Item 6E Memo CITY OF
SOUTH LAKE Item 6E
MEMORANDUM
(November 17, 2015)
To: Shana Yelverton, City Manager
From: Robert H. Price, P.E., Director of Public Works
Subject: Ordinance No. 1131, 2nd Reading, Adopt ordinance to abandon
a permanent drainage easement in the Zelda Office
development
Action
Requested: Ordinance No. 1131, 2nd Reading, Adopt ordinance to abandon a
permanent drainage easement as recorded in instrument
D213130362 of the Deed Records of Tarrant County, Texas,
situated in the O.W. Knight Survey, Abstract No. 899, in the City of
Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas and being more particularly
described as the Zelda Office development. (1St Reading approved
on November 3, 2015.)
Background
Information: City staff is recommending abandonment of a drainage easement
that was originally dedicated to the city to provide for a temporary
detention basin during the construction of the first building in the
Zelda Office development. The easement was recorded in the
County records when it was intended to be a temporary measure
during the development of Phase I of the development.
Zena Rucker, the developer of the Zelda Office development has
requested the abandonment of a permanent drainage easement
that has been proven to be not necessary. The permanent
drainage easement to be abandoned is on property described as a
tract of land deeded to William R. & Zena Rucker as recorded in
Instrument Volume 12069, Page 1671 of Deed Records of Tarrant
County, Texas. The applicant has provided a signed and sealed
letter by a licensed Professional Engineer in the State of Texas
which provides the justification for this development to forego the
detention requirement. This drainage easement must be
abandoned since the applicant currently has a second building
under construction over the drainage easement. This will also
facilitate future property transactions.
Item 6E
Financial
Considerations: The filing fee for recording the Quitclaim Deed in Tarrant County
records will be the only cost associated with the abandonment of
the easement.
Strategic Link: The easement abandonment links to the City's strategy map
relative to Corporate Focus Area of Quality Development.
Citizen Input/
Board Review: None
Legal
Review: The ordinance has been reviewed by the City Attorney's office.
Alternatives: The City Council may approve Ordinance No. 1131, amend or deny
it.
Staff
Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of Ordinance No. 1131, 2nd Reading,
Adopt ordinance to abandon a permanent drainage easement as
recorded in instrument D213130362 of the Deed Records of
Tarrant County, Texas, situated in the O.W. Knight Survey,
Abstract No. 899, in the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas
and being more particularly described as the Zelda Office
development. (1St Reading approved on November 3, 2015.)
Supporting
Documents: Location Map
Engineers Letter
Document Instrument No. D213130362
Ordinance No. 1131
Ordinance No. 1131 Quitclaim Deed
Staff
Contact: Robert H. Price, P.E., Public Works Director
Alejandra Ayala, P.E., Civil Engineer
ndL- IL
N
,GWA
iTi:S H EAD CST
•;
Co
IP
T
E SOUTH�LAKE-BL-V-D
_ s .T OW
l r 1 lip
It 1
A _
i,
Zelda Office '
Development
47
A.
01-0. r r
n --c
®D ii INC. IVIL ENGINEERING
i '.0 TT 1`.} NC. TEXAS FIRM No,F-3116
August 12, 2014
Ms. Alex Ayala, P.E.
City of Southlake
1400 Main Street
Southlake, Texas 76092
Re: Rucker Commercial on Southlake Blvd.
Detention Requirement
Dear Ms. Ayala:
Thank you for meeting with me on Friday, July 251' regarding the detention requirement for the
above referenced property. The letter is a follow up to that meeting and a request for
confirmation that detention for the 3-acre commercial tract owned by Ms. Rucker will not need
detention due to its location in the watershed and current drainage policy as reflected in the
Integrated Storm Water Management System manual published by the North Central Texas
Council of Governments, Section 2.1.9, "Downstream Hydrologic Assessment" on page 2.1-47
thru 2.1-49. (copy attached)
Attached is a drainage area map showing the drainage area contributing to the flow in the
tributary adjacent to Ms. Rucker's property. The tributary crosses under FM 1709 a few hundred
feet west of Ms. Rucker's 3-acre parcel and flows in a south by southeast direction affecting the
subject tract near its southerly end. According to available data and as shown on the attached
drainage area map, the overall drainage area is 236.2 acres to the point that the subject tract
drains into it. Since the subject tract is only a total of 3 acres in size, it is much, much less than
the 10% threshold of the 10 percent rule" as defined by NCTCOG's iSWM (also attached). It's
actual contribution is 1.27% of the watershed and therefore will have no significant impact on the
flow of the creek whether detention is provided or not.
