r~F~pi=R No~ ~_ ~1~
;:a~:~l.~Fto~tl~ iaL1li~Jt"ZiLTt~~Li ti ~~ua~...~.: ~ic:t-~r~ir.lc~
1=iEG~6aftL'IPJki fFiF= I-:El~d COiJf41'i t.;Ohli-'i+i_.IiicP~li.~b~_ C:OLIiI•C[!: 3l"LIDY
01l Hilo C~r~ ~.a ~I,i~ dciy ~.a'F .J ~.ut?~ 2=:k k~icy ~_t I~~~L Olu~i Vn IrldCi c• L5y
Curnu~.~;_si~~iet 4.iJ.:iar;,s>~ .-scone' Lry (~r;mrn;saaot-per =r'li' Illy is
i~u~_tr L ~_tnanimously approved 6y a vote of 4-~b-0, ;r t,uLil i~
..ieai lrry i~Bly-"ar'd lYt Ly 't t'~e ~`'-- - .. ../ ~-. .. N ~. - -~ ~ -' 1 St!;ij~
~~. car i Go~.;iiL~ ~,U ril ~~i'eltensive l.. ii. Url iii
:drtu ~'.L arr cn-r f:ie Sday9 S~_lly ~; ~~k51(ic at t, a,[, k7 {'. h'~, itt tl'i e: Ker1
~_U~auLy C~~iiuinsaiorrer s' Co~_r r-~6 room.
~~ 7~~(~
COMMISSIONERS' COURT AGENDA REQUEST
PLEASE FURNISH ONE ORIGINAL AND NINE COPIES OF THIS REQUEST
AND DOCUMENTS TO BE REVIEWED BY THE COURT.
MADE BY: William H. Williams OFFICE: Commissioner, Pct. 2
MEETING DATE: June 24, 2002 TIME PREFERRED:
SUBJECT: (Please be specific) Consider and discuss authorizing a Public Heazing regarding the
Kerr County Comprehensive Colonia Study and Plan, Tuesday, July 2, 2002, at 6:30 p.m., in the
Ken County Commissioners Courtroom. The purpose of the public hearing is to review revisions
made to the plan resulting from public input at previous heazings. GrantWorks will adertise and
conduct the public heazing.
EXECUTIVE SESSION REQUESTED: (PLEASE STATE REASON)
NAME OF PERSON(S) ADDRESSING THE COURT: Bill Williams, Commissioner, Pct. 2.
ESTIMATED LENGTH OF PRESENTATION: 5 minutes.
IF PERSONNEL MATTER NAME OF EMPLOYEE:
Time for submitting this request for Court to assure that the matter is posted in
accordance with Title 5, Chapter 551 and 552, Government Code, is as follows:
Meeting scheduled for Mondays: 5:00 P.M. previous Tuesday
THIS REQUEST RECEIVED BY:
THIS REQUEST RECEIVED
All Agenda Requests will be screened by the County Judge's Office to determine if adequate
information has been prepared for the Court's formal consideration and action at time of Court
meetings. Your cooperation is appreciated and wntributes towazd your request being addressed
at the earliest opportunity. See Agenda Request Rule adopted by Commissioners Court.
Page 1 of 2
Bill Williams
From: "Eric Hartzell" <eric~graniworks.net>
To:	"Bill Williams" <kerrco2@ktc.com>
Cc:	"Gabi Ramirez" <gabi~grantworks.net>
Sent:	Wednesday, June 12, 2002 3:48 PM
Subject:	Public hearing
Comm. Williams, here's the text of a proposed public hearing notice for the
Colonia Plan. `T-,ucs o g•q ~ <T~~~, 2
Please consider an item on the a 2~ meeting to hold the Z~ z--
public hearing at 6:30 on a 66Y. I will run the ad later
that same week assuming the Court agrees with the date and time (it must run
72 hours before the meeting). Let me know if you want any revisions to the
text of the notice.
If you think we'll have a quorum at the hearing meeting, it may be a good
idea to include an action item on that agenda to direct us to make changes
and present a final version for Court consideration at the July 8, 2002
regulaz meeting.
Thanks! -eric
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ~ ucSD~
Kerr County Comprehensive Colonia Study And Plan --___ J ~ ~y Z~ Za6Z
Kea County invites all residents tom p bli regazding the
Kea County Comprehen ' o of y and Plan (TCDP Contract 720135) at
6:30 P.M. on 14fexd 002, at the Commissioners Court Room in the
County Courthouse (700 Main Street in Kerrville). The Public Hearing will
include a presentation of the Plan with revisions made following prior
public hearings and time for additional comment regazding the Plan.
Revisions include a stricter set of criteria to identify eligible areas and
removal of several areas that do not meet the plan's criteria including
Molina/Keith Boulevard, Silver Creek, Quail Run, Fawn Run, Mills-Miller, and
Four Seasons. Written comments will also be considered if delivered to the
Office of the County Judge, 700 Main Street, Kerrville, Texas 78028. Anyone
with a disability who requires special accommodation at the meeting should
contact the County Judge's office before 3 P.M. on Friday, June 28, to make
arrangements.
Eric Hartzell
Executive Vice President
GrantWorks, Inc.
Austin, Texas
6/17/02
INTRODUCTION
Kerr County has commissioned this Comprehensive Colonia Study and Plan to
identify the existing locations of and conditions in its "colonia areas." Though it
is located more than 100 miles from the Texas-Mexico border, the county is
home to several communities that share some characteristics with the colonias of
South Texas.
This plan's purpose is to assess the conditions in the unincorporated
communities of Kerr County to identify needs and to identify possible solutions
for those needs, particularly in the areas of water, sewer, and housing.
While many of these areas in Kerr County do not fit the public perception of the
term "colonia," they qualify for assistance under some federal programs designed
to assist unincorporated communities whose residents are primarily low-to-
moderate income and that contain a high percentage of substandard housing or
lack adequate water and sewer systems.
These areas are referred to as "colonia areas" because they may qualify for
assistance through the Texas Community Development Program, afederally-
funded program that provides housing and infrastructure assistance in rural
Texas. The TCDP has two major funding categories for infrastructure assistance,
the Community Development Fund and the Colonia Fund. Grants under the first
fund are typically $250,000 while the Colonia Fund grants are $500,000.
All of these communities are located in the eastern third of the county. Several
are "suburbs" of the city of Kerrville and all are fairly accessible from state
highways and farm•to-market roads that radiate from that city- Growth has been
steady in Kerr County, fueled by many retirees lured to the area for its scenery,
lower costs of living, and laid-back lifestyle. Many eligible areas are primarily
KERB COUNTY, TEXAS Page 1
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
home to elderly residents living in mobile homes; others provide residences for
the lower paid construction and service workers that have come to Kerr County
due to its overall growth.
For the purposes of this study, "colonia area" refers to any identifiable
unincorporated community or subdivision that meets the following criteria:
(1) Has ten or more housing units with a density of at least 2.0 units per acre
in the developed residential areas;
(2) Has a significant proportion (25/0 or greater) of substandard housing
based upon an exterior visual survey; ;3nsi
(3) Lacks either centralized water or sewer services and can be reasonably
served by an existing or proposed service provider within the planning
period.
Though all areas described in this study meet the above criteria, these areas are
not automatically eligible for assistance. A door-to-door survey that verifies at
least 51 percent of residents within any project target area are low-to-moderate
income must be completed prior to any application for construction project grant
funds. Low-to-moderate income residents are those members of households
earning less than 80 percent of the median household income, adjusted for their
particular household size. In Kerr County a family of four earning less than
$33,000 in 2001 or a single person earning less than $23,000 is considered low-
to-moderate income. The federal government releases new income limits each
year.
Prior to the door-to-door survey, the County must hold a public hearing at which
possible project types and target areas will be discussed. During the door-to-
door survey, all residents will be informed of the project and any opinions will be
Page 2 JUNE 2002
registered. All public comments regarding infrastructure projects will be carefully
considered by the County before any applications are submitted.
In mid-2000 Kerr County contracted with GrantWorks, a community development
grant management and planning firm based in Austin, Texas, to complete this
Comprehensive Study and Plan. The report's purpose is to:
• Provide a working definition of "colonia area" that meets the needs and
expectations of the County and its residents
• Identify the number, location, physical character, and population of colonia
areas
• Quantify existing and needed infrastructure
• Document housing needs and costs
• Create goals and objectives for improving conditions in the colonia areas
• Establish aten-year Capital Improvements Program
The County has created this plan, including goals and objectives, with opportunity
for citizen involvement at several commissioners court meetings, public hearings
and workshop meetings held in August and November 2001 and March, April and
June 2002. In addition, opportunity for public input was provided at public
hearings for the County's participation in the 2001-02 TCDP funding cycles where
community goals and objectives relevant to this plan were discussed.
Public comment regarding draft versions of this plan identified several
discrepancies in designating certain neighborhoods as "colonia areas" and led to
an overall refocusing of the Colonia Planning effort upon those areas that most
closely meet the colonia area criteria (please see note on page 9).
Throughout this document the capitalized form of the word "County" refers to the
government of Kerr County while the non-capitalized version refers to the
geographic entity.
KERB COUNTY, TEXAS Page 3
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
COUNTY OVERVIEW
PHYSICAL CHARACTER
Kerr County is fifty miles northwest of San Antonio in the Edwards Plateau region
of south central Texas, also known as the Texas Hill Country. The county is
bounded on the northeast by Gillespie County, on the east by Kendall County, on
the south by Bandera County, on the southwest by Real County, on the west by
Edwards County, and on the northwest by Kimble County. The county covers
1,107 square miles of hilly land drained by the Guadalupe River and its tributary
streams.
