Loading...
1992-11-17 CC PACKET City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM November 11, 1992 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Karen P. Gandy, Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: Revision to Packet Procedure Please note that the Community Development Staff has revised the packet information submitted for the Council ' s review and consideration. The following changes have been made: 1 . The applications for the requested actions have been deleted to eliminate some redundant information covered in my memo. 2 . The first review letter and exhibit have also been deleted with the understanding that any comment not addressed by the applicant will be carried over to the second review. Any deletion or change to a review comment will now be listed in my memo under "P, & Z ACTION. " The P & Z recommendation will be noted with the numbered item shown exactly as stated in the First Review Summary. We will continue copying the review letter for Council in blue paper to assist them in referencing it during the meeting. KPG City of Southlake �T-r • 1 : November 10, 1992 Mayor: Gary Fickes Mayor Pro Tern: Richard W.Wilhelm Mr. Michael Curtis 2752 Newcastle Drive • Councilmembers: Grapevine, Texas 76051 Barry K. Emerson Jerry Farrier Dear Mr. Curtis: Stephen W.Apple Sr. Jon Michael Franks Michael J.O'Brien This letter is in response to the letter (undated) you City Manager: sent last week to Billy Campbell, Director, Southlake Curtis E.Hawk Department of Public Safety, and others. I agree with the last sentence in your letter, that " . . . it would be Citysecretary: inappropriate for (your) letter to go without response. " Sandra L.LeGrand I requested Director Campbell to allow me to respond since by City Charter the City Manager is responsible for the proper administration of all affairs of the City. Your letter evidences frustration with the situation involving your son the night of Saturday, October 10, 1992 . As a parent I can understand the frustration. However, your recapitulation of the events of the incident appears to be somewhat onesided, and unfortunately you may have proverbially jumped to the conclusions enumerated. I will attempt to explain. The police responded to a request for service involving a possible burglary in progress. The three (3) responding officers confronted a number of suspects outside the • residence, and upon entering the residence a large number of suspects fled and a foot chase ensued. It was fortunate that no one (officers or suspects) was injured in the chaos of the moment. Subsequently, twenty-seven (27) suspects were detained by the three police officers. Seven (7) adults (i.e. , age 17 or older) were arrested for criminal trespass. There were no persons of age 21 or older present; there were containers of alcoholic beverages present. Given these two facts, there was probable cause to issue citations to everyone present. The remaining juveniles were issued citations for violation of the alcoholic beverage laws, and their parents were notified and allowed to take charge. The on-the-scene supervisor could have elected to arrest everyone involved (also for criminal trespass) , 667 North Carroll Avenue o Southlake, Texas 76092 (817) 481-5581 ° FAX (817) 481-0036 Mr. Michael Curtis November 11, 1992 Page 2 and have their vehicles towed and impounded. The supervising police officer recognized correctly that, once identified, those not yet charged with criminal trespass could later have complaints issued. You state in your letter that " . . .there was not, and should not have been, any question about quilt or innocence of the individuals apprehended on the scene. . . " for trespassing and minor in possession of alcohol. Fortunately, in our society police only enforce the law and are not judge and jury. It is not uncommon to have a situation where there is probable cause to issue a citation or make an arrest, but when upon further review the evidence in the case does not support prosecution. That is how our system works. In the issue in question, the police officers on the scene had probable cause to issue citations, however, in order to prosecute, we still needed to tie the individuals who were issued citations to the containers. ;r ' The option of issuing criminal trespass complaints was denied once the original complainant (the owner of the residence) dropped the charges. This action to drop the criminal complaints was not within the control of our agency. Given the circumstances explained above, and as related to you by Director Campbell and Deputy Director Malcolm Jackson, the citation for "minor in possession" was dismissed against everyone except three persons who were actually observed in possession by the officers. We could not tie the others to possession. In the three cases brought forward, the facts available supported prosecution for unlawful possession. Each of the three defendants had the opportunity to plead not guilty and let the judge decide whether or not the evidence presented would withstand judicial review. In Municipal Court last Wednesday, November 4, one defendant pleaded no contest and paid the fine, one pleaded no contest and opted for Teen Court, and one pleaded not guilty and was set for trial. In your letter you referred to possible procedural errors because several citations had a wrong date. I .am not sure that you recognize the difference between a citation and a criminal complaint. The citation issued your son is an example. The citation is nothing more than a summons to appear. The citation on the front indicates the violation for which your son was cited. On the reverse, your son was directed to appear before the Court Clerk within eleven business days. On October 22 he Mr. Michael Curtis November 11, 1992 Page 3 appeared before the Court Clerk and was set for plea session on November 4, 7: 00 p.m. , at which time your son pleaded no contest and opted for Teen Court. Since he did not contest the charges, there was no need to set the case for trial and no formal complaint was drawn up. Only when cases are set for trial will a formal complaint be drawn up. The trial is set around the complaint and the evidence presented in support of the case. Your letter also raises questions concerning the role of the C.I.S.D. in the matter. You question why only those involved in extra-curricular activities had their citations dismissed. I can only reiterate what Director Campbell and Deputy Director Jackson have told you: the matter involving the Southlake Police and the matter involving the Carroll School administration are two separate matters. We had no way of knowing which of the twenty-seven (27) persons originally issued citations were involved in extra-curricular activities. We had neither input nor control over how C. I. S.D. disciplined its students involved in extra-curricular activities (just as we had no control over the property owner's decision not to press criminal trespassing charges) . Likewise, our decisions concerning which cases had facts which would support prosecution in no way involved the school district. It just happened that the three who were tied to the containers of alcoholic beverages were not involved in extra-curricular activities. Our police officers are conscientious, dedicated, and well-trained public servants. The competency and integrity of our police officers and police administrators (and also the C. I.S.D. administrators) should not be brought into question because of whether or not the facts available do or do not support prosecution, or because of how the school district disciplines its students. We will never know how many of the twenty-seven individuals apprehended at the scene were in possession of alcoholic beverages. Probably most of them know who actually was or was not. What lessons they have learned will depend in part on the reactions of their parents, their peers, and the perceptions of the individuals involved. As I mentioned above, I understand your frustration. However, uncalled-for assertions of unequal application of the law and coverup will not in any way contribute to what you say in your letter you have attempted to do; that is, make the incident a positive learning experience for your son and those students with r Mr. Michael Curtis November 11, 1992 Page 4 whom you have contact. I urge you to reconsider the offer by Deputy Director Jackson to have your son participate in an observation program with the department. Such participation could help to make this a positive learning experience. I hope this letter adequately responds to your questions. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Aia :Curtis E. Hawk City Manager CEH/kb cc: Mayor Gary Fickes and Councilmembers - Billy Campbell, Director of Public Safety Malcolm Jackson, Deputy Director of Police Services Dr. Annette Griffin, C.I.S.D. Superintendent l ' IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH DIVISION JAMES R. PHIPPS, § Plaintiff, § VS. § CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS § and JERRY FICKES, INDIVIDUALLY § AND AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF § CIVIL ACTION NO. 4-92 CV-746 Y SOUTHLAKE and BARRY EMERSON, § INDIVIDUALLY AND AS CITY COUNCIL§ MEMBER OF THE. CITY OF SOUTHLAKE § and MIKE O'BRIEN, INDIVIDUALLY § AND AS CITY COUNCIL MEMBER OF § THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE and § DON RAMSOUR, INDIVIDUALLY and § HELEN RAMSOUR, INDIVIDUALLY, § Defendants. § ANSWER TO THE HONORABLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE: NOW COME the City of Southlake, Texas, Gary Fickes, Barry Emerson, and Mike O' Brien, Defendants in the above-captioned and numbered cause, and subject to Defendants ' Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Rule 12 (b) (6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure filed contemporaneously with this Answer, hereby make and file this } their Answer to the Complaint for Damages presented in this case, and would show the Court the following: I. Defendants admit that James Phipps is a resident of the State of Texas, but lack sufficient knowledge to admit or deny Plaintiff's actual city of residency. ANSWER PAGE1 b:phipps.ans II . Defendants admit in part and deny in part the allegations contained in Paragraph II of Plaintiff' s Complaint for Damages, in that Defendants deny that Jerry Fickes is the Mayor of the City of Southlake. Defendants admit that Gary Fickes is the Mayor of the City Southlake and resides and may be served with process at 155 Kimball Avenue, Southlake, Texas 76092 , as well as all remaining allegations in Paragraph II. III. The allegations contained in Paragraph III of Plaintiff' s Complaint for Damages, call for a legal conclusion to which no response is necessary. Defendants would note that 28 U.S.C. § 1331 gives federal question jurisdiction to federal district courts, but specifically deny that jurisdiction is conferred under 42 U.S.C. § 1985 based upon the factual averments presented in the pleading. IV. Defendants admit the allegations contained in Paragraph IV of Plaintiff' s Complaint for Damages. V. Defendants admit the allegations contained in Paragraph V of Plaintiff' s Complaint for Damages. VI. Defendants admit that there is a building situated upon the subject property and that on or about June 15, 1992 , Plaintiff made application for a change of zoning classification from "AG" agricultural to "0-1" office. Defendants also admit that on ANSWER PAGE2 b:phipps.ans September 1, 1992 , that Plaintiff and his legal counsel appeared before the Southlake City Council to present his application and answer any questions which the city council might have. Defendants deny that the building located on said property was used as an office for the previous four (4) years with the knowledge and consent of the Defendants and that the application for change of zoning was filed at the request of the zoning administrator for the City. of Southlake. Further, Defendants specifically deny that they in any way conspired to deprive Plaintiff of his rightful use of the subject property and that the City' s zoning ordinance or Master Plan was applied unequally to Plaintiff. Defendants lack sufficient knowledge to either admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph VI. VII. Defendants deny all allegations contained in Paragraph VII of Plaintiff' s Complaint for Damages. VIII. Defendants deny all allegations contained in Paragraph VIII of Plaintiff's Complaint for Damages, and specifically deny that Plaintiff's allegations state a cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1985. IX. Defendants deny all allegations contained in Paragraph IX of Plaintiff's Complaint for Damages, and specifically deny that the City's Master Plan "grandfathered" property adjacent to Plaintiff's property. ANSWER PAGE3 b:phipps.ans X. Defendants deny all express or implied averments set forth in Paragraph X of Plaintiff ' s Complaint for Damages as to the intent of the council and the existence of a conspiracy to interfere with, prevent, prohibit or deny Plaintiff the use of said property. Defendants lack sufficient knowledge to respond as to Plaintiff's beliefs, intended use of the property or to the amount of money expended in remodeling said property. Further, Defendants would note that the development