application fee of $300 is required. Mr. Greene concluded his presentation and 

stated, staff recommended amending Section 5.21-10(b) to add an application fee of $300 due to the time 

and cost required of staff to process the non-residential and multifamily design standard appeal 

applications. 

Commissioner Lowe asked where the amount for the fee came from to which Mr. Greene answered it was 

the same amount that was charged for the Conditional Sign Permit fee. 

Chair Casteel asked if anyone wished to speak in favor of the plat. No one spoke. 

Chair Casteel asked if there was anyone to speak in opposition. No one spoke. 

Motion made by Vice Chair Elrod and seconded by Commissioner Bearden to close the public hearing. 

The motion carried unanimously. (8-0-0) 

Motion by Commissioner Myrick, seconded by Vice Chair Elrod, to approve the amendment to Section 

5.21-10(b), Non-Residential and Multifamily Design Standards Appeal Procedures, Chapter 144, Zoning 

Ordinance, establishing an application fee. The motion carried unanimously. (8-0-0) 

) 

) 

ATTACHMENT 2


AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 144, SECTION 5.21-10(B), NEW BRAUNFELS CODE OF 

ORDINANCES REGARDING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A FEE FOR THE PROCESSING OF 

APPEALS TO THE NON-RESIDENTIAL AND MULTIFAMILY DESIGN STANDARDS; REPEALING 

ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; CONTAINING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND DECLARING AN 

EFFECTIVE DATE. 

WHEREAS, the State of Texas has enacted legislation empowering municipalities to make special 

exceptions to the terms of the zoning ordinance; and 

WHEREAS, The City Council of the City of New Braunfels, Texas is aware of the expense, time and effort 

required of staff to process an appeal to the non-residential and multifamily design standards; and 

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of New Braunfels, Texas has determined establishment of a fee is 

needed to cover the administrative cost of implementing this ordinance; now therefore, 

BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS: 

SECTION 1 

THAT Section 5.21-1 (b), Chapter 144 of the New Braunfels Code of Ordinances, City of New Braunfels, 

) Texas is hereby deleted and replaced with the following: 

(b) Appeal Procedures 

(1) All appeal actions for a site plan application denied by the Planning Director or 

his/her designee shall be submitted to and reviewed by the City Council, if requested by the applicant. 

(2) An appeal must be made in writing on an application form available in the Planning 

Department, shall be accompanied by an application fee of $300 and shall include a site plan, building 

elevation plan and landscape plan. 

(3) The appeal shall be scheduled for consideration of the site plan on the regular 

agenda of the Council within 30 days after the appeal application is received, or, in the case of an incomplete 

application, 30 days after the submission is deemed complete. 

(4) The Council shall review the site plan and shall recommend approval, approval 

subject to certain conditions, or disapproval of the concept plan or building site plan. 

) 

appeals. 

(5) The City Council shall determine final approval or disapproval of all site plan

to 

SECTION2 

THAT all provisions of the Code of Ordinances of the City of New Braunfels not herein amended or repealed 

shall remain in full force and effect. 

SECTION3 

THAT all other ordinances, or parts of ordinances, in conflict herewith are hereby repealed to the extent that 

they are in conflict. 

SECTION4 

THAT if any provisions of this ordinance shall be held void or unconstitutional, it is hereby provided that all 

other parts of the same which are not held void or unconstitutional shall remain in full force and effect. 

SECTIONS 



PASSED AND APPROVED: Second Reading this the 10 1 h day of January, 2011. 


) 

ATTEST: 





U:\Pianning\Ordinances\Fee Changes\BidDesignStdsAppeaiFee.doc 

) 

2

(( 

~ ,Cityof 


..... ... 



Agenda Item No. 3-H 

Presenter/Contact- Jim Klein, City Engineer 

(830) 221-4020 - jklein@nbtexas.org 

SUBJECT: Approval of the first reading of an ordinance amending Ordinance Number 75-10 to 

approve installation of four way stop signs at the intersection of Hollyhock Lane at Larkspur and 

all way stop signs atPahmeyer Road and Anna Lee Drive. 


Ms. Crissy Hoffmann requested the installation of stop signs at the following locations. 

1.) NW corner of Hollyhock Lane at Larkspur 

2.) SE corner of Hollyhock Lane at Larkspur 

3.) NE corner of Larkspur at Hollyhock Lane 

4.) SW corner of Larkspur at Hollyhock Lane 

I am recommending the installation of all way stop signs at Pahmeyer Road and Anna Lee Drive 

to allow installation of a crosswalk for the South Tributary trail. 

These requests were considered by the Transportation and Traffic Advisory Board at their 

December 9, 2010 meeting and they recommended approval of the installation of the stop signs 

as described in the attached ordinance. 


N/A 

,j Yes 


Priority: 

2006 Comprehensive Plan: Transportation 

Goal21: Provide a system of convenient and 

safe transportation facilities through 

comprehensive, cooperative a continuing 

transportation system planning and 

development. 


Stop signs cost approximately $135 each. Sufficient funding is available in the FY201 0/11 

approved street and drainage budget. 


The Transportation and Traffic Advisory Board recommended approval of the installation of the 

stop signs. 


Staff recommends the approval of the first reading of the attached ordinance. 


o 

ORDINANCE NO. 2011-__ 

An ordinance amending ordinance number 75-10 dated April 28, 1975 

to approve installation of the traffic control devices (stop signs) at 

the intersection of Hollyhock Lane at Larkspur and all way stop signs 

at Pahmeyer Road at Anna Lee. 

WHEREAS, after engineering and field investigation, the City Engineer has 

recommended that traffic control signs be installed on certain streets, avenues, 

thoroughfares and boulevards within the corporate limits of the City of New Braunfels in 

order to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens. 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY 

OF NEW BRAUNFELS, TEXAS: 

I. 

THAT Ordinance Number 75-10 dated April 28, 1975, is hereby amended to 

authorize the installation of additional Traffic Control signs at the following location in 

the corporate limits of the City of New Braunfels, Texas: 

STOP SIGNS: 

1120 Four-way stop signs at the intersection of HOLLYHOCK LANE at 

LARKSPUR 

1121 All-way stop signs at the intersection of PAHMEYER ROAD AND ANNA 

LEE 

) 

II. 

THAT the Public Works Department is directed to obtain and install the traffic 

control signs in the locations as set forth in this ordinance, and is directed to maintain 

the signs in a manner that provides for the health, welfare and safety of the citizens of 

New Braunfels. 

Ill. 

THAT all provisions as set forth in Ordinance Number 75-10 dated April 28, 

1975, will be and remain in full force and effect as though written in full in this ordinance. 

) 


I:> 

IV. 

THAT all provisions hereof are hereby declared to be severable and if any 

provisions hereof is declared to be invalid or unconstitutional, such shall not invalidate 

or affect the remaining provisions hereof which will be and remain in full force and 

effect. 

v. 

This Ordinance shall take effect from and after its second and final reading. 

PASSED AND APPROVED: First reading this the 1oth day of January, 2011. 

PASSED AND APPROVED: Second reading this the 24th day of January, 

2011. 


) 


ATTEST: 

ANN SMITH, INTERIM CITY SECRETARY 


ALAN C. WAYLAND, CITY ATTORNEY 

) 


uu 

) 

)

f'Jotyof 

~: New Braunfels City Council Agenda Item Report 

"' 4 ;;>----- 


Agenda Item No. 3-1 


(830) 221-4020 - engineering@nbtexas.org 

SuBJECT: Approval of the first reading of an ordinance amending the code of ordinances of 

the City of New Braunfels, Texas by amending section 126-346 (f) to add no parking zones along 

the northeast side of Stone Gate Drive in the 200 block and providing an effective date. 

) 


Mr. Ben Engelhardt (TXDOT) requested the City consider no parking on the southeast side of 

Stone Gate Drive at State Highway 46. He indicated that TxDOT is getting regular complaints 

from the public regarding operation of the traffic signal at this intersection. The complaints are 

that the signal stops traffic too frequently on SH 46. TxDOT proposes to adjust the signal timing if 

the City can separate the left and right turn traffic on Stone Gate. They could then have separate 

detection zones and times for the left and right turns. To provide room for an additional traffic lane 

on Stone Gate, parking would not be allowed in the 200 block. 

Engineering staff has discussed this with the Fire Department and they indicate that eliminating 

the parking would also improve the sight distance and make this intersection safer. 

This item was considered by the Transportation and Traffic Advisory Board at their December 9, 

2010 meeting and they recommended approval of the· no parking zone as described in the 

attached ordinance. 


2006 Comprehensive Plan: Transportation Goal 21: 

~ Yes 

Provide a system of convenient and safe 


transportation facilities through comprehensive, 

Priority: 

cooperative and continuing transportation system 

planning and development. 


None. 


The Transportation and Traffic Advisory Board recommended approval of the no parking zone. 


Staff recommends the installation of the no parking zone for the area indicated in the attached 

ordinance 


OL 


An ordinance amending the code of ordinances of the City of New Braunfels, 

Texas by amending section 126-346 (f}(82) to add no parking zones along the 

northeast side of Stone Gate Drive in the 200 block and providing an effective 

date. 

~) 

WHEREAS, City staff has recommended amending the ordinances to add a no 

parking zone along the northeast side of Stone Gate Drive in the 200 block. 

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of New Braunfels, Texas has 

determined that the City's parking ordinance should be amended as recommended by 

the City Engineer. 



I. 

That the City of New Braunfels Code of Ordinances is hereby amended by adding 

Section 126-346(f) as follows: 

) 

SEC. 126-346. STOPPING, STANDING OR PARKING PROHIBITED IN SPECIFIED 

PLACES. 

(f)(82) On the northeast side of Stone Gate Drive in the 200 block, such no 

parking zone shall be designated as a tow away zone. 

II. 

THAT all provisions hereof declared to be severable and if any provisions hereof 

are declared to be invalid or unconstitutional, such shall not invalidate or affect the 

remaining provisions hereof which remain in full force and effect. 

Ill. 


All other ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are repealed to the 

~ extent that they are in conflict. 

,' 

IV. 

This Ordinance shall become adopted and effective ten (1 0) days after the date 

of publication in a newspaper pursuant the Charter of the City of New Braunfels. 

PASSED AND APPROVED: First reading this the 1oth day of January, 2011. 

PASSED AND APPROVED: Second reading this the 24th day of January, 

2011. 


ATTEST: 





) 




~ 

Agenda Item No. .} .J 



SUBJECT: Approval of the first reading of an ordinance amending the Code of Ordinances of 

the City of New Braunfels, Texas by modifying Section 126 to establish speed limits 

on SH 46 from Alves Lane to the New Braunfels city Limits. 


The Texas· Department of Transportation (TxDOT) completed an engineering study which 

indicated the need to reduce the current speed limit on a portion of SH 46 within the City. 

Attached is a letter from TxDOT transmitting the results of this engineering study to the City. 

Current speed limits are posted at 55 mph from Alves Lane to Deborah Drive (MP 1.125), 45mph 

from Deborah Drive to just past Camp Willow Road (MP 1.950), 55mph from Camp Willow Road 

to just south of Weltner Road, then 60 mph to the City Limits. 

Based upon the results of the engineering study, it is recommended that the speed limit be 

) reduced to 50mph from Alves Lane to Deborah Drive. The other speed limits will remain as 

posted. 


2006 Comprehensive Plan: Transportation Goal 

~ Yes 

21: Provide a system of convenient and safe 



Priority: 

cooperative a continuing transportation system 



None. 


N/A 


Staff recommends establishing speed limits as indicated in the attached ordinance. 

) 


l:ib 

. 

I 

. 

. 

Texas Department of Transportation 

P. 0. BOX 29928 • SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 78229-0928 • (210) 615-1110 

The Honorable R. Bruce Boyer 

Mayor, City of New Braunfels 




Re: City Ordinance/Speed Zone 

SH46 

Comal County 

Control: 0216-01 & 216-02 

Dear Mayor Boyer: 

An engineering and traffic investigation has been conducted as required by the 

Transportation Code Sec. 545.353, Authority of Texas Transportation Commission to 

alter speed limits for the above-mentioned section of highway. The related strip maps 

are attached. 

The strip maps reflect reductions to the existing 55 mph zone on SH 46 from Alves 

Lane to Deborah Drive within the New Braunfels City Limits. It is requested that the 

appropriate traffic control regulation be prepared. In addition we are requesting an 

updated city ordinance from Deborah Drive to just south of Waltner Road. For your 

convenience, I have included a sample city ordinance. Please furnish a copy of the 

executed traffic control regulation to this office as soon as possible. 

) 

If you have any questions feel free to contact Jeanne T arrants, who is handling this 

matter, at (210) 615-6061. 

Sincerely, 

nJJ_ u,~.~-- 

~~(' Judy Friesenhahn, P.E. 

Traffic Engineer 

JF:jlt 

Attachments 

) 

.,._ -' 

An Equal Opportunity Employer

\-/ '-...._,- J 

L AH/ca.M:RCIAL RURAL/A lDENT AL 

RESTRICTED SHiHT DISTANCE 

BALL BAN~U~~E.~~~~~~· SPE.ED ~~g en o N 

GRA S 7. ~~> :;: 

U AC oH AN - - 

R. 0. W, AN ROA BED WIDTH 0.. a.. Q. 

ACCIDENTS 2 :::1. 

ZON L NGTHS MILE 

20NE 

 

;'C.. ~ ;! VI -'A. 

19 

TOWARD 'i i'i lil l5 

~'Of 

I FM 78 P· \lf g : NEW BRAUNFELS ".'~ 

~ ;: g :r ::: ::: .... ~ 

ceNTERLLNeaEARINGs SH 46i ~ : 8 Ita 

\ 

:; ~ :!! IINC. l mt.._ ,u 0 

I ~ ~ I ~ 

20NE SPEEDS ~.PH 35 4 50 

ZONE LE THS MILE 

ACCIDENTS 0 

R.O.W, AND ROADBED WIDTH 120' - 66' 

SURFACE WIDTH NO TYPE 66' X 1• ACP 

GRAD .S OVER 37. 

CURVES OVER z• 

BALL BANK or A RY SPEED 2 

RESTRICTED SJG T DISTANCE 

DEVELOPMENT URBAN/C RCIAL RLRAL/RES1D£NTUL 

8~ 

-w 

SAN ANrONIO DISTRICT COMAL COUNTY MIIIIICIIII. ~~~ox 

011 

HECHIJIIAY SH 46 CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS •uuc:u NONE '- PERCENTILE SPEED 

_,_.. aa11: 2 TOP SPEED MEASURED 

DATE of SURVEY OCT 2010 SCALEtl0"•-1 MILE_ cum.rnr 111.11: 5 NUMBER OF CARS CHECKED 

~=~~ SPEED ZONE 

SECT! ON ONE LENGTH Q, 32Z MILES SECTION TWO LENGTH MlLES • FATAL ACCIDENTS 

~•ua '&«'""' "" awr11«1 ,...lll:f,.. {j PERSONAL INJURY /I.CCIOENT 

lUI• 19.1 2 ·0 Rl-1 SHEE S •••10 Q PROPERTY DAMAGE ACCiDENT 

~ 19.424 ~:=:1 RI-~~~TS e-n "" COO:I$ra m&et.~ .. ~~D~~1~s~~~T~~~U~~NEO -@- 

s•••,..,. _, . ·-- -· -···-- 

-·-- ---·----------

----··-~···~-~--~~·,.~--~~-~~~~~·"-"-"~"'''' -~·~·-....... ~. ~· ~=··~"--·=~-~-~=~=-~--


AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE 

CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS, TEXAS BY MODIFYING SECTION 126 TO 

ESTABLISH SPEED LIMITS ON SH 46 FROM ALVES LANE TO THE 

SOUTH CITY LIMITS 

WHEREAS, in the City of New Braunfels, Texas, engineering and traffic 

investigations have been conducted by Texas Department of Transportation in order to 

determine reasonable and prudent speeds on the section of: 

SH 46 from Control Section 0216-01 MP19.102, at Alves Lane, southeasterly to 

Control Section 0216-02 MP 2.260, at approximately 507 feet south of Weltner Road a 

total distance of 2.582 miles approximately. 

WHEREAS, it has been determined by said engineering and traffic 

investigations, that the traffic speed as described below is the maximum reasonable and 

prudent speed on said section of roadway. 



THAT the maximum reasonable and prudent speed limit on SH 46 from Alves 

Lane south to Deborah Drive be reduced from 55 mph to 50 mph. 

THAT the maximum reasonable and prudent speed limit on SH 46 from Deborah 

Drive to south of Camp Willow Road at MP 1.950 be established at 45mph. 

THAT the maximum reasonable and prudent speed limit on SH 46 from south of 

Camp Willow Road be 55mph to MP 2.260, then 60mph south to the City of New 

Braunfels City Limits. 

FURTHERMORE, that if any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be held void or 

unconstitutional, it is hereby provided that all other part of the same which are not held 

void or unconstitutional shall remain in full force and effect. All other ordinances or parts 

of ordinances in conflict herewith are repealed to the extent that they are in conflict. 

FURTHERMORE, this Ordinance shall become adopted and effective ten (1 0) days 

after the date of publication in a newspaper pursuant the Charter of the City of New 

Braunfels. 

)

PASSED AND APPROVED: First reading this the day of January 10, 2011. 

PASSED AND APPROVED: Second reading this the day of January 24, 2011. 


ATTEST: 

BY: 


------------------------ 




) 

)



Agenda Item No.3-K 



SUBJECT: 

Authorization for the City Manager to approve change order 4 to the contract with 

DNT Construction, LLC for construction services on Goodwin Lane as part of the 

Goodwin Lane Improvements Project. 


The Goodwin Lane Improvements Project consists of demolition and reconstruction of Goodwin 

Lane from FM306 to approximately 3,140 feet to the north. Construction includes demolition, 

utility improvements, drainage improvements, grading and paving improvements. The contract 

with DNT Construction, LLC for construction was approved by City Council on April 26, 2010 at a 

cost of $962,763.95. 

A sidewalk conflict was discovered in the field and requires removal that was not anticipated in 

the original contract. The change order amounts to $935.00 and includes this removal. 

The attached is a detailed breakdown of the change order items as provided by DNT 

Construction, LLC. 

ADDRESSES A NEED/ISSUE IN A CITY PLAN OR COUNCIL PRIORITY" . 

City Council Strategic Priorities - Objective 


X Yes 

3: Implement ongoing program of 

Priority: 

infrastructure construction and maintenance 


On April 15, 2010, the New Braunfels Industrial Development Corporation (NBIDC) approved 

funding this project in an amount not to exceed $1,119,000. When council approved award of 

construction on this project, a project budget of $1,059,038.95 was established. This amount fully 

funds the project and funding for this change order. 


N/A 


Authorization for the City Manager to approve change order 4 to the contract with DNT 

Construction, LLC for construction services on Goodwin Lane as part of the Goodwin Lane 

Improvements Project. 


:::JL 

(J N~~ Braunfels 

"~ 

Project: Goodwin Lane Improvements 

Contractor: DNT Construction LLC 

Construction Change Order 

Change Order No. 4 

Date: December 17, 2010 

12/17/2010 

Address: 18952 Redland Rd. San Antonio Texas 78259 

In accordance with the terms of the Owner-contractor Agreement, datedApril27, 2010, between the City of New Braunfels, OWNER, and DNT Construction LLC, CONTRACTOR, CONTRACTOR 

Is hererby directed to make add~ions or alterations in the Work with details and costs as described below. Any compensation paid in conjunction with the tenms of this Changer Order shall 

comprise total compensation due the CONTRACTOR for the Work or for the change defined In this Change Order. By signing this Change Order, Contractor acknowledges that the stipulated 

compensation includes payment for the Work of Change plus all payment for the interruption of Schedules, Stop Work Orders, Extended Overhead, Delay, or any other impact, claim or ripple 

effect, and by signing specifically waivers any Reservation or Claim for Add~ionai Compensation w~h respect to the Subject of this Change Order. Except as modified by Change Order, all 

work perfonmed under this Change Order shall be completed in accordance with the Contract Documents. 

PURPOSE FOR THIS CHANGE ORDER: 

Remove existing sidewalk that is in conflict with proposed drainage channel between STA 22+ 15 and STA 24+00 and extend 18" CMP Pipes Per RFI #7 

4 

5 

6 

Demo Existing Sidewalk 

Haul Off Concrete 

18" CMP (Gal Stl), Per Linear Foot, Including Excavation 

and Backfill, Complete In-Place 

LD 

LF 28.20 

302.00 10.00 

$282.00 

TOTAL- THIS CHANGE ORDER 

$935.00 2 

~· -~ ' -. I,.~-~ 

olriGINAt'coNTRA(j ~f.iouiili: .. 

Previous Change Orders 

Amount ofThis Change Order 

TOTAL OF ALL CHANGE ORDERS 

REVISED CONTRACT AMOUNT: 

$~~7,~63.95 

$74,293.20 

$935.00 

$75,228.20 

$1,043,092.15 

) 

ORIGINAL CONTRACT TIME: 0 Days 

Previous Change Orders 10 Days 

This Change Order 2 Days 

TOTAL OF ALL CHANGE ORDERS 12 Days 

REVISED CONTRACT TIME: 12 Days 

ORIGINAL CONTRACT (FINAL)(SUBSTANTIAL) COMPLETION DATE: ---:A::!i:p7,ril~9~, ;:20".:'1:"1 __ _ 

R~V~SED (FINAL)(SU(lST{'NTIAL~ .~().MPLETI()N !>ATE.: April2l, 2011 

··~;:~

,..,,Cityof 

~ ... New Braunfels City Council Agenda Item Report 

"'=, 


Agenda Item No. 3-L 


(830) 221-4020- jklein@nbtexas.org 

SUBJECT: Approval of the second and final reading of an ordinance amending Ordinance Number 

75-10 to approve installation of four way stop signs at the intersection of Divine Way and 

Angelina/Gaines Drive. 


Ms. Cathy Bolton requested the City consider installation of stop signs on Divine Way at Medina 

Drive. After review, Engineering Staff recommended installation at Angelina/Gaines as this is a 4- 

way intersection and Medina is a "T" intersection. 

This request was considered by the Transportation and Traffic Advisory Board at their November 

17, 2010 meeting and they recommended approval of the installation of the stop signs as 

described in the attached ordinance. A first reading of this ordinance was approved by City 

Council on December 13, 2010 . 

. ) ADDRESSES A NEED/ISSUE IN A CITY PLAN OR COUNCIL PRIORITY: 

2006 Comprehensive Plan: Transportation Goal 21: 

-1 Yes 

Provide a system of convenient and safe 



Priority: 

cooperative a continuing transportation system 



Stop signs cost approximately $135 each. Sufficient funding is available in the FY2010/11 

approved street and drainage budget. 


The Transportation and Traffic Advisory Board recommended approval of the installation of the 

stop signs. 


) 

Staff recommends the approval of the second and final reading of the attached ordinance. 



An ordinance amending ordinance number 75-10 dated April 28, 1975 

to approve installation of the traffic control devices (stop signs) on 

Divine Way at Angelina/Gaines Drive providing a severability clause; 

and declaring an effective date. 

WHEREAS, after engineering and field investigation, the City Engineer has 

recommended that traffic control signs be installed on certain streets, avenues, 

thoroughfares and boulevards within the corporate limits of the City of New Braunfels in 

order to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens. 



I. 

THAT Ordinance Number 75-10 dated April 28, 1975, is hereby amended to 

authorize the installation of additional Traffic Control signs at the following location in 

the corporate limits of the City of New Braunfels, Texas: 

STOP SIGNS: 

1116 On the NE corner of DIVINE WAY at ANGELINA DRIVE 

1117 On the SW corner of DIVINE WAY at GAINES DRIVE 

1118 On theSE corner of GAINES DRIVE at DIVINE WAY 

1119 On the NW corner of ANGELINA DRIVE at DIVINE WAY 

) 

II. 

THAT the Public Works Department is directed to obtain and install the traffic 

control signs in the locations as set forth in this ordinance, and is directed to maintain 

the signs in a manner that provides for the health, welfare and safety of the citizens of 

New Braunfels. 

Ill. 

THAT all provisions as set forth in Ordinance Number 75-10 dated April 28, 

1975, will be and remain in full force and effect as though written in full in this ordinance. 

) 


IV. 

THAT all provisions hereof are hereby declared to be severable and if any 

provisions hereof is declared to be invalid or unconstitutional, such shall not invalidate 

or affect the remaining provisions hereof which will be and remain in full force and 

effect. 

v. 

This Ordinance shall take effect from and after its second and final reading. 

PASSED AND APPROVED: First reading this the 13th day of December, 2010. 

PASSED AND APPROVED: Second reading this the 1oth day of January, 

2011. 


) 


ATTEST: 




) 


) 

)

'.Jcityof 

~ · New Braunfels 


"" :;;:=--- 


Agenda Item No. t./ 1/ 

Presenter/Contact- Steve Ramsey, Director of Public Works 

(830) 221-4020 - sramsey@nbtexas.org 

':H 

SUBJECT: Discuss and consider approval of a resolution supporting Guadalupe County Judge 

Mike Wiggins as representative on the South Central Texas (Region L) Regional Water 

Planning Group. 


The South Central Texas (Region L) Regional Water Planning Group is responsible for preparing 

and updating this area's regional water plan in accordance with state law. The Region L Water 

Planning Group consists of individuals representing affected water interests. The City of New 

Braunfels was recently made aware of the existence of a vacant County position on the Region L 

Planning Group. This vacancy is the position previously occupied by former Comal County 

Commissioner Jay Millikin. 

The City has been informed that Mike Wiggins, Guadalupe County Judge, is willing to serve on 

. the Region L Water Planning Group as a county representative. Portions of the corporate limits of 

) the City of New Braunfels lie within Guadalupe County .. The City has interests in the protection of 

~ spring flows and in the proper management and planning for surface and ground water supplies 

and for water conservation and reuse. Because water issues have become increasingly complex 

and important, the nomination of a well qualified candidate is of upmost importance. 

Guadalupe County Judge Mike Wiggins is well qualified and his nomination and service on the 

Region L Water Planning Group is in the best interest of the citizens of New Braunfels. 


N/A 

,j Yes 

Strategic Priorities: Work with other entities 


and the community to develop a City vision 

Priority: 

utilizing available resources. 


N/A 


N/A 


) Council approval of a resolution supporting Guadalupe County Judge Mike Wiggins as a 

representative on the South Central Texas (Region L) Regional Water Planning Group. 


November 29, 2010 

South Central Texas Regional Water Planning Group 

The South Central Texas Regional Water Planning Group (SCTRWPG), Is ono of the 161'egional 

water planning groups established by the TWDB to davelop a regional water plan AS required by 

Senate Bi111, 75th legislative Session. 

These regional plans provide fc:lr many things including local watar conservation and preparation 

for drought while ensuring the health of the public, economy and natural resources. 

Water Planning 

In addition to developing a plan. the Group is required to establish policies, make decisions. and 

consider interest groups in the development of tha regional water plan. 

Tho development C1f a rogionai water plan includes studies, decisions, and recommendations 

regarding the water supply needs, potential water supply options and strategies throughout the 

area. Recognizing the importance of public participation, the SCTRWPG has established a public 

participation process to achieve stakeholder acceptance of the regional water plan. 

The South Central Texas study area also known as Region l, encompasses twenty and one-half 

(20 1/2) counties with a total2000 population of 1,695,584 {2000 US Census Data). 

History 

On February 19, 1998, the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) adopted rules for state and 

regional water planning and grant assistance. designating 16 regional water planning areas to 

implement state and regional water planning aspects of SB 1. The overall goal of SB 1 was to 

"develop regional and state water plans that will provide for the orderly development, m;magamenl, 

and consorvalion of water resources. and preparation for and response to drought conditions in 

order that sufficient water will be available at a reasonable cost to ensure public health, safety, and 

welfare further economic development, and protect the agricullural and natural resources of the 

planning area.'' 

) 

Planning Process 

Regional water planning is a "bottom ur>" process designed to ensure that the water noeds of all 

Texans are met. These plans map out how to: 

• Conserve water supplies 

• Meet future water supply needs 

• Respond to future droughts in the planning areas 

Planning group members represent Interests and prepare a region-specific water pl~n. Tho public 

at large are also invited to provide comments on the draft regional pl~ms. 

In Elccordance with SB 1, regiomll water plans are approved by the Texas Water Development 

Aoard (TWDB) and incorporated into a comprehensive state wator plan. Water plans are updated 

ovory fivo yoar~'>. Tha


Poge6ol28 

Reaponslbllftl&s 

Each RWPG is rasponsiblu for preparing and adopting a regional water plan for its area. Most 

RWPGs have hired consultants to assist with developing the engineering, socioeconomic, 

hydrological, environmental, legal and Institutional components of the regional water plans. 

RWPGsmust: 

• Provide a process for public input In lhe planning process 

• Hold public meetings 

• Furnish a draft report of the plan for public review and comment 

SB I requires that each regional water plan address the needs of all wator usors and suppliers, 

except certain political subdivisions that decide not to participate. 

Why does this matter 

Texas' vulnerability to dro~•ght and to the limits of axlstlng water supplies are incraasing as 

populations grow. Tho state's populalion is axpaclecl to increase from lis current level of about 19 

million to more than 36 million paopla hy the year 2050. 

TWDB financial assistance may ba provided only to water supply projects that meet needs In a 

manner that is consistent with the approved regional water plans. In addition, the Texas Natural 

Resource ComM.wallon Commission may not issue a water right for rnunicipal purposes unless H it; 

consistent with an approved regional water plan. 

Who Oversees the Regional Water Planning Process 

TWQB Is the laad state agency for coordinating the rogional water planning process and 

developing a comprehensive state water plan. To accomplish these tasks, the TWDB developed 

planning guidelines, designated planning areas and appointed the original planning group 

members for the 16 regions. 

Each planning area functions on its own with continuous guidance from the TWOB. New planning 

group members are voted In by existing members. 

When was this process established 

In June 1997, Governor Georga W. Bush signed Into taw Senate Bill I, comprehensive water 

IQglslation enac:tecl by the 75th Texas Legislature. This lagislalion created the regional water 

planning process.

RESOLUTION No. 2011-__ 

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW 

BRAUNFELS, TEXAS, DECLARING ITS SUPPORT FOR GUADALUPE 

COUNTY JUDGE MIKE WIGGINS AS A REPRESENTATIVE ON THE 

SOUTH CENTRAL TEXAS (REGION L) REGIONAL WATER PLANNING 

GROUP 

WHEREAS, the South Central Texas (Region L) Regional Water Planning Group 

is responsible for preparing and updating a regional water plan in accordance with state 

law, and the Region L Water Planning Group consists of individuals representing 

affected water interests; and 

WHEREAS, the City of New Braunfels is aware of the existence of a vacant 

county position on the Region L Planning Group; and 

WHEREAS, this vacancy is the position previously occupied by former Carnal 

County Commissioner Jay Millikin; and 

WHEREAS, the City of New Braunfels has been informed that Mike Wiggins, 

Guadalupe County Judge, is willing to serve on the Region L Water Planning Group as 

a county representative; and 

WHEREAS, portions the corporate limits of the City of New Braunfels lie within ) 

the Guadalupe County; and 

WHEREAS, the City of New Braunfels has interests in the protection of spring 

flows and in the proper management and planning for surface and ground water 

supplies and for water conservation and reuse, and because water issues have become 

increasingly complex and important, the nomination of a well qualified candidate is of 

upmost importance; and 

WHEREAS, Guadalupe County Judge Mike Wiggins is well qualified and his 

nomination and service on the Region L Water Planning Group is in the best interest of 

the citizens of New Braunfels. 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW 

BRAUNFELS TEXAS declares its support for Guadalupe County Judge Mike Wiggins 

as a representative on the South Central Texas (Region L) Regional Water Planning 

Group; 

PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED on this the 1 0 1 h day of January, 2011. 

)

.HJ.L 

City of New Braunfels, Texas 

Attest: 



) 

)

.LIOL 

) 

)

~J~sraunfels 



Agenda Item No. L/- B 

Presenter/Contact- Nathan Pence, Watershed Program Manager 

-Tommy Hill, Guadalupe Blanco River Authority 

(830) 608-2166 - npence@nbtexas.org 

SuBJECT: Discuss and consider approval of a resolution authorizing the City Manager to 

support the Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority's application for flood protection planning grant 

assistance filed with the Texas Water Development Board. 


The Guadalupe Blanco River Authority (GBRA) intends to work with the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (Corps), the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB), and its river communities to 

develop new flood information. The Corps has a 50/50 cost share program available to 

communities, and the TWDB has issued notice of its 2011 Flood Protection Planning Grants. The 

successful combination of these programs could provide 75% funding, leaving a local 25% costshare. 

GBRA plans to pay the 25% local cost share to study the main channel of the lower 

Guadalupe River, and work with its communities to obtain local 25% funding for any desired new 

studies of the remaining major tributaries. The study will take 5-6 years, and could begin as early 

as September 1, 2011 if GBRA successfully secures a TWDB Flood Protection Planning Grant in 

2011. 

Computerized rainfall-runoff and flood elevation models, and Geographical Information Systems 

now offer GBRA the ability to use LIDAR to develop basin-wide flood information that is accurate 

and useful. The output can be used to improve Federal Emergency Management Agency 

(FEMA) floodplain information, generate flood inundation forecasting for the National Weather 

Service (NWS), and allow analyses of both structural and non-structural cost effective flood 

damage reduction projects. 


N/A 

..,; Yes I City Plan/Council Priority: 

I 

Regional and Resource Mgmt 


None. However, staff is exploring the possibility of having the scope of work expanded to include 

Blieders Creek and Dry Carnal Creek. 


N/A 


Support of the Resolution, as it builds upon the City's commitment to protecting life and property 

through advanced flood warning and preparedness. 


Guadalupe-Blanco RiYer Authority 

Lower Guadalupe River Flood Study 

December l. 20 lO 

Backgrouml 

Communities on the lmver 

Guadalupe River haye suffered 

fi·om several floods over the 

last 40 years. Perhaps most 

significant \\'as the 2002 flood 

\Vhen the Canyon Dam 

spilhvay operated for the first 

time in its history. The Lower 

Guadalupe bas also had its 

share of significant floods, 

most recently in 1998 and 

2004. Then, in June 2010, 

New Braunfels was hit by over 

12 inches of rain in a fe\v 

hours. These experiences have 

led GBRA to consider a comprehensive look at flooding conditions in the lower river and 

to commit $25,000 to retain Halff Associates to help develop the scope of work. 

Lower Gmtdalttpe River Flood Sftuly 

GBRA intends to work \Vith the Cotps of Engineers. 

the Texas Water Development Board, and its river 

coll1llnmities to develop new flood information. The 

Corps has a 50150 cost share program that is available 

to conununities. and the TWDB has issued notice of its 

2011 Flood Protection Planning Grants. The successful 

combination of these programs could provide 75% 

funding. leaving a loca125% cost-share. 

'• ... ) 

The lower basin communities of San 

Marcos, \Viu1bedey, New Braunfels. Seguin, 

and Victoria are rapidly growing. Many 

areas of the Guadalupe River below Canyon 

Reservoir have never been smdied, and 

FE1,LJ\ maps have outdated infonnation. 

The combination of repeated severe floods. 

outdated flood infonnation, and exploding 

development requires action. 

Leveraged 

Funding 

• federal 50% 

state 25% 

HAlFF 

Ill HALFF 

••• 

) 


Significant technological advances have been made in the integration of low-cost 

topographic data called LIDAR with computerized flood models. Many Lower 

comnnmities have new LIDAR, and GBRA is wruking with TWDB to 

Computerized rainfall-mnoff and flood elevation models, and Geographical Infommtion 

Systems now offer GBRA the ability to use LIDAR to develop basin-wide flood 

infommtion that is accurate and useful. The output can be used to improve FEMA 

floodplain infonnation, generate flood immdation forecasting for the NWS, and allow 

analyses of both structural and non-stnJctural cost effective flood damage reduction 

projects. 

GBRA plans to work with the Corps and TWDB to update existing studies and develop 

new studies for the lmver Guadalupe River to provide a complete "lower basin" study. 

i\11 available infom1ation from existing and ongoing studies will be utilized. Known 

studies that are 

lUlderway or plam1ed 

and may be incotporated 

are: 

• GBRA's study of 

Colletto Creek. 

• The City ofNe\v 

Bratmfels and 

Coma! Comity have 

.,:.. . 

... -· 

/( i 

2 


1110 

completed a study of Dry Comal Creek. 

• Guadalupe County is completing a study of Alligator-Geronimo Creek. 

• Hays County is planning a study of the Blanco River. 

• The City of San Marcos has completed a recent study of the San JMarcos River. 

• FENJA recently re-studied the Guadalupe River through Victoria County. 

' 

I 

~- P:t:t:o~ RQvij~ 

jf:';:,:;M~L.-on 

J 

M*iOISn~m~ 

!c::J~-5~ 

1-lrohtrt'*·Nqfl,.a•,. 

!O OOR.\8r"N!"

Hff 

Table 1. Preliminarv Bmlget 

Task 

Budget 

Collection oO>at!l :in'd.udlileLII>AR. . $120,QOQ 

Environmental Constraints $70,000 

·. 

· Re\'iew IP Ft()()d'D'iliuagtMreas ..·· · .. ·· ..• $.5;0Q0 

Field Sun·~· $110,250 

Hydrology $340,000 

Hydraulics $253 500 

Evaluate FlOo!.fProteqt Criteria $1.5,000 

H&H .Analysis of .Alternatives $70,000 

.·· 

Benefit CostAnalysis . ·· .. $.50000 

Final Dellverables $20,000 

Project Management $30,00() 

Total $1,083,750 

T able 1. E stimate• Fiscal y ear Study Requirements 

FY FY FY FY's 

Total 

Total Project Budget 

2012 2013 2014 2015-17 

$250,000 $250,000 $2so;q

RESOLUTION NO. 2011 R- 

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS , TEXAS, 

TO SUPPORT THE GUADALUPE-BLANCO RIVER AUTHORITY 

APPLICATION FOR FLOOD PROTECTION PLANNING GRANT ASSISTANCE 

FILED WITH THE TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD. 

WHEREAS, the Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority (GBRA), desires to 

develop a basin-wide Flood Protection Planning Study for the lower Guadalupe 

River, understanding that the river and its tributaries drain areas within the City 

of New Braunfels, Texas; and 

WHEREAS, the City of New Braunfels, Texas, ensures that the proposed 

planning does not duplicate existing projects with the exception of updating 

existing flood protection plans; and 

WHEREAS, GBRA and the City of New Braunfels, Texas, will appropriate 

matching funds and in-kind services, if the grant is awarded, to assist with the 

financing of the Flood Protection Planning Study; and 

WHEREAS, the City of New Braunfels, Texas, will attempt to pursue 

implementation of viable solutions identified through the proposed planning effort 

and will pursue and identify potential sources of funding for implementation of 

viable solutions; and 

) 

WHEREAS, GBRA as well as many of the cities and counties in the lower 

Guadalupe River basin, Texas, are currently participating in the National Flood 

Insurance Program making flood insurance available for all insurable structures 

in their respective incorporated and unincorporated areas; 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF 

THE CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS, TEXAS: 

THAT, the City Council of the City of New Braunfels, Texas does hereby 

authorizes support of the GBRA application to the Texas Water Development 

Board for flood protection planning grant assistance. 

)

PASSED AND APPROVED this the 1oth day of January, 2011. 


BY: 

---------------------- 


ATTEST: 


) 

)

1111 

) 

)

lll 



Agenda Item No. Lf-C!, 



SUBJECT: 

Discuss and consider the approval of locating a statue of Prince Carl 

Solms in front of the Civic/Convention Center. 


On October 29, 2010, the City of New Braunfels received a letter from the Historic Outdoor Art 

Gallery requesting approval of locating a life size six foot three inch bronze sculpture of Prince 

Carl Solms on Seguin Avenue in front of the Civic/Convention Center monument sign. This 

sculpture will be completed by local artist Paul Tadlock in early 2012. 

The Downtown Development Board Design Review sub-committee voted to approve this 

location on December 3, 2010. The sub-committee presented this item to the Downtown 

Development Board on December 21, 2010 who also approved the recommended location. 


)~~-~~-----,-C-i-ty--P-Ia_n_/C_o_u_n_c_i_l ____________________________________ _, 

No 

_ _ Priority: 


There is no fiscal impact to the City. The Historic Outdoor Art Gallery will fund this project. 


The Downtown Development Board recommends approval of locating the Prince Solms statue in 

front of the Civic/Convention Center. 


Staff recommends approval. 

ATTACHMENTS: 

) 

1. Historic Outdoor Art Gallery request letter 

2. DDB Design Review Sub-committee meeting notes 

3. DDB December 21, 2010 minutes excerpt 

Page I of I

llZ 

Historic Outdoor Art Gallery IN ew Braunfels, Inc. 

"Highlighting History and Honoring Heritage" 

October 29 ~ 2010 

Michael Morrison 

City Manager 

424 South Castell Avenue 

New Braunfels, Tx. 78130 

Dear Mr. Morrison 

This letter is to request location approval for a life size six foot three inch bronze sculptor 

of Prince Carl, founder of New Braunfels. The placement would be on Seguin Avenue in 

front of the new monument sign located on the Civic Center City Convention Center 

property. Prince Carl would greet and welcome both residences and visitors to the City of 

New Braunfels. This sculptor would not be completed until early 2012. The location is 

the choice of the sculptor artist,. Paul Tadlock 

Paul Tadlock is one of America's leading sculptors; his work is on public display at 

museUms, galleries and private collections around the world. Many of his works have 

been commissioned and become limited edition collection items. Paul created the bronze 

of the little girl with the two deer fawns presently displayed at the New Braunfels Public 

Library entrance. Paul and his wife, Georgia, are residents ofNew Braunfels. Paul's 

website is www.paultadlock.com Paul is on our board of the ffistoric Outdoor Art 

--Museum!New-Br-aunfels,·lnc.-which-is-anon-protit-501-(C)·-3-orcganization.-·- 

Information on this sculptor of Prince Carl would be prepared for the City Council 

agenda on Monday, November 22nd. The artist has a sketched rendering. for submission. 

