The URL can be used to link to this page

1998-11-17 CC Packet . City of Southlake,Texas 0 MEMORANDUM November 13, 1998 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council FROM: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager SUBJECT: Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 Note that the financial report prepared by Finance Director Lou Ann Heath (pp. 4B-1- 13) includes the sales tax report and the 9/30/98 quarterly investment report. The October financials are not ready, however, because we cannot produce the report for October until the September books are completely closed. Lou Ann is still in the process of making adjustments and recording liabilities that pertain to September (an example is the 9/98 Fort Worth water bill). The October reports will be prepared and • distributed as soon as possible to the Council. The auditors, Weaver and Tidwell, are scheduled to start their work December 7. Also included under reports is the Town Square Status Report prepared by Deputy Director of Public Works Ron Harper (pp. 4B-14-15). If you have any questions, call Lou Ann Heath, Ron Harper, or me. 1. Agenda Item No. 5A. Approval of the Minutes of the Regular City Council meeting held on November 3, 1998. If you have any changes to the minutes of the regular City Council meeting please discuss these at the work session or-notify Sandy LeGrand prior to the meeting. She will bring the amended minutes to the meeting for your consideration. r 2. Agenda Item No. 5B. Authorize the Mayor to execute an interlocal agreement for' animal control between the City of Grapevine and the City of Southlake. As noted • in the memo from Chief Campbell, Grapevine hasprovided this service to the City P .ti Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest ifor City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 Page2of35 of Southlake for over five years. Due to the wording in the original contract, which includes an expiration date of September 1998, we are bringing the interlocal agreement back to you for consideration. Section 5 of the agreement now includes language which will provide for the automatic renewal each year, unless either party provides 90 days written notice to terminate. Note that Grapevine provides this service to us for the cost of one Animal Control Officer (ACO). You will recall that your FY 1998-99 budget included $26,000 for this purpose. Questions about this item may be directed to Gary Gregg. 3. Agenda Item No. 5C. Authorize the Mayor to enter into a cooperative working agreement between the Metro Narcotics Interdiction Unit and the City of Southlake, SandAgenda Item No. 5D. Authorize the Mayor to enter into a'cooperative working agreement g ent between the Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence and Coordination Unit and the City of Southlake. The metroplex cities cannot afford to work narcotics just "in their own backyard." Users may be apprehended in Southlake, but it is likely that dealers would be elsewhere. Drug dealers and users do not respect boundaries, which requires strong coordination among jurisdictions. These items on your agenda update agreements to work with other cities and the county to ensure coordination for intelligence gathering for drug related offenses. Your packet contains the one page update to the cooperative working agreement. Note that we have also included an excerpt from the original agreement (Project Narrative) which contains more details of our cooperation. The Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence and Coordination Unit (TCNICU) is the umbrella organization and receives grant funding for its role in promoting cooperation among jurisdictions. The grant funds overhead and administrative cost ' Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest . for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 ' Page 3 of 35 which includes special narcotics and seizure prosecutors. The Metro Narcotics Interdiction Unit is the northeast arm of the group, which provides investigation resources when needed by participating cities. These cooperative agreements provide a formal mechanism for agencies to mutually agree to, objectives and to agree to cooperate to the fullest extent possible. Questions about these agreements should be directed to Director Campbell. 4. Agenda Item No. 5E. Authorize the Mayor to enter into an agreement between the cities of Bedford, Colleyville, Euless, Grapevine, Haltom City, Keller, North Richland Hills, Richland Hills, Southlake, and Trophy Club , all of Tarrant County, and Trophy Club MUD for centralized recruiting for fire personnel. The memo • from Human Resources Director Lauren Safranek describes the advantages of entering into this type of interlocal agreement. Deputy Director of Fire Services Garland Wilson has scrutinized this approach carefully, and initially identified a number of concerns. He is now satisfied that the testing, etc. will be as good or better than we have been conducting in-house. Questions about this agreement may be directed to either Garland or Lauren. 5. Agenda Item No. 5F. Authorize the Mayor to enter into a professional services agreement with Cheatham and Associates for the Shady Oaks realignment at Dove Street. This realignment will allow Shady Oaks to intersect Dove Street to provide vehicles access to Dove once SH 114 is reconstructed. This project is a result of _ the proposed reconstruction of SH 11.4 at the Dove Street-intersection,-As indicated- --- --.---- -- --by Bob Whitehead in his memo, the proposed plans for the construction of frontage • roads along the south side of SH 114 will eliminate the existing intersection at Dove Street and Shady Oaks. The State planned to build a turnout onto the frontage road Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest • for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 ' Page 4 of 35 from Shady Oaks, but it would not allow access from Shady Oaks to Dove. Therefore, the proposed Shady Oaks realignment will intersect Dove approximately 300 feet west of the existing intersection. The costs for the design and surveying of the realignment is $49,875. The State has agreed to include the realignment as part of their highway construction, as long as the City pays for the design and construction of the road. The anticipated construction costs for this project are $650,000. Please contact Public Works Director Bob Whitehead if you have any questions regarding this item. 110 6. Agenda Item No. 5G. Authorize the Mayor to enter into a Developer Agreement for Florence Elementary School. The Keller Independent School District is planing an addition to Florence Elementary School. This addition will require the installation of a new fire hydrant that requires the installation of a 6-inch water line in an easement along the east right-of-way line at Harrell Drive. This agreement is a standard agreement. 7. Agenda Item No. 5H. Award of bid to J. L. Bertram for paving and drainage improvements to Ridgecrest Drive. The paving and drainage improvements to Ridgecrest Drive were scheduled as part of the FY 97-98 CIP budget, which provided $355,576. The project was delayed because of difficulty in obtaining the necessary drainage easements. The improvements include reconstructing the __ _ existing roadway and associated drainage. The low bidder for this project is J. L. — Bertram Construction with a base bid of$299,918. The bid amount did not include IIIthe overlay for Southlake Park Road, but a change order will be provided to include the overlay with an estimated cost of $66,500. The change order will be on the Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 Page 5 of 35 next agenda for your consideration. Should the cost exceed the original estimate, it is anticipated it will be made up on other capital projects. This project will complete the street improvements that began with the Hilltop Addition. 8. Agenda Item No. 5I. Ordinance No. 704, 1st reading, Proposing changes in Article IV, General Sign Provisions, and Article V, Specific Sign Regulations. The changes recommended by City Council (10/13/98 meeting) and P&Z (11/5/98 meeting) as well as "clean up" items are detailed in the memorandum prepared by Stefanie Sarakaitis. There has been a question raised as to whether or not the "phase-out" of subdivision marketing signs was approved with the previous sign ordinance amendment. The • revision to the Sign Ordinance No. 704 was presented to City Council as a Discussion Item at the June 16, 1998 City Council meeting. Bruce Roberts, with the Fort Worth Builders Association, spoke regarding subdivision marketing signs, asking that the Council consider a phase-out period for these signs. A letter was received by Mr. Roberts on July 1, 1998, proposing an eighteen (18) month phase out period, and stating his desire to develop details of the plan with Council. This response was noted in the staff report and the letter was included in each of the packets for the Planning & Zoning Commission Public Hearings (07/09; 07/23; 08/06) and the City Council readings (08/18; 09/01). The issue was not discussed during any meeting beyond the initial discussion at Council, nor was Mr. Roberts present at any other meeting. After the ordinance approval it was learned, through Paul Ward's conversation with the Builders Association, that Mr. Roberts left the Builders Association during the course of the ordinance update._ Mr. Ward has contacted the Greater Fort Worth Builders Association's current Vice President and • Governmental Affairs Liaison, Kosse Maykus, to notify him of the current ordinance revisions, and has encouraged him to attend the meetings to address the • ' Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest 0 for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 Page6of35 subdivision marketing signs phase-out issue. Mr. Maykus was not present at the 11/05 P&Z Public Hearing. It is staff's understanding that Mr. Maykus will appear before City Council at the work session to discuss this issue. Should you desire to have a "phase-out" period, it can be added on second reading of this ordinance. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval 7-0 concurring with the recommendations submitted and asking for additional clarification as to the method of measurement of the window signs. This clarification has been added to the draft submitted for Council review. Feel free to contact Stefanie Sarakaitis should you have any questions regarding the revisions proposed in the sign ordinance. 0 9. Agenda Item No. 5J. Authorize the Mayor to enter into a Partial Developer Agreement for Timarron, Village H, Phase 2. This partial agreement allows the developer to proceed with grading the streets and lots in the Timarron development while the City completes the review of the infrastructure construction plans. The intent is to complete the grading before the winter months to allow installation of utilities once the fmal construction plans are complete. The agreement ensures the developer will install approved erosion control prior to beginning any grading. The layout of the streets have been planned to minimize the impact on the trees in the area. As indicated in Deputy Director of Public Works Charlie Thomas' memo, this partial agreement will be replaced with the final developer's agreement prior to the construction of the water, sewer, paving and drainage improvements. _ _- _ _ 10.Agenda Item No. 5K. __ Encroachment agreement-to .allow. the-continuance-of an- - -- existing sign within a ROW dedication, proposed Lot 4R3, J.G. Allen No. 18 • Addition (Lucky Lady). This agreement is simple in nature and similar to the agreement we used to allow the continuance of parking in a ROW dedication-for the ' Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 Page7of35 out-building on the Mesco site along Kimball. The "Lucky Lady" retail building and convenience store was sold by Jim Martin to the Shunail Corporation as a piece of property carved out of a bigger platted lot and sold off without going through the plat revision process. When Dr. Mark Cox brought forward a request to construct a new veterinary clinic on a portion of the remainder property, staff required that the entire property be included in the plat revision (as required by ordinance). The plat revision required the dedication of ROW along Randol Mill; the Shunail Corporation has requested an agreement to allow the continued use of their existing sign within the dedicated ROW before they will sign the plat. Staff does not have any concerns with this agreement in that we normally would not require the removal of the sign anyway until road construction was anticipated. Feel free to contact Director Last should you have any questions regarding this agreement. • 11.Agenda Item No. 7A. Ordinance No. 725, 2nd reading, Smoking Regulations. Repealing Ordinance No. 537. You will recall that we discussed "polishing up" the language and formatting of this ordinance during work session on first reading. The detailed memo from Shana Yelverton describes what we have done to make the ordinance easier to understand and to tie up loose ends. Note that Building Official Paul Ward and his staff have discussed this with representatives of Kirby Steakhouse, Corner Bakery (which intends to be entirely nonsmoking) and the Restaurants of Southlake. Concerns raised have been considered and incorporated into the text of the ordinance. The ordinance has been provided to you in a underline/strikeout format so you can easily see the changes we are making to our existing ordinance. Please let Shana know if you have questions about the ordinance.__Paul Ward will.be.available to answer any technical questions you may---have regarding the ventilation systems, or other construction issues. • Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest • for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 Page8of35 12. Agenda Item No. 7B. Ordinance No. 726, 2nd reading, Changing the street name of Wyndsor Ridge, location in Timarron, Wyndsor Grove, Phase II, to Rustic Ridge Court. This item was approved on first reading at the November 3, City Council meeting. The request to change the street name from Wyndsor Ridge to Rustic Ridge Court was initiated by staff because there is another street in the City with a similar name. This name change will eliminate the possibility of confusion during emergency calls. There have been no homes built on this street. As you recall, all street names are reviewed by the Development Review Committee (DRC) and the public safety staff to help ensure there is no duplication. Currently, the Public Safety Department is analyzing the process of how street names are reviewed. Soon there will be recommendations to improve the current process to minimize the possibility of assigning similar names to different streets. 13.Agenda Item No. 7C. ZA 98-120, Site Plan for the Remington, on property legally described as tracts 4F, 4F1, 5A1B, 6A1, and a portion of Tract 6B situated in the Jesse G. Allen Survey. There are no unresolved issues with this application. They are bringing forward their first phase which is in conformance with their approved Concept Plan. One change to note is that they have reconfigured their lot lines between the two product types to allow both products to be in the same lot. Although the Concept Plan allowed relief from the bufferyards along the common lot line, this comment was raised in the review letter again because of the relocation of the common lot line. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval 6-0-1 granting relief as noted in the Staff Report. Feel free to contact Director_Last or Ed McRoy (Planner) should you have any questions regarding this ----- - - -. application. • • Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest • for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 Page 9 of 35 14. Agenda Item No. 8A. Ordinance No. 480-292, 1st Reading (ZA 98-121) Rezoning and Concept Plan, for M & J Farm. The reason this request is before us is that the Remington development acquired a rear portion of this property and this property must be included in the preliminary plat that is being processed by Remington. The remainder tract does not meet the minimum 10 acres required for AG zoning so a rezoning must be submitted for review. Although the _application was first submitted as a standard B-1 request, it was modified at the P&Z meeting to SP-2 for a nursery yard and buildings for retail sales and a caretaker unit. The uses shown on the plan currently exist on the property. This request initially appeared to be routine in nature but has now become complicated. Staff accepted the rezoning application with the understanding that • Mr. Mortazavi had owned the property and operated the nursery business at the time of annexation in December, 1988. However, since the Commission meeting, a neighboring property owner has questioned Mr. Mortazavi's claim that the greenhouse structures were constructed prior to annexation. To date, staff has not be able to confirm the neighbor's claims. We will continue to research this matter and hope to have more definitive information by Tuesday's meeting. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval 6-1 (Creighton dissenting due to Land Use Plan concerns). There is one issue that may be confusing in the motion made by Commissioner Peebles. There was a stipulation that relief from items 13, 14, 15, and 17a of the review letter be granted for this applicant only. The attorneys have pointed out that this limitation is unenforceable ___ due to the fact that zoning will "go with the land." This is different from an SUP which can be limited to a particular applicant. We may wish to discuss this issue 111 further in executive session. Feel free to contact Director Last or Karen Gandy should you have any questions regarding this application. ' Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 • Page 10 of 35 15.Agenda Item No. 8B. ZA 98-122, Preliminary Plat, for The Remington Addition. There are no unresolved issues regarding this application. The property bounded by this plat includes the Remington property as well as the remainder pieces of the Mortazavi tract and the church property. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval 6-0-1 waiving the requirement for a tree survey on the Mortazavi tract, due to the fact that everything existed, and deferring the tree survey on the church tract until they process future plans. Feel free to contact Director Last should you have any questions regarding this application. 16.Agenda Item No. 8C. Ordinance No. 480-291, 1st reading, ZA 98-113), Rezoning on property legally described as being Tracts 1B and 1B1 situated in the James • Thornhill Survey, Abstract No. 1505. There are no unresolved issues related to the zoning request portion of this application. Ordinarily we would have placed this type of request on consent but there are issues with drainage that may arise during the deliberation on the zoning. The prior owner of the land had filled in a portion of his property, and this somewhat distorted the natural flow of water through the property. Apparently all of the surrounding properties drain to this property. Adjacent lot owners are basically wanting assurances that the drainage that has always gone through this property continues to go through this property, and does not back up on their lots. Engineering staff is familiar with the issues and is communicating with the applicants regarding how they anticipate resolving the drainage concerns. They will be prepared to brief you on these issues at the meeting. The plat showing was tabled at P&Z to resolve some of the drainage concerns and give the applicant time to clarify his needs as to the_number_of_lots he. was proposing. S • Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 • Page 11 of 35 Related to the zoning request, there is a super-majority vote requirement for approval on this item due to the surrounding owner opposition being greater than the 20% threshold. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval 7-0 based on the fact that the SF1 requested was less intense than the medium density the LUP might allow. Feel free to contact Director Last regarding this application or Charlie Thomas regarding the drainage issues. 17.Agenda Item No. 8D. ZA 98-123, Preliminary Plat for Explorer Addition. There are no unresolved issues related to this application. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval 7-0 subject to the Plat Review Summary. Feel free to contact Director Last should you have any questions regarding this application. 18.Agenda Item No. 9A. Resolution No. 98-70, Amending the Fee Schedule. The fee schedule, which is annually adopted by resolution, has been included in your packet in a redline/strikeout format so you can easily see the changes proposed. Note that P&Z-related fees have been reviewed in detail with Councilmember Edmondson, Lou Ann Heath and Greg Last, the results of which have been incorporated into the resolution. Staff had prepared a comparison of Southlake's development fees against the average of all cities in the NCTCOG region, as well as a more detailed comparison against several selected cities. Also a comparison was generated for selected cities on a variety of scenarios of development to determine total fee costs for processing different types of development. These comparisons_are included behind the memo from Lou Ann Heath. The changes recommended in the fee schedule, under the • Community Development section, are as a result of the meeting with • Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 Page 12 of 35 Councilmember Edmondson. Feel free to contact Director Last or Councilmember Edmondson should you have questions regarding the development fees. For other fee recommendations in the resolution, feel free to contact the Director most affiliated with the fee for any additional information you might need. 19.Agenda Item No. 10A. Any action necessary to authorize the Mayor to enter into a professional services agreement with an architect for Town Hall. The following recaps how we got to this point: August 18, 1998 City Council authorizes staff to negotiate agreement with Schwarz and Urban Architecture October 6, 1998 Architectural services contract presented to City Council. City Council established selection committee to review proposal October 13, 1998 Selection committee met and directed staff to negotiate a lower fee with Schwarz/Urban. Directed staff to seek proposal in 10%/$10 million level. November 5, 1998 Selection committee met and voted not to accept 11.5% Schwarz/Urban proposal. Directed staff to negotiate separately with Urban. November 10, 1998 Urban informed City they were unable to pursue • architectural services contract separately. • Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest • for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 Page 13 of 35 Based on the recommendation of the selection committee on Thursday, November 5, I mailed a letter to Schwarz indicating the committee's direction. (copy attached). On Monday, November 9, we received a written reply from Schwarz. (copy attached). On Tuesday, November 10, we received a letter from Urban Architecture informing us they must decline the opportunity to negotiate a separate proposal. (copy attached). Given the above and the concern for our timetable, and since he was already one of the firms City Council authorized us to negotiate with, I contacted Schwarz and requested that he send us a proposal separately. I reiterated the concerns of City Council as expressed in my November 5 letter to him. He indicated that he could have a proposal to us by late Monday, cognizant of the City's concerns. • We have worded the agenda item so that you will be able to take any action you need, including, if necessary, to reject the proposal (to be forthcoming) from Schwarz and directing staff to seek RFQs (request for qualifications) from a select list of other architects. We are working at compiling a list from firms in the business who have experience with this sort of building, and will have it available Tuesday night. There are several reminders about how the professional services selection procedure must be carried out in order to comply with state statutes. The City Council cannot seek "bids" per se. Council first must select and authorize negotiations with an architect. Only then can the issue of cost be negotiated. If agreement cannot be reached on the cost, the City Council must select another--and then open negotiations -- - - with the new architect, and so on until an agreement is reached. Normally, the • process begins by seeking RFQs, selecting the top candidate to interview, then • Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest • for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 ' Page 14 of 35 working down the list until an agreement is reached on a contract for services. This process can take up to 60-90 days, depending upon where you begin. The assumption had been made from the beginning that we would like to work with the Schwarz/Urban team due to their involvement with Town Square and the Town Hall concept. However, if we cannot reach an agreement, we will be prepared to move on. Our biggest concern now is simply getting the project underway. (See the attached letter from Tarrant County Commissioner Glen Whitley). FYI, I know there has been feedback from who believe we should get a considerably lower percentage fee for this service. I am not sure these comments take into account the nature of the type of building we will be constructing. I know • that Grapevine's city hall fees were fixed at approximately 10.3%, $465,000 for a $4.5 million building. I believe the actual cost of their 38,000 sq.ft. building came in at closer to $6 million, but the fee was fixed. F.C. LeVrier, the P&Z representative on the selection committee, will be at the meeting Tuesday. 20. Agenda Item No. 10B. Authorize the Mayor to enter into a professional services contract with Freese and Nichols for the South Fork Kirkwood Creek improvements (including Runyan property and Shady Oaks area). As discussed at your last meeting, this contract would provide the data needed to develop a plan for the watershed in question. Freese and Nichols prepared Phase I of the Master Drainage Plan Report, which makes them highly qualified to move forward with-this study,-. - - -- considered as part of Phase II of the master plan effort. • • • Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 ' Page 15 of 35 As Bob Whitehead points out in his memo, the development of individual drainage plans is already underway. Council has already authorized the plan for the east reach of the West Jones Branch (ranked as priority #1 in the master plan), which is in the final design stage. Your approval of this item would accelerate the study for the South Fork Kirkwood Branch, which was ranked as priority #4 in the master plan. The CIP includes funding for six drainage projects over the next two years, including the aforementioned channel improvements for the West Jones Branch, the Versailles channel, Chapel Downs channel (Dove Creek watershed), Continental Park Estates channel, Vista Trails drainage improvements, and Mission Hills channel improvements (Dove Creek watershed). Funds for these projects, with the exception of our commitment for the West Jones Branch, could be reallocated to cover the approximately $80,000 needed to move forward with this project. 1111 We have included the Executive Summary from the Phase I study as an attachment to my memo. A full copy of that report is available in Bob Whitehead's office, should you need it for reference. We are in receipt of a follow up letter from Mr. Runyan, a copy of which is attached. We will have an engineering response to his assertions, and will need to again address this in executive session. Mr. Runyan will not be in attendance at this meeting. If Council is in agreement to move forward with this during work session, and following executive session, you may wish to place the contract on the consent agenda. 21.Agenda Item No. 10C. Michael Drive issues/alternatives._ This_item is on the agenda to discuss the issues related to improvements to Michael Drive and to obtain feedback from the City Council regarding the alternatives for constructing the roadway and whether or not the City will participate in the costs associated. • Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 ' Page 16 of 35 The memo from Zoning Administrator Karen Gandy identifies some of the zoning options of treating each parcel separately as a separate S-P-1 zoning case, collectively as a NR-PUD for light industrial use, or limiting each parcel to the existing use in place today. The S-P-1 request will require a site plan and the NR- PUD request will require a development plan. The City Council could decide to waive the required exhibits and document the current "as built" conditions with pictures, development regulations and standards for each parcel. As Capital Projects Coordinator Shawn Poe describes in his memo, there are a number of alternatives related to the construction of the roadway. The City Council will need to determine whether or not to participate in the costs associated with 1111 improving Michael Drive. The cost estimates for the road construction are described below: Options 1 through 3 include paving the roadway from Davis to the end of Michael Drive, which is approximately 1,150 feet in length. These cost estimates include the construction of the ultimate culvert across the creek that crosses Michael Drive. 1 - 31' wide asphalt base with existing gravel $ 286,174.20 2 - 31' wide asphalt with new base material $ 312,044.20 3 - 37' wide concrete street with new base material $ 661,830.00 Options 4 through 6 include paving only a portion of the roadway from Davis to _ the east side of the creek, which is approximately-750 feet in length. Therefore,- --------------- these costs do not include the construction of the culvert under Michael Drive. • Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest • for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 ' Page 17 of 35 4 - 31' wide asphalt base with existing gravel $ 117,045.50 5 - 31' wide asphalt with new base material $ 133,347.50 6 - 37' wide concrete street with new base material $ 355,875.00 Costs for Water and Sewer Improvements: 7 - Water Improvements $ 83,265.00 , 8 - Sewer Improvements $ 55,250.00 We will be prepared to discuss the alternatives with the City Council at the meeting. Please let me know if you have any questions regarding this item. It is our intent to have this item on the December 1 agenda for your consideration • if we have your direction. OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST 22.Bicycle Helmet Ordinance Progress. The attorneys have completed the first draft of this ordinance and have forwarded it to staff. Deputy Director of Police Services Gary Gregg is carefully reviewing its provisions to ensure it covers all of the issues discussed by Councilmember Martin, Ginny Elder and others involved in the process. Once he has done this, he intends to compare our proposed ordinance with other existing ordinances and laws. We are in the process of forming an ad hoc committee to finalize a recommendation to Council. This group will review the proposed ordinance, study the research and debate the merits of the ordinance provisions. I_have_spoken with Ms. Elder _about this_ approach and-she has ----- -- - enthusiastically agreed to participate. We are in the process of notifying other who • have indicated they want to assist. We will keep you informed of the committee's • Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 ' Page 18 of 35 progress. The first meeting is scheduled for Monday, November 23 at 7:00 p.m. at the Senior Activity Center. 23.TxDOT Correspondence. Please note the attached letter from TxDOT informing us that the Commission approved construction funding for the portion of S.H. 114 from Dove Road to Carroll for FY 2002 (the "missing" White Chapel link). Note his comments on the other projects presented for consideration by Metroport Cities. We will need to begin preparing for an August 1999 delegation appearance. 24. CIAC Appointments. In your last packet, we mentioned that we hoped you would make the appointments to the Capital Improvements Advisory Committee at your November 17 meeting. We have not put this item on the agenda for this meeting, • however, due to time constraints. We are hoping you can act on these appointments in the near future hopefully December 1. Recall that this is the committee that conducts the study necessary to adopt/update impact fees. In the past, the City Council has appointed a committee consisting of representatives from the Planning & Zoning Commission, the development community (as required by law), and interested citizens. If you would like to have this type of committee again, you could either reappoint the current members or make new appointments. Another option, as discussed in my last memo, would be to simply task the P&Z with this assignment. Under the law, they can serve as the committee provided the Commission meets certain requirements (which it does). I. have_ spoken with-_some of_ the P&Z _ commissioners -about -taking on this --- - - - - responsibility, and they have indicated they would be willing to serve in this • capacity, recognizing it would require special meetings. • Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 ' Page 19 of 35 We are at the point where we need your direction. Please let me know if you have any questions and/or how you wish to proceed, otherwise, I intend to have this item on the December 1 agenda. 25.Crime Control Board Activity. FYI, the Board has approved a contract for the north site. We are expecting to close on the last two lots for the west site by.the end of this month. Negotiations continue for the east site. Please let Shana Yelverton, Lou Ann Heath, or Director Campbell know if you have any questions. 26.Franchise Agreements and the Texas Legislature. Given our recent activity related to franchise agreements (and fees), I thought you might be interested in reading related articles published by the Texas Municipal League (attached). 111 27. Staff Appointments to Regional, State Committees. Note the attached letter from the North Central Texas Council of Governments informing Ron Harper of his appointment to the Public Works Advisory Committee for a two-year term. His service on this committee will give him the opportunity to provide Southlake input on a variety of critical public works issues, and provide us a presence at NCTCOG. On a related note, NCTCOG's Executive Board also appointed Shana Yelverton to serve on the Government Applications Review Committee (GARC). GARC provides local review of applications submitted from the region for state or federal funding. Paul Ward is the 1998 President of the International Conference of Building Officials for the North Texas Chapter.__ • Finance Director Lou Ann Heath will co-chair the legislative committee of the Government Finance Officers Association of Texas. Since this is a legislative year, • Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 ' • Page 20 of 35 the committee will be very active in addressing issues that affect government finance. You will recall that Lou Ann previously served as president (1996-97) of GFOAT, which has approximately 675 members statewide. Director of Human Resources Lauren Safranek has been elected to a two year term as a Trustee to the TMHRA (Texas Municipal Human Resource Association) board. She will also serve as Chair for the Programs Committee. Charlie Thomas is currently President of the Texas Chapter of the American Public Works Association (TPWA) and was also appointed as a member of NCTCOG Stormwater Task Force giving Southlake input on this important committee. • Finally, Shelli Siemer has just been elected as President of Urban Management Assistants of North Texas. This service will not adversely affect the staff's ability to do their job, rather, brings additional value to the organization. I believe these appointments reflect the quality of our professional staff and I am proud to have them working within their professional associations and/or on regional committees and representing Southlake so favorably. 28.Fort Worth Water Contract. This item has been discussed with you on several occasions, including the June retreat. We are bringing it to your attention again because it will be on your agenda for action in the very near future. The City of Southlake has purchased water from the City of Forth Worth since • 1985. We have done so under a contract with Fort Worth, negotiated at that time, which now differs from the "standard" contract they have with their other customer Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 ' . Page 21 of 35 cities. With the expiration of our current contract in June 2002, Fort Worth will expect us to sign a "standard" contract with them. However, to draw water through the Trophy Club line under our interlocal agreement, we will need to execute this agreement before then. Fort Worth will not allow Trophy Club to transport water to us under our current agreement. The implications of executing the new contract will be: • The City of Southlake's cost to purchase water from Fort Worth will be reduced from $1.1549 per 1000 gallons to $1.0844 per 1000 gallons, and the "excess demand" charges will be also be reduced. The "excess demand" charges are based upon the difference between the maximum day and hour uses and average • day and hour usage. • The City of Southlake will have to collect from each builder at the building permit stage a Fort Worth water impact fee which is currently (until June 1999) $594.52 for a one inch meter. We will bring the new contract forward for your consideration in the near future. In the meantime, please call Bob Whitehead if you have questions. 29.Airing of City Council and P&Z meetings. Effective October 1, we began taping Planning & Zoning meetings, in addition to City Council meetings, and airing them on cable channel 25. All videos of all meetings do air on the cable channel, but the -videos do not currently air on a consistent schedule due--to-factors beyond our control. • • Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest • for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 • Page22of35 • Marcus has informed Public Information Officer Tracy Southers that the VCRs and other equipment needed to air the tapes will be moved to a City facility once'the fiber optic upgrade is complete. Tracy will then be responsible for airing the videos herself and a programming schedule can be developed. 30.Complaint re: roads/school buses. Bob Whitehead and Shawn Poe have both received calls from Mr. Jacky Mayfield regarding the narrow road conditions and their adverse affect on school bus transportation. Mr. Mayfield is in charge of C.I.S.D.'s bus drivers and believes that the narrow roadways have been the cause of some recent bus fender benders. Some of his specific areas of concern include Continental (in front of Carroll Elementary) and the intersection of Highland and White Chapel. As you are aware, these roadway improvements have been on our 11111 schedule of projects in the capital improvements program. The Continental improvements, which include a third lane in front of the school, will be advertised for bids next week. Additionally, the realignment of the Highland/White Chapel intersection will likely begin within six months. We are still working on obtaining the right-of-way for this later project, but we hope to be able to move this up on the project priority list. You may receive phone calls from Mr. Mayfield regarding this issue. It is important to inform you of some issues which residents brought up at the recent traffic calming meetings regarding the school buses speeding through their neighborhoods. The residents asked the Public Safety Department to be aware of the issue and monitor the speeds in which the school buses travel. Although the narrow..roadways_may be difficult for the busesto-travel at speeds in excess of-the - - — -- - speed limits, they should be able to do so safely at the appropriate, posted legal • speeds. Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 ' Page 23 of 35 31. Speed Hump Meeting Recap. The first meetings were held with the property owners in the Coventry Manor subdivision and the Shady Lane Area. As indicated in the draft policy, the goal of the first meeting is to obtain input from the residents regarding their traffic concerns and educate them regarding traffic calming options. Residents in both areas indicated there is a high level of cut-through traffic and speeding throughout their neighborhood. Speed humps were presented as the most viable option to resolve the traffic volumes and speeding. The reaction from residents at both meetings was against installing speed humps. The Coventry Manor residents were not in favor of installing speed humps because they believe it will negatively affect their property values, although some indicated that if the aesthetics of the speed humps were improved (either cobblestone or brick) • they may give it more consideration. Staff is currently researching the options for improving the appearance of speed humps. The residents expressed consensus for installing a gate to close off the access from Shady Oaks. Councilmembers Ronnie Kendall and Debra Edmondson discussed the ramifications of closing/gating the community with the residents. (Although residents were discouraged from pursuing the gated community, they may approach the City Council about this issue. We will have our attorney discuss in executive session the legal implications of gating the streets or otherwise closing off an access point.) The focus of this solution came down to the residents' agreement that a long-term solution to the traffic volume is to pursue road construction of an additional east/west roadway. An immediate solution offered to the residents is for the patrol officers to continue _.to monitor.the traffic on Turnberry_Lane and Coventry-Lane to enforce the 25 mph speed limits. r • Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest • for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 ' Page 24 of 35 There was very little consensus from the Shady Lane residents on how to resolve their traffic problems. Some residents believe speed humps is the best solution, while others expressed strong sentiments against speed humps. The meeting ended with an agreement that we will continue to monitor this area over the next 30 days and pursue additional traffic calming options. 'The Public Safety Department will obtain additional statistics regarding the traffic volumes and speed levels along Shady Lane, and pursue the enforcement of the speed limit. The residents also request that staff pursue reducing the speed limit to 25 mph on Shady Lane. The policy for traffic calming was included in the October 30 packet of information. We received some feedback regarding changes to the policy. Some of the revisions include: standardizing the petition forms, giving priority to projects that do not meet eligibility requirement but have property owners who are willing to share in the costs of speed hump installation, and requiring property owners to share in the cost of speed hump removal. Please let us know if you have any additional feedback regarding the policy. 'We will forward the changes to you at a later date and plan to have this item on the next agenda. Note the articles attached to my memo. 32. Grapevine Correspondence re: Library. As you recall, in August the City Council entered into an interlocal agreement with the City of Grapevine for library services with a new fee structure established at $25.00 for each library card issued to Southlake residents. It was estimated that the Grapevine Library System has over 7.,000 Southlake residents with librarycards. .It was not knownat the time how - - - many of these cards were active, due to limitations of their computer system. In • our agreement, the City agreed to pay $25.00 for each cardholder. City Council directed staff to notify residents that the City would pay for one card per household, Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest • for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 ' Page 25 of 35 but would require other individual family members to pay the cost associated for any additional library cards. I told City Council that I would send a letter to each household to this effect. I have delayed sending this notice because Grapevine City Manager Roger Nelson informed me that he didn't believe they would charge-for more than one card per family. The Grapevine Library's new computer system has been installed and they have begun their re-registration process for all Southlake residents. As the attached letter indicates, they will process a charge for only one member per family, but they will allow for multiple cards issued in one name to avoid any additional charges to be • incurred by the Southlake residents. Based on the 6,100 households in the City of Southlake, our anticipated expenses will be a maximum of approximately $152,500 (if every household requests a library card). The City of Grapevine will send a monthly invoice to us based on the number of Southlake families that register each month. The first bill is $15,275 for 611 families currently registered in the new system. 33.MLK Holiday. The City of Southlake grants its employees nine (9) holidays. As indicated in the attached survey of 17 cities (excluding Southlake) the number is in line with twelve (12) of the area cities. Only Arlington (11) and Flower Mound (10) observe more, while Farmer's Branch, Haltom City, and Irving offer less (8). Each city in the survey observes the traditional holidays: New. Years, Memorial, Independence, Labor, Thanksgiving and-day after, and Christmas. - There is some variation in the other specific "day" which is observed. We observe Good Friday. Only 7 of the other 17 do so. We observe Christmas Eve, as does 10 of the other 17 cities. Only 5 cities in the survey (Arlington, Coppell, Dallas, Fort Worth, and • Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest • for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 Page 26 of 35 Grand Prairie) observe the Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday. No city in northeast Tarrant does so. Over the last several years, we have received some criticism for not observing the day as an official holiday. I would like your thoughts on adding MLK day as a holiday beginning this next year. I believe it is always the 3rd Monday in January, which in 1999 will be January 18th. While I would like to add MLK, I would not recommend deleting either Good Friday or Christmas Eve, our two holidays that are in addition to the seven traditional days. Please let me know your thoughts as quickly as possible. I will not bring it up if you are not inclined to add the day. 34.Leadership Southlake. Members of the 1998 Leadership Southlake class will attend the November 17, 1998 City Council meeting to complete their class on our city • government. Their meeting begins at the City Administration office at 3:00 p.m. and includes a tour of City Hall. 35. SYAC Activity Update. The holidays are approaching and SYAC is planning a number of community service projects. On Sunday, November 15, we will have 35 SYAC volunteers participate in "Tinsel Time on Ice" benefiting the Ronald McDonald House. SYAC will participate as "Santa's Helpers", paint faces, take pictures, read stories, and of course, ice skate with kids. SYAC is also participating in a clothing drive through December 15th. Their goal is to collect warm clothes, blankets, and coats for those adults and youth less fortunate during this holiday season. Boxes have been placed at the Administration Building, City Hall, Public Works Facility, Community Center and Senior Activity Center. Also, this month SYAC is also helping the Parks and Recreation division with Turkey Day-Bonanza, Basketball Coach Look, and Southlake Saturday Night. • Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest • for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 ' Page 27 of 35 As you recall, the City Council's meeting with SYAC for their Youth in Government program was rescheduled for Wednesday, November 18, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. at the Community Center. This meeting is intended to give the SYAC members a better understanding of the role of elected officials in representing the City. Please let me or Courtney Queen know if you will be able to attend, and if so, if you need us to prepare something for you. 36.Westlake Hearing Report. Judge Davis heard the summary judgment hearing on Friday, November 6, which focused on the annexation of Solana. Considering the complexity of this issue, it is not appropriate to go into much detail regarding this matter in this memo. We can discuss it with you in more detail in Executive Session. As always, our City Attorney Allen Taylor did an excellent job representing Southlake's case. 37.Nature Center Update. On Sunday, October 25, Park Planning and Construction Superintendent Ben Henry met at Bob Jones Park with Nature Center Committee members Ronnie Kendall, Cara White, Dick Anderson, Rosemary Hutchins, and Julie Landesburg to determine a location for the donated building from Mr. Terry Wilkinson. The committee selected a location that would be suitable and accessible in the near term. The proposed location for the Nature Center is approximately south of the location for the amphitheater, near the corner of City/COE land. At its November 9 meeting, the Park Board approved the new location along with some other resulting changes to the master development plan. These changes were: • A reduction in the- site area- allocated to--the -amphitheater. - -Although the — -- amphitheater is still only a concept at this time, moving the nature center closer 111 Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest • for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 • Page28of35 to that area caused the amphitheater to be reduced in size. There will still be an area of approximately 2.2 acres for this facility. • A reduction in the perimeter length of the first "loop" of the park road. This will essentially bring it almost entirely within City-owned property, and should reduce the cost of this portion of the road. It will also reduce the impact on the surrounding environment by allowing more of the property to remain undisturbed physically and visually by a park road. 38.Park Development Activity Update. • Bicentennial Park Expansion, Phase II -- Paving of the parking lot and utility work should be competed this coming week. Court construction and lighting work will begin in two weeks. The contractor for the tennis pro shop should begin within a month. • Bob Jones Park -- The pump enclosure is complete and electricians will install disconnects and meters by next week. The irrigation pump and system should be fully automated within a week. A contract for water well construction was awarded and this work should begin within a few weeks. • 39. Teen Center Coordination Meeting. On Tuesday, November 10, approximately '20 people came to the Durham Elementary/Intermediate School cafeteria to hear about the proposed Teen Center. Park Board Chair Vicki Johnson and Board member Robin Jones made the presentation and asked for attendees to volunteer their time by serving on planning committees. The three committees formed were Programs and Activities, Building Design, and Corporate Sponsorship. The attendees broke into committees and discussed briefly-discussed--their ideas and planned for future- — - committee meetings. The next general meeting will be held on Monday, January • Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest • for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 Page 29 of 35 18, 1999. It is anticipated that a Teen Center could be ready to open in Summer 2000. 40.Marcus Cable Transfer Update. On Wednesday, November 11, Director of Community Services Kevin Hugman and Public Information Officer Tracy Southern attended a consortium meeting in Fort Worth, and then a luncheon sponsored by Charter Communications. The attorneys representing the consortium were also present and briefed the city representatives on the progress to date. Pat Svacina, City of Fort Worth, also discussed the efforts by Charter Communications to correct customer service problems. Some of the major points of this convoluted situation are: • April 1998 -- Paul Allen, co-founder of Microsoft Corporation, purchased $2.8 • billion of non-voting stock in Marcus Cable, the 11th largest cable company in the United States. He apparently had the option to convert to voting stock if he desired. Jeffrey Marcus was to remain as CEO, therefore no Application for Franchise Authority Consent to Transfer of Control of Franchise (FCC 394) was initiated by Marcus. • Early August 1998 -- Paul Allen purchases Charter Communications, the #12 cable company in the U.S., based in St. Louis, Missouri with systems in other states and also one in Los Angeles. • Approximately two weeks later, Jeffrey Marcus and another top executive of Marcus resigned. • August 28, 1998 -- Southlake and other cities served by Marcus Cable, received an FCC 394, Application for Franchise Authority Consent to Transfer of -Control of Franchise. -The-transferee -is Vulcan-Cable, Inc.-; a-holding company -- for Paul Allen. Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 Page 30 of 35 • Early October 1998 -- Paul Allen apparently "contracts" Charter Communications to manage the Marcus Cable operations. Paul Barford, Senior Vice President of Operations for Charter, meets with Fort Worth Mayor Ken Barr and Fort Worth city staff. Mayor Barr expressed his dissatisfaction with Marcus Cable and stated that if Fort Worth were to consider the franchise transfer at that time, the City Council would disapprove the transfer and require Marcus Cable to find other buyers. Mr. Barford asks for time. to show improvements in customer service. An agreement is made with the consortium to extend the 120 day time frame for approval of transfer from December 28, 1998 to January 31, 1999. • October 29, 1998 - Allan Collins, Marcus Vice President of Operations for the Metroplex Region, is dismissed. • • November 11, 1998 - Charter invites city representatives to a luncheon in Fort Worth to introduce themselves and discuss their efforts to date to correct customer service problems in the Fort Worth system (which includes Southlake). A copy of the article from the Thursday, November 12 Fort Worth Star-Telegram article is attached. At the luncheon, Charter spent some time introducing their top management, but spent the bulk of their presentation in discussing the problems they have found, and what they were doing to correct them. In the meeting prior to the luncheon, Fort Worth representatives said that they have been favorably impressed with the changes they had seen by Charter, and felt very positive about them. The consortium also discussed options available to the cities should they choose to • deny the transfer of franchise. Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest • for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 Page 31 of 35 As an aside, Marcus has completed the fiber installation in Southlake, and is now in the process of contacting customers for converter box swap-out and providing instructions on their use. We have received a number of calls complaining about the need for additional converter boxes on customer sets. Unfortunately, this is a downside to the new upgraded systems, but we have been in contact with Marcus representatives and will refer calls of this nature to them. Kevin received a call from a Marcus representative today who offered to send someone from their office to handle the customer service complaints we receive from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Please feel free to contact Kevin or Tracy if you have any further questions • regarding this matter. 41.The SPIN meeting scheduled for Country Walk on November 16th has been cancelled. Brad Walker, political representative for Country Walk Homeowner's Association called Kevin Hugman as well as SPIN #16 Representative Bob Walker to indicate his understanding that the problem had been resolved. There is however ongoing dialogue amongst the parties involved concerning the need for a future SPIN meeting to discuss some related concerns for the Country Walk area. 42. SPIN Planning and Zoning Academy. SPIN sponsored its "Planning and Zoning Academy" last Tuesday evening which was well attended and well received. Karen Gandy prepared a detailed interactive script to disseminate information that allowed for an_interesting approach to learning about the processes related to planning, - - --- - zoning, and development activities. The presentation was taped and will be • prepared for placement on the City's cable channel soon. There were several contributors to the evening presentation which included Angela Roberds and Al Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 ' • for Page 32 of 35 Morin of SPIN, seven SYAC youths as P&Z Commissioners, and various staff members. 43.Economic Development Activities. Following are some recent activities from the Economic Development staff. Feel free to contact Director Last if you have questions or would like additional information. • New Economic Development Addition. Kate had her baby on October 29 and both mother and baby are doing well! His name is Andrew Robin, born at 2:36 a.m., 8 lbs. and 20" long. • Chamber of Commerce Report. Attached to my memo is the Chamber of Commerce Report given to the Chamber Board on Thursday,November 12. • • Southlake Economic Report. The winter addition of the Southlake Economic Report has been sent to the printers. We will forward copies of the report to you in your next Council packet. 44. Status Report: Landscape Ordinance Revisions. Director Last and Keith Martin met with Councilmembers Martin and Edmondson regarding potential revisions to the landscape ordinance. It is anticipated that another workgroup meeting will be held to review a draft of revisions before forwarding to Council for discussion on December 1, 1998. Feel free to contact Keith or Greg should you have questions regarding the progress of revisions to this ordinance. 45. Status Report: Outside Storage Amendments. Staff recommends expanding the SUP for outside storage to include the C-3 district thereby giving the retailers an opportunity to present their needs to the Commission and Council and giving the • city officials and citizens an opportunity to review each request on a case-by-case basis. This amendment would afford an opportunity to review the 5% rule currently Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest • for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 Page 33 of 35 in place and to also address the differences between outside storage and outside display. We hope to bring something forward to you for your direction on December 15, then send it to P&Z for their recommendation. 46. Status Report: Residential Minimum PUD Acreage Amendments. The workgroup for this topic met on Wednesday evening, November 11 and discussed a variety of topics related to PUD requirements. Topics included the minimum required open space percentage, minimum PUD acreage threshold, maximum density provisions and general benefits of PUD's for both the City and the developer. It was concluded that additional research would be done and another workgroup meeting would be held. We hope to also have this item to you for direction on December 15, before sending it on to P&Z. Feel free to contact Karen Gandy should you have • any questions regarding progress on this item. 47. Status Report: Entry Portal Concept Development. We had intended to have this item on your agenda for discussion but decided to delay it due to the number of items on the agenda. Director Last had forwarded to you in your last packet a summary of recommendations and related sketches regarding concepts for entry portals. Preliminary feedback that we have received from a few Councilmembers is that these recommendations are on track with what is anticipated for these portals. We will bring this item forward as soon as possible, possibly in a work session if regular agendas do not accommodate a timely review. Feel free to contact Director Last should you have any comments regarding these proposals. _ 48.Response _to Open Records Request fromJohn-Ege. -The-response -is-somewhat detailed, and it took several days for DPS staff to compile data, but the implication • of his written request and verbal comments required attention. Also, you may have Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 " • for Page 34 of 35 received calls from an appointed board member who has also implied that we use citations to generate revenue. The response to Mr. Ege indicates otherwise. 49.Final note. We are making every attempt to more effectively manage the agendas for your meetings, recognizing the difficulties of deliberating important issues at very late hours. Your packet contains our estimated times for each of the items on this agenda. Note that, by our calculations, this meeting will likely last four and one half hours (11:30 p.m.), if you proceed without a break. Obviously, these are just estimates as there are a number of influencing factors. Hopefully, the exercise of estimating times as a matter of practice will help us avoid long and difficult meetings. • 50. Also attached to my memo: • Standard & Poor's letter relating to the $4,275,000 Tax Notes, Series 1998 (Crime Control). • Letter from Ted Gillium dated November 5, 1998 regarding the suggestion to engage a third party to resolve the TIF issue. • Thank you letters • Calendar of Upcoming Events C Staff Extension Numbers: Barlow, Kate, Economic Development Specialist, ext. 776 S Bloomberg, Chuck, Plans Examiner, ext. 747 Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Agenda Item Comments and Other Items of Interest • for City Council Meeting November 17, 1998 Page 35 of 35 Campbell, Billy, Director DPS, ext. 730 Carpenter, Chris, Planner, ext. 866 Gandy, Karen, Zoning Administrator, ext. 743 Harper, Ron, City Engineer, ext. 779 Hawk, Curtis E., ext. 701 Heath, Lou Ann, Director of Finance, ext. 716 Henry, Ben, Parks Planning and Construction Superintendent, ext. 824 Hugman, Kevin, Director of Community Services, ext. 757 Killough, Dennis, Senior Planner, ext. 787 Last, Greg, Community Development Director, ext. 750 LeGrand, Sandra, City Secretary, ext. 704 Jackson, Malcolm, DPS Administrative Coordinator, ext. 726 Queen, Courtney, Community Services Coordinator, ext. 827 Safranek, Lauren, Director of Human Resources, ext. 836 Sarakaitis, Stefanie, Comprehensive Planner, ext. 753 Siemer, Shelli, Assistant to the City Manager, ext. 806 Thomas, Charlie, Deputy Director of Public Works, ext. 814 Ward, Paul, Chief Building Official, ext. 755 • Wilson, Garland, Deputy Director Fire Services, ext. 735 Whitehead, Bob, Director of Public Works, ext. 740 Whitehead, Nona, Community Services Coordinator, ext. 834 Yelverton, Shana, Assistant City Manager, ext. 705 M:\W D-FILES\CEH\MEETINGS\98-11-17.doc _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .� .... •.... . .... •.°. ....,..... +w ua�. v• �He LYVV l.VP • • PROJECT NARRATIVE 1. Problem Statement and.S • 0 • The goal of this project is to enhance greater communication and coordination between law enforcement agencies in Tarrant County,vihich would strength=local narcotics enforcement and proseculice. The following statistics are submitted from this projecx's Quarterly Reports(6.1-97 to 5 31- DRUG SEIZURES DOSE Marijuana 615.13 Marijuana Plants 32 Heroin-Black Tar 2.53 Heroin- .80 Hein-White 3.86 Codes 15.40 166 II Cocaine 1,673.23 Cocaine rack 8.62 LSD 274 Parlocybin 8.78 t>aates 148 Amphetamines 13.92 Ivies 56.29 Tranquilizers 143 Total Drug Value: $12,356,935.00 Total Arrest: 1,476 ASSET FORFEITURES Vehicles: - 28 Currency: $414,526.00 Personal Property: $30,105.00 CM 4.1 •• rII VW I.►• tell•VV III IVIII VN £IYI ISNJ. V.I `WI I V.4, II VV • 2. Goal Statement The goal of the task fine is to improve the commtmication and coordinaticm between both law enforcmnent armies and prosecutors along with civic efforts to reduce drag related crime. This would tad to enhance the total c rhmnal justice effort both on the street end in the oomtmam. 3. Target Group The general facts oftiris project is Tarrant County.Texas,poptikeion 1,306,800. The nundxf ofpeopic to bu targeted is difficult to estimate. Arrest during the t period ofJune 199E-May 1996 Wei 647;June 1996- May 1997 was 937;and arrest during our fast want period reached 1,476. Our emphasis has shifted searewbat in most dour sectors as our agencies require more resistance controlling sect level distribution. Our entire y is especially apprehensive about the possibility of the hog** affecting north Tarrant County spreading to other areas. It is our desire and intent to assist our age with demand reduction while sal maintaining a coordinated effort to attack major traffickers. • 4. Project Activities In our view,this project is the most imported resource affectingdrug trafficking and use in our communities. We have set up policies and procedures that tend to bring all Tarrant County law=forcemeat mar in order to combat our mutual problems. We work regularly with other agencies such as the Drug Enforcement Aggen y,.the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Internal Reverse Service,Ihe Texas Department of Public Safety,etc.,in order to enhance ow effictiveness,denunmication,and avoid dttplication. We have monthly OCOETF meetings which are rponaared by the Dallas Division of the U. S. Attorney's mice. These meetings king together law enforcement and prosecution teams from federal, state.and local govemment Together we prioritize,target,and implement plate of action that most affect drag trafficking in North Teas. Without this picot,only the lie communities in our area would have the ream available to combat the drug problem EWA the largo ago ties treed a funded task force whose primes"melsion is to bring all • CJD 4.2 • -.. •..,. .'.