Item 6D Item 6D
M E M O R A N D U M
(February 6, 2018)
To: Shana Yelverton, City Manager
From: Rob Cohen, Director of Public Works
Subject: Ordinance No. 657-D, 1st Reading, Consider an amendment to
the City’s Impact Fee Ordinance revising impact fees on new
land development in the City of Southlake, Texas for roadway
facilities necessitated by new development; readopting the
current land use assumptions for the city; adopting revised
capital improvements plans for roadway improvements;
providing for the assessment, payment and time of payment
for roadway impact fees; and providing for review of roadway
impact fees and the fee schedules. (The 1st reading of this
ordinance is a public hearing to and will meet the public
hearing requirements established in the State of Texas Local
Government Code Section 395. If City Council takes action on
this item a 2nd reading and public hearing on this proposed
ordinance amendment will be held on February 20, 2018).
PUBLIC HEARING
Action
Requested: Ordinance No. 657-D, 1st Reading, Consider an amendment to the
City’s Impact Fee Ordinance revising impact fees on new land
development in the City of Southlake, Texas for roadway facilities
necessitated by new development; readopting the current land use
assumptions for the city; adopting revised capital improvements
plans for roadway improvements; providing for the assessment,
payment and time of payment for roadway impact fees; and
providing for review of roadway impact fees and the fee schedules.
(The 1st reading of this ordinance is a public hearing to and will
meet the public hearing requirements established in the State of
Texas Local Government Code Section 395. If City Council takes
action on this item a 2nd reading and public hearing on this
proposed ordinance amendment will be held on February 20,
2018). PUBLIC HEARING
Item 6D
Background
Information: Ordinance No. 657-D, 1st Reading, Consider an amendment to the
City’s Impact Fee Ordinance revising impact fees on new land
development in the City of Southlake, Texas for roadway facilities
necessitated by new development; readopting the current land use
assumptions for the city; adopting revised capital improvements
plans for roadway improvements; providing for the assessment,
payment and time of payment for roadway impact fees; and
providing for review of roadway impact fees and the fee schedules.
(The 1st reading of this ordinance is a public hearing to and will
meet the public hearing requirements established in the State of
Texas Local Government Code Section 395. If City Council takes
action on this item a 2nd reading and public hearing on this
proposed ordinance amendment will be held on February 20,
2018). PUBLIC HEARING
Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code (LGC) allows
cities to charge impact fees for water, wastewater and roadway
capital improvements. These fees are a charge on new
development to pay for the construction or expansion of off -site
capital improvements that are necessitated by and benefit the new
development. Southlake has charged water and wastewater impact
fees since 1990 and roadway impact fees since 1996.
The most recent update to the existing ordinance was completed in
2015 by Kimley-Horn and Associates. The current fee structure
was adopted by the City Council in April, 2016.
The proposed amendment to the current ordinance is to consider
the addition of roadway projects that were not part of the 2015
update. The main purpose of the amendment is to consider the
addition of the future State Highway (SH) 114 frontage road project
between Dove Road and Kirkwood Blvd. and future Roadway
Intersection Capacity Improvement projects to the 10 -year Impact
Fee Capital Improvements Program (CIP).
A detailed presentation on the proposed impact fee ordinance
amendments will be presented to City Council during its February
6th work session. The first public hearing on the proposed impact
fee ordinance amendment is scheduled for the regular session later
in the evening. A second public hearing will be held at the
subsequent City Council meeting on February 20, 2018, prior to
considering final adopt of the proposed Impact Fee Ordinance
amendments.
Item 6D
Financial
Considerations: Funding for the impact fee study and adoption process will come
from the respective roadway impact fee funds.
Strategic Link: The impact fee study update links with the City’s strategy map
relative to the focus area of performance management and service
delivery by adhering to providing high quality services through
sustainable business practice.
Citizen Input/
Board Review: A detailed presentation on the proposed impact fee ordinance
amendments will be presented to City Council during its February
6th work session. The first public hearing on the proposed impact
fee ordinance amendment is scheduled for the regular session later
in the evening. A second public hearing will be held at the
subsequent City Council meeting on February 20, 2018, prior to
considering final adopt of the proposed Impact Fee Ordinance
amendments.
Legal Review: Should City Council make fee adjustment recommendations, the
ordinance will be reviewed by the City Attorney’s office
Supporting
Documents: Attachment A: Draft ordinance No. 657- D
Attachment B: CIAC summary comments to Council
Attachment C: 2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update including:
A. Land Use Assumption Report
B. Roadway Capital Improvements Plans
Staff
Recommendation: Approve ordinance No. 657- D as recommended by staff.
Staff Contact: Rob Cohen, Director of Public Works
Kyle D. Hogue, P.E., Deputy Director/City Engineer
Steven D. Anderson, P.E., CFM, Deputy City Engineer
Page 1 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
ORDINANCE NO. 657-D
AN ORDINANCE REVISING IMPACT FEES ON NEW LAND
DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS FOR WATER,
WASTEWATER AND ROADWAY FACILITIES NECESSITATED BY
SUCH NEW DEVELOPMENT; ADOPTING REVISED LAND USE
ASSUMPTIONS FOR THE CITY; ADOPTING REVISED CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS PLANS FOR WATER, WASTEWATER AND
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE ASSESSMENT,
PAYMENT AND TIME OF PAYMENT OF WATER, WASTEWATER
AND ROADWAY IMPACT FEES; PROVIDING FOR REVIEW OF
WATER, WASTEWATER AND ROADWAY IMPACT FEES AND THE FEE
SCHEDULES; PROVIDING FOR THE PLACEMENT OF REVENUE
COLLECTED FROM WATER, WASTEWATER AND ROADWAY
IMPACT FEES INTO WATER AND WASTEWATER FACILITIES
IMPACT FEE ACCOUNTS AND ROADWAY IMPACT FEE ACCOUNTS
ESTABLISHED FOR THOSE PURPOSES; PROVIDING FOR OFFSETS
AND CREDITS; PROVIDING FOR REFUNDS OF UNEXPENDED FUNDS;
PROVIDING FOR USE OF FUNDS DERIVED FROM WATER,
WASTEWATER AND ROADWAY IMPACT FEES; PROVIDING THAT
IMPACT FEES MAY BE PLEDGED TOWARD PAYMENT OF BOND
ISSUES AND SIMILAR DEBT INSTRUMENTS; PROVIDING THAT THIS
ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES;
PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR NOTICE
OF PUBLIC HEARING; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Southlake is a home rule city acting under its charter adopted by the
electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter 9 of the Local
Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the City of Southlake is responsible for and committed to the provision of public
facilities and services at levels necessary to cure any existing public service deficiencies in already
developed areas; and
WHEREAS, such facilities and service levels are provided by the City utilizing funds allocated
in capital budgets and capital improvement plans adopted by the City and relying upon the funding
sources indicated therein; and
Page 2 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
WHEREAS, new residential and nonresidential development causes and imposes increased
demands upon City public facilities and services, including water, wastewater and roadway facilities that
would not otherwise occur; and
WHEREAS, planning and zoning projections indicate that such development will continue and will
place ever-increasing demands on the City to provide necessary public facilities; and
WHEREAS, the development potential and property values of properties is strongly influenced
and encouraged by City policy as expressed in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and as implemented
via the City’s zoning ordinance and map; and
WHEREAS, to the extent that such new development places demands upon the public facility
infrastructure, the City Council has determined that those demands should be satisfied by shifting the
responsibility for financing the provision of such facilities from the public at large to the developments
actually creating the demands for them; and
WHEREAS, the amount of the impact fee to be imposed shall be determined by the cost of the
additional public facilities needed to support such development, which public facilities are identified in
a capital improvements plan approved by the City, and
WHEREAS, the City Council, after careful consideration of the matter, hereby finds and
declares that impact fees imposed upon new residential and nonresidential development to finance specified
major public facilities in designated service areas, the demand for which is created by such development,
are in the best interests of the general welfare of the City and its residents, are equitable, and do not
impose an unfair burden on such development; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the authority granted in its charter and Chapter 395 of the Texas Local
Government Code, the City of Southlake has previously adopted water, wastewater and roadway impact
fees to offset the cost of providing these public facilities; and
Page 3 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
WHEREAS, the City Council now desires to update its Land Use Assumptions and Capital
Improvements Plan and amend its impact fees in accordance with the provisions of its charter and
Chapter 395; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the City has complied with said statute in the notice,
adoption, promulgation and methodology necessary to adopt and amend its impact fees.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS:
SECTION 1
SHORT TITLE
This Ordinance shall be known and cited as the Water, Wastewater and Roadway Impact Fee
Ordinance.
SECTION 2
INTENT
This Ordinance is intended to impose water, wastewater and roadway impact fees, as established
in this Ordinance, in order to finance public facilities, the demand for which is generated by new
development in the designated service area or areas.
SECTION 3
AUTHORITY
The City is authorized to enact this Ordinance by Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code,
as amended , (“Chapter 395”) and by the Southlake City Charter which authorize it to enact or impose
impact fees on land within its corporate boundaries or extraterritorial jurisdiction, or on land owned by
persons with whom it has a water or wastewater service contract, as charges or assessments imposed
against new development in order to generate revenue for funding or recouping the costs of capital
improvements or facility expansions necessitated by and attributable to such new development. The
provisions of this Ordinance shall not be construed to limit the power of the City to adopt such
Page 4 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
ordinance pursuant to any other source of local authority, nor to utilize any other methods or powers
otherwise available for accomplishing the purposes set forth herein, either in substitution of or in
conjunction with this Ordinance. Guidelines may be developed by resolution or otherwise to implement
and administer this Ordinance.
SECTION 4
DEFINITIONS
As applied in this Ordinance, the following words and terms shall be used :
(1) Assessment - The determination of the amount of the maximum impact fee per service
unit which can be imposed on new development pursuant to this Ordinance.
(2) Building Permit - Written permission issued by the City for the construction, repair,
alteration or addition to a structure.
(3) Capital Construction Cost of Service - Costs of constructing capital improvements or
facility expansions, including and limited to the construction contract price, surveying and
engineering fees, land acquisition costs (including land purchases, court awards and
costs, attorney’s fees, and expert witness fees), interest charges and other finance costs
for bonds, notes or other obligations issued to finance capital improvements identified in
the Capital Improvements Plan, and the fees actually paid or contracted to be paid to an
independent qualified engineer or financial consultant preparing or updating the Capital
Improvements Plan who is not an employee of the City .
(4) Capital Improvement - Any of the following facilities that have a life expectancy of
three or more years and are owned and operated by or on behalf of a political
subdivision :
(a) water supply, treatment, and distribution facilities; wastewater collection and
treatment facilities; and storm water, drainage, and flood control facilities; whether
or not they are located within the service area; and
(b) roadway facilities.
(5) Capital Improvements Advisory Committee (Advisory Committee) - The advisory
committee appointed by the City Council , consisting of at least five members, not less
than 40 percent of which shall be representatives of the real estate, development, or
building industries who are not employees of the City, and , if impact fees are to be
applied within the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the City, including one member
representing the extraterritorial jurisdiction; or consisting of the Planning and Zoning
Commission, including one regular or ad hoc member who is not an employee of the City
and which is representative of the real estate, development, or building industry, and , if
impact fees are to be applied within the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the City, one
Page 5 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
representative of the extraterritorial jurisdiction area; which committee is appointed to
regularly review and update the Capital Improvements Plan, file semiannual reports, and
advise the City of the need to update impact fees in accordance with the requirements of
Chapter 395.
(6) Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) - The plan or plans adopted in Section 9 of this
Ordinance which identify water, wastewater, and roadway capital improvements or
facility expansions pursuant to which impact fees may be assessed . The Capital
Improvements Plan may be composed of separate Water and Wastewater Capital
Improvements Plan and a Roadway Capital Improvements Plan .
(7) City - City of Southlake, Texas.
(8) City Council (Council) - Governing body of the City of Southlake.
(9) Commercial Development - For the purposes of this Ordinance, all development which
is neither residential nor industrial.
(10) Comprehensive Plan (Master Plan) - The comprehensive long-range plan, adopted by
the City Council, which is intended to guide the growth and development of the City
which includes analysis, recommendations and proposals for the City regarding such
topics as population, economy, housing, transportation, community facilities and land use.
(11) Credit - The amount of the reduction of an impact fee for fees, payments or charges for the
same type of capital improvements for which the fee has been assessed.
(12) Existing Development - All development within a service area which has a water or
wastewater tap on the City's water or wastewater system , or which has access to the
City’s roadway system as of the date of the adoption of this Ordinance.
(13) Facility Expansion - The expansion of the capacity of an existing facility which serves
the same function as an otherwise necessary new capital improvement in order that the
existing facility may serve new development. Facility expansion does not include the
repair, maintenance, modernization, or expansion of an existing facility to better serve
existing development.
(14) Final Plat - The map, drawing or chart meeting the requirements of the City's Subdivision
Ordinance on which is provided a subdivider's plan of a subdivision, and which has received
final approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council and which is
recorded with the office of the County Clerk.
(15) Growth-Related Costs - Capital construction costs of service related to providing
additional service units to new development, either from excess capacity in existing
facilities, from facility expansions or from new capital facilities. Growth-related costs do
not include:
Page 6 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
(a) Construction, acquisition, or expansion of public facilities or assets other than
capital improvements or facility expansions identified in the capital improvements
plan;
(b) Repair, operation, or maintenance of existing or new capital improvements or
facility expansions;
(c) Upgrading, updating , expanding, or replacing existing capital improvements to
serve existing development in order to meet stricter safety, efficiency,
environmental , or regulatory standards;
(d) Upgrading, updating , expanding, or replacing existing capital improvements to
provide better service to existing development;
(e) Administrative and operating costs of the City; and
(f) Principal payments and interest or other finance charges on bonds or other
indebtedness, except for such payments for growth-related facilities contained in
the Capital Improvements Plan .
(16) Impact Fees - Fee to be imposed upon new development, calculated based upon the
costs of facilities in proportion to development creating the need for such facilities. Impact
fees do not include dedication of land for public parks or payment in lieu of the dedication
to serve park needs; dedication of rights-of-way or easements, or construction or
dedication of site-related water distribution or wastewater collection facilities or internal
roadways required by other ordinances of the City Code; or lot or acreage fees placed in
trust funds for the purpose of reimbursing developers for oversizing or constructing water
or wastewater mains or lines; or participation fees charged as part of the City 's
Neighborhood Sewer Program .
(17) Industrial Development - Development which will be assigned to the industrial customer
class of the water or wastewater utilities; generally development in which goods are
manufactured , or development which is ancillary to such manufacturing activity .
(18) Land Use Assumptions - Description of the service area and projections of changes in land
uses, densities, intensities, and population therein over at least a 10-year period , adopted
by the City, as may be amended from time to time, upon which the Capital
Improvements Plan is based.
(19) Service Unit Equivalent (SUE) - Basis for establishing equivalency among and within
various customer classes and land uses. For water and wastewater uses, a SUE is based
upon the relationship of the continuous daily maximum flow rate in gallons per minute
for a water meter of a given size and type compared to the continuous daily maximum flow
rate in gallons per minute for a 1" diameter simple water meter, using American Water
Works Association C700-09 and C-702-10 standards. The table of equivalencies for water
Page 7 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
and wastewater showing the determination of SUE's based on meter size is included in
Exhibit D-1.
(20) New Development - The subdivision of land ; or the construction, reconstruction,
redevelopment, conversion, structural alteration, relocation, or enlargement of any
structure; or any use or extension of the use of land ; any of which increases the
number of service units for water, wastewater or roadway services or requires the
purchase of a new water or wastewater tap. New development includes the purchase of a
water tap resulting from the conversion of an individual well to the City's water utility
and includes the purchase of a wastewater tap resulting from the conversion of an
individual septic or other individual waste disposal system to the City's wastewater
utility .
(21) Offset - The amount of the reduction of an impact fee designed to fairly reflect the
vaSUE of system-related facilities, pursuant to miles herein established or administrative
guidelines, provided and funded by a developer pursuant to the City's subdivision
regulations or requirements.
(22) Public Works Director - Public Works Director of the City of Southlake, or his designee.
(23) Residential Development - A lot developed for use and occupancy as a residence or
residences, according to the City's zoning ordinance.
(24) Roadway Facility - Improvement for providing roadway service including, but not
limited to, pavement, right-of-way, drainage and traffic control devices. Roadway facility
excludes roadways which are constructed by developers, the costs of which are reimbursed
from charges paid by subsequent users of the facilities. Roadway facilities also exclude
dedication of rights-of-way or easements or construction or dedication of off-site
roadways required by valid ordinances of the City of Southlake and necessitated by and
attributable to the new development.
(25) Roadway Facility Expansion - Expansion of the capacity of any existing roadway
improvement for the purpose of serving new development, not including the repair,
maintenance, modernization or expansion of the existing roadway facility to serve existing
development.
(26) Roadway Improvement Plan - Portion of the Capital Improvements Plan, as may be
amended from time to time, which identifies the roadway facilities or roadway
expansions and their associated costs which are necessitated by and attributable to new
development, and for a period not to exceed ten (10) years, and which are to be financed
in whole or in part through the imposition of roadway impact fees pursuant to this
Ordinance.
(27) Service Area - An area defined in this Ordinance within the corporate boundaries of the
City for roadway facilities or with the corporate boundaries or extraterritorial jurisdiction of
the City or other areas served by the City for water and wastewater facilities to be
served by the capital improvements or facility expansions specified in the Capital
Page 8 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
Improvements Plan applicable to the service area. The Service Area for Water and
Wastewater Impact Fees is set forth in Exhibit A-1. The Service Areas for Roadway
Impact Fees are set forth in Exhibit A-2.
(28) Service Unit - Standardized measure of consumption, use, generation, or discharge
attributable to an individual unit of development calculated in accordance with generally
accepted engineering or planning standards for a particular category of capital
improvements or facility expansions. Service units for water and wastewater impact fees
are expressed in Service Unit Equivalents (SUE’s). Service units for roadway impact fees
are expressed in vehicle-miles per development unit.
(29) Site-related Facility - Improvement or facility which is for the primary use or benefit of a
new development and /or which is for the primary purpose of safe and adequate provision
of water or wastewater facilities to serve the new development, and which is not included
in the Capital Improvements Plan, and for which the developer or property owner is
solely responsible under subdivision and other applicable regulations.
(30) System-related Facility - A capital improvement or facility expansion which is designated
in the Capital Improvements Plan and which is not a site-related facility . A system-related
facility may include a capital improvement which is located offsite, within or on the
perimeter of the development site.
(31) Tap Purchase - The filing with the City of a written application for a water or wastewater
tap and the acceptance of applicable fees by the City . The term "tap purchase" shall not
be applicable to a meter purchased for and exclusively dedicated to fire protection.
(32) Wastewater Facility - Improvement for providing wastewater service, including, but not
limited to, treatment facilities, lift stations, or interceptor mains and necessary land or
easements therefor. Wastewater facility excludes wastewater collection lines or mains
which are constructed by developers, the costs of which are reimbursed from charges
paid by subsequent users of the facilities and which are maintained in dedicated funds.
Wastewater facilities also exclude dedication of rights-of-way or easements or
construction or dedication of on-site wastewater collection facilities required by valid
ordinances of the City and necessitated by and attributable to the new development.
(33) Wastewater Facility Expansion - Expansion of the capacity of any ex1stmg wastewater
facility for the purpose of serving new development, not including the repair,
maintenance, modernization or expansion of an existing wastewater facility to serve
existing development.
(34) Wastewater Improvement Plan - Portion of the Capital Improvements Plan, as may be
amended from time to time, which identifies the wastewater facilities or wastewater
expansions and their associated costs which are necessitated by and attributable to new
development, and for a period not to exceed ten (10) years, and which are to be
financed in whole or in part through the imposition of wastewater impact fees pursuant to
this Ordinance.
Page 9 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
(35) Water Facility - Improvement for providing water service, including, but not limited to,
water supply facilities, treatment facilities, pumping facilities, storage facilities, or
transmission mains and necessary land or easements therefor. Water facility excludes
water lines or mains which are constructed by developers, the costs of which are
reimbursed from charges paid by subsequent users of the facilities and which are
maintained in dedicated trusts. Water facilities also exclude dedication of rights-of-way or
easements or construction or dedication of on-site water distribution facilities required by
valid ordinances of the City and necessitated by and attributable to the new
development.
(36) Water Facility Expansion - Expansion of the capacity of any ex1stmg water facility for the
purpose of serving new development, not including the repair, maintenance, modernization
or expansion of an existing water facility to serve existing development.
(3 7) Water Improvement Plan - Portion of the Capital Improvements Plan, as may be
amended from time to time, which identifies the water facilities or water expansions and
their associated costs which are necessitated by and attributable to new development, and
for a period not to exceed ten (10) years, and which are to be financed in whole or in
part through the imposition of water impact fees pursuant to this Ordinance.
(38) Vehicle-Mile - A unit used to express both supply and demand provided by, and placed
on, the roadway system . A combination of the number of vehicles travelling during a given
time period and the distance in which these vehicles travel in miles.
SECTION 5
APPLICABILITY OF IMPACT FEES
A. This Ordinance shall be uniformly applicable to new development which occurs within the
corporate limits of the city and its extraterritorial jurisdiction, and other areas served by the City’s water and
wastewater facilities.
B. No new development shall be exempt from the assessment of impact fees as defined in this
Ordinance except as provided by state law. The payment of impact fees applicable to a school district shall
be subject to the district's consent through a contract between the City and the district.
Page 10 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
SECTION 6
IMPACT FEES AS CONDITIONS OF DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL
No application for new development shall be approved within the City without assessment of impact
fees pursuant to this Ordinance, and no water and wastewater tap shall be issued and no building permit
shall be issued unless the applicant has paid the applicable impact fees imposed by and c alculated
hereunder.