Thank you for your consideration of this very important sculptor to our historic city. 

Secretary 

) 

P.O. Box 311805 • New Braunfels, Texas 78131-1805 

830•609•1369 • 830•609•0441 • Fax 830•606•7524

.l.lJ 

D ibell 0 architects, pile 

388 Comal Ave. New Braunfels, Texas 78130 ph. 830.643.1195 

www. dibelloarch itects. com 

Memo 


To: Downtown Development Board & City Staff 

Re: Design Review Committee Meeting Notes for 

December 3, 2010 meeting at Railroad Car 

Project: 

From: Dale Dibello 

Document2 

Page 1oft 

Meeting Notes for the December 3, 2010 meeting of the Design Review Committee. 

Present at Meeting: Dale Dibello, Carol Johnson, Craig Massouh, Fred Heimer, Marian Benson, Linda Dietert, 

Dave Albright, Cherise Bell, Don Forres 

Guest presenters: Wayne Rahe, President of the Board for the Historic Outdoor Art Gallery and sculptor 

Paul Tadlock 

1) Call to order at 7:30AM 

2) Presentation by Wayne Rahe regarding proposed location of Prince Solms statue in front of Civic Center. 

a) Grant writer needs specific location to include in the submittal. 

b) Motion carried to approve the proposed location. 

) 

3) Discussed Sidewalk Extension 

a) Reviewed related pages from the Downtown Implementation Plan. 

b) Reviewed examples of Bulb Out at Midblock handout from Cherise. 

c) No motion made, but agreed that the City should hire a traffic consultant to do design work based on the 

recommendations of the Downtown Implementation Plan. 

d) Agreed that this committee would be involved in setting the design criteria for the consultant. 

e) General Frustrations Expressed: 

i) What is the City's commitment towards control of Seguin Avenue in relation to TxDot's control Is it 

realistic for us to be even thinking of changes to Seguin A venue 

ii) Parking: Don suggested that we need to get the buy-in from the City on the surface parking schemes, 

but Fred suggested that we should not wait on the parking issue to be resolved but rather have the City 

engage a consultant for the sidewalk extension project and other key improvements - consultant to do 

design, City to get bids for construction and identify a critical path. 

4) Reviewed Draft Sidewalk Design Guidelines 

a) Committee reviewed handout Cherise prepared and made comments for inclusion. 

5) Meeting was adjourned at 9:00 AM: 

a) Next meeting date not yet set. 

End of Meeting Notes 

)

11£:1 

Downtown Development Board December 21, 2010 Meeting Minutes Excerpt 

The Design Review sub-committee heard a presentation from Wayne Rahe of the ~) 

Historic Outdoor Art Gallery/New Braunfels, Inc. at their last meeting. Mr. Rahe's 

organization would like to locate a life size sculpture of Prince Carl Solms in front of the 

monument sign of the Civic/Convention Center. The sub-committee voted to approve 

the location and is recommending that the Downtown Development Board approve the 

location also. 

It was moved by Dale Dibello and seconded by Pat Wiggins that the Prince Solms 

sculpture location be approved. Motion carried. 

) 

)



Agenda Item No. Ll -D 


(830) 221-4055- smattingly@nbtexas.org 

SUBJECT: 

Discuss and consider the first reading of an ordinance amending 

Ordinance No. 2009-50 continuing the enforcement of the Two Hour 

Parking Zone in Downtown New Braunfels. 


In July 2009, City Council approved ordinance number 2009-50 creating a Downtown On 

Street Parking Zone at the request of the Downtown Association Parking Committee. As part 

of the approval process, City Council asked that staff collect data for 18 months and then bring 

that information back to the City Council for their review. City Council would at that time 

determine whether to continue the two-hour parking enforcement. 

In October 2009, Elite Calibre Services was hired to enforce the two hour parking zone 

ordinance. Their contract was re-newed for one year in September 2010, with the 

understanding that the City could cancel this contract if they decided not to continue the 

. ) enforcement of the two-hour parking zone. 

As requested by City Council, the Downtown Development/Main Street Office has been 

gathering feedback from business owners, visitors, the enforcement company, municipal court 

and other stakeholders on the two hour parking zone. A report is attached that documents this 

information. 

The approved Downtown Implementation Plan outlines parking management strategies 

including two-hour parking as a critical success factor for downtown revitalization and growth. 


--1 

Strategic Priority: Growth and 

Yes City Plan/Council Priority: Development; Objective 12a: Support 

ongoing downtown development efforts. 


The cost of enforcement has been budgeted at $20,000 for the current fiscal year. 

Page 1

116 


The Downtown Association (DTA) recommends continuation of enforcing the downtown two hour ~ 

parking zone. See attached. 

J 

The Main Street Advisory Board (MSAB) recommends continuation of enforcing the downtown 

two hour parking zone with modifications. See attached. 


Staff recommends continuation of enforcing the downtown two hour parking zone. 

ATTACHMENTS: 

1. Report regarding data collected 

2. DTA recommendations 

· 3. MSAB recommendations 

4. Letters from downtown property and business owners 

5. Ordinance 

) 

) 

Page2

.L.Lf 

October 2009-December 2010 

Downtown Two-Hour Parking Enforcement Data 

53 Citations: 2nd time violators- 2; 3rd time violators- 39; 4th time violators- 12 

$3,611.30 collected 

Case Status with Municipal Court 

2-Appeal 

2 - Community Service 

5- Dismissed by Judge 

2 - Dismissed by Prosecutor 

1 - Dismissed Not Guilty 

3 -Pending 

5 - Payment Plans 

2- Pre Trial 

31- Closed 

ATTACHMENT 1

.L.LO 

ASSOCIATION 


Mr. Mike Morrison 

New Braunfels City Manager 

424 S. Castell Ave. 


Mayor Bruce Boyer and City Council 


Ref: Two Hour Parking 

Dear Mr. Morrison, Mayor Boyer, City Council, 

At the Downtown Association's December Board meeting, the Board voted to submit a resolution to the 

City to continue the two hour parking ordinance. Rosemary Allen, the DTA Transportation chairman has 

contacted several of the downtown businesses concerning the continuation of the two hour parking. 

The two hour parking areas in the downtown area are viewed as the only true public parking available at 

this time and it gives customers an opportunity to park close to the downtown businesses. 

) 

Be it resolved that The New Braunfels Downtown Association, Inc. supports the continuation of the 

City's Two Hour Parking zones. 

We are aware that the two hour parking ordinance will will be coming to the City Council for your 

review in the near future and we wanted you to have the Downtown Association's input prior to your 

voting on this parking ordinance. Please let us know if there is additional action that needs to be taken 

by the Association in support of this resolution. Thank you for your support of the two hour parking. 

Sincerely, 

Nancy Bower, DTA President 

ATTACHMENT 2 

)

ll~ 

) MAIN STREET ADVISORY BOARD 

Be it resolved, that the Main Street Advisory Board requests that the City Council consider modification to 

the "Downtown New Braunfels Two Hour Parking" ordinance. Since the inception of the Downtown New 

Braunfels ordinance circumstances have changed considerably. The number of off- street "free" parking 

spaces have reduced. Since these spaces are in privately owned lots, they will continue to reduce as the 

demographics of the downtown businesses change. Until adequate off street parking can be obtained, 

we feel that the restrictive parking ordinance requires modification. Our recommendations are as follows: 

) 

• Modify the existing zone: 

o 

o 

Include only West San Antonio Street from the Railroad Crossing to and including the 

Plaza surrounding area 

Eliminate from the monitored area, the streets of Castell, Hill, Seguin and East San 

Antonio 

• Fine structure: Reduce the fines. 

o 

o 

Recommended fines: 

• 1st offense Warning 

• 2nd offense $ 25 

" 3rd offense $50 

• 4 1 h and subsequent offense $ 100 

Eliminate additional court costs applied to tickets, which substantially increase fine. Ex: 

Currently including court costs, fines are actually in excess of $ 90 for 2nd offense 

• Parldng passes: 

o 

Allowed for business owners upon request. Passes may be used at the discretion of the 

business owner. 

Many of our current guidelines were structured closely to the Georgetown, Texas ordinance. In reviewing 

the Georgetown ordinance, it is apparent that they needed to amend their ordinance. Recently they 

adopted a four month moratorium on the ordinance, in order to allow City staff to re-evaluate the 

guidelines imposed. After the study, the city council recently changed the ordinance as follows: 

• Two hour parking was extended to Three Hours 

• Fines were reduced: First offense will be a warning, second offense will be a fine of up to $20, 

third offense will be a fine of up to $50, and a fourth or subsequent offense will be a fine of up 

to $100. 

The original Downtown New Braunfels ordinance was intended to encourage Downtown business 

development, not dissuade. In addition, the intent of the Main Street Advisory Board when 

recommending fines was for the total fine to be approximately $25 and $50, not plus court costs. 

Unfortunately there are business owners and property owners that are being negatively affected; 

therefore, we respectfully request that you consider our recommendations. 

) 

Submitted on behalf of the Main Street Advisory Board 

ct::~f!Jv/1 

Chairman, 201 0 

ATTACHMENT 3

lZl1 

Monique L. Vernon 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

Shannon Mattingly 

Thursday, October 14, 2010 2:21 PM 


FW: 2 hr parking 

Shannon S. Mattingly, AICP 

Director of Planning and Community Development P.O. Box 311747 New Braunfels, Texas 78131- 

1747 

Ph: (838) 221-4855 Fax: (838) 688-2189 

smattingly@nbtexas.org 

-----Original Message----- 

From: Dancing Pony [mailto:dancingponyboutique@yahoo.com] 

Sent: Monday, September 27, 2818 4:19 PM 

To: Shannon Mattingly 

Subject: 2 hr parking 

Hi Shannon, 

Read the Sunday article. We strongly support the continuation of the 2 hr 

limit. It used to be owner and employee parking took up most of the spaces on 

San Antonio way before stores even opened. Now the parking is available, and 

when fully occupied we know it is with customers, both service and retail. I 

would also like to see added the 3 spaces on Mill, right around the corner from 

San Antonio. I was on the original parking committee, and these 3 were to be 

included. They got overlooked somehow, and when I asked Nancy B. to reinstate 

them, she was reluctant to do so because she had just rec'd approval on the 

committee's recommendation from Judge Scheel and did not want to bother him 

again. These 3 spaces are taken up every morning primarily by the law office on 

the corner, and their cars remain throughout the day. They are in close 

proximity to the 288 block of San Antonio, and very important to the businesses 

located nearby. I hope you agree. 

) 

Thanks, 

Jim Beall 

ATTACHMENT 4 

) 

1

.LL.L 


From: 

~ent: 

}fo: 

·cc: 

Subject: 


Thursday, June 03, 2010 4:22 PM 

'Ross Fortune'; Amy Rogers 

Shannon Mattingly 

RE: June Downtown Connection: High Noon Tunes and Take Out Taking Off 

Hello Ross, 

Thank you for your email expressing your concerns about the Downtown Two Hour Parking policy. The Downtown 

Association formed a parking committee to come up with ways to help create constant parking turnover downtown. 

They made the suggestion of a two hour parking policy based on that of many other downtowns in Texas. I certainly 

understand your position as a downtown business owner and I value your input. When City Council approved this 

parking policy they put an 18 month review on it. It will go back to City Council in January 2011 along with all ofthe 

monthly reports from our parking enforcement agency and the feedback my office has received. Comments such as 

yours will be shared for Council's consideration when they are deciding whether to continue enforcement or not. 

I have answered your questions below to the best of my knowledge. 

Thanks! 


·,f' , City of 

.~-.New Braunfels 

. ....., 7, 

e 

From: Ross Fortune [mailto:rossfortune@hotmail.com] 

Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2010 3:46 PM 

To: Amy Rogers; Monique L. Vernon 

Subject: RE: June Downtown Connection: High Noon Tunes and Take Out Taking Off 

Amy & Monique 

in regard to the Two Hour Parking Enforcement Update in the Downtown Connection ... 

over the past two and a half years i seriously doubt there is anyone in New Braunfels who has spent as 

much time downtown as myself. so, here are a few observations and a few facts ... 

1). parking fines do not start start at $50 they start at $93. Fines start at $50 but have court costs added 

to them as stated in the ordinance. 

2). when this policy was first mooted, the fines were supposed to be in the region of $15 to $25. so, is the 

$93 rising to $500 due to corruption, greed, lies or incompetence it is one of those four options. 

whichever one it is does not reflect well on the City. The Downtown Association parking committee 

recommended the fees for this policy. 

'1). official warning citations are regularly being issued for cars parked for less than 2 hours Our parking 

)ttendant marks tires in multiple colors on each round. He can only issue citations after the 2 hours has 

·· passed. You may see him issuing citations to the first set of cars that were marked shortly after you see 

him marking the second set of cars. 

1

.lLL 

4). visitors a~d tourists are being scared away 

5). we are losing a tenant in our building and may lose more because of this ridiculously draconian law. is 

there a fund to compensate business owners for their losses maybe the fines could be redistributed to 

this effect. to whom do i send my invoice 

:) 

6). i have heard comments to the effect that people who work for the City do not understand the 

catastrophic impact this has already had on the downtown because people from the City do not actually 

spend any time in the downtown. they merely pretend to support it. 

7). the downtown often resembles a ghost town now, surely the exact opposite of what this was supposed 

to achieve. 

8). imposing restrictions on parking when there is no parking problem is misguided and idiotic. 

9). the maps showing people where to park are available to people after they have already parked. 

result ... people are not re-parking, they are getting in their cars and leaving. The Downtown Association 

brochures showing the map with available all day parking lots are in most downtown businesses. They 

are also given out with parking warnings. Warnings do not have a fee associated with them. 

10). the main benefactor of the parking policy is Gruene 

11). the threat of a $500 fine as a cunning ruse to attract more business to the downtown simply makes 

no sense. 

12). the whole policy is a nuisance and an embarrassment. two weeks ago we had someone in to train 

staff. he had to park outside the building as he had computers and equipment in his vehicle that he 

regularly had to return to and reference. he was here for most of the day and it was embarrassing to have 

him set a timer every two hours so that he could stop what he was doing and run out and move his ·) 

vehicle up one parking spot. especially as there were no other cars parked anywhere! he was from Austin ' ,' 

and to be frank it made New Braunfels look like some retarded backwoods town. We have four parking 

lots available for those who plan to stay downtown longer than two hours. 

13). tuesday this week we had a ruptured sewer pipe in the basement. we had emergency plumbers and a 

clean up crew on site most of the day. again there were no other cars parked anywhere around and yet 

every two hours a plumber and a clean up technician had to drop tools, stop work, run outside and move 

their vehicles. do you not realize how stupid this is!!!!!! and how stupid it makes us all look! Our 

parking policy does not apply to service vehicles or handicap vehicles. 

14). another example. someone visits downtown New Braunfels, parks, goes to get something to eat, 

wanders around a few shops, gets back to their car and finds a $93 parking citation on the windshield 

attached (with no little irony) to a Welcome to New Braunfels leaflet. result. they screw the leaflet up, toss 

it in the street, get in their car and vow never to return to this "crazy f*cking town". real example. exact 

quote. 

15). the severity of the fines is not just keeping people away, it is making this town a joke, a ghost town, 

a laughing stock. 

Ross 

Ross Fortune 

Phoenix Saloon 

193 W. San Antonio St, 

New Braunfels, TX 78130, 

) 

.. •' 

(830) 660-6002 (cell) 

2

.LLJ 

www. thephoenixsaloon.com 

)ubJect: June Do~ntown Conn~cti~~: 

Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 14:43:09 -0500 

From: ARogers@nbtexas.org 

CC: MVernon@nbtexas.org 

Good Afternoon Downtowners and Friends, 

Hi~h Noon T~~~~ a~d T~k~ Out Taki~g Off 

Please find attached the June 2010 publication of The Downtown Connection. We hope you are enjoying 

this publication and welcome your comments and suggestions. The newsletter will be available on our 

website before the end of closing today. Thanks for making downtown New Braunfels great and the place 

to shop, play and stay. 

Have a good afternoon and evening, 

Amy 


Downtown Development/ 

Main Street Program 



(830)221-4090 

) 

3

Luke Speckman 

619 Hunter's Creek Drive 

New Braunfels, Texas 78130 

830-608-5426 

Dear Mayor and City Council and City Staff, 

As a downtown property owner and landlord, I would like you know that the 2 hour 

parking restriction downtown has been very helpful. I have served on Mainstreet Board 

and other downtown organizations for years and part of the parking problem has always 

been Tenants and Building owners that would park in front of their building all day long 

and prevent a paying customer from finding a parking place. Please continue to keep this 

policy in effect as it has a positive effect on the overall plan to improve downtowns 

accessibility and walkability by opening up heretofore unavailable parking. 

With regards, 

Luke Speckman 

)

1£:::, 

. Monique L. Vernon 

From: 

~ent: 

jO: 

Cc: 

Subject: 

Cindy Lohkamp [realtors@randallmorris.com] 

Monday, December 20, 2010 4:07 PM 

Bruce Boyer; Kathleen Krueger; Mike Ybarra; Richard Zapata; Sandy Nolte; Steven Digges; 

Mark Goodner 

Rosemary Allen; Monique L. Vernon; Nancy Bower; Cindy- Work 

2-hour Parking 

Dear Mayor Boyer and City Council, 

I'm writing to let you know Randall Morris & Associates Real Estate is very much in favor of extending the 

downtown 2-hour parking. We have six ( 6) tenants in our building up stairs and the convenience for all of our 

clients is great for the times they are only running in to pick up or drop off something. Postmen, FedEx, and 

UPS use the street parking as well. 

I've been able to observe patrons of the Taqueria El Tapatio use the space for high traffic times at the restaurant 

and on Farm-to-Market days, folks park in front of our building and walk through our property and Chase 

Banking parking lot to the market. 

It also seems convenient for the businesses I see across across the street from us like 50 Foot Designs, Griffin 

Photography, Water to Wine, Ludwig Leather, Oyster Bar, Olives Italian Market, The Parlor, and Oak Leaf 

Quilts. 

Thanks for your continued support of this convenient downtown parking! 

)Happy Holidays to you and your family! 

Cindjj .£ofikarf!P- Office Manager 

Randall Morris & Associates Real Estate 

190 S. Seguin Ave. 

New Braunfels TX 78130-5117 

~830-609-7400 

(F) 830-620-1665 

(C) 830-708-4986 

realtors@randalbnorris.com 

www.randalbnorris.com 

) 

1

lLb 

• Access Control 

• Audio/Video Receivers, Televisions 

• Central Vacuums 

• Home Theaters 

• Lighting/Home Control 

• Networking ~ 

"Today's Link to a Better Lifestyle" 

• Security Et Surveillance } 

• 24 Hr. Monitoring 

To Whom it May Concern: 

I would like to voice my support for the 2 hour Parking Program in Downtown 

New Braunfels. The program has been successful in creating parking turnover in the 

limited spaces that are available for my customers in the Downtown Area. 

Darrin Toney 

CEO/President 

) 

PO Box 312599 

339 Main Plaza 


www.alarm-automation. com 

Lie# Bl5804 

Bus (830) 606-3819 

Fax (830) 625-0285 

)

127 


From: 

~e~t: 

,lb. 

Cc: 

Subject: 

Rosemary Allen [fara@nbtx.com] 

Tuesday, December28, 201012:39 PM 

Bruce Boyer; Kathleen Krueger; Sandy Nolte; Steven Digges; Mike Ybarra; Mark Goodner; 

Richard Zapata; Michael Morrison 


Downtown On Street Two Hour Parking 


Mayor, City Council, and City Manager, 

I ask that you, please, vote to continue the Downtown On Street Two Hour Parking. 

The Two Hour Parking Zone was established so there would be constant turn-over of customer parking giving customers 

a chance to park at or near the front door. · 

The limited on street parking that is available is valuable to the business as well as the property owner and the use of this 

parking needs to be maximized and managed. 

Please continue this policy that is working for the customers. 

Thank you, 

Rosemary Allen 

7 45 Summerwood Dr. 

fara@nbtx.com 

) 

This message has been scanned for viruses and 

dangerous content by MailScanner, and is 

believed to be clean. 

) 

1

lLI::l 


AN ORDINANCE MODIFYING SECTION 126-355 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES CITY OF 

NEW BRAUNFELS, TEXAS TO CONTINUE THE DOWNTOWN ON-STREET PARKING ZONE; 

REPEAUNG ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFUCT, ADDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND GIVING 

AN EFFEcnVE DATE. 

WHEREAS, the Staff has recommended specific parking regulations to be implemented to 

manage traffic parking within certain areas; and 

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of New Braunfels has determined that the addition of 

specific parking regulations will be beneficial to the City of New Braunfels and should be modified as 

recommended by Staff. 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW 

BRAUNFELS, TEXAS: 

I. 

THAT Section 126-355 of the Code of Ordinances, City of New Braunfels, Texas is hereby 

amended to read as follows: 

Sec. 126-355. DOWNTOWN PARKING ZONE. 

(a) Definitions. The following terms, as used in this Section, have the following definitions. 

Chief of Police shall mean the Chief of Police of the City of New Braunfels, Texas or his designee. 

) 

Director of Planning shall mean the Director of Planning and Community Development of the City of New 

Braunfels, Texas or his designee. 

Downtown Parking Zone shall mean the area comprised of the following public streets as identified in 

Appendix A: 

(1) Main Plaza (with the exception of the Carnal County Courthouse); 

(2) Seguin Avenue from Mill Street to Coli Street; 

(3) San Antonio Street from Market Avenue to Academy Avenue (with the exception of the 

Carnal County Courthouse); 

(4) Castell Avenue from Mill Street to Coli Street; 

Motor vehicle shall mean any mechanically or electrically powered device not operated on rails, upon 

which or by which any person or property may be transported upon a land highway. The load on a 

motor vehicle or trailer attached to it, is considered part of the vehicle. Tractors and motorized 

machinery are included while self-propelled in transit or used for transportation. 

Overnight Parking is defined as from 1:00 a.m. to 4:00a.m. of any day. 

Temporary Visitors Permit shall be issued, free of charge, for persons visiting from out of town, at the 

written request of any person residing within the Downtown Parking Zone or any owner/operator of a 

"hotel" located within the Downtown Parking Zone. (For the purposes of this section, the term "hotel" 

shall have the same meaning as set forth in Section 156.001 of the Texas Tax Code.) These Temporary 

Visitor permits shall be valid only on the date(s) noted on the permit. 

) 


lZ~ 

The Chief of Police has authority to enforce this ordinance as described below: 

(b). Offenses. 

(1) Except as provided in Subsection (D), below, no person shall park any motor vehicle on any 

public street in the Downtown Parking Zone for more than two consecutive hours between the 

hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, without displaying a temporary visitor 

permit. 

(2) Except as provided in Subsection (D), below, no person shall park any motor vehicle on any 

public street in the Downtown Parking Zone overnight. 

(3) An individual commits an offense if he displays a permit issued pursuant to this Section on a 

motor vehicle other than the motor vehicle for which the permit was issued. 

(4) An individual commits an offense if he displays a permit issued pursuant to this Section on a 

motor vehicle on a day other than the day issued. 

(5) A person commits an offense if he falsely represents himself as being eligible for a 

temporary visitors permit, submits false documents, or otherwise makes a false statement of 

material fact on an application for a permit. 

(c) 

Penalties. 

) 

(1) Any vehicle parked for more than two consecutive hours in the Downtown Parking Zone, 

during times when parking is restricted and without displaying a valid permit issued under this 

Section, will be subject to: 

(i) A warning for the first offense; 

(ii) A fine not to exceed $50.00 for the second offense plus Court Costs; 

(iii) A fine not to exceed $200.00 for the third offense plus Court Costs; and 

(iv) A fine not to exceed $500 for the fourth and any subsequent offenses plus Court 

Costs. 

(2) A person who commits any other violation against the provisions of this Section is subject to 

the penalties provided for in the Code of Ordinances, City of New Braunfels, Texas. 

(3) For purposes of this subsection, counting of repeat offenses shall commence on January 

1st and end on December 31st of each calendar year. Offenses committed in prior calendar years 

shall not be counted in determining the level of penalty applied for offenses committed in 

subsequent calendar years. 

(d). 

Exceptions. The terms of this Section shall not apply in the following instances: 

(1) Motor vehicles that are used in individuals to carry equipment and goods necessary for 

making improvements and repairs, providing actual labor, and performing other related services 

at any location within the Downtown Parking Zone. Not including employees of the business. 

(2) The provisions of this Section shall not apply to vehicles that display a valid temporary 

visitors permit. 

(e). 

Temporary Visitor Parking Zone Permits. 

) 

(1) Temporary Visitor permits shall be issued, free of charge, for persons visiting in the area 

from out of town, at the written request of any person residing within the Downtown Parking 

Zone or any owner/operator of a "hotel" located within the Downtown Parking Zone. (For the 

purposes of this section, the term "hotel" shall have the same meaning as set forth in Section 

156.001 of the Texas Tax Code.) These Temporary Visitor permits shall be valid only on the 

date(s) noted on the permit and only two permits per business will be issued daily. Permits will 

be issued by the Director of Planning and Community Development. 

(f). Miscellaneous. 


(1) A permit issued pursuant to this Section, and properly displayed, authorizes the visitor's 

motor vehicle to be parked in the Downtown Parking Zone for more than two consecutive hours 

when otherwise prohibited by this Section. A permit does not authorize the visitor's motor vehicle 

to be parked in a manner or location that is prohibited or otherwise governed by regulations, 

ordinances, statutes, or laws other than provided for in this Section. 

(2) A permit is not transferable from one motor vehicle to another. 

(3) A lost or stolen permit may be replaced. The visitor must submit a signed affidavit stating 

that the permit was lost or stolen and not transferred to another vehicle, nor given or conveyed 

to another individual. 

II. 

All other ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are repealed to the extent that 

they are in conflict. 

III. 

THAT all provisions hereof are hereby declared to be severable and if any provision is declared to 

be invalid or unconstitutional, such shall not invalidate or affect the remaining provisions which will be 

and remain in full force and effect. 

IV. 

This Ordinance shall take effect after its second and final reading and ten days after publication 

pursuant to city charter. 

PASSED AND APPROVED: First reading this the lOth day of January, 2011. 

PASSED AND APPROVED: Second reading this the 24th day of January; 2011. 

) 


ATTEST: 

BY: 

R.BRUCEBOYER,MAYOR 



ALAN WAYLAND, CITY ATTORNEY 

) 


--Proposed 2-hour parking

~) 

)

,.._,City of 

\;';-.. New Braunfels 


JANUARY 10, 2011 

Agenda Item No. 4-£. 


(830) 221 ~4055 - smattingly@nbtexas.org 

SuBJECT: Discuss and consider an appeal to the Non-Residential and Multifamily Design 

Standards Exterior Building Materials requirement for themed lodging and an 

additional outbuilding to be located within the Schlitterbahn Water Park 

) 


The Schlitterbahn Water Park is beginning a series of renovations of various elements 

within the Park. This specific project includes the addition of twelve (12) new lodging 

units and the renovation of an existing concession stand. The new lodging units (Tree 

Haus) will be constructed from a combination of wood and steel frame elements in a 

"tree house" theme. The buildings will resemble the structures shown in Attachment 3 

where most of the fac;ade material is wood with features that include live plant material. 

The "trunk" base of the structures will vary with two forms of construction, Type One or 

Type Two. Type One will utilize a steel frame surrounded by a rebar and wire mesh 

exterior "cage" that is covered in sculpted cement and accentuated with living plant life. 

Type Two will be made from real tree trunks and limbs harvested from the local area. 

The concession stand will be remodeled internally and externally. The external remodel 

will include a wood wainscot with a metal screen wall above, surrounding the food 

service area. Other walls are clad with the locally harvested wood siding and 

accentuated with locally harvested tree elements. 

The structures are proposed to be oriented towards the river and will not be 

immediately adjacent to any public streets. 

Section 5.21-10 of the Zoning Ordinance states that enforcement of the Non 

Residential and Multifamily Design Standards may be appealed to the City Council if an 

application is denied by the Planning Director or his/her designee. The appeal must be 

scheduled for consideration on the regular agenda of the Council within 30 days after 

the submission is received, or, in the case of an incomplete submission 30 days after 

the submission is deemed complete. The Council shall review the plans and 

recommend approval, approval subject to certain conditions, or disapproval of the 

concept plan or site plan. The City Council shall determine final approval or disapproval 

of all site plan appeals. 

) 


Case# 

Lot Size: 

CS-11-001 

Approximately 27 acres 


Building Area: 


and Land Use: 

Comprehensive Plan Future 


Multiple buildings with various square footages 

There is a mixture of zoning districts and various land ~) 

uses surrounding the water park (see Attachment 4 for 

zoning map). Surrounding uses include retail, 

restaurants, offices, resort rentals, condominiums and 

single-family homes. 

Private Recreation 

NOTIFICATION: 

N/A 


~ 

X Yes City Plan/Council Pros: 

Priority: 

1. Goal12: Protect and enhance the visual 

Comprehensive Plan environment of the City. 

2. Goal 13: Maintain and enhance the green 

appearance of New Braunfels. 

3. Goal 41: Continue working with tourism 

based organizations to promote the City as 

a place to meet, visit and vacation. The 

proposed buildings will provide a unique 

aesthetic feature that can be viewed as an 

attraction to New Braunfels. 

) 

-- 

Cons: 

1. Goal 9A Consider establishing 

architectural standards and building 

material standards for nonresidential 

structures. The proposed buildings are not 

in compliance with the minimum masonry 

exterior building material requirements that 

have been established per Section 5.21-4, 

Chapter 144, New Braunfels Code of 

Ordinances. 


N/A 


N/A 


135 


Staff recommends approval of the request as the proposed structures are unique and 

will add character to the water park ambiance. The proposed structures will not be 

erected immediately adjacent to roadways. 

ATTACHMENTS: 


2. Aerial/Site Plan 

3. Proposed Building Elevations 

4. Zoning Map 

5. Section 5.21-4, Chapter 144, New Braunfels Code of Ordinances 

U:\Pianning\CCagenda\Building Design Standards\Schlitterbahn\tree_houses.doc 

) 

) 


136 

£;J N~ Braunfels 

APPEAL OF BUILDING DESIGN STANDARDS 

Planning and Community Development 

424 S. Castell Avenue, New Braunfels TX 78130 

Phone: (830) 221-4050 Fax: (830) 608-2109 

1. Applicant m If owner(s), so state; If agent or other type of relationship, a letter of authorization must be 

furnishe~ from owner(s) at the time the application is submitted. 

l 

Name :Mark Stuart Architect- Schlitterbahn Development Group 

Mailing Address 3150 IH 35 South. New Braunfels. Texas 78130 

Telephone: 830-620-4000 Fax: Mobile:~40~9~·7w:3:.::::9..::-9:.::::0;;:;:48~------- 

Email: mstuart@schlitterbahn.com 

2. Property Address/Location: 470 Union Street, New Braunfels, Texas 78130 ______ _ 

3. Detailed description of design standard(s) not in compliance with Sec. 5.21 Non-Residential and 

Multifamily Design Standards:------------------------- 

Not to adhere to masonry requirements for themed lodging and additional outbuildings to be located 

throughout the Schlitterbahn Water Park 

4. Reason for request: 

) 

To be consistent with the existing waterpark themed elements & introduce new lodging & outbuildings 

including Tree Houses using native wood siding and real tree elements. 

5. Attachments: The following items must be submitted with the application: 

X Completed application. 

X Fagade elevation drawing. 

Site plan. 

X Details of construction materials. 

The undersigned hereby requests City Council to consider an appeal to the Building Design Standards for the 

location(s) stated above. 

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: 

Date Denied by Planning Div. __._l"L-"'+/"-'tt~,(-tf-"-0 ___ _ 

Council Meeting Date: --=-l +-L.__t o--1!--'t-'-1 ---- 

1 I 

Case No. C S I/ - 00 I 

) 

C:\Documents and Settings\mstuart\My Documents\MARKSTUART\SDG\NEWBRAUNFELS-MASTERPLANI 

THs\VARIENCE-REQUEST\Appeal of Bldg Design Stds.doc 

ATTACHMENT 1

\._.,--' 

..._,. 

0 

3 

DESCRIPTION OF WORK 

PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS 

Schlitterbahn plans to construCt 

12 new Tree Haus units and remo 

-del an existing concession stand. 

c 1 The buildings will resemble the 

example concepts shown in Attach 

-ment 3. Most of the fat;ade material 

to be used will be of wood and will 

include features with live plant 

material. Building construction 

materials proposed include a com 

-bination of wood imd steel frame 

elements. The structures are pro 

-posed to be located as indicated 

on the Site Plan in Exhibit A 1. 

B 

~,, 

...... 

==- 

SCHLmERBAHN. 

DEVELOPMENT GROUP 

315DRI35Io.lln 

No .. l_,.k.To ... 711:n,.t,Sio. 

Tlloll301~ 

F ....{U0)60NII9 

ARCHITECT 

MARK A. STUART AlA 

31SORI2$:1uh 

-•-ll.t•••7111:1),U... 

fobji3DI62a..ccao 

t• .. IU0)-.111t 

6 

~ 

~ g 

~!ii~ 

E2«cn 

wln< 

~3!il 

~8!1" 

BY; 

11/02/10 

RJC 

MSA 

A 

~ 

~ 

)> 

0 

X 

31: 

m 

z 

-f 

N 

ffi-~~~_!IAL SITE PLAN SCHLITTERBAHN WATER RESORT 

PARTIAL SCHLITTERBAHN 

SITE PLAN 

TREEHAUS & CONCESSION 

IMPROVEMENTS 

EXHIBIT A 1

c 

0 

:g 

> 

.!! 

w 

.., 0 

.... .... 

0 

w N 

Ll. 

N' 

z .... 

;:) v 

w 

0 

~ I 

fA 

iE :) 

z 

li> . 

1- 

cc: 0 

0 .., :: 

0:: 

w 

cc: 

0 

C2 

~ w 

cc: t< 

w 

~ 

I 

cc: 1- 

w c. 

w 

v 

z 

ti: 

== 8 

z u.. 

% 0 

VI 

~ 

w 

..J 

cc: c. 

w ::iE 

1- Cl: 

X 

1- w 

::i 

X 

v 

.., 

) 

) 

ATTACHMENT 3

139 

Fence ~ 1-n-n-m-r-rrni ~· ~~ ~i ~ 

EMPlOYEE CAFE 

GRlU.EX[T 

'-- Screen Wall 

with wood 

wainscot 

ELEVATION FACING POOL AREA 

) 

Covered Patio 

Metal Roof 

Screen Wall 

With Wood 

Wainscot 

ELEVATION FACING ENTRY PATH & TREE HAUS 

)

j 

740 

• 

-C-1 

-C-2 -C-3 

ZONING DISTRICTS 

-C-4A 

c:::::J R-3 

-C-1A 

I:J R-1A6.6 

)>o 

~ -M-1 

~ -C-18 

> CJR-2 

(") ' 

:I: 

m 3: ~-J _ ._ City of 

~ < New Braunfels 

,a::.. "'-v r 

""" 

·---/ 

·,---- 

CS11-001 

Schlitterbahn 

851 

• 

Map Created On 12/22/10 

~

141 

5.21-4. Exterior Building Materials. 

Masonry Requirement. At least 80 percent of the vertical walls of all buildings (excluding 

doors and windows) to which these standards apply, shall be finished in one or more of the 

following materials: 

(a) Permitted by Right: 

(1) Brick, stone, cast stone, rock, marble, granite, glass block, tile; 

(2) Stucco or plaster; 

(3) Glass with less than 20 percent reflectance (however, only a maximum of 50 

percent of a building may be constructed in glass); 

(4) Split-face concrete block, poured-in-place concrete, and tilt-wall concrete. 

Any use of concrete products shall have an integrated color and be textured 

or patterned. Tilt-wall concrete structures shall include reveals, punch-outs, 

or other similar surface characteristics to enhance the fagade on at least ten 

percent of each fagade. 

(b) 

Special Use Permit Required: The following exterior building materials require a 

Special Use Permit ( S. U. P) in accordance with Section 3.6 of the Zoning Ordinance. 

), 

(c) 

(1) Exterior Insulation and Finish System (EIFS) or equivalent product. 

(2) Cellulose fiber-reinforced cement building board products, i.e. Hardi-Board 

products or other cement building products approved by a nationally 

recognized building products evaluation service. 

Additions to existing structures with vertical walls made of wood, including shingles 

and siding, may utilize wood in an amount consistent with the percentage of wood on 

lfle ong1nal structure. 

) 

ATTACHMENT 5

) 

)

~J N~~ Braunfels City Council Agenda Item Report 


Agenda Item No. L/ -E 

Presenter- Shannon Mattingly, Planning Department 

830-221-4055 - smattingly@nbtexas.org 

SUBJECT: Public hearing and first reading of an ordinance rezoning 16.589 acres, located 

at 631 Lakeview Boulevard, from "R-3" Multifamily District to "POD" Eden Hill 

Planned Development District. 

APPLICANT AND OWNER: 

Eden Home Inc. 

631 Lakeview Boulevard 


) 


The subject property is located on Lakeview Boulevard between River Road and 

Lakeview Circle and is currently developed as a continuing care retirement community. 

The property has been used as such for over one hundred years. The property owner 

is proposing to redevelop the property to upgrade the existing facilities to include 

memory care and skilled nursing as well as independent living units to provide a facility 

with complete elder care services in the community. The majority of the redevelopment 

will be concentrated in the center of the property and will not affect the existing cottages 

located on the perimeter of the property. The base zoning will remain R-3. There are no 

additional land uses proposed that are not currently allowed in the R-3 district. 

The proposed deviations are as follows: 

) 

R-3 Proposed Eden Hill POD 

Maximum building height = 45 feet 

Maximum building height= 65 feet. 

No structure erected, altered, or placed 

within 175 ft. of the northwest boundary line 

of the property shall exceed 45 ft. in height. 

Per the current City Code, height shall be 

measured from the average elevation of the 

finished grade surrounding the structure to 

the highest point of the structure. 

Minimum parking for nursing Minimum of 1 parking space for each 

home\homes for the aged and independent living unit 

infirm: 

• 1 space/each 4 employees 

• 1 space/each 4 patient beds 

• 1 space/each staff doctor 

Eden Hill POD note number 8 on Attachment 8 references exterior building material 

requirements. The applicant indicates all new buildings will comply with the City's 


current minimum masonry fac;ade standard of 80%, however, feels it is necessary to 

include the note as part of the development standards in the event the City's Building 

Design Standard requirements undergo any future revisions. Detail plans must be 

submitted and approved by the Planning Commission prior to approval of construction } 

for any proposed buildings. 


Case#: 

Size: 


PZ10-44 

16.589 acres 

North- "R-3" Multifamily District and "M-1" Light Industrial 

District I Construction Equipment Yard 

South - "R-3" Multifamily District I Vacant 

East- "R-3" Multifamily District I Construction Equipment 

Yard 

West -"R-2" Single and Two-Family District I Single 

Family Residential Dwellings 


Land Use Designation: Institutional, Churches, Nursing Homes 

lmprovement(s): An existing Continuing Care Retirement Community 

Notification: 

Public hearing notices were sent to twenty-nine property owners located within 200 feet. ,) 

As of January 4, 2011, five responses have been returned in favor (#6, 17, 25, 27, and 

29) and one response has been returned in opposition (#9). 


Yes 

City Plan/Council Priority: 




Pros: 




achieving better places to live. The proposed POD 

is consistent with the existing development and 

Future Land Use Plan. 

Goal 3A Encourage designs that provide for the 

preservation and protection of open space and 

natural resources and minimize disturbance of 

native vegetation. The additional height allowance 

will allow for more open space on the property 

rather than the buildings at a lower height and 

spread out over the property. 

Cons: 

None 

.) 



N/A 


The Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 7, 2010 and 

recommended approval of the rezoning, unanimously (7-0-0) 


Staff recommends approval of the Eden Hill POD. The proposed development is 

consistent with the Future Land Use Plan and existing use of the property. 

) 

ATTACHMENTS: 


2. Zoning Map 



5. Aerial Map 

6. Photographs 


8. Concept Plan (reduced copy) 

9. Development Standards 

10. Conceptual Building Elevation 

11. Sec. 3.5 Planned Development Districts 

12. Sec. 3.3-3 "R-3" Multifamily District 

13. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes- December 7, 2010 

14. Ordinance 

U:\Pianning\CCagenda\ZoneChgs&SUP\2011 \Eden Hill POD 1-1 0-11.docx 

' .f 

) 

Page.3 of3

146 

~···~City of 


APPLICATION FOR 

ZONE CHANGE 


NEW BRAUNFELS TX 78130 

E-MAIL: planning@nbtexas.org 

PHONE: (830) 221-4050 FAX: (830) 608-2109 

1. Applicant -If owner{s), so state; If agent or other type of relationship, a letter of authorization must be 

furnished from owner{s) at the time submitted. 

Name Eden Home Inc. 