-.... •... .vn.aw r••• t tMt t4V. YS wdt CM+W I.NU thesuspectwhich led to hismend days after the t heard, ,; ,` This is an excellent sample of bow our Task Force is abbe to assist our commimities. Our Northeast Sector Cow has immersed his uaeit in combating' the heroin problem in Northeast Taint may. Prom September 1S, 1998 until November 1, 1998,we haw had five deaths of young people frn . overdoses of heroin. Over the past two years,we have bad twelve other skits deaths. One of our staff is co the Boasd of Directors of a National Police Support erpnisaion. In order to assist the Northeast Sector,this organization was asked to research the heroin whim moss the ecranhyr. They found that certain eras of Florida had gene through a amilw'as daring the mid 90s. Civic groups and police officials worked tordur` m tombatiag than problem and heroin deaths have subsided over the last year We have secured this plan off and our Northeast Sector is using many of their tactics. Our Sector Coordinator has addressed over twenty civic pups and school functions. He has woticed with his police chiefs and the school nmerintendents of the three school districts in his area. Be has coordiaated the its of his cities with Dello and Plano authorities s • who are similar problems. At the same titre,his unit has been actively puisuing and artesting dead and users of heroi n. Ibis is what our Task Force is all about. No project can be successful without involving itself in commtvity support endeavors. One doer mambas is on the Board of Direetra for Okenitege,Inc. As sock he represented the onforooment element in formulating a longeange plan that helps bring nipped agencies together in woad with clients and conummity gimps. Other staff mambas are . members Qfmakes local,civic,and support groups from Lions and Optimists Clubs to woridug with defendants in the"Direct"Pry. Our Police agencies represent the problems oft ',ramifies. As a problem increases in a particular area,our enforcement entithmis shills in order to be successful. flaws,drive-by shootings,and demising drug use are examples of problems that have developed over the year& Our police chiefs often have ow-scoter eut*d nsiors rodirout their ids or cab times of change, The of this project is based on the Sect that we work C3D4.4 • •V VV 1110 W7•VY !a ;VU&VV 7V!rI ItR I . Vl! '�! I.IJJV l■Vt IIIIIn 1996 there vvae 1,006 arrests of juveniles in Tarrshht County for violent 01': weapons offenses. In 1997 there were 903 sireiler arrests even though on juvenile population has gone up by 2.3%. Ilsoughout the 90a there has been a steady downward tread of these offenses. This would appem to be indicative that a broad based awes&min be successful over time. Authority-Tarrant County while Similar outcomes can be analyzed by viewing adult Part I grime. In 1990 there were 11,423'violent crimes in Tarrant may. In 1997, with the above mentioned larger population,there weee 8,539 reported violent crimes. Much of the above decrease is believed to have been caused by the comb' of longer prison sentenves for violent cdfoiders,cocadinatien of paliee oil,intervention of civic and community g ou & It would sesPesr that the numbers&violent mimes reported have stabilized. We do not anticipate any significant changes in these stsfisties for either adult or juveniles. Our Task Force has witnessed several in narcotics trafficking and use over the past few years. While cocaine and marijuana usage have remained Math*stable,inethanrphetamine and beoia usage have ill increased. The smuggling of all drugs has increased in the Metroplex as pressure has been applied m Houston and border areas. Methamphetamine trafficking has gone from Ig a significant problem in the late 80s and early 90a to a minor problem in the mid 90s to a major problem emeently. Instead of having a significant lab problem with methamp we are now primarily witnessing the finished produd being in from Mexico. It should be noted that we can have little edSict on drugs being smuggled into our area and ultimately distributed elsewhere. While we will be able to take down severed large shipments each year,demand redaction across the county veal be!Nuked bane smuggling is Our arrests have mirrored the activities that are initiated by our pow agencies. Our MEOW far 6-1-96 to 5-31-97 were 987. Our wrests for 6-1-97 to 5-31.98 increased to 1,476. We do not believe that we can sustain the above number of arrems so we do anticipate a reduction of 200 or so this year. The abceife increase was primarily caused by the emphasisg on demand reductieu. ��-Quarterly statistics- CV. COD 4.6 • r11%01 ,4 gi, FAA u4 l 4 r na wnauu till NU. WI 4b 1 rt4.id1 r,Ud Seizures and Farms have remained relatively stable. ..9Vb�1 e cur` r._:;-;' . state seizure and forfeiture totals have been lower,am Federal stidisticihave increased. This has been caused primarily by our Sectors wodciag closely with Federal ate. The relations we have established with Federal agencies is better than ever. We have also worked with our Federal agencies more because of manpower shortages caused by dptemd reduction. We would anticipate that our Task Farce will be successful financially if we can maintain our current emphasis. It is very difficult to forecast the nature of the drug problem in the future. Where the uses of marijuana and cocaine are ours►concern. other drugs aro making a comeback We are of the minion that heroin us e has peaked and will slowly lessen as oarmunny and punka)!initiatives lake hold. We are concerned about the memergance ofinethamphetangues and amphetamines which abow a significant statistical increase. The affect these two drugs have on users is severe. Users tend to become extremely paranoid and brace and are dangerous to society. We will renew our worts to attack the diors of these drugs. Finally,which we admit that drug eat is a difficult occupation,we also acknowledge it is our respomiblhty to meet the problem frontally. A good Task Force is adaptable • and able to roust the needs of its aooa :nt . The following includes statistical information necessary to additionally support the above conclusions. coo 4.7 . • .. City of Southlake uthiakNovember 5, 1998 Administrative Offices • David M. Schwarz Mayor: Schwarz Architectural Services, Inc. Rick Stacy 1133 Connecticut Avenue,N.W., Suite 800 Mayor Pro Tem: Washington, D.C. 20036 W.Ralph Evans • Deputy Mayor Pro Tern: via facsimile and regular mail Scott F.Martin Dear Mr. Schwarz: Councilmembers: • Wayne Moffat Ronnie Kendall The City of Southlake's Architectural Services Selection Committee met today to Debra Edmondson discuss the selection of the architect to design the Town Hall. The committee Gary Fawks consisted of the Mayor, three City Councilmembers and a member of the City Manager: Planning and Zoning Commission. Curtis E.Hawk Assistant City Manager: The complexities of using two architectural firms drives up the cost for the design Shana K.Yelverton of the Town Hall more than originally anticipated. The City Council committee secretary: rejected the joint proposal between Schwarz Architectural Services, Inc. and ra L. LeGrand Urban Architecture because the eleven and one-half percent(11.5%) floating architectural services fees are higher than the City is willing to pay.. I regret to inform you that we will be unable to work with you on this project. The City Council committee has directed staff to find one architectural firm who will agree to work on a fixed fee basis with the building construction costs capped at ten million dollars. In hopes to ensure some continuity with the Town Square project, we will pursue negotiations with Urban Architecture for these services. Thank you very much for your patience and perseverance throughout this process. - Although you will not be able to leave your mark on the Town Hall, we are very pleased with your work on the overall Town Square development. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions at 817-481-5581 extension 702. Si rely, L Curtis E. Hawk City Manager S 1725 East Southlake Blvd. • Southlake, Texas 76092 (817)481-5581 • FAX(817)329-1747 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER" ! : }u nip Nn4tt! ! C41UR! �tKV!4t Nil. 1�14 r. 1 DAVID M. SCHWARZ 0 . ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES, INC. November 9, 1998 Mr. Curtis E. Hawk City of Southtake 1725 East Southtake Blvd. Southtake, TX 76092 Re: Southtake Town Hall Dear Mr. Hawk: Thank-you for your letter of November 5, 1998. It was with much sadness and regret that we received it and reviewed the points you raised. We have a deep and abiding belief in Southtake . Town Square and believe that high quality architecture can truly serve to enhance the richness of our daily lives. I can understand however that given the City Council committee's decision related to the cost of construction for the project,you have decided to pursue another direction, As you and I have discussed, I remain deeply concerned as to whether a quality piece of architecture that meets the City's program can be built for the budget stated in your letter, Since the inception of our planning for Southtake Town Square, it has been our recommendation that an important civic building front onto, and be an important part oty the town square development. S With the nomination of a new Town Hall for the most prominent site within the town square, it has been our vision that this building, as the centerpiece of the Square;recall the traditional town square Texas courthouses built during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Given the City's current budget for the project, it is not clear that this vision can be fulfilled. Should the City's position change at any point in the future,we would look forward to working with you on what we view as an important and exciting project. Sincerely, David M. Schwarz/ Architectural Services,Inc. ti\_,) � i David M. Sch 1:/) S1133 Connecticut Avenue,N.W.,Suite 800, Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 862-0777 ti00 Texas Commerce aenk Tower,20i Main Street,Port Wes,Tawas 76102 (817)339.1133 ropor„._ ---- '-------- , , • November 10, 1998 • ICo � (_ Curtis Hawk,City Manager - •-- - City of Southlake = _ 1725 East Southlake Blvd. Southlake,texas 76092 -URBAN: 1KEHil LIME:, Re: Town Hall • 7931 Presmn Hoed 210.LB 12 Architectural Services Dallas, laTexas7520, Tel 214.522.8494 Dear Mr.Hawk. Fax 214.512.8537 • At this time,Urban Architecture must regretfully decline the opportunity to negotiate a proposal to solely provide architectural services to the City of Southlake for the new Town Hall_ By submitting a proposal with another architect,Urban has fiduciary responsibility to this original team,even though the services would have been separately contracted with the City• Until that architect consents and releases Urban Architecture to work solely with the City of Southlake,Urban is prevented from engaging in any III negotiations. Urban Architecture did not approach or solicit the Town Hall project independently of the team presented,and cannot afford to proceed into any negotiations without a release from David Schwarz. This release is being withheld,and Urban does not expect that it will be forthcoming at any time soon. We are disappointed that the David Schwarz/llrban Architecture team proposal was rejected because we felt that this was the best solution for the project design. With the team proposal rejected,and • knowing that there does not appear to be any possible financial arrangement to keep the team involved, Urban is further disappointed that we will not be able to independently work on the project, The City of Southlake has shown vision and wisdom in locating the Town Hall project within Southlake Town Center, This will be an exciting and incredibly dynamic environment within which to operate a city and county government. Urban Architecture would have enjoyed being involved in the continued development of this vision. ' Thank you for your confidence and trust in Urban Architecture shown by the opportunity given to us. We wish you the best in your search for an architect. Sincerely. - - - Michael J.Murray, Principal - - _ - - _ , . Urban Architecture O IPPr7. ••* COUly?, .. (d NOV 1 31998 Luj TARRANT COUNTY OFFICE,f ----� j NORTHEAST SUB-COURTHOUSE MrlNi^-DER 645 GRAPEVINE HIGHWAY,SUITE 6 HURST,TEXAS 76054 (817)581-3600 FAX(817)581-3603 B. GLEN WHITLEY COUNTY COMMISSIONER PRECINCT NO.3 • •November 11, 1998 Mr. Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager City of Southlake • 667 North Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 Dear Curtis: In recent weeks, we have had a number of requests for the County to participate in Tax Increment Financing Districts (TIF) with other cities in our area. During the course of these discussions and based on articles in the newspaper, I have had a few questions regarding the status of the Southlake Town Hall. When you have a chance, could you give me an estimated timeline so I can keep everyone on the Commissioner's Court up to date on the progress. - Thank you for your assistance in this matter. " Sincerely, B. Glen Whitley, County Commissioner -- -- Precinct 3 — - — - -- - 116 City of Southlake • Master Drainage Plan - Phase I Executive Summary The City of Southlake has experienced rapid development over the past fifteen years,which has led to increased stormwater runoff throughout the City. Phase I of the City of Southlake Master Drainage Plan, prepared by Freese and Nichols, Inc., Cheatham and Associates and Schrickel, Rollins and Associates,was developed to assist the City in evaluating the existing conditions of the city wide drainage infrastructure. Phase I of the Master Plan was developed in seven parts: 1) mapping and geographic information system assessment;2)existing stream and channel assessment 3) storm drain system assessment; 4) status of the existing hydraulic models; 5) environmental overview; 6) priority ranking of streams and channels, and storm drain systems; and 7) funding Sstrategy assessment.Mapping and Geographic Information System Assessment The existing topographic map of the City was produced by the North Texas GIS Commission from February 1994 aerial photography of the City. Physical features such as homes, roads, and above ground utilities are not included on the map. The mapping, prepared for planning level studies,was not intended to be used for detailed engineering design efforts. In an effort to determine if the mapping topographic features had sufficient accuracy to prepare detailed computer models of the drainage systems, an evaluation was performed using spot elevations and confirmation surveys at various locations throughout the City. It was determined that the existing maps do not have the 41111) City of Southlake Master Drainage Plan-Phase I ES-1 , accuracy needed to support a more detailed engineering study and design activities. The maps do •provide sufficient information for large scale planning activities. Existing Stream and Channel Assessment The assessment of the City's existing streams and creeks was performed in three parts: data collection, field reconnaissance, and problem identification. The eight major streams and creeks identified in the Corps of Engineers' 1995 Flood Insurance Study were evaluated. Corps hydraulic models and work maps were obtained and reviewed. Field reconnaissance was performed on approximately 26.5 stream miles to obtain data on the current condition of the channels,the channel overbanks,and the existing road crossings. Channel areas experiencing erosion and other observed problem areas were identified for each major stream and tributary and are described in the main body of the report. Storm Drain System Assessment The assessment of the City's existing storm drain system was performed in two parts: data collection and problem identification. As-built records at the City and at the Texas Department of Transportation were researched for data on existing storm drain systems and road culverts. Field reconnaissance was performed to obtain data on the current condition of the drainage structures and to confirm their existing sizes and locations. Meetings with City personnel were held to obtain information regarding the reported and known problem areas within the City. A map was created . showing all of the identified problem areas. The map provides information regarding the existing condition of the drainage structures at each problem area and identifies the reported and potential impact of flooding at each location. IDCity of Southlake Master Drainage Plan-Phase I ES-2 Vs of Existing Hydraulic Models • The existing stream models, developed in the early 1980's for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Program, account for approximately 11.5 of the existing 26.5 stream miles within the City of Southlake. Each reach of each stream was compared to the existing stream models. General observations and conditions were recorded with regard to the main channel, both channel overbanks, and the size, shape, and configuration of each culvert along the stream. Areas of channel improvements, pond construction, and storm drainage outlet pipes were noted and are included in the report. Numerous drainage structures are not included in the models and several developed areas are not modeled. The City's rapid growth in areas distant from the major creek channels has not activated the requirements for updating the stream models. Typically, developers will perform the stream modeling when projects are adjacent to or include flood plain areas defined by FEMA. Although these models reflect the existing conditions in the Ilkicinity of the project at that period in time with the project in place,they typically do not take into account future upstream conditions. These models should be updated on a priority basis to better define the current and future 100-year flood plain limits. Environmental Overview Separate field reconnaissance was conducted for this portion of the Phase I study. The environmental overview was divided into three areas: evaluation of the streams and tributaries within the City for endangered species and threatened species, assessment of the potential for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers jurisdiction over"waters of the United States,"and an assessment of the permitting requirements for anyfuture drainage improvements.-- - - City of Southlake Master Drainage Plan-Phase I ES-3 Nine endangered or threatened species were found to have the potential to occur within Tarrant County. All of the species listed are either not expected to occur within the City of Southlake or should not be impacted by any future drainage projects within the City. All of the streams and channels within the City are considered`waters of the United States" and subject to federal regulation. These jurisdictional waters are controlled by the Corps of Engineers' Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit process and the EPA National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits. The 404 permit requirements have recently changed requiring a more vigorous process which can significantly affect new construction as well as maintenance activities. New rules are being promulgated by EPA for stormwater NPDES permits. In addition,the numerous on-channel detention/retention ponds which have been constructed throughout the City may also be considered jurisdictional waters. Several small wetland areas, which are also considered jurisdictional waters, were observed to occur within the channels at various locations throughout the City. areas ty are generally located at road crossings which 0 have been blocked with silt and vegetation. Because these wetlands occur within the limits of the channel banks, any drainage improvements within the channel must address these areas. At least one wetland area exists outside the limits of the channel banks in the West Jones Branch watershed between State Highway 114 and North Kimball Road. Any construction activities in the area must address and protect this wetland. Any drainage improvements within the streams and creeks will be subject to permitting requirements. These projects will be subject to the review and approval of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The requirements associated with these permits can have a significant impact on City of Southlake Master Drainage Plan-Phase I ES-4 improvement alternatives. They will need to be taken into account in the review of alternatives in Sthre phases. Maintenance activities are subject to the permitting process as well. Activities that disturb more than 1 acre or 500 feet of channel are subject to very stringent requirements. Priority Ranking System A priority ranking system was developed for each major stream and for all of the identified storm drain system critical structures or problems. A ranking of each watershed, structure or problem was based on a set of technical criteria established by the project team and City personnel. That criteria includes reported history of flooding,number of residences affected,public safety,and potential for upstream and downstream development. The two highest priority ranked streams are the West Jones Branch and Dove Creek. The Ofive highest ranked storm drain system improvements are: 1) Continental,between Independence Court and Forest Drive,2) SH 114 and Highland Street,3)Lonesome Dove Road, 4) Summerplace Addition on Dove Creek Trail between Summerplace Lane and Preakness Circle,and 5)Whispering Dell Estates near the J. Johnson Elementary School. Assessment of Funding Strategies Various mechanisms were evaluated for funding the drainage system improvements. Such mechanisms include developer drainage system improvements, general fund financing, grants, special improvement districts, drainage utilities, and drainage impact fees. Of the mechanisms reviewed, the most significant improvements would likely result from the implementation of a •drainage utility. City of Southlake Master Drainage Plan-Phase I ES-5 . . V Summary of Recommendations • While a detailed description of the recommendations is included in Chapter 9, a brief summary of the key recommendations is listed below: 1) Develop a detailed topographic map of the City,preferably with one foot contour intervals. . 2) Update the hydraulic computer models, with West Jones Branch and Dove Creek reviewed first,followed by BB-6 and South Fork of Kirkwood Branch. 3) Develop a program for acquiring drainage easements along all of the major streams and tributaries within the City,as feasible. 4) Adopt and pursue a stormwater management financing plan. The first two items should be accomplished in Phase II of the Master Drainage Plan development while items 3 and 4 will need to be performed primarily by the City. . City of Southlake Master Drainage Plan-Phase I ES-6 . 1141F"' 4) , Texas Department of Transportation OEWITT C.GREER STATE HiGHWlY BLDG.•125 E.1111 i STREET•AUSTIN,TEXAS 78701-2483•(512)4638585 November 4, 1998 September 24,1998 Commission Meeting-METROPORT Cities Honorable Rick Stacy Mayor,City of Southlake do Prime Strategies,Inc. . 150E S.Lamar Blvd. Austin,TX 78704 Dear Mayor Stacy: The Texas Transportation Commission has asked me to express their appreciation for the METROPORT Cities presentation regarding the S11 114 and US 377 projects. The delegation did an excellent job of illustrating the continued need for these projects. During the business portion of their meeting,the Transportation Commission approved the 1999 Unified Transportation Program which approved construction funding for the project on SH 114 from Dove Road • to Carroll School Road for Fiscal Year 2002. The SH 114 project-from SH 170 to Precinct Line Road and the US 377 project from Keller Hicks Road to SH 170 will be considered for Priority 2 status(project development up through acquisition of right of way)during the FY 2000 update of the Unified Transportation Program,scheduled for consideration by the Transportation Commission in August, 1999. Thank you again for your presentation and please continue to work with Mr.Steven Simmons in the Fort Worth District and Mr_Jay Nelson in the Dallas District. Sincerely, _ ` 7 -7. J. Michael W.Behrens,P.E. Assistant Executive Director Engineering Operations cc: Honorable Jane Nelson • Honorable Ron Lee . Mr.David M.Laney Ms.Anne S. Wynne Mr.Robert L.Nichols Mr.Charles W.Heald • Mr.Steven Simmons Mr.Jay Nelson • An Equal Opportunity Employer . ... 7, _, ,,...,...„, , , . r ',,,,,„ .. ,.„...,,,_ A i . :.: . -Tiegislative . ...,- , . . . ,,,t e_7,,,,/,-7,-, . . ,. , .L, ,_::,. , . . . . .,„, s 'rf� , s v rY;F F ; T ,,, F aFa��.� �YYY♦y P'K'. :r-...M . �� dfir October 28, 1998 •QC' ('' . Number 10 /-/ h1 G-FS &&.c-' s,cy INTERIM COMMITTEE WILL PUBLISH REPORT ,cH ss WRITTEN BY TELECOM INDUSTRY rr he co-chairmen of the Joint Interim Committee on Municipal Franchise Agreements For Telecommunications Utilities (the "joint committee") have decided to publish the joint 0 committee's July 28 draft report, despite evidence that most of the report was written by the telecom industry. (For complete background information on the joint committee and its draft report, please see the September 29, 1998, edition of the TML Legislative Update.) According to an October 14 Dallas Morning News report, the co-chairmen (Senator Eddie Lucio and Representative Bill Carter) said the report's finding and recommendations are sound, despite the fact that telecom lobbyists wrote the bulk of the report. As a result, the report is undoubtedly doomed to be known henceforth as the "AT&T Report," even though no AT&T lobbyist will officially be listed as an author. Other members of the joint committee indicated that there's no point in reworking the report's verbiage, because to do so would be wasting time on a study that is "severely flawed." Senator Florence Shapiro, for example, said that a rewrite wouldn't change the report conceptually. And without dramatic changes, she said, "I think it's going to be very difficult to pass." WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURED Consider these two situations: 1. The Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) says it needs an increase of$32 million to pay for its water quality permitting and inspection programs over the next two years. ilte: When you receive this TMLcopies please Legislative U date, make of it and distribute them to members of the governing body and to department heads as appropriate.TML sends only one copy to each city, and we rely on those ,.rho receive it to distribute it. Thanks for your help. Published by the Texas Municipal League 1821 Rutherford Lane, Suite 400, Austin, Texas 78754-5128 • (512) 719-6300 V . ..). 1, . • . * Legislative ", 4 .. .,., - ,. . ,- _ ,. ., • ,-.,... L..S S S ,s, /`�� September 29, 1998 y L Number 9 '<`-/ LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE STUDYING FRANCHISE FEES GOES BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD A bizarre sequence of events has resulted in a decision by the co-chairmen of the Joint Interim qofiCommittee on Municipal Franchise Agreements For Telecommunications Utilities (the "joint committee") to withdraw and rewrite the joint committee's draft report. (For a complete background on the joint committee and the League's testimony before it, please see the May 29, 1998, edition of the TML Legislative Update.) Here is the sequence of events: July 21, 1998 -- the six-member joint committee releases its draft report. July 27, 1998 -- one member of the joint committee, Representative Steve Wolens, issues a statement criticizing the draft report. July 28, 1998 -- the joint committee meets to discuss and finalize the draft report. August 6, 1998 -- Representative Wolens releases a revised draft report. August 13, 1998 -- Senator Florence Shapiro, a member of the joint committee, proposes additional changes to the draft report. August 26, 1998 -- the joint committee again meets to finalize its report. September 2, 1998 -- the joint committee releases the executive summary of the final report. 0 e: When you receive this TML Legislative Update, please make copies of it and distribute them to members of the governing_ body and to department heads as appropriate.TML sends only one copy to each city, and we rely on those who receive it to distribute it. Thanks for your help. Published by the Texas Municipal League 1821 Rutherford Lane, Suite 400, Austin, Texas 78754-5128 ® (512) 719-6300 PV September 16, 1998 -- the Dallas Morning News discloses that the joint committee's report was largely written by lobbyists for 1111 telecommunications companies. September 17, 1998 -- the joint committee's co-chairmen withdraw the report and begin a rewrite. Here are the details. The July 21 Draft Report On July 21, the joint committee issued a 27-page report with four attachments. The bottom line: current municipal revenue would be protected, but the joint committee rejected TML's argument that a city may charge rent for use of the right-of-way in addition to recovering the cost of managing the right-of-way. In short, the report gave the telecom companies most of what they wanted: • A right-of-way "cost recovery structure" should base franchise compensation on the amount of revenue received by cities in 1998 and should place the burden of proof on a city to justify an increase on the basis of the city's right-of-way "expenditures." • The state should establish a "uniform statewide" cost recovery structure under which each telecom company's fee would be based on the number of access lines it has in any given city. • The Public Utility Commission should have authority to review franchise agreements. • • These new state policies should preempt and replace all existing city charters, city 'ordinances, and franchise agreements. The draft report contained numerous other recommendations, most of them favorable to the telecommunications industry. The July 27 Statement From Representative Wolens On July 27, Representative Steve Wolens announced that he was "sadly disappointed" in the report, noting that the report was "not balanced" and did not "represent the complete testimony presented" to the joint committee. He pointed out that the recommendations contained. in the July 21 draft report "would create unearned windfall profits for an already multi-billion dollar industry while forcing Texas cities to either raise property taxes or slash services to their citizens." Finally, Representative Wolens stated his hope that the draft report was "merely a first step in this process" and that "more reasonable alternatives" would be agreed upon after further discussion. The July 28 Meeting _ - The joint committee met on July 28 to discuss the draft report. -Two members (Representative Wolens and Senator David Sibley) had scheduling conflicts and were absent. Senator Eddie Lucio (Co-Chairman), Senator Florence Shapiro, Representative Bill Carter (Co-Chairman), and 0 Representative Fred Hill were present. 2 VSenator Shapiro raised numerous questions about the report and the prospect that the recommendations would harm cities and may be unconstitutional. She forcefully argued for 0 changes in the report and convinced the joint committee that no vote should be taken until the recommendations were reconsidered. The joint committee decided to hold another meeting on August 26. (Note: Texas cities owe a great debt of gratitude to Representative Wolens and Senator Shapiro for their efforts to improve the report from the standpoint of cities. TML encourages city officials to express that gratitude.) The August 6 Alternate Report On August 6, Representative Wolens issued an alternate report entitled, First Revised Draft Report. The report's recommendations affirmed a city's authority (and constitutional obligation) to collect value-based compensation (rent) for commercial use of rights-of-way; ensured that municipal franchise revenue would, at a minimum, remain stable and would grow as use of the rights-of-way grows; and established that cities may collect compensation from wireless providers a well as land-based providers. The August 13 Comments On August 13, Senator Florence Shapiro issued her written "Comments on the Draft Report." Senator Shapiro argued that: • "Compensation for use of the ROW (right-of-way) should not be strictly based upon costs incurred by the city. There should be some allowance for the value of • the land." • The recommendations should "provide for a reasonable growth index" for municipal franchise revenue, since "municipal costs and property values are sure to increase." • Allowing for PUC review would "add a whole new layer of bureaucracy" and "cities are not comfortable with this arrangement." Senator Shapiro also expressed her concern about the effect of the joint committee's recommendations on current franchise agreements. The August 26 Meeting The joint committee met on August 26 to adopt a final report. After several of Representative Wolens's and Senator Shapiro's changes were accepted, the report was adopted on a 5-1 vote, with Representative Wolens voting "no." The September 2 Executive Summary On September 2, the joint committee released the executive summary of the fmal report. It contains the following recommendations: 1. For those cities who choose to receive revenues through a ROW fee, establish a uniform general use ordinance using a per-line fee applicable to telecommunications providers certificated to provide local exchange service under the Texas Utilities Code that occupy the ROW of that city. While the per-line fee mechanism, i.e. the imposition of a flat fee on each - - - 3 - PPV access line that physically utilizes the public ROWs to connect an end user, should be standardized statewide, the unique functions of an . individual city may determine a unique compensation level in each city. Define appropriate terms, including a definition of an "access line." 2. Such a structure should limit revenues received through ROW fees to a defined set of city functions directly related to the management of the ROW and an increase in the number of access lines; apportion payment for such use appropriately to the telecommunications industry users of the ROW as one of multiple ROW users. 3. Ensure that, upon implementation of the general use ordinance, revenues received by cities for use of the ROW will not decrease from the level of fiscal year 1998. 4. Provide a system of annual review by the Public Utility Commission of Texas to determine the appropriate apportionment of lines per provider per city; require that such a system maintain fair compensation for cities and maintain the intent of administrative simplicity for cities and providers alike. Establish final audit authority within the Public Utility Commission of Texas while not prohibiting the ability of the cities to conduct their own audits. 5. For a city receiving revenues through a ROW fee, prohibit the imposition of other fees (application, permit, excavation, inspection, etc.) to a PUC- certificated local exchange telecommunications provider. • 6. Establish that the per-line ROW fee is the only legal remuneration for entry into city ROW that may be imposed on a PUC-certificated local exchange provider. Prohibit such requirements as the provision of in-kind services (e.g., dedicated-use fiber optic cable, etc.). 7. Expressly prohibit any double collection of fees. 8. Establish a framework and time line for cooperative development of a uniform general-use ordinance by the cities and the industry. Following final adoption of the uniform general-use ordinance, require use of the ordinance by all cities by a statutory date certain except for existing contracts between an individual city and an individual company. • Such contracts should be grand fathered until expiration, unless both parties agree to the terms of the ordinance. • Determine methodology for addressing new entrants in a city where the local ILEC is grand fathered for some additional months. • Any city which does not currently receive revenues for use of its ROW may choose to enact an agreement comparable to that of a similarly situated city in both population and eo a h g S�' P Y. • Recognize that essential differences exist between areas of the state that may dictate individual city requirements relating to presence in the ROW in a uniform general use S ordinance. 4 9. Establish that technological developments will continue to expand the 1110 number and types of communications services offered by telecommunications providers and cable operators and will lead to the offering of competing services by such companies. In order to ensure that providers of competing services do not obtain competitive advantages from the grant of municipal authority, the fees assessed by municipalities for use of the public rights-of-way when telecommunications providers offer the same type of service should be competitively neutral. The recommendations had improved slightly from the standpoint of Texas cities, but still fell far short of conforming with TML's positions. The First Dallas Mornin9NewsArticle On September 16, in a copyrighted story, the Dallas Morning News reported that the joint committee's recommendations "largely are similar—and at a number of key places, identical—to language (industry) lobbyists secreted to committee staffers." In other words, much of the report was a verbatim duplication of material provided to the joint committee by telecom lobbyists. While Representative Bill Carter, one of the joint committee's co-chairs, said the duplication was a coincidence, Senator Eddie Lucio, the other co-chair, said he was "surprised" and "disgusted." Representative Wolens called the duplication "a dual fraud," a fraud on both the public and the legislature. Senator Shapiro was also highly critical, saying the revelations "send a bad signal to people who take the time and trouble to appear before legislative committees." The news article included excerpts from both the telecom lobbyists' material and the joint committee's report. Much of the wording was identical; the remainder was strikingly similar. The Second Dallas MorningNewsArticie The following day, September 17, the Dallas Morning News reported that the joint committee's co-chairmen had decided to recall the report and rewrite it. They indicated that the joint committee will meet again in October to make final recommendations. But the article quoted Senator Lucio as follows "...the report will be rewritten from scratch but. . .some, 'if not the majority' of the earlier recommendations will be retained." We will keep you informed. FEDERAL COURT RULING BACKS FRANCHISE FEES n a significant win for cities around the nation, the Federal District Court in Detroit has taken a "giant step toward upholding the authority of cities to manage the public rights-of-way and charge compensation for their use. In the case of TCG Detroit v. City of Dearborn, the judge issued a decision upholding the city's authority to require telecommunications companies to enter into franchise agreements and pay franchise fees under the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996. This victory is particularly noteworthy because the court's opinion recognizes that cities are _ _ entitled to charge rent for the use of the public rights-of-way, as opposed to merely recovering the cost of maintaining the public rights-of-way, a position frequently articulated by telephone and cable companies. • The Texas Municipal League, the National League of Cities, and localities around the nation have consistently maintained that the Telecommunications Act of 1996, specifically Section 5 253(c), expressly preserves municipal franchising, compensation, and right-of-way management authority, including the right of cities to charge rent for the use of the public rights-of-way. Please see article above.) In the case in question, the City of Dearborn, Michigan was sued by a new telephone company (TCG). The suit maintained that Dearborn's ordinance requiring TCG to enter into, a franchise agreement to pay franchise fees to the city in the amount of 4 percent of gross revenues was a violation of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Specifically, TCG argued that the ordinance violated Section 253 of the Telecommunications Act on the grounds that: (1) the compensation is not fair and reasonable under the Act, (2) the city is not requiring compensation in a competitively neutral and nondiscriminatory manner, and (3) the city's ordinance is in violation of the Act because it has the effect of prohibiting the company's entry into the market. In reaching a decision in favor of the City of Dearborn, the district court rejected all of TCG's claims. With regard to the issue of compensation, the opinion contains a substantial discussion of the provision of Section 253(c) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which allows cities to charge "fair and reasonable compensation. . .for use of the public rights-of-way." In a decision very favorable for cities, the judge rejected TCG's claims that "fair and reasonable compensation" was limited solely to a city's costs. "There is nothing inappropriate with the city charging compensation, or rent, for the City owned property that the Plaintiff [phone company] seeks to appropriate for its private use. The statute specifically allows it," the judge said. The judge also examined what other telecommunications providers were willing to pay to help determine whether the amount charged to TCG was "fair and reasonable." The judge noted three 0 other cases in which telecommunications companies negotiated, and agreed to, franchise agreements with the City of Dearborn similar to that proposed to TCG.. He noted that "this is evidence in support of a finding that the compensation sought by the city is fair and reasonable." This case addressed a key point of disagreement between cities and telecommunications companies. The telecoms argue that a city may only recover the cost of managing the right-of- way (whatever that means.) Cities, on the other hand, have forcefully argued that, in addition to recovering the costs of exercising police power over rights-of-way, they are entitled to collect rent from any company that wishes to use public right-of-way. This difference of opinion was a central focus of the Texas study discussed in the article above. The Dearborn decision validates the cities' contentions. The decision will undoubtedly be appealed. (Note: much of this article is a reprint from the August 31, 1998 edition of Nation's Cities Weekly.) MUNICIPAL ZONING AUTHORITY UPHELD UNDER TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1996 I n another stunning victory hed fordown cities, the United Statesi Courtof of Appealst i for the 4th Circuit the on 1, 1998, and a unanimous opinon significanmportance rTelecommunications Act of 1996 (the "Act"), upholding the authority of local governments over . September decisions regarding the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities, particularly relating to the siting of communications towers or so-called monopoles. In AT&T Wireless PCS, Incorporated; PrimeCo Personal Communications; L.P.; Lynhaven 0 United Methodist Church v. City Council of Virginia Beach, the appeals court reversed the United States District Court's order requiring the city council to approve an application to erect communications towers in a residential area of Virginia Beach. The lower court had determined that the council had violated the Act by denying the application. AT&T and PrimeCo sought a conditional use permit to erect two 135-foot towers at the Lynhaven Methodist Church in a heavily residential area of the city with no significant commercial development, no commercial antenna towers, and no above-ground power lines. The companies had entered into leases with the church to construct and operate the two towers on church property. Although the city's planning department and planning commission approved the application, the city council voted unanimously to deny the application. Its decision was recorded in a two-page summary of the minutes describing the application, listing the names and views of all who testified at the hearing, and recording the votes of each council member. Also, on the letter from the planning commission to the city describing the application, the city had stamped the word "Denied" and indicated the date of the council's vote. The council did not generate written findings of fact concerning its vote, nor did it produce a written explanation for the basis for its vote. On competing motions for summary judgment, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia ordered the city council to approve the application. Section 704(c)(7) of the Act, entitled "Preservation of local zoning authority," provides that except for the specified limitations, the authority of a state or local government or instrumentality thereof shall not be limited or affected in connection with decisions concerning placement, construction, and modification 'of personal wireless service facilities. In limitation, the statute provides that such regulation by any state or local government or instrumentality: (1)'shall not 0 unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally equivalent services; and (2) shall not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services. The statute also provides that any decision denying requests to place, construct, and modify such facilities shall be in writing and supported by substantial evidence contained in a written record. Overruling the district court, the circuit court held that the city council had not violated the "unreasonable discrimination limitation." In fact, the appellate court expressed serious doubt that the council had discriminated at all "among providers of functionally equivalent services," much less "unreasonably," finding a lack of evidence that the council had any intent to favor one company or form of service over another. The circuit court also found that the evidence disclosed that opposition to the application rested on a traditional basis of zoning regulation; i.e., preserving the character of the neighborhood and avoiding aesthetic blight. The 4th Circuit affirmed the opinion of the lower court that the council did not violate the requirement that the governmental regulation "shall not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of wireless services," holding that this specification applies only to "blanket prohibitions" and "general bans or policies," not to individual decisions. Finally, the circuit court overruled the district court's holding that the city violated the requirement to issue its decision in writing, supported by substantial evidence contained in a written record. The appeals court treated the two requirements of this subsection separately: (a) whether the decision was in writing, and (b) whether it was supported by a written record. The court held the council's decision clearly_was. reflected by writing, both in the condensed minutes of the council and the letter from the planning commission. Additionally, the circuit court found - that the record disclosed that the requirement for substantial evidence was fulfilled, in that the council had before it the appellees' application, the planning department's report, transcripts of hearings before the planning commission and the city council, numerous petitions opposing the application, one supporting the application, and letters to the council both for and against 7 V __ Moreover, the court said that whereas the approval of the planning department and the planning • commission (as well as the support of numerous experts who testified on behalf of the applicants) might have amounted to a preponderance of evidence in favor of the application, the repeated and widespread opposition of the majority of the citizens who voiced their views was sufficient evidence to support the council's disapproval. The Virginia Municipal League, through its general counsel, filed an amicus curiae brief supporting the position of the City Council of Virginia Beach. (Note: the material for this article was provided by the Virginia Municipal League.) SENATE INTERIM COMMITTEE ON ANNEXATION PREPARES TO RELEASE FINAL REPORT r-rhe Senate Interim Committee on Annexation, after holding hearings around the state over the 1 course of nearly a year, is preparing to release its final report. The Committee will make eight recommendations. • Recommendation #1 - Grandfather Certain Land Uses Following Annexation. The Committee will recommend that the annexation laws be amended to grandfather pending building developments where preliminary plats have been filed 60 days before notice of annexation is first published. Recommendation #2 - Require Cities to Adopt a Three-Year Advance Annexation Plan. The Committee will recommend that cities be required to implement three-year rolling annexation plans, and that annual annexations be 0 effectuated in compliance with such plans. • Recommendation #3 - Strengthen Requirements for Providing Municipal Services to Newly Annexed Areas. The Committee will recommend that: (1) cities compile a comprehensive inventory of services and facilities provided by a public or private entity in the area proposed for annexation; (2) emergency medical services be added to the list of services that must be provided to newly annexed areas; (3) the city not provide a service plan that has the effect of diluting services being provided within the city prior to annexation; and (4) the service determinations based on "different characteristics" are subject to judicial review or review by an arbitrator. Recommendation #4 - Accelerate Statutory Schedule for Providing Municipal Services to Newly Annexed Areas. The Committee will recommend that cities be required to provide for public safety (including EMS), solid waste collection, maintenance of utilities and other facilities, and begin the construction of necessary infrastructure improvements on the effective date of an annexation. In addition, the Committee will recommend that construction of necessary infrastructure be "substantially completed" within two and one-half years of an annexation. Recommendation #5 - Involve Affected Persons in Annexation Service Planning and Subject Service Plan Disputes-to Resolution by-a Third Party. - - The Committee will recommend that cities be required to enter into good faith consultations and negotiations with residents of the affected area, and will 41 recommend that in the event of an impasse in negotiations, either party may request binding arbitration. In addition, the Committee will recommend that the arbitration board's award would be an enforceable contract. 8 _,_______ •, . . North Central Texas Council Of Governments November 6, 1998 Ron Harper City Engineer City of Southiake - 667 N. Carroll Ave. Southlake, TX 76092 Dear Ron, • It is my pleasure to inform you that the Executive Board of the North Central Texas Council of • Governments (NCTCOG) has reappointed you for service on the Public Works Advisory Committee. You will be serving a two-year term expiring September 30, 2000. This important committee provides expertise and support to the Board and staff on a wide range of local public works issues. For example, the committee provides the continuing advice required by the Executive Board regarding the Standard Specifications for Public Works 0 Construction - North Central Texas which now indudes standard drawings. Over the next few years, the committee will oversee the comprehensive review of the 314 Edition of the Standard Specifications. The Committee is composed of public works professionals appointed to serve two-year terms, with one-half of the members appointed each year by the Executive Board. The Chairman and Vice-Chairman are appointed annually by the Board. Committee membership indudes. members from cities, counties, special districts, and professional/trade associations. The Public Works Advisory Committee usually meets on the first Thursday of every month at 1:00 p.m. in the NCTCOG offices. If a Committee Appointment Information Sheet is included, please complete or update all the information and mail it back to us in the return envelope provided. Should you have any questions or need any additional information, please contact Lois Thompson at (817) 695- 9222. I look forward to seeing you at the next meeting. Sincerely, Joh rom' e Directo of Environmental Resources J P:It 411. .., 616 Six Flags Drive, Centerpoint Two - -- -- P. O. Box 5888, Arlington, Texas 76005-5888 (817) 640-3300 FAX: 817.640-7806'©recycled paper • • I Southlake gets over the speed hump SOUTHLAKE — Residents of a road humps or ask for increased patrol. Southlake neighborhood gathered Thurs- Concerned that the humps would day to discuss traffic concerns. decrease property values, Dana Arnold . Recently, drivers have been using the told staff writer Kellie Gormly that he - neighborhood street as a cut-through and opposed the device. many drivers are breaking the 25 mph "I would rather pay for a police officer speed limit through the residential area. • to stand there and write tickets,"he said. Residents debated whether to install SEE COMPLETE STORY )• PAGE 9 Southlake officials consider residential speed humps • BY KELLIE B.GORN1LY dents, many of whom were con- about speed humps and the results of cars observed in surveys must assured the residents that city ot•ti- Slar-Telegram Sluff Miler ccrned about declining property of-two recent surveys taken by a travel at 35 miles per hour or cials are concerned about their values. Dana Arnold, who recent- radar machine in the neighbor- higher. Access for emergency problem.. SOUTHLAKE — Nearly 30 ly moved here from Columbus, hood. During 29 consecutive vehicles also is considered. The "I think the biggest problem is residents and city officials gath- Ohio, said that the property value hours on Oct. 29-30, 2,100 cars City Council can waive a require- volume," Kendall said. "It's a Bred Thursday night at Chris and on his previous home declined by passed through Coventry Street; meat if necessary,Campbell said. neighborhood problem. but it's a Becky Miltenberger's home on 25 percent when his neighbor- the maximum speed recorded was The speed humps would be city problem." Turnberry Lane to discuss hood installed speed humps. 46 mph. In another survey con- clearly marked, and 30-by-30- The city is considering adding installing speed humps in their "I would rather pay for a police ducted Nov. 2-5, 4,-619 cars inch warning signs would be another cast west street nearby as neighborhood. officer to stand there and write passed through the Coventry and installed to prevent possible acci along term solution to the cut- The meeting was held in tickets,"he said. Turnberry during 80 consecutive dents, Campbell said. The humps through problem, she said. This response to complaints from resi- Some residents, however, sup- hours; the maximum speed was would be 12 feet wide, 3 to 3.5 street would be created within five dents about frequent speeding and ported the idea; the speed humps 52 mph. inches high and 200 to 40Q feet heavy cut-through traffic. are only offensive if the driver is "What we want is to take the apart. years and stretch across Shady Residents complained that speeding, they said. Most people opportunity to solve or slow down "We want to get them on a Oaks Drive between ;eytonville most drivers exceed the 25 mph seemed unenthusiastic about sonic of your problems when property line — not in front of and White Chapel Boulevard. speed limit on both streets, some- speed humps, but recognized we're not here," said Billy Camp- someone's house, not in front of - Two-thirds of residents on the times driving as fast as 60 mph in them as an effective way to con- bell,director of public safety. someone's driveway," said Bob affected streets must approve the late-night drives. They also said trol the problem. The city already had formal Whitehead, director of public speed humps before the idea pro- that far too many cars use Turn- • "I don't want to look at speed qualifications for installing speed works. ' ceeds.After city staff analysis, the berry and Coventry lanes as a cut- humps, and I don't want property humps: The.road must he a resi- Speed humps, which will cost residents will approach City through to Shady Oaks Drive. values to go down," said Becky dcntial street with no more than up to$3,000 each and be installed Council fc r consideration and a City officials proposed Miltenberger. "But I do want this two traveling lanes, have a traffic by an outside contractor, can be public hearing. installing four speed humps — to stop." volume of more than 500 vehicles removed later if residents and three on Turnberry,one on Coven- In a slide show called Traffic per day but less than 4,000, the officials decide they are no longer try—as a solution. The idea trig- Calming, Department of Public speed limit must be 30 miles per needed;officials said. Kellie lt.Gormly,(817)2st-6275 gored mixed reactions from resi- Safety officials presented the facts hour or lower and the 85 percent Councilwoman Ronnie Kendall thrdwr(e).3tar.teJegram.cagl{,.;. ilowingthe flow Area cities turning to humps and bumps in effort to curb speed demons By Steve Miller Since being introduced in the mid-1970s from Eu- Northeast Tarrant Bureau of The Dallas Morning News rope, the traffic-control devices have slowly gained SOUTHLAKE — Becky Miltenberger is trying to ground in the city and in suburbia. bring the "sleeping policemen" from her old Dallas Dallas and Fort Worth are among the cities that neighborhood to her new one in Southlake. have them,as are Plano and North Richland Hills.And Speeding traffic through Mrs. Miltenberger's tree- now,relatively small Southlake—population 20,000— lined neighborhood has convinced her of the need for is considering installing a few of its own. road humps—traffic-slowing devices called"sleeping policemen" in England and woonerf in the Nether- "People cutting through here aren't afraid to take lands, where the devices were conceived. on the speed limit," said Mrs. Miltenberger, who By any name,speed humps are the obstructive bane moved to Southlake two years ago from Dallas. "But of lead-footers and short-cutters and are the gently they know they have to slow down before they go over sloping saviors of neighborhood dwellers. They vary a speed hump." in height from 2 to 4 inches,in length from 12 to 24 feet Southlake is considering a pilot program for the and in cost from S800 to $8,000. Please see AREA on Page 41A. Continued from Page 39A. relationship," said Ms. Bilnoski. "Ye devices, which are gaining favor in a they slowed traffic. But they're noir number of cities. when cars go over them.And you g- The driver who is too hurried to tired of driving over them yourself. heed caution over a hump risks dam- When the humps were installF age to the oil pan, muffler and align- one neighbor recalled being awa ment_ ened by the protest of early-mornin 'Taking them at even 25 mph is too car horns. fast," said Wolf Gloger, owner of the "Yeah, for the first two or thr; • Auto Hospital of Dallas. He says he's weeks,people would beep their hoc. seen undercarriages ruined as a result at 5 or 6 in the morning as they hit it. of humming over the humps. bumps," said Gary Lawler, wh . - "If you aren't watching what you worked with Ms. Bilnoski to get t are doing, it can be a rude awaken- humps installed."I understand that i- ing•" other areas, people would drive c . Not too rude for several hundred people's lawns to get around tt. Fort Worth residents. The city has a humps." waiting list of 130 neighborhoods that In some places, protesters take th want to get speed humps for their city or county to court. Randy Slage streets. The city has installed around of Bethesda, Md., alleged that spee 50 so-far in a program that started in humps violated the Americans Wit July. Disabilities Act by denying hir - "We only have.$50,000 budgeted for "meaningful access to the street" H: speed humps,"said Dianna Vazquez,a 1997 suit was dismissed by a U.S. Di city traffic engineer."So a lot of these trict Court judge in Maryland. neighborhoods aren't going to get The humps have also been decrie ' them." by some law enforcement personne Many cities that use speed humps who say they interfere with police an — estimates vary from 60 to 350 na- fire response times and access. On tionwide—require that two-thirds of study found that humps can add a: the requesting neighborhood's resi- average of 10 seconds to a call for hel: dents sign a petition backing the mea- 'The issue is where the humps ar sure...A traffic study is usually manda- located,"said Gary Gregg,deputy con tory as well. mander of police services in Soutl Ten years ago,Dallas resident Bob- lake. "If they are located in an are bi.Bilnoski had tired of late-night ca- that is, say, seven minutes away an rousers speeding past her house on the humps add 40 seconds, we woul Monticello Avenue in Dallas'M streets have to look twice at that." III neighborhood. Empty beer bottles lit- Fort Worth police U.Bill McDone_ tered the lawns,residuals of the revel- said the addition of a speed hump o: ry on nearby Greenville Avenue. one street often just moves speeders t The answer? Speed humps, the another. _ block decided.The theory was that at "They just take a different route • least some motorists would seek an- which I guess solves the problem fc other route. • one street,"the officer said. 'They are absolutely a love-hate It's a solution that's often paid fc /2.,All • BUMPS IN THE ROAD Here are some key facts about speed humps: ■The residents of Delft, in The Netherlands, hatched the idea of building speed humps to slow motorists driving through a neighborhood. • Delft's rebellion against the automobile prompted the residents to tear up the brick pavement,forcing motorists to slow or risk losing a muffler, oil pan or worse. ■The concept moved to Germany in the early 1970s,where it was dubbed Verkehrsberuhigung,or'traffic tranquilization."When the concept of using obstacles or barriers to control the speed or flow of • street traffic gained popularity in the United States in the mid-1970s,it • . became known among transportation planners as"traffic calming." ■The average speed hump in the United States costs around$1,000. It ranges in height from 2 to 4 inches and varies in length from 12 to 24 feet. Most are marked by reflectors of varying size. Many are also painted with white or yellow Xs or similar markings. SOURCES:A Survey of Traffic Calming Practices in the United States(University of California.1998);Traffic Calming State-of-the Art(Reid Ewing for the Institute of Transportation Engineers,1998). 11110 The Dallas Morning News by an entire city. labor. It's quite a repair." Tax-increment financing has been - used in several downtown areas such Aesthetics are "very important in as Fresno, ('atif. Voters in Albuquer ,"said Reid Ewing,a Florida-based que, N.M., approved a $100,000 bond consulting engineer who just complet- issue for traffic-calming devices, in- • a study of speed humps for the cluding speed humps. Institute of Transportation Engineers, a Washington,D.C.-based engineering Like Fort Worth, Dallas builds organization. speed humps into its budget, employ- ing a sliding scale of payment between "I've seen your humps,"Mr.Ewing • the city and residents of a neighbor- said of the 400 or so speed humps in hood. The ratio depends on the aver- Dallas."In fact,the marking pattern is age speed over the limit found during attractive. The aesthetics of these a requisite traffic study. humps have to do with property val- ues." Dallas' speed hump budget this year is$75,000. Mr. Lawler, one of the M streets Addison builds the Cadillac of activists —,,moved out of the neigh- - '>:,000 apiece, boyhood four years ago. But his for speed humps at a cost of for which it foots the entire bill.The men neighbors still give him mock city's 13 humps are made of concrete grief for his part in installing speed instead of asphalt,and each is topped humps. - by a reddish brick pattern. - -"I have friends there who tell me I -- - - - - "Ours are quite different,"said Rob- • es the neighborhood," said Mr.• in Jones, the city's street superinten- dent."They're real nice.We go out for to the city." • bids and do them through contract V --__ :i- -( GRAPEVINE T :E _--_- • .;')ScH Mr I NOV5 ,998 _\It.'" I November 4, 1998 Curtis Hawk City Manager City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Avenue . Southlake, TX 76092 Dear Curtis, Effective October 3, 1998 the Grapevine Public Library began a re-registration 0 process for all Southlake residents. We only processed one member per family, but allowed multiple cards in that one name so there would be no inconvenience to the library users. At the end of each month an invoice will be processed showing the number of Southlake families registered for the month. Please send the check to the library so the proper account numbers will be added before going to City Hall. Thank you for your cooperation and I hope this process works well for us all. Sincerely, • . 04, , ,e' . Janis Roberson Library Director JR/mhc • :_, Grapevine Public Library • 1201 Municipal Way • Grapevine,Texas 76051 Phone 817-410-3400 • Fax 817-410-3080 GRAPEVINE T E kg A S O • r•'..:••••-• INVOICE BILL REMIT TO: City of Southlake TO: Grapevine Pubic Library 667 N. Carroll Ave. 1201 Municipal Way Southlake, TX 76092 Grapevine, TX 76051 INVOICE DATE: November 4, 1998 Non-Resident Fee For October, 1998 611 Families @ $25.00 Per Non-Resident Family NET DUE: $15,275.00 0 Grapevine Public Library • 1201 Municipal Way • Grapevine,Texas 76051 Phone 817-410-3400 • Fax 817-410-3080 outhlake Book Purchases FY98 Previous Balance (97) $5,890.97 1/97 Oryx 106.10 2 Contributions for FY98 0/02/97 Brodart 11.57 1 10/02/97 76.48 5 $10,000.00 10/02/97 13.65 1 , 10/08/97 Follett 860.94 54 FY98Expenditures 10/25/97 Brodart 76.26 6 10/25/97 B&T 13.90 1 $13,964.64 10/25/97 24.00 2 10/25/97 BTSB 112.63 8 FY98 Balance 10/27/97 Brodart 19.15 1 10/27/97 9.78 1 $1,926.33 10/27/97 87.92 3 10/27/97 13.87 1 Total Number of Books 10/27/97 8.67 1 Since 1991 5073 10/27/97 69.72 2 10/27/97 30.25 2 10/31/97 34.00 1 11/03/97 B&T 51.81 4 11/03/97 13.38 1 11/03/97 Brodart 19.95 1 08/97 21.99 1 08/97 13.33 1 11/12/97 14.14 1 11/12/97 BTSB 14.59 1 11/14/97 B&T 43.07 4 11/17/97 Brodart 43.96 1 11/24/97 B&T 27.82 2 12/01/97 Brodart 13.08 1 12/05/97 13.87 1 12/05/97 B&T 26.76 2 12/15/97 13.62 1 12/19/97 Brodart 40.00 1 12/20/97 12.67 1 12/20/97 B&T 12.01 1 01/05/98 13.08 1 01/15/98 13.38 1 01/16/98 73.08 6 01/26/98 24.79 2 01/29/98 Star Books 250.66 20 01/30/98 B&T 13.62 1 10217/98 15.26 1 3/98 261.72 21 02/26/98, Star Books 918.61 73 02/26/98 B&T 74.00 5 03/03/98 30.83 2 03/03/98 26.70 2 0/09/98 47.49 3 09/98 47.55 4 3/18/98 114.90 14 03/20/98 90.86 3 03/30/98 72.87 5 03/30/98 129.18 9 04/06/98 14.17 1 04/07/98 68.43 2 04/13/98 275.83 19 04/17/98 63.28 5 04/24/98 50.49 5 05/02/98 18.27 1 05/14/98 40.00 3 05/11/98 50.29 4 05/22/98 22.20 2 06/15/98 BTSB 269.23 29 06/15/98 B&T 13.38 1 06/19/98 BTSB 14.07 1 07/06/98 B&T 15.02 1 07/07/98 43.04 3 07/13/98 13.38 1 �15/98 BTSB 53.98 6 /27/98 B&T 644.77 39 07/27/98 95.96 6 07/31/98 46.63 3 08/07/98 39.62 3 08/07/98 BTSB 37.35 4 08/13/98 B&T 244.53 17 08/13/98 64.55 5 08/14/98 623.32 49 08/22/98 196.41 6 08/22/98 29.25 2 08/31/98 1,410.72 105 08/31/98 84.10 6 08/31/98 103.45 8 09/03/98 437.31 45 09/03/98 BTSB 46.46 5 09/08/98 B&T 184.30 15 09/11/98 38.58 4 09/11/98 150.99 13 09/14/98 121.17 10 021/98 BTSB 288.10 20 5/98 B&T 270.49 17 09/25/98 (11.17) -1 09/25/98 (15.25) -1 09/28/98 B&T 226.34 12 09/29/98 112.30 9 �/29/98 BTSB 14.95 1 /29/98 15.63 1 09/29/98 288.71 24 09/29/98 1,867.37 143 10/05/98 B&T 87.48 6 10/05/98 BTSB 57.68 4 10/05/98 28.49 2 10/12/98 B&T 144.64 13 • 10/12/98 (17.01) -4 10/12/98 (33.75) -1 10/13/98 BTSB 32.12 2 10/13/98 B&T 50.15 5 10/15/98 484.37 34 10/18/98 120.59 10 10/20/98 71.26 7 10/26/98 $ 73.10 6 FY98 Total 13,964.64 41110 Total Number of Books 1028 S IP 411. 1 ' Comparative Analysis of City Employee Holidays Day after City/Town , New Year's Good Friday Memorial Independence Labor Thanksgiving Thanksgiving Christmas Eve Christmas MLK,Jr. Other Total Z:•� 1,5,55-551 •.r V � - 4 l t., � rK' ? '.� yf 5 ' A O , - �s G:w" : mi;' „ :1. s < t h f3 I 's • 55'5 aC� ,,., °<Xx.. ,,''' Ci �' _. :: '-Arlington x x x x x x x x x x Presidents 11 d a a�..t:kz Colleyville x x x x x x x x x 9 f'« cC+ 9, 1 • c�i, v rr (!� - >w,' ., ��r' «X<. �'•i``�X�'yt.,'-, .. :'X. =�;.::Jji'`.s,.. ab Iipeli`` , . ... .. .., ., ., .. e�IC��.>.«�r;M�r.�,.,�',�tX'• .�,�;�r.:.-,,, -. . ., ,_.,. , .. ..< .<.t�its', „ �t..t... • Dallas x x x x x x x x Presidents 9 • 55` , sit.: "1':c:t.ten'.!"?t:."« _.s,' 4 �x�; �4. f t �n sfi �. .fie=•`. iUless'; ..,, .•. .. ''X ,., ."x��;'. X'� ;;� OJ '"9",.` ... .. .. ..•'�� .., ,. .. ,. .... ...... ...._. . :'t ., s .•,.::x•',�a-�ar�5.r�..`.?sxct�,:.5•.r,., . ,a, c s., ;�xis•.:<, ':� ""8�?a. . Farmers Branch x x x x x x x x 8 .x• t Fi w M " 'x X' , X<% -R:: C^` �x�J� xVim-^'f:.�XaS;x.. ;'� <iX, -M ` E 'ees .10 s: Fort Worth x x x x x x x x Personal 9 _ S b f -} eyy AF C 1 R Gz"an .Pr .., ,,h'. .�-acz ,,,. , ,,.. '>"'s '-X.: • 3..x`='_ '�<x;;;� L,5'',,y,�;� Y.•X;:>•-w.'--= v �x- '• 1 tq < Grapevine x x x x x x x x Personal 9 = y < # µ -;fi+S.. th V .. - T3 yF, F Haltl"Clt "X',<+.. • sx`„'., 6 "iK�•' • _ . -«x .° xx'" � Hurst x x x x x x x x x 9 �,�,. .t(".. ,✓:,. .�;.- :'s :,:1 :lh; ,i3'; 3,;'-»'p^;'rek,x,zxy.-! _ .,�i c»? ',?..-t:-<s ..c:.< -:fit :ro:, t.:a, 7;.+•J,,,, „i ua',r";:f �r A,k. .�b'',',,. ,;,,.Y' sa t..,,, '�- s .i<-a s 3p ^ss;"'.. 4✓, f;. r,T Y^x' ti%' ��';=<�e;r ?'b1 � 9 y:�„�-•,< ;.�•y <`.Yi-Y�' A •N•-2a� �q.,�t•,{'. � ...Y k'°�'�"'i .t o{t4i'1;. �ff" t�.,rc :rY%,...«:�w� 4 -^"'Lv.-�,, ":,2",eq'• � S„fit e+f a'>•lt. Es.. i',s� 3X= :F,a� Floating& Keller x x x x x x x Personal 9 - -c..yzr,..p ,:;• -i'"=; ••s;'„-?; - s`t°;$ : -<'. "'J x' ,,. .1 •$'"„ ..�'•••t bs="S ''-.'k�. e 1. l Ci CII4iiid iiti`Hiiis;iis?_'�:'" 11,• ',1a,:`m:,:i,,, .ik,.:-sS%:°t''�ti•�s _. ,':17 s , ' : iii - fi 3'.. AU er'ti� i :-.+i2+� 't',r.*'• :'; t ~`` Southlake x x x x x x x x x 9 NEWS CUPPING Source` l\ 5 O1(11 n �1 Date: 410 fl l ! — l -9 Arlington leading Plano in bid . 1 for Stars' recreational ice rinks Kevin first,"he said."Arlington and I la- By J Shay no are the" areas of the maw'" Arlington Morning Nava growth in the metroplex." vS,4i' ARLINGTON — Arlington has The Stars have the Dr PeppeiA moved ahe :';of Plano as the pro- StarCenter, in Irving, which"'1s spective hottie of the Dallas Stars' used for youth hockey leagues,- second recreational ice arena,city recreational skating and classes,' and team officials said Tuesday. and as the practice facility for the ' A new ire rink in Plano not National Hockey League club. affiliated with the Stars, along The Arlington facility would be with Arlington's approval of a 80,000 to 90,000 square feet with downtown tax increment financ- two NHL-size ice sheets,a viewing ing district, were factors in that area,locker rooms,meeting rooms development, said Lance Lank- and retail space, Mr. Lankford ford, director of legal affairs and said. It would serve a variety'bf business development for the skating needs, from hockey: club. leagues to figure-skating classes,.- "With the new rink in Plano, he said. we're now really focusing on the The facility would cost about$i6':,. mid-cities area," Mr. Lankford million, he said. The price does:.: said. "There aren't many rinks in not include land and improve-4 that area." ments. The Stars first announced plans David Sampson, president of- to build StarCenters in Arlington, the Arlington Chamber of Conic Plano and DeSoto in 1994, but ne- merce,which handles most of the,..: gotiations have become serious in city's economic development e1 recent weeks,said Bill Studer,dep• forts, described negotiations with uty city manager for Arlington the Stars as"long-term,substantial overseeing administration. and current." "Our indications are ... (the "I'm not aware of any unmi- Stars1 want to do one in Arlington nent decision," he said. • 0 0 0 NEWS CLIPPING Source . _ _ I Date: 1,\._v_ „.• 199 . . . .. . _ _. . . ... • , ... . ...__ ______._ _________ C: I • B u SINE s s DIGEST 2C MARKETS 5-11C . MUTUAL FUNDS 9-10C y AMEX 11C ' 1498 N Star-iblegram www.star-telegram.com i • Marcus service was poor, new bosses say . ,,,..