Therefore, I request that the detention requirement be waived for the subject 3 acre commercial
tract owned by Ms. Rucker.
We do recognize that a more detailed study will be required to ascertain the limits of flow of the
100-year (1%) storm in the tributary near the southern portion of the property as further
commercial improvements are constructed to ensure that the buildings are not in the floodplain.
This is required irrespective of the detention requirement.
Please call if you have any questions and thank you for your assistance.
DF
Sincerely, r���,t 7 �ti It
DeOtte, Inc.
RICHARD W, ..
C (Nr �1� 74232
Richard W. DeOtte, P.E., CFM SY1�.S� ISYE4E '�
PHONE(817)337-8899 420 JOl INSON ROAD;SUITE 303-KELLER,TEXAs 76248 FAx(817)337-5133
%vmv.DE0T E.COM
'1
77
` , 4 { 1-0OCL
,
C 4
A' $$
s
4--
January 2006 2.1.9 Downstream Hydrologic Assessment
2.1 .9 Downstream Hydrologic Assessment
The purpose of the Streambank Protection and Flood Control criteria is to protect downstream properties
from flood and erosion impacts due to upstream development. Some Local Criteria require the designer
to control peak flow at the outlet of a site such that post-development peak discharge equals pre-
development peak discharge. It has been shown that in certain cases this does not always provide
effective water quantity control downstream from the site and may actually exacerbate flooding problems
downstream. The reasons for this have to do with (1) the timing of the flow peaks, and (2) the total
increase in volume of runoff.
Due to a site's location within a watershed, there may be very little reason for requiring flood control from
a particular site. In certain circumstances where detention is in place or a master drainage plan has been
adopted, a development may receive or plan to receive less that ultimate developed flow conditions from
upstream. This might be considered in the detention needed and its influence on the downstream
assessment. Any consideration in such an event would be with the approval of the local authority. This
section outlines a suggested procedure for determining the impacts of post-development storm water
peak flows and volumes that a community may require as part of a developer's storm water management
site plan.
2.1.9.1 Reasons for Downstream Problems
Flow Timing
If water quantity control (detention) structures are indiscriminately placed in a watershed and changes to
the flow timing are not considered, the structural control may actually increase the peak discharge
downstream. The reason for this may be seen in Figure 2.1.9-1. The peak flow from the site is reduced
appropriately, but the timing of the flow is such that the combined detained peak flow (the larger dashed
triangle)is actually higher than if no detention were required.
1
Flow
`••� } Peak flow increase
Total flow ++, Total flow with detention
• •i
PIS
development flow r•.+
' �Detalned flow
Time
Figure 2.1.94 Detention Timing Example
In this case, the shifting of flows to a later time brought about by the detention pond actually makes the
downstream flooding worse than if the post-development flows were not detained. This is most likely to
happen if detention is placed on tributaries towards the bottom of the watershed, holding back peak flows
and adding them as the peak from the upper reaches of the watershed arrives.
Increased Volume
i
ISWM"`'Design Manual for Slte Development 2.1-47
2.1.9 Downstream Hydrologic Assessment January 2006
An important impact of new development is an increase in the total runoff volume of flow. Thus, even if
the peak flow is effectively attenuated, the longer duration of higher flows due to the increased volume
may combine with downstream tributaries to increase the downstream peak flows.
Figure 2.1.9-2 illustrates this concept. The figure shows the pre- and post-development hydrographs
from a development site (Tributary 1). The post-development runoff hydrograph meets the flood
protection criteria (i.e., the post-development peak flow is equal to the pre-development peak flow at the
outlet from the site). However, the post-development combined flow at the first downstream tributary
(Tributary 2) is higher than pre-development combined flow. This is because the increased volume and
timing of runoff from the developed site increases the combined flow and flooding downstream. In this
case, the detention volume would have to have been increased to account for the downstream timing of
the combined hydrographs to mitigate the impact of the increased runoff volume.