MailingAddress 631 Lakeview Boulevard, New Braunfels, TX 78130 

Telephone: 8 3 0-62 5-62 91 Fax: 83 0-62 0-77 86Mobi/e: 830-660-2 760Email: larryd®edenhill.org 

2. Property Address/Location: 631 Lakeview Boulevard, New Braunfels, TX 78130 

3. Legal Description: 

NameofSubdivision: See attached survey/metes and bounds description 

Lot(s): _________ Block(s): __________ Acreage: ______ _ 

4. Existing Use of Property: Continuing Care Retirement Community (CCRC) 

5. Proposed Use of Property {attach additional or supporting information if necessary): ______ _ 

Redevelopment of existing Continuing Care Retirement Community (CCRC) 

6. 

Zoning Change Request: Current Zoning:_R_-_3 ______ Proposed Zoning PDD ( R- 3 ) - EdenHi 11 

If "POD Planned Development District", check if: Concept Plan_x __ OR Detail Plan _____ _ 

7. 

Reason for request (please explain in detail and attach additional pages if needed): ------ 

See attachment 

8. 

ATTACHMENTS: 

X 

--x- 

X 

-x-- 

Metes and bounds description or survey and map if property is not platted. 

Location in 1 00-year floodplain: Please provide a map of the floodplain overlaying the property proposed for 

zoning or, at a minimum, a copy of the proper FEMA flood map, with panel number. (Current floodplain maps are 

those most recently adopted by the City Council.) 

Map of property in relation to City limits/major roadways or surrounding area. 

If requesting a Planned Development (PD), applicant must provide development standards on the detail plan 

and/or provide the standards in a separate document as described in the Zoning Ordinance, Section 3.5. Provide 

14 copies of the 1 :200 for distribution with 4 copies of 1 :200 and one legible 11 x17 of the revisions. 

20/0 

Fee Received ByO, · '@roJ 9..... 

For Office Use Only 

Amoun~ I , 040 r;& Receipt No.: l

~ 

:;! 

0 

::I: 

3S: I' 

EZ2J Subject 

c::::::J Parcels 

ZONING 

-C-1 -C-3 -C-4 

DISTRICTS 

-M-1 

c:JR-1 

CJR-2 

CJR-3 

CJzHA 

CJzH 

m s"> > y / 6 > 

z > - 

.... f' .., '> '> ". 

City of 

N 

-- 

~-...New Braunfels 

PZ10-44 


"R-3" to "POD" 

Map Created On 11/17/10

----- I--------- - -------• 

~ 

);! 

0 

:I: I I 

E:ZJ Subject 

CJ Parcels 

Existing Land Use 

1,..'::.:-C;:Z:] Institutional 

Residential High Density 


- Commercial 

- Industrial 

-Government 

-Open Space 

k·::-:::::J 

r', 

Drainage 


3: s , • y • '> '> e M 

m 

z 

-1 

w 


~= 

PZ10-44 


03" to "POD" 


-~

I 

fZJsubject 

0Parcels 

- Commercial 

j"···:.,:·:j Drainage 

Mixed Use 

- Open-Parks 


~ D Residential Low Density 

;1 0 Residential Medium/High Density 

)> -Utilities 

0 ~tilt" I 

::I: ~ Ins u 1ona • 

s: 

m 

z 

-t 

~ 


~~ New Braunfels Eden Home Inc. 

"R-3" to "POD" 


c: 

0 

"0 

I 

0 

c. 

til 

:2 

ATTACHMENT 5

151 

ATTACHMENT 6

152 

-M 

U) 

1 

~ 

... 

CQ 

"''"~- 

, 

oZ 

'15~ \ 

.z-W 

~ 

z 

:s 

0. 

)

PLANNING COMMISSION- DECEMBER 7, 2010- 6:00PM 


Applicant: 

Owner: 

Address/Legal Description: 

Eden Home, Inc. 

Eden Home for the Aged 

631 Lakeview Boulevard I 16.589 acres out of the A-2, SUR-1, J M 

Veramendi 

REQUEST FOR ZONING- CASE #PZ10-44 



) 

1. Caddell, Ginger & Cleburne 

3. Eden Home for the Aged 

5. Hopp, Mary Gayle 

7. New Braunfels Utilities 

9. Tolbert, Susan 

11. Dean Word Company 

13. Duettra, Georgia & Marcia McGlothlin 

15. Knight, Harry & Ann 

17. Boyer, Bruce & Toya 

19. Meadows, Thomas & Shirley 

21. Lowrey, James & Leslie 

23. Morris, Marvin 

25. Overall, William & Rebecca 

27. Granzin, Miles & Susan 

29. Blake, James & Sarah 

2. Eden Heights Inc. 

4. Groves, Glenn & Gail 

6. James, Eric & Felicia 

8. Sole Fide Ltd. 

10. Vaughn, James 

12. Worley, Joy Ann 

14. Boyle, Mildred 

16. Jurica, Peter & Constance TR 

18. McDowell, Anna Declaration of Trust 

20. Tornquist, Perry & Kandace 

22. Blake, Kathryn 

24. Bartram, Raymond & Carole 

26. Taylor, Steve & Catherine 

28. Zoller, James & Barbara 


ATTACHMENT 7

~-Notification 

Response Map I 

@ 

.. Favor(2%) 

Object (2%) 

L__: No Response ( 85%) 

~SUBJECT 

D NotificationBuffer 

r' ,City of 

~ .. New Braunfels 

"- 

~ 

\_../ 

PZ10-44 


'.3" to "POD" 

'\..._/ 

W*E 

s 


·J

··~ 

\..__,/ 

I 

~Iii/~ 

0 

-J 

LEGEND 

EXISTINCOIIERHtAO UnU'IY 

£XIstlH(IUNDERCROIIHD1EUf'HDN£ 

CIISliNGUHliERORDUNDEI.ECTRIC 

[XI511NG SANITARY Sf:I'IER UHE 

EXISTINGEOGEOFPAVEIAENT 

EXISTING TAtE 

ElCISTlNGTEI.EPtiGNEPEGESTAL 

thr:~ 

~ 

1 

""~"'=-l"":t.n'-1'~1"= 

o !!!":0 1 u 

EXISTINGUGHTPOLE 

EXISIIHOfliiEH'IDRN'I'T 

£XIS11NOWATER Vlol.VE. 

£1QS11NCW"'I£ftl.tE1ER 

[XISTINGCIL\NOUT 

EXlSTIN05ANITARYS£1'1ERw.Nt101.E 

EXlSTING STOIIt.l ORIIIN UANNOLE 

a:~ 9~~m~~t~~ 

PM 

PA~%v==r 

'""··~~~~~ .. ~~· 

~=~:.':.c..,nmad~>~nlpl 

......,,..,)r.rllldq""~'"'~'"11:'""'.,.,.1l)o>rplo)>ll.llll)lom11coi_...A>,uooodL"III$r..olno ...... ,t.:..,.lflp.:.l"ollo• 

foU1dcllciL111CodoiiVInGUUIL ... ,IIn>}'OI IIIII) nDI~Isoofl'clc~tlltl .... ldJIIIIIS 