Just under half of the county's population resides in its principal community and
county seat, Kerrville. Ingram is the only other incorporated place in the county.
Interstate 10, State Highways 16, 27, 41, and 173, and several farm-to-market
roads serve the county. US Highway 87 skirts the county's eastern boundary and
US Highway 83 crosses the county's western edge.
Less than 10 percent of the county's land is arable. Soil types range from
shallow dark loams over limestone in the northwest to variable light colored
brown•to-red clays and darker loams over clayey subsoils elsewhere. The county
has characteristic Edwards Plateau vegetation such as long stem grasses, live
oaks, juniper, and mesquite.
HISTORY
The banks of the Guadalupe River have been home to humans for thousands of
years. Native American groups including the Lipan Apaches, Comanches, and
Kiowas hunted game and fished the river. Apache incursions against San Antonio
resulted in Spanish expeditions to what is now Kerr County during the 1700s, but
the first attempt at Anglo settlement in the area of the present Kerr County did
not take place until 1846 when Joshua D. Brown established a shingle•making
Page 4 JUNE 2002
camp at the site of present Kerrville on the Guadalupe River. Apache and
Comanche raids persisted through the late 1870s against an increasing number
of white settlers despite the establishment of the United States Army's Camp
Verde in southern Kerr County in 1855.
Kerr County was formed from Bexar County in 1856 and included what is now
Kendall County. The community that grew around Brown's shingle factory was
renamed Kerrville and became the county seat, but the frequent raids against the
remote settlement led to the designation of the more established town of Comfort
as the county seat in 1860. With the creation of Kendall County in 1862, the Kerr
County government returned to Kerrville.
Many of the county's earliest settlers came from the Appalachian South,
particularly Tennessee, while others crossed into Kerr County from the German
settlements at Fredericksburg, Comfort, and New Braunfels. Cattle and sheep
ranching comprised the bulk of the economic base. A second community,
Zanzenberg (modern-day Center Point), was established in 1859.
The Civil War bitterly divided the county's residents, but economic growth
continued briskly in the war's aftermath, particularly with the arrival of the San
Antonio and Aransas Pass railway in 1887. Charles Schreiner's Y 0 Ranch was
organized in the 1880s and grew to 600,000 acres of rangeland for cattle, sheep
and goats. Mohair was a principal export.
Tourism based on church camps became important in the early 1900s, followed
by summer youth camps and dude ranches in the middle part of the century.
Today more than 30 camps host 25,000 children each year. Sanatoriums and
health retreats were established during this time as well, heralding the county's
late twentieth century boom as a health care and retirement center. Today, a
Veterans Affairs Medical Center, a major general hospital and the Kerrville State
Hospital are located in the county.
KERR COUNTY, TEXAS Page 5
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
Senior citizen communities, hunting, fishing, exotic game, and two major festivals
bolster the current economy. Both the Texas Arts and Crafts Fair and the
Kerrville Folk Festival attract 25,000 or more visitors each year to Kerr County.
Small manufacturing facilities such as Mooney Aircraft and James Avery
Craftsmen provide jobs for local residents, though Mooney Aircraft's future is
somewhat questionable at this time.
POPULATION
During the early part of the century Kerr County's population hovered around
5,000 before doubling during the 1920s. Following sluggish growth in the
depression years of the 1930s, the population again began to increase rapidly
(approximately 26 percent growth every 10 years) until the current day. The
Texas State Data Center at Texas A&M University estimates the county's
population will continue to grow but at a reduced rate during the next 30 years.
The Data Center model's strong reliance on birth and death rates versus
migration rates could be a cause for this slower predicted growth.
	Year	Population	%, Change
	1960	16,800	20%

C	1970	19,454	16%
ensus	1980	28,780	48%
	1990	36,304	26%
	2000	43,653	20%
	2010	49,250	13%
Projected	2020	54,886	11%
	2030	57,565	5%
*Projections from the Texas A&M State Data Cenfer• all other figures
from Decennial Censuses of Population.
Page 6 JUNE 2002
The county's population is evenly split between incorporated and unincoporated
areas, with approximately 22,000 of the county's 44,000 total residents living in
either Kerrville or Ingram. Approximately 4,000 residents live in unincorporated
communities that qualify as colonia areas, or about 20% of the unincorporated
county population.
According to the 2000 US Census, approximately 19 percent of the county's
residents are of Hispanic ethnic origin, while 89 percent consider themselves
white. About two percent (2%) of Kerr County's residents are black and about
one percent are either American Indian or Asian. The percentage of the county's
population under the age of five (5) years is just 5.3 percent, far below the
statewide average of 7.8 percent. The county's population is also much older
than average, with 24.9 percent of all residents over the age of 65 compared to
just 9.9 percent for Texas as a whole. The county is considered to be middle
income with a median household income of $30,800, about ten percent (10%)
under the Texas average ($34,500) and a poverty rate of 14.5 percent.
KERR COUNTY, TEXAS Page 7
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
PLANNING ACTIVITIES: SURVEY
Kerr County's plan was created to comply both with the requirements of its Texas
Community Development Program contract and with the specific needs and
priorities of county officials and personnel, rural utility personnel, and the public.
The Survey portion of this document was used to produce the Area Profiles
(Appendix E) and Maps (Volume 2). The Survey included seven elements, listed
below with their corresponding contract section number:
a.l VERIFICATION OF NUMBER OF COLONIA AREAS
The first step in completing the Survey required identification of the colonias in
the county. Information from the Kerr County Appraisal District and the Kerr
County Clerk's Office was used to locate subdivisions and unincorporated "towns"
throughout the county. Discussions with engineers, County officials, water utility
personnel, and local residents narrowed down the list of subdivided areas to
those with residential development.
Field surveys of each subdivided area and investigation of other unsubdivided
developments led to a complete listing of potential colonic areas in the county.
For each potential colonic area the following information was collected:
• Approximate date of establishment (prior to 1990)
• Number of housing units (Co%nia criterion)
• Physical size (acres)
• Number of lots
• Average size of lots
• Estimated population
• Percent of area that is developed
• Density of development (Co%nia criterion)
Page 8 JUNE 2002
Note The TCDP definition (and the federal definition used by HUD) of colonic
area requires that the area be established prior to 1990 and have conditions such
as lack of potable water supply, lack of adequate sewage disposal, or lack of
decent, safe, and sanitary housing. This definition, particularly the use of the
words decent in the housing criteria and adequate in the sewage disposal criteria,
allows for a degree of flexibility and is subject to some interpretation at the local
level. It is the County's responsibility, with the assistance of their planning
consultant, to establish the "objective" measures that it will use to designate its
colonic areas.
Following the initial review, several draft reports, and substantial public input, the
original criteria used to identify colonic areas for Kerr County were redefined to
meet a stricter set of standards.
Changes to the colonic area criteria were:
• Increase in the minimum density from one housing unit per 3 acres to one
housing unit per 0.5 acres in the developed portion of the area.
• Require that the housing criterion be met in addition to, not instead of other
criteria. The housing criterion requires that at least 25% of the homes in
the area be considered in fair or poor condition (substandard) based upon
the visual exterior survey.
• Require that any water or sewer improvements be reasonably provided
within the planning period.
When applied, eight areas fit the modified criteria: Eastern and Western Kerrville
South, Center Point, Hill River Country Estates, Woodcreek, Blue Ridge-Lafayette,
Westwood Park, and Westwood Oaks Mobile Home Park (MHP).
KERR COUNTY, TEXAS Page 9
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
a.2 VERIFICATION OF CONDITION OF HOUSING STOCK
Field surveys recorded the locations, types, occupancy status, and conditions of
existing housing in each potential colonia area. This information was recorded on
field maps through a windshield surveys performed in December 2001 and
throughout the spring of 2002.
The survey of housing used a classification system that rates the condition of
each housing unit ranging from "standard" to "dilapidated" as defined on the
following page. A housing unit includes single-family detached houses,
mobile/manufactured homes, and multifamily units such as apartments,
condominiums, and town homes.
A house in standard condition may have one or more characteristics of decay but
is not considered deteriorated unless repairs would require significant expense to
the homeowner.
Homes that were not visible from the public street were not surveyed. This
occurred in relatively few cases in the areas included in this report, though many
other areas in the county have long driveways with homes set far back from the
streets, preventing visual survey.
Substandard housing, defined as housing units in the Deteriorating or Dilapidated
condition categories, is one of the Co/onia criteria used to determine whether a
potential colonia area qualifies as a colonia. At least 25 percent of the housing
units in a community must be substandard to qualify as a colonia area.
The scope of the housing analysis for the Colonia areas includes inventory and
mapping of manufactured homes (mobile homes, doublewides, etc.) and the
estimated costs of both housing rehabilitation and housing reconstruction. Most
Page 10 JUNE 2002
homes that are considered "dilapidated" are not economically feasible to
rehabilitate. This is also true of many manufactured homes that are simply
deteriorated. Demolition and clearance of the existing structure and construction
of a new housing unit is the only alternative in these cases. This activity is
eligible under the HOME Owner•Occupied Housing Assistance program
administered by the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs.