Combined flow Peak flow Increase Combined flow
...................... ...........................-.___
Tributary 1 Tributary 2 Tributary 1 Tributary 2
Pre-development Post-development
Detained Flow
Before Development After Development
Figure 2.1.9-2 Effect of Increased Post-Development Runoff
Volume with Detention on a Downstream Hydrograph
2.1.9.2 Methods for Downstream Evaluation
The downstream assessment is a tool by which the impacts of development on storm water peak flows
and velocities are evaluated downstream. The assessment extends from an outfall of a development to a
point downstream,determined by one of two methods:
• Zone of Influence — Point downstream where the discharge from a proposed development no
longer has a significant impact upon the receiving stream or storm drainage system
• Adequate Outfall—Location of acceptable outfall that does not create adverse flooding or erosion
conditions downstream
These methods recognize the fact that a structural control providing detention has a "zone of influence"
downstream where its effectiveness can be felt. Beyond this zone of influence the storm water effects of
a structural control become relatively small and insignificant compared to the runoff from the total
drainage area at that point. Based on studies and master planning results for a large number of sites, a
general rule of thumb is that the zone of influence can be considered to be the point where the drainage
area controlled by the detention or storage facility comprises 10% of the total drainage area. This is
known as the 10% Rule. As an example, if a structural control drains 10 acres, the zone of influence
ends at the point where the total drainage area is 100 acres or greater.
Typical steps in a downstream assessment include:
2.1-48 ISWMTM Design Manual for Site Development
e
January 2004 2.1.9 Downstream HydroloSle Assessment
1. Determine the outfall location of the site and the pre-and post-development site conditions.
2. Using a topographic map determine a preliminary lower limit of the zone of influence (approximately
10% point).
3. Using a hydrologic model determine the pre-development peak flows and velocities at each junction
beginning at the development outfall and ending at the next junction beyond the 10% point.
Undeveloped off-site areas are modeled as "full build-out" for both the pre- and post-development
analyses. The discharges and velocities are evaluated for three storms:
"Streambank Protection"storm,either the 1-or 2-year,24-hour event
"Conveyance"storm of either the 5-, 10-,or 25-year,24-hour event
100-year,24-hour storm event
4. Change the land use on the site to post-development conditions and rerun the model.
5. Compare the pre- and post-development peak discharges and velocities at the downstream and of
the model. If the post-developed flows are higher than the pre-developed flows for the same
frequency event, or the post-developed velocities are higher than the allowable velocity of the
downstream receiving system, extend the model downstream: Repeat steps 3 and 4 until the post-
development flows are less than the pre-developed flows, and the post-developed velocities are
below the allowable velocity. Allowable velocities are given in Table 4.4-3 in Chapter 4 of this
manual.
6. If shown that no peak flow increases occur downstream, and post-developed velocities are allowable,
then the control of the flood protection volume (Qr) can be waived by the local authority. The
developer saves the cost of sizing a detention basin for flood control. In this case the downstream
assessment saved the construction of an unnecessary structural control facility that would have been
detrimental to the watershed flooding problems. In some communities this situation may result in a
fee being paid to the local government in lieu of detention. That fee would go toward alleviating
downstream flooding or making channel or other conveyance improvements.
7. If peak discharges are increased due to development, or if downstream velocities are erosive, one of
the following options are required.
• Document that existing downstream conveyance is adequate to convey post-developed storm
water discharges(Option 1 for Streambank Protection and Flood Control)
• Work with the local government to reduce the flow elevation and/or velocity through channel or
flow conveyance structure improvements downstream. (Option 2 for Streambank Protection and
Flood Control)
• Design an on-site structural control facility such that the post-development flows do not increase
the peak flows, and the velocities are not erosive, at the outlet and the determined junction
locations.
Even if the results of the downstream assessment indicate that no downstream flood or erosion protection
is required,the water quality steps of the integrated Design Approach will still need to be addressed.