09008 

DlolE : OCTOBER 29, 2010 

=· 

TtiiSDOCUUENTISitEl.EASEil 

f'OII'UIEPURI'OStOFINTERU.! 

~~~~L~~DER TtiE 

bl111CUII"""OII••ILII01"1M."

Edertlifill POD 

Development Standards 

PDD Notes: 

1) 

Deviation from code standards. The city council may approve a PD 

concept plan with deviations from any provision in this Code. Such 

deviations shall be listed or shown as part of the ordinance that 

approves the concept plan. 

2) All City Code requirements applicable to the R-3 zoning base district 

apply unless otherwise modified by the regulations established in this 

PDD Concept Plan. 

3) All permitted uses and uses permitted by Special Use Permit in the 

R-3 base zoning district are permitted uses and uses permitted by 

Special Use Permit in the PDD. 

4) Additional Permitted Non-Residential Uses that are classified as 

Nursing/Convalescent Home/Sanitarium and Assisted Living 

Facility/Retirement Home: 

a. Continuing Care Retirement Community 

b. Independent Living 

c. Assisted Living 

5) 

6) 

Definitions: 

a. Continuing Care Retirement Community (CCRC) - An 

alternative housing option designed to accommodate the 

needs of elders who can no longer live alone. CCRC's 

offer a full continuum of care, ranging from fully 

independent units, to assistance with personal care in 

assisted living units, to long-term care in a skilled nursing 

facility. 

b. Independent Living - Method of living and performing 

day-to-day tasks for the ederly within a facility or facilities 

that may or may not provide limited assistance to the 

residents. The independent living facility unit is equipped 

with kitchens within each unit and will also offer 

communal dining. 

c. Assisted Living - Facility or facilities that provide either 

routine general protective oversight or assistance with 

activities necessary for independent living to mentally or 

physically limited persons; Assisted Living facilities may 

be equipped with a full kitchen in each living unit and may 

or may not also offer communal dining. 

The sale and on-site consumption of alcoholic beverages is permitted 

in connection with the following uses: 


) 

) 

ATTACHMENT 9

157 



d. Assisted Living Facility/Retirement Home 

e. Nursing/Convalescent Home/Sanitarium 

7) Changes in concept plan. Changes in the concept plan shall be 

considered the same as changes in the zoning ordinance and shall be 

processed as required in section 144-2.1. Those changes which do not 

alter the uses permitted or increase the density, floor area ratio, 

height, or coverage of the site as indicated on the approved concept 

plan, may be authorized by the planning director. 

8) Code: 

5.21-4. Exterior building materials. 

Masonry requirement. At least 80 percent of the vertical walls of all 

buildings (excluding doors and windows) to which these standards 

apply, shall be finished in one or more of the following materials: 

(a) Permitted by right. 



(3) Glass with less than 20 percent reflectance (however, only a 

maximum of 50 percent of a building may be constructed in glass); 

(4) Split-face concrete block, poured-in-place concrete, and tiltwall 

concrete. Any use of concrete products shall have an 

integrated color and be textured or patterned. Tilt-wall concrete 

structures shall include reveals, punch-outs, or other similar 

surface characteristics to enhance the facade on at least ten percent 

of each facade. 

(b) Special use permit required. The following exterior building 

materials require a special use permit (S.U.P) in accordance with 

section 144-3.6. 

(1) Exterior insulation and finish system (EIFS) or equivalent 

product. 

(2) Cellulose fiber-reinforced cement building board products, i.e. 

Hardi-Board products or other cement building products approved 

by a nationally recognized building products evaluation service. 

) 

Code Interpretation: A Special Use Permit (SUP) is only required 

if materials included in Code Section 5 .21-4(b) exceed 20% of the 

vertical walls of all buildings (excluding doors and windows) to 

which these standards apply.

9) This project lies within the city limits of New Braunfels. 

Building Design Standards Table- Non-Residential Uses 

Permitted Uses 

PDD Regulation 

Continuing Care Retirement Community The building exterior materials include 

Independent Living 

stone, brick, stucco, and exterior siding 

Assisted Living (cement board). As noted in Note 8, 

Assisted Living Facility/Retirement Home cement building products are permitted by 

Nursing/Convalescent Home/Sanitarium right. 

Development Standards Table- Non-Residential Uses 


Continuing Care Retirement Community 


Assisted Living 

Assisted Living Facility/Retirement Home 

Nursing/Convalescent Home/Sanitarium 


The current zoned R-3 building height is 

limited to 45-0". This PDD requests a 

maximum allowable height of65'-0". 

Table 1 - Off-street Vehicle Parking Requirements 

Code Requirements PDD Regulation ) 

Nursing I Convalescent Home I Sanitarium 

I Assisted Living Facility I Retirement 

Home: 

1 for each four employees 

1 for each four patient beds 

1 for each staff doctor 



1 for each unit 

PERMITTED USE MINIMUM VEHICLE SPACES 



Continuing Care Retirement Community Based on industry standards for these uses, 


vehicle off street parking spaces 


requirements will be calculated using the 

Assisted Living Facility/Retirement Home parking ratios shown on Table 1. 


)

159 

Z omn2 . T a bl e- N on-R es1 'd en f Ia I U ses 

R-3 Base Zoning District PDD Regulation 

Minimum Lot Size NA 

Minimum Lot Width 100' 

Minimum Lot Depth 100' 

Maximum Height 45' 65' 

Minimum Building 

Setbacks 

Front Yard 25' 

Side Yard 5* 

Rear Yard 20' 

Maximum Building NA 

Coverage 

Maximum Floor to Area NA 

Ratio 

* Where any building abuts a property with a one or two family use, the setback from the 

one or two family property line shall be at least 20 feet plus one foot for each foot of 

building height over 20 feet. No structure erected, altered, or placed within one hundred 

and seventy-five feet (175') of the northwest boundary line of the property shall exceed 

forty-five 45 feet ( 45,') in height. Height shall be measured from the average elevation of 

the finished grade surrounding the structure to the highest point of the structure. 

) 

)

-=) 

·.t:. 

dl 

or! 

·~o~ 

cu 

..... 

m 

S' 

•oi 

'tl 

.-1 

•oi 

::s 

,Q 

'tl 

cu 

m 

0 ) 

·p. 

0 

.. •' 

1-1 

p. 

... 

0 

cu 

.-1 

f 

~ 

s:l 

cu "' 

'tl 

·oi 

~ 

1-1 

p. 

0 

.... 

>. 

.-1 

s:l 

0 

) 

.·' 

ATTACHMENT10

161 

3.5 Planned Development Districts. 

3.5-1 Purpose: The planned development district is a free-standing district designed to provide for 

the development of land as an integral unit for single or mixed uses in accordance with a plan that 

may vary from the established regulations of other zoning districts. It is the intent in such a district 

to insure compliance with good zoning practices while allowing certain desirable departures from 

the strict provisions of specific zoning classifications. 

3.5-2 Application: An application for a planned development district shall be processed in 

accordance with this Chapter. A pre-planning conference is required between the applicant and 

the Planning Director prior to the actual filing of the application. 

3.5-3 Base District. A base zoning district shall be specified. The regulations in the base zoning 

district shall control unless specifically stated otherwise in the PD. 

3.5-4 District plans and requirements: There are two types of plans that may be used in the 

planned development process. The general purpose and use of each plan is described as 

follows: 

(a) Concept plan. This plan is intended to be used as the first step in the planned 

development process. It establishes the most general guidelines for the district by 

identifying the land use types, development standards, approximate road locations and 

project boundaries and illustrates the integration of these elements into a master plan for 

the whole district. 

) 

(b) Detail plan. The detail plan is the final step of the planned development process. It 

contains the details of development for the property. For smaller tracts or where final 

development plans are otherwise known, the detail plan may be used to establish the 

district and be the only required step in the planned development process. 

3.5-5 Concept plan requirements: Said concept plan shall include the following: 

(a) Relation to the comprehensive plan. A general statement setting forth how the 

proposed district will relate to the city's comprehensive plan and the degree to which it is 

or is not consistent with that plan and the proposed base zoning district. 

(b) Acreage. The total acreage within the proposed district. 

(c) Survey. An accurate survey of the boundaries of the district. 

(d) Land uses. Proposed general land uses and the acreage for each use, including open 

space. For residential development, the total number of units and the number of units per 

acre. 

(e) General thoroughfare layout. Proposed streets, as a minimum to arterial street level. 

(Showing collector and local streets is optional.) 

(f) Development standards. Development standards, if different from the base zoning 

district, for each proposed land use, as follows: 

(1) Minimum lot area. 

(2) Minimum lot width and depth. 

(3) Minimum front, side, and rear building setback areas. 

ATTACHMENT 11

162 

(4) Maximum height of buildings. 

(5) Maximum building coverage. 

(6) Maximum floor to area ratios for nonresidential uses. 

(7) Minimum parking standards for each general land use. 

(8) Other standards as deemed appropriate. 

(g) Existing conditions. On a scaled map sufficient to determine detail, the following shall 

be shown for the area within the proposed district. 

(1) Topographic contours of ten feet or less. 

(2) Existing streets. 

(3) Existing 1 00-year floodplain, floodway and major drainage ways. 

(4) City limits and E.T.J. boundaries. 

(5) Zoning districts within and adjacent to the proposed district. 

(6) Land use. 

(7) Utilities, including water, wastewater and electric lines. 

3.5-6 Detail plan requirements: The application for a planned development district shall include a 

detail plan consistent with the concept plan. Said detail plan shall include the following: 

(a) Acreage. The acreage in the plan as shown by a survey, certified by a registered 

surveyor. 

) 

(b) Land uses. Permitted uses, specified in detail, and the acreage for each use. 

(c) Off-site information. Adjacent or surrounding land uses, zoning, streets, drainage 

facilities and other existing or proposed off-site improvements, as specified by the 

department, sufficient to demonstrate the relationship and compatibility of the district to 

the surrounding properties, uses, and facilities. 

(d) Traffic and transportation. The location and size of all streets, alleys, parking lots and 

parking spaces, loading areas or other areas to be used for vehicular traffic; the proposed 

access and connection to existing or proposed streets adjacent to the district; and the 

traffic generated by the proposed uses. 

(e) Buildings. The locations, maximum height, maximum floor area and minimum 

setbacks for all nonresidential buildings. 

(f) Residential development. The numbers, location, and dimensions of the lots, the 

minimum setbacks, the number of dwelling units, and number of units per acre (density). 

(g) Water and drainage. The location of all creeks, ponds, lakes, floodplains or other 

water retention or major drainage facilities and improvements. 

(h) Utilities. The location and route of all major sewer, water, or electrical lines and 

facilities necessary to serve the district. 

)

163 

(i) Open space. The approximate location and size of greenbelt, open, common, or 

recreation areas, the proposed use of such areas, and whether they are to be for public 

or private use. 

U) Sidewalks and bike paths. Sidewalks or other improved ways for pedestrian or bicycle 

use. 

(k) If multifamily or non-residential development, a landscape plan. 

A detailed plan, with all of the information required of a concept plan, may be submitted in 

lieu of a concept plan. 

3.5-7 Phasing schedule: PD districts larger than 350 acres shall provide a phasing schedule 

depicting the different construction phases. 

3.5-8 Approval of district: The City Council may, after receiving a recommendation from the 

Planning Commission, approve by Ordinance the creation of a district based upon a concept plan 

or a detail plan. The approved plan shall be made part of the ordinance establishing the district. 

Upon approval said change shall be indicated on the zoning maps of the city. 

) 

The development standards and requirements including, but not limited to, maximum height, lot 

width, lot depth, floor area, lot area, setbacks and maximum off-street parking and loading 

requirements for uses proposed shall be established for each planned development district based 

upon the particular merits of the development design and layout. Such standards and 

requirements shall comply with or be more restrictive than the standards established in the base 

zoning district for the specific type uses allowed in the district, except that modifications in these 

regulations may be granted if it shall be found that such modifications are in the public interest, 

are in harmony with the purposes of this Chapter and will not adversely affect nearby properties. 

3.5-9 Planning Commission approval of detail plan: The Planning Commission is authorized to 

approve a detail plan or the amendment of a detail plan for property for which a concept plan has 

been approved by the City Council. If the City Council initially approved a detail plan in 

establishing the district, the detail plan may only be amended by the City Council. The approved 

detail plan shall be permanently filed in the Planning Department. The Planning Commission shall 

approve the detail plan if it finds that: 

(a) Compliance. The plan complies with the concept plan approved for that property and 

the standards and conditions of the PD district; 

(b) Compatibility. The plan provides for a compatible arrangement of buildings and land 

uses and would not adversely affect adjoining neighborhood or properties outside the 

plan; and 

(c) Circulation of vehicular traffic. The plan provides for the adequate and safe circulation 

of vehicular traffic. 

If no detail plan has been approved for the property within ten years of the date of approval of a 

concept plan, the detail plan must be approved by the City Council, after receiving a 

recommendation from the Planning Commission, after notice and hearing. 

) 

3.5-10 Expiration of detail plan: A detail plan shall be valid for five years from the date of its 

approval. If a building permit has not been issued or construction begun on the detail plan within 

the five years, the detail plan shall automatically expire and no longer be valid. The Planning 

Commission may, prior to expiration of the detail plan, for good cause shown, extend for up to 24 

months the time for which the detail plan is valid.

164 

3.5-11 Appeals from Planning Commission action: If the Planning Commission disapproves a 

detail plan over which it has final approval authority, or imposes conditions, or refuses to grant an \ 

extension of time for which a detail plan is valid, the applicant may appeal the decision to the City / 

Council by filing a written request with the Planning Director within ten days of the decision. 

3.5-12 Changes in detail plan: Changes in the detail plan shall be considered the same as 

changes in the zoning ordinance and shall be processed as required in Section 2.3. Those 

changes which do not alter the basic relationship of the proposed development to adjacent 

property and which do not alter the uses permitted or increase the density, floor area ratio, height, 

or coverage of the site, or which do not decrease the off-street parking ratio or reduce the yards 

provided at the boundary of the site, as indicated on the approved detail plan, may be authorized 

by the Planning Director. Any applicant may appeal the decision of the Planning Director to the 

Planning Commission for review and decision as to whether an amendment to the Planned 

Development District ordinance shall be required. 

3.5-13 Minimum development size: The total initial development of any Planned Development 

District shall not be less than two acres for nonresidential developments and five acres for 

residential developments. 

3.5-14 Deviation from code standards: The City Council may approve a PD concept plan with 

deviations from any provision in the Code of Ordinances. Such deviations shall be listed or shown 

as part of the Ordinance that approves the concept plan. 

) 

)

165 

CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS- ZONING ORDINANCE 

3.3-3. "R-3" multifamily district. The following regulations shall apply in all "R-3" districts: 



Land Use Matrix, are as follows: 

(1) Uses permitted by right: 



Accessory dwelling (one accessory dwelling per lot, no kitchen) 

Boardinghouse/lodging house 


Duplex/two-family/duplex condominiums 

Family home adult care 

Family home child care 

Home occupation (see Sec. 5.4) 

Hospice 

Multi-Family (apartments/condominiums) 

One family dwelling, detached 

Rental or occupancy for less than one month (see Sec. 5.16) 

Single family or two-family industrialized home (see Sec. 5. 7) 

) 

) 


Adult daycare (with overnight stay) 

Art dealer/gallery 





Club (private) 

Community building (associated with residential uses) 



Country club (private) 

Day camp 




Fraternal organization/civic club (private club) 

Golf course, public or private 


Hospital, general (acute care/chronic care) 


Hotel/motel 

Hotels/motels- extended stay (residence hotels) 

Municipal use owned or operated by the City of New Braunfels, including libraries. 

Museum 

Nursing I convalescent Home I sanitarium 


Plant nursery (growing for commercial purposes but no retail sales on site 




ATTACHMENT12

155 

Retirement home I home for the aged - public 


Telephone exchange buildings (office only) ~) 

Truck garden (no retail or wholesale sales) 

_ 





listed in subsection (1 ), the uses listed in this subsection shall be deemed those authorized in the 

district. 


(1) One family dwellings. 

(2) Duplexes. 

(i) Height. 35 feet. 

(ii) Front building setback. 25 feet. 

(iii) Side building setback. There shall be a side building setback on each side of a 

building not less than five feet in width. Buildings on corner lots shall have 15-foot side 

building setbacks adjacent to the street where the rear lot lines of the corner lots coincide 

with the rear lot lines of the adjacent lots. Buildings on corner lots shall have 25-foot side 


with the side lot lines of the adjacent lots. 


setback 20 feet from the right-of-way-or the driveway to the garage shall be at least 20 

feet long to provide enough space for a vehicle to park without overhanging into the rightof-way, 


(iv) Rear building setback. 20 feet. 

(v) Width of lot. Interior lots 60 feet. Corner lots 70 feet. Where a lot has less width than 

herein required, and such lot was in separate ownership prior to September 25, 1967, 

this requirement will not prohibit the erection of a one-family dwelling. 

(vi) Lot area per family. Every single-family dwelling hereafter erected or altered shall 

provide a lot area of not less than 6,600 square feet per dwelling for interior lots, and 

7,000 square feet per dwelling for corner lots, provided that where a lot has less area 

than herein required and such lot was in separate ownership prior to September 25, 

1967, this requirement will not prohibit the erection of a one-family dwelling. Where public 

or community sewer is not available and in use, for the disposal of all sanitary sewage, 

each lot shall provide not less than one half acre and one acre on the Edwards Aquifer 

Recharge Zone. 

(vii) Lot depth. 100 feet. 

(viii) Parking. Two off-street parking spaces shall be provided for each one-family 

detached dwelling. See Section 5.1 for other permitted uses' parking. 


)

167 













(v) Width of lot. The minimum width of an interior lot shall be 60 feet and the minimum 

width of a corner lot shall be 72 feet, provided that where a lot has less width than herein 

required, and such lot was in separate ownership prior to September 25, 1967, this 

requirement will not prohibit the erection of a one-family dwelling. 

(vi) Lot area per family. Duplexes hereafter erected or altered shall have a lot area of not 

less than 8,000 square feet for an interior lot and 8,500 square feet for a corner lot. 

Where a lot was legally under separate ownership prior to September 25, 1967, but has 

an area less than the minimum required in this provision, this regulation shall not prohibit 

the erection of a one-family residence, but shall prohibit the erection of a two-family 

residence. Where a public or community sewer is not available and in use for the 

disposal of all sanitary sewage, each lot shall provide not less than one acre and 

approved by the City Sanitarian. 


(viii) Parking. Two off-street parking spaces shall be provided for each two-family dwelling 

unit. See Section 5.1 for other permitted uses' parking. 

(3) Multifamily dwellings. 

(i) Height. 45 feet . 

(ii)Front building setback. 25 feet. 

(iii) Rear building setback. 25 feet. 

(iv) Side building setback. There shall be a side building setback on each side of a 






) 




if the garage door is closed. (See illustration 8 in Sec. 5.1-1)

168 

-j 

I 

(v) Residential setback. Effective November 8, 2006, where a multifamily dwelling abuts a 

one or two family use or zoning district, the setback from the one or two family property 

line shall be at least 20 feet plus one foot for each foot of building height over 20 feet. 

(vi) Width of lot. The minimum width of an interior lot shall be 60 feet and the minimum 

width of a corner lot shall be 72 feet, provided that where a lot has less width than herein 

required, and such lot was in separate ownership prior to September 25, 1967, this 

requirement will not prohibit the erection of a one-family dwelling. 

(vii) Lot area. The minimum lot area for a multifamily dwelling shall be 15,000 square feet; 

for each unit over ten an additional 1,500 square feet of lot area shall be required. Where 

public or community sewer is not available and in use, for the disposal of all sanitary 

sewage, multifamily developments shall be approved by the City Sanitarian. 

(viii) Lot coverage. The combined area of all yards shall be at least 55 percent of the total 

lot or tract; provided, however, that in the event enclosed parking is provided the 

minimum total yard area requirement shall be 40 percent of the total lot or tract. 

(ix) Distance between structures. For multifamily structures, there shall be a minimum of 

ten feet between structures side by side; a minimum of 20 feet between structures side 

by front or rear; a minimum of 40 feet between structures front to front; and a minimum of 

ten feet between structures backing rear to rear, and a minimum of 20 feet front to rear. 

(See illustration 1) 

----.j 

-~----- -- 

Street 

!+--tO"Min(SidebySide) 

---~ ----- 

) 

_-, c- -, -" 

~ ' -- I 

--- ---'-----'-' -- --~- 

- ~ -~------ ---- 

--- --- 

- - ' 

----~ --------- 

--~--------· - . -- 

' -- i 

-- ~~ 20' 

by Rea~ 

--- 

..... ......._-I 

-- -- 

I --~- t 

---- -- 

Street 

Illustration 1 

Distance Between Multifamily (Low Density) Structures 

)

169 

(x) Lot depth. 100 feet. 

(xi) Parking. 

For apartments, apartment hotel units and other multifamily dwellings, off-street parking 

spaces shall be provided in accord with the following schedule: 

1. One-bedroom apartment or unit ... 1 1/2 spaces 

2. Two-bedroom apartment or unit ... 2 spaces 

3. Each Additional bedroom ... 1/2 space 

4. Each dwelling unit provided exclusively for low income elderly occupancy ... 3/4 

space 

("Low income elderly" is defined as any person 55 years of age or older with low or 

moderate income, according to HUD standards. ) 

(4) Non-Residential Uses. 



) 


building not less than five feet in width. Where any building abuts a property with a one 

or two family use, the setback from the one or two family property line shall be at least 20 

feet plus one foot for each foot of building height over 20 feet. 

(iv) Comer lots. Buildings on corner lots shall have 15-foot side building setbacks 

adjacent to the street where the rear lot lines of the corner lots coincide with the rear lot 

lines of the adjacent lots. Buildings on corner lots shall have 25-foot side building 

setbacks adjacent to the street where the rear lines of the corner lots coincide with the 

side lot lines of the adjacent lots. Where a minimum 25-foot setback is required, a canopy 

at least eight feet in height, attached to the main building, may be built within 15 feet of 

the property line so long as such construction will not obstruct the vision of vehicular or 

pedestrian traffic. 

(v) Garage setback. Where a driveway is located in front of a garage, the garage shall be 




(vi) Rear building setback. 20 feet. 

(vii) Width of lot. 60 feet. 

(viii) Lot depth. 1 00 feet. 

(ix) Parking. See Section 5.1 for permitted uses' parking. 

)

170 

DRAFT 


PUBLIC HEARINGS -·) 

Case PZ10-44: Public Hearing and recommendation to City Council regarding the proposed 

rezoning of 16.589 acres, located at 631 Lakeview Boulevard, from "Rm3" Multifamily District to 

"POD" Eden Hill Planned Development District. (Eden Home, Inc.) 

Mr. Greene explained that the subject property was located on Lakeview Boulevard between River Road 

and Lakeview Circle and is currently developed as a continuing care retirement community. He explained 

that the property owner is proposing to redevelop the property to upgrade the existing facilities to include 

memory care and skilled nursing as well as independent living units to provide a facility with complete 

elder care services in the community and that the majority of the redevelopment will be concentrated in 

the center of the property It will not affect the existing cottages located on the perimeter of the property. 

Mr. Greene explained that the base zoning will remain R-3 and no additional land uses that are not 

currently allowed in the R-3 district are proposed. He stated that there were two deviations from the base 

zoning; one would be that the maximum building height would be 65 feet and not 45 feet where no 

structure erected, altered, or placed within 175 ft. of the northwest boundary line of the property would 

exceed 45ft. in height. The other deviation would be a minimum of 1 parking space for each independent 

living unit would be required. Mr. Greene pointed out that Eden Hill POD note number 8 on Attachment 8 

referenced exterior building material requirements in which the applicant indicated all new buildings would 

comply with the City's current minimum masonry fa9ade standard of 80%. He further clarified that the 

applicant felt it was necessary to include the note as part of the development standards in the event the 

City's Building Design Standard requirements undergo any future revisions. Mr. Greene said that any 

detail plans must be submitted and approved by the Planning Commission prior to approval of 

construction for any proposed buildings. He said public hearing notices were sent to 29 property owners 

located within 200 ft.; five responses were received in favor (# 6, 17, 25, 27, and 29) and one in 

opposition (#9). Mr. Greene concluded saying that Staff recommended approval of the Eden Hill POD as 

the proposed development is consistent with the Future Land Use Plan and existing use of the property. 

Larry Dahl, Chief Executive Director Eden Hill, explained to the Commission that they wanted to ) 

modernize their facilities and showed a brief presentation on what those facilities would look like. He . 

pointed out that they would also like to preserve as much green space as possible. 

Chair Casteel asked if there was anyone present who wished to speak in favor of the rezoning. 

Mr. Tim Word, 401 Toncido Dr., San Antonio, TX, stated that his property abuts the Eden Hill POD 

property and that Eden Home has been the best neighbor they have ever had. 

Chair Casteel asked those opposed to the rezoning to address the Commission. 

Susan Tolbert, 579 Lakeview Circle, explained that she was not necessarily opposed to the rezoning but 

was very concerned about any new compressors that would be added to the expansion. She stated that 

she would like to talk to the applicant about that. 

Mr. Dahl responded to Ms. Tolbert's concern stating that it was a valid concern. He explained that they 

had replaced a temporary chiller with a high efficiency chiller that was quieter and that they were 

expecting to replace others. He also stated that with the new development the air conditioning units would 

be placed on the roof in order to project the sound up and not out but that he was also willing to work with 

engineers to see if there was an even better solution. 

Motion by Commissioner Bearden, seconded by Commissioner Myrick, to close the public hearing. The 

motion carried unanimously. (7-0-0) 

Motion by Commissioner Myrick, seconded by Commissioner Bearden, that Case PZ1 0-44, the proposed 

rezoning of 16.589 acres, located at 631 Lakeview Boulevard, from R-3" Multifamily District to "POD" 

Eden Hill Planned Development District, be forwarded to City Council with a recommendation to approve. 

The motion carried unanimously. (7-0-0) 

ATTACHMENT13 

)

171 


AN ORDINANCE REZONING 16.589 ACRES LOCATED AT 631 LAKEVIEW 

BOULEVARD, FROM "R-3" MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT TO "EDEN HILL PLANNED 

DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT" WITH CONCEPT PLAN; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN 

CONFLICT; CONTAINING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE 

DATE. 



WHEREAS, in keeping with the spirit and objectives of the "POD" Planned Development District, 

the City Council has given due consideration to all components of said district; and 

WHEREAS, it is the intent of the City Council to provide harmony between existing zoning 

districts and proposed land uses; and 


WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend the Zoning Map by changing 16.589 acres located 

at 631 Lakeview Boulevard, from "R-3" Multifamily District to "Eden Hill Planned Development District"; 

now, therefore, 

BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS, TEXAS: 

SECTION 1 

THAT Sections 1.2-1.and 1.2-2, Chapter 144, of the New Braunfels Code of Ordinances and 

particularly the Zoning Map of the City of New Braunfels, are amended by changing the following 

described tract of land from "R-3" Multifamily District to "Eden Hill Planned Development District": 

"16.589 acres located at 631 Lakeview Boulevard, as delineated on Exhibit 'A' and further 

described in Exhibit 'B' attached, and adopting the development standards as stated in 

Exhibit 'C'." 

SECTION2 

THAT all provisions of the Code of Ordinances of the City of New Braunfels not herein amended 

or repealed shall remain in full force and effect. 

SECTION3 

THAT all other ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed to the 

extent that they are in conflict. 

) 

SECTION4 

THAT if any provisions of this ordinance shall be held void or unconstitutional, it is hereby 

provided that all other parts of the same which are not held void or unconstitutional shall remain in full 

force and effect. 

1

172 

SECTION 5 


PASSED AND APPROVED: First Reading this the 1oth day of January, 2011. 




ATTEST: 




) 

I l 

j 

U:\Pianning\Ordinances\Zone Changes\Eden Home PDD.docx 

) 

2

_, .......... -.... 

--· -·-·- - -- - 

,.-,.-, 

K 

- . 

174 

P.O. BOX 310483 • NEW BRAUNFELS, TX 78.131-0483 • Phone: (830) 606-3913 • Fax: (830) 625-2204 

LEGAL DESCRIPTION 

O:F 

16.589 acres of land located in the City of New Braunfels, Coma! County, Texas, and 

being out of the Juan Martin De V eramendi Two League Grant Survey No. I, Abstract 

No. 2, Coma! County, Texas and being out of and a part of a 53.5 acre tract of land as 

conveyed by WARRANTY DEED RESERVING VENDOR'S LIEN from ROCHETTE 

R. CORETH, ET AL, to EDEN HOME FOR THE AGED, INC., filed for record on June 

14, 1954, and recorded in Volwne 103, Pages 140-142 of the Deed Records of Comal 

County, Texas, and a 6. 75 ac..·re tract as conveyed by WARRANTY DEED from the 

CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS to EDEN HOME FOR THE AGED, lNC. dated July 27, 

1954 and recorded in Volume 103, Pages 274-275 ofthe Deed Records of Coma! County, 

Texas, and also being a part of a 0.696 of an acre tract being designated as Rock Street 

and conveyed by QUITCLAIM unto EDEN HOME FOR THE AGED, INC. from the 

CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS, ofthe County of Coma!, Texas, and executed on October 

29, 1984, and recorded in Volume 417, Pages 378-380 of the Official Public Records of 

Comal County, Texas, and being part of LAKEVIEW BLVD., a 0.579 of an acre tract a 

conveyed by QUITCLAIM DEED from the City of New Braunfels, of the County of 

Coma!, State of Texas, to Eden Home, Inc., executed on May 28, 1996 and recorded in 

Document No. 9606011742 of the Official Public Records of Coma! County, Texas, said 

16.589 acres ofland being more particularly described as tallows: 

) 

BEGINNING: 

THENCE: 

THENCE: 

at a found W' iron pin in the North Right ofWay Line of Lakeview 

Boulevard and being the Southwest corner of this parcel and said 

0.579 of an acre tract; 

(1) NORTH 37 deg. 50' 14" West (all bearings in this description 

are based on Grid North of the Texas Coordinate System, NAD 83 

(93), Zone 4204), a distance of 85.74 feet along the Southwest line 

of this parcel and said 0.579 of an acre tract and the Northeast 

Right of Way Line of Lakeview Boulevard to a found W' iron pin 

with plastic cap being the Northwest comer of said 0.579 of an 

acre tract and the Southeast corner of RIDGEVIEW 

SUBDIVISION as recorded in Volume 117, Pages 286-287 of the 

Deed Records of Comal County, Texas; 

(2) NORTH 36 deg. 49' 16" West, a distance of 470.00 feet along 

the Southwest line of this parcel and said 53.5 acre tract and the 

Nm1heast line of said RIDGEVIEW SUBDIVISION, to a found 

W' iron pin with plastic cap being the Southwest corner of a 3.97 

) 

CONSULTING ENGINEER~ AND LAND SUFlVEYOHS 

EXHIBIT ;8

175 

acre tract (EDEN HEIGHTS, INC.) as recorded in Volume 287, 

Pages 80-82 ofthe Deed Records of Coma! County, Texas; 

THENCE: 

the following courses along the North line of this parcel and the 

South line of said 3.97 acre tract: 

(3) NORTH 82 deg. 11' 16" East, a distance of 164.04 teet to a 

found Yz" iron pin with plastic cap being an angle point; and 

(4) NORTH 82 deg. l3' 45" East, a distance of 48.00 feet to a 

found Yz'' iron pin with plastic cap being the Southeast comer of 

said 3. 97 acre tract; 

THENCE: 

the f()llowing courses along the West line of this parcel and the 

East line of said 3.97 acre tract: 

(5) NORTH 07 deg. 46' 15" West, a distance of 133.00 feet to a 

found cotton spindle in asphalt being an angle point; 

(6) NORTH 15 deg. 09' 00" East, a distance of 200.30 feet to a 

found "X" cut in concrete being an angle point; 

(7) NORTH 08 deg. 09' 15" West, a distance of 81.00 feet to a 

found W' iron pin with plastic cap being an angle point; and 

(8) NORTH 37 deg. 09' 45" East, a distance of 65.81 feet to a 

found W' iron pin being the Northwest comer of this parcel and the 

Northeast corner of said 3.97 acre tract; 

THENCE: 

the t()llowing courses along the North line of this parcel and the 

South line of a 33.048 acre tract as conveyed by GENERAL 

WARRANTY DEED from EDEN HOME INC., formerly EDEN 

HOME FOR THE AGED, INC. to DEAN WORD III, FOREST R. 

WORD, BRYAN C. WORD, MARY AMBER WORD, AND 

PATRICK Z. WORD, dated December 19, 1995 and recorded in 

Document No. 9506481824 of the Official Public Records of 

Coma! County, Texas: 

(9) SOUTH 76 deg. 50' 45" East, a distance of 125.18 teet to a 

fatmd cotton spindle being an angle point; 

(10) SOUTH 80 deg. 47' 45" East, a distance of 138.11 feet to a 

found cotton spindle being an angle point; 

) 

(11) SOUTH 73 deg. 28' 25" East, a distance of71.89 feet to a 

found Yz" iron pin with plastic cap being an angle point; 

2

176 


found Yl" iron pin with plastic cap being an angle point; 

(13) SOUTH 71 deg. I 0' 27" East, a distance of 170.56 feet to a 

found cotton spindle being an angle point; and 

(14) SOUTH 71 deg: 50' 01" East, a distance of 185.58 feet to a 

found W' iron pin with plastic cap being the Northeast corner of 

this parcel and an interior comer of said 33.048 acre tract; 

THENCE: 

the following courses along the East line of this parcel and the 

West line of said 33.048 acre tract: 


found Y2" iron pin being an angle point; 


tound W' iron pin with plastic cap being an angle point; 

(17) SOUTH 32 deg. 24' 1 T' West, a distance of 184.48 feet to a 

found W' iron pin with plastic cap being an angle point; 

(18) SOUTH 05 deg. 39' 11" West, a distance of 84.25 feet to a 

found W' iron pin with plastic cap being an angle point; 

) 

(19) SOUTH 45 de g. 48' 31" East, a distance of 3 77.06 feet to a 

set Mag Nail in a 5 foot square boulder leaning at a 45 deg. angle 

being an angle point; and 

(20) SOUTI-I 44 deg. 11' 29" West, a distance of 42.97 feet to a set 

Y2" iron pin with plastic cap being the Southeast comer of this 

parcel in the North Right of Way Line of Lakeview Boulevard, and 

being a point of curvature; 

THENCE: 

the following courses along the South line of this parcel and the 

North Right ofWay Line of said Lakeview Boulevard: 

(21) 499.59 feet along the arc of a curve to the left, having a radius 

of 849.00 feet, and a central angle 33 deg. 42' 55" and whose 

chord bears Notth 79 deg. 20' 41" West, a distance of 492.41 feet 

to a found W' iron pin in asphalt pavement and being a point of 

tangency; 

(22) SOUTH 83 deg. 49' 15'' West, a distance of209.01 feet to a 

found !12'' iron pin with plastic cap being a point of curvature; and 

3 

)

1"("( 

(23) 266.61 feet along the arc of a curve to the left, having a radius 

of 824.15 feet, and a central angle of 18 deg. 32' 06", and whose 

chord bears South 74 deg. 30' 42'' West, a distance of 265.45 feet 

to a found Yz" iron pin being the POINT OF BEGINNING, and 

containing 16.589 acres of land. 

THIS LEGAL DESCRIPTION WAS WRITTEN IN CON.JUNCTJON WITH A 

SURVEY PLAT PREPARED IN THIS OFFICE ON 10/20/06, J'OB NO. 06-08-2006, 

UPDATED ON 01/27/2010,.JOBN0.120210. 

) 

F:\120209\lcgals\ 16.589 acres legal dcscription.do1: 

4

178 

Eden Hill POD 


PDDNotes: 

1) 

Deviation from code standards. The city council may approve a PD 

concept plan with deviations from any provision in this Code. Such 

deviations shall be listed or shown as part of the ordinance that 

approves the concept plan. 

~) 

2) All City Code requirements applicable to the R-3 zoning base district 

apply unless otherwise modified by the regulations established in this 

PDD Concept Plan. 

3) All permitted uses and uses permitted by Special Use Permit in the 

R-3 base zoning district are permitted uses and uses permitted by 

Special Use Permit in the PDD. 

4) Additional Permitted Non-Residential Uses that are classified as 

Nursing/Convalescent Home/Sanitarium and Assisted Living 

Facility/Retirement Home: 




5) 

6) 

Definitions: 

a. Continuing Care Retirement Community (CCRC)- An 

alternative housing option designed to accommodate the 

needs of elders who can no longer live alone. CCRC's 

offer a full continuum of care, ranging from fully 

independent units, to assistance with personal care in 

assisted living units, to long-term care in a skilled nursing 

facility. 

b. Independent Living - Method of living and performing 

day-to-day tasks for the ederly within a facility or facilities 

that may or may not provide limited assistance to the 

residents. The independent living facility unit is equipped 

with kitchens within each unit and will also offer 

communal dining. 

c. Assisted Living - Facility or facilities that provide either 

routine general protective oversight or assistance with 

activities necessary for independent living to mentally or 

physically limited persons; Assisted Living facilities may 

be equipped with a full kitchen in each living unit and may 

or may not also offer communal dining. 

The sale and on-site consumption of alcoholic beverages is permitted 

in connection with the following uses: 


EXHIBIT ·c 

) 

)

179 



d. Assisted Living Facility/Retirement Home 

e. Nursing/Convalescent Home/Sanitarium 

7) Changes in concept plan. Changes in the concept plan shall be 

considered the same as changes in the zoning ordinance and shall be 

processed as required in section 144-2.1. Those changes which do not 

alter the uses permitted or increase the density, floor area ratio, 

height, or coverage of the site as indicated on the approved concept 

plan, may be authorized by the planning director. 

8) Code: 

5.21-4. Exterior building materials. 

Masonry requirement. At least 80 percent of the vertical walls of all 

buildings (excluding doors and windows) to which these standards 

apply, shall be finished in one or more of the following materials: 

) 

(a) Permitted by right. 



(3) Glass with less than 20 percent reflectance (however, only a 

maximum of 50 percent of a building may be constructed in glass); 

(4) Split-face concrete block, poured-in-place concrete, and tiltwall 

concrete. Any use of concrete products shall have an 

integrated color and be textured or patterned. Tilt-wall concrete 

structures shall include reveals, punch-outs, or other similar 

surface characteristics to enhance the facade on at least ten percent 

of each facade. 

(b) Special use permit required. The following exterior building 

materials require a special use permit (S.U.P) in accordance with 

section 144-3.6. 

(1) Exterior insulation and finish system (EIFS) or equivalent 

product. 

(2) Cellulose fiber-reinforced cement building board products, i.e. 

Hardi-Board products or other cement building products approved 

by a nationally recognized building products evaluation service. 

) 

Code Interpretation: A Special Use Permit (SUP) is only required 

if materials included in Code Section 5.21-4(b) exceed 20% of the 

vertical walls of all buildings (excluding doors and windows) to 

which these standards apply.

180 

9) This project lies within the city limits of New Braunfels. 

Building Design Standards Table- Non-Residential Uses 



Continuing Care Retirement Community The building exterior materials include 


stone, brick, stucco, and exterior siding 

Assisted Living (cement board). As noted in Note 8, 

Assisted Living Facility/Retirement Home cement building products are permitted by 

Nursing/Convalescent Home/Sanitarium right. 

Development Standards Table- Non-Residential Uses 


Continuing Care Retirement Community 



Assisted Living Facility/Retirement Home 



The current zoned R-3 building height is 

limited to 45-0". This PDD requests a 

maximum allowable height of 65 '-0". 

Table 1 - Off-street Vehicle Parking Requirements 

Code Requirements 

Nursing I Convalescent Home I Sanitarium 

I Assisted Living Facility I Retirement 

Home: 


1 for each four employees 

1 for each four patient beds 

1 for each staff doctor 



1 for each unit 

PERMITTED USE MINIMUM VEHICLE SPACES 



Continuing Care Retirement Community Based on industry standards for these uses, 


vehicle off street parking spaces 


requirements will be calculated using the 

Assisted Living Facility/Retirement Home parking ratios shown on Table 1. 


)

181 

Z ODin!! . T a bl e- N on-R es1 .d en f Ia I U ses 

R-3 Base Zoning District PDD Regulation 

Minimum Lot Size NA 

Minimum Lot Width 100' 

Minimum Lot Depth 100' 

Maximum Height 45' 65' 

Minimum Building 

Setbacks 

Front Yard 25' 

Side Yard 5* 

Rear Yard 20' 

Maximum Building NA 

Coverage 

Maximum Floor to Area NA 

Ratio 

* Where any building abuts a property with a one or two family use, the setback from the 

one or two family property line shall be at least 20 feet plus one foot for each foot of 

building height over 20 feet. No structure erected, altered, or placed within one hundred 

and seventy-five feet (175') of the northwest boundary line ofthe property shall exceed 

forty-five 45 feet (45') in height. Height shall be measured from the average elevation of 

the finished grade surrounding the structure to the highest point of the structure. 

) 

)

182 

)

183 


January 1 0, 2011 

Agenda Item No. d::J;. 

Presenter - Shannon Mattingly, Planning Department 

830-221-4055 - smattingly@ nbtexas.org 

SUBJECT: Public hearing and first reading of an ordinance rezoning a portion of 

Rivercrest Heights Subdivision, from "C-1" Local Business District to "R-2A" 

Single-Family and Two-Family District. 

APPLICANT 

OWNER: 




Multiple Owners (17 lots) 

) 


When City Council was reviewing the Short-Term Rental section of the zoning 

ordinance, the Planning Department identified multiple residential neighborhoods with 

zoning other than residential. Council directed the Planning Department to have 

neighborhood meetings to explain the purpose of residential zoning and pursue 

rezoning to an appropriate district. 

The original master plan for the Rivercrest Heights Subdivision was approved in 1960. 

There are currently three vacant lots, one three-family dwelling, four two-family 

dwellings, and nine single-family dwellings. A public meeting for the 17 affected 

properties of Rivercrest Heights Subdivision was held on November 15, 201 0 to explain 

the purpose of zoning the neighborhood to reflect the existing residential use. No 

property owners attended. 

The property owner of 1262 Hill Crest Drive contacted staff on November 15 as he was 

unable to attend the neighborhood meeting. He stated his triplex is currently leased as 

long term rentals but was for sale. Thus far, the only interested buyers noted their desire 

to potentially use the triplex as overnight rental units. Therefore he would like to keep 

the "C-1" zoning as this makes the property more marketable for sale. If rezoned to 

"R-2A" the triplex at 1262 Hill Crest Drive would have legal nonconforming use, but 

would not be eligible for short term rental as it is not currently used as short term rental. 


Case# PZ10-47 

) 

Size: 

5.30 acres 


184 


and Land Use: 




North - R-1 I Single family dwellings 

South- R-1 I Single family dwellings and one medical 

office located in a Single Family residence 

East - C-1 I Commercial 

West -R-11 Single family dwellings 

Residential, low density. 

Single and two-family dwellings. 

-=) 

Notification: 

Public hearing notices were sent to the 17 property owners within the Rivercrest Heights 

Subdivision and 38 property owners located within 200 feet of the subdivision. As of 

December 20, 2010, three responses in favor (#11, 25 and 40), one response in favor 

with conditions (#6), (lots facing Common Street should remain "C-1 "), two opposed 

(#32 and 55), and one returned undeliverable have been received. 


Yes 


Priority: 

2006 Comprehensive 

Plan 



Goal 6: Refine or add zoning requirements to 

be compatible with the community's overall 

intentions and the best interests of the 

community as a whole. 

) 

Goal 20: Protect character and boundaries of 

existing neighborhoods. 

Cons: 

None. 


N/A 

. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: 


recommended approval of the rezoning, unanimously (7 -0-0) 


Staff recommends approval of the rezoning of a portion of Rivercrest Heights 

Subdivision as it is consistent with the current use and intent of the existing residential 

subdivision and is consistent with the goals and priorities of the Comprehensive Plan. 

) 


ATTACHMENTS: 


2. Zoning Map 



5. Aerial Map 



8. Sec 3.4-3 "R-2A" single-family and two-family district 


10. Ordinance 

U:\Pianning\CCagenda\ZoneChgs&SUP\2011 \Rivercrest Hts_1 agenda sheet_pz 10-4 7 .do ex 

) 

) 


.. ' 

~-~-,City of 


'- 

lBb 


ZONE CHANGE 



E-1\.lA f L: planninz@11btexas.org 

PHONE: (830) 221-4050 FAX: (830) 608-2!09 

1. 

2. 

3. 

Applicant a If owner(s), so state; If agent or other type of relationship, a letter of authorization must be 

furnished from owner(s) at the time submitted. 

~me·----~~~~~~~~~~~~~-~~~~~~~~\~s _________ 

MamngAdd~"--------~~~~=-4 __ S ___ ~-=~s~~~~L~\~------------------ 

Telephone: ___ ~ ___ Fax:.=~~~---·Mobile: ___ ~~='Email:=~~~-- 

Property Address/Location: _ 

___._~~·v..... 

Jes-= ..... C~)'L~s±.._._ __{-k;lo-1.:=\¥~~K~=±~s=--------- 

Legal Description: () ' .L \ \ _ ' I .L 

Name of Subdivision:_--~...b_~;..:\Je_S:..=;...C.=f'C..=.;b::;......:...,_\--'""'~~~-..;..\ b++VV\_.:__-s _______ _ 

4. 

5. 

Lot(s): (t\..u..\.f, f \.!c. Block(s): I 5 Acreage:------- 

Existing Use of Property: 3'.¥\es\.e &ritt\~l :Rfs"td.ell\_-ta.~ p\u_s ~u_~-t:~--r.~\ t'( 

Proposed Use of Property (attach additional or supporting information if necessary): ______ 

1< e.s \ cie &A.-\; a._ l 

6. Zoning Change Request: Current Zoning:_..li!C.....:::;;_-_t.;._. ___ Proposed Zoning _ _,_~--~~A--'--- 

7. 

If "POD Planned Development District", check if: Concept Plan ___ OR Detail Plan ____ _ 

Reason for request (please explain in detail and attach additional pages if needed): ------- 

±o coe..± -th-e.- most 'KWcceao...-\-'e 'LQ~\ ~ 

) 

8. 

ATTACHMENTS: 

Metes and bounds description or survey and map if property is not platted. 

Location in 100-year floodplain: Please provide a map of the floodplain overlaying the property proposed for 

zoning or, at a minimum, a copy of the proper FEMA flood map, with panel number. (Current floodplain maps are 

those most recently adopted by the City Council.) 

Map of property in relation to City limits/major roadways or surrounding area. 

If requesting a Planned Development (PD), applicant must provide development standards on the detail plan 

and/or provide the standards in a separate document as described in the Zoning Ordinance, Section 3.5. Provide 

14 copies of the 1:200 for distribution with 4 copies of 1:200 and one legible 11x17 of the revisions. 

The undersigned hereby requests rezoning of the above described property as indicated. 

For Office Use Only 

Fee Received By: ___/J+,_Pr _______ Amount ______ Receipt No.:------- 

Date 

Date Received: ___________ __.Zoning signs issued: Date: ______ No. ___ _ 

Cash/Check Number: __________ Case Number: ___....;...P_Z_\_0_-_4.:..7 ______ 

) 

U:\Pianning\Applications\Zone Change.DOC 

ATTACHMENT 1

- C-1 Local Business District 

- C-1A Neighborhood Business Distrcit 

- C-1B General Business District 

- C-4 Resort Commercial District 

- C-4A Resort Commercial District 

- C-0 Commercial Office District 

~ - M-1 Light Industry District 

;! CJ R-1 Single Family Distrtct 

0 CJ R-2 Single and Two Family District 

~ £:J R-3 Multifamily District 

m 

D ZHA Zero Lot Line Home District 

~ rzZJ SUBJECT 

N 

~.,City of 

~-.. New Braunfels 

PZ10-47 

Rivercrest Heights Subdivision 

"C-1" to "R-2A .. 


_______ [ _________ _ 

·-~··----·-----······· -········-··--········-··················-····-----·----------- 

- Commercial 

)> 

-1 

- Industrial 

-1 

)> 

- Government 

(') 

Institutional 

~ - Open Space 

~ r2"ZJ SUBJECT 

-1 - Bodies of Water 

w 

~,City of 


"-v 

0 --...- 

\_) 

PZ10-47 


"r · ~· to "R-2A" 

\.__.; 


0

[_ ----- 

)> 

-1 

-1 

)> 

0 

::I: 

3: 

m 

z 

-1 

.;.. 

D Residential Low Density 

D Residential Medium/High Density 

~SUBJECT 

- Bodies of Water 



'-- 

PZ10-47 


"C-1" to "R-2A .. 


~ 

-1 

> 

0 

X 

3:: 

m 

z 

-1 

C7l 

SUBJECT 

PZ10-47 


"\ ·~ to "R-2A" 

\.._) 

Map Created On 11/16/1 0 

() 

·.,

191 

PLANNING COMMISSION - DECEMBER 7, 2010 - 6:00PM 


Owner/Applicant: 


Various I City of New Braunfels 

Various properties on Woodcrest Circle and Hillcrest Drive 



Coma! Appraisal District Records. The property under consideration is marked as "SUBJECT". 

) 

1. Aquacorp Inc. dba Masons Auto Wash 

3. Birkner, Jack & Stephanie 

5. Campbell, James & Cynthia 

7. Clifton, Donald & Brenda 

9. Curtis, Matthew & Lennis 

11. Heynis, Ronald 

13. Holt, Charles & Linda 

15. K B M K 983 Investment I Ltd. 

17. Lee, William & Patrick 

19. McDonald, Lowell 

21. Owens, Herbert & Diesta 

23. Piller, Rolf 

25. Quarles, Jackie & Janeane 

27. Schumann, Benny & Carol Jean 

29. Verner, Charles & Sonia 

31. Vulcan Realty Group LLC 

33. High Brehm Hats & Western Wear Inc. 

35. Baese, Kermit 

37. Davidek, Thomas 

39. Banks, Becky 

41. Bryan, John & Teresa 

43. Evans, Roy & Opal 

45. Hansen Living Trust 

47. Higginbotham, Hulon 

49. Leng, Chhin 

51. Miller, Donald & Judy 

53. Property Owner 

55. Tate, Tom 

2. Bird, Barbara 

4. Blaine, Ronald & Patricia 

6. Car Properties LLP 

8. Coma! Family Practice Assoc. 

10. Devilbiss, Jennifer & Travis 

12. Hitzfelder, Brittney & Chapa, Michelle 

14. Isaacs, Lucille 

16. Lee, William et al 

18. Lowry, Madison 

20. McDonald, Michael & Loretta 

22. Peebles, Betty 

24. Prescott Limbs & Braces Inc. 

26. Rodriguez, Ronny & Lana 

28. Tice, Virginia 

30. Vitopil, Louis & Hattie 

32. Weems, Dorothy 

34. Fischer, George & Myrtle 

36. Domanski, Paul & Stacy 

38. French, Marci dba Tutoring Center of New Braunfels 

40. Barber Family Trust 

42. Canet, Dan & Annette 

44. Gordon, David 

46. Hart Management Trust 

48. Lee, William & Sammie 

50. Lin, Song Yan 

52. Palacios, Ronald & Dawn 

54. Rempel, Alan & Jennifer 

SEE ATTACHED MAP 

) 

ATTACHMENT 6

, ________ Object 

"---·____• No Response 

SUBJECT RESPONSE 

~ Favor 

Object 

No Response 

CJ NotificationBuffer 

f'_, City of 

~ .. New Braunfels 

'--- 

,._ 

·'-". 

PZ10-47 


"C" ... "to "R-2A" 

'--..__/ 


-,J

IIVLV oJII~~L - 1\IV~I \..I ~.;)L I 1~1611L.;) 193 

Triplex and Duplex located the corner of Woodcrest 

Circle and Hillcrest Drive. 

Single family dwellings at top of Woodcrest Circle cui 

de sac. 

) 

Two-family dwellings located on East Common 

Street. 

ATTACHMENT 7

194 

3.4-3. "R-2A" single-family and two-family district. 

Purpose. The R-2A single-family and two-family districts intended for development of single-family 

residences and associated uses as well as for development on larger parcels of land of low density twofamily 

duplex units. The following regulations shall apply in aii"R-2A" districts: 

J 

(a) Authorized uses. Uses permitted by right and by special use permit shall be those set forth in the 

Land Use Matrix in Section 4 of this Chapter. The allowed uses in the district, which are intended to be 

identical with those listed in the Land Use Matrix, are as follows 






Duplex I two-family I duplex condominiums 



Home occupation (See Sec. 5.4) 


Single or two family industrialized home (see Sec. 5. 7) 









Farms, general (live stock/ranch) (see Chapter 6, Municipal Code and Sec. 5.8) 



Municipal use owned or operated by the City of New Braunfels, including libraries 




(a) School, K-12 (public or private) 


(b) University or college (public or private) 



) 



the district. 






building not less than 5 feet in width. Buildings on corner lots shall have 15-foot side 


ATTACHMENT 8 

)

195 


building setbacks adjacent to the street where the rear lines of the corner lots coincide 








width of a corner lot shall be 70 feet. 


have a lot area of not less than 6,600 square feet per family for interior lots, and 7,000 

square feet per family for corner lots, provided that where a lot has less area than herein 

required and such lot was in separate ownership prior to September 25, 1967, this 

requirement will not prohibit the erection of a one-family dwelling. Where a public or 

community sewer is not available and in use for the disposal of all sanitary sewage, each 

lot shall provide not less than one half acre and one acre on the Edwards Aquifer 



) 

(2) Duplexes. 


detached dwelling unit. See Section 5.1 for other permitted uses' parking. 
















) 

(vi) Lot area per family.' Two-family dwellings (duplexes) hereafter erected or altered shall 

have a lot area of not less than 8,000 square feet for an interior lot and 8,500 square feet 

for a corner lot. Where a public or community sewer is not available and in use for the 



(vii) Lot depth. 100 feet.

1% 



(3) Non-residential uses: 







(iv) Corner lots. Buildings on corner lots shall have 15-foot side building setbacks 



setbacks adjacent to the street where the rear ljnes of the corner lots coincide with the 











) 

(viii) Lot depth. 100 feet. 


)

l~rt 

DRAFT 

EXCERPT FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 7, 2010 


Case PZ10-47: Public Hearing and recommendation to City Council regarding a proposed 

rezoning of a portion of Rivercrest Heights Subdivision, from "C-1" Local Business District to "R- 

2A" Single and Two Family District. (City of New Braunfels) . 

Ms. Bell elucidated that the master plan for the Rivercrest Heights Subdivision was approved in 1960 and 

currently there are three vacant lots, one, three-family dwelling, four, two-family dwellings, and nine 

single-family dwellings. She said that no property owners attended th~ public meeting for affected 

properties of Rivercrest Heights Subdivision. Ms. Bell pointed out that she was contacted by the one of 

the property owners (1262 Hill Crest Drive) who could not attend the neighborhood meeting. He explained 

to her that his triplex was currently leased as long term rentals but he had it up for sale. He stated that he 

was interested in keeping the current "C-1" zoning as he said that the only interested buyers noted their 

desire to potentially use the triplex as overnight rental units and the current zoning made his property 

more marketable. She said public hearing notices were sent to the 17 property owners within the 

Rivercrest Heights Subdivision and 38 property owners located within 200 feet; two responses were 

received in favor (#6 and 40) and two in opposition were received (#32 and 55). Ms. Bell noted that one of 

the responses in favor asked that the properties facing East Common Street should be kept with the "C-1" 

zoning district. Ms. Bell concluded saying that Staff recommended approval of the rezoning of a portion of 

Rivercrest Heights Subdivision as it was consistent with the current use of the land. 


spoke. 

Chair Casteel asked those opposed to the rezoning to address the Commission. No one spoke. 

) Motion by Commissioner Bearden, seconded by Commissioner Lowe, to close the public hearing. The 

motion carried unanimously. (7 -0-0) 

Motion by Commissioner Lowe, seconded by Commissioner Hoyt, that Case PZ10-47, the proposed 

rezoning of a portion of Rivercrest Heights Subdivision, from "C-1" Local Business District to "R-2A" 

Single and Two Family District, be forwarded to City Council with a recommendation to approve with staff 

recommendations. The motion carried unanimously. (7 -0-0) 

) 

ATTACHMENT 9

1~1::! 


AN ORDINANCE REZONING 5.30 ACRES KNOWN AS A PORTION OF THE 

RIVERCREST HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION FROM "C-1" LOCAL BUSINESS DISTRICT, TO 

"R-2A" SINGLE-FAMILY AND TWO-FAMILY DISTRICT; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES 

IN CONFLICT; CONTAINING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE 

DATE. 



WHEREAS, in keeping with the spirit and objectives of the "R-2A" Single-Family and Two-Family 

District, the City Council has given due consideration to all components of said district; and 



WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend the Zoning Map by changing S.30 acres consisting 

of Lot S, Block 16: Rivercrest Heights SF, and Lots 9-2S, Block 16, Rivercrest Heights 6, to "R-2A" Single 

Family and Two-Family District; now, therefore, 


SECTION 1 

THAT Sections 1.2-1 and 1.2-2, Chapter 144, of the New Braunfels Code of Ordinances and particularly ) 

the Zoning Map of the City of New Braunfels, are amended by changing the following described tract of 

land from "R-3" Multi-Family District to "R-1A-6.6" Single Family District: (S.30 acres consisting of LotS, 

Block 16, Rivercrest Heights SF, Lots 9-2S, Block 16, Rivercrest Heights 6 to "R-2A" Single-Family and 

Two-Family District and as delineated on Exhibit 'A'. 

SECTION2 



SECTION3 



SECTION4 




) 

1

199 

SECTIONS 


PASSED AND APPROVED: First Reading this the 10 1 h day of January, 2011. 




ATTEST: 

Ann Smith, Interim City Secretary 


_) 


U :\Pianning\Ordinances\Zone Changes\Rivercrest Heights_R-2A.docx 

_) 

2

m 

>< 

:5 I «6 s ss s \ L I / <

201 

~-_,City of 



JANUARY 1 0, 2011 

Agenda Item No. 1-t1 



SUBJECT: 

Discuss and consider a resolution of the City of New Braunfels, Texas, 

requesting that State Highway 46 from Interstate Highway 35 to the East 

city limits of New Braunfels in Guadalupe County be designated as the 

Representative Edmund Kuempel Memorial Highway 


TxDOT has received a request from Guadalupe County to designate a portion of SH 46 

from Interstate 35 to the east city limits of New Braunfels in Guadalupe County. State 

Representative Edmund Kuempel was a longtime member of the 44th District of the 

Texas House of Representatives, having been first elected to represent the citizens of 

the City of New Braunfels in 1983. Representative Kuempel served the citizens of his 

District by tirelessly advocating for highway safety and the improvement of roads within 

his District. 

) 

The City of Seguin has also been asked to support this designation. 

Notification: 

Guadalupe County and TxDOT. 



Priority: 


The only costs associated with this request would be cost sharing in the installation of 

the street signs on the new section and the continual maintenance. 


n/a 


Staff recommends approval. 

ATTACHMENTS: 

·) 1. Resolution 

U:\Pianning\CCagenda\Road name change for SH46 east.docx 


202 

RESOLUTION NO. 2011 R- 

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS, TEXAS, 

REQUESTING THAT STATE HIGHWAY 46 FROM INTERSTATE 

HIGHWAY 35 TO THE EAST CITY LIMIT OF NEW BRAUNFELS IN 

. GUADALUPE COUNTY BE DESIGNATED AS THE REPRESENTATIVE 

EDMUND KUEMPEL MEMORIAL HIGHWAY 

WHEREAS, State Representative Edmund Kuempel was a longtime member of 

the 44th District of the Texas House of Representatives, having been first elected to 

represent the citizens of the City of New Braunfels in 1983; and, 

WHEREAS, Representative Kuempel served the citizens of his District by 

tirelessly advocating for highway safety and the improvement of roads within his District; 

and,. 

WHEREAS, the City of New Braunfels, Texas desires to honor Representative 

Edmund Kuempel for his long public service, and for his championing of transportation 

issues; and, 

WHEREAS, the City of New Braunfels, Texas by authority granted in Texas 

Administrative Code, Title 43, Rule 25-9, adopts this Ordinance as an indication of its 

commitment, in cooperation with the Guadalupe County and City of Seguin, to 

designate State Highway 46, from IH 35 in New Braunfels to IH 10 in Seguin, as the ' ·_.) 

Representative Edmund Kuempel Memorial Highway; now, therefore; 

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW 

BRAUNFELS, TEXAS: 

THAT, the City Council of the City of New Braunfels, Texas does hereby approve 

and request the Texas Department of Transportation designate State Highway 46 as 

the Representative Edmund Kuempel Memorial Highway. 

ADOPTED AND APPROVED this the 1oth day of January, 2011. 


ATTEST: 

BY: 

------------------------ 



) 

U:\Pianning\Resolutions\Kuempel.docx

f' _,City of 

l;~ New Braunfels 



Agenda Item No. 1-/ "-L 



SUBJECT: Discuss and consider the second and final reading of an ordinance amending 

Chapter 106, Signs, of the Code of Ordinances by amending Section 106-3 to 

define mobile billboards, parking and twenty-four hour period, amending 

Section 106-10 "signs on operable vehicles", and amending Section 106-11 to 

prohibit mobile billboards as off premise signs. 


This item was passed on first reading by the City Council with amendments on 


A new form of advertising began appearing in the City in early summer this year. It started 

with panel trucks that have converted side panels that allow the signs on the side panels 

to rotate; thereby, creating three sign faces per panel. The signs advertise a variety of 

goods and services that are not provided by the owner of the truck nor offered on the 

property they are parked on. Another advertiser appeared utilizing electronic message 

boards attached to vehicles. 

With the appearance of these new off-premise mobile signs Staff began receiving 

complaint calls. Staff researched the legality of said signs through the Sign Ordinance. 

The current Sign Ordinance prohibits off-premise signs within the city limits and the ET J, 

but it also exempts signs on operable vehicles. The signs also do not meet the definition 

of portable signs. 

The current Sign Ordinance is intended to prohibit the subject signs, but as written Staff 

cannot enforce their removal. To address the conflict in the ordinance, staff has drafted 

the attached revisions to the Sign Ordinance. 

A public hearing was held at the October 11, 2010 City Council meeting and this item was 

tabled until November 8, 2010. On November 8, 2010 it was tabled again to allow for 

additional research. 

Staff met with the owner and operator of the new mobile sign trucks regarding their 

concerns with the proposed ordinance. They have two primary concerns. The first is 

associated with equality of their operations compared to other mobile advertisements 

located on taxis, buses/shuttles, etc. Their second concern is associated with the amount 

of time they will be allowed to continue to operate their mobile signs if the ordinance is 

) adopted. They would prefer to be allowed to operate their mobile signs in perpetuity. 


The ordinance has been revised per City Council request to allow for these signs to 

be driven on the roadways but to not allow them to be used as off-premise signs on 

any one property for more than two-hours within a twenty-four hour period until 

Labor Day 2012. This only includes the vehicles that register within 10 days of the 

ordinance passing. 


Yes City Plan/Council Pros: 

Priority: Goal 12: Protect and enhance the visual 

2006 Comprehensive Plan environment of the City. 



Cons: 

None 


N/A 


N/A 


The revisions as written will be difficult to enforce and prosecute. In order to document, staff will ) 

have to continuously follow these vehicles, which will reduce the time being spent on other code 

compliance issues. Therefore, staff would recommend allowing them to park stationary until 

Labor Day 2012 without a time limitation. After Labor Day 2012 they will not be allowed to 

continue to park and be used as an off-premise sign. 

ATTACHMENTS: 

1. Ordinance 

U:\Pianning\CCagenda\Ordinance Amendments\Sign Ord Short mobile billboardsl1-1 0-11.docx 

) 


205 

ORDINANCE NO. 2011 - 

) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS AMENDING CHAPTER 106 

"SIGNS" OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES BY AMENDING SECTION 106-3 TO 

DEFINE MOBILE BILLBOARDS AND PARKING; AMENDING SECTION 106-11 TO 

PROHIBIT MOBILE BILLBOARDS; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING 

A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 

WHEREAS, the basic purpose of mobile billboards is to display commercial 

advertising on public streets, and by their nature, mobile billboards are intended to 

attract the attention of citizens on public streets and adjacent right-of-way, including 

drivers, pedestrians, bicyclists, and others; and 

WHEREAS, vehicles that display commercial advertising from a mobile platform, 

which can start, stop, and turn abruptly, accentuate the tendency of commercial 

advertising to seize attention and distract drivers and pedestrians; and 

WHEREAS, mobile billboards create aesthetic blight and visual clutter, as well as 

potential and actual traffic, health and safety hazards; and 

) 

WHEREAS, prohibiting mobile billboards to be used as off-premise signs will 

promote the public health, safety and welfare of motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists and 

others using the public streets and roadways in the City by eliminating aesthetic blight 

and visual clutter and potential traffic and safety hazards; and 

WHEREAS, prohibiting mobile billboards to be used as off-premise signs will 

protect the public investment in and the character and dignity of the City's streets; 

NOW, THEREFORE, 

BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS, 

TEXAS: 

SECTION 1: That Chapter 106 "Signs" of the Code of Ordinances is hereby 

amended by: 

a. Amending Section 106-3 "Definitions" by adding a new definition for "Mobile 

Billboards" and "Parking" which shall hereinafter read as follows: 

) 

Mobile Billboard means a sign installed or displayed on a motor 

vehicle or a trailer being towed by a motor vehicle in the public right-ofway 

for the purpose of advertising a business or entity that is unrelated to 

the owner of the vehicle's primary business. The term does not include a 

sign that is displayed or installed on a vehicle operated in the normal 

course of the vehicle owner's business, if the sign contains advertising or 

identifying information directly related to the business and is not used to 

display advertising that is unrelated to the business. 

U:\Pianning\Ordinances\Mobile Billboards Ord.docx 


206 

Park or parking means the standing of a vehicle, whether occupied or 

not, other than temporarily for the purpose of and while actually engaged in 

loading or unloading merchandise or passengers. 

Twenty-four hour period means that a vehicle can only be parked 

stationary within a two hour period that begins at 8:00 a.m. on said day and ends 

the following day at 8:00 a.m. 

b. Amending Section 106-10, "Signs Exempt from Regulations or Permits" by 

amending subsection (n) to read as follows: 

(n) Signs on operable vehicles except as prohibited in 106-11. 

c. Amending Section 106-11 "Prohibited Signs" by adding a new Subsection (I) 

which shall hereinafter read as follows: 

(I) Mobile billboards when being used as an off-premise sign and being parked on a 

public right-of-way or on public or private property for more than two hours on one 

property within a twenty-four hour period of time until Labor Day 2012, after which these 

mobile billboards may not be parked for off-premise advertising. Any such vehicle 

parked on private property shall not be visible from the public right-of-way, except as 

allowed for above. Existing mobile billboards shall be registered with the Planning 

Director within ten days after final passage of this ordinance to qualify for the exception 

for two hour parking until Labor Day 2012. 

d. Amending Section 106-13 "Off-premises sign regulations" by amending 

subsection (3)(b) to read as follows: 

) 

(b) Mobile advertising. Mobile advertising as defined in this chapter is allowed 

without permit, except as prohibited by Section 106-11 (1). It is a separate offense for a 

property owner to knowingly allow Mobile Advertising or Mobile Billboards upon the 

owner's property for more than two-hours in a twenty-four hour period until Labor Day 

2012, after which the owner may not allow these types of signs at all. 

SECTION 2: It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the 

sections, paragraphs, sentences, clauses and phrases of this Ordinance are severable 

and, if any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section of this Ordinance should be 

declared invalid by the final judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such 

invalidity shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and 

sections of this Ordinance. 

SECTION 3: All provisions of the Code of Ordinances of the City of New Braunfels 

not herein amended or repealed shall remain in full force and effect. All Ordinances or 

parts thereof in conflict herewith are repealed to the extent of such conflict only. 

) 



207 

SECTION 4: This Ordinance will take effect upon the second and final reading in 

accordance with the provisions of the Charter of the City of New Braunfels. 

PASSED AND APPROVED: First reading this 13th day of December, 2010. 

PASSED AND APPROVED: Second reading this 1oth day of January, 2011. 


ATTEST: 

By: ____________ ~------------- 

R. Bruce Boyer, Mayor 


) 


Alan C. Wayland, City Attorney 

) 



208 

)

tJ ~~Braunfels 

209 



Agenda Item No.IJ .j 



SUBJECT: Discuss and consider the second and final reading of an ordinance rezoning 

47.97 acres located on the west side of Oak Run Parkway, approximately 2,000 

feet north of Loop 337, from "R~1A~8" Single~family District with Restrictions to 

"Enclave at Westpointe Village Planned Development District" with Concept 

Plan. 

APPLICANT: 

Westpointe Residential 

11202 Disco Drive 

San Antonio, TX 78216 

OWNER: 

Investor Grosenbacher Partnership 

11202 Disco Drive 

San Antonio, TX 78216 


This portion of the Westpointe development, known as The Enclave at Westpointe Village, was 

zoned R-1A-8 with restrictions in 2007. The applicant is now requesting a Planned 

Development District (POD) with R-1A-8 base zoning. The POD allows departures from some 

ordinance standards while increasing others, to provide an enhanced overall product that could 

not be achieved under a regular zoning district. The land use will remain single-family 

residential. 

The Concept Plan presents a residential neighborhood of 136 single-family lots with 

meandering streets and common open space. The gross residential density is 3.06 units per 

acre. Over 9 acres of park/open space are proposed within the subdivision. The developer 

originally proposed to dedicate 10 acres of parkland on Mission Hill to the City, however 