„:.!. ,. ::,.:„-,,,,;f BY MARK P.Comm Star-relegrdm Stall Writer Charter Communications tells officials utives in charge of Marcus. • ',, ,y' y Marcus executives have previously .4 Charter Communications execu- it is focused on solving cable problems apologized to city officials for ongo- fives yesterday blamed bad manage- ing consumer service problems. The ment at Marcus Cable for the poor company, which is spending millions service.that has plagued North Texas showed that there were serious prob- mer chief operating officer, has an 1 g P g to upgrade the system,has also added customers for the past year. lems that required serious attention," unlisted phone number in Dallas. customer service representatives over r "`rc"fY190"at""" •r said BarryBabcock, chairman of St. Barry Babcock, Charter executives met yesterday Marcus took over the local cable the past year• chairman of with city officials to explain how they Louis-based Charter. franchises in 1995 when his company Charter executives said the system plan to fix the Marcus Cable system, Jeffrey Marcus, the chief executive acquired the operations of Sammons was getting40,000 complaint calls Charter Comme- I Y Y 9 P P nicatians,blames which serves 130,000 customers in who left the cable TV company to join Cable. Marcus Cable, in turn, was each week. During the first nine Marcus Cable a greater Fort Worth. Chancellor Media, was said to he out acquired this year by Paul Alien,a co- months of 1998, Marcus Cable management for 4 "We looked at all the measure- of the country yesterday and unavail- founder of Microsoft. Allen later received I million calls from cus- poor service. i ments in the industry, and they all able to comment.Lou Borelli,the for- acquired Charter and has put its exec- (More on CHARTER on Page I IC) t- CHARTER pany last month,Charterhas halted and not following through on what "I don't want us to pay for Mar- all marketing for new customers they needed to do,"Buford said. cus' sins, but I want them to hold while it tries to fix the problems. Pat Svacina, a spokesman for us accountable,"Babcock said. From Page IC Babcock said the company won't the city of Foil Worth,said officials Charter inherited the Marcus —_ actively seek new customers until hope to complete the transfer of the Cable system when Jeffrey Marcus service problems are solved. franchise agreements early next unexpectedly left the cable com- turners,Babcock said. Charter also dismissed two top year. The deadline was originally pany. Marcus' departure forced ' A similar Charter system in Los Marcus Cable officials — Vice late December, but the officials owner Allen to find a new team to ' Angeles received half as many President of Operations Alan have extended it to January and run his cable holdings. calls, even though it had as many Collins and Marketing Director could add up to 60 more days, customers as Fort Worth. Victoria Milner — and has reat- Svacina said. Allen paid $2.8 billion in April Marcus Cable has been fined signed other workers to answer ser- Fort Worth and 16 other cities to buy Marcus Cable, and he three times this year for a total of vice calls more promptly. have agreed to hire a consultant to announced that Marcus would run $25,000 for not answering con- During the past eight weeks,the negotiate the transfer. the day-to-day operations. Less sumer complaints in a timely man- changes have had a noticeable Marcus Cable also serves Rich- than a month later, Marcus said he ner. The company could i+nswer effect, said David Barford, Charter land Hills, North Richland Hills, would become chief executive of calls within 30 seconds less than 80 senior vice president of operations. Benbrook. Watauga, Keller, Lake Chancellor Media in Irving. percent of the time, and sending a The number of calls to the Mar- Worth, White Settlement, Forest After Marcus' announcement technician to a customer's home cus system has been reduced to Hill, Kennedale, Everman, Crow- that he plgnned to join Chancellor, took at least four days. 31,000 a week, from 40,000. Ser- ley,Mansfield and Burleson. Allen went shopping and agreed to "That doesn't mean there are vice calls are handled within the Svacina said the city wants to buy Charter Communications and bad people working for Marcus next day and calls are answered make sure that similar customer its management team for$4.5 bil- Cable," Babcock said, "but that within 30 second more than 90 service problems don't happen lion in July. there were bad decisions made at percent of the time,Barford said. •under new management, so City "They [Allen's representatives] . Marcus corporate offices." Charter explained those changes Council members are pushing for a approached us and said they would Babcock said that although Mar- yesterday to officials from 20 tough transfer agreement that could like to combine the companies and cus Cable added people to answer North Texas cities that have joined impose higher financial penalties or have us run both," Babcock said. calls,it didn't properly train them. to negotiate the transfer of Marcus even open the system up to a new "We were not going down that mad "That was really putting a Band- Cable's franchise agreements to owner. at the time, but we agreed to Aid on the cause, and it was not Charter. Babcock said the company change paths." treating the symptom," Babcock "We need to communicate with would accept an agreement that said.- them becauseMarcusCable had imposed tougher pena�lcies.for fail-' Mark P.Couch,($17)390-7695 Since taking control of the c aom- track record of broken promises ing to meet customerservice goals. mcouch@star_telegramroin . 0 • Ill City of Southlake � Chamber of Commerce Report • UthI Date: November 12, 1998 Presented To: Chamber of Commerce Board Prepared By: Economic Development Staff- Greg Last, Kate Barlow, Matt Denton Following are selected items of interest related to economic development in the City of Southlake. RECENT DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS • October 20, 1998: Council approved a site plan for Kirby's Steakhouse located east of Bank Street, southwest of S.H. 114, and approximately 400' south of East Southlake Blvd. • October 20, 1998: Council approved a site plan for Campus Circle Parking Lot located on the north side of Kirkwood Blvd. across from Sam School Rd. (Solana). • November 3, 1998: Council approved authorization to advertise for bids for the traffic signal at F.M. 1709 and Central Avenue (Town Square). • REGULATORY ISSUES • Impervious Coverage Ordinance: Council approved the second reading of this ordinance at the October 20, 1998 meeting, which involves the revision of certain maximum lot coverage requirements and the establishment of maximum impervious coverage requirements. Staff contact: Karen Gandy, Zoning Administrator, 481-5581, ext. 743. • Sexually Oriented Business (SOB) Ordinance: Staff is continuing to work on the requested study which precedes the adoption of a new SOB ordinance. The moratorium has been extended through February 13, 1999. Staff contact: Karen Gandy, Zoning Administrator, 481-5581, ext. 743. • Landscape Ordinance Revisions: Staff is beginning the draft of potential revisions to the landscape ordinance. Anticipated schedule for review is Council on December 1 for discussion and forwarding to P&Z on December 3, 1998. Staff contact: Keith Martin, Landscape Administrator, ext. 848. • Revisions to Minimum PUD Acreage Thresholds: A workgroup is currently meeting to evaluate potential revisions to the zoning_;ordinance as it relates to the minimum acreage required to bring forward a Planned Unit Development zoning request. Staff contact: Karen Gandy, Zoning Administrator, 481-5581, ext. 743. S Chamber of Commerce Report November 12, 1998 Page 1 0 STAFF PROJECT UPDATES • 1998 Site Inventory Guide: Staff is working on the 1998 Site Inventory Guide update with estimated completion in 3-4 weeks. Updated drafts of many sites have been sent to landowners/brokers for confirmation of information accuracy. Please return these asap should you have received this information. • Entry Portals: City staff is in the process of discussing entry portal concepts with the City Council. In the past we have had discussions with representatives of the Southlake Chamber and Keep Southlake Beautiful regarding the possibility of funding assistance and advocacy on the part of both entities. Additional information will be provided in the future regarding the entry portals at critical entries to the city and potential for joint efforts to see them constructed. • Lunch Presentation to Scenic Fort Worth: Director Last was invited to speak at the annual luncheon meeting of Scenic Fort Worth along with the planning directors from Fort Worth and Grand Prairie. As part of our community support and public awareness programs, we attempt to accommodate these type of requests and hope that these opportunities increase the visibility of Southlake. Attached is a copy of the handout presented at the luncheon. INTERESTING DATA & OTHER INFORMATION S • Bond Ratin s: Attached is a co g py of the latest mumcipal bond ratings for the City of Southlake as prepared by Moody's and Standard & Poors. These ratings were prepared in association with a recent issuance of tax notes in October of 1998. We thought you might be interested in this information which shows considerable strengths for Southlake in a variety of areas. • Residential Permits: 59 issued in October, Average Value for 1998 is $265,100. • Commercial Permits: 2 permits issued in October including 10,669 SF at 2501 Parkview Dr. within the Southridge Office Park and 8,729 SF at 2545 E. Southlake Blvd. within • Georgetown park. • General Fund Sales Tax Revenues: Fiscal year 1998 collections totaled $2.5 million; Fiscal year 1998 was up 30.6% from last year. • Urban Land Institute (ULI) Meeting & Article: Attached you will find an excerpt from an article written referencing a discussion held during the recent ULI conference in Dallas. This excerpt noted the progressive Town Square development in Southlake. • Enclosures: Urban Land Institute (ULI) Meeting & Article Scenic Fort Worth Presentation Chamber of Commerce Report November 12, 1998 Page 2 SMoody's Bond Rating for Southlake Standard & Poor's Bond Rating for Southlake • For further information contact: Community Development Department • Phone: (817) 481-5581 / Fax: (817) 488-9370 Greg Last, Community Development Director, ext. 744 Matt Denton, Economic Development Intern, ext. 776 Copies To: City Council Planning and Zoning Commission Carroll ISD Board of Trustees Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager S • Chamber of Commerce Report November 12, 1998 Page 3 III 2az ecd Jt& << uo 3 , 000 Gather for ULI Fall Conference Issue: October 14-20, 1998 Shopping center trends • According to Jeffery Gunning, vice president of'RTKL Associates Inc., the value shopping center was one of the __ first new variations of shopping centers •- to rise from the ashes of the decline of- the late 1980s and early 1990s. • Centers now look to attract cus- tomers in far more ways than simply offering products at a great price. -,.. r' � '` - Shopping centers are now offering such '• K.' things as entertainment while bringing 4 :.�,.....ti, ^y may..-; -'•J'= ti�� =; "-'�:-j rv-� in the theme of the surrounding areas or .'-�"� J ;,•� �i4 • ;a+ _ ,- , , {;; "branding' centers to fit the image of a • 1 `k�':.µ ;'":� •. `"' • I city or region. One of the area's newest t -i- y- _^n., •t -, -� • `.-�= • ' - centers to use a different concept is the . - ;n Southlake Towne Center, currently ,•T p=- ,1 under construction in Southlake, *=,':; -. ;,, • Southlake Towne Center features a :., � �:_ ''`� --''`- - > rF: return to "street shopping" focusing on _,: ,- - •••=:` '•, - ' • • a pedestrian-friendly environment. i' "The city originally built to conceal or _' ,• ': , . I' hide buildings in Southlake, but the `' town center concept brings everything NILp right out in the open," said Brian l• n '." •,, •-- `"°• Stebbins, CEO of Cooper and Stebbins. Grace Saenz Dickson/Dailas Real Estate News "Instead of being 50 feet from the street, Herb Weitzman,left,president and CEO of The Weitzman Group and Cencor Realty Services in ' now you are right up on it." Dallas,and Brian R.Stebbins, right,CEO of Cooper and Stebbins in Southlake, listen to a discus- ; The company has worked with city sion on shopping center development trends. officials to bring a city office building for such services as a driver's license divi- sion and justice of the peace.This facet will force people into the town square. and hopefully encourage them to return for shopping and entertainment. ,, a-..:-. Vr. • ,-;:,..-;••-•:•••-7.-::•':.e.i:V:Ii.:7-4...i.g .-1.fit,..,.-.:?... n:j.:. - u�y —is-:H-� �.�:;`y-:_ STANDARD - -_titr ..t.._ :- r SPOOR'S RE�'p NOV 111998 ; -• Yy `" .�: ,1,::. Public Finance ' - .,...,..„. _____ -_ yh _,_= :_ - . New Issue, lie / �+ew ` ,,,...„:„: : ....,....,.....„.,...„...,.,„:„.„,....,....,„.„.„............„,.._ h.,:c.... .- 2a .-:11 - 1s i ?"vJ-_- cS�.n 3�1�s� a i��•�iat_ ISSUER: SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS November 2, 1998 NEW RATING S4.275 mil tax nts ser 1998 dtd Oct 15, 1998 due.Feb 15,2004 A+ -- OUTLOOK: STABLE • Offices: ` --. RATIONALE ; : ;: The rating on Southlake,Texas'notes reflects: '' Main Off ce: =_ • A predominantly residential taxable property base that has exhibited solid growth, • High wealth, 25 Broadway • Sound financial management and healthy reserves,and New York,NY 10004 (212)208-8000 • High debt burden and growth driven capital needs. Southlake(population 21,600)is a fast-growing suburb in northeastern Tarrant County,located between Regional Offices: Iliance and Dallas-Fort Worth International airports.Over the past five years,new homes with an average illre approaching S300,000 have been developed at a rate of about 600 annually.The population growth has gered retail and commercial construction along several thoroughfares,which contributed to an assessed 84 State,Street,6th Floor valuation increase of S380 million,or 24.5%,for fiscal 1999 to S1.93 billion.The tax base has more than Boston,M8:02109, tripled in the past seven years.Portions of the Solana Office Park are in Southlake,with American Airlines' (617)371-0300• Sabre Group,Citibank,Levi Strauss,and Mercedes Benz having a presence.Other properties within that office - park valued at S 134 million are the subject of an annexation dispute that may come on the city tax rolls in this 10 South Wacker Drive fiscal year.Median household estimated buying income is about twice the national average. Suite 2915 Financial performance is sound,with an unreserved general fund balance of S2.5 million,or 21.6%of Chicago,IL 60606 expenditures,at fiscal 1997 year-end.The city projects a slight operating surplus through the just ended fiscal (312)831-040.0 1998.In April 1998,the city began collecting a temporary 1/2%sales tax dedicated for crime control to fund capital items related to police services over the next five years.Sales tax collections overall for fiscal 1998 were 30.6%above the prior year and reflect the opening of several new retail outlets,including Home Depot. 500 North Akard Street The balanced 1999 budget features 17 new staff positions and one-time funding relating to Year 2000 Suite 3200 computer upgrades. Dallas,TX''75201,:-. , s Overall net debt is high at$6,347 per capita and 6,3%of market value.At the current pace of (214)871;-1400..,; "i _:.':- development,the city projects that it will require annual infrastructure investment of S5 million-S 15 million - :e.="4 .= ', annually over the next five years.In addition,the city is planning to invest S10 million in a Town Center 555 California Stieet - project that will include new city offices and be financed through a tax increment district by early 1999. 21st Floor OUTLOOK San Francisco,CA 94104 (415)765-5000 The outlook reflects solid tax base growth,conservative management,and strong reserves that are expected to offset the budgeted pressures associated with growth. . • 0 Analysts: Alexander Fraser Dallas ::214-871=1406. - Standard&Poor's Malachy Fallon ;:::, ADisiaaofTlielk�ara•�aCa•pmca� ;'Da11a§` +:: F";',^•5'a'. Abliabef b,Saomcd A heft a Diem a n.Nd'aw-iGf Campoiu,L .Ezccariee offices 1221 Aram of*Amaieu.N Yoh.N.Y.10020.Editorial offices 23 Broadway,New Yoh,N.Y. `• 214-871-1402•'`'';...�` • M Moody's investors Service New Issue Report 1 L i Municipal Credit Research P"blhh.d1onoros _ Southlake (City of) TX • Contacts Dennis Porcaro -- Orlie Prince -- Steven Levine Moody's Rating • Issue • Rating Tax Notes,Series 1998 Al Sale Amount • $4,275,000.00 Expected Sale Date 10/20/98 Rating Description Tax Notes . 1111 MOODY'S RATES CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, TAX SUPPORTED DEBT AN Al AFFECTING THE UNDERLYING Al RATING ON$47.116 OF GENERAL OBLIGATION, C DEBT . . • Opinion • Moody's Investors Service has assigned an Al rating with a stable outlook to the City of Southlake, Texas upcoming sale of$4,275,000 in Tax Notes, Series 1998. The notes are secured by the City's general obligation limited tax pledge. In addition,Moody's has affirmed the Al underlying rating on the City's currently outstanding$47,116,137 general obligation tax supported debt.The rating and stable outlook are derived from the following credit factors:financial operations of the city.continue to be_malritalned in a sound.. manner,as reflected by the maintenarioeof_s 20%or high�fund fiat ice level over the: past few years;a rapidly-growing and d'nreregilitg tax base;with�'fnro year average;annual growth rate of 23.1%;wealth' income levels which far excxed both state and national averages;and although debt burden Is above average,debt position Is affordable. Financial operations for the city continue to be well managed, as reflected by the maintenance of a General Fund balance at 20%or higher over the past few years. Moody's believes this is particularly important,given the rapid rate of development and. Increasing levels of demand for city servicesyPrope_rty taxes are.the city's major.source of revenue and collections on a total basis are strong at over 100% Uneudited;data for;FY1998 t ...,-'. gip.�_..-., ..... indicates that the Olt fn1siied the'year.waith a small t urphrs wti fi�will,resuit in modest Increase the*General Fund balance:71Officiata repori th"atpofig forward they plan • to maintain reserves between the council's stated policy of fifteen to twenty-five percent of total General Fund revenues. : • Located in both Tarrant and Denton Counties, the city continues to experience strong • taxable value growth. This growth has been primarily driven by sustained residential development. However, in recent years industrial/commercial and retail growth have • increasingly contributed to taxable values, as well as to tax base diversification. The five year average annual growth rate in assessed value has been exceptionally strong at 23.1%. Moody's believes that strong growth will continue in the city over the next several years, due in part to the city's location, as well as the availability of developable land. Resident wealth and Income levels,as well as housing values, are significantly above both state and national levels,with per capita and median•family incomes registering 177%and 200%of the state's levels, respectively. Both Tarrant and Denton Counties'• unemployment rates have historically been,below both the state and national rates. The city's overall debt burden is appreciably above the median,with an overall net debt burden of 6.9%and per capita of$6,143. The FY 1997 medians for both are 3.3%and $1,579, respectively.Contributing to this high debt burden Is the debt of overlapping entitles which accounts for nearly 55% of the total overall net debt of the City. Debt service as a percentage of expenditures is also high, as reflected by FY 1997 debt service costs accounting for 17.7%of total operating expenditures:Contributing to the city's high debt service costs is its above average rate of principal retirement,almost 80% - In fifteen years. City officials indicated.that:approximately$48.2 mill�o i inadditional K; _.:; ..:: . capital needs have bean identified over the next tour to Neiyears:'Moody's beleves that= ` "� continued growth Inthe tax base,evenata-slower pace,will enable officialsto keep ' . _ • future debt costs affordable.in addition;officials have instituted development lriipacf fees, _ which will help fund future capital expenditures and debt service costs. . • 0 Copyright 1998 Moody's investors Service • . .. .•• • 4 • • • ..• . • • • • •. . •.: : . . . . • ••.. • • • • • • . „ CARROLL INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT • 1201 N. CARROLL AVENUE • SOUTHLAKE,TEXAS 76092 • (817)481-5775 Ted Gillum, Ed.D. Michael Murphy,Ed.D. Superintendent . Assistant Superintendent for v t � Curriculum and Instruction John H.Craft .Q \ ( 9 . Assistant Superintendent of uP ` Assistant F' Steve Johnson Financial and Business Operations Superintendent for Administrative Services HEART of the GOLDEN TRIANGLE. � ; November 5, 1998 ti. _ Curtis Hawk ' �l�vi%�. J~ �i;Y City Manager �,n'�typ,�t -' " City of Southlake 1725 E. Southlake Blvd. Southlake, TX 76092 • Dear Curtis: I am sure you will concur that the City of Southlake and Carroll ISD need to come to an agreement about - the district's involvement in the TIF. As we discussed during lunch on November 3, 1998,the District is participating in the TIF at zero percent. If we are to move beyond the current status,we need to do so prior to December 31, 1998. .. I suggest we engage a third party to help resolve this issue. Mr. Trent Petty, former Grapevine City Manager, advised me that he would be willing to serve as a mediator and/or an independent third party consultant for the City and the District. As you know,he is experienced with TIF issues and he would be able to provide input, analysis and suggestions which would ensure we have left no stone unturned in our efforts to explore the possibility of a mutually beneficial agreement. I remind you,time is of the essence. I await your prompt reply. Sincerely, Ted Gillum,Ed.D. Superintendent . City of South lake,Texas • MEMORANDUM October 30, 1998 To: Barry Hinkle,Lieutenant,Police Services From: Ben A.Brown, Sergeant,Police Services Subject: Citizen commendation on Corporal Ron Wyrick On this date at approximately 1945 hours,Mr.Mike Pinkard of Roanoke met me in the SDPS lobby. Mr.Pinkard related the following details to me regarding an incident that had taken place approximately fifteen minutes earlier: Mr.Pinkard stated to me that he was Eastbound on FM 1709 near Kroger when his dog jumped or fell out of the back of his truck. Mr.Pinkard did not see this happen but Corporal Wyrick who was driving behind Mr.Pinkard, did. Corporal Wyrick slowed his vehicle and positioned it in such a way that the traffic following did not run over the dog. After the dog got up and ran to the side of the roadway, Corporal Wyrick caught up with Mr.Pinkard a couple of blocks down the road and initiated a traffic stop to advise him of the situation. Mr.Pinkard returned to the area where his dog was and it jumped back into his truck,apparently uninjured. Mr.Pinkard expressed his gratitude toward Corporal Wyrick,stating that not only was his dog a valuable breed of cow dog,but that his dog was very dear to him. Mr.Pinkard was certain that if Corporal Wyrick had not been so faobservant and had not acted as quickly as he did,then he would have either lost his dog completely or a passing vehicle would have injured the dog. Mr.Pinkard is a former police chief,and is currently serving as a City Councilman for the City of Roanoke. He specifically requested that the Director of Public Safety be notified of this incident,and requested that a copy of the documentation be forwarded to Corporal Wyrick's personnel file. Mr.Pinkard stated that the officers of the Southlake Department of Public Safety are doing a great job, and to"keep up the good work." I am available if you have any questions or comments regarding this issue. -(-641-9"'"'/sy . BAB Cc: Billy Campbell,Director of Public Safety Gary Gregg,Deputy Director,Police Services City Personnel File: Corporal Ron Wyrick _ • III .oti i .., tt-42 oi� • 1019 Diamond Blvd. Southlake, TX 76092 (817) 481-5565 October 15, 1998 Billy Campbell, Chief of Police Southlake D.P.S. 667 N. Carroll Ave. Southlake, TX 76092 Dear Chief Campbell, On Wednesday, August 29, 1998 while my husband and I were both out of town, 0 our dog Max accidentally got out of our yard and was roaming the neighborhood. Apparently he fell in a deep ditch partially filled with water and was unable to get out. We would like to express our appreciation of Officer Jeff Vogel, #169, who helped to rescue Max. We were told by neighbors that the water in the ditch was too deep for Max to stand and he had to swim for an unknown length of time until he was rescued. This must have been very difficult as he is 15 years old! We are grateful to Officer Vogel who took charge and saved our beloved pet. Rescuing a stray, panicked dog could have been dangerous so we especially appreciate his efforts. We appreciate the hard work the police force faces in keeping not only the citizens of Southlake safe, but our pets too! Officer Vogel is a great example of this. Sincerely, 6.11J'AAO4ellaCC--- Barbara Holbert IV • • 110 October 28, 1998 Dear Mr. Gregg, On March 3rd, 1998, I was in a very bad car accident at Southlake Blvd and White's Chapel,in which the driver of the other car was killed. Even though thisis long overdue, I want to take this time to thank you and the Southlake police department for helping me during this difficult time. I especially want to tell you how wonderful Carrie Fullington was when I was in the hospital and for several weeks after the accident. ;Her support and understanding were invaluable to me. We have recently moved to Southlake. I am very happy to know that we have such a terrific police department here. Thank you, Sharon Morris • Vzr Luo1.uQoI .J!-1-kQ if() h XA.tirD TyprticcAz Ailed comu, oto-vt.. Gyvt, dad ; O aoilm �o� • `� o � � d� I 967, teed FcvLtLVLL c wn � U �l.CICne ..Q01)-e, itortzLo. G ,/v e/ -t‘ ma-ccen , tino ±0 CA,k pUbecia Lit.)-itod AcylizeKul .� .�ea..e A a.u- .cm-6 -a Lacy ft*e Cc/Yrue c�,�r� ��n OW, J cU2,i, • 40 j1) Ltin;�e a n d kc ,kc . # 0.yyt 0-Vani 6_6, All JuccAl 4,0 c (A)rth a word of thanks! URA- . -9 - Pr" CARROLL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL Is Nu is Ex .. Stcl-kkt:St,i,Lk De-ptir-64,04 /4655 all 06, 1/14LEL. litaa U.4tk, 01A_ st_441. Lc+ -.V 0,talt4,/n drLu �l4'Z �'2 U2.IiL�1 �- �YDC�(I�L'Off6' et-P-Pdci47 qta4 (1, ali otp 4G-L %a-JAL ya,L. syk. lativ4 61-6- OkticttreA,L„ S-ixte..evLdt-)el 64 � rJ Atkctrat 3ctirt-retA . I ,,,,, :.?„ . ,,,,,A, ,\, si1/4 — ,_,,.A, / si? ,-- ' , ".."—', Plaith/-44 : 0 l+rf r A .j„.„, ._.,f„, ,,,, Qd -ate` /03. �� r �� lam ��dg�� `� Joel` 'i c,x if4 Qk �`d �� 3Q \\� "t k ©\ e^ �`-A . „....A CA)' • �a -,vs;) �\A \Pry �A PC' ik \ i0j. 1„0y G` >A\ Ct-Av , N\) '. Allik l'a'e THE illtOLONY ....•. ... . . ., TEXAS ,'7'7:73 CITY BY THE LAKE t,r,i I g::,. - y Vicki Hess-Miller .0 Fire Inspector 667 N. Carroll Southlake, Texas 76092 November 2, 1998 Dear Ms. Hess-Miller, Thank you so much for assisting our department with the October Open House at Central Fire Station in The Colony. Your Fire Safe House is an extraordinary piece • of work. You obviously have great reason to be proud of it. All of the hundreds of kids that saw it were very appreciative and enjoyed their experience. They enjoyed it almost as much as their ride on the fire engine, although it may have been a toss-up. It was a great day and thank you again. If may be of any assistance to you or your department, please do not hesitate to ask. Sincerel , w . Van Morrison k -- ..) Fire Chief The Colony Fire Department • , 4900 Blair Oaks The Colony,Texas 75056 (972)625-3944 PPF Commander Ricky Black October 30, 1998 Southlake Fire Dept. 667 N. Carroll Ave. Southlake ,TX 76092 Commander Black, Thank you for providing the staff for training classes in First Aid and Adult CPR to our Cub Scout Patrol this fall. Not only have they earned the Webelo Readyman pin, but had a valuable lesson in emergency care! I'd like to commend Mike Leonard, Jason Wise and Brian Corbin for their ability to keep the boys' interest while conveying the importance of the material they were learning. Thank you also to Vicki Hess Miller for her professional and pleasant manner while arranging these classes for us. Sincerely, S Julie.Paine._. Leader Dragon Patrol P ck982 dieeet-404440 C140,Afkkg ' . 7 ac Net 1/ Joepk ` , • breAam p‘s\Ner • ! • Upcoming Meetings & Events November 15 - December 5 SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SATURDAY November 15 November 16 November 17 November 18 November 19 November 20 November 21 7.-30 PM- .11:30 AM- 130 PM 1 ;7:00 PM City Council 1 7:00 PM SYAC Mtg/ 7:30 AM Metroport I/ 9:30 PM I City Council Briefing 1 Mtg./Council I Community Center Cities Partnership/ � � -- SYAC 'Chambers ITrophy Club Tinseltown on Ice 7:00 PM P&Z Mtg/ 5:30 PM-7:30 PM Council Chambers Star Party on the Hill /Bicentennial Park ti Mayor out of town I November 22 November 23 November 24 November 25 November 26 November 27 November 28 6:00 PM SPDC/Council PACKET DAY CITY CLOSED CITY CLOSED Chambers ot�" it 10. Thanksgiving Day November 29 November 30 December 1 December 2 December 3 December 4 December 5 r 11:30 AM- 1:30 PM 7 ;7:00 PM City Council 17:00 PM Crime Control 7:00 PM P&Z Mtg I r#`, 8:00 AM - City Council Briefing II Mtg/Council 1Mtg/Council Council Chambers '4 12:00 PM i Chambers I Chambers Breakfast 7:00 PM SYAC Mtg/ Community Center With Santa/ Durham Elementary — — - Mayo[out of town — — 1 October November December January SMTWT F S SMTWT F S SMTWT F_S SMTWT F S 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 244 2518 255 2 26 27 26 27 28 29 30 28 29 30 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 29 30 27 28 29 30 31 31 Printed by Calendar Creator Plus on 11/11/98 c City of Southlake, Texas • CITY COUNCIL BRIEFING FROM STAFF: MONDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 1998 LOCATION: Administration Building, Conference Room 1725 East Southlake Boulevard, Southlake, Texas TIME: 11:30 A.M. TO 1:00 P.M. AGENDA 1. Development issues. 2. City Council agenda items. CERTIFICATE I hereby certify that the above agenda was posted on the official, bulletin boards at the Administrative Offices, 1725 East Southlake Boulevard, Southlake, Texas, on Friday, November 13, 1998, at 6:00 p.m. pursuant to the Texas Government Code, Chapter 551. �< �,..•• ••.•9 =Js andra L. LeGrand _N= i� City Secretary 0-%�•,� 1 If you plan to attend this public briefing affdi } Y aw ability that requires special needs, please advise the City Secretary 48 hours in advance at 481-5581 extension 704, and reasonable accommodations will be made to assist you. M:\WP-FILES\BRIEFING.CC IFir CITY OF SOUTHLAKE 1% SALES TAX REPORT • 1998-99 collected budget balance budget to date balance percent $3,021,050 $310,767 $2.710,283 89.71% FISCAL FISCAL FISCAL YEAR % Inc YEAR % Inc YEAR % Inc MONTH 96-97 -Dec 97-98 -Dec 98-99 -Dec October $161,892 25.8% $237,164 46.5% $310,767 31.0% November 135,367 21.0% 193,664 43.1% - n/a December 115,084 10.7% 163,871 42.4% - n/a January 198,873 41.7% 266,437 34.0% - n/a February 125,671 31.9% 168,914 34.4% - n/a March 104,733 1.5% 160,147 52.9% - n/a April 182,384 33.1% 215,299 18.0% - n/a May 152,577 39.5% 217,760 42.7% - n/a Se 171,813 53.0% 200,233 16.5% - n/a July 223,854 24.5% 274,072 22.4% - n/a August 184,851 39.7% 224,126 21.2% - n/a September 173.917 42.0% 200.169 15.1% = n/a TOTAL $1,931,017 30.8% $2,521,857 30.6% $310,767 31.0% Actual Budget Actual Estimated (budget-est.) % Month 1997-98 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 Difference Change October $ 237,164 $ 284,122 $ 310,767 $ 310,767 $ 26,645 9.38% November 193,664 232,009 - 232,009 - 0.00% December 163,871 196,317 - 196,317 - 0.00% January 266,437 319,192 - 319,192 - 0.00% February 168,914 202,359 - 202,359 - 0.00% March 160,147 191,856 - 191,856 - 0.00% April 215,299 257,928 - 257,928 - 0.00% May 217,760 260,876 - 260,876 - 0.00% June 200,233 239,879 - 239,879 - 0.00% July 274,072 328,338 - 328,338 - 0.00% August 224,126 268,503 - 268,503 - 0.00% ptember 200.169 239.669 = 239.669 - 0.00% $ 2,521,856 $ 3,021,050 $ 310,767 $ 3,047,695 $ 26,645 0.88% 20.85% 11/10/98 SLSTX99.XLS L/ / PPr SOUTHLAKE PARKS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 1/2% SALES TAX REPORT S 1998-99 collected budget balance budget to date balance percent $1.510.525 $155,384 $1.355.141 89.71% FISCAL FISCAL FISCAL YEAR % Inc YEAR % Inc YEAR % Inc MONTH 96-97 -Dec 97-98 -Dec 98-99 -Dec October $80,946 25.8% $118,582 46.5% $155,384 31.0% November 67,684 21.0% 96,832 43.1% - n/a December 57,542 10.7% 81,935 42.4% - n/a January 99,437 41.7% 133,219 34.0% - n/a February 62,836 31.9% 84,457 34.4% - n/a March 52,366 1.5% 80,074 52.9% - n/a April 91,192 33.1% 107,650 18.0% - n/a May 76,289 39.5% 108,880 42.7% - n/a Ole 85,906 53.0% 100,117 16.5% - n/a July 111,927 24.5% 137,036 22.4% - n/a August 92,426 39.7% 112,063 21.2% - n/a September 86.958 42.0% 100.085 15.1% = n/a TOTAL $965,508 30.8% $1,260,929 30.6% $155,384 31.0% Actual Budget Actual Estimated (budget-est.) 1997-98 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 Difference Change October $ 118,582 $ 142,061 $ 155,384 $ 155,384 $ 13,322 9.38% November 96,832 116,005 - 116,005 - 0.00% December 81,936 98,159 - 98,159 - 0.00% January 133,219 159,596 - 159,596 - 0.00% February 84,457 101,179 - 101,179 - 0.00% March 80,074 95,928 - 95,928 - 0.00% April 107,650 128,964 - 128,964 - 0.00% May 108,880 130,438 - 130,438 - 0.00% • June 100,117 119,940 - 119,940 - 0.00% July 137,036 164,169 - 164,169 - 0.00% *gust 112,063 134,251 - 134,251 - 0.00% tember 100.085 119.835 - 119.835 - 0.00% $ 1,260,928 $ 1,510,525 $ 155,384 $ 1,523,848 $ 13,322 0.88% 19.79% 20.85% SLSTX99.XLS rr SOUTHLAKE CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT 1/2% SALES TAX REPORT III1998-99 Collected Budget Balance Budget to Date Balance Percent $1.438,525 $125.207 $1.313.318 91.30% Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Dollar Percent 1997-98 1998-99 Increase/ Increase/ MONTH Actual Actual (Decrease) (Decrease) October $ - $ 125,207 125,207 100.0% November - - n/a n/a December - - n/a n/a January - - n/a n/a February - - n/a n/a March - - n/a n/a April - - n/a n/a May 77,337 - n/a n/a June 86,019 - n/a n/a IIIJuly 108,531 - n/a n/a August 105,651 - n/a n/a September 89,966 - n/a n/a TOTAL $467,504 $125,207 $125,207 n/a Budget Actual Estimated (budget-est.) % 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 Difference Change October $ 135,242 $ 125,207 $ 125,207 $ (10,035) -7.42% November 110,437 - 110,437 - 0.00% December 93,447 - 93,447 - 0.00% January 151,935 - 151,935 - 0.00% February 96,323 - 96,323 - 0.00% March 91,324 - 91,324 - 0.00% April 122,774 - 122,774 - 0.00% May 124,177 - 124,177 - 0.00% June 114,182 - 114,182 - 0.00% July 156,289 - 156,289 - 0.00% August 127,807 - 127,807 - 0.00% September 114.588 = 114.588 - 0.00% $ 1,438,525 $ 125,207 $ 1,428,490 $ (10,035) -0.70% 0 -3 • • II City of Southlake Quarterly Investment Report For the Month Ended September 30, 1998 Prepared by limi . FIRST SOUTHWEST ASSET MANAG MENT, INC, • City of slake • DETAIL OF SECURITY HOLDINGS As of September 30, 1998 • Yield Security Security Settle Maturity Current Purchase Purchase Book Market Accrued Market Days to to Description CUSIP Coupon Date Date Par Price Cost Value , Price Interest Value Maturity Maturity General Operating TEXAS NATIONAL BANK CD 02574-0ct98 5.830 09-30-98 10-30-98 3,000,000 100.000 3,000,000.00 3,000,000.00 100.000 0 3,000,000.00 30 5.83 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 3133m33w3 5.570 04-17-98 04-07-99 1,005,000 99.945 1,004,450.39 1,004,708.94 100.344 26,901 1,008,454.69 189 5.63 FLEX REPO-AMBAC south-opr 6.220 04-03-97 03-15-00 1,655,486 100.000 1,655,485.64 1,655,485.64 100.000 4,290 1,655,485.64 532 6.22 TEXPOOL texpool 5.549 20,514,175.28 20,514,175.28 20,514,175.28 5.55 26,174,111.31 26,174,369.86 31,191 26,178,115.61 Parks Development Corporation FLEX REPO-AMBAC south-spd 6.220 04-03-97 03-15-00 1,947,422 100.000 1,947,422.22 1,947,422.22 100.000 5,047 1,947,422.22 532 6.22 TEXPOOL texpool 5.549 1,070,814.30 1,070,814.30 1,070,814.30 5.55 • 3,018,236.52 3,018,236.52 , 5,047 3,018,236.52 TOTAL PORTFOLIO 29,192,347.83 29,192,606.38 36,238 29,196,352.13 • • (lt • • . • PORTFOLIO SUMMARY City of Southlake September 30, 1998 10% 3% 12% •Certificates of Deposit 3,000,000 Agency Securities 1,008,455 --.' i Flexible Repurchase Agreements _ _ - 3,602,908 ---- - - - - --- -_ . -------- - - p Money Markets & Pools /'' 21,584,990 75% `- - - . . • MaturiSmmary • III City of Southlake As of September 30, 1998 Maturity Schedule by Percentage Maturity Schedule by Amount $25,000,000 1 year or More $20,000,000 - 181 to 365 Days 12% 3% $15,000,000 • $10,000,000 • $5,000,000 • 30 Days or Less ■ 85% $0 I I I I 30 Days or Less 31 to 90 Days 91 to 180 Days 181 to 365 Days 1 year or More 1 N 0 YIELD'SARY City of Southlake 111 September 30, 1998 Weighted Security Security Percent of Yield to Days to Average Weighted Cusip Description Market Value Assets Maturity Maturity Maturity YTM Certificates of Deposit 02574-Oct98 TEXAS NATIONAL BANK CD 3,000,000 10.3 5.83 30 3 0.60 3,000,000 10.3 30 3 0.60 Agency Securities 3133m33w3 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 1,008,455 3.5 5.63 189 7 0.19 1,008,455 3.5 189 7 0.19 Flexible Repurchase Agreements south-opr FLEX REPO-AMBAC 1,655,486 5.7 6.22 532 30 0.35 south-spd FLEX REPO-AMBAC 1,947,422 6.7 6.22 532 35 0.41 3,602,908 12.3 1,064 66 0.77 Money Markets&Pools • texpool TEXPOOL 21,584,990 73.9 5.55 0 0 4.10 21,584,990 73.9 0 0 4.10 TOTAL PORTFOLIO 29,196,352 , 100.0 1,283 75 5.66 . 1 I Irst SuuthNcst Asset Management,Inc. • • 1gI QUARTERLY MARKET VALUE ASSET RECONCILIATION City of Southlake From 06-30-98 To 09-30-98 06-30-98 Additions Withdrawals Realized Unrealized Interest 09-30-98 Security Market Value Purchases Sales Gains Gains Dividends Market Value AGENCY COUPON SECURITIES FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 1,003,744 0 0 0 4,711 0 1,008,455 5.570%Due 04-07-99 Accrued Interest 13,062 13,995 27,056 1,016,805 0 0 0 4,711 13,995 1,035,511 Average Capital 1,016,805 Total Gain 18,706 IRR for 0.25 Years 1.84% CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT TEXAS NATIONAL BANK CD 3,000,000 0 -3,014,178 0 0 14,178 0 5.750%Due 07-01-98 TEXAS NATIONAL BANK CD 0 3,000,000 -3,015,593 0 0 15,593 0 6.120%Due 07-31-98 TEXAS NATIONAL BANK CD 0 3,000,000 -3,014,400 0 0 14,400 0 5.840%Due 08-31-98 TEXAS NATIONAL BANK CD 0 3,000,000 -3,014,182 0 0 14,182 0 5.950%Due 09-30-98 TEXAS NATIONAL BANK CD 0 3,000,000 0 0 0 0 3,000,000 5.830%Due 10-30-98 . Accrued Interest 14,178 -13,699 479 3,014,178 12,000,000 -12,058,354 0 0 44,655 3,000,479 `k Average Capital2,920,288 ` Total Gain 44,655 IRR for 0.25 Years 1.53% I TEXPOOL [Fees] TEXPOOL 21,246,897 2,564,699 -2,519,699 0 293,092 21,584,990 21,246,897 2,564,699 -2,519,699 0 293,092 21,584,990 Average Capital 20,326,736 Total Gain before Fees 293,092 IRR for 0.25 Years 1.44% FLEXIBLE REPURCHASE AGREEMENT FLEX REPO-AMBAC 3,477,011 128,475 -2,078,475 0 0 128,475 1,655,486 6.220%Due 03-15-00 FLEX REPO-AMBAC 3,349,934 97,488 -1,597,488 0 0 97,488 1,947,422 6.220%Due 03-15-00 First Southwest Asset Management,Inc. 1 • - 0 • QUARTERLY MARKET VALUE ASSET RECONCILIATION City of Southlake 'From 06-30-98 To 09-30-98 06-30-98 Additions Withdrawals Realized Unrealized Interest 09-30-98 • Security Market Value Purchases Sales Gains Gains Dividends Market Value Accrued Interest 125,032 -115,072 9,960 6,951,977 225,963 -3,675,963 0 0 110,891 3,612,868 Average Capital 5,677,783 Total Gain 110,891 IRR for 0.25 Years 1.95% TOTAL PORTFOLIO 32,229,1158 14,790,662 -18,254,016 0 4,711. 462,633 29,233,848 , External Additions 14,790,662 -— External Withdrawals -18,254,016 Average Capital 29,941,613 Total Gain before Fees 467,344 IRR for 0.25 Years 1.56% lA First Southwest Asset Management,Inc. 2 I • •• 11 PURCHASE AND SALE/MATURITY City of SouthLake General Operating From 07-01-98 To 09-30-98 Trade Settle Unit Date Date Quantity Security Price Amount PURCHASES 09-15-98 09-15-98 128,475 FLEX REPO-AMBAC 100.00 128,475 6.220%Due 03-15-00 07-01-98 07-01-98 3,000,000 TEXAS NATIONAL BANK CD- 100.00 3,000,000 6.120%Due 07-31-98 08-01-98 08-01-98 3,000,000 TEXAS NATIONAL BANK CD 100.00 3,000,000 5.840%Due 08-31-98 09-01-98 09-01-98 3,000,000 TEXAS NATIONAL BANK CD 100.00 3,000,000 5.950%Due 09-30-98 09-30-98 09-30-98 3,000,000 TEXAS NATIONAL BANK CD 100.00 3,000,000 5.830%Due 10-30-98 12,128,475 SALES/MATURITIES 09-01-98 09-01-98 1,950,000 FLEX REPO-AMBAC 100.00 1,950,000 6.220%Due 03-15-00 07-01-98 07-01-98 3,000,000 TEXAS NATIONAL BANK CD 100.00 3,000,000 5.750%Due 07-01-98 07-31-98 07-31-98 3,000,000 TEXAS NATIONAL BANK CD 100.00 3,000,000 6.120%Due 07-31-98 08-31-98 08-31-98 3,000,000 TEXAS NATIONAL BANK CD 100.00 3,000,000 5.840%Due 08-31-98 09-30-98 09-30-98 3,000,000 TEXAS NATIONAL BANK CD 100.00 , _ 3,000,000 5.950%Due 09-30-98 13,950,000 First Southwest Asset Management,Inc. • ' PURCHASE AND SALE/MATURITY City of Southlake Parks Development Corporation From 07-01-98 To 09-30-98 Trade Settle Unit Date Date Quantity Security Price Amount PURCHASES 09-15-98 09-15-98 97,488 FLEX REPO-AMBAC 100.00 97,488 6.220%Due 03-15-00 97,488 SALES/MATURITIES 07-13-98 07-13-98 300,000 FLEX REPO-AMBAC 100.00 300,000 6.220%Due 03-15-00 09-01-98 09-01-98 1,200,000 FLEX REPO-AMBAC 100.00 1,200,000 6.220%Due 03-15-00 1,500,000 JU First Southwest Asset Management,Inc. • • AMORTIZATION AND ACCRETION City of Southiake September 30, 1998 Purchase Information Amortization/Accretion Information Purchase Month Year Total Adjusted Quantity Lot Date Price Total Cost To Date To Date To Date Balance Cost AGENCY COUPON SECURITIES(Straight Line) FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 5.570%Due 04-07-99(3133m33w3) 1,005,000 1 04-17-98 99.945 1,004,450 46.45 258.55 258.55 291.06 1,004,709 CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT(Straight Line) TEXAS NATIONAL BANK CD 5.830%Due 10-30-98(02574-Oct98) 3,000,000 1 09-30-98 100.000 3,000,000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3,000,000 FLEXIBLE REPURCHASE AGREEMENT(Straight Line) • FLEX REPO-AMBAC 6.220%Due 03-15-00(south-opr) 1,655,486 1 04-03-97 100.000 1,655,486 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,655,486 FLEX REPO-AMBAC 6.220%Due 03-15-00(south-spd) 1,947,422 1 04-03-97 100.000 1,947,422 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,947,422 Total 3,602,908 0.00 • 0.00 • 0.00 0.00 3,602,908 GRAND TOTAL • 7,607,358 46.45 258.55 258.55 . 291.06 7,607,617 1 ( 6V First Southwest Asset Management,Inc. City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM November 13, 1998 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Ron Harper, Deputy Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Town Square Status Report Town Square Progress continues on the infrastructure and commercial elements of this project. Six buildings are currently under construction. All buildings have had steel erected. Buildings lA and 1B. have been inspected by Building Inspections and have been released for tenant finish work. Buildings 5A and 5B have had the exterior stucco installed on the rear of the buildings. Brick work on 5B is approximately 95% complete and brick work on 5A is approximately 75% complete. These buildings will be available for tenant finish work in approximately 2 weeks. Building 4C has had all the exterior sheathing installed, rear stucco has been applied and brick work has begun. Building 2C has had framing installed and exterior sheathing is being installed. Both buildings have had rough-in mechanical, electrical and plumbing systems installed. Interior framing and sheathing is being constructed. Curbs at the front of Buildings 1A and 1B have been poured. Sidewalks have been delayed until the streets are paved. Street drains have been installed in State Street. Paving of State Street and Fountain Place began on November 12. The Developer has submitted the proposed sign variance documentation to staff for their review. A work session needs to be scheduled so that the sign request can be considered at the December 1, 1998 City Council Meeting. Tenant construction permit applications have been received from Corner Bakery, Banana Republic, Bombay Company, Chicos, Gap, Gap for Kids, Harolds and Williams-Sonoma. Post Office Square There is no change from the last report on this phase of the project. rTown Square Status November 13, 1998 irPage 2 Town Hall The Architect Selection Committee decided to reject the joint proposal of Schwarz and Urban at the November 5 meeting. Urban was asked to submit a separate proposal, but was unable to do so. The City Manager will brief Council as to the status of the selection process at the November 17, 1998 City Council meeting. I would like to remind Council Members that individual tours of the project site can be arranged by contacting me 1 - 2 days in advance. Work has progressed to the point where a good feel for the layout and aesthetics of the project can be visualized. RJH/rjh d:\wd-files\sts\statll.doc 41 City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM November 13, 1998 To: Curtis E. Hawk From: Sandy LeGrand, City Secretary Subject: Open Records Request We received twenty-two (22) "Open Records" requests in our office between November 3 - November 12, 1998 (copies attached). We will routinely include copies of all the open records in the second Council meeting of the month packet for all Councilmembers. Below is a brief summary of the 22 requests: Total received between 11/3 - 11/12: 22 Processed, responded to and closed: 20 Pending: 2 (McCartha and Runyan) In summary, of the 22 requests received, three were from councilmembers, three were from our city attorney's office and 16 were received from citizens, including media and other cities. If you have any questions regarding the status of any of these or other questions, please contact me.• Ar A ,JA /Jag /lc attachment: 22 Open Records Requests • 11110 City ofhlake ~ Joint Use Project Expenditures FY1993/94 through FY1998/99 Project FY1993/94 FY1994/95 FY1995/96 FY1996197 FY1997/98 FY1998/99 Total Carroll Intermediate athletic field and basketball court $ 51,180 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 51,180 Durham Elementary/Int. School soccer fields and additional improvements at Carroll Intermediate School $ - $ 21,896 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 21,896 Carroll Middle School and Durham Elementary/Intermediate School equipment $ - $ - $ 12,680 $ - $ - $ - $ 12,680 equipment $ - $ - $ - $ 5,491 $ 14,031 $ - $ 19,522 Carroll Middle School gym $ - $728,312 $ 38,006 $ - $ - $ - $ 768,318 Carroll Middle School parking lot $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 85,980 $ - $ 85,980 Field#1-girls softball lights $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 5,998 $ 39,002 $ 45,000 Carroll Middle School gates $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 8,000 $ 8,000 Rockenbaugh Elementary- portable scoreboard $ - $ -_ $ - $ - $ - $ 2,000 $ 2,000 Total $ 51,180 $750,208 $ 50,686 $ 5,491 $106,009 $ 49,002 $1,012,576 Funded through:* SPDC $ - $728,312 $ 38,006 $ - $ 91,978 $ 39,002 $ 897,298 Park Dedication Fees $ 51,180 •$ 21,896 $ 12,680 $ 1,945 $ - $ - $ 87,701 General Fund Operations $__ $ -, $ -3.546 $ 14.031 $ 10.000 $ 27.577 Total $ 51,180 $750,208 .$ 50,686 $ •5,491 $106,009 $ 49,002 $1,012,576 LAFINANCE\SPDCLIUMAPI.XLS 1 11/9/98 • • 1111 City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM November 13, 1998 TO: Shana Yelverton, Assistant City Manager FROM: Billy Campbell,Director of Public Safety - SUBJECT: Authorize the Mayor to execute an Interlocal Agreement for animal control between the City of Grapevine and the City of Southlake. Attached is a copy of the proposed Interlocal Agreement for animal control between the City of Grapevine and the City of Southlake. The original agreement was dated to last for five years and expired on September 30, 1998. The original agreement did not contain any language that allowed for its renewal. Pending a renewed agreement, Grapevine has agreed to continue service without a contract. This agreement has been drafted and,reviewed by the attorneys and contains language that allows for the automatic renewal each year. The agreement basically authorizes Grapevine Animal Control to act on our behalf, to enforce our animal control ordinances and impound stray animals located here in Southlake. The fee agreement gr nt is very straightforward and mirrors the one previously used..We agree to pay the current annual personnel costs for one animal control attendant. We request that this item be placed on the Consent Agenda at the November 17, 1998 City Council meeting. BC/bls Attachment _ 5B-1 TAYLOR,OLSON,ADKINS, SRALLA&ELAM,L.L.P. Illi• TTORNEYS AT LAW 00 THROCKMORTON STREET TELEPHONE 81 332-2380 3400 BANK ONE TOWER FAX(817)332-4740 FORT WORTH,TEXAS 76102-3821 ANALESLIE MuNCY . November 2, 1998 Gary Gregg Deputy Director of Police Services City of Southlake 667 North Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 • Re: Interlocal Agreement with Grapevine Dear Gary: Enclosed are two originals of the Second Interlocal Agreement for Animal Control with Grapevine as you requested. If changes are needed, let me know. Sincer , eg'./(f/ ' Analeslie Muncy 7 \outhlakacttaa\greggm03 IIII 5B-2 III STATE OF TEXAS § SECOND § INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT § FOR ANIMAL CONTROL COUNTY OF TARRANT § THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this the day of , 1998, between the City of Grapevine, Texas("Grapevine"), a municipal corporation, and the City of Southlake, Texas("Southlake"), a municipal corporation. WHEREAS,Grapevine maintains an animal control facility with the capacity to accommodate both its'needs and the needs of other cities; and WHEREAS,the growth of Southlake has created the necessity for a city animal control policy 0 and enforcement of animal control laws; and WHEREAS, the Interlocal Cooperation Act, Chapter 791, Texas Government Code, authorizes governmental entities to contract with each other for services, and Southlake desires to contract with Grapevine for the use of its animal control facility and operations; NOW, THEREFORE, Grapevine and Southlake agree as follows: SECTION 1. SERVICES PROVIDED BY GRAPEVINE. Grapevine agrees to provide the following services on behalf of Southlake: (1) Maintain an animal control facility("facility")that meets all the requirements of state law and that is large enough to accommodate the demand for animal holding services in 0 Grapevine, Southlake, and other entities contracting for its use; INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL PAGE 1 SB-3 (2) Operate the facility in accordance with state laws and regulations, including, but not limited to treating animals humanely while in its custody,holding animals a reasonable period of time before destroying them, returning animals to owners when they are claimed before destruction, humanely destroying animals which are not claimed or placed with new owners, and providing facilities which have been inspected and approved by the Texas Department of Health for rabies observation; (3) Prepare animals for rabies testing and properly pack and ship them; (4) Keep the facility open to the public for at least eight hours per day on weekdays and at least three hours on Saturday for the purpose of giving owners ample opportunity to redeem their impounded animals; • (5) Require every owner who redeems an impounded animal to pay the then current impoundment fee; (6) Provide the same services to the citizens of Southlake that are provided to citizens of Grapevine and provide animal control staff sufficient to operate the facility in an efficient, sanitary, and humane way, and to promptly respond to calls for animal control services within Southlake as requested by Southlake, including, but not limited to, responding to complaints, impounding animals, issuing citations, providing testimony in court, and responding to emergency animal control situations; (7) Prepare and provide to$outhlake a quarterly report that includes the following information: (i) statement of all fees collected,indicated separately by city to which the 411) fees are attributable, and all contributions made to the facility, with the origin of the contributions; INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL PAGE 2 5B-4 • (ii) number of dogs, cats, and miscellaneous animals taken into custody or received in the facility, by city of origin; (iii) number of animals in rabies observation, broken down by number redeemed by owners and number of unclaimed animals and number of days in custody, by city of origin; (iv) number of animals shipped for rabies testing, by city of origin; (v) . number of animals reclaimed by owners, by city of origin; and (vi) number of adoptions, by city of origin. SECTION. 2. RESPONSIBILITIES OF SOUTHLAKE. In the performance of this Agreement Southlake shall: (1) Maintain in force an animal control ordinance that governs animals at large and other regulations determined appropriate by the Southlake city council,which ordinance shall include provisions for impoundment, fees, signs, and rabies control; and (2) Provide information to its citizens on the policies and operations of the facility. SECTION 3. FEES AND PAYMENTS. (a) Animal Control Attendant. Southlake agrees to pay to Grapevine, on or before October 31 of each year of this Agreement, an amount sufficient to pay the annual personnel costs of one animal control attendant for the then current fiscal year. The costs paid by Southlake shall be based on the Grapevine pay and classification plan and personnel benefits schedule in effect at the 4111 time the costs are paid. INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL 5B-5 PAGE 3 III (b) Disposition of Fees. Grapevine shall retain all fees collected from its activities under Section 1 of this Agreement. (c) Annual Review of Payment for Services. (1) Within 90 days before the end of each fiscal year during the term of this Agreement, the financial officers of the two cities shall calculate the amount of Southlake's annual payment for the animal control attendant. If they cannot agree on the amount,the two city managers shall consider the matter. If no agreement can be reached, the cities shall retain the services of an independent accountant to make the determination. The cost of the accountant shall be shared equally between Grapevine and Southlake. (2) Within 90 days before the end of each fiscal year during the term of this 41 Agreement,the two cities shall review the Agreement to determine whether Southlake's payment for services under this Agreement, including fees collected by Grapevine during the year under Section 1,are sufficient to equitably pay for the animal control enforcement activity attributable to Southlake. The determination of"activity attributable to Southlake" shall be made using generally accepted accounting practices. SECTION 4. ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY. Southlake grants to Grapevine the authority to enforce all ordinances, laws, and regulations in effect within the city limits of Southlake applicable to animal control, including the authority to perform necessary governmental and police powers through its designated officers,including,but not limited to impounding animals, issuing citations, testifying in court, issuing appropriate notices and orders, and exercising the power to arrest, and Grapevine agrees to perform these enforcement ill services on behalf of Southlake. INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL PAGE 4 5B-6 Ill SECTION 5. TERM. The term of this Agreement is one year beginning as of October 1, 1998. Each year this Agreement shall be automatically renewed for an additional one-year term unless either party delivers • to the other,written notice of the intent to terminate the Agreement, at least 90 days before the end of a term. Notice under this section must be sent by certified U.S. mail, return receipt requested,to the following: __ If to Southlake: City Manager City of Southlake 1725 Southlake Blvd. Southlake, Texas 76092 If to Grapevine: City Manager City of Grapevine III Grapevine, Texas Either party may change its address for notice by giving notice of the change in the same manner as for notice of intent to terminate. SECTION 6. INDEMNITY AND DEFENSE. - Each party agrees to indemnify,defend,and hold harmless the other party,its officers,agents, employees,and volunteers,in both their public and private capacities,from and against claims,suits, demands, losses,damages, causes of action, and liability,of every kind, including,but not limited,to, expenses of litigation or settlement,court costs, and attorneys fees,which may arise from the acts or omissions of the indemnifying party,whether or not arising from death or injury to a person or animal or the loss of, loss of use of, or damage to property including an animal. In complying with this section neither party shall be liable for injury, death, or damage arising out of or occurring as a i consequence of this Agreement to any extent greater than the party would be liable in defense of its INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL 5B-7 PAGES • actions under the provisions of the Texas Tort Claims Act, Chapter 101, Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. SECTION 7. SEVERABILITY. . If any portion of this Agreement shall be found to be contrary to law, it is the intent of the parties that the remaining portions shall remain valid and in full force and effect to the extent possible. EXECUTED this day of , 1998. CITY OF GRAPEVINE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE Mayor Mayor ATTEST: ATTEST: City Secretary City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: AND LEGALITY: City Attorney City Attorney \southlakelagreementslanioartrol INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL 58-8 PAGE6 City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM 411, November 13, 1998 TO: Shana Yelverton, Assistant City Manager FROM: Billy Campbell, Director of Public Safety SUBJECT: Authorize the Mayor to enter into a cooperative working agreement between the Metro Narcotics Interdiction Unit and the City of Southlake. It is time to renew our Cooperative Working Agreement between the Metro Narcotics Interdiction Unit and the Southlake Department.of Public Safety. This grant is funded by the Criminal Justice Division of the Governor's Office and is controlled by TCNICU officials, however, State and Federal guidelines require separate Cooperative Agreements. This is to certify that the objectives are mutually agreed upon by the parties to cooperate in whatever extent possible to further the goals of the multi-agency project. The agreement will remain in effect as long as the grant is funded, unless the Southlake Department of Public Safety submits a 30 day written withdrawal notice. We request that this item be placed on the Consent Agenda at the November 17, 1998 City Council Meeting. ee BC/bls Attachment • 5C-1 ......... .. couiv,.. - A.L.Van Dorn Sa ° �4, ' i Terry Barlow t4 �.; / 1," 0 z • Commander Chief Prosecutor Dale Stanley •.;` . * . '�.•' Ann Wright Assistant Commander Deputy Chief Prosecutor TARRANT COUNTY NARCOTICS INTELLIGENCE AND COORDINATION UNIT P.O.Box 24148 Fort Worth,Texas 76124-1148 (817)496-9402 Metro(817)654-4915 Fax(817)457-2830 E-Mail:tarrant@swbell.net October 28, 1998 Chief Billy Campbell Southlake Park Police Department 667 North Carroll Southlake, TX 76092 Re: Cooperative Working Agreements- TCNICU&Metro Interdiction Unit • Dear Chief Campbell: We are again required to renew our Cooperative Working Agreements. Currently being funded is the large TCNICU grant along with the small Metro Interdiction grant. While they are both controlled by TCNICU officials, State and Federal guidelines require separate Cooperative Agreements. We are enclosing five copies of both Agreements for your review and signature. Once the Agreements have been signed by the Project Director, Tim Curry,we will return an original Agreement to your office. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Please contact me at 817/496-9402 if you have any additional questions. Sincerely . L. Van orn ALVD/gaf • Ends. 5C-2 • METRO NARCOTICS INTERDICTION UNIT Special Condition COOPERATIVE WORKING AGREEMENT This is to certify that the objectives of the Metro Narcotics Interdticion Unit Grant (which is funded by the Criminal Justice Division of the Governor's Office) are mutually agreed upon by the parties hereunder to cooperate in whatever extent possible to further the goals of the multi-agency project. This agreement will remain in effect as long as the grant is funded, except as follows: The cooperative agency will have the right to withdraw this agreement by 410 giving the Metro Narcotics Interdiction Unit Project Director thirty (30) days written notice of such intent. TIM CURRY BILLY CAMPBELL Criminal District Attorney Chief of Police of Tarrant County and Southiake Police Department TCNICU Project Director Date: Date: • • 5C-3 City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM November 13, 1998 TO: Shana Yelverton,Assistant City Manager FROM: Billy Campbell, Director of Public Safety - SUBJECT: Authorize the Mayor to enter into a cooperative working agreement between the Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence and Coordination Unit and the City of Southlake. It is time to renew our Cooperalive Working Agreement between the Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence and Coordination Unit and the Southlake Department of Public Safety. This grant is funded by the Criminal Justice Division of the Governor's Office and is controlled by TCNICU officials,however, State and Federal guidelines require separate Cooperative Agreements. This is to certify that the objectives are mutually agreed upon by the parties to cooperate in whatever extent possible to further the goals of the multi-agency project. The agreement will remain in effect as long as the grant is funded, unless the Southlake Department of Public Safety submits a 30 day written withdrawal notice. We request that this item be placed on the Consent Agenda at the November 17, 1998 City i Council Meeting. ea BC/bls Attachment S 5D-1 r ........ ....,....A.,.,,... .... , .,... .. ''0 A.L.Van Dorn a ° �) \i' k: Terry Barlow Commander ;H ";,� �; y? Chief Prosecutor �. -" .. Dale Stanley .. * Ann Wright Assistant Commander "" Deputy Chief Prosecutor TARRANT COUNTY NARCOTICS INTELLIGENCE AND COORDINATION UNIT -- P.O.Box 24148 • Fort Worth,Texas 76124-1148 (817)496-9402 Metro(817)654-4915 Fax(817)457-2830 E-Mail:tarrant@swbell.net October 28, 1998 • Chief Billy Campbell Southlake Park Police Department 667 North Carroll Southlake, TX 76092 Re: Cooperative Working Agreements- TCNICU&Metro Interdiction Unit iDear Chief Campbell: We are again required to renew our Cooperative Working Agreements. Currently being funded is the large TCNICU grant along with the small Metro Interdiction grant. While they are both controlled by TCNICU officials, State and Federal guidelines require separate Cooperative Agreements. We are enclosing five copies of both Agreements for your review and signature. Once the Agreements have been signed by the Project Director, Tim Curry, we will return an original Agreement to your office. • Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Please contact me at 817/496-9402 if you have any additional questions. Sincerely . L. Van orn ALVD/gaf S Ends. 5D-2 • TARRANT COUNTY NARCOTICS INTELLIGENCE AND COORDINATION UNIT Special Condition COOPERATIVE WORKING AGREEMENT This is to certify that the objectives of the Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence and Coordination Unit Grant (which is funded by the Criminal Justice Division of the Governor's Office) are mutually agreed upon by the parties hereunder to cooperate in whatever extent possible to further the goals of the multi-agency project. This agreement will remain in effect as long as the grant is funded, except as follows: The cooperative agency will have the right to withdraw this agreement by giving the Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence and Coordination Unit Project Director thirty (30) days written notice of such intent. TIM CURRY BILLY CAMPBELL Criminal District Attorney Director of Public Safety • of Tarrant County and Southlake Police Department TCNICU Project Director Date: Date: 5D-3 p7V--,-------- City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM '0 November 13, 1998 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Lauren Safranek, Director of Human Resources SUBJECT: Authorizing the Mayor to enter into an interlocal agreement between the Cities of Bedford, Colleyville, Euless, Grapevine, Haltom City, Keller, North Richland Hills, Richland Hills, Trophy Club, Southlake, all of Tarrant County, and Trophy Club MUD for centralized recruiting for fire personnel During the past year, several entities have joined into an interlocal agreement to conduct a central recruiting program for fire personnel. The City of Southlake has been given the opportunity to join this centralized recruiting process in an effort to obtain a larger pool from which to select firefighters from and to cut recruiting and testing costs. Currently, this joint recruiting effort includes Bedford, Colleyville, Euless, Grapevine, Haltom City, Keller, North Richland Hills, Richland Hills, Tarrant IIICounty, Trophy Club, and Trophy Club MUD. As part of this process, entities agree to develop, implement, and maintain a central recruiting program for fire personnel which may include an application process, written test, and an agility test. This testing process would develop one or more eligibility lists from which the City of Southlake will be able to select applicants to interview. Another goal is for the eligibility lists to include a broader range of applicants to select from including women and minorities. The City has the right to select only applicants that meet the minimum qualifications for the firefighter/paramedic positions, and can select from any order on the list. To develop and facilitate this recruiting process, a committee composed of a Fire representative in conjunction with a Human Resources representative of each entity was developed. Each entity shall equally fund outside expenses, which are unanimously agreed on and associated with the central recruiting process, such as brochures and, advertisements. Participation in the centralized recruiting effort will greatly decrease the City's expense in recruiting future firefighter/paramedics. All processing of applications is conducted by the City of Bedford, therefore, staff time to process and review applications is reduced. Advertising and testing material costs are cut significantly since all entities equally split the cost of advertising and tests. Additionally, overtime costs are also cut ,5E-/ Pr Authorizing the Mayor to enter into an interlocal agreement for the centralized recruiting for fire personnel - - November 13, 1998 Page 2 • • since only a few personnel from each City will need to be present during the written and agility test. For these reasons, I am requesting that the attached interlocal agreement be placed on the Council agenda for November 17, 1998 so that the City of Southlake may participate in the central recruiting for fire personnel. If there are any questions, feel free to contact me. 1101— LDS O . __ . ._ __ ,_ , ip, .5Ea al The State of Texas: CENTRAL RECRUITING FOR FIRE PERSONNEL INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT County of Tarrant: This agreement is entered into by and between the Cities of Bedford, Colleyville, Euless, Grapevine, Haltom City, Keller,North Richland Hills, Richland Hills, Southlake,all of Tarrant County, Texas ,Trophy Club, and Trophy Club Municipal Utility District, of Denton County, Texas (hereinafter referred to as "Cities")pursuant to the authority granted by the Interlocal Cooperation Act, Chapter 791 Texas/Government Code. WHEREAS,there is a need for cooperation in the recruitment of fire personnel; and WHEREAS, Cities have determined that the most economical and effective method for attracting and hiring qualified personnel for fire department positions is through an agreement establishing a joint effort; and, WHEREAS, Cities desire to enter into this Agreement to provide for the recruitment, investigation and testing of applicants for fire department positions; and, WHEREAS, each party if authorized to perform the services contemplated herein; NOW, THEREFORE, 1111) WITNESSETH: In consideration of the mutual covenants and the term and conditions hereinafter set forth, Cities agree as follows: 1. Cities agree to develop, implement, and maintain a central recruiting program for fire personnel,which may include a background investigation, testing and the creation of one or more eligibility lists. 2. A committee composed of the Fire Chief in conjunction with Human Resources of each City, or their designated agent, shall oversee the joint recruiting process. The Committee shall establish minimum requirements for applicants for fire department positions, and shall agree on which City shall assume responsibility for various tasks, resources, and services such as record keeping, printing, testing facility, etc. Each City, shall equally fund outside expenses, which are unanimously agreed on associated with the central recruiting process, such as brochure development and advertisement. All of such payments shall be made from current revenues available to the paying City. A recruiting brochure will be developed by the Committee. Any _ requirement that an individual City might have.that is over and above the minimum requirements for applicants shall be specified by attachment to the recruiting brochure. Each City shall use a common form for applicants and all such applications shall be forwarded to the 0 Committee. The Committee may unanimously promulgate such rules and regulations, including but not limited to the type of testing, both physical, and psychological, as may be desirable for the operation of the central recruiting process. Testing shall be done in a manner, 5E-3 or • which complies with the legal requirements of Fire and Police Civic Service Law and other statutes applicable to any City covered by this Agreement. 3. While any employee of the Cities is working on tasks associated with or for the central recruiting process, such employee shall continue to be an employee of the City for which the employee works on duties that do not include the central recruiting process and shall be considered to be under the command of the Committee. 4. In performing duties under the Agreement, each party will comply with all necessary Federal, State and local laws,regulations and ordinances. 