2.1.9.3 Example Problem
Figure 2.1.9-3 illustrates the concept of the ten-percent rule for two sites in a watershed.
Discussion
Site A is a development of 10 acres, all draining to a wet Extended Detention (ED) storm water pond.
The flood portions of the design are going to incorporate the ten-percent rule. Looking downstream at
each tributary in tum, it is determined that the analysis should end at the tributary marked"80 acres." The
100-acre(10%)point is in between the 80-acre and 120-acre tributary junction points.
ISWM"Design Manual for SW Development 2.1.49
_ -.-�3� =r¢�.-.-ye.4 •j.-i-...-eve+e-.w!.cw.av5ve:nw'x-uc�-<svrnm�•n:nstxxua^.c..
EXHIBIT B
METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION
0.2534 ACRES (11,040 SQUARE FEET)DRAINAGE EASEMENT
2.730 ACRES IN THE O.W.KNIGHT SURVEY,A-899
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE,TARRANT COUNTY,TEXAS
All that certain 0.2534 acres (11,040 square feet) of land, which is a portion of the 2.950 acres of land
described in the deed to William R. and Zena Rucker recorded in Volume 12069,Page 1671 in the Deed
Records of Tarrant County, Texas (D.R.T.C.T.), in the O.W. Knight Survey, A-899, in the City of
Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas and more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows: (all
bearings shown hereon are based on Texas State Plane Coordinate System,North Central Zone);
COMENCING at a 3/4" iron rod found for the southeast corner of said 2.730 acres, common to the
southwest corner of the deed described to Billy W. Hayes, recorded in Volume 6551, Page 938, in the
D.R.T.C.T.,THENCE along the common lot line of said 2.730 acres and deed to Billy W. Hayes North
010 14' 45" West—476.99' to the POINT OF BEGINNING and southeast corner of the herein described
easement;
THENCE South 88°45' 15"West— 120.00' to the southwest corner of the herein described easement;
THENCE North 01° 14' 45"West—92.00' to the northwest corner of the herein described easement;
THENCE North 88° 45' 15" East— 120.00' to a 1/2" iron rod with a cap stamped "SPRY" found in the
said common lot line of said 2.730 acres and deed to Billy W. Hayes, for the northeast corner of the
herein described easement;
THENCE along the common lot line of said 2.730 acres and deed to Billy W. Hayes South 010 14' 45"
East—92.00' to the POINT OF BEGINING and containing 0.2534 acres(11,040 square feet)of land.
THIS METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION IS ISSUED IN CONJUNCTION WITH
THE SURVEY PREPARED BY SPRY SURVEYORS, HEREBY REFERENCED AS
EXHIBIT A. THIS METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION IS EXHIBIT B.
I I IEXHIBIT B1
14' COMMON ACCESS ESMT.
ICAB. A, SLIDE 4650, P.R.T.C.T.
I I
5' U.E.. CAB. A, I I
SLIDE 4650, P.R.T.C.T. 12' UTILITY & ACCESS ESMT
II VOL 13378,PG 164, D.R.T.C.T.
12' UTILITY & ACCESS ESMT
I I I VOL 13279,PG 557, D.R.T.C.T.
II I
II I
I I I SOUTH LINE OF PROPOSED
LOT 1, BLOCK A, RUCKER ADDITION
-j I I N 88 45'15" E 120.00' 10 1/2" IRF
v 0 w/CAP "SPRY"
0I I Li — f,.
goy I I {+ p
Q) Q
Ou
w 0) o I /DRAINAGE EASEMENT L,, Q .
0, v 00 I I - 0.2534 ACRES = 0 w
F,-- C° I i I 11,040 SQ. FT. �' 0 0
00o � � wtr) �
� o�d �o , , o J � � o
-� � � II i /� U-)
azQ o0
Y I I I �'
LL) P ..O.B.
o � v I I I S 88-4575- IN 120.00' z
II I o
I I I 2.730 ACRES
REMAINDER OF 2.95 ACRES 4'
cn
E I ( I WILLIAM R. & ZENA RUCKER
VOL. 12069, PG. 1671
I I D.R.T.C.T. V
II
I P.O.C.