SECTION 7
ESTABLISHMENT OF WATER AND
WASTEWATER SERVICE AREA AND ROADWAY SERVICE AREAS
A. There is hereby established a Water and Wastewater Impact Fees Service Area as depicted
on Exhibit A-1 attached to this Ordinance.
B. There are hereby established Roadway Impact Fees Service Areas as depicted on
Exhibit A-2 attached to this Ordinance.
C. The service areas shall be established consistent with any facility service area defined in the
Capital Improvements Plans for each utility or facility. Additions or revisions to the service areas may be
approved by the City Council consistent with the procedures set forth in Chapter 395.
SECTION 8
LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
The Land Use Assumptions used in the development of the impact fees, attached as Exhibit-B to
this Ordinance, are hereby adopted. These assumptions may be revised by the City Council according to
the procedures set forth in Chapter 395 .
SECTION 9
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLANS
A. The Water and Wastewater Capital Improvements Plan attached as Exhibit C-1 to this
Ordinance is hereby adopted.
Page 11 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
B. The Roadway Capital Improvements Plan attached as Exhibit C-2 to this Ordinance is hereby
adopted.
C. The Water and Wastewater Capital Improvements Plan and Roadway Capital
Improvements Plan may be amended by the City Council from time to time, pursuant to the procedures
set forth in Chapter 395 .
SECTION 10
SERVICE UNITS
A. Service units are established in accordance with generally accepted engineering and
planning standards . Service units for water and wastewater impact fees are expressed in Service Unit
Equivalents (SUE’s). Service units for roadway impact fees are expressed in vehicle-miles per development
unit.
B. The City Council may revise the service units designation from time to time according to the
procedures set forth in Chapter 395.
C. Water and Wastewater Service Units. Service units for water and wastewater fees
shall be calculated based on Service Unit Equivalents as determined by the size and type of the water
meter(s) for the development. The meter types used to calculate the number of SUE's shall be either
simple, compound or turbine meters.
1. The Service Unit Equivalents used for the calculation of water and wastewater
impact fees are set forth in the Table of Equivalencies - Water and Wastewater attached as Exhibit D-1
to this Ordinance.
2. If the Public Works Director determines that the water pressure in the City's
transmission main is significantly higher or lower than standard pressure such that the size of the water
meter is not indicative of actual service demand, the Public Works Director may adjust the number of
Page 12 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
SUE's based on a smaller or larger sized meter which more accurately reflects the flow rate and the
system pressure conditions.
3. If a fire demand meter (tap) is purchased for a property, the meter size utilized to
calculate the number of SUE's shall be the dimension of the portion of the fire demand meter which
reflects the meter size which would be required to provide appropriate residential or business service
to the property . This reduced meter size shall then be utilized to calculate the number of SUE's.
4. Upon wastewater tap purchase for residential lots for which no water meter has been
purchased , service units shall be calculated based on a 1" water meter. The calculation of service units
for wastewater tap purchases for other uses of lots shall be based on data submitted by a professional
engineer licensed in the State of Texas, which is reviewed and approved by the Public Works Director.
D . Roadway Service Units. Service units for roadway impact fees will be established based
upon estimated vehicle-miles of demand generated by the development. Vehicle-miles of demand are
determined based upon size and type of development and the service area where the development is
located. The vehicle-mile demand factors used for the calculation of roadway impact fees are set forth in
the Land Use/Vehicle-Mile Equivalency Table attached as Exhibit D-2 to this Ordinance.
E . The Public Works Director or the City Council may approve an alternative calculation of
Service Unit Equivalents or vehicle-miles of demand for a particular development based upon an
engineering report prepared by a qualified professional engineer licensed to perform such engineering
services in the State of Texas which demonstrates that the number of SUE’s or vehicle-miles of demand
for the development will be different than shown in Exhibits D-1 or D-2 .
Page 13 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
SECTION 11
IMPACT FEES PER SERVICE UNIT
A. Computation . The maximum impact fee per service unit for each service area shall be
computed by dividing the growth-related capital construction cost of service in the service area identified in
the Capital Improvements Plan for that category of capital improvement, by the total number of projected
service units anticipated within the service area which are necessitated by and attributable to new
development, based on the Land Use Assumptions for that service area. The maximum water and
wastewater impact fee per service unit has been calculated as shown in the Maximum Impact Fee
Schedule attached as Exhibit-E to this Ordinance. The maximum roadway impact fee per vehicle-mile
which will be assessed for different uses has been calculated for each service area as shown in
Exhibit-E. The total impact fee assessed per service unit shall be a combination of the water, wastewater
and roadway impact fees. Maximum assessable impact fees in Exhibit-E may be amended by the City
Council according to the procedures set forth in Chapter 395 .
B. Collection rate. The amount of impact fees to be collected is set by the City Council
based upon equitable policy considerations . The amount of impact fees to be collected is set forth in
the Impact Fee Collection Schedule by Service Unit for Water, Wastewater and Roadway attached as
Exhibit-F to this Ordinance.
1. The amount of impact fees collected within a development shall be at the rates in
effect in Exhibit F on the date that impact fees are assessed on the property .
2. The total impact fees collected per service unit shall be a combination of the water,
wastewater and roadway impact fees.
Page 14 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
3. Exhibit-F may be amended by ordinance adopted by the City Council from time to
time, provided that the amount of impact fees to be collected shall not exceed the maximum assessable
impact fees set forth in Exhibit-E.
SECTION 12
ASSESSMENT OF IMPACT FEES
A. The impact fees adopted by this ordinance shall go into effect on April 1, 2016. The
approval of any subdivision of land or of any new development on or after April 1, 2016 shall include
as a condition the assessment of the impact fees applicable to such development as set forth in this
ordinance.
B . Assessment of impact fees for any new development shall be at the time of final plat
approval and shall be the impact fee per service unit then in effect, as set forth in Exhibit-E.
1. Where a final plat is approved prior to April 1, 2016, impact fees shall be assessed
at the rate in effect on the date of plat approval.
2. For a development which received final plat approval prior to adoption of impact
fees by the City, or for which no plat approval is required, impact fees shall be assessed on the effective
date of adoption of the impact fees.
3. After a development has been assessed impact fees under this or any prior
ordinances, no new impact fee or increase in any impact fee of the same category shall be assessed against
that development unless :
a. the final plat lapses or expires or a new application for final plat approval
is submitted on the property; or
b. the number of service units to be developed on the property increases.
Page 15 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
4. For purposes of this section, a final plat shall include a plat showing and a plat
revision, but shall not include an amended plat submitted under Section 3 .05 of the City’s Subdivision
Ordinance.
SECTION 13
CALCULATION OF IMPACT FEES
Following a request for new development, the City shall compute impact fees due for the new
development in the following manner:
1. Water and Wastewater Impact Fees
a. The number of SUE's shall be determined by the size of the water
meter(s) based on the table set forth in Exhibit D-1, or as otherwise determined by the City Council or
Public Works Director as provided in Section 10 of this Ordinance.
b. SUE’s shall be summed for all meters purchased for the development.
c. The total number of SUE’s shall be multiplied by the impact fee per SUE
(1" water meter) set forth in the applicable fee schedule in Exhibit-F.
d. Fee credits and offsets shall be subtracted as determined by the process set
forth in Section 15 of this Ordinance.
2. Roadway Impact Fees
a. The City has been divided into two roadway service areas and for each
service area a specific maximum roadway fee has been calculated. Each service area has a different
maximum assessed roadway impact fee per vehicle-mile as set forth in Exhibit-E. The same number of
vehicle-miles per development unit is used in each service area to calculate the amount of impact fees
assessed.
Page 16 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
b. For collection purposes, roadway impact fees are calculated based upon
equitable considerations applicable to each development unit. The amount of impact fees collected shall
not exceed the maximum assessed roadway impact fees per service area.
c. Exhibit-F shows the roadway impact fee per development unit used for
calculating the amount of impact fee to be collected.
d. Fee credits and offsets shall be subtracted as determined by the process set
forth in Section 15 of this Ordinance.
SECTION 14
COLLECTION OF IMPACT FEES
A. No water or wastewater tap shall be issued until all impact fees, including roadway impact
fees, have been paid to the City except as provided otherwise by agreement.
B. Except as provided below, impact fees shall be collected at the time of the issuance of the
building permit for new development, or if no building permit is required , at the time of water or
wastewater tap purchase.
C. Because fire protection is of critical concern to the community as a whole, water demand
related solely to fire protection is not subject to collection of an impact fee. However, if the fire
protection capacity of the fire demand meter is routinely utilized for regular residential or business
purposes as evidenced by the consumption recorded on the City's meter-reading and billing systems, the
current owner of the property shall be assessed the current impact fees for the fire protection capacity
which has been converted to residential or business use .
D. To avoid the use of fire flow volumes for domestic use, the owner of any property for which
a fire demand meter is purchased shall be required to execute a restrictive covenant on a form approved
by the City Attorney, which shall acknowledge the right of the City to assess such fees to subsequent
Page 17 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
owners of the property . This covenant shall be executed prior to the purchase of the fire demand meter
and shall be filed in the deed records of the County .
E. The City may provide for a different date of fee collection under any of the following
circumstances:
1. The City may collect impact fees at the time of platting for any development which
will utilize capital improvements which are subject to pro rata reimbursement.
2. The City may defer collection of impact fees to a later date where service for which
the fee is assessed will not be available within a reasonable period of time.
3. The City may, at its sole discretion, enter into agreements to establish a different
date of fee collection than those provided in this Section.
SECTION 15
OFFSETS AND CREDITS AGAINST IMPACT FEES
A. The City may offset the present value of any system-related facilities, pursuant to rules
established in this section, which have been dedicated to and have been received by the City, including the
value of capital improvements constructed pursuant to an agreement with the City, against the va lue of the
impact fee due for that category of capital improvement.
B. The City may credit impact, perimeter roadway, pro rata, acreage or lot fees which have been
paid pursuant to Ordinance Nos. 330, 493, 494, 510, 657, 657-A, 657-B or other City ordinances against the
value of impact fees due for that category of capital improvement, subject to guidelines established by the
City.
C. All offsets and credits against impact fees shall be subject to the following limitations and
shall be granted based on this Ordinance and additional standards promulgated by the City, which may be
adopted as administrative guidelines.
Page 18 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
1. No offset or credit shall be given for the dedication or c onstruction of site-related
facilities unless the facilities are oversized pursuant to an agreement with the City.
2. The unit costs used to calculate the offsets shall not exceed those assumed for the
capital improvements included in the Capital Improvements Plan for the category of facility within the
service area for which the impact fee is imposed.
3. If an offset or credit applicable to a plat has not been exhausted within ten (10) years
from the date of plat filing or within such period as may be otherwise designated by contract, such offset or
credit shall expire.
4. The City will not reimburse the property owner or developer for an offset or credit
when no impact fees for the new development can be collected pursuant to this Ordinance or for any value
exceeding the total impact fees due for the development for that category of capital improvement, unless
otherwise agreed to by the City .
D. An applicant for new development must apply for an offset or credit against impact fees due
for the development either at or before the time of fee payment, unless the City agrees to a different time.
The applicant shall file a petition for offsets or credits with the City on a form provided for such purpose.
The contents of the petition shall be established by administrative guidelines. The City must provide the
applicant, in writing, with a decision on the offset or credit request, including the reasons for the decision.
The decision shall specify the maximum value of the offset or credit which may be applied against an
impact fee, which value and the date of the determination shall be associated with the plat for the new
development.
E. The available offset or credit associated with the plat shall be applied against an impact fee
in the following manner:
1. Such offset or credit shall be prorated equally among all service units, as calculated
Page 19 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
in Section 10 and remain applicable to such service units, to be applied at time of filing and acceptance of an
application for a building permit or tap purchase, as appropriate, against impact fees due.
2. If the total number of service units used by the City in the original offset or credit
calculation described in Paragraph (1) is eventually exceeded by the number of total service units realized
by the actual development, the City may, at its sole discretion, collect the full impact fee exclusive of any
associated offset or credits for the excess service units.
F. At its sole discretion, the City may authorize alternative credits or offsets upon petition by
the owner in accordance with guidelines promulgated by the City.
SECTION 16
ESTABLISHMENT OF ACCOUNTS AND RECORDS
A. The City shall establish separate interest-bearing accounts, in a bank authorized to receive
deposits of City funds, for each major category of capital facility for which an impact fee is imposed
pursuant to this Ordinance.
B. Interest earned by each account shall be credited to that account and shall be used solely for
the purposes specified for funds authorized in Section 17.
C. The City shall establish adequate financial and accounting controls to ensure that impact
fees disbursed from the account are utilized solely for the purposes authorized in Section 17.
Disbursement of funds shall be authorized by the City at such times as are reasonably necessary to
carry out the purposes and intent of this Ordinance; provided , however, that any fee paid shall be
expended within a reasonable period of time, but not to exceed ten (10) years from the date the fee is
deposited into the account.
D. The City shall maintain and keep adequate financial records for each such account, which
shall show the source and disbursement of all revenues, which shall account for all monies received ,
and which shall ensure that the disbursement of funds from each account shall be used solely and
Page 20 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
exclusively for the provision of uses specified in the Capital Improvements Plan as system-related capital
projects. The City Finance Department shall also maintain such records as are necessary to ensure that
refunds are appropriately made under the provision in Section 19 of this Ordinance, and such other
information as may be necessary for the proper implementation of this Ordinance.
SECTION 17
USE OF PROCEEDS OF IMPACT FEE ACCOUNTS
A. The impact fees collected pursuant to this Ordinance may be used to finance or to
recoup capital construction costs of service. Impact fees may also be used to pay the principal sum
and interest and other finance costs on bonds, notes or other obligations issued by or on behalf of the
City to finance such capital improvements or facilities expansions.
B. Impact fees collected pursuant to this Ordinance shall not be used to pay for any of
the following expenses:
1. Construction, acquisition or expansion of capital improvements or assets other
than those identified for the appropriate facility in the Capital Improvements Plan;
2. Repair, operation, or maintenance of existing or new capital improvements or
facilities expansions;
3. Upgrading, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to serve
existing development in order to meet stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or regulatory
standards;
4. Upgrading, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to provide
better service to existing development; provided however, that impact fees may be used to pay the
costs of upgrading, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements in order to meet the need
for new capital improvements generated by new development; or
Page 21 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
5. Administrative and operating costs of the City.
SECTION 18
APPEALS
A. The property owner or applicant for new development may appeal the following decisions of
the Public Works Director to the City Council:
1. The applicability of an impact fee to the development;
2. The calculation of applicable service units attributable to the development;
3. The value of the impact fee due;
4. The availability or the value of an offset or credit;
5. The application of an offset or credit against an impact fee due;
6. The amount of the refund due under Section 19, if any.
B. An appeal to the City Council must be filed by the applicant with the City Secretary within
thirty (30) days following the Public Works Director's decision. The City Council shall hear the appeal
within 30 days of receipt by the City Secretary. Notice of the hearing shall be mailed to the applicant at least
seven (7) days prior to the hearing.
C. At the hearing, the City Council shall consider all relevant evidence and shall allow
testimony from the applicant, city personnel and other interested persons relevant to the appeal. The hearing
may be continued from time to time.
D. The burden of proof shall be on the appellant to demonstrate that the fee is not applicable or
that the determination of service units or the value of the fee or of the offset or credit was not calculated
according to the applicable impact fee schedule or the guidelines established in this Ordinance. The
applicant shall submit an engineering report prepared by a qualified professional engineer licensed to
perform such engineering services in the State of Texas, which demonstrates that the applicant’s burden has
been met.
Page 22 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
E. Following the hearing, the City Council shall consider all evidence and determine whether
the appeal should be granted (in whole or in part) or denied.
F. If the appeal is accompanied by a bond or other sufficient security satisfactory to the City
Attorney in an amount equal to the original determination of the impact fee due, the development
application or tap purchase or building permit issuance may be processed while the appeal is pending.
SECTION 19
REFUNDS
A. Any impact fee or portion thereof collected pursuant to this Ordinance which has not
been expended within ten (10) years from the date of payment, shall be refunded , upon application, to the
record owner of the property at the time the refund is paid , or, if the impact fee was paid by another
governmental entity, to such governmental entity, together with interest calculated from the date of
collection to the date of refund at the statutory rate as set forth in Section 302.002, Texas Finance
Code, or any successor statute.
B. If a refund is due pursuant to subsection (A), the City shall pro-rate the same by dividing
the difference between the amount of expenditures and the amount of the fees collected by the total
number of service units assumed within the service area for the period to determine the refund due per
service unit. The refund to the record owner or governmental entity shall be calculated by multiplying
the refund due per service unit by the number of service units for the development for which the fee
was paid , and interest due shall be calculated upon that amount.
C . Upon completion of all the capital improvements or facilities expansions identified in
the Capital Improvements Plan upon which the fee was based , the City shall recalculate the maximum
impact fee per service unit using the actual costs for the improvements or expansions. If the
maximum impact fee per service unit based on actual cost is less than the impact fee per service unit
paid , the City shall refund the difference, if such difference exceeds the impact fee paid by more than
Page 23 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
ten percent (10%). The refund to the record owner or governmental entity shall be calculated by
multiplying such difference by the number of service units for the development for which the fee
was paid , and interest due shall be calculated upon that amount.
D. Upon the request of an owner of the property on which a water or wastewater impact fee
has been paid , the City shall refund such fees if:
1. Existing service is available and service is denied; or
2. Service was not available when the fee was collected and the City has failed to
commence construction of facilities to provide service within two years of fee payment; or
3. Service was not available when the fee was collected and has not
subsequently been made available within a reasonable period of time considering the type of capital
improvement or facility expansion to be constructed, but in no event later than five years from the
date of fee payment.
E. The City shall refund an appropriate proportion of water impact fee payments in the
event that a previously purchased water meter is replaced with a smaller meter, based on the SUE
differential of the two meter sizes and the per-SUE fee at the time of the original fee payment, less
an administrative charge set forth in City guidelines.
F. Petition for refunds shall be submitted to the Public Works Director on a form
provided by the City for such purpose. Within one month of the date of receipt of a petition for
refund, the Public Works Director must provide the petitioner, in writing, with a decision on the
refund request, including the reasons for the decision. If a refund is due to the petitioner, the Public
Works Director shall notify the Finance Director and request that a refund payment be made to the
petitioner. The petitioner may appeal the determination to the Council, as set forth in Section 18.
Page 24 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
SECTION 20
UPDATES TO PLAN AND REVISION OF FEES
The City shall review the Land Use Assumptions and Capital Improvements Plan for water,
wastewater and roadway facilities at least every five years, the first five year period to commence from
the date of adoption of the Capital Improvements Plan referenced herein . The City Council shall
accordingly then make a determination of whether changes to the Land Use Assumptions, Capital
Improvements Plan or impact fees are needed and shall, in accordance with the procedures set forth in
Chapter 395, either update the fees or make a determination that no update is necessary .
SECTION 21
FUNCTIONS OF ADVISORY COMMITTEE
A. The functions of the Advisory Committee are those set forth in Chapter 395 and shall
include the following:
1. Advise and assist the City in adopting Land Use Assumptions;
2. Review the Capital Improvements Plan regarding water, wastewater, and roadway
capital improvements and file written comments thereon;
3. Monitor and evaluate implementation of the Capital Improvements Plan;
4. Advise the City of the need to update or revise the Land Use Assumptions, Capital
Improvements Plan and impact fees; and
5. File a semiannual report evaluating the progress of the City in achieving the Capital
Improvements Plan and identifying any problems in implementing the plan or administering the impact fees.
B. The City shall make available to the Advisory Committee any professional reports prepared
in the development or implementation of the Capital Improvements Plan.
C. The City Council may adopt procedural rules for the Advisory Committee to follow in
carrying out its duties.
Page 25 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
SECTION 22
AGREEMENT FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
The City Council may authorize the owner of a new development to construct or finance some
of the public improvements identified in the Capital Improvements Plan . In the case of such approval,
the property owner must enter into an agreement with the City prior to collection of impact fees. The
agreement shall be on a form approved by the City, and shall establish the estimated cost of the
improvements, the schedule for initiation and completion of the improvements, a requirement that the
improvements shall be completed to City standards, and any other terms and conditions the City deems
necessary . The Public Works Director shall review the improvement plan, verify costs and time
schedules, determine if the improvements are contained in the Capital Improvements Plan, and determine
the method and timing of reimbursing the owner for construction costs from impact fee or other revenues.
SECTION 23
USE OF OTHER FINANCING MECHANISMS
The City may finance water, wastewater, and roadway capital improvements or facilities
expansions designated in the Capital Improvements Plan through the issuance of bonds, through the
formation of public improvement districts or other assessment districts, or through any other authorized
mechanism, in such manner and subject to such limitations as may be provided by law, in addition to
the use of impact fees. Except as herein otherwise provided , the assessment and collection of an impact
fee shall be additional and supplemental to, and not in substitution of, any other tax, fee, charge or
assessment which is lawfully imposed on and due against the property .
Page 26 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
SECTION 24
IMPACT FEES AS ADDITIONAL AND SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATION
A. Impact fees established by this Ordinance are additional and supplemental to, and not in
substitution of, any other requirements imposed by the City on the development of land or the issuance of
building permits or the sale of water or wastewater taps or the issuance of certificates of occupancy,
including but not limited to pass-through fees charged by the City of Fort Worth for water or wastewater
connections. Such fees are intended to be consistent with and to further the policies of City's Comprehensive
Plan, Capital Improvement Plan, zoning or dinance, subdivision regulations and other City policies,
ordinances and resolutions by which the City seeks to ensure the provision of adequate public facilities in
conjunction with the development of land .
B. This Ordinance shall not affect, in any manner, the permissible use of property, density of
development, design, and improvement standards and requirements, or any other aspect of the development
of land or provision of public improvements subject to the zoning and subdivision regulations or other
regulations of the City, which shall be operative and remain in full force and effect without limitation with
respect to all such development.