5. The party regularly employing the employee assigned central recruiting tasks shall pay all wages and disability payments, pension payments and payments for damages to equipment and clothing of that employee while he or she is involved in activities pursuant to this Agreement the same as though the services had been rendered within the jurisdiction wherein the employee is regularly employed. 6. A City that is a party to this Agreement may withdraw from this Agreement only after providing not less than thirty (30) days written notice of withdrawal to the other participating Cities. The Agreement may be amended or terminated at any time by mutual agreement of the Cities. Withdrawal by any City shall not invalidate the Agreement as far as the remaining Cities are concerned. 0 7. In the event that any person performing services pursuant to this Agreement shall be cited as a party to a State or Federal civil lawsuit arising out of the performance of those services,that person shall be entitled to the same benefits that he or she would be entitled to receive if such civil action had arisen out of the performance of his or her duties as a member of the department where he or she is regularly employed and in the jurisdiction of the party by which that person is regularly employed. 8. Each City does hereby waive all claims against and agree to release every other City, its fire department, officials, agents, officers, and employees in both their public and private capacities, from and against any and all claims, suits, demands, losses, damages,causes of action and liability of every kind, including but not limited to court costs and attomey's fees, which may arise due to any death or injury to any person, or the loss of, damage to, or loss of usage of any property, arising out of or occurring as a consequence of the performance of this Agreement whether such injuries, death, or damages are caused by the sole negligence or the joint negligence of any City, its officials, agents, officers, and employees. It is the express intention of the parties hereto that the waiver and release provided for in this paragraph includes claims arising out of such other City's own negligence, whether that negligence is a sole or a concurring cause of the injury, death or damage. 9. It is expressly understood and agreed that, in the execution of the Agreement,no City waives, nor shall be deemed hereby to waive any immunity or defense that would otherwise be 40 available to it against claims arising in the exercise of governmental powers and functions. Pr . . . • ii• 10. Each City agrees that if legal action is brought under this Agreement,exclusive venue shall lie in Tarrant County,Texas and construction of its terms or provisions,as well as the rights and duties of the Cities hereunder, shall be governed by the laws of the State of Texas. 11. This Agreement may be amended or modified only by the mutual written agreement of the Cities. 12. This Agreement contains all commitments and agreements of the Cities,and oral commitments not contained herein shall have no force or effect to alter any term or condition of this Agreement. 13. Should all the named cities in this Agreement not duly authorize and execute this Agreement,then this Agreement shall only be in effect as to those cities who have duly authorized and executed this Agreement on first reading by their Council. Thereafter,any of the remaining named cities to this Agreement who have not duly authorized and executed this Agreement shall not be allowed to participate in this Agreement without the express written consent of all cities who have duly authorized and executed this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto have executed multiple copies of this Agreement to be effective upon execution and dating by each City, a fully executed copy of which shall be furnished to the City Secretary of each City. The Agreement shall be effective until 12:00 P.M. June 10,2000 and thereafter such agreement shall be automatically renewed 0 for successive two year terms unless terminated by notice to all participating Cities given at least 30 days prior to expiration of the then current term. • 5E-5 PPPr • APPROVED BY THE CITY F . BEDFORD,TEXAS By: Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney APPROVED BY THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE,TEXAS By: Date: a • APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney APPROVED BY THE CITY OF EULESS,TEXAS By: Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: • CityAttorney Attom y • Pr • • APPROVED BY THE CITY OF GRAPEVINE,TEXAS By: Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney APPROVED BY THE CITY OF HALTOM CITY, TEXAS By: Date: O APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney APPROVED BY THE CITY OF KELLER,TEXAS By: Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:._. City Attorney . 5E- 7 • APPROVED BY THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS,TEXAS By: Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney • APPROVED BY THE CITY OF RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS By: 4110 Date: • APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney APPROVED BY THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE,TEXAS By: Date: APPROVED ASTO FORM AND LEGALITY:_ City Attorney • .sue-B Pir APPROVED BY THE CITY OF TROPHY CLUB,TEXAS By: Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney APPROVED BY THE CITY OF TROPHY CLUB MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT,TEXAS • By: . . Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: District Attorney • City of Southiake,Texas 0 MEMORANDUM November 13, 1998 To: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager From: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works Subject: Authorize Mayor to enter into a professional services agreement with Cheatham and Associates for the Shady Oaks realignment at Dove Street Background • This project is a result of the proposed SH 114 reconstruction at the Dove Street intersection. The proposed right-of-way and construction of the frontage roads along the south (or west) side of SH 114 requires that the existing intersection of Dove Street and Shady Oaks be eliminated. The State proposed building a turnout from Shady Oaks onto the frontage road. Doing this, there would not be access from Shady Oaks to Dove. Therefore, the City is proposing to realign Shady Oaks so as to intersect Dove approximately 300 feet west of the existing intersection. This will allow vehicles access to Dove once SH 114 is reconstructed. The State has agreed to include this project as a part of the future highway project so that their contractor will construct the realignment if we pay someone to design it first, and pay for the construction by reimbursing the State with an estimated cost of$650,000.00. Recommendation Staff recommends Council authorize the Mayor to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with Cheatham and Associates for the Shady Oaks realignment at Dove Road. Please place this item on the November 17, 1998 Regular City Council Agenda for City Council review and consideration. gf/7 BW/ts Attachment: Contract Map • fit:\wdtiles\projects'Shady Oaks Realignment\PSA-Shady Oaks Realignment memo.doc 5F-1 . Pry CHEATHAM AND • ASSOCIATES November 10, 1998 Mr. Robert Whitehead, P.E. Director of Public Works City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Ave. Southlake, TX 76092 Re: Proposal for Providing Professional Services in Connection with the Design of Re-alignment of Shady Oaks at Intersection with West Dove Road CONSULTANT'S UNDERSTANDING As you are aware, the Highway Department is proposing a grade separation interchange at S.H. 114 and Dove Road. 111 TxDot is proposing that the new alignment of Shady Oaks and Dove Road be constructed to curve Shady Oaks sharply to the east and intersect the proposed service road. The City of Southlake however, desires that Shady Oaks curve to the west, and back to the north (See Exhibit „A„ ). As a result of the new alignment of Shady Oaks, the drainage must be addressed. The new Shady Oaks will intersect Dove Road at the existing culvert. Therefore, it is proposed that a box culvert be constructed for approximately 320 feet to carry the water which currently flows in the creek. This re-alignment of drainage will require a Corps of Engineers 404 Permit, and approval of FERIA. Therefore, the project will consist of approximately 700 feet of roadway, and 320 feet of box culvert. In addition, approximately 700 feet of water line will have to be relocated. The consultant will coordinate the design with TxDot to assure that the proposed re-alignment ties in with the proposed interchange being designed by TxDot. The project will include the surveying, design, bidding and contract administration of the proposed construction. SCOPE OF SERVICES 1.0 Surveying III IA Our firm will furnish all necessary surveying field and office work necessary to perform the engineering design and to prepare construction plans. ENGINEERS • PLANNERS • SURVEYORS A Subsidiary Firm of Southwest Planning and Design, Inc. 1601 E. Lamar Blvd. • Suite 200 • Arlington, Texas 76011 817/548-0696 • Metro 265-8836 • Fax 817/265-8532 5F-2 Pr • Mr. Robert Whitehead, P.E. November 10, 1998 City of Southlake Page 2 1.2 We will also furnish all construction staking. 1.3 Surveying for easement preparation, if required, will also be furnished. (See Item 3.2) 2.0 Engineering_ 2.1 Our firm will furnish all necessary technical expertise required to accomplish the engineering design of the street and drainage. The design will be in accordance with applicable state and local regulations. 2.2 Our firm will then prepare construction plans, specifications and contract documents based on the engineering design. 2.3 We will assist in the advertising for and taking of construction bids. We will issue any required addendums. Our firm will assist in the processing of contract documents after contract award and will issue notice-to-proceed. 2.4 Periodic on-site visits by an engineer will take place during construction. We will issue and process any required change orders. ?.5 We will provide assistance in conducting the final inspection and issuance of • certificate of completion. 3.0 Easements (if required) 3.1 Our firm will conduct the search for deeds and conduct other research at the Tarrant County Courthouse necessary for the preparation of the required easements. 3.2 We will then prepare the legal (metes & bounds) descriptions of the easements with computer plotting. This work element also includes the surveying work necessary to prepare easements and to tie easements to the base line(s). 3.3 This element includes preparation of the final written easement document and of the accompanying drawing. 3.4 This proposal does not contemplate our firm providing assistance in acquiring property owner's signatures, nor participating in any condemnation proceedings without additional compensation. 4.0 Inspection 4.1 We will not furnish full-time on-site construction inspection, but will make periodic visits to the site, and will be available for plan interpretations. • 5F-3 PF • Mr. Robert Whitehead, P.E. November 10, 1998 City of Southlake Page 3 FEES We will provide all the services and products described in the scope of services including all services necessary for engineering surveying, engineering, preparation of construction plans and specifications, preparation of construction cost estimates, contract administration, construction staking and periodic visits during construction, and as-built plans for a flat fee of$43,875.00 for engineering., $6,000.00 for surveying., including design surveys and construction staking. (See attachment"A" for cost breakdown.) TERMS Invoicing will be based on percentage of completion. Billing will normally occur around the first of each month and payment expected within ten working days. GUARANTEE Cheatham& Associates guarantee to maintain the fees presented herein for 90 days from the date of this proposal unchanged. If the above meets with your approval, this proposal can also serve as our agreement, which you may indicate by signing in the space provided below. Please do not hesitate to call should you 0 have any questions or requested modifications of the proposal. The opportunity to be of service to you and the City of Southlake is greatly appreciated. Respectfully, lotio.v. Eddie Cheatham, P.E. F:,.VORDPROPOSAL\SOUTHLAK\.Shady Oaks Realign.wpd • AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED: Accepted this day of _, 1998 By: Title: S 5F-4 • ATTACHMENT "A" ENGINEERING/SURVEYING FEE CALCULATION: PRELIMINARY DESIGN PHASE: Field Crew $ 75.00 x 40 hrs. . . . $ 3,000.00 Staff Engineer $ 75.00 x 140 hrs. . . . $10,500.00 Cad Technician S 55.00 x 130 hrs S7.150.00 SUB-TOTAL $ 20.650.00 FINAL DESIGN PHASE: Staff Engineer $ 75.00 x 250 hrs. . . .S 18,750.00 Cad Technician $ 55.00 x 190 hrs. . . .$ 10,450.00 SUB-TOTAL $ 29,200.00 CONSTRUCTION PHASE: Field Crew $75.00 x 40 hrs $ 3,000.00 Staff Engineer $ 75.00 x 60 hrs S 4,500.00 SUB-TOTAL $ 7,500.00 • TOTAL SURVEYING $6,000.00 TOTAL ENGINEERING $ 51,350.00 TOTAL FEE S 57,350.00 S 5F-5 EX/STAG DOVE ROAD •• •SOY=crtvrs ,! ; • I Iv__ I I i / I i411•' \II 1 I I ` /i '1 1!1 1 1 I G/ 1 0-\,, i1\\\ \ I / 1 I % \4 11\\ ,�i I MOUSE ` r , `� �111 1111 \• \ I :�, \ \ 1 11 1, P I \C; \,• I I `n\ \(1 1, i�l 5.�I 1'. I `, \ / �1 .\\, `•\\ \ \ 1 IC 1 ;1\ '.1 \ \ OI \ 1. 1 1\ Il 11 \ \ a I 1 \I Il 1\I ` \ \- ' \ I y I iI \� \ 1 Is 1 I / \ \ \ I I _.— —_ 4__ mo �� , . ", \i , \ ,71 i.--N \\\'\; 1\ CJ/\ / , /, x 1 10 1 �\ iI I 1 1 1111I // j 11 11 I 400' d I —-- — — — II jr i i ——' I j I I I I i I I 1 I I � i I I I I S EXHIBIT ':1" SHADY OAKS DRIVE AT DOVE ROAD INTERSECTION 5F-6 Proposed Realignment - Shady Oaks • W. ove Rd. • N /�\ E w-'�r�- S DUt . No Scale 5F-7 City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM November 13, 1998 To: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager From: Charlie J. Thomas, Deputy Director of Public Works Subject: Authorize Mayor to enter into a Developer Agreement for Florence Elementary School Background The Developer Agreement for Florence Elementary School is attached with the following changes: The Keller Independent School District is planning to add an addition onto Florence Elementary School and that necessitates the installation of a new fire hydrant; therefore, • a 6-inch water line is being installed in an easement along the east right-of-way line at Harrell Drive by the school. This Agreement is a standard agreement except for no park fee. Recommendation Staff recommends Council authorize the Mayor to enter into a Developer Agreement for Florence Elementary School. Please place this item on the Regular City Council Agenda for November 17, 1998 for City Council review and consideration. CT/ts Attachment: Agreement M:\Florence Elementary DA Memo.doc 4 5G-1 • Florence Elementary School Lot 10, J.G. Allen No. 18 Addition COMMERCIAL DEVELOPER AGREEMENT An agreement between the City of Southlake, Texas, hereinafter referred to as the "City", and the undersigned Developer, hereinafter referred to as the "Developer", of Lot 10, J.G. Allen No. 18,'Addition, hereinafter referred to as "Addition" to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, for the installation of certain community facilities located therein, and to provide city services thereto. It is understood by and between the parties that this Agreement is applicable to Addition (a commercial development) and to the off-site improvements necessary to support the subdivision. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS A. It is agreed and understood by the parties hereto that the Developer shall employ a civil engineer licensed to practice in the State of Texas for the design and preparation of the plans and specifications for the construction of all facilities covered by this Agreement. B. The Developer will present to the City either a cash escrow, Letter jfk, of Credit, performance bond or payment bond acceptable to the City guaranteeing and agreeing to pay an amount equal to 100% of the value of the construction cost of all the public facilities to be constructed by the Developer, and providing for payment to the City of such amounts, up to the total remaining amounts required for the completion of the subdivision if the Developer fails to complete the work within two (2) years of the signing of this Agreement between the City and Developer. All bonds should be approved by a Best- rated bonding company. All letters of credit must meet the Requirements for Irrevocable Letter of Credit attached hereto and incorporated herein. The value of the performance bond, letter of credit or cash escrow will reduce at a rate consistent with the amount of work that has been completed by the Developer and accepted by the City. Performance and payment bond, letter of credit or cash escrow from the prime contractor(s) or other entity reasonably acceptable to the City, hereinafter referred to as Contractor, will be acceptable in lieu of Developer's obligations specified above. • 5G-2 C. The Developer agrees to furnish to the City maintenance bonds, letter of credit or cash escrow amounting to 20% of the cost of construction of underground public utilities and 50% for the paving. These maintenance bonds, letter of credit or cash escrow will be for a period of two (2) years and will be issued prior to the final City acceptance of the subdivision. The maintenance bonds, letter of credit or cash escrow will be supplied to the City by the contractors performing the work, and the City will be named as the beneficiary if the contractors fail to perform any required maintenance. D. It is further agreed and understood by the parties hereto that upon acceptance by City, title to all facilities and improvements. mentioned hereinabove, which are intended to be public facilities, shall be vested in the City of Southlake, and Developer hereby relinquishes any right, title, or interest in and to said facilities or any part thereof. It is further understood and agreed that until the City accepts such improvements, City shall have no liability or responsibility in connection with any such facilities. Acceptance of the facilities for this provision and for the entire Agreement shall occur at such time that City, through its City Manager of his duly appointed representative, provides Developer with a written acknowledgement that all facilities are complete, have been inspected and approved and are being accepted by the City. E. = On all public facilities included in this Agreement for which Developer awards his own construction contract, Developer agrees to the following procedure: 1. Developer agrees to pay the following: a. Inspection fees equal to three percent (3%) of the cost of the water , street, drainage and sanitary sewer facilities, on all facilities included in this agreement for which Developer awards his or her own construction contract, to be paid prior to construction of each phase and based on actual bid construction cost; b. Administrative Processing Fee equal to two percent (2%) of the cost of water, street, drainage and sanitary sewer facilities, on all facilities included in this Agreement for which Developer awards his or her own construction contract, to be paid prior to construction of each phase and based on actual bid construction cost; 5G-3 c. Trench testing (95% Standard); • d. The additional charge for inspections during Saturday, Sunday, holidays, and after normal working hours; e. Any charges for retesting as a result of failed tests; f. All gradation tests required to insure proper cement and/or lime stabilization. 2. The City agrees to bear the expense of: a. All nuclear density tests on the roadway subgrade (95% Standard); b. Technicians time for preparing concrete cylinders; and c. Concrete cylinder tests and concrete coring samples. The City can delay connection of buildings to service lines or water mains constructed under this Agreement until said water mains and service lines have been completed to the satisfaction of and acceptance by the City. F. The Developer will be responsible for mowing all grass and weeds and otherwise reasonably maintaining the aesthetics of all land and lots in said subdivision which have not been sold to third parties. After fifteen (15) days written notice, should the Developer fail in • this responsibility, the City may contract for this service and bill the Developer for reasonable costs. Such amount shall become a lien upon all real property of the subdivision so maintained by the City, and not previously conveyed to other third parties, 120 days after Developer has notice of costs. G. Any guarantee of payment instrument (Performance Bond, Letter of Credit, etc.) submitted by the Developer or Contractor on a form other than the one which has been previously approved by the City as "acceptable" shall be submitted to the City Attorney for the City and this Agreement shall not be considered in effect until such City Attorney has approved the instrument. Approval by the City shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. IPP 5G-4 • H. Any surety company through which a bond is written shall be a surety company duly authorized to do business in the State of Texas, provided that the City, through the City Manager, shall retain the right to reject any surety company as a surety for any work under this or any other Developer's Agreement within the City of Southlake regardless of such company's authorization to do business in Texas. Approval by the City shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. The Developer agrees to fully comply with the terms and conditions of all other applicable development regulations and ordinances of the City of Southlake. J. The Developer agrees that the completed project will be constructed in conformance with the Development Site Plan, Construction Plans and other permits or regulatory authorizations granted by the City during the development review process. II. FACILITIES A. ON-SITE WATER The Developer hereby agrees to install water facilities to service lots as shown on the final plat of Addition to the City of Southlake. Water facilities will be installed in accordance with plans and specifications to be prepared by the Developer's engineer and released by the City. Further, the Developer agrees to complete this installation in accordance with Ordinance No. 170 and shall be responsible for all construction costs, materials and engineering. In the event that certain water lines are to be oversized because of City of Southlake requirements, the City will reimburse the Developer for the oversize cost greater than the cost of an 8" line. Additionally, the City agrees to provide temporary water service at Developer's request and expense, for construction, testing and irrigation purposes only, to individual lots during the construction of buildings, even though sanitary sewer service may not be available to the buildings. op, 5G-5 • B. DRAINAGE Developer hereby agrees to construct the necessary drainage facilities within the Addition. These facilities shall be in accordance with the plans and specifications to be prepared by Developer's engineers, released by the City Engineer, the City, and made part of the final plat as approved by the City Council. The Developer hereby agrees to fully comply with all EPA requirements relating to the planning, permitting and management of storm water which may be in force at the time that development proposals are being presented for approval by the City. C. STREETS The street construction in the Addition, commercial development of the City of Southlake will be installed in accordance with plans and specifications to be prepared by the Developer's engineer and released by the City Engineer. 1. The Developer will be responsible for: 4110) a) Installation and two year operation of street lights; b) Installation of all street signs designating the names of the streets inside the subdivision, said signs to be of a type, size, color and design standard generally employed by the Developer and approved by the City in accordance with City ordinances; c) Installation of all regulatory signs recommended based upon the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices as prepared by the Developer's engineer by an engineering study or direction of the Director of Public Works. 5G-6 i 2. All street improvements will be subject to inspection and approval by the City of Southlake. No work will begin on any street included herein prior to complying with the requirements contained elsewhere in this Agreement. All water, sanitary sewer, and storm drainage utilities which are anticipated to be installed within the street or within the street right-of-way will be completed prior to the commencement of street construction on the specific section of street in which the utility improvements have been placed or for which they are programmed. It is understood by and between the Developer and the City that this requirement is aimed at substantial compliance with the majority of the pre- planned facilities. It is understood that in every construction project a decision later may be made to realign a line or service which may occur after construction has commenced. The Developer has agreed to advise the City Director of Public Works as quickly as possible when such a need has been identified and to work cooperatively with the City to make such utility change in a manner that will be least disruptive to street construction or stability. D. ON-SITE SANITARY SEWER FACILITIES The Developer hereby agrees to install sanitary sewage collection facilities to service lots as shown on the final plat of Addition to the City of Southlake. Sanitary sewer facilities will be installed in accordance with the plans and specifications to be prepared by the Developer's engineer and released by the City. Further, the Developer agrees to complete this installation in compliance with all applicable city ordinances, regulations and codes and shall be responsible for all construction costs, materials, engineering, permits and Impact Fees. In the event that certain sewer lines are to be oversized because of City of Southlake requirements, the City will reimburse the Developer for the oversize cost greater than the cost of an 8" line. 1 5G-7 G. USE OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY It is understood by and between the City and Developer that the Developer may provide unique amenities within public right-of-way, such as landscaping, irrigation, lighting, etc., for the enhancement of the Addition. The Developer agrees to maintain these amenities until such responsibility is turned over to a homeowners association. The Developer understands that the City shall not be responsible for the replacement of these amenities under any circumstances and further agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City from any and all damages, loss or liability of any kind whatsoever by reason of injury to property or third person occasioned by its use of the public right-of-way with regard to these improvements and the Developer shall, at his own cost and expense, defend and protect City against all such claims and demands. H. START OF CONSTRUCTION Before the construction of the water, sewer, streets or drainage facilities can begin, the following must take place: 1. Approved payment and performance bonds submitted to the City in the name of the City prior to commencement of any work. 2. At least five (5) sets of construction plans stamped "Released for Construction" by the City Engineer. 3. All fees required by the City to be paid to the City. 4. The Developer, or Contractor, shall furnish to the City a policy of general liability insurance. 5. A Pre-Construction Meeting to be held with all Contractors, major Sub-Contractors, Utilities and appropriate Government Agencies. 5G-9 • III. GENERAL PROVISIONS A. INDEMNIFICATION DEVELOPER COVENANTS AND AGREES TO INDEMNIFY AND DOES HEREBY INDEMNIFY, HOLD HARMLESS AND DEFEND CITY, ITS OFFICERS, AGENTS, SERVANTS AND EMPLOYEES, FROM AND AGAINST ANY AND ALL CLAIMS OR SUITS FOR PROPERTY DAMAGE OR LOSS AND/OR PERSONAL INJURY, INCLUDING DEATH, TO ANY AND ALL PERSONS, OF WHATSOEVER KIND OR CHARACTER, WHETHER REAL OR ASSERTED, (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, REASONABLE FEES AND EXPENSES OF ATTORNEYS, EXPERT WITNESSES AND OTHER CONSULTANTS), ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, THE CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, OCCUPANCY, USE, EXISTENCE OR LOCATION OF SAID IMPROVEMENT OR IMPROVEMENTS, AND SHALL FURTHER BE LIABLE FOR INJURY OR DAMAGE TO CITY PROPERTY, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH ANY AND ALL ACTS OR OMISSIONS OF DEVELOPER, ITS OFFICERS, AGENTS, SERVANTS, EMPLOYEES, CONTRACTORS, SUBCONTRACTORS, LICENSEES, INVITEES OR TRESPASSERS. DEVELOPER AGREES TO INDEMNIFY THE CITY, ITS OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES FOR ANY DAMAGES, CLAIMS OR LIABILITIES ARISING FROM THE NEGLIGENT ACT OR OMISSION, OR OF THE CONCURRENT NEGLIGENT ACT OR OMISSION, OF THE CITY, ITS OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES. - B. Venue of any action brought hereunder shall be in Fort Worth, Tarrant County, Texas. • 5G-19 C. Approval by the City Engineer or other City employee of any plans, designs or specifications submitted by the Developer pursuant to this Agreement shall not constitute or be deemed to be a release of the responsibility and liability of the Developer, his engineer, employees, officers or agents for the accuracy and competency of their design and specifications. Such approval shall not be deemed to be an assumption of such responsibility and liability by the City for any defect in the design and specifications prepared by the consulting engineer, his officers, agents, servants or employees, it being the intent of the parties that approval by the City Engineer signifies the City's approval on only the general design concept of the improvements to be constructed. In this connection, the Developer shall for a period of two (2) years after the acceptance by the City of Southlake of the completed construction project, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, servants and employees, from any loss, damage, liability or expense on • account of damage to property and injuries, including death, to any and all persons which may arise out of any defect, deficiency or negligence of the engineer's designs and specifications incorporated into any improvements constructed in accordance therewith, and the Developer shall defend at his own expense any 10 suits or other proceedings brought against the City, its officers, agents, servants or employees, or any of them, on account thereof, to pay all expenses and satisfy all judgements which may be incurred by or rendered against them or any of them in connection with herewith. D. This Agreement or any part thereof or any interest herein, shall not be assigned by the Developer without the express written consent of the City Manager, which shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. E. On all facilities included in this Agreement for which the Developer awards his or her own construction contract, the Developer agrees to employ a construction contractor who is approved by the City, and whose approval shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed, said contractor to meet City and statutory requirements for being insured, licensed and bonded to do work in public projects and to be qualified in all respects to bid on public projects and to be qualified in all respects to bid on public projects of a similar nature. In addition, the Developer, or Contractor shall furnish the payment and performance bonds in the name of the City prior to the commencement of any work hereunder and shall also furnish to the City a policy of general liability insurance. 5G-11 • F. Work performed under the Agreement shall be completed within two (2) years from the date thereof. In the event the work is not completed within the two (2) year period, the City may, at its election, draw down on the performance bond, letter of credit or other security provided by Developer and complete such work at Developer's expense; provided, however, that is the construction under this Agreement shall have been started within the two (2) year period, the City may agree to renew the Agreement with such renewed Agreement to be in compliance with the City policies in effect at that time. IV. OTHER ISSUES A. OFF-SITE DRAINAGE B. OFF-SITE SEWER C. OFF-SITE WATER D. PARK FEES The Developer agrees to pay the Park Fee of$1,000 per acre, in accordance with the Subdivision Ordinance No. 483-F, Section 7.0. There are approximately ' N/A acres in Addition, which would bring the total cost of Park Fees to $^N/A . E. TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE All construction activities shall meet the requirements of the Tree Preservation Ordinance No. 585-A. SIGNED AND EFFECTIVE on the date last set forth below. DEVELOPER: Keller Independent School District By: Charles R. Bradberry Title: Superintendent Address: 304 Lorine, Keller, Texas 76248 5G-12 S STATE OF COUNTY OF On , before me, Notary Public, personally appeared , personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the ' person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument, the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. 1111 (SEAL) Notary Public My commission expires: CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS By: Rick Stacy, Mayor ATTEST: Sandra LeGrand, City Secretary • Date: 5G-13 PPV- REQUIREMENTS FOR IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT 1. The Letter of Credit must have a duration of at least one year. 2. The Letter of Credit may be substituted for utility security deposits exceeding $10,000.00. The City reserves the right to specify the face amount of the letter of credit. 3. The Letter of Credit must be issued by a FDIC insured bank in a form acceptable to the City of Southlake. The City reserves the right to approve/disapprove the bank issuing the Letter of Credit. 4. The Letter of Credit must be issued by a bank that has a minimum capital ratio of six (6%) percent, and has been profitable for each of the last two consecutive years. 5. The customer must provide the City with supporting financial information on the bank to allow the City to ascertain requirements are met. Suitable financial information would be the previous two (2) years December 31 Call Reports submitted to the FDIC and audited financial statements. 6. Partial drawings against Letters of Credit must be permitted. 7. The City must be able to draft on sight with proof of amount owed. 8. The customer pays any and all fees associated with obtaining Letter of Credit. 9. Expiring Letter of Credit must be replaced by substitute Letters of Credit at least 30 days prior to the expiration date on the Letter of Credit held by the City. 5G-14 City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM November 13, 1998 To: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager From: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works Subject: Award of Bid to J.L. Bertram for paving and drainage improvements to Ridgecrest Drive Background The improvement of Ridgecrest Drive was scheduled as part of the FY 97-98 CIP budget, which provided $355,576.00. Improvements include reconstructing the existing roadway and associated drainage. The bid amount did not include the overlay for Southlake Park Road, but a change order will be provided to include the overlay. The change order will make the entire project cost close to the budgeted funds. This will complete street improvements that began • with the Hilltop Addition. A fabric layer called petromat which eliminates cracks from the base material moving or "reflecting" in the surface asphalt was bid as an alternative. The use of this material will reduce the City's maintenance for crack sealing and provide a more asthetic looking surface over a longer period. This project was delayed due to difficulty in obtaining necessary drainage easements. All necessary easements have been obtained. The low bidder for this project is J.L. Bertram Construction with a base bid of$299,920.56, plus the alternate bid of$11,640.00 for a total bid of$311,560.56. The attached bid tabulation provides additional bids and costs. Recommendation Staff recommends Council award the contract to J.L. Bertram Construction for the road improvements to Ridgecrest Drive in the amount of$311,560.56. Please place this item on the November 17, 1998 Regular City Council Agenda for City Council review and consideration. BW/ts Attachment: Bid Tabulations Map M:\wd-files\streets\award of bid for Ridgecrest Drive.doc 5H-1 • • 0 1 PAVING & DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, RIDGECREST DRIVE JOB NO. 001-229 CHEATHAM &ASSOCIATES BID TABULATION SHEET 1 OF 2 OWNER: CITY OF SOUTHLAKE J.L.Bertram Const.,Inc. APAC Texas,Inc. JRJ Paving,Inc. Reynolds Asphalt 8 Const. 1007 Harrison Ave. P.O.Box 1807 11359 Kling Drive P.O.Box 370 JOB TITLE: PAVING&DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, Arlington.TX 76011 Ft.Worth,TX 76101 Dallas,IX 75229 Euless,TX 76039 RIDGECREST DRIVE PHONE:_ PHONE: 817/336.0521 PHONE: 972/857-2291 PHONE: 817/267-3131 PROJ.MGR: DAVID E.MAYES FAX: FAX: 817/877-4908 FAX: 972/857-2320 FAX: 817/267-1878 AMT.BID: $299,920.56 AMT.BID: $330,856.10 AMT.BID: $354,589.76 AMT.BID: $369,532.60 BID DATE:November 4,1998 JOB NO. 001-229 ; _ - - ITEM PLAN UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QTY. PRICE COST PRICE COST PRICE COST PRICE COST 1 ROADWAY&R.O.W.PREPARATION L.F. 3,628 6.79 $24,634.12 6.75 $24,489.00 8.50 $30,838.00 8.50 $30,838.00 2 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION C.Y. 1,700 5.12 $8,704.00 11.25 $19,125.00 13.00 $22,100.00 12.75 $21,675.00 3 CEMENT STABILIZED SUB-GRADE 6"Ti TICK S.Y. 9,700 1.89 $18,333.00 3.00 $29,100.00 1.80 $17,460.00 2.70 $26,190.00 4 CEMENT FOR SUB-GRADE STABILIZATION TON 136 11 I.76 $15,199.36 100.00 $13,600.00 115.00 $15,640.00 118.00 $16,048.00 5 2"THICK HMAC(COMPACTED)SURFACING(TYPED) S.Y. 8,925 10.14 $90,499.50 10.00 $89,250.00 7.85 $70,061.25 8.50 $75,862.50 6 TRANSITION CONNECT.TO EXIST.ASPHLTIC RDWY S.Y. 65 22.94 $1,491.10 62.00 $4,030.00 11.80 $767.00 15.50 $1,007.50 7 6"THICK REINF.CONCRETE DRIVEWAYS S.F. 600 5.74 $3,444.00 21.00 $12,600.00 6.00 $3,600.00 6.60 $3,960.00 8 6"I-IMAC DRIVEWAYS . S.F. 2,629 2.49 $6,546.21 7.00 $18,403.00 2.60 $6,835.40 2.70 $7,098.30 9 6"THICK CRUSHED STONE DRIVEWAYS S.F. 432 4.33 $1,870.56 14.00 $6,048.00 1.90 $820.80 3.70 $1,598.40 10 SAW-CUTS ACROSS CONCRETE DRIVES L.F. 152 2.06 $313.12 2.00 $304.00 2.50 $380.00 2.50 $380.00 11 SAW-CUTS ACROSS ASPHALTIC DRIVES L.F. 198 2.06 $407.88 2.00 $396.00 2.50 $495.00 1.70 $336.60 12 18"DIA.CLIII REINF.CONC.PIPE CULVERTS L.F. 130 49.58 $6,445.40 34.00 $4,420.00 50.00 $6,500.00 74.00 $9,620.00 C.T1 13 27"DIA.CLIII REINF.CONC.PIPE CULVERTS L.F. 277 68.47 $18,966.19 50.00 $13,850.00 66.00 $18,282.00 88.00 $24,376.00 14 30"DIA.CLIII REINF.CONC.PIPE CULVERTS L.F. 180 77.36 $13,924.60 55.00 $9,900.00 83.00 $14,940.00 99.00 $17,820.00 ) N 15 42"DIA.CLIII REINF.CONC.PIPE CULVERTS L.F. B0 122.00 $9,760.00 81.00 $6,480.00 100.00 $8,000.00 150.00 $12,000.00 16 TYPE S SAFETY END TREATMENT EA. 4 1110.00 $4,440.00 650.00 $2,600.00 800.00 $3,200.00 900.00 $3,600.00 17 4'X 4'DROP INLETS EA. 4 2670.00 $10,680.00 2400.00 $9,600.00 2000.00 $8,000.00 1830.00 $7,320.00 18 CH-11 TYPE A ENDWALL ON SGL.27"DRAIN PIPE EA. 1 1255.00 $1,255.00 1600.00 $1,600.00 1800.00 $1,800.00 1475.00 $1,475.00 19 CH-11 TYPE B ENDWALL ON SGL.30"DRAIN PIPE EA. 1 1255.00 $1,255.00 1400.00 $1,400.00 1300.00 $1,300.00 1310.00 $1,310.00 20 CH-11 TYPE A ENDWALL ON DBL.30"DRAIN PIPE EA. 2 1390.00 $2,780.00 2100.00 $4,200.00 1500.00 $3,000.00 1860.00 $3,720.00 21 CH-11 TYPE A ENDWALL ON DBL.42"DRAIN PIPE EA. 2 1390.00 $2,780.00 3400.00 $6,800.00 5000.00 $10,000.00 1800.00 $3,600.00 22 UNCLASSIFIED CHANNEL EXCAVATION C.Y. 720 3.67 $2,642.40 6.50 $4,680.00 11.00 $7,920.00 9.90 $7,128.00 23 6"THINK REINF.CONCRETE RIP-RAP S.F. 2,110 4.81 . $10,149.10 4.50 $9,495.00 8.50 $17,935.00 6.60 $13,926.00 24 6"THICK REINF.CONCRETE CHANNEL LINING S.F. 2,500 4.81 $12,025.00 4.30 $10,750.00 8.50 $21,250.00 7.70 $19,250.00 25 12"RIP-RAP ON 30'STORM DRAIN DISCHARGE S.Y. 25 67.00 $1,675.00 70.00 $1,750.00 70.00 $1,750.00 50.00 $1,250.00 26 12"RIP-RAP ON 27"STORM DRAIN DISCHARGE S.Y. 25 67.00 $1,675.00 64.00 $1,600.00 70.00 $1,750.00 50.00 $1,250.00 27 2'X 2'STONE GABIONS L.F. 72 33.00 $2,376.00 32.00 $2,304.00 45.00 $3,240.00 55.00 $3,960.00 28 DISCON.,LOWER IN PLACE,&RECONN.8"W.L. L.F. 400 20.00 $8,000.00 32.00 $12,800.00 34.00 $13,600.00 44.00 $17,600.00 29 REMOVE&SALVAGE EXIST.15"RCP L.F. 32 18.00 $576.00 16.00 $512.00 15.00 $480.00 17.00 $544.00 30 REMOVE&SALVAGE EXIST.18"RCP L.F. 134 19.00 $2,546.00 22.50 $3,015.00 20.00 $2,680.00 19.00 $2,546.00 31 REMOVE&SALVAGE EXIST.24"RCP L.F. 76 20.00 $1,520.00 28.00 $2,128.00 20.00 $1,520.00 21.00 $1,596.00 32 REMOVE&SALVAGE EXIST.30"RCP L.F. 12 21.00 $252.00 27.00 $324.00 25.00 $300.00 24.00 $288.00 33 EROSION CONTROL L.S. 1 12200.00 $12,200.00 1850.00 $1,850.00 38000.00 $38,000.00 26000.00 $26,000.00 34 TRENCH SAFETY L.F. 1,321 0.42 $554.82 1.10 $1,453.10 0.11 $145.31 3.30 $4,359.30 SUB-TOTAL AMOUNT BID $299,920.56 $330,856.10 $354,589.76 $369,532.60 ALTERNATE BID 1A D.O.T.PETROMAT 4596 S.Y. 9,700 $1.20 $11,640.00 2.25 $21,825.00 2.20 $21,340.00 1.50 $14,550.00 TOTAL AMOUNT BID $311,560.56 $352,681.10 $375,929.76 $384,082.60 PAVING & DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, RIDGECREST DRIVE JOB NO. 001-229 CHEATHAM &ASSOCIATES BID TABULATION SHEET 2 OF 2 OWNER: CITY OF SOUTHLAKE Texas Stand.Const.Inc. (Bidder Name) (Bidder Name) (Bidder Name) P.O.Box 210768 (Street Address) (Street Address) (Street Address) JOB TITLE: PAVING&DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, Dallas,TX 75211 (City,State,Zipcode) (City,State,Zipcode) (City,State,Zipcode) RIDGECREST DRIVE PHONE: 214/330-5229 PHONE: PHONE: PHONE: PROJ.MGR: DAVID E.MAYES FAX: 214/330-5254 FAX: FAX: FAX: AMT.BID: $561,911.00 AMT.BID: $0.00 AMT.BID: $0.00 AMT.BID: $0.00 BID DATE:November 4,1998 JOB NO. 001-229 . ITEM PLAN UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QTY. PRICE COST PRICE COST PRICE COST PRICE COST 1 ROADWAY&R.O.W.PREPARATION L.F. 3,628 15.00 $54,420.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 2 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION C.Y. 1,700 15.00 $25,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 3 CEMENT STABILIZED SUB-GRADE 6"THICK S.Y. 9,700 4.00 $38,800.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 4 CEMENT FOR SUB-GRADE STABILIZATION TON 136 150.00 $20,400.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 5 2"THICK HMAC(COMPACTED)SURFACING(TYPED) S.Y. 8,925 18.00 $160,650.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 6 TRANSITION CONNECT.TO EXIST.ASPHLTIC RDWY S.Y. 65 75.00 $4,875.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 7 6"THICK REINF.CONCRETE DRIVEWAYS S.F. 600 10.00 $6,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 8 6"HMAC DRIVEWAYS S.F. 2,629 4.00 $10,516.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 9 6"THICK CRUSHED STONE DRIVEWAYS S.F. 432 10.00 $4,320.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 10 SAW-CUTS ACROSS CONCRETE DRIVES L.F. 152 5.00 $760.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 11 SAW-CUTS ACROSS ASPHALTIC DRIVES L.F. 198 5.00 $990.00 $0.00 - $0.00 $0.00 12 18"DIA.CLIII REINF.CONC.PIPE CULVERTS L.F. 130 45.00, $5,850.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 C.1 13 27"DIA.CLIII REINF.CONC.PIPE CULVERTS L.F. 277 65.00 $18,005.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 = 14 30"DIA.CLIII REINF.CONC.PIPE CULVERTS L.F. 180 75.00 $13,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 15 42"DIA.CLIII REINF.CONC.PIPE CULVERTS L.F. 80 90.00 $7,200.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 CO 16 TYPES SAFETY END TREATMENT EA. 4 1000.00 $4,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 17 4'X 4'DROP INLETS EA. 4 1500.00 $6,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 18 CH-11 TYPE A ENDWALL ON SGL.27"DRAIN PIPE EA. 1 3000.00 $3,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 19 CH-11 TYPE B ENDWALL ON SGL.30"DRAIN PIPE EA. 1 3200.00 $3,200.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 20 CH-11 TYPE A ENDWALL ON DBL.30"DRAIN PIPE EA. 2 5000.00 $10,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 21 CH-11 TYPE A ENDWALL ON DBL.42"DRAIN PIPE. EA. 2 6000.00 $12,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 22 UNCLASSIFIED CHANNEL EXCAVATION C.Y. 720 • 20.00 $14,400.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 23 6"THINK REINF.CONCRETE RIP-RAP S.F. 2,110 20.00 $42,200.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 24 6"THICK REINF.CONCRETE CHANNEL LINING S.F. 2,500 15.00 $37,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 25 12"RIP-RAP ON 30'STORM DRAIN DISCHARGE S.Y. 25 200.00 $5,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 26 12"RIP-RAP ON 27"STORM DRAIN DISCHARGE S.Y. 25 200.00 $5,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 27 2'X 2'STONE GABIONS L.F. 72 50.00 $3,600.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 28 DISCON.,LOWER IN PLACE,&RECONN.8"W.L. L.F._ 400 70.00 $28,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 29 REMOVE&SALVAGE EXIST.15"RCP L.F. 32 30.00 $960.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 30 REMOVE&SALVAGE EXIST.18"RCP L.F. 134 20.00 $2,680.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 31 REMOVE&SALVAGE EXIST.24"RCP L.F. 76 30.00 $2,280.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 32 REMOVE&SALVAGE EXIST.30"RCP L.F. 12 100.00 $1,200.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 33 EROSION CONTROL L.S. 1 2500.00 $2,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 34 TRENCH SAFETY L.F. 1,321 5.00 $6,605.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 SUB-TOTAL AMOUNT BID $561,911.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 ALTERNATE BID 1A D.O.T.PETROMAT 4596 S.Y. 9,700 $2.50 $24,250.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 TOTAL AMOUNT BID $586,161.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 I rrAL IP Area of Proposed street Improvements \ \ 0 , , , : \ I /[H. 1 1 , ! ( I I 1 I ;iinika via i \ I - 17.V \ . ,- , --7-----Th N. • - al 1 110 . \o i • 0.111101 I 1 1 . ____—-----— 1 ovi , ! i 1 \, 1 7 44re % H I V P , 0 , ftr4 A Po • 011 .03$ 0 . - -c7). . _T -1-' 1 cmi I Ef 1 1 1 I I • \ Dove St. r. I 1 iI__, ! 1 ! I I I Proposed Improvements i City of Southiake 5H-4 City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM November 13, 1998 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Stefanie E. Sarakaitis, Planner SUBJECT: First Reading of SIGN ORDINANCE No. 704-A The attached draft 2 of Sign Ordinance No. 704-A reflects the recommendations discussed by City Council at its October 13, 1998 meeting, the Planning & Zoning Commission's recommendations, and a few "clean- up"items. Each of the recommended changes is listed in the table below.. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 481-5581, ext. 753. Mirtiiefa*AM:, A e'ro nWit1 ar lIA E s °�o^ r UZSiPatte 9 16.C.2 Ground signs: location Location limitations regulation stricken, since signs in public right-of-way limitation/minimum addressed in§ 17(prohibited signs);minimum setback to be fifteen(15)feet setback from any property line 11-12 19.D.2 Bulletin board signs: Minimum setback shall not be applicable minimum setback 12 19.G.2 Gasoline pricing signs Minimum letter height shall not apply for the fuel classification (i.e. "Unleaded", "Diesel", etc.) or the price-per-gallon display; illumination revised to provide for internal illumination for fuel classification and price- per-gallon panels only. 13 21.B.2 Model home signs Minimum setback and locations where allowed stricken since ground sign regulations modified; residential adjacency stricken since this only applies to attached signs 13 21.C.2 Special purpose signs Maximum height for ground signs increased to nine (9) feet; maximum area increased to sixty-four (64) s.f., not exceeding thirty-two (32) s.f. per face; maximum number reduced to three (3), to include two (2) off-site and one (1)on-site;locations where allowed stricken 13-14 21.D.2 Development signs Residential adjacency stricken;locations where allowed stricken 14 22.A.2 Subdivision marketing Minimum setback shall not be applicable signs 14 22.B.2 Builder signs Minimum setback shall not be applicable 14 22.C.2 Real estate signs Maximum area revised to provide for sixty-four (64) s.f., not exceeding thirty-two (32) s.f. per face; minimum setback shall not apply for ground signs four(4)s.f.or less per face in area 14 22.D Window signs Language added for the area of the sign to be measured by the smallest box that could be drawn around the continuity of the sign 14-15 22.E.2 Garage sale signs Maximum number of signs increased to four (4) per sale, only one (1) off- site sign along any (not each) numbered highway (1938, 1709, 114), all signs must display address of sale;minimum setback shall not be applicable; placement time revised to noon Thursday to noon Monday; frequency limitation section added 16-22 Appendices Various exhibits Appendix 'A': maximum allowed sign area provisions added for exhibits; Appendix`B': clarification graphic added for window signs 'S '-enc. Draft#2, Sign Ordinance No. 704-A L:\CITYDOCS\ORDIDRAPTSIGN\704-A\CCMEMOI.DOC SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-A Page 1 of 1 5S ti 11111 SIGN ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE REGULATION OF SIGNS WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS; PROVIDING FOR FINDINGS AND PURPOSES FOR THE ADOPTION OF THIS ORDINANCE; PROVIDING FOR DEFINITIONS; PROVIDING FOR ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT; PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE AND REVOCATION OF SIGN PERMITS; PROVIDING FOR THE REMOVAL OF SIGNS; PROVIDING FOR APPEALS AND VARIANCES; PROVIDING FOR LIMITATIONS ON THE LOCATION, SETBACK, HEIGHT, SIZE, LIGHTING AND OTHER REGULATIONS OF SIGNS; PROHIBITING CERTAIN SIGNS; PROVIDING FOR EXEMPT SIGNS; ALLOWING NONCOMMERCIAL (IDEOLOGICAL) COPY ON SIGNS; PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS HEREOF; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN PAMPHLET FORM; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 1111 WHEREAS, the City of Southlake, Texas 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 Council of the City of Southlake finds that the uncontrolled proliferation of signs is hazardous to users of streets and highways within the City of Southlake and will adversely affect the safety and efficiency of the City's transportation network; and WHEREAS, the City Council further fmds that scenic resources are distributed throughout the City and have contributed greatly to its economic development by attracting tourists,permanent residents, and new businesses and cultural facilities; and WHEREAS, the City Council further finds that unless the location, number, setback lighting and size of signs are regulated, the scattering of such signs throughout the City would be detrimental to the preservation of those scenic resources and so to the economic base of the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has further determined that the proliferation of signs in the City has an adverse affect on adjacent properties; and L:\CITYDOCS\ORD\DRAFI\SIGM704A\DRAFr-2.DOC SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-A Draft 2 November 13,1998 Page i 411 WHEREAS, the City Council has heretofore developed and adopted a comprehensive plan guiding the orderly and proper growth of the City in order to promote the public health, safety, welfare and aesthetics; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the orderly and uniform regulation of signs is a substantial factor in guiding the attractive and aesthetic development of properties in accordance with the comprehensive plan and thereby avoiding detrimental impacts of signs on the appearance of the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council further finds that the regulations adopted herein allow for a reasonable use of signs by businesses, residences and other properties for advertisement, dissemination of protected speech and other purposes; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that, in addition to the above findings, the adoption of this ordinance will serve the following purposes: To preserve, protect, and enhance areas of historical, architectural, cultural, aesthetic, and economic value regardless of whether they are natural or manmade; To protect adjacent and nearby properties, in particular, residentially zoned properties from the impact of lighting, size, height, movement, and location of signs; To protect the safety and efficiency of the City's transportation network by reducing the confusion or distraction to motorists and enhancing the motorist's ability to see pedestrians, obstacles, other vehicles, and traffic signs; To enhance the impression of the City which is conveyed to tourists and visitors by controlling the location,number, and size of signs; To integrate sign regulations more effectively with other regulations by establishing requirements for setbacks, height, and spacing to allow for lighting, ventilation, and preservation of views in a manner consistent with land uses in the various zoning districts; and • - To preserve and enhance the appearance of the City and the public interest in aesthetics, and to control and reduce visual clutter and blight; and L:\CITYDOCS\ORD\DRAFTSIG \704-A\DRAFf-2.DOC SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-A Draft 2 November 13,1998 Page ii 63 110 To provide institutional entities within the City the ability to communicate public events to the general public; and WHEREAS, the City Council deems it necessary to adopt this ordinance in order to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the general public. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE,TEXAS: SECTION 1. The attached regulations are hereby adopted as the Sign Ordinance of the City of Southlake: SECTION 2. 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 0 hereby repealed. Ordinance No. 4-W is hereby repealed. SECTION 3. 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 4. Any person, firm or corporation who violates, disobeys, omits, neglects or refuses to comply with or who resists the enforcement of any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be fined not more than Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) for each offense. Each day that a violation is 0 permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense. L:\CITYDOCS\ORD\DRAFRSIGN\704-A\DRAFr-2.DOC SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-A Draft 2 November 13,1998 Page iii 5s-d- • SECTION 5. All rights and remedies of the City of Southlake are expressly saved as to any and all violations of the provisions of Ordinance No. a iv,; or any other ordinances affecting the regulation of signs which have accrued at the time of the effective date of this ordinance; and, as to such accrued violations and all pending litigation, both civil and criminal, whether pending in court or not, under such ordinances, same shall not be affected by this ordinance but may be prosecuted until final disposition by the courts. SECTION 6. The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby authorized to publish this ordinance in book or pamphlet form for general distribution among the public, and the operative provisions of this ordinance as so published shall be admissible in evidence in all courts without further proof than the production thereof. SECTION 7. The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby directed to publish the proposed ordinance or its caption and penalty together with a notice setting out the time and place for a public hearing thereon at least ten (10) days before the second reading of this ordinance, and if this ordinance provides for the imposition of any penalty, fine or forfeiture for any violation of any of its provisions, then the City Secretary shall additionally publish this ordinance or its caption and penalty in the official City newspaper one time within ten days after passage of this ordinance, as required by Section 3.13 of the Charter of the City of Southlake. SECTION 8. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law, and it is so ordained. • L:\CITYDOCS\ORDIDRAFIISIGN\704-A\DRAFr-2.DOC SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-A Draft 2 November 13,1998 Page iv SS-� PASSED AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING ON THIS DAY OF • , 1998. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY PASSED AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING ON THIS DAY OF , 1998. • MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY EFFECTIVE: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney • L:\CITYDOCS\ORD\DRAF7\SIGN\704-A\DRAFr-2.DOC SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-A Draft 2 November 13,1998 Page v 1 SIGN ORDINANCE • TABLE OF CONTENTS ARTICLE I-IN GENERAL 1 SEC. 1 DEFINITIONS 1 A. GENERAL 1 ARTICLE II-ADMINISTRATION 4 SEC.2 RESPONSIBILITY FOR ENFORCEMENT 4 SEC.3 SIGN PERMIT REQUIRED 4 SEC.4 APPLICATION FOR SIGN PERMIT 4 SEC.5 FEES 4 SEC. 6 CONDITIONAL SIGN PERMIT 4 SEC.7 REVOCATION OF PERMITS 5 SEC. 8 INSPECTION 5 SEC. 9 PERMIT VALID FOR ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY(180)DAYS 5 el SEC. 10 INVESTIGATION FEES: WORK WITHOUT A PERMIT 5 SEC. 11 REMOVAL OF SIGNS 6 A. OBSOLETE SIGNS 6 B. UNSAFE,DILAPIDATED OR DETERIORATED SIGNS. 6 C. SIGNS ON UTILITY POLES 6 D. SIGNS IN RIGHT-OF-WAY AND/OR ON PUBLIC PROPERTY 6 E. ILLEGALLY ERECTED SIGNS 6 F. EXTENT OF SIGN REMOVAL 7 SEC. 12 FILING OF LIENS AGAINST PROPERTY 7 ARTICLE III-APPEALS AND VARIANCES 7 SEC. 13 APPEALS 7 SEC. 14 VARIANCES 7 ARTICLE IV-GENERAL SIGN PROVISIONS 7 SEC. 15 WIND PRESSURE AND DEAD LOAD REQUIREMENTS 7 SEC. 16 PERMITTED SIGN STRUCTURES AND GENERAL REGULATIONS 8 A. ATTACHED SIGN 8 B. MONUMENT SIGN 9 C. GROUND SIGN 9 • SEC. 17 PROHIBITED SIGNS 10 A. GENERAL 10 B. OBSCENE SIGNS 10 C. OBSTRUCTING DOORS,WINDOWS,OR FIRE ESCAPES 10 L:\CITYDOCS\ORD\DRAFflSIGN\704-A\DRAFr-2.DOC SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-A Draft 2 November 13,1998 Page vi D. OBSTRUCTING VISION/SIGHT TRIANGLE 10 • E. INTERFERENCE WITH TRAFFIC 10 F. PORTABLE SIGNS 10 G. CERTAIN ILLUMINATED SIGNS 10 H. SIGNS PROJECTING ON/OVER PUBLIC PROPERTY OR PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY 10 I. ROOF SIGNS 11 J. SIGNS ON UTILITY POLES 11 ARTICLE V-SPECIFIC SIGN REGULATIONS 11 SEC. 18 SPECIFIC SIGN REGULATIONS 11 SEC. 19 PERMANENT SIGNS REQUIRING PERMIT 11 A. BUSINESS SIGN 11 B. MENUBOARD SIGN 11 C. SUBDIVISION ENTRY SIGN 11 D. BULLETIN BOARD SIGN 11 E. DIRECTORY SIGN 12 F. INSTITUTIONAL SIGN 12 G. GASOLINE PRICING SIGN 12 H. DIRECTIONAL SIGN 12 SEC 20. PERMANENT SIGNS EXEMPT FROM PERMIT 13 A. HOME OCCUPATION SIGN 13 SEC.21 TEMPORARY SIGNS REQUIRING PERMIT• 13 A. BANNER 13 B. MODEL HOME SIGN 13 C. SPECIAL PURPOSE SIGN 13 D. DEVELOPMENT SIGN 13 SEC. 22 TEMPORARY SIGNS EXEMPT FROM PERMIT 14 A. SUBDMSION MARKETING SIGN 14 B. BUILDER SIGN 14 C. REAL ESTATE SIGN 14 D. WINDOW SIGN 14 E. GARAGE/YARD SALE SIGN 14 ARTICLE VI-EXEMPTIONS AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS 15 SEC.23 EXEMPT SIGNS 15 SEC.24 NONCONFORMING EXISTING SIGNS 15 SEC.25 SIGN COPY 15 SEC.26 APPENDICES 15 . - L:\CITYDOCS\ORD\DRAFrS1GN\7O4-A\DRAFr-2.DOC SIGN ORDINANCE NO.0 704-A Draft 2 November 13,1998 Page vii 5T-8 ARTICLE I-IN GENERAL • SEC. 1 DEFINITIONS A. GENERAL ALTER: To change the size, shape or outline, or type of sign or to change the electrical lighting, except for the replacement of lamps not brighter than the original or the replacement of a surface panel. ATTACH: To stick,tack,nail or otherwise affix a sign to any object; to paint, stencil, write, or otherwise mark on an object. BUILDING: A structure which has a roof supported by walls for the shelter, support, or enclosure of persons,animals,or chattel. BUILDING OFFICIAL: The Building Official of the City of Southlake,Texas,or his designee. CIVIC ORGANIZATION: An organization which offers community programs to citizen, city or civil affairs groups. COMMENCEMENT OF WORK: For construction of a sign shall be the point in time when the sign has been delivered to the site and attachment to a building has begun or holes are excavated for ground installation. DILAPIDATED OR DETERIORATED CONDITION: Any sign which in the opinion of the building official has any of the following characteristics: 111 (a)Where elements of the surface or background can be seen,as viewed from the normal viewing distance, to have portions of the finished material or paint flaked, broken off, or missing, or otherwise not in harmony with the rest of the surface;or (b)Where the structural support or frame members are visibly bent,broken,dented,or torn;or , (c)Where the panel is visibly cracked, or in the case of wood and similar products, splintered in such a way as to constitute an unsightly or harmful condition;or (d) Where the sign or its elements are twisted or leaning or at angles other than those at which it was originally erected(such as may result from being blown or the failure of a structural support); or (e)Where the message or wording can no longer be clearly read by a person with normal eyesight under normal viewing conditions;or DISTANCE: Distance of signs from R.O.W. shall mean the shortest horizontal distance from the nearest R.O.W. to a vertical line to the ground from the nearest element of the sign or the shortest horizontal distance in a straight line between the nearest elements of signs. ERECT: To build, construct, attach,hang, place, suspend or affix. This shall also include the painting of signs on the exterior surface of a building or structure. FACADE: Any separate face of a building,including parapet walls and omitted wall lines,or any part of a building which encloses or covers usable space. Where separate faces are oriented in the same direction,or in the directions within 45 degrees of one another,they are to be considered as part of a single facade. GROSS SURFACE AREA OR AREA OF A SIGN: Methods of area measurement shall be in accordance with Appendix'A'. 1111 HEIGHT: As applied to a sign,height shall be measured as the vertical distance between the highest part of the sign or its supporting structure,whichever is higher,and natural grade at the center of the base of the sign(see Appendix'A'for clarification). L\Crrvnocs\ORDADRAFnstcrmo4-A\DRAFr-2.Doc SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-A Draft 2 November 13,1998 Page 1 —.7/ ILLUMINATION: The enhancement of a sign utilizing electric lights, luminous tubes or other similar • means. LEASE SPACE: An area of a building separated internally and intended for use by an individual tenant. LOGO: Any registered trademark of an organization,individual,company, or product which is commonly used in advertising to identify that organization,individual,company,or product. OBSOLETE: Any sign which advertises a business,use or purpose that is no longer in existence. PAD SITE: A tract, lot, or land lease intended for the single use of a freestanding building typically adjacent to street R.O.W.and may also be a portion of a tract or lot. PUBLIC PROPERTY: Any property which is owned by a governmental entity. It shall also include property for which the primary use is for the operations of a governmental entity. SCULPTED ALUMINUM PANEL: An aluminum sign panel with text or graphic depictions cut out from the panel,typically with a translucent material covering the cut-out from the inner side of the panel. SETBACK: The distance from the closest portion,whether the support or edge of the sign,to the right-of- way. SIGHT TRIANGLE: There shall be two different sight triangles as depicted in the Subdivision Ordinance. One shall be for public and/or private street intersections and the other for the intersection of private non- single family driveways with public or private streets. SIGN: Every sign, name, number, identification, description, and announcement, declaration, demonstration, device, display, flag, banner, pennant, illustration, logo, balloon, streamer, valance, advertising display, poster, beacon, light or insignia, and structure supporting any of the same, affixed directly or indirectly to or upon any building or outdoor structure, or erected or maintained upon a piece of land,which directs attention to any object,project,service,place,activity,person,institution,organization, or business. SIGN, ATTACHED: Any sign attached to, applied on, or supported by any part of a building (including • canopy fascia,walls and awnings)which encloses or covers usable space. SIGN,BANNER: A temporary sign made of cloth,flexible plastic or canvas material. SIGN, BUILDER: A temporary on-site sign identifying the builder or general contractor of a residential construction site. SIGN, BULLETIN BOARD: A permanent on-site sign providing public information to the residential subdivision within which it is located. SIGN,BUSINESS: A permanent on-site sign that is used to identify a business,profession, organization, institution, service, activity or other nonresidential use conducted, sold or offered on the site where such sign is located. This sign may also identify the name of the site or development or may identify the occupants within the site or development. SIGN,DEVELOPMENT: A temporary on-site sign providing identification or information pertaining to a - residential or- commercial development to include the builder, property owner, architect, contractor, engineer, landscape architect, decorator, or mortgagee, within that development, but shall not include a subdivision marketing sign. SIGN,DIRECTIONAL: A permanent on-site sign intended to aid in vehicular movement on the site. L:ICITYDOCS\GRDIDRAFII.SIGM704-A\DRAFT-2.DGC SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-A Draft 2 November 13,1998 Page 2 �J.1- ID . SIGN, DIRECTORY: A permanent on-site sign providing direction to or identifying the buildings in the • development. SIGN FACE: The surface of one side of a sign. For a monument sign,the sign face shall include the sign structure(excluding base). SIGN,GARAGE/YARD SALE: A temporary sign intended to advertise garage sales or yard sales. SIGN, GASOLINE PRICING: A permanent on-site sign which displays the price per gallon of fuel sold by that business,and which may be periodically changed to reflect changes in fuel prices. SIGN, GOVERNMENT: A sign erected by or on behalf of a federal, state or local government or an agency thereof. SIGN, GROUND: Any sign connected to the ground by legs,poles,or other supports and which is not an attached,portable,monument,or vehicular sign. SIGN, INSTITUTIONAL: A permanent on-site sign used to identify governmental and municipal agencies, public schools, churches, or similar public institutions, and used to communicate messages of public importance to the general public. SIGN,MENUBOARD: A permanent on-site sign which displays a menu and pricing for food services and may include an audible speaker and microphone integral to the sign. SIGN, MODEL HOME: A temporary real estate sign identifying a homebuilder's model home open for inspection. SIGN,MONUMENT: Any sign which is connected to the ground and which has no clear space for the full width of the sign between the bottom of the sign and the surface of the ground. SIGN, OFF-SITE: A sign which directs attention to a business, commodity, service, good, product, or entertainment not related to the site upon which such sign is located or to which it is affixed. SIGN, ON-SITE: Any sign, the content of which relates to the site on which it is located, referring exclusively to businesses, commodities,services,products,goods, or entertainment on the site, or the sale, lease,or construction of those sites. SIGN, POLITICAL: A type of off-site sign which refers only to the candidates or issues involved in a political election. SIGN,PORTABLE: Any sign which is not attached or affixed to the ground,a building,vehicle, or other fixed structure or object. Portable signs include those signs installed on wheels, trailers, skids,and similar mobile structures. SIGN,READERBOARD(electronic): A sign that utilizes alternating electronic data control components. SIGN, READERBOARD (manual): A sign comprised of non-permanent letters, numerals or symbols, which allows a change of sign copy by adding,removing or rearranging said letters,symbols or numerals. SIGN,REAL ESTATE: A temporary sign intended to advertise real estate for sale or lease. SIGN, SPECIAL PURPOSE: A temporary sign that is either on-site or off-site that provides identification • or information pertaining to a special event or occurrence sponsored by a non-profit or civic organization. SIGN,SUBDIVISION ENTRY: Any permanent on-site sign identifying a residential subdivision. L:\CITYDOCS\ORD\DRAFINSIGN\704-A\DRAFr-2.DOC SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-A Draft 2 November 13,1998 Page 3 5T-! i • SIGN, SUBDIVISION MARKETING: A temporary sign used to market or advertise residential IDsubdivisions within the City and to direct interested persons to the subdivision location. SIGN,TEMPORARY: Any sign constructed of cloth, canvas, light fabric, cardboard,wallboard, or other like materials,with or without frames, and any type sign not permanently attached to the ground, wall, or building,intended to be displayed for a short period of time only. SIGN,VEHICULAR: Any sign which is affixed to a vehicle. SIGN, WINDOW: Any sign located on the internal and/or external surface of the window, or is located within two feet(2')of the window,of any establishment. SITE: A lot,tract or pad site. ARTICLE II-ADMINISTRATION SEC.2 RESPONSIBILITY FOR ENFORCEMENT It is the responsibility of the Building Official to interpret, administer and enforce the requirements of this ordinance. SEC.3 SIGN PERMIT REQUIRED No person shall erect,alter or display any sign nor shall any person allow the erection,alteration or display of any sign upon any property within the City owned or controlled by him without first obtaining a permit to do so from the City of Southlake,except as hereinafter provided. No sign permit shall be released until III after the building permit for the principal building on the site has been issued, except as hereinafter provided. SEC.4 APPLICATION FOR SIGN PERMIT Application for a permit shall be made as required by this ordinance and the following information shall be submitted as separate documents: a. Application form shall be completed. b. General plan that illustrates: - Location of the building,structure,or tract to which or upon which the sign is to be attached or erected. -Position of the sign in relation to rights-of-way, easements,buildings, structures, existing signs, etc. c. Sign drawing that illustrates height, length, width, and all other dimensions associated with the sign. d. Letter from owner of the property stating that the applicant has permission to erect such signs. SEC.5 FEES A. All fees for sign permits shall be in accordance with the current fee schedule adopted by the City Council. B. An annual renewal fee for applicable temporary signs shall be determined in accordance with the current fee schedule adopted by the City Council. SEC. 6 CONDITIONAL SIGN PERMIT 0 A. - GENERAL: Notwithstanding anything in this ordinance to the contrary, the erection of a sign or signs . may be approved pursuant to this section under a conditional sign permit approved by the City Council. The purpose of this section is to allow for a specialized review of signs which may not be appropriate generally without certain restrictions,but which,if controlled as to the number,size,height,color,location, LACn7DOCS\oRD\DRAFT SIGN\704-A\DRAFr-2,DOC SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-A Draft 2 November 13,1998 Page 4 lighting,or relation to adjacent properties,would promote the health,safety,and welfare of the community. • Conditional permitting of signs shall not be based upon the content of the sign,but is intended to allow for the evaluation of the physical impact of the proposed sign on adjacent properties and to ensure adequate mitigation of potentially unfavorable factors,such as the number,size,height, color,location,lighting,and other potentially unfavorable impacts. B. APPLICATION: An application for a conditional sign permit shall be submitted to the Building Official and shall include all documents as required by Section 4 of this ordinance. Additionally,the applicant shall submit construction plans drawn by a registered professional engineer or architect in the State of Texas and also provide renderings of the particular sign types, facades,materials,compositions,dimensions,lighting, and colors. C. FEES: Fees for conditional sign permits shall be determined in accordance with the current fee schedule adopted by the City Council. D. ANNUAL RENEWAL FEES: An annual renewal fee for applicable temporary conditional signs shall be determined in accordance with the current fee schedule adopted by the City Council. SEC.7 REVOCATION OF PERMITS The Building Official may suspend or revoke any permit issued under the provisions of this ordinance whenever it is determined that the permit is issued in error or on the basis of incorrect or false information supplied, or whenever such permit is issued in violation of any of the provisions of this ordinance or any other ordinance of this City or laws of this state or the federal government. Such suspension or revocation shall be effective when communicated in writing to the person to whom the permit is issued,the owner of the sign, or the owner of the site upon which the sign is located. Upon such revocation, all construction related to the revoked permit shall cease. - A person may appeal the revocation of the sign permit to the City Council byfiling an appeal in PP accordance with this ordinance. The City Council shall affirm, reverse, or modify the suspension or revocation and such decision shall be final. Upon final determination that the permit is properly revoked, any portion of the sign in place as a result of the permit shall be removed within 10 days by the owner of the sign or the owner of the site on which the sign is located. Failure to remove the sign shall be deemed a violation of this ordinance. SEC. 8 INSPECTION The Building Official shall periodically inspect each sign regulated by this ordinance for the purpose of ascertaining whether the same is obsolete and whether it is in need of removal or repair. SEC.9 PERMIT VALID FOR ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY(180)DAYS If the work authorized by a permit issued under this ordinance has not been commenced within one hundred eighty(180)days after the date of issuance,the permit shall become null and void. SEC. 10 INVESTIGATION FEES: WORK WITHOUT A PERMIT A. INVESTIGATION. Whenever any work for which a permit is required by this ordinance has been commenced or completed without first obtaining a permit, a special investigation shall be made before a permit may be issued for such work. • B. FEE. An investigation fee, in addition to the permit fee, shall be collected whether or not a permit is then subsequently issued. The investigation fee shall be equal to the amount of the permit fee required by this ordinance. L:\CITYDOCS\ORD\DRAF!