0
I I ( 3/4" IRF
Y
This survey Is Issued in con)unctlon with the
a I I 1 Mates and Bounds Description by Spry
Surveyyarraa hreb referenced as Exhibit B2.
m This Survey is Exhibit 81.
N
ry11,040 SQUARE FOOT
x,
11l OF TF 1 certify that this survey was made on the DRAINAGE EASEMENT
°°
°°°°°
pO °prepresents Oo round, that this plat correctly repts the
p oo!G�S rERF o9�1 facts found at the time of survey. 2.730 ACRES, REMAINDER OF
2.95 ACRES WILLIAM R. & ZENA RUCKER
0 000100o0e00oo0eo000o0ooa000
DAVID CARLTON LEWIS O.W. KNIGHT SURVEY, aesTRacT ass
000000000000000000000000 poo0 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS
o "0.0 5647 e' ISSUE DATE: 04/17/2013 SCALE i'= 40' PROJECT NO.: 034-053-50
�F�°°50
U�v SPRYSURVEYORS
` .NINE 17, 2012 � 8241 Mid—Cities Blvd., Suite 102 •North Richland Hills, TX 76182
CERTIFICATE DATE DAVID CARLTON LEWIS, R.P.LS. N0. 5647 Ph 817.896.6150• Fax 817284.8408• www.sprysurveyors.com
Gi
,
MARY LOUISE GARCIA . "•`•-..
COUNTY CLERK
;c
100 West Weatherford Fort Worth, TX 76196-0401
`"«•*«"' PHONE (817) 884-1195
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
1400 MAIN ST STE 310
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092
Submitter: CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
DO NOT DESTROY
WARNING - THIS IS PART OF THE OFFICIAL RECORD.
Filed For Registration: 5/22/2013 4:35 PM
Instrument#: D213130362
E 6 PGS $32.00
By:
D213130362
ANY PROVISION WHICH RESTRICTS THE SALE, RENTAL OR USE OF THE DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY
BECAUSE OF COLOR OR RACE IS INVALID AND UNENFORCEABLE UNDER FEDERAL LAW.
Ordinance No. 1131
ORDINANCE NO. 1131
AN ORDINANCE VACATING AND ABANDONING A
DRAINAGE EASEMENT PREVIOUSLY GRANTED TO THE
CITY BY ZENA RUCKER, WHICH EASEMENT IS FILED AS
INSTRUMENT NO. D213130362 AND RECORDED IN THE
DEED RECORDS OF TARRANT; DECLARING THAT SUCH
EASEMENT IS UNNECESSARY FOR USE BY THE PUBLIC;
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A QUITCLAIM
DEED RELEASING AND ASSIGNING THIS EASEMENT TO
THE OWNERS OF THE FEE ESTATE; PROVIDING A
SEVERABILTY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Southlake, Texas ("the City") is a home rule city acting
under its power adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas
Constitution and Chapter 9 of the Local Government Code; and
WHEREAS, on or about May 22, 2013, Zena Rucker,granted a permanent drainage
easement ("the easement'') to the City, which easement is filed of record as Instrument No.
D213130362 and recorded in the Deed Records Of Tarrant County, Texas; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, after careful study and
consideration, has determined that a portion of the easement is not being used by, nor
useful or convenient to the public in general, and that the public would be better served and
benefited by its vacation and abandonment; and
WHEREAS, in order to remove any question as to the continued interest in
the easement, the City desires to execute a quitclaim deed releasing and assigning
all title and control in said easement to the owners of the fee estate on which the easement
is located.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE,TEXAS:
SECTION 1
The City Council finds that a portion of the permanent drainage easement
granted to the City on or about May 22, 2013 by Zena Rucker, which easement is
filed of record as Instrument No. D213130362 and recorded at The Deed Records of Tarrant
County, Texas, and which is described in the attached Exhibit B and shown on the attached
Exhibit BI, is not being used by, nor useful or convenient to the public in general and that
the public would be better served and benefited by the vacation and abandonment of the
easement.
I
Ordinance No. 1131
SECTION 2
The Mayor of the City of Southlake, Texas, is hereby authorized and empowered
to execute a quitclaim deed to the above-described easement to the current owner of the
fee estate on which the easement is located, specifically, Zena Rucker.