SECTION 25
RELIEF PROCEDURES
A. Any person who has paid an impact fee or an owner of land upon which an impact fee has
been paid may petition the City Council to determine whether any duty required by this Ordinance has not
been performed within the time so prescribed . The petition shall be in writing and shall state the nature of
the unperformed duty and request that the act be performed within sixty (60) days of the request. If the City
Council determines that the duty is required pursuant to the ordinance and is late in being performe d, it shall
cause the duty to commence within sixty (60) days of the date of the request and to continue until
completion.
Page 27 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
B. The City Council may grant a variance or waiver from any requirement of this Ordinance,
upon written request by a developer or owner of property subject to the Ordinance, following a public
hearing, upon finding that a strict application of such requirement would, when regarded as a whole, result
in confiscation of the property.
SECTION 26
CUMULATIVE CLAUSE
This Ordinance shall be cumulative of all provisions of ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas,
except where the provisions of this Ordinance are in direct conflict with the provisions of such
ordinances, in which event the conflicting provisions of such ordinances are hereby repealed. Ordinance
Nos . 330, 493, 494, 510, 657, 657-A, 657-B and 657 -C are specifically saved from repeal and shall
remain in effect to the extent they provide for the charging of a fee not replaced by this Ordinance or
other duly adopted ordinances of the City .
SECTION 27
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE
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 28
NOTICE OF HEARING
The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby directed to post this Ordinance in its entirety
Page 28 N:\00-New N Drive\Meetings\City Council\2018 Agendas\2018-02-06 - AMS Due 2018-01-19\Item 6D-1st Reading Impact Fee Update\Ordinance 657-D -
Draft.docx
on the City website together with a notice setting out the time and place for a public hearing thereon and for
its consideration by the City Council at least ten (10) days before the second reading of this Ordinance, as
required by Section 3.13 of the Charter of the City of Southlake.
SECTION 29
EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and it is so ordained .
PASSED AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING ON THIS 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY,
2018.
MAYOR
ATTEST :
CITY SECRETARY
PASSED AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING ON THIS 20TH DAY OF
FEBRUARY, 2018.
MAYOR
ATTEST :
CITY SECRETARY
EFFECTIVE : __________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
City Attorney
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas
Prepared by:
Texas Registration Number 928
801 Cherry Street, Unit 11, Suite 950
Fort Worth, TX 76102
817.335.6511
November 2017
ã Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., 2015
061237016
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update i November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
Table of Contents
Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................... i
2.1 Executive Summary ....................................................................................................... 1
2.2 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 3
2.3 Roadway Impact Fee Study Calculation Inputs ........................................................... 5
A.Land Use Assumptions ........................................................................................... 5
B.Land Use Assumptions Methodology ...................................................................... 6
C.Roadway Impact Fee Study Service Areas .............................................................. 7
D.Land Use Assumptions Summary ........................................................................... 7
E.Capital Improvement Plan ..................................................................................... 10
2.4 Methodology For Roadway Impact Fees .................................................................... 15
A.Service Area ......................................................................................................... 15
B. Service Units ......................................................................................................... 15
C.Cost Per Service Unit ............................................................................................ 17
D.Cost of the CIP ..................................................................................................... 17
1.Review of Roadway Impact Fee CIP Costing Sheets ......................................... 18
2. Project Information ........................................................................................... 19
3. Construction Pay Items ..................................................................................... 20
4. Construction Component Allowances ............................................................... 21
5. Summary of Cost and Allowances ..................................................................... 21
E.Summary of Roadway Impact Fee CIP Cost.......................................................... 22
F.Service Unit Calculation ....................................................................................... 24
2.5 Impact Fee Calculation ............................................................................................... 29
A.Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee Per Service Unit ............................... 29
B.Plan for Awarding the Roadway Impact Fee Credit ............................................... 31
C.Service Unit Demand Per Unit of Development .................................................... 33
2.6 Sample Calculations .................................................................................................... 37
2.7 Conclusion.................................................................................................................... 38
APPENDICES ......................................................................................................................... 39
A.Appendix A – Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
B.Appendix B – CIP Service Units of Supply
C.Appendix C – Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory Service
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update ii November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
List of Exhibits
2.1 Roadway Service Areas ..................................................................................................... 9
2.2 Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvement Plan – Service Area North ............................ 13
2.3 Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvement Plan – Service Area South ............................. 14
List of Tables
2.1 Land Use Assumptions for Roadway Impact Fees .............................................................. 8
2.2 10-Year Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvement Plan for Service Area North ............. 11
2.3 10-Year Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvements Plan for Service Area South ........... 11
2.4 Level of Use for Proposed Facilities ................................................................................. 16
2.5 Level of Use for Existing Facilities ................................................................................... 16
2.6 10-Year Roadway Impact Fee CIP with Conceptual Level Cost Projections – Service Area
North ................................................................................................................................ 23
2.7 10-Year Roadway Impact Fee CIP with Conceptual Level Cost Projections – Service Area
South ................................................................................................................................ 23
2.8 Transportation Demand Factor Calculations ..................................................................... 27
2.9 10-Year Growth Projections…………………………………………………………. ........ 28
2.10 Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee Computation ........................................... 29-31
2.11 Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee ..................................................................... 32
2.12 Land Use/Vehicle-Mile Equivalency Table (LUVMET) .............................................. 35-36
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 1 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
2.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This study was performed to update the City of Southlake’s Roadway Impact Fees.
Transportation system analysis is an important tool for facilitating orderly growth of the
transportation system and for providing adequate facilities that promote economic
development in the City of Southlake. The implementation of an impact fee is a way to
shift a portion of the burden of paying for new facilities onto new development.
The City of Southlake was divided into two (2) service areas for the purposes of the 2015
Roadway Impact Fee Update. These service areas cover the entire corporate boundary of
the City of Southlake. Each service area is an individual study area. For each service
area, the funds collected must be spent on projects identified in the Roadway Impact Fee
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for that specific service area.
This report, 2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update, adds the SH 114 Westbound
Frontage Road and ramps from Kirkwood Boulevard to Dove Road, Kirkwood and SH
114 u-turn lanes, a right-turn lane from Dove Road onto the future SH 114 Westbound
Frontage Road, and Dove road improvements west of SH 114. Additionally, capacity
related recommendations from the Southlake Citywide Intersection Analysis were added
to the Roadway Impact Fee CIP. No other changes were made from the 2015 Roadway
Impact Fee Update.
Roadway improvements necessary to serve the 10-year (2015-2025) needs were
evaluated. Typically, infrastructure improvements are sized beyond the 10-year
requirements; however, Texas’ impact fee law (Chapter 395) only allows recovery of
costs to serve the 10-year planning period. For example, the projected recoverable cost to
construct the infrastructure needed through 2025 by service area is:
SERVICE AREA:North South
COST OF CAPACITY ADDED ATTRIBUTABLE TO GROWTH
WITH FINANCING $ 38,819,502 $ 22,122,375
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 2 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
A portion of the remainder can be assessed as the planning window extends beyond 2025
and as the impact fees are updated in the future. As required by Chapter 395, this total
cost is reduced by 50% to account for the credit of the use of ad valorem taxes to fund the
Roadway Impact Fee CIP.
The impact fee law defines a service unit as follows: “Service Unit means a standardized
measure of consumption attributable to an individual unit of development calculated in
accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning standards and based on
historical data and trends applicable to the political subdivision in which the individual
unit of development is located during the previous 10 years.”
Therefore, the City of Southlake defines a service unit as the number of vehicle-miles of
travel during the afternoon peak-hour. For each type of development the City of
Southlake utilizes the Land Use/Vehicle-Mile Equivalency Table (LUVMET)to
determine the number of service units.
Based on the City’s 10-year growth projections and the associated demand (consumption)
in terms of vehicle-miles is as follows:
SERVICE AREA:North South
TOTAL VEHICLE-MILES OF NEW DEMAND OVER TEN YEARS 24,758 23,203
Based on the additional service units and the recoverable capital improvements plans, the
City may assess a maximum roadway impact fee per vehicle-mile ([Recoverable Cost of
CIP*50%] / Total Growth) of:
SERVICE AREA:North South
MAX ASSESSABLE FEE PER SERVICE UNIT $ 784 $ 477
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 3 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
2.2 INTRODUCTION
Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code describes the procedure Texas cities
must follow in order to create and implement impact fees. Senate Bill 243 (SB 243)
amended Chapter 395 in September 2001, to define an impact fee as “a charge or
assessment imposed by a political subdivision against new development in order to
generate revenue for funding or recouping the costs of capital improvements or facility
expansions necessitated by and attributable to the new development.”
Chapter 395 mandates that impact fees be reviewed and updated at least every five (5)
years. Accordingly, the City of Southlake has developed its Land Use Assumptions and
Roadway Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) with which to update the City’s Roadway
Impact Fees. The City has retained Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. to provide
professional transportation engineering services for the 2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor
Update. This update incorporated several projects along SH 114 from Kirkwood
Boulevard to Dove Road (N-11 and I-8 to I-10) and capacity related recommendations (I-
11 to I-17) from the Southlake Citywide Intersection Analysis into the Roadway Impact
Fee CIP. No other changes were made from the 2015 Roadway Impact Fee Update.
This report includes details of the impact fee calculation methodology in accordance with
Chapter 395, the applicable Land Use Assumptions, development of the CIP, and the
refinement of the Land Use Equivalency Table.
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 4 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
This report introduces and references two of the basic inputs to the Roadway Impact Fee:
the Land Use Assumptions and the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Information
from these two components is used extensively in the remainder of the report. This
report consists of a detailed discussion of the methodology for the computation of impact
fees. This discussion -Methodology for Roadway Impact Fees and Impact Fee
Calculation addresses each of the components of the computation and modifications
required for the study. The components include:
·Service Areas;
·Service Units;
·Cost Per Service Unit;
·Cost of the CIP;
·Service Unit Calculation;
·Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Per Service Unit; and
·Service Unit Demand Per Unit of Development.
The report also includes a section concerning the Plan for Awarding the Roadway
Impact Fee Credit. In the case of the City of Southlake, the credit calculation was based
on awarding a 50% credit.
The final section of the report is the Conclusion,which presents the findings of the
update analysis.
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 5 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
2.3 ROADWAY IMPACT FEE STUDY CALCULATION INPUTS
A.LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
In order to assess an impact fee, Land Use Assumptions must be developed to provide
the basis for population and employment growth projections within a political
subdivision. As defined by Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code, these
assumptions include a description of changes in land uses, densities, and population
in the service area. In addition, these assumptions are useful in assisting the City of
Southlake in determining the need and timing of transportation improvements to
serve future development.
Information from the following sources was compiled to complete the land use
assumptions:
·Southlake 2030 (City of Southlake Comprehensive Plan)
·Tarrant County Appraisal District (TAD)
·North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG)
·City of Southlake staff.
The Land Use Assumptions include the following components:
·Land Use Assumptions Methodology – An overview of the general
methodology used to generate the land use assumptions.
·Roadway Impact Fee Study Service Areas – Explanation of the division of
Southlake into two (2) service areas for transportation facilities.
·Land Use Assumptions Summary – A synopsis of the land use assumptions.
The population and employment estimates and projections were all compiled in
accordance with the following categories:
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 6 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
Units:Number of dwelling units, both single and multi-family.
Population:Number of people, based on person per dwelling unit factors.
Employment: Square feet of building area based on three (3) different
classifications. Each classification has unique trip making characteristics.
Retail: Land use activities which provide for the retail sale of goods that
primarily serve households and whose location choice is oriented toward
the household sector, such as grocery stores and restaurants.
Service: Land use activities which provide personal and professional
services such as government and other professional administrative offices.
Basic: Land use activities that produce goods and services such as those
that are exported outside of the local economy, such as manufacturing,
construction, transportation, wholesale, trade, warehousing, and other
industrial uses.
B.LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS METHODOLOGY
The residential and non-residential growth projections formulated in the 2015
Roadway Impact Fee Update were done using reasonable and generally accepted
planning principles. The following factors were considered in developing these
projections:
·Character, type, density, and quantity of existing development;
·Current zoning plans;
·Future Land Use Plan (based on Southlake 2030);
·Historic Growth trends;
·Location of vacant land; and
·Physical holding capacity of Southlake.
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 7 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
Existing residential and employment estimates were obtained using TAD and DCAD
parcel data and an aerial survey of existing development.
For the remaining undeveloped areas, assumptions based upon the Southlake 2030
Consolidated Future Land Use Plan were used to estimate the ultimate buildout of
residential and employment development. The remaining undeveloped parcels were
assumed to reach build out in the next 10-years.
Research of existing building permits was performed to compare the projected growth
determined by the previously discussed methodology with growth trends in the City
of Southlake over the last ten (10) years. During that period, approximately 1,552
residential units were developed. It was expected that the next ten years of
development would be reasonably close to these estimates. No updates were made to
the Land Use Assumptions that were utilized in the 2015 Roadway Impact Fee
Update.
C.ROADWAY IMPACT FEE STUDY SERVICE AREAS
The geographic boundary for the 2015 Roadway Impact Fee Update service areas for
transportation facilities are shown in Exhibit 2.1. The City of Southlake was divided
into two (2) service areas for the 2015 Roadway Impact Fee Update. The dividing
line between the service areas is SH 114. In the previous 2008 Roadway Impact Fee
Study there were three (3) services areas. The two (2) service areas south of SH 114
in the 2008 Study were consolidated into one service area in the 2015 update.
D.LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS SUMMARY
Table 2.1 summarizes the residential and employment 10-year growth projections.
The anticipated growth over the next ten years is similar to historical growth over the
previous ten years. These Land Use Assumptions were consistent with those used in
the 2015 Roadway Impact Fee Update.
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 8 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
Table 2.1 Land Use Assumptions for Roadway Impact Fees
Basic Service Retail Total
2015 5,568 1,796 45,599 2,629,991 38,060 2,713,650
2025 7,192 2,320 45,599 3,966,782 1,900,659 5,913,040
10-Year
Growth 1,624 524 0 1,336,791 1,862,599 3,199,390
2015 22,961 7,407 586,673 3,069,005 4,053,962 7,709,640
2025 26,147 8,435 1,377,089 3,827,474 5,512,144 10,716,707
10-Year
Growth 3,186 1,028 790,416 758,469 1,458,182 3,007,067
2015 28,529 9,203 632,272 5,698,996 4,092,022 10,423,290
2025 33,339 10,755 1,422,688 7,794,256 7,412,803 16,629,747
10-Year
Growth 4,810 1,552 790,416 2,095,260 3,320,781 6,206,457
Total (Citywide)
Service Area Year Population Dwelling
Units
Employment (Square Feet)
A (North of SH 114)
B (South of SH 114)
DR
A
F
T
S
N
F M 1 9 3 8
Ea s t Do v e Rd .
N W
h i t e C h a p e l B l v d
N C a r r o l l A v e .
N P e y t o n v i l l e A v e .
East Continental Blvd.
West Southlake Blvd.
S
K
i
m
b
a
l
l
A
v
e
.
N K i m b a l l A v e .
Wes t Continenta l Blv d.
D a v i s B l v d .
Johnson Rd.
Florence Rd.
S C a
r r o
l l A v e
.
Union Church
T .W . K i n g R d .
S h a d y O a k s D r .
S P e y t o n v i l l e A v e .
N
C
a
r
r
o
l
l
A
v
e
.
T .W . K i n g R d .
Grapevine
Flower Mound
Colleyville
Westlake
Trophy Club
North Richland Hills
Roanoke
Euless
Hurst
Marshall Creek
Legend
Service Areas
N
S
Major Roads
SH 114
Local Roads
City Limits
Lakes
Streams 0 1 2
Miles
Exhibit 2.1Service Area Bound aries
2017 CIP Update Roadway Impact FeeMinor Update
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 10 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
E.CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
The City has identified the City-funded transportation projects needed to accommodate
the projected growth within the City. The CIP for Roadway Impact Fees is made up of:
·Recently completed projects with excess capacity available to serve new growth;
·Projects currently under construction; and
·Remaining projects needed to complete the City’s Master Thoroughfare Plan.
The CIP includes frontage road, arterial, and collector facilities as well as intersection
improvements. All of the frontage road, arterial, and collector facilities are part of the
currently adopted Master Thoroughfare Plan.
The CIP for Roadway Impact Fees that are proposed for the 2017 Roadway Impact Fee
Minor Update are listed in Tables 2.2 and 2.3,and mapped in Exhibit 2.2 (Service Area
North)and Exhibit 2.3 (Service Area South). The tables show the limits of each
project as well as the facility’s classification. The CIP was developed in conjunction
with input from City of Southlake staff and represents those projects that will be needed
to accommodate the growth projected from the land use assumptions.
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 11 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
Table 2.2 10-Year Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvement Plan for Service Area North
Table 2.3 10-Year Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvement Plan for Service Area South
Service
Area Proj. #Impact Fee
Class Roadway Limits
N-1 A4D(100)(1/2)Kirkwood Blvd. (1) Tyler St. to Stockton Dr.
N-2 A4D(100)Kirkwood Blvd. (2) E. Dove Rd. to N White Chapel Blvd.
N-3 A4D(88)N White Chapel Blvd. (1) E. Dove Rd. to Kirkwood Blvd.
N-4 A4D(88)(1/2)N White Chapel Blvd. (2) Kirkwood Blvd. to SH 114 WBFR
N-5 A4D(100)E Kirkwood Blvd. (3) Carillon Development to Existing Highland St.
N-6 A4U(88)E Kirkwood Blvd. (4) Existing Highland St. to N. Carroll Ave.
N-7 A4D(88)E Kirkwood Blvd. (5) N. Carroll Ave. to Highland St.
N-8 A4D(100)(1/2)E Kirkwood Blvd. (6) Highland St. to 835 Feet West of Blessed Way
N-9 A4D(100)(1/2)E Kirkwood Blvd. (7) 935 Feet East of Blessed Way to N Kimball Ave.
N-10 A4D(88)N Kimball Ave. E. Dove Rd. to SH 114
N-11 Frontage Road SH 114 WBFR Kirkwood Blvd. to E. Dove Rd.
I-1 Intersection Improvement (WB and NB
right-turn) N. White Chapel Blvd. & E. Dove Rd.
I-2 Roundabout N. Carroll Ave. & Highland St. (Kirkwood Blvd.)
I-3 Signal Installation N. Kimball Ave. & Kirkwood Blvd.
I-9 Intersection Improvement (WB and NB
right-turn) E. Dove Rd. & SH 114
I-10 U-turn Lanes Kirkwood Blvd. & SH 114
S A
N o
r t h
(N )
Service
Area Proj. #Class Roadway Limits
S-1 A4D(130-140)FM 1938 Phase 2 Randol Mill Bend to West Southlake Pkwy.
S-2 A4D(88)N White Chapel Blvd. Phase 1 SH 114 to Highland St.
S-3 A4D(88)N White Chapel Blvd. Phase 2 Highland St. to Emerald Blvd.
S-4 A3U(70)N Pearson Ln. Florence Rd. to West Southlake Blvd.
S-5 C2U(60)Tower Dr. & Zena Rucker Rd. East Southlake Blvd. to S. Carrol Ave.
S-6 C2U(60)Zena Rucker Rd. 935' East of Byron Nelson Pkwy. to Tower Dr.
S-7 A4D(88)(1/2)S Carroll Ave. (1) Zena Rucker Rd. to Westmont Dr.
S-8 A4D(88)(1/2)S Carroll Ave. (2) 120 ft. South of Versailles to 290 ft. North of Breeze Way
S-9 C2U(60)Village Center Dr. (1) 700 ft. South of Southlake Blvd. to George Dawson
S-10 C2U(60)Village Center Dr. (2) S Kimball Ave. to S Nolen Dr.
S-11 A4D(94)Brumlow Ave. East Continental Blvd. to 250' North of Southern City Limits
S-12 A3U(70)W Highland St. White Chapel Rd. to SH 114
I-4 Roundabout Continental Blvd. & Peytonville Ave.
I-5 Roundabout Continental Blvd. & Byron Nelson Pkwy.
I-6 Roundabout N. White Chapel Blvd. & Highland St.
I-7 Roundabout Dove Rd. & Peytonville Ave.
I-8 Intersection Improvement (SB right-turn) E. Dove Rd. & SH 114
I-11 Intersection Improvement (NB & SB left-
turn) W. Southlake Blvd. & N. Pearson Ln.
I-12 Intersection Improvement (SB right-turn
and extend NB left-turn) W. Southlake Blvd. & N. White Chapel Blvd.
I-13 Intersection Improvement (EB & WB left-
turn) E. Southlake Blvd. & N. Carroll Ave.
I-14 Intersection Improvement (SB right-turn) E. Southlake Blvd. & N. Kimball Ave.
I-15 Roundabout E. Dove Rd. & Shady Oaks Dr.
I-16 Intersection Improvement (NB right-turn) Shady Oaks Dr. & W. Highland St.
I-17 Intersection Improvement (NB right-turn,
EB left and right-turn, WB left-turn) W. Continental Blvd. & Davis Blvd.
S A
S o
u t h
(S )
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 12 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
The various roadway classifications describe the purpose and function of each roadway.
These roadway classifications are based on the City of Southlake’s Master Thoroughfare
Plan. There are twelve (12) primary classifications on the City of Southlake’s Master
Thoroughfare Plan that were used in the 2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update. These
classifications are:
·Freeway – 300’ to 500’
·A6D – 130’ to 150’ Arterial
·A6D – 124’ Arterial
·A5U – 84’ Arterial
·A4D – 100’ Arterial
·A4D – 94’ Arterial
·A4D – 88’ Arterial
·A2U – 88’ Arterial
·A3U – 70’ Arterial
·C2U - 84’ Collector
·C2U – 70’ Collector
·C2U – 60’ Collector
Each of the classifications have different vehicular capacities assigned to them (see Table 2.4)
based on their roadway characteristics. Arterial thoroughfares are designed to move more traffic
and provide a larger amount of capacity. Arterials provide for travel between neighborhoods and
commercial areas or serve as routes for thru-traffic from adjacent cities. A collector’s primary
function is to bring traffic from local streets to arterial facilities. Collectors are intended to move
less traffic and are designed with lower vehicular capacity than arterial facilities.DR
A
F
T
!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
S-9
S-8
S-7S-6
S-5
S-3
S-2
S-1
N-9N-8
N-8
N-6
N-7
N-5
N-4
N-3
N-2
N-1
N-11
S-12
S-11
S-10
N-10
N-10
I-3
I-2
I-1
I-4
I-7
I-6
I-5I-17
I-16
I-14I-13I-12
I-10
East Dove Rd.