COLONIA AREA HOUSING CONDITIONS CLASSIFICATION
Classification Criteria
Good/ Few or no minor visible exterior defects, limited to:
Standard ~ cracked, peeling, or missing paint
cracked, sagging, rotting, or missing siding, steps, porch planks, or
other wooden surfaces
cracked or broken window panes
cracked masonry, brick, or mortar surfaces
a few missing or damaged roof shingles
small rust spots or holes on mobile homes
Generally meets local codes and no evident threat to health and safety
Minor rehabi/nation needed in a few cases
Fair/ Visible exterior defects requiring repair beyond routine maintenance
Deteriorating such as:
missing or damaged wooden surfaces that could cause injury
missing window panes or badly deteriorated window frames
missing or major holes in exterior siding up to one (1) foot across
and/or penetrate through the interior walls
roof missing many shingles or has holes up to six (6) inches across
chimney bricks missing
extensive rusting, joint separation on mobile home exterior
Rehabi/nation is economics//y feasib/e and needed in most cases
Reconstruction is needed /n a /ew cases (mobi/e homes)
Poor/ Fails to provide adequate shelter
Dilapidated Multiple defects listed under "Fair" or other major damage such as:
sagging foundation
sagging roof
slanted or tilted exterior walls
missing doors
collapsed chimney or porch
fire or severe water damage
Rehabi/nation is economics//y feasib/e in a few cases
Reconstruction is needed in most cases
KERR COUNTY, TEXAS Page 11
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
Using data collected in the windshield survey, estimated costs for rehabilitating
and reconstructing housing units in the colonia areas was determined using the
following method:
Rehabilitation
10% of Good Units x $10,000 per unit
75% of Fair Units x $20, 000 per unit
25% of Poor Units x $30, 000 per unit
Reconstruction
25% of Fair Units x $45,000 per unit
50% of Poor Units x $45,000 per unit
Demolition of Abandoned Units
25% of Poor Units x $5,000 per unit demolition
This method is based upon GrantWorks' experience as Texas' largest non-
governmental provider of housing rehabilitation and reconstruction program
management services for lower income households, with more than 800 units
assessed and completed through the TCDP and Texas HOME Programs since
1995. This experience provides the following rules of thumb: (1) some units that
appear to be in "good" condition on their exteriors may still require wiring,
plumbing, or other internal improvements; (2) most "fair" and some "poor" units
can still be rehabilitated cost-effectively; (3) around 1 in 2 "poor" units are not
salvageable and must be removed and replaced; and (4) about 1 in 4 "poor" units
are abandoned structures that should be demolished.
a.3, a.5, a.6 MAPPING OF AREAS
Base maps were prepared using digital map files from the Kerr Central Appraisal
District and original subdivision plat maps filed with the County Clerk at the
Courthouse. All potential colonia areas were mapped on a county-wide base
Page 12 JUNE 2002
map. After the colonia criteria were applied, those potential colonia areas that
qualified were mapped in detail.
County-wide mapping includes two maps:
1) Colonia Areas Base with county boundaries, roads, major water features,
precinct limits, incorporated city limits with extraterritorial jurisdictions,
and the colonia areas, and
2) Utili y Service Area Base with roads, incorporated city limits, rural utility
service areas (i.e., areas where a utility holds the certificate of convenience
and necessity	for water or sewer service), and water	lines color	coded
according to service provider where available; there is	currently no	sewer
service in any of the county's colonia areas. The utility service areas were
identified using TNRCC maps showing the Certificate of Convenience and
Necessity (CCN) areas granted to the various utilities.
Colonia area mapping consists of the following map sets for each area, each
overlying a base map that shows subdivision names, lot lines, rights of way,
major water features, city limits, and extraterritorial jurisdiction limits:
1) Land Use and Housing showing data gathered in the visual field survey for
housing unit locations, types, conditions, and occupancy and land use
types, by lot,
2) Existing Water System showing locations and capacities (where available)
of water facilities provided by the rural utility service suppliers and color-
coded to reflect which water service supplier owns and operates the
particular system, and
3) Existing Streets and Draina˘e showing street surfacing width, type and
condition, right-of-way width, major drainage structures, drainage problem
areas identified through the field survey and local input, and 100-year flood
hazard boundaries provided by the FEMA Flood Plain map series for Kerr
County.
KERR COUNTY, TEXAS Page 13
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
a.4 RESIDENT DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC INFORMATION
Demographic and economic information for each colonia area is found its
individual Area Profile (Appendix E). colonia areas range in size from about 230
residents to nearly 1,300. The current population of each colonia area was
estimated using the 2000 Census Block Group figure for persons per occupied
housing unit times the number of occupied housing units recorded during the
field survey. Block group data for persons per occupied housing unit ranged from
2.5 in Center Point to 3.1 in Woodcreek.
Where available, the number of residents assumed to be "low•to•moderate
income," which includes those members of households earning 80% or less of
the median family income, was taken from door-to-door income surveys. In areas
where no survey has been completed and where no Census data is available that
provides the level of geographic detail needed, the information was listed as "not
available" (N/A) on the area profiles.
As stated earlier, one of the main purposes of this study is to identify areas that
are likely to be eligible for Texas Community Development Program (TCDP)
assistance. Before any construction activities are approved by the TCDP, a door-
to-door income survey of the target area must be completed.
Approximate median household income for the colonia areas was determined
using 1990 Census Block Group figures adjusted to remove incorporated areas.
2000 Census figures have not been released for this information.
Countywide demographic and economic data was provided by the U.S. Census
Bureau's "Quickfacts" sheet on their website (www.census.gov). Population
projections for 2010-2030 were obtained from the Texas State Data Center at
Texas A&M University.
Page 14 JUNE 2002
a.5 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT OF COLONIA AREAS
The physical description of each colonia area was compiled from several sources
and graphically illustrated on the individual Colonia Area maps as described in
the "Mapping of Colonia Areas" section above:
1) Land uses, through field survey,
2) Flood•prone areas, through field survey and FEMA Flood Hazard Boundary
Maps showing the 100-year flood hazard areas,
3) Soil types, from the U.S. Soil Conservation Service Maps (type is named on
each colonia area Streets and Drainage map in an inset box), and
4) Topography, from the U.S. Geologic Survey 7.5 minute Quadrangle Maps.
a.6 EXISTING AND NEEDED INFRASTRUCTURE IN COLONIA AREAS
Infrastructure conditions and requirements were assembled from several sources
and mapped as described in the "Mapping" section above:
1) Water system inventory provided by the larger privatelyheld rural water
service providers-Kerrville South Water Company (Eastern Kerrville
South), Aquasource (Western Kerrville South, Woodcreek, Blue Ridge-
Lafayette, Westwood Oaks MHP, and parts of Center Point), Weidenfeld
Water Company (parts of Center Point)--and from the Texas Natural
Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) for all systems in the
county;
2) No centralized sewer collection and treatment systems exist in
unincorporated Kerr County, so no inventory was possible. The rural
utilities, the Upper Guadalupe River Authority, any existing engineering
studies, and the field survey were used to identify needs.
3) Street and Drainage conditions and needs were determined by the field
survey, mapping from the Kerr CAD, the U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS), the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and TxDOT, and through
meetings with the Kerr County Commissioners and the general public.
KERR COUNTY, TEXAS Page 15
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
Water. All of the county's colonic areas have water service through privately held
water systems. There are no public systems serving unincorporated Kerr County.
Several systems rely on single wells and may be in disrepair. The soils in some of
the colonic areas are thin, with exposed limestone bedrock in many places. This
significantly increases the costs of installing and maintaining water and sewer
systems. Water improvement costs were estimated using the following basis
unless other engineering estimates were available. Due to Kerr County's rocky
nature, these costs are somewhat higher than those found in other areas:
Linear feet (LF) of new/replacement water line x $25.00
(with valves, hydrants, trench work, asphalt repair, easements)
Or $35.00 if bedrock is at surface
Number of new water service connections x $500.00
Any additional costs for new wells, pumps, storage (lump sums)
Wastewater, None of Kerr County's colonic areas have centralized sewer service.
Again, the costs of installing wastewater lines is much higher in Kerr County
except along the Guadalupe River due to the lack of a significant soil layer. Only
those colonic areas with sufficient total population and development density or
that are proximate to existing wastewater treatment facilities were considered for
wastewater service improvements during the planning period. This list includes
Kerrville South (eastern and western), Woodcreek, Center Point/Hill River Country
Estates, Westwood Park, Blue Ridge-Lafayette, and Westwood Oaks Mobile Home
Park (MHP). Costs were estimated based upon the following figures, derived
from the engineering budgets for the County's 2001 Colonic Fund and 2002
Community Development Fund first-time sewer system projects in Kerrville South
and by prior studies for proposed sewer facilities serving the Center Point
community:
Page 16 JUNE 2002
LF of new sewer line x $40.00 ($30.00 for force main)
(with manholes, testing, trench work, asphalt repair, easements)
Number of new sewer service connections x $1,200.00
(includes septic tank abandonment costs)
Any additional costs for new treatment, lift stations (lump sums)
Streets and Drainage. The streets in each colonic area were field surveyed to
determine their surface type, condition, and width. Conditions were assessed for
both paved and unpaved streets using the following scheme:
Good-Street surface is intact and smooth, little or no surface cracking on
paved streets or surface material loss on unpaved streets; routine
maintenance will keep street usable and safe for at least five years.
Fair-Street surface is cracked, with some lose surface material, potholes;
should be resurfaced with new material (unpaved) or seal-coated (paved).
Poor-Street surface material is missing over large areas, large potholes
are common, erosion of exposed base material may be present, some sub-
grade failure in paved streets causing slumping; streets require new base
material, reshaping, leveling, and reapplication of surface material.
Improvement costs were based on no work for good streets, repair and new
surface treatment for fair-conditioned paved streets, reconstruction using a two
course asphalt and aggregate surface with surface treatment on poor paved
streets, and grading, laying asix-inch compacted base, and two-course surface
treatment on unpaved roads. Related roadside drainage ditch was included as
well.