SECTION 3
After the quitclaim deed is executed, the City Secretary is authorized and instructed
to file it in the deed records of Tarrant County, Texas.
SECTION 4
It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the phrases, clauses,
sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance are severable, and if any phrase,
clause, sentence, paragraph or section of this ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional
by the valid judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such
unconstitutionality shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences,
paragraphs and sections of this ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by the
City Council without the incorporation in this ordinance of any such unconstitutional
phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section.
SECTION 5
This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and its passage, and it so
ordained.
PASSED AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING ON THIS 3RD DAY OF
NOVEMBER,2015.
THE HONORABLE LAURA HILL,MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY SECRETARY
2
Ordinance No. 1131
PASSED AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING ON THIS 17 TH DAY OF
NOVEMBER,2015.
THE HONORABLE LAURA HILL,MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY SECRETARY
EFFECTIVE:
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
CITY ATTORNEY
3
EXHIBIT B
METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION
0.2534 ACRES (11,040 SQUARE FEET)DRAINAGE EASEMENT
2.730 ACRES IN THE O.W.KNIGHT SURVEY,A-899
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE,TARRANT COUNTY,TEXAS
All that certain 0.2534 acres (11,040 square feet) of land, which is a portion of the 2.950 acres of land
described in the deed to William R. and Zena Rucker recorded in Volume 12069,Page 1671 in the Deed
Records of Tarrant County, Texas (D.R.T.C.T.), in the O.W. Knight Survey, A-899, in the City of
Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas and more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows: (all
bearings shown hereon are based on Texas State Plane Coordinate System,North Central Zone);
COMENCING at a 3/4" iron rod found for the southeast corner of said 2.730 acres, common to the
southwest corner of the deed described to Billy W. Hayes, recorded in Volume 6551, Page 938, in the
D.R.T.C.T.,THENCE along the common lot line of said 2.730 acres and deed to Billy W. Hayes North
010 14' 45" West—476.99' to the POINT OF BEGINNING and southeast corner of the herein described
easement;
THENCE South 88°45' 15"West— 120.00' to the southwest corner of the herein described easement;
THENCE North 01° 14' 45"West—92.00' to the northwest corner of the herein described easement;
THENCE North 88° 45' 15" East— 120.00' to a 1/2" iron rod with a cap stamped "SPRY" found in the
said common lot line of said 2.730 acres and deed to Billy W. Hayes, for the northeast corner of the
herein described easement;
THENCE along the common lot line of said 2.730 acres and deed to Billy W. Hayes South 010 14' 45"
East—92.00' to the POINT OF BEGINING and containing 0.2534 acres(11,040 square feet)of land.
THIS METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION IS ISSUED IN CONJUNCTION WITH
THE SURVEY PREPARED BY SPRY SURVEYORS, HEREBY REFERENCED AS
EXHIBIT A. THIS METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION IS EXHIBIT B.
I I IEXHIBIT B1
14' COMMON ACCESS ESMT.
ICAB. A, SLIDE 4650, P.R.T.C.T.
I I
5' U.E.. CAB. A, I I
SLIDE 4650, P.R.T.C.T. 12' UTILITY & ACCESS ESMT
II VOL 13378,PG 164, D.R.T.C.T.
12' UTILITY & ACCESS ESMT
I I I VOL 13279,PG 557, D.R.T.C.T.
II I
II I
I I I SOUTH LINE OF PROPOSED
LOT 1, BLOCK A, RUCKER ADDITION
-j I I N 88 45'15" E 120.00' 10 1/2" IRF
v 0 w/CAP "SPRY"
0I I Li — f,.
goy I I {+ p
Q) Q
Ou
w 0) o I /DRAINAGE EASEMENT L,, Q .