suitability of said property due to the location and flight traffic caused by the Dallas/Fort Worth Airport are matters to be decided by the City Council of the City of Southlake in its proper legislative authority. Defendants deny all remaining allegations in Paragraph X. XI . Defendants deny all allegations contained in Paragraph XI of Plaintiff's Complaint for Damages. XII. Defendants deny all allegations contained in Paragraph XII of Plaintiff' s Complaint for Damages. XIII. Defendants deny all allegations contained in Paragraph XIII of Plaintiff's Complaint for Damages. JURY DEMAND XIV. Defendants demand a jury trial of all issues as guaranteed by the United States . Constitution and the Constitution of the State of Texas. ANSWER PAGE4 b:phipps.ans SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS XV. Defendants specially except to Plaintiff's Complaint for Damages for the reason that Mayor Gary Fickes, Councilmember Mike O'Brien and Councilmember Barry Emerson are sued in both their official and their individual capacities but the Complaint fails to specify allegations on particular factual events or acts that form the basis of the suit against them in their official or individual capacities and therefore Defendants are unable to prepare a defense or to effectively respond to the individual and official status claims. XVI. Defendants specially except to Plaintiff's Complaint for Damages in particular Paragraph VII of said Complaint for the reason that the allegations contained therein fail to specify any particular factual events or acts regarding which Defendants violated Plaintiff's constitutional rights to substantive and procedural due process or what actions by which Defendants constituted a violation of Plaintiff's rights. Defendants specially except to Plaintiff's Complaint for Damages as it fails to state specific factual information that would give rise to a cause of action against the named Defendants pursuant to the provisions of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . XVII. Defendants specially except to Plaintiff' s Complaint for Damages as it fails to state specific factual information that would give rise to a cause of action against the named Defendants ANSWER PAGES b:phipps.ans pursuant to the provisions of 42 U.S.0 § 1985. XVIII. Defendants specially except to Plaintiff ' s Complaint for Damages for the reasons that Plaintiff has failed to allege notice and proof of loss for his claim for damages against Defendant, City of Southlake, pursuant to the provisions of Section 12 . 06 of the Southlake Municipal Charter. XIX. Defendants specially except to Plaintiff' s Complaint for Damages for the reason that Plaintiff does not allege any constitutionally protected right or property interest in any zoning classification now in existence or which may hereafter be imposed upon Plaintiff' s land. XX. Defendants specially except to Plaintiff ' s Complaint for Damages for the reason that Plaintiff has failed to state a claim for unconstitutional damage to his property or property interest for the reason that the failure to grant a change in existing zoning classification does not constitute damage to property as a matter of state and/or federal law. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES XXI. Defendants affirmatively allege that their are entitled to the defense_ of absolute immunity. XXII. Additionally and alternatively, Defendants affirmatively allege that they are entitled to the defense of qualified immunity. ANSWER PAGE6 b:phipps.ans XXIII. Additionally and alternatively, Defendants affirmatively allege that they are entitled to official or sovereign immunity. XXIV. Defendants affirmatively allege that Plaintiff is barred from recovery because he voluntarily assumed the risk of purchasing said property without first inquiring as to the proper zoning classification for said property. Plaintiff unreasonably and illegally undertook improvements to the building located on said property, without determining its zoning restrictions and without applying for necessary permits, and by so doing, assumed the risk of the injuries of which he now complains. XXV. 7 1 Defendants affirmatively allege that Plaintiff is estopped from asserting the claims which form the basis of Plaintiff's Complaint for Damages in that upon purchasing said property, Plaintiff undertook improvements based solely upon his reliance on the actions of the previous owners and representations made by the real estate agent as to the previous use of the property and did not attempt to actually ascertain whether said use of the property was in fact legal under the applicable municipal zoning ordinance. XXVI. Defendants affirmatively allege that Plaintiff has failed to exhaust all available procedural and administrative remedies in that Plaintiff, although aware of his rights, failed to request a denial of his zoning request without prejudice which would have ANSWER PAGE7 b:phipps.ans allowed him to reapply under another zoning classification. Plaintiff further failed to seek a hearing before the Zoning Board of Adjustment as to the legal non-conforming use status of his property. Defendants would further affirmatively allege that the claims set forth in Plaintiff's Complaint for Damages are not ripe for review by this Court. XXVII. Defendants affirmatively allege that they had legal authority for any and all actions in which they took part which may have affected Plaintiff. XXVIII. Defendants affirmatively allege that Plaintiff has failed to give notice and proof of loss for his claim for damages against Defendant, City of Southlake, as required by Section 12. 06 of the Municipal Charter of the City of Southlake. XXIX. Defendants deny that Plaintiff has any constitutionally protected right or property interest in any zoning classification now in existence or which may hereafter be imposed upon Plaintiff's land. XXX. Defendants deny that failing to approve a change in a zoning classification that has existed for some time could constitute a denial of a reasonable use of property under state and/or federal law. ANSWER PAGE8 b:phipps.ans XXXI . Defendants further submit that Plaintiff cannot seek to recover under the claim pled as the city council of the City of Southlake voted by majority vote to approve the zoning change request at the September 1, 1992 council meeting. In accordance with Section 211. 001 of the Texas Local Government Code, the new zoning category did not become effective because of a procedural requirement of the Municipal Zoning Ordinance which required a weighted vote to overturn a negative recommendation of the City Planning & Zoning Commission. Plaintiff has made no challenge to the legality or constitutionality of the weighted vote provision of state law and the Municipal Zoning Ordinance and therefore, has not stated a claim based upon the actual vote of the City Council. COUNTERCLAIM Pursuant to the provisions of Rule 13 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendants assert that they are entitled to recover any and all attorneys fees and costs of court expended in the defense of this case pursuant to the provisions of 42 U.S.C. § 1988 . Defendants will show the Court that Plaintiff's Complaint for Damages is a frivolous suit, without merit, that is not based on existing law or a logical or reasonable extension of existing law. WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Defendants respectfully pray that Plaintiff take nothing by his suit, that all requested relief in Plaintiff's Complaint be denied, that Plaintiff's pleadings be stricken and that Defendants be awarded their costs and attorneys ANSWER PAGES b:phipps.ans V fees as permitted by law pursuant to 42 U.S. C. § 1988 , and that the Court grant Defendants all such other and further relief to which they may justly be entitled. Respectfully submitted, 261 E. Allen Taylo Jr. Texas Bar No. 691475 Wayne K. Olson Texas Bar No. 15276900 A Member of the Firm of: FIELDING, BARRETT & TAYLOR 8851 Highway 80 West, Suite 300 Fort Worth, Texas 76116-6041 (817) 560-0303 FAX (817) 560-3953 ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that on the 12th day of November, 1992, a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested to all attorneys of record in this cause. fl (te4J767,fr_ • ANSWER PAGE10 b:phipps.ans t , ARTICLE 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 1.01 Purpose The purpose of this ordinance is to provide for the orderly, safe and healthful development of the area both within the City and within it' s extraterritorial jurisdiction and to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the community, and to minimize public and private losses due to flood conditions. In order to carry out the purpose hereinabove stated, it is hereby declared to be the policy of the City to guide and regulate the implementation of all drainage improvements both within the City and within it's extraterritorial jurisdiction. This ordinance shall be administered using the following guidelines: A. Due consideration shall be given to the City's Master Plan, Thoroughfare Plan, Land-Use Plan and other developmental guides recommended by the City. B. Consideration shall be given to both the currently developed property and the anticipated development of property in the future. C. Protection of the soils, topography, wildlife, vegetation and other amenities of the City shall be considered an objective of this ordinance. D. Determination of cost participation in any improvements shall attempt to be reasonable and consistent in their application to all developments or assessment programs. Section 1.02 Definitions A. General Rules: For the purpose of this ordinance, the following rules shall be applied in constructing, interpreting, or otherwise defining the terms and provisions hereof: 1. Words used in the present tense shall include the future, words used in the singular number shall include the plural number and words used in the plural shall include the singular. 2. The word "shall" is mandatory and the word "may" is per- missive. 3. The phrase "used for" shall include the phrases, "arranged for" , "designed for" , "intended for" , and "occupied for" , and shall apply exclusively to physical uses. 1-1 B. Definitions: For the purpose of this ordinance, certain words or terms applicable hereto are defined as hereinafter provided. Words and terms used in this ordinance, but not defined in this ordinance shall have the meanings ascribed thereto in the Zoning Ordinance, The Subdivision Ordinance, or other applicable ordi- nances of the City. Benchmark: An elevation reference mark. "CA" Factor: A multiplicative coefficient achieved by multiplying the coefficient of runoff "C" , by the area in acres •"A" that is tribu- tary to the point of design. "cfs" : Cubic feet per second. A measure of the volume of water. Critical Structures: All drainage improvements outlined in the Conceptual Drainage Plan (prepared by the City) which are impacted by a large watershed, and are intended for participatory cost allocations as determined by the City. Detention: The detention of stormwater on a site or within a project shall be interpreted as a temporary restrainment of runoff with anticipation- of normal runoff over an extended period of time. Development: Any man-made change to improved or unimproved real estate, including but not limited to, buildings or other struc- tures, mining, dredging, filling, grading, paving, excavation or drilling operations. Development Permit: A permit required before development shall begin in an area designated as within the limits of the base flood. Drainage Easement: A delineated portion of land set aside for the overland or . underground transfer of storm water. This area shall not have any permanent structures, fences, or other obstacles hindering the safe transfer of water through the easement. Drainage Improvements: All elements of a storm drainage system consisting of streets, alleys, storm sewers, channels, culverts, bridges, swales, and any other facility through which or over which storm water flows. Escrow: Money placed in the possession of the City to accomplish the purpose set out in this ordinance, including but not limited to the following: purchase of right-of-way, design and construction of drainage improvements, curb, gutter, and pavement. - FEMA: Abbreviation for "Federal Emergency Management Agency" 1-2 , "FIRM Map" : A map produced by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, which has the purpose of a Flood Insurance Rate Map. The Federal Emergency Management Agency has delineated both the areas of special flood hazards and the risk premium zones applic- able to the community. Flood: A general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of normally dry land areas from the overflow of inland or tidal waters, the unusual and rapid accumulation of runoff or surface waters from any source, or mudslides which are caused or precipitated by accumulations of water on or under the ground. Flood, "100 year" : A flood that, on the average, is likely to occur once every 100 years, (i.e. , that has a one-percent chance of occurring each year) . Also referred to as "100 year storm" and as the "Base Flood" . Flood plain: The area of land inundated with water over a specified design storm frequency, typically a 100 year storm. Floodway: The channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas that must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than one foot. Floodway Map: A map produced by FEMA which delineates the flood boundary and floodway. Fort Worth Drainage Manual: The City of Fort Worth Storm Drainage Criteria and Design Manual. Freeboard: A factor of safety usually expressed in feet above a flood level for purposes of flood plain management. Frequency: The average frequency statistically determined for which it is expected that a specific flood level or discharge may be equalled or exceeded. HEC I Analysis: A computer watershed model developed by the Hydraulic Engineering Center, U.S. Corps of Engineers, which contains several methods with which to simulate . surface runoff and river- reservoir flow in river basins and flows in urban areas. HEC II Analysis: A computer backwater flood model developed by the Hydraulic Engineering Center which calculates water surface profiles for steady, gradually varied flows in natural or man-made channels. Maintenance: Periodic removal of underbrush, occasional rough mowing, and no dumping of trash, soil, or other debris. This shall include general upkeep of the area to prohibit any activity which may impede the overland flow of storm water. 