\SIGN\704-A\DRAFr-2.ImC SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-A Draft 2 November 13,1998 Page 5 SEC. 11 REMOVAL OF SIGNS IIIA. OBSOLETE SIGNS. Any sign, which the Building Official determines to be obsolete, shall be removed by the permit holder, owner of the sign or owner of the site on which the sign is located. For temporary signs, the sign must be removed as noted on the sign permit application or within three (3) days after receiving written notification to do so from the Building Official. For permanent signs, the sign must be removed by the permit holder, owner of the sign, or owner of the site on which the sign is located within a reasonable time period as determined by the Building Official. Upon failure to comply with such notice or to file an appeal of the decision in accordance with this ordinance, the Building Official is authorized to cause the removal of such sign,and any expense incident thereto shall be paid by the permit holder, owner of the sign or owner of the site on which the sign is located. B. UNSAFE DILAPIDATED OR DETERIORATED SIGNS. If the Building Official determines that any sign is unsafe or insecure,or is dilapidated or deteriorated,he shall give written notice to remove or replace (in accordance with this ordinance) said sign to the person or persons responsible for such sign. If the permit holder, owner of the sign or owner of the site on which the sign is located fails to remove or repair the sign within ten(10) days after such notice or to file an appeal of the decision in accordance with this ordinance,the Building Official is hereby authorized to cause the removal of such sign. Nothing contained herein shall prohibit the immediate removal, without notice, of any sign or portion of a sign which is determined by the Building Official to be an immediate threat or danger to the public health, safety, or welfare. Any expense incident to the removal of a sign pursuant to this paragraph shall be paid by the permit holder,owner of the sign or owner of the site on which the sign is located. The removal of the sign or portion of the sign shall be limited to the extent necessary to eliminate the threat to the public health, safety,and welfare. C. SIGNS ON UTILITY POLES. Any sign that is erected, constructed or otherwise attached to a utility pole located upon any public right of way or utility easement may be removed by City personnel. The permit holder, owner of the sign or owner of the site on which the sign is located shall be charged a sign recovery fee in accordance with the city fee schedule to recover such sign from the City unless the permit holder or owner satisfactorily establishes that such sign was not placed in the right-of-way by the owner of such sign or by any authorized agent, representative, or employee of said owner. Any such sign removed by City personnel may be held for a period of seventy-two (72) hours and upon expiration of such time may be disposed. The City is not required to notify the permit holder or owner of the sign that it has been picked up or that disposal of the sign is imminent. D. - SIGNS IN RIGHT-OF-WAY AND/OR ON PUBLIC PROPERTY: Any sign that is erected, constructed or otherwise located within or upon public right-of-way or on public property may be removed by City personnel and the permit holder or owner of such sign shall be charged a sign recovery fee in accordance with the city fee schedule to recover such sign from the City. No such fee shall be charged if the permit holder or owner satisfactorily establishes that such sign was not placed in the right-of-way by the permit holder or owner of such sign or by any authorized agent, representative or employee of said owner. Any such sign removed by City personnel may be held for a period of seventy-two(72)hours and upon expiration of such time may be disposed. The City is not required to notify the permit holder or owner of the sign that it has been picked up or that disposal of the sign is imminent. E. ILLEGALLY ERECTED SIGNS: Any temporary sign that is erected, constructed or otherwise displayed, which the Building Official determines to be in direct violation of this ordinance, may be removed by City personnel. The permit holder, owner of the sign or owner of the site on which the sign is located shall be charged a sign recovery fee in accordance with the city fee schedule to recover such sign from the City. Any such sign removed by City personnel may be held for a period of seventy-two (72) hours and upon expiration of such time may be disposed. The City is not required to notify the permit holder or owner of the sign that it has been picked up or that disposal of the sign is imminent. For • permanent signs,the sign must be removed by the permit holder,owner of the sign,or owner of the site on which the sign is located within a reasonable time period as determined by the Building Official. Upon failure to comply with such notice or to file an appeal of the decision in accordance with this ordinance,the L:\CITYDOCS\ORD\DRAFRSIGN\704A\DRAFr-2.DOC SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-Af Draft 2 November 13,1998 Page 6 5.-— I Building Official is authorized to cause the removal of such sign,and any expense incident thereto shall be paid by the permit holder,owner of the sign or owner of the site on which the sign is located. F. EXTENT OF SIGN REMOVAL: The Building Official shall determine to what extent the elements of the sign must be removed to comply with this section. This may include any of the following, but is not limited to the following: 1. SIGN COPY: Removal of the text or copy portion of the sign. 2. SIGN BOX: Removal of the portion of the sign excluding the structural support of the sign. 3. ENTIRE SIGN: Removal of all structural elements of the sign. SEC. 12 FILING OF LIENS AGAINST PROPERTY The city is authorized to file a lien against any property which is not otherwise exempt to recover expenses incurred by the city for the removal of a sign or portion of a sign from the property,pursuant to Section 11 F. ARTICLE III-APPEALS AND VARIANCES SEC. 13 APPEALS Any decision rendered by the Building Official under this ordinance may be appealed to the City Council by any person,agent,or representative affected by such decision. Such appeal must be received within ten (10) days after the placement of a letter in the U.S. mail addressed to the address on the permit or the address of the current owner of record in the County tax records which states the written decision which has been rendered by the Building Official. Such appeal shall be filed in writing with the Building Official specifying the grounds on which the appeal is based. The Building Official shall forthwith transmit to the . 411 City Council all documents pertaining to the appealed action. The City Council shall hear the appeal at a City Council meeting as soon as practicable thereafter to determine whether the decision of the Building Official was in accordance with all ordinances and regulations. The decision of the City Council shall be fmal. SEC. 14 VARIANCES The City Council may authorize variances to any restriction set forth in this ordinance, including but not limited to the number, type, area, height, or setback of signs, or any other aspect involved in the sign permitting process. In granting any variance,the City Council shall determine that a literal enforcement of the sign regulations will create an unnecessary hardship or a practical difficulty on the applicant, that the situation causing the unnecessary hardship or practical difficulty is unique to the affected property and is not self-imposed,that the variance will not injure and will be wholly compatible with the use and permitted development of adjacent properties,and that the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the spirit and purpose of this sign ordinance. A person may request a variance from the Sign Ordinance by filing the request with the Building Official. Any request for variance shall be accompanied by a completed application and a non-refundable filing fee in the amount specified in the current fee schedule adopted by City Council. ARTICLE IV-GENERAL SIGN PROVISIONS SEC. 15 WIND PRESSURE AND DEAD LOAD REQUIREMENTS All signs shall be designed and constructed to withstand a wind pressure of not less than thirty(30)pounds • per square foot of area and shall be constructed to receive dead loads as required by the Uniform Building Code. The sign permit application must include a statement signed by the applicant which states compliance with this requirement. L:ICITYDOCSIORD\DRAF[\SIGN\704-A\DRAFr-2.DOC SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-A Draft 2 November 13,1998 Page 7 ST—is SEC. 16 PERMITTED SIGN STRUCTURES AND GENERAL REGULATIONS ill A. ATTACHED SIGN 1. GENERAL: Unless otherwise specifically provided, the regulations set forth in this subsection shall be applicable to all attached signs which are allowed under this ordinance. Signs may not be attached to light fixtures, poles, curbs, sidewalks, gutters, streets, utility poles, public buildings, fences,railings,public telephone poles,or trees. The direct painting of signs on buildings shall be prohibited except for signs less than a three(3)square foot area used for building identification. 2. MINIMUM/MAXIMUM LETTER/LOGO HEIGHT: The minimum height allowed for letters or logos shall be six(6) inches. The maximum height allowed for letters or logos shall be based on the following criteria: Distance From R.O.W. * Maximum Letter/Logo Height Less than 100 ft. • 12 inches 101 - 150 ft. 18 inches 151 -200 ft. 24 inches 201 -250 ft. 30 inches 251 -300 ft. 36 inches 301 and greater 42 inches * -For any lease space which does not front on a street, the maximum letter/logo height shall be based on the distance from the vehicular driveway access (see Appendix `B' for further clarification). • 3. MAXIMUM AREA: 0.75 square feet for every one foot of width of building or lease space not to exceed 400 square feet(see Appendix'A'for further clarification). 4. NUMBER OF SIGNS: Only one attached sign per lease space shall be allowed along each street frontage on any site, unless otherwise specifically provided in this ordinance. A secondary sign may be permitted at a public entrance,provided the entrance is on another side of the building,but shall be limited to twenty-five percent(25%) of the primary or permitted sign size, whichever is more restrictive. The six (6) inch minimum letter/logo height will not apply to these secondary signs. No more than two(2)attached signs shall be allowed per lease space. Attached signs shall be located within the first story of the main exterior entrance for a building or lease space (see Appendix`B'for further clarification). 5. SIGN WIDTH: Attached signs shall be limited in width to the middle seventy five percent(75%) of the width of any building or lease space. In the event the lease space facade is horizontally articulated,the 75%rule shall apply to the allowed sign to be located on any single plane facade (see Appendix'B'for further clarification). 6. ROOF LINE LIMITATIONS: In no case shall an attached sign project above the roof line of any building, except those attached to parapet walls and the sign may not extend above the parapet wall. Signs shall be no closer vertically to the eave of the roofline or overhang than the predominant letter height(see Appendix 'B' for further clarification). Signs may be attached to a continuous plane fascia, if the sign does not extend above or below the projection of the fascia. Signs attached to fascia are only allowed when attached to structural canopy supported to the ground by columns constructed of similar masonry material as the primary structure (See Appendix`3'for further clarification). 1111 - 7. ILLUMINATION: Attached signs may only be illuminated utilizing internal lighting. Exterior letters with exposed neon lighting are not allowed. L:\CITYDOCS\ORD\DRAFIISIGN\704-A\DRAFT-2.DOC SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-A Draft 2 November 13,1998 Page 8 8. PROTRUSIONS: Attached signs may not protrude farther than eighteen inches (18") from the Sbuilding,excluding signs attached to canopies. 9. RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY: Attached signs shall not be allowed on any facade (other than the main front of the building)which faces property zoned for single-family residential uses if the sign is within one hundred fifty feet(150')of the property line of said residential property. B. MONUMENT SIGN 1. GENERAL: Unless otherwise specifically provided, the regulations set forth in this subsection shall be applicable to all monument signs which are allowed under this ordinance. 2. MINIMUM LETTER/LOGO HEIGHT: The minimum height allowed for letters or logos shall be six(6)inches. 3. MAXIMUM HEIGHT: Four (4) feet, excluding monument base and sign structure. The monument base may be an additional eighteen(18)inches in height measured from ground level at the center of the base to the top of the base. The sign structure shall not exceed five(5)feet. 4. MAXIMUM AREA: One hundred(100) square feet per sign with a maximum area per sign face of fifty(50) square feet. The maximum area for the sign structure shall not exceed seventy(70) square feet (see Appendix'A'for measurement criteria). 5. NUMBER OF SIGNS: Only one monument sign, excluding menuboard signs, shall be allowed along each street frontage on any site, unless otherwise specifically provided in this ordinance. Monument signs may be no closer than five hundred(500)feet on any one site. 6. MINIMUM SETBACK: Fifteen(15)feet from any property line. 7. MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS: All monument sign bases shall be constructed of the same masonry material as the front building facade on the same site or shall be stone or brick. The sign structure must be constructed or covered with the same masonry material as the principal building, or stone, or brick. Sculpted aluminum sign panels will be allowed. All sign text and graphic elements shall be limited to a minimum of six (6) inches from the outer limits of the sign structure. 8. ILLUMINATION: Monument signs may only be illuminated utilizing internal lighting for sculpted aluminum panels or a ground lighting source where the light itself and supporting structure are not visible from public R.O.W. C. GROUND SIGN 1. GENERAL: Unless otherwise specifically provided, the regulations set forth in this subsection shall be applicable to all ground signs. 2. 3. MAXIMUM HEIGHT: Three feet(3') 4. MAXIMUM AREA: Eight(8)square feet with a maximum of four(4)square feet per sign face. 5. NUMBER OF SIGNS: One(1)sign per site. LACITYDOCS\ORD\DRAFPSIGN\704-A\DRAFr-2.DOC SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-A Draft 2 November 13,1998 Page 9 T=I 1 • SEC. 17 PROHIBITED SIGNS 410 A. GENERAL Any sign which is not specifically permitted in Articles V and VI of this ordinance shall be prohibited. B. OBSCENE SIGNS No person shall erect or display on any site a sign in which the dominant theme of material taken as a whole appeals to a prurient interest in sex,or is patently offensive because it affronts community standards relating to the description or representation of sexual matters,and is utterly without redeeming social value. C. OBSTRUCTING DOORS,WINDOWS,OR FIRE ESCAPES No person shall erect or display on any site any sign which prevents free ingress to or egress from any door,window,or fire escape. D. OBSTRUCTING VISION/SIGHT TRIANGLE No person shall erect or display on any site any sign in such a manner as to obstruct free and clear vision at any location, street, intersection, or driveway. All signs placed at any intersection shall prevent such problem by observing a sight triangle as provided for in Section 1, "Definitions." E. INTERFERENCE WITH TRAFFIC No person shall erect or display on any site any sign which interferes with vehicular or pedestrian traffic as a result of the position, size, shape, movement, color, fashion, manner, or intensity of illumination or any 111 other characteristics causing such interference. Nor shall any person erect or allow to be displayed any sign in such a manner as to interfere with, obstruct the view of, or be confused with any authorized traffic sign, signal, or device, including, without limitation, signs making use of the words "stop," "go," "look," "slow," "danger,"or any other similar word,phrase,symbol or character,or employ any red,yellow,green, or other colored lamp or light in such a manner as to cause confusion or otherwise interfere with vehicular or pedestrian traffic. F. PORTABLE SIGNS No person shall erect or display on any site any portable sign; except, however, that upon a majority vote by the City Council, a conditional use permit may be issued to any non-profit organization for an on-site portable sign. Permits shall be issued for one thirty (30) day period with at least ninety (90) days separation between permits. G. CERTAIN ILLUMINATED SIGNS 1. No sign shall be illuminated to such an intensity or in such a manner as to cause a glare or brightness to a degree that it constitutes a hazard or nuisance to traffic. Moving, flashing, intermittent lighted,changing color,revolving,or similarly constructed signs shall not be allowed. 2. No lighted sign shall be erected or displayed within one-hundred fifty(150)feet of a single-family residentially zoned property unless the lighting is shielded from view of the residentially zoned property and indirect light does not exceed 1/2 lumen measured from any property line of the residentially zoned property. H. SIGNS PROJECTING ON/OVER PUBLIC PROPERTY OR PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY It shall be prohibited to erect or display any type of sign on or over public right-of-way (ROW) or other public property, unless the same be erected by the City, County, State or other authorized governmental agency,or with the permission of the City,for public purposes. L:\cn'YDocs\oRD\DRAFr\SIcN\7o4A\DRAFf-2.Doc SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-A Draft 2 November 13,1998 Page 10 5 7_18 ROOF SIGNS 11111 Any sign erected on a vertical framework supported by and located immediately and entirely over the roof of a building is prohibited. Any sign attached to a fascia extending above the projection of the fascia shall be prohibited. The painting or otherwise affixing of signs on a roof is prohibited. J. SIGNS ON UTILITY POLES No person shall erect or display any sign on any utility pole located upon any public right-of-way or utility easement. ARTICLE V-SPECIFIC SIGN REGULATIONS SEC. 18 SPECIFIC SIGN REGULATIONS This article regulates the type of sign structure allowed for each type of sign permitted by this ordinance. Each of the signs identified in this article is subject to the general sign provisions set forth in Article IV except where modifications to the general regulations are noted. SEC. 19 PERMANENT SIGNS REQUIRING PERMIT Unless otherwise specifically provided, the regulations set forth in this article shall be applicable to all of the following signs. A. BUSINESS SIGN 1. PERMITTED SIGN STRUCTURE: Attached and/or monument • 2. MODIFICATIONS TO GENERAL REGULATIONS: None B. MENUBOARD SIGN 1. PERMITTED SIGN STRUCTURE: Attached and/or monument 2. MODIFICATIONS TO GENERAL REGULATIONS: a. MINIMUM LETTER/LOGO HEIGHT: Not applicable b. MAXIMUM HEIGHT: Six feet(6'). c. MAXIMUM AREA: Twenty four(24) square feet. Only one face will be allowed per sign. d. MAXIMUM NUMBER OF SIGNS: No more than two(2)signs per site. e. LOCATION LIMITATIONS: All menuboard signs must be located at the side or rear of the principal building. If two (2) signs are erected, signs must be at least eighteen(18) feet apart. f. ILLUMINATION: Internal lighting may be utilized for sign panel. C. SUBDMSION ENTRY SIGN 1. PERMITTED SIGN STRUCTURE: Attached and/or monument 2. MODIFICATIONS TO GENERAL REGULATIONS: a. MAXIMUM HEIGHT: Attached sign may not project above top of wall b. MAXIMUM AREA: Thirty-two(32)square feet for attached sign c. MAXIMUM NUMBER OF SIGNS: One (1) monument sign or two (2) attached wall plaque signs(not a combination thereof)per street entrance d. PLACEMENT OF SIGN: Monument sign may be located on median at street entrance if approved by City Council on Concept Plan, in developer's agreement, or by a separate application. SI); BULLETIN BOARD SIGN 1. PERMITTED SIGN STRUCTURE: Attached,monument and/or ground 2. MODIFICATIONS TO GENERAL REGULATIONS: a. MINIMUM LETTER/LOGO HEIGHT: Not applicable L\CRYDOCS\ORD\DRAFIlSIGN\704-A\DRAFr-2DOC SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-A Draft 2 November 13,1998 Page 11 CjT-I� b. MAXIMUM HEIGHT: Six(6)feet . c. d. MAXIMUM AREA: Eighteen(18)square feet. Only one face allowed per sign. MAXIMUM NUMBER OF SIGNS: One(1)per subdivision entrance,not to exceed two (2)per subdivision OK: No ,a G.fg LOCATION WHERE ALLOWED: No closer than one-hundred (100) feet from an arterial. Sign must be located on designated common area and maintained by the home owner's association. €.M MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS: Bulletin board must have a lockable covering. Masonry requirement shall not apply. E. DIRECTORY SIGN 1. PERMITTED SIGN STRUCTURE: Attached and/or monument 2. MODIFICATIONS TO GENERAL REGULATIONS: a. MINIMUM SETBACK: Seventy-five(75)feet from drive entrance at right-of-way. b. MAXIMUM NUMBER OF SIGNS: One(1)sign per street entrance. c. RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY: Not applicable d. LOCATIONS WHERE ALLOWED: Only distance measurements shall apply. F. INSTITUTIONAL SIGN 1. PERMITTED SIGN STRUCTURE: Attached and/or monument 2. MODIFICATIONS TO GENERAL REGULATIONS: a. GENERAL: i. Sign must be integral to the permitted sign for the site. ii. Messages on readerboards, whether electronic or manual, may not scroll, flash, or change more frequently than once a day. iii.• b. Manual readerboard signs using alphabetical lettering must have a lockable covering. MAX MUM AREA: Readerboard display cannot exceed two-thirds (2/3) of the permitted gross surface area per face of the sign,excluding monument sign border. c. ILLUMINATION: Internal illumination may be utilized for sign panel. G. GASOLINE PRICING SIGN 1. PERMITTED SIGN STRUCTURE: Monument 2. MODIFICATIONS TO GENERAL REGULATIONS: a. GENERAL: i. Sign must be integral to the permitted sign for the site. ii. Price-per-gallon display, whether electronic or manual,may not scroll, flash, or change more frequently than once a day. x1-10_10- i U J1F 'PJ-# "C !kW 1611 t.#:d'-(t"-=1'ii 'ros ii'i o.='.fit At ce'ta y i(iO tig. b.c MAXIMUM AREA: Price-per-gallon display cannot exceed two-thirds (2/3) of the permitted gross surface area per face of the sign,excluding monument sign border. G. NUMBER OF SIGNS: One(1)per site. 41.e ILLUMINATION: Internal illumination may be utilized for'file r 4. ‘., 'L' 'eatilt,sign pane 3,. H. DIRECTIONAL SIGN 1. PERMITTED SIGN STRUCTURE: Monument 2. MODIFICATIONS TO GENERAL REGULATIONS: a. MAXIMUM HEIGHT: Three(3)feet b. MAXIMUM AREA: Eight(8) square feet with a maximum of four(4) square feet per • sign face. .. c. NUMBER OF SIGNS: Maximum of two(2)signs per site. L:\CITYDOCS\ORD\DRAFrSIGN\704-A\DRAFr-2.DOC SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-A Draft 2 November 13,1998 Page 12 • SEC.20 PERMANENT SIGNS EXEMPT FROM PERMIT A permit shall not be required for the following signs: A. HOME OCCUPATION SIGN 1. PERMITTED SIGN STRUCTURE: Attached 2. MODIFICATIONS TO GENERAL REGULATIONS: a. MINIMUM LETTER/LOGO HEIGHT: Not applicable b. MAXIMUM AREA: One(1)square foot c. MAXIMUM NUMBER OF SIGNS: One(1) d. LOCATIONS WHERE ALLOWED: Any sign must be non-illuminated and mounted flat against the wall at the entrance of the home occupation. SEC.21 TEMPORARY SIGNS REQUIRING PERMIT A permit shall be required for the following signs: A. BANNER 1. PERMITTED SIGN STRUCTURE: Attached 2. MODIFICATIONS TO GENERAL REGULATIONS: a. MAXIMUM AREA: 0.5 square feet for every one foot of width of building or lease space not to exceed fifty(50)square feet. b. MAXIMUM NUMBER OF SIGNS: One(1)per site c. DURATION: Maximum fifteen(15) days,twice per calendar year with a sixty(60)day separation between permits. B. MODEL HOME SIGN 1. PERMI I"1'hD SIGN STRUCTURE: Monument and/or ground • 2. MODIFICATIONS TO GENERAL REGULATIONS: a. MAXIMUM HEIGHT: Five(5)feet for ground signs b. MAXIMUM AREA: Sixty-four (64) square feet with a maximum of thirty-two (32) square feet per sign face • • G. 4.c1 MAXIMUM NUMBER OF SIGNS: One(1)sign per builder per subdivision .'di MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS: Not applicable g C. SPECIAL PURPOSE SIGN 1. PERMITTED SIGN STRUCTURE: Attached and/or ground 2. MODIFICATIONS TO GENERAL REGULATIONS: . 5.:4i Xt e, . . me fly (.61ef 1ifit E' ;��1 {j. "9 u 0 w[6.1)CiiLl%�- i vg1/7.. 1 !1!ri� E@r itifi4-icAtiim; .1 yW w. a.g MAXIMUM NUMBER OF SIGNS: Feuy ( a4) te4X ( total per event or occasion,Ei ;c o te'S1 .I t tr i e ' �.�1 /1; "iI«:.ii3141 b. PLACEMENT TIME: Twenty-one (21) days, must be removed within three (3) days after termination of the event. No more than twice a year. G.e MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS: Not applicable d. e.f. RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY: Not applicable D. DEVELOPMENT SIGN 1. PERMITTED SIGN STRUCTURE:Monument and/or ground 2. MODIFICATIONS TO GENERAL REGULATIONS: a. MAXIMUM HEIGHT:Five(5)feet b. MAXIMUM AREA: Sixty-four (64) square feet with a maximum of thirty-two (32) square feet per sign face L:\CITYDOCS\ORD\DRAFI\SIGN\704-A\DRAFr-2.DOC SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-A Draft 2 November 13,1998 Page 13 ST � I • c. MAXIMUM NUMBER OF SIGNS: One(1)per site III d. DURATION: Sign may be installed at any time after the issuance of the building permit for a commercial development or approval of the developers agreement for a residential subdivision. The sign must be removed within one (1) year or upon the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for a commercial development and upon the issuance of a certificate of occupancy on seventy-five percent(75%) of the lots within the subdivision for a residential subdivision. e. MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS: Not applicable g* SEC.22 TEMPORARY SIGNS EXEMPT FROM PERMIT A permit shall not be required for the following signs: A. SUBDIVISION MARKETING SIGN 1. PERMITTED SIGN STRUCTURE: Ground 2. MODIFICATIONS TO GENERAL REGULATIONS: a. MAXIMUM NUMBER OF SIGNS: One(1)sign for every twenty(20)platted lots,not to exceed a total of four(4)signs b. LOCATION OF SIGNS: •No sign may be placed closer than fifty feet (50') from an intersecting R.O.W. w v G.11 PLACEMENT TIME: 12:00 noon Friday to 12:00 noon Monday 4.e DURATION: Signs may be placed upon subdivision approval. The signs shall be valid for one(1)year from subdivision approval or upon issuance of a certificate of occupancy on seventy-five percent(75%)of the lots. S B. BUILDER SIGN 1. PERMITTED SIGN STRUCTURE: Ground 2. MODIFICATIONS TO GENERAL REGULATIONS: a. DURATION: Signs may only be placed after issuance of a building permit and must be removed upon the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. MINIMUM SETBA >K -Nbt a} Tic 1 C. REAL ESTATE SIGN - 1. PERMITTED SIGN STRUCTURE: Attached,monument,and/or ground 2. MODIFICATIONS TO GENERAL REGULATIONS: a. MINIMUM LETTER/LOGO HEIGHT: Not applicable b. MAXIMUM HEIGHT: Five (5) feet above grade for ground signs; below roof line for attached c. MAXIMUM AREA WPALri , xis,„Ai, r' f�` mry°.i thirty-two (32) square feet pf e d. MAXIMUM NUMBER OF SIGNS: One(1)per site pa- e. :tt S :A'C:K:�`No E* '�b'1 O 'I,.1' >r& • 4 ,t" I_ . -glam` 1 D. WINDOW SIGN Window signs may not obscure more than fifteen percent(15%)of the window area per facade,measured and located within ten(10)vertical feet from the at-grade exterior entrance to the lease space. i .strz;_3tif 3� ar ilk.S s,qr `tli dt fl . V i .,tbo C i ,,iC �. paii,g-ii_ny414337xplitiait t i'fi .Ap.rj :i . •` .wg of "r i_:•,• 1, No illuminated window signs shall be allowed within two feet of the window glazing except for open/closed signs. 0 E. ` GARAGE/YARD SALE SIGN 1. PERMITTED SIGN STRUCTURE: Ground 2. MODIFICATIONS TO GENERAL REGULATIONS: L:ICnYDOCSIORDORAFnSIGN\704-A\DRAFr-2.DOC SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-A Draft 2 November 13,1998 Page 14 a. MAXIMUM NUMBER OF SIGNS: Two(2) per sal- , ��`�t }'�� iZ�74 c;. .a1t,� it."I�e}(j iS,*• i(llAi�O.�S�1'•fl(_:3.' .. l�Y' .�.'l. the-subdivision. raa` .� ,. , o ati,tro b.g PLACEMENT TIME: 12:00 noon may lq .l ' , to 12:00 noon Monday or on any legal holiday Vo:8: C2 !C't\v1 3*' if(7q '`� strj;,.; , .,.41._, s ARTICLE VI-EXEMPTIONS AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS SEC. 23 EXEMPT SIGNS The following signs are exempted from the requirements of this ordinance: A. Vehicular signs, unless the sign is used or intended to be used as an on-site or off-site sign. It shall be prima facie evidence that a sign is used as an on-site or off-site sign if a vehicle is parked at the same location for a continuous period exceeding seventy-two (72) hours. No person shall attach any sign to a trailer, skid, or similar mobile structure, where the primary use of such structure is to provide a base for such sign or to constitute the sign itself. This provision shall not be interpreted to prohibit identification signs on vehicles used for business purposes,nor shall it be interpreted to prohibit bumper stickers. B. Warning and security signs. C. Government signs and signs for non-profit organizations sponsored by government including flags, insignia, legal notices, informational, directional, and traffic signs which are legally required or necessary to the essential functions of government agencies. 411, D. "No Dumping"and"No Trespassing"signs. E. Signs in public parks placed inside ballfield fencing by the City,which are intended for advertising to raise funds for recreation programs which have copy on only one face with the copy facing toward the interior of the field. F. Political signs,unless affixed to the ground or a grounded structure located within public right-of-way or on public property. SEC.24 NONCONFORMING EXISTING SIGNS All signs that are lawfully in existence on the date of adoption of this ordinance may exist in their present form,but no such signs shall be altered or moved unless a permit is issued pursuant to the provisions of this ordinance. Permits granted prior to the passage of this ordinance shall be renewed only if the applicant complies with all provisions of this ordinance. Any legal, non-conforming sign which has been substantially destroyed or dismantled for any purpose other than maintenance shall be deemed as completely destroyed if the cost of repairing the sign is more than 60%of the cost of erecting a new sign of the same type at the same location. Under this provision,the sign shall be removed and a permit shall be required to erect a new sign. SEC.25 SIGN COPY Notwithstanding anything contained herein to the contrary,any sign authorized in this ordinance is allowed to contain non-commercial(ideological)copy in lieu of any other copy. SEC.26 APPENDICES It is anticipated that the following appendices will be changed periodically by the Building Official in response to changes in the administration of this ordinance. L:\CITYDOCS\ORD\DRAFIISIGN\704-A\DRAFr-2.DOC SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-A Draft 2 November 13,1998 Page 15 5T APPENDIX 'A' 0 METHODS OF AREA MEASUREMENT ATTACHED SIGNS AND GROUND SIGNS EXHIBIT A-1 Attached sign 12 I 6 I 12 HEIGHT: 3' 2' _- IVY , .erg 4 . _ h 4 per . LETTER HEIGHT: 12" 3' +z" A, ,4 _4- 3" '' =�4 �. , _ - SCGN:_ = MAXIMUM ALLOWED AREA: 22.5 s.f. (0.75 x 30) s „ f ; �...- MEASURED AREA SHOWN: 18 s.f. (3'x 6') r:::t4 . NOTES: Area limited to 0.75 square feet for every t } one foot of width of building or lease space not to - _ .;:_t, exceed 400 square feet;signs shall be limited in width to the middle seventy five percent(75%)of :-M�_ the width of any single plane facade for any building or lease space. 30' XHIBIT A-2 Attached signs 75% 40' 75 —6'-6" 7'-6"--6'-2.-6" 15' 2-6- HEIGHT:HEIGHT: 2'&1' J 12" ' SICN HERE ...r, LETTER HEIGHT: 10 & 2' �o , , sign Wave i MAXIMUM ALLOWED AREAS: 15 s.f. (0.75 x 20) I & 15 s.f. (0.75 x 20) MEASURED AREAS SHOWN: 15 s.f. (2'x 7.5')& 15 s.f. (1'x 15') I NOTES: Area limited to 0.75 square feet for every I``. one foot of width of building or lease space not to = ='I: --, a : exceed 400 square feet;signs shall be limited in - .-~ _.!--1,- y '_ width to the middle seventy five percent(75%)of the width of any single plane facade for any building 20' I 20' or lease space. EXHIBIT A-3 Ground sign _2'_ HEIGHT: 3' Sign 2' MAXIMUM AREA ALLOWED: 4 s.f.per sign face +3' 1111 1' MEASURED AREA SHOWN: 4 s.f. (2'x 2') I I L:\CITYDOCS\ORD\DRAFTlSIGN\704-A\APPENDIX2.VSD SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-A ''T-D4Draft 2 November 13,1998 Page 16 APPENDIX 'A' ill METHODS OF AREA MEASUREMENT MONUMENT SIGNS EXHIBIT A-4 Monument sign-attached lettering HEIGHT: 3' MAXIMUM ALLOWED SIGN AREA: 50 s.f.per face 12 MEASURED SIGN AREA SHOWN: 27 s.f. (3'x 9') -1.5' 9' 1.5' MAXIMUM ALLOWED STRUCTURE AREA: 70 s.f. per face 1 -- 3' .._ IGN MEASURED STRUCTURE AREA SHOWN: 48 s.f. (4'x 12') 4' L _ NOTES: The sign structure must be constructed or covered - with the same masonry material as the principal building,or - •r stone,or brick. All sign text and graphic elements shall be limited to a minimum of six(6)inches from the outer limits of the sign structure. Sign may be illuminated utilizing a ground lighting source,where the light itself and supporting structure may not be visible from public R.O.W. EXHIBIT A-5 Monument sign-sculpted aluminum panel 14' HEIGHT: 4' 9" I 12.5' I 9" MAXIMUM ALLOWED SIGN AREA: 50 s.f. per face �. ' - :; -` ;_;,-_..2::,, ,,,!!,,, .;,::;;:,,,,3:,:,_:„.:,;,,,;41..,w . L-:::::: ,:,,, :: , -_,,,: :,:, :_7:-. ., j} •EASURED SIGN AREA SHOWN: 50 s.f.(4'x 12.5') M MAXIMUM ALLOWED STRUCTURE AREA: 70 s.f. per face g MEASURED STRUCTURE AREA SHOWN: 70 s.f. (5'x 14') 6"' --- NOTES: The sign base and/or structure must be constructed `__ ' � ._` "" or covered with the same masonry material as the principal " ' _ == -= " building, or stone,or brick. All sign text and graphic elements sloped ground shall be limited to a minimum of six(6)inches from the outer limits of the sign structure. Sculpted aluminum sign panels may be illuminated utilizing internal lighting. EXHIBIT A-6 Monument sign-masonry panel HEIGHT: 3' 12' MAXIMUM ALLOWED SIGN AREA: 50 s.f. per face -1'-6" i 9' 1 1'-6' MEASURED SIGN AREA SHOWN: 27 s.f. (3'x 9') _1 IOIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIHHhIIIIIIII1IIHl MAXIMUM ALLOWED STRUCTURE AREA: 70 s.f. per face y : y ; `' -�.- ? 5' 3' .' Loco \ 1 nm MEASURED STRUCTURE AREA SHOWN: 60 s.f. (5'x 12') _ =;, '' NOTES: orcovered withsign the same base masonry material as the principal constructed_ 1 I""I'I""'III'III"I"'I"""IIIIIII"'II 0 building,or stone, or brick.All sign text and graphic elements 1' shall be limited to a minimum of six(6)inches from the outer limits of the sign structure. Sign may be illuminated utilizing a ground lighting source,where the light itself and supporting structure may not be visible from public R.O.W. L:1CITYDOCSIORDTRAFIISIGN\704-A\APPENDDC2.VSD SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-A Draft 2 November 13,1998 Page 17 5s aE-7 APPENDIX 'S' • SELECTED GRAPHIC CLARIFICATIONS Sections 16.A.2 and 16.A.4 -For any lease space which does not front on a street,the maximum letter/logo height shall be based on the distance from the vehicular driveway access. Only one attached sign per street frontage shall be allowed on any site along said street frontage, unless otherwise specifically provided. A secondary sign may be permitted at a public entrance, provided the entrance is on another side of the building,but shall be limited to twenty-five percent(25%)of the primary or permitted sign size, whichever is more restrictive. The six(6)inch minimum letter/logo height will not apply to these secondary signs. No more than two (2)attached signs shall be allowed per lease space. Drive Parking 120' 5n' max. 18 r/logo max. 18"letter/logo max. 18"letter/logo max. 12" m H permitted permitted permitted go primary sign primary sign primary sign g letter/logo man secondary sign at amisses secondary sign at publicnce publicentrance secondary sign secondary sign 25%area of primary sign 25%area of primary sign .. 40 Parking Section 16.A.4- Attached signs shall be limited to within the first story of the main exterior entrance for a building or lease space. o. n t , c a y ,. x rc•.i:, ah y.. _ a -." :_...F;.es,, x.�e'.3->'r-r.:^'c=�Cs�?d`cr;.>d e-. _..e, - aa. ,,» r:, .; . ..>. .. .__t.✓. .. ., z: -r :''fit - - " _ �� t ' - Signs Signs Signs " Si n` ' Makers ) �_:"= - ..'„---,;'::.1::0 • .. ..1... :' :f, !• 1. , z��. "b• zit . - 4' a , .;:z... ' `:. : , (,� '%h.7;.•', ,A r:Y.' 9 Y -° ,,. I ,,. Sign Shoppe _lW, . -: :::::::''',;;;; -,L7'7:'' .; ,''.?. E evator:'?_' a .�.. sry. :n ' `.rvf l W ` L:\CITYDGCS\ORD\DRAFr\SIGN\704 AWPPENDIX2.VSD SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-Aer a r-Draft 2 November 13,1998 Page 18 APPENDIX 'B' • SELECTED GRAPHIC CLARIFICATIONS Section 16.A.5-Attached signs shall be limited in width to the middle seventy five percent(75%)of the width of any building or lease space or single plane facade. . 75% . .-75%—. 1-75%—• • . I • . . I . . ,,,,, :..;.:.,: ,Iy. :sis.., i!.. .:,:::% .',!:'z"•:,• e . ..^N\-.,, ,,: .. :-Y.,,,,,.... :: ,:.f ri,-::.;-,. :5.7:2 ,------k Q: .i -SiE&S SONS; -:N::;;i-i.:‘';-.,:,.- ,--, ', -,,,,--•:- :SIGNS' :,--,_: i.:r 7:,- SUBS ; , ;,:-:':-, '4'&. ".,-:,;',,„''.,'''4,"- ',',7',.`:--' n";,'",,' 'Z.,,'.: ''''' ' " I ---', • '''''.,•':j: "'"-- 'Y 'l''':",'' SIGN.,',4'1, '''j, .4:;:,,,:,V1._:'', .,-,,,,,-,:-_7 .-....:'-:,,,.”.:.'f2 '..!,:i.:, .. - .',-,,,:12.„,,`, '- ' ,',,,„_:',,'• ‘,,', „-; :i, .::,-,)-7.;:-i.:-..7:---'4' ..1'..''•'--::ie:',-,,,;2''i ':!;!'-,,,,.:i-21-_,*.:-.----..1: CITY:,--,::: 'r- 7:::, :.71.---'-',?-•.;Y,--;',.,...':;'!.-:-.:.F:'f:,'::: 7. , , ..:,. .. . I'.. III Section 16.A.6- Signs shall be no closer vertically to the eave of the roofline or overhang than the permitted letter height. _ ....liiill Mill__ .., — 24" .. . -....:-.., •••••••••• ''. 111111 1!— — -- 111111 ., 24" iiim SIGN iiiic ....__. - , Rill' mil , ....,. ._ iiiiii iiiiii 111111 r. 111111 111111 . 111111 . 111111 .; .. . ; 111111 111111 111111 11, 111111 '1- - . .. ' 111111 ..._ . _. MIII 111111 111111 111111 LACITYDOCSIORDTRAFf\SIGN\704-A\APPENDIX2.VSD SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-A Cdi--..717aft 2 November 13,1998 Page 19 APPENDIX 'B' 0 SELECTED GRAPHIC CLARIFICATIONS Section 16.A.6 -Signs may be attached to a continuous plane fascia provided the sign does not extend above or below the projection of the fascia. Such signs are only allowed when attached to structural canopy supported to the ground by columns constructed of similar masonry material as the primary structure. Sign Column —► - Section 22.D -Window signs may not obscure more than fifteen percent(15%)of the window area per facade, measured and located within ten (10)vertical feet from the at-grade exterior entrance to the lease space. The area of the sign shall be measured by the smallest box that could be drawn around the continuity of the sign. No illuminated window signs shall be allowed within two feet of the window glazing except for open/closed signs. WINDOW AREA: 108 s.f. (9'x 12') 2,....*SALE* MAXIMUM ALLOWED WINDOW SIGN AREA: 9 16.2 s.f.(15%of 108 s.f.) 8' 10' MEASURED WINDOW SIGN AREA SHOWN: 16 s.f. (2'x 8') - i -.. L:\CITYDOCS\ORD\DRAPT\SIGN\704-A\APPENDIX2.VSD SIGN ORDINANCE NO.704-A --).,,Draft 2 November 13,1998 Page 20 City of Southlake,Texas 1 I MEMORANDUM November 13, 1998 To: Curtis E. Sawk, City Manager From: Charlie Thomas, Deputy Director of Public Works Subject: Authorize the Mayor to enter into a Partial Developer Agreement for Timarron Village H, Phase 2 Background A Partial Developer Agreement for Timarron Village H, Phase 2 is attached. This Partial Developer Agreement is for grading only and includes the erosion control. The Developer is requesting to begin grading operations before the final construction plans are complete and before contracts have been negotiated. The intent is to complete the grading before the winter months so that installation of utilities can begin at the earliest possible date. This area is presently being used as a pasture and the streets have been laid out to minimize the impact on what few trees are on the tract. The grading plans and erosion control plans have been reviewed and approved by the staff. A final Developer Agreement will be required for construction of water and sewer and paving and drainage improvements. Recommendation It is recommended that the City Council consider authorizing the Mayor to enter into a Partial Developer Agreement for Timarron, Village H, Phase 2, located in the southwest corner of East Continental Boulevard and Brumlow Avenue for grading only. Please place this item on the Regular City Council Agenda for November 17, 1998 for City Council review and consideration. CT/ts Attachment: Partial Developer Agreement 110, M:\wd-files\projects\timarron\village H\special developer agreement memo.doc 5J-1 a ripPARTIAL DEVELOPER AGREEMENT TIMARRON VILLAGE H, PHASE 2 STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF TARRANT § This Agreement is entered into by and between the City of Southlake, Texas, hereinafter referred to as the "City" and Westerra Timarron, L.P., hereinafter referred to as the "Developer", the owner of the below described property. WHEREAS, the Developer has prepared a final plat and received approval for same by the City for a subdivision known as Timarron Village H, Phase 2 located in the southwest corner of East Continental Boulevard and Brumlow Avenue; and WHEREAS, the Developer has prepared construction plans for grading and erosion control and also for paving and drainage and water and sanitary sewer • improvements and submitted to the City for review and comments; and WHEREAS, the Developer would like to proceed with grading of the streets and lots as soon as possible prior to the winter months, while the City completes review of the • infrastructure construction plans. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. The Developer agrees to install the approved erosion control prior to any grading operations. 2. The Developer agrees to have the construction plans completed per City review and comments as soon as possible and have a contract with a contractor in place such that construction of the water and sewer and paving and drainage can commence immediately upon completion of the grading operation. 3. Both parties agree that a final Developer Agreement will be negotiated to replace this Partial Developer Agreement prior to beginning the construction of the water and sewer and paving and drainage improvements. • 5J-2 Partial Developer Agreement on Village H,Phase 2 Page Two Two 4. Venue of any action brought hereunder shall be in Fort Worth, Tarrant County, Texas. Signed and effective on this day of , 1998. DEVELOPER: Westerra Timarron, L.P. City of Southlake, Texas By: By: Title: _ Title: Mayor M:\WD-Files\projects\timan on\village-h.special developer agreement.doc • • 5J-3 City of.Southlake, Texas 41111 MEMORANDUM November 13, 1998 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Greg Last, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Encroachment agreement to allow the continuance of an existing sign within a ROW dedication, proposed Lot 4R3,J.G. Allen No. 18 Addition • History: Apparently the Shunail corporation purchased from Jim Martin a tract of land that included the retail center and convenience store on the northwest corner of FM 1709 and Randol Mill. This purchase was consummated without the benefit of processing a plat revision on the property. Dr.Mark Cox, who operates a vet clinic in this building,has processed and received approval for a new vet clinic on a tract at the southwest corner of the Martin remainder property. As a part of this approval,we required the processing of the required plat revision to include three lots: 1)the proposed vet clinic lot, 2)the remainder Martin lot, and 3)the previously sold Shunail lot. With this plat revision there • was a ROW dedication of 5' required along Randol Mill. The existing pole sign for the convenience store/gas station is along the west ROW of Randol Mill and will be within the ROW dedication of the plat..The Shunail Corporation is resisting signing the plat until they have an agreement which allows the continued use of their sign until such time as Randol Mill Avenue is widened . Requested Action: Attached is an"Encroachment Agreement",prepared by City Attorney Wayne Olson, for the above referenced lot, requested by Shah J. Jiwani on behalf of the Shunail Corporation, Inc. This agreement is substantially the same as the encroachment agreement we previously approved allowing the continued use of the parking lot in front of the out-building along Kimball, east of Mesco. It is a fairly standard agreement used for this type of purpose. All parties involved in this property are requesting that the Council approve the attached encroachment agreement which will then allow the Shunail Corporation to sign the plat, further allowing Dr. Cox to file the plat, acquire his lot and proceed with construction of his vet clinic. - Please contact me if you have any questions. GL/ses 1111 cc: Encroachment Agreement �K— I • ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT - STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF TARRANT, § THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the City of Southlake, a home rule municipal corporation in Tarrant County, Texas, acting herein by and through its duly authorized City Manager, Curtis E. Hawk, hereinafter referred to as the "City," and Shunail Corp. hereinafter referred to as "Grantee." A. WHEREAS, Grantee is the owner of proposed Lot 4R3, of the J.G. Allen No. 18 Addition, (being a revision to Lot 4 of the J.G. Allen No. 18 Addition to the City of • Southlake, Texas, recorded in Cabinet A, Slide 1253 of the Plat Book of Tarrant County, Texas) (the "Grantee Tract"); and - - B. WHEREAS, Grantee has heretofore prepared a plat ("Grantee's plat") of the Grantee tract which dedicates to the City for right-of-way purposes the land more particularly described on Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part hereof (the "Encroachment Area"); and C. WHEREAS, at the time of dedication, an existing sign on Grantee's property was located in the Encroachment Area and City has, subject to limitations, agreed to allow the sign to remain in place; and • D. WHEREAS, Grantee has further agreed to a reservation ofright-of-way on Grantee's plat for the future expansion of Randol Mill Road on the property more • C:\TEMP\ENCRCHL2.WPD(11/13/98) Page 1 • particularly described on Exhibit "A" (the "Reservation Area"); and E. WHEREAS, upon the acquisition of the Reservation Area by the City or the State of Texas for future widening of Randol Mill Road, it is anticipated that certain canopy and gasoline facilities"will be required to be relocated by Grantee. WITNESSETH: 1. For and in consideration of the payment by Grantee of good and valuable consideration and the true and faithful performance of the mutual covenants herein contained, City hereby grants to Grantee permission to encroach upon, use and occupy portions of the public right-of-way for the purpose of maintaining and using the existing pole sign located within the Encroachment Area. 2. All maintenance and operation in connection with such encroachment, use, III and occupancy shall beperformed in strict compliance with the Charter, Ordinances and P Y P Codes of City and in accordance with the directions of the Director of Public Works of City, or his duly authorized representative. 3. There shall be no further encroachments in, under, on or above the surface area of the streets and sidewalks involved. ' " 4. Grantee, at no expense to City, shall make proper provision for the relocation and/or installation of any existing or future utilities affected by such encroachment, use and occupancy, including the securing of approval and consent from the utility companies and the appropriate agencies of the State and its political subdivisions. In the event any installation, reinstallation,, relocation _or repair of any existing or future utility or 0 improvements owned or constructed by or on behalf of the public or at public expense is C:\TEMP\ENCRCHL2.WPD(11/13/98) Page 2 sK--3 r , . ! made more costly by virtue of the construction, maintenance or existence of such encroachment and use, Grantee shall pay to City an additional amount equal to such additional cost as determined by the Director of Public Works, or his duly authorized representative. 5. City may enter and utilize the Encroachment Area at any time for the purpose of installing or maintaining improvements necessary for the health, safety and welfare of the public or for any other public purpose. In this regard, City shall bear no responsibility or liability for damage or disruption of existing or proposed improvements installed by Grantee, its predecessors or its successors, but City will make reasonable efforts to minimize such damage. , 6. The initial term of this agreement shall be twenty-five(25)years, commencing • on the date this agreement is executed, , subject to termination as provided elsewhere herein. The rights, duties, obligations and liabilities herein set forth shall be appurtenant to, and shall "run with" the Grantee Tract. 7. Upon the termination of this agreement for any reason whatsoever, Grantee shall, at the option of City and at no expense to City, remove all of Grantee's improvements from the Encroachment Area. 8. It is further'understood and agreed between the parties hereto that the City streets and sidewalks, including the portions of such streets and sidewalks to be used and encroached upon as described herein, are held by City as trustee for the public; that City exercises such powers over the streets as have been delegated to it by the Constitution • of the State of Texas or by the Legislature; and that City cannot contract away its duty and C:ITEMPIENCRCHL2.WPD(11/13/98) ./ Page 3 5K--if r , . 0 . . its legislative power to control the streets for the use and benefit of the public. While there - is no conflict now, and barring any future conflict between uses of the Encroachment Area by the City and the Grantee, Grantee's continued use of such area will not be terminated . unreasonably, it is nevertheless agreed that if the City Council should at any time during the term hereof determine in its sole discretion to construct public streets within the public right-of-way or to use or cause or permit the said portions of the streets and sidewalks to be used for any other public-purpose, including but not being limited to underground, surface or overhead communication, drainage, water lines, sanitary sewerage, transmission of natural gas or electricity, or any other public purpose whether presently contemplated or not, which is not compatible with Grantee's continued use, then to the extent of the conflict, this agreement shall be cancelled and terminated upon a majority IIIvote of the city council. 9. In the event this agreement is cancelled and terminated as provided in Paragraph 8, City will give Grantee 90 days written notice of City's intent to utilize the Encroachment Area. Grantee shall remove any improvements as required by this agreement within such time period: No construction by City which interferes with Grantee's use of the Encroachment Area shall occur until such time period has expired unless approved in writing by Grantee. It is further understood and agreed that upon the termination of this agreement, Grantee will lose the right to utilize the sign that Grantee is currently utilizing in the area that will now become public right-of-way. At that time Grantee will be allowed to replace the sign with another sign(s) on the Grantee Tract if and as allowed by applicable regulations in effect when the sign is replaced. • C:\TEMP\ENCRCHL2.WPD(11/13/98) Page 4 5K- 5 v . 0 10. Grantee_understands and agrees that the granting of any encroachment hereunder is not meant to convey to Grantee any right to use or occupy property in which a third party may have an interest, and Grantee agrees that it will obtain all necessary • permission before occupying such property. 11. Grantee agrees to comply fully with all applicable federal, state and local . laws, statutes, ordinances, codes or regulations in connection with the construction, operation and maintenance of said encroachments and uses. 12. Grantee agrees to pay promptly when due all fees, taxes or rentals provided for by this agreement or by any federal, state or local statute, law or regulation. 13. Grantee covenants and agrees that it shall operate hereunder as an independent contractor as to all rights and privileges granted hereunder and not as an III. ., officer, employee a ent, servant orof City;that Grantee shall have exclusive control of and gY� the exclusive right to control the details of its operations, and all persons performing same, and shall be solely responsible for the acts and omissions of its officers, agents, servants, employees, contractors, subcontractors, licensees and invitees; that the doctrine of respondeat superior shall not apply as between City and Grantee, its officers, agents, servants, employees, contractors and subcontractors, and nothing herein shall be construed as creating a partnership or joint enterprise between City and Grantee. 14. GRANTEE COVENANTS AND AGREES TO INDEMNIFY, AND DOES HEREBY INDEMNIFY, HOLD HARMLESS AND DEFEND CITY, ITS OFFICERS, AGENTS, SERVANTS AND EMPLOYEES, FROM AND AGAINST ANY AND ALL 0 CLAIMS OR SUITS FOR PROPERTY DAMAGE OR LOSS AND/OR PERSONAL C:\TEMP\ENCRCHL2.WPD(11/13/98) Page 5 • INJURY, INCLUDING DEATH, TO ANY AND ALL PERSONS, OF WHATSOEVER KIND OF CHARACTER, WHETHER REAL OR ASSERTED, (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, REASONABLE FEES AND EXPENSES OF ATTORNEYS, EXPERT WITNESSES AND OTHER CONSULTANTS), ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, . THE CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, OCCUPANCY, USE, EXISTENCE OR LOCATION OF SAID ENCROACHMENT AND USES GRANTED HEREUNDER, WHETHER OR NOT CAUSED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY ALLEGED NEGLIGENCE OF OFFICERS, AGENTS, SERVANTS, EMPLOYEES, CONTRACTORS, SUBCONTRACTORS, LICENSEES OR INVITEES OF CITY; AND GRANTEE HEREBY ASSUMES ALL LIABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY FOR SUCH CLAIMS OR SUITS. GRANTEE SHALL LIKEWISE ASSUME ALL LIABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY AND SHALL INDEMNIFY CITY FOR ANY AND ALL . INJURY OR DAMAGE TO CITY PROPERTY, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH ANY AND ALL ACTS OR OMISSIONS OF GRANTEE, ITS OFFICERS, AGENTS, SERVANTS, EMPLOYEES, CONTRACTORS, SUBCONTRACTORS, LICENSEES, INVITEES, OR TRESPASSERS. 15. Grantee agrees, binds and obligates itself to maintain public liability insurance covering all public risks related to the proposed use and occupancy of public property as located and described in the portion of the Encroachment Area being used by Grantee for the sign. The amounts of such insurance shall be not less than the following: Property damage, per occurrence $100,000 Personal injury or death, per occurrence $1,000,000 C:\TEMP\ENCRCHL2.WPD(11/13/98) Page 6 r . . . 0 with the understanding of and agreement by Grantee that such insurance amounts shall be revised upward at City's option (but not in excess of the limits then being required by the City of other independent contractors doing business with the City) and that Grantee covenants and agrees to so revise such amounts within thirty (30) days following notice to Grantee of such requirement. Such insurance policy shall provide that it cannot be canceled or amended without at least thirty (30) days prior written notice to City. The liability insurance policy shall-name City as an additional insured. • Grantee shall provide to City a copy of an endorsement to Grantee's liability policy wherein either City is named therein as an additional insured or blanket coverage is provided for all persons or organizations required to be "additional insureds" by written contract. 1111 16. Grantee agrees to deposit with Citywhen this agreement is executeda 9 P g sufficient sum of money to be used to pay necessary fees to record this Consent Agreement in its entirety in the deed records. After being so recorded, the original hereof shall be returned to the City Secretary. 17. Grantee covenants and agrees to maintain the encroachments described in Exhibit "B" attached hereto in a neat, safe and good condition at all times. 18. In addition to the other grounds for termination provided for in this agreement, this agreement may be terminated by the City should Grantee breach any terms or conditions set forth in this agreement and not cure same within 30 days after written notice thereof. Ill19. It is specifically understood and acknowledged that Grantee's building, C:\TEMP\ENCRCHL2.WPD(11/13/98) Page 7 • canopy and gasoline facilities on the Grantee Tract will become nonconforming structures to the extent that they are not in compliance with current or future setback requirements of City's Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and such structure will be allowed to remain within any such setbacks to the extent permitted by Section 6 of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance,as amended from time to time. 20. It is further understood and acknowledged that upon acquisition of the Reservation Area by the City or the State of Texas, Grantee's canopy and gasoline facilities may have to be removed or relocated onto the Grantee tract and that there may be insufficient area available on the Grantee tract to meet current or future setback requirements. Nothing in this agreement shall be construed to prevent Grantee or its successors and assigns from seeking a variance or other appropriate administrative relief IIIIthat may be available in the future to obtain permission to replace or relocate Grantee's canopy and gasoline facilities on the Grantee Tract, subject to the same review and approval criteria as is applicable to other applications for variances or administrative relief. 21. Grantee agrees that should any action, at law or in equity, arise out of the terms of this agreement or on account of Grantee's maintaining or using the encroachment described herein, venue for said action shall be in Tarrant County, Texas. In any action brought by City for the enforcement of the obligations of Grantee, City shall be entitled to recover interest and reasonable attorneys fees. . EXECUTED this day of , 1998. 0 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, GRANTOR SHUNAIL CORP., GRANTEE C:\TEMP\ENCRCHL2.WPD(11/13/98) Page 8 pr • . By: By: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager Title: Return to: Mrs. Sandy LeGrand City Secretary City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Ave. Southlake, Texas 76092 Phone (817) 481-5581 • • . C:\TEMP\ENCRCHL2.WPD(11/13/98) Page 9 SK - lO pr • STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF TARRANT § This agreement was acknowledged before me on this day of , 1998 by Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager of the City of Southlake, Texas, who informed me that he is the duly authorized City Manager for the City of Southlake, that he was authorized to execute the above agreement on behalf of said city. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE this the day of -, 1998. Notary Public'in and for the State of Texas 4110 C:\TEMP\ENCRCHL2.WPD(11/13/98) Page 10 • STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF TARRANT § This agreement was acknowledged before ,me on this day of - 1998 by ,who informed me that he is the duly authorized of Shunail Corp. (a Texas corporation), and that he was authorized to execute the above agreement on behalf of said corporation. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE this the day of , 1998. • Notary Public in and for the State of Texas County of • - • • 1111 C:\TEMP\ENCRCHL2.WPD(11/13/98) • Page 11 Sk--f - . ,:..... :....„...,...„:„...i.......,....,....,..,.„.„:„... prr-____ i„ . ...._..___.________________ 1 v^. • a S , a ZI I I•• N.E9'31'13'E.475.93' El v { 1 ear 1 , I • m{� 1i• - • Is in{ 1 1 I a 11 11 { /--,' . o r • kn w _1R . I I. 1 . I//, P, d r3 4 JIB :..m,. i• J 1 tic. / \ C /// 1 { u.p�— QI { Q.) 1N 1 // • d y I ,, 1 1 I , <' P pY i /J --i i I \ �•o- ; j 1 I. n I // I.:'a,5. / i 16 c s J\eOl // 1 11 1 .f / , c /I /b ' r s.1cvsr ••:r Q' \ " / G I I' / \ /.. � `�� bb ` 5 i I r \ \ / /� / ° 1i 1 1 �a\\\ /' '� y'�ob / • r' p / J ; { 1 •\ :•L ,• \\ /,' yes°_ R° / 1 1 �n ♦4 \ 1 I \ •i 5 �JP' I roc tF41, 1 •I \�/'n` °.,� • - 1 / / ," • . I .. h / / / 1 t • , r 1 / / > / / / W J / ✓r yQ,�1'4 4� y { yr u...p \ \ I. ...... \ T.saW.w^•^.1.nr M err...rw,a w.,..w rands a e,wr es,pry riMM.w v.•rl.e.e w w.•,vwa1 d r.c.•.owl raw. •1ee Clef..1.1..el Srthealse reserve,'lb•l,he errs.Tr re.~require Pre-.err.ne!n / \ - _ -__ _ Nlr.n.Mn rarer el re lr.•S.M I.fie.and ore be bre.,le entry• e-`s. hr..15 e le leer.•.... ..l re be e.elnt mi Iv n•M..Mir Il.r vb.' E X H I B I T A t.Teean'rirl•Seer,Se.r Germs.4 MI.q.a1W le ew p.We eat.Ws • • . , \ PLAT REVISION LOTS 4R1. 4R2 AND 4R3 J.G . ALLEN NO . 1,8- ADDITION . PV . ' . , / 41.0.--•-•-Ir. , 4 l'. t- — — —. — ...-.1 , •-. ..-.---1 0 . i I m i 1 �olW I o Wiz ! Icn co I:Li li �' .. ►OMFII rat oW W \ IL7 rcn - - - — �, a / o . I a CCI� / I 5.86' O1'W. a3.53'3 •o / / ' c J n GAS r[ctrvjA/ /"`' •`X. NAIL SET' '0 'I ,& / \ S!' ws v:tvt• .1 $ I ---I ,Z ,ti . . z •c*1Q- /�• • ',' ''; •h' • •• 7 k. • /4.° 4. it. I. • .Cf./: . /.,6 a1• •9 a..rYDNIIOINNG W.C.U. • I p� y• / oAGC ur. • N r i S f� •I , • •4:.. - o Row oEDIGAT�arJ /\ g r N y . aOWER - - •O VAC",• �/ •12- ' ••t • •G ♦ \ it ' WNNO1-• • • / t1 ,/ 1 1 + j • • �� WNNOLE'I �iXI6J.rI Ki6 • / ••• ! 1 ; I ' (,' i f I • OAS ISLAND I S!/_M --' -' •// 1 1•r • 1' ilr 1'! ( • • • • • •I•'•• ••� L7._-. / • . . • idol ! 6 t ' • !• •• ; , I • aft 1 I / I II ! r f / • , • •:• , . —i --/.` 7 5/a- I.R. FND. •�9 1 !• '�• / 0J` / •./•. s //��/ / o` • • \ \\> • / •• 1 , • �// / Lwa OSED Se ,,‘,1/ ..... .... ,;,„5...:: ......• .;.. .. .. .. ., _ , .. . . •„ ...,,,,,:,,..... .... . •.• ...:.. .,.....:. • .,. ....... „3...(.. ....!,....i...,... . ..:.•.. 1........,....... • .. .•:........:•R,..qc.• ...................:.".. ...;x.4.....•:•... . \ .9. \ -. 'e• .i '. '+• /i:..'/ � PLO • /' �� .` ' �� OJ• ` / TtUP IONt rat / . / / '%NI' /./ / s/1.R. SET ' - // EXHIBIT B • 0 . " M1y c#!} 5•yT ..,. .:'Cy�:'•ra•;. •e...t - e •- - •'ate �i^ �.f!•,....= 3 • .. .:�.,< :S.' • ;T''-' .. . . ' s,. • City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM November 13, 1998 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Shana K. Yelverton, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 725, Smoking Regulations, 2nd reading, Repealing Ordinance No. 537 The attached ordinance has been modified slightly from the ordinance presented on first reading, although most of the changes are not substantive. Most are formatting and language clarifications based on city attorney input. I have summarized the changes from first reading below: ► The definition section has been expanded to cover words and terms used in the new provisions of the ordinance. ► Section 4.1(a)(1) has been expanded from first reading to provide for exception when Alt the restaurant can demonstrate that they can achieve the same results gained by physical barriers using an alternative system. Note that any alternative system would have to be designed by an engineer and approved by the Building Official. This section was added after consultation with representatives from Kirby's Steakhouse. With the passage of this ordinance, contiguous space, in any amount, will not be sufficient as a means of separating smoking and nonsmoking areas. • Language was added in Section 4.1(a)(2) to require proper maintenance of the ventilation system to ensure its continued effectiveness (note that the fees for additional testing as referenced in this section have been included in your fee schedule). ► The previous section 4.6 has been moved to Section 5.1. Section 5.3 is simply a restatement of what is now section 4.4, specifically applied to entertainment establishments. Section 5.2 is new, requiring live entertainment, games, etc. to be provided in nonsmoking areas. This was added because we assumed your intent was to provide an environment in these establishments comparable to that provided in restaurants; that is, the same degree of enjoyment by nonsmoking and smoking patrons. If this is not your intent, it can easily be deleted. • Section 7 has been added since first reading, to delineate with some specificity our position on applicability. The provisions of this section will allow existing restaurants to continue as legal non-conforming uses, but they cannot expand their nonconformity. 