Street renovation costs were calculated based upon recent County street
reconstruction and paving costs:
KERR COUNTY, TEXAS Page 17
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
(Street Length x Width) x $0.35 for Poor
(Street Length x Width) x $0.25 for Fair
a.7 OTHER INFORMATION
Additional historic background information is provided in the profile of the
county's largest colonia area, Center Point, which is considered a town by most
local residents.
Page 18 JUNE 2002
PLANNING ACTIVITIES: PLAN
The second major portion of the Kerr County Comprehensive Colonic Study and
Plan is the plan itself. The County developed goals and objectives, developed a
ranking methodology to assist in prioritizing improvements in the colonias,
prepared aten-year capital improvements program. This information is included
in this report and in the indexed colonic profiles.
2.a. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Goa/s are those items that present a generalized description of the desired future
state of the community. They are often articulated by local elected officials
through a planning process.
Objectives are clear targets for specific actions, and may be quantifiable. The
usually have associated time lines during which the objective is to be achieved.
Objectives provide structured, measured advancement toward meeting
community goals.
The County's goals and objectives for the Colonia areas are:
Goal 1 Clean, safe, sanitary drinking water provided for all residents through
approved means.
Objective A Assist water providers with expanding and reconditioning their
systems through sponsorship of grant applications.
Objective B Coordinate with rural water suppliers to modify service area
boundaries if necessary to provide water service.
Objective C Host twice•yearly "Water Summits" that include representatives from
the public, area water suppliers, Headwaters Underground Water Conservation
District and the Upper Guadalupe River Authority.
KERR COUNTY, TEXAS Page 19
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
Objective D Consider organizing "self help" initiatives in colonia areas where
volunteers, working with local water utility providers, may access State STEP
funds for water system improvements.
Goal 2 Safe, sanitary and legal wastewater collection, treatment and discharge
through approved means.
Objective A Continue coordination between potential wastewater service
providers to plan for service in the more densely populated colonia areas named
in this plan.
Objective B Coordinate with cities and rural utilities to modify service area
boundaries if necessary to provide sewer service.
Objective C Ensure adequately sized and appropriately located septic tanks
under the subdivision ordinance enforcement and through the County's on-site
septic sewer facility monitoring and permitting agreement with the UGRA.
Goal 3 Accessible, safe, weatherproof, and affordable housing with full plumbing
facilities, adequate sewage disposal, and potable water service for all residents.
ObjectiveA Publicly proclaim Fair Housing Month, provide information regarding
federal Fair Housing policy and local Fair Housing Ordinances to the public
Objective B Work with local churches and community groups to begin aself-help
housing rehabilitation program aimed at preserving the county's existing housing
stock.
Objective C Apply for approximately $500,000 in HOME grant funds in each of
the next 10 years to provide owner-occupied housing rehabilitation or
reconstruction assistance to low income, elderly and/or disabled homeowners in
colonia areas.
Objective D Consider assisting with the establishment of a countywide non-profit
community housing development organization (CHDO) to take advantage of
housing development funds from the Texas Housing Trust Fund and the owner-
occupied rehabilitation CHDO set-asides
Page 20 JUNE 2002
Goal 4 Remove dilapidated, unsafe and abandoned structures, abandoned cars
and other large items of refuse from roadsides, vacant lots, and drainage ways.
Objective A Consider using the authority granted by the Texas Health and Safety
Code Chapter 343 to abate public nuisances in various neighborhoods of the
county.
Objective B Use a portion of any HOME assistance grants to demolish and
remove severely dilapidated houses occupied by lower income elderly or disabled
residents and replace these houses with new structures.
Goal 5 Safe, accessible, and all-weather roads serving all unincorporated
communities in the county.
ObjectiveA Investigate the creation of Road Districts as authorized in the Texas
Transportation Code Chapter 257 to finance county road improvements in colonia
areas.
Objective B Pave all dedicated streets in colonia areas that serve more than 20
residences per mile from the point where this density occurs to the nearest
existing paved county road or state farm-to•market road or highway.
Objective C Regularly seal coat all existing paved streets in colonia areas.
Goal 6 Adequate drainage to prevent loss of property or life, deterioration of
roadways, and erosion control.
Objective A Install drainage facilities that route water flows during storm events
through or around developed colonia areas, particularly where such flows cross
streets and residential yards.
Objective B Dig or reshape roadside ditches whenever County maintained roads
are constructed or repaired.
Objective C Enforce minimum driveway culvert sizes for all new subdivisions and
driveways in colonia areas.
KERR COUNTY, TEXAS Page 21
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
Objective D Provide flood hazard insurance information to residents of colonia
areas whose homes are located within the flood hazard zone.
Goal 7 Prevent, where possible, the creation of new colonia areas that lack
proper roads, drainage facilities, and water or wastewater services.
Objective A Enforce existing subdivision rules.
Objective B Enforce use of proper septic tanks and adequate drainfield size in all
colonia areas.
Objective C Encourage education programs that emphasize housing
maintenance and repair.
2.b. RANKING AND PRIORITIZATION OF COLONIA AREAS
Kerr County has limited resources to expend addressing the infrastructure needs
of its colonia areas. Its 8 colonia areas are home to around 4,000 citizens. In
order to meet the current needs in the colonia areas as well as anticipate future
needs, a method was devised for ranking the areas. The ranking is based on the
original criteria used to identify the areas: density of development, housing
conditions, and access to centralized water and sewer facilities. Points were
assigned to each colonia area based on the relative conditions found for these
four criteria.
Density is an important factor because denser developments more intensely use
infrastructure such as roads and utilities. Denser development allows more
people to be served at a lower per capita cost than when development is spread
over large areas. Risk of contamination of water resources from inadequately
sized septic tank drainfields is another reason why denser developments warrant
a higher priority. Density is measured by housing units per acre of residentially
developed land.
Page 22 JUNE 2002
Housing that is poor or fair in condition reduces the overall appearance, property
values, and tax revenue generation of a colonia area. Substandard housing may
also be hazardous to the health of residents, their visitors, and rescue and
emergency personnel such as firefighters or medical professionals. Those areas
with higher percentages of poor and fair condition homes receive priority and can
be targets of future housing rehabilitation and reconstruction programs.
Safe, clean drinking water is found in most of the rural areas of Kerr County.
Based upon the limited amount of information gathered from the private for-profit
water service providers in the county, colonia areas appear to have few if any
direct water needs, though some still have unconnected housing units. Anecdotal
evidence describes supply problems such as lack of proper water treatment,
inadequate well capacity, and undersized or leaking water lines in some areas.
Because this information was not verifiable no discussion is included here
regarding specific water suppliers or colonia areas. Priority is given to
connecting the remaining unserved or underserved households in the colonia
areas, determined by locating housing units that are not on water lines or are
connected to undersized water lines (less than two inches in diameter with
multiple connections).
Centralized sanitary sewer service is not available in the unincorporated areas of
Kerr County. The areas included in the Plan are heavily populated and densely
developed enough to require or support a system on their own, or are smaller but
located in close proximity to larger colonia areas or to existing sewer systems.
The estimated cost per connection considering the total cost of providing service
to the colonia area was used as a means to rank the relative priorities under this
criterion. Lower costs per connection generally indicate higher housing density,
favorable topography, proximity to other developed areas that will also use the
sewer system, or proximity to a proposed treatment facility.
KERR COUNTY, TEXAS Page 23
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
Points were assigned to each factor based on the following matrix:
Criteria 1: Density of Deve/opment	Criteria 2: Poor Housing Conditions
The average density for all Colonic Areas (CAs) was	To qualify as a CA, at least 25% of the housing must be
calculated to be 3.0 housing units per acre	fair or poor in condition. Priority is given to those areas
CAs exceeding 150°Jo ofaverage = 3	with proportionally greater poor condition housing
CAs with 100% to 150~Jo ofaverage = 2	CAs exceeding 25a/o Poor condition housing = 2
CAs with 75a/o to 100% ofaverage = 1	CAs with 10~/o to 25% Poor condition housing = 1
CAs with less than 75% of average = 0	CAs with less than 10°jo Poor condition housing = 0
	CAs exceeding 50aJo Fair/Poor condition housing = 1
	CAs with less than 50Q/o Fair/Poorcondition housing=0
Criteria 3: /nadequate Water Supp/y	Criteria 4: /nadequate Sewage Disposal
	The average cost per connection taking into account
CAs with unserved homes or supply problems = 2	the TOTAL cost for centralized collection and treatment
	facilities in CAs where this is feasible was $7,~3.
CAs needing line replacement = 1	CAs with less than average cost/connection = 3
CAs with no known needs = 0	CAs with 100% to 120°Jo of average = 2
	CAs with more than 120% ofaverage = 1
	CAs where septic tanks are adequate = 0
The points earned by each colonia area were added to yield a final score. The
maximum possible score is 12 points (3 for maximum density, 2 for maximum
poor condition and 1 for maximum fair plus poor condition housing, 2 for
households unserved by water systems, 1 for water line replacement needs, and
3 for minimum cost per sewer connection). The highest score was 8 points each
for Eastern Kerrville South, Center Point, and Blue Ridge-Lafayette, followed
closely with 7 points by Hill Country River Estates. Because some colonia areas
scored the same number of points, a final ranking was determined by overall
priorities of (1) sewer, (2) water, (3) housing conditions, and (4) density.
Page 24 JUNE 2~2
c. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM
Capital improvements are new or upgraded constructed or installed items such as
water supply, storage, treatment, and distribution facilities; wastewater collection
and treatment facilities; roads and bridges; drainage and flood control facilities;
parks, recreational facilities, or community centers; and structures for the
operation of governmental functions.