1-3 Mean Sea Level: The National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) of 1929 or other datum, to which base flood elevations shown on a community's Flood Insurance Rate Map are referenced. Mudslide: A general and temporary movement down a slope of a mass of rock or soil, artificial fill, or a combination of these materials caused or precipitated by the accumulation of water on or under the ground. Retention: The retention of stormwater on a site or within a project shall be interpreted as a permanent restrainment of runoff with no anticipation of runoff over an extended period of time. Ultimate Conditions: The level of development anticipated upon full development of all land with a watershed. Typically determined by reference to existing use, existing zoning or projected land use from the City Land Use Plan, whichever is more intense. Unless specifically stated otherwise, all storm run-off calculations required within this ordinance should be based on ultimate conditions of development. 1-4 ARTICLE 6 F OFF-SITE DOWNSTREAM IMPROVEMENTS Section 6.01 General A. General: With the requirements of this Article, the City intends to allocate the burden of critical off-site improvements between all the land owners who impact critical structures. The drainage studies required for each development shall be responsible for considering their impact on all downstream structures, and cost participation shall be determined as outlined in this Article. Section 6.02 Limits of Off-Site Study A. Conceptual Drainage Plan: The Conceptual Drainage Plan adopted by the City delineates the major watersheds throughout the City and highlights critical drainage structures within those watersheds. B. Limits of Study: The off-site study shall extend either to the City Limits, the Corp of Engineer's property surrounding Grapevine Lake, or the Extraterritorial Jurisdiction line where applicable. Section 6.03 Responsibility for Off-Site Study A. First Development: It shall be the responsibility of the first } development equal to or greater than 10% of the watershed flowing into the lowest point of the tract, by Preliminary Plat, Concept Plan, or Final Plat, to perform the drainage study to the limits as described in the previous section. B. Credit for Cost of Study: The land owner initially respon- sible for obtaining the Off-Site Study shall be allowed to credit the cost of the study towards his participation in the off-site improvements as outlined in this article. The cost of this study shall be approved by the Director of Public Works. Any costs deemed unreasonable shall not be credited toward the cost of off-site improvements. Section 6.04 Requirements of Off-Site Study A. Complete Watershed: The Off-Site Study shall include the complete watershed which drains to the limit of the study as outlined above. This is regardless of the location of the development within that watershed. B. Accuracy Level: The Off-Site Study shall be performed under the criteria of the Preliminary Drainage Study with the following additions: 1. All existing drainage structures shall be noted as to type and size, and current condition. 6-1 2. All proposed critical drainage structures shall be determined as to type and size. 3. An accurate acreage breakdown of the entire watershed and each of the tributary watersheds leading into the flow line of the main water shed. C. Cost Determination: Included with the Off-Site Study shall be an itemized cost estimate of all critical structures within the watershed downstream. This shall include, but not be limited to, the following: 1. Cost of removing existing structures where applicable. 2. Cost of repairing or improving existing structures where applicable. 3. Cost of installing new structures. 4. Cost of improving or maintaining existing open channels. 5. Cost of designing the structures and preparing construction plans and documents sufficient to obtain competitive bids. Section 6.05 Off-Site Easement Acquisition A. Any necessary easements not dedicated by platting :shall be procured by separate instrument and shall be the developer or property owner' s responsibility. If the developer or property owner cannot obtain a required off-site easement, then the developer or property owner may request that the City assist in the acquisition. The developer must make an offer in writing, based on the fair market value of the easement, to the property owner from whom the easement is being acquired. In any event, all costs of obtaining the easement shall be the responsibility of the developer or property owner and the City must be reimbursed for any costs incurred. Section 6.06 Cost Participation for Off-Site Improvements A. Adjacent Downstream Structures: Drainage structures which are adjacent to developments shall be paid for as follows: 1. If the development covers 60% or more of the watershed serviced by the adjacent structure, it shall be the responsi- bility of the developer to install and pay for the adjacent structure. 2. If the development covers less than 60% of the watershed serviced by the adjacent structure, it shall be the responsi- bility of the developer to install and pay for the adjacent structure, but the City shall reimburse the developer• on a pro-rata per acre basis when the remaining acreage develops. This will be on the current cost of the improvements and 6-2 shall extend for no longer than a five-year period. B. Other Downstream Improvements: The developer of any tract of land within a watershed serviced by a critical structure as outlined in the City Conceptual Drainage Plan shall participate in the cost of improving that structure on a percentage formula having a per-acre of watershed coefficient and a land use coeffic- ient as follows. 1. Within the watershed serviced by said critical structure, areas shall be delineated showing the more intense land use of the existing zoning or the proposed land use plan. 2. The "CA" shall be determined for the entire watershed as a whole to the point of design for the critical structure. 3. The "CA" factor shall be determined for the subject tract. 4. The "CA" factor for the subject tract shall be taken as a percentage of the "CA". factor for the entire watershed. This shall be the percentage responsibility of the subject tract. 5. This percentage shall then be multiplied with the cost of the critical structure to obtain the dollar amount of contribution required by the subject tract. Section 6.07 Construction of Off-Site. Improvements A. Remaining capacity in critical structure: When the critical structure being impacted by the proposed development still has capacity to handle the increase in runoff created by the development, the developer shall not be responsible' for the construction improvements to the structure or replacement thereof. The developer will be responsible for satisfying the monetary obligation for participation as outlined in the previous section. B. No capacity remaining: . Should the proposed development create runoff which exceeds the capacity of the critical structure, it shall be the responsibility of the developer to construct the ultimate improvements needed to said structure. 1. Prior Contributions: The City shall be responsible for transferring _ all funds from previous developments contri- bution to the specific structure to the developer who must construct said improvements. 2. Future Refunding: The City shall be responsible for procur- ing additional participatory funds from other developers within said watershed and transferring these funds to the developer responsible for constructing the improvements. This shall only extend for a period of five years from the 6-3 • ARTICLE 9 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS Section 9 .01 Contingent Warning A. The degree of flood protection required by this ordinance is considered reasonable for regulatory purposes and is based ._ on engineering and scientific methods of study. Larger floods may occur on rare occasions or flood heights may be increased by man-made or natural causes, such as bridge openings restricted by debris. This ordinance does not imply that areas outside flood plain areas or land uses permitted within such districts will be free from flooding or flood damages. Section 9 .02 Maintenance Issues A. General: The City considers the issue of maintenance very important and herein have outlined the responsibilities for maintenance of all drainage easements and structures. B. Drainage Easements With No Structures: It shall be the responsi- bility of the owner to maintain all land contained in a drainage easement. C. Drainage Easements With Surface Structures: It shall be the responsibility of the owner to maintain . all land and surface structures within a drainage easement. This shall include periodic flushing, hosing, or brooming of surface structures sufficient to maintain the intended flow of water in the structure. Maintenance shall not include the replacement of structures (concrete flumes, etc. ) which have deteriorataed due to age, or which have been destroyed by erosion or other natural causes. The City shall replace these structures as funding becomes available at the discretion of the City Manager. D. Bar Ditches and Culverts: Although these items are typically found in R.O.W. dedicated to the City, maintenance of these items shall be the responsibility of the individual land owner. This shall include all maintenance as outlined in the definitions as well as periodic grading or earthwork needed to maintain the intended cross-section of the ditch and to maintain a positive flow of drainage across the property. Maintenance shall also include periodic cleaning of culverts to remove all sediment or other hindrances to the flow of water. Culverts shall be replaced by the owner should any structural failure in the culvert poten- tially impede the flow of water. Section 9.03 Enforcement A. Development Permit: No development shall be allowed within the limits of the flood plain until the developer/owner has received a development permit from the City. This shall include grading plans and other requirements as outlined by the Director 9-1 of Public Works. B. Building Permit: No building permits shall be issued for proper- ties which have not been analyzed for potential flooding, do not have applicable floodway or flood plain limits shown, potentially require a finish floor elevation in excess of that proposed, or do not fulfill the requirements of this ordinance. • C. Final Plat Filing: The City shall not approve any Plat for filing in the County Plat Records that does not meet the require- ments of this ordinance. Section 9 .04 Modifications and Variations A. Compliance: Where the Council finds that compliance with these regulations would cause unusual hardship or extraordinary diffi- culties because of exceptional and unique conditions of access, location, shape, size, drainage, or other physical features of the site, the requirements may be modified to mitigate the hardship, provided that the public interest is protected and the development is in keeping with the general spirit and intent of this ordinance. 1. This section shall not be interpreted to permit the develop- ment of land which is inherently unsuitable for the use proposed. 