after further review the City Staff does not believe this would be beneficial to include in 

the POD and it would not be used to meet any of the required park land dedication 

requirements. 

Restrictions from the former zoning have been incorporated in the proposed development 

standards. All standards of the R-1A-8 base zoning will apply unless specifically modified by 

the POD, as detailed in the attached development standards. 

The Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 3, 2010 and recommended approval 

with four additional requirements. Multiple meetings followed with the developer and residents of 

the neighborhood. 

The developer then held a meeting with the Hunter's Creek neighbors on October 18, 2010, and 

) then held a second meeting with the neighbors on Tuesday, October 26, 2010. 


210 

Planned Development District. These items have been incorporated into the development 

standards attached. 

City Council held a public hearing and approved the first reading of the ordinance on December 

13, 2010, including additional requirements submitted by the developer at the meeting. All of 

these items have been included in the development standards. 


Size: 


and Land Use: 




47.97 acres 

North- R-1A6.6/ Single-family residences 

South - MU-B I Vacant 

East- MU-A I Vacant 

West- APD I Vacant (NBISD property) 

Low Density Residential 

None 

Notification: 

Public hearing notices were sent to 18 property owners located within 200 feet. Four 

responses in objection were received (#9, 12, 15, 17) and none in favor. This project has not 

been re-notified since the original POD request went before the City Council. 


) 

Yes 


Priority: 




Pros: 




achieving better places to live. 

The proposed zoning is consistent with the future 

land use plan as well as adjacent land uses. 

Goal 3A Encourage designs that provide for the 

preservation and protection of open space and 

natural resources and minimize disturbance of 

native vegetation. 

The subject property is located over the Edwards 

Aquifer recharge zone, where preservation of 

open space and native vegetation is important. 

Standard residential zoning does not require the 

natural/undisturbed areas or the maximum 

impervious cover proposed in the POD 

development standards. 

Cons: 

None 

) 


211 


Unknown costs associated with the increased performance monitoring associated with the 

drainage improvements. 


The Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 3, 2010 and recommended 

approval of the zoning with the following requirements: 

1. Lots 29 through 42 and 52 through 66 must abide with the single story and masonry 

requirements; 

2. Streets with 30 ft. pavement widths include a centerline stripe; 

3. Amend the Concept Plan Summary Table to show 15' side setback along 

Westpointe Dr.; and 

4. The percentage of varying lot widths must be kept the same as shown on the 

Concept Plan. 


Staff recommends approval of the attached Enclave at Westpointe Village POD Development 

Standards. 

) 

ATTACHMENTS: 

1. Application and Site Plan 

2. The Enclave at Westpointe Village POD Development Standards and Concept Plan 

3. Zoning Map 



6. Aerial Map 


8. Sec. 3.4-2 "R-1A-8" Single-Family District 

9. Sec. 3.5 Planned Development Districts 

10. Excerpt from the Planning Commission minutes of August 3, 2010 

11. Summary of meetings 

12. Ordinance 

Y:\CCagenda\ZoneChgs&SUP\201 0 Cases\Westpointe POD 2nd 1-1 0-11.doc 

) 


212 

s 

APPLICAT.iiON FOR. 

ZONE CHANGE 

424 S. C.48.1'ELL AVBNl./E 


E-U41L: plannin~(i'i.vlbte;;as.org 

PHONE: (/.~()0 ReceiptNo.: 1797oo 

7 

Date Received: ft:, /3o /1 D Zoning slg~ issued: Date: j, t No. _....5=---- 

cash/Check Number:---.~.{~O:.!.J/;J.~-----c.ase Number: P 2 ID-J. 7 

U:\Piannlng\Applicatlons\Zone Change.DOC 

,_) 

ATTACHMENT 1

-~ Environmental Densily (37.5%) 

-~, 

Single Family Homes (typ) -------., 

~----Public Street Paving 

O:tt )(I.!J., p~ 

Total Site: 1,936,474.00 ft 2 (44.45533 acres) 

u G 1 t'l'ide 1-.feand.eri.nq Walkway 2:.1% 40,454.00 ft"' (0. 92870 acres) 

• Si.t1gle Family Driveway .... 5. 7% l.l.O ,168, DO ft= (2. 54288 acres) 

F~J Public Street Paving .. ,... 1. 7% 1491649 o 00 ft::l (3. 435~ aores) 

:;: Single Family Homes (typ), 21..9% .o:12.(1, 697.00 ft= (9.74970 aores) 

HIJ Jervi.ous . . ............ 62:.5% 1,210,906.00 ft= 

t 1." 

r~ 

~---· 

"' 60 feet 

diiil 

~ 

~-commons wl Natural Landscaping 

Areas Compared To Site (44.4%) 

commons w/ llntm:al Landscaping 20.'l:!c: 4DO,ot62.00 £t" (9.19:334 oi'IQX'IIIS) 

Meandering Front Yard (Caving} 23,8~ 460,186.00 :ft" (l.O.SG•M2 acres) 

Remaining S.ite ................ 55.611: 1,075,826.13 ft= 

(24.69157 ncres) 

1'\:1 

1-" 

w 

THE ENC:LA.VE at 

WestPv~l%~ 

RUdhHI llcllt• LoiiCJL:. Ch::~:tl 

.00,00 1 15°.0'52" 53.57' S:L•I1' 

.00.(;(1' 130"15'511" .!.1!3.00 1 :n.0.00' 

:n•3l'!I!S" 

137aS0°45" 

24"37'24" 

87..68' 

S79.29' 

2U,Ofl' 

:>07.44' 

11;1.19' 

(10.56' 

213.23' 

11 !':0.00' 81.34'3lt" 313.::!3' 

" 

Ttllilft.'lll Cllo!::'•J !'ou.:J.:HJ 

:::11.95' u lf3.:i7 15511 1•1 

!:1'!9.:-!.t.' ~7 i4"44'3rl" R 

372.30' s 10~6 1 5!1 11 ~~ 

20:...9' N lf6~31'43" E 

360.73 1 s a.o••ll'4B" w 

1,22~.oo• H ss••J3'10" R 

.::19:>,4'1' s fi8"1';'3J" w 

109.16' S 35'01'06" ~I 

96.31.' tJ 33°.'~6'2'7" 1!: 

336.07 1 s 34'25 1 00" 18CJ.02' 11 47'36'37." w 

4i.O;!' s ,.,.,~'11" F. 

5'/fl.ll~· s 'i2°o]7'45" ~J 

109.12' 5 50"3'34" E 

R!_cic f-_!9!'!!son Site .. ~~ 

~ ~'Sfudlo ,. 

M::i;;h~~I:P;:-•·f"'i::tti~J 

-- 

T~&EclJ:::oQcn: 

88327lt!Avel'l 

Go!dm Va!12y, MN 55427 

763-59lHJUSS 

Fan: 763-S9SoODBD 

~~ .... p-..:cwp 

OUrbDOit 

~~.r:'0111 

CoJ!Yf8~1~D10 •lhhd~RB~Dd lha diHI&m. ~ncltpo:IJICIIio:l>•llv..m BID Tho •~kl 

proportyoiRI

214 

The Enclave at Westpointe Village 

Planned Development District 


(This Draft includes all of the proposed changes shown in the 12/13/1 0 agenda packet 

those discussed at the 12/13/10 meeting.) 

BASE ZONING DISTRICT 

This Planned Development District (PDD) will have the base zoning requirements of the 

R-1A-8 zoning district as described in the current zoning ordinance of the City of New 

Braunfels. The Enclave at Westpointe Planned Development District (EWVPD) will 

accommodate a modified street and lot layout for a sustainable community that provides 

generous native landscaped areas, unique lot diversity and pedestrian friendly 

circulation. 

CONCEPT PLAN REQUIREMENTS 

RELATION TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 

This project area is currently zoned R-1A-8-R83. The project area and proposed use 

are in accordance with the Land Use Plan and Major Thoroughfare Plan depicted in the 

City's Comprehensive Plan. 

) 

ACREAGE 

The proposed Development District area is 47.97 acres. This includes the subdivision 

area of approximately 44.46 acres and right-of-way area within the proposed 

Westpointe Drive. 

SURVEY 

An accurate survey of the boundary of the district is included as an attachment. 

LAND USES 

The land use is single family residential. 

GENERALTHOROUGHFARELAYOUT 

The attached Concept Plan includes the general thoroughfare layout. 

Enclave at Westpointe Village Planned Development District 

ATTACHMENT 2

215 

DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 

~) 

The general development standards are as follows: 

fThe *identifies a specific note that provides additional detail regarding the standard.) 

Base Zoning: 

R-1A-8 

Total Acres: 

44.455 (excluding Westpointe Dr) 

Number Of Residential Lots: 136 

Lots/Acre: 3.06 

Park/Open Space: Approx. 9.167 Acres *1 

Land Use: 

Total Sidewalk (5-Ft.): 

Single-Family Residential 

7,000 Lf Min. 

· Cul-De-Sac Diameter: 160 Ft. Min. *2 

Average Lot Area: 9,413 Sq.Ft. *3 

Minimum Lot Area: 7,000 Sq.Ft. *4 

Front Setback Minimum: 25Ft. *5 

) 

Side Setback Minimum: 5 Ft. *6 

Rear Setback Minimum: 

20Ft. 

Minimum Lot Width At Front Setback Line: 59. Ft. *7 

Minimum Lot Depth: 

Maximum Bldg Height: 

100Ft. 

Lots 29 through 42 and 52 thru 66 shall be a 

maximum of one story; 35 ft. for remainder of 

lots. 

Maximum Bldg Coverage On Average Lot: 33.15% *8 

Minimum Building Footprint Square 1 ,800 sq. ft. on Lots 29 through 42 and 52 

Footage: through 66. 

) 

Masonry Requirements: 

Connectivity: 

Exterior side or rear walls on lots adjacent to 

Hunters Creek (Lots 29 through 42 and 52 

through 66) shall be constructed with masonry 

siding composed of brick, rock or stucco. 

There shall be no street connection from the 

proposed subdivision to Hunters Creek 

Subdivision by means of the street known as 

Hunters Ridge. 


Page2 of8

216 

Access: 

The Enclave at Westpointe Village will be a 

controlled access (gated) neighborhood as 

follows: 

1. The primary (northern) access point off 

of Westpointe Drive will be the main 

entry and will serve as entry and exit for 

both homeowners and emergency 

vehicles. 

2. The secondary (southern) access point 

off of Westpointe Drive will serve as an 

exit only for homeowners while allowing 

entry and exit for emergency vehicles. 

*1 - Open space within this sustainable community includes water quality and detention 

pond areas as well as native landscaped areas. All common areas will be maintained 

by the HOA and the common areas and native landscaped areas will be owned by the 

HOA. 

*2 - The cul-de-sac diameter being provided is in excess of the minimum required by 

code and will provide a park-like island with additional open space that provides a 

unique identity within the neighborhood. 

*3- The average lot area exceeds the 8,000 SF minimum in R-1A-8 base zoning district 

by approximately 17.7%. The nature of the meandering street layout within this 

sustainable neighborhood creates lots with varied sizes and shapes. This eliminates 

monotony while providing unique views as one walks or drives along the streets. Using 

this design technique, called caving, the average distances of homes front to front and 

homes rear to rear have increased (the areas where home windows are concentrated) 

compared to conventional planning that strives to make all lots at the 8,000 square foot 

minimum. 

) 

*4- There are currently 26 lots within the subdivision that fall below the minimum 8,000 

square foot area. Of these 26 lots, there are only 10 lots that are below 7,500 square 

feet. The nature of the street layout within this sustainable community creates lots with 

exciting shapes, unlike standard cookie-cutter rectangular box-shaped lots. 

*5- There is a variable front setback throughout the subdivision. The bulk of the lots 

within this sustainable community have a front setback, as depicted on the Concept 

Plan, in excess of the 25 foot minimum. This provides a more inviting pedestrian 

experience within the neighborhood. 

*6 - The minimum side setback for lots that abut Westpointe Drive shall be 15 feet on 

the side that abuts Westpointe Drive. Otherwise, the required side setback for corner 

lots is 5 feet. 



217 

*7 - The minimum lot width at a 25-foot front setback is 15 feet. However, this is an 

unusual circumstance for "flag lots" located in a cul-de-sac. The minimum lot width of 

59 feet occurs at the front setback that is established and shown on the Concept Plan. 

The nature of the street layout within this sustainable community creates lots with 

unusual shapes, unlike standard rectangular box-shaped lots, that, while not meeting 

minimum area and width requirements, provide greater diversity within the community. 

The lots that are located at the end of the cul-de-sac that appear flag-like are set in a 

more secluded area with terrific views to adjacent open space. Those lots have widths 

of 59 to 65 feet at the meandering setback with the narrowest portion being 15-feet wide 

for driveway access. The percentage of varying lot widths will be kept the same as 

shown on the concept plan. 

*8 - If the largest building ·footprint is placed on the smallest lot, the resulting building 

coverage is 43.1 %. 

STREET DESIGN CRITERIA 

The base street design criteria used within the Enclave at Westpointe Subdivision is for 

"Local streets serving one- and two-family residential property" having a ROW width of 

50 feet. 

1. No tangent section is required between reverse curves as this will allow for the 

meandering nature of the streets as currently laid out. With the large sweeping 

radius of the curves and slow residential speeds, tangents are not needed. 

Intersections are at the outer portion of the curves providing increased sight 

distances compared to the "tee" intersections of standard platting. However, a 

painted center line is required. 

2. Minimum pavement width for the interior streets (excluding Westpointe Drive) is 30 

feet (FOC to FOC). These interior streets with pavement widths of 30 feet shall 

have a double yellow center line throughout the subdivision. 

3. Trees may be planted within the 4.5-foot landscape strip between back of curb and 

the sidewalk. 

4. The residential sidewalks will be 5 feet in width. 



218 

DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS 

1. Existing Detention Pond 

A. Excavation of the existing detention pond shall be completed before the final 

reading of the zoning case. 

B. The excavation shall be completed in accordance with the approved plans, as 

certified by the project engineer and accepted by the City Engineer, following an 

on-site inspection by the project engineer and a third party engineer for the City. 

C. Applicant shall pay the costs of the City's third party engineer's inspection, not to 

exceed $1 ,500. 

2. Water Pollution Abatement Plan (WPAP) 

The following items are to be completed as soon as possible by the owner upon 

obtaining approval of the Water Pollution Abatement Plan for this project from TCEQ 

regardless of the status of the EWVPD, the subdivision plat, or the full set of 

construction plans for Unit 1: 

A. The owner shall excavate the full volume of the east detention pond as 

referenced in the latest version of the drainage report for this project. This will 

provide an approximate increase of 138,000 cubic feet of detention volume, 

which more than doubles the storage capacity of the existing detention pond. 

B. In addition to this excavation, the outfall structure of the existing pond will be 

reconstructed to match the configuration modeled in the latest version of the 

drainage report for this project, thus significantly reducing the discharge potential 

for any storm water that enters this detention pond. 

) 

C. To provide a further increase in available storage capacity near the outfall point, 

the east water quality pond will also be excavated to subgrade with this initial site 

work (excavated to the level below the filtration section that will be installed at a 

later date). This will provide in excess of an additional 60,000 cubic feet of 

storage v~Qiume. 

D. An earthen berm will be installed within the project area along Lots 37, 38 and 39 

of the Hunter's Creek Subdivision between the existing water quality pond and 

the existing detention pond. In lieu of the interceptor channel planned previously 

in this area, this berm will be constructed to divert runoff to the detention pond 

that would not be captured in the proposed street (Wauford Way). This will 

further minimize the amount of runoff from the site that has the potential to flow 

across Lots 37, 38 and 39 of the Hunter's Creek Subdivision. 

3. New Drainage Facilities 

A. The new drainage facilities for the entire EWVPD, as shown on the Phasing Plan 

attached hereto, shall be completed before any vertical improvements are 

completed or allowed on the site. 

) 

Enclave at Westpointe Village Planned Development District Page 5 of 8

219 

B. The new drainage facilities for the entire EWVPD shall be completed in 

accordance with the approved plans for such improvements (such plans to be· 

based upon the approved drainage study dated October 19, 2010), as certified 

by the project engineer and accepted by the City Engineer, following an on-site 

inspection by the project engineer and a third party engineer for the City. 


exceed $1,500. 

4. Performance Guarantee 

A. The drainage facilities for the entire EWVPD shall operate to meet or exceed the 

approved design criteria (as detailed in the approved drainage plans) for the 

Coverage Period (as defined below), provided, however, any drainage ponds for 

Phase II of the EWVPD may not fully meet the approved design criteria until the 

streets within Phase II are fully constructed. 

) 

B. As used herein, the term "Coverage Period" shall mean a two-year period of time 

commencing upon the issuance by the City of a certificate of occupancy for the 

59th residential house on the property subject to the zoning case (provided that 

all streets for Phase I and Phase II of the EWVPD shown on Schedule A must be 

completed by that date) and ending on the second annual anniversary of such 

commencement date. Note: the impervious cover for all of the streets in the 

EWVPD, plus the impervious cover allocated for 59 residential houses, shall not 

exceed 65% of the impervious cover planned for the EWVPD that drains toward 

the Hunter's Creek subdivision, as detailed in the approved drainage study 

(dated October 19, 201 0). 

C. In order to provide financial security for the obligation described in paragraph A 

above, Applicant shall post with the City Cash Surety (as defined below) within 

30 days following the final reading of the zoning case in the amount of $200,000 

or 1 0 percent of the cost of improvements, whichever is greater. The statement 

of construction value shall be provided to the City Engineer to support the Cash 

Surety amount. 

D. As used herein, the term "Cash Surety" shall mean one of the following: 

(i) Cash or its equivalent delivered to the City and to be held by the City in a 

separate, interest-bearing account with all interest thereon belonging to 

the Applicant; 

(ii) An irrevocable letter of credit issued by a financial institution reasonably 

acceptable to the City; or 

(iii) A performance bond issued in the name of the City on terms reasonably 

acceptable to the City. 

) 

E. If, during the Coverage Period, the City's third party engineer sends a written 

notice to Applicant stating in that notice that the drainage improvements for the 


220 

EWVPD are not operating to meet the design criteria specified in the approved 

design documents (and specifying in such notice the specific deficiencies in such ) 

operation), within 30 days thereafter Applicant shall do one of the following: (i) 

notify the City in writing that the Applicant shall rectify the problems specified by 

the City's third party engineer, or (ii) notify the City in writing that Applicant 

disagrees with the conclusion of the City's third party engineer. In the event that 

Applicant fails to send either of the two written notices specified above within 

such 30-day period, Applicant shall be deemed to have selected option (i) above. 

F. In the event that Applicant notifies the City that Applicant will rectify the problems 

specified by the City's third party engineer as contemplated in paragraph E 

above, Applicant shall be required to complete such necessary work in a 

reasonably expeditious manner, not to exceed 90 days, subject to force majeure. 

G. In the event that Applicant notifies the City that Applicant disagrees with the 

conclusion of the City's third party engineer, the City and Applicant shall agree on 

· another independent third party engineer within 15 days of the City's receipt of 

Applicant's written notice. In the event that the City and Applicant fail to agree on 

the designation of such independent third party engineer within such 15-day 

period, the City shall select such independent third party engineer. The 

independent third party engineer shall determine if the drainage improvements 

for the EWVPD are operating to meet the design criteria in the approved design 

documents, and the conclusion of the independent third party engineer in that 

regard shall be binding on the Applicant, its successors and assigns, and the 

City; provided, however, nothing is intended to modify or reduce Applicant's 

obligations pursuant to State law (regulatory or common law) with respect to 

drainage from the property subject to the zoning case onto adjoining properties. 

In the event that the independent third party engineer specifies in a written notice 

to Applicant that the drainage improvements for the EWVPD are not operating to 

meet the design criteria in the approved design documents (and specifying in 

such notice the specific deficiencies in such operation), Applicant shall be 

required to complete such necessary work in a reasonably expeditious manner, 

not to exceed 90 days, subject to force majeure, from the receipt by Applicant of 

the written notice from the independent third party engineer. Applicant shall be 

responsible for paying the inspection costs of such independent third party 

engineer, not to exceed $3,000. 

) 

H. In the event that Applicant fails to rectify the specified problems in the drainage 

improvements for the EWVPD within the 90-day period, subject to force majeure, 

under either paragraph F or paragraph G above, the City shall have the right to 

utilize the Cash Surety to rectify the specified problems in the drainage 

improvements. The City shall· be required to notify Applicant in writing of the 

City's election to utilize the Cash Surety for this purpose. 

I. Within 30 days following the expiration of the Coverage Period, the City shall 

return to Applicant any unused Cash Surety. 

) 


221 

LIFT STATION 

A lift station planned adjacent to lot 53 of the subdivision shall instead be located 

adjacent to Lot 52 and near the street Mission Run Hill. 

BUILDING PERMITS 

Upon final approval of the full set of construction plans for Unit 1 by the City of New 

Braunfels and New Braunfels Utilities, the developer must complete all street and 

drainage improvements prior to a building permit being issued for any lot within Unit 1 of 

the EWVPD. This requirement will be applicable on a unit by unit basis. 

) 

MAINTENANCE 

1. Maintenance Bond 

A. Prior to acceptance of public improvements or approval of private improvements 

a Maintenance Bond or other surety instrument shall be accepted by the City in 

compliance with the following: 

i. Shall be in an amount equal to 10% of the cost of improvements for the first 

two calendar years. 

ii. Shall cover all street and drainage improvements. The construction value or 

final pay estimate shall be provided to the City Engineer to support said 

warranty and maintenance bond amounts. 

iii. Shall be satisfactory to the City Attorney as to form, sufficiency, and manner 

of execution. 

iv. In an instance where a Maintenance Bond or other surety instrument has 

been posted and a defect or failure of any required improvement occurs 

within the period of coverage, the City may declare said bond or surety 

instrument to be in default and require that the improvements be repaired or 

replaced. 

v. Whenever a defect or failure of any required improvement occurs within the 

period of coverage, the City shall require that a new Maintenance Bond or 

surety instrument be posted for a period of one (1) full calendar year 

sufficient to cover the corrected defect or failure. 

2. Applicant, its successors and assigns, shall be required to maintain all drainage 

facilities for the POD in accordance with the City Code. 

U:\Pianning\Pianned Developments\The Enclave at Westpointe Village\The Enclave at Westpointe Village- POD final draft 1-10- 

11.doc 

) 



' ' 222 

' 

~~ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ \ •, 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ ·- 

\ 

\ I ca 

\ 

\ 

r:: 

-ca 

D.. 

C) ) 

r:: 

tn 

..c: 

D.. 

....... ... · 

/

n \l 

M 

N 

: I 

J 

1 

) 1\~.--y: 

- \ I I I I I I 

.\ ~·~j \ ~' 

Q 

~ 

a:s 

IZ!z 

s~ 

g. D. 

9 

~~ 

~Q 

85) 

! 

~ 

~ 

\ I 

!f 

•I 

!I 

il! 

~~ 

a; 

h 

"' 

NOTE:: lHE PERCENTAGE OF VARYING LOT WIDtHS MUST BE 

KEPT THE SAME AS SHOWN ON lHIS PLAN 

• t.IINit.IUM SIDE SEmACK FOR LOTS ALONG WESTPOIMTE 

ORIVE IS 1~ FEET. 

+ HOUSE ON LOT 1$ UM11EO TO ONE ~y AND MUST 

CONFOFW TO t.IASOHRY REQUIREMENTS PER POD OESCAIP110H 

BASE ZONING: 

TOTAL ACR£5: 

NUt.IBER OF LOTS; 

LOTS/ACR£:: 

PARK/OPEN SPACE: 

LAND USE: 

TOTAL SIDEWALK (5-Fl): 

CUL-DE-SAC OIIJ.IE'TER: 

AVERAGE LOT AREA: 

t.IINIMUM LOT AREA: 

FliONT SE'lliACK UtNII.IUM: 

SlOE SETBACK MINIMUM: 

REAR SElBACK IAINIMUW! 

I.IINIMUM LOT WIDTH AT FRONT SETBACK UNE:. 

I.IINIMUM LOT DEP'IH: 

MAXIMUM BlDG HEIGHT: 

MAXIMUM BLDG CO\IERAOE 

-r· 

.~"' 

.~

...... ~ 

~ Subject Property 

- i City Limits 

111..... 6 

ZONING 

-APD 

DR-1 

0R-1A 

I I R-1A6.6 

LJR-2 

Zoning Map 

0R-2A 

-R-3 

R-3L 

·======· 

-R-3H 

0THA 

L]zH 

I I ZHA 

-C-1 

-C-1A 

-C-3 

-C-18 

!i 

~ 

0 

:I: 

:!: 

m 

z 

-t 

w 

-C-48 

I~Ji:~}:f:0~1 

MU-A 

-MU-8 

LJPD 

··--- 

PZ10-27 

Enclave at Westpointe Village 

R-1 A-8 to POD 

~- 

_J 

Map Created On 

7/14/10

Existing Land Us~Map 

::'bi::x:s:>-X\5Z· '50: 

Legend 

........ 


. - i City Limits 

111 •••••fi 

Existing Land Use 

'···-·--·-···-' Residential Low Density 

- Commercial 

- Industrial 

-School 

- Government 

~ 

);! 

(') 

:I: 

5: 

m 

z 

-1 

.j:a. 

-Institutional 

~ 


Drainage 

f',~ City of 



R-1A-8 to POD 


7/14/10

Future Land Use Map 

7/NLLDJi'P"/ 'P;( \x{.·.A 

::a: 

Legend 

......... 

; i City Limits 

••••••115 

Future Land Use 


: Res Low Density 

- Commercial 

- Industrial 

-Institutional 

~ 

~ 

0 

:::I: 

s: 

m 

z 

-f 

Ul 

- Government 

-School 

r-, City of 

Utilities 

- Open - Parks 


'-- 

L> 



l ~' • 

\_,) 

._) 


7/14/10

!:i 

:;! 

0 

~ 

s:: 

m 

z 

-1 

0') 

"=-~-' 

......... 

Subject Property 

f'., 

; ; City Limits 

••••••IIi 



......._ 

PZ10-27 


R-1A-8 to POD 


7/14/10


PLANNING COMMISSION -AUGUST 3, 2010 -6:00PM 


Investor Grosenbacher Partnership (Westpointe Residential) 

·J 


47.97 acres located on the west side of Oak Run Parkway, approximately 

2,000 feet north of Loop 337 


The circled numbers on the map correspond to the property owners listed below. All i~formation is from the 


1. Kiesling, Bob & Betty 10. Rompel, Alan & Jennifer 

2. NBISD 11. Castilleja, Jerry & Debra 

3. Ross, Robert & Susan 12. Miner, Philip & Sue Ellen 

4. Kemraj, Virjanand & Jaishree 13. Studdard, Kenneth & Sue 

5. Oldani, Daniel & Norma 14. Seidel, Esther 

6. Holley, Van & Joy 15. Muschalek, Thomas & Kim 

7. Dix, Mark 16. Smith, Vincent & Maria 

8. Hellbusch, Richard & Ladonna 17. Smith, Nick & Angela 

9. Gribbon, Daniel & Teresa 18. Investor Grosenbacher Partnership 

() 


ATTACHMENT 7

~J 

@ 

Legend 

\222a Subject Property 

c::J 200' Notification Buffer 

f" ,City of 


PZ10-27 



~ 

N 


7/14/10

230 

3.4-2 "R-1A-B" single-family district. 

Purpose. The R-1A-8 single-family district is intended for development of primarily detached, single-family 

residences and customary accessory uses on lots of at least 8,000 square feet in size. The following 

regulations shall apply in all "R-1A-8" districts: 




(1) Uses permitted by right 









Single family industrialized home (see Sec. 5.7) 





Contractor's temporary on-site construction office (only with permit from Building Official; see 

Sec. 5.9) · 



Golf course, public and private 



Park and/or playground (public) 




Truck gardens (no retail sales) 


Water storage (surface, underground or overhead), water wells and pumping stations that are 

part of a public or municipal system 

) 


listed in subsection (1 ), the uses listed in this subsection shall be deemed those authorized in the 

district. 


(1) Residential uses. 



(iii) Side building setbacks. There shall be a side building setback on each side of a 




) 

ATTACHMENT 8

231 
















each lot shall provide not less than one half acre per dwelling unit not located over the 

recharge zone and one acre per dwelling unit located over the recharge zone. 




(2) Non-residential uses. 







(iv) Comer lots. Buildings on corner lots shall have 15-foot side building setbacks 















(ix) Parking. See Section 5.1 for permitted uses' parking.

232 

3.5 Planned Development Districts. 

3.5-1 Purpose: The planned development district is a free-standing district designed to provide for ~) 

the development of land as an integral unit for single or mixed uses in accordance with a plan that 

may vary from the established regulations of other zoning districts. It is the intent in such a district 

to insure compliance with good zoning practices while allowing certain desirable departures from 

the strict provisions of specific zoning classifications. 

3.5-2 Application: An application for a planned development district shall be processed in 

accordance with this Chapter. A pre-planning conference is required between the applicant and 

the Planning Director prior to the actual filing of the application. 

3.5-3 Base District. A base zoning district shall be specified. The regulations in the base zoning 

district shall control unless specifically stated otherwise in the PD. 

3.5-4 District plans and requirements: There are two types of plans that may be used in the 

planned development process. The general purpose and use of each plan is described as 

follows: 

(a) Concept plan. This plan is intended to be used as the first step in the planned 

development process. It establishes the most general guidelines for the district by 

identifying the land use types, development standards, approximate road locations and 

project boundaries and illustrates the integration of these elements into a master plan for 

the whole district. 

(b) Detail plan. The detail plan is the final step of the planned development process. It 

contains the details of development for the property. For smaller tracts or where final 

development plans are otherwise known, the detail plan may be used to establish the 

district and be the only required step in the planned development process. 

3.5-5 Concept plan requirements: Said concept plan shall include the following: 

) 

(a) Relation to the comprehensive plan. A general statement setting forth how the 

proposed district will relate to the city's comprehensive plan and the degree to which it is 

or is not consistent with that plan and the proposed base zoning district. 

(b) Acreage. The total acreage within the proposed district. 

(c) Survey. An accurate survey of the boundaries of the district. 

(d) Land uses. Proposed general land uses and the acreage for each use, including open 

space. For residential development, the total number of units and the number of units per 

acre. 

(e) General thoroughfare layout. Proposed streets, as a minimum to arterial street level. 

(Showing collector and local streets is optional.) 

(f) Development standards. Development standards, if different from the base zoning 

district, for each proposed land use, as follows: 

(1) Minimum lot area. 

(2) Minimum lot width and depth. 

(3) Minimum front, side, and rear building setback areas. 

) 

ATTACHMENT 9

233 

(4) Maximum height of buildings. 

(5) Maximum building coverage. 

(6) Maximum floor to area ratios for nonresidential uses. 

(7) Minimum parking standards for each general land use. 

(8) Other standards as deemed appropriate. 

(g) Existing conditions. On a scaled map sufficient to determine detail, the following shall 

be shown for the area within the proposed district. 

(1) Topographic contours of ten feet or less. 

(2) Existing streets. 

(3) Existing 1 00-year floodplain, floodway and major drainage ways. 

(4) City limits and E.T.J. boundaries. 

(5) Zoning districts within and adjacent to the proposed district. 

(6) Land use. 

(7) Utilities, including water, wastewater and electric lines. 

) 

3.5-6 Detail plan requirements: The application for a planned development district shall include a 

detail plan consistent with the concept plan. Said detail plan shall include the following: 

(a) Acreage. The acreage in the plan as shown by a survey, certified by a registered 

surveyor. 

(b) Land uses. Permitted uses, specified in detail, and the acreage for each use. 

(c) Off-site information. Adjacent or surrounding land uses, zoning, streets, drainage 

facilities and other existing or proposed off-site improvements, as specified by the 

department, sufficient to demonstrate the relationship and compatibility of the district to 

the surrounding properties, uses, and facilities. 

(d) Traffic and transportation. The location and size of all streets, alleys, parking lots and 

parking spaces, loading areas or other areas to be used for vehicular traffic; the proposed 

access and connection to existing or proposed streets adjacent to the district; and the 

traffic generated by the proposed uses. 

(e) Buildings. The locations, maximum height, maximum floor area and minimum 

setbacks for all nonresidential buildings. 

(f) Residential development. The numbers, location, and dimensions of the lots, the 

minimum setbacks, the number of dwelling units, and number of units per acre (density). 

(g) Water and drainage. The location of all creeks, ponds, lakes, floodplains or other 

water retention or major drainage facilities and improvements. 

) 

(h) Utilities. The location and route of all major sewer, water, or electrical lines and 

facilities necessary to serve the district.

234 

(i) Open space. The approximate location and size of greenbelt, open, common, or 

recreation areas, the proposed use of such areas, and whether they are to be for public ~) 

or private use. 

U) Sidewalks and bike paths. Sidewalks or other improved ways for pedestrian or bicycle 

use. 

(k) If multifamily or non-residential development, a landscape plan. 

A detailed plan, with all of the information required of a concept plan, may be submitted in 

lieu of a concept plan. 

3.5-7 Phasing schedule: PD districts larger than 350 acres shall provide a phasing schedule 

depicting the different construction phases. 

3.5-8 Approval of district: The City Council may, after receiving a recommendation from the 

Planning Commission, approve by Ordinance the creation of a district based upon a concept plan 

or a detail plan. The approved plan shall be made part of the ordinance establishing the district. 

Upon approval said change shall be indicated on the zoning maps of the city. 

The development standards and requirements including, but not limited to, maximum height, lot 

width, lot depth, floor area, lot area, setbacks and maximum off-street parking and loading 

requirements for uses proposed shall be established for each planned development district based 

upon the particular merits of the development design and layout. Such standards and 

requirements shall comply with or be more restrictive than the standards established in the base 

zoning district for the specific type uses allowed in the district, except that modifications in these 

regulations may be granted if it shall be found that such modifications are in the public interest, 

are in harmony with the purposes of this Chapter and will not adversely affect nearby properties. 

3.5-9 Planning Commission approval of detail plan: The Planning Commission is authorized to 

approve a detail plan or the amendment of a detail plan for property for which a concept plan has 

been approved by the City Council. If the City Council initially approved a detail plan in 

establishing the district, the detail plan may only be amended by the City Council. The approved 

detail plan shall be permanently filed in the Planning Department. The Planning Commission shall 

approve the detail plan if it finds that: 

) 

(a) Compliance. The plan complies with the concept plan approved for that property and 

the standards and conditions of the PD district; 

(b) Compatibility. The plan provides for a compatible arrangement of buildings and land 

uses and would not adversely affect adjoining neighborhood or properties outside the 

plan; and 

(c) Circulation of vehicular traffic. The plan provides for the adequate and safe circulation 

of vehicular traffic. 

If no detail plan has been approved for the property within ten years of the date of approval of a 

concept plan, the detail plan must be approved by the City Council, after receiving a 

recommendation from the Planning Commission, after notice and hearing. 

3.5-10 Expiration of detail plan: A detail plan shall be valid for five years from the date of its 

approval. If a building permit has not been issued or construction begun on the detail plan within 

the five years, the detail plan shall automatically expire and no longer be valid. The Planning 

Commission may, prior to expiration of the detail plan, for good cause shown, extend for up to 24 

months the time for which the detail plan is valid. 

)

235 

) 

3.5-11 Appeals from Planning Commission action: If the Planning Commission disapproves a 

detail plan over which it has final approval authority, or imposes conditions, or refuses to grant an 

extension of time for which a detail plan is valid, the applicant may appeal the decision to the City 

Council by filing a written request with the Planning Director within ten days of the decision. 

3.5-12 Changes in detail plan: Changes in the detail plan shall be considered the same as 

changes in the zoning ordinance and shall be processed as required in Section 2.3. Those 

changes which do not alter the basic relationship of the proposed development to adjacent 

property and which do not alter the uses permitted or increase the density, floor area ratio, height, 

or coverage of the site, or which do not decrease the off-street parking ratio or reduce the yards 

provided at the boundary of the site, as indicated on the approved detail plan, may be authorized 

by the Planning Director. Any applicant may appeal the decision of the Planning Director to the 

Planning Commission for review and decision as to whether an amendment to the Planned 

Development District ordinance shall be required. 

3.5-13 Minimum development size: The total initial development of any Planned Development 

District shall not be less than two acres for nonresidential developments and five acres for 

residential developments. 

3.5-14 Deviation from code standards: The City Council may approve a PD concept plan with 

deviations from any provision in the Code of Ordinances. Such deviations shall be listed or shown 

as part of the Ordinance that approves the concept plan. 

)

236 

EXCERPT FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 3, 2010 


Case PZ10-27: Hold a public hearing and make a recommendation to City Council regarding the 

proposed rezoning of 47.97 acres located on the west side of Oak Run Parkway, approximately 

2,000 feet north of Loop 337, from "R-1 A-8" Single Family District to "POD" Planned Development 

District with a Concept Plan. (Westpointe Residential) 

Ms. Mullins explained said this portion of the Westpointe development was zoned R-1A-8 with restrictions 

in 2007. Restrictions included masonry and height limits adjacent to Hunters Creek, and no street 

connection between the two subdivisions. She said the applicant was now requesting a Planned 

Development District (POD) with R-1A-8 base zoning. She said the Concept Plan presented by the 

applicant showed a residential neighborhood of 136 lots, for a gross residential density of 3.06 units per 

acre, with meandering streets and over 9 acres of park/open space in addition to dedicating 10 acres of 

parkland on Mission Hill to the City. She said that restrictions from the former zoning were incorporated in 

the development standards and all standards of the R-1A-8 base zoning would apply unless specifically 

modified by the POD. Ms. Mullins then briefly outlined the departures from ordinance standards. She 

stated that 18 notices were sent to property owners within 200 ft. of the subject property; no responses 

were received in favor of the rezoning and two responses were received in opposition (#12, 15). She 

concluded by stating that staff recommended approval of the proposed POD with the following revisions 

to the development standards: 1) Restrict parking to one side of the street with a pavement section of 28 

feet; 2) Include a center line stripe; and 3) Amend the Concept Plan Summary Table to show 15' side 

setback along Westpointe Dr. 

Chair Casteel asked Ms. Mullins to explain the masonry requirement for homes adjacent to Hunter's 

Creek Subdivision. Ms. Mullins explained the restrictions were adopted in 2007 and noted that only a few 

homes on the proposed plan ·would have to abide by the masonry requirement and single story limitation 

because of the green space buffer between the two developments. 


) 

) 

Steve Eckland with Bury & Partners spoke on behalf of the developer. He compared the proposed layout 

of the development with that previously approved and noted that the number of lots had decreased, the 

amount of open space had increased and 2.4 acres of impervious cover had been removed. He said the 

developer was willing to increase pavement width to 30 ft. to allow parking on both sides of the road. 

Joey Guerra, 11202 Disco Drive, San Antonio, owner and developer, believed that the additional green 

space between the subdivisions should not limit the homes to single story. He noted that they were 

required to reduce the percentage of impervious cover in the residential development because of the 

additional water flowing towards the property from the extension of Oak Run Parkway. 

Discussion relating to masonry and height requirements followed. Drainage problems in the area were 

also discussed at length. 


Phil Miner, 443 Hunters Trophy, described the significant flooding problems in the neighborhood. He said 

he objected to the rezoning for safety and environmental concerns. 

Ron Reaves, 521 Hunters Creek, said he was an officer of the Hunters Creek Property Owners 

Association. He asked the Commission to incorporate the same wording regarding masonry requirements 

and height limitation in the new ordinance. He described his concerns with flooding problems in the area 

and asked the Commission not to recommend approval of the rezoning until all questions had been 

answered. 

) 

ATTACHMENT 10

2.37 

Earl Studdard, 339 Hunters Trace, stated his concerns with drainage, adding that his back yard had been 

destroyed three times. 

David Whitaker, 39 Hunters Trail, said the proposed plan lacked dimension and detail. He noted that the 

flooding problems experienced by the neighborhood stemmed from the construction of the extension of 

Oak Run Parkway. · 

Danny Gribbon, 461 Hunters Trophy, said his concern was that the lift station would be located directly 

behind his house. 

Kim Muschalek, 323 Hunters Trace, questioned how the developer claimed a reduction in impervious 

cover when the number of lots increased from 112 to 136. She said she had high water in her yard during 

the June 9 1 h flood, which also flooded her septic system. 

Motion by Commissioner Elrod, seconded by Commissioner Hoyt, to close the public hearing. The motion 

carried unanimously. (9-0-0) 

Ms. Mattingly reminded the Commissioners that most of the details, including drainage, flood plains, lot 

widths, etc., would be addressed when the Detail Plan, Master Plan and subdivision plat were submitted 

for approval. 

Chair Casteel asked if the existing drainage pond would be reworked with the development. Mr. Eckland 

said it would, then elaborated on the location and design of the lift station. 

Commissioner Hoyt noted that studies had shown that narrower streets were safer because vehicles 

were forced to drive slower. 

) 

Commissioner Bearden noted that the plan did not specifically state how many lots had widths of 15 ft. 

Mr. Eckland believed there were no more than five lots with widths of 15 ft. 

Motion by Commissioner Bearden, seconded by Commissioner Massouh, that Case PZ10-27, the - 

proposed rezoning of 47.97 acres located on the west side of Oak Run Parkway, approximately 2,000 

feet north of Loop 337, from "R-1A-8" Single Family District to "POD" Planned Development District with a 

Concept Plan, be forwarded to City Council with a recommendation to approve, with the following 

requirements: 1) That Lots 29 through 42 and 52 through 66, must abide with the single story and 

masonry requirements; 2) That streets with 30 ft. pavement widths include a center line stripe; 3) Amend 

the Concept Plan Summary Table to show 15' side setback along Westpointe Dr.; and 4) The percentage 

of varying lot widths must be kept the same as shown on the Concept Plan. The motion carried, with 

Commissioner Myrick voting "no". (8-1-0) 

)

238 

Enclave at Westpointe- summary of meetings 

January 20, 2010- meeting with Mr. Miner- Jim Klein 

February 8- meeting with Jeff Moeller- Shannon Mattingly and Jim Klein 

February 22- meeting with Joey- Jim Klein 

February 23- City retained HMT to analyze capacity in existing drainage easements through Hunters 

Creek Subdivision 

July 13- meeting with Joey and Bury- Shannon Mattingly, Stacy Snell, Jim Klein and Holly Mullins 

July 16- meeting with Jeff and James at HMT to review Bury report- Jim Klein 

July 27- meeting with Phil Miner- Mike Morrison, Robert Camarena, Steve Ramsey, Jim Klein and Jeff 

Moeller 

July 28- meeting with Ron Reaves and David Whitaker- Jim Klein and Shannon Mattingly 

August 2- meeting with Ron Reaves and David Whitaker- Stacy Snell and Holly Mullins 

August 3- public hearing on the PDD zoning request- Planning Commission 

August 4- Mike Morrison, Mayor Boyer, Shannon Mattingly, and Jim Klein 

) 

August 10- Mike Morrison, Mayor Boyer, Councilman Ybarra and Jim Klein 

September 1- Joey Guerra and his partner, Aaron from Bury- Mike Morrison, Shannon Mattingly, Jim 

Klein, Stacy Snell, and Jeff Moeller 

September 15- Joey eta I, -Shannon Mattingly and Jim Klein 

September 30- meeting to review Bury report- Jim Klein, Jeff Moeller and James 

October 5- meeting discuss engineering report- Jim Klein and HMT 

October 19- Phone call with Mr. Miner 

Mr. Miner asked what HMT's role was along with what I thought the process was to correct the drainage 

issues in Hunter's creek. We discussed HMT's role, drainage issue we had identified and explained how 

we were all working to agree on existing flow rates near his property as it entered Hunter's Creek. He 

brought up other internal drainage issues also, but I tried to stay focused on the issue where Westpointe 

water left their property. Mr. Miner also brought up the sewer lift station issue. Call lasted approx 30 

minutes. 

) 

ATTACHMENT 11

239 

10/20- Phone call with Mr. Reaves 

Mr. Reaves called wanting a more in depth explanation on HMT's role as well as wanted to go over 

other documented problems he had within Hunters Creek. Phone call lasted approx 15 mins, with a 

follow up meeting scheduled the following day. 

10/21- Meeting with Mr. Reaves at HMT office 

Met with Mr. Reeves and went over all the work HMT has done on the project. We went over drainage 

area maps of the Hunters Creek area as well as of the Panther Canyon area. Went over what we were 

doing, again, tried to emphasize the point that we all needed to agree to an existing flow rate at the 

point water left the Westpointe property. Went over other problem areas Mr. Reaves had 

documentation on inside of Hunter's Creek as well as issues he had with the Comal River and how all 

this water ended up in Landa Park. Lift station, TCEQ, WPAP requirements were also discussed. Meeting 

lasted approximately 2 hours. 

October 25- Phil Miner, Mr. Morrison, Jeff M 

Mr. Miner came in to discuss the overall situation. We went over HMT's role, developer's 

responsibilities, and the City's role in the process. We discussed drainage in the entire area as well as lift 

station concerns he had. Mr. Miner was clear that the current situation was unacceptable and wanted 

things fixed ASAP. Meeting lasted approximately 1 hour. 

October 26- community meeting arranged by Joey Guerra 

) 

10/29- Phone call from Mr. Miner 

Mr. Miner called to discuss the drainage issues as well as issues that were discussed at the last public 

meeting. He wanted to know if there was an option we could look at that would divert water to another 

watershed, specifically, if we could capture most of the water and discharge it onto the Kiesling 

property. He said we really needed to find a way to eliminate water coming to Hunter's Creek. I told him 

the goal was to limit the water coming to Hunter's Creek to the existing conditions, but we could not 

divert water out of the watershed. Phone call lasted approx 20 mins. 

November 2- meeting with Ron Reaves, David Whitaker, Sue Ellen and Kim Muschalek- Shannon 

Mattingly and Stacy Snell 

) U:\Pianning\Enclave at Westpointe conversations.docx 

I

240 


AN ORDINANCE REZONING 47.97 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF OAK RUN 

PARKWAY, APPROXIMATELY 2,000 FEET NORTH OF LOOP 337, FROM "R-1A-8" SINGLE 

FAMILY DISTRICT TO "ENCLAVE AT WESTPOINTE VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 

DISTRICT" WITH CONCEPT PLAN; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; 

CONTAINING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of New Braunfels has complied with all requirements of notice 

of public hearing as required by the Zoning Ordinance of the City of New Braunfels; and 

WHEREAS, in keeping with the spirit and objectives of the "PDD" Planned Development District, the 

City Council has given due consideration to all components of said district; and 

WHEREAS, it is the intent of the City Council to provide harmony between existing zoning districts and 

proposed land uses; and 


WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend the Zoning Map by changing 47.97 acres located on 

the west side of Oak Run Parkway, approximately 2,000 feet north of Loop 337, from "R-1A-8" Single-family 

District to "Enclave at Westpointe Village Planned Development District;" now, therefore, 


SECTION 1 


particularly the Zoning Map of the City of New Braunfels, are amended by changing the following described 

tract of land from "R-1A-8" Single-family District to "Enclave at Westpointe Village Planned Development 

District": 

"47.97 acres located on the west side of Oak Run Parkway, approximately 2,000 feet north of 

Loop 337, as delineated on Exhibit 'A' and further described in Exhibit 'B' attached, and 

adopting the development standards as stated in Exhibit 'C'." 

) 

SECTION 2 

THAT all provisions of the Code of Ordinances of the City of New Braunfels not herein amended or 


SECTION 3 

THAT all other ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed to the extent 


) 

1

241 

SECTION4 

THAT if any provisions of this ordinance shall be held void or unconstitutional, it is hereby provided 

that all other parts of the same which are not held void or unconstitutional shall remain in full force and effect. 

SECTION 5 






ATTEST: 

) 




Y:\Ordinances\Zone Changes\Westpointe PDD.doc 

) 

2

Location Map 

m 

>< 

::I: 

-m 

-t 

> - 

......... 


- ; City Limits 

11 

••n•ii 

f',Cityof 


"- 


R-1A-8 to POD 

N / 

'\ 


7/14/10 

'"'--', 

~ 

J 

"---"

243 

111 r11 1 PAPE-DAWSON 

ENGINEERS 

1 

lAND DEVELOPMENT EHVIROMMfNTAl TRANSPORTATION WATER RESO·URCES SURVfYINii 

FIELD NOTES 

FOR 

A 47.97 acre, or 2,089,643 square feet more or less, tract of land, out of a 205.00 acre tract of land 

out of !he City of New Braunfels, Coma! County, Texas, and being out of the William Mockford 

Survey No. 285. Abstract No. 393, and the Andres Sanches Survey No. 286, Abstract No. 528, 

Co mal County, Texas, said 205.00 acre tract being (I) all of that certain 200.00 acre tract conveyed 

by Franz Coretb, a/kla Franz E. Coreth, and wife to Psalms 127, L.P. by deed dated May 5, 1998 

and recorded as Document No. 9806010990 of the Official Public Records of Comal County, 

Texas, and (2) all of that certain 5.00 acre tract conveyed by Franz Coreth, a/k/a Franz E. Coreth to 

Psalms 127, L.P. by deed effective December 18, 2006 and recorded as Document No. 

200606053330 of the Official Public Records of ComaJ County, Texas. Said 47.97 acre tract 

described more particularly by metes and bounds as follows: 

) 

BEGINNING: 

THENCE: 

THENCE: 

THENCE: 

At the southern most comer of said 205.00 acre tract, being the southern most 

~orner of said herein described tract; 

N 43°03'02" W, along and with southwestern line of said 205.00 acre tract, a 

distance of760.10 feet fo an angle point; 

N 43

47.97 Acres 

Job No. 6858.0 I 

Page2 of3 

244 

(con't) 

.~) 

THENCE: 

N 45°21 '14" E, a distance of89.29 feet to an angle point; 

N 53°03'59" E, a distance of378.23 feet to an angle point; 

N 52°48'09" E, a distance of 138.80 feet to an angle point; 

N 53°04'35" E, a distance o£215.81 feetto an angle point; 



N 52°58'50" E, a distance of206.31 feet to an angle point; 

N 53°03'20" E, a distance of55.38 feet to an angle point for the beginning of a 

non-tangent curve to the left, being the northern most comer of the herein 

described tract; 

Departing said northwestern line, over and across said 205.00 acre tract the 

following calls and distances:. 

Southeasterly, along the arc of said curve to the left, with a radial bearing of 

N59°15'04" B, a radius of 500.00 feet, a central angle of03°52'51", a chord 

bearing and distance of S 32°41'21" E, 33.86 feet, at an arc length of 33.87 

feet to a point of tangency; 

S 34°37'47" E, a distance of 26.67 feet to an angle point for the beginning of a 

curve to the left; 

Southeasterly, along the arc of said curve to the left, said curve having a radius 

of 500.00 feet, a central angle of 37°58'24", a chord bearing and distance of 

S53°36'58" E, 325.35 feet, at an nrc length of 331.38 feet to a point of 

tangency; 

S 72°36'10" 1::, a distance of 393.77 feet to an angle point for the beginning of 

a curve to ihe right; 

Southeasterly, along the arc of said curve to the right, said curve having a 

radius of 1,000.00 feet, a central angle of 05°34'04", a chord bearing and 

distance ofS 69°49'08" E, 97.14 feet, at an arc length of97.18 feet to a point 

of non-tangency, being the eastern most corner of ~he herein described tract; 

S 22°57' 54" W, a distance of 134.12 feet to an angle poinl for the beginning of 

a curve to the right; 

) 

liinf PAPE-DAWSON 

pENGINEERS 

)

47.97 Acres 

Job No. 6858.01 


:l4~ 

(con't) 

~) 

Southwesterly, along the arc of said. curve to the right, said curve having a 

radius of 300.00 feet, a central angle of 38°44'56", a chord bearing and 

distance of S 42°20'22" W, 199.04 feet, at an arc length of 202.89 feet to a 

point of tangency; 

S 61 °42'50" W, a distance of611.80 feet to an angle point for the beginning of 

a curve to the left; 

Southwesterly, along the arc of said curve to the left, said curve having a radius 

of 2,000.00 feet, a central angle of J!P52'33,', a chord bearing and distance of 

S 51°46'34" W, 690.32 feet, at an arc length of 693.80 feet to a point of 

tangency; 

S 41 °50' 17'' W, a distance of 549.43 feet to an angle point for the beginning of 

a curve.to the right; 

Southwesterly, along the arc of sa[d curve to the right, said curve having a 

radius of 2,000.00 feet, a central angle of 04°58'51", a chord bearing and 

distance of S 44°19'43" W, 173.81 feet, at an arc length of 173.86 feet to a 

point oftangency; 

) 

S 46°49'08" W, a distance of 104.24 to an angle point; 

S 43° I 0'52" E, a distance of 32.00 feet to an angle point on the southern line 

of said 205.00 acre tract, being the southeastern line of herein described tract; 

THENCE: 

S 46°49'08" W, continuing along said southeastern line, a distance of 324.38 

feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and containing 47.97 acres of land in the 

City ofNew Braunfels, Coma I County, Texas. 

This document was prepared under 22 TAC 663.21, does not reflect the results of an on the ground 

survey, and is not to be used to convey or establish interests in real property except those rights and 

interests implied or ·established by the creation or reconfiguration of the boundary of the political 

subdivision for which it was prepared. 

Prepared by: 

Job No: 

Date: 

Doc Id: 

Pape-Dawson Engineers, Inc. 

6858-0l 

July ll, 2007 

P:\68\58\00\Wmd\l'ictd Notes\070709-ZONJNG-A.doc 

) 

W!!.l PAPE.~DAWSON 

'81 ENGINEERS 

1

246 

The Enclave at Westpointe Village 

Planned Development District 


(This Draft includes all of the proposed changes shown in the 12/13/1 0 agenda packet 

those discussed at the 12/13/10 meeting.) 

BASE ZONING DISTRICT 

This Planned Development District (POD) will have the base zoning requirements of the 

R-1A-8 zoning district as described in the current zoning ordinance of the City of New 

Braunfels. The Enclave at Westpointe Planned Development District (EWVPD) will 

accommodate a modified street and lot layout for a sustainable community that provides 

generous native landscaped areas, unique lot diversity and pedestrian friendly 

circulation. 

CONCEPT PLAN REQUIREMENTS 

RELATION TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ) 

This project area is currently zoned R-1A-8-R83. The project area and proposed use 

are in accordance with the Land Use Plan and Major Thoroughfare Plan depicted in the 

City's Comprehensive Plan. 

ACREAGE 

The proposed Development District area is 47.97 acres. This includes the subdivision 

area of approximately 44.46 acres and right-of-way area within the proposed 

Westpointe Drive. 

SURVEY 

An accurate survey of the boundary of the district is included as an attachment. 

LAND USES 

The land use is single family residential. 

GENERALTHOROUGHFARELAYOUT 

The attached Concept Plan includes the general thoroughfare layout. 


EXHIBIT "C"

247 

DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 

) The general development standards are as follows: 

(The* identifies a specific note that provides additional detail regarding the standard.) 

Base Zoning: 

R-1A-8 

Total Acres: 

44.455 (excluding Westpointe Dr) 

Number Of Residential Lots: 136 

Lots/Acre: 3.06 

Park/Open Space: Approx. 9.167 Acres *1 

Land Use: 

Total Sidewalk (5-Ft.): 

Single-Family Residential 

7,000 Lf Min. 

Cul-De-Sac Diameter: 160Ft. Min. *2 

Average Lot Area: 9,413 Sq.Ft. *3 

Minimum Lot Area: 7,000 Sq.Ft. *4 

Front Setback Minimum: 25Ft. *5 

) 

Side Setback Minimum: 5 Ft. *6 

Rear Setback Minimum: 

20Ft. 

Minimum Lot Width At Front Setback Line: 59 Ft. *7 

Minimum Lot Depth: 

Maximum Bldg Height: 

100Ft. 

Lots 29 through 42 and 52 thru 66 shall be a 

maximum of one story; 35 ft. for remainder of 

lots. 

Maximum Bldg Coverage On Average Lot: 33.15% *8 

Minimum Building Footprint Square 1 ,800 sq. ft. on Lots 29 through 42 and 52 

Footage: through 66. 

) 

Masonry Requirements: 

Connectivity: 

Exterior side or rear walls on lots adjacent to 

Hunters Creek (Lots 29 through 42 and 52 

through 66) shall be constructed with masonry 

siding composed of brick, rock or stucco. 

There shall be no street connection from the 

proposed subdivision to Hunters Creek 

Subdivision by means of the street known as 

Hunters Ridge. 



248 

Access: 

The Enclave at Westpointe Village will be a 

controlled access (gated) neighborhood as 

follows: 

1. The primary (northern) access point off 

of Westpointe Drive will be the main 

entry and will serve as entry and exit for 

both homeowners and emergency 

vehicles. 

2. The secondary (southern) access point 

off of Westpointe Drive will serve as an 

exit only for homeowners while allowing 

entry and exit for emergency vehicles. 

*1 - Open space within this sustainable community includes water quality and detention 

pond areas as well as native landscaped areas. All common areas will be maintained 

by the HOA and the common areas and native landscaped areas will be owned by the 

HOA. 

*2 - The cul-de-sac diameter being provided is in excess of the minimum required by 

code and will provide a park-like island with additional open space that provides a 

unique identity within the neighborhood. ) 

*3- The average lot area exceeds the 8,000 SF minimum in R-1A-8 base zoning district 

by approximately 17.7%. The nature of the meandering street layout within this 

sustainable neighborhood creates lots with varied sizes and shapes. This eliminates 

monotony while providing unique views as one walks or drives along the streets. Using 

this design technique, called coving, the average distances of homes front to front and 

homes rear to rear have increased (the areas where home windows are concentrated) 

compared to conventional planning that strives to make all lots at the 8,000 square foot 

minimum. 

/ 

*4- There are currently 26 lots within the subdivision that fall below the minimum 8,000 

square foot area. Of these 26 lots, there are only 10 lots that are below 7,500 square 

feet. The nature of the street layout within this sustainable community creates lots with 

exciting shapes, unlike standard cookie-cutter rectangular box-shaped lots. 

*5 -There is a variable front setback throughout the subdivision. The bulk of the lots 

within this sustainable community have a front setback, as depicted on the Concept 

Plan, in excess of the 25 foot minimum. This provides a more inviting pedestrian 

experience within the neighborhood. 

*6 - The minimum side setback for lots that abut Westpointe Drive shall be 15 feet on 

the side that abuts Westpointe Drive. Otherwise, the required side setback for corner 

lots is 5 feet. 

) 



249 

*7 - The minimum lot width at a 25-foot front setback is 15 feet. However, this is an 

unusual circumstance for "flag lots" located in a cul-de-sac. The minimum lot width of 

59 feet occurs at the front setback that is established and shown on the Concept Plan. 

The nature of the street layout within this sustainable community creates · lots with 

unusual shapes, unlike standard rectangular box-shaped lots, that, while not meeting 

minimum area and width requirements, provide greater diversity within the community. 

The lots that are located at the end of the cul-de-sac that appear flag-like are set in a 

more secluded area with terrific views to adjacent open space. Those lots have widths 

of 59 to 65 feet at the meandering setback with the narrowest portion being 15-feet wide 

for driveway access. The percentage of varying lot widths will be kept the same as 

shown on the concept plan. 

*8 - If the largest building footprint is placed on the smallest lot, the resulting building 

coverage is 43.1 %. 

STREET DESIGN CRITERIA 

) 

The base street design criteria used within the Enclave at Westpointe Subdivision is for 

"Local streets serving one- and two-family residential property" having a ROW width of 

50 feet. 

1. No tangent section is required between reverse curves as this will allow for the 

meandering nature of the streets as currently laid out. With the large sweeping 

radius of the curves and slow residential speeds, tangents are not needed. 

Intersections are at the outer portion of the curves providing increased sight 

distances compared to the "tee" intersections of standard platting. However, a 

painted center line is required. 

2. Minimum pavement width for the interior streets ·(excluding Westpointe Drive) is 30 

feet (FOC to FOC). These interior streets with pavement widths of 30 feet shall 

have a double yellow center line throughout the subdivision. 

3. Trees may be planted within the 4.5-foot landscape strip between back of curb and 

the sidewalk. 

4. The residential sidewalks will be 5 feet in width. 



250 

DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS 

1. Existing Detention Pond 

A. Excavation of the existing detention pond shall be completed before the final 

reading of the zoning case. 

~) 

B. The excavation shall be completed in accordance with the approved plans, as 

certified by the project engineer and accepted by the City Engineer, following an 

on-site inspection by the project engineer and a third party engineer for the City. 



2. Water Pollution Abatement Plan (WPAP) 

The following items are to be completed as soon as possible by the owner upon 

obtaining approval of the Water Pollution Abatement Plan for this project from TCEQ 

regardless of the status of the EWVPD, the subdivision plat, or the full set of 

construction plans for Unit 1: 

A. The owner shall excavate the full volume of the east detention pond as 

referenced in the latest version of the drainage report for this project. This will 

provide an approximate increase of 138,000 cubic feet of detention volume, 

which more than doubles the storage capacity of the existing detention pond. 

B. In addition to this excavation, the outfall structure of the existing pond will be ) 

reconstructed to match the configuration modeled in the latest version of the 

. drai·nage report for this project, thus significantly reducing the discharge potential 

for any storm water that enters this detention pond. 

C. To provide a further increase in available storage capacity near the outfall point, 

the east water quality pond will also be excavated to subgrade with this initial site 

work (excavated to the level below the filtration section that will be installed at a 

later date). This will provide in excess of an additional 60,000 cubic feet of 

storage volume. 

D. An earthen berm will be installed within the project area along Lots 37, 38 and 39 

of the Hunter's Creek Subdivision between the existing water quality pond and 

the existing detention pond. In lieu of the interceptor channel planned previously 

in this area, this berm will be constructed to divert runoff to the detention pond 

that would not be captured in the proposed street (Wauford Way). This will 

further minimize the amount of runoff from the site that has the potential to flow 

across Lots 37, 38 and 39 of the Hunter's Creek Subdivision. 

3. New Drainage Facilities 

A. The new drainage facilities for the entire EWVPD, as shown on the Phasing Plan 

attached hereto, shall be completed before any vertical improvements are 

completed or allowed on the site. 

_)· 



251 

l 

B. The new drainage facilities for the entire EWVPD shall be completed in 

accordance with the approved plans for such improvements (such plans to be 

based upon the approved drainage study dated October 19, 2010), as certified 

by the project engineer and accepted by the City Engineer, following an on-site 

inspection by the project engineer and a third party engineer for the City. 

l 



4. Performance Guarantee 

A. The drainage facilities for the entire EWVPD shall operate to meet or exceed the 

approved design criteria (as detailed in the approved drainage plans) for the 

Coverage Period (as defined below), provided, however, any drainage ponds for 

Phase II of the EWVPD may not fully meet the approved design criteria until the 

streets within Phase II are fully constructed. 

) 

B. As used herein, the term "Coverage Period" shall mean a two-year period of time 

commencing 'upon the issuance by the City of a certificate of occupancy for the 

59th residential house on the property subject to the zoning case (provided that 

all streets for Phase I and Phase II of the EWVPD shown on Schedule A must be 

completed by that date) and ending on the second annual anniversary of such 

commencement date. Note: the impervious cover for all of the streets in the 

EWVPD, plus the impervious cover allocated for 59 residential houses, shall not 

exceed 65% of the impervious cover planned for the EWVPD that drains toward 

the Hunter's Creek subdivision, as detailed in the approved drainage study 

(dated October 19, 201 0). 

~ 

i 

I 

I 

--~ 

I 

i 

C. In order to provide financial security for the obligation described in paragraph A 

above, Applicant shall post with the City Cash Surety (as defined below) within 

30 days following the final reading of the zoning case in the amount of $200,000 

or 1 0 percent of the cost of improvements, whichever is greater. The statement 

of construction value shall be provided to the City Engineer to support the Cash 

Surety amount. 

D. As used herein, the term "Cash Surety" shall mean one of the following: 

(i) Cash or its equivalent delivered to the City and to be held by the City in a 

separate, interest-bearing account with all interest thereon belonging to 

the Applicant; 

(ii) An irrevocable letter of credit issued by a financial institution reasonably 

acceptable to the City; or 

(iii) A performance bond issued in the name of the City on terms reasonably 

acceptable to the City. 

) 

E. If, during the Coverage Period, the City's third party engineer sends a written 

notice to Applicant stating in that notice that the drainage improvements for the 



252 

EWVPD are not operating to meet the design criteria specified in the approved 

design documents (and specifying in such notice the specific deficiencies in such ) 

operation), within 30 days thereafter Applicant shall do one of the following: (i) . 

notify the City in writing that the Applicant shall rectify the problems specified by 

the City's third party engineer, or (ii) notify the City in writing that Applicant 

disagrees with the conclusion of the City's third party engineer. In the event that 

Applicant fails to send either of the two written notices specified above within 

such 30-day period, Applicant shall be deemed to have selected option (i) above. 

F. In the event that Applicant notifies the City that Applicant will rectify the problems 

specified by the City's third party engineer as contemplated in paragraph E 

above, Applicant shall be required to complete such necessary work in a 

reasonably expeditious manner, not to exceed 90 days, subject to force majeure. 

G. In the event that Applicant notifies the City that Applicant disagrees with the 

conclusion of the City's third party engineer, the City and Applicant shall agree on 

another independent third party engineer within 15 days of the City's receipt of 

Applicant's written notice. In the event that the City and Applicant fail to agree on 

the designation of such independent third party engineer within such 15-day 

period, the City shall select such independent third party engineer. The 

independent third party engineer shall determine if the drainage improvements 

for the EWVPD are operating to meet the design criteria in the approved design 

documents, and the conclusion of the independent third party engineer in that 

regard shall be binding on the Applicant, its successors and assigns, and the - 

City; provided, however, nothing is intended to modify or reduce Applicant's ) 

obligations pursuant to State law (regulatory or common law) with respect to 

drainage from the property subject to the zoning case onto adjoining properties. 

In the event that the independent third party engineer specifies in a written notice 

to Applicant that the drainage improvements for the EWVPD are not operating to 

meet the design criteria in the approved design documents (and specifying in 

such notice the specific deficiencies in such operation), Applicant shall be 

required to complete such necessary work in a reasonably expeditious manner, 

not to exceed 90 days, subject to force majeure, from the receipt by Applicant of 

the written notice from the independent third party engineer. Applicant shall be 

responsible for paying the inspection costs of such independent third party 

engineer, not to exceed $3,000. 

H. In the event that Applicant fails to rectify the specified problems in the drainage 

improvements for the EWVPD within the 90-day period, subject to force majeure, 

under either paragraph F or paragraph G above, the City shall have the right to 

utilize the Cash Surety to rectify the specified problems in the drainage 

improvements. The City shall· be required to notify Applicant in writing of the 

City's election to utilize the Cash Surety for this purpose. 

I. Within 30 days following the expiration of the Coverage Period, the City shall 

return to Applicant any unused Cash Surety. 

) 



LIFT STATION 

A lift station planned adjacent to lot 53 of the subdivision shall instead be located 

adjacent to Lot 52 and near the street Mission Run Hill. 

BUILDING PERMITS 

Upon final approval of the full set of construction plans for Unit 1 by the City of New 

Braunfels and New Braunfels Utilities, the developer must complete all street and 

drainage improvements prior to a building permit being issued for any lot within Unit 1 of 

the EWVPD. This requirement will be applicable on a unit by unit basis. 

MAINTENANCE 

1. Maintenance Bond 

A. Prior to acceptance of public improvements or approval of private improvements 

a Maintenance Bond or other surety instrument shall be accepted by the City in 

compliance with the following: 

i. Shall be in an amount equal to 10% of the cost of improvements for the first 

two calendar years. 

ii. Shall cover all street and drainage improvements. The construction value or 

final pay estimate shall be provided to the City Engineer to support said 

warranty and maintenance bond amounts. 

iii. Shall be satisfactory to the City Attorney as to form, sufficiency, and manner 

of execution. 

iv. In an instance where a Maintenance Bond or other surety instrument has 

been posted and a defect or failure of any required improvement occurs 

within the period of coverage, the City may declare said bond or surety 

instrument to be in default and require that the improvements be repaired or 

replaced. 

v. Whenever a defect or failure of any required improvement occurs within the 

period of coverage, the City shall require that a new Maintenance Bond or 

surety instrument be posted for a period of one (1) full calendar year 

sufficient to cover the corrected defect or failure. 

2. Applicant, its successors and assigns, shall be required to maintain all drainage 

facilities for the POD in accordance with the City Code. 

U:\Pianning\Pianned Developments\The Enclave at Westpointe Village\The Enclave at Westpointe Village- POD final draft 1-10- 

11.doc 

) 