A capital improvements program (CIP) is a schedule of major public physical
improvements based upon an analysis of available fiscal resources. CIPs are the
foundation of financing for capital expenditures because they blend program and
needs analysis with financial capabilities. Properly developed and used, CIPs are
critical tools for anticipating large expenditure items and determining when and
how much money will be needed to keep up with infrastructure needs. Several
elements form an effective CIP:
1) Knowledge of County fiscal and budget policies;
2) Assessment of County's fiscal health;
3) Assessment of fiscal health of utility districts and cities operating in the
unincorporated portion of the county;
4) Assessment of current and needed facilities based on existing and
anticipated development;
5) Identification and description of specific capital projects;
6) Prioritization of identified capital projects; and
7) Identifying potential funding sources for capital projects
The time frame for this CIP is ten years, 2001 through 2010. Many factors that
affect the ability of counties to influence or control development could change
during this time period; for example, it was not until 1999 that all Texas county
governments were given the authority to own and operate their own public water
and wastewater systems.
KERR COUNTY, TEXAS Page 25
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
The CIP lists specific projects, estimates costs for those projects, proposes
funding mechanisms, and schedules the year or years over which the project
should be constructed.
Often the costs associated with capital improvements are large in comparison
with routine maintenance and operations that Counties perform on their roads,
bridges, and buildings. Sometimes money must be budgeted for several fiscal
years, accumulating in an account, so that single large purchases may be made;
other times, it is preferable to borrow larger amounts of money for capital
improvements and make scheduled payments over a number of years. This is
especially true of utility districts that must finance improvements to water supply
and storage facilities and wastewater treatment facilities.
This CIP considers the financial and operational resources of Kerr County as well
as the resources of the UGRA and the private and non-profit utility companies
that serve colonia areas.
2.c.1) FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
The County's fiscal year runs January 1 through December 31. There are limited
resources for colonia area improvements. Its primary contribution is
maintenance of roads and roadside drainage ditches in the colonia areas, paid for
from the Road and Bridge Fund.
Implementing these improvements falls primarily to the utility service providers,
which in many cases are private companies. These include:
1) Upper Guadalupe River Authority (public, plans to provide sewer service
in unincorporated areas);
2) City of Kerrville (public, serves inside city limits);
3) AquaSource (private, serves Blue Ridge•Lafayette, Westwood Oaks MHP,
portions of Center Point);
Page 26 JUNE 2002
4) Weidenfeld Water Works Inc. (private, serves Western Kerrville South and
portions of Center Point);
5) Kerrville South Water Company (private, serves portions of Eastern
Kerrville South);
6) Private system serving the Wood Drive area (Oak Grove Mobile Home
Park) of Eastern Kerrville South;
7) Private system serving Elmwood Mobile Home Parkin Center Point;
8) Private system serving Hill River Country Estates (Hill River Water Works);
9) Private system serving Westwood Park subdivision (Westwood Water,
Inc.)
The public non-profit and governmental utility providers may issue debt, raise
revenues, or use grants and loans from private, state or federal sources to expand
their utility systems. The private for-profit utilities are also able to access some
grant programs, but are less likely to compete well for funding.
Public Improvements Financing Practices. The type of financing used to pay for
infrastructure expenditures depends on several factors, the most critical of which
include the annual tax or utility receipt revenues generated, the unmet demand
for different infrastructure projects, and the public or non-profit entity's
indebtedness. Because costs often run into the millions of dollars, several
alternatives are often used to finance infrastructure expansion or replacement:
general obligation bonds and certificates of general obligation, revenue bonds,
operating revenues/general fund, impact fees, and state or federal funds.
• General obligation bonds are paid out of a government's annual revenues.
These types of bonds usually raise large sums of money with the debt retired
over several decades. G.O. bonds are backed by the "full faith, credit and
taxing powers" of the issuing jurisdiction. When G.O. bonds are sold, the
jurisdiction guarantees that it will raise sufficient revenues to retire the debt
KERR COUNTY, TEXAS Page 27
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
on schedule, usually using property taxes. Because G.O. bonds are repaid by
all taxpayers in a community, they are usually used to finance projects that
benefit the community as a whole, such as public buildings, parks, recreation
centers, and major street improvements. Certificates of obl-igation are similar
to G.O. bonds.
• Revenue bonds are	sold to develop projects that produce revenues	to	the
governmental utility,	such as municipal sewer and water systems-	In	this
case, the guarantee of repayment comes from the revenues generated by the
financed project, which usually includes taxes or fees collected from the
project's beneficiaries. Most projects financed using revenue bonds benefit a
wide class of users, such as water customers, airport users, or toll road users.
Unlike G.O. bonds, revenue bonds do not require the backing by the
jurisdiction's "full faith, credit and taxing powers." Consequently, the local
government is not obligated to raise taxes to avoid default on the revenue
bonds. Because of this, revenue bonds usually carry higher interest rates than
general obligation bonds. These bonds parallel those used for private
enterprises; voter approval is usually not necessary to float revenue bonds.
• erating revenues or the General Fund are funds that are derived from the
income-generating functions of a governmental or non-profit utility such as
sales and property tax collections and fees and fines levied by its courts.
Financing infrastructure using operating revenues or the general fund saves
the interest and fees associated with issuing bonds, but because the operating
revenue cannot usually provide the large cash flows of a bond issuance, it is
usually used to finance smaller, lower-cost capital improvement projects that
can be paid for in one year.
• Special Districts such as Road Districts or Drainage Districts may be formed
to provide improvements in a county. Road Districts may be created by a
Page 28 JUNE 2002
Commissioners' Court following a public hearing to issue bonds up to the
amount of one-fourth of the value of the property located within the district. A
two-thirds majority of the district's voting eligible voters must approve any
bonds or other debt that is issued. Drainage Districts may be created in the
same manner as Road Districts, or by petition by resident taxpayers of the
proposed district to the Commissioners' Court. Depending on how they are
organized, they may not be limited in the same way Road Districts are
regarding maximum debt issuance- Bond proceeds may be used to purchase
private roads, construct new roads, or improve existing roads within a Road
District or to build levees, channelize streams, or construct and maintain
other waterways that prevent flooding and promote proper drainage in a
Drainage District. Proceeds are financed by additional property taxes that
must support capital improvement debt retirement plus a maintenance fee.
• Impact fees include user fees and special assessments and can only be levied
by cities. Impact fees are levied as charges to property developers to help
defray the costs of providing infrastructure or new facilities for the new
development. The approach applies the costs of infrastructure development
to those who are primary beneficiaries (usually the developers). The decision
as to who will pay impact fees for development is difficult, but many
communities that are experiencing rapid growth must raise infrastructure
development funds in this manner. In some communities, developers are
allowed to make non-cash contributions in lieu of fees. Such contributions
might include land for a community park or construction of a new branch
library. Other fees include those that are usually collected directly from the
beneficiaries of a project. Examples include public swimming pool or golf
course user fees, trash collection fees, or water meter tap fees. These fees
can be levied by counties and by utility companies.
KERR COUNTY, TEXAS Page 29
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
• The final method of financing is use of state and federal funds. Appendix D
gives additional information regarding these resources. Grants and low-
interest loans provided by state and federal agencies have long been a key
ingredient in the development of local infrastructure. Most assistance
requires some form of local matching contribution and some require that
other socioeconomic conditions be present in the local jurisdiction, such as
low-income neighborhoods or high unemployment. Although state and federal
assistance for infrastructure has decreased significantly in the past twenty-five
years, grant programs continue to provide a significant source of funding for
infrastructure development in rural Texas. These sources include the Texas
Community Development Program (TCDP), the Texas Parks & Wildlife grant
program (TP&W), the Statewide Transportation Enhancement Program
(TxDOT), and loan programs such as the State Water Revolving Loan Fund
(Texas Water Development Board) and USDA's Rural Development (RD)
programs. The latter two programs are available to both the County and to
the non-profit water districts; all other programs mentioned require County
sponsorship.
Other suggestions for financing capital improvements include:
• use of county prisoners as day laborers for drainage, park, and street projects
as a way to save money and accomplish additional work;
• encouragement of volunteer groups to make simple park improvements and to
clear brush and debris out of vacant lots and drainageways;
• use of the Small Cities Environment Program (STEP), a self-help grant
program supported by the Texas Natural Resources Conservation
Commission, the Texas Water Development Board, and the TCDP, that uses
volunteer labor to install or replace water or sewer lines bought using grants
from the TCDP. This program requires that project cost be significantly lower
than the costs of similar improvements using conventional construction
contractors (at least a 40 percent reduction in cost).
Page 30 JUNE 2002
Cost of Financing. Each option available to pay for infrastructure carries a certain
financial obligation. One objective of local governments is to incur minimal
interest and finance charges, which may depend on the bond rating of the
jurisdiction. If enterprise funds, revenues from general taxes, or outside
assistance from state or federal sources are sufficient to pay for infrastructure
development, no financing costs will be incurred.
E ui Local governments must determine the relationship between those who
receive the benefits and those who pay the costs. In some cases, it is possible to
identify groups of individuals who benefit more directly from a particular project;
in others, the benefit may be more widely distributed. Some forms of financing
may be more burdensome to one group of citizens than another, leaving local
governments to decide how the costs and benefits of infrastructure projects will
be distributed.
Political Acceptability. While most communities have a range of infrastructure
financing options, local political realities often play a major role determining
which option is chosen, if any. In some communities it may not be politically
feasible to increase property taxes, while it may be acceptable to issue bonded
indebtedness for a specifically earmarked purpose. In other cases, it may be
more acceptable to charge fees directly to those who benefit from a project or
incur debt that will be repaid by fees charged for use of the project. In any case,
the County will always seriously consider the comments of area residents when
participating in any infrastructure improvement projects.