2. Any modification will not have the effect of preventing the orderly subdivision of other land in the area in accordance with the provisions of this ordinance. B. Discretion of Council: At the discretion of the Council, the normal standards. and requirements of this ordinance may also be modified in the case of a Planned Unit Development. Such depar- tures from the standards specified may be made only when the Council finds that the plan provides for convenience and safe access, adequate space for recreation, and provision for light and air, and offers all essential utility services and necessary public and other facilities, an is in conformance with all provisions of the City Code which specifically apply to Planned Development. Section 9 .05 Violations: A. Fines: Any person, firm, corporation, agent or employee thereof who violates any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined not to exceed Two Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($2000.00) for each offense. Each day that a violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense. B. Injunctions: The City shall have the right to institute an action in a court of competent jurisdiction to enjoin the 9-2 violation of any provision of this ordinance within it' s municipal boundary or within its extraterritorial jurisdiction, and this remedy shall be in addition to any penal provision in this ordinance or in the Code of the City of Southlake. Section 9 .06 Severability of Provisions: A. It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council of the City that any word, phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph, section or part in or of this ordinance shall be severable. B. If any court of competent jurisdiction shall judge any word, phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph, section or part in or of this ordinance to be invalid, such judgement shall not affect any other word, phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph, section or part in or of this ordinance not specifically included in said judgement. C. If any court of competent jurisdiction shall judge invalid the application of any provision of this ordinance to a particular property, building, ' or other structure, which judgement shall not affect the application of said provision to any other property, building, or structure not specifically included in said judge- ment. Section 9.07 Conflicting Ordinances A. This Ordinance shall be and is hereby declared to be cumulative of all other ordinances of the City; and this Ordinance shall not operate to repeal or affect any of such other ordinances except insofar as the provisions thereof might be inconsistent or in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance, in which event such conflicting provisions, if any, in such other ordinance or ordinances are hereby repealed. Section 9 .08 Liability Disclaimer: A. General: All of the regulations provided in this Ordinance are hereby declared to be governmental and for the health, safety and welfare of the general public. Any member of the City Council or a City Official or employee charged with the enforcement of this Ordinance, acting for the City of Southlake in the discharge of his duties, shall not thereby render himself personally liable; and he is hereby relieved from all personal liability for any damage that might accrue to persons or property as a result of any act required or permitted in the discharge of his said duties. B. Professional Liability: The Professional Engineer responsible for preparing the drainage study shall retain liability for said drainage study, regardless of any action taken by the City or the City' s Engineer concerning the study. 9-3 FIELDING, BARRETT & TAYLOR CARVAN E.ADICNs ATTORNEYS SUSAN H.HoLLowAY RoBERT M.ALLIBON 8851 HIGHWAY 80 WEST,SUITE 300 SusAN S.JONES DANIEL R.BARRETT* FORT WORTH,TEXAS 76116 WAYNE K.OLSON ELIZABETIL ELAM TELEPHONE(817)560-0303 TUN G.SRALLA** DAVID FIELDING FAX(817)560-3953 J.MARK SUDDERTII JOSEPHINE GARRETT E.ALLEN TAYLOR,JR. E.GLENN GIDEL JAMES P.WAGNER DWAYNE D.HITT WENDY R.WILSON *BOARD CERTIFIED PERSONAL INJURY TRIAL LAW— OF COUNSEL TEXAS BOARD OF LEGAL SPECIALIZATION ANALESLIE MUNCY CIVIL TRIAL SPECIALIST— **BOARD CERTIFIED CIVIL APPELLATE LAW— NATIONAL BOARD OF TRIAL ADVOCACY TEXAS BOARD OF LEGAL SPECIALIZATION July 22, 1992 D fl Mr. Curtis Hawk JUL 2 41992 City Manager City of Southlake OFFICE OF CITY 667 N. Carroll Avenue lio1,NAGER Southlake, Texas 76092 M 3 Re: Liability of municipalities for drainage and flooding CI- -Dear Curtis: You have asked us to address the issue of whether the City of Southlake is legally responsible for flooding which occurs from an improper impoundment or diversion of water . within natural creek beds which are on private property within the city limits of Southlake. You specifically limited your question to a scenario in which the City of Southlake does not hold any easement rights within the creek bed. It is my opinion that as a general rule the city would not be liable for flooding damages which are caused by natural creek beds. The discussion below will hopefully give you some background on the potential liability the city in other contexts and the basis of my opinion that the city is not responsible under the fact circumstances you presented. Under Section 11.086 of the Texas Water Code (formerly Section 5.086/Article 7589a) a person has a cause of action against an adjacent property owner who either diverts or impounds water that causes damages to such person. In effect, the owner of an upper estate who diverts water and thereby causes damage to the lower estate is liable for damages. Conversely, the owner of the lower estate who impounds water, thereby causing it to back up upon and cause flooding upon the upper estate is liable for damages to that person. Section 11.086 provides in part: "(a) No person may divert or impound the natural flow of surface waters in this State or permit a diversion or impoundment by him to continue in a manner that damages the property of another by the overflow of the water diverted or impounded. (b) A person whose property is injured by an overflow of water caused by unlawful diversion or impounding has remedies at law and in equity and may recover damages occasioned by the overflow." 4. Mr. Curtis Hawk July 22, 1992 Page 2 The Supreme Court has held that the statute has no application to persons or entities who are not proprietors of land. Kraft v. Langford, 565 S.W.2d 223 (Tex. 1978). Therefore, the engineer who designed a drainage system which caused damage to a landowner was not liable under the statute. The Supreme Court has also held that the prior article 7589a, which was worded almost identical to the current section 11.086 of the Water Code, did not apply to a governmental agency or a municipality. City of Houston v. Renault, 431 S.W.2d 322 (Tex. 1968). However, this decision has been virtually undermined by the Dallas Court of Appeals decision in Abbott v. City of Princeton, 721 S.W.2d 872 (Tex.App. - Dallas 1986, writ refd n.r.e.). In Abbott, the Court of Appeals stated that when section 11.086 was codified in the Water Code a definition was added that defined "person" as including a government or governmental subdivision or agency. The court stated that it could see no legislative intent to exclude municipalities from Section 11.086 of the Water Code. Therefore, when the codification took place and the Act was adopted, an entirely new statutory scheme was implemented which destroyed the rationale upon which Renault was based. It therefore appears that a municipality may be sued under Section 11.086. The Abbott court clarified that such a lawsuit under the statute must be brought within two years of the latest damage caused by a diversion or impoundment of water. This does not prevent the petition from being amended when additional rainfall causes damage during the trial of the cause. Mitchell v. Blomdahl, 730 S.W.2d 791 (Tex.App. - Austin 1987, writ refd n.r.e.). In addition to the statutory cause of action allowed under Section 11.086 of the Water Code, a land owner who is damaged by the diversion or impoundment of water may also sue under a common law cause of action. Kraft v. Langford, 565 S.W.2d 223 (Tex. 1978); Bily v. Omni Equities, Inc., 731 S.W.2d 606 (Tex.App. - Houston [14th Dist.] • 1987, writ refd n.r.e.); City of Watauga v. Taylor, 752 S.W.2d 199 (Tex.App. - Fort Worth 1988, no writ). The common law rule in Texas appears to be that a downstream property owner must receive the surface waters naturally flowing thereon from a higher estate, yet he is not required to receive these waters except in their natural condition, untouched by the hands of man. Land is subject to no servitude to receive upon it water, the natural flow of which has been diverted to it. Higher land is entitled to have surface water flow to lower land so long as the water follows its usual course and runs in its natural quantities. Langford v. Kraft, 498 S.W.2d 42 (Tex.Civ.App. - Beaumont 1973, dism'd, w.o.j.; writ refd n.r.e.). In Kraft, supra, the Texas Supreme Court distinguished between a common law cause of action and a civil law cause of action. The essence of the Supreme Court's decision was that the civil law cause of action has now been codified in Section 11.086 of the Texas Water Code. Under this statute, the elements of a cause of action are: P y Mr. Curtis Hawk July 22, 1992 Page 3 1. A diversion or impoundment of surface water; 2. Which causes; 3. Damage to the property of the plaintiff landowner. Under a statutory cause of action, no negligence need be proven in order to prevail. Bily, supra. The downside of the statutory cause of action, however, is that it can only be brought against the adjacent landowner. Under a common law cause of action, negligence must be proven in order to prevail. However, a cause of action can be asserted against third parties (as opposed to owners of contiguous estates causing the impoundment). It appears, based on the above discussion, that municipalities are now considered persons against whom a cause of action may be brought under Section 11.086 if they actually impound or divert the natural flow of water. In addition, a municipality can be held liable for negligence which causes flooding to a plaintiff's property. City of Watauga v. Taylor, supra. In the Watauga case, the city was held liable for improper maintenance of a drainage ditch; i.e., failure to keep the ditch clear of vegetation and debris. The drainage ditch involved in the Watauga case was a dedicated drainage easement that the city had constructed improvements within. In finding the city liable, the court went into a lengthy discussion about whether the maintenance of a drainage ditch was a proprietary function versus a governmental function under the Texas Tort Claims Act. Because of the 1987 amendments to the Tort Claims Act, this function is now considered to be a governmental function and the city is liable up to the maximum limits provided in the Act. Because the Watauga court found that the maintenance responsibility of a city was a proprietary function, it did not have occasion to address the necessary findings of a negligent use of property or a premise defect which are required to show governmental liability under the Tort Claims Act. The Watauga court further held that the approval of a plat which included the drainage easements was a governmental function under the Texas Supreme Court's decision in City of Round Rock v. Smith, 687 S.W.2d 300, 303 (Tex. 1985). The Watauga case is also important because the court held that a negligence action brought against the city for failure to provide sufficient drainage was subject to governmental immunity. This defense was therefore assertable against the claim that the city had the duty to remove a bridge or otherwise remedy the drainage system underneath the bridge which aggravated the flooding problem on plaintiff's property. This ruling is favorable to municipalities in that it holds that a city is not liable for the inadequate design or providing of drainage. As an oversimplification, however, this case and other cases .l Mr. Curtis Hawk July 22, 1992 Page 4 seem to indicate that once the city takes on the responsibility to assume drainage control, it must do so in a non-negligent manner. There are some other cases involving municipalities which are important to note. In City of Perryton v. Huston, 554 S.W.2d 435 (Tex.Civ.App. - Eastland 1970, no writ), the city was held liable for $27,000 in damages for an intentional taking of property under Article 1, Section 17 of the Texas Constitution, based upon the fact that it had constructed a drainage channel which substantially increased the quantity and velocity of water flowing onto plaintiff's property. My understanding of the facts in the Perryton case is that the city basically finished out a drainage channel which ended directly adjacent to the plaintiff's property and made no provision for the handling of the water onto the plaintiff's property. It obviously caused great damage to the property. It appears that this cause of action was • based upon common law and the taking action. This case can also be limited to the context that the city had voluntarily taken on the construction of drainage improvements. Another case which is of interest to municipalities is Langford v. Kraft, supra. In Langford, a land owner was entitled to an injunction under section 5.086 of the Texas Water Code against a subdivision in which there was installed a storm drainage system which increased both the quantity and velocity of water on the plaintiff's property. This was true in spite of the fact that the plat and drainage system had been approved by the city and county planning commissions. In the Langford case, the developer had constructed the storm sewer so as to cause the entire surface rainfall to be concentrated into one system of pipes from which it was discharged in a concentrated mass with great force onto plaintiff's property. The discharge increased both the quantity and