0, v 00 I I - 0.2534 ACRES = 0 w
F,-- C° I i I 11,040 SQ. FT. �' 0 0
00o � � wtr) �
� o�d �o , , o J � � o
-� � � II i /� U-)
azQ o0
Y I I I �'
LL) P ..O.B.
o � v I I I S 88-4575- IN 120.00' z
II I o
I I I 2.730 ACRES
REMAINDER OF 2.95 ACRES 4'
cn
E I ( I WILLIAM R. & ZENA RUCKER
VOL. 12069, PG. 1671
I I D.R.T.C.T. V
II
I P.O.C.
0
I I ( 3/4" IRF
Y
This survey Is Issued in con)unctlon with the
a I I 1 Mates and Bounds Description by Spry
Surveyyarraa hreb referenced as Exhibit B2.
m This Survey is Exhibit 81.
N
ry11,040 SQUARE FOOT
x,
11l OF TF 1 certify that this survey was made on the DRAINAGE EASEMENT
°°
°°°°°
pO °prepresents Oo round, that this plat correctly repts the
p oo!G�S rERF o9�1 facts found at the time of survey. 2.730 ACRES, REMAINDER OF
2.95 ACRES WILLIAM R. & ZENA RUCKER
0 000100o0e00oo0eo000o0ooa000
DAVID CARLTON LEWIS O.W. KNIGHT SURVEY, aesTRacT ass
000000000000000000000000 poo0 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS
o "0.0 5647 e' ISSUE DATE: 04/17/2013 SCALE i'= 40' PROJECT NO.: 034-053-50
�F�°°50
U�v SPRYSURVEYORS
` .NINE 17, 2012 � 8241 Mid—Cities Blvd., Suite 102 •North Richland Hills, TX 76182
CERTIFICATE DATE DAVID CARLTON LEWIS, R.P.LS. N0. 5647 Ph 817.896.6150• Fax 817284.8408• www.sprysurveyors.com
Gi
NOTICE OF CONFIDENTIALITY RIGHTS: IF YOU ARE A NATURAL PERSON,
YOU MAY REMOVE OR STRIKE ANY OR ALL OF THE FOLLOWING
INFORMATION FROM ANY INSTRUMENT THAT TRANSFERS AN INTEREST IN
REAL PROPERTY BEFORE IT IS FILED FOR RECORD IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS:
YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER OR YOUR DRIVER'S LICENSE NUMBER.
QUITCLAIM DEED
STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF TARRANT
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
That the City Council of the City of Southlake, County of Tarrant, State of Texas, after
careful study and consideration, has determined that a portion of an existing permanent drainage
easement granted to the City by Zena Rucker, filed with the County Clerk of Tarrant County,
Texas as Document No. D213130362, and recorded in the deed records of Tarrant County,Texas, is
not being used by, nor useful or convenient to the public in general, and therefore constitutes a
public charge without a corresponding public benefit, and the public would be better served and
benefited by its vacation and abandonment.
Therefore, for and in consideration of the above findings and for other good and valuable
consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the City of
Southlake, Grantor, does hereby assign and convey and forever quitclaim unto the current owner
of the fee estate on which such easement is located, specifically, Zena Rucker, Grantee, and its
successors or assigns, all of the City's right title, and interest, if any, in and to the real property
described in the attached Exhibit B and shown on the attached Exhibit B 1.
In accordance with governing law, the undersigned has been authorized to execute this
conveyance by Ordinance No. 1131, passed by the City Council of the City of Southlake on
, a copy of which ordinance is attached hereto as Exhibit C and
incorporated herein by reference.
This deed shall convey any right, title and interest, if any, owned by Grantor in and to the
above described property unto the said Grantee, so that Grantee, and its heirs and assigns, shall
have and hold such property conveyed, if any, forever, and so that neither Grantor nor Grantor's
successors or assigns shall have, claim or demand any right or title to the aforesaid property,
premises or appurtenances or any part thereof.
Executed this the day of , 2015.
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, Grantor
By:
The Honorable Laura Hill,Mayor
ATTEST:
Lori Payne, City Secretary
STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF TARRANT
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared Laura Hill,
Mayor of the City of Southlake, known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the
foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the same for the purposes and
consideration therein expressed.
GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE this day of
2015.
Notary Public in and for the State of Texas
My Commission expires:
After filing please return to:
City Secretary
City of Southlake
1400 Main Street
Southlake, Texas 76092