N W h i t e C h a p e l B l v d
East Southlake Blvd.
N C a r r o l l A v e .
N P e y t o n v i l l e A v e .
East Continental Blvd.
S K i m b a l l A v e .
West Continental Blvd.
S C a r r o l l A v e .
T .W . K i n g R d .
S h a d y O a k s D r .
Dove Rd.
E Highland St.
West Southlake Blvd.
S P e y t o n
v i l l e A v e .
B
r
u
m
l
o
w
A
v
e
S W h i t e C h a p e l B l v d
E
K
ir
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
.
West Bob Jo nes Rd
N C a r r o l l A v e .
T .W . K i n g R d .
S
N
Grapevine
Colleyville
Flower Mound
Westlake
Trophy Club
North Richland Hills
Legend
Impact Fee Eligible Projects
Impact Fee Eligible Completed Projects
Other Transportation Projects
!(Project Number
Intersection Projects
Local Roads
Lakes
Streams
100 Year Flooplain
City Limits
0 0.5 1
Miles
I 2017 CIP Update Road wa y Impact F ee Minor Upda te
Exhibit 2.2Roadway Improvements Service Area North (N)
See Inset
I-8 I-9I-15
Dove Rd.
Inset
S
h
a
d
y O
a
k
s
D
r.
S
H
1
1
4
DR
A
F
T
!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
S-9
S-8
S-7S-6
S-5
S-4
S-3
S-2
S-1
S-1
N-9N-8
N-8
N-6
N-7
N-5
N-4
N-3
N-2
N-1
N-11
S-12
S-11
S-10
N-10
N-10
I-3
I-2
I-1
I-4
I-7
I-6
I-5I-17
I-16
I-14I-13I-12
I-11
S
N
F M 1 9 3 8
East Dove Rd.
N C a r r o l l A v e .
N P e y t o n v i l l e A v e .
East Continental Blvd.
West Southlake Blvd.
S
K
i
m
b
a
l
l
A
v
e
.
N K i m b a l l A v e .
West Continental Blvd.
Johnson Rd.
Florence Rd.
S C a r r o l l A v e .
W Highland St.
Union Church
N P e a r s o n L n .
K
irk
w
o
o
d
B
lv
d.
S h a d y O a k s D r .
Dove Rd.
D a v i s B l v d .
E Highland St.
S P e y t o n v i l l e A v e .
B
r
u
m
l
o
w
A
v
e
E
K
ir
k
w
o
o
d
B
l
v
d
.
S P e a r s o
n L n
.
S o u t h r i d g e L a k e s P k w y .
N C a r r o l l A v e .
E Kirkwood Blvd.
Grapevine
Colleyville
Westlake
North Richland Hills
Legend
Impact Fee Eligible Projects
Impact Fee Eligible Completed Projects
Other Transportation Projects
!(Project Number
Intersection Projects
Local Roads
Lakes
Streams
100 Year Flooplain
City Limits
0 0.5 1
Miles
I 2017 CIP Update Roadway Impact FeeMinor Update
Exhibit 2.3Roadway Improvements Service Area South (S)
I-8 I-9I-15
Dove Rd.
Inset
S
h
a
d
y O
a
k
s
D
r.
S
H
1
1
4
See Inset
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 15 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
2.4 METHODOLOGY FOR ROADWAY IMPACT FEES
A.SERVICE AREA
The service areas used in the 2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update are shown in the
previously referenced Exhibit 2.1. These are the same service areas utilized in the 2015
Roadway Impact Fee Update. Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code
specifies that “the service areas are limited to an area within the corporate boundaries of
the political subdivision and shall not exceed six (6) miles.” Based on the guidance in
Chapter 395 and examination of the City of Southlake, two roadway service areas were
deemed appropriate. These service areas cover the entire corporate boundary of the City
of Southlake. Service Area North is located north of SH 114 and Service Area South is
located south of SH 114. Both service areas are approximately four (4) miles in
diameter.
B.SERVICE UNITS
The “service unit” is a measure of consumption or use of the roadway facilities by new
development. In other words, it is the measure of supply and demand for roads in the
City. For transportation purposes, the service unit is defined as a vehicle-mile. On the
supply side, this is a lane-mile of an arterial street. On the demand side, this is a vehicle-
trip of one-mile in length. The application of this unit as an estimate of either supply or
demand is based on travel during the afternoon peak hour of traffic. This time period is
commonly used as the basis for transportation planning and the estimation of trips created
by new development.
Another aspect of the service unit is the service volume that is provided (supplied) by a
lane-mile of roadway facility. This number, also referred to as capacity, is a function of
the facility type, facility configuration, number of lanes, and level of service.
The hourly service volumes used in the 2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update are
based upon Thoroughfare Capacity Criteria published by the North Central Texas
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 16 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
Council of Governments (NCTCOG), but have been adjusted to the City of Southlake’s
Master Thoroughfare Plan. The capacity of a freeway (frontage road) has been added
along with updates to capacities based on existing counts since the 2015 Roadway Impact
Fee Update.Tables 2.4 and 2.5 show the service volumes utilized in this report.
Table 2.4 Level of Use for Proposed Facilities
(used in Appendix B – CIP Service Units of Supply)
Roadway Type
(MTP Classifications)Median Configuration
Hourly Vehicle-Mile
Capacity per Lane-Mile of
Roadway Facility
Frontage Road Undivided 900
A4D – 130’ to 140’ Arterial Divided 725
A4D – 100’ Arterial Divided 725
A4D – 94’ Arterial Divided 725
A4D – 88’ Arterial Divided 725
A4U – 88’ Arterial Undivided 650
A3U – 70’ Arterial Undivided 650
C2U – 60’ Collector Undivided 525
Table 2.5 Level of Use for Existing Facilities
(used in Appendix C – Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory)
Roadway
Type Description
Hourly Vehicle-Mile
Capacity per Lane-Mile of
Roadway Facility
2U-C Two lane undivided collector 525
2U-A Two lane undivided arterial 525
3U-C Three lane undivided (TWLTL) collector 650
3U-A Three lane undivided (TWLTL) arterial 650
4U-C Four lane undivided collector 650
4U-A Four lane undivided arterial 725
4D-C Four lane divided collector 725
4D-A Four lane divided arterial 725
5U-A Five lanes undivided arterial 725
6D-A Six lane divided arterial 800
7U-A Seven lane undivided arterial 750
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 17 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
C.COST PER SERVICE UNIT
A fundamental step in the impact fee process is to establish the cost for each service unit.
In the case of the roadway impact fee, this is the cost for each vehicle-mile of travel.
This cost per service unit is the cost to construct a roadway (lane-mile) needed to
accommodate a vehicle-mile of travel at a level of service corresponding to the City’s
standards. The cost per service unit is calculated for each service area based on a specific
list of projects within that service area.
The second component of the cost per service unit is the number of service units in each
service area. This number is the measure of the growth in transportation demand that is
projected to occur in the ten-year period. Chapter 395 requires that Impact Fees be
assessed only to pay for growth projected to occur in the city limits within the next ten
years, a concept that will be covered in a later section of this report (Section 2.3.E). As
noted earlier, the units of demand are vehicle-miles of travel.
D.COST OF THE CIP
All of the project costs for the roadway system are eligible to be included in the 2017
Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update. Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code
specifies that the allowable costs are “…including and limited to the:
1.Construction contract price;
2.Surveying and engineering fees;
3.Land acquisition costs, including land purchases, court awards and costs, attorney’s
fees, and expert witness fees; and
4.Fees actually paid or contracted to be paid to an independent qualified engineer or
financial consultant preparing or updating the Capital Improvement Plan who is not
an employee of the political subdivision.”
The engineer’s opinion of the probable costs of the projects in the CIP is based, in part,
on the calculation of a unit cost of construction. This means that a cost per linear foot of
roadway is calculated based on an average price for the various components of roadway
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 18 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
construction. This allows the probable cost to be determined by the type of facility being
constructed, the number of lanes, and the length of the project. The costs for location-
specific items such as bridges, highway ramps, drainage structures, and any other special
components are added to each project as appropriate.
1. Review of Roadway Impact Fee CIP Costing Sheets
The following section provides an overview of the costing sheets specifically developed
for each Roadway Impact Fee project. The costing sheet contains the following four
elements:
·Project Information;
·Construction Pay Items;
·Construction Component Allowances; and
·Summary of Costs and Allowances
The 2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update incorporates two different versions of the
costing sheets. The first type of costing is used to summarize the costing of roadway
projects that had been previously constructed or estimates have been determined in past
CIP Budgets, in the Kirkwood Boulevard Alignment Study, or the newly added SH 114
Frontage Road Project. The second version of costing sheets consists of projects that
possess no previous costing estimates. Costing sheets that summarize the known cost of
projects include the first two elements listed above (Project Information and Construction
P a y I t e m s ) a s t h e c o s t i n g s h e e t s w i t h n o p r e v i o u s e s t i m a t e s c o n t a i n a l l f o u r o f t h e
elements. This costing methodology remains unchanged since 2015.
For intersection projects, individual costing sheets are not provided. For newly identified
intersection projects in the Southlake Citywide Intersection Analysis, conceptual cost are
provided and these were utilized when determining CIP cost.
A sample costing sheet is provided below with the location of the four sections
highlighted.
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 19 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
2. Project Information
In order to correctly estimate the cost of a roadway project, several attributes are first
identified:
·Project Number – Identifies which Service Area the project is in with a corresponding
number. The corresponding number does not represent any prioritizations and is used
only to identify projects. For example, Project N-2 is in Service Area North and is
the 2nd project on the list.
City of Southlake Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2015 Roadway Impact Fee Update updated:10/9/2017
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.N-2
Name:Kirkwood Blvd. (2)
Limits:E. Dove Rd. to N White Chapel Blvd.
Impact Fee Class:A4D(100)
Ultimate Class:4-Lane Divided Arterial
Length (lf):2,295
Service Area(s):N
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
108 Unclassified Street Excavation 16,830 cy 10.00$168,300$
208 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)13,770 sy 6.00$82,620$
308 8" Concrete Pavement 12,750 sy 46.00$586,500$
323 4" Topsoil 10,455 sy 2.50$26,138$
508 5' Concrete Sidewalk 22,950 sf 4.50$103,275$
608 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 1,217 sy 52.00$63,286$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:1,030,119$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$
√Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%30,904$
√Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 35%360,542$
√Illumination 6%61,807$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%
√Water Minor Adjustments 3%30,904$
√Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%20,602$
√Establish Turf/Erosion Control 2%20,602$
√Basic Landscaping and Irrigation 4%41,205$
Miscellaneous:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:566,565$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,596,684$
Construction Contingency:15%239,503$
Mobilization 5%79,834$
Prep ROW 3%47,901$
Construction Cost TOTAL:1,964,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-1,964,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%392,800$
Previous City contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Assumed $5 per square foot $5 1,147,500$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:3,504,300$
This project consists of the construction of a new
four-lane divided arterial.Project Information
Construction Pay Items
Construction Component
Allowances
Summary of Costs
and Allowances
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 20 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
·Name – A unique identifier for each project. In some cases, multiple projects occur
on the same roadway. In this situation, the names of these projects are designated a
number, such as “1” or “2,” in order to distinguish them. For example, in Service
Area North, two projects are located along N. White Chapel Blvd. The northern most
project was designated the name “N. White Chapel Blvd. (1)”, and the project
immediately south was designated the name “N. White Chapel Blvd (2)."
·Limits – Represents the beginning and ending location for each project.
·Impact Fee Class – The costing class to be used in the analysis. The impact fee class
provides the functional classification, width and number of lanes attributed to each
roadway project. The construction costs are variable, calculated based on the twelve
classification categories outlined in the City of Southlake’s Master Thoroughfare
Plan. These twelve classes are listed in Section 2.3.E and the impact fee classes
assigned to the IF projects can be seen in Table 2.2 and Table 2.3. For example,
A4D(100) signifies a 4 lane, divided arterial that is 100 feet in width. An A4D(100)
Impact Fee Class means the entire roadway is to be constructed. Additional
classifications are utilized in cases where a portion of the facility currently exists and
the road is only to be widened. The following notation is used for these projects:
o “(1/2)” for facilities where half the facility still needs to be constructed;
·Ultimate Class – Corresponds to the functional classification on the City of
Southlake’s Master Thoroughfare Plan.
·Length (ft.) – The distance measured in feet that is used to cost out the project.
·Service Area(s) – Represents the service area where the project is located.
·Description – Used to describe the project type assumed in the costing such as a
widening or reconstruction.
3. Construction Pay Items
A typical roadway project consists of a number of costs, including the following: planning,
survey, design engineering, permitting, right-of way acquisition, and construction and
inspection. While the construction cost component of a project may actually consist of
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 21 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
approximately 100 various pay items, a simplified approach was used for developing the
conceptual level project costs. The table below summarizes the pay items for concrete
roads.
Concrete Pay Items
·Unclassified street excavation
·Lime Stabilization
·Concrete pavement and curb
·Topsoil
·Concrete Sidewalk
·Turn lanes and median openings
4. Construction Component Allowances
A percentage of the paving construction cost is allotted for various major construction
component allowances, as appropriate. These allowances include traffic control,
pavement markings and signage, roadway drainage, illumination, minor water and sewer
adjustments, landscaping and irrigation. These allowance percentages are also based on
historical data.
In addition, lump sum dollar allowances are provided for special drainage structures,
railroad crossings, and intersection improvements where needs are anticipated. The
paving and allowance subtotal is given a fifteen percent (15%) construction contingency,
five percent (5%) mobilizations, and three (3%) preparation of right-of-way to determine
the construction cost total.
5. Summary of Cost and Allowances
To determine the total Impact Fee Project Cost, twenty percent (20%) of the construction
cost total is added for engineering, surveying, and testing.
An allotment for ROW/easement acquisition was calculated for each project individually
based on an assumption of $5 per square foot of ROW land value.
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 22 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
Funding contributions for roadway projects from private and public entities other than the
City of Southlake have been subtracted from the corresponding City projects.
The Impact Fee Project Cost Total is the Construction Cost Total plus engineering,
surveying, and testing; plus ROW/easement acquisition; and minus roadway funding
contributions from other entities.
E.SUMMARY OF ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CIP COST
Tables 2.6 and 2.7 are the 10-Year Roadway Impact Fee CIP project lists for each
service area with planning level project costs. Individual project cost worksheets can be
seen in Appendix A,Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections. It should be noted that
these tables reflect only conceptual-level opinions or assumptions regarding the portions
of future project costs that are recoverable through impact fees. Actual project costs are
likely to change with time and are dependent on market and economic conditions that
cannot be predicted.
The 2017 Roadway Impact Fee CIP establishes the list of projects for which Impact Fees
may be utilized. Essentially, it establishes a list of projects for which an impact fee
funding program can be established. Projects not included in the Roadway Impact Fee
CIP are not eligible to receive impact fee funding. The 2017 Roadway Impact Fee CIP is
different from a City’s construction CIP, which provides a short-term list of projects that
the City is committed to building. The 2017 Roadway Impact Fee CIP for Impact Fees is
simply an inventory of future projects needed to serve future development. The cost
projections utilized in this study should not be utilized for the City’s construction CIP.
The 2017 Roadway Impact Fee CIP accounts for all the projects listed in the 2015
Roadway Impact Fee Update CIP along with several projects along SH 114 from
Kirkwood Boulevard to Dove Road (N-11 and I-8 to I-10) and capacity related
recommendations (I-11 to I-17) from the Southlake Citywide Intersection Analysis.
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 23 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
Table 2.6 10-Year Roadway Impact Fee CIP with Conceptual Level Cost Projections -
Service Area North
Table 2.7 10-Year Roadway Impact Fee CIP with Conceptual Level Cost Projections -
Service Area South
Service
Area Proj. #Class Roadway Limits Length
(mi)
Total Project
Cost
N-1 A4D(100)(1/2)Kirkwood Blvd. (1)Tyler St. to Stockton Dr.0.40 1,300,000$
N-2 A4D(100)Kirkwood Blvd. (2) E. Dove Rd. to N White Chapel Blvd.0.43 3,504,300$
N-3 A4D(88)N White Chapel Blvd. (1) E. Dove Rd. to Kirkwood Blvd.0.34 1,850,000$
N-4 A4D(88)(1/2)N White Chapel Blvd. (2) Kirkwood Blvd. to SH 114 WBFR 0.23 1,050,000$
N-5 A4D(100)E Kirkwood Blvd. (3)Carillon Development to Existing Highland St.0.42 5,699,000$
N-6 A4U(88)E Kirkwood Blvd. (4) Existing Highland St. to N. Carroll Ave.0.16 822,000$
N-7 A4D(88)E Kirkwood Blvd. (5) N. Carroll Ave. to Highland St.0.16 1,159,000$
N-8 A4D(100)(1/2)E Kirkwood Blvd. (6) Highland St. to 835 Feet West of Blessed Way 0.33 2,625,000$
N-9 A4D(100)(1/2)E Kirkwood Blvd. (7) 935 Feet East of Blessed Way to N Kimball Ave.0.29 861,600$
N-10 A4D(88)N Kimball Ave. E. Dove Rd. to SH 114 1.18 10,383,832$
N-11 Frontage Road SH 114 WBFR Kirkwood Blvd. to E. Dove Rd.0.97 9,000,000$
I-1 Intersection Improvement (WB and NB right-
turn) N. White Chapel Blvd. & E. Dove Rd.300,000$
I-2 Roundabout N. Carroll Ave. & Highland St. (Kirkwood Blvd.)1,500,000$
I-3 Signal Installation N. Kimball Ave. & Kirkwood Blvd.200,000$
I-9 Intersection Improvement (WB and NB right-
turn) E. Dove Rd. & SH 114 150,000$
I-10 U-turn Lanes Kirkwood Blvd. & SH 114 600,000$
41,004,732$
15,167$
41,019,899$
S A
N
Total Cost in SERVICE AREA NORTH (N)
Service Area Project Cost Subtotal
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update Cost Per Service Area
Service
Area Proj. #Class Roadway Limits Length
(mi)
Total Project
Cost
S-1 A4D(130-140)FM 1938 Phase 2 Randol Mill Bend to West Southlake Pkwy.1.56 3,465,000$
S-2 A4D(88)N White Chapel Blvd. Phase 1 SH 114 to Highland St.0.33 5,452,128$
S-3 A4D(88)N White Chapel Blvd. Phase 2 Highland St. to Emerald Blvd.0.81 5,537,858$
S-4 A3U(70)N Pearson Ln. Florence Rd. to West Southlake Blvd.1.00 4,778,300$
S-5 C2U(60)Tower Dr. & Zena Rucker Rd. East Southlake Blvd. to S. Carrol Ave.0.35 662,118$
S-6 C2U(60)Zena Rucker Rd.935' East of Byron Nelson Pkwy. to Tower Dr.0.19 1,026,000$
S-7 A4D(88)(1/2)S Carroll Ave. (1) Zena Rucker Rd. to Westmont Dr.0.14 200,000$
S-8 A4D(88)(1/2)S Carroll Ave. (2) 120 ft. South of Versailles to 290 ft. North of Breeze Way 0.09 331,960$
S-9 C2U(60)Village Center Dr. (1) 700 ft. South of Southlake Blvd. to George Dawson Driveway 0.44 2,476,675$
S-10 C2U(60)Village Center Dr. (2) S Kimball Ave. to S Nolen Dr.0.33 1,684,500$
S-11 A4D(94)Brumlow Ave. East Continental Blvd. to 250' North of Southern City Limits 0.76 4,904,625$
S-12 A3U(70)W Highland St. White Chapel Rd. to SH 114 0.60 2,615,700$
I-4 Roundabout Continental Blvd. & Peytonville Ave.1,500,000$
I-5 Roundabout Continental Blvd. & Byron Nelson Pkwy.2,500,000$
I-6 Roundabout N. White Chapel Blvd. & Highland St.1,500,000$
I-7 Roundabout Dove Rd. & Peytonville Ave.2,410,000$
I-8 Intersection Improvement (SB right-turn) E. Dove Rd. & SH 114 150,000$
I-11 Intersection Improvement (NB & SB left-turn) W. Southlake Blvd. & N. Pearson Ln.120,000$
I-12 Intersection Improvement (SB right-turn and
extend NB left-turn) W. Southlake Blvd. & N. White Chapel Blvd.458,000$
I-13 Intersection Improvement (EB & WB left-
turn) E. Southlake Blvd. & N. Carroll Ave.2,100,000$
I-14 Intersection Improvement (SB right-turn) E. Southlake Blvd. & N. Kimball Ave.323,000$
I-15 Roundabout E. Dove Rd. & Shady Oaks Dr.1,500,000$
I-16 Intersection Improvement (NB right-turn) Shady Oaks Dr. & W. Highland St.140,000$
I-17 Intersection Improvement (NB right-turn, EB
left and right-turn, WB left-turn) W. Continental Blvd. & Davis Blvd.760,000$
46,595,864$
15,167$
46,611,031$Total Cost in SERVICE AREA SOUTH (S)
S A
S o u t h
(S )
Service Area Project Cost Subtotal
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update Cost Per Service Area
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 24 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
F.SERVICE UNIT CALCULATION
The basic service unit for the computation of the City of Southlake’s roadway impact fees
is the vehicle-mile of travel during the afternoon peak hour. To determine the cost per
service unit, it is necessary to project the growth in vehicle-miles of travel for the service
area for the ten-year study period.