~~~ 

!Ill \ 

~, I 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ \ 

\ 

\ 

c: 

ca 

- 

\ 

\ 

c: 

\ ~ 

tn 

\ ·- 

\ 

\ 

J: 

D.. 

D.. 

C) ) 

< 

·· ... 

......

,, City of 


) 



Agenda Item No. L.f~ K 

Presenter- Shannon Mattingly, Planning Director 

830-221·4055- smattingly@nbtexas.org 

SUBJECT: Public hearing and first reading of an ordinance rezoning a portion of Mission 

Forest Subdivision from "R-3" Multi-Family District to "R-1A-6.6" Single 

Family District. 

APPLICANT 

OWNER: 




Multiple Owners (141ots) 

) 

. BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: 






The original master plan for the Mission Forest Subdivision was approved in 1993. The 

affected lots are currently developed with 14 single family residences, which is 

consistent with the remainder of the neighborhood. A public meeting for the Mission 

Forest Subdivision was held on November 15, 2010 to explain the benefits of zoning the 

neighborhood to reflect the existing residential use. Approximately 24 residents 

attended, of which eight owned property in the subject area. Those in attendance were 

supportive of changing the zoning to "R-1 A-6.6" Single Family District. The affected 

properties and existing development are in compliance with the development standards 

of the "R-1 A-6.6" District. 


Case # PZ1 0-46 

) 

Size: 


and Land Use: 



3.5 acres 

North - C-1 A, R-1 I Vacant land and single family 

dwellings. 

South- R-3 I Vacant land 

East - R-1 I Single family dwellings 

West -R-2, C-1 A I Loop 337 and vacant land 

Single- family dwellings. 


256 


Single - family dwellings. 

Notification: 

Public hearing notices were sent to the 14 affected property owners within the Mission ~) 

Forest Subdivision and 17 property owners located within 200 feet of the subdivision. 

As of December 20, 2010, five responses in favor (#9, 13, 21, 23, and 24), zero against, 

and zero returned undeliverable have been received. 


Yes 


Priority: 


Plan 







Goal 20: Protect the character and boundaries 

of existing neighborhoods. 

Cons: 

None. 


N/A 



recommended approval of the rezoning, unanimously (7-0-0). 


Staff recommends approval of the rezoning of Mission Forest Subdivision as it is 

consistent with the current use and intent of the existing residential subdivision and is 

consistent with the goals and priorities of the Comprehensive Plan. 

ATTACHMENTS: 

1 . Application 

2. Zoning Map 



5. Aerial Map 



8. Sec 3.4-2 "R1 A-6.6" Single-family district 


10. Ordinance 

) 

U:\Pianning\CCagenda\ZoneChgs&SUP\2011\Mission Forest_pz1 0-461 agenda.docx 

Page2of2

257 

~-~~City of 


"" 


ZONE CHANGE 

424 S. CASTELL AVENl!f 


E-MA fL. planning(iiJnbtexas.org 

PHONE. (830; 221--4050 FAX: 1830! 608-2109 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

Applicant ~ If owner(s), so state; If agent or other type of relationship, a letter of authorization must be 


Name.~~_.,G=--~-+-t-'-=f-=~6~~:-=-~{\}eJ~w~~~n=a._==u._~~~~=Ls==~==~~ 

Mailing Address __ l(=d-,__"-t-"'-_S~-~==a..;;;;;..;;;;:S;._--k~-'-l.._l ----~~-----~ 

Telephone:.~~-==-~·Fax:=====~"""'Mobile:=-====·Email: __ ==-= 

Property Address/Location:. _ _,t\t----...;..\:_S_,S"-'..:....l()::=::....:..."'--~b..._,..C>f!"'-'--_.M---''---....:S=-u...=b...:....-cl"'"" 

. ...:...\..:.....~..:....\.:....s_ .... _,_l ~-=-V\~-- 

Legal Description: I\_ J. ' ' _f:' ~ l- 0 1 1 • 

__·...;..__ 

Name of Subdivision:_='c::_~=='\. S=S_\ t)~A_T'D.;.....;;;;.....;;.\Cc.S 

tot(s): M (;Ll ~ f \e. 

\.....;c..)~LA...=-=':)=\_~'l;...;:\1:.-~.;;;;;S.....;~:..;;D;;....V\..__;;_~ 

Block(s):========== Acreage:------- 

Existing Use of Property: 3:0{)\.-e..- V:~'\'{ J.-es"td

1\.:l 

U1 

co 

~ 

-4 

> 

0 

:I: 

s: 

m 

z 

-4 

N 

IOOlm@ 

til 

,., , City of 


- 

·~ 

PZ10-46 

Mission Forest Subdivision 

"Rr ftll to "R-1A6.6" 

'-"". 

- C-1ANeighborhood Business District 

c:J PD Planned Development District 

c:J R-1 Single Family District 

0 R-1A6.6 Single Family District (6,600 sq. ft. min. lot) 

D R-2 Single and Two Family District 

c:::J R-3 Multifamily District 

1!!1!!1 R-3H Multifamily High Density District 

1!!!111 R-3L Multifamily Low Density District 

c:J THA Townhouse Residential District 

£ZasuBJECT 

r.::l City Limits 


l ..__,.

~ ~-------- ;-··· 

Exis'trrig Land Use Map 

Existing land Use 

I I Residential Low Density 

- Commercial 

-School 

- Government 

- OpenSpace 

~. 

~ Dramage 

~SUBJECT 

~ 

-1 

)> 

0 

~ 

s: 

m 

z 

-f 

w 

f' ,City of 


'--- 

PZ10-46 


"R-3" to "R-1 A6.6" 

Map Created On 11/161

1'\:1 

0"1 

....... 

(J1 

~ 

-- 

.J 

:· . Cityof 

New Braunfels 

PZ10-46 


"R-3" to "R-1A6.6"

262 


PLANNING COMMISSION- DECEMBER 7. 2010- 6:00PM 



( 

\ ) 


Various properties on Evergreen Lane 



Carnal Appraisal District Records. The property under consideration is marked as "SUBJECT". 

1. Bergfeld, Esther 

3. Boswell, John & Grace 

5. Craig, Robert & Carolyn 

7. Kibby, Sandra 

9. Lord, Jeffrey 

11. Ohlrich, Jack 

13. Romer, Frances 

15. Taylor, Randel 

17. Zipp, Timothy & Allyson 

19. Dinsdale, Richard & Lynda 

21. Felle, Robert & Linda 

23. Ketterman, Susan 

25. Meier, Robert & Rosalie 

27. Sadler, Dale 

29. Schwartz, Michael & Phyllis 

31. Von Gonten, John 

2. Bosenbury, Paul & Patsy 

4. Covington, Michael & Renee 

6. Hardeman, Terry & Janice 

8. Kupfernagel, Herman & Bobbie 

10. Nielson, Richard & Evelyn 

12. Phillips Family Living Trust 

14. Sampiere, Vincent & Eleanor 

16. Waples, John & Rachel 

18. Boyd, Steven & Sandra 

20. Downey, Dorothy 

22. Grones, Matthew & Patricia 

24. Kilkenny, James & Carolyn 

26. Myers, Thomas & Odille 

28. Scarbrough, Laura 

30. Stephens, Glenn & Lucy 

) 


C_) 

ATTACHMENT 6

f.::\ 650 

-~-# 

. '20 6s~ - 

-~ r-· 

615 

• 

®662--·· 

® ,;658 

637 

f) 

: Object 

No Response 


~ Favor 

Object 

No Response 

0 200' Notification Buffer 

f'.,Cityof 


PZ10-46 


"R-3 .. to "R-1A6.6 .. 

·* 

s 

Map Created On 12/29/'

264 

Photo Sheet- Mission Forest 

) 

Entrance to Gardens of Mission Forest known as 

Evergreen Lane. 

View of Evergreen Lane cui de sac. 

I 

1 

Streetscape view of Evergreen Lane. 

) 

ATTACHMENT 7

265 

3.4-2. "R-1 A-6. 6" single-family district. 

CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS -ZONING ORDINANCE 

Purpose. The R-1A-6.6 single-family district is intended for development of primarily detached, singlefamily 

residences and customary accessory uses on lots of at least 6,600 square feet in size. The 

following regulations shall apply in all "R-1A-6.6" districts: 

"R-1A" district. The district called "R-1A" shall be renamed and shown on the zoning map as "R-1A-6.6". 














) 

··'' 





Contractor's temporary on-site construction office (only with permit from Building Official; 

see Sec. 5.9) 












Water storage (surface, underground or overhead), water wells and pumping stations that 

are part of a public or municipal system 



the district. 

(b) Height and area requirements: 



) 





ATTACHMENT 8

266 








) 






7,000 square feet per family for corner lots, provided that where a lot has less area than 

herein required and such lot was in separate ownership prior to September 25, 1967, this 

requirement will not prohibit the erection of a one-family dwelling. Where public or 

community sewer is not available and in use, for the disposal of all sanitary sewage, each 

lot shall provide not less than one half acre_per dwelling unit not located over the 


(vii) Lot depth. 1 00 feet. 






) 





















)

267 

DRAFT 




rezoning of a portion of Mission Forest Subdivision from "R-3" Multifamily District to "R-1A-6.6" 

Single Family District. (City of New Braunfels) 

Ms. Bell explained that the original master plan for the Mission Forest Subdivision was approved in 1993 

and that the subject properties are currently developed with 14 single family residences that are 

consistent with the remainder of the neighborhood. She recapitulated that a public meeting for the 

Mission Forest Subdivision was held and that approximately 24 residents attended, of which 8 owned 

property in . the subject area. She stated that the property owners in attendance were supportive of 

changing the zoning to "R-1A-6.6" Single Family District. Ms. Bell mentioned that the subject properties 

are in compliance with the development standards of the "R-1A-6.6" District. She said public hearing 

notices were sent to 14 affected property owners within the Mission Forest Subdivision and 17 property 

owners located within 200 feet; five responses were received in favor (#9, 13, 21, 23, and 24) and no 

responses in opposition were received. Ms. Bell concluded her presentation saying that Staff 

recommended approval of the rezoning of Mission Forest Subdivision for the same reasons as the prior 

cases. 


spoke. 


) 

Motion by Commissioner Bearden, seconded by Commissioner Hoyt, to close the public hearing. The 


Motion by Commissioner Myrick, seconded by Commissioner Bearden, that Case PZ1 0-46, the proposed 

rezoning of a portion of Mission Forest Subdivision from "R-3" Multifamily District to "R-1A-6.6" Single 

Family District, be forwarded to City Council with a recommendation to approve with staff 

recommendations. The motion carried unanimously. (7 -0-0) 

) 

AlTACHMENT 9

268 


AN ORDINANCE REZONING 3.50 ACRES KNOWN AS A PORTION OF THE MISSION 

FOREST SUBDIVISION FROM "R-3" MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICT, TO "R-1A-6.6" SINGLE 

FAMILY DISTRICT"; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; CONTAINING A 

SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 



WHEREAS, in keeping with the spirit and objectives of the "R-1A-6.6" Single-Family District, the 

City Council has given due consideration to all components of said district; and 



WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend the Zoning Map by changing 3.50 acres known as 

the Mission Forest Subdivision: 

Mission Forest 1 , Block 1 , Lots 7-9 Mission Forest 2, Block 1 , Lots 10-13 

Mission Forest 1, Block 2, Lot 15 and16 Mission Forest 2, Block 2, Lots 17-21 

to "R-1A-6.6" S1ngle Fam1ly D1stnct; now, therefore, 


SECTION 1 



described tract of land from "R-3" Multi-Family District to "R-1A-6.6" Single Family District: 3.50 

acres known as Mission Forest Subdivision: 

Mission Forest 1 , Block 1 , Lots 7-9 Mission Forest 2, Block 1 , Lots 1 0-13 

Mission Forest 1, Block 2, Lot 15 and16 Mission Forest 2, Block 2, Lots 17-21 

.. 

and as delineated on Exh1b1t 'A'. 

) 

SECTION2 



SECTION3 



SECTION4 

) 

1

269 




SECTIONS 






ATTEST: 

) 




U:\Pianning\Ordinances\Zone Changes\Mission Forest_R1-A-6.6.docx 

2

............ ·-··-··----------- 

J 

I 

: 

•. 

! 

i 

! 

I 

! i ! 

i 

m 

>< 

::J: 

Ill 

=i 

~ 

Legend 



Agenda Item No. L/- L 



SUBJECT: Public hearing and first reading of an ordinance rezoning a portion of Gruene 

Road Subdivision, from "R-3" Multifamily District, to "R-1 A-8" Single-Family 

District and "R-2A" Single-Family and Two-Family District. 

APPLICANT 

OWNER: 




Multiple Owners (37 lots) 


When City Council was reviewing the Short-Term Rental section of the Zoning 

Ordinance, the Planning Department identified multiple residential neighborhoods with 




The original master plan for the subject area was named Gruene Road Subdivision and 

was approved March 30, 1984. According to the Master Plan notes "This subdivision is 

for residential use only". The subdivision developed in units with about 152 single-family 

residences, two, two-family residences, and two, four-family residences. The 

subdivision currently has two zoning districts, "R-3" and "R-2". This rezone addresses 

only the "R-3" portion as the "R-2" is a district designed to intermix single-family and 

two-family residences. 

The subject property has 35 single-family residences and two, four-family residences. 

Based on the size of lots and adjacent properties, two zoning districts are 

recommended "R-1A-8" and "R-2". (See Attachment 7.) All of the affected area meets 

the requirements of the R-1A-8 Zoning District. The 1500 block of Amy Avenue contains 

the two four-family dwellings and two single-family dwellings. Because of this land use 

and the location next to "R-2" zoning, the best appropriate zoning for the 1500 block of 

Amy Avenue would be "R-2A" with the four-family dwellings becoming a legal 

nonconforming use. 

A public neighborhood meeting for the affected properties in the Gruene Road 

Subdivision was held November 15, 2010 to explain the purpose of zoning the 

neighborhood to reflect the existing residential use. Approximately 7 residents attended 

who resided in the Gruene Road Subdivision. Those in attendance were supportive of 

the concept to change their zoning to "R-1A-8" Single-Family District only. They were 

opposed to two-family zoning. 


'[('L 


Case # PZ1 0-49 

Size: 


and Land Use: 



lmprovement{s): 

9.60 acres 

North- C-11Warehouses 

South - R-2 I Single Family Dwellings 

East- M-11 Railroad Tracks 

West- R-3 I Single and multi family dwellings 

(these houses located within Gruene Courtyard 

Subdivision PZ1 0-49) 

Residential low density dwellings. 

Single-family and two-family dwellings and two, fourfamily 

dwellings. 

Notification: 

Public hearing notices were sent to the 37 property owners in Gruene Road Subdivision 

and 15 property owners located within 200 feet. As of December 20, 2010, four 

responses in favor (#14, 15, 35, and 42} one opposed (#16), and zero returned 

undeliverable have been received. 


) 

Yes 


Priority: 


Plan 









Cons: 

None. 


N/A 


The Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 7, 2010 and ) 

recommended approval of the rezoning, unanimously (7-0-0). 


273 


Staff recommends approval of the rezoning of Gruene Road Subdivision as it is 

consistent with the current use and intent of the existing residential buildings and is 

consistent with the goals and priorities of the Comprehensive Plan. 

ATTACHMENTS: 


2. Zoning Map 



5. Aerial Map 


7. Proposed Zoning Map 


9. Sec. 3.8-2 "R-1 A-8" single-family district 

10. Sec. 3.8-4 "R-2A" single-family and two-family district 

11. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes December 7, 2010 

12. Ordinance 

U:\Pianning\CCagenda\ZoneChgs&SUP\2011\Gruene Road_1 agenda sheet_pz10-49.docx 

) 


!'"'-_, City of 

~-. New Braunfels 

'- . 

27£1 


ZONE CHANGE 

424 S. CASTELL A VENUE 


E-MAIL: planning(@;·lbtexas.org 

PHONE: (830) 221-4050 FAX: (830) 608-2109 

) 

/ 

1. Applicant~ If owner(s), so state; If agent or other type of relationship, a letter of authorization must be 


Name C~±1(. cf N~w:J.>flbu.-"'-'-=ls 

Mailing Address 4 d.. Ll S C,_o._s ±c..\ \ 

I 

Telephone: Fax: Mobile: Email:=----- 

2. Property Address/Location:_-"G=-_._\-"U....=...::-e~lf\_...:::..:oe....__~..\.-~ =o,__cu;l__;;,__:,___~..=;_...;;;.U....=\:;;,..=...:Cl=l=-\.::....:\l;..::.l-=S::..J. ... \..:.~=t..,;V\.~- 

3. Legal Description: /'__ r,-:, \. ' 

Name of Subdivision:_..;:L.=-_ru.._;;;._...;;;e:....V\~e-"-I(

I 

Zontrr'g Map 

C-1A Neighborhood Business District 

C-1 B General Business District 

M-1 Light Industry District 

M-1A Light Industrial District 

)> 

-1 

-1 

)> 

() 

:::c 

s 

m 

z 

--! 

N 

PO Planned Development District 

R-1 Single Family District 

R-2 Single and Two Family District 

R-3 Multifamily District 

~J -- N~~ Braunfels 

...:--~ 

PZ10-49 

Gruene Road Subdivision 

"R-3" to "R-1A8" & "R-2A" 


--·----- --"·~----~ 

Existing Land Use Map 


PZ10-49 


"R-3" + -"R-1A8" & "R-2A" 

~ 

0 


Future Land U 

~ 

-1 

)> 

(") 

::I: 

s: 

m 

z 

-1 

.a::. 

f',,Cityof 


'-- 

PZ10-49 


"R-3" to "R-1A8" & "R-2A" 

Map Created On 11/18/"

I 

Aerial Map 

~ 

-1 

)> 

0 

X 

!!: 

m 

z . 

: ~,,Cityof 


- 

--- _... 

\'...._.,_. 


"R-3" t/~·-~R-1A8" & "R-2A" 

:,0 

SUBJECT 


·J

279 






Various properties in Gruene Road Subdivision 



Carnal Appraisal District Records. The property under consideration is marked as "SUBJECT". 

) 

1. Christ Presbyterian Church Inc. 

3. Ellison, Sandra 

5. Gruene Realty Development LLC 

7. Kunz, Kelli & Mann, Aridy 

9. Martin, Stephanie & Rodney 

11. T T X Commercial Group 

13. Tieman, Laura 

15. Zook, Robert 

17. Altgelt, Kelsey & Brever, Misty 

19. Banister, Kathleen 

21. Barbosa, Jose & Minerva 

23. Camarena, Manuel & Dora 

25. Cooper, Eric & Grace 

27. Foster, Cynthia 

29. Gaines, Beverly 

31. Gay, Mattie 

33. Hester, Linde & Jennifer 

35. Hoffman Brandenburg, Claudia 

37. Ledbetter, James & Ardie 

39. McGinnes, Robert 

41. Ramirez, Arvin 

43. Sacatar Properties LLC 

45. Short, Wesley & Megan 

47. Tarlton, Elly 

49. Urias, Roxanne 

51. Wertheim, Kurt & Betty 

2. DLI Holdings LLC 

4. Furney, Steven & Suzan 

6. Jetex Family Limited Partnership 

8. Mack, Glenn & Janet 

10. Martinez, Juan & Cortez, Maria 

12. Tabor, Bryan 

14. West, Leach & Assoc. 

16. Aguirre, Juan & Elida 

18. Ayala, Maria 

20. Barb, Markus & Gail 

22. Brandenburg, Cory & Patricia 

24. Betty Coker Trust 

26. Feltner, Stephen 

28. Frankenberger, Dieter & Joette 

30. Gallas, Dusty 

32. Gustafson, Scott & Mary 

34. Hill, Elizabeth 

36. Jarrad, Thomas & Marian 

38. McCollum, Mary Jane 

40. Neese, Marguerite 

42. Reuwer, Michael & Gretchen 

44. Sharon Peters Real Estate Inc 

46. Smith, William & Clara 

48. Titsworth, Alexander & Candy 

50. Webb, Kimberly 

52. Wetz, Michael 


ATTACHMENT 6

No Response 

r::;-;.::.' 

:/@' /; :. . . 

. .. 23~,_·· ...·.,.. .·@a. 

. "'9"' 

,' .1'~~.:,.;: ..· . 

:",_..-' 

..: :" . . 

~-· ....... . 

•.1 5. 6'.4.· >e 6 

.f43\ 

·. c\$1};.~ 

. ''A:~s/ 

; Object 


Object 

No Response 

• I c:J 200' Notification Buffer 

\~. 

PZ10-49 


"R-3" t- "R-1A8" & "R-2A" 

\._/ 

+ s 


~i

1\) 

co 

~ 

~ 

-t 

)> 

0 

::I: 

3: 

m 

z 

-1 

...... 

~,,cNityor .fel Proposed Zoning of Gruene Road and Gruene Courtyard 

~ ew 8 raun s S bd" . . 

...... q; U IVISIOnS 

N 

.a~. 

w~X,~;..r 

s 

Map Created 0 n 11123tl 0

282 

Photo Sheet- Gruene Road 

Streetscape of Denise Drive. 