velocity of the runoff water in violation of the statute. In the Langford case, the county was not made a party to the lawsuit. The court stated that the county was not a necessary party in that it was not shown to have accepted the streets which were dedicated and which were causing the flooding problem. This case therefore leaves unanswered the question of whether a municipality or a county might be liable if drainage improvements which are causing the flooding are dedicated to and accepted by the governmental entity. Again, under the Round Rock and Watauga cases, the city appears to be immune from liability for the mere approval of a plat which authorizes drainage improvements; however, the actual dedication and acceptance of drainage improvements which grants control to the municipality might create liability in a different context. Although it is not totally clear under state law whether a municipality would be deemed to be a "proprietor" of a dedicated drainage easement for purposes of section 11.086 liability, the Watauga case indicates that a municipality may be held liable for the failure to maintain dedicated drainage easements, presumably under a negligence theory under a common law cause of action. It is my opinion, therefore, that a Texas court would probably find that if the city requires the construction of drainage improvements to certain specifications, and Mr. Curtis Hawk July 22, 1992 Page 5 subsequently inspects and accepts those improvements in conjunction with final plat approval, these acts would be deemed to be an acceptance of the drainage improvements on the part of the city and they would become the responsibility of the city to maintain. The city has the authority to require a maintenance bond for the cost of maintenance of these facilities for a reasonable period of time; however, the underlying legal responsibility remains with the city effective upon the acceptance of the dedication. In conclusion, until a Texas court specifically rules that a city is a "proprietor" of a drainage easement for purposes of section 11.086, the city should not be liable for impoundments or diversions of water caused by conditions within the drainage easement merely by the fact that the city owns the easement. However, under common law, a municipality may be held liable for the negligent maintenance of dedicated drainage easements if that negligence causes damages to adjacent property owners. The most likely way this will occur is through failure to remove obstructions within the drainage way, thereby causing an impoundment of water onto the adjacent property. Texas courts will hopefully continue to affirm that municipalities are not liable for the design or mere approval of drainage systems even after those drainage systems are dedicated to the city. Municipalities, however, are definitely liable for drainage facilities which are constructed by the municipality and which cause damages through diversion or impoundment. Even though the city would have defenses to these types of liabilities, I strongly recommend that the city develop a standard drainage easement maintenance policy to assure that the city is not liable for any damages caused by failure to maintain. Also, even though legal responsibility may not be imputed to the city from a practical point of view, your citizens will look to the city to alleviate drainage problems which they are incurring, especially if those drainage problems are encountered as a result of new developments which have been approved by the city. I trust that I have adequately answered your inquiry. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please let me know. Very truly yours, Wayne K. Olson WKO:cr hawk.43 i DRAINAGE ISSUES I. Existing Drainage Problems A. With Easements Policy Questions: How far does staff pursue correcting drainage problems in monetary terms? B. Without Easements Policy Question: Does the City want to pursue obtaining drainage easements when existing problems arise? II. Development Drainage Problems A. Easements required downstream Policy Question: Are all easements downstream of a subdivision the responsibility of the developer? If so, how far downstream are they responsible? B. Cost participation of drainage improvements 1. On-site improvements 2 . Off-site improvements Policy Question: Should all developments be required to install drainage improvements if their development covers less than 60% of the s Drainage Issues November 12, 1992 - Page 2 watershed even if they are eligible to receive prorata reimbursement. III. Drainage Maintenance A. Property owner responsibility of drainage easements Policy Question: Does the City want the property owners to maintain drainage easements if it can be maintained by normal lawn maintenance? B. City's responsibility of drainage easements Policy Question: Does the City maintain existing or proposed drainage easements if the property owners do not? IV. City's Liability Policy Question: Does the City want to implement a Drainage System Maintenance Plan to insure all drainage easements are maintained? DRAINimmi41W mta City of South lake,Texas MONTHLY DEPARTMENT REPORTS OCTOBER 1992 ZONING 4A PARKS & RECREATION 4B STREET 4C WATER/WASTERWATER 4D BUILDING 4E PUBLIC SAFETY 4F MUNICIPAL COURT 4G COMPLAINTS 4H FINANCE 4I City of Southlake,Texas PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT FEE REVENUE REPORT FOR THE MONTH ENDING 31 OCTOBER 1992 ZONING $ 100 . 00 NO. OF CASES ( 1) PLATTING 24,780 . 00 NO. OF CASES (4) SITE PLAN/CONCEPT PLANS 150 . 00 NO. OF CASES ( 1) SPECIFIC USE PERMITS 100 . 00 NO. OF CASES ( 1) BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 50 . 00 NO. OF CASES ( 1) To be refunded in Nov. , 1992 (Case withdrawn) MISCELLANEOUS INCOME 278 . 50 NO. OF RECEIPTS ( 12 ) TOTAL REVENUE $ 25,458 . 50 TOTAL NO. OF RECEIPTS (20) CITY OF SOUTIILAKE PARKS AND RECREATION MONTHLY REPORT OCTOBER 1992 92 91 CALENDAR YEAR CALENDAR YEAR + JAN-DEC JAN-DEC OCT-SEPT OCT-SEPT THIS SECURITY LAST THIS YEAR LAST YEAR THIS YEAR LAST YEAR MONTH DEPOSIT MONTH TO DATE TO DATE FY9I-92 FY90-91 LODGE REGISTRATION 100.00 200.00 75.00 245.00 . 200.00 270.00 175.00 RENTAL .00 .00 .00 245.00 110.00 275 .00 130.00 DALLFIELDS LIGHTS DALLFIELD 01 .00 .00 .00 .00 50.00 100.00 40.00 DALLFIELD r2 . DALLFIELD 13 TOTAL 100.00 *550 .00 75 .00 490 .00 360.00 1,135.00 345.00 /TO DE REFUNDED. 4b-1 City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM November 09, 1992 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Michael H. Barnes, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Street Department Monthly Report - October, 1992. The enclosed report details the Street Department activities for the month of October, 1992 . This report is to be included in the City Council packets for their November 17, 1992 meeting. mm) MHB/ck City of Southlake, Texas _ I MEMORANDUM November 09, 1992 TO: Michael H. Barnes, Director of Public Works FROM: Brad Payton, Street Superintendent SUBJECT: Monthly Report for Street Department October, 1992 . Description Oct. Sept. 1 . Tons of asphalt used a. Ultimate Petroleum Mix 0 0 b. Hot Mix Asphalt 30 0 c . Cold Mix Asphalt 150 200 2 . Lane Miles of Road Repaired 95 95 3 . Number of Street Signs Repaired or Replaced (all types) 14 6 4 . Feet of Ditch Line Cleaned and shaped 600 500 5 . Number of Vehicles Repaired 0 0 6 . Row mowed in miles of streets 75 75 7 . Tons of Rip-Rap stone used 35 8 . Tons of Base material used 100 P/cbk { City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM November 11, 1992 TO: Curtis E . Hawk, City Manager FROM: Michael H. Barnes, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Water Department Monthly Report - October, 1992 . The enclosed report details the Water Department activities for the month of October, 1992 . This report is to be included in the City Council packets for their November 17 , 1992 meeting. nW MHB/ck 'Yd—/ UTILITY DEPARTMENT REPORT MONTH October 1992 SEPT. OCT. GALLONS PUMPED FROM WELLS 0 0 PURCHASED FROM FORT WORTH 58,358, 000 46,473, 000 TOTAL PUMPED AND PURCHASED 58,358,000 46,473,000 WATER METERS SET 39 35 NEW WATER TAPS MADE 3 2 VALVES REPAIRED 6 0 VALVES TESTED 17 27 FIRE HYDRANTS INSTALLED 0 0 FIRE HYDRANTS REPAIRED 8 0 FIRE HYDRANTS FLUSHED _ 1 11 DEAD END WATER MAINS FLUSHED 35 35 WATER MAINS REPAIRED 2 2 WATER METERS AND SERVICE LINE REPAIRED 6 9 NEW ACCOUNTS 43 54 FINAL ACCOUNTS 44 49 LOCKED METER FOR DELINQUENT PAYMENT 11 11 PULLED METERS 0 0 METERS REPLACED 5 5 MISCELANEOUS WORK ORDERS 112 84 SEWER LIFT STATIONS CHECKED (3 L.S. ) 66 110 REQUIRED MONTHLY SEWAGE TESTS 16 10 SEWER PLANT MAINTENANCE (BANK & DOVE) 44 44 SEWER MANHOLES INSPECTED 21 43 MISCELLANEOUS PROJECTS 0 1 32 Man Hours for New Community Building WATER SUPERINTENDENT //772CAMLAP.0 . DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS MONTHLY REPORT SEND REPORT TO: TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH DIVISION OF WATER HYGIENE WATER WORKS OPERATION FOR 1100 WEST 49th STREET GROUND WATER SUPPLIES AUSTIN. TEXAS 78756-3192 I Name of System CITY OF SO[FTNT.-\KF County T4RRaNT (la) Water System I.D. No. 2200075 Month of O TORFR 19 2— Day Pumpage to Distribution System in Thousand Gals. (6) _ (7) (8) (9) of (2) Direct (3) From Gnd. (4)Purchased (5) Total Disinfection Corrosion Other Fluoride Month from Wells Storage from Others Pumpage Control Treatmeat Residuals L 1 0 1,837.0 1,837.0 2 0 2 ,268.0 2 ,268.0 3 n 2,521.0 2 ,521.0 4 0 1,822.0 , 1 .822.0 5 0 2,017.0 2,017.0 , 6 0 , 1,693.0 1,693.0 , 7 0 1,500.0 1,500.0 , 8 n 1,144.0 1 .144.0 9 0 , 1,140.0 - 1,140.0 10 0 1,498.0 1,498.0 11 0 1,542.0 1,542.0 12 0 1,790.0 1,790.0 13 0 1.959.0 1 .959.0 , , 14 0 1,829.0 1,829.0 15 0 734.0 734.0 16 , 0 1,237.0 1,237.0 , 17 0 _ 1,360.0 1,360.0 , 18 0 1,182.0 1,182.0 19 0 - 1 531.0 1 531 0 9 NipT Fc - NPRATTVF 20 0 . 1.102.0 1 _102_n , 21 0 1,267.0 1,267.0, _ 22 0 _ , 1 .691 .0 1 ,691 _0 , , 23 0 1,557.0 1,557.0 , 24 0 1.579.0 1 .579_n , 25 0 . 1,754.0 1,754.0, 26 n 1 ,317_0 1 _5;7 n , 27 0 _ 957.0 957.0 , , 28 0 1,464.0 1.464.0 , 29 0 _ 1,168.0 1,168.0 30 n 9R1 _n , 9R1 n 31 0 1,012.0 1.012.0 Total n _ 46.473_0 46,47S_n _ Avg. 0 , 1,499.13 1.,499.13 Mex. 0 2 ,521.0 2.521.0 Min. 0 _ 734.0 734.0 No.of Active Water Services(10) 2.719 Chemical Analysis(11) 11-R�1 Dates and Results of Distribution Bacteriological Analyses(12) R-cAMPT FS - 1TFGAT1 rE Dates and Results of Raw Unchlorinated Well Water Samples(13) NONE Reservoirs or Tanks Cleaned(14) 8-87 Dead Ends Flushed(15) 35 General Remarks(16) Submitted By(1_ Certificate No.(18) 46 S-6n-594 7 FARM NO_l33 All reports due by the 15th of the following month. 5/88 ycZ -3 OCTOBER 31, 1992 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE PERMIT MONTHLY REPORT REPORT. FOR OCTOBER 1992 NUMBER OF THIS LAST SAME MONTH THIS YEAR LAST YEAR THIS YEAR LAST YEAR PERMITS ISSUED MONTH MONTH LAST YEAR TO DATE TO DATE FISCAL FISCAL OCT92 SEP92 OCT 1991 1-10 1992 1-10 1991 10/92-10/92 10/91-10/91 BUILDING: Res-Single Family 36 33 14 310 159 36 14 Alteration/Addn. 2 6 0 22 27 2 0 Accessory Bldg 1 3 2 20 22 1 2 Commercial-New 2 1 0 13 3 2 0 Commercial-Alt/Addn. 2 0 _4 12 21 2 4 Foundation Only 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 Swimming Pool 8 8 6 95 79 8 6 SUB-CONTRACTORS: Electrical 85 74 33 636 361 85 33 Plumbing 63 55 47 485 354 63 47 Heat/Air 37 40 18 353 233 37 18 Culvert 1 1 1 12 10 1 1 Demolition 1 0 0 2 4 1 0 CERT. OF OCCUPANCY: Residential 85 28 40 327 199 85 40 COMMERCIAL 2 6 2 47 36 2 2 OTHER: Misc.Building 25 24 12 185 176 25 12 SIGNS 2 5 11 66 75 2 11 SCHOOLS 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 TENNIS COURTS 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 FENCE 0 0 1 6 10 0 1 TOTALS 352 284 191 2596 1775 - 352 191 4E1 I. CITY SOUTHLAKE1. PERMIT ' [THLY REPORT REPORT FOR OCTOBER 1992 OCTOBER 31, 1992 FEES COLLECTED FOR THIS LAST SAME MONTH THIS YEAR LAST YEAR THIS YEAR LAST YEAR PERMITS ISSUED MONTH MONTH LAST YEAR TO DATE TO DATE FISCAL FISCAL OCT92 SEP92 OCT 1991 1-10 1992 1-10 1991 10/92-10/92 10/91/10/91 BUILDING: Res-Single Family 43,619.00 40,849.00 15,551.32 388,765.00 188,315.65 43,619.63 15,551.32 Alteration/Addn. 482.00 1,785.00 .00 5,290.00 7,078.80 482.00 .00 Accessory Bldg. 199.00 392.00 193.00 3,844.00 2,418.08 199.00 193.00 Commercial-New 1,409.00 208.00 .00 24,068.00 8,369.00 1,409.00 .00 Commercial-Alt/Addn. 1,397.00 .00 2,132.00 3,869.00 10,564.00 1,397.00 2,132.00 Foundation Only .00 .00 .00 .00 906.68 .00 .00 Swimming Pool 1,957.00 1,727.00 1,280.40 22,575.00 17,925.12 1,957.00 1,280.40 SUB-CONTRACTORS: Electrical 7,930.15 7,241.89 2,823.95 66,135.28 35,239.85 7,930.15 2,823.95 Plumbing 6,749.50 6,138.00 2,902.50 56,422.76 30,393.50 6,749.50 2,902.50 Heat/Air 3,326.50 3,244'.00 1,216.00 29,441.00 15,158.69 3,326.50 1,216.00 Culvert 65.00 65.00 65.00 795.00 2,174.00 65.00 65.00 Demolition 15.00 .00 .00 30.00 30.00 15.00 .00 CERT. OF OCCUPANCY: Residential .