The growth in vehicle-miles from 2015 to 2025 is based upon projected changes in
residential and non-residential growth for the period. In order to determine this growth,
baseline estimates of population, basic square feet, service square feet, and retail square
feet for 2015 were made along with projections for each of these demographic statistics
through 2025. The Land Use Assumptions (see Table 2.1)details the growth estimates
used for the impact fee determination. For the purposes of the study, these values have
not changed from the 2015 Roadway Impact Fee Update.
The residential and non-residential statistics in the Land Use Assumptions provide the
“independent variables” that are used to calculate the existing (2015) and projected
(2025) transportation service units used to establish the roadway impact fee maximum
rates within each service area. The roadway demand service units (vehicle-miles) for
each service area are the sum of the vehicle-miles “generated” by each category of land
use in the service area.
For the purpose of impact fees, all developed and developable land is categorized as
either residential or non-residential. For residential land uses, the existing and projected
population is converted to dwelling units. The number of dwelling units in each service
area is multiplied by a transportation demand factor to compute the vehicle-miles of
travel that occur during the afternoon peak hour. This factor computes the average
amount of demand caused by the residential land uses in the service area. The
transportation demand factor is discussed in more detail below.
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 25 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
For non-residential land uses, the process is similar. The Land Use Assumptions provide
the existing and projected amount of building square footages for three (3) categories of
non-residential land uses – basic, service, and retail. These categories correspond to an
aggregation of other specific land use categories based on the North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS).
Building square footage is the most common independent variable for the estimation of
non-residential trips in the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE), Trip Generation
Manual, 9th Edition. This independent variable is more appropriate than the number of
employees because building square footage is tied more closely to trip generation and is
known at the time of application for any development or development modification that
would require the assessment of an impact fee.
The existing and projected land use assumptions for the dwelling units and the square
footage of basic, service, and retail land uses provide the basis for the projected increase
in vehicle-miles of travel. As noted earlier, a transportation demand factor is applied to
these values and then summed to calculate the total peak-hour vehicle-miles of demand
for each service area.
The transportation demand factors are aggregate rates derived from two sources – the
ITE, Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, and the regional Origin-Destination Travel
Survey performed by the NCTCOG and the National Household Travel Survey (NHTS).
The ITE, Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, provides the number of trips that are
produced or attracted to the land use for each dwelling unit, square foot of building, or
other corresponding unit. For the retail category of land uses, the rate is adjusted to
account for the fact that a percentage of retail trips are made by people who would
otherwise be traveling past that particular establishment anyway, such as a trip between
work and home. These trips are called pass-by trips, and since the travel demand is
accounted for in the land use calculations relative to the primary trip, it is necessary to
discount the retail rate to avoid double counting trips.
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 26 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
The next component of the transportation demand factor accounts for the length of each
trip. The average trip length for each category is based on the region-wide travel
characteristics survey conducted by the NCTCOG and the NHTS.
The computation of the transportation demand factor is detailed in the following
equation:
Variables:
TDF = Transportation Demand Factor;
T = Trip Rate (peak hour trips / unit);
Pb = Pass-By Discount (% of trips);
Lmax = Maximum Trip Length (miles);
L = Average Trip Length (miles);
OD = Origin-Destination Reduction (50%); and
SAL = Max Service Area Trip Length (see Table 2.8).
For land uses which are characterized by longer average trip lengths (primarily residential
uses), the maximum trip length has been limited to four (4) miles based on the maximum
trip length within each service area. Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code
allows for a service area of six (6) miles; however the service area within the City of
Southlake is approximated to be a four (4) mile distance.
The adjustment made to the average trip length (L) statistic in the computation of the
maximum trip length (Lmax) is the origin-destination reduction (OD). This adjustment is
made because the roadway impact fee is charged to both the origin and destination end of
the trip. For example, the impact fee methodology will account for a trip from home to
work within the City of Southlake to both residential and non-residential land uses. To
avoid counting these trips as both residential and non-residential trips, a 50% origin-
)SAor*(min
*)1(*
Lmax
max
where...ODLL
LPTTDFb
=
-=
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 27 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
destination (OD) reduction factor is applied. Therefore, only half of the trip length is
assessed to each land use.
Table 2.8 shows the derivation of the Transportation Demand Factor for the residential
land uses and the three (3) non-residential land uses. The values utilized for all variables
shown in the Transportation Demand Factor equation are also shown in the table.
Table 2.8 Transportation Demand Factor Calculations
Variable Residential Basic
(General Light
Industrial)
Service
(General Office)
Retail
(Shopping
Center)
T 1.00 0.97 1.49 3.71
Pb 0%0%0%34%
T (with Pb)1.00 0.97 1.49 2.45
L
(miles)17.21 10.02 10.92 6.43
SAL 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
Lmax *
(miles)4.00 4.00 4.00 3.22
TDF 4.00 3.88 5.96 7.89
* Lmax is less than 4 miles for retail land uses; therefore this lower trip length is used
for calculating the TDF for retail land uses
The application of the demographic projections and the transportation demand factors
are presented in the 10-Year Growth Projections in Table 2.9. This table shows the total
vehicle-miles by service area for the years 2015-2025. These estimates and projections
lead to the Vehicle Miles of Travel for 2015-2025. These values utilized are the same the
numbers used in the 2015 Roadway Impact Fee Update.
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 28 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
2 0 1 5
-
2 0 2 5
G r o w t h
P r o j e c t i o n s 1
T O T A L
S i n g l e
F a m i l y
U n i t s
T r i p
R a t e
T D F 2
V E H I C L E
M I L E S 3
B A S I C
S E R V I C E
R E T
A I L
B A S I C 6
S E R V I C E 7
R E T A I L 8
B A S I C
S E R V I C E
R E T A I L
T O T
A L
V E H I C L E
M I L E S 1 0
1 .0 0
0 .9 7
1 .4 9
3 .7 1
N
5 2 4
2 ,0 9 5
0
1 ,3 3 6 ,7 9 1
1 ,8 6 2 ,5 9 9
0
7 ,9 6 7
1 4 ,6 9 6
2 2 ,6 6 3
2 4 ,7 5 8
S
1 ,0 2 8
4 ,1 1 1
7 9 0 ,4 1 6
7 5 8 ,4 6 9
1 ,4 5 8 ,1 8 2
3 ,0 6 7
4 ,5 2 0
1 1 ,5 0 5
1 9 ,0 9 2
2 3 ,2 0 3
T o t a l s
1 ,5 5 2
6 ,2 0 6
7 9 0 ,4 1 6
2 ,0 9 5 ,2 6 0
3 ,3 2 0 ,7 8 1
3 ,0 6 7
1 2 ,4 8 7
2 6 ,2 0 1
4 1 ,7 5 5
4 7 ,9 6 1
V E H I C L E -M I L E S
O F
I N C R E A S E
(2 0 1 5
-
2 0 2 5 )
N o t e s :
N
2 4 ,7 5 8
1
F r o m
C i t y
o f
S o u t h l a k e
2 0 1 5
L a n d
U s e
A s s u m p t i o n s
f o r
R o a d w a y
I m p a c t
F e e s
S
2 3 ,2 0 3
2
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n
D e m a n d
F a c t o r
f o r
e a c h
S e r v i c e
A r e a
(f r o m
L U V M E T )
u s i n g
S i n g l e
F a m i l y
D e t a c h e d
H o u s i n g
l a n d
u s e
a n d
t r i p
g e n e r a t i o n
r a t e
3
C a l c u l a t e d
b y
m u l t i p l y i n g
T D F
b y
t h e
n u m b e r
o f
d w e l l i n g
u n i t s
4
F r o m
C i t y
o f
S o u t h l a k e
L a n d
U s e
A s s u m p t i o n s
f o r
R o a d w a y
I m p a c t
F e e s
5
T r i p
g e n e r a t i o n
r a t e
a n d
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n
D e m a n d
F a c t o r s
f r o m
L U V M E T
f o r
e a c h
l a n d
u s e
6
'B a s i c '
c o r r e s p o n d s
t o
G e n e r a l
L i g h t
I n d u s t r i a l
l a n d
u s e
a n d
t r i p
g e n e r a t i o n
r a t e
7
'S e r v i c e '
c o r r e s p o n d s
t o
G e n e r a l
O f f i c e
l a n d
u s e
a n d
t r i p
g e n e r a t i o n
r a t e
8
'R e t a i l '
c o r r e s p o n d s
t o
S h o p p i n g
C e n t e r
l a n d
u s e
a n d
t r i p
g e n e r a t i o n
r a t e
9
C a l c u l a t e d
b y
m u l t i p l y i n g
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n
D e m a n d
F a c t o r
b y
t h e
n u m b e r
o f
t h o u s a n d
s q u a r e
f e e t
f o r
e a c h
l a n d
u s e
1 0
R e s i d e n t i a l
p l u s
n o n -r e s i d e n t i a l
v e h i c l e -m i l e
t o t a l s
f o r
e a c h
S e r v i c e
A r e a
S E R V I C E
A R E A
R E S I D E N T I A L
V E H I C L E -M I L E S
N O N -R E S I D E N T I A L
S Q U A R E
F E E T
4
T R A N S .
D E M A N D
F A C T O R 5
N O N -R E S I D E N T I A L
V E H I C L E -M I L E S 9
7 .8 9
5 .9 6
3 .8 8
4 .0 0
T a b l e
2 .9
1 0 -Y e a r
G r o w t h
P r o j e c t i o n s
S E R V I C E
A R E A
V E H -M I L E S
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 29 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
2.5 IMPACT FEE CALCULATION
A.MAXIMUM ASSESSABLE ROADWAY IMPACT FEE PER SERVICE UNIT
This section presents the maximum assessable roadway impact fee rate calculated for
each service area. The maximum assessable roadway impact fee is the sum of the
eligible 2017 Impact Fee CIP costs for the service area divided by the growth in travel
attributable to new development projected to occur within the 10-year period. A majority
of the components of this calculation have been described and presented in previous
sections of this report. The purpose of this section is to document the computation for
each service area and to demonstrate that the guidelines provided by Chapter 395 of the
Texas Local Government Code have been addressed.Table 2.10 illustrates the
computation of the maximum assessable impact fee computed for each service area.
Each row in the table is numbered to simplify explanation of the calculation.
Table 2.10 Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee Computation
Line Title Description
1
Total Vehicle-Miles
of Capacity Added
by the CIP
The total number of vehicle-miles added to the service
area based on the capacity, length, and number of lanes
in each project. (from Appendix B – CIP Service Units
of Supply)
Each project identified in the 2017 Roadway Impact Fee CIP will add a certain
amount of capacity to the City’s roadway network based on its length and
classification. This line displays the total amount added within the service area.
2
Total Vehicle-Miles
of Existing
Demand
A measure of the amount of traffic currently using the
roadway facilities upon which capacity is being added.
(from Appendix B – CIP Service Units of Supply)
A number of facilities identified in the 2017 Roadway Impact Fee CIP have traffic
currently utilizing a portion of their existing capacity. This line displays the total
amount of capacity along these facilities currently being used by existing traffic.
3
Total Vehicle-Miles
of Existing
Deficiencies
Number of vehicle-miles of travel that are not
accommodated by the existing roadway system. (from
Appendix C – Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory)
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 30 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
In order to ensure that existing deficiencies on the City’s roadway network are not
recoverable through impact fees, this line is based on the entire roadway network
within the service area. Any roadway within the service area that is deficient – even
those not identified on the 2017 Roadway Impact Fee CIP – will have these additional
trips removed from the calculation.
4
Net Amount of
Vehicle-Miles of
Capacity Added
A measurement of the amount of vehicle-miles added by
the CIP that will not be utilized by existing demand.
(Line 1 – Line 2 – Line 3)
5
Total Cost of the
CIP within the
Service Area
The total cost of the projects within the service area
(from Table 2.6/Table 2.7 - 10-Year Roadway Capital
Improvement Plan with Conceptual Level Cost
Projections)
This line simply identifies the total cost of all of the projects identified in the service
area.
6 Cost of Net
Capacity Supplied
The total CIP cost (Line 5) prorated by the ratio of Net
Capacity Added (Line 4) to Total Capacity Added (Line
1).[(Line 4 / Line 1) * (Line 5)]
Using the ratio of vehicle-miles added by the 2017 Roadway Impact Fee CIP
available to serve future growth to the total vehicle-miles added, the total cost of the
2017 Impact Fee CIP is reduced to the amount available for future growth (i.e.,
excluding existing usage and deficiencies).
7
Cost to Meet
Existing Needs and
Usage
The difference between the Total Cost of the CIP (Line
5) and the Cost of the Net Capacity supplied (Line 6).
(Line 5 – Line 6)
This line is provided for information purposes only – it is to present the portion of the
total cost of the 2017 Roadway Impact Fee CIP that is required to meet existing
demand.
8
Total Vehicle-Miles
of New Demand
over Ten Years
Based upon the growth projection provided in the Land
Use Assumptions (see Section 2.3), an estimate of the
number of new vehicle-miles within the service area
over the next ten years. (from Table 2.9)
This line presents the amount of growth (in vehicle-miles) projected to occur within
each service area over the next ten years.
9 Percent of
Capacity Added
The result of dividing Total Vehicle-Miles of New
Demand (Line 8) by the Net Amount of Capacity Added
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 31 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
Attributable to New
Growth
(Line 4), limited to 100% (Line 10). This calculation is
required by Chapter 395 to ensure capacity added is
attributable to new growth.10 Chapter 395 Check
In order to ensure that the vehicle-miles added by the 2017 Roadway Impact Fee CIP
do not exceed the amount needed to accommodate growth beyond the ten-year
window, a comparison of the two values is performed. If the amount of vehicle-miles
added by the Roadway Impact Fee CIP exceeds the growth projected to occur in the
next ten years, the Roadway Impact Fee CIP cost is reduced accordingly.
11
Cost of Capacity
Added Attributable
to New Growth
The result of multiplying the Cost of Net Capacity
Added (Line 6) by the Percent of Capacity Added
Attributable to New Growth, limited to 100% (Line 10).
The value of the total 2017 Roadway Impact Fee CIP project costs (excluding
financial costs) that may be recovered through impact fees. This line is determined
considering the limitations to impact fees required by the Texas legislature.
B.PLAN FOR AWARDING THE ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CREDIT
Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code requires the Capital Improvement Plan
for Roadway Impact Fees to contain specific enumeration of a plan for awarding the
impact fee credit. Section 395.014 of the Code states:
“(7) A plan for awarding:
(A)a credit for the portion of ad valorem tax and utility service revenues
generated by new service units during the program period that is used
for the payment of improvements, including the payment of debt, that
are included in the capital improvements plan; or
(B)In the alternative, a credit equal to 50 percent of the total projected
cost of implementing the Roadway Impact Fee Capital Improvement
Program…”
The following table summarizes the portions of Table 2.10 that utilize this credit
calculation, based on awarding a 50 percent credit.
Line Title Description
12
Cost of Capacity Added
Attributable to New
Growth with Financing
Assume 50% of future projects to be funded through debt at a rate of
4.25%.
13 Credit A credit equal to 50% of the total projected cost, as per section
395.014 of the Texas Local Government Code.
14 Maximum Assessable
Fee Per Service Unit
Found by dividing the Recoverable Cost of the CIP attributable to
growth (Line 13) by the Total Vehicle-Miles of New Demand Over
Ten Years (Line 8). (Line 13 / Line 8)
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 32 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
Table 2.11 Maximum Assessable Roadway Impact Fee
North (N)South (S)
1
TOTAL VEH-MI OF CAPACITY ADDED BY THE CIP
(FROM ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CIP
SERVICE UNITS OF SUPPLY,APPENDIX B)
13,124 14,194
2
TOTAL VEH-MI OF EXISTING DEMAND
(FROM ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CIP
SERVICE UNITS OF SUPPLY,APPENDIX B)
2,324 5,439
3
TOTAL VEH-MI OF EXISTING DEFICIENCIES
(FROM EXISTING ROADWAY FACILITIES
INVENTORY,APPENDIX C)
0 3,278
4 NET AMOUNT OF VEH-MI OF CAPACITY ADDED
(LINE 1 - LINE 2 - LINE 3)10,800 5,477
5 TOTAL COST OF THE CIP WITHIN SERVICE AREA
(FROM TABLES 2.6 and 2.7 ) $ 41,019,899 $ 46,611,031
6 COST OF NET CAPACITY SUPPLIED
(LINE 4 / LINE 1) * (LINE 5) $ 33,756,089 $ 17,985,671
7 COST TO MEET EXISTING NEEDS AND USAGE
(LINE 5 - LINE 6) $ 7,263,810 $ 28,625,360
8 TOTAL VEH-MI OF NEW DEMAND OVER TEN YEARS
(FROM TABLE 2.9 and Land Use Assumptions)24,758 23,203
9
PERCENT OF CAPACITY ADDED
ATTRIBUTABLE TO GROWTH
(LINE 8 / LINE 4)
229.2%423.6%
10 IF LINE 8 > LINE 4, REDUCE LINE 9 TO 100%,
OTHERWISE NO CHANGE 100.0%100.0%
11 COST OF CAPACITY ADDED ATTRIBUTABLE TO GROWTH
(LINE 6 * LINE 10) $ 33,756,089 $ 17,985,671
12 COST OF CAPACITY ADDED ATTRIBUTABLE TO GROWTH WITH
FINANCING $ 38,819,502 $ 22,122,375
13 CREDIT FOR AD VALOREM TAXES (50% OF LINE 12) $ 19,409,751 $ 11,061,188
14 MAX ASSESSABLE FEE PER SERVICE UNIT ($ PER VEH-MI)
(LINE 13 / LINE 8) $ 784 $ 477
SERVICE AREA:
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 33 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
C.SERVICE UNIT DEMAND PER UNIT OF DEVELOPMENT
The roadway impact fee is determined by multiplying the impact fee rate by the number
of service units projected for the proposed development. For this purpose, the City
utilizes the Land Use/Vehicle-Mile Equivalency Table (LUVMET), presented in Table
2.12. This table lists the predominant land uses that may occur within the City of
Southlake. For each land use, the development unit that defines the development’s
magnitude with respect to transportation demand is shown. Although every possible use
cannot be anticipated, the majority of uses are found in this table. If the exact use is not
listed, one similar in trip-making characteristics can serve as a reasonable proxy. The
individual land uses are grouped into categories, such as residential, office, commercial,
industrial, and institutional.
The trip rate presented for each land use is a fundamental component of the LUVMET.
The trip rate is the average number of trips generated during the afternoon peak hour by
each land use per development unit. The next column, if applicable to the land use,
presents the number of trips to and from certain land uses reduced by pass-by trips, as
previously discussed.
The source of the trip generation and pass-by statistics is the ITE Trip Generation
Manual, 9th Edition. This manual utilizes trip generation studies for a variety of land uses
throughout the United States, and is the standard used by traffic engineers and
transportation planners for traffic impact analysis, site design, and transportation
planning.
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 34 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
To convert vehicle trips to vehicle-miles, it is necessary to multiply trips by trip length.
The adjusted trip length values are based on the Regional Origin-Destination Travel
Survey performed by the NCTCOG and the NHTS. The other adjustment to trip length is
the 50% origin-destination reduction to avoid double counting of trips. At this stage,
another important aspect of the state law is applied – the limit on transportation service
unit demand. If the adjusted trip length is above the maximum trip length allowed within
the service area, the maximum trip length used for calculation is reduced to the
corresponding value. This reduction, as discussed previously, limits the maximum trip
length to the approximate size of the service areas.
The remaining column in the LUVMET shows the vehicle-miles per development unit.
This number is the product of the trip rate and the maximum trip length. This number,
previously referred to as the Transportation Demand Factor, is used in the impact fee
estimate to compute the number of service units consumed by each land use application.
The number of service units is multiplied by the impact fee rate (established by City
ordinance) in order to determine the impact fee for a development.
The LUVMET for the 2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update was not changed from
the 2015 Roadway Impact Fee Update.
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 35 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
Table 2.12 Land Use / Vehicle-Mile Equivalency Table (LUVMET)
ITE Land
Use Code Development Unit
Trip Gen
Rate
(PM)
Pass-by
Rate
Pass-by
Source
Trip
Rate
NCTCOG
Trip Length
(mi)
Adj.