Two-family dwellings located on Pams Path outside 

project area. 

Streetscape of Kellys Way. 

) 

Four-family dwelling on Pam's Path. 

) 

ATIACHMENT8

283 

3.4-2 "R-1A-8" single-family district. 

Purpose. The R-1A-8 single-family district is intended for development of primarily detached, single-family 

residences and customary accessory uses on lots of at least 8,000 square feet in size. The following 

regulations shall apply in aii"R-1A-8" districts: 













Single family industrialized home (see Sec. 5. 7) 

) 





Contractor's temporary on-site construction office (only with permit from Building Official; see 

Sec. 5.9) 



Golf course, public and private 









Water storage (surface, underground or overhead), water wells and pumping stations that are 

part of a public or municipal system 


listed in subsection (1 }, the uses listed in this subsection shall be deemed those authorized in the 

district. 





) 





ATTACHMENT 9

284 

I 
















each lot shall provide not less than one half acre per dwelling unit not located over the 







) 





















) 


285 


















Single or two family industrialized home (see Sec. 5.7) 

) 























the district. 



) 






ATTACHMENT 10

286 




















(2) Duplexes. 




) 


1 

I ! 

I 

I 














(vi) Lot area per family. Two-family dwellings (duplexes) hereafter erected or altered shall 






) 

I

287 

1 

I 

) 

) 



{3) Non-residential uses: 























) 

/

288 

DRAFT 




rezoning of Gruene Road Subdivision, from "R-3" Multifamily District, to "R-1A-8" Single Family 

District and "R-2A" Single and Two Family District. (City of New Braunfels) 

Ms. Bell said that the Planning Department had identified multiple residential neighborhoods with zoning 

other than residential. She explained that City Council directed the Planning Department to have 

neighborhood meetings in order to explain the purpose of residential zoning and pursue rezoning to an 

appropriate district. In this particular case, she said, the original master plan for the subject area was 

named Gruene Road Subdivision and was approved March 30, 1984 and according to the Master Plan 

notes "This subdivision is for residential use only". Ms. Bell stated the subdivision developed in units with 

about 152 single-family residences, twa-, two-family residences, and two, four-family residences. 

Currently, the subdivision has two zoning districts, "R-3" and "R-2". Ms. Bell clarified that this rezone 

addressed only the "R-3" portion as the "R-2" is a district designed to intermix single-family and two-family 

residences. Ms. Bell gave a description of how many single-family residences as well as two and fourfamily 

residences were in the neighborhood and explained that based on the size of the lots, as well as 

those properties adjacent to the neighborhood, the zoning districts "R-1A8" and "R-2" were 

recommended. She explicated that the subject area meets the requirements of the "R-1A8" Zoning 

District while the best appropriate zoning for the 1500 block of Amy Avenue would be "R-2A" with the 

four-family dwellings which would have legal nonconforming use. Ms. Bell said that on November 15, 

2010 a public neighborhood meeting was held for the affected properties. in this subdivision in order to 

explain the proposed changes. She noted that approximately 7 residents who resided in Gruene Road 

Subdivision attended and were supportive of the concept to change their zoning to "R-1A-B" Single 

Family District only but were against two-family zoning. She said public hearing notices were sent to 39 

property owners in Gruene Road Subdivision and 14 property owners located within 200 feet; four 

responses were received in favor (#14, 15, 35, and 42) and one in opposition was received (#16). Ms. 

Bell concluded saying that Staff recommended approval of the rezoning of Gruene Road Subdivision from 

R-3" Multifamily District, to "R-1A-B" Single Family District and "R-2A" Single and Two Family District as it 

is consistent with the current use and intent of the existing residential buildings as well as consistent with 

the goals and priorities of the Comprehensive Plan. 

) 


spoke. 


Motion by Commissioner Bearden, seconded by Commissioner Hoyt, to close the public hearing. The 


Motion by Commissioner Massouh, seconded by Commissioner Lowe, that Case PZ1 0-49, the proposed 

rezoning of Gruene Road Subdivision, from "R-3" Multifamily District, to "R-1A-8" Single Family District 

and "R-2A" Single and Two Family District, be forwarded to City Council with a recommendation to 

approve with staff recommendations. The motion carried unanimously. (7-0-0) 

) 

ATTACHMENT 11

289 

ORDINANCE NO. 2011· 

AN ORDINANCE REZONING 9.60 ACRES KNOWN AS A PORTION OF THE GRUENE 

ROAD SUBDIVISION FROM "R-3" MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICT TO "R-1A-8" SINGLE· 

FAMILY DISTRICT AND "R·2A" SINGLE-FAMILY AND TWO·FAMIL Y DISTRICT; 

REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; CONTAINING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; 

AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 

) 



WHEREAS, in keeping with the spirit and objectives of the "R-1A-8" Single-Family District, and 

"R-2A" Single-Family and Two-Family District, the City Council has given due consideration to all 

components of said district; and 




the Gruene Road Subdivision: 

Gruene Road 4, Block 1 , Lots 35-41 Gruene Road 5, Block 5, Lots 1, 8-10, and 12-14 

Gruene Road 4, Block 5, Lots 1-7 Gruene Road 5, Block 6, Lots 1-8 

to "R-1A-8" Smgle-Fam1ly D1stnct; 

Gruene Road 4, Block 1, Lots 31 and 34 Gruene Road 5, Block 4, Lot 8 

Gruene Road 4, Block 1, Lots 30A and 30B Gruene Road 5, Block 1, Lot 32 

Gruene Road 4, Block 4, Lot 7 

to "R-2A" Smgle-Fam1ly and Two-Fam1ly Distnct; now, therefore, 


SECTION 1 



described tract of land from "R-3" Multi-Family District to "R-1A-6.6" Single Family District: (9.60 acres 

known as the Gruene Road Subdivision: 

Gruene Road 4, Block 1, Lots 35-41 Gruene Road 5, Block 5, Lots 1, 8-1 0, and 12-14 

Gruene Road 4, Block 5, Lots 1-7 Gruene Road 5, Block 6, Lots 1-8 

to "R-1A-8" Smgle-Fam1ly D1stnct; 

Gruene Road 4, Block 1, Lots 31 and 34 Gruene Road 5, Block 4, Lot 8 

Gruene Road 4, Block 1, Lots 30A and 30B Gruene Road 5, Block 1, Lot 32 

Gruene Road 4, Block 4, Lot 7 

. . 

) to "R-2A" Smgle-Fam1ly and Two-Family D1stnct) as delineated on Exhibit 'A'. 

1

290 

SECTION2 



SECTION3 



SECTION4 




SECTIONS 





) 


ATTEST: 




U:\Pianning\Ordinances\Zone Changes\Gruene Road_R-1 A-8 and R-2A.docx 

) 

2

-- ···--------- 

'-_' 

m 

>< 

:I: 

- OJ 

=i 

~ 

,.-_,City 

- 

of 

~~ New Braunfels 

PZ10-49 


"R-3" to "R-1A8" & "R-2A" 


292 

)

,...,City of 


'-., 

293 


January 1 0, 2011 

Agenda Item No. L/- At 

Presenter - Shannon Mattingly, Planning Director 

830-221-4055- smattingly@nbtexas.org 

SUBJECT: Public hearing and first reading of an ordinance rezoning a portion of the 

Gruene Courtyard Subdivision, from "R-3" Multi-Family District, to "R-1 A-6.6" 

Single-Family District and "R-2A" Single-Family and Two-Family District. 

APPLICANT 

OWNER: 






When City Council was reviewing the Short-Term Rental section of the Zoning 

Ordinance, the Planning Department identified multiple residential neighborhoods with 




The original master plan for the subject area was named Gruene Road Subdivision and 

approved March 30, 1984. According to the Master Plan notes "This subdivision is for 

residential use only". A portion of this subdivision was separated off and developed as 

Gruene Courtyard Subdivision, with the Master Plan approved on December 5, 1995, 

with subsequent units approved in 1997 (Unit 1 ), 1999 (Unit 2) and 2000 (Unit 3). The 

subdivision developed in units with about 61 single-family residences and two, twofamily 

residences. The subdivision currently has two zoning districts, "R-3" and "R-2". 

This rezone addresses only the "R-3" portion as the "R-2" is a district designed to 

intermix single-family and two-family residences. 

Unit 4 has an approved plat (June 6, 2006) but is not yet recorded. Based on the lot 

sizes in Unit 4, the intent of the plat is for single-family residences. Potentially four lots 

are large enough to meet the minimum lot requirement for a two-family residence. (See 

Attachment 7.) There are four lots large enough to accommodate a two-family 

residence. Two of those lots would abut the existing "R-2" zoning. Therefore the lots 

located on Denise Drive and abutting "R-2" zoning are recommended to be zoned "R- 

2A". (See Attachment 8.) However, the construction plans previously submitted and 

approved by the City note that two of the lots will be used for detention. 

A public meeting for the affected properties in the Gruene Courtyard Subdivision was 

held on November 15, 2010 to explain the purpose of zoning the neighborhood to reflect 

the existing residential use. Approximately 13 residents attended. Those in attendance 


were supportive of changing their zoning to "R-1 A-6.6" Single-Family District with no 

two-family dwellings. 

The question of "granny flats", known as accessory dwellings in the New Braunfels ~ 

Zoning Ordinance, was rasied at the Planning Commission meeting. For clarification, 

one accessory dwelling without a kitchen is allowed per lot in all of the residential zoning 

districts but they cannot be occupied for compensation. 


Case # PZ1 0-50 

Size: 


and Land Use: 




12.40 acres 

North- C-11 Commercial Retail/ Professional offices 

South - R-2 I Single Family Dwellings 

East- R-3 I Vacant lot 

West- R-2 I Single Family Dwellings 

Residential 

Single Family Dwellings/Two Family Dwellings 

Notification: 

Public hearing notices were sent to the 32 property owners of Gruene Courtyard 

Subdivision and 37 property owners located within 200 feet. As of December 17, 2010, ) 

12 responses in favor (#6, 12, 32, 58, 64, 66, 67, 79, 82, 83, 88, and 92) of the 12 

received in favor, 3 noted they were opposed to "R-2A" zoning, two responses opposed, 

(#2 and 95) and none returned undeliverable have been received. 


Yes 


Priority: 




Pros: 

Goal 6: Refine or add zoning requirements to be 

compatible with the community's overall intentions 

and the best interests of the community as a 

whole. 



Cons: 

None. 


N/A ) 



The Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 7, 2010 and recommended 

approval of the rezoning with Commissioner Bearden opposed (6-1-0). 


Staff recommends approval of the rezoning of the Gruene Courtyard Subdivision from 

"R-3" to "R-1 A-6.6" and "R-2A" as it is consistent with the current use and intent of the 

existing residential buildings and is consistent with the goals and priorities of the 

Comprehensive Plan. 

) 

ATTACHMENTS: 


2. Zoning Map 



5. Aerial Map 


7. Gruene Courtyard Unit Four (Melissa Lane and Denise Drive) 

8. Proposed Zoning Map 


1 o. Sec. 3.4-2 "R-1 A-6.6" single-family district 

11. Sec. 3.4-3 "R-2A" single-family and two-family district 


13. Ordinance 

U:\Pianning\CCagenda\ZoneChgs&SUP\2011\Gruene Courtyard_agenda sheet_pz50.docx 

) 


[;J N~~ Braunfels 

"": 

~96 


ZONE CHANGE 

424 S. CASTELL A VENUE 


E-t'v!A !L: planning(@;1btexas.org 

PHONE: (830) 22/-4050 FAX: (830) 608-2109 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

Applicant a If owner(s), so state; If agent or other type of relationship, a Jetter of authorization must be 


Name. __ ~C:;.....-\:.;..;.c\i_,_.:D_f.;....;·__.tJ....;;.·.~.e_'--w-c-_\3_tt~_a....._'-..J...~V\..;;.CJ~;;;.;.ts;;._ ______ 

Mailing Address '-1 Q 4 S C9s -k. L \ 

Telephone:. ______ _.Fax: __ ~-~--·Mobile: ___ ~==·Email:=----- 

Property'Address/Location: (b CLLeV\.e. Lo\..\rh[ ru:d 

Legal Description: 

Name of Subdivision: G C

I 

I'V 

lD 

-J 

ZONING !DISTRiCT 

~ C-1 Local Business District 

IIIIJ C-1A Neighborhood Business District 

1111 C-1B General Business District 

IIIIJ C-3 Commercial District 

Ill C-0 Commercial Office District 

IIIII M-1 Light Industry District 

l:=J PD Planned Development District 

> c::J R-1 Single Family District 

::1 CJ R-2 Single and Two Family District 

~ CJ R-3 Mulitfamily District 

~ lliiJ R-3H Multifamily High Density District 

~~SUBJECT 

-1 

N 

!'"',City of 


"--- 

PZ10-50 

Gruene Courtyard Subdivision 

11 

R-3" to "R-1A6.6" & "R-2A" 


1\:1 

lD 

CX) 

Existing land Use 


D Residential Medium Density 


- Commercial 

- Industrial 

-Government 

[;ii).;llnstitutional 

-Open Space 

)> ··'"'~:1 

-1 .:_:,:,·:~.1 Drainage 

;;! ~ SUBJECT 

() 

:J: 

s 

m 

z 

-1 

w 

~ ,Cltyof 


~-- 

PZ10-50 

Gruene CourtYard Subdivision 

"R-3" to 'QA6.6" & "R-~A" 


0

1\:1 

lD 

lD 

Future Land Use 

- Commercial Industrial 

- Commercial 

f:,~.~;:;;q Drainage 

- Government 

Institutional 


D Residnetial Medium I High Density 

~ -Utilities 

);! ZJ SUBJECT 

0 

:::z: 

3: 

m 

z 

-t 

,f::l. 


~_. New Braunfels 

PZ10-50 


"R-3" to "R-1A6.6" & "R-2Au 

Map Created On 11/18/H

I 

w 

(S) 

(S) 

> Legend 

....f 

-1 

)',;. 

SUBJECT 

:z: 0 -,Lrii'>/1 . • . - '··' 

5: 

m 

z 

~ 

(11 

~-,Cityof 


'-, ~--\ ..... 

I 

PZ10-50 

Gruene CourtYard Subdivision 

"R-3" to Q1A6.6" & "R-2A" 

Map Created On 11/18/1 a 

0

301 






Various properties in Gruene Courtyard Subdivision 




1. A 0 R Real Estate Inc. 

3. Ayala, Maria 

5. Barb, Markus & Gail 

7. Bente, Debra Sue 

9. Brandenburg, Cory & Patricia 

11. Cavanaugh, John & Louise 

13. Cooper, Eric & Grace 

15. Davila, Jessica 

17. Ellison, Sandra Lee 

19. Ford, Betty Jo 

21. Frankenberger, Dieter & Joette 

23. Gallas, Dusty 

25. Gruene Realty Development LLC 

27. Hack, David 

29. Jamison, Marilyn 

31. Kunz, Kelli & Mann, Andy 

33. Lux, Gary 

35. Martin, Dale 

37. Martinez, Juan & Cortez, Maria 

39. Neese, Marguerite 

41. Petrie, James & Cathy 

43. Ramirez, Arvin 

45. Rowlett, Rickey & Mary 

47. Schomburg, Jeffrey & Mitzi 

49. Short, Wesley & Megan 

51. Suchy, Sharon 

53. Tabor, Bryan 

55. Thompson, Stacy 

57. Titsworth, Alexander & Candy 

59. Veraza, Rafael & Ana 

61. West, D. L. 

63. Wright, Deadra 

65. Bartay, James & Patricia 

67. Bell, Johnston & Barbara 

69. Bozeman, Janet 

71. Crandall, Judy 

73. Evans, Susan 

75. Guenther, Joyce 

77. Harpster, Robert & Mary 

2. Aguirre, Juan & Elida 

4. Banister, Kathleen 

6. Bauerschlag, Roland & Myrtle 

8. Bingham, Denise 

10. Busch, Vivian 

12. Betty Coker Trust 

14. Crisp, Nathan & Theresa 

16. Eastham, Penelope 

18. Feltner, Stephen 

20. Foster, Cynthia 

22. Gaines, Beverly 

24. Gay, Mattie 

26. Gustafson, Scott & Mary 

28. Hoffman Brandenburg, Claudia 

30. Joynt, Jim & Peggy 

32. Lilly Marjory Management Trust 

34. Manfredo, Salvatore 

36. Martin, Stephanie & Rodney 

38. Molina, Raul & Bertha 

40. Pams Path LLC 

42. Petty, Gerry 

44. Roth, John 

46. Sacatar Properties LLC 

48. Serrata, Juan & Bertha 

50. Stillman, Roberto & Kathleen 

52. T T X Commercial Group 

54. Testerman, Charles & Gayle 

56. Tieman, Laura 

58. Ulbrich, John & Laura 

60. Wertheim, Kurt & Betty 

62. Wetz, Michael 

64. Zook, Robert 

66. Bean, George 

68. Bormann, Grace 

70. Braune, Lillie Ann 

72. Ellis, Doris 

74. Ola Gilbert Living Trust 

76. Hamilton, Ronald & Lisa 

78. Hicks, Vernen & Cara 

) 


ATTACHMENT 6

302 

~ I 

REQUEST FOR ZONING- CA~E #PZ10-50 (continued) 

79. Holder, Mamie Rue 

81. Johnson, Andra 

83. Koenig, Louis & Dorothy Ann 

85. McDaniel, Janie 

87. McNeill, Billie 

89. Edward & Margaret Roets Trust 

91. Singleton, William & Sandra 

93. Vallejo, David & Karen 

95. West, Leach & Assoc. 

97. Whittenburg, Betty 

80. Ibarra, Judith 

82. Jones, David 

84. Little, Robert & Sue Ann 

86. Mclennan, Stuart & Jean 

88. Medlin, John & Nadine 

90. Shea, Teri 

92. Sodders, Kenneth & Wanda 

94. Walch, Lauren 

96. Whitehead, ~anda 


)

Nont'ication Response Map 

141 

e 

~ Favor (1 0%) 

Object (45%) 

No Response 

CJ NotificationBuffer 

[I] 

j 

~ 1cityof 


"-q ;;;;;,. 

e 


"R-3" to "R-1A6.6" & "R-2A" 

Map Created On 11/18/"

MARCH 29, 

TO 15'. 

. OTS 1 AND 10. 

SIDE YARD LOT LINE. 

il 

u 

.. 78.00' 

I:; "' 

~I"' 

::l 

. 

~ 1 :: 

I I "'IJ i;; 

WI~' 1: ~ 

~ l~"'" 

2 3 4 

!:il c-~~oo_:_J~·+~=5\[s-·--· 

GRUENE ROAD SUBD • 

UNIT-5 

(8/203) 

-m;-~

~· ·~ 

~' 

;:) 

w 

~ 

U1 

~ 

....j 

)> 

(") 

:I: 

s: 

m 

z 

....j 

co 

~,,oN·tyof fer Proposed Zoning of Gruene Road and Gruene Courtyard 

U ew 8 raun 1S S bd" . . 

U 

IVISIOnS 

N 

.A~. 

"'·x.~ 

$ 

Map Created On 11123t10

306 

Photo Sheet- Gruene Courtyard 

View from Denise Drive looking toward undeveloped 

land and Alley of Jo Lynn Lane. 

Streetscape view of Jo Lynn Lane. 

) 

Streetscape from Denise Drive to undeveloped land. 

) 

Attachment 9

307 

3.4-2. "R-1 A-6. 6" single-family district. 

CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS ..,. ZONING ORDINANCE 

Purpose. The R-1A~6.6 single-family district is intended for development of primarily detached, singlefamily 

residences and customary accessory uses on lots of at least 6,600 square feet in size. The 

following regulations shall apply in all "R-1A-6.6" districts: 

"R-1A" district. The district called "R-1A" shall be renamed and shown on the zoning map as "R-1A-6.6". 



Land Use Matrix, are as follows · 











) 





Contractor's temporary on-site construction office (only with permit from Building Official; 

see Sec. 5.9) 












Water storage (surface, underground or overhead), water wells and pumping stations that 

are part of a public or municipal system 



the district. 

(b) Height and area requirements: 

( 1) Residential uses. 

) 






ATTACHMENT 10

308 




Garage setback. Where a driveway is located in front of a garage, the garage shall be ) 









7,000 square feet per family for corner lots, provided that where a lot has less area than 

herein required and such lot was in separate ownership prior to September 25, 1967, this 

requirement will not prohibit the erection of a one-family dwelling. Where public or 

community sewer is not available and in use, for the disposal of all sanitary sewage, each 

lot shall provide not less than one half acre_per dwelling unit not located over the 








) 




















) 


309 

~) 




duplex units. The following regulations shall apply in all "R-2A" districts: 















) 








Farms, general (crops") (see Chapter 6, Municipal Code and Sec. 5.8) 







Recreation buildings (public} 








the district. 



) 






ATTACHMENT 11

310 


building setbacks adjacent to the street where the rear lines of the corner lots coincide ~.,) 


















(2) Duplexes. 




) 




















) 

(vii) Lot depth. 100 feet.

311 


























312 

DRAFT 




rezoning of a portion of the Gruene Courtyard Subdivision, from "R-3" Multifamily District, to "R- 

1A-6.6" Single Family District and "R-2A" Single and Two Family District. (City of New Braunfels) 

Ms. Bell stated the reason behind the City initiated zoning change once more. She went on to state that 

the original master plan for the subject area was named Gruene Road Subdivision and approved March 

30, 1984 and as Case PZ1 0-49, according to the Master Plan notes was for residential use only. Ms. Bell 

said that a portion of Gruene Road Subdivision was separated off and developed as Gruene Courtyard 

Subdivision and that Master Plan was approved on December 5, 1995, with subsequent units approved in 

1997 (Unit 1), 1999 (Unit 2) and 2000 (Unit 3). She communicated to the Commission that within the 

subdivision there were about 61 single-family residences and two, two-family residences and that the 

subdivision currently has two zoning districts, "R-3" and "R-2". As before, she explained that this particular 

rezoning addressed only the "R-3" portion as the "R-2" is a district designed to intermix single-family and 

two-family residences. Ms. Bell elucidated that the first three units in the subdivision had been built out 

with single-family residences while Unit 4, which is currently vacant, had an approved plat from 2006 but 

had not been recorded. She expounded that the intent of the approved plat is for single-family residences 

based on the lot size shown but that two lots were large enough to meet the minimum lot requirement for 

a two-family residence. Because these two lots would abut existing "R-2" zoning, Ms. Bell said that Staff 

recommended zoning the lots located on Denise Drive to "R-2A". Ms. Bell explained that Staff had met 

regarding the undeveloped lot (Unit 4) and based on the size of the lots on the plat, Staff recommended 

the undeveloped parcel be zoned "R-1A6.6" along with the others in the subdivision. She said that a 

public meeting for the affected properties in the Gruene Courtyard Subdivision was held and 

approximately 13 residents attended. Ms. Bell stated those in attendance were supportive of changing 

their zoning to R1A6.6 Single Family District with no two-family dwellings. She said public hearing notices 

were sent to the 32 property owners of Gruene Courtyard Subdivision and 37 property owners located 

within 200 feet; twelve responses were received in favor (#6, 12, 32, 58, 64, 66, 67, 73, 79, 82, 88 and 

92) and two in opposition (#2 and 96). Ms. Bell finished saying that because the rezoning is consistent 

with the current use and intent of the existing residential buildings Staff was recommending approval of 

the rezoning of the Gruene Courtyard Subdivision from "R-3" to "R-1A-6.6" and "R-2A". 

) 


Sue Lynn Aguirre, 556 Denise Drive, questioned which part of the subdivision would be "R-1A6.6" and 

which part would be "R-2A". Ms. Bell clarified which portion using a map she displayed on the monitor. 

She pinpointed where there were existing two-family structures within the Gruene Courtyard Subdivision. 

Ms. Aguirre stated that she was concerned with rental possibilities of the properties. 

Commissioner Lowe asked if there were duplexes south of the subdivision and Ms. Bell replied that there 

were some. Ms. Aguirre stated that she would prefer not to have duplexes at all. Ms. Mattingly then spoke 

about how and why Staff decided to propose "R-1A6.6" for the undeveloped piece of land within Gruene 

Courtyard. She said that the decision was based on the lot sizes associated with the unrecorded plat. She 

continued stating that the property owner of the undeveloped piece within the subdivision could come 

back and replat the property to all duplexes but the way the plat is configured currently there were only 

four lots that met the requirements for duplexes. 


Robert West, 1220 Fox Glen Road, stated that his family owns the undeveloped piece of land in the 

subdivision and expressed his concern that the proposed zoning would be going from "R-3" to "R-1A6.6" 

as he was interested in developing "granny flats" on the property. He stated that he would be fine with the 

vacant lot being rezoned to "R-2A" since that would allow him to develop the property in a manner that he 

) 

ATTACHMENT12

wants. 

313 

) 

Tim Word, 401 Toncido Drive, San Antonio, TX, stated that while he was in favor of rezoning 

neighborhoods to the appropriate district, he was concerned with the taking of property rights on 

undeveloped land. 

Susie Evans, 540 Jo Lynn, expressed that the rezone seemed appropriate but felt that anything other 

than single-family residences would detract from the character of the neighborhood. She stated that she 

was concerned for the future of the vacant property. She explained that if it were to be sold with the 

zoning district of "R-2A", the land could develop with as many duplexes as possible. 

Janie McDaniel, 527 Jo Lynn, expressed her concern with the flooding in the area. 

Motion by Commissioner Bearden, seconded by Commissioner Myrick, to close the public hearing. The 


Commissioner Bearden asked Mr. West if the footprint for the homes planned in Unit 4 were similar to 

those that had already been developed. Mr. West replied that there were a couple of lots that he would 

like to see developed with "granny flats." Discussion regarding the overall look of the development was 

discussed between Mr. West and Commissioner Bearden. 

Chair Casteel stated that the point of the rezoning was to not have an apartment complex in the middle of 

a single-family area. She stated that if the Commission recommended an "R-2A" zoning district, the 

vacant property could be replatted to include all duplexes. Commissioner Bearden retorted that the 

Commission needs to be careful of zoning vacant land when there is not "100% buy-in." He pointed out 

that with the previous case the subdivision was completely built out and that it made sense to rezone to 

the appropriate district. 

) 

Commissioner Myrick wondered if it made sense to build duplexes on the vacant property as what is built 

out surrounding it is single-family residences. Ms. Mattingly noted that the unrecorded plat would expire in 

June of 2011 if no construction occurred on it per State code 

Motion by Commissioner Massouh, seconded by Commissioner Lowe, that Case PZ10-50, the proposed 

rezoning of a portion of the Gruene Courtyard Subdivision, from "R-3" Multifamily District, to "R-1A-6.6" 

Single Family District and "R-2A" Single and Two Family District, be forwarded to City Council with a 

recommendation to approve with staff recommendations. The motion carried with Commissioner Bearden 

voting "no." (6-1-0) 

Ms. Mattingly pointed out that this case would go before City Council at their January 10, 2011 meeting. 

)

314 

ORDINANCE NO. 2011· 

AN ORDINANCE REZONING 12.40 ACRES KNOWN AS A PORTION OF THE GRUENE 

COURTYARD SUBDIVISION FROM "R·3" MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICT, TO "R·1A·8" 

SINGLE-FAMILY DISTRICT" AND "R·2A" SINGLE-FAMILY AND TWO-FAMILY 

DISTRICT; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; CONTAINING A SAVINGS 

CLAUSE; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 

) 



WHEREAS, in keeping with the spirit and objectives of the "R·1A-8" Single-Family District, and 

"R-2A" Single-Family and Two-Family District, the City Council has given due consideration to all 

components of said district; and 



WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend the Zoning Map by changing 12.40 acres known 

as the Gruene Courtyard Subdivision: 

A-154 SUR 34 H FOSTER, ACRES 5.596 

Gruene Courtyard 3, Block B, Lots 11-20 

(approved plat June 6, 2006: 

Gruene Courtyard, Unit 4, Lots 1-20 and 

Gruene Courtyard 4, Block D1, Lots 1-1 0) 

Gruene Courtyard 3, Block C, Lots 1-10 




to "R-1A-8" Srngle-Fam1ly D1stnct; 

A-154 SUR 34 H FOSTER, ACRES 5.596 

Gruene Courtyard 3, Block G, Lots 1 and 2 


Gruene Courtyard 4, Block G, Lots 5 and 6) 

to R-2A" Single-Family and Two-Family District; now, therefore, 


) 

1

315 

SECTION 1 



described tract of land from "R-3" Multi-Family District to "R-1A-6.6" Single Family District: (12.40 acres 

known as the Gruene Courtyard Subdivision: to "R-1A-8" Single-Family District; 

A-154 SUR 34 H FOSTER, ACRES 5.596 Gruene Courtyard 3, Block B, Lots 11-20 


Gruene Courtyard, Unit 4, Lots 1-20 and 

Gruene Courtyard 4, Block D1, Lots 1-1 0) 

Gruene Courtyard 3, Block C, Lots 1-10 Gruene Courtyard 2, Block B, Lots 6-10 

Gruene Courtyard 1, Block B, Lots 1-5 Gruene Courtyard 3, Block B, Lots 11-20 

to "R-2A" Single-Family and Two-Family District) as delineated on Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B". 

A-154 SUR 34 H FOSTER, ACRES 5.596 Gruene Courtyard 3, Block G, Lots 1 and 2 


Gruene Courtyard 4, Block G, Lots 5 and 6) 

) 

SECTION2 


- 

or repealed. shall remain in full force and effect. 

SECTION3 



SECTION4 




) 

2

316 

SECTIONS 





ATTEST: 





) 

U:\Pianning\Ordinances\Zone Changes\Gruene Courtyard_R-1 A-8 and R-2A.docx 

) 

3

'-~- 

'J 

~,City of 


PZ10-50 


"R-3" to "R-1A6.6" & "R-2A" 

W*E 

s 

Map Created On 11/18/1C

-i---~--··-··-· 

MARCH 29, 

TO 15'. 

JTS 1· AND 10, 

SIDE YARD LOT LINE. 

il 

" 

2 3 4 

GRUENE ROAD SUBD. 

UNIT-5 

(8/203) 

BLOCK 5 

5 I 6 

.LJVV~.a..a.'"".a... ~.,.., .... ......, 

M.D;S. LAND SURVEYING CO. 

618 COMAL STREET 

NEW BRAUNFELS, TEXAS 78130 

PHONE: (830) 625-0337 

DATE PREPARED: 04-D3-06 

JOB fl 06-0146 

I I ll,~~·l'·"·-· b ---~:} .o~-o-$__ -7"1'7"$' t t t: -1:1---=t*--,=n 1.-·1 

P.OB~t--,_ -I . Ti c . ..... . ' 

50' R.O.W. • I • .., 

25'--t---1 

5' SIRIP DEDICATED IN. 

• VOWME 5, PAG.E 74 

1025' 

I 9. 

B 

Ul 

0 

m ... ::l 

Ulw 

o~-;o 

C5f!;:: 

0::1- ....... 

wzt:. 

Ci]::l 

::l 

~ 

w 

1-' 

co 

m 

>< 

:X: 

ffi 

=i 

~ 

~ 

GRUENE COURTYARD 

UNIT THREE 

(13/344) 

GRUENE COURTYARD 

UNIT FOUR 

BEING 5.595 ACRES OF, .LAND SITUATED IN THE HENRY 

FOSTER SURVEY NO~ ~4. ABSTRACT NO. 154, CITY OF 

NEW. BRAUNFELS. .. C:QMAL COUNTY, TEXAS AND BEING 

OUT OF THAT CERTAIN 20.948 ACRE TRACT OF LAND 

CONVEYED TO WESr-tEACH & . ~OCIATES, INC., 

REC()RPED IN .DOCUt.4ENT NO. 950!~0163 OF THE 

OFFICIAL PUBUC RECORDS OF. COMAL. COUNTY, TEXAS. 

APPROVED THIS THE_ DAY OF ~ .. ' · · · · · . --· 2006. 

BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMisS.IOJ'I.: .OF THE;''CIJY· OF NEW 

BRAUNFELS, TEXAS. '· · · 

·....:;.... . :._;:. .. ~·-r:- 

:~•~C'-ltlls;otl"l611.1":':. 

coFY 

~ J1Bl"lO'IB 

"!)ON!Jf 

~VED 

18¥:~~:_;:!~ ... 

'-"' 



I, THE UNDERSIGNED DAVID A. LAMBERTS, A REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND 

SURVEYOR IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAT IS TRUE 

·AND.CORRECTLY MADE UNDER .MY SUPERviSION AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE 

CITY AND STATE ·SURVEY REGULATIONS AND LAWS AND MADE ON THE GROUND 

AND THAT THE CORNER MONUMENTS WERE PROPERLY PLACED UNDER MY 

SUPERVISION. 

DAVID A. LAMBERTS 

REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR 

NO. 4907 

SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME THIS THE DAY OF ------- 

A.D. 2006. . 

PRINTED NAME 


COUNTY OF COMA!, . 

NOTARY ~UBL!C 

COMAL COUNTY, TEXAS 

I. JOY STREATER. DO.·HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE• FQREgQIJ>IG'•INSTRUMENT WAS FILED FOR 

IN THE MAP AND PLAT RECORDS, DOCUMENT ·i ... ·.: · 1:-- OF COMA 

nM TLir. nAv·nF' __ , 2006, AT -~--•• ..,.,,,):~~~7:· .. -.-·M

f',cityof 




Agenda Item No. 4-tl 



SuBJECT: Public hearing and first reading of an ordinance rezoning a portion of the Garden 

Park Subdivision, from "R-1" Single-Family District, "R-3" Multi-Family District, 

and "C-1" Local Business District to "R-2A" Single-Family and Two-Family 

District. 

APPLICANT 

OwNER: 











The original master plan for the Garden Park Subdivision was approved in 1977. There 

are 23 properties and all but one property, 1340 Summerwood Drive, are currently twofamily 

dwellings. A public meeting for the affected properties in the Garden Park 

Subdivision was held on November 15, 2010 to explain the purpose of zoning the 

neighborhood to reflect the existing residential use. Two identified residents attended, 

including the owner of 1340 Summerwood Drive. Both property owners in attendance 

were supportive of changing their zoning to "R-2A" Single-Family and Two-Family 

District. Prior to the Planning Commission meeting, a neighbor turned in a petition of 32 

signatures representing 21 households which were in favor of the "R-2A" zoning. 

If the City Council chooses to rezone these properties to "R-2A" then an amendment to 

the Future Land Use Plan from "Residential medium/high density" to "Residential low 

density" is recommended. 

) 



Case # PZ1 Om48 

Size: 


and Land Use: 




5.96 acres 

North- C-1 B, R-1/ Commercial Professional Offices/ 

Retail and Single family dwellings 

South - M-1 I Warehouses and Railroad Tracks 

East- C-1/ Single family dwellings 

West - C-1 I Commercial Retail 

Residential Low Density and Residential Medium/High 

Density 

Two-family dwellings. 

Notification: 

Public hearing notices were sent to the 23 property owners and 58 property owners 

located within 200 feet. As of December 20, 2010, four responses in favor (#37, 53, 63, 

and 82), three against (#28, 29 and 52), and zero returned undeliverable have been 

received. 


Yes 


Priority: 




Pros: 

Goal 6: Refine or add zoning requirements to be 

compatible with the community's overall intentions 

and the best interests of the community as a 

whole. 

) 



Cons: 

None. 


N/A 


The Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 7, 201 0 and recommended 

approval of the rezoning, unanimously (7 -0-0). 

) 



Staff recommends approval of the rezoning of this portion of Garden Park Subdivision, 

(Buttercup Lane and Summerwood Drive) as it is consistent with the current use and intent 

of the existing residential buildings and is consistent with the goals and priorities of the 

Comprehensive Plan. 

ATTACHMENTS: 


2. Zoning Map 



5. Aerial Map 



8. Petition 

9. Sec. 3.8-4 R-2A single and two-family district. 


11. Ordinance 

) 

U:\Pianning\CCagenda\ZoneChgs&SUP\2011 \Garden Park_ agenda sheet_pz1 0-48.docx 

) 


322 

~~ Rf'~ .... . . Braunfels 

. . 

~ . . 


ZONE CHANGE 



E-MAIL: plannin-btexas.org 

PHONE: (830) 221-4050 FAX: (830) 608-2109 

1. 

Applicant - If owner(s), so state; If agent or other type of relationship, a letter of authorization must be 


Name L::\i-y o ~ N Lw 'bS-e--~~.Q_ l S 

Mailing Address '-l d.. L£ 8 Ca..s:fe-. l l 

Telephone: Fax: Mobile: Email: 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

Property Address/Location: 

Legal Description: 

Name of Subdivision: 

Cu.cdeV\ Pg.s-J< S u.hd.'i \ll~ 'i f) 1/) 

• 

Gw:~ PQS"\

- -~-- ;___ ---- 

Zon\~ Map 

ZONING DISTRICT 

.. C-1 Local Business District 

.. C-1A Neighborhood Business District 

.. C-1 B General Business District 

.. C-0 Commercial Office District 

~ 

-1 

)> 

0 

:I: 

s: 

m 

z 

-1 

N 

~ M-1 Light Industry District 

CJ R-1 Single Family District 

c:::J R-2 Single and Two Family District 

CJ R-3 Multifamily District 

c:::J TH Townhouse District 

(::J ZHA Zero Lot Line Home District 

~SUBJECT 

f' ,Cityof 


"-- 

PZ10-48 

Garden Park Subdivision 

"R-1", "R-3" & "C-1" to "R-1A8" & "R-2A" 


I 

Existing Land Use Map 

- Government 

b;;){ !Institutional 

)> 1~ .·: 1 - Open Space 

-i 

-i 

)> 

0 

X 

35: 

m (.J 

~ ., , City of 

w ·-~:.·· New Braunfels 

"-v 

... 

if 

,_: 

\_.· 

PZ10-48 

Garden ~ark Subdivision 

"R-1". "R-3" &~ ;1" to "R-1A8" & "R-2A" 

-..._,r 


()

Future La~ Use Map 

~ 

-t 

> 

(') 

X 

3: 

m 

z 

-t 

.l=oo 

- Open-Parks 


~.,Cityof 


PZ10-48 


"R-1", "R-3" & "C-1" to "R-1A8" & "R-2A" 


___ _j ______________________________________ ..... ---·--··-----------~ .. --------------------------- ·----~----.. ~-------·- -----·---------·--··--- 

~ 

-t 

)> 

("') 

~ ~ SUBJECT 

m 

~(J 

01 _ , City of 

··::· New Braunfels 

......__..,..__..,..-::;;iloo-- 

--:· "F"' 

\~· 

PZ10-48 


"R-1". "R-3" & :/ -\1" to "R-1A8" & .. R-2A" 

~ 


,_y

PLANNING COMMISSION ~.DECEMBER 7, 2010- 6:00PM 





Various properties on Buttercup Lane and Summerwood Drive 




1. Alves, Lory Ann 

3. Bankston, Gene 

5. Bischoff, Ralph & Darlene 

7. Callia, Evelyn 

9. Cole MP TS Texas LP 

11. Dallenbach, Patricia 

13. Ellis, Charles & Carolyn 

15. Escamilla, Emilio & Sheryl 

17. Friesenhahn, Darrell & Donna 

19. Hall, Susan 

21. Harper, Kenneth & Alberta 

23. Hinojosa, Adam & Melisa 

25. Hitzfelder Family Partners Ltd. 

27. Justice, Connie & Williams, Timothy 

29. Koerth, Verna Mae 

31. Lema Inc. 

33. D & K McLain Family Living Trust 

35. Morris, Evelyn 

37. Paine, Jack & Sandra 

39. Perez, Antonio & Maria 

41. Post, Kimberly 

43. Ratliff, Daniel 

45. Robson, Scott & Tracy 

47. Rose, Carl & Anita 

49. Ruma Ltd. 

51. Schlabach, Robert & JoAnn 

53. Seidel Family Partnership No 2 Ltd. 

55. 0 & E Story Revo. Trust 

57. Waller, Christopher 

59. Brever, Roslyn 

61. Hunter Road Properties Inc. 

63. Adams, Randal & Susan 

65. Campbell, Michael 

67. Jacoby, Jill & Lee, Patrick 

69. Kay, G. 

71. Kelinske, Marilyn 

73. Lyncrest Partners Ltd. 

75. Meckel, Norma 

77. Plumeyer, Charles & Marjorie 

79. Stein, Jonathan 

81. Winslow, Marion 

2. Ayala, Joe 

4. Barganier, Tommy & Emma 

6. Burton, Janine & Russell 

8. Anson & Patsy Circe Rev. Living Trust 

10. Currie, Archie & Dolores 

12. Dunk, Cameron & Jordan, Bonnie 

14. Erben, Milton & Sylvia 

16. Fiscal, Lourdes 

18. Gonzalez, Enriqueta & Gonzalez, Martha 

20. J Hansmann Living Trust 

22. Hernandez, Patricia 

24. Hitzfelder Family Partners Ltd. 

26. Jaqua, James & Cynthia 

28. Kay, G. 

30. Kromer, James & Maureen 

32. Martin, John 

34. Moore, Valerie & Ronnie 

36. City of New Braunfels 

38. Pape, Catherine 

40. Pierce, Tonya 

42. Prosperity Bancshares Inc. 

44. Richardson, Ben & Angelique 

46. Rempel, Alan & Jennifer 

48. Run how, Elmer & Helen 

50. Saenz, Roberto 

52. Schneider, Roland & Dorothy 

54. Seidel Properties Ltd. 

56. Terstege, Amanda & Albert 

58. Zunker, Eugene & Shirley 

60. M & G Properties Ltd. 

62. H P S J Ltd. 

64. Bolinger Rvcbl Trust & Carson Fmly Rvcbl Trust 

66. Hitzfelder, Dan dba Dan Hitzfelder Builder 

68. Jergins, Ernesto 

70. Kear, Theresa 

72. Lema Inc. 

74. McDonald, Robert & Patricia 

76. Nagel, Otto & Carla 

78. Rea, Sam & Dorothy 

80. Wells, Florence Ann 

82. Zunker, Danny & Carolyn 


ATTACHMENT 6

~----------------------------------------~--------------------------------------------~------------------~---------- 

412 

• 

- Favor 

' Object 

'----- • No Response 


~ Favor 

Object 

1342 

• 

No Response 

D 200' Notification Buffer 

f'.,Cityof 


"'-, 

- 

===- 

--- 

\"--" 

1320 

• 

' . \~ 

PZ10-48 


"R-1" "R-3" & ...- 1 .. to "R-1A8.. & "R-2A.. 