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 Commercial 60.00 150.00 60.00 1,200.00 1,000.00 60.00 60.00 OTHER: Misc.Building 600.00 600.00 300.00 4,590.00 4,651.80 600.00 300.00 SIGNS 75.00 271.00 595.00 3,682.00 3,381.50 75.00 595.00 SCHOOLS .00 .00 .00 .00 4,595.00 .00 .00 TENNIS COURT .00 .00 .00 1,217.00 .00 .00 .00 FENCE .00 .00 119.00 3,904.00 1,925.49 .00 119.00 TOTALS 67,884.15 62,670.89 27,238.17 615,828.04 334,127.16 67,884.15 27,238.17 4E2 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE PERMIT MONTHLY REPORT REPORT FOR OCTOBER 1992 OCTOBER 31, 1992 THIS LAST SAME MONTH THIS YEAR LAST YEAR THIS YEAR LAST YEAR BUILDING VALUATION MONTH MONTH LAST YEAR TO DATE TO DATE TOTAL FISCAL TOTAL FISCAL FOR PERMITS ISSUED OCT92 SEP92 OCT 91 1-10 1992 1-10 1991 10/92-10/92 10/91-10/91 BUILDING: Res-Single Family 7,395,800.00 7,183,800.00 2,676,767.00 65,650,048.00 31,784,013.00 7,395,800.00 2,676,767.00 Alteration/Addn. 40,000.00 142,500.00 .00 527,850.00 689,157.00 40,000.00 .00 Accessory Bldg. 15,400.00 28,500.00 12,500.00 319,300.00 179,025.00 15,400.00 12,500.00 Commercial-New 142,000.00 10,800.00 .00 3,415,100.00 1,258,350.00 142,000.00 .00 Commercial-A1t/Addn. 15,000.00 .00 200,000.00 341,300.00 921,076.00 15,000.00 200,000.00 Foundation Only .00 .00 .00 .00 67,700.00 .00 .00 Swimming Pool 160,000.00 135,700.00 99,000.00 1,752,200.00 '1,412,800.00 160,000.00 99,000.00 SCHOOLS .00 .00 .00 745,000.00 12,389,500.00 .00 .00 TENNIS COURTS .00 .00 .00 137,500.00 .00 .00 .00 FENCE .00 .00 8,000.00 489,800.00 134,767.00 .00 8,000.00 TOTALS 7,768,200.00 7,501,300.00 2,996,267.00 73,378,098.00 48,836,388.00 7,768,200.00 2,996,267.00 TOTAL INSPECTIONS: 1506 1286 647 9090 5035 1506 647 BUILDING INSPECTIONS: CONTRACTOR REGISTRATION 156 $11,700.00 Building 490 397 216 Electrical 396 316 150 Plumbing 383 334 173 Mechanical 207 197 90 TOTAL BLDG. INSP. 1476 1244 629 CODE ENFORCEMENT: Investigations 30 42 18 4 E 3 SOUTHLAKE POLICE DEPARTMENT PATROL DIVISION SUMMARY October 1992 CALLS FOR SERVICE 666 CITATIONS 442 PATROL 185 S .T.E.P . 257 ARRESTS 64 . FELONY 2 MISD 62 ACCIDENTS 27 MINOR 24 MAJOR 2 /f 2 Raluo/t Date: 11 /04/92 Page 1 Report N b 3 epor m r � OFF030 OFFENSES BY OFFENSE DESCRIPTION FROM 10;01/92 TO 10/31/92 Offense Offense Officer Property Date Number Detective Stolen POE MOE Status Offenses for 911 HANG UP 10/09/92 228077 114 / 0 0 C 10.' l1 /92 227150 132 1 999 0 0 C 10/15/92 228260 150 / 0 0 C 10/ 15/92 229261 150 / 0 0 C Offenses for ABANDONED VEHICLE 10/06/92 227942 its / 0 0 C 10/08/92 228041 119 / 999 0 0 C 10Y29/92 22G765 134 / 999 0 0 C Offenses for ALARM CALL 10/01 /92 227738 119 / 0 0 C 10i01/92 227744 119 10/01/92 227758 150 10/02/92 227772 119 / 0 0 C 13/02/92 227796 119 / 0 0 C '- 10/02/92 227813 119 / O 0 C ) 10/04/92 227862 139 0 0 C 10/04/92 227881 188 / 0 0 C 10/04/92 227885 139 / 0 0 C 10/04/92 227886 134 / O 0 C 10/06/92 227950 139 / 0 0 C 10/06/92 227938 108 !0/07/92 227996 150 .' 0 3 C 10/08/92 226001 150 0 C 10/08/92 228025 145 / 0 0 C 10/08/92 228009 119 / 0 0 C 10/08/92 228033 150 / 0 0 C 10/09/92 228062 111 / 0 0 C 10/09/92 22S060 143 / 0 0 C 10/09/92 228069 111 / 0 0 C 10/09/92 228070 143 / 0 0 C 10/10/92 228103 119 10/10/92 228114 119 / 0 0 C 10/ 10/92 228121 143 / 0 0 C 10/10/92 228095 143 / 0 0 C 10/10/92 228126 114 / 0 0 C 10/ 12/92 228169 139 / 0 0 C 10/12/92 228168 127 / 0 0 C 10/12/92 228152 139 / 0 0 C 10/ 13/92 22B188 127 / 0 _ 0 C 10/14/92 228209 127 / 0 O C ' 10/14/92 228211 127 / 0 0 C 10/14/92 228222 127 / 0 0 C ^� �� Report Data: 1l /04/92 Page 2 Report Nmbr : OFF0300 '' OFFENSES BY OFFENSE DESCRIPTION FROM 10/01 /92 TO 10/31 /92 GrIWse Offense Officer Property Date NumUer Detective Stolen POE MOE Status Offensas for ALARM CALL 10/15/92 228237 119 / 0 0 C 10/15/92 228252 114 / 0 0 C 10/ 15/92 228241 11l 10/15/92 228248 119 / 0 0 C 10/ 15/92 229262 l50 10/16/92 228290 150 / 0 0 C 10/16/92 228285 150 / 0 0 C 10/ 17/92 228320 500 / 0 0 C 10/19/92 228378 139 / 0 0 C 10/ 1S/92 228380 139 / C 0 C 10/20/92 228391 144 / 999 0 0 C 10/20/92 228395 108 / 999 0 0 C 10/20/92 228402 127 / 999 0 0 C 10/20/92 228415 134 / 0 /} C 10/21 /92 228424 134 / 0 0 C 10/21 /92 228433 127 / 0 0 C 10/21/92 228439 127 / 0 0 C 10/21/92 228459 134 / 999 0 0 C ' 10/21 /92 228467 108 / 0 0 C 10/21/92 228485 132 / 999 0 0 C 10/22/92 228488 134 / 999 0 0 C 10/23/S2 228534 114 / 0 0 C 10/23/92 228519 141 10/25/92 228600 119 / 0 � C 10/26/92 228621 119 / 0 0 C 10/26/92 228629 143 / 0 0 C 10/27/92 228652 134 / 999 0 0 C 10/27/92 228667 108 / ` 0 0 C 10/27/92 228674 108 / 0 0 C 10/27/92 228686 132 / 0 0 C 10/28/92 228736 144 / 999 0 10 C 10/29/92 228746 127 / 0 0 C 10/29/92 228749 127 / 0 0 C 10/29/92 228756 139 / 0 0 C 10/29/92 228758 127 / 0 0 C 10/29/92 228767 132 / 999 0 0 C 10/29/92 228764 132 / 999 0 0 C 10/30/92 228783 108 / 0 0 C 10/31/92 228810 134 / 999 0 0 C 10/30/92 228804 140 / 0 0 C 10/31/92 228815 111 / 0 0 C 10/31/92 228826 143 / 0 0 C 10/31 /92 228830 111 / 0 0 C 10/31/92 228839 144 / 0 0 C Report Data: 11 /04/92 F,age � Report Nmbr ; CFF0300 OFFENSES BY OFFENSE DESCRIPTION FROM 10/01 /92 TO 10/31/92 Offense O� fanse Officer Property Number Detective Stolen POE MOE Status Offa/'onn for ALARM CALL 10/3l /92 228841 500 / 0 0 C Offenses for AMBULANCE CALL 10/25/92 228587 143 / 0 0 C Offenses for ANIMAL CALL 10/19/92' 228375 127 / 0 0 C 10/30/92 228781 108 / 0 0 C Offenses for ANIMAL DETAIL 10/23/92 228508 143 / 0 0 C Offenses for ASSIST FD 10/10/92 228122 119 / 0 0 C 10/ 13/92 228194 139 / 0 0 C 10/17/92 228302 111 / 0 0 C ''--` 10/25/92 228575 500 / 0 0 C ,) 10/25/92 228607 114 / 0 0 C - ' Offenses for ASSIST OTHER AGENCY 10/04/92 227871 139 0 0 C 10/08/92 920941 114 / 999 0 0 C 10/08/92 228003 114 / 999 0* 0 C 10/16/92 228289 114 10/17/92 228294 114 / 0 O C 10/ 18/92 228343 111 / 999 10/24/92 228541 114 Offenses for ATT SUICIDE 10/28/92 228�93 127 C Offenses for BOMB THREAT 10/20/92 920878 139 / 0 0 A 10/20/92 228408 139 / 999 0 0 C Offenses for BURGLARY (B) 10/01/92 920819 143 / K 15 65 A 10/01/92 227731 143 / 0 0 C Offenses for BURGLARY (R) 10/21/92 228460 132 / 999 0 0 C 10/24/92 920888 143 / F 4 55 A 10/24/92 228555 143 / 0 0 C ^� « � Report Date: 11/04/92 Page 4 Repor m r t N b : OFF030C OFFENSES BY OFFENSE DESCRIPTION FROM 10/01 /92 TO 10/3z/02 WfEmse Offense Officer Property Date Number Detective Stolen POE MOE Status Offenses for BURGLARY IN PROGRESS 1O/09/92 228054 150 / 999 0 0 C Offenses for BURGLARY M/V 10/i2.'W 923858 127 / 133 0 0 S 10/ 12/92 228171 127 / 0 0 C 10/23/92 920884 141 / 133 K 0 0 S 10/23/92 228529 141 / 0 0 C Offensea for CHILD ABUSE z0/17/92 229317 114 Ofienses for CHILD NEGLECT 10/12/92 920855 140 / 140 O 0 A 10/27/92 920896 140 / 140 0 0 A Offenses for CITY ORDINANCE VIOLATION ' 10/04/92 227872 139 / 0 0 C 10107/92 227993 150 / 0 0 C 10/07/92 228000 150 / 0 0 C 10/09/92 920846 150 / 999 0 0 CA 10/ 10/92 ` 228091 114 10/11/92 228144 139 10/24/92 228555 114 10/24/92 228558 141 10/24/92 228562 141 / 0 0 C 10/25/92 228G09 114 / 0 0 C 10/26/92 228616 114 / 999 0 0 C 10/29/92 228733 134 / 999 0 0 C 10/28/92 228729 144 / 999 0 0 C 10/29/92 228768 132 / 999 0 O C 10/31/92 228818 143 / 0 0 C Offenses for CIVIL DISPUTE 10/02/92 227791 119 / 0 0 C Offenses for CIVIL STANDBY 10/16/92 920865 150 / 0 0 A 10/ 15/92 228240 119 / 0 0 C 10/16/92 228263 150 / 0 0 C 10/ 16/92 228270 119 / 0 0 C 10/20/92 228409 108 / 999 0 0 C 10/23/92 228494 132 / 999 0 0 C 10/25/92 228603 114 / 0 0 C 10/31/92 228813 143 / 999 0 0 C � �� Report Catei 11/04/92 Page 7n Report Nmbr : OFF0300 OFFENSES BY OFFENSE DESCRIPTION FROM 10/01/92 TO 10/31/92 Offense Offense Officer Property Date Number Detective Stolen POE MOE Status Offenses for CRIMINAL MISCHIEF 10/06/92 920833 108 / 0 0 A 10/06/92 227933 108 / 0 0 C 10/06/92 227930 108 / 0 0 C 10/ 11/32 228133 114 / 0 0 C 10,'12/92 228155 127 / 0 0 C 10/ 18/92 920873 111 / 133 0 0 S 10/18/92 920874 119 / 0 O A 10/18/92 228342 111 / 999 0 0 C 10/18/92 228349 119 / 999 0 0 C 10/21/92 920880 127 10/21 /92 228441 127 / 0 0 C 10/24/92 920885 114 / 133 0 0 S 10/24/92 228537 114 10/30/92 228809 132 / 999 0 0 C 10/31 /92 228851 114 / 999 0 0 C for CRIMINAL TRESPASS ' ! 10/10/92 920852 141 / 140 O 0 CA 10/ 10/92 228130 141 / 0 0 C Offenses for DAMAGED PROPERTY 10/10/92 920850 111 / 133 0 0 C Offenses for DEMENTED PERSON 10/28/92 920898 127 / 0 0 � Offenses for DISCHARGE FIREARM 10/04/92 227884 139 / 0 0 C 10/15/92 228233 119 / 0 0 C 10/22/92 228479 108 / 0 0 C 10/26/92 228644 114 / 0 0 C 10/31/92 228833 111 / 0 0 C Offenses for DISTURBANCE 10/01/92 227742 143 / 0 0 C 10/02/92 227798 143 / 0 0 C 10/03/92 227851 500 / O 0 C 10/03/92 227852 134 / 0 0 C 10/06/92 227954 134 / 0 0 C 10/08/92 228035 150 / 999 0 0 C 10/09/92 228068 111 / 0 0 C 10/10/92 228111 119 / 0 0 C 10/13/92 228191 139 / 0 0 C 10/17/92 228315 119 / 0 0 C Report Dst& 11 /34/92 Page 6 Report *mbr ; DF'0300 OFFENSES BY OFFENSE DESCRIPTION FROM 10/01 /92 TO 10/31/92 Offense Offense Officer Property Date Number Detective Stolen POE MOE Status ------ Offenses for DISTURBANCE 10/18/92 228356 141 / 0 0 C 10/ 19/92 228374 127 10/20/S2 226410 108 / 999 0 0 C 10/21/92 228444 108 / 0 0 C 10/24/92 228538 141 / 0 0 C 10/27/92 228661 127 / 0 0 C 10/29/92 228773 132 / 999 0 0 C 10/31/92 228819 111 / 0 0 C 10/31 /92 228846 144 / 0 0 C 10/31/92 228855 144 0 0 C Offenses for DDG CALL 10/01/92 227740 119 / 0 0 C 10/02/92 227764 141 / 0 0 C 10131 /92 227759 150 / 0 0 C 10/02/92 227818 119 / 0 0 C - \ � (/10/05/92 227912 139 / 0 C ' ' 10/06/92 227948 139 / 0 0 C 10/07/92 227997 150 / 0 0 C 10/06/92 228010 119 / 0 0 C 10/08/92 228027 145 / 0 0 C 10/03/92 228043 150 / 999 0 0 C 10/09/?2 226075 143 1C/09/s? 228078 114 / 0 0 C 10/10/92 228124 150 / 0 0 C 10/13/92 228192 139 / 0 0 C 10/14/92 228225 144 / 0 0 C 10/ 15/92 228242 111 / 0 0 C 10/16/92 228280 119 / 0 0 C 10/21/92 228453 132 / 999 0 0 C 10/22/92 228482 108 / 0 0 C 10/26/92 228630 119 / 0 0 C 10/26/92 228643 150 / 0 0 C 10/26/92 228622 119 / 0 0 C 10/31/92 228828 111 Offenses for DOMESTIC DISTURBANCE 10/16/92 228282 150 / 0 0 C 10/27/92 227678 132 / ' 0 0 C Offenses for DOSMESTIC DISTURBANCE 10/ 19/92 228389 134 / 999 0 0 C ?nses for DWI 4� Report Data: 11 /04/92 Page � Report Nmbr : JFF0300 OFFENSES BY OFFENSE DESCRIPTION FROM 10/01/92 TO 10/31/92 Offense Offonse Officer Property. Date Number Detective Stolen POE MOE Statm 10/10/92 228092 141 / 0 0 C 10/18/92 920875 150 / 140 0 0 A 10/ 18/92 228355 150 / 0 0 C 10/26/92 920895 111 / 140 0 0 CA 10/26/92 228633 111 / 0 0 C Offenses for DWL5 10/23/92 920882 111 / 140 0 O CA 10/26/92 920893 111 / 140 0 0 CA Offenses for FALSE ALARM OR REPORT 10/22/92 920881 108 / 0 0 � 10/22/92 228473 108 Offenses for FIGHT 10/31/92 228848 108 / 999 0 0 C Offenses for FLEEING POLICE 10/12/92 920853 134 / 140 0 0 CA Offenses for HARASSMENT ` 10/09/92 920844 111 / 140 0 0 A 10/09/92 228066 11l / 0 0 C 10/18/92 920876 141 � / 0 0 � 10/ 18/92 228358 141 / 0 0 � 1C/20/92 920879 132 / 0 0 � 10/20/92 228413 132 / 0 0 C 10/23/92 920883 119 / 140 0 0 A 10/23/92 228507 119 0 C 10/24/92 228563 141 / 0 0 C 10/26/92 920894 119 / 140 0 0 A 10/26/92 228628 119 / 0 0 C 10/30/92 920902 132 / 0 0 A 10/30/92 228808 132 / 999 O 0 C Offenses for HIT & RUN ACCIDENT 1D/09/92 920847 150 / 0 0 A 10/10/92 228089 150 / 0 0 C 10/15/92 228253 150 / 0 0 C 10/28/92 228710 139 / 0 0 C Offenses for INJURED PERSON 10/01/92 227729 141 / O 0 C � nses for INJURY TO A CHILD ` 10/17/92 920870 114 / 140 0 0 A �� �� x Report �ata: 11/04/92 Page G Report Nmbr : OFr0300 OFFENSES BY OFFENSE DESCRIPTION FROM 10101 /92 TO 10/31/92 Offense Jffense Officer Property Date Number Detective Stolen POE MOE Status Offenses for INJURY TO A CHILD 10/20/92 920877 140 / 140 0 0 A Offenses for INVESTIGATION' 10/92/92 227780 143 / 0 0 C 10/04/92 227889 144 / 0 0 C 10/06/92 227952 108 / 0 0 C 10/ 12/92 228156 139 / 0 0 C 10/14/92 920859 146 / 140 0 0 S 10/ 17/92 228309 119 / 0 0 C W/19/92 229390 141 / 999 0 0 C 10/21/92 228450 144 / 0 0 C z0/22/92 228464 144 10/22/92 228480 10/23/92 228536 114 / 0 0 C W /24/92 228539 141 / 0 0 C 10/24/92 228553 119 / O 0 C /,_` . . 10/25/92 228584 141 / 0 0 C / 10/25/S2 228595 111 / 0 0 C 10/30/92 228769 134 / 199 ' 0 0 C 10131)92 228856 500 Offenses for LOOSE LIVESTOCK 10/04/92 227861 139 / 0 0 � 10/08/92 228044 11y / 999 0 0 - � 10/09/92 228067 143 / 0 0 C 10/10/92 228106 111 10/16/92 228269 119 / 0 0_ C 10/17/92 228295 114 / 0 0 C 10/20/92 228411 132 / 999 0 0 C 10/21/92 22S428 139 / 0 0 C 10/22/92 228484 132 / 999 0 6 C 10/30/92 228794 108 / 0 0 C 10/31/92 228812 134 / 999 0 0 C Offenses for MAJOR ACCIDENT 10/02/92 227795 111 / 0 0 C 10/07/92 227987 111 / 0 0 C 10/09/92 228073 111 / 0 0 C 10/11/92 228132 114 / 0 0 C 10/25/92 228599 111 / 0 0 C Offenses for MEDICAL CALL 10/22/92 228465 134 / 9999 0 0 C � 10/23/92 228499 132 / 999 0 0 C Repo-t Date; 11/04192 -Page 9 Report Nmbr : OFF0300 OFFENSES BY OFFENSE DESCRIPTION FROM 10 /01 /92 TO 10/31/92 Offense Offense Officer Property Dave Number Detective Stolen POE MOE StatuE Offenses for MEET COMPLAINANT . 10/03/92 227843 108 C 10/03/32 227849 134 / O 0 C 10/05;92 227919 134 1 999 0 0 C 10/05/92 227917 134 / 999 0 0 C 10/06/92 227951 139 / 0 0 C 10/07/92 227995 111 / 999 0 0 C 10/08/92 228028 111 / 0 0 C 10/ 10/92 228107 143 / 0 0 C ' 10/10/92 228104 119 / 0 0 C 10/09/92 228076 150 / 0 0 C 10/11 /92 228147 139 / 0 0 C 10/ 12/92 228161 127 / 0 0 C 10/14/92 228231 134 / 0 0 C 10/ 15/92 228236 119 / 0 0 C 10/15/92 228256 141 / 0 0 C 10/ 15/92 228259 150 / 0 0 C �--` 10/16/92 228281 111 0 0 C \ � 10/ 17/92 228304 119 / 0 0 C 10/18/92 228340 119 / 999 0 0 C 10/ 18/92 228365 141 / 0 0 C 10/18/92 228351 150 / 0 0 C 10/ 19/92 228376 127 / 0 0 C 10/19/92 228388 144 / 999 0 0 C 10/20/92 228412 132 / ' 0 0 C 10/21 /92 228435 127 / 0 0 C 10,'21/92 228454 132 / 999 0 0 C 10/21/92 228452 132 / 999 0 0 C 10/21/92 228447 132 / 999 0 0 C 10/21/92 228458 134 / 999 0 0 C 10/22/92 228481 127 / 0 0 C 10/22/92 228487 134 / 999 0 0 C 10/23/92 228501 143 / 0 0 C 10/25/92 228592 119 / 0 0 C 10/26/92 228619 119 / 0 0 C 10/27/92 228684 132 / 0 0 C 10/29/92 228763 132 / 999 0 0 C 10/30/92 228776 108 / 0 0 C 10/30/92 228800 134 / 0 0 C 10/31/92 228836 111 / 0 0 C 10/31/92 228862 108 / 0 0 C Offenses for MINOR ACCIDENT 10/01/92 227730 111 / 0 0 C . 