For
O-D
Adj. Trip
Length
(mi)
Max Trip
Length
(mi)
Veh-Mi
Per Dev-
Unit
PORT AND TERMINAL
Truck Terminal 030 Acre 6.55 6.55 10.02 50%5.01 4.00 26.20
INDUSTRIAL
General Light Industrial 110 1,000 SF GFA 0.97 0.97 10.02 50%5.01 4.00 3.88
General Heavy Industrial 120 1,000 SF GFA 0.68 0.68 10.02 50%5.01 4.00 2.72
Industrial Park 130 1,000 SF GFA 0.85 0.85 10.02 50%5.01 4.00 3.40
Warehousing 150 1,000 SF GFA 0.32 0.32 10.83 50%5.42 4.00 1.28
Mini-Warehouse 151 1,000 SF GFA 0.26 0.26 10.83 50%5.42 4.00 1.04
RESIDENTIAL
Single-Family Detached Housing 210 Dwelling Unit 1.00 1.00 17.21 50%8.61 4.00 4.00
Apartment/Multi-family 220 Dwelling Unit 0.62 0.62 17.21 50%8.61 4.00 2.48
Residential Condominium/Townhome 230 Dwelling Unit 0.52 0.52 17.21 50%8.61 4.00 2.08
Senior Adult Housing-Detached 251 Dwelling Unit 0.27 0.27 17.21 50%8.61 4.00 1.08
Senior Adult Housing-Attached 252 Dwelling Unit 0.25 0.25 17.21 50%8.61 4.00 1.00
Assisted Living 254 Beds 0.22 0.22 17.21 50%8.61 4.00 0.88
LODGING
Hotel 310 Room 0.60 0.60 6.43 50%3.22 3.22 1.93
Motel / Other Lodging Facilities 320 Room 0.47 0.47 6.43 50%3.22 3.22 1.51
RECREATIONAL
Golf Driving Range 432 Tee 1.25 1.25 6.43 50%3.22 3.22 4.03
Golf Course 430 Acre 0.30 0.30 6.43 50%3.22 3.22 0.97
Recreational Community Center 495 1,000 SF GFA 2.74 2.74 6.43 50%3.22 3.22 8.82
Ice Skating Rink 465 1,000 SF GFA 2.36 2.36 6.43 50%3.22 3.22 7.60
Miniature Golf Course 431 Hole 0.33 0.33 6.43 50%3.22 3.22 1.06
Multiplex Movie Theater 445 Screens 13.64 13.64 6.43 50%3.22 3.22 43.92
Racquet / Tennis Club 491 Court 3.35 3.35 6.43 50%3.22 3.22 10.79
INSTITUTIONAL 0.00
Church 560 1,000 SF GFA 0.55 0.55 4.20 50%2.10 2.10 1.16
Day Care Center 565 1,000 SF GFA 12.34 44%B 6.91 4.20 50%2.10 2.10 14.51
Primary/Middle School (1-8)522 Students 0.16 0.16 4.20 50%2.10 2.10 0.34
High School (9-12)530 Students 0.13 0.13 4.20 50%2.10 2.10 0.27
Junior / Community College 540 Students 0.12 0.12 4.20 50%2.10 2.10 0.25
University / College 550 Students 0.17 0.17 4.20 50%2.10 2.10 0.36
MEDICAL
Clinic 630 1,000 SF GFA 5.18 5.18 7.55 50%3.78 3.78 19.58
Hospital 610 1,000 SF GFA 0.93 0.93 7.55 50%3.78 3.78 3.52
Nursing Home 620 Beds 0.22 0.22 7.55 50%3.78 3.78 0.83
Animal Hospital/Veterinary Clinic 640 1,000 SF GFA 4.72 30%B 3.30 7.55 50%3.78 3.78 12.47
OFFICE
Corporate Headquarters Building 714 1,000 SF GFA 1.41 1.41 10.92 50%5.46 4.00 5.64
General Office Building 710 1,000 SF GFA 1.49 1.49 10.92 50%5.46 4.00 5.96
Medical-Dental Office Building 720 1,000 SF GFA 3.57 3.57 10.92 50%5.46 4.00 14.28
Single Tenant Office Building 715 1,000 SF GFA 1.74 1.74 10.92 50%5.46 4.00 6.96
Office Park 750 1,000 SF GFA 1.48 1.48 10.92 50%5.46 4.00 5.92
Land Use Category
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 36 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
Table 2.12 (Cont’d) Land Use / Vehicle-Mile Equivalency Table (LUVMET)
ITE Land
Use Code Development Unit
Trip Gen
Rate
(PM)
Pass-by
Rate
Pass-by
Source
Trip
Rate
NCTCOG
Trip Length
(mi)
Adj.
For
O-D
Adj. Trip
Length
(mi)
Max Trip
Length
(mi)
Veh-Mi
Per Dev-
Unit
COMMERCIAL
Automobile Related
Automobile Care Center 942 1,000 SF Occ. GLA 3.11 40%B 1.87 6.43 50%3.22 3.22 6.02
Automobile Parts Sales 843 1,000 SF GFA 5.98 43%A 3.41 6.43 50%3.22 3.22 10.98
Gasoline/Service Station 944 Vehicle Fueling Position 13.87 42%A 8.04 1.20 50%0.60 0.60 4.82
Gasoline/Service Station w/ Conv Market 945 Vehicle Fueling Position 13.51 56%B 5.94 1.20 50%0.60 0.60 3.56
Gasoline/Service Station w/ Conv Market and Car Wash 946 Vehicle Fueling Position 13.86 56%A 6.10 1.20 50%0.60 0.60 3.66
New and Used Car Sales 841 1,000 SF GFA 2.62 20%B 2.10 6.43 50%3.22 3.22 6.76
Quick Lubrication Vehicle Shop 941 Servicing Positions 5.19 40%B 3.11 6.43 50%3.22 3.22 10.01
Self-Service Car Wash 947 Stall 5.54 40%B 3.32 1.20 50%0.60 0.60 1.99
Tire Store 848 1,000 SF GFA 4.15 28%A 2.99 6.43 50%3.22 3.22 9.63
Dining
Fast Food Restaurant with Drive-Thru Window 934 1,000 SF GFA 32.65 50%A 16.33 4.79 50%2.40 2.40 39.19
Fast Food Restaurant without Drive-Thru Window 933 1,000 SF GFA 26.15 50%B 13.08 4.79 50%2.40 2.40 31.39
High Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant 932 1,000 SF GFA 9.85 43%A 5.61 4.79 50%2.40 2.40 13.46
Sit Down Restaurant 931 1,000 SF GFA 7.49 44%A 4.19 4.79 50%2.40 2.40 10.06
Coffee/Donut Shop with Drive-Thru Window 937 1,000 SF GFA 42.80 70%A 12.84 4.79 50%2.40 2.40 30.82
Other Retail
Free-Standing Retail Store 815 1,000 SF GFA 4.98 30%C 3.49 6.43 50%3.22 3.22 11.24
Nursery (Garden Center)817 1,000 SF GFA 6.94 30%B 4.86 6.43 50%3.22 3.22 15.65
Home Improvement Superstore 862 1,000 SF GFA 2.33 48%A 1.21 6.43 50%3.22 3.22 3.90
Pharmacy/Drugstore 881 1,000 SF GFA 9.91 49%A 5.05 6.43 50%3.22 3.22 16.26
Shopping Center 820 1,000 SF GLA 3.71 34%A 2.45 6.43 50%3.22 3.22 7.89
Supermarket 850 1,000 SF GFA 9.48 36%A 6.07 6.43 50%3.22 3.22 19.55
Toy/Children's Superstore 864 1,000 SF GFA 4.99 30%B 3.49 6.43 50%3.22 3.22 11.24
Department Store 875 1,000 SF GFA 1.87 30%B 1.31 6.43 50%3.22 3.22 4.22
SERVICES
Walk-In Bank 911 1,000 SF GFA 12.13 40%B 7.28 3.39 50%1.70 1.70 12.38
Drive-In Bank 912 Drive-in Lanes 33.24 47%A 17.62 3.39 50%1.70 1.70 29.95
Hair Salon 918 1,000 SF GLA 1.45 30%B 1.02 3.39 50%1.70 1.70 1.73
Land Use Category
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 37 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
2.6 SAMPLE CALCULATIONS
The following section details two (2) examples of maximum assessable roadway impact fee
calculations.
Example 1:
·Development Type - One (1) Unit of Single-Family Housing in Service Area North
Roadway Impact Fee Calculation Steps – Example 1
Step
1
Determine Development Unit and Vehicle-Miles Per Development Unit
From Table 2.12 [Land Use – Vehicle Mile Equivalency Table]
Development Type: 1 Dwelling Unit of Single-Family Detached Housing
Number of Development Units: 1 Dwelling Unit
Veh-Mi Per Development Unit: 4.00
Step
2
Determine Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Per Service Unit
From Table 2.11, Line 13 [Maximum Assessable Fee Per Service Unit]
Maximum Fee for City of Southlake (Service Area North): $784 / vehicle-mile
Step
3
Determine Maximum Assessable Impact Fee
Impact Fee = # of Development Units * Veh-Mi Per Dev Unit * Max. Fee Per Service Unit
Impact Fee = 1 * 4.00 * $784
Maximum Assessable Impact Fee = $3,136
Example 2:
·Development Type – 125,000 square foot Home Improvement Superstore in Service
Area South
Roadway Impact Fee Calculation Steps – Example 2
Step
1
Determine Development Unit and Vehicle-Miles Per Development Unit
From Table 2.12 [Land Use – Vehicle Mile Equivalency Table]
Development Type: 125,000 square feet of Home Improvement Superstore
Development Unit: 1,000 square feet of Gross Floor Area
Veh-Mi Per Development Unit: 3.90
Step
2
Determine Maximum Assessable Impact Fee Per Service Unit
From Table 2.11, Line 13 [Maximum Assessable Fee Per Service Unit]
Maximum Fee for City of Southlake (Service Area South): $477 / vehicle-mile
Step
3
Determine Maximum Assessable Impact Fee
Impact Fee = # of Development Units * Veh-Mi Per Dev Unit * Max. Fee Per Service Unit
Impact Fee = 125 * 3.90 * $477
Maximum Assessable Impact Fee = $232,538
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 38 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
2.7 CONCLUSION
The City of Southlake has established a process to implement the assessment and collection of
roadway impact fees through the adoption of an impact fee ordinance that is consistent with
Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code.
This report establishes the maximum allowable roadway impact fee that could be assessed by the
City of Southlake. This report accounted for the addition of eleven projects to the CIP which
included the SH 114 WBFR (N-11), and intersection projects I-8 to I-17. With these additional
projects, the cost of the CIP rose from that calculated in the 2015 Roadway Impact Fee Update.
The maximum assessable roadway impact fee calculated in this report is $784 for Service Area
North and $477 for Service Area South (from Table 2.11) for the 2017 Roadway Impact Fee
Minor Update. The maximum assessable roadway impact fee rose $211 and $67 for Service Area
North and South, respectively.
This document serves as a guide to the assessment of roadway impact fees pertaining to future
development and the City’s need for roadway improvements to accommodate that growth.
Following the public hearing process, the City Council may establish an amount to be assessed
(if any) up to the maximum established within this report and update the Roadway Impact Fee
Ordinance accordingly.
In conclusion, it is our opinion that the data and methodology used in this update are appropriate
and consistent with Chapter 395 of the Texas Local Government Code. Furthermore, the Land
Use Assumptions and the proposed Capital Improvement Plan are appropriately incorporated
into the process.
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update 39 November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
APPENDICES
A. Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
B. CIP Service Unit Supply
C. Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
A.APPENDIX A –CONCEPTUAL LEVEL PROJECT COST PROJECTIONS
DR
A
F
T
Roadway Improvements - Service Area North (N)
IF Classification
From To
N-1 A4D(100)(1/2)Kirkwood Blvd. (1)Tyler St.Stockton Dr.1,300,000$
N-2 A4D(100)Kirkwood Blvd. (2)E. Dove Rd.N White Chapel Blvd.3,504,300$
N-3 A4D(88)N White Chapel Blvd. (1)E. Dove Rd.Kirkwood Blvd.1,850,000$
N-4 A4D(88)(1/2)N White Chapel Blvd. (2)Kirkwood Blvd.SH 114 WBFR 1,050,000$
N-5 A4D(100)E Kirkwood Blvd. (3)Carillon Development Existing Highland St.5,699,000$
N-6 A4U(88)E Kirkwood Blvd. (4)Existing Highland St.N. Carroll Ave.822,000$
N-7 A4D(88)E Kirkwood Blvd. (5)N. Carroll Ave.Highland St.1,159,000$
N-8 A4D(100)(1/2)E Kirkwood Blvd. (6)Highland St.835 Feet West of Blessed Way 2,625,000$
N-9 A4D(100)(1/2)E Kirkwood Blvd. (7)935 Feet East of Blessed Way N Kimball Ave.861,600$
N-10 A4D(88)N Kimball Ave.E. Dove Rd.SH 114 10,383,832$
N-11 Frontage Road SH 114 WBFR Kirkwood Blvd.E. Dove Rd.9,000,000$
I-1 Intersection Improvement
(WB and NB right-turn)300,000$
I-2 Roundabout 1,500,000$
I-3 Signal Installation 200,000$
I-9
Intersection Improvement
(WB and NB right-turn)150,000$
I-10 U-turn Lanes 600,000$
TOTAL 41,004,732$
City of Southlake - 2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees
Summary of Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
#Project Limits Project Cost
N. White Chapel Blvd. & E. Dove Rd.
N. Carroll Ave. & Highland St. (Kirkwood Blvd.)
N. Kimball Ave. & Kirkwood Blvd.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the
City of Southlake. The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project.
Intersection Improvements
Kirkwood Blvd. & SH 114
E. Dove Rd. & SH 114
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
DR
A
F
T
City of Southlake Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update updated:11/9/2017
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.N-1
Name:Kirkwood Blvd. (1)
Limits:Tyler St. to Stockton Dr.
Impact Fee Class:A4D(100)(1/2)
Ultimate Class:4-Lane Divided Arterial
Length (lf):2,100
Service Area(s):N
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
City Contribution to Construction Cost:-980,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing 320,000$
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:No ROW Acquisition Costs included
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:1,300,000$
This project consists of the widening of an existing
two-lane concrete facility to a four-lane divided
arterial. This projects is included in the FY 2015 CIP
with an anticipated City contribution of $1,300,000.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Southlake.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the determination
of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
DR
A
F
T
City of Southlake Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update updated:11/9/2017
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.N-2
Name:Kirkwood Blvd. (2)
Limits:E. Dove Rd. to N White Chapel Blvd.
Impact Fee Class:A4D(100)
Ultimate Class:4-Lane Divided Arterial
Length (lf):2,295
Service Area(s):N
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
108 Unclassified Street Excavation 16,830 cy 10.00$168,300$
208 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)13,770 sy 6.00$82,620$
308 8" Concrete Pavement 12,750 sy 46.00$586,500$
323 4" Topsoil 10,455 sy 2.50$26,138$
508 5' Concrete Sidewalk 22,950 sf 4.50$103,275$
608 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 1,217 sy 52.00$63,286$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:1,030,119$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$
√Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%30,904$
√Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 35%360,542$
√Illumination 6%61,807$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%
√Water Minor Adjustments 3%30,904$
√Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%20,602$
√Establish Turf/Erosion Control 2%20,602$
√Basic Landscaping and Irrigation 4%41,205$
Miscellaneous:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:566,565$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,596,684$
Construction Contingency:15%239,503$
Mobilization 5%79,834$
Prep ROW 3%47,901$
Construction Cost TOTAL:1,964,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-1,964,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%392,800$
Previous City contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Assumed $5 per square foot $5 1,147,500$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:3,504,300$
This project consists of the construction of a new
four-lane divided arterial.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Southlake
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained or the determination of the City Engineer for a
specific project.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
DR
A
F
T
City of Southlake Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update updated:11/9/2017
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.N-3
Name:N White Chapel Blvd. (1)
Limits:E. Dove Rd. to Kirkwood Blvd.
Impact Fee Class:A4D(88)
Ultimate Class:4-Lane Divided Arterial
Length (lf):1,800
Service Area(s):N
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
City Contribution to Construction Cost:-1,480,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing 370,000$
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:No ROW Acquisition Costs included
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:1,850,000$
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane asphalt facility to a four-lane
divided arterial. This projects is included in the FY
2015 CIP with an anticipated City contribution of
$1,850,000.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Southlake.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the determination
of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
DR
A
F
T
City of Southlake Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update updated:11/9/2017
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.N-4
Name:N White Chapel Blvd. (2)
Limits:Kirkwood Blvd. to SH 114 WBFR
Impact Fee Class:A4D(88)(1/2)
Ultimate Class:4-Lane Divided Arterial
Length (lf):1,205
Service Area(s):N
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
City Contribution to Construction Cost:-800,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing 250,000$
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:No ROW Acquisition Costs included
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:1,050,000$
This project consists of the construction of the two
southbound lanes to complete a four-lane divided
arterial. The two northbound lanes are assumed to
be developer built based on an existing agreement.
This projects is included in the FY 2015 CIP with an
anticipated City contribution of $1,050,000.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Southlake.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the determination
of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
DR
A
F
T
City of Southlake Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update updated:11/9/2017
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.N-5
Name:E Kirkwood Blvd. (3)
Limits:Carillon Development to Existing Highland St.
Impact Fee Class:A4D(100)
Ultimate Class:4-Lane Divided Arterial
Length (lf):2,240
Service Area(s):N
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
City Contribution to Construction Cost:-
Engineering/Survey/Testing
Other Standard Bridge Construction and Design 3,250,000$
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Assumed $5 per square foot 699,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:5,699,000$
This project consists of the construction
of a new four-lane divided arterial.
Based on the Kirkwood Boulevard
Alignment Study (August 2014), the
estimated cost was $5,000,000 for
construction, engineering, survey, and
testing.
1,750,000$
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Southlake.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the determination
of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
DR
A
F
T
City of Southlake Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update updated:11/9/2017
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.N-6
Name:E Kirkwood Blvd. (4)
Limits:Existing Highland St. to N. Carroll Ave.
Impact Fee Class:A4U(88)
Ultimate Class:4-Lane Undivided Arterial
Length (lf):840
Service Area(s):N
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
City Contribution to Construction Cost:-
Engineering/Survey/Testing
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Assumed $5 per square foot 72,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:822,000$
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane asphalt facility into a four-lane
undivided arterial. Based on the Kirkwood
Boulevard Alignment Study (August 2014), the
estimated cost was $750,000 for construction,
engineering, survey, and testing.
750,000$
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Southlake.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the determination
of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
DR
A
F
T
City of Southlake Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update updated:11/9/2017
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.N-7
Name:E Kirkwood Blvd. (5)
Limits:N. Carroll Ave. to Highland St.
Impact Fee Class:A4D(88)
Ultimate Class:4-Lane Divided Arterial
Length (lf):840
Service Area(s):N
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
City Contribution to Construction Cost:-
Engineering/Survey/Testing
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Assumed $5 per square foot 159,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:1,159,000$
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane asphalt facility into a four-lane
divided arterial. Based on the Kirkwood Boulevard
Alignment Study (August 2014), the estimated cost
was $1,000,000 for construction, engineering,
survey, and testing.
1,000,000$
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Southlake.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the determination
of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
DR
A
F
T
City of Southlake Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update updated:11/9/2017
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.N-8
Name:E Kirkwood Blvd. (6)
Limits:Highland St. to 835 Feet West of Blessed Way
Impact Fee Class:A4D(100)(1/2)
Ultimate Class:4-Lane Divided Arterial
Length (lf):1,730
Service Area(s):N
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
City Contribution to Construction Cost:-
Engineering/Survey/Testing
Other Cost of original two lanes 1,825,000$
ROW/Easement Acquisition:No ROW Acquisition Costs included
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:2,625,000$
800,000$
This project consists of the widening an
existing two-lane concrete facility into a
four-lane divided arterial. Based on the
Kirkwood Boulevard Alignment Study
(August 2014), the estimated cost was
$800,000 for construction, engineering,
survey, and testing. Note this project
includes the previous City cost of the
existing northern two lanes and the
Highland St. & Kirkland Blvd.
intersection project.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Southlake.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the determination
of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
DR
A
F
T
City of Southlake Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update updated:11/9/2017
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.N-9
Name:E Kirkwood Blvd. (7)
Limits:935 Feet East of Blessed Way to N Kimball Ave.
Impact Fee Class:A4D(100)(1/2)
Ultimate Class:4-Lane Divided Arterial
Length (lf):1,540
Service Area(s):N
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
104 Unclassified Street Excavation 6,844 cy 10.00$68,444$
204 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)4,620 sy 6.00$27,720$
304 8" Concrete Pavement 4,278 sy 46.00$196,778$
319 4" Topsoil 4,534 sy 2.50$11,336$
504 5' Concrete Sidewalk 7,700 sf 4.50$34,650$
604 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 720 sy 52.00$37,416$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:376,345$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$
√Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%11,290$
√Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 35%131,721$
√Illumination 6%22,581$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%
√Water Minor Adjustments 3%11,290$
√Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%7,527$
√Establish Turf/Erosion Control 2%7,527$
√Basic Landscaping and Irrigation 4%15,054$
Miscellaneous:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:206,989$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:583,334$
Construction Contingency:15%87,500$
Mobilization 5%29,167$
Prep ROW 3%17,500$
Construction Cost TOTAL:718,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-718,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%143,600$
Previous City contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:No ROW Acquisition Costs included -$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:861,600$
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Southlake
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained or the determination of the City Engineer for a
specific project.
This project consists of the widening an
existing two-lane concrete facility into a
four-lane divided arterial.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
DR
A
F
T
City of Southlake Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update updated:11/9/2017
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.N-10
Name:N Kimball Ave.
Limits:E. Dove Rd. to SH 114
Impact Fee Class:A4D(88)
Ultimate Class:4-Lane Divided Arterial
Length (lf):6,225
Service Area(s):N
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
City Contribution to Construction Cost:-8,191,709$
Engineering/Survey/Testing 1,180,306$
Other $1,204,000 from the City of Grapevine (1,204,000)$
ROW/Easement Acquisition:2,215,816$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:10,383,832$
This project consisted of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane asphalt facility into a four-lane
divided arterial.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Southlake.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the determination
of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
DR
A
F
T
City of Southlake Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update updated:11/9/2017
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.N-11
Name:SH 114 WBFR
Limits:Kirkwood Blvd. to E. Dove Rd.