~;

Photo Sheet- Garden Park 

Example of two-family dwellings on Buttercup Lane. 

Streetscape view of Summerwood Drive. 

ATTACHMENT 7

·r 

Zone Change 

case P210-48 

Hearing: 12/7/10 

.~. 

Petition to Change Zoning 

RECEIV.BDi 

DEC 0 3 2010 

We, the undersigned, are for a zoning change from Rl- Cl to R2A, on duplexes located in the 400 and 500 blocks of 

Buttercup Ln. This location is between Summerwood Dr. and Azalea Ln., in Garden Park Subdivision, New Braunfels, Tx 

78130. 

BY: 

\ 

1 

.. ---.,_ 

00 

1- 

z 

w 

::i 

J: 

(.) 

~ 

1- 

.r 

\~ 

Zone Change 

Case P210-48 

Hearing: 12/7/10 

"-"' 

Petition to ·Change Zoning 

r,...,-..._._.. __ " .. -: 1. 

>i_,...dJ 

BY: 

DEC 0 S 2010 

We, the undersigned, are for a zoning change from Rl - C1 to R2A, on duplexes located in the 400 and 500 blocks of 

Buttercup Ln. This location is between Summerwood Dr. and Azalea Ln., in Garden Park Subdivision, New Braunfels, Tx 

78130. 

w 

1-'

332 

) 

~-l.r-tl---=t-+-==t~~+~~~+-_j__J_LJ---- ----~j 

'I J, 

II 

«:::) I I 

-C) 

C'J 

~ 

Q 

~ I 

c 

_I; 

) 

)

333 










Accessory building/structure . 






























listed in subsection (1), the uses listed in this subsection shall be deemed those authorized in 

the district. 


( 1) One family dwellings. 


(ii) Front building se~back. 25 feet. 




ATTACHMENT 9

334 


building setbacks adjacent to the street where the rear lines of the corner lots coincide ~·· .) 

with the side lot lines of the adjacent lots. . 

















(2) Duplexes. 




) 




















) 

(vii) Lot depth. 1 00 feet.

335 

(viii) Parking. Two off-street parking spaces shall be provided for each two-family dwelling · 

















) 









)

336 

EXCERPT FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 7. 2010 

DRAFT 



rezoning of a portion of the Garden Park Subdivision, from "R-1" Single Family District, "R-3" 

Multifamily District, and "C-1" Local Business District to "R-1A-8" Single Family District and "R- 

2A" Single and Two Family District, with a Future Land Use Map amendment from "Residential 

medium/high density" to "Residential low density." (City of New Braunfels) 

Ms. Bell again explained that the Planning Department was directed by City Council to rezone certain 

neighborhoods to the appropriate zoning. She told the Commission that the original master plan for the 

Garden Park Subdivision was approved in 1977 and all but one of the 23 properties, 1340 Summerwood 

Drive, are currently two-family dwellings. She stated that a public meeting for the affected properties in 

the Garden Park Subdivision was held on November 15, 201 0 to explain proposed changes and that two 

identified 'residents attended which included the owner of 1340 Summerwood Drive. She stated that they 

were supportive the zone change to "R-2A" Single-Family and Two-Family District. Ms. Bell said that an 

amendment to the Future Land Use Plan from "Residential medium/high density" to "Residential low 

density" would be recommended to City Council should the Planning Commission recommend approval 

of the rezoning. She said public hearing notices were sent to 23 property owners within the subdivision 

and 58 property owners located within 200 feet; four responses were received in favor (#37, 53, 63, and 

82) and three responses in opposition were received (#28, 29, and 52). Ms. Bell noted that a petition with 

32 signatures representing 21 households was received in favor. Ms. Bell finished stating that Staff 

recommended approval of the rezoning of this portion of Garden Park Subdivision, (Buttercup Lane and 

Summerwood Drive) as it is consistent with the current use and intent of the existing residential buildings 

and is consistent with the goals and priorities of the Comprehensive Plan. 


spoke. 


) 

j 

Susan Hall, 1288 Summerwood Drive, stated that she was confused by the rezoning. Ms. Mattingly 

reiterated that City Council directed Staff to look at neighborhoods that did not have the appropriate 

zoning and pursue the rezoning of those neighborhoods. 

Sue Hansmann, 1323 Summerwood Drive, also stated that she was confused and Chair Casteel along 

with Ms. Mattingly clarified the rezoning reasons to her. 

Motion by Commissioner Bearden, seconded by Commissioner Lowe, to close the public hearing. The 


Motion by Commissioner Perez, seconded by Commissioner Bearden, that Case PZ1 0-48, the proposed 

rezoning of a portion of the Garden Park Subdivision, from "R-1" Single Family District, "R-3" Multifamily 

District, and "C-1" Local Business District to "R-1A-8" Single Family District and "R-2A" Single and Two 

Family District, with a Future Land Use Map amendment from "Residential medium/high density" to 

"Residential low density", be forwarded to City Council with a recommendation to approve with staff 

recommendations. The motion carried unanimously. (7-0-0) 

/ 

) 

ATTACHMENT 10

337 


AN ORDINANCE REZONING 5.64 ACRES KNOWN AS A PORTION OF THE GARDEN 

PARK SUBDIVISION FROM "R-1' SINGLE-FAMILY DISTRICT, "R-3" MULTI-FAMILY 

DISTRICT, AND "C-1" LOCAL BUSINESS DISTRICT TO "R-2A" SINGLE-FAMILY 

DISTRICT AND TWO-FAMILY DISTRICT; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; 

CONTAINING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 



WHEREAS, in keeping with the spirit and objectives of the "R-2A" Single-Family District and Two 

Family District, the City Council has given due consideration to all components of said district; and 




the Garden Park Subdivision: 

Garden Park 4, Block A, Lots 12-19 Garden Park 6, Block A, Lot 25 

Garden Park 5, Block A, Lots 20-24 Garden Park 6, Block E, Lots 18-26 

to "R-2A" Smgle-Fam1ly D1stnct and Two-Fam1ly D1stnct; now, therefore, 

) 


SECTION 1 



described tract of land from "R-1" Single-Family District, "R-3" Multi-Family District, and "C-1" Local 

Business District, to "R-2A" Single-Family District and Two-Family District: (5.64 acres known as 

Garden Park Subdivision: 

Garden Park 4, Block A, Lots 12-19 Garden Park 6, Block A, Lot 25 

Garden Park 5, Block A, Lots 20-24 Garden Park 6, Block E, Lots 18-26 

. . 

to "R-2A" Smgle-Fam1ly D1stnct and Two-Fam1ly D1stnct) and as delineated on Exh1b1t 'A' . 

SECTION 2 



) 

SECTION 3 



1

338 

SECTION4 




~) 

SECTION5 






ATTEST: 


) 



U:\Pianning\Ordinances\Zone Changes\Garden Park_R2-A.docx 

) 

2

____ ,_ 

~ t==:::d 

::z: 

~ , D 11,, , , , < < < > l 1 1 > 1 < < < 6 ) > oy < A 1 

.;_ 

r_,Cityof 

-- 

:: ~-..New Braunfels 

PZ10-48 


"R-1", "R-3" & "C-1" to "R-1A8" & "R-2A" 


340 

)

f' ,City of 




Agenda Item No. L/- D 

Presenter I Contact- Shannon Mattingly, Planning Director • 


SuBJECT: 

First public hearing regarding the annexation of 1,984.098 acres of land 

on IH-35 North between FM 1101 and FM 1102 adjacent to the existing 

City limits. 

APPLICANT/OWNER: 

The State of Texas 

General Land Office 

Agent: Rick Sheldon 


A request for voluntary annexation has been submitted to the City by the property owner 

of 1 ,984.098 acres in Comal County. This property is adjacent to and contiguous to the 

existing corporate City Limits and the petitioner has agreed and consented to the 

annexation of the subject property by the City and further agreed to be bound by all 

acts, ordinances, and all other legal action now in force and effect within the corporate 

limits of the City and all those which may be hereafter adopted. This property is located 

between FM 1101 and FM 1102 abutting IH-35, and a map is attached. 

A schedule for annexation is as follows: 

Annexation petition filed: 

Council accepts petition/sets public hearings by resolution: 

1st Public Hearing: 

2nd Public Hearing: 

First Reading of Ordinance: 

Second Reading of Ordinance: 





February 14, 2011 



Case No.: 

Size: 




CS10-26 

1 ,984.098 acres 

Mixed Use, Commercial 

N/A 

) 

NOTIFICATION: 

Notice of the public hearing was published in the New Braunfels Herald-Zeitung on 



342 


N/A City Plan/Council Objective 88: Annex areas to assure consistent 

Priority: 

land use controls. 

2006 Comprehensive Objective 8G: Consider annexing property 

Plan 

adjacent to arterial roadways to allow expansion 

of commercial development. 


N/A 


N/A 


N/A 

ATTACHMENTS: 

1. Request for voluntary annexation 

2. Property description 

3. Aerial map 

4. Service Plan 

) 

Y:\Annexation\2011 Annexation\GLO properties\1 st PH 1-1 0-11.docx 

) 


343 

{}ENERr\L Ll\ND (ilFFll(~JE 

JERRY PATTERSON, COlVIMISSIONER 

November 22,2010 

Michael E. Morrison 

City Manager 


424 S. Castell Ave. 

New Braunfels, Texas 78130 

mmorrison@nbtexas. org 

Via E-Mail 

Re: Annexation 

Dear Mr. Morrison: 

This will confirm that the State of Texas, acting by and through Jerry E. Patterson, the 

Commissioner of the Texas General Land Office, on behalf of the Permanent School Fund, owns 

the property described on the attached schedule (the "Property"). We are hereby requesting that 

the City of New Braunfels formally annex the Property. 

) If you have any questions or need any additional information, please advise. 

2!.,' 

Hal Croft,~ .,4. 

Deputy co'::u:ler 

Asset Management Division 

Texas General Land Office 

enclosure 

Cc: Alan C. Wayland 

awayland@nbtexas.org 

Stephen E Austin Bu.i.lcling • 1700 North Congress .Avenue • Austin, Texas '78701--1495 

Post Office Box 12873 • Austin, Texas 78711-2873 

512-463-5001 • 800-998-4GLO 

wvvvv.glo.state.tx.us 

ATTACHMENT 1

344 

PROPERTY DESCRJPTION 

Tract One: 

731.134 acres efland out of the Nancy Kenner League Survey No.3, Abstract No. 306, along 

the west side ofiH-35 in the vicinity of Kohlenberg Road and Watson Lane, New Braunfels, 

Comal County, Texas. 

Tract Two: 

1,252.964 acres of land at the northeast comer ofiH-35 and Kohlenberg Road, New Braunfels, 

Comal County, Texas. 

) 

ATTACHMENT 2

~ 

-1 

)> ....... ~ 

~ i i City Limits 

..... ··-··-·· 

~ Proposed Annexation 

z -- 

-1 "'-"' 

w 

Texas General Land Office Petition for Annexation 

Map Prepared 12/2/2010

346 

~:.,City of 

~~ New Braunfels 

!'LANNING 

SERVICE PLAN FOR 2011 ANNEXATION 

F 

\. ) 

Upon annexation of the area described below and as identified on Exhibit A, the City of New Braunfels will 

provide City services utilizing methods by which it extends services to any other equivalent area of the City. 

1984.098 acres of land on /H-35 North between FM 1101 and FM 1102 adjacent to the 


SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF ANNEXATION 

1. Police Protection 

The City of New Braunfels, Texas and its Police Department will provide police protection to 

newly annexed areas at the same or similar level of service now being provided to other 

areas of the City with like topography, land use and population density as those found within 

the newly annexed areas. The Police Department will have the responsibility to respond to all 

dispatched calls for service or assistance within the newly annexed areas. 

2. 

Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services 

The City of New Braunfels, Texas and its Fire and Rescue Department will provide fire 

protection and EMS to newly annexed areas at the same or similar level of service now being 

provided to other areas of the City with like topography, land use and population density as 

those found within the newly annexed areas. The Fire and Rescue Department will have the 

responsibility to respond to all dispatched calls and requests for service or assistance within 

the newly annexed areas. 

3. Maintenance of Water and Wastewater Facilities 

Any and all water or wastewater facilities owned or maintained by New Braunfels Utilities 

(NBU) at the time of the proposed annexation shall continue to be maintained by NBU. Any 

and all water and wastewater facilities which may be acquired subsequent to the annexation 

of the proposed areas shall be maintained by NBU to the extent of its ownership. The now 

existing water and wastewater mains at existing locations shall be available for the point of 

use extension based upon the NBU standard extension policy now existing or as may be 

amended. On-site sewerage systems may be maintained in accordance with Chapter 130 of 

the City Code of Ordinances. 

4. Solid Waste Collection 

The City of New Braunfels, Texas collects solid waste and refuse within the corporate limits 

of the City. Solid waste collection and residential recycling will be provided to citizens in the 

newly annexed areas at the same or similar level of service now being provided to other 

areas of the City with like topography, land use and density as those found within the newly 

annexed areas. The City may negotiate with annexed areas to allow continued services with 

an existing solid waste management provider. After the second anniversary of the 

annexation date, the City will impose fees and provide the service. 

If areas with private roads and/or gates are arranged so that garbage may be collected 

without creating a safety hazard, the City, at its discretion, may collect the garbage provided 

proper indemnification is received from the community association or individual property 

owners. The City will then impose fees and provide the service. Garbage collection locations 

shall be subject to the approval of the Sanitation Manager. In the event the City does not 

collect garbage within the areas with private roads and/or gates, residents of these areas will 

not be billed for service after the two-year date. l ) 

Page 1 

ATTACHMENT 4

3£17 

5. 

Maintenance of Roads and Streets 

Any and all public roads, streets or alleyways shall be maintained to the same degree and 

extent that other public roads, streets, and alleyways are maintained in areas of the City with 

like topography, land use and density as those found within the newly annexed areas. 

Private roads will remain under the ownership of the homeowners association and as such 

maintained by the association. 

6. Maintenance of Parks, Playgrounds, and Swimming Pools 

The City of New Braunfels, Texas is not aware of the existence of any publicly owned parks, 

playgrounds or swimming pools now located in the proposed areas of annexation. In the 

event any such parks, playgrounds, or swimming pools do exist and are public facilities, the 

City will maintain such areas and facilities to the extent and degree and to the same or similar 

level of service now being provided to other such areas and facilities within the corporate 

limits of the City with like topography, land use and density as those found within the newly 

annexed areas. Private facilities will remain under the ownership of the homeowners 

association and as such maintained by the association. 

) 

7. Maintenance of any Publicly Owned Facility, Building or Municipal Service 

The City of New Braunfels, Texas is not aware of the existence of any publicly owned facility, 

building, or other municipal service now located in the proposed areas of annexation. In the 

event any publicly owned facility, building, or other municipal service does exist and are 

public facilities, the City will maintain such areas and facilities to the extent and degree and to 

the same or similar level of service now being provided to other such areas and facilities 

within the corporate limits of the City with like topography, land use and density as those 

found within the newly annexed areas. 

8. 

Other. Services 

The City of New Braunfels, Texas finds and determines that such services as planning, code 

enforcement, animal control, library, parks and recreation, court and general administration 

will be made available after the effective date of annexation at the same or similar level of 

service now being provided to other areas of the City with similar topography, land use and 

density as those found within the newly annexed areas. 

CONSTRUCTION OF ANY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS TO BE 

COMPLETED WITHIN 2 %YEARS 

1. Police and Fire Protection and Solid Waste Collection 

The City of New Braunfels, Texas, finds and determines it is not necessary to acquire or 

construct any capital improvements within 2 %years of the effective date of the annexation of 

the particular annexed areas for the purpose of providing police protection, fire protection, 

emergency medical services or solid waste collection. The City finds and determines that it 

has at the present time adequate facilities and other resources to provide the same type, kind 

and level of service and protection which is presently being administered to other areas 

already incorporated in the City of New Braunfels, Texas with like topography, land use and 

population density as those found within the newly annexed areas. 

) 

2. 

Water and Wastewater Facilities 

Water service is currently provided to the annexed areas by Crystal Clear Water Supply 

Corporation. Wastewater is provided by on-site sewage facilities. Service will continue to be 

provided at or above current levels following annexation. 

Page2

3£18 

3. 

Roads and Streets 



the particular annexed areas. 

4. Maintenance of Parks, Playgrounds, and Swimming Pools and Any Other Publicly 

Owned Facility, Building, or Service 



the particular annexed areas for the purpose of parks maintenance, playgrounds, swimming 

pools and other publicly owned facility, building or service. 

SPECIFIC FINDINGS 

The City of New Braunfels, Texas, finds and determines that this proposed service plan will not 

provide any fewer services and will not provide a lower level of service in the areas being considered 

for annexation that were in existence in the proposed areas at the time immediately preceding the 

annexation process. Given the proposed annexation areas' topography, land utilization and 

population density, the service levels to be provided in the newly annexed areas will be equivalent to 

those provided to other areas of the City with similar characteristics. 

TERMS 

This plan shall be valid for a term of ten ( 1 0) years. Renewal of the Service Plan is at the discretion of 

the City of New Braunfels. 

LEVEL OF SERVICE 

) 

Nothing in this plan shall require the City to provide a uniform level of full municipal services to each 

area of the City, including the annexed areas, if different characteristics of topography, land use, and 

population density are considered a sufficient basis for providing different levels of service. 

AMENDMENTS 

The plan shall not be amended unless public hearings are held in accordance with Chapter 43 of the 

Texas Local Government Code. 

Y:\Annexation\201 0 Annexation\TIMBAR 29.898 ac\Service Plan - 201 O.doc 

Page 3 

)

. Cityof 

~J :: New Braunfels City Council Agenda Item Report 

.... ::;:;....-- 

· January 10, 2011 

Agenda Item No. L/-.:P 



SuBJECT: 

First public hearing for the annexation of a 100.007 acre tract of land out of 

Subdivision No. 33 and Subdivision No. 58 of the A.M. Esnaurizar Eleven 

League Grant Survey, and being a portion of Tract Three, a 112 acre tract of 

land, all of Tract Four, a 1.93 acre tract of land and all of Tract Five, an 88.5 

acre tract of land located east of FM 1101 and west of Westmeyer Road 

adjacent to the existing City Limits. 

APPLICANT/OWNER: 



New Braunfels TX 78130 

) 


This property was purchased by the City of New Braunfels in March of 2010 but is 

currently outside the city limits. The property is adjacent to and contiguous to the 

existing corporate City Limits and the City agrees to be bound by all acts, ordinances, 

and all other legal action now in force and effect within the corporate limits of the City 

and all those which may be hereafter adopted. This property is located on FM 1101 

near the airport and a map is attached. 

A schedule for annexation is as follows: 

Annexation petition filed: 

Council accepts petition/sets public hearings by resolution: 

1st Public Hearing: 

2nd Public Hearing: 

First Reading of Ordinance: 

Second Reading of Ordinance: 








Case No.: 

Size: 




CS10-27 

100.007 acres 

Commercial/Industrial 

N/A 

) NOTIFICATION: 

· · Notice of the public hearing was published in the New Braunfels Herald Zeitung on 



350 


N/A City Plan/Council Objective 88: Annex areas to assure consistent 

Priority: 

land use controls. 

2006 Comprehensive Objective 8G: Consider annexing property 

Plan 

adjacent to arterial roadways to allow expansion 

of commercial development. 

fiSCAL IMPACT: 

N/A 


N/A 


N/A 

ATTACHMENTS: 

1. Property description 

2. Aerial map 

3. Service Plan 

) 

Y:\Annexation\2011 Annexation\City-owned property\1 st PH 1-1 0-11.docx 

) 


351 

HI~T 

ENGINEERING &:sURVEYING 

HOLLMIG• MOELLER• THORNHlLL 

EXHIBIT A 

METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION 

FORA 

100.007 ACRE TRACT OF LAND 

Being a 100.007 acre tract of land out of Subdivision No. 33 and Subdivision No. 58 of the A.M. Esnaurizar Eleven 

League Grant Survey, and being a portion of Tract Three, a 112 acre tract of land, all of Tract Four, a 1.93 acre tract of 

land and all of Tract Five, an 88.5 acre tract of land, described in Volume 604, Page 561, of the Official Public Records 

of Coma! County, Texas, said 100.007 acre tract of land being more particularly described as follows: 

BEGINNING: At a 1/2" iron pin found for the most Southerly comer of said 1.93 acre tract (Tract 4), the most 

Easterly comer of a 28.80 acre tract recorded in Volume 101, Page 599, of the Deed Records, Comal County, Texas, 

for the most Northerly comer of an 88.5 acre tract of land, as recorded in Document #200706027817, of the Deed 

Records of Coma! County, Texas, the most Westerly comer of said 88.5 acre tract (Tract 5), for a Westerly interior 

comer and Point of Beginning of this herein described 100.007 acre tract of land; 

THENCE: Along and with the Southwesterly line of said 1.93 acre tract (Tract 4), N 43°37' 19" W a distance of 

2781.46 to a 112" iron pin stamped "HMT Prop. Cor." set in the Southeasterly right-of-way line of FM 1101, for the 

Northerly comer of a 29.46 acre tract of land, described in Volume 147, Page 272, of the Deed Records of Comal 

County, Texas, for the Westerly comer of this herein described 100.007 acre tract of land; 

) 

THENCE: Along and with the Southeasterly right-of-way line of FM 1101, and the Northwesterly line of said 1.93 

acre tract (Tract 4), N 44°55' 00" E a distance of 30.00 feet to a l/2" iron pin found in the Southeasterly right-of-way 

line of FM 1101, being the West comer of a 57.268 acre tract of land, as described in Document #200706033517 of the 

Deed Records of Comal County, Texas, being the most Northerly comer of said 1.93 acre tract (Tract 4), for a 

Northwesterly comer of this herein described 100.007 acre tract of land; 

THENCE: Along and with the common line of said 57.268 acre tract, and said 1.93 acre tract (Tract 4), the following 

calls: 

S 43°37' 19" E a distance of 2769.83 feet a l/2" iron pin stamped "HMT Prop. Cor." set, for an interior comer of this 

herein described tract of land, 

S 88°59' 49" E a distance of 17.00 feet to a l/2" iron pin stamped "HMT Prop. Cor." set, for a Southerly comer of said 

57.268 acre tract, a Southeasterly comer of said 1.93 acre tract (Tract 4), and an interior comer of this herein described 

100.007 acre tract of land; 

THENCE: Along and with the Southeasterly line of said 57.268 acre tract, the Northwesterly line of said 88.5 acre 

tract (Tract 5), N 45°45' 59" Eat a distance of 740.73 feet passing a 1/2" iron pin found stamped "Tri-county", being 

the Southerly comer of an 80.443 acre tract of land, as described in Document #200806033744, of the Deed Records of 

Comal County, Texas, and continuing along the Southeasterly line of said 80.443 acre tract of land, for a total distance 

of 2776.05 feet to a 2" pipe found at fence comer, being the most Easterly comer of said 80.443 acre tract, the South 

comer of a 100 acre tract of land, as recorded in Document #200306047836, of the Deed Records of Comal County, 

Texas, the most Westerly corner of said 112 acre tract (Tract 3), for a Northerly comer of this herein described 100.007 

acre tract of land; 

) 

410 N. Seguin Ave.•New Braunfels, Texas 78130•Phone 830.625.8555•Fax f 

410 N. Seguin Ave. • New Braunfels, Texas 78130 • Phone 830.625.8555 

ATTACHMENT 1

352 -- 

THENCE: Along and "tith the common line of said 112 acre tract (Tract 3), and said 100 acre tract, N 45°17' 17'' E a 

distance of 222.7 4 feet to a 1/2" iron pin stamped "HMT Prop. Cor." set for a Northerly comer of this herein described 

100.007 acre tract of land; 

THENCE: Across said 112 acre tract (Tract 3), S 44°58' 20" E a distance of 1395.40 feet to a 112" iron pin stamped ~) 

"HMT Prop. Cor." set in the common line of said 112 acre tract (Tract 3) and a 109.33 acre tract of land, as described 

in Document #200706027818, of the Deed Records of Carnal County, Texas, for the most Easterly comer of this herein 

described 100.007 acre tract of land; 

THENCE: Along and with the Northwesterly line of said 109.33 acre tract, and the Southeasterly line of said 112 acre 

tract (Tract 3), S 45°18' 31" W a distance of225.81 feet to a mag nail in a 6" Cedar Post set for the most Northerly 

comer of a 76.95 acre tract of land described in Volume 705, Page 276, Deed Records, Carnal County, Texas, the most 

Westerly comer of said 109.33 acre tract, the most Southerly comer of said 112 acre tract (Tract 3), for a Northeasterly 

comer of this herein described 100.007 acre tract of land; 

THENCE: Along and with the Northwesterly line of said 76.95 acre tract of land, and the Southeasterly line of said 

88.5 acre tract (Tract 5), S 45°19' 56" W a distance of2814.88 feet to a mag nail in a 6" Cedar Post set for the most 

Easterly comer of said 88.5 acre tract as recorded in Document #200706027817, the Northerly comer of the remainder 

of a 20.5 acre tract of land as described in Document #200706027817, Deed Records, Co mal County, Texas, the most 

Westerly comer of said 76.95 acre tract, the most Southerly comer of said 88.5 acre tract (Tract 5), for the most 

Southerly comer of this herein described 100.007 acre tract of land; 

THENCE: Along and with the Northeasterly line of said 88.5 acre tract as described in Document #200706027817, 

and the Southwesterly line of said 88.5 acre tract (Tract 5), N 44°58' 20" W a distance of 1416.68 feet to the Point of 

Beginning and containing 100.007 acre of land. 

Bearings based on Texas Coordinate System, South Central Zone, North American Datum 1983. 

Surveyed on the ground this the lOth day of February, 2010. 

Reference Plat prepared this same date. 

) 

Drew-lA. Mawyer 

Registered Professional La d Surv yor No. 5348 

!Projects/City of New Braunfels/P&W 100 ac/Survey/M&B/M&B P&W 100.007 

) 

410 N. Seguin Ave.•New Braunfels, Texas 78130•Phone 830.625.8555•Fax 830.625.8556•hmtnb.com

.___ 

·-~i 

J 

(604/561) 

(N41tUO'OO'W JO.OO') 

N44'55'00"E 

30.00' 

"\~~ 

ro;;;-_~" 

~)~~() 

..,..o~J' 

·I"' / ~ ,, , 

"-. / ~- ~~- "s,, 

~ / 

#)/ 

..~. 

~x 

,,,!""""'~ 

~-!C> 0 , 

0. 

(1) 

0. 

CXl (1) 0 

·· XC :tJ 

"'llJ :::J CD 

mrn-o 

'< 0 

"0 , 

3 no. 

(1) - Ul 

-, 

"" 

MSSC INVES'l'MENTS, LP 

CAU.£0 88.5 AC 

200706027817 

///' 

/ ' 

/ MSSC INVESTMENTS. LP '· 

,/ R~:~Gg~:~75 A( '·, 

100.007 ACRES OF LAND OUT OF SUBDIVISION NO. 33 AND SUBDIVISION NO. 58 OF THE A.M. ESNAURlZAR 

ELEVEN LEAGUE GRANT SURVEY. COMAL COUNTY, TEXAS, AND BEING A PORTION OF TRACT THREE, A 112 

ACRE TRACT, All OF TRACT FOUR, A 1.93 ACRE TRACT AND ALL OF TRACT FIVE, AN 88.5 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, 

DESCRIBED IN VOLUME 604, PAGE 561 OF THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF COMAL COUNTY, TEXAS. 

WAYMAN I

-------------------------------'------- 

)> 

-1 

;;! 

0 

::I: 

s: 

m 

z 

-1 

N 

.___..ll Subject Property 

......... 

; ; City Limits 

...... lflj 

f',Cityof 


-~~-· 

CS10-27 

Annexation of 100.007 acres 

·-~~-· 


j 

-~-

355 

f'_1 City of 


PLANNING 

SERVICE PLAN FOR 2011 ANNEXATION 

Upon annexation of the area described below and as identified on Exhibit A, the City of New Braunfels 

will provide City services utilizing methods by which it extends services to any other equivalent area of the 

City. 

A 100.007 acre tract of land out of Subdivision No. 33 and Subdivision No.58 of the A.M. 

Esnaurizar Eleven League Grant Survey, and being a portion of Tract Three, a 112 acre 

tract of land, all of Tract Four, a 1.93 acre tract of land and all of Tract Five, an 88.5 acre 

tract of land located east of FM 1101 and west of Westmeyer Road, adjacent to the 


SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF ANNEXATION 

1. Police Protection 

The City of New Braunfels, Texas and its Police Department will provide police protection 

to newly annexed areas at the same or similar level of service now being provided to 

other areas of the City with like topography, land use and popula.tion density as those 

found within the newly annexed areas. The Police Department will have the 

responsibility to respond to all dispatched calls for service or assistance within the newly 

annexed areas. 

) 

2. 

Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services 

The City of New Braunfels, Texas and its Fire and Rescue Department will provide fire 

protection and EMS to newly annexed areas at the same or similar level of service now 

being provided to other areas of the City with like topography, land use and population 

density as those found within the newly annexed areas. The Fire and Rescue 

Department will have the responsibility to respond to all dispatched calls and requests for 

service or assistance within the newly annexed areas. 

3. Maintenance of Water and Wastewater Facilities 

Any and all water or wastewater facilities owned or maintained by New Braunfels Utilities 

(NBU) atthe time of the proposed annexation shall continue to be maintained by NBU. 

Any and all water and wastewater facilities which may be acquired subsequent to the 

annexation of the proposed areas shall be maintained by NBU to the extent of its 

ownership. The now existing water and wastewater mains at existing locations shall be 

available for the point of use extension based upon the NBU standard extension policy 

now existing or as may be amended. On-site sewerage systems may be maintained in 

accordance with Chapter 130 of the City Code of Ordinances. 

) 

4. Solid Waste Collection 

The City of New Braunfels, Texas collects solid waste and refuse within the corporate 

limits of the City. Solid waste collection and residential recycling will be provided to 

citizens in the newly annexed areas at the same or similar level of service now being 

provided to other areas of the City with like topography, land use and density as those 

found within the newly annexed areas. The City may negotiate with annexed areas to 

allow continued services with an existing solid waste management provider. After the 

second anniversary of the annexation date, the City will impose fees and provide the 

service. 

Page 1 

ATTACHMENT 3

356 

If areas with private roads and/or gates are arranged so that garbage may be collected 

without creating a safety hazard, the City, at its discretion, may collect the garbage 

provided proper indemnification is received from the community association or individual 

property owners. The City will then impose fees and provide the service. Garbage 

collection locations shall be subject to the approval of the Sanitation Manager. In the 

event the City does not collect garbage within the areas with private roads and/or gates, 

residents of these areas will not be billed for service after the two-year date. 

5. Maintenance of Roads and Streets 

Any and all public roads, streets or alleyways shall be maintained to the same degree 

and extent that other public roads, streets, and alleyways are maintained in areas of the 

City with like topography, land use and density as those found within the newly annexed 

areas. Private roads will remain under the ownership of the homeowners association and 

as such maintained by the association. 

6. Maintenance of Parks, Playgrounds, and Swimming Pools 

The City of New Braunfels, Texas is not aware of the existence of any publicly owned 

parks, playgrounds or swimming pools now located in the proposed areas of annexation. 

In the event any such parks, playgrounds, or swimming pools do exist and are public 

facilities, the City will maintain such areas and facilities to the extent and degree and to 

the same or similar level of service now being provided to other such areas and facilities 

within the corporate limits of the City with like topography, land use and density as those 

found within the newly annexed areas. Private facilities will remain under the ownership 

of the homeowners association and as such maintained by the association. 

7. 

Maintenance of any Publicly Owned Facility, Building or Municipal Service 

The City of New Braunfels, Texas is not aware of the existence of any publicly owned 

facility, building, or other municipal service now located in the proposed areas of 

annexation. In the event any publicly owned facility, building, or other municipal service 

does exist and are public facilities, the City will maintain such areas and facilities to the 

extent and degree and to the same or similar level of service now being provided to other 

such areas and facilities within the corporate limits of the City with like topography, land 

use and density as those found within the newly annexed areas. 

) 

8. Other Services 

The City of New Braunfels, Texas finds and determines that such services as planning, 

code enforcement, animal control, library, parks and recreation, court and general 

administration will be made available after the effective date of annexation at the same or 

similar level of service now being provided to other areas of the City with similar 

topography, land use and density as those found within the newly annexed areas. 

CONSTRUCTION OF ANY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS TO BE 

COMPLETED WITHIN 2 %YEARS 

1. 

Police and Fire Protection and Solid Waste Collection 


construct any capital improvements within 2 ~ years of the effective date of the 

annexation of the particular annexed areas for the purpose of providing police protection, 

fire protection, emergency medical services or solid waste collection. The City finds and 

determines that it has at the present time adequate facilities and other resources to 

provide the same type, kind and level of service and protection which is presently being 

administered to other areas already incorporated in the City of New Braunfels, Texas with 

like topography, land use and population density as those found within the newly 

annexed areas. 

Page2 

)

357 

2. 

Water and Wastewater Facilities 

For the next 2 % years, New Braunfels Utilities finds and determines that there is 

sufficient capacity for water and wastewater to provide services to the annexed areas 

pursuant to NBU's extension policies. The construction of any capital improvements 

necessary to extend water and wastewater services to an annexed area will be 

completed pursuant to Chapter 43 of the Texas Local Government Code, as amended 

and Chapter 130 of the City Code of Ordinances. 

3. Roads and Streets 


construct any capital improvements within 2 % years of the effective date of the 

annexation of the particular annexed areas. 

4. Maintenance of Parks, Playgrounds, and Swimming Pools and Any Other Publicly 

Owned Facility, Building, or Service 


construct any capital improvements within 2 % years of the effective date of the 

annexation of the particular annexed areas for the purpose of parks maintenance, 

playgrounds, swimming pools and other publicly owned facility, building or service. 

SPECIFIC FINDINGS 

The City of New Braunfels, Texas, finds and determines that this proposed service plan will not 

provide any fewer services and will not provide a lower level of service in the areas being 

considered for annexation that were in existence in the proposed areas at the time immediately 

preceding the annexation process. Given the proposed annexation areas' topography, land 

utilization and population density, the service levels to be provided in the newly annexed areas 

will be equivalent to those provided to other areas of the City with similar characteristics. 

TERMS 

This plan shall be valid for a term of ten (10) years. 

discretion of the City of New Braunfels. 

Renewal of the Service Plan is at the 

LEVEL OF SERVICE 

Nothing in this plan shall require the City to provide a uniform level of full municipal services to 

each area of the City, including the annexed areas, if different characteristics of topography, land 

use, and population density are considered a sufficient basis for providing different levels of 

service. 

AMENDMENTS 

The plan shall not be amended unless public hearings are held in accordance with Chapter 43 of 

the Texas Local Government Code. 

) Y:\Annexation\2011 Annexation\City-owned property\Service Plan - 2011.docx 

Page 3

358 

-) 

) 

)

359 

,..,Cityof 




Agenda Item No. 4-Q 

Presenter/Contact- Councilmember Steven Digges 

SuBJECT: Discuss and consider repealing the moratorium on Short Term Rental Specific Use 

Permits and registration of non-conforming uses. 


Councilmember Digges requested that this item be placed on the agenda for consideration to 

repeal Resolution No. 2010-R46 (extending the moratorium on short term rental special use 

permits). 



Priority: 



N/A 

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

360 

I 

RESOLUTION NO. 201 0-J; • tf{p 

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS, 

TEXAS EXTENDING THE MORATORIUM ON SHORT TERM RENTAL SPECIAL USE 

PERMITS AND REGISTRATION OF NON-CONFORMING USES. 

WHEREAS, the City Council previously passed Resolution No. 2010-16 on April 

12, 2010 establishing a 180 day moratorium on applications for short term rental special 

use permits and registrations to certify a legal non-conforming use pursuant to Chapter 

144 Section 5.16 of the Code of Ordinances, City of New Braunfels, Texas; and 

WHEREAS, the City Council continues to be concerned about the potential 

impacts that short term rentals in residential neighborhoods may create that are 

detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of 

New Braunfels, which may be jeopardized by the continued issuance of short term 

rental SUPs prior to further review of the matter and possible adoption of new 

regulations by the City Council; and 

WHEREAS, current moratorium is set to expire on October 9, 2010; and 

" 

WHEREAS, the City needs additional time to review existing information on the 

effects of short term rentals and to review the City's short term rental regulations in a 

comprehensive fashion to determine whether these regulations sufficiently address the 

impacts of short term rentals on residential property; and 

WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that a 180 day extension of the 

moratorium on short term rental SUPs and registration and certification of legal nonconforming 

rights would allow the City Staff and City Council an opportunity ·to further 

examine and propose standards for review of applications for short term rentals; NOW, 

THEREFORE, 

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW BRAUNFELS, 

TEXAS THAT: 

1. The foregoing recitals are not mere recitals, but are material portions of this 

Resolution. 

2. For purposes of this Resolution the following definitions apply: 

Moratorium-Short Term Rentals 1 

U :legal/ common/ ACW /resolutions/ 2010 I shortterrnrentalsupmoratorium.doc/ 9 I 27/10

361 

a. Short Term Rentals are one and two unit dwellings occupied for less than 

thirty (30) consecutive days in any zoning district, except C-4, C-4A, C-48, C-2, and C- 

) 2A;and 

b. Special Use Permits provisions are found in section 3.6 of Chapter 144 of 

the Code of Ordinances, City of New Braunfels, Texas. 

3. The City shall accept no applications for Special Use Permits for short term 

rentals after the effective date of this Resolution for the term of the moratorium herein 

established. The City shall accept no registration to receive a certification of legal nonconforming 

rights pursuant to section 5.16 of the Code of Ordinances, City of New 

Braunfels, Texas after the effective date of this Resolution from the term of the 

moratorium herein established. Any acceptance or processing of an application or 

registration by a City official for a short term rental special use permit after the effective 

date of this Resolution shall be deemed void, and such unauthorized acceptance or 

processing of the application or registration shall be grounds for denial of the permit. 

4. The term of the moratorium on short term rental special use permits shall be an 

additional 180 days from the termination of the current Resolution 2010-16, which is 

October 9, 2010, or the adoption of regulations governing such short term rentals, 

whichever first occurs, unless extended by action of the City Council. 

) 

5. City Staff is hereby further directed to present an Ordinance to the City Council 

as soon as the law allows to ban any further short term rentals within one or two family 

dwelling zoning districts within the City, and any such other amendments that City Staff 

shall determine are necessary for the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the 

City of New Braunfels. 

6. This Resolution shall take effect on October 9, 2010 after its passage by the City 

Council, which shall be deemed the effective date of the Resolution. This date is 

intended to prevent a lapse in the current moratorium which expires on October 9, 2010. 

7. In the event that any one or more of the provisions contained in this Resolution or 

moratorium shall for any reason be held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable in any 

respect, such invalidity, illegality or unenforceability shall not affect any other provisions 

of this Resolution or moratorium, but this Resolution and moratorium shall be construed 

as if such invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision has never been contained herein. 

PASSED AND APPROVED on this 27th day of September, 2010. 


) 

Moratorium-Short Term Rentals 2 

U:legal/ common/ ACW / resolutions/2010/ shorttermrentalsupmoratorium.doc/9 /27/10

ATTEST: 

Ann Smith, I 

APPROVED AS TO FORM: -------- ·- -~ 

......--- !i 

" ~ 

' 

) 

Moratorium-Short Term Rentals 3 ) 

U:legal/ common/ ACW I resolutions/2010/ shorttermrentalsupmoratorium.doc/9 /27/10

~·,City of 




Agenda Item No. 5 (A - C) 

Presenter/Contact - Alan C. Wayland 

SUBJECT: EXECUTIVE SESSIONS 

(A) 

(B) 

Deliberate and consider the purchase, exchange, lease or value of real property, in 

accordance with Section 551.072, of the Texas Government Code. 

(A. Wayland, City Attorney) 

Deliberate issues regarding economic development negotiations in accordance with 

Section 551.087, of the Texas Government Code. 


(C) Deliberate pending/contemplated litigation, settlement offer(s), and matters 

concerning privileged and unprivileged client information deemed confidential by 

Rule 1.05 of the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct in accordance 

with Section 551.071, of the Texas Government Code. 


In accordance with Texas Government Code, Subchapter D, the City Council may convene in a 

closed session. After the Executive Session discussion on the above noted item, any final 

action or vote taken will be in public. 


N/A 



Priority: 


N/A 

BoARD/CoMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: 

N/A 


N/A

364

J - City of New Braunfels

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?