0 If a nonconforming use expands its seating capacity, it must then comply with the „ , 1110 Curtis E. Hawk November 13, 1998 Page 2 provisions of the new ordinance. As a reminder, these revisions emanated from input provided by Councilmember Edmondson, Building Official Paul Ward, Plans Examiner Chuck Bloomberg, Building Inspector Larry Kelly and myself. The following is an excerpt from my previous memo describing our approach: • The goals of revising the ordinance are two fold. First, the ordinance should provide for clean indoor air, protecting non-smokers from the effects of second hand smoke and providing for a comfortable environment in facilities frequented by the public. Second, recognizing that Southlake residents favor the development of restaurants in the city, the ordinance should not contain regulations which are so onerous as to discourage restaurants or other facilities from locating in Southlake. Councilmember Edmondson and the staff agreed that no retrofitting should be required for existing restaurants. ► The definition of public places should be expanded to include assisted living facilities, at least the congregate living areas (recognizing that independent living units are a private residence). The purpose of this effort is to protect seniors living in facilities from the effects of second hand smoke in the public areas of those facilities. ► There was discussion about incorporating a provision into the ordinance which would prohibit smoking within 15' of an entrance to the building. Some ordinances require this to eliminate the "curtain" of smoke which forms at the entrances to public buildings when smokers congregate on the front porch during breaks. However, state law provides that it is a "defense to prosecution" if there are no receptacles available in these areas to extinguish smoking materials. As such, it is probably not a provision worth changing at this time. This can always be regulated by the property owner. • Using the Plano and Arlington ordinances as guides, the group discussed the need to require ventilation systems in restaurants which provide the maximum mitigation of drifting smoke from a smoking area to a non-smoking area. Building Official Paul Ward and his staff reviewed systems and discussed this issue with their counterparts in those cities to determine the most practical means of addressing this issue. • With regard to restaurants, Councilmember Edmondson expressed her preference that we revise Section 4.2 of the ordinance, which allows restaurants with seating for fewer than 50 patrons to choose to post signs stating "This establishment does not provide an indoor or outdoor nonsmoking area. " The recommendation to Council would be to offer the option of designating the whole restaurant as a nonsmoking facility or comply with the proposed regulations. • //4 6 • Curtis E. Hawk November 13, 1998 Page 3 • The treatment of bars, adult entertainment facilities, billiard halls, etc. also warrants discussion. As the ordinance is currently written, these facilities would be required to meet the same requirements as restaurants. • We also discussed the development of an ordinance regulating the possession or purchase of tobacco products by a minor. Staff is currently researching this issue, but plans to bring forward a recommendation to Council soon as a separate issue. • Finally, the group discussed the use of tobacco products in city facilities, on city property and in city vehicles. The discussion resulted in a determination that the ordinance should not be modified-- it currently contains a provision prohibiting smoking in city facilities. The group believed that prohibiting smoking on city property was not appropriate. The discussion of how to handle city vehicles resulted in the determination that an internal personnel policy should be generated to address this concern. 1111 The attached Ordinance No. 725 is in a redline/strikeout format for ease of noting the proposed changes to the existing ordinance. Please place consideration of Ordinance No. 725 on the agenda for the November 17 City Council meeting for second reading. I will be happy to answer any questions you may have. 46/ 110\ / 43 • ORDINANCE NO. 725 AN ORDINANCE TA PROMOTINGE THE PUBLIC HEALTH BY ESTABLISHING PUBLIC SMOKING REGULATIONS; PROVIDING FOR DEFINITIONS; PROHIBITING SMOKING IN CERTAIN DESIGNATED AREAS AND PUBLIC PLACES; REGULATING SMOKING IN FOOD PRODUCTS ESTABLISHMENTS, ENTERTAINMENT ESTABLISHMENTS AND; REGULATING SMOKING IN THE WORKPLACES; PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 537;PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS HEREOF; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN PAMPHLET FORM; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the. City of Southlake, Texas 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 laWHEREAS, there is a substantial body of evidence which concludes that the smoking of tobacco may be a danger to health and a health hazard to those who are present in confined spaces; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, to provide for the regulation and prohibition of the-smoking or burning of tobacco products within certain facilities, both private and public, within the City of Southlake, ' NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: SECTION 1 , Definitions The words, terms and phrases used in this ordinance shall have their commonly understood meanings except to the extent that they are specifically defined otherwise in this ordinance. The following words and terms, when used in this ordinance, unless otherwise defined within, shall be understood to mean: 7/ / • 1.2 "Billiard Hall" - means a place of amusement whose chief purpose is providing the use of billiard/pool tables to the public for a fee. 1.3 - "Bingo Parlor" - means a facility regulated under V.A.T.C.S., Article 179d - "Bingo Enabling Act." 1.4 "Care Facility" - means an institutional use of a building or property whereby a publicly or privately funded program enables persons to receive medical, psychological, emotional or other rehabilitative care as an outpatient or live-in member. This definition does not . include those institutional uses provided for elsewhere in this ordinance, nor does it include foster care programs or family homes. 1.5. "Employee" - means any person who is employed by any employer for direct or indirect monetary wages or profit. 1.62 "Employer" - means any person who employs the services of an individual person. 1.7h "Enclosed" - means closed in by a roof and walls with appropriate openings for ingress and egress, but does not include areas commonly described as public lobbies. 1.8 "Entertainment Establishments" means an operation 0 1..84 "Food Products Establishments" - means an operation that sells food for human consumption and includes restaurants of any kind, but does not include grocery stores. 1.94 "Health Care Facilities" - any office or institution providing individual care or treatment of diseases, whether physical, mental or emotional, or other medical, physiological and psychological conditions. 1.106 "Person" - shall include associations, firms, partnerships and corporations, as well as individuals or groups of individuals. 1.11 "Personal Care Facility" - an establishment that furnishes, in one or more facilities, food and shelter to four or more persons who are unrelated to the proprietor of the establishment; and provides personal care services; and in addition, provides minor treatment under the direction and supervision of the resident's attending physician licensed by the Texas Board of Medical Examiners, or services which meet some need beyond basic provision of food, shelter and laundry. 1.124-.4 "Public place" - means any enclosed area to which the public is invited or in which the public is permitted, and includes, but is not limited to: stores, offices, theaters, and other commercial establishments, restaurants, public and private institutions of learning, healthcare facilities, , and all public governmental facilities, but does not include the offices or work areas of workplaces not entered by the ON, public in the normal course of business. A private residence is not a public place. I Ordinance No. 537 A 725 Page 2 of 12� 7/2-5 • 1.13 "Sexually Oriented Business" - means an adult arcade, adult bookstore, adult video store, adult cabaret, adult motel, adult motion picture theater, adult theater, escort agency, nude modeling studio or sexual encounter center, as these terms are defined in Section 5-166 of the City code. 1.144-S "Smoking" - means the possession of, or emitting or exhaling the smoke of, burning tobacco, weed, or other plant product. 1.154.9 "Workplace" - means any enclosed area under the control of a public or private employer which employees normally frequent during the course of employment. A private residence is not a place of employment. SECTION 2. General Provisions 2.1 The owner, operator, manager, employer, or other person having control of any area where smoking is prohibited shall post notice, as provided herein, in sufficient numbers and at such conspicuous locations, including entrances thereto, so as to be readily observable by a reasonably observant person and shall provide,receptacles for the extinguishment of smoking materials within twenty feet (20') of the entrance to such area where smoking is to be prohibited as provided by this ordinance. 2.2 A sign prohibiting smoking shall be sufficient if it contains the words "no smoking, City of Southlake ordinance," the universal symbol for no smoking, or other language that clearly prohibits smoking. Notice shall be deemed sufficient if each entrance to a building is posted with a sign containing the words "smoking permitted in designated areas only." 2.3 Nothing in this sectionordinance shall require the owner, operator, manager, employer, or other persons having in control of any building, facility, room, establishment or structure to incur any expense to make structural or other physical modifications to comply with the terms and conditions of this sectioner-clinance. The posting of signs or the equipping of any area with facilities for the extinguishment of smoking materials shall not be construed to require be infeasible structural changes. 2.4 Nothing in this ordinance shall be construed to permit smoking where, it is otherwise prohibited by law or regulation. 2.5 Nothing in this ordinance shall be construed to preclude any owner or other person having authority to manage and control any public place or place of employment workplace from prohibiting smoking to a greater extent than is provided by this ordinance. Alk Ordinance No. 537 A725 Page 3 of 121 SECTION 3 1 Smoking Prohibited in Certain Designated Areas 3.1 An owner, operator, manager, employer, or other person having control of any building or area within a building may designate all or any part of such building or area thereof a "no smoking" area wherein smoking shall be prohibited upon compliance with the provisions of this ordinance and the posting of notice as herein required. 3.2 A person commits an offense if he or she smokes or possesses a burning tobacco, weed, or other plant product in any of the following areas: (a) an elevator used by the public; (b) any enclosed or indoor public place of any facility owned, operated or managed by the City, including but not limited to any public meeting room, conference room, restroom or public service area; (c) any enclosed or indoor retail, or service establishment serving the general public including, but not limited to, any grocery store, drug store, depai Intent store, and the public places within financial institutions; (d) every publicly or privately owned theater, auditorium, or other enclosed facility which is open to the public for the primary purpose of exhibiting any motion 0 picture, performing arts, museum displays, athletic event, or any other performance or event; (e) all areas which have been properly designated by the owner, operator, manager, employer, or other person having control of any building or area as "nonsmoking" areas in accordance with Section 3.1 of this Ordinance; (f) any enclosed or indoor facility of a public primary or secondary school; (g) public spectator seating areas of arenas, stadiums and outdoor events where chairs, benches or similar seating is provided, unless specifically designated as a smoking section; (h) health care facilities; provided that the owner or other person with authority to manage and control such facility may designate separate rooms, including in- patient sleeping quarters; or areas, as places where smoking is permitted, using existing physical barriers and ventilation systems to the greatest extent possible to minimize the smoke in adjacent nonsmoking areas. In no event shall smoking be 41Ikif Ordinance No. 537 A725 Page 4 of 121 7/42— • permitted in any health care facility corridor providing direct access to in-patient sleeping quarters; • (i) any enclosed or indoor common area of personal care facilities, or care facilities, including but not limited to, common social or recreational areas, common kitchen or dining facilities or lobby areas; (Zi) designated nonsmoking areas of food products and entertainment establishments as set forth in Sections 4 and 5 of this Ordinance; (1}) designated nonsmoking areas of workplaces as set forth in Section 5 of this Ordinance; 3.3 Notwithstanding anything in section 3.2 to the contrary, tThe owner or person in control of an establishment or area described in section 3.2(c), 3.2(d), 3.2(f),-a 4 3.2(g), and 3.2 Q may designate an area within the establishment as a smoking area provided that: (a) the area may not include the entire establishment; (b) the area may not include cashier areas or over the counter sales areas; IP (c) the area may not include the viewing area of any theater or movie theater; (d) the area may not include the entire lobby; (e) the area in which smoking is permitted utilizes existi g „hysica ba an� ventilation systems to the greatest extent possible to minimize the smoke in designed by a professional engineer as provided in section 4.1 of this ordinance-; and (f) the area is posted with appropriate signs designating the area as a smoking area. 3.4 It is a defense to prosecution under this section if the person was smoking in an area that was: (a) a designated smoking area of a facility or establishment described in section 3.2(c), 3.2(d), 3.2(f), 3.2(g),-and 3.2(h), and 3.2(i) of this section which is posted as a smoking area with appropriate signs;- (b) an administrative area or private office of an establishment described in section 3.2(c), 3.2(d), 3.2(f), e4 3.2(h), or 3.2(i)unless such administrative area or private office is posted as a nonsmoking area in accordance with Section 3.1;- 410 Ordinance No. 537 A725 Page 5 of 121 1 — (c) a retail or service establishment which is primarily engaged in the sale of tobacco products or smoking implements; or (d) not posted as a nonsmoking area as required by sections 2.1 and 2.2 of this ordinance. SECTION 4 Food Products Establishments 4.1 A food products establishment which has indoor or enclosed dining areas with seating arrangement for fifty (50) or more patron& shall provide separate indoor or enclosed dining areas for nonsmoking patrons. A food products establishment which has outdoor dining areas with seating arrangements for fifty (50) or more patron& shall provide separate outdoor dining areas for nonsmoking patrons. ^ nonsmoking area must: (a) In any food products establishment that provides designated smoking areas, each smoking area must: (la) be separated, where feasible, from smoking areas by a minimum of four. feet (1') of contiguous floor space; be separated from nonsmoking areas 111 by physical means, such as partitions, glazing and doors and be equipped with a separate heating and cooling system from those serving nonsmoking areas. Exceptions may be granted for alternate separation based on an engineering design when approved by the Building Official. Such exception may be granted when equivalent results can be demonstrated. (214) utilize existing physical barriers and ventilation systems to the greatest extent possJible to minimize the smoke in adjacent nonsmoking areas, and be situated where feasible so that air from the smoking area is not drawn Utilize a ventilation system which shall be designed by a professional engineer to provide an air change every fifteen (15) minutes and shall exhaust the air to the exterior of the building or adequately filter air before recirculating into occupied spaces and shall not cause air from a smoking area to be drawn across the nonsmoking area. The ventilation system shall be properly maintained to assure that it is operated at all times in compliance with this section. The system shall be tested by the City to verify that the system removes visual smoke at a rate of four (4) times per hour and that air from j Ordinance No. 537 A725 Page 6 of 121 7,47 / • • designated smoking areas is not drawn across nonsmoking areas. Smoking shall not be allowed in any area until the area is successfully tested and approved by the Building Official. The owner shall be required to pass additional tests in the future, as determined by the Building Official, if the adequacy of the system appears to fail to meet the requirements of this ordinance. A fee will be assessed for tests that fail to meet their standards. The fee amount will be established by City Council Resolution. (b) In any food products establishment that provides designated smoking areas, each nonsmoking area must: (1s) be clearly designated by appropriate signs visible to patrons within the dining area indicating that the area is designated nonsmoking; and (24) have ash trays or other suitable containers for extinguishing smoking materials at the perimeter of the nonsmoking area. 42 owner or person in control of such a food products establishment does not designate a nonsmoking area, signs stating "This establishment does not provide a[n indoor or Such signs shall be clearly legible and shall be posted conspicuously so as to be readily observable by a reasonably observant person. The Building Official may accept an alternate system not complying with the exhaust requirements of this Subsection for existing smoking areas prior to the effective date of this ordinance. 4.23. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent an owner or person in charge of a food products establishment from designating the entire establishment as nonsmoking. 4.34 Each food products establishment which has indoor or enclosed dining,areas wi*ham arrangement for fifty (50) or more patron& or outdoor dining areas with. seating arrangements for fifty (50) or more patron& shall: (a) have and implement a written policy which conforms to this ordinance and is kept on file on the premises; and (b) make the policy available for inspection by employees and municipal enforcement personnel; Ordinance No. 537 A725 Page 7 of 121 7,9 i1 . 1 4.44 Non-dining areas of any food products establishment affected by this section to which patrons have general access, including, but not limited to, food order areas, food service areas, restrooms and cashier areas shall be designated as nonsmoking areas. 4--6 owner, manager or operator of a food products establishment, bar, night club, adult entertainment establishment, billiard hall, bingo parlor or bowling center commits an offense if he or she designates or maintains a smoking area in violation of this section. sales in alcoholic beverages; or, by this Ordinance. 4.5; It shall be unlawful for any person to operate a food products establishment without complying with this Ordinance Section.- SECTION 5 Entertainment Establishments ' 0 5.1 Any entertainment establishment, including but not limited to a bar, nightclub, sexually oriented business, billiard hall, bingo parlor, or bowling center, shall provide separate entertainment areas for nonsmoking patrons. Any service or amenity, such as live entertainment, games, pool tables, etc., which the entertainment establishment chooses to provide must be available in the nonsmoking area. 5.2 Smoking and nonsmoking areas shall meet all requirements of Sections 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3. 5.3 Areas of any entertainment establishment to which all patrons have general access, including but not limited to restrooms and cashier areas, shall be designated as nonsmoking areas. 5.4 It shall be unlawful for any person to operate any entertainment establishment without complying with this Section. SECTION 65 Smoking in the Workplace III I Ordinance No. 537 A725 Page 8 of 12-1 7A7-// 5.1 Within three (3) months from the effective date of this ordinance, every employer within • the City of Southlake who owns, occupies or controls a workplace shall adopt, implement and enforce a written policy on smoking that: (a) conforms to this oOrdinance and section; I (b) reasonably accommodates the interests of both smokers and nonsmokers but minimizes the involuntary exposure of nonsmokers to second-hand smoke; (c) designates nonsmoking areas so as to use existing structural barriers and ventilation to minimize involuntary exposure of nonsmokers to second-hand smoke; and (d) establishes a procedure for addressing employee disputes and objections arising under the no smoking policy; (e) contains a statement that the employer shall not discharge, retaliate, or discriminate against any employee who: (1) files any complaint or causes any proceeding to be instituted under or related to this ordinance; IP (2) testifies or will testify in any proceeding instituted under this ordinance; or, exercises on his own behalf or the behalf of others any right afforded by this ordinance. 5.2 Employers shall provide conspicuous signage indicating nonsmoking areas; 5.3 Nothing in this section shall prohibit an employer from designating an entire workplace I as nonsmoking. 5.4 Employers shall supply a written copy of the smoking policy to all current employees within three (3) weeks of the date of the adoption of the policy, and to all future employees . at the time of their entry into employment. 5.5 It shall be unlawful for an employer to operate a workplace without complying with the requirements of this oOrdinance. SECTION 7 Compliance; Non Conforming Uses 7.1 Except as otherwise provided in this Section, the requirements of this ordinance shall not apply to any facility, business or agency lawfully operating on the effective date of this Ordinance No. 53-7 A725 Page 9 of 121 I • ordinance or constructed under a valid building permit issued prior to the effective date of this ordinance. • 7.2 No facility, business or agency which is non conforming as to the requirements of this ordinance shall increase or expand such non conformity. 7.3 Any nonconforming facility, business or agency shall comply with the requirements of this ordinance when structural changes are made which expand the seating capacity of the facility, business or agency. SECTION 86 Enforcement Any person who violates this ordinance shall be guilty of a Health and Sanitation misdemeanor violation and subject to a fined- of amount not more than Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00), Each day that a violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense. SECTION 9S 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 0 'provisions of such ordinances, in which event the conflicting provisions of such ordinances are I hereby repealed. Ordinance No. 537 is hereby repealed. SECTION 109 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 111-9 All rights and remedies of the City of Southlake are expressly saved as to any and all violations of the provisions of Ordinance No. 537 or any other ordinances affecting smoking regulations which have accrued at the time of the effective date of this ordinance; and, as to such accrued violations and all pending litigation, both civil and criminal, whether pending in court or not, under such ordinances, same shall not be affected by this ordinance but may be prosecuted until final disposition by the courts. Ordinance No. 537 A725 Page 10 of 121- 7 /v . • SECTION 1244. The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby directed to publish the proposed ordinance or its caption and penalty together with a notice setting out the time and place for a public hearing thereon at least ten (10) days before the second reading of this ordinance, and if this ordinance provides for the imposition of any penalty, fine or forfeiture for any violation of any of its provisions, then the City Secretary shall additionally publish this ordinance in the official City newspaper one time within ten days after passage of this ordinance, as required by Section 3.13 of the Charter of the City of Southlake. The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby authorized to publish this ordinance in book or pamphlet form for general distribution among the public, and the operative provisions of this ordinance as so published shall be admissible in evidence in all courts without further proof than the production thereof. SECTION 131.2 This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from January 1, 1993, and after its passage and publication as required by law, and it is so ordained. PASSED AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING ON THIS DAY OF , 1998. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY PASSED AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING ON THIS DAY OF , 1998. MAYOR ATTEST: Ordinance No. 537 .'1725 Page 11 of 121 • CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney Date: ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE: M:\WD-FILES\ORDINANC\587-A-Smoking Ord.doc\kb • Ordinance No. 537 A725 Page 12 of 12 1 7,4?,/5 City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM November 13, 1998 To: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager I ` From: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works Subject: Ord. No. 726, 2"d reading, changing the street name of Wyndsor Ridge, located in Timarron, Wyndsor Grove, Phase II, to Rustic Ridge Court Background Staff has initiated this request for a street name change due to a similar street name in another sub-division. The street name change will avert any confusion for Department of Public Safety staff. Recommendation Staff recommends Council approve Ordinance No. 726, 2"d reading, changing the street name of Wyndsor Ridge, located in Timarron, Wyndsor Grove, Phase II, to Rustic Ridge Court. Please place this item on the November 17, 1998 Regular City Council Agenda for City Council review and consideration. B✓✓W/ts Attachment: Ordinance No. 726 M.ud-61es`ord 7:6 memo.doc 41. 7B-1 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE ORDINANCE NO. 726 AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE NAME OF STREET LOCATED IN TIMARRON, WYNDSOR GROVE, PHASE II ADDITION WITHIN THE CITY,PRESENTLY KNOWN AS "WYNDSOR RIDGE" TO "RUSTIC RIDGE COURT"; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF INCONSISTENT ORDINANCES. WHEREAS, a change in the name of the street located within the City of Southlake, Texas (the "City"),presently known as "Wyndsor Ridge", located in Timarron Wyndsor Grove, Phase II Addition, to "Rustic Ridge Court"has been requested by the City; and WHEREAS, it is the intention of the City Council to hereby officially change the name of such street as requested. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE: 1111 Section 1. That all of the above premises are found to be true and correct and are incorporated into the body of this Ordinance as if copied in their entirety. Section 2. That the name of the portion of the street located within the City presently known as "Wyndsor Ridge", located in Timarron Wyndsor Grove, Phase II Addition, is hereby officially changed to "Rustic Ridge Court". Section 3. If any section, article,paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or word in this ordinance, or application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid or unconstitutional by a Court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the City Council hereby declares it would have passed such remaining portions of the ordinance despite such invalidity, which remaining portions shall remain in full force and effect. Section 4. All ordinances or parts of ordinances inconsistent or in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby expressly repealed to the extent of the inconsistency or conflict. S 7B-2 • • PASSED AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING ON THIS DAY OF , 1998. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY PASSED AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING ON THIS DAY OF , 1998. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY EFFECTIVE: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: CITY ATTORNEY • • 7B-3 City of Southlake, Texas STAFF REPORT November 13, 1998 CASE NO: ZA 98-120 PROJECT: Site Plan /The Remington STAFF CONTACT: Dennis Killough, Senior Current Planner, 481-5581, ext. 787 REQUESTED ACTION: Site Plan on property legally described as Tracts 4F, 4F1, 5A1B, 6A1,and a portion of Tract 6B situated in the Jesse G. Allen Survey, Abstract No. 18, and being approximately 22.558 acres. PURPOSE: Purpose of this request is to obtain approval to allow construction of the Remington Retirement Complex in accordance with Corridor Overlay Zone Requirements. LOCATION: On the south side of West Southlake Boulevard (F.M. 1709) across from Jellico Estates. OWNERS: Ernest and Joyce Owen APPLICANT: Lifestyles, Inc. CURRENT ZONING: "S-P-2" Generalized Site Plan District for senior adult living complex to include tri-plex and quadra-plex villas, personal care facility, nursing care facility, and senior multi-family units. LAND USE CATEGORY: Public/Semi-Public and Low Density Residential NO.NOTICES SENT: Fourteen(14) RESPONSES: One (1)response was received within the 200'notification area • E.I- Wiesman, 2607 W. Southlake Blvd, Southlake, TX, in favor. (Received November 3, 1998). P&Z ACTION: November 5, 1998; Approved (6-0-1) subject to Site Plan Review Summary No. 1, dated October 30, 1998, relocating the plantings elsewhere within Phase 1 (Item#3);requiring the applicant to work with the City to have a single trail/sidewalk along Owenwood Drive (Item #9); allowing the loading areas as shown (Item #14); and accepting the applicant's commitment to work with the Landscape Administrator to adequately screen the buildings on this site from • the Slayton's property. , City of Southiake, Texas II) STAFF COMMENTS: Attached is Site Plan Review Summary No. 2, dated November 13, 1998. L:\COMDEV\WP-FILES\MEMO\98CASES\98-120SP.WPD II . _ _ 1 I 1C2 9 "S 1 A" to 1 �� TR.2C27 TR.2C26 18A 17A l� • 1J9 AC 1.63 AC J.HALL W. J.HALL 1B • GOODELL 17D 1 127 0 TR.2C26A STATE O S • WA .37 O . "AG" NORTHEAST 9 90 = TARRANT "56 R.SLAYTON ; c TR.4G1 y 5 __ BAPTIST 1R 1.22 Ac ca 1H.4F1 "SF-1A"o � U A. 1.58 TRAM ,„q CHURCH E,WIESMAN 4.025 Ac ICI t TR. En"'4./ — i 5A3 .80 1.0 0 TR 5A1 Ac 7.030 AC TR SC Ill 9.549 \ 1\ , "CS" TR.5A2 " II/r 13.402 Ac �i K1 TR.4L1 1 Ac 1.26 Ac R.SLAYTON TR.4F TR.40 nsy AC 7.642 AC TR.50 .•- 3.10 Ac 4K TR.4L Ac .74 Ac TR 5A1B "SF-1 A" 8.180 0 6 ' PT. TR.4 III 2 Ac r I 4TR 4 TR 4G _ TR 4F IC 2.00 AC 7.642 AC "AG" 8.39 AC TR Fitt 2.48 AC R.REUTLINGER D. SAMMONS • ladmi "AG" a _ \ TR • "AG" ..-,.-- f TR 602 7.34 1. 6,1-,--) TR 68 5. 0 KELLER ISD J. URVG 5.002 0 TR 6A S ,.A $ "AG" "AG" 4.00 0 TR 6 • TR 6A1A 11.0 0 • 3.00 TR 4D J 19.70 AC P.BAILEY MORTAZAVI B.COUCH t "AG" .a J - N0 1 TR 6A2 2.00 0 t TR 7 S ,.87 AC TR 693 6B2A TR 681 0 AA Art__ — 2.01 0 I 22 r" _ _ . ADJACENT OWNERS SOUTHLAK ■�,� 13„ "1 " " KEl LEI AND ZONINNG1 L. �„ I 1 34 35 3 6 37 3 !a 6 ,' • CT FLINT TR 7R 2E m �4 I I " 1 r •1 III • III • . . 111 .. .__ _.• .• SUMMARY CIIART.DUFFERYARDS IMIXEMIEMIZZOMICEMINIIM1 • Dasmadufbler-Cierden DEVELOPMENT RECU1ATIONS I -z-•,-7---17...-ur,.... V0.373 Asset us 1011,217 3 V.heal sues! .0112. ai 1 li 7 r 1 ...- -.1 • I:madman-WAIN max • 1111.216:1.1'.11•••11a a awe ea.laal as VIAN'a sad neweaaw 119,773 XV.I. Don/awl Pali.. Nth A-n.4,...,4 ail oar,4.n.1.dal tInnlegatwat tesps1.101.as swl Add....d. hi 1,1,Atultiplo P....1,14..i.k.u4lhaliii amid.nawawkaw We l'Iweea al Cr. ,.. moraampe--7. 1 Y'...."." --- ,,,. a.,...s ws .-•. . . ' N lt sn Snaa 4.5.1 awrcit' N.... ur sr.••• • s a e........ batsman 114.0.W.laseawmal INIew)- 21,713 N Y.Caws Ma NiArealls ws.1 Mel. adia,.aN Waa WI a 4&wawa 1.1.31 a(deo Curlanlanseas Asia, ...w. lhaaa tr or. oll* '40.375 Acme LadSualLAILlueaCten llatiaaaca Nu NO aide Joa fullianaw&amass= •••••-•• :alga N.V.Tawsl armful arca I/Manisa Sae.walks ara;11/1,4411 ammo fe.owl 474.540.464 awl MN squaw -r-1• tt00)1y2.of Wnawaed Ian-Tao kai 1,01220,We Asaiaal leas.Al of du Alma aware faawae re lakm• I ve•-• 1.4 1,44 14 r•• a . w NM Arm 11sase I.Villa weal itswiaal lea..Cade,/Nunisa NUWel • gly,,,,a1.),S.m e2 NaIN IsaaIwal 1;14 000/N.Y.magmata it MILN.llama,dm aps.aw 11.1123 tuna!law N-Waimea.Wail:me seal VW. 71.1.irro aws,10...Atia•1Jai/Pallier, f•wwewes ana sans elm erataisnassa far pasaesJ awe 4110(“fairear),140 lema ) rw.ra 3941.102 3.1,.or Iola Rawl wal 3.50 laws NwInwslal squara fa. .....••••• TA. ••A•1 0, /.• • 0 • AA,/MT I/ 2.••••• ••• A••• I $1 • .1 4.0••• 4.97,NNS SaTatel slogans spas to.S.S.SaNl nays.. 2.4115.12&F.pa'mat ` )20021/ LA. 00 0 ...• a a 4 ••••00 NORTH 1 439.03. 1.1.10•LommayanT ansonenu. N 89'5 '213” L 0.. Of M•10. 11 21 • 11•2•0 0 • 0 13, 1-. ...A-a we se e. sa a a MS-- ':. - - -- -- -••... --I..---IfF-NV.;!MI)CO' I CCI.VV.-crwicr4wapcn,nitwit ....., sei..e.acm ."''''...-•- u.. ;_q., .......... •••••er --P-n.164.•."•••`---- wPfN11- '14 Wad I r ="....' <N.L....,,,,,,. .4,. I ,-.7-WI^ •• .'• •1 ...:.4.4.....-....._. •....,... P ....yr, I.. ....4 •••• 4 i• 6 4 2. Ya,•Al 42111.1 ' 1 I ..- --.•• ••,.. r „......,,,,,.#., j v,- .. . ..• --( -- .`".1..... Mt?"' ___ _____ ' '''''''"4pr. I . ... • , ...I 0 1-,.. .....1 n. E•ri a • m )174-1 ....... ,.., • • _ .• .., . A • 110•••1 •. • - 10- 1•001 .2 A e . ii I .1r7.7 I:WaLlir ----'- \ror41 1 'iff: loriti- 4:14P4'1,1,114 i 1 • ' I- ....., \ ..... ....... .5. i 1,e1 ii . „....... . ,., . i 1 he wai --"Ija - atilt i 1,1 maarar•a• 1....•aft. ...... . • ,-.. .....-, me r w • • a 'i VI__ • 1....aw or w...• a 1 a 1,.......- 'en' 4- ."1: ". ''''' ...." //4- 1--•.. ,1••• 1 gz,..,m25-revor . 1 rutionv...er.1.4 Irl.,.. 23 1'00. /0 fs•-• 'n . ..1,-"%i 0 -.-•••••.---w,p, %,\a I- • A . saw. laa..o as r.a s • • . , , .........! R 1 1 04.93. ‘,„„„„ • „..,.',. T 2CP.66',...., 2 iii,,, ---- - -,.... • ard__.,„,„„, ..___, _ \ ,, et mei, 77-. •‘t)- '41c: L 40%55'11.6. ..... IA or• • 0 • F.4,4.1 Li ,, .111p. ..t., 1.1.4..."5",-,. ,__ I 145;* --.(z......N-. A ; --- • •' ,• • •...'..f?.A *-- - ---- . - - -- "M"huor - ' - ' -lc . 20 -_: ; i 1 A . .. .. ..„,.., ,.• .iguterailii CB N 78'13'52" E .• LC 4•..73* %A• 1122001 ..“) I'A a I* 0 1 #.1.. e--: . D oourcrwao. . i MI % ..t.'"-..-7-----•.:'''....'."...• .,.-. ;"- ',',7- 1110..'' t ..... I 11.1,04 I• •i. .-A '1.-. .... ....- .. . . ..,......, ... .kljtz-CL:P:-Mrtall12.W ii/ i ti- \ I., ''''"" .g IIW S 00.01.06" E 1 84.10,.... 11,' 1: I 1 •41110, ; I • ,itral11111111111r•wmi. r in._ •---_,,-...,::;.,=--..7.,:;--:_..-_:_.ty .---:::.-T-_ .1.ttlts.. c' 1•ILI' 1 s'• ' f; i '. .''''•• .'N'l 1.,,11,44 ,- 1,.,/,' . , glia.r. -- le. i _ Cf1 ,•1...• lit.I.;'11'1 ItININel KNI's' 0,. !L. k ,L','LY.!I•tit:1:=`;'" -. 1. , - . #•‘, . .,...z.=_,... - 1:::: III a t p:s.1 a>11.:NC.!I.; .4,„ II y e.-••••••••• ,. ..,..., 10111.210 01 ID 1`• '. , r- :.... ;,„„ _____ . ____„..- IlL .Jr6'," 30.4Y - • . TAL IMAM WA r ti ,t_.•.-. 4r4416`... ..em:fil•CO01,7401.10 .-c-7,.. , '....".51111.1ti , . .'. .4,;.4, N 6E1•'15'.E 11•40T. •. ,,A. --. 10011 20 /• •••'••••••-•°Tee4.1 •/.. a. ......,, . „- .11,0.° 11.13 10260.1011100 UM''''.'•'".".""'"‘ re:RI , I , . 1121.•••.1•1120 ' i Darr, 03 1,21 , I 1, g J1 . ''''.• S 00'01.06. E amaal.ausuasen mane 889.81' ne.0.161101. 1, ta aleeir7“feeenarrua. .,,,,, N 00'04'35" W 507.72' _ 4„.., .. , 1117/1. e i ..'. I I : 1 03 11100 0 LIM/11,0110/1•10.10.0 Ce • •-,E-sg. 11•.'r•••r_2112.- ..T.r.••=er.4t..7'..251:.:P/ML='• '•"1.r:"/ 1 .t- 2 gri el / .AdlagariMin .: i I : ' 1: ,) "Illr Ikal,pm 00mcsa haw Martmeate..........r, ..--.... e .0.1.0,.... 1 fi............. , 1.4.4•11.. 0 0. ...,.--,..-2.-°7..."--. '.--.1.-...-..-..:,....:2-...........--,... r7 %.,.,,,ii ... .. 2...611•1=1 .•• .0..i .1,,.. :-..,............' MI rl...W...". . =Z.:L=2':=...=.Z....-I. '=-'.4.7..i.111?: .....7.Z.Zr ••••I .. . .......... l=del=r".• T7:-.- --..-./..... _______ III i 1 , ._ •, i,...._ ,._ . . . , . , i =._. .... .-;;F:-.- .- I ::: 7.-::::::ST =-F.,---."=_-s-F=,•:.7.•••-_-- I=•.:1-7--ir li, l' i.... *; i II ,„.... .... ,-... • • -__-.. , - 1.:4.;. act•Trittp:rvi hals1'1' ! 1_,CYr #2 1.1100,0 1101•••.TA•11.4 al l:•=1•21rAttr• .Z....A•••=•••..= T.T.7.17-7= '• -•'".-1-:•--.:11:. 'la 1,:' ,, VItaT.A.S1 16„:„.. el teen., L....,......... '''' iTa.....t•-7.aa'. ....a...Z.= ==.---••=2-•-•7::::-"" n i . ' ' I , La rr.t...=•: •-••••=r....- ^.7:-•,....TaTdr fr.7" : .".' r-..=.7----:... - -........... -....-- ---- ii, • . ruzcxs..s.wrzc.r.i ;I 9 , .--.--=.-7 ,.:I'law . ,. ,.. 4---=-... :- . ....4.,• 1 i . ___.__. , t e ; _ 1 I • i-'3 i• '. I. - - -.--....-•--• -:::::1"---'=-:::::-."7 -0,: , ..... Attar•-••-• , .1 mai i ---.7.-;..... •-r-.•,...... tt. r.i... . IL .1.1.,_.„..1 • , s .... _ . . ,....,.=......... ..7::. ........ F) .t' :j. ' /, ............. -.--.N.Ep.,., ........ : 03 c0 1 • ( /""---,-..,--,-.-.---. hiir3:.‘.,...____ ..__.... ... ____ ...• . ,_...__. ,..,........ .,..„..,.-:, ,_. _. --...:-.....„- . . raraiiiiiil - ... ---r-- .7.1m-lila -,-Wor Ada 1.1114:017 allitai ill . le./.. ,,-.4.a ....__ _...... .,...---...---..._.,._.... ... _ ., -•' . .. , , . __ , 469.80 _ - •, S 011002" E "Z"....,4.r. .......-- ........... ---- • I X.191.1110•Tal.01 IrlIn......e . _ OAT r.i. A . n'' ? 00/.0 '''''•••••• it••=7:,•=1 ...a...,a;...., AAA.••••=0 ...A.0...••=a• • . ' _ t. • .21.1 UM 212010110121002111. I i0 A ' '• - • . .•=1A• 3•.•' ',....,S 88.47.36" E .1.0-•••••-•• _-_. ,.._-...... ..--... • •'•:;.•?/".•/•••*..+•:• 11`..••••V.'.1/12/1f022:12:17,4T#or.-:.?-1,-,4-cff.. 1.---- •- .-1.'- 1 ' 84.63' SUMMARY CHART-INTERIOR LANDSCAPE a' I S 0022'49" W 502.86' 11•1•••••000 M.01,10 us no..•• Lae...Arm ..Isna.Com, 001 ..0•• 112•04 G• 111../21.11-.1..111/4„,,,-f 0. 0.0.0 ....0,0.42,4001 IA,/A rA19-. • 0 :i 1.1 k.e.n..... Pr.AI 1010 0. TA. TA= '.. 1:..•.:.•• ....•%Z...='• ...7:"=• *'-." team' 11.n....1.11•0 • 4.....1 -=',=--' F.- .."•;.--2•-•=:" LOCATICH rri-I.u. .1E2. 1\4.1_1•IC..3"-FCT 40r/ 0,111. 11, 1,1 nee eat ma .r.-.lezlert... ••--•• RECD JUL 0 1 1998 Z2611 W/Stentl ,peni n......i ....s. an. PA 10/ 0.). CW CoV S 1'3E1 N T W 0 01 D DRIVE ADDITION 9.11......1.10yrt 0,....., •Ltmel was falkweaa: 000 0•00. 1•06 a.It VAA•••••11 • LOTS I&2.BLOCK I Lifcseyka,Inc. 1.1X•411,461"..... • . 0 . UnnaliinGtinnila CITY OF SOUTHIAKE SOO W.&nubble Boukaurel ens 1.•it va 0..... 7,1•13.1.t.A.m......C..•••••••••...1..aft TARRANT courTry.TEXAS Souelddie,'IX 76092 W.S.ft.11.4144.844mcs 4.444 ILI ail T1 ird)-0865 11021%121.W••002 01 T.1211,0,1011,1•10 PAISPING ZONING:AG&CS MIMI Sw.it.el 9•11411.•••is1.1 YROPOSED'ZONING. Iltilurs/111.. ILW111 .1.0___WADjelangiLIMP ..:te -Nil •Ili.M.Zoole.6 61., SP2-for Kalil(adule Wee complex se&actuate tri-pke,qualm- jtja.S•It Amami Lordarrat 40. MA it.:1.1 If. Jinni plea and polo-yks•213.4,pcnonal ore facility,e tuning can Neer W.Galin Amnia. in.:vv.-4mo: ^pito.in. iiim...$ I 10 6 fuiliiy.anal man mkt-family emits. .1:1 1 A%Veit Vie tiny II...unveil/ 11.170 64.11.0.0•••••das 171,1734 P.Comae Da..•al Peollea 141W/SP:113: MAY 11, 11/1118 =ail IAI15 IIIW 11/1•1Nfl V RIS11/12411A1.AND Fowl Worth,TX 711107 leien/VAR*:II: .11IINIK t•2I), 111/1)-1 MN)34 II Came.Wow..wall...is 'ii illidGrsodn i- nude 1017)737.9513 tx,234...h..u....c. 11:4" Z.A.98-024 At 17)753-117511(lea) 661111 1, .11••66 1..sawarsas 00. • PREVIOUSLY APPROVED CONCEPT PLAN • • City of Southlake, Texas 411 , SITE PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY Case No.: ZA 98-120 Review No: Two Date of Review: 11/13/98 Project Name: Site Plan - The Remington, being 11.081 acres out of the J.G. Allen Survey Abstract No. 18 APPLICANT: ARCHITECT: • Lifestyles Inc. Galier Tolson French Design Associates 800 W. Southlake Blvd. 4316 West Vickery Blvd. Southlake, TX 76092 Fort Worth, TX 76107 Phone : (817) 251-8380 Phone : (817) 737-9513 Fax : (817) 251-9172 Attn: Diana Hanson Fax : (817) 763-8758 Attn: Mark Tolson • CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 11/09/98 AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. THESE STIPULATIONS ARE HEREBY MADE CONDITIONS OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AMENDED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION, PLEASE CONTACT EDWARD MCROY AT (817) 481-5581, EXT. 880. * This plan review was based on the MF-2, Multiple Family Residential District, standards for all product types, the Corridor•Overlay Zone standards, the Personal Care Facilities requirements, 0. . found in Section 45.9 of the Specific Use Permit section, and the specific zoning for this site as established with Ordinance No. 480- 275. 1. Provide the required 5' Type A bufferyard along the south line of Lot 1. Amend the Bufferyard Summary Chart to reflect the required plantings. (See attached Bufferyard Chart) (P&Z Action 11/5/98 Allow relocation of plantings within Phase 1) * The approved concept plan for this site shows a lot line along the common drive between the Villas and the Assisted Living Center. Relief was granted for the required bufferyard between these two lots at that time. With this Site Plan,the applicant has included both the "Villas" and the "Assisted Living Center" within a single lot and appears to again be requesting a waiver of the required bufferyards between Lot 1 and the future Lot 2 . 2. Within the Retirement Villas, identify each triplex, quadraplex etc. with a distinct letter for ease of reference (Building A, Building B, etc.). 3. Label, all curve radii adjacent to the fire lane and ensure a minimum 30' interior radius. Specifically, label the curve radii at the drive entrances to Owenwood Drive. In addition, it appears that the fire lane near the south side of the Assisted Living Center narrows such that the geometry does not comply with fire lane requirements. 4. In the Site Data Chart include both the impervious coverage and the lot coverage. Lot coverage is 0 defined as the total first floor footprint area of all buildings. Include the area(99,936 Sq. Ft.) and the percentage (20.70%). lCl City of Southlake,Texas Show, label and dimension the proposed 50' D. &U.E. within the Slayton tract and intersecting Owenwood Drive. 6. Spot elevations must be shown on the grading plan at all critical points, including but not limited to edges of pavement, curb returns, building corners, drainage paths, etc. Include directional flow arrows in all flow lines, and show and label all existing and proposed drainage structures labeled with size, type and flow line elevation. Also show centerline of water courses and existing drainage easements. 7. Note the benchmark used for the topographical information. This should correspond to a City approved benchmark. 8. Provide horizontal and vertical articulation meeting the requirements of Ord. 480, Section 43.9.c.l.c. Compliance with the articulation requirements is as shown on the attached articulation evaluation chart. 9. Relocate the temporary turn around and easement shown at the south terminus of Owenwood Drive so that it is entirely,within the Remington development or provide documentation that K.I.S.D. has granted such an easement with permission granted for the construction of such a turn- around on their property. A permanent cul-de-sac with R.O.W. dedication or a permanent turn- around meeting the requirements for emergency vehicles may be required within the Remington Development should a through connection not be provided for Owenwood Drive. * The west lot line adjacent to Owenwood Drive is considered to be the front yard, the east line is the rear yard, and the north and south lines are considered to be side yards. Building setback lines and the 4:1 slope setback requirements are in conformance with the approved Concept Plan for this site in which relief was granted allowing setbacks as shown. * , The minimum floor area within the combined nursing suite/assisted living center as shown in this Site Plan is in conformance with the approved Concept Plan in which a relief was granted for reduced floor areas. * Parking as shown on this Site Plan is in conformance with the approve Concept Plan in which relief was granted allowing a reduction in required parking. * Masonry material requirements as shown in this Site plan are in conformance with the approved Concept Plan and Ordinance No. 480-275. * Staff recommends that some flexibility be granted for the location of the sidewalk along Owenwood Drive,particularly in natural areas, so that field location can be utilized with staff concurrence to limit the impact on natural vegetation. *. No review of proposed signs is intended with this site plan. A separate building permit is required prior to construction of any signs. • `1C•1 City of.Southlake, Texas 41 * The applicant should be aware that prior to issuance of a building permit a Plat must be processed and filed in the County Plat Records, a fully corrected site plan, landscape plan, irrigation plan, and building plans, must be submitted for approval and all required fees must be paid. This may include but not be limited to the following fees: Park Fee, Perimeter Street Fee, Water& Sewer Impact and Tap Fees, and related Permit Fees. * Protected trees cannot be removed outside of 6' from the proposed building without processing a Tree Removal Permit or without approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Cuts or fills within the limits of the critical root zone of protected trees are not permitted unless adequate construction methods are approved by the Landscape Administrator. * A letter of permission from the adjacent property owner(s) must be obtained prior to issuance of a building permit for the construction of off-site pavement and a permit from TxDOT must be obtained prior to any curb cutalong F.M. 1709. -- * Denotes Informational Comment att: Bufferyard Calculation Chart, Interior Landscape Summary Chart,Articulation Evaluation Chart cc: Lifestyles Inc. VIA FAX ABOVE Galier, Tolson, French VIA FAX ABOVE Ernest& Joyce Owen VIA FAX : (817) 251-9172 Washington& Associates VIA FAX: (817) 481-4106 Attn: Jackey Fluitt L:\COMDEV\WP-FILES\REV\98\98120SP2.WPD - • • • City of Southlake,Texas i SUMMARY CHART - BUFFERYARDS Remington at Owenwood Dr. (98-120) Site Plan Location/ Length of Required/ Bufferyard Canopy Accent Fence/Screening Base Line Provided . Length Width/Type Trees Trees Shrubs Height&Material - North- Required 410' 20' - N 12 ' 21 49 Tree 21>12" 18<12" Credits =63 - =54 Provided 410' 40' - Na 0 7 42 4'-6" Brick Wall . East - Required 890' 5' - A 9 18 72 Tree 5>12" 1>12" Credits =15 - =4 -- Provided 890' - 10' - Aa 7- 14 — 58 6' Wrought Iron South - Required 195' 5' - A 2 • 4 16 Provided 195' None 0 • 0 0 West - Required 1012' 5' -A 10 20 80 Tree 3 > 12 3 < 12" 9 Credits = . = 9 Provided 1012' 10' - Aa 6 14 75 4'-6" Brick&Iron *Note any credits used in calculations: a. 20% credit reduction in required plant material provided for doubling width of bufferyard. 0 Other Comments: 1. A minimum of 50% of all canopy trees planted on the site shall be 2" in caliper and 50% must 4" in caliper.This includes bufferyards as well as interior. SUMMARY CHART - INTERIOR LANDSCAPE Landscape % of Area in Canopy Accent Ground Area Front or Side Trees Trees Shrubs Cover (Sq. Ft.) Required 44,220a,' 75% 74 147 737 4,422 Tree 91 > 12" 76 < 12" Credits = 273 = 228 • Provided 262,787 75% 11 91 . 725 4,350 • *Note any credits used in calculations: a. 10% credit was provided for maintaining the R.O.W. b. 750 Square feet of credit was provided for enhanced paving. Other Comments: 1. A minimum of 50% of all canopy trees planted on the site shall be 2" in caliper and 50% must 4" in caliper. This includes bufferyards as well as interior. el BUILDING INSPECTIONS L:trees/dre98/98-120 - nrra Articulation Evaluation No.2 se No.ZA 98-120 Date of Evaluation: 11/13/98 vations for The Remington Assisted Living/Nursing Suirtes Bldg. ceived: 11/09/98 Front-facing: West Wall ht. = 20 • Elevation A&B Horizontal articulation Vertical articulation Required Provided Delta Okay? Required Provided Delta Okay? Max.wall length -- 60 60 0% Yes 60 55 -8% Yes. Min. artic. offset 3 2 -33% No 3 3 0% Yes Min. artic. length 2 7 250% Yes 2 7 250% Yes Right-facing South Wall ht. = 11 Elevation C&D Horizontal articulation Vertical articulation • Required Provided Delta Okay? Required Provided Delta Okay? Max.wall length 33 35 6% No 33 33 0% Yes Min. artic. offset 2 3 50% Yes 2 2 0% Yes Min. artic. length 2 5 150% Yes 3 4 33% Yes Rear -facing: East Wall ht. = , 11 Elevation E&F Horizontal articulation Vertical articulation Required Provided Delta Okay? Required Provided Delta Okay? Max.wall length 33 26 -21% Yes 33 27 -18% Yes Min. artic. offset . 2 2 0% Yes 2 3 50% Yes in. artic. length 1 5 400% Yes 3 4 33% Yes IP eft-facing: North Wall ht.= 11 Elevation G&H Horizontal articulation Vertical articulation Required Provided Delta Okay? Required Provided Delta Okay? Max.wall length 33 32 -3% Yes 33 33 0% Yes Min. artic. offset 2 3 50% Yes. 2 2 0% Yes Min. artic. length 2 8 300% Yes 3 5 67% Yes • s) , AA 17\ Case No. ZA 98-120 Date of Evaluation: 11/13/98 Elevations for The Retirement Villas. . Oteceived: 11/09/98 Front-facing: South Wall ht. = 11 Elevation I Horizontal articulation Vertical articulation Required Provided Delta Okay? Required Provided Delta Okay? Max.wall length 33 14 -58% . Yes 33 20 -39% Yes _ Min. artic. offset 2 3 50% Yes 2 3 50% Yes Min. artic. length 3 6 100% Yes . 3 12 300% Yes Left-facing West Wall ht.= 11 Elevation J - Horizontal articulation Vertical articulation Required Provided Delta Okay? Required Provided Delta Okay? Max.wall length 33 26 -21% Yes _.. 33 26 -21% Yes Min. artic. offset 2 - 3 50% Yes ' 2 2 0% Yes Min.artic. length 2 5 150% Yes 7 11 57% Yes Left-facing: West Wall ht.= 11 Elevation K Horizontal articulation Vertical articulation Required Provided Delta Okay? - Required Provided Delta Okay? Max. wall length 33 • 19 -42% Yes 33 19 -42% • Yes Min. artic. offset. 2 2 0% Yes 2 3 50% Yes Min. artic. length 4 10 150% Yes 4 11 175% Yes *Rear- facing: North Wall ht.= 11 Elevation L Horizontal articulation Vertical articulation Required Provided Delta Okay? Required Provided Delta Okay? Max.wall length 33 26 -21% Yes 33 31 • -6% Yes Min. artic. offset 2 2 0% Yes 2 2 0% Yes Min. artic. length 5 10 100% Yes 1 4 300% Yes Front-facing: South Wall ht. = 11 Elevation M Horizontal articulation Vertical articulation Required Provided Delta Okay? Required Provided. Delta Okay? Max.wall length 33 19 -42% Yes 33 29 -12% Yes Min. artic. offset 2 3 50% Yes 2 2 0% Yes Min. artic. length 3 6 100% Yes 6 11 83% Yes • S . . • nn _11 1 Case No.ZA 98-120 Date of Evaluation: 11/13/98 Elevations for The Retirement Villas. . received: 11/09/98 Rear-facing North Wall ht. = 11 Elevation N Horizontal articulation Vertical articulation Required Provided Delta Okay? Required Provided Delta Okay? Max. wall length - 33 26 -21% Yes 33 30 -9% Yes - Min. artic. offset 2 2 0% Yes 2 2 0% Yes Min. artic. length 3 10 233% Yes 3 4 33% Yes Rear- facing: West Wall ht. = 11 _ Elevation 0 Horizontal articulation Vertical articulation Required Provided Delta Okay? Required Provided Delta Okay? Max.wall length 33 26 -21% Yes _ 33 30 -9% Yes • Min. artic. offset 2 2 0% Yes -- 2 2 0% Yes Min. artic. length 3 - 10 233% Yes 4 4 0% Yes Front-facing: East Wall ht.= 11 Elevation P Horizontal articulation Vertical articulation Required Provided Delta Okay? Required Provided Delta Okay? Max. wall length 33 , 28 -15% Yes 33 23 -30% Yes Min. artic. offset 2 6 200% Yes 2 3 50% Yes Min. artic. length ' 3 9 200% Yes 3 12 300% Yes ront - facing: North Wall ht.= 11 Elevation Q Horizontal articulation Vertical articulation Required Provided Delta Okay? Required Provided Delta Okay? Max.wall length 33 14 -58% Yes 33 23 -30% Yes Min. artic. offset 2 3 50% Yes 2 2 0% Yes Min. artic. length 3 6 100% Yes 5 10 100% Yes Rear - facing: South Wall ht.= • 11 Elevation R Horizontal articulation Vertical articulation Required Provided Delta Okay? Required Provided Delta Okay? Max.wall length - 33 26 -21% Yes 33 33 0% Yes Min. artic. offset 2 2 0% Yes 2 2 0% Yes Min. artic. length 3 10 233% Yes 6 10 67% Yes Left-facing: West Wall ht. = 11 Elevation S Horizontal articulation Vertical articulation Required Provided Delta Okay? Required Provided Delta Okay? Max. wall length 33 22 -33% Yes 33 22 -33% Yes Min. artic. offset 2 2 0% Yes 2 2 0% Yes Min. artic. length 5 12 140% Yes . 5 12 140% Yes 0 . i1i ,1j City of Southlake,Texas OTREE PRESERVATION ANALYSIS (Residential Development) Case No: ZA 98-120 Date of Review: 10 - 22 - 98 Number of Pages: 1 Project Name: Remington Estates (Site Plan,Phase I) APPLICANT: • ENGINEERS/PLANNERS: Ernest and Joyce Owen, Lifestyles Inc. Gailer, Tolsen, French-Design Associates 800 West Southlake Blvd. 4516 West Vickery Blvd. . Southlake,TX 76092 Ft. Worth, TX 76107 Phone:(817) 329-0865 Phone: (817) 737-9513 Fax: Fax: (817) 763-8738 THIS ANALYSIS IS PREPARED AT THE TIME OF REVIEW OF THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT AND IS TO PROVIDE AN ANALYSIS OF THE PLAN OR SURVEY AND THE IMPACT OF CONSTRUCTION ON ANY PROTECTED TREES ON THE SITE. FOR ANY QUESTIONS OR CLARIFICATION CONTACT KEITH MARTIN, LANDSCAPE ADMINISTRATOR AT(817)481-5581 EXT. 848. TREE PRESERVATION COMMENTS: " 0 1. Parking lot medians have been strategically placed to help preserve some protected Post Oaks. To • ensure that these Post Oaks live, no grade changes should occur for as far around the trees as possible. Some alternative paving may also be installed to allow for a pervious area to exist in the area of the trees roots. . 2. The grade change in back of the retention wall along the front of the Retirement Villas will remove approximately eighteen(18)protected trees. The trees along the top of the retention wall will also be effected.I recommend that flexibility be given to the applicant to work with staff for placement of the retention wall. Also, that the applicant consult with the City Engineers about . alternative construction procedures to help preserve the trees bordering the wall. * No grade changes•shall be allowed within the limits of the critical root zone of any protected tree unless adequate construction methods are approved by the Landscape Administrator or if grading is as directed by the city's drainage inspector. * A protected tree shall be considered to be preserved only if a minimum of 75% of the critical root zone is maintained at undisturbed natural grade and no more than 25% of the canopy is removed due to building encroachment. * All construction plans shall include the requirements noted in Appendix 'C', of the Tree Preservation Ordinance 585-A. - 0 • BUILDING INSPECTIONS L:trees/drc98/98-120 • • • 0 • lax• u4 la%avnamn. i',— — — — — — -- — o�;Mwn_.o_'— — — — — — — i.a'aa•[1 ., f iYROPOSF:D (iI)' R.O.«'.fO «' F: N ‘V O O D ll R„L E . um ` _I.�-. ;fT __ e. \ 1 y� SS aco�xrruD "� ,, 1 `1} -Q. 41 7r'.....4: e�� ,��]]] NA:Au,, fit' uses < BB' • oL am :Yai'�.■�.l_� r1 r 11 „','I,hlx ;.•.1 � orn•ua' C v I _ f `rie•412 ifi '1 .1• A..m ruw 7 wp n SVrMnrtlul. J -�I'li, I 1 D.el' 1 �' �� lea 1�::sI ▪ 5n 1 \1\•i'.ir1it 1Li: . : 1FLTVRLIILLSLII .H \� -S�l�. �. S ',.I '' , ,1 -'.'� n• vu...,.an ta.•na.rw>,..m. a I J �'� =+momY �� ,2e-^u,u ' o.m 1;..is1! d-�1 , ' _ 1 car am n.xx tiff • mcr IID * "' S ! ! S�! •�!CHI!! S'�IIIIS ---- —�i�v r- 'L�r —� .4... asp . _ �__ a s, ...,.r.," • — fin Snr6'C . imuO•[.lvll' "�"-w.�•= - R14,'MINCE I ()N j .ww... •ww. j e • �NnWOOOD DRIVE 4 7rV I _ 4 'i : LOTS I LL Y,BLOCK I • -' — — •+ rwo[or CffY OPSOUTIIIAKE h !�.p M TARN'T COUNTY,TEXAS • L 4 •— It u..o.p.p. ZONING: —li ' Sr!-fur senior taut living compko to include triplea..pudn- - W plea Intl pen ,k me a.ilas,personal fu re ilcy,nursing ca ® I facility,sod armor multifamily vain. IA D,LOW DIMITY RE510ll.I1ALAND - "— ILDIIC.9FM6fl1KIJC I 'l .{7--- - {unuor[RA a — ` 'ru in usvnw,...nu • Ernest&Witty.O.ert \` 1 Lifestyle!,Inc. I 1�'i SUMMARY CHART—SITE DATA ;; -»•' 800 Wd Sood X 16092Bouk J \ an — I — — — — �• .- vy.'..T.�,.u--: r-.rwrw..a ��`. r....�'4 SaudJatq TX 7607! s+.�+w�..�.+ � (NI713DAN1S _ The K�atm iO.enmd One RO ocnI Con o ray, o' Potter to Acre - I.. •Plthe Oise. •- �s�... I....w.. e... �....n Flewrte ql: OMILT u. am.nm.nu _ — ...............• _ttlo..yne1+ Caller:ColrniVrends Design Associates 4316• Wm Vkkcry Ifoukw,d see u.,xWn.w..n. ar..r...u., ^iw C...WrF.Y.]mAr - . . • so..-.....r...—•••••,. Yon Worth TX 76107 la. n......ILIOIYOmm _ ttn al�':�. IN17)737•'1518 - • usararr I.A`o��o. ,,,,,, e^I^ 1.4...14.17.74,ra1.ew.A.w. IBI717f3JI75N Iful �M` r.r.ta •- -in.e..r -11.we..Y L13.119L. / 'f �nr: .' ►SIT ..a.ea%....rta M Slobr^,r..7......r / ` al•ir.T�Ib..Y.r-L.II.i nim OLEO J/q.I.4.tl.m1 Eit 'r�..,.�. r1t.,...�anr .— r�es.�s.i.—I..r.tA..mre - ,ym.t.n•n � �•— P_L�1 O nienl'olm OC'Iench a r.....po.........uaW ueslen ASSOGtA're3 rr. a e.r.Iln.l.�nCr..+4...a. nl..,.aaJ.r..i..a • �[ f ��: M1..4Tr 1.,n • ,_sat...... II[/�NO,v,..f,...I -• rr, 1446.1.11.11.mt a.. .I — '/..\!n-4 I..I1 Gv nViw. +w 0 , . ' . - - - • 11A/iRJIU. RI NI'u.OYn, V/R_1.11.rcu. MI.Rd.01:141 . wet DIUC.r ' w.m:.w /IHI11'Y • REio, LI' :LO.TrRC11IYALILDL,TLLL ....LOU rR?Yn•1nmL`nLL �� /Y89'119N'E 1� k�� JEJJJC'O rt • PItOPOS1':I) 60' It. O. W. 'IO \V E N \V O 0 D D It I V E CIRCLE // 9 UP,RDS rr rn,clirF;7 r,TT--_-- $ ---ur'r--•ruTidt••,•, I WEST . • IIL{f ,' '�� ...•".-- EGRESS �'� __ ' ''r. �\ / ..1� J4H,:;W�iJ ammo .v - - fair— -rv,^"T_�? - \�s Item amnvn Y7.•'9'� j -rSt - Tom.4��" . .�,m J , ( ruere nut �I ur. r} rR.A 41,,. ti(•--Ca u.1-' 1 naS rcr.u. /.f./A I M VI 1 Y'R' 'J . A. IIEI' rimy"1' R 'l' IY • true , 'I1( 111Y'U'_•--,( 1 JL 2,61.7 .Z I —— Ir...rr—.Y 2a.Tb — V,I.AiA r.Sr YS -- ——agel_ - ———'" K1r �� {• r ——I W=`� j — ,' ' `I LL:h:woLICOMfISrvL\7LLL _ LOT it 1_ �� 1 • 1 fi% � ��/ COL'R77:ARD COURTEtRD , I c � �'t..1 IR. 1-.•-.. �1 [RNL iuAniY\, TLL as .0 ROAM NAMa,11R,TLL24ANN E-- R I. I•\ .. ■ t i IW-0 t 4:. Inrt�' _ 1''1'. 1'II 1':I`"11':I�'I. NATURAL .�. °,61' E?'71U0' r eih --- _ --- i\tiff 1 ti.1.1•.1> 1.1\•'1 Nf: e„ " N I 1 .1. \- rtRF11 .,�-+� .r1 r.N, R Ip14.93 S00'mor .-- 7 `� ('I;N'1'1•:It �... :.;SA me, • �'�• _ iu�„�=� •i, Ts07.66 79ST/ua r—' r �r- -- - - --. �' ..:� I rnT L109.Si 1/ r u �� IV LON •v I 1f• I m,c �� fGJ06:73 I I, COURTYARD 6 dp Irr i x •u �\ 0 r -�, Il♦ GRa' r..oa.:urN I • \ >_ t '1'1R- Ell au r- s r, 1.T,.L,TLL2A,'TL - ;t... i '.i T 1nA1 '.(Fj rren'IOTRs:sRtLs,( , 't __ �K� _ i :5 nu ` 1 �\ ._ - -_._. _.. _ r- < �� i ccamasamas 1•i0.01' \ p.'l --- N 1 1 I:til N( . `�J__z 13 1! II ;.` iN69'2I:i6E 1 sn'yJo Lc 1�� tit I I I'I '—. <- ; ' -i. 2ii1. NW \\\ \3 y • FLTL'REPIL{.SE1/ ,7- '"az nATAc r.w.T 1 • `�G.3.� .r ■ �� • L 8 #tl�/YG3'0rp'E 1 fir. 1.0 �.v4axrrar,•r� 1.".• ..' ;� ♦♦l Rr-r •,.'\ `� eR.Ir �� 4. .I.` .` . fC''ni'n —rr.r1 Lk ——°E:1c Y.I' LlY-— i•Sl'=II“*2/u1L�-I 'V- 1In1I.l_l lLr C IX .. �. N66'Qi3' 'y3., R rs -�fAG� 1 ,K _'.'. ..'.'. r• Ice 1,.. '7 w '_ ' .,_.S=Te . iln Iona, I A �('Y�,^_ er .occ WC Ei LOT #2 , - .rr I ` — --_vnir - -- . �� _I°.� - — -ram, n • U.-` _ ,q_ r __ I soeo r-E owns oh-I:+i A 0.01' Sr OUR Ltunu YT?nvnn M7r I11L.r1LIGilr. uRrrr. SUMMARY CHART-INTERIOR LANDSCAPE w\rn.n SUMMARY CHART -UUFFERYARDS Lnn:rtvrxluvr.nerx Ir.�.R.. I.M AA,. r ar..• rri ' "' ••. . ,a.,,••••• Comm .... C.A..� 1.A �: r 4. inM. w ..i.i...N .Y.1 G1W 11. ,• 141 nl�+ or Il.r at T.GIr a.rlr. X•Ir• IIHIIIIIIIIIIIINMIIIIIIEIEIEME r... n..Y1 Lila „r ¶ ii ru ux N A...1 Nr `. rfY 41 AN-Vd.X •• 1iw �.r�...../.••..�.I....r A.M..r...r.. _ arr. •v••°d•SIINFAA um awn ,.w. ..• ! UAr n 1,.,Y•.. ' •J.IBinAl.IMSSCAR 1 M. 1 N• 1 . I .1./II e..R.I BO..TWA yr. ..•1 rip.i )1 -LA.x•.rr.G.OM)-♦Sri.IL _..r 10 Y .Poly.1,411.1 WA' _ row <r E Lill S.n Smarr/Lab...Area ODOWENWOOD DSSVE • rt... row Ir A •" low,1. .u a u . .n Total Sr It AD .DITION - •r 1. IN. M*•. ... L..I.....00.M- I •.. r.. VAN 1/.13.S.L.RWby lo.rpb I. JJ ..............1..*..... " ....d .....n M.. 1f.M11. .Coa..I..• N vol In. .r,..rw......*..•......r awl.. L211111.0 N.n111a1A.R°fDuka .•,.Me•AILA +.+1�......•.1��.•r....rr.y.r.n..rr. T•uln.•.s.•••,1.tm AA FL RECD 0 Gilier.Tolwn.Frcnch IANRNA.*A 1�t/t/NOV1`I 1998 ASSIGN ASSOCIATES rESItRL ru Pad L..b..r..ln•:turn Sf rt N.1'.• 1,1nuil n.11f..111 N..1•-.•••I... •. I•..,,ti tI V.ILIET %.1.IS I:'U Gua man"..• H . - ! • • 0 . - ..R D tirc D IiMIAIN C-'v,•. "env-. -, .ILM, Li u c c c C �:'sa: -�tli,t,,H _ C c C _ "0111 1" COCHF:RF. Ml. LOHHY I I I IP '1. 41 r �� I J t• o ! 10E' eil rDRxlDDna _ of o 4 `. ('U Axill llAM 1 ' . F46: r� Ipa — tix v.: �v"1'' ,0,.., .1 0--:::::-r- mike It c c c c 'a .ri nla C !C" -:v D c... __S glib r ., E MAIN hingtEr " DINING - +_I r a ROOM ��Z��F L• AN US G.\PF.D - MP WOW - IA... CO C'RTY.\RU COURT AR D • I_ Fr o I•� COCRTYARDMR r �., EI 111 L. ►'� 41. m'� ,a1w It T�91 D D itt4; ,....:It Wil r<2;;EI _ 10 liiiitli I■'� ��11111Firilc :11_ ;:}I I� cnnnlnon.a ��. � 1 4111.17 ,gill, CORRIDOR./ •fin :iRW ;� CU It II M�� All I II 1 covuRa auRReu'.1r nIY +cY1E1 � � �l' d1-' ; iaA • -• — -I �iC1D r4,D0 F . li • -� ; i .IYF c nmQ 1111 SERVICE. GAZEBO un,,,nT — _ - VIE\ q,---i C _vru 113',R 1 lull 1 nna,n • NIIRSINC RQ. I DINING• nr..u.v.nr TT ROOST /--__.----_•``` ! jr . \II I r 'PO ( d I :, ar. I_• G. II I L CORRIDOR./ +_.. 1 i I' CO RRIDOR110 0 . l� yp I1S'LY I ii �r 4JII, _m.Tr 1 I�", kA.:411 bl ROOMI a L„-1L3► 4::j ' i-.. 1�y F 4il@� i -+r� . C► ,, �� ; ` ossi .�� ► ,��► ;IDS, All� 1C �11► .-4gt0IALY1,01.CM 1VI G G G S +W I _► , ■ �1 1 1 1 NURSING 1 W)R'I E. I 1doOCl1F:RF.o�, RED NOV 0 91998 4:- Galier.Tabon.F-,ench A&&41.- 'I'I•:1 ) I ,IVIN< Ir / NUTt&IN<3 &,UL'I'1•; VIA )<)I2. III,AN Q URRIORAa31/CIAr.) / raA[J•+i,� I u I (](] k2 1$11M,MJ„IA-4-•J nwm,4'Ru 1010, 1111.131.0511 ' 'NSI/ "I., , I•I•,•. ;n.Il1A1M' • • • . • • lie - v.n�ru:. uavna v �:�„ -•-ruuerrnr • e.�._ .nr&aru. 10. ,%.,-- mllm""".N.„;� m 1111111111 ,1' 11111 oill..,m,,„„,„„„,, :• ....lal HIm 1; lill li � lit�iiii 1-u.Af "„,,,�m 1.01.n W8�I m1 I luuur,. um.,.'...7,Y,,,, /NGL 1r I•_IJIM1141:VIrV-Tm,a: Iv p' 11 , n alit , I I nib �lUlillil (13 I =�1E�n I1 „1"Ili k. �. e: ..... tsCII L+■ ie 1 1�a ��'L' ��v I �. 111 �; I�I��I�� ®III '�"�"i _441111 �.I : • .- iumlmn iilmniimmir mnummiununnnrumllllllllll1111IY�Yi111'1I1111111II1I i ,quiPI 3•. , �, Win,-,r,7� - :..:u. ..IItl11n.,!... ia.,;. M IN■: 1w11 jn11:J11 =nlfr i � 1 . gil..M.... ■■■ ■■■' , T 11w wn�nnr U{wl {:x la*nl n.n IIIIIY Ilwll ■:is�I! 1. mg. •H11n1111=111�w111IU ma iI■a ; '`�'I�+x� ,�.,,: ■w� ` ^■■ Sul pll�nlr.. uull,lillu�lwnla' ■!I,,luw�u�l iI_I• :: lul— 1 I ■•k anll■flllninnwwum ■■ "NEE 11,1n■• - - I N J •■._ ■nllnfpNllff •'dm---nun--111111 III..- ■1111--IIw11 11.ru` ' - Million 1�111IoIq■n�/I■C num mul_ —_-- -- --�.■iiIHUIIIIal111VUUMlr -..` 'NMI - nuu_ wnn�iu■■■t--- NII •I 1 I 1 ws • 1 eI -- I — I �.-'�� IW - _ ., j .. �, r-, r� m ref 1' Itl1� IIN►010# !iipiii a 4u1„1 ' I� liil. 1 "19(11111 11111 INIIflg:1I:<itIlp i 111 111il�I�IIIIDIINiii > •R�.s,1�Y:•vrr ilillil 1 I 19i liuml f li 11 ili 1 1 ii p5 +i �Ipit•l�ll. , '�II��„. 11114011 II.. ..II I ii •5a il1r11111i?a!, .r :ra I�y,itl .1111 III ��% \ n MI I r - 3 it ' Illlii--.. \�. ~.■Nlllntl.!I�I. r s.. r-.w. �� e9kL. \ ;fir'� k. • 141111111 � � s■ ■■■ --. ■ �+,I_,�_.. ■■ ■■ 7nl Ilw 1{Itwllf{w ■■ .y.Ee 11 I 11:.. ,.. ■ a s 111� 1111 np11p1i_. .■ 11 I N. la 'ii%.: i■7 IIlI� ...r •ilCl . . 41 1U111 Bn�"A7�1111 w y1in1ii, ,1 el •.. — , cam " : (!== 44• • _ _ _ FIB :'.�i _ _ s-1 • +- - i aardawastimauwrrrrY ;-.ilIldl��llli:,, _ r _ 1 =I'•... rrxurraal- f�%I _,.___ mar '• a- Ac • —r— i%�/1 I wan. i ,��-. . 00 101 ,. • i 1 iiiiiiiiiiil 1ii1. 1111 11111111 ,G c. . .�� _L�� `I3 I kku�:_ • • . -. r/ �� l GalietTolson.French .T.FI(ATION _ _ pt„Anl _ ELEVATION SECTION OI. AliocIATI5c1ATU flit t(;K Wn1 ,1, 1f11I71)J ".le I..J...'wn ' ral.. 1 .CAL .ia ao- rnr.r.m REED OCT 121998 rM• ® I • • • 0 - • • MYR. � p 11 raaew� ucrvu ntAlil�IlAtlAYtlYI 1 ►1nn ::, anxur:mr tiAu.vn r i 0, i "" ,�I I ,4 ! i' ;i 1 1 'III it ill,rjlirri„1 u°ili II�[� I�IMMI I 1111,Im - _ 1' CM �ntllllll@II1��QL 1 illln•c1 ? • � �, T- 1 1 I l ,. �i, ..„ - .. r,, 4 I .rill III I III I.'--=mwre 1 1,-millir- --r1 � IN 1}-'-il�urags �1 ?ITT! -i.1 3. lim:N■ ijillill:::: ••NM Jr j ,; ,. 9' I 4 411 • I• • OO OOa - _ - • i raxrurr::nra cux+Kvv I .0 dIIIIY I I IIIIIA hIIIIR n..._T.�� 1 /' m-ante I�p�ry� �:. •�+ 1T I■D ' IIVRI► Ni."!I • L.L'l II rxer14.,:F nlnl nl .J,.. � WNI111IlitAu...- (� Q r: 1 °�. Q I'.,�I /110 r All 3 uas MRI .� ma i i o�u'nsn• t' =N. _. 1 18 �_ iw�� I I I��i�ll�! III k III �w�� • ~ 11� I I ., f`.rF4o ir . . .. . . , • r a _-.. \ TJ rr—fir. . QQ_ 00 00 00 1 I.r. I v, j I xcaurrraa rrax�ru- lirrnu 7Ill_ —.,- ._. i' I•II — .~—_- I111111011111610411 W�/lna44(1 I. �� 'i :ll II• - ., ! I l,lj1, l I'iu l�l —_ ---..—_.- I i ':" 11 I I al ICI .ndl--Wes, I(I�� I -L I I11��I-n11,�.IY s'd 1 611111011IIINIAAYlUIF1�„Ii,.,:. • I 1, ,' I'��IIIII Ij 111 ' I .,I I�I:I_; .I iii II �i l I I I { � I d I I� •. M.12 D 1 5 . alll11111�11 �t1 �V'��I nalll .I �� \�'< .ifllltl�Il i- Iin�uivr..� :.'.1 rrxv I P.�Q11q,Illel E { .,wii ' 9u-^=*1 :it rl "Imi 11 iiiillRj• iii iii ! i -� 11 1 1111 ell ig,•N.i 1 ii�71�i! o p�. �ri• 11 �i■=R — --- a�._i.�iii ^ _. AO /, 1 1 -'------- �sunMO 1111111Or1/m ' • _ 1 . . • GJIIecThlwn.hench �¢n I I....' ... fri!te' ' . r MYIn\'IW �.r� 114111 ...II`._. L ._. ICI r.. ` wn'iiu nr .-r._ ____ ly rr-lu Mt .,r - n. S. . W rw�.v.raml 1 Bp QCT.121998 -..- • • .• r . • .=.iv 1111112 Ial on-:ear.I222/ir1.MM22V2W.•ry • ind6Axe •I.tt�IWt1IW Atli�I�� f III 'I I �f ..'i III I i t�W�1Y1111N11Aw.. �1._ rzr.2urrrsD;ralAVav-. • • �� YI�.p11 I` �Npp r�,�� ,.�.�....—��I�.W.I.wII�IlilAlll�l-��...,..�.....��_..�1— • • IIII I I (.I I�,, ..I1',it{III,i I .' III..II:•,��..', :.nll_\.7 -.-i---_• • • y�_ ,1_. t�i"IIY11gyn _____-_. 'fill•�I�� ipul iliiiIli"_ {CIS 1111 ; t I;I I I: I f;III-I lI IIIII• 1:l 1 1: 1.I li II -i Ill,il '1.4 1' 9 p 11 I 'I' II iI)p�a!'r;lil Im Nrlil'11 u „ A oef� 1IIII F 1 it p —� .„ 2 1„ iI "I I I f I i f I i I. I t f, .1111 h mrA.,,a11 1A)lllAlfltlalllllhi ".m., •rnv 1..�/II.IIIn•Ih 111n:1!Co, I I III II ..- `lI It,1,� ,I I 1'I',l I ',�11_a I �11 =—•_ .�+,NI� 1� NI�11lIaIinmi 1111UlUpUlUnll "m0EliIIIRINILHWL,, ,la.. aft. LLI I p d8 �� ■w i li�)II uu_.. — n.■ ■•u nu . wE u • ..a a �QEM w■w II : E ■r■ ■.w. .- °11111111w �,� ' ■■ w�n 1/ l ■ nu■ —' ■ ■� NuIE/■ ■y■ .1111=1111.■.■■ '��'� ,iiii��I' � I�1�1�1■.II.N,S■S■a ,. ■• awl 11 ' w��■■.■�..- N� � �.f■.� , !�! S ■ -a,.... _a�_ B1uu�,43 ill:, iiti,1 1::t w■�I lei sn.e slit i 1■■'lk Tc'4-• 'not-- -i- , .. On -.e..,i■._ - .L.S.w�...■1 1 .wa. === • L ,ri LA - 1 1 L«.. IN IN ON WO • C c J o l .. 1S1.ItiVIVI.'I.( )N -I.'" - xr'$x:Avxvvr- I I I I 1l, 1(11 ` \ ,fo l II I 1ul t I j 11 • Q � Il� ) � i ll + • o7 i I 11 -- - - poorwri- •r..0 yr-ram ..t °0 00 irr .L . . .. 1 .-rvursxu.- N rswnv v n1111 IIIIIAIf�llllii -1- - �r1MTA%rsw,yt ry - ` • �`• d4 !!! L' IJJL,:� I-I, e � � ■■� J I mIG j �f wig_31 ....II' it iiiiY : ■ I I m • .igi ' " DESIG.Tolfan.French It 1 DESIGN ASSOCIATES I"ICI ,1";Vi�r7'1( )N '1 1' s } ¢I i-w """"UNIAWB' "�" •r r. r. 1 o. we «r O C T rAEn..runw 1 • ! i I If ,2�,5 77IVAI ILUZ AT., SNr..:rA— � NF:v. f _mpai i •I ,: +'i II I Ii • I4114111.111111111119411r4 U IUllika d',VI I hW �i u - I i•iir � m mN Inli � w �4i" i .n � plI pK, �+— 11 I 1 EI. • i 11, MN .. • - —.r ,.♦ n .,. Inr- . A_ I r; rv1w^` 'CI tease. PEF /FPY4--L. L '}1..02..4,14tOTAMMaLIV,P,W •- 11u1I I _I • :. i.. 1111 � _ -�II. 1 r k ..ii4lB-. 1 II I' m�,1ioki �' WPia.. Ir:,.::..„!I,',..:aIeii,..oniimiluIfpIOIIrh, .�. i I .n� _t • imam—� �2 I 1JJ nix-71 fr:.igi 1 .® i , memo iminientravern • - Ml l 1 111111e . i T .v...,,yr-rr i - _.-_. :J ___.. 6 d n 4 ,4 � L_s — I I I 1_ • -I- 1 I il - - I eluwx I I L! ni 11i�1M�/buurrynI�� I--}- y1'1 • . , r!I cl iG • •11111t11ymd� . Inn� ■ �1�.� .,WEMAINi�'rrri�! ..Iii m� mmmilr • :ii i �jr i 1 ,_ 1 •-i re, 11 m Inc fCf�TfI1 .. „. •_. r fffflllfiTi 1 ■ •a 11 H n . u 1 i ./ I W A C L11 11MIar. •mnriilin ,Ct T ■ - ■ .■. 0 11 w u ` l LLill1 I D'1GRw . Cl7I CI: = :1 Ilit MIME I •_._ y I Galier.Tolmn.Frtnch i ff.., ,. ' 1 DISICN ASSOCIA117 ICINEMENNOW _____ vr•.o , I i � I . ... , _ . M ..b..... RED OCT 21998 I , 1; 1 0 . . 0 . 0 . • 1 _ i °Mt . J :�a:cma's rxv�eavl Wz:: ••• _ • i - tea."aa>L n1 I :� F raft 11111 11 kl •i II 1�- I r 'I f�� A 'a1 _ / ■ �q■1 ens a � I. ` lifliNAii Pr'. um gm MIS 1'pk� r cIA...III Ill , i; i- 1 1 il l ,1 —fi-- r.___ �,•, I F - L,, 1 ! 1, c j 1 +1, , ,,, 1 i il_i . 1 4 s �, 1 • 1 f .1 II- tZr11Yl77''.S.WI'Y.�."R'1.. AF• i 1 `I R;.LR•••• II A411Y1Pi`SLX1:7F•Ftl• - , 1 _7 11 • �:EEFL' 111Allallilli _AL 1: - 11 ri 11: ni•1-- ■~i1f �1 1] •u n1 I. ■ ■. n1 11 1�11 u■ aila,i i w Itt, ' �.