Impact Fee Class:Frontage Road
Ultimate Class:2-Lane Frontage Road
Length (lf):5,100
Service Area(s):N
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
City Contribution to Construction Cost:-9,000,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:9,000,000$
This project consists of the construction of a new
two-lane frontage road. It is anticipated that the City
will contribute $9,000,000 to this project.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Southlake.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the determination
of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
DR
A
F
T
Roadway Improvements - Service Area South (S)
From To
S-1 B-3 A4D(130-140) FM 1938 Phase 2 Randol Mill Bend West Southlake Pkwy.3,465,000$
S-2 B-5, C-18 A4D(88)N White Chapel Blvd. Phase 1 SH 114 Highland St.5,452,128$
S-3 B-5, C-18 A4D(88)N White Chapel Blvd. Phase 2 Highland St.Emerald Blvd.5,537,858$
S-4 B-1 A3U(70)N Pearson Ln.Florence Rd.West Southlake Blvd.4,778,300$
S-5 N/A C2U(60)Tower Dr. & Zena Rucker Rd.East Southlake Blvd.S. Carrol Ave.662,118$
S-6 C-9 C2U(60)Zena Rucker Rd.935' East of Byron Nelson Pkwy. Tower Dr.1,026,000$
S-7 C-10 A4D(88)(1/2)S Carroll Ave. (1)Zena Rucker Rd.Westmont Dr.200,000$
S-8 C-11 A4D(88)(1/2)S Carroll Ave. (2)120 ft. South of Versailles 290 ft. North of Breeze Way 331,960$
S-9 C-13 C2U(60)Village Center Dr. (1)700 ft. South of Southlake Blvd.George Dawson Driveway 2,476,675$
S-10 N/A C2U(60)Village Center Dr. (2)S Kimball Ave.S Nolen Dr.1,684,500$
S-11 C-12 A4D(94)Brumlow Ave.East Continental Blvd.250' North of Southern City Limits 4,904,625$
S-12 C-7 A3U(70)W Highland St.White Chapel Rd.SH 114 2,615,700$
I-4 Roundabout 1,500,000$
I-5 Roundabout 2,500,000$
I-6 Roundabout 1,500,000$
I-7 Roundabout 2,410,000$
I-8 Intersection Improvement (SB right-
turn)150,000$
I-11 Intersection Improvement (NB &
SB left-turn)120,000$
I-12 Intersection Improvement (SB right-
turn and extend NB left-turn)458,000$
I-13 Intersection Improvement (EB &
WB left-turn)2,100,000$
I-14 Intersection Improvement (SB right-
turn)323,000$
I-15 Roundabout 1,500,000$
I-16 Intersection Improvement (NB right-
turn)140,000$
I-17
Intersection Improvement (NB right-
turn, EB left and right-turn, WB left-
turn)
760,000$
TOTAL 46,595,864$
Shady Oaks Dr. & W. Highland St.
W. Continental Blvd. & Davis Blvd.
W. Southlake Blvd. & N. Pearson Ln.
W. Southlake Blvd. & N. White Chapel Blvd.
E. Southlake Blvd. & N. Carroll Ave.
E. Southlake Blvd. & N. Kimball Ave.
E. Dove Rd. & Shady Oaks Dr.
E. Dove Rd. & SH 114
Project Cost
City of Southlake - 2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
Capital Improvement Plan for Roadway Impact Fees
Summary of Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
ProjectIF Class#2007 #
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Southlake.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards or the determination of the City Engineer for a specific project.
Continental Blvd. & Peytonville Ave.
Continental Blvd. & Byron Nelson Pkwy.
N. White Chapel Blvd. & Highland St.
Dove Rd. & Peytonville Ave.
Intersection Improvements
Limits
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
DR
A
F
T
City of Southlake Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update updated:11/9/2017
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.S-1
Name:FM 1938 Phase 2
Limits:Randol Mill Bend to West Southlake Pkwy.
Impact Fee Class:A4D(130-140)
Ultimate Class:4-Lane Divided Arterial
Length (lf):8,235
Service Area(s):S
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
City Contribution to Construction Cost:-2,760,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing 1,115,000$
Other $660,000 Roadway Impact Fee Fund (660,000)$
ROW/Easement Acquisition:250,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:3,465,000$
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane asphalt facility to a four-lane
divided arterial. This projects is included in the FY
2015 CIP with an anticipated City contribution of
$3,465,000.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Southlake.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the determination
of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
DR
A
F
T
City of Southlake Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update updated:11/9/2017
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.S-2
Name:N White Chapel Blvd. Phase 1
Limits:SH 114 to Highland St.
Impact Fee Class:A4D(88)
Ultimate Class:4-Lane Divided Arterial
Length (lf):1,745
Service Area(s):S
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
City Contribution to Construction Cost:-7,077,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing 537,065$
Other $1,414,000 Roadway Impact Fee Fund / $1,225,000 Utility Fund (2,639,000)$
ROW/Easement Acquisition:477,063$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:5,452,128$
This project consisted of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane asphalt facility into a four-lane
divided arterial.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Southlake.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the determination
of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
DR
A
F
T
City of Southlake Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update updated:11/9/2017
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.S-3
Name:N White Chapel Blvd. Phase 2
Limits:Highland St. to Emerald Blvd.
Impact Fee Class:A4D(88)
Ultimate Class:4-Lane Divided Arterial
Length (lf):4,300
Service Area(s):S
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
City Contribution to Construction Cost:-7,077,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing 622,795$
Other $1,414,000 Roadway Impact Fee Fund / $1,225,000 Utility Fund (2,639,000)$
ROW/Easement Acquisition:477,063$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:5,537,858$
This project consisted of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane asphalt facility into a four-lane
divided arterial.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Southlake.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the determination
of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
DR
A
F
T
City of Southlake Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update updated:11/9/2017
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.S-4
Name:N Pearson Ln.
Limits:Florence Rd. to West Southlake Blvd.
Impact Fee Class:A3U(70)
Ultimate Class:3-Lane Arterial
Length (lf):5,300
Service Area(s):S
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
103 Unclassified Street Excavation 23,556 cy 10.00$235,556$
203 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)22,967 sy 6.00$137,800$
303 8" Concrete Pavement 21,789 sy 46.00$1,002,289$
318 4" Topsoil 13,544 sy 2.50$33,861$
503 5' Concrete Sidewalk 53,000 sf 4.50$238,500$
603 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 669 sy 52.00$34,798$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:1,682,804$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$
√Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%50,484$
√Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 35%588,981$
√Illumination 6%100,968$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%
√Water Minor Adjustments 3%50,484$
√Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%33,656$
√Establish Turf/Erosion Control 2%33,656$
√Basic Landscaping and Irrigation 4%67,312$
Miscellaneous:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:925,542$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:2,608,345$
Construction Contingency:15%391,252$
Mobilization 5%130,417$
Prep ROW 3%78,250$
Construction Cost TOTAL:3,209,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-3,209,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%641,800$
Previous City contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Assumed $5 per square foot 927,500$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:4,778,300$
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane asphalt facility into a new three-
lane arterial.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained or the determination of the City Engineer for a
specific project.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Southlake
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
DR
A
F
T
City of Southlake Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update updated:11/9/2017
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.S-5
Name:Tower Dr. & Zena Rucker Rd.
Limits:East Southlake Blvd. to S. Carrol Ave.
Impact Fee Class:C2U(60)
Ultimate Class:2-Lane Collector
Length (lf):1,850
Service Area(s):S
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
City Contribution to Construction Cost:-662,118$
Engineering/Survey/Testing
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:662,118$
This project consisted of the construction of two
collector facilities. This City contributed $663,000
to the construction of these facilities.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Southlake.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the determination
of the City Engineer for a specific project.
City contributions: Caroll Median & Drive-lane
Improvements ($237,538), Zena Rucker &
Decel Ln. Construction ($44,097), Tower Blvd.
& Decel Ln. Construction ($262,144), Tower
Blvd. Signal ($118,339).
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
DR
A
F
T
City of Southlake Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update updated:11/9/2017
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.S-6
Name:Zena Rucker Rd.
Limits:935' East of Byron Nelson Pkwy. to Tower Dr.
Impact Fee Class:C2U(60)
Ultimate Class:2-Lane Collector
Length (lf):1,020
Service Area(s):S
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
101 Unclassified Street Excavation 4,533 cy 10.00$45,333$
201 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)4,420 sy 6.00$26,520$
301 8" Concrete Pavement 4,193 sy 46.00$192,893$
316 4" Topsoil 1,473 sy 2.50$3,683$
501 5' Concrete Sidewalk 10,200 sf 4.50$45,900$
601 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 0 sy 52.00$-$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:314,330$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$
√Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%9,430$
√Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 35%110,016$
√Illumination 6%18,860$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%
√Water Minor Adjustments 3%9,430$
√Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%6,287$
√Establish Turf/Erosion Control 2%6,287$
√Basic Landscaping and Irrigation 4%12,573$
Miscellaneous:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:172,882$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:487,212$
Construction Contingency:15%73,082$
Mobilization 5%24,361$
Prep ROW 3%14,616$
Construction Cost TOTAL:600,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-600,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%120,000$
Previous City contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Assumed $5 per square foot 306,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:1,026,000$
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained or the determination of the City Engineer for a
specific project.
This project consists of the construction
of a new two-lane collector.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Southlake
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
DR
A
F
T
City of Southlake Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update updated:11/9/2017
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.S-7
Name:S Carroll Ave. (1)
Limits:Zena Rucker Rd. to Westmont Dr.
Impact Fee Class:A4D(88)(1/2)
Ultimate Class:4-Lane Divided Arterial
Length (lf):720
Service Area(s):S
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
City Contribution to Construction Cost:-338,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing 50,000$
Other $188,000 Roadway Impact Fee Fund (188,000)$
ROW/Easement Acquisition:
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:200,000$
This project consists of driveway modifications to
the Shops of Southlake and a traffic signal at the
intersection of S. Carroll Ave. & Zena Rucker Rd.
This projects is included in the FY 2015 CIP with an
anticipated City contribution of $200,000.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used for
any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Southlake.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained within the Subdivision Ordinance or the determination
of the City Engineer for a specific project.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
DR
A
F
T
City of Southlake Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update updated:11/9/2017
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.S-8
Name:S Carroll Ave. (2)
Limits:120 ft. South of Versailles to 290 ft. North of Breeze Way
Impact Fee Class:A4D(88)(1/2)
Ultimate Class:4-Lane Divided Arterial
Length (lf):500
Service Area(s):S
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
106 Unclassified Street Excavation 2,222 cy 10.00$22,222$
206 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)1,500 sy 6.00$9,000$
306 8" Concrete Pavement 1,389 sy 46.00$63,889$
321 4" Topsoil 1,194 sy 2.50$2,986$
506 5' Concrete Sidewalk 2,500 sf 4.50$11,250$
604 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 234 sy 52.00$12,148$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:121,495$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$
√Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%3,645$
√Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 35%42,523$
√Illumination 6%7,290$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%
√Water Minor Adjustments 3%3,645$
√Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%2,430$
√Establish Turf/Erosion Control 2%2,430$
√Basic Landscaping and Irrigation 4%4,860$
Miscellaneous:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:66,822$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:188,318$
Construction Contingency:15%28,248$
Mobilization 5%9,416$
Prep ROW 3%5,650$
Construction Cost TOTAL:232,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-232,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%46,400$
Previous City contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Assumed $5 per square foot 53,560$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:331,960$
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained or the determination of the City Engineer for a
specific project.
This project consists of the
widening of an existing two-
lane facility into a four-lane
divided arterial.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Southlake
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
DR
A
F
T
City of Southlake Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update updated:11/9/2017
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.S-9
Name:Village Center Dr. (1)
Limits:700 ft. South of Southlake Blvd. to George Dawson Driveway
Impact Fee Class:C2U(60)
Ultimate Class:2-Lane Collector
Length (lf):2,340
Service Area(s):S
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
101 Unclassified Street Excavation 10,400 cy 10.00$104,000$
201 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)10,140 sy 6.00$60,840$
301 8" Concrete Pavement 9,620 sy 46.00$442,520$
316 4" Topsoil 3,380 sy 2.50$8,450$
501 5' Concrete Sidewalk 23,400 sf 4.50$105,300$
601 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 0 sy 52.00$-$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:721,110$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$
√Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%21,633$
√Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 35%252,389$
√Illumination 6%43,267$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%
√Water Minor Adjustments 3%21,633$
√Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%14,422$
√Establish Turf/Erosion Control 2%14,422$
√Basic Landscaping and Irrigation 4%28,844$
Miscellaneous:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:396,611$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,117,721$
Construction Contingency:15%167,658$
Mobilization 5%55,886$
Prep ROW 3%33,532$
Construction Cost TOTAL:1,375,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-1,375,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%275,000$
Previous City contribution
Other Roadway Adjacent to George Dawson 124,675$
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Assumed $5 per square foot 702,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:2,476,675$
This project consists of the
construction of a new two-lane
collector. Note that $124,675
was included for the City's
contribution to George Dawson
Driveway.
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained or the determination of the City Engineer for a
specific project.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Southlake
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
DR
A
F
T
City of Southlake Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update updated:11/9/2017
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.S-10
Name:Village Center Dr. (2)
Limits:S Kimball Ave. to S Nolen Dr.
Impact Fee Class:C2U(60)
Ultimate Class:2-Lane Collector
Length (lf):1,735
Service Area(s):S
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
101 Unclassified Street Excavation 7,711 cy 10.00$77,111$
201 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)7,518 sy 6.00$45,110$
301 8" Concrete Pavement 7,133 sy 46.00$328,108$
316 4" Topsoil 2,506 sy 2.50$6,265$
501 5' Concrete Sidewalk 17,350 sf 4.50$78,075$
601 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 0 sy 52.00$-$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:534,669$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$
√Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%16,040$
√Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 35%187,134$
√Illumination 6%32,080$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%
√Water Minor Adjustments 3%16,040$
√Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%10,693$
√Establish Turf/Erosion Control 2%10,693$
√Basic Landscaping and Irrigation 4%21,387$
Miscellaneous:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:294,068$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:828,737$
Construction Contingency:15%124,311$
Mobilization 5%41,437$
Prep ROW 3%24,862$
Construction Cost TOTAL:1,020,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-1,020,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%204,000$
Previous City contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Assumed $5 per square foot 460,500$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:1,684,500$
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained or the determination of the City Engineer for a
specific project.
This project consists of the construction of a new
two-lane collector.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Southlake
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
DR
A
F
T
City of Southlake Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update updated:11/9/2017
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.S-11
Name:Brumlow Ave.
Limits:East Continental Blvd. to 250' North of Southern City Limits
Impact Fee Class:A4D(94)
Ultimate Class:4-Lane Divided Arterial
Length (lf):4,035
Service Area(s):S
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
109 Unclassified Street Excavation 17,933 cy 10.00$179,333$
209 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)24,210 sy 6.00$145,260$
309 8" Concrete Pavement 23,313 sy 46.00$1,072,413$
324 4" Topsoil 15,692 sy 2.50$39,229$
509 5' Concrete Sidewalk 40,350 sf 4.50$181,575$
609 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 2,140 sy 52.00$111,268$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:1,729,079$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$
√Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%51,872$
√Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 35%605,178$
√Illumination 6%103,745$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%
√Water Minor Adjustments 3%51,872$
√Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%34,582$
√Establish Turf/Erosion Control 2%34,582$
√Basic Landscaping and Irrigation 4%69,163$
Miscellaneous:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:950,993$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:2,680,072$
Construction Contingency:15%402,011$
Mobilization 5%134,004$
Prep ROW 3%80,402$
Construction Cost TOTAL:3,297,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-3,297,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%659,400$
Previous City contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Assumed $5 per square foot 948,225$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:4,904,625$
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained or the determination of the City Engineer for a
specific project.
This project consists of the
reconstruction of an existing
two-lane asphalt facility into a
four-lane divided arterial.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Southlake
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
DR
A
F
T
City of Southlake Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update updated:11/9/2017
Conceptual Level Project Cost Projection
Project Information:Description:Project No.S-12
Name:W Highland St.
Limits:White Chapel Rd. to SH 114
Impact Fee Class:A3U(70)
Ultimate Class:3-Lane Arterial
Length (lf):3,165
Service Area(s):S
Roadway Construction Cost Projection
No.Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost
103 Unclassified Street Excavation 14,067 cy 10.00$140,667$
203 6" Lime Stabilization (with Lime @ 27#/sy)13,715 sy 6.00$82,290$
303 8" Concrete Pavement 13,012 sy 46.00$598,537$
318 4" Topsoil 8,088 sy 2.50$20,221$
503 5' Concrete Sidewalk 31,650 sf 4.50$142,425$
603 Turn Lanes and Median Openings 400 sy 52.00$20,780$
Paving Construction Cost Subtotal:1,004,919$
Major Construction Component Allowances**:
Item Description Notes Allowance Item Cost
Traffic Control None Anticipated 0%-$
√Pavement Markings/Signs/Posts Includes Striping/Signs for Bicycle Facilties 3%30,148$
√Roadway Drainage Standard Internal System 35%351,722$
√Illumination 6%60,295$
Special Drainage Structures None Anticipated 0%
√Water Minor Adjustments 3%30,148$
√Sewer Minor Adjustments 2%20,098$
√Establish Turf/Erosion Control 2%20,098$
√Basic Landscaping and Irrigation 4%40,197$
Miscellaneous:$0 -$
**Allowances based on % of Paving Construction Cost Subtotal Allowance Subtotal:552,706$
Paving and Allowance Subtotal:1,557,625$
Construction Contingency:15%233,644$
Mobilization 5%77,881$
Prep ROW 3%46,729$
Construction Cost TOTAL:1,916,000$
Impact Fee Project Cost Summary
Item Description Notes:Allowance Item Cost
Construction:-1,916,000$
Engineering/Survey/Testing:20%383,200$
Previous City contribution
Other
ROW/Easement Acquisition:Assumed $5 per square foot 316,500$
Impact Fee Project Cost TOTAL:2,615,700$
The planning level cost projections shall not supersede the City’s design standards contained or the determination of the City Engineer for a
specific project.
This project consists of the reconstruction of an
existing two-lane asphalt facility into a three-lane
arterial.