2.c.2) & 3) CAPTIAL NEEDS LIST and SCHEDULE OF CAPITAL PROJECTS
Capital needs lists are specified in each Area Profile. Those that will be
addressed by the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) over the next ten years are
shown in the CIP Schedule.
KERB COUNTY, TEXAS Page 31
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
Each colonia area's capital needs list was reviewed and prioritized based on its
ranking. The exact order and timing of implementation of specific improvements
may change depending on when and where resources become available to the
County. (~pr~j rt rnntainP in this CIP is required by anv State or local aeencv
The decision to a° rticipate in anv project will be left to the property owners
Inrata~i within the target areas At the time that specific improvement projects
arP ~~~+Pmplated, Duhlic hParingc will b h Id to r iv omm nt which will be
~arafi y c~nciciPred by the Commissioners Court The timing and extent of any
project listed in the CIP or discussed in this Plan may be modified to meet the
cit~~ations and needs that exist within the County at that time.
Each project's description, location, proposed year of improvement, estimated
cost, and possible funding source is shown on the CIP Schedule, Appendix B.
Project costs are in 2002 dollars; costs should be adjusted for future projects to
account for inflation and changing labor and materials costs.
In general, the most pressing capital needs in Kerr County's colonia areas are, in
order, (1) sanitary wastewater collection and treatment systems in the larger and
denser communities of Kerrville South, Center Point/Hill River, Woodcreek,
Ingram area, and Westwood Park, (2) new water systems, extension of first-time
water service, or system upgrades in colonia areas, (3) minor improvements to
roads in several colonia areas, (4) new drainage facilities to control localized
flooding in a few areas.
Centralized wastewater facilities have long been discussed for several of Kerr
County's colonia areas, particularly Kerrville South and Center Point/Hill River.
Based on natural topography, density of development, and potential build-out
populations, there are five Wastewater Service Areas where centralized
wastewater collection and treatment systems would be feasible during the
Page 32 JUNE 2002
planning period from an engineering perspective, if not from a financial
perspective. They include eight colonia areas that together are home to about
4,500 residents, more than 80% of the county's colonia area population:
1) Kerrville South (2 colonia areas, 554 housing units; several non-
colonia areas),
2) Center Point/Hill River (2 colonia areas, 562 housing units),
3) Woodcreek (1 colonia area, 144 housing units),
4) Ingram Area (2 colonia areas-Westwood Oaks MHP and Blue Ridge-
Lafayette-220 housing units, in conjunction with a future Ingram or
Greenwood Estates system),
5) Westwood Park subdivision (1 colonia area, 90 housing units).
Costs for wastewater service were based upon the figures outlined in section a.6,
"existing and needed infrastructure in colonia areas," in this report. Shared costs
of additional wastewater treatment capacity, sewer trunk lines and lift stations
were distributed among the Western Kerrville South colonia area and several non-
colonia areas located in the Kerrville South Wastewater Service Area based upon
each area's current shares of the Service Area's total estimated connections:
colonia Area	LF Line	Conns.	Other Anticipated Facilities	Total Cost
E Kerrville South	12,920	301	Trunk line to Kerrville system	$1,485,000
W Kerrville South	19
800	203	2 lift stations, trunk line to E Kerrville	$1,375,000
	,		South system*	
Center Point	38
360	453	2 lift stations, 19,400 LF force main	$3,473,000
	,		to/added capacity at Kerrville plant	

Hill River	
14
000	
89	1 lift station, trunk line to Center Point
**	
$771,000
	,		System	
Woodcreek	15,500	144	Package treatment facility	$1,195,000
Ingram Area	16,450	217	Trunk lines to main system	$1,264,000
Westwood Park	12,210	90	Trunk lines and lift station to Comfort	$760,000
*Shared cost with non-colonia areas along Encino, Monroe, Fawn Valley, Valley View, etc.
**Shared cost with non colonia area along Skyline Drive.
KERB COUNTY, TEXAS Page 33
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
Kerrville South Wastewater Service Area: The County, working in
conjunction with the Upper Guadalupe River Authority (UGRA) and the City
of Kerrville, secured a $500,000 TCDP Colonia Fund grant and a $250,000
TCDP Community Development grant to provide first-time sewer service to
portions of eastern Kerrville South during 2002. The UGRA will own and
operate the lines while the City will provide treatment at its wastewater
treatment plant. The UGRA and Kerr County expect to continue adding
sewer mains and residential connections moving westward and northward
from the current target areas around Wood Drive and East Loyal Valley as
funds become available. Future low-to-moderate income target areas
include West Loyal Valley (George Muck, Shannon, Frederick, and Quail
Valley) south of Ranchero Road and several apartment complexes, mobile
home communities, and duplexes located on Ranchero Road itself.
Once Phase One (Eastern Kerrville South) is complete, Phase Two can
begin to connect Western Kerrville South. To allow gravity flow from the
west to the east, this phase could connect to the main line serving Eastern
Kerrville South via a lift station and force main across Camp Meeting Creek
near the end of Valley View. Western Kerrville South lies mainly along the
north side of Ranchero Road. Topographically, the land falls from north to
south, so a major collection line ("trunk line") along the north side of
Ranchero from Tierra Verde Estates (Twombly Drive) east, with smaller
collection lines connecting at Tierra Grande, North Valley Verde, Donna,
Encino, Fawn Valley, Ridge Grove, and Michon (Tierra Verde and Aureon
Estates) is a likely configuration.
About two-thirds	of the expected connections	for this	phase would be in
colonia-eligible	areas with the remaining	located	in higher income
neighborhoods.	For budgeting purposes, the	colonia	area sub-phases for
Page 34 JUNE 2002
this project could include, in proposed order of construction from east to
west, Donna/Valley Verde, Tierra Grande/Mobile Home Park (on south side of
Ranchero), and Twombly/Michon.
• (:enter Point Wastewater Service Area: In the recent past plans have also
developed to provide a centralized wastewater collection and treatment
system in Center Point. The community incorporated for a brief period in
the 1990s with creation of a sewer system as a driving force. An
application to USDA Rural Development for agrant/loan-financing package
was created but not submitted before local citizens voted to dissolve the
municipality. Another potential service provider, the Kerr County-Center
Point Water Control and Improvement District (WCID), was formed in 1961
but has been inactive since the early 1980s.
The cost of providing sewer service in Center Point is driven by the options
for treatment: connection via force main to the existing treatment facilities
in Kerrville (19,400 linear feet) or Comfort (32,000 linear feet), or
construction of a new treatment facility locally. Engineering work in
preparation for the Rural Development grant/loan focused on the local
treatment option, but this may be less efficient than piping wastewater to
Kerrville. Detailed engineering options beyond the scope of this plan must
be developed to make this determination.
Topography dictates a fairly straightforward collection system for Center
Point: two main collection areas, one north and one south of the
Guadalupe River, would funnel their flow to lift stations located near the
river. The main lift station would then pump wastewater through a force
main along SH 27 to the Kerrville system. The collection system would
include all of North Center Point, the original town, and the Elmwood
mobile home community, the densest parts of the colonia area. Verde Hills
KERR COUNTY, TEXAS Page 35
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
(non-colonia	area) and Verde Creek	would	likely remain on septic tanks
during the	planning period due to	their	relatively lower	densities and
distance from the rest of the community.
A second colonia area, Hill River Country Estates, and the homes along
Skyline Drive, also fall within the Center Point Wastewater Service Area.
The development	density in	the	colonia	area is among the highest in the
county and some	residents	are	using	cesspools and other unapproved
septic systems. With 89 households in the colonia area and approximately
50 more along Skyline Drive between Hill River and Center Point, extension
of sewer to this area is both financially feasible and desirable from a public
health perspective. Approximately 14,000 linear feet of line and one small
lift station would be required to serve this area.
The relative size	of this project, particularly the	large	up-front costs of
connecting to an	existing system or building a	local	treatment plant,
dictates funding sources other than the Texas Community Development
Program. USDA Rural Development is the most likely funding source since
it will provide up to 90% grant funds for this type of project. By
comparison, Texas Water Development Board Funds are typically 100%
repayable. USDA requires that all engineering work, permanent and
temporary easements, and permitting be completed before release of
construction funds. This process alone can take two or more years, so the
entire time allocated to completing aUSDA-funded sewer system for Center
Point should be four to six years. The system's probable main components
(force main to existing system or new treatment plant, at least two major
lift stations, and lines to connect them) and collection system (nearly
55,000 linear feet of sewer line) could be completed with USDA funds.
TCDP funds can be used later in the project to offset a portion of the costs
by connecting low-to-moderate income residents.
Page 36 JUNE 2002
• Woodcreek: this colonia area is fairly densely populated with average lots
of less than one-half acre. Approximately 500 residents live in 144 houses,
most of which are mobile homes. Though the colonia area is too distant
from the county's existing or proposed wastewater collection systems to
take advantage of shared facilities, it benefits from favorable topography
that would entirely gravity-flow without the need for expensive lift stations.
A small package wastewater treatment plant (approximately 0.25 MGD)
sized according to TNRCC requirements for the area's build-out population
of 867 could serve the area, discharging into Wood Creek.
A sewer system for Woodcreek will be eligible for the TCDP Colonia Fund.
It would require about two and one•half Colonia Fund grants ($500,000
apiece) to complete the system and connect the residents.