10/03/92 227841 108 / 0 0 C ~ Report Date: 11/04/92 Page 1C Report Nmbr : OFF0300 OFFENSES BY OFFENSE DESCRIPTION FROM 10/01 /92 TO 10/31/92 Offense Offense Officer Property Date Number Detective Stolen POE MOE Status Offenses for MINOR ACCIDENT 10/04/92 227869 139 / 0 0 C 10/06/92 227949 139 / 0 0 C 19/07/92 227989 150 / 0 0 C 10/12/92 228157 139 / 0 0 C 10/ 12/92 228176 144 / 0 0 C 10/ 15/92 228257 114 / 0 0 C 10/15/92 228239 111 / 0 0 C 10/16/92 228275 111 10.'19/92 228377 127 / O 0 C 1G/ 19/92 228379 127 W/20/92 228393 139 J 999 0 0 C 10/20/92 228406 127 / 999 0 0 C 10,'20/92 228394 139 / 999 0 0 C 10/21 /92 228434 139 / 0 0 C 10/21/92 228446 139 / 0 O C 10/22/92 228466 139 / 999 0 ' 0 C ^—` 10/23/92 228520 111 / 0 0 C ( ) 10/25/92 228546 150 / 0 0 C 10/26/92 228642 119 / 0 0 C 10/26/92 229641 150 / 0 0 C 10/28/92 228712 139 / 0 0 C 10/30/92 22877A 132 / 999 0 0 C 10i30/92 228802 132 ' Offenses for MISSING PERSON 10/14/92 920863 134 / 0 0 A 10/14/92 228228 t34 / 0 0 C Offenses for MOTORIST ASSIST 10/01/92 227756 114 0 0 C 10/02/92 227771 150 / 0 0 C 10/02/92 227774 143 / 0 O C 10/05/92 227904 108 / 0 0 C 10/05/92 227913 139 / 0 0 C 10/08/92 228017 111 Offenses for OPEN DOOR 10/02/92 227767 114 / 0 0 C 10/02/92 227770 141 / 0 0 C 10/04/92 227858 144 / 0 0 C 10/07/92 227994 114 / 0 0 C 10/15/92 228232 144 / 0 0 C ' 10/20/92 228422 144 / 0 0 C 10/27/92 228683 144 / 0 0 C Report Date: 11/04/92 Page 11 Report Nmbr ; OFF0300 ' OFFENSES BY OFFENSE DESCRIPTION FROM 10/01/92 TO 10/31/92 Offense Offense Officer Property Date Number Detective Stolen POE MOE Status Offenses for PI 10/10/92 920851 500 / 999 0 0 CA 10/ 10/92 22G127 5C0 / 0 0 C 10/17/92 920872 150 / 999 0 0 CA 10/ 17/92 228323 141 / 0 0 CA Offenses for POSS DRUG PARAPHERNALIA 10/ 17/92 920868 114 / 999 0 0 CA 10/17/92 228299 114 / O 0 CA 10/25/92 920890 150 / 999 0 0 CA 10/25/92 228602 111 / 0 0 C Offenses for POSS MARIJUANA 10/30/92 920901 140 / 999 0 0 CA 10/30/92 228807 140 / ' 0 0 C Offenses for PROWLER 10/01/92 227725 141 / 0 0 C 10/09/92 228064 143 / 0 0 C 10/11/92 228134 500 / 0 O C 10/19/92 228369 141 / 999 0 0 C 10/22/92 228491 134 / 999 0 0 C Offenses for RECKLESS DAMA6E 10/06/92 920837 139 Offenses for RECKLESS DRIVER 10/01/92 227743 111 / 0 0 C 10/06/92 227960 134 / 0 0 C 10/19/92 228368 114 / 999 0 0 C Offenses for RECOVERED PROPERTY 10/17/92 228324 500 / 0 0 C 10/18/92 228350 111 / 999 0 0 C 10/25/92 228586 143 / 0 0 C 10/25/92 920889 143 / 0 0 A ` Offenses for ROBBERY 10/02/92 920823 150 / A 0 0 A 10/02/92 227821 150 / 0 0 C Offenses for RUNAWAY 10/03/92 920825 139 / 140 0 0 A 10/03/92 227833 139 / 0 0 C 10/08/92 920843 119 / 0 0 A q�13 Report Date: 11 /04/92 Page 12 Peport Nmbr : OFF0300 OFFENSES BY OFFENSE DESCRIPTION FROM 10/01/92 TO 10/31/92 Offense Offense Officer Property Date Number Detective Stolen POE MOE Status ======== ===_____ __-__ ----- ---- _____ === === Offenses for RUNAWAY 10/08/92 228040 150 / 999 0 0 C 10/08/92 228047 119 / 999 0 0 C Offenses for SEXUAL ASSAULT 10/14/92 920861 140 / 140 0 0 A Offenses for SIMPLE ASSAULT ' 10/01/92 920821 143 / 140 0 0 CA i0/ 17/92 920869 119 / 999 0 0 A Offenses for SOLICITOR 10/08/92 228029 111 / 0 0 C 10/09/92 228084 150 / 0 0 C 10/26/92 228639 143 / 0 0 C Offenses for STORM DAMAGE 1 10/31 /92 22B857 114 / 999 0 O C Offenses for SUSP PERSON . 10/01/92 227735 119 / 0 0 C 10/04/92 227855 144 / 0 0 C 10/07/92 227971 119 / 0 0 C 10/ 13192 228202 134 / 999 0 0 C 10/21 /92 228425 132 / 0 0 C 10/22/92 228486 144 / 999 0 0 C 10/23/92 228516 111 / 0 0 C 10/25/92 228598 119 / 0 0 C 10/27/92 228681 134 / 0 0 C 10/29/92 228750 127 / 0 0 C 10/3C/92 228805 132 / 0 0 C 10/31/92 228838 108 / 0 0 C 13/31 /92 228854 114 / 0 0 C Offenses for SUSP VEHICLE 10/01/92 227753 114 / 0 0 C 10/02/92 227800 119 / 0 0 C 10/07/92 227978 111 / 999 0 0 C 10/08/92 228022 111 / 0 0 C 10/07/92 227992 114 / 999 O 0 C 10/12/92 228159 139 / 0 0 C 10/14/92 228230 144 / 0 0 C 10/16/92 228287 114 / 0 0 C 10/18/92 228357 114 / 0 0 C 10/18/92 228359 114 / 0 0 C TV Report Date: 11/04/92 'Page 172, Report Nmbr : OFF0300 OFFENSES BY OFFENSE DESCRIPTION FROM 10/01 /92 TO 10i31 /92 2ffmse Oifense Officer Property Date Number Detective Stolen POE MOE Status Offenses for SUSP VEHICLE 10/23/92 228521 141 / 0 0 C 10/24/92 228564 114 / 0 0 C 10/24/02 228573 141 / 0 0 C 10/28/92 228711 127 / 0 0 C 10/31/92 228850 144 / 0 0 C Offenses for THEFT 10/11/92 228131 500 Offenses tor THEFT 20/20C- 10/05/92 227908 108 / 0 0 C 10/ 14/92 920860 140 / 140 A 0 0 A 10/18/92 228348 119 / 999 0 0 C Offenses for THEFT 200/750 10/12/92 920857 139 / B 0 0 A '—\ 10/12/92 228172 139 / 0 0 C '' ` / 10/14/92 920862 127 / K 0 0 A ' 10/ 14/92 228224 127 / 0 0 C Offenses for THEFT 750/20, 000 10/ 15/92 920864 119 / 133 K 0 0 S 10/ 15/92 228249 119 / 0 0 C Offenses for THEFT U/20 10/02/92 227773 119 / 0 0 C 10/03/92 227848 144 / 0 0 C 10/05/92 920830 108 / 133 K 0 0 S 10/08/92 920842 145 / 133 K 0 0 S 10/07/92 227977 119 / 0 » C 10/08/92 228030 145 / 0 0 C 10/13/92 228195 139 / 0 0 C 10/16/92 228274 111 / 0 0 C 10/17/92 920871 150 / K 0 0 A 10/17/92 228321 141 / 0 0 C 10/19/92 228384 144 / 999 0 0 C 10/27/92 228Q5 144 / 0 0 C Offenses for TOWED VEHICLE 10/24/92 920886 111 / 999 0 0 C Offenses for TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT 10/08/92 228008 111 / 0 0 C 10/10/92 228112 111 �u�~ Report Date: 11/04/92 Page 14 Report Nmor : OFF0300 OFFENSES BY OFFENSE DESCRIPTION FROM 10/01 /92 TO 10/31/92 Offense Offense Officer Property Date Number Detective Stolen POE MOE Status ==______ ________ === === ------ Offenses for TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT 10/10/92 228120 111 / 0 0 C 10/ 10/92 228123 1l1 / 0 0 C 10/13/92 228189 139 10/ 13/92 228186 127 / 999 0 0 C 10/21 /92 228437 108 / 0 0 C 10/23/92 228500 132 / 0 0 C Offenses for TRAFFIC HAZARD 10/29/92 228762 139 / 0 0 C Offenses for TRESPASS 10/02/92 227822 140 / 0 0 C Offenses for TRF VIOLATION 10/23/92 228505 111 / 0 0 C 10/30/92 920900 139 / 999 0 '0 CA 10/31 /92 920903 111 / 999 0 0 CA z0/30/92 223789 139 / 0 0 C Offenses for TRF WRNT ARREST 10/01 /92 920822 141 / 999 0 0 CA 10/61 /92 227760 141 / 0 0 C 10/03!92 920826 i08 / 99S 0 0 CA 10/03/92 920827 139 / 999 0 0 CA 10/03/92 227832 139 / 0 0 C 10/03/92 227837 108 / 0 0 C 10/03/92 227840 139 / 0 0 C 10/05/92 920828 139 / 999 0 0 CA 10/05/92 920829 139 / 999 0 0 CA 10/05/92 920831 139 / 999 0 0 CA 10/05/92 227910 139 / 0 0 CA 10/05/92 227911 108 / 0 0 CA 10/05/92 227906 139 / 0 0 CA 10/05/92 227898 139 / 0 0 C 10/06/92 920834 139 / 999 0 0 CA 10/06/92 920835 145 / 999 0 0 CA 10/06/92 920836 108 / 999 0 0 CA 10/06/92 227937 139 / 0 0 C 10/06/92 227939 145 / 0 0 C 10/06/92 920838 134 / 999 0 .0 _ CA 10/06/92 227946 108 / 0 0 C 10/07/92 920839 114 / 999 0 0 CA ' 10/09/92 920845 145 / 999 0 0 CA 10/10/92 920848 141 / 999 0 0 CA « x � � ~- � � w= � Report Date: 11/04/92 Page 15 Report Nmbr : OFF0300 OFFENSES BY OFFENSE DESCRIPTION FROM 10/01 /92 TO 10/31 /92 Offense Cffense officer Property Date Number Detsctive Stolen POE MOE status Offenses for TRF WRNT ARREST 10/09/92 22B074 145 / 0 0 C 10/ 12/92 920854 145 / 999 0 0 CA 10/12/92 228151 134 / 999 0 0 CA 10/ 12/92 920856 145 / 999 0 0 CA 10/16/92 920866 111 / 999 0 0 CA 10/16/92 920867 145 / 999 0 0 CA 10/16/92 228268 111 / 1012 0 0 C 10/24/92 920887 119 / 999 0 0 CA 10/24/92 228549 119 / 0 0 C 10/25/92 920891 141 / 999 0 0 C� 10/Z5/12 228608 141 / 0 0 C 10/26/92 228627 111 / 0 O CA 10/30/92 920899 145 / 999 0 0 CA 10/31/92 228825 111 Offenses for VICIOUS D06 10/08/92 920840 150 / 140 0 0 A urrenses for WARRANT ARREST 10/01/92 920818 114 / 999 0 0 CA 10/01/92 920820 111 / 999 0 0 CA 10/01/92 227728 114 / 0 0 C 10/01/92 227736 111 / 0 0 C 10/03/92 920824 139 / 999 0 0 CA 10/05/92 920832 108 / 999 0 0 CA 10/06/92 227927 132 / 999 0 0 C 10/07/92 227988 114 / 0 0 C 10/10/92 920849 114 / 999 0 0 CA 10/ 10/92 228094 114 / 0 0 C 10/25/92 920892 114 / 999 0 0 CA 10/2G/92 228615 114 10/28/92 920897 140 / 140 0 0 CA 10/28/92 228690 140 / 0 0 C Offenses for WELFARE CHECK 10/10/92 228093 114 / 0 0 C 10/20/92 228407 108 / 999 0 0 C 10/20/92 228416 132 / 0 0 C Total Offenses Printed: 515 It Arrests Gl :idents ' -' Major 5 Minor 22 SOUTHLAKE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY MILEAGE AND GASOLINE REPORT FOR OCTOBER, 1992 10/01 10/31 TOTAL MILES TOTAL GALLONS UNIT # MILEAGE MILEAGE DRIVEN GASOLINE USED 232 118, 153 1 is, S00 647 46. 0 234 95/ 523 97, 545 27022 120. 5 235 122, 007 122, 738 731 51 . 5 236 84/ 897 86, 638 l , 741 468. 2 237 91 , 321 93, 653 2, 332 202. 6 238 39, 089 41 , 054 1 , 965 172. 9 239 37/ 425 39, 335 1 , 910 183. 2 24(:'l 67/ 538 70, 724 3, 186 ' � 103. 9 241 28, 092 29, 057 965 43. 4 242 40, 902 44, 130 3/ 278 226. 7 243 31 ` 512 32, 742 1 , 2SO ' 75. 4 244 5, 938 7, 350 1 , 412 68. 9 245 27861 3, 312 451 28. 7 246 4, 056 6/ 417 2, 361 94. 4 250 (VAN) 97, 661 97, 944 283 15. 7 319 55, 926 57, 112 1r186 79. 0 C-1 35, 115 36, 787 1�6{) 88. 7 .- ' TOTAL MILES DRIVEN 27, 372 TOTAL GALLONS GASOLINE USED 2, 069. 7 � Zv�*�_ " d� �Q SOUTHLAKE DEPARTMENT OF PURL I C SAFETY MONTHLY WARRANT D I VI S I ON REPORT I ocTOBER 1992 MUNICIPAL WARRANTS CURRENT MONTH PAST MONTH YTD WARRANTS ON HAND Beginning Count 351 371 N/A Received 195 0 765 Served 63 19 451 Purged 32 1 172 Ending Count 451 351 N/A FINES COLLECTED By Warrant Officer $9, 865 $1,119 $52,153 By Other Agency $1, 928 $3, 293 $25,720 Total $11, 793 $4, 412 $77,873 WARRANTS SERVED By Warrant Officer 53 6 308 By Other Agency 10 13 143 Total 63 19 451 INVESTIGATION DIVISION MONTHLY REPORT October, 1992 NEW CASES ASSIGNED 41 CURRENT ACTIVE CASES 147 CASES CLEARED: UNFOUNDED 1 INACTIVATED/SUSPENDED 11 EXCEPTIONALLY CLEARED 3 BY ARREST/CITATION 3 WARRANT ACTIVITY: SEARCH WARRANTS OBTAINED 0 SEARCH WARRANTS SERVED 0 ARREST WARRANTS OBTAINED 2 ARREST WARRANTS SERVED 2 GENERAL ACTIVITY: MEETINGS ATTENDED 7 SURVEILLANCE TIME (approx) 0 PUBLIC SPEECHES/PRESENTATIONS 2 CRIME SCENES WORKED 2 SEIZURES FILED 0 VALUE $ 0 SCHOOL/TRAINING SESSIONS 7 days /716_ ao SOUTHLAKE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE SERVICES DIVISION MONTHLY REPORT - October, 1992 FIRE CALLS: AVERAGE TIME ON CALL Structure-(residential) 1 0 Hrs_32 Min Structure-(commercial) 1 TOTAL $ LOSS (Fire) Structure-(other bldg) 0 $ 2 ,050, Vehicle-(car,boat,etc. ) 2 Grass/Trash 4 CALLS BY TIME OF DAY Total Fire Calls 8 0700-1200_11_ _16_% 1200-1900 32 45 % OTHER CALLS: 1900-2400 18 25_% Haz-Mat Incident 9 2400-0700 _10 14 % Bomb Threat/Call 2 Other Emergency 30 PLAN REVIEWS: Other Non-Emergency. 0 Comm. /Indust. 10 Total Other Calls 41 Residential 0 Subdivision 1 EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE: C/O Issued: 3 Total EMS Calls 23 OTHER ACTIVITY TOTAL CALLS FOR SERVICE (Dispatched / Tone Outs) 72 Burn Permits 90 Public Educ. PATIENTS TREATED: Classes 16 Total Patients Treated 28 Grass/Weed Complaints 41 Medical Only 10 Pre-fire Plans Injury Only 8 Reviewed 0 Both Med/Inj 0 MVA Patients 0 MVA with Seatbelt 0 SOUTHLA lc'E L7E/'AI? 77'1ENT OF F'L.1EL IC SAFETY PION THL Y PO/C'T OC TOBEA? 7 .9.9 A®MI NI S TA'A TI VEE COOf?'Q I NA TOFF POLICY 'S IN DEVELOPMENT POLICIES APPROVED 1 . UNI FORM AND RELATED EQUIP. 1 .PURSUI T 2. DISCIPL INARY 2. 5.RULES OF CONDUCT -. 4. FIRE - OPERATING PROCED. 4. 5. 6 �? G. 7. 8. 8. 9. 9. OUT-SIQE T/ A ININC NAME COURSE DATE(S) RICKY BLACK POLICE SUPERVISION 10/3/92 - 10/30/92 FRANKIE NORWOOD ADVANCED TELECOMMUNICATIONS 10/5/92 - 10/09/92 GARY GREGG ELECTRONIC SURVELIENCE 10/12/92 - 10/16/92 RHONDA MOORE INTERN. CRIME SCENE SEARCH 10/13/92 - 10/16/92 FM STEWART INTERN. CRIME SCENE SEARCH 10/13/92 - 10/16/92 1RY TRA VER NORTH TEXAS FIRE SCHOOL 10/17/92 - 10/18/92 RHONDA MOORE CURRENT ISSUES IN LAW 10/27/92 IN—HOUSE TPA INI/VG DATE COURSE INSTRUCTOR 09/30-10/02 INCIDENT COMMAND SYSTEM JERRY WIL L IAMS 10/14-10/18 COACH EOUIPEMNT VEHCILE OPERATIONS JIMMY VANN 10/21-10/23 ANAPHALAXIS EMERGENCIES CHARLIE WARD 10/24-10/30 ADVANCED CARDIAC LIFE SUPPORT BAYLOR MEDICAL CENTER TOTAL NUMBER OF PERSONNEL ATTENDING IN-HOUSE TRAINING: 0 POL ICE 0 POLICE RESERVES 9 FIRE 5 FIRE RESERVES 0 COMMUNICATORS HER ACTIVITIES: ASSISTING CHRIS TERRY WITH AWARDS PARTY. OFFICIAL MUNICIPAL COURT MONTHLY REPORT IMUNICIPAL SOUTHLAKE • TRAFFIC MISDEMEANORS NON-TRAFFIC MISDEMEANORS COURT OF • FOR MONTH OCTOBER 19 92 NON- PARKING STATE CITY PARKING LAW ORDINANCE 1. NEW CASES FILED DURING THE MONTH ii 377 15 42 8 is•}tii+•:?•}}}:}:ii:?:•}}:i\Vi.�::?:n..::.:-i?::n:'Li•}';.??'.v:::i?:•:i?•\?i^}}}i:? :ti?\'i•}:::::v`...... 2. DISPOSITIONS PRIOR TO TRIAL. :�:.:::}:.:.:::::.::,.:.,:.:.•::.::::_::::.}.,,:.. .:::\;:;:>::;.}:•}:•:•}:?:•}:.:::.:.. _ ..:�.,•::,N....::::\:::::}:<: .,.:::.. A. Deposit Forfeited 28 0 0 0 B. Fined (Before trial only.If the defendant goes before the 201 2 9 4 judge,enter In item 3.) C. Cases Dismissed (Do not include here those dismissals which are i6 3 0 1 0 reported separately in 3C and 4 below.) 