NOTE: The planning level cost projections listed in this appendix have been developed for Impact Fee calculations only and should not be used
for any future Capital Improvement Planning within the City of Southlake
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix A - Conceptual Level Project Cost Projections
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
B.APPENDIX B –CIP SERVICE UNITS OF SUPPLY
DR
A
F
T
Service Area North 11/9/2017
VEH-MI VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS
LENGTH CAPACITY SUPPLY TOTAL CAPACITY
(MI)PK-HR PK-HR DEMAND PK-HR
PER LN TOTAL PK-HR VEH-MI
N-1 Kirkwood Blvd. (1)Tyler St. to Stockton Dr.0.40 4 A4D(100)(1/2)552 725 1153 220 933 1,300,000$
N-2 Kirkwood Blvd. (2)E. Dove Rd. to N White Chapel Blvd.0.43 4 A4D(100)0 725 1261 0 1261 3,504,300$
N-3 N White Chapel Blvd. (1)E. Dove Rd. to Kirkwood Blvd.0.34 4 A4D(88)447 725 989 152 837 1,850,000$
N-4 N White Chapel Blvd. (2)Kirkwood Blvd. to SH 114 WBFR 0.23 4 A4D(88)(1/2)447 725 662 102 560 1,050,000$
N-5 E Kirkwood Blvd. (3)Carillon Development to Existing Highland St.0.42 4 A4D(100)0 725 1230 0 1,230 5,699,000$
N-6 E Kirkwood Blvd. (4)Existing Highland St. to N. Carroll Ave.0.16 4 A4U(88)545 650 414 87 327 822,000$
N-7 E Kirkwood Blvd. (5)N. Carroll Ave. to Highland St.0.16 4 A4D(88)545 725 461 87 374 1,159,000$
N-8 E Kirkwood Blvd. (6)Highland St. to 835 Feet West of Blessed Way 0.33 4 A4D(100)(1/2)370 725 950 121 829 2,625,000$
N-9 E Kirkwood Blvd. (7)935 Feet East of Blessed Way to N Kimball Ave.0.29 4 A4D(100)(1/2)281 725 846 82 764 861,600$
N-10 N Kimball Ave.E. Dove Rd. to SH 114 1.18 4 A4D(88)1,249 725 3419 1,473 1,946 10,383,832$
N-11 SH 114 WBFR Kirkwood Blvd. to E. Dove Rd.0.97 2 Frontage Road 0 900 1739 0 1,739 9,000,000$
I-1 N. White Chapel Blvd. & E. Dove Rd.300,000$
I-2 N. Carroll Ave. & Highland St. (Kirkwood Blvd.)1,500,000$
I-3 N. Kimball Ave. & Kirkwood Blvd.200,000$
I-9 E. Dove Rd. & SH 114 150,000$
I-10 Kirkwood Blvd. & SH 114 600,000$
13,124 2,324 10,800 41,004,732$
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update Cost Per Service Area 15,167$
TOTAL COST IN SERVICE AREA N $41,019,899
SUBTOTAL
City of Southlake - 2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
CIP Service Units of Supply
Project ID
#ROADWAY LIMITS LANES IMPACT FEE
CLASSIFICATION
PEAK
HOUR
VOLUME
TOTAL PROJECT
COST
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix B - Roadway Impact Fee CIP Service Units of Suppy
DR
A
F
T
Service Area South 11/9/2017
VEH-MI VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS
LENGTH CAPACITY SUPPLY TOTAL CAPACITY
(MI)PK-HR PK-HR DEMAND PK-HR
PER LN TOTAL PK-HR VEH-MI
S-1 FM 1938 Phase 2 Randol Mill Bend to West Southlake Pkwy.1.56 4 A4D(130-140)1,244 725 4523 1,940 2,583 3,465,000$
S-2 N White Chapel Blvd. Phase 1 SH 114 to Highland St.0.33 4 A4D(88)1,160 725 958 383 575 5,452,128$
S-3 N White Chapel Blvd. Phase 2 Highland St. to Emerald Blvd.0.81 4 A4D(88)1,245 725 2362 1014 1348 5,537,858$
S-4 N Pearson Ln.Florence Rd. to West Southlake Blvd.1.00 2 A3U(70)514 650 1305 516 789 4,778,300$
S-5 Tower Dr. & Zena Rucker Rd.East Southlake Blvd. to S. Carrol Ave.0.35 2 C2U(60)0 525 368 0 368 662,118$
S-6 Zena Rucker Rd.935' East of Byron Nelson Pkwy. to Tower Dr.0.19 2 C2U(60)0 525 203 0 203 1,026,000$
S-7 S Carroll Ave. (1)Zena Rucker Rd. to Westmont Dr.0.14 4 A4D(88)(1/2)1,434 725 395 196 199 200,000$
S-8 S Carroll Ave. (2)120 ft. South of Versailles to 290 ft. North of Breeze Way 0.09 4 A4D(88)(1/2)1,434 725 275 136 139 331,960$
S-9 Village Center Dr. (1)700 ft. South of Southlake Blvd. to George Dawson Driveway 0.44 2 C2U(60)0 525 465 0 465 2,476,675$
S-10 Village Center Dr. (2)S Kimball Ave. to S Nolen Dr.0.33 2 C2U(60)0 525 345 0 345 1,684,500$
S-11 Brumlow Ave.East Continental Blvd. to 250' North of Southern City Limits 0.76 4 A4D(94)1,456 725 2216 1,113 1,103 4,904,625$
S-12 W Highland St.White Chapel Rd. to SH 114 0.60 2 A3U(70)235 650 779 141 638 2,615,700$
I-4 Continental Blvd. & Peytonville Ave.1,500,000$
I-5 Continental Blvd. & Byron Nelson Pkwy.2,500,000$
I-6 N. White Chapel Blvd. & Highland St.1,500,000$
I-7 Dove Rd. & Peytonville Ave.2,410,000$
I-8 E. Dove Rd. & SH 114 150,000$
I-11 W. Southlake Blvd. & N. Pearson Ln.120,000$
I-12 W. Southlake Blvd. & N. White Chapel Blvd.458,000$
I-13 E. Southlake Blvd. & N. Carroll Ave.2,100,000$
I-14 E. Southlake Blvd. & N. Kimball Ave.323,000$
I-15 E. Dove Rd. & Shady Oaks Dr.1,500,000$
I-16 Shady Oaks Dr. & W. Highland St.140,000$
I-17 W. Continental Blvd. & Davis Blvd.760,000$
14,194 5,439 8,755 46,595,864$
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update Cost Per Service Area 15,167$
TOTAL COST IN SERVICE AREA S 46,611,031$
ROADWAY IMPACT FEE
CLASSIFICATION
SUBTOTAL
PEAK
HOUR
VOLUME
City of Southlake - 2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
CIP Service Units of Supply
TOTAL PROJECT
COST
Project ID
#LIMITS LANES
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix B - Roadway Impact Fee CIP Service Units of Suppy
DR
A
F
T
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update November 2017
City of Southlake, Texas
C.APPENDIX C –EXISTING ROADWAY FACILITIES INVENTORY SERVICE
DR
A
F
T
Service Area N 11/9/2017
% IN
ROADWAY FROM TO LENGTH LENGTH EXIST CLASS PEAK SERVICE CAPACITY
(ft)(mi)LANES AREA
NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB
Dove Rd.SH 114 Kirkwood Blvd 1183 0.22 2 2 4D-C Arterial (88')255 290 100%725 725 325 325 57 65 268 260
E Highland St.SH 114 Kirkwood Blvd.515 0.10 1 1 2U-A Collector (70')50 60 100%525 525 51 51 5 6 46 45
E Highland St.Kirkwood Blvd.N Kimbal Ave.4339 0.82 1 1 2U-A Collector (70')4 41 100%525 525 431 431 3 34 428 398
E Kirkwood Blvd.N White Chapel Blvd Southmont Dr 4559 0.86 2 2 4D-C Arterial (100')22 14 100%725 725 1,252 1,252 19 12 1,233 1,240
E Kirkwood Blvd.Southmont Dr Highland St.2239 0.42 0 0 Unbuilt Arterial (100')N/A N/A 100%525 525 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
E Kirkwood Blvd.Highland St.E Highland St.1460 0.28 1 1 2U-A Arterial (88')255 290 100%525 525 145 145 71 80 75 65
E Kirkwood Blvd.E Highland St.250 Feet East of Grace Ln.829 0.16 2 2 4D-C Arterial (100')171 199 100%725 725 228 228 27 31 201 196
E Kirkwood Blvd.250 Feet East of Grace Ln.800 Feet West of Blessed Way 1122 0.21 1 1 4D-C Arterial (100')147 109 100%725 725 154 154 31 23 123 131
E Kirkwood Blvd.800 Feet West of Blessed Way 800 Feet East of Blessed Way 1768 0.33 2 2 4D-C Arterial (100')147 109 100%725 725 486 486 49 36 436 449
E Kirkwood Blvd.800 Feet East of Blessed Way N Kimball Ave.1543 0.29 1 1 2U-C Arterial (100')183 98 100%525 525 153 153 53 29 100 125
East Bob Jones Rd North White Chapel Blvd.Homestead Ct.2336 0.44 1 1 2U-A Collector (70')15 33 100%525 525 232 232 7 15 226 218
East Dove Rd.Kirkwood Blvd.Eastern City Limits 13032 2.47 1 1 2U-A Arterial (88')260 241 100%525 525 1,296 1,296 642 595 654 701
Grace Ln.SH 114 600 Feet North of SH 114 616 0.12 2 2 4D-C Arterial (100')N/A N/A 100%725 725 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Grace Ln.600 Feet North of SH 114 Kirkwood Blvd.1008 0.19 0 0 Unbuilt Arterial (100')N/A N/A 100%525 525 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Kirkwood Blvd.SH 114 T. W. King Rd.1062 0.20 3 3 6D-C Arterial (100')230 322 100%800 800 483 483 46 65 436 418
Kirkwood Blvd.T. W. King Rd.Tyler St.4436 0.84 2 2 4D-C Arterial (100')230 322 100%725 725 1,218 1,218 193 271 1,025 948
Kirkwood Blvd.Tyler St.Stockton Dr.2102 0.40 1 1 2U-C Arterial (100')230 322 100%525 525 209 209 92 128 117 81
Kirkwood Blvd.Stockton Dr.E Dove Rd.441 0.08 2 2 4D-C Arterial (100')230 322 100%725 725 121 121 19 27 102 94
Kirkwood Blvd.E Dove Rd.N White Chapel Blvd.2295 0.43 0 0 Unbuilt Arterial (100')N/A N/A 100%525 525 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N Carroll Ave.Burney Ln SH 114 9991 1.89 1 1 2U-A Arterial (100')345 395 100%525 525 993 993 653 747 341 246
N Kimball Ave.Dove Kirkwood Blvd.6440 1.22 1 1 4D-C Arterial (88')628 384 100%725 725 884 884 766 468 118 416
N Kimball Ave.Kirkwood Blvd.SH 114 2571 0.49 2 2 4D-C Arterial (88')701 548 100%725 725 706 706 341 267 365 439
N White Chapel Blvd Northern City Limits 300 Feet North of Sam Bass Ridge Rd 405 0.08 1 1 2U-C Collector (70')N/A N/A 100%525 525 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N White Chapel Blvd 300 Feet North of Sam Bass Ridge Rd 320 Feet North of King Ranch Rd 3172 0.60 1 1 2U-A Collector (70')23 18 100%525 525 315 315 14 11 302 305
N White Chapel Blvd 320 Feet North of King Ranch Rd Clariden Ranch Rd 1534 0.29 2 2 3U-A Collector (70')267 180 100%650 650 283 283 78 52 206 231
N White Chapel Blvd Clariden Ranch Rd Dove 7879 1.49 1 1 2U-A Collector (70')267 180 100%525 525 783 783 398 269 385 515
N White Chapel Blvd Dove SH 114 3428 0.65 1 1 2U-A Arterial (88')267 180 100%525 525 341 341 173 117 168 224
T.W. King Rd.Northern City Limits 1200 Feet North of Westpark Cir.913 0.17 1 1 2U-C Collector (60')N/A N/A 100%525 525 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
T.W. King Rd.1200 Feet North of West Park Cir.Bob Jones Rd.4121 0.78 1 1 2U-A Collector (70')N/A N/A 100%525 525 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
T.W. King Rd.Bob Jones Rd.Plaza Dr.4001 0.76 1 1 2U-A Collector (70')47 39 100%525 525 398 398 36 30 362 368
T.W. King Rd. E Plaza Dr.Kirkwood Blvd.1715 0.32 2 2 4U-C Collector (70')47 39 100%650 650 422 422 15 13 407 410
W Bob Jones Rd T.W. King Road North White Chapel Blvd.3216 0.61 1 1 2U-A Collector (60')15 15 100%525 525 320 320 9 9 311 311
SUBTOTAL 96,271 18.23 12,231 12,231 3,798 3,399 8,434 8,832 0 0
24,462 7,196 17,266 0
PK-HR PK-HR
VEH-MI
DEFICIENCIES
VOL PER LN TOTAL TOTAL VEH-MI
City of Southlake - 2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory
PM VEH-MI VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS EXISTING
EXIST
LANES HOUR PK-HR PK-HR PK-HR
SUPPLY DEMAND CAPACITY
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix C - Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory
DR
A
F
T
Service Area S 11/9/2017
% IN
ROADWAY FROM TO LENGTH LENGTH EXIST CLASS FUTURE PEAK SERVICE CAPACITY
(ft)(mi)LANES LANES AREA
NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB
Brumlow Ave East Continental Blvd.250' North of Southern City Limits 4036 0.76 1 1 2U-A Arterial (94')4D-A 626 830 100%525 525 401 401 479 634 -77 -233 77 233
Byron Nelson Pkwy.East Southlake Blvd.Bryson Wy.2059 0.39 2 2 4D-C Arterial (88')4D-A 223 380 100%725 725 565 565 87 148 478 417
Byron Nelson Pkwy.Bryson Wy.Inwood Dr.1273 0.24 2 2 4U-C Arterial (88')4D-A 223 380 100%650 650 313 313 54 92 260 222
Byron Nelson Pkwy.Inwood Dr.East Continental Blvd.2436 0.46 2 2 4D-C Arterial (88')4D-A 223 380 100%725 725 669 669 103 175 566 494
Davis Blvd.West Southlake Blvd.Southern City Limits 4871 0.92 3 3 7U-C Arterial (130'-140')6D-A 1089 1460 100%750 750 2,076 2,076 1,005 1,347 1,071 729
Dove Rd.Western City Limits N Shady Oaks Dr.2849 0.54 1 1 2U-A Arterial (88')2U-A 780 325 100%525 525 283 283 421 175 -138 108 138
Dove Rd.N Shady Oaks Dr.SH 114 510 0.10 2 2 4D-C Arterial (88')2U-A 917 486 100%725 725 140 140 89 47 51 93
E Continental Blvd.White Chapel Blvd.Byron Nelson Pkwy.4214 0.80 1 1 2U-A Collector (84')2U-C 437 777 100%525 525 419 419 349 620 70 -201 201
E Continental Blvd.Byron Nelson Pkwy.South Carroll Ave.4258 0.81 1 1 2U-A Collector (84')2U-C 388 632 100%525 525 423 423 313 510 110 -86 86
E Continental Blvd.South Carroll Ave.Crooked Ln.3317 0.63 1 1 2U-A Collector (84')2U-C 342 651 100%525 525 330 330 215 409 115 -79 79
E Continental Blvd.Crooked Ln.South Kimbal Ave.1139 0.22 2 2 4U-C Collector (84')2U-C 276 540 100%650 650 280 280 60 116 221 164
E Southlake Blvd.White Chapel Blvd.Byron Nelson Pkwy.2497 0.47 3 3 7U-C Arterial (130'-140')6D-A 1702 2580 100%750 750 1,064 1,064 805 1,220 259 -156 156
E Southlake Blvd.Byron Nelson Pkwy.S Carroll Ave.2845 0.54 3 3 7U-C Arterial (130'-140')6D-A 1861 2665 100%750 750 1,212 1,212 1,003 1,436 210 -224 224
E Southlake Blvd.S Carroll Ave.S Kimball Ave.5342 1.01 3 3 7U-C Arterial (130'-140')6D-A 1556 2099 100%750 750 2,276 2,276 1,574 2,124 702 153
E Southlake Blvd.S Kimball Ave.Nolen Dr.1807 0.34 3 3 7U-C Arterial (130'-140')6D-A 1615 1812 100%750 750 770 770 553 620 217 150
E Southlake Blvd.Nolen Dr.Commerce St.1822 0.35 3 3 7U-C Arterial (130'-140')6D-A 1289 1434 100%750 750 776 776 445 495 332 282
E Southlake Blvd.Commerce St.SH 114 1163 0.22 3 3 7U-C Arterial (130'-140')6D-A 1289 1434 100%750 750 496 496 284 316 212 180
Florence Rd.N Pearson Ln.Randol Mill Ave.5312 1.01 1 1 2U-A Collector (60')2U-C 73 146 100%525 525 528 528 73 147 455 381
FM 1938 Northern City Limits Randol Mill Rd.2207 0.42 2 2 4D-C Arterial (130'-140')6D-A 315 863 100%725 725 606 606 132 361 474 245
Johnson Rd.N Pearson Ln.Randonl Mill Ave.5327 1.01 1 1 2U-A Collector (70')2U-C 233 233 100%525 525 530 530 235 235 295 295
N Carroll Ave.SH 114 East Southlake Blvd 3895 0.74 2 2 4D-A Arterial (100')4D-A 879 1180 100%725 725 1,070 1,070 648 870 421 199
N Nolen Dr.SH 114 300 Feet South of SH 114 291 0.06 1 1 3U-C Arterial (84')5U-A 335 318 100%650 650 36 36 18 18 17 18
N Nolen Dr.300 Feet South of SH 114 East Southlake Blvd.1034 0.20 2 2 5U-C Arterial (84')5U-A 328 437 100%725 725 284 284 64 86 220 198
N Pearson Ln.Florence Rd.West Southlake Blvd.5302 1.00 1 1 2U-A Arterial (70')3U-A 267 483 100%525 525 527 527 268 485 259 42
N Peytonville Ave.W Dove Rd.Southridge Lakes Pkwy.6449 1.22 1 1 2U-A Collector (70')2U-C 173 376 100%525 525 641 641 211 459 430 182
N Peytonville Ave.Southridge Lakes Pkwy.Corporate Cir 5337 1.01 1 1 2U-A Collector (60')2U-C 173 376 100%525 525 531 531 175 380 356 151
N Peytonville Ave.Corporate Cir West Southlake Blvd.472 0.09 2 2 5U-A Arterial (88')4D-A 293 387 100%725 725 130 130 26 35 103 95
N White Chapel Blvd SH 114 Ascot Dr.3111 0.59 1 1 2U-A Arterial (94')4D-A 508 652 100%525 525 309 309 299 384 10 -75 75
N White Chapel Blvd Ascot Dr.W Chapel Downs Dr.1149 0.22 1 1 3U-A Arterial (94')4D-A 496 749 100%650 650 141 141 108 163 34 -22 22
N White Chapel Blvd W Chapel Downs Dr.Emerald Blvd.1777 0.34 1 1 2U-A Arterial (94')4D-A 496 749 100%525 525 177 177 167 252 10 -75 75
N White Chapel Blvd Emerald Blvd.East Southlake Blvd.1058 0.20 2 2 5U-A Arterial (94')4D-A 496 749 100%725 725 291 291 99 150 191 140
Randol Mill Ave FM 1938 West Southlake Blvd.8234 1.56 1 1 2U-A Arterial (130'-140')6D-A 488 756 100%525 525 819 819 761 1,179 58 -360 360
S Carroll Ave.East Southlake Blvd.Zena Rucker Rd.948 0.18 2 2 4D-A Arterial (88')4D-A 735 845 100%725 725 260 260 132 152 128 109
S Carroll Ave.Zena Rucker Rd.Westmont Dr.2643 0.50 1 1 3U-A Arterial (88')4D-A 714 720 100%650 650 325 325 357 360 -32 -35 32 35
S Carroll Ave.Westmont Dr.Old Carroll Rd.932 0.18 1 1 2U-A Arterial (88')4D-A 714 720 100%525 525 93 93 126 127 -33 -34 33 34
S Carroll Ave.Old Carroll Rd.E Continental Blvd.1993 0.38 2 2 4D-C Arterial (88')4D-A 714 720 100%725 725 547 547 270 272 278 276
S Kimball Ave.SH 114 East Southlake Blvd.1004 0.19 3 3 6D-C Arterial (124')6D-A 826 992 100%800 800 456 456 157 189 299 268
S Kimball Ave.East Southlake Blvd.Southern City Limits 7531 1.43 2 2 4D-C Arterial (88')4D-A 585 449 100%725 725 2,068 2,068 834 640 1,234 1,428
S Nolen Dr.East Southlake Blvd.Crooked Ln.1145 0.22 2 2 4U-C Arterial (70')3U-A 335 318 100%650 650 282 282 73 69 209 213
S Pearson Ln.West Southlake Blvd.Union Church Rd.2641 0.50 1 1 2U-A Collector (70')2U-C 262 252 100%525 525 263 263 131 126 132 137
S Peytonville Ave.West Southlake Blvd.850 Feet South of West Southlake Blvd.843 0.16 2 2 4D-A Arterial (88')4D-A 197 269 100%725 725 232 232 31 43 200 189
S Peytonville Ave.850 Feet South of West Southlanke Blvd.West Continental Blvd.4460 0.84 1 1 2U-A Collector (70')2U-C 396 293 100%525 525 443 443 335 247 109 196
S White Chapel Blvd East Southlake Blvd.Londonberry Terrace 1009 0.19 2 2 4D-A Arterial (88')2U-A 336 604 100%725 725 277 277 64 115 213 162
S White Chapel Blvd Londonberry Terrace Southern City Limits 7385 1.40 1 1 2U-A Arterial (88')2U-A 336 604 100%525 525 734 734 470 845 264 -110 110
Sam School Rd.Northern City Limits W Dove Rd.1769 0.34 1 1 2U-A Collector (70')2U-A 76 92 100%525 525 176 176 25 31 150 145
Shady Oaks Dr.E Dove Rd.East Southlake Pkwy.10678 2.02 1 1 2U-A Collector (60')2U-C 248 251 100%525 525 1,062 1,062 502 508 560 554
Southridge Lakes Pkwy.N Peytonville Ave.Brazos Dr.2553 0.48 1 1 2U-C Arterial (88')4D-A 135 118 100%525 525 254 254 65 57 189 197
Southridge Lakes Pkwy.Brazos Dr.East Southlake Pkwy.1963 0.37 2 2 4D-C Arterial (88')4D-A 135 118 100%725 725 539 539 50 44 489 495
Tower Dr.East Southlake Blvd.Zena Rucker Rd.895 0.17 1 1 2U-G Collector (60')2U-C N/A N/A 100%525 525 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Union Church S Pearson Ln.Davis Blvd.5307 1.01 1 1 2U-A Collector (84')2U-C 193 299 100%525 525 528 528 194 301 334 227
Village Center Dr.East Southlake Pkwy 700' South of Southlake Pkwy 698 0.13 1 1 2U-C Collector (60')2U-C N/A N/A 100%525 525 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Village Center Dr.700' South of Southlake Pkwy S Kimball Ave.2339 0.44 0 0 Unbuilt Collector (60')2U-C N/A N/A 100%525 525 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Village Center Dr.S Kimball Ave.S Nolen Dr.1735 0.33 0 0 Unbuilt Collector (60')2U-C N/A N/A 100%525 525 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
W Highland St.Shady Oaks Dr.SH 114 5825 1.10 1 1 2U-A Collector (60')2U-C 143 92 100%525 525 579 579 158 101 421 478
Watermere Dr.West Southlake Pkwy Union Church 2857 0.54 1 1 2U-C Collector (60')2U-C N/A N/A 100%525 525 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
W Continental Blvd.Davis Blvd White Chapel Blvd.9247 1.75 1 1 2U-A Collector (84')2U-C 723 399 100%525 525 919 919 1,266 699 -347 221 347
W Southlake Blvd.Western City Limits Davis Blvd.5642 1.07 3 3 7U-C Arterial (130'-140')6D-A 1092 2106 100%750 750 2,404 2,404 1,167 2,250 1,237 154
W Southlake Blvd.Davis Blvd.S Peytonville Ave.3094 0.59 3 3 7U-C Arterial (130'-140')6D-A 1500 2571 100%750 750 1,318 1,318 879 1,507 439 -188 188
W Southlake Blvd.S Peytonville Ave.Southridge Lakes Pkwy.1741 0.33 3 3 7U-C Arterial (130'-140')6D-A 1706 2645 100%750 750 742 742 563 872 179 -130 130
W Southlake Blvd.Southridge Lakes Pkwy.N Shady Oaks Dr.3703 0.70 3 3 7U-C Arterial (130'-140')6D-A 1752 2719 100%750 750 1,578 1,578 1,229 1,907 349 -329 329
W Southlake Blvd.N Shady Oaks Dr.N White Chapel Blvd.2544 0.48 3 3 7U-C Arterial (130'-140')6D-A 1843 2830 100%750 750 1,084 1,084 888 1,364 196 -279 279
Zena Rucker Rd.Byron Nelson Pkwy.935 Feet East of Byron Nelson Pkwy.935 0.18 1 1 2U-C Collector (60')2U-C 723 399 100%525 525 93 93 128 71 -35 22 35
Zena Rucker Rd.935' East of Byron Nelson Pkwy.S Carroll Ave.1974 0.37 0 0 Unbuilt Collector (60')2U-C N/A N/A 100%525 525 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
SUBTOTAL 195,426 37.01 36,372 36,372 21,216 28,584 15,156 7,788 662 2,616
72,744 49,800 22,945 3,278
VEH-MI
PK-HR PK-HR PK-HR
VOL PER LN TOTAL TOTAL VEH-MI
City of Southlake - 2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory
EXIST
LANES
PM VEH-MI VEH-MI VEH-MI EXCESS EXISTING
SUPPLY DEMAND CAPACITY DEFICIENCIES
HOUR PK-HR PK-HR
2017 Roadway Impact Fee Minor Update
City of Southlake, Texas Appendix C - Existing Roadway Facilities Inventory
DR
A
F
T