• Ingram Area The lack of centralized sewage collection in and around the
incorporated City of Ingram is a concern second only to that of Kerrville
South, mainly due to the number and density of homes (more than 800
septic tanks on 1.5 square miles). Two portions of this area meet the
colonia area definition: the Westwood Oaks Mobile Home Park, located
just northeast of Ingram, and the Blue Ridge-Lafayette areas just east of
Ingram along State Highway 27. An adjacent unincorporated non-colonia
area, Greenwood Estates, contains nearly 200 homes. Westwood Oaks
MHP is located due north of Greenwood Estates in the Nichols Creek valley.
Plans to provide sewer service in the Ingram area have been discussed for
many years. Currently a large sewer main extends west from Kerrville to
the Ingram High School facilities along SH 27. Any plans to provide sewer
service to Ingram or to Greenwood Estates should include Westwood Oaks
MHP and Blue Ridge•Lafayette. Wastewater from Westwood Oaks MHP, a
KERR COUNTY, TEXAS Page 37
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
high density area, would gravity flow southward along Nichols Creek,
requiring no lift stations. Wastewater from Blue Ridge-Lafayette would
gravity flow the short distance to the main line along SH 27.
These areas are eligible for either TCDP Colonia or Community
Development funds but would more likely be connected as part of an area-
wide system using USDA Rural Development assistance. Again, this
program provides up to 90% grant and lOaJo repayable loan assistance,
depending on the USDA's own calculations. Grant/loan ratios are more
often in the range of 75/25 or 80/20. The City of Ingram is investigating
an Ingram Area wastewater collection system that would most likely
connect to the City of Kerrville for treatment.
• Westwood Park: This Colonia area is located just over a mile west of the
service territory of the Kendall County Water Control and Improvement
District Number 1, the water and wastewater provider for the
unincorporated town of Comfort. Some discussion between the WCID and
the residents has taken place in the past regarding extension of wastewater
collection service. When the WCI D completes its new wastewater treatment
plant in late 2002 it will have adequate excess capacity to serve several
thousand connections outside the immediate Comfort community.
Providing sewer service to Westwood Park would involve a lift station and
approximately 2.5 miles of sewer line. This project could be completed
using TCDP Community Development or Colonia funds.
Wastewater Service Coordination: Wastewater services are unlikely be provided by
the water utilities currently serving the county's various unincorporated areas.
The UGRA is actively interested in providing service in unincorporated areas and
the City of Kerrville has expressed its desire to become the regional wastewater
Page 38 JUNE 2002
treatment center for Kerr County. The Kendall County WCID No. 1 (Comfort) has
the capacity to offer water and wastewater service to eastern Kerr County as well
The private water companies serving the larger colonia areas have no plans for
wastewater service at this time; regardless, the UGRA plans to request the right
to provide sewer service (a "certificate of convenience and necessity," or CCN) in
several areas that have private water systems. The final entity that could legally
build and operate a wastewater system is Kerr County itself, though the County
has no plans to do so at this time.
In the future, the County will assist the UGRA, the Cities of Kerrville and Ingram,
the Kendall County WCID Number 1, and the private water utilities in coordinating
wastewater services where feasible and necessary. Since natural watersheds
cross utility service boundaries and proximate colonia areas are often served by
different water utilities, cooperation is essential.
Septic Systems: Kerr County has an intergovernmental agreement with the UGRA
to permit the construction and license the operation of on-site sewage facilities
(OSSF), commonly called septic systems. For new construction, a registered
sanitarian or engineer must design all alternative OSSFs, while the installer may
provide designs for standard OSSFs. All completed systems are inspected by the
UGRA before they are covered. Any repairs to licensed OSSFs also require a
construction permit and may be inspected by UGRA.
Water facilities in unincorporated Kerr County are completely controlled by the
private sector. More than 30 privately held companies are authorized by the
TNRCC to provide public water service, including large multi•county providers
such as AquaSource and Weidenfeld Water Works.
KERR COUNTY, TEXAS Page 39
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
This lack of public ownership and management makes effective water planning by
the County extremely difficult, particularly in identifying needs such as lack of
residential water service, poor water quality, or inadequate supply or storage
capacity. System maps obtained from several companies and the TNRCC's CCN
map were used to create colonia area water maps. Data retrieved from the
TNRCC's on-line Water Utilities Database were used to create a snapshot of the
colonia area's existing water systems (see "Private Water Utility Information"
table on the following page). None of the private water systems operating in the
county's colonia areas appears to be violating TNRCC minimum water system
requirements (TAC 30 Part 1, §290.45) regarding storage, pressure, or
production capacity.
Most of the privately held rural water service providers have maintained their
systems well and have added customers regularly as development occurs in their
respective service areas. Primary water concerns include:
• Center Point: Although inaccurate and incomplete information from private
water system providers may contribute to an over estimation of homes
lacking centralized water service, it appears that up to 90 homes in
developed areas of Center Point may still rely on individual wells. If the
worst-case scenario is true, approximately 11,800 linear feet of new water
line and 90 connections are needed in Center Point, costing an estimated
$410,500. Undersized lines serve some parts of the community. The
TNRCC requires that lines smaller than two inches (2") in diameter serve
no more than 10 residential connections, a condition violated in at least
three locations in that colonia area.
The options for providing additional water service range from forming a
new public water supply corporation or water district or reviving the
defunct Center Point Water Control and Improvement District. Any of these
Page 40 JUNE 2002
options would provide the residents served with an elected board. Other
options include ownership by the UGRA or extension and ownership by one
or more of the private water supply companies already in operation in
Center Point. Any of these options are eligible for assistance under the
TCDP Colonia or Community Development Funds, though the private
ownership option would not score as well in this competitive program.
The Headwaters Underground Water Conservation District (HUWCD) was formed
in 1991 to protect and monitor groundwater in Kerr County, primarily through the
regulation of wells and the promotion of conservation and antipollution efforts.
All wells that produce more than 17.4 gallons per minute (25,000 gallons per
day) are permitted, while smaller wells are registered. HUWCD tests wells for
water quality, checks water levels, and ensures that wells are located away from
possible contamination sources. Although eligible to construct and operate
public water systems, the HUWCD does not have any plans to do so during the
planning period.
KERR COUNTY, TEXAS Page 41
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
Private Water Utility Information
		Storage Capacity	Well Capacity	Total Meters on
Area	Water Utility(s)/Water System	(Gals)	(GPM) and No.	S stem
	Kerrville South Water Co./Coma Vista	563,000	977 (4)	905
Kerrville South (Eastern)	Kerrville South Water Co./Westcreek	75,000	110 (1)	128
	Unknown Name (Wood Drive area)	N/A	N/A	~75
	AquaSource/Erlund Subdivision	66,000	186 (2)	207
Kerrville South (Western)	(A portion also served by Kerrville South	
-	
-	
(-60)
	Water)			
	AquaSource/Center Point North	20,000	135 (1)	83
	AquaSource/Taylor	45,000	80 (1)	168
	Weidenfeld WW/Center Point	15,000	110 (2)	58
Center Point				
	Weidenfeld WW/Verde Park (non-colonia)	54,000	50 (1)	54
	Verde Hills WSC (non-colonia)	40,000	100 (2)	22
	Elmwood Mobile Home Park	40,000	75 (1)	73
Woodcreek	AquaSource/Woodcreek	42,000	130 (1)	176
Hill River Country Estates	Hill River Water Works	9,000	23 (1)	18
Westwood Oaks MHP,	AquaSource/Ingram WSC	480,000	1,030 (6)	1,643
Blue Ridge-Lafayette	AquaSource/Westwood Oaks*	21,000	130 (1)	130
Westwood Park Subdivision	Westwood Water System	35,000	61 (2)	80
*Effective 10/2001, AquaSource/Westwood Oaks system is connected to and operated by AquaSource/Ingram WSC; italicized figures
provide 2001 data for stand-alone Westwood Oaks system for reference.
Page 42 MAY 2002
Roads are the most expensive improvements that the County itself might make.
The County will consider forming one or more Road Districts to raise funds for
road building in colonia areas according to the relative need reported in this
study and on each colonia area map. Appendix C also indicates the total
approximate cost of the proposed road improvements. .
Drainage is adequate in most colonia areas mainly due to roadside ditches and
natural creeks. The steep terrain in many parts of Kerr County contributes to
rapid drainage, though erosion of streets is a major problem as a result.
The most significant drainage problems in colonia areas occur in Center Point.
The Guadalupe River and Verde Creek floodplains cut across the Center Point's
flat site from east to west. Approximately 30 homes sit within the Guadalupe's
100-year flood hazard zone; another 15 homes lie within Verde Creek's flood
hazard zone just south of the Center Point colonia area. The most flood•prone
area lies in the triangle formed by SH 27, FM 480, and the Guadalupe just
southeast of the two roads' intersection where Steel Creek enters the river.
Approximately 40 of Westwood Oaks MHP's 130 residences appear to lie within
the 100-year flood hazard area of Nichols Creek, asouthward-flowing intermittent
tributary of the Guadalupe River. No flood damage has been reported from this
area in recent years.
Despite the presence of flood hazard zones in several colonia areas, no required
major drainage infrastructure work was identified. Most drainage problems were
minor and would be corrected with culvert replacement and cleaning, ditch
dredging and cleaning, and road paving.
KERR COUNTY, TEXAS Page 43
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
COLONIA AREA RA 1KN -$taS AND PRIG SCOR~YELS
APPENDIX A:
nt 3 g 1
o Colonic Area 3 q 0
a s B y
4Eastern tterrviUe South 2 3
1 2 g ~
e Lafayette , 2 3
q 7 Blue Ridg -
3 q Center Point
e
' ~, ~.