� I e c • s \f J�, • - % • I ' ' EL__Aa1_ • yip . 1 I — ":W : xa x j arrr:. rs err y I I PT ' .. ` ^ - I gill �� - nil J A 1 ,�- s aGI� -` -_ IL rI�:I �� ,, ilia 1_ • 11 pI III1® MI.I L1—SX — 11 11 ` ICD NOV 0 91998 Art V -_L� j-= ` j \I- DESGalIGN ASSOCIATES L1.1;VIVI'I( )N ( 1 I DESIGN ASSOCIAnch TES 1111 K.Kh.•1•Y.•1 •e•u v •o ' va 1r I �• 9�- 111 MOM Ida.111.1M.1.11 • IAA IMMO.. mil•• 1 .I. I . I:LIYI..Yp.+ _,,,,�.._..�.r~„ I. .;•:. I • • • . .• QNLTN/lrau'.xERiLYNV 1 -� a•.umr• �� pin I1 • . N • • RECDNOV• `r• • 0 91998 GalienTDlwn.French J)/OZ' DES14NY.r 1 4 T n ASSOCIATES fi .r1E14� Y.N 1 iw6n\ 1Yl In �...,... I.. I Wrl..n..�� *w r Wm O1 •• 0 . • . , • , uu —NC _ .. - fen., yew / -- — N / /ter j /; ' _� r= -, - :H. L=:;" y7•1 , • ``�; ° I , j fir, • l I J�`86617 t 100 O, 3J 14, ' '�i _. - J1. i , _ -— / ..I i{,; sus" •r1:1— _{._. ? —�El - I• 7-1 %'' `,, \ \ ' i \ / ' -I. �. ' _-- i L 4i% % j ! • rrour rr'r` eo vim? I'. 1 V ,"gyp owrzi . . . ,:. -_,. .,., , Iwi, i. -: a ` C' , r ,', 4 • - 0 Q. at% ,^ 6.v__�e•`;''a :,°, . , r _ ° \,..„..,„:„ q.11flwr kt, ! 19 I /] i ' iOO \a I , �a oO :roor, � . . , ` \ / s 01•WIlling4! J!�f� 1 r . • iie• O a am-, /: — • ! r . ,._— c °r �Fo :• / _• .... .- .../4:0,„-- .---4.. sw il ; - . --.0 • .c) - • a r .,,, ,l. ,:\....t. , - -_ , • •,-. 1 , ,...). (.1,5 at , .. ___,,, =‘.7,..cy s.s. i4, 9... ,„.... „0, ., 1 . /p • o Ip. . ,°°9U .' a . e \ J • I . . e .. j,: /f °_ O,Le a A ��L�LS`�'° _ i =_0=�_ '1 LI a -`o�_—A� f a nt^ _ '..... �F �'� J ate.mra.o.:. val�rn;, .. — F OCT 1 ? 1998 ,,— —�� _--- -- _ --_ _ _ —— --- — - -_ 4T lZD PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN ... OWENS TRACT AI TIE CITY OF SOUTHLAXE • TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS )Irzopl1wwo1SSOM/OWA MEMO In SMUT AND IOR7 00M MLIO3 738 I 43300.4Tl7.@C LOISTISls,WC 37 90708 100507.58L�ie�1OIWS�w 101r Si=740.64 l MS (n7)111-IM0 (/17)111-001 NITRO 401-3077 /firmM Me A11 MO an-/r1 Mil MAIM/011.40-14001/ CAM PA 411 11-IS . .. 0 ' • r•..;••ti. r. .. ,..l tp,..7., I .__...,_.___.. .... \ „...._.............. 41Z... . ...- ... .,... (7...' .,.. ,-.7. / ''' Z. ' I 1.,`---7---,-",,...;12._ , ,_,.7___,, r-4-.... • 1 HIM% Ma, 1 1 : I ,C 1 1 / , ,,„.. 1 '''.7: ! r - ,,, : . • 4..._,- -,„, .- . \--s\ \ • --------- . ' .\- I -1---' Ir- .71 1., • Jo.... ...... 6 ,.., ......:..... . .: .;,_____ i \ ......z,-: .L.. i 1 ,------i 5"1,1f: _.; „. J• 4,,,:, r ..._, .- FI ;-,‘ il '-- ' -/ '. N "\‘.NV,:i/ • 'LA'.'- --:- Oa Mo.NM Ma MA.MK 0•11 I. I".'...'...\ . •'''i \ .. T.. . _Z....'q ., 1 1 1-+.:11 )! :::.. ,, • ,,, ...„ ,,\LIi._.i.,--,--....,-,-----__...)..-.,—..-___....--,' .-_.:; 1\i-ri ',.] . i. -,_ ----,75----' "------7---/ (7::: (71-1., 7 c---/i: ' V yo i,- .: 1 , ‘ . ...--....1 -)t. eit/A) - .' •/* ..; .., • ...)„,./, \ . , ...!,- . ,•;, 1 ,--• ‘.. • e.;,:•;0',0-d-s-j:.--4dr! --- ..... , .1. , i --'7•• ,....-,-7, _.:.. ,-,----.1,Lad") i., 'r-t,-)------- I i .....--, 1: e \ \ \ . , , ( 1. 2-7(7 '\‘'s. \ i ; , ---, .,.— • -----____„-- •-- ----------______ —---f---f-----/ i„ •-., --; ‘,.. \ • 1 ( \ \ - —...-. .---•„' ) ---, -----,.....•.... ---1- --, (•/, t t• \ \ , 1 i ! \----/! • ; .1 './ : , .\, •• ••• ,„,.„,..„,, , ,` \ \ \ \) , r ow se pm .;I ' • \,,..,. ..., ‘-ne'\ \ \. N' \ N ' '"7" 1........--- ,,,\ \ \ ,. . i.„,,,nii m a.........__---.......,,,,,ft..........---..,„, - \ ,•f .., . •, • • It .....:7. ' "IT' cc .,' lirb- gaiiiiiin". 7- 1111 10, -----) .\, \ \.\ \ \,... •frige 2e--,ni; -..--,-.1.7. , ,--- ---,-r. -aigb- -.. . I.,... '.-,,r----.- ------R • .` \. \ ,. .' ,"\)". 7-7, , *...,..1 ,•1 ,Y---..•\•-•-•:\ . ,, ) - . . .. • ; ._ , / ,A, , ,,,, \\,2,, ,, I ... Y 1 . .". ' I, • --..., ,...„ . ..1.1%.......lti, ... .... .i.% .._. .. ,, ____.... ! ) : \ \ \ \ ',. \ i t4laial , 11111,LAkflINI r ?(,-- Ai ) . • ,.:‘,0 ., -, . . ;_ _ __ _. ......_ , /.... , . .. „.,..... /4....N. , „ ) , . .,, ,,,,,,„ , : ,,77/ ,/ ,' ....L. ., , -,------ --er. , ..-:, . ..27-7777.'A ',.. /, ( "., I r-• . , i- ... / 1...T, ..,, , ..--7/ / ' in. i MI ).‘ ,. s ..k. ra 1 - ,s; --,„--./ / PAU ' ' i t s ...,1/ •_•—, //' --1,<:7-1../ ' ,...., •I? N2.... A '7'-------/ •://`--': -74'.-..-,.-. ,. At 11111 '* ,./ ;I :-... i ,; ----, Jr• _ . , _,/. / • . ‘.... • . '.•' • / ''' 'Agallerier41121. . . WANIN.---"Ri- . • AIIIIIII I.- al= A"• '=.0.110111011MITIMINIMILIMIOIK.Wiliiih.....- --""111111.M111.1......._CI=VISr 14111141/410111021/41MINIMIIIIIIPINPF / • , ,.. .- Li '-....i111.11111111W^- . / / 111WiSMIIMEMIIP.:411M- 7111KIIMMMMEI, •.I=a g 1 I IN,--..I M.li MI I II M=I i....-- '• a I li M IA r C--...1 PI P_.. 41 I I I I I I I I r M.....a I I I 4 I I I I I I I I I I I IP"-• I Ili a " .. _...0.".....0 / ..-....". ". .--• -.. -.. Z.- ..--.. ----.-_-.•-•--.1._ -.-.-._.. i, _,.... ..._:,.,____,....., .--.,,_..._____._•,--_,,,::-,,,,s--..:,..2 ,- ;_- -1..".,.. .-.-.-- —. .,---- --.-...—."'--7-- :^-'--:--.=.---._'---...--------'-..---=-=-77" ..---'--—-1:7..-- --- . .'''---- \ , PTO OCT 1 0 1998 • . .. • , al.)20 PRE'LIMINARY • GRADING PLAN ,l . • OWENS TRACT nr re, • • CITY OF SOUTHLAKE . . TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS • . • P7,77-41.11111:7770 rt-AlTd PIMA=11: • .• AA77-7.147,,cr.I.ASCVVVS.,,INC. ' --:7 SO-7-_ • 7,-.724.* •••••••‘.'LVitT,.:t:77:57:Ira : fan).-- .- -• .",' • • 11 . -• . City of Southlake, Texas. STAFF REPORT November 13, 1998 CASE NO: ZA 98-121 PROJECT: First Reading/Ordinance No. 480-292 Rezoning and Concept Plan!-M& J Farms STAFF CONTACT: Dennis Killough, Senior Current Planner, 481-5581, ext. 787 Karen P. Gandy,Zoning Administrator, 481-5581, ext. 743 REQUESTED ACTION: Zoning Change on property legally described as Tract 6B 1 and a portion of Tract 6B, situated in the Jesse G. Allen Survey, Abstract NO. 18, and being approximately 3.46 acres. ) PURPOSE: Purpose of this request is to establish "S-P-2" Generalized Site Plan District with a nursery, retail sales, and caretaker unit. LOCATION: On the north side of Union Church Road approximately 2,020'west of Davis Boulevard (F.M. 1938). OWNER/APPLICANT: . Joseph Mortazavi CURRENT ZONING:. "AG" Agricultural District REQUESTED ZONING: "B-1" Business Service Park District AMENDED REQUEST: "SP-2" Generalized Site Plan District for nursery yard and buildings for retail sales and a caretaker unit LAND USE CATEGORY: Low Density Residential NO.NOTICES SENT: Seven(7) RESPONSES: None P&Z ACTION: November 5, 1998;Approved(6-1) subject to Concept Plan Review Summary No. 1, dated October 30, 1998, amending the zoning request to S-P-2 Generalized Site Plan District with a nursery yard and buildings for retail sales with a caretaker unit as shown on the Concept Plan; granting relief on items listed in November 5, 1998, letter amending Item#17b to read, "...allow,lot size as shown(3.46 acres) or acreage net of any R.O.W. dedication; stipulating that the S-P-2 cannot be expanded, and it must be the same concentration of ppv _ . City of Southlake,Texas 0 businesses that the applicant has there today;and stipulating that Items #13, 14, 15, and 17a be granted with respect to this applicant only. STAFF COMMENTS: Attached is Concept Plan Review Summary No. 2, dated November 13, 1998. L:\COMDEV\W P-FILES\MEMO\98CASES\98-121 ZC.W PD • 0 . - - - — . .r ;'' -1-'7. -t*1• 11?i1.1.. • 1.11.h7.. aa;i::_V liOsliWtiU-.a P A% fi 1 tI1iltel1meIlv SAlssAi 9u 1cr. ..1• r 0_ 0 0fo..-.-tivsr1 i.o ieAir-1;n-1i1.1n4i1.f1jl-t 1.1p1fao;1ioW1,.0-1.si1l 61l1ifiiWngm41 a1 1:o 1m 1l1sI1ua 0ii-ogs1os rir.i to 01s-S • 73cfA43 ! 4 — 91 : e 6 $J 1111111 440 111111S* . I: t 1111 1 Ilinill St 0111111111111111 5 • 2" la WM WV* n2D roipo -, E k \13.1 1112e2 t rAlt 11611011a4011111 Ta3 SEAS 4 77 suwv k- airrii, -1 WO. Iwo iiimpimp--- 1 .., Tit 222 - Iwis-•-,-1 T 011.010.211.1. -: 111111101 MO"f4 . 111111L" s 1111611F1111 110-1111W*00 1 m 1 tiAt T"" 1116 0101111111 :g 110111111°t.. -OA ‘' 1ft 215 122 he GO ka S gi .:----\------- -- -k " 1_ \IV 4 4 r ---- \ .--.21" la 4 '"‘. 13- `''‘-1 ".•," 18 mu& \ TR 9ci -11111.11 u,4 \ . '%111 , ttikl , 11% TR . 4 .. I \ au NM t 1 ta..54 \?4. • I. . il z ,')- cl 1 Ta.40 11.41' /It sal , 95 Ac gisau,,,,,, lazucsuRvEsf JM , ( \ 75 el -.4i ii \ /0-rin6iiii114 4: lallt \), i...,,, --. — t7 Ac 71 V ilitirillimr7671,uvgavilkE064c.--: •,-.... V TIT= F° ri tC Ni \ ,-,•$ ' 44) 43 I'71 .>' -i 7114K 1143 V" 71 612 \5.12111\11113A \ c4 4 - s ri g f ,Eilk - Tig ;&siTii.- sic. 223kc_ , .. . . , a1 k -'.'44111110111 - - - 'Fs u s sk 111111 c: :-..- - , .0_„TV• 11Z? 4 \ . • '%\• ,0V ilmine--,. -IT ,,..1. , % .'.. f• ---011-D 1 1615 k -..,„.. , ._.. 1.4 AC _ • I 4 . 1 ..=-• . 1 -- --.....,... . -- ------_—_ _ — • TRAci MAP TR 5A1 B 17: 8.180 0 6 PO . 4G TR 4F "AG"G n "S _2 P " =2 AC �7 "SP_2" 8.39 AC -- TR 6A1 2.4BAC D. J. _. . - SAMMONS MORTAZAVI - - J-. B. •11 MORTAZAVI COUCH / OO TR 6B2 • `, LF N 5. Al'RVE TR 68 i• S� 4 $Y �5 0 a "AG" ' TR 6A 1, 1 4.00 ® 1' TR 6 TR 6A1A 1 11.0 3.00 .40 . AC P.BAILEY R.RUTLINGER 1 — D. I HAI p II SAMMONS . u) TR 6A2 CC 2.00 0 W - CL TR `> 6B2A Tft Ct71 „AG,, „AG„ .34 AC+ „AG,� COUCH 22 _ ... .. — . ...-- .. - - -- - .—.. - ---. - ...... -•—_ .. ........ - -- - ..-- .. — MI - IN - - - la . 13 sn ,Qs n 70 70 75 75 70 70 70 70i 7'7o 5 = 4 S 3 R 2 nip. :1 1 = 2 = 3 R 4 5 R 6 5 i 6 4s +e 'q 37 61 _ 4] 0b •% 1i IS 70 70 70 70 70 7 „0 FLINT CT FLINT TR TR 2E I. /J, e2 n as .* •. as 70 70 70 70 70 6.020 7 49 9 ^ 1p Ell '12� , "- 2 6 3 g 4 " 5 R 6 ` 8 I •s 7D 70 II 137 O70 4. OWNERS } R23 R2� "20 219 &, ADJACENT21 ' AND ZONING - , >o >o 70 70 70 COUNTRY GLFIy —+ RR XD- .-. . — , t .„ i n I n I City of Southlake, Texas CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY 4110Case No: ZA 98-121 Review No: One Date of Review: 10/30/98 Project Name: Concept Plan for B-1 Zoning-M&J Farms,being 3.46 acres out of the J.G. Allen Survey., Abstract No. 18 APPLICANT: SURVEYOR M&J Farms Peiser Surveying _ 2499 Union Church Road 1333 Corporate Drive STE#10 „ . Keller, TX 76248 Irving. TX 75038 Phone: (817) 431-5915 Phone:(972) 751-0055 Fax: (817) 337-4170 Attn: Joseph Mortazavi Fax: (972) 751-1014 Attn: Hugh Peiser CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 10/12/98 AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. THESE STIPULATIONS ARE HEREBY MADE CONDITIONS OF CONCEPT PLAN APPROVAL UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AMENDED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION,PLEASE CONTACT EDWARD MCROY AT(817)481-5581,EXT.880. 1. Provide a Vicinity Map indicating the area in which the property is located. 2. Provide an appropriate title, i.e. "CONCEPT PLAN FOR B-1 Zoning Request". Ensure this title • block contains the following: Project Name City County State Survey Name Abstract Number Gross Acreage Date of Preparation 3. Provide the name and address of the owner and/or applicant. 4. Label the existing zoning of the property, the existing land use designation (L.U.D.), and the proposed zoning. (Chart OK) 5. Label all adjacent tracts with the owner's name, existing zoning and existing land use designation. (L.U.D.) 6. Identify the existing and/or proposed uses for all buildings shown. Specifically,indicate the use or uses for the "wood house" and the small buildings between the green houses. 7. Label the dimensions between each proposed driveway entrance centerline. 8. Provide a minimum separation of 150' between drives centerline to centerline as required for commercial drives on a collector street as specified in the Driveway Ordinance No. 634. 9. Provide the distance to the nearest right-of-way intersection, and/or driveway entrance centerline, • along Union Church Road in both directions, from the shown/proposed drive centerlines. 10. Show and label any proposed off site common drives. A common access easement will be required for any such off site common drive. $11'S PIP City of Southlake, Texas 0 11. Show and label the approximate extent of existing tree cover if any. Provide a Tree Survey meeting the requirements of Schedule "B" in the Tree Preservation Ordinance No. 585-A. 12. Show and label all required bufferyards as to type and width as follows: Type and Width Location Adjacent feature 10' Type C South Line Union Church Road 10' Type Fl East Line Pearson and Couch Tracts 10' Type F 1 North Line proposed Remington site 10' Type Fl West Line Bailey Tract 13. List the number of proposed dwelling units. (P&ZAction 11/5/98 Delete for this applicant only) 14. Show and label a required 8'high screening device along the east,north and west property boundary. (P&ZAction 11/5/98 Delete for this applicant only) 15. Dimension the distance between principal and accessory buildings. A minimum distance of 20' is required between detached principal or accessory buildings on the same lot. Three of the existing • greenhouse buildings and both of the existing apparent accessory buildings are located closer than 20'. (P&ZAction 11/5/98 Delete for this applicant only) 16. Show and label any existing or proposed trash dumpsters. All outside storage or dumpsters shall be located at the side or rear of principal buildings. Such areas shall be totally encircled or screened by a minimum 6' screening device. 17. The following changes are needed with regard to compliance with the proposed zoning district: a. A minimum side yard of not less than fifteen(15) feet is required. One existing greenhouse building encroaches into this required side yard. (P&ZAction 11/5/98 Delete for this applicant only.) b. A minimum net lot area of five (5) acres is required. The proposed area of this site is 3.46 gross acres. (P&Z Action 11/5/98 Allow as shown with no expansion of district and no increase in intensity of existing uses.) * Although not required by ordinance, staff would appreciate placing the City case number"ZA 98- 121" in the lower right corner for ease of reference. * The applicant should be aware that prior to issuance of a building permit a Plat must be processed and • filed in the County Plat Records, and a site plan, landscape plan, irrigation plan, and building plans, must be submitted for approval and all required fees must be paid. This may include but not be limited to the following fees: Park Fee, Perimeter Street Fee, Water& Sewer Impact and Tap Fees, and related Permit Fees. 011- 1 P ------------ City of Southlake,Texas 410* This review is based on the "B-1" Zoning District Regulations. This site falls within the applicability of the residential adjacency standards as amended by Ordinance 480-CC, Section 43,Part III"Residential Adjacency Standards". Although no review of the following issues is provided with this concept plan,the applicant must evaluate the site for compliance prior to submittal of the site plan. A Site Plan must be submitted and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council prior to issuance of a building permit. Note that these issues are only - the major areas of site plan review and that the applicant is responsible for compliance with all site plan requirements: • Masonry requirements per §43.13a, Ordinance 480, as amended and Masonry Ordinance No. 557, as amended. • Roof design standards per § 43.13b, Ordinance 480, as amended • Mechanical Equipment Screening per § 43.13c, Ordinance 480, as amended. • • Vertical and horizontal building articulation(required on all building facades)per §43.13d, Ordinance 480, as amended. • Building setback standards as per § 43.13h and as shown in exhibit 43-E, Ordinance 480, as amended. • III • Spill-over lighting and noise per §43.13i and §43.13j, Ordinance 480, as amended. • Off-street parking requirements per §35, Ordinance 480, as amended. All areas intended for vehicular use must be of an all weather surface material in accordance with the Ordinance No. 480, as amended. • Screening as per §39.4, Ordinance 480, as amended. • Interior landscaping per Landscape Ordinance No. 544. • Fire lanes must be approved by the City Fire Department. * Denotes Informational Comment cc: M&J Farms VIA FAX ABOVE Peiser Surveying VIA FAX ABOVE L:\COMDEV\WP-FILES\REV\98\98121 CP 1.W PD 1111 41a-'1 City of Southlake,Texas IIIITREE PRESERVATION ANALYSIS (COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT) Case No: ZA 98-121 Date of Review: 10 - 22 - 98 Number of Pages: 1 Project Name: 2449 Union Church Road,Tracts 6B1 and a portion of 6B2 (Concept Plan) APPLICANT: ENGINEERS/PLANNERS: Joseph Mortazavi Peiser Surveying Co., Inc. 2449 Union Church Rd. 1333 Corporate Dr., Suite 100 Irving, TX 75038 Phone: Phone: (972) 751-0055 Fax: Fax: (972) 751-1014 THIS ANALYSIS IS PREPARED AT THE TIME OF REVIEW OF THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT AND IS TO PROVIDE AN ANALYSIS OF THE PLAN OR SURVEY AND THE IMPACT OF CONSTRUCTION ON ANY PROTECTED TREES ON THE SITE. FOR ANY QUESTIONS OR CLARIFICATION CONTACT KEITH MARTIN, LANDSCAPE ADMINISTRATOR AT(817)481-5581 EXT. 848. TREE PRESERVATION COMMENTS: 1. A Tree Survey meeting the requirements of Schedule `B' in the Tree Preservation Ordinance 585- A shall be required with the submittal of a Concept Plan, Site Plan or Preliminary Plat,whichever occurs first. 2. If the applicants request for a`B-1"zoning is granted the property will not be exempt from the requirements of the Tree Preservation Ordinance. The property does have protected trees existing on it. If any protected tree/s are removed the applicant will be required to obtain a Tree Removal- Permit and mitigate the removed tree/s. * Only the owners of property zoned SF20, SF30, SF1,R-PUD and RE who resides at the property and uses the residence as a homestead shall be exempt from the requirements of the Tree . Preservation Ordinance as it pertains to that property. * All licensed plant and tree nurseries shall be exempt from the tree protection and replacement requirements and from the tree-removal permit requirements only in relation to those trees planted and growing on the premises of said licensee which are so planted and growing for the sale or intended sale to the general public in the ordinary course of said licensee's business. ill BUILDING INSPECTIONS L:trees/dre98/98-121 4q-Q • • . • • • . .' ---Z-' • Scale 1“ = 50 RANO P. CARLSON 1,0L.9094 Pa 1973 . • 111. ! I I • , • , • i - 6 I PAM/CIA ANN BAILEY 6171-9866,Pa 6403 I N 00'2380"E 359 85' fii oz 15218 ACRES • ,$. I i.a.9239.Pa.Mt 78,...' . ',.. 1 -••-•.----. .- . ..''''......\\ 00 V.X 4 V '''' J.48 ACRES • POR110N OF • 53 l' $ 3:5 .g .1 I :.....,: 1 • 44.•••:• ••••• i. ) JOSEPH MORTAZA V1 L ffee ..... ... ., . lit.''set. . . '''... VOL 10299.PG. 1.754 tdi X) OL. 9.116.PC I827 ol 5 00127'09-W 3721.00 c• ..---•---•---•- , C "....."...". t X . g i a 1 fara Orr far as, ."'".7.•••! ...-'.... .....-. .;0022.:97.l 4277 ---e- -.7.-- 5 001249"W maw ,,•- . LEE! 'Imo I 0.0 I 14 nen Vect fr...On Seme C.611.Sony.P.n.Ma.II. T...Corny fana.anal hang a meter el 841 est44 tn.11 al land scenend le I 4.49*.11334 aa ncera......102111.Page 155.on In Pm.9514.Pape , 1651 al.O.a..of Wm.Cent.Tem.sai..44140 fn44 forl1.1., fan.by nat44 art bero.as faro s /1.60?/. INESAIAN CC.10.00 at•1/2 In.Inn red fauna at the northeast con.al said..... VOL. 4089,PC 9 larstarcre tr.af bon • TKO.5 00 6.22 nab 10.6 X at.an el..fens 11no•...of 502.5 • fort to•1/2 iner ira.en ples.cap nownp.11.1,1.5.J oat Os.... DON.5 00 erg.22 rnar.4 sex Y. ...a Oen Man..'owe On a alalcon et•112.611 roan•1/2..In*.tomd for Gan. . Surreyeet 1433144,0. 16112023 hi II re.al..31 na.X•chtann al 100.50 lert le a 1/2..son rod ..Obana oali atonnea 0.014..36611 est las earn. le • 16140 3 CO an.07.1 00..W.•.tan.of 3111.60 Nal to a 1/2 buo 1.. tour ter Caren are pont hong in the math Mr of Mir Omar limn The...nes Rapist*.Prof...WM Sutra,harry MUM.that gnafCn IleaTattL2 ani121:1"ftet'iet7/1"nrIrebt.:-•tri='''''''''''' (0) PO pat se v.,end.pr..,onenetlah an far.hanan r.xorared P.m. REC1)OCT 1 2 1998 rear*I the manne re,al the nal prtarern ele.Weal: or.maw,or cram."hi Me surreyor or rear nea one.. 11424 fa 1 00 oop.23 nuo.on ow-9.•deem.ol 659.a9 No to o 1/2 leinn Irm. Sc; .rnaumanla arta*1 hereon oat.,wet.an.hart.,as WWI tWee Of male. NW ter cam. Mon.ea Ina. X ...se.....a.Olen cr..rt..In.*.vile Ito pro.aly cr oratnnon[...Orem 114fACIS 13,.1.4.56 mat.4 um C.•dawn.of 211.02 net la.Pl4111 ( 0, CR.oi and net mars ca errant remnant,en M.an ne mai•neereparen c.o.. 112..inG on bon..156102 aware ff.or In ac.of lana man.Ws.. Were,weel w woo or armor,lo•c.o.,..caot o•owoo; (or Us on.O...an ty.al imonsornant.4 ery.ors...en h..and en.ote1 .oar mt.lha...nre of.Pr..,ow..wok 1.6 Yen Dm orcomlo unoo ow 111* aotanrx.61.. P-1152 PEISER SURVEYING CO., INC. (I) Ul..Drawly naeocafres te arn Orrn•.0e onto. 0.4 s OP.. OCTOBER 7,19ga fo. • 144, r 9 L.... .424.6.,,,,Nu - tan CORPORAL aRNE =1,„ 51.91t 1 103 Nu.C Pow 2.31.I.V1 • p•.50. 0694 IDA!166311 C0115120121. • 112111121TUI r5't A 1101/1.2611 •113100.0 Ei 6...Pry*len Sern.On NM X we tarn en N1 M-111.9 2 5 '414' •11...." 110121VAGS R1JOY IL ..............,wee CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. 480=292 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 480, AS AMENDED,THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS; GRANTING A ZONING CHANGE ON A CERTAIN TRACT OR TRACTS OF LAND WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS BEING LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS TRACT_6'BIAND:A::PORT0 1 OF :TRACT..w6B ° SITUATED TNT THE''JESSE.-G`T'ALLEN SURVEY, ;ABSTRACT " :"NO: ;.I8,: ; AND- . " BEING APPROXIMATELY3.46ACRES, AND MORE FULLY AND COMPLETELY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" FROM "AG" AGRICULTURAL=DISTRICT TO "S=P-27;=GENERALIZED SITE``PIAN DISTRICT."FOR :A NURSERYYARD'-a AND BUILDINGS FORRETAIL SALES. WITH".A CARETAKER UNITAS DEPICTED ON THE APPROVED CONCEPT PLAN ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN AS EXHIBIT "B", SUBJECT TO THE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS CONTAINED IN THIS ORDINANCE; 1111 CORRECTING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP; PRESERVING ALL OTHER PORTIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE; DETERMINING THAT -THE PUBLIC INTEREST,MORALS AND GENERAL WELFARE DEMAND THE ZONING CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS HEREIN MADE; PROVIDING THAT.THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS HEREOF; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Southlake, Texas 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 Texas Local Government Code; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 211 of the Local Government Code, the City has the • authority to adopt a comprehensive zoning ordinance and map regulating the location and use of L:\COMDEV\W P-FILES\ZBA\PEN DI NG\480-292.ORD Page 1 ^ ippr . • buildings, other structures and land for business, industrial, residential and other purposes, and to amend said ordinance and map for the purpose of promoting the public health, safety, morals and general welfare, all in accordance with a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the hereinafter described property is currently zoned as "`AG"^Agricultural District under the City's Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance; and WHEREAS, a change in the zoning classification of said property was requested by a person or corporation having a-proprietary interest in said property; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, at a public hearing called by the City Council did consider the following factors in making a determination as to whether these changes should be granted or denied: safety of the motoring public and the pedestrians using . ill the facilities in the area immediately surrounding the sites; safety from fire hazards and damages; noise producing elements and glare of the vehicular and stationary lights and effect of such lights on established character of the neighborhood; location, lighting and types of signs and relation of signs to traffic control and adjacent property; street size and adequacy of width for traffic reasonably expected to be generated by the proposed use around the site and in the immediate neighborhood; adequacy of parking as determined by requirements of this ordinance for off-street parking facilities; location of ingress and egress points for parking and off-street loading spaces, and protection of public health by surfacing on all parking areas to control dust; effect on the promotion of health ad the general welfare; effect on light and air; effect on the over-crowding of the land; effect on the concentration of population, and effect on transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public facilities; and, 0 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, further considered among L:\COMDEV\WP-FILESIZBA\PENDING\480-292.ORD Page 2 4A-11 pirr Sother things the character of the districts and their peculiar suitability for particular uses and the view to conserve the value of the buildings, and encourage the most appropriate use of the land throughout this City; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, does fmd that there is a public necessity for the zoning changes, that the public demands them, that the public interest clearly requires the amendments, and that the zoning changes do not unreasonably invade the rights of those who bought or iniproved property with reference to the classification which existed at the time their original investment was made; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, does fmd that the changes in zoning lessen the congestion in the streets, helps secure safety from fire, panic, and other 11 dangers, promotes the health and the general welfare, provides adequate light and air, prevents the over-crowding of land, avoids undue concentration of population, and facilitates the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, has determined that there is a necessity and need for the changes in zoning and has also found and determined that there has been a change in the conditions of the property surrounding and in close proximity to the tract or tracts of land requested for a change since the tract or tracts of land were originally classified and therefore feels that the respective changes in zoning classification for the tract or tracts of land are needed, are called for, and are in the best interest of the public at large, the citizens of the city of Southlake, Texas, and helps promote the general health, safety and welfare of the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY • OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: L:\COMDEV\W P-F1LES\ZBA\PENDING\480-242.ORD Page 3 51Nu A,14 • PP" 0 SECTION 1. That Ordinance No. 480, the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Southlake, Texas, passed on the 19th day of September, 1989, as originally adopted and amended, is hereby amended so that the permitted uses in the hereinafter described areas be altered, changed and amended as shown and described below: Being Tfact 6B-ITand:a_portion of-,Ttact=6B=,situatedin the Jesse;G:A-11eri"Siuvey AbstractNo :1'8 Tandbeing approx mately. 46�acres, and more fully and completely described in Exhibit A from'.y AG; Agricultura1=°Districrtd.-S P-2t;Generaliiea Site.Plan"Dialtice;fora=nu seiy yard�and-buildings;for;retail:sales.-with a-caretaker- umt;las depicted on the approved Concept Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "B". SECTION 2. That the City Manager is hereby directed to correct the Official Zoning map of the City 0 of Southlake, Texas, to reflect the herein changes in zoning. SECTION 3. That in all other respects the use of the tract or tracts of land herein above described shall be subject to all the applicable regulations contained in said Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable and pertinent ordinances for the City of Southlake, Texas. . All existing sections, - subsections, paragraphs, sentences, words, phrases and definitions of said Zoning Ordinance are not amended hereby, but remain intact and are hereby ratified, verified, and affirmed. SECTION 4. That the zoning regulations and districts as herein established have been made in accordance with the comprehensive plan for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals and the general welfare of the community. They have been designed, with respect to both present III conditions and the conditions reasonablyanticipated to exist in the foreseeable future; to lessen P L:\COMDEV\W P-FILES\ZBAIPENDING1484292.0RD Page 4 nn_la IPPIV • congestion in the streets; to provide adequate light and air; to prevent over-crowding of land; to avoid undue concentration of population; and to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, drainage and surface water, parks and other commercial needs and development of the community. They have been made after a full and complete hearing with reasonable consideration among other things of the character of the district and its peculiar suitability for the particular uses and with a view of conserving the value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout the community. SECTION 5. That this ordinance shall be cumulative of all other ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, affecting zoning and shall not repeal any of the provisions of said ordinances except in ii„ those instances where provisions of those ordinances are in direct conflict with the provisions of this ordinance. SECTION 6. That the terms and provisions of this ordinance shall be deemed to be severable and that if the validity of the zoning affecting any portion of the tract or tracts of land described herein shall be declared to be invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of the zoning of the balance of said tract or tracts of land described herein. SECTION 7. Any person, firm or corporation who violates, disobeys, omits, neglects or refuses to comply with or who resists the enforcement of any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be fined not more than Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) for each offense. Each day that a . • violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense. L:\COMDEV\W P-FILES\ZBA\PENDING1480-292.ORD Page 5 ippr _ . SECTION 8. All rights and remedies of the City of Southlake are expressly saved as to any and all violations of the provisions of Ordinance No. 480, as amended, or any other ordinances affecting zoning which have accrued at the time of the effective date of this ordinance; and, as to such accrued violations and all pending litigation, both civil and criminal, whether pending in court or not, under such ordinances, same shall not be affected by this ordinance but may be prosecuted until final disposition by the courts. SECTION 9. The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby directed to publish the proposed ordinance or its caption and penalty together with a notice setting out the time and place for a public hearing thereon at least ten (10) days before the second reading of this ordinance, and if this ordinance provides for the imposition of any penalty, fine or forfeiture for any violation of any of its provisions, then the City Secretary shall additionally publish this ordinance in the official City newspaper one time within ten (10) days after passage of this ordinance, as required by Section 3.13 of the Charter of the City of Southlake. • SECTION 10. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law, and it is so ordained. • L:\COMDEV\W P-FILES\ZEA\PENDING\480-292.ORD Page 6 QH-1e1 PIPPF . . . • PASSED AND APPROVED on the 1st reading the day of , 1998. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY PASSED AND APPROVED on the 2nd reading the day of , 1998. 4110 MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: CITY ATTORNEY DATE: ADOPTED: • EFFECTIVE: L:\COMDEV\W P-FILES\TA\PENDINO\480-292.ORD Page 7 "Fr • EXHIBIT "A" Being a 3.46 acre tract situated in the Jesse C. Allen Survey, Abstract No. 18 in Tarrant, County Texas, and being a portion of that certain tract of land conveyed to Joseph Mortazavi as recorded in Volume 10299, Page 1354, and in Volume 9316, Page 1637 of the Deed Records of tarrant County, Texas, said tract being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows: COMMENCING at a 1/2 inch iron rod found at the northeast corner of said Joseph Mortazavi tract of land; • THENCE S 00 deg 22 min. 49 sec. W, along an existing fence line a distance of 502.86 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod-with plastic cap stamped R.P.L.S. No.3688 set for corner; THENCE S 00 deg. 22 min. 49 sec. W, continuing along the exsiting fence line a distance of 482.69 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod found for corner; THENCE N 89 deg. 41 min. 21 sec. W, a distance of 100.39 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod with plastic cap stamped R.P.L.S. No. 3688 set for corner; THENCE S 00 deg. 07 min 09 sec. W, a distance of 378.00 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod found for corner, said point being in the north line of Union Church Road; THENCE S 89 deg. 45 min. 30 sec. W, along the north right—of--way line of said Union Church Road distance of 120.36 feet to a-1/2 inch iron rod set for corner; • THENCE N 00 deg. 23 min. 40 sec. E, a distance of 859.89 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod set for corner; THENCE S 89 deg. 56 min. 45 sec. E, a distance of 218.82 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and containing 150,702 square feet or 3.46 acres of land more or less. • L:\COMDEV\W P-FILES\ZBA\PENDING\480-292 ARD Page 8 ��-11 0 _ . • �o • koo 1 z • zScale 1' . 50' AANO P.CARLSON ' Nt.9094 Pa I973 I ' I 6 PA/Pq.ANN atter i la-DJQa Pa IAOJ • 1 • , ISM ACRES I -. .---=----- AA. 611 ICI IR Pa NI :.: it t Sa ACRES y i ' POROCNI OF NSIPN 1NWTAIAN ,. ram. •• ILLIo7Da Pa 1JSA VOL.9.1111 Pa 19.17 C 1 1 OOVTOr.]1/00• u •saoir.-r.«1.«• o .. oc • r•_wnrr...r.w-.nr.w..rrr-- • LWG t WILIAN PM AalR Pa D -.174.'..':1._1:1:.�'-.-. wa1m..Z..CO.....ttrrfnm r...in....me ..... .-._r rur o,...... r_...I...r_r.r.moma1._...r...r- _ ..ru.r..,..r-.. (r..........7..«�., ..........row...... REGT OCT 121998 er..�u4PA d.u_.r-c.....r r.r......n rer.... I:)r - -M..t.r-Mhlrru-w.lY (0.. -r._....r-w r..n nc� u sr..-1.um.w.r._iM�rr...._� .�....ru.•urin rr.....w �ln'�:�l (.(- 4 .... .. ...11 PEISER SURVEYING CO., INC. l0 ryr--w....wr w..... r 4. ,OOI0.011.11M131.1 CarrCr f, �i tun 4.M. 1"�'-_ •Mara �• w.RRPC�-•Pw.r+r~........r am d w. �•• fi ii-10: warm.morn, 3 w. jtd__ .wr U. City of Southlake, Texas • STAFF REPORT - November 13, 1998 CASE NO: ZA 98-122 PROJECT: Preliminary Plat-The Remington Addition STAFF CONTACT: Dennis Killough, Senior Current Planner, 481-5581, ext. 787 REQUESTED ACTION: Preliminary Plat on property legally described as Tracts 4F, 4F1, 5A1, 5A1B, 6A1, 6B and 6B1, situated in the Jesse G. Allen Survey, Abstract No. 18, and being approximately 33.0 acres. • PURPOSE: Purpose of this request is to subdivide existing tracts in order to create buildable lots, accomodate construction of the Remington development, and establish future right-of-way location. LOCATION: On the south side of West Southlake Boulevard(F.M. 1709) across from Jellico Estates. OWNERS: Joseph Mortazavi,NET Church, and Ernest and Joyce Owen APPLICANT: Lifestyles, Inc. CURRENT ZONING: "AG" Agricultural District, "CS" Community Service District, and "S-P-2" Generalized Site Plan District for senior adult living complex to include tri-plex and quadra-plex villas, personal care facility, nursing care facility, and senior multi-family units. LAND USE CATEGORY: Low Density Residential and Public/Semi-Public NO. NOTICES SENT: Twelve (12) RESPONSES: None P&Z ACTION: November 5, 1998; Approved (6-0-1) subject to Plat Review Summary No. 1, dated October 30, 1998, waiving Item #15c (minimum lot area of 5 acres within Lot 4), and waiving the requirement for a tree survey on Lot 4 and deferring the requirement for a Tree Survey for the church's property until the Concept Plan. STAFF COMMENTS: Attached is Plat Review Summary No. 2, dated November 13, 1998. L:\COMDEV\WP-FILES\MEMO\98CASES\98-122PP.WPD I6-I in211 ., :Ii1iitktMti4 k 4 Ns 06 sty iv iiilli MB ......0011Kurir... 1 = ; ..: tt Pic 'A-0•1111fr 4 *-:::- • 1 ''_ ..IL Mir lossmarx,--Ai _. . ,__ _r_logoi lit,p .I., I, ' " f WI* .w' '- - -* -Iii is ilk , , ittiwaila i81F B . 111k grillfill. WOO S' IS 0 r 9+ R� ma � 1 - ,A+: es4s AC talk ^ SURVEY ilr. Stail ' 699 k t t`` sz�. reiptuis f 11111 \attiti �� A 2A510 1: -11111Wilk -- r 19� ,1 o---"'i''' 'l ► r, \ - i.:2. +�k _____\C[ ,.,, ft, 1 72 ;*i1d:111'0,51 la 4\ la IC • ----fir--- -a ,_ : . t 4 s..._. _. � 1. t 14� � ,: ; is a , 1 t ; Rol T35d" le ID . Li _ i �� • 35 Ac IL t lag j 1 I 1 RI ,i illi • . �T� B� is 1 1 8 4 `\ 1.1 r s3. = tY { 4 I3 T3 Ac a L @ 4 1 `�eu,''I Asa - 16 �� B` s�� i ��Ac�zT3��n al am } I 4A9, k ..,-i , c..‘ •sc r. Ta • iim..%1 . /firi 4 iiiie I T.4 AC l Q6-a- TRACT MAP . "SF--1 iR.2C27 TR.2C26 10A , 17A J.HALL 1.70 AC 1.63 AC J.HALL J.HALL t D . W.GOODEL 170 .127 0 R.2C27A TR.2C26A 1813 STA TEXAS 37 0 02_0 - .1 .180 0 / _ .- ��-,• 3 0 14 "SF-1 A" z 0 - �6a TR.4C1 5 1R 1.22 Ac M. IR.4F1 Z O -. 1.88A,. R.SLAYTON TR.4M >-,q 4.025 Ac �� i - 58 .80 1.0 0 - ,A I Ac 7neA Ar t0c TR 5C IA 1 TR.5A2 13.482 Ac 'Jr 9.549 ` 4K1 TR.4L1 5Ac 1.26 Ac TR.4F TR.4C n„'9 Ac E.WIESMAN 7.642 AC l. TR.50 '-- 3.10 Ac 4K TR.4L 1Ac .74Ac TR 5A10 "Ann R.SLAYTON 8.180 ® z 1�77 PT. TR.4 T.4J 2 Ac II • TR 4 TR 4G TR 4F n� 2.00 AC 7.642 AC 8.39 AC TP Fet 2.48 AC D.SAMMONc a•\ R.REUTLINGER . `s TR • 1It 602 7.34 - 5. 0 KELLER ISO J. Q1,VEY TR 6l) - 1,.... a nm at TR 6A S 'I S B.COUCH 4.00 0 r` TR 6 . "AG" TR 6A1A 11.0 0 3.00 TR 4D 19.70 AC P.BAILEY -1 ne D.SAMMONS J Z _"AG„ 1 O No to TR 6A2 Q t 2.00 0 j pW,, TR 7 TR 6D3 602A 2.01 0 .87 AC 112__6EiL B.. et-5 filL .34 AC COUCH 22 n. _ __ __ SOUTIILAK ----e9NTINF.NTAF-�-BL-1.. 0._l----- �.7�. -. n • 1, n n Inn n A A A MI A 1 KEI,LEI .n �q - ,u 5 is 4 l9 3 I9 2'rn t - 6 1 9 2 9 3 9 4 9 5 3 6 9 7 9 8 9 9 ADJACENT OWNERS n n ,. » n 7, A " FLIN'1 TR TR 2E ep AND 3ONiNG XI ' 5.020 S.6-, Ia i/. 'I 0 I910 1911 1912! r1192 19 3I94 I95 IS ^ti 7I98 I99 r _ .. City of Southlake, Texas PLAT REVIEW SUMMARY Case No: ZA 98-122 Review No: Two Date of Review: 11/13/98 Project Name: Preliminary Plat-The Remington Addition.being 33.04 acres out of the J.G. Allen Survey, Abstract No. 18 APPLICANT: SURVEYOR: Lifestyles Inc. Washington & Associates Inc. 800 W. Southlake Blvd. 500 Grapevine Hwy. STE. #375 Southlake, TX 76092 Hurst. TX 76054 Phone : (817) 251-8380 Phone: (817) 485-0707 Fax : (817) 251-9172 Attn: Diana Hanson Fax: (817) 485 4106 Attn: Jackey Fluitt CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 11/09/98 AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. THESE STIPULATIONS ARE HEREBY MADE CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AMENDED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION,PLEASE CONTACT EDWARD MCROY AT(817)481-5581,EXT. 880. 1. Delete the approval block from the face of the plat. 2. Provide the correct deed record(volume and page)for the N.E.T. Church tract(Lot 3)in the preamble IIIof the legal description. 3. The following changes are needed with regard to adjacent properties within 200'to include properties across any adjacent R.O.W.: a. Show and label the name of the record owner& corresponding deed record(volume & page) for the adjacent unplatted Slayton tract to the west. b. Label the existing zoning on shown properties as follows: Property Existing Zoning Property Existing Zoning Lotl,Block 1 SP2 Bailey tract AG Lot 2,Block 1 SP2 Sammons tract AG Lot 3,Block 1 AG Keller I.S.D.tract AG Lot 4,Block 1 AG Slayton tract SF1-A Wiesman tract AG Lot 1,Jellico Estates SF1-A Couch tract AG Lot 17,Jellico Estates SF1-A Pearson tract AG Lot 18,Jellico Estates SF1-A c. Remove L.U.D. labels from all properties shown on the plat. 4. The following changes are needed with regard to easements: a. Show and label easements for water, sewer and/or drainage in compliance with approved utility and/or construction plans. No easements have been shown that correspond to the water, sewer, or storm sewer lines proposed within Lots 1 and 2. In addition, drainage L:\COMDEV\WP-FILES\REV\98\98122PP2.WPD Li Page 1 1 City of Southlake, Texas easements should be shown for detention areas even where these are stated to be temporary. _ b. Show and label common access easements in accordance with the Site Plan currently under consideration for Lot 1 of this site. (City Case No. 98-120) c. Show and label the 50' D.&U.E. within the approved preliminary plat of the Slayton tract adjacent to the west property boundary. 5. Label the existing R.O.W. width for Union Church Road. 6. Relocate the temporary turn around and easement shown at the south terminus of Owenwood Drive so that it is entirely within the Remington development or provide documentation that K.I.S.D. has granted such an easement with permission granted for the construction of such a turn- around on their property. A permanent cul-de-sac with R.O.W. dedication or a permanent turn- around meeting the requirements for emergency vehicles may be required within the Remington Development should a through connection not be provided for Owenwood Drive. 7. Show and label the area embraced by tree cover. Provide a tree survey to include Lots 3 and 4. (P&ZAction 11/5/98 Waive the tree survey on Lot 4 and defer the tree survey on Lot 3 until a future plat, concept plan or site plan.) • Preliminary water, sewer and drainage plans are required with this submittal. Such plans have been provided for Lots 1 and 2 but have not been provided for Lots 3 and 4. * The following comments may require modification pending the result of the S-P-2 zoning action curently in process for Lot 4. 9. The following changes are needed regarding the proposed Lot 4: a. Show and label a minimum front building setback line of 30' along Union Church Road from the required R.O.W. dedication. * It appears the existing single story wood house encroaches into this 30' setback. b. Provide the minimum lot area of 5 acres for a B-1 Business Service Park District(Sec 24.5 f.). (P&Z Action 11/5/98 Delete) * Denotes Informational Comment cc: Lifestyles Inc. VIA FAX ABOVE Washington & Associates Inc. VIA FAX ABOVE M&J Farms VIA Mail 2449 Union Church Road,Keller,TX 76248 N.E.T. Church VIA FAX (817) 514-9638 Attn: Johnny Bemstien LACOMDEV\WP-FILES\REV\98\98122PP2.WPD Page 2 r __ City of Southlake,Texas STREE PRESERVATION ANALYSIS (COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT) Case No: ZA 98-122 Date of Review: 10 - 22 - 98 Number of Pages: 2 . Project Name: Owens Tract(Preliminary Plat) APPLICANT: ENGINEERS/PLANNERS: Ernest and Joyce Owen, Lifestyles Inc. Gailer, Tolsen, French- Design Associates 800 West Southlake Blvd. 4516 West Vickery Blvd. Southlake, TX 76092 Ft. Worth, TX 76107 Phone:(817) 329-0865 Phone: (817) 737-9513 Fax: Fax: (817) 763-8738 THIS ANALYSIS IS PREPARED AT THE TIME OF REVIEW OF THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT AND IS TO PROVIDE AN ANALYSIS OF THE PLAN OR SURVEY AND THE IMPACT OF CONSTRUCTION ON ANY PROTECTED TREES ON THE SITE. FOR ANY QUESTIONS OR CLARIFICATION CONTACT KEITH MARTIN, LANDSCAPE ADMINISTRATOR AT(817)481-5581 EXT. 848. TREE PRESERVATION COMMENTS: The applicant has not submitted a Tree Survey for the Timberlake Community Church tract and the Joseph Mortazavi tract with the Preliminary Plat. A survey has been submitted with the Concept Plan for the actual Remington development site,but at the time the two above mentioned tracts were not involved. 2. Parking lot medians have been strategically placed to help preserve some protected Post Oaks. To ensure that these Post Oaks live, no grade changes should occur for as far around the trees as possible. Some alternative paving may also be installed to allow for a pervious area to exist in the area of the trees roots. 3. The grade change in back of the retention wall along the front of the Retirement Villas will . remove approximately eighteen(18)protected trees. The trees along the top of the retention wall will also be effected. I recommend that flexibility be given to the applicant to work with staff for placement of the retention wall. Also,that the applicant consult with the City Engineers about alternative construction procedures to help preserve the trees bordering the wall. * A Tree survey meeting the requirements of schedule B of the Tree Preservation Ordinance 585-A shall be required with the submittal of a Concept Plan, Site Plan or Preliminary Plat. * No grade changes shall be allowed within the limits of the critical root zone of any protected tree unless adequate construction methods are approved by the Landscape Administrator or if grading 40 is as directed by the city's drainage inspector. BUILDING INSPECTIONS .se)-b L:trees/drc98/98-122 City of Southlake,Texas TREE PRESERVATION ANALYSIS Case: 98-122 Page 2 * A protected tree shall be considered to be preserved only if a minimum of 75%of the critical root zone is maintained at undisturbed natural grade and no more than 25% of the canopy is removed due to building encroachment. * All construction plans shall include the requirements noted in Appendix 'C', of the Tree Preservation Ordinance 585-A. * All area within public R.O.W., public utility or drainage easements as shown on an approved Final Plat, and the fire lanes,required parking areas and area within six feet(6')of the building foundation as shown on an approved Site Plan shall be exempt from the tree protection and replacement requirements specified in the Tree Preservation Ordinance 585-A. • BUILDING INSPECTIONS L:trees/drc98/98-122 tad I•Ieofa M1�1 arcs exSn-w as aMR lar.a 004 au.s .aoa aw.au .R•/._ • (410— • t Ile a- t•-I im tt9 en v xa f al � '—D �-I—SA 1•'•• • I• WI MI •I I �— tit � r— - — — J;1 I "": i. y 1011 ` .� .a✓ _ _'__ x{.1' .•.•- - '.:yy.I ..awe. lua.. - Smerr•mm • i l • i . 1 : , I 1 1 i i i , I 1 ,%��~ ;��rt •-_ !J _i_.. _ �- •I 1\i W.�••.I.o•.0.1 1 -S- si--. ' C ,k ,•..k .\c.:..a e\wi .,'\ 10af1 \ \ , I C.., ,1 rri•'. 1. .• '. • . • ' j ...__ - - •scud m• F. I. ``q � \ \ •` Carr' 1 /'. }�i; _ • / �.i. _- • • y ',�•(.�\ •�. \ ` 1 sr i ..I,-. rti'-.''ilI 7 _mow. I d 5 i ' ( \ ' �.\.\ \\\\. \ \ \ sem.?.r I 1,,\O s Tr._,\ ' / '°'_r i'el 3 e ,9-- . .1 t' \ l ro a.•mr l�..- / ) 1 'Caw 1 •'1 ..Ile :. .. -_.�-s.i I n \ ,\ \ \ l 1 i 1 l Carz _ ° ..� �- �_` -, _ c `•0�. •, \\ \�\. \\\ i` 1 + i I l / YYt •r °Ruu°Ie:aan��F'' , - r _ ._.._..-.._.._ • -1,_ l tl ■ • v \ \\��\ \ :\.`N t\ • \ \ \ 1 / L f ` 'a sac .-- Y IpIl1I•vast I I I I.�.-.. n. �. ccV ice• 1 w •-t J• t I 1I`'.—.. •, • I• ;Yd ( ;. E _ , 'C:'"d':-. j o o u uux xwm to WY SWIM, 1 r4.. \ Y� rag- GG-L ._ _ - .7 / .sass-le I� �I .r�r-za I of� • a.7:1fa+ (.,e1 r•A • • I .�' r/ O,, oo�j P �6 .�`•� a r1s pPa f M �� m' , .11` 6i1 L• •. •a°I' ='�._'—�.� .' t ' Via...—_-' b• Il lI • ! • ,"cr + Y /i( -7• °.r•1 --Z--. Car ,� ( ,\ `y \. -• \a P l l r _ .Ili.f'.r.ro7/!:ti ° ,fit-' jam- 4l • -1A ' i�. ->/�•..>, :.rv.. �•1�-may*� e: �.. . - •C t'f"`tI'�I/7J' i1 yM�i=S/N7oaD=TA,(1r \ L__ i--r- Y 'ry 1 .. it //t i — .1_... • MN carat -- W f•• ��..�.13ffi `'. I P.O.B. A►•r b M.Car r 5.•Y• • 0r C.LAM MIT OP=LS LUIIFTY a TAN-ANT PIM=0ISCWIo1 WIG no.KW Iai dd r•Ylk r. C.NON-MM:Meat At Ilea S 0072.4e R..In..JA mod IN.-r d a...WK./I.41ES7 N. ILI•r••M.Ql TO d Oa.SO W.I.1 r w a....1.1•My►.A I.•I?i.ti Mi r..Ca1... .•1,a..I Y 1.4.•••IOW Ina ell d k•Y.•UM Pa• ' OW Si.0•1 Iera d f..1 Wl}r..d—I..g•pIv d Nd owl•. S[IM Y I1171•N let•YI Y••/f 1.M I.4 Ia.dw ho Yto b r,..al/ttr Co. I!•. d_ r WW1.1 son a'`pr .....bi..1.drGto to a KW (MOalft.R�. .rin.h WIN.Iirrr• PRISLOOYINPPL&T ' MOM••1/YI.,y1•••k r ad.l••d IA lla(•d S.M.144'44 IO,Q Ya•yyRd>h�ll•Y ar.4�i.l b•1/rtidhd 'a Ilk1oa rl,a Cale am ,d•I.wlr l.y YYL u.rW N Nod ra1r u.u..ayes• •r1••.Y1d r.r•r••••r•b dY1..al•1r1. TM RIDm7GTON ADDITION s k•Co.1•••ant IA.LC.0 aN— $ ....Y•t.lddk Cad..,.a4r:Yh.10)At P.Nu uILC 1•'. 901Q Y 1...[N.I% Y.It"1.n1I•.C..Iiq r.Yd r N.F�.YL AN ADDITION TO CITY OF soureuxr. TARRANT cowers, True �• d•w YY••L IlORC Ymsfd L•..IS IONcc.O,O hd d.l.'Ira.l.•IwM .Yy.Nea•r I..IYII N.to t/r Ni.d how/a.Meg.wd MCC .•erlld.111 bed b•arw.r/A WS•awe•We ofrrDal: r.a•.1•ard•IddW..v.dYM YMtY w.I.YrY BRING 33.04 A i OUT OF ITSCRY OF •Ilk•r MOM k4•ho•r11P,•d Ale l.(d•.q*I d.! for N-N P...110I aiICI: Savlau8 I ban 1WWII'L.RnI..c J.G.A►LAN SMUT,ABSTRACT NO. 18 Iloa YsentR•.qr are.Y r.r Mho M,IAa kd Y•I/Yti i SIIa .Irons•a no I.b•r/t I..rod r.t d a.e NOVAlDb6 1998 4 LOTS • •acco 4, : POa I MWYSL ILIA te b•qr.d M. WINE YO-Gf£R SIOSI WI Y•if 1.•1.1.4 • IOU N Melt C'Ctrs h.l N.W.,.lawt Pea II MTV le MU fad N. .N•1/Y l.d k• OWES: Ilea At i N-IC if?WO L MSC M b•Copp.-0.Pow.6..1 elY... IOU S OGIr3L WOO.N.1/Y N.d NM ICUs'@' I M1T•.ry•In "PIMA n•ndYOu•t Ya.Intl.....Y I..l Mho Am I DAME: AI:= ..•�Mt - y� IOU S eOY c•••••►/�•/�Ys 1.d.MIMIC MINI 1/7'1+.d I'd Ilea S 11Y••[MR 4 Y N.yY a d h.t a.. ..•••• pg.. -�� -\ 1 MIYY.•rd•ta.dM/.vIIY•r1 YJ..•I Wt. BOW •R/NI.1t01••.b•yr I.dYWNYMYrY•Y.NI IA pot'RI'- �'_� • noQ *.h.•dl•1.0.0NIYr IKM 1M.ARLCL l••• 1101 1.•r•w.•.k..•1•Fp.6 Maw rPort a MIIW wl4 CITY OF FELLER -' Ia O $aunt C c.d.,dog•1••••••KWh.1 Ni Fir Is ratk.N aural lid.I••(L4NSlS iQ d r =NC - or MP,M...r MIAOW s.••d J.61 Ih1NV teat LOCATION MAP .Ill.....,moo...... - . q -laa • Fep NOV 0 91998 City of Southlake, Texas • STAFF REPORT November 13, 1998 CASE NO: ZA 98-113 PROJECT: First Reading/Ordinance No. 480-291 Rezoning/Tracts 1B and 1B1.James Thornhill Survey.Abstract No. 1505 STAFF CONTACT: Karen P. Gandy,Zoning Administrator, 481-5581, ext. 743 • REQUESTED ACTION: Zoning Change on property legally described as being Tracts 1B and 1B1 situated in the James Thornhill Survey, Abstract No. 1505, and being approximately 5.0 acres. -_ PURPOSE: Purpose of this request is to rezone the property to accommodate home construction. LOCATION: On the north side of West Continental Boulevard approximately 250' east of Southlake Hills Drive. OWNERS: Kaeini Family First Limited Partnership and Raman Chandler 1111 APPLICANT: Kaeini Family First Limited Partnership CURRENT ZONING: "AG" Agricultural District REQUESTED ZONING: "SF-1A" Single Family Residential District LAND USE CATEGORY: Medium Density Residential NO.NOTICES SENT: Twenty-eight(28) RESPONSES: Nine (9) responses were received within the 200'notification area: • Raul L. and Helen S. Regaldo, 1006 Southlake Hills Dr., Southlake, Texas, opposed. "1. The existing zoning provides 'green space' buffer between existing residential subdivisions. 2. Continental Blvd. cannot take the additional automobile or construction traffic without experiencing further deterioration." (Received October 28, 1998). • Thomas L. and Tracy Christensen, 1003 Southlake Hills Dr., Southlake, Texas, opposed. "Prefer to have the land behind our home undeveloped!" (Received October 28, 1998). • John J. Gagnon, 1005 Southlake Hills Drive, Southlake, Texas, opposed. "Need more details on water drainage, concern on existing trees, confusion on 1 acre lots versus 5000 sq. foot home gC - ► City of Southlake, Texas on 2 lots." (Received November 2, 1998). • Mew , thridge, Southlake, Texas,opposed. "Lettatther fromR. landownerBelaus1311(Kaeini)Nor contradicts the plan to divide into 4 lots. Other issues are drainage,landscaping,environmental impact." (Received November 2, 1998). • Mark and Lisa Sharp, 1009 Southlake Hills Drive, Southlake, Texas, opposed. "Drainage (will there be problems?). Clarify where the house will be (which lot?). How many trees will be taken out?" (Received November 2, 1998). • Joseph J. Bectol, 1000 Hidden Knoll Court, Southlake, Texas, opposed. "Drainage problems exist and are not resolved. Flooding will occur if not taken into account and corrected. Siting of house on 2 lots indicate potential for sell of all lots separately. Has environmental impact statement been conducted." (Received November 2, 1998). • Daphne Biddle, 1011 Southlake Hills Drive, Southlake,Texas, undecided. "We need clarification as to the drainage problems that will occur if no plans are made now." (Received November 2, 1998). • Henry P. Nagy, 1313 Northridge, Southlake, Texas, opposed. "Until the city of Southlake can determine the impact on water drainage and address this formally." (Received November 5, 1998). • Terrence and Barbara Torrey, 1007 Southlake Hills Drive, Southlake, Texas, opposed. "Not enough information. Area provides a buffer between neighbor hoods." (Received November 5, 1998). Attached is a letter sent by the owner and applicant to the surrounding homeowners, regarding their plans for the property. P&Z ACTION: November 5, 1998; Approved(7-0). STAFF COMMENTS: Please note that a change of zoning to the "SF-1A" Single Family Residential District does not require a Concept Plan Review by Staff. A super-majority (6 out of 7) vote of the City Council will be required for approval of this item due to the opposition within 200' exceeding 20% of the total land area. L:\COMDEV\WP-FILES\MEMO\98CASES\98-113Z.WPD LETTER SENT BY APPLICANT TO SURROUNDING HOMEOWNERS • I UU PVT livvocece misaF mio r lioseAND \Icad , f4K\-; NO pf-M C ki);Wic=ZiA 111C1I3 ( I P . - ' o G &RIACt\)1f)E rz,q NE LAs I IS `IDS , WE GWN 1)-E fickc5 L-.ccAT )3 60. DiE 1\;o21")-1 S io OF i SOU LPkG: LU!D PrpPPO( , : �Gr als i CF Soo11-tu-} HILLS .0P , ''CtUSHOULD ;.aUE. 12ECeuED I� LL l\ afl I2'i( uL7 `IGR OF DiE zoN l k - cRA E i. .% NAIE i n\1 o To Pe)-CSC N A LLL Co m m c I a)ozi E. ETha jalie u iu JU I 1 o P SW R AI'N GUT(cNs oQ CC'C QtJS tfa,LIVI I+1 EI poi 4)EoEto St Sus— 0 F(ffl (Lt op S Wint( T-Hci, To 13olL J eurQ n�sz- o c T-uni . AAuc PEGwL r s ro RE-zoke Foil 14 lcOLmRAL. 0 Sr2 C:Sit( c P 0 d_ PrCfa-7 1- INf f1Oh P(Ai iu i 0E ME LAND i N 1 t) 1,O1S 1 O . U I LO 00 P F}of`?L. o N = LU TC;w ziS TE- S3E\Ck OP fl-c Pi2oPE i'i ,LINO L,jE 1 ENE Lcr F2GN i &LOPE . IF m@QE ARE il-NY & Esfc(US OR CoiC NS cPPL 6E CCNThc i�U i)-T 817 - -/81 -sJaa . 1); 13E £LA-p TO ,toDREc ANC Cc(Qck)S Sind. Tor(da_a- r)o r en RECD Ulf v 0 21998 8c- 3 6 ' ' r tt j1J�Y~ 1 W t i5b 175 I t3+ tss cJF 11!IPPr 2t1144. ;E gn 2 � 2 � 5 ? em s 3 s; 6 s 5 4 3 � � `r T /kw a�,�IS 9s 1R c")),... '04� U n —I 1 ''' 6\ = 2 110 1m:' 1� ______.______...._.) 1 a 8 (` 0 2 _i 1m / .. ° �C3 ac f' t.o III ► ► -1-) 9 W " no t E. L t � 7 1 =� 12�0 ) tt, ° 136 T 1ss � R 9 R j-6 I Z e 11 a 10 A A $ 1 = N rsa ,.SF_20A A x 5 8 ." • ri0 r ,to . ,I Z >n 1.. x tss �' 5 . C 1 + I NORTHRIDGE DR t W170 R �D.GALASKI g oC n a IiU I),.1 �, z 1a . O z I w ?! 1 N Ij'DDN T ^J.LOWE Y J. TYj4?pit 05 A 2 -Its U - q ,to Be /lo r6 A?PEARSON `j N 0 1 ,k20� !' 2 T.CHRISTENSEN�• 13a '" sits •� 111.3 ,� ro 143 6 to � � , x ,., J.BECTOL $D.CROSS^ a TR 1A4 A� R.REGALDO j.GAGNON c !_)----•----.._! 1.21 AC ` " O 5 Tt7 19 p� + _�3.38 AC '�+la O141 ,� _. r/3 TR 1Al T. FULLER L.BONET : 1.0 AC ' 4 T.TORREY L B.BARTHOLOMEW • 9 TR 1A6 .29 AC /vs a K.MOORE �v8 TR 1A6A .50 AC 3 S. 1 rJ ' M.SHARP it' C a P. TR 1 AB EARNEST O K.MOORE .81 AC R 1 2 _ t. D.BIDDLE ` �"AG" 11 as :N r - K.MOORE a TR 1A9 0 - 1.10 AC 102 T 310 CONTINENTAL BLVD — — — — —— — — — — — 134 111 J. HOLLSTEIN J. POLAK E. ROBERTSON T. DILL - 43t- ,+r Igo111 R I • ism44 ,, D.TOMLIN o C.VIANE s 42 �� I - s T.GARDNER 204200 C 10R s 30R _ I ,� �z I s Ic - • "SF-20B" 7 0 172 q N. I C s d 4 • In 0 s 205 n 125 L7 E+ R . p � 5 - 418 .aI I A a 37 d _ ,u ,..,1'w } 124 O a 2- - 7 2\ z ADJACENT OWNERS H I t 2 2 AND ZONING gc. 7� a I j 8 ?. _ nl 1 1 � \ t f • CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. 4804n AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 480, AS AMENDED,THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS; GRANTING A ZONING CHANGE ON A CERTAIN TRACT OR TRACTS OF LAND WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE,TEXAS BEING LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS SAB AND 1B1S, 1(IOWA IN.:;THE:JA_MES7THORNHILL:'SUI2vEY ABSTRAC 4N0-1 ..... ,.Ls w..d n' -. . •. @ .q._...:_ 1SOS;; A_ND;"BEffi—O APPROXIMATELY,, .AC_RES, AND MORE FULLY AND COMPLETELY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT"A"FROM"AG"AGRICUL,TURAUDISTA ICTi TO "SF=1A"77,"SINGLE 7FAMII Y` RESIDENTIAL, DISTRICT, SUBJECT TO THE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS CONTAINED IN THIS ORDINANCE; CORRECTING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP; PRESERVING ALL OTHER PORTIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE;DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST,MORALS AND GENERAL WELFARE DEMAND THE ZONING CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS HEREIN MADE; PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS HEREOF; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Southlake, Texas 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 Texas Local Government Code; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 211 of the Local Government Code, the City has the authority to adopt a comprehensive zoning ordinance and map regulating the location and use of buildings, other structures and land for business, industrial, residential and other purposes, and to amend said ordinance and map for the purpose of promoting the public health, safety, morals and general welfare, all in accordance with a comprehensive plan; and L:\COMDEV\W P-FILES\ZBA\PENDING\480-29I.ORD Page 1 (e g c_ • WHEREAS, the hereinafter described property is currently zoned as 'SAG"A riculfural District under the City's Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance; and . WHEREAS,a change in the zoning classification of said property was requested by a person or corporation having a proprietary interest in said property; and WHEREAS,the City Council of the City of Southlake,Texas,at a public hearing called by the City Council did consider the following factors in making a determination as to whether these changes should be granted or denied: safety of the motoring public and the pedestrians using the facilities in the area immediately surrounding the sites; safety from fire hazards and damages; noise producing elements and glare of the vehicular and stationary lights and effect of such lights on established character of the neighborhood; location, lighting and types of signs and relation of signs to traffic control and adjacent property; street size and adequacy of width for traffic reasonably • expected to be generated by the proposed use around the site and in the immediate neighborhood; adequacy of parking as determined by requirements of this ordinance for off-street parking facilities; location of ingress and egress points for parking and off-street loading spaces, and protection of public health by surfacing on all parking areas to control dust; effect on the promotion of health ad the general welfare; effect on light and air; effect on the over-crowding of the land; effect on the concentration of population, and effect on transportation,water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public facilities; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake,Texas, further considered among other things the character of the districts and their peculiar suitability for particular uses and the view to conserve the value of the buildings,and encourage the most appropriate use of the land throughout this City; and, • L:\COMDEV\W P-FILES\ZBA\PENDING\48I1-291.ORD Page 2 IIIWHEREAS,the City Council of the City of Southlake,Texas,does find that there is a public necessity for the zoning changes, that the public demands them, that the public interest clearly requires the amendments,and that the zoning changes do not unreasonably invade the rights of those who bought or improved property with reference to the classification which existed at the time their original investment was made; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, does find that the changes in zoning lessen the congestion in the streets,helps secure safety from fire,panic, and other dangers, promotes the health and the general welfare, provides adequate light and air, prevents the over- crowding of land, avoids undue concentration of population, and facilitates the adequate provision of transportation,water, sewerage, schools,parks and other public requirements; and, WHEREAS,the City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, has determined that there is • a necessity and need for the changes in zoning and has also found and determined that there has been a change in the conditions of the property surrounding and in close proximity to the tract or tracts of land requested for a change since the tract or tracts of land were originally classified and therefore feels that the respective changes in zoning classification for the tract or tracts of land are needed,are called for, and are in the best interest of the public at large, the citizens of the city of Southlake, Texas, and helps promote the general health, safety and welfare of the community. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE,TEXAS: SECTION 1. That Ordinance No. 480, the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Southlake, Texas, passed on the 19th day of September, 1989, as originally adopted and amended, is hereby III .. L:\COMDEV\W P-FILES\ZBAIPENDING\480.291.0RD Page 3 ge--- S 411 amended so that the permitted uses in the hereinafter described areas be altered, changed and amended as shown and described below: , Being Tracts":1B:and-1B1_situated:in�the Jaynes:Tliornhill�Survey,Abstract".No -1505 _� �::,aa^...� — .._s.•+::.:... ..,.>.., .�ca=.�:<7:. .*er-..:.a.w.c..�. .._m>_ �t:•. Sz_;:'r.±�i��:'.:1„::x..^�'sa;:.� and;:being=ypp roximately.;50=4acres, and more fully and completely described in Exhibit"A" from."AG"A c iltural';Disi±t to SF,;1A- Sin le�F ity-lResicletial District: SECTION 2. That the City Manager is hereby directed to correct the Official Zoning map of the City of Southlake,Texas,to reflect the herein changes in zoning. SECTION 3. That in all other respects the use of the tract or tracts of land herein above described shall be subject to all the applicable regulations contained in said Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable 0 and pertinent ordinances for,the City of Southlake, Texas. All existing sections, subsections, paragraphs, sentences, words, phrases and definitions of said Zoning Ordinance are not amended hereby, but remain intact and are hereby ratified, verified, and affirmed. SECTION 4. That the zoning regulations and districts as herein established have been made in accordance with the comprehensive plan for the purpose of promoting the health, safety,morals and the general welfare of the community. They have been designed, with respect to both present conditions and the conditions reasonably anticipated to exist in the foreseeable future;to lessen congestion in the streets; to provide adequate light and air; to prevent over-crowding of land; to avoid undue concentration of population; and to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, drainage and surface water, parks and other commercial needs and development of the • community. They have been made after a full and complete hearing with reasonable consideration L:\COMDEV\W P-FILES\ZBA\PENDING\480-291.ORD Page 4 ('� /� �y Cam' 1. ` / PFr 0 among other things of the character of the district and its peculiar suitability for the particular uses and with a view of conserving the value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout the community. SECTION 5. That this ordinance shall be cumulative of all other ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, affecting zoning and shall not repeal any of the provisions of said ordinances except in those instances where provisions of those ordinances are in direct conflict with the provisions of this ordinance. SECTION 6. That the terms and provisions of this ordinance shall be deemed to be severable and that if the validity of the zoning affecting any portion of the tract or tracts of land described herein shall be declared to be invalid,the same shall not affect the validity of the zoning of the balance of said tract or tracts of land described herein. SECTION 7. Any person, firm or corporation who violates, disobeys, omits,neglects or refuses to comply with or who resists the enforcement of any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be fined not more than Two Thousand Dollars($2,000.00)for each offense. Each day that a violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense. SECTION 8. All rights and remedies of the City of Southlake are expressly saved as to any and all violations of the provisions of Ordinance No. 480, as amended, or any other ordinances affecting zoning which have accrued at the time of the effective date of this ordinance; and, as to such accrued L:ICOMDEV\W P-FILES\ZBA\PENDING\480-291.ORD Page 5 0 C - IC) pplV • violations and all pending litigation,both civil and criminal,whether pending in court or not, under such ordinances, same shall not be affected by this ordinance but may be prosecuted until final disposition by the courts. SECTION 9. The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby directed to publish the proposed ordinance or its caption and penalty together with a notice setting out the time and place for a public hearing thereon at least ten (10) days before the second reading of this ordinance, and if this ordinance provides for the imposition of any penalty, fine or forfeiture for any violation of any of its provisions,then the City Secretary shall additionally publish this ordinance in the official City newspaper one time within ten(10)days after passage of this ordinance, as required by Section 3.13 of the Charter of the City of Southlake. • SECTION 10. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law, and it is so ordained. PASSED AND APPROVED on the 1st reading the day of , 1998. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY • III L:\COMDEVIWP-FILES\ZBA\PENDING\480-291.ORD • Page 6 BC - it PASSED AND APPROVED on the 2nd reading the day of , 1990. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: • CITY ATTORNEY DATE: ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE: • LACOMDEV\WP-FILES\79A\PENDING\480-291.ORD Page 7 gC - ! Z P/IPP 411 EXHIBIT "A" WHEREAS The Kaeini Family Limited Partnership is the owner of a tract of land as conveyed by deed in Volume 12425,P. 2392 of the Deed Records of Tarrant County,Texas and including the SAVE&EXCEPT TRACT which was retained by C.R. Chandler& wife R.R. Chandler from the original deed recorded in Volume 9985,Page 893 all of which are situated in the James Thornhill.Survey,Abst. 1505 in the City of Southlake,Tarrant County,Texas and being more particularly described as follows: •' BEGINNING at the southwest corner of said tract,same being in the south line of said Thornhill Survey; THENCE N 00°05'13"W along the west line of said tract, passing he theast corner of Lot 1,Block 1 of Southlake Hills Phase I as recorded in Cabinet A, Slide 1 27 of theme Plat Records of Tarrant County,Texas and in all 659.97' to the northwest corner of said~-•• Tract 2, same being the southwest corner of Lot 7, Block 1 of said Southlake Hills Phase I;• • <<� THENCE N 89°27'47"E along'the north line of said tract and the-south lire of Lots 7-9 of said Southlake Hills Phase.I for 329.68'.to the southeast corner of said Lot 9; THENCE S 00°04'42"E along the east line of said tract and the.west line of said Southlake Hills East for 662.37' to a point in the said south line of the J. Thornhill Survey; , THENCE S 89°52'49"W along said line for 329.57' to the'POINT OF-BEGINNING and CONTAINING 217,935 sgt;are feet or 5.00 acres of land. • • LACOM DEV\W P-FILES\ZBA\PENDING\480-291.ORD • Page 8 City of Southlake, Texas STAFF REPORT November 13, 1998 CASE NO: ZA 98-123 PROJECT: Preliminary Plat-Explorer Addition STAFF CONTACT: Dennis Killough, Senior Current Planner, 481-5581,ext. 787 REQUESTED ACTION: Preliminary Plat on property legally described as Tract 1B 1A situated in the Harrison Decker Survey,Abstract No. 438,Tracts 4B and 4C, situated in the C.B. McDonald Survey,Abstract No. 1013, and Tract 1B situated in the Payton R. Splane Survey, Abstract No. 1453, and • being approximately 16.493 acres. PURPOSE: Purpose of this preliminary plat is to create lots in order to get a building permit. LOCATION: On the south side of East Continental Boulevard at the intersection of East Continental Boulevard and Crooked Lane. OWNER: Explorer Pipeline Company • APPLICANT: Huitt-Zollars, Inc. CURRENT ZONING: "I-2" Heavy Industrial District LAND USE CATEGORY: Industrial NO.NOTICES SENT: Seventeen(17) RESPONSES: One (1)response was received within the 200' notification'area • Charles R. Young, P.O. Box 3348, Grapevine, TX, in favor. (Received November 3, 1998). P&Z ACTION: November 5, 1998;Approved(7-0)subject to Plat Review Summary No. 1, dated October 30, 1998. STAFF COMMENTS: Attached is Plat Review Summary No. 1, dated November 13, 1998. L:\COMDEV\WP-FILES\MEMO\98CASES\98-123 PP.WPD 4110 8� � � sx 1,',: AU Otliii .......,-.. IIIII . SI V. s20 tkila 1111 3,• \ . 4,1A-, ss 4A 0* el u2kc . r \ I' ' **44101 0 gli A 1:410147 .....,,,„111111 \ mg la "56 14 Tit t . _c....iimille _dc, ..- alilliiala,N:sct;\ A v. 0000011, 111.11001§,' 7.77• _..0 Tots *- • • 011 0, sisla ..... --rOyu Op ..,,, sr 01 Vaal osi \WNW 61)4 AWII ssk MOW lom.—vahr-,:i._r , ‘ ... ....,, . . . .. . '*11,11r010111101t `r..4 114)4 N IS 71b„VIr I .:-7..:-• '. ' it" 10111'1 : . '- 1110 111 altra0 1 1111"4 44 0 0 11 I I I I I III al 1 OW°11.0 4 s •,. ,,,...... ..„_:,,,(........„, .....• , _ , — - . yr ‘0,4,,onim voismi sat .,---- ilis 1 ......--Z \s 4g161 1111 041111% is it 0-r.. .c. * 0,411111, ,,,gelk0 004 1.1111111MIV001 \ WI 1 2 /`C 101411401111 t 04 s tst-20,. stookerotio ... , • i? -•\00.0.. •shoo sLiake ------eittsshok ,, ots Oita zo,.....cer. . 0 011,10 pot iiiiroves,_ - .0*.-411011K- . wk.. liktlitps , ifits tiii04111110 -,t2a SOS ' '\'_ _ A 13S1 t 0i,.. ilittlitteato v. sAtigifit III)W '1 Kt \ ... \ IV - 1 . ::::: ottlis,01 iv - 4:At _.,....„....: . , .. 1t. a :..., ), ra..4 siurd.%•11%.4.0_.._.. ,. 311 410_\i, As* Ilikroweiri Oiliter8lt saseibt.". ;A.:4. 111 ----- .17"::111..t;lallir- -*16,6 k v.7* *• AC • . .' ' 13 IA PI.-?-1\s*::: •to.AT-TZ4. . It It s SI i:3%.1'"\ eitiVrts*Voilit , ' \0 U;f4- 591 V•59' rr. .cii.. ......_ , . . V.ga .: 34 l'C' • ti i mi SIS V.' 62 kt il.. . -• 174.