? ~~1~=~`=4"'`I ' ~` " and Prioritiaation
a es 22.24 for explanation of Ranking
See P B
3
:i
+~'r TEXAS
KERR COUNTY
GOMPREHENSIYE COlON1A STUDY & PLA
APPENDIX B
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS SCHEDULE
		f/sro/ Yeor	
Cobnia Area (PCl7	Scheduled CIP	2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 201 T	Potential Funding Sources
Eastern Kerrville South (2)	Weed Drive Uees	SS~O,OIi	TCDP Colonic fund, UGRA
	E. Leydyo0iy	5237,509	T(DP CD Fund, UGRA
	W:le-elYe>3ey	5119;0M	TCDP Colonio Fund, UGRA
	Readnre	5231 0	TCDP CD Fund, UGRA
enter Point/Hill River (2)	System	53,593,600	USDA Rural Development, UGRA
	Connections	$650,000	TCDP (olonia Fund (1.25 program yrs), UGRA
			TCPD Colonio Fund (0.15 program years)
lue Rid a-lafa ette (4)	lines/Connections	5399,000	USDA Rural Develo merd, UGRA
astern Kerrville South (1)	D~ttt~JY0111yktdp	SS45,~	TCDP Colonio Fund, UGRA
	iiertro ~eAdtjiMlP		TCDP (olonia Fund, UGRA
	T jl~dHp	5237,SA0 832	TCDP (D Fund (1.25 program years), UGRA
oodcreek (1)	(om late S stem	51,195,000	TCDP (olonia Fund (2.5 rc rom ears
Westwood Oaks MHP (1)	Lines~Connections	5865,000	USDA Rural Development, UGRA
Westwood Park 3)	lines Connections	5760,000	TCDP (olonia Fund (1.5 pro ram ears)
TCDP =Texas Community Development Program (CD = (ommuniry Development Fund);iWDR =Texas Water Development Board; UGRA =Upper Guadalupe River Authority.
Streets where capital improvements are scheduled are indicated on each colonic area profile 6y UPPERCASE text.
~~ Kerrville South Wastewater Service Area
Center Point Wastewater Service Area
Woodcreek Wastewater Service Area
In ram Area Wastewater Service Area
Westwood Park Wastewater Service Area
Center Point Water Service Area
KERR COUNTY, TEXAS Page 45
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
APPENDIX B
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS SCHEDULE
(continued)
Planned Grant Application Timeline-Future Grants Only
Grant amounts will vary from capital budgets because they include management costs, while the
capital budgets include only acquisition, construction, and engineering costs.
Program	Program
Year	Funds
Available	Capital Project	Amount ($)
TCDP-Col	2002	2003	Kerrville South (KS)-W Loyal Valley Sewer	$500,000
TCDP-CD	2003!04	2004	KS-Ranchero Sewer	$250,000
TCDP•Col	2003	2004	KS-Donna/Valley Verde Sewer	$500,000
USDA•RD	N/A	2004-06	Center Point (CP)/Hill River Sewer System	$2,848,000
TCDP-Col	2004	2005	KS-Tierra Grande/MHP Sewer	$500,000
TCDP-Col	2005	2006	Center Point/Hill River Sewer Conns. 1	$500,000
TCDP-CD
;.

'~G~i~~i	2005/06


bra	2006

,..
X77	KS•Twombly/Michon R-M) Sewer


±` ~nn~, ~ D~ 1~la~r i{;tr~+r~s......	$250,000


. ~I?p~~t3D'
TCDP-Col	2007	2008	Woodcreek Sewer 1	$500,000
TCDP-CD	2007/08	2008	Woodcreek Sewer 2/T•M Sewer 2	$250,000
TCDP-Col	2008	2009	Woodcreek Sewer 3	$500,000
USDA RD	N/A	2009.11	Westwood Oak/Blue Ridge-Lafayette Sewer	$1,264,000
TCDP-Col	2009	2010	Westwood Park Sewer 1	$500,000
TCDP-Col	2010	2011	Westwood Park Sewer 2 /other project	$500,000
TOTAL	$9,362,000
USDA-RD = U.S. Department of Agriculture-Rural Development
TCDP =Texas Community Development Program
CD =Community Development Fund
Col = Colonia Fund
Kerrville South Wastewater Service Area Center Point Water Service Area
Center Point Wastewater Service Area
Woodcreek Wastewater Service Area
In ram Area Wastewater Service Area Multi le Project Area Grant
Westwood Park Sewer
KERR COUNTY, TEXAS Page 46
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
APPENDIX C
STREET SEGMENTS SUGGESTED FOR REPAIR

PCi AREA	
STREET	LINEAR
FEET	-
ESTIMATED COST
Center Point	Mostly	3,092	$15,151
	Avenue D	1,044	53,654
	3`" Street	1,082	$3,246
	4"' Street	541	51,894
	North	850	83,400
	Church	1,933	$6,766
	Swayze	713	$2,106
	Kelly	3,711	811,133
	Park	2,474	$6,589
	Cypress	348	$2,262
	Depot	425	51,063
	11 Lane	1,178	$6,223
TOTAL			$64,085
Western Kemille South	White Oak	3,401	$9,523
	Loudiar	464	$2,320
	Terra Grande	1,275	$3,570
	Cedar Ridge MNP	948	54,917
	Ranchero MNP	2,860	$10,010
	Shadow Ridge	812	$2,842
	Wild Cherry	1,044	$2,923
	N Valley Verde	3,208	$2,055
	Ridge Crest	2,203	$11,566
	Monroe	2,628	$13,140
	Mountain	5,914	$29,510
TOTAL			$92,496
KERR COUNTY, TEXAS Page 47
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
APPENDIX C
STREET SEGMENTS SUGGESTED FOR REPAIR (cont'd.)
		LINEAR	
PCT AREA	STREET	FEET	ESTIMATED COST
Woodcreek	Pal	1,739	$4,869
	Gibson	812	$3,045
	Rhonda	618	52,163
	Stringer	850	$2,915
	Seville	580	51,450
	Kings Court	502	$1,406
	Demarc	734	$2,055
	Aaron	211	$401
	Valencia	173	E1,933
	Mt Top	618	$2,318
	Wood Creek	3,285	$12,319
	Wendy	651	$2,464
TOTAL			$37,402
Westwood Oaks MHP	Skyview	4,329	$12,465
	Acorn	1,256	$6,280
	Fox Trail	850	$4,250
TOTAL			$22,995
Hill River Country Estates	Hackberry	1,150	$1,245
	Live Oak	1,768	$11,138
	Walnut	1,633	S10,288
	Pecan	1,536	$9,611
	Cypress	2,038	$12,839
	Skyline Drive	1,382	$8,707
	Hackberry	1,150	$7,245
	Live Oak	1,168	$11,138
TOTAL			$59,894
Blue Ridge-Lafayette	Park Ploce	502	$2,510
	Private Road 1	1,063	$5,953
	Private Road 2	1,082	$6,059
	Private Road 3	1,140	$6,384
	Private Road 4	1,005	$5,628
	VogesLane	696	$3,898
TOTAL			$30,432
KERB COUNTY, TEXAS Page 48
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
APPENDIX D
PRIVATE, STATE AND FEDERAL FUNDING SOURCES
Office of Rural Community Affairs (Texas Community Development Program)
Grants made to cities and counties for water, sewer, streets, drainage, and other capital
improvements that principally benefit low•to•moderate income residents. Kerr County is
eligible for the Alamo Area's regionally-competitive Community Development Fund
$250,000 grants; the border-region competitive Colonia Fund for $500,000 grants; and
the statewide Small Towns Environment Program (STEP) $300,000 grants, which require
volunteer labor to yield significant cost savings. Matching funds for Community
Development and Colonia grants have typically come from rural utility districts.
Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs
Grants are made to cities, counties, and non-profit entities for single and multifamily
housing construction, rehabilitation and reconstruction, rental assistance, first-time
homebuyer down payment and closing cost assistance, and low interest home financing.
For example, the nearby City of Bandera and Medina County have used the Texas HOME
Program (HUD funds) to rehabilitate and reconstruct dozens of homes. HOME requires
voluntary relocation of the homeowner for 20.30 days during the construction period.
Texas Water Development Board
State Revolving Loan Fund makes loans available to expand water and sewer systems in
rural areas. Typically utility districts and cities are the applicants for assistance. The
county currently does not meet the distress criteria for the TWDB's Economically
Distressed Areas Program (EDAP).
United States Department of Agriculture Rural Development
This agency, formerly called the Farmers Home Administration (FmHA), typically offers
grant/loan combinations to make improvements in rural communities through its Rural
Utility Service. Many non-profit water corporations began using loans from USDA Rural
Development. Other RD funds are also used for housing, health clinics, and utility
services.
US Department of Commerce Economic Development Administration
Grants are made to stimulate job creation or retention in economically depressed areas.
Some parts of Kerr County could be eligible for these funds, but most Colonia areas do not
qualify since job creation and retention is usually a key requirement.
Federal National Mortgage Agency (Fannie Mae)
This private corporation, chartered by the federal government, provides housing assistance
to lower income residents. Nearly all resources are dedicated toward increasing
homeownership opportunities.
KERR COUNTY, TEXAS Page 49
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN
APPENDIX E
AREA PROFILES
Each of the eight (8) colonic areas identified in Kerr County have atwo- or three-
page profile. When a particular developed area or subdivision abutted another
developed area or subdivision, the areas were combined into a single colonic area.
Kerrville South is geographically divided into two sections, the eastern and western,
by a wealthier non-colonic area between the streets Valley View and Encino.
Each area was given a number, beginning in the northeast in Precinct 1 and
moving counterclockwise in the same direction as the county precinct numbers.
KERR COUNTY, TEXAS Page 50
COMPREHENSIVE COLONIA STUDY & PLAN