\-‘\.' . aw 40 .occ s ,.,::•,, , . .. , , 0 At 1111110 \ . i . t i . t .%.,, ?, ,7. • , . 1 )-- \ 1:•*' 1...- TR 6E LnEN y r TR 6D 4.57 AC Cl 4 12.678 0 Qa I 0 3AC R ® 111 lit 1 ' TRACT 4 R I I "1-1" ,359u 0 1 ' m D • m 5 N TR E—SYSTEMS INC. TR 6F 5 I 4.07 AC n q O 3 c x ' 9 • O J.BEECH CITY OF SOUTHLAKE N I m Z ,� X "S "I—�" . �11yrTfAL�I•VD K3 w TR 1810D . I .67 AC I D.STOWS k "I-1" TR 1810E IK1 .45 AC •I-1• TRACT 3 C 1R TR 1B10F TR 1910A...38 :2A .45 AC S.HUGHES 6C1 , PARADIGM PROPERTIES TR 1e10c1• 1810C T 1A ....1 MANAGEMENT INC. C2 .45 AC S.HUGHES 6C" 15.6 A TR 1812 TR 1815 •B I • (28 .45 AC C.YOUNG m. ms 1 TR 1812A to ' .45 AC TR 1814 �..18 — C.YOUNG /// I� 1IC TR 1858 TR 18 / 1 •H 45 0 MH•J.HALL 1B l "�If F D.TR 1817 18 L5 TR 185 GOLLIHUGH-61 • 1.5 O TA TR 1818 .,..18 L4 z� M.LONG 61 L w M. TR 1813 wTR Q iiio L3 TR 1811A - WILLOUGBY 6D N`" 81 .45 AC F TR 1816 ,......3F1 .4 AC 6c L2 TR loll TR 188 RJ CONOCO,INC. I ; .45 AC 4 AC "'so ,4. OIL&CHEMICAL CO. L6A TR 189A TR 101 ,4..45 AC TR41A8CA ...601 16.654 AC I 1 .04 L6 TR 1B98 1.-4. 14.356 0 .45 AC TR 1 BBC 1B .4 AC 683 L1. TR.45 AC9 TR 1868 .....F. .4 AC sex 1 L7 TR 189C e' .45 AC TRa10701 0 AC 1+ m M -n- TR 1B7C / /4 m X "1-2" IL .45 AC TR IB7B m rater IR 1D1C IBQ I 1 C) 0 .4 AC /al 1.4022 0 I -�i022 0= 1.0316 0 2 TR 1B7A ? IA .43 AC ( TR 187 % Z .38 AC /6A ," '" ," "I-2" 1 O TR 4C 1 �• .46 AC 5 I' P 'Orr 4. • '` - 1 I c P(P 4 PETROLEUM COMPANY OF TEXAS 11 $4Of DfC17ER TR51A1C8 1 , 4¢4 L f� 1 G 5UR 436 a ys\��c - .soO� P� TR 183 /�G\•(•� 30 AC TANG . OS i ADJACENT OWNERS 5 2��ob AND ZONING SD - 5 City of Southlake, Texas PLAT REVIEW SUMMARY 4 se No: ZA 98-123 Review No: One Date of Review: 11/13/98 Project Name: Preliminary Plat- Lots 1 - 3, Block 1, Explorer Addition, being 16.49 acres out of the Harrison Decker Survey, Abstract No. 438 APPLICANT: SURVEYOR: Explorer Pipeline Co. Huitt-Zollars, Inc. 6847 South Canton 500 W. 7th Street, Suite 300 Tulsa, Oklahoma 74136 Fort Worth, Texas 76102 Phone: (918)493-5160 Phone: (817) 335-3000 Fax: (918)493-5125 Attn. Mr.Fred Low Fax:(817)335-1025 Attn.Mickey Nowell CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 10/12/98 AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. THESE STIPULATIONS ARE HEREBY MADE CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AMENDED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION,PLEASE CONTACT LISA SUDBURY AT (817)481-5581,EXT. 862. 1. The following changes are needed regarding adjacent properties within 200' including properties across any adjacent right-of-way: a. Show the proposed plat revision for Tract 4, Green Meadow(ZA 98-112) and proposed Lot and Concept Plan for the Public Works facility. b. Label existing zoning and Land Use Designation (LUD = ) on all adjacent properties. c. Label and dimension existing easements adjacent to this site. 2. Show and label adjacent street intersections with street names, including future Kimball & Continental and revise S. Kimball to Crooked Lane. 3. Remove bufferyard designations. 4. Remove all building lines from along the lot interiors. Do not remove the 30' Building line along Continental or the 50' along SH 26. 5. The following changes are needed regarding easements: a. Provide easements for water, sewer and/or drainage as required by Public Works. b. Provide common access easements, as needed, between lots if access to Lots 2 and 3 is to be provided through Lot 1 to SH 26. L:\COMDEV\WP-PILES\RHV\98\98123PP1.WPD Page 1 Q City of Southlake, Texas c. Where adjacent property is unplatted or platted showing a 5'U.E.,provide a 5'U.E. along the property line; if adjacent property is platted and shows no easement,provide a 10' U.E. along 411 the interior of the property line. d. No utility easements to serve the interior lots have been shown. Provide all appropriate easements depending on the intentions to provide electric service. e. Verify whether or not the "Con-Dor Pipeline Easement, Vol. 8366, Page 1407, in the southwest corner of Lot 1, Fina Addition extends into.this property. If so, show, label and dimension. 6. The following changes are needed regarding rights-of-way: a. Show and dimension the right-of-way dedication for Continental Boulevard(94' arterial) in accordance with the current Master Thoroughfare Plan. Dimensions must either be from center line of apparent existing right-of-way or full width from across right-of-way if opposite side has dedicated their half. b. Show and label the existing right-of-way with dimensions, i.e., public streets, highways, alleys,private street/drives,railroads, etc. Also provide dimensional centerline references to existing or approved street intersections on the perimeter of the subdivision or within 200 feet of the perimeter. Place the City case number"ZA 98-123" in the lower right-hand corner of the plat. 8. Revise the title block and graphic to "Block 1" instead of Block A. 9. Delete the approval block from the face of the plat. 10. be tied to a survey corner or prev corner. 11. The ProvidePUB a quantitativemust land use schedule in accordanceiously withfiled the followsubdivisioning format: Quantitative Land Use Schedule Phase Existing Existing Proposed Number Gross Density-DU/ Open Space Land Use Zoning Zoning of Units Acreage Gross Acreage Area/% P&Z ACTION: November 5, 1998; Approved (7-0) subject to Plat Review Summary No. 1, dated October 30, 1998. * Denotes Informational Comment Explorer Pipeline Co. VIA FAX ABOVE Huitt-Zollars,Inc. WA FAX ABOVE L:\COMDEV\WP-FILES\RSV\98\98123PP1.WPD Page 2 S01- • ..a~ m J.A. rREE,MA1il1 ...E. BLSAESS PAR„ S U F V Y �\-5? _, .<3 CAR A,3rE 143! _ IIIIOICnIr CEX1NrTIWI5 l • ORi_T a2I3 I ^�plIYIM N«Ir IW r 0•c•r Sxr.n. TRACT],viLY MEADOW SUB. I1.M1ar M.IMPS.CAAt..&O•«l.Rogow.OA.. S YOL JPb.d.Pr,MM.rW w N.rA f/I.r Rrwl.own.I.1 `GREEN EE BUSWESS PARn / CR::.'. N!l.ru.w�wo�r IRA[ [r /«I'IOL 0.P4 0 iMC I`�',.gl V•I•'j� fIRA•2i'V•I l.n•09M./MI w 903.wow n•w•..?WOW tit:' Si ruJ / J '/ ern. TwKNore..i ore.Mrirl.w M•YIM11 2 I _ 1 1 Y. .r lwww0NR•«g _ __ MOROI.•r•r m'« Awn N«r Ear C«N«nNl IOW \ i.�� 4 T �� __ _�, _ -_�% g rim nA.0 M w A[m Ono r ww 1:404,\'SEE/ - EAST CONTINENTAL BLVD. •m•r!r•w«.«w.w» wN.,nla. r.aN[wlor revel.V.lua!NO.rw•2.1 W.W.I Son wry Earle«+ww WMr M1ar a SURVEY left MO, nl C.lq l«r l••«nra--(COl1N'[T`RDyti0.... 'K 1.-.IE wm'IH 0.11�SB9`..i- -E-1919:i5'- 4 5.17.«0!mi.Wain.on a[ma n m•aw --- "�" "� ..wr.Ia pa:.1 ewr*•a Cwte...,1[atw I.--� 487.00. 1 2.4a• WC ow.Newer Tmrat Cowry.I•wm J 0• L>,•meow.`. I POINT OF lEBMlN4/0 rKKE 1wn 00 dew.23 mew.00•ewes Eat.•nrrw• -leer(+ar..-I i -IO.00•R.O.W. .o w'u.wo -1I1.14 r.IRM r« Wet WA/me..we•wowr LOT[n C€cr,zn DEDICATION wrla.111..I«Nw..ar woa'r veld TRACT 3.GREEN ALADOW SUB. [glom lean e.Who.!!.. .Y0.J0B:JRTION '1 IN (�2 9 vex.a. IIVOL.0J1.7.A PG 30 TREWS rMn M q ]I owes OO ow*[arm•I b.•:ASSET A SERE Mtl I-� -w vrtwrewp T• �� ,. III ON.TOO'. 9wn�r NIA..A.m.,•wwM•r.U2�0 DR.C.i NW.t••wW a..rn Iwo r.11.Uwwa N iI w lv Rwmrrr•n•elal RO.19.la 100IM R0.11; . y I -I M t xo vr[-w 'WWI !wm N ]!wlwlw 00•a••s u•1.•I•q Ilr• m I BLOCK A I M'mlla°9,EM,I.wn.D.._.w•laarm.,: m • A II ton to.Sou..wear r•tat r I. ,y�VESaJ In I'I t I 1giM t.•••«r•rrwwwl r•M1w.a Cw.w1 r !O rvE S]zAa• I Tows w Vow.W9.raw SSE D-wxtw•ea.lawn -r-y • my�--- SB9.95.00'E Cwnr1.T•ug Wr 3 V• I REKE 00*Claw 23•oar«00 wares •.I•rr.a TWOS SO FT I mom 00 I.•We w.S Car l.w r•IC•ct _ :I OR T4 EXPLORER PPre u CO. r IRA wore.n.*w to Cnr.rallw p 1 C ISD�II VOL 511C Pi 431 II la TOW. SROE,/w«Mt,Da.nwmw.Iml*1.0.14. e 1:4. ' e 61 K0 OR•T rKK[ IwNg�w•eel�.p-rr.•Eal u«r wg cwrlwet.t 0n e4L 1. .tl3 Z' A S I _ M'xlnwr CrM s-wei[•nrwnt•I mI C•rt/ll ll*1, CR-:.:. ZI eg TVA SQ.IT. 4__fJ.eEipntlpr-___ c r.To39owl l•:: nRD!ACRES I e••OR ••e TRUCE non89 M op..4!win.00•wna Mel.•Iwo No JIII Mgt.III*et Nill Calewgr 0il Ca.wnl M.• • I D N•ll In Vole.ON1.Popo IRA•.o.n.caea.TM. .:x.ES_NARD re:.L 1 �, Coal rely .OL.c?*.=i NA. 1 w�m.v..v I:Im THENCE IMn.oIw r not rue•[glom ROW.n _r-_.. I ___-_a�.qQ I. 972,49' RNo:•onNwrlMzz,,..p.m . l • _- ^ So.lla r we.Ear Co....I.a.NMI swot ---Ea-.-E.s:in == N89`45'00'WT--- 959.44' --� J we.e51401 aae«rr mod wir.r.wr. :.L i:=:.Pi 325 y E G� 1•V•Ilwa lNog SP-.1 _' Nil�•rlI r)N�\ !.1 !KNEE So. 89 R..•S num.00•a wa Eat•Ir.ISO • O _ ' Rw r Yid Cwtlanwl OWL a•ww[glow W I I-I ft \ r `r A- I, I •ewmar on.•! .Lodi Of r� . :7 r.W_..rE"M LON', . 7 L 5153_S�.agwee.l 7r.••7 SW.r«r•'IL9u C VOL Or,.PO T_ - ' OR.'" CU v O 1 WE T`.. 21.1043.LL003o.i` I ...P. I $/ • f..::'MdeExr.' I �I •a: L'OTI p • • _ I c, e ' PRELIMINARY PLAT -. .=. r. :. . _ _ 1\I � _ ._ . . _ . z �.II% i OF • z, t�' EXPLORER ADDITION ,• - ., - - F- .,„„,.*ewe: - • 11 I, 7 LOTS I-3. BLOCK A ` d -•' 16.49 ACRES OF LAND RI T- SITUATED IN THE HARRISON DECKER SURVEYABSIRAcr !4 b ? d N0.438 CITY OF SOUTFO Alm TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS E2 p Om • .r 1 ;elm •, / .I f I n ' oN III ,-" ,/ ( I NOA'E / DATE 10-09-98 O . 1 C9�w• ., 7 -- b Fi SCALE f-�100.0' TO.PnPMJST PETRCEF4M CO OF TE-S 0 1 yI •' • C) . VOL d3OC.?`i I .I /i/9 ,60 O./ 'I�I T Set O Ia0 �ar cy, -O /e,.. ,mot fit' .�. ..E :El1 4 _ _ .41 � 0.,../ jd p,.,`P r�-1 moo• . ( °a.•. yN 'p Gam/ / EXPLORER PIPELI\E CO. HLIIT��LIL�RS TIbew'.xe Gi C]V.•.4 C:we.SS.C.e OE Ix[ a .T�:Ex•:x.rE-a.. \ \ , y • 1.j/ ,weer nos I.E.. • �-� )1)54'GL u0N / S �,'c-w[� rJ.R. 5 P!�\Ni r �ll.WK.. • :30347PS.DCN OT' S I V E \ / - /I .C) THIS FIAT FILED IN CABINET ,SLIDE CO . Pr------- City of South lake,Texas MEMORANDUM November 13, 1998 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Lou Ann Heath, Director of Finance SUBJECT: Resolution 98-70, Amending the Fee Schedule The Fee Schedule establishes the amounts charged for a variety of services and products provided by the City. Each year staff reviews the Fee Schedule to determine if the amounts are appropriate for the service provided, or if new services have been introduced that need to be included in the Schedule. Each Director has reviewed and made recommendations for fee changes within their scope of responsibility. The NCTCOG Annual Fee Survey of area cities (April 1998) is used as a guide to determine the reasonableness of fees. The Fee Schedule is intended to recover the actual cost associated with providing services or products. The Fee Schedule is grouped in Sections according to type of activity. This amendment creates two additional Sections that were previously included within Section III - Public Works Activities: 1) Section IV - Water and Wastewater Utilities Activities and; 2) Section V - - Building Inspection Activities. Section VI is re-named Community Services Activities from its previous label, Park Activities. There are also specific line item fees that have been relocated to different Sections to correspond with the related type of Activity. These specific,line item relocations have been noted throughout the Schedule. The following discusses the changes in each Section. At the October 20 Council meeting, this resolution was tabled so that further research could be done on the proposed fees related to Community Development Activities. Director Last and his staff conducted a survey of selected cities and compared Southlake's fees for a hypothetical project to the fees that would be collected in other cities for the same type of project. As a result of the survey and discussions with Councilmember Edmondson, changes recommended from the previously proposed fee schedule for Section II - Community Development Activities are as follows: Item Original 10/20/98 11/17/98 5. Zoning and Concept Plan $300+$10/acre $300+$20/acre $400+$20/acre 6. Zoning and Site Plan $300+$10/acre $300+$20%acre $400+$20/acre 16. Final Plat (P.U.D.) $300+$30/Lot-Res $500+$30/Lot-Res $400+$30/Lot-Res $300+$30/Ac-Comm $500+$30/Ac- $300+$30/Ac-Comm Comm i `y -/ Curtis E. Hawk • Resolution 98-70, Amending the Fee Schedule November 13, 1998 page 2 Other changes within Section II - Community Development Activities remain as previously proposed. Section I. Administrative Activities. (Page 1) Copy Charges - The cost to reproduce public records will be according to the General Services Commission Charge Schedule. This includes a variety of charges for paper, video, and audio reproduction, computer usage costs and other types of reproduction costs. Ambulance Fees - A uniform $300 per local transport is proposed, an increase from $150 for transport to Baylor. In the past 6 months, 77% (of 220) of the ambulance runs were to Baylor-Grapevine. Based on a comparison of neighboring cities, $300 is on the low side of average. Our current collection rate on transports is approximately 40%. ``�-�° Section II. CommunityDevelopment Activities. (Pages 2 through 4) In addition to the changes discussed previously, a change to the Color Mapping fees are proposed. A clarification to the Park Land Dedication Fee is proposed to include the per lot fee for residential and the per acre fee for non-residential properties. Section IV. Water and Wastewater Utilities Activities. (Pages 4 through 6) This is a new section that was previously included within the Public Works Activities Section. The Water Meter Fee is revised to more closely approximate actual costs for the meters and transponders. The Fire Hydrant Meter Deposit is also modified to actual cost. A new item is included for damaged meter and transponder replacement, at actual cost. Many times a meter will be damaged and need to be replaced while a home is under construction. The recommended costs are for the usual components that must be replaced. Section V. Building Inspection Activities. (Pages 6 and 7) This is also a new section that was previously included within the Public Works Activities Section. Clarification to the temporary type sign permit as an annual, calendar year $25.00 fee are proposed. A Sign Recovery Fee of$25.00 and $50.00 is proposed. a Q/4'-'0R I r, • . CITY OF SOUT FEE HLAKESCHEDULE flACTIVITY FEE 1 44, 7. Water Reconnect Fees for Non-Payment, Business Days Only: 8 a.m.-5 p.m.: lst/2nd/3rd & subsequent $20/$40/$60 After 5 p.m.: lst/2nd/3rd & subsequent $40/$60/$80 Weekends, anytime $40/$60/$80 4-57 8. Water Meter Re-installation Fee $50.00 9. Water Meter Reread Fee $5.00 4-7 10. Service Charge - Damaged or Broken Lock, Meter and/or Transponder $25.00 11. Damaged meter and transponder replacement: 1"Meter $86.00 1" Transponder $150.00 ? Meter Box $32.50 ___`\ _:- 4-8: 12. Late Utility Payment Fee 5% of Outstanding Balance 19. Street Light Costs Developer pays installation -I 2 yearoperatiea-Eest moved to Public Works Activities Section 2-7 13. Additional or Replacement Recycling Bins $6.00 Additional or Replacement Recycling Lids $4.00 (added Res.#97-59) moved from Building Inspection Activities Section I i SECTION V. Building Inspection Activities 207 1. Building Permit Fees Per the currently adopted U.B.C. (Administrative Code) 24,2. Water Well Permit . _ __ __ _ $42.00 _ _ _ . }?.., 22.. 3. Tent Permit $15.00 U 1.:\FINANCE\sUDGET\98-99\FEE1O983.Doc PAGE 6-FEE SCHEDULE �41-. 9 . 7. r- SOI1THr A KT FrE SCHED ax ( 13a11� ACTIVITY �'EE -. i2. BuildingReservations for Special al Activities (amended Res.#97-59): Security and Clean-up Deposit $50.00 (refundable) Bicentennial Park - The Lodge (with Kitchen) $15.00/hr Bicentennial Park - Community Center/room $15.00/rm/hr Community Center/entire building $35.00/hr Senior Center Large meeting room $15.00/hr Senior Center Large meeting room & Kitchen $35.00/hr Senior Center Kitchen use fee $25.00/hr . 3. Organized Athletic Programs $1,000,000 General Liability Insurance Policy Meeting Fees $100 per year 4. TV/VCR Rental Fee No charge with reservation 0 5. Equipment Rental: (Driver's license held) Tennis Racket & Balls (Courts on Hill) No charge iTh, Volleyballs No charge l Basketballs No charge 6. Reservations of Park Facilities (Bicentennial Park) (amended Res.#97-59): Security and Clean-up Deposit (group of 100 or more require) $50.00 (refundable) Hilltop Picnic Area $5.00/4 hrs Pine Tree Picnic Area $5.00/4 hrs Bicentennial Pavilion $8.00/4 hrs Adventure Alley Pavilions $8.00/4 hrs/pavilion . 3 ) Li ;., L:\FINANCE\BUDGET198-99\FEE10983.DOC PAGE 8-FEE SCHEDULE �r2_// • Curtis E. Hawk,City Manager Higgins Branch Drainage Improvements November 13, 1998 Page Two Phase II, or the development of individual drainage area master plans is programmed over the next several years. The first plan authorized was for the east reach of West Jones Branch, which runs from behind Wal-Mart north and east under North Kimball, and Shady Lane to Lake Grapevine. This project is in the final design stage and should be to Council January 1999. • Staff is planning to bring to Council on December 1 the proposed Stormwater Drainage Utility System (SDUS) which is the proposed financing system for drainage improvements. The City's CIP identifies six drainage projects to be funded in the next two years. Recommendation The attached proposal from Freese and Nichols, Inc. is to master plan the South Fork Kirkwood Branch. Staff recommends that Council authorize the Mayor to enter into a III professional services contract with Freese and Nichols for a fee not to exceed $79,500 for Task 1 which will develop "stream management alternatives" and prepare a "stream management report". Please place this item on the Regular City Council Agenda for November 17, 1998 for City Council review and consideration. i•' j-//i. — /7 '7 BW/ts Attachment: Agreement Map M:wd-tiles\higgins branch memo.doc • , -. . 10C-2 AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ® STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF TARRANT § This AGREEMENT is entered into by City of Southlake, hereinafter called "OWNER" and Freese and Nichols, Inc., hereinafter called "FNI". In consideration of the AGREEMENTS herein, the parties agree as follows: I. EMPLOYMENT OF FNI: In accordance with the terms of this AGREEMENT: OWNER agrees to employ FNI: FNI agrees to perform professional services in connection with the Project;OWNER agrees to pay to FNI compensation. The Project is described as follows: Develop and implement a storm water management master plan and subsequent improvements for South Fork Kirkwood Creek from the confluence with Kirkwood Creek to Durham Elementary School. II. SCOPE OF SERVICES: FNI shall render professional services in connection with Project as set forth in Attachment SC-Scope of Services and Responsibilities of OWNER which is attached to and made a part of this AGREEMENT. III. COMPENSATION: OWNER agrees to pay FNI a fee not to exceed Seventy-Nine Thousand Five Hundred Dollars($79,500),for all professional services rendered under this AGREEMENT in accordance with Attachment CO -Compensation, which is attached hereto and made a part of this AGREEMENT. IV. TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AGREEMENT: The Terms and Conditions of Agreement as set forth as Attachment TC shall govern the relationship between the OWNER and FNI. 0 Nothing under this AGREEMENT shall be construed to give any rights or benefits in this AGREEMENT to anyone other than OWNER and FNI,and all duties and responsibilities undertaken pursuant to this AGREEMENT will be for the sole and exclusive benefit of OWNER and FNI and not for the benefit of any other party. This AGREEMENT constitutes the entire AGREEMENT between OWNER and FNI and supersedes all prior written or oral understandings. This contract is executed in two counterparts. IN TESTIMONY HEREOF, they have executed this AGREEMENT, the day of 1998. ATTEST: CITY OF SOUTHLAKE (OWNER) By: ATTEST: FREESE AND NICHOLS, INC. I (FNI) 0 /.. '/,, / .,-----, . / '/ J /�&,,, By J ram:OFF98050[R:',CONTRACT\1998\CONTRACT,SLAKES W M tit.W PD1 1 OC-3 ATTACHMENT SC SCOPE OF SERVICES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF OWNER ARTICLE I BASIC SERVICES: FNI shall render the following professional services in connection with the development of the Project: A. Introduction The scope of work provides for two elements of work for the South Fork Kirkwood Creek 'SFKC) drainage basin. The initial work effort provides Phase II drainage master planning for this basin. Following the master planning effort. the second task will be the development of contract documents for the improvements as defined by the master plan for the stream reach extending from West Highland Street upstream to the school detention basin, or other segments as determined necessary. These two work elements will be identified as Task 1 and Task 2. B. Scope of Work for Task 1 1. Kick-Off Meeting FNI proposes that prior to beginning the drainage master planning, effort for this drainage basin, a general meeting be held with selected city staff and city officials to identify generally acceptable drainage control concepts and solutions that may be implemented within the City of Southlake. These ideas will be formulated into potential alternatives that can be further developed for alternative Sconsiderations. 2. Data Collection Upon notice to proceed, FNI will obtain available drainage and associated data related to the drainage basin from the City of Southlake,the Texas Department of Transportation(TxDOT),and other entities. Data needed includes, but is not limited to,property ownership,maps, easement descriptions,existing or planned rights-of-way,plans for existing or planned improvements that may have a significant impact drainage or drainage improvements within the basin. State Highway 114 is currently being upgraded by TxDOT. FNI will meet with TxDOT to obtain available data regarding their plans to modify the cross drainage system for this stream. Field surveys will begin after notice to proceed,and will be used to supplement and verify the existing Flood Insurance Study (FIS)stream computer models. Additional cross sectional surveys will be made to extend the limits of the present FIS stream computer model. This new stream cross sections will begin approximately at Garden Court and extend up to the school detention pond. 3. Develop Drainage Basin Hydrological Models FNI will develop computer models that reflect the SFKC drainage basin characteristics to determine stream flow at various locations along the stream. Two basic models will be developed. One will represent present day conditions. The second model will reflect ultimate development conditions based upon the City of Southlake Land Use Plan, dated January 20, 1998. A hydrological model reflecting existing conditions will be useful to the City of Southlake in case modifications or changes are ® necessary to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) maps. The ultimate conditions FNI - ram:OFF98050(R:`.CONTRAC\1998\CONTRACTSLAKESWMM.WPD OWNER 10C-4 PillFry model will be utilized in the drainage master planning effort to identify improvements to meet these eventual ultimate runoff conditions. IP Flow regimes with return frequencies of 2, 5, 10 , 25. 50, 100 and 500 years will be determined with both models. 4. Develop Stream Hydraulic Models We will utilize the existing FIS hydraulic model for SFKC that extends from the confluence with Kirkwood Branch upstream to approximately Garden Court. Surveyed stream cross sections will be added to supplement definition of the stream section and to verify the accuracy of the original model. It is anticipated that approximately 10 additional sections will be added to the existing 1.8 mile stream model. The existing model will be evaluated and compared to existing field conditions in order to make any adjustments that may be necessary to reflect present conditions. Beginning at Garden Court, the stream model will be extended upstream utilizing the new surveyed cross sectional data. Approximately 30 additional cross sections will be utilized. The resulting 2.56 mile long SFKC model will reflect existing conditions throughout the study reach. It will become the base model to evaluate the various stream management alternatives that will be considered. 5. Develop Stream Management Alternatives The SFKC drainage basin was divided into seven stream reaches during the Phase I Master Drainage Plan report. Each of these seven stream segments represent somewhat independent characteristics identified along each reach. Stream management alternatives will address each of the stream segments. 111 Our goal is to identify a range of stream management alternatives that are considered acceptable to the community as well as finding acceptance with environmental agencies. A maximum of three(3)stream management plans will be developed that will generally range from a minimum to a maximum level of structural improvement to meet the flood control objectives. Community involvement is recommended in order to obtain citizens' input. We propose to have two (2) meetings with citizen groups to better understand their knowledge of problems along the stream. We w ill present typical solutions that could be implemented and receive their comments about stream management in general. Environmental agency approval of stream improvements will likely be required on larger scale channel improvements. We will coordinate with our environmental science staff to develop alternatives for consideration that we believe will be found acceptable to the agencies. Each stream segment alternative within each stream management plan will be evaluated to: a. Determine the level of flood control needed by comparing the limits of the 10. 50 and 100-year goods for existing stream versus ultimate development conditions. b. Determine the number of inhabitable structures removed from the flood plain. It may be necessary after developing the ultimate hydrology and hydraulic models to survey finished floor elevations of impacted structures to evaluate flood control. We have assumed ten(10)structures will be need to be surveyed to determine structural protection. c. Determine need for erosion control. d. Determine the probable environmental acceptability of the management alternative by regulatory 11111 agencies FNI ram:OFF98050(R:CONTRACT.I998\CONTRACT,SLAKESWMM.WPD OWNER 1 OC-5 111111111111111... e. Determine the preliminary estimate of probable project cost. Land values will be based upon information available from the Tarrant County Appraisal District. S These factors will be rated for each stream management plan to determine the best ranked aiternative for application. One meeting.(1)will be held with city staff members to review the results of the stream management alternatives and receive comments. 6. Prepare Stream Management Report A drainage master plan report will be prepared that describes the stream,stream segment characteristics and the stream management plans studied. Appropriate hydrological and hydraulic data shall be provided along.with maps indicating the flood limits before and after each management plan is applied. The report will summarize the selection process. and a stream management plan for South Fork Kirkwood Creek will be recommended. Four(4) copies of the"Dram" South Fork Kirkwood Creek Drainage Master Plan will be delivered to the city for review. One(I)review session will be held with city personnel to receive review comments. Fifteen (15) reports will submitted to the city for distribution to the City Council. 7. Review with City Council The South Fork Kirkwood Creek Drainage Master Plan will be presented to the City Council at one(1) session. Final adjustments to the report will be made based upon council's direction. Fifteen(15)final copies of the report will be delivered to the City of Southlake. C. Scope of Work for Task II ;. Field Surveys Depending upon the identified storm water management plan,the survey effort can be tailored to meet the requirements for development of engineering plans. Concurrent with the field survey for engineering design,the surveyor will identify property corners,landowners,existing easements and etc. For engineering purposes the following survey data are anticipated: a. Topographic maps (l' contour interval) of stream segments. b. Existing drainage facilities, roadways, select trees (4" diameter and larger), fences. and other features that will influence drainage characteristics. c. Existing building locations and finished floor elevations for those facilities that may be near the stream area and considered potential for flood damage. d. Locate existing utilities and utility easements. e. Property owners and property corners. In addition, an archeological survey, as required for permitting, will be performed for the stream segments along which improvements will be made. Preliminary Plans Prepare preliminary engineering drawings for the planned improvements. Plans will be completed to approximately a 40% level of completion sufficient for city review and to generally identify the scope of the project. Engineering plans will be coordinated with the Corps of Engineers (COE). Three (3) sets of full size preliminary drawings and a preliminary estimate of probable construction cost will be • submitted to the city for review. One (l) meeting with the city will be held to review the proposed improvements and receive comments. FNI —'.i—, / ram:OFF980501R:`CONTRACP.1998`CONTRACT\SLAKESWMM.WPD OWNER 10C-6 Easements De-elopment of easement legal descriptions will begin immediately after the preliminary plan review IPmeeting with the city. 4. 404 Permit Application Depending upon the identified storm water management plan elected,a Section 404, individual permit may be required. If an individual 404 permit is required,FNI will prepare the Section 404 application for an Individual Permit(ENG FORM 4345). The application will include the name and address of the applicant, description of the proposed activity, discussion of the purpose for the proposed project, description of the limits of impacts to waters of the U.S.. names and addresses of adjoining_ property owners (this information is to be provided by Owner), description of the water body. appropriate figures, and the preliminary plans. FNI's environmental scientists will assist Owner in identifying project design enhancement features along the limits of the proposed project. Enhancement measures include such items as providing natural structures within the confines of the stream channel, routing low flows through bypassed natural channels, recommending trapezoidal earthen banks where feasible, etc. The permit application will include text and figures appropriate for the public notice. The public notice text/figures will be included as an attachment to the Individual Permit application. The intent of this attachment is to provide the COE with the pertinent information for the public notice in a format that will require minimal revision, thereby, expediting the COE's process time for the public notice. The draft permit application will be submitted to Owner for review prior to submittal to the COE. Owner's comments will be incorporated into the final permit application and submitted to the COE,or to Owner for submittal to the COE, within 10 days of receipt of the Owner's comments. a. Meet with Owner FN'I will attend one(1) meeting,with Owner to discuss the permit application. It is intended that this meeting will occur after Owner has reviewed the draft permit application. Comments from Owner will be received at this time. FNI will then prepare the final permit application for submittal to the COE. 5. Final Design Based upon the City's comments and the preliminary comments from the COE and other agencies, FNI will begin preparation of final engineering documents suitable for advertisement of construction. It is anticipated that the preliminary review comments from the regulatory agencies will allow concurrent final design and development of the construction documents. If necessary, the plans will be modified to reflect the elements of the approved 404 Permit. Specifications will be based upon the North Central Texas Council of Government Standard Specifications. Three (3) full size drawings and specifications will be submitted to the City of Southlake for review. Following one(1) review session with city staff to receive comments,one(1)set of reproducible final plans and specifications will be completed and submitted to the City of Southlake for advertisement by the city. A final estimate of probable construction cost will be provided to the city. • FNI ram:OFF98050(R:`.CONTRACT'1998\\CONTRACTSLAKESWMM.W PD 0 WNER 1 OC-7 o. Advertisement. Bid. and Award of Contract FNI will assist the city during this phase by: a. Answering questions from contractors and suppliers. b. Attending one (I) pre-bid conference. c. Attending one (1) bid opening and assist with preparation of the bid tabulation. d. Making recommendations for contract award. 7. Construction Administration Assist Owner in conducting. one (1) pre-construction conference with the Contractor(s). review construction schedules prepared by the Contractor(s) pursuant to the requirements of the construction contract, and prepare a proposed estimate of monthly cash requirements for the Project. FNI shall furnish six (o) fail size sets of final plans to Owner marked "For Construction''. Make up to nine (9) visits to the site to observe the progress and the quality of work and to attempt to determine in general if the work is proceeding in accordance with the Contract Documents. If FNI is requested to visit the site more than 9 times, the requested visits shall be considered an Additional Service and FNI shall be entitled to additional compensation. In performing the services outlined above, FNI will endeavor to protect Owner against defects and deficiencies in the work of Contractors and FNI will report any observed deficiencies to Owner; however, it is understood that FNI does not guarantee the Contractor's performance, nor is FNI responsible for supervision of the Contractor's operation and employees. FNI shall not be responsible for the means.methods,techniques,sequences.or procedures of construction selected by the Contractor, or any safety precautions and programs relating in any way to the condition of the premises. the work of the Contractor or any Subcontractor. FNI shall not be responsible for the acts or omissions of any ® person (except his own employees or agents) at the Project sites or otherwise performing any of the work of the Project. Review samples,catalog data,schedules,shop drawings. laboratory,shop mill tests of material and test equipment, and other data pursuant to the Construction Contract. Interpret intent of the plans and technical specifications for Owner and Contractor and prepare change orders as needed to clarify the intent of the plans and specifications. Prepare monthly and final estimates, based on quantities provided by the City Inspector, utilizing the estimate forms provided by Owner, pursuant to the Construction Contract. Change Orders shall be prepared when required to reflect a change of construction scope. Conduct. in company with Owner's representative, a final review of the Project for conformance with the design concept of the Project and general compliance with the Contract Documents. and review and comment on the certificate of completion and the recommendation for final payment to the Contractor(s). Revise the construction drawing in accordance with the information furnished by construction Contractor(s)reflecting changes in the Project made during construction. One set of reproducible prints of"Record Drawings" shall be provided by FNI to Owner. S FNI• ' ram:OFF98050(R:•.CONTRACT.1998\CONTRACTS LAKES'.VMM.W PD OWNER 10C-8 ARTICLE II 110 ADDITIONAL SERVICES: Additional Services to be performed by FNI, if authorized by Owner.which are not included in the above described basic services, include, but are not limited to the following: A. Preparing the application and follow-up coordination with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR). B. Preparing applications and supporting documents for government grants, loans, or planning advances, and providing data for detailed applications. C. Providing full time site inspection during.construction of the Project. D. Performing designs for trench safety and retaining walls, etc., not included in the above Scope of Services. E. Revisions to plans as a result of design modifications requested by Owner or by the contractor after completion of original final design (unless to correct error on original plans). F. Appearing before regulatory agencies or courts as an expert witness in any litigation with third parties or condemnation proceedings arising from the development or construction ofthe Project,including preparation of engineering data and reports for assistance to Owner. G. Assisting Owner in claims disputes with Contractor(s). H. .Assisting Owner in the defense or prosecution of litigation in connection with or in addition to those services contemplated by this Agreement. Such services, if any, shall be furnished by FNI on a fee basis negotiated by the respective parties outside of and in addition to this Agreement. S I. Providing environmental support services, including the design and implementation of ecological baseline studies, archeological surveys, environmental monitoring, impact assessment and analyses, permitting assistance other than listed in the above Scope of Services, and other assistance required to address environmental issues. J. Geotechnical investigation of subsurface conditions. K. Attending, homeowners and/or Council meetings other than those described in the Scope of Services, including preparation of all displays, reports, or other data for use at such meetings. L. Preparing plans and/or specifications related to the relocation of utilities. ARTICLE III TIME OF COMPLETION: FNI is authorized to commence work on the Project upon execution of this AGREEMENT and suggests the following schedule in order to meet the anticipated S. H. 114 in:provements: Data Collection & Survey 40 Days After Notice To Proceed Hydrology/Hydraulic Analysis 70 Days After Notice To Proceed Stream Management Analysis 100 Days After Notice To Proceed ® Master Plan Development 130 Days After Notice To Proceed F`I .r- cam:OFF98050tR:..CONTRAC17.19981CONTRACT\SLAKESWMM.WPD OWNER 10C-9 ARTICLE IV 111) RESPONSIBILITIES OF OWNER: Owner shall perform the following, in a timely manner so as not to delay the services of FNI: A. Assist FNI by placing at FNI's disposal all available information pertinent to the Project including previous reports and any other data relative to design or construction of the Project. B. Examine submittals from FNI within a reasonable time so as not to delay the services of FNI. C. Bear all costs incident to compliance with the requirements of this Article III. ARTICLE. V ENGLNEERING FEE: Because of the indeterminacy of the effort for the latter phases of this project, the engineering, fee for only Task 1 is provided in Attachment CO. Fees for Task 2 will be submitted to the OWNER for approval ARTICLE IV . RESPONSIBILITIES OF OWNER: Owner shall perform the following, in a timely manner so as not to delay the services of FNI: D. Assist FNI by placing at FNI's disposal all available information pertinent to the Project including previous reports and any other data relative to design or construction of the Project. • E. Examine submittals from FNI within a reasonable time so as not to delay the services of FNI. F. Bear all costs incident to compliance with the requirements of this Article III. ARTICLE V ENGINEERING FEE: Because of the indeterminacy of the effort for the latter phases of this project, the engineering fee for only PHASE I is provided in Attachment CO. Fees for Phases II. III, and IV will 'be submitted to the OWNER for approval near the completion of Phase I. III .. . . ...., ..., FNI ram:OFF98050[R:`.CONTRACT\1998\\CONTRACT'SLAKESWMM.WPC OWNER 10C-10 PPIPr' COMPENSATION ATTACHMENT CO A. Not to Exceed: The total`ee for Basic Services,n A:acnment SC shall ce comcutec on a cost plus basis according to the Scnedule of thanes out shall nct exceed Seventy-Nire Thousand Five Hundred Collars($79.500). If FNI sees the Scope of 0 Services: a cirg so:hat additional services are neeced,including but not limited:o those services oescnbed as Additional Services as osacr:bec r.Attachment SC,FNI will tic:;hi OWNER'or OWNER's apercval before orcceecing. Additional Serv'ces sic„:a:omot.ted based on the Schedule of Charges. B. Schedule of Charges for Additional Work: POSITION MIN MAX PRINICIPAL 154.28 191.71 SENIOR CONSULTANT 76.06 224.34 MANAGER-BRANCH OFFICE 117.02 150.54 CROUP MANAGER 136.39 15'3.97 SR.CISCIPL:NE_E ..ER 147.59 72.24 CISCIPLINE'_EA.DER 94.13 149.57 RCGRAM'a.1IAGE 34.1' 05,14 ENGINEER it 98.40 '25.13 ENGINEER V 90.48 114.33 ENGINEER IV 79.46 99.18 ENGINEER INTERN III 67.10 a5.36 ENGINEER INTERN II 60.18 76.04 ENGINEER INTERN I 53.13 66.01 ELECTRICAL ENGINEER INTERN III 68.92 90.46 ELECTRICAL ENGINEER INTERN II 51.27 67.29 MECHANICAL ENGINEER V 81.16 106.52 MECHANICAL ENGINEER IV 74.66 98.00 MECHANICAL ENGINEER INTERN III 72.69 91.76 RESIDENT ENGINEER 92.58 121.50 SENIOR RESIDENT REPRESENTATIVE 72.37 92.73 DESIGNER II 66.54 100.72 DESIGNER I 80.05 74.08 SENIOR ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN 75.96 86.71 ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN 59.76 77.38 TECHNICIAN:i 51.47 56.67 TECHNICIAN! 43.52 53.42 DRAFTER 43.13 48.91 ii ESTIMATORSCHEDULER 49.47 41.76 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES ADMIN ASST 39.81 49. 76 DOCUMENT CONTROL CLERK 39.31 49.13 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTIST VII 87.94 109.92 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTIST V 73.97 92.46 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTIST IV 71.05 83.18 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTIST III 58.79 63.24 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTIST II 55.29 61.49 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTIST I 40.80 48.78 SENIOR ARCHITECT 103.26 129.07 ARCHITECTV • 34.90 106.13 ARCHITECT'II 66.60 33.25 ARCHITECT•I 54.76 68.44 HYDRCLCG.ST:V 55.53 72.38 :HYDP.OGEOLCGIST 74.29 92.37 'WORD PRGCESSING,SECRETARIAL 38.12 44.58 OPERATICNS ANALYST 56.74 82.57 CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR 39.38 49.85 INFORMATION SERVICES CLERK 38.29 44.27 CO-OP 17.00 38.20 The ranges and individual salaries will be adjusted annually. RATES FOR INHCUSE SERVICES Comcuter and CAC Calcomo Plotter 9C„AD Stators 3':.:C per hour Bond 32.00 per plot cc Stators __.:C per hour Color 33.50 per blot i A,(Ccmpu:er 5CC CO per hour 'leilum 34.00 per plot Mylar $10.00 per plot Print Shop Bluelines $0.08 per square foot Offset and Xerox Copies S0.07 per single side copy Offset and Xerox Copies $0.14 per double side copy DEC Binding(Reg.Cover) $2.00 per book GBC Bindirg(Embcss.Cover) $4.00 per book 'race Binding:Reg.Cover; $1.75 per book lace 3in.dirgi Emboss Cover) 33.75 per back • Testing Apparatus vl b1C !Density :=:- $'=�3 CO per month 3es Oe:ec;:cr 5':..0 per test OTHER DIRECT EXPENSES ',Diner itrect expenses are r rpapursed at actual cost times a multiplier of 1.I 5 They include outside printing and reproduction sxcense.communication expense.:ravel.transportation and subsistence away from Fort Worth and other miscellaneous sxpenses direcjv related a the work including costs of laboratory analysis,tests,and other work required to be done by naependent persons other:Matt gaff members. FNI ✓1,r` corn:34 03-31-98 1 0C-11 OWNER v' ATTACHMENT TC 3-20-96 TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AGREEM IE I' • I. DEFLNITIONS: The term Owner as used herein refers to City of S uthl_akz: _ The term FNI as used herein refers to Freese and Nichols,Inc., its employees and agents;also its subcontractors and their employees and agents. As used herein,Services refers to the professional services performed by Freese and Nichols pursuant to the AGREEMENT. 2. CHANGES:Owner,without invalidating the AGREEMENT,may order changes within the general scope of the WORK required by the AGREEMENT by altering, adding to and/or deducting from the WORK to be performed. If any change under this clause causes an increase or decrease in FNTs cost of,or the time required for,the performance of any part of the Services under the AGREEMENT, an equitable adjustment will be made by mutual agreement and the AGREEMENT modified in writing accordingly. 3. TERMIL•`+ATION: The obligation :o crovide services under this AGRED, 1 may be terminated by either parry upon ten days' written notice. In the event of termination, FNI will be paid for all services rendered and reimbursable expenses incurred to the date of termination and, in addition,all reimbursable expenses directly attributable to termination. 4. CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES: In no event shall FNI or its subcontractors be liable in contract, tort, strict liability, warranty,or otherwise for any special,indirect, incidental or consequential damages, such as loss of product,loss of use of the equipment or system, loss of anticipated profits or revenue,non-operation or increased expense of operation or other equipment or systems. 5. INFORMATION FURNISHED BY OWNER: Owner will assist FNI by placing at FNI's disposal all available information pertinent to the Project including previous reports and any other data relative to design or construction of the Project. FM shall have no liability for defects or negligence in the Services attributable to FNI's reliance upon or use of data, design criteria, drawings, specifications or other information furnished by Owner and Owner agrees to indemnify and hold FNI harmless from any and all claims and judznents,and all losses, costs and expenses arising therefrom. FNI shall disclose to Owner, prior to use thereof,defects or omissions in the data, design criteria, drawings,specifications or other information Sprovfurnished by Owner to FNI that FNI may reasonably discover in its review and inspection thereof. ide Ownercertificates ofinsurance which shall contain the following minimum coverage 6. INSURA.�ICE:FNI shall to mfi (All limits in thousands): Commercial General Liability Workers' Compensation General Aggregate S2,000 Each Accident $500 Automobile Liability(Any Auto) Professional Liability CSL $1,000 S3,000 Annual Aggregate 7. SUBCONTRACTS:If, for any reason, at any time during the progress of providing Services, Owner determines that any subcontractor for FNZ is incompetent or undesirable, Owner will notify FM accordingly and FNI shall take immediate steps for cancellation of such subcontract. Subletting by subcontractors shall be subject to the same regulations. Nothing contained in the AGREEMENT shall create any contractual relation between any subcontractor and Owner. • 3. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUN EN'TS: All drawings,reports data and other project information developed in the execution of the Services provided under this AGREEMENT shall be the property of the Owner upon payment of FNI's fees for services. FYI may retain copies for record purposes. Owner agrees such documents are not intended or represented to be suitable for reuse by Owner or others. Any reuse by Owner or by those who obtained said documents from Owner without written verification or adaptation by FNI will be at Owner's sole risk and without liability or legal exposure to FNI, or to FNI's independent associates or consultants, and Owner shall indemnify and hold harmless FM and FNI's independent associates and consultants from all claims,damages, losses and expenses including attorneys'fees arising out of or resulting therefrom. Any such verification or adaptation will entitle FNI to further reasonable compensation. FYI may reuse all drawings,report data and other project information in the execution of the Services provided under this AGREEMENT in FNI's other activities. Any reuse by FNI will be at FN.I's sole risk and without liability or legal el exposure:o Owner, and FNI shall indemnify and hold harmless Owner from all claims, damages, losses and expenses including attorneys' fees arising out of or resulting therefrom. FNI-,- OWNER/ 10C-12 POLLUTANTS AND HAZARDOUS WASTES: It is understood and agreed that FYI has neither created nor contributed to the creation or existence of any hazardous, radioactive, toxic, irritant,pollutant,or otherwise dangerous substance or condition at the site. if any,and its compensation hereunder is in no way commensurate with the potential risk or injury or loss that may be caused by exposures to such substances or conditions. The parties azee that in performing the Services required by this AGREEMENT, FNI does not take possession or control of the subject site,but • - - ' acts as an invitee in performing the services, and is not therefore responsible for the existence of anypollutant present on or migrating from the site. Further.FN7 shall have no responsibility for any pollutant during clean-un, 'rar:sportar_cn, storage or disposal activities. 10. OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS: FNI will furnish an opinion of probable project development cost based on present day cost,but does not guarantee the accuracy of such estimates. Opinions of probable cost,financial evaluations, feasibility studies,economic analyses of alternate solutions and utilitarian considerations of operations and maintenance costs prepared by FNI hereunder will be made on the basis of FNI's experience and qualifications and represent FNI's judgement as an experienced and qualified design professional. It is recognized,however,that FM does not have control over the cost of Iabor, material, equipment or services furnished by others or over market conditions or contractors' methods of determining their prices. I:. CONSTRUCTION REPRESENTATION: If required by the AGRE.E`ENT. FYI will furnish Cor._traction Representation according to the defined scope for these services. FYI will observe the progress and the quality of work to determine in general if the work is proceeding in accordance with the Contract Documents. In performing these services,FYI will endeavor to protect Owner against defects and deficiencies in the work of Contractors;Fi`+'I will report any observed deficiencies to Owner,however, it is understood that FNI does not guarantee the Contractor's performance, nor is FNI responsible for the supervision of the Contractor's operation and employees. FN. I shall not be responsible for the means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures of construction selected by the Contractor, or the safety precautions and programs incident to the work of the Contractor. FNI shall not be responsible for the acts or omissions of any person(except his own employees or agent) at the Project site or otherwise performing any of the work of the Project. If Owner designates a person to serve in the capacity of Resident Project Representative who is not a FNI's employee or FNI's agent, the duties, responsibilities and limitations of authority of such Resident Project Representative(s)will be set forth in writing and made a part of this AGREEMENT before the Construction Phase of the Project begins. 11. PAYMENT: Progress payments may be requested by FYI based on the amount of services completed. Payment for • the services of FYI shall be due and payable upon submission of a statement for services to OWNER. Statements for services shall not be submitted more frequently than monthly. Any applicable new taxes imposed upon services, expenses, and charges by any governmental body after the execution of this AGREEMENT will be added to FNI's compensation. If OWNER fails to make any payment due FYI for services and expenses within thirty(30)days after receipt of FN.I's statement for services therefore,the amounts due FNI will be increased at the rate of one percent(I%)per month from said thirtieth (30th) day, and, in addition, FYI may, after giving seven (7) days' written notice to OWNER, suspend services under this AGREEN[ENT until FYI has been paid in full, all amounts due for services, expenses and charges. 13. ARBITRATION: No arbitration arising out of, or relating to, this AGREEMENT involving one part to this AGREEMENT may include the other party to this AGREEMENT without their approval. 14. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNMEN-TS: OWNER and FNI each are hereby bound and the partners, successors, executors, administrators and legal representatives of OWNER and FNI are hereby bound to the other party to this AGREEMENT and to the partners,successors,executors,administrators and legal representatives(and said assigns)of such other party, in respect of all covenants,agreements and obligations of this AGREEMENT. Neither OWNER nor FNI shall assion. sublet or transfer any riahts under or interest in(includin„but without limitation, moneys that may become due or moneys that are due)this AGREEMENT without the written consent of the other, except to the extent that any assignment, subletting or transfer is mandated by law or the effect of this limitation may be restricted by law. Unless specifically stated to the contrary in any written consent to an assignment,no assignment will release or discharge the assignor from any duty or responsibility under this AGREEMENT. Nothing contained in this paragraph shall prevent FNI from employing such independent associates and consultants as FYI may deem appropriate to assist in the performance of services hereunder. 15. PURCHASE ORDERS: If a Purchase Order is used to authorize FNI's Services,only the terms,condition-s istructions 4111 typed on the face of the Purchase Order shall apply to this AGREEMENT. Should there be any conflict between the Purchase Order and the terms of this AGREEMENT, then this AGREEMENT shall prevail and shall be determinative of the conflict. 10C-13 WIIP Drainage Study for Higgins Branch 4 i ,i . ri iii,A.. 1 1 II ...... ... w .4. .., . ........q, I il 41R ___ he it m t), Ai lk INN **VI 1 1 <c) t - to.. , ins „---- . Emil - e 1 A I , -i--- , i N 411111[ Elementa School =a� R� �� p7_ City of Southlake,Texas • MEMORANDUM November 12, 1998 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Karen P. Gandy, Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: Michael Drive: Issues and Alternatives It is my understanding that the purpose of this discussion item is two-fold--1) to again review the outstanding issues confronting property owners along Michael Drive and 2) to decide on a recommended course of action to address such issues as zoning and infrastructure improvements necessary to bring the area into compliance with city ordinances. Attached is the staff report given to Council on October 13, 1998 which provides the historical background of Michael Drive/Tiffany Acres. The time line of the report begins in 1978 (prior to the properties' annexation into the City)and continues through the present. The report also reviews the steps necessary to bring the area into compliance with current development regulations. These steps included: • zoning, • preliminary and final platting, including the dedication of right-of-way, • construction of the roadway, Michael Drive, including the placement of two 10' x 6' concrete box culverts across the creek on the western half of the property as well as the extension of water and sewer services to each of the properties. This discussion is driven by a request from Mr.and Mrs.Claffey of Claffey Pools to place additional materials storage on parcel 3, located on the north side of Michael Drive,which is currently owned by V. J. Strand. The Claffeys would like to purchase this parcel as well as parcels 1,2 and 4 on the north side as well. The fact that all four parcels are not zoned and platted and only have legal, nonconforming rights to limited outside storage precipitated my initial conversations with them. Upon learning that any future business expansions would require not only zoning and platting,but the construction of Michael Drive, the Claffeys began discussions with all other property owners along Michael Drive,seeking their support to rezone their properties and share in the cost of the road construction. The obvious questions coming out of their discussions with the others were: "What is it going to cost me?" and "Will I lose my right to operate my business?" There are several decision points in this discussion: Related to Zoning: • Decide whether each parcel should be treated as a separate S-P-1 zoning case (either with I-1 uses or for the existing use on each parcel)or whether to collectively zone the area as a NR-PUD for light industrial use or limiting each parcel to the existing use in place today. Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager 0 November 12, 1998 Page Two • Decide whether to waive the required exhibit with the rezoning application and document the "as built"conditions with pictures, development regulations and standards for each parcel or to require the appropriate exhibit. [The S-P-1 request will require a site plan while the NR-PUD request will require a development plan. Both types of application permit the creation of development regulations specific to each use. To my knowledge, no new construction is proposed on any parcel at this time--with the exception that the Claffeys would like additional materials storage on parcel 3, as mentioned earlier.] Related to the Construction of Michael Drive: Decide whether to require the following: • a 60' ROW dedication with a 37' pavement section; or 31' pavement section • utilizing the existing gravel as the required base materials; or new base material • using either asphalt or concrete materials • • improving the entire roadway from Davis to the end of Michael Drive requiring a culvert upgrade, or improve a portion of the roadway from Davis to the creek, requiring no culvert upgrade. Decide whether the City will participate in any way with the improvements. Attached to this memorandum is a staff report, prepared by Shawn Poe, Capital Projects Coordinator. In the report, he describes in greater detail each of the above-listed options and the costs associated with each of them. Should you have questions regarding the road construction issues, please call Shawn Poe at(817) 481-5581, extension 846 and for zoning-related issues, please call me at extension 743. KPG M:\SHELLI\Michael Dr\MICHALDR.WPD 0 City of Southiake,Texas MEMORANDUM November 13, 1998 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Shawn Poe, Capital Projects Coordinator SUBJECT: Michael Drive Cost Estimates Attached are the cost estimates for the paving, water, and sewer improvements required for Michael Drive in order to be in compliance with the City's standards. I included several options for the paving improvements. On page 1 of 8, the cost estimate is for paving a 31' wide (measured from back of curbs) Michael Drive from Davis to the end of Michael Drive, which is approximately 1150'. This cost estimate is for asphalt paving and assumes that the existing gravel on Michael Drive is adequate to use as the base material. On page 2 of 8, the cost estimate is also for a 31' wide asphalt paved Michael Drive, but assumes that the on site gravel is not adequate for base material. The cost estimate on page 3 of 8 is for paving Michael Drive with concrete at the standard 37' wide cross-section for a 60' ROW. The estimate assumes that the existing gravel is not:adequate for the base material. The cost estimates on pages 1-3 also include constructing the ultimate culvert across the creek that crosses Michael Drive. The cost estimates on pages 4-6 assume that Michael Drive will be paved from Davis to the east side of the creek. Consequently, the cost associated with constructing the culvert under Michael Drive is not included in these cost estimates. On page 4 of 8, the cost estimate is for paving a 31' wide (measured from back of curbs) Michael Drive from Davis to the east side of the creek, which is approximately 750'. This cost estimate is for asphalt paving and assumes that the existing gravel on Michael Drive is adequate to use as the base material. On page 5 of 8, the cost estimate is also for a 31' wide asphalt paved Michael Drive, but assumes that the on site gravel is not adequate for base material. The cost estimate on page 6 of 8 is for paving Michael Drive with concrete at the standard 37' wide cross-section for a 60' ROW. The estimate assumes that the existing gravel is not adequate for the base material. The cost estimates for installing water and sewer to serve the development along Michael Drive are shown on pages 7 and 8, respectively. If you have any questions, - pease call me at extension 846. cc: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works • m:\wd-files\memos\michael staff report.doc MICHAEL DRIVE 0 . XISTING GRAVEL BASE IS ADEQUATE 150 LF of 31'B-B ASPHALT ROADWAY) Pay Item Description Approx.Qty.Unit Unit Price Total Price 1 Grading&prepare subgrade 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000.00 2 3"Type B Level-up HMAC 548 TN $66.00 $36,168.00 3 3"Type D Surface HMAC 548 TN $67.00 $36,716.00 4 6"reinforced concrete curb 2300 LF $18.00 $41,400.00 5 Three 10'x6'precast concrete box culvert 40 LF $1,500.00 $60,000.00 6 Two 4'x7'concrete headwall 2 EA $14,000.00 $28,000.00 7 Hydromulch/seeding 2500 SY $1.00 $2,500.00 8 Silt fence/Hay bale dikes for erosion control 1 LS $2,350.00 $2,350.00 9 Rebuild Existing Driveways 8 EA $1,000.00 $8,000.00 Subtotal $220,134.00 Eng.,Surveying $33,020.10 Contingnecy(15%) $33,020.10 TOTAL $286,174.20 11111 _ _ _ . _ __ _ _ _ • . ..., 1 of 8 11/13/98 Pry MICHAEL DRIVE • XISTING GRAVEL BASE IS INADEQUATE 1150 LF of 31'B-B ASPHALT ROADWAY) Pay Item Description Approx.Qty.Unit Unit Price Total Price 1 I Grading&prepare subgrade 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000.00 2 Pulverize,mix,&compact 6"existing surface 4250 SY $3.00 $12,750.00 3 Cement or Lime for stabilization 65 TN $110.00 $7,150.00 4 3"Type B Level-up HMAC 548 TN $66.00 $36,168.00 5 3"Type D Surface HMAC 548 TN $67.00 $36,716.00 6 6"reinforced concrete curb 2300 LF $18.00 $41,400.00 7 Three 10'x6'precast concrete box culvert 40 LF $1,500.00 $60,000.00 8 Two 4'x7'concrete headwall 2 EA $14,000.00 $28,000.00 9 Hydromulch/seeding 2500 SY $1.00 $2,500.00 10 Silt fence/Hay bale dikes for erosion control 1 LS $2,350.00 $2,350.00 11 Rebuild Existing Driveways 8 EA $1,000.00 $8,000.00 Subtotal $240,034.00 Eng.,Surveying $36,005.10 Contingnecy(15%) $36,005.10 I TOTAL I $312,044.20 • ... 2 of 8 11/13/98 Pry MICHAEL DRIVE •XISTING GRAVEL BASE IS INADEQUATE - - (1150 LF STANDARD 37'B-B CONCRETE ROADWAY) Pay Item Description Approx.Qty.Unit Unit Price Total Price 1 Grading&prepare subgrade 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000.00 2 Pulverize,mix,&compact 6"existing surface 5000 SY $3.00 $15,000.00 3 Cement or Lime for stabilization 75 TN $110.00 $8,250.00 4 7"Concrete roadway 4750 SY $80.00 $380,000.00 5 Three 10'x6'precast concrete box culvert 40 LF $1,500.00 $60,000.00 6 Two 4'x7'concrete headwall 2 EA $14,000.00 $28,000.00 7 Hydromulch/seeding 2500 SY $1.00 $2,500.00 8 Silt fence/Hay bale dikes for erosion control 1 LS $2,350.00 $2,350.00 9 Rebuild Existing Driveways 8 EA $1,000.00 $8,000.00 Subtotal $509,100.00 Eng.,Surveying $76,365.00 Contingnecy(15%) $76,365.00 1 TOTAL $661,830.00 ____ __ _ _ ___ _ 1111 3 of 8 11/13/98 IV MICHAEL DRIVE • III EXISTING GRAVEL BASE IS ADEQUATE (750 LF of 31'B-B ASPHALT ROADWAY from Davis to Creek) Pay Item Description Approx.Qty.Unit Unit Price Total Price 1 Grading&prepare subgrade 1 LS $3,500.00 $3,500.00 2 3"Type B Level-up HMAC 395 TN $66.00 $26,070.00 3 3"Type D Surface HMAC 395 TN $67.00 $26,465.00 4 6"reinforced concrete curb 1500 LF $18.00 $27,000.00 5 Three 10'x6'precast concrete box culvert 0 LF $1,500.00 $0.00 6 Two 4'x7'concrete headwall 0 EA $14,000.00 $0.00 7 Hydromulch/seeding 1650 SY _ $1.00 $1,650.00 8 Silt fence/Hay bale dikes for erosion control 1 LS $1,350.00 $1,350.00 9 Rebuild Existing Driveways 4 EA $1,000.00 $4,000.00 Subtotal $90,035.00 Eng.,Surveying $13,505.25 Contingnecy(15%) $13,505.25 TOTAL! $117,045.50 S ..,. 4 of 8 11/13/98 MICHAEL DRIVE • OciSTING GRAVEL BASE IS INADEQUATE (750 LF of 31'B-B ASPHALT ROADWAY from Davis to Creek) Pay Item Description Approx.Qty.Unit Unit Price i ce 1 Grading&prepare subgrade 1 LS $3,500.00 2 Pulverize,mix,&compact 6"existing surface 2750 SY $3.00 3 Cement or Lime for stabilization 39 TN $110.00 4 3"Type B Level-up HMAC 395 TN $66.00 5 3"Type D Surface HMAC 395 TN $67.00I i6 6"reinforced concrete curb 1500 LF $18.007 Three 10'x6'precast concrete box culvert 0 LF $1,500.008 Two 4'x7'concrete headwall 0 EA $14,000.009 Hydromulch/seeding 1650 SY $1.00 . . i10 Silt fence/Hay bale dikes for erosion control 1 LS $1,350.00 i11 Rebuild Existing Driveways 4 EA $1,000.00SubtotalEng.,SurveyingContingnecy(15%)1 I I TOTAL50 • 5 of 8 11/13/98 , IIV MICHAEL DRIVE •EXISTING GRAVEL BASE IS INADEQUATE • . (750 LF STANDARD 37'B-B CONCRETE ROADWAY from Davis to Creek) Pay Item Description Approx.Qty.Unit Unit Price Total Price 1 Grading&prepare subgrade 1 LS $3,500.00 $3,500.00 2 Pulverize,mix,&compact 6"existing surface 3250 SY $3.00 $9,750.00 3 Cement or Lime for stabilization 50 TN $110.00 $5,500.00 4 7" Concrete roadway 3100 SY $80.00 $248,000.00 5 Three 10'x6'precast concrete box culvert 0 LF $1,500.00 $0.00 6 Two 4'x7'concrete headwall 0 EA $14,000.00 $0.00 7 Hydromulch/seeding 1650 SY $1.00 $1,650.00 8 Silt fence/Hay bale dikes for erosion control 1 LS $1,350.00 $1,350.00 9 Rebuild Existing Driveways 4 EA $1,000.00 $4,000.00 Subtotal $273,750.00 Eng.,Surveying $41,062.50 Contingnecy(15%) $41,062.50 I TOTAL $355,875.00 __ S 6 of 8 11/13/98 MICHAEL DRIVE ' • VTER IMPROVEMENTS ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL COST 1 8" C-900 DR-18 PVC WATER PIPE LF 1290 $17.50 $22,575.00 2 ; 8" GATE VALVE&VALVE BOX EA 1 $600.00 $600.00 3 1" WATER SERVICE EA I 12 $400.00 $4,800.00 4 FIRE HYDRANT ASSEMBLY EA 4 $1,350.00 $5,400.00 5 D.I. FITTINGS TON 1.5 $2,800.00 $4,200.00 6 1 2" BLOWOFF ASSEMBLY EA 1 1 $2,300.00 $2,300.00 7 12"x 8"TAPPING SLEEVE&VALVE EA 1 $2,600.00 $2,600.00 8 8"x 6"TAPPING SLEEVE&VALVE EA 4 $2,200.00 $8,800.00 9 CONNECT TO EXISTING SYSTEM EA 1 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 10 BORE FM 1938 LF 90 $100.00 $9,000.00 11 TRENCH SAFETY LF 1150 $1.50 $1,725.00 12 CONCRETE CY 5 $110.00 $550.00 SUB-TOTAL $64,050.00 ENG. &SURVEYING $9,607.50 15%CONTINGENCY $9,607.50 I I TOTAL $83,265.00 • .., 7 of 8 11/13/98 MICHAEL DRIVE • EWER IMPROVEMENTS • ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL COST 1 8" SDR-35 PVC SEWER PIPE LF 1000 $26.00 $26,000.00 2 STD.4'DIA.MANHOLE EA 1 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 3 SHORT 4" SERVICE EA 6 $300.00 $1,800.00 4 LONG 4" SERVICE EA 6 $800.00 $4,800.00 5 CONNECT TO EXISTING SYSTEM EA 2 $1,000.00 $2,000.00 6 STD. CLEANOUT EA 2 $500.00 $1,000.00 7 TRENCH SAFETY LF 100 $1.50 $150.00 8 EROSION CONTROL LS 1 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 9 EXTRA DEPTH FOR 4'DIA.MH VF 7 $250.00 $1,750.00 - SUB-TOTAL $42,500.00 ENG.&SURVEYING $6,375.00 15%CONTINGENCY $6,375.00 TOTAL $55,250.00 • 8 of 8 11/13/98 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE FEE SCHEDULE 0 ACTIVITY FEE 2. Building Reservations for Special Activities (amended Res.N97-59): Security and Clean-up Deposit $50.00 (refundable) Bicentennial Park- The Lodge (with Kitchen) $15.00/hr Bicentennial Park- Community Center/room $15.00/rm/hr Community Center/entire building $35.00/hr Senior Center Large meeting room $15.00/hr Senior Center Large meeting room & Kitchen $35.00/hr • Senior Center Kitchen use fee $25.00/hr • 3. Organized Athletic Programs $1,000,000 General Liability Insurance Policy Meeting Fees $100 per year 4. TV/VCR Rental Fee No charge with reservation 5. Equipment Rental: (Driver's license held) Tennis Racket & Balls (Courts on Hill) No charge Volleyballs No charge Basketballs No charge 6. Reservations of Park Facilities (Bicentennial Park) (amended Res.#97-59): Security and Clean-up Deposit (group of 100 or more require) $50.00 (refundable) Hilltop Picnic Area $5.00/4 hrs Pine Tree Picnic Area $5.00/4 hrs Bicentennial Pavilion $8.00/4 hrs Adventure Alley Pavilions $8.00/4 hrs/pavilion L:\FINANCE\BUDGET\98-99\FEE10983.DOC PAGE 8-FEE SCHEDULE ply CITY OF SOUTHLAKE FEE SCHEDULE • ACTIVITY FEE 7. Reservations for Fields and Courts: Ballfields (No Lights) $7.50/1.5 hr/field Ballfields (With Lights) $15.00/1.5 hr/field Soccer Fields $2.50/1.5 hr/field CIS Multi-use Court (Hockey/Basketball) $10.00/ $7.50/1.5 hr CIS Multi-use Court (With Lights) $ :00/hr$15.00/1.5 hr Sand Volleyball Courts $5.00/hr/court Tennis Courts (Courts on Hill-Bicentennial Park) $5.00/1.5 hr/court In-Line Hockey Court (Bicentennial Park-No Lights) $10.00/hr In-Line Hockey Court (Bicentennial Park-With Lights) $20.00/hr Basketball courts $5.00/hr Field Preparation Fees: Weekday Games $25.00/field Weekend Games $37.50/field L:\FINANCE\BUDGET\98-99\FEE10983.DOC PAGE 9-FEE SCHEDULE /3,7z� City of Southlake,Texas I 11111 MEMORANDUM November 13, 1998 To: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager I From: Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Works I j Subject: Authorize the Mayor to enter into a professional services contract with Freese and Nichols for the South Fork Kirkwood Creek drainage improvements (including Runyan property and Shady Oaks area) Background April of 1998, Southlake received from our engineers, Freese and Nichols, the Master Drainage Plan Report—Phase I. This report: 0 • Assessed by data collection and problem identification the existing streams, channels, and storm drain systems • Provided an environmental overview • Provided a priority ranking system, and • Assessed funding strategies The Phase I report ranked the main watersheds as follows: 1. West Jones Branch 2. Dove Creek 3. BB-6 (Headwater is Foxborough Subdivision, then south past Rockenbaugh School and south under East Continental, east of Byron Nelson) 4. South Fork Kirkwood Branch (Headwater is Shady Oaks/Highland, thence north under Shady Oaks and Dove to Kirkwood) 5. BB-8 (Headwater is Southridge Lakes, then running south through Ginger Creek Estates, Timber Lakes and Monticello) 6. BB-9 (Jellico Creek) 7. Higgins Branch (Cross Timber Hills north to Kirkwood) 8. Kirkwood Creek 4 10 -1