3 DIS POSITIONS DI OSITIONS AT TRIAL: • t there I isnoa aranceb • - efore the Ld a en i ( appearance ) 9 ter n item t 2.) A. Trial by Judge (1) Finding of Guilty 21 0 0 0 (2) Finding of Not Guilty 0 0 0 0 B. Trial by Jury • (1) Finding of Guilty 0 0 0 0 (2) Finding of Not Guilty • 0 0 0 0 C. Dismissed at Trial • 10 0 1 0 4. CASES DISMISSE D: A. After Driver er Safet y Course 29 • B. After Deferred Disposition (Art.45.54 C.C.P.) 0 0 0 0 C. Af ter Proofof 'Financial n ancial Responsibility nsibili ty usual/Y.liability Y in suranae 30 5. CASES APPEALED 0 0 0 0 11. SAFETY RESPONSIBILITY 6. JUVENILE ACTIVITY: AND ............. ••••.•.•...... • •..:.• •'...'.`:..` DRIVERS LICENSE SUSPENSION •A. Warnings Administered HEARINGS HELD 0 0 12. SEARCH WARRANTS ISSUED (Do not include warrants for arrest) 0 B. Statements Certified • (in accordance with Texas Family Code, 0 13. ARREST WARRANTS ISSUED: Sec 51.09(b).) C. Detention Hearings Held A. Class C isdemeanors Only 199 an accordance with Texas Family Code, Sec 54.01.) 0 B. Felonies and Class A and B Misdemeanors Only 0 7. COUNTY COURT COMPLAINTS 14. STATUTORY WARNINGS GIVEN ACCEPTED (Complaints within jurisdcrion of (Warnings given to defendants charged with County County Court accepted in magistrate capacity) 0 or District Court offense) 0 8. FELONY COMPLAINTS ACCEPTED 15. EMERGENCY MENTAL HEALTH 0 (Complaints within jurisdiction of District Court accepted in magistrate capacity) 0 HEARINGS HELD I. EXAMINING TRIALS CONDUCTED 16. TOTAL REVENUE (Include only preliminary hearings of felony cases) 0 (Include all revenues collected during month to be remitted to the dry or state.) City: 23 , 096 . 25 State: 7 , 153 . 40 10. INQUESTS CONDUCTED 0 $ 3 0 , 2 4 9 . E COMPLAINTS REPORT OCTOBER 1992 DEPARTMENT THIS LAST # CLOSED # CLOSED YTD* YTD* YTD* MONTH MONTH THIS MO. LAST MO. RCVD. CLOSED OPEN OCT92 SEP92 OCT92 SEP92 1992 1992 1992 Streets & 33 44 21 19 402 243 159 Drainage Code 30 42 25 . 20 286 197 89 Enforcement Water & 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 Wastewater * YTD totals for 1992 Calendar Year 4-/ CITY OF SOUTHLAKE General Fund and Debt Service Fund Statement of Revenues,Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the period ended October 31, 1992 with Comparative Actual amounts for the period ended October 31, 1991 To Date Percent To Date Actual Percent 1992-93 Actual Collected/ Actual Total Collected/ REVENUES Budget 10/31/92 Expended 10/31/91 9/30/92 Expended Ad Valorem Taxes $2,909,533 $85,088 2.9% $27,654 $2,722,621 1.0% Sales Tax 579,000 0 0.0% 0 510,036 0.0% Franchise Fees 304,450 81,260 26.7% 0 279,619 0.0% Fines 270,600 23,520 8.7% 23,988 203,565 11.8% Charges for Services 55,750 331 0.6% 170 46,357 0.4% Permits/Fees 622,150 107,082 17.2% 74,075 791,983 9.4% Miscellaneous 17,340 2,256 13.0% 1,707 32,213 5.3% Transfer In-Other Funds 267,295 0 0.0% 0 29,451 0.0% Interest Income 65,000 2,104 3.2% 2,486 67,118 3.7% Total Revenues $5,091,118 $301,641 5.9% $130,080 $4,682,963 2.8% EXPENDITURES City Secretary $145,599 $10,066 6.9% $8,587 $124,457 6.9% City Manager 141,239 9,966 7.1% 20,445 129,129 15.8% Support Services 509,964 34,713 6.8% 44,763 410,773 10.9% Finance 205,487 15,389 7.5% 14,230 192,339 7.4% Municipal Court 162,858 . 6,479 4.0% 10,290 145,345 7.1% Fire 569,238 31,060 5.5% 43,166 478,354 9.0% Police 909,333 45,878 5.0% 69,402 823,352 8.4% Public Safety Support 378,852 21,124 5.6% 24,618 340,626 7.2% Building 161,870 9,828 6.1% 10,109 127,329 7.9% Community Development 197,888 10,360 5.2% 9,346 145,364 6.4% Streets/Drainage 883,730 19,098 2.2% 22,396 642,300 3.5% Parks 139,595 3,131 2.2% 4,123 90,035 4.6% Public Works Administration 93,739 4,536 4.8% 6,092 69,673 8.7% Debt Service-General Obligation Bonds 916,398 10,599 1.2% 0 706,932 0.0% Total Expenditures $5,415,790 $232,227 4.3% $287,567 $4,426,008 6.5% Excess (deficiency)of Revenue over Expenditures ($324,672) $69,414 ($157,487) $256,955 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES AND (USES) Transfer to other fund $0 $0 $0 ($796) Excess (deficiency)of Revenues and other sources over Expenditures ($324,672) $69,414 ($157,487) $256,159 FUND BALANCE OCT 1 $1,244,380 $1,244,380 $988,221 $988,221 ENDING FUND BALANCE $919,708 $1,313,794 $830,734 $1,244,380 FUND 100 GENERAL FUND CITY OF SOUTHLAKE REPORT PRINT DATE- 11/10/92 REVENUE REPORT PERIOD ENDING 10/31/92 PAGE 1 FISCAL MONTH 01 8.33X OBJECT ACCOUNT CURRENT YEAR-TO-DATE ESTIMATED UNREALIZED 1 DESCRIPTION ACTUAL ACTUAL %BUD REVENUE BALANCE 000 NON DEPARTMENTALIZED 100 TAXES 110.00 AD VALOREM/CURRENT 49,051.09 49,051.09 3 1,877,484 1,828,432.91 111.00 AD VALOREM/DELINQUENT 2,869.85 2,869.85 2 140,000 137,130.15 112.00 PENALTY & INTEREST 1,528.05 1,528.05 2 85,000 83,471.95 115.00 SALES TAX 579,000 579,000.00 121.00 FRANCHISE-GAS 50,600 50,600.00 122.00 FRANCHISE-TELEPHONE 34,800 34,800.00 123.00 FRANCHISE-ELECTRIC 81,259.58 81,259.58 39 208,900 127,640.42 124.00 FRANCHISE-BANK 125.00 FRANCHISE-CABLE 10,150 10,150.00 100 TAXES 134,708.57 134,708.57 5 2,985,934 2,851,225.43 200 FINES 210.00 FINES & FORFEITURES 23,433.75 23,433.75 9 268,800 245,366.25 215.00 TEEN COURT REVENUES 86.00 86.00 5 1,800 1,714.00 200 FINES 23,519.75 23,519.75 9 270,600 247,080.25 300 CHARGES FOR SERVICES 301.00 AMBULANCE 330.50 330.50 2 15,000 14,669.50 302.00 DISPATCHING 303.00 MUTUAL AID 750 750.00 305.00 SPECIAL SERVICES PROGRAM 35,000 35,000.00 350.00 FIRE DEPT INCOME 5,000 5,000.00 300 CHARGES FOR SERVICES 330.50 330.50 1 55,750 55,419.50 400 PERMITS & FEES 410.00 PERMITS-RES NEW SINGLE FAM 43,619.00 43,619.00 13 325,000 281,381.00 410.01 PERMITS-BLDG RES-ALT/ADDN 482.00 482.00 482.00- 410.02 PERMITS-BLDG RES-ACS BLDGS 199.00 199.00 199.00- 410.03 PERMITS-BLDG COMMRCL NEW 1,409.00 1,409.00 1,409.00- 410.04 PERMITS-BLDG COMMERCIAL 1,397.00 1,397.00 1,397.00- 411.00 PERMITS-PLUMBING 6,543.68 6,543.68 13 50,000 43,456.32 412.00 PERMITS-ELECTRICAL 7,249.12 7,249.12 13 55,000 47,750.88 413.00 PERMITS-HEAT & AIR 3,399.50 3,399.50 14 25,000 21,600.50 414.00 PERMITS-SPRINKLER 576.00 576.00 14 4,000 3,424.00 414.01 PERMITS-WATER WELL 415.00 PERMITS-SITE PLAN 1,000 1,000.00 416.00 PERMITS-CULVERT 65.00 65.00 9 700 635.00 416.01 PERMITS-APPROACH 417.00 PERMITS-POOL 1,935.00 1,935.00 10 20,000 18,065.00 418.00 PERMITS-SIGN 75.00 75.00 2 4,000 3,925.00 419.00 PERMITS-HOUSE MOVING 419.01 PERMITS-DEMOLITION 420.00 PERMITS-SOLICITORS 100 100.00 421.00 PERMITS-ALCOHOLIC USE 422.00 PERMITS & FEES-MISC. 205.00 205.00 1 19,150 18,945.00 423.00 FEES-ZONING 539.10 539.10 6 9,000 8,460.90 424.00 FEES-PLATTING 24,780.00 24,780.00 99 25,000 220.00 425.00 FEES-BOARD OF ADJ 50.00 50.00 3 1,600 1,550.00 FUND 100 GENERAL FUND CITY OF SOUTHLAKE REPORT PRINT DATE- 11/10/92 REVENUE REPORT PERIOD ENDING 10/31/92 PAGE 2 FISCAL MONTH 01 8.33% OBJECT ACCOUNT CURRENT YEAR-TO-DATE ESTIMATED UNREALIZED i DESCRIPTION ACTUAL ACTUAL %BUD REVENUE BALANCE 426.00 FEES-ZONING SPECIAL EXCEPT 100 100.00 427.00 FEES-STREET LIGHTS 2,000 2,000.00 429.00 FEES-INSPECTION 2,758.55 2,758.55 6 50,000 47,241.45 430.00 FEES-SPECIAL USE ZONING 100.00 100.00 20 500 400.00 431.00 FEES-BUILDING 440.00 CONTRACTOR REGISTRATION 11,700.00 11,700.00 39 30,000 18,300.00 400 PERMITS & FEES 107,081.95 107,081.95 17 622,150 515,068.05 500 MISCELLANEOUS 502.00 PERIMETER RD FEE 510.00 MIS-INCOME 830.95 830.95 14 6,000 5,169.05 511.00 MIS-VITAL STATISTICS 120 120.00 512.00 MIS-INSPECTION FEES 513.00 MIS-RETURNED CHECK CHG 45.00 45.00 38 120 75.00 515.00 MIS-FEMA FUNDS 516.00 MIS-STREET LIGHTS 517.00 MIS-ZONING 518.00 MIS-BUILDING 519.00 MIS-POLICE DEPARTMENT 160.00 160.00 11 1,500 1,340.00 520.00 MIS-SALE OF FIXED ASSETS 530.00 MIS-TOWER LEASE 800.00 800.00 8 9,600 8,800.00 531.00 MISC-PUBLICATIONS 420.00 420.00 420.00- 500 MISCELLANEOUS 2,255.95 2,255.95 13 17,340 15,084.05 700 OTHER REVENUES 713.00 OPERATING TRANSFER IN 159,446 159,446.00 726.00 LOAN PROCEEDS 700 OTHER REVENUES 159,446 159,446.00 900 INTEREST 910.00 INTEREST EARNED 1,795.94 1,795.94 4 50,000 ,48,204.06 900 INTEREST 1,795.94 1,795.94 4 50,000 48,204.06 000 * NON DEPARTMENTALIZED 269,692.66 269,692.66 6 4,161,220 3,891,527.34 TOTAL GENERAL FUND 269,692.66 269,692.66 6 4,161,220 3,891,527.34 'UND 400 GO BOND DEBT SERVICE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE REPORT PRINT DATE- 11/10/92 REVENUE REPORT PERIOD ENDING 10/31/92 PAGE 9 FISCAL MONTH 01 8.33X OBJECT 1 ACCOUNT CURRENT YEAR-TO-DATE****** ESTIMATED UNREALIZED DESCRIPTION ACTUAL ACTUAL XBUD REVENUE BALANCE 000 NON DEPARTMENTALIZED 100 TAXES 110.00 AD VALOREM/CURRENT 30,500.23 30,500.23 4 807,049 776,548.77 111.00 AD VALOREM/DELINQUENT 1,140.16 1,140.16 1,140.16- 100 TAXES 31,640.39 31,640.39 4 807,049 775,408.61 700 OTHER REVENUES '13.00 OPERATING TRANSFER IN 107,849 107,849.00 700 OTHER REVENUES 107,849 107,849.00 800 NON-OPERATING REVENUE 104.00 AD VALOREM - TRANSFER IN 800 NON-OPERATING REVENUE , 900 INTEREST )10.00 INTEREST EARNED 308.80 308.80 2 15,000 14,691.20 900 INTEREST 308.80 308.80 2 15,000 14,691.20 000 * NON DEPARTMENTALIZED 31,949.19 31,949.19 3 929,898 897,948.81 TOTAL GO BOND DEBT SERVICE 31,949.19 31,949.19 3 929,898 897,948.81 FUND 100 GENERAL FUND CITY OF SOUTHLAKE REPORT PRINT DATE- 11/10/92 DEPT/CATEGORY EXPENDITURE REPORT PERIOD ENDING 10/31/92 PAGE 1 FISCAL MONTH 01 8.33% ACCOUNT MTD *********** YEAR-TO-DATE *********** ANNUAL CATEGORY DESCRIPTION ACTUAL ACTUAL ENCUMBERED %BUD APPROPRIATION BALANCE 500 OTHER EXPENSES .00 .00 .00 0 0 .00 DEPT 000 TOTAL ******** .00 .00 .00 0 0 .00 NON DEPARTMENTALIZED 100 PERSONNEL SERVICES 4,405.85 4,405.85 .00 8 57,872 53,466.15 200 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,833.33 2,833.33 .00 10 28,150 25,316.67 300 LEASE OBLIGATIONS .00 .00 .00 0 0 .00 400 SUPPLIES 670.39 670.39 .00 5 14,500 13,829.61 500 OTHER EXPENSES 101.32 101.32 .00 2 5,500 5,398.68 600 ADMINSTRATIVE EXPENDITURES 110.16 110.16 .00 1 8,500 8,389.84 700 MAINTENANCE .00 .00 .00 0 480 480.00 800 PROFESSIONAL CONSIDERATION 1,944.81 1,944.81 .00 8 23,747 21,802.19 900 CAPITAL OUTLAY .00 .00 .00 0 6,850 6,850.00 DEPT 100 TOTAL ******** 10,065.86 10,065.86 .00 7 145,599 135,533.14 CITY SEC/MAYOR/COUNCIL 100 PERSONNEL SERVICES 9,212.41 9,212.41 .00 7 126,267 117,054.59 200 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES .00 .00 .00 0 1,000 1,000.00 300 LEASE OBLIGATIONS .00 .00 .00 0 0 .00 400 SUPPLIES 164.25 164.25 .00 7 2,500 2,335.75 500 OTHER EXPENSES .00 .00 .00 0 0 .00 600 ADMINSTRATIVE EXPENDITURES 173.54 173.54 .00 8 2,100 1,926.46 700 MAINTENANCE 16.80 16.80 .00 3 600 583.20 800 PROFESSIONAL CONSIDERATION 399.35 399.35 .00 6 6,272 5,872.65 900 CAPITAL OUTLAY .00 .00 .00 0 2,500 2,500.00 DEPT 103 TOTAL ******** 9,966.35 9,966.35 .00 7 141,239 131,272.65 CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE 100 PERSONNEL SERVICES .00 .00 .00 0 21,240 21,240.00 200 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES .00 .00 .00 0 194,000 194,000.00 300 LEASE OBLIGATIONS 2,134.45 2,134.45 .00 6 36,674 34,539.55 400 SUPPLIES .00 .00 .00 0 3,500 3,500.00 500 OTHER EXPENSES 6,609.49 6,609.49 .00 7 98,100 91,490.51 600 ADMINSTRATIVE EXPENDITURES 20,391.75 20,391.75 .00 20 104,300 83,908.25 700 MAINTENANCE 5,577.33 5,577.33 .00 14 38,500 32,922.67 800 PROFESSIONAL CONSIDERATION .00 .00 .00 0 150 150.00 900 CAPITAL OUTLAY .00 .00 .00 0 13,500 13,500.00 DEPT 105 TOTAL ******** 34,713.02 34,713.02 .00 7 509,964 475,250.98 SUPPORT SERVICES 100 PERSONNEL SERVICES 8,190.85 8,190.85 .00 8 106,252 98,061.15 200 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 6,483.46 6,483.46 .00 10 66,500 60,016.54 400 SUPPLIES 283.10 283.10 .00 3 8,300 8,016.90 500 OTHER EXPENSES .00 .00 .00 0 0 .00 600 ADMINSTRATIVE EXPENDITURES 106.58 106.58 .00 3 4,200 4,093.42 700 MAINTENANCE .00 .00 .00 0 300 300.00 FUND 100 GENERAL FUND CITY OF SOUTHLAKE REPORT PRINT DATE- 11/10/92 DEPT/CATEGORY EXPENDITURE REPORT PERIOD ENDING 10/31/92 PAGE 2 FISCAL MONTH 01 8.33% ACCOUNT MTD *********** YEAR-TO-DATE *********** ANNUAL CATEGORY DESCRIPTION ACTUAL ACTUAL ENCUMBERED %BUD APPROPRIATION BALANCE 800 PROFESSIONAL CONSIDERATION 325.00 325.00 .00 5 6,215 5,890.00 900 CAPITAL OUTLAY .00 .00 .00 0 13,720 13,720.00 DEPT 106 TOTAL ******** 15,388.99 15,388.99 .00 7 205,487 190,098.01 FINANCE 100 PERSONNEL SERVICES 6,256.24 6,256.24 .00 7 85,430 79,173.76 200 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES .00 .00 .00 0 61,750 61,750.00 400 SUPPLIES 35.16 35.16 .00 1 3,500 3,464.84 500 OTHER EXPENSES .00 .00 .00 0 0 .00 600 ADMINSTRATIVE EXPENDITURES 87.30 87.30 .00 1 6,000 5,912.70 700 MAINTENANCE .00 .00 .00 0 3,100 3,100.00 800 PROFESSIONAL CONSIDERATION 100.00 100.00 .00 4 2,378 2,278.00 900 CAPITAL OUTLAY .00 .00 .00 0 700 700.00 DEPT 107 TOTAL ******** 6,478.70 6,478.70 .00 4 162,858 156,379.30 COURT 100 PERSONNEL SERVICES 29,134.84 29,134.84 .00 6 471,041 441,906.16 200 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES .00 .00 .00 0 3,500 3,500.00 300 LEASE OBLIGATIONS .00 .00 .00 0 700 700.00 400 SUPPLIES .00 .00 .00 0 12,450 12,450.00 500 OTHER EXPENSES .00 .00 .00 0 1,500 1,500.00 600 ADMINSTRATIVE EXPENDITURES .00 .00 .00 0 800 800.00 700 MAINTENANCE 365.19 365.19 .00 1 28,200 27,834.81 800 PROFESSIONAL CONSIDERATION 1,560.07 1,560.07 .00 6 27,122 25,561.93 900 CAPITAL OUTLAY .00 .00 .00 0 23,925 23,925.00 DEPT 131 TOTAL ******** " 31,060.10 31,060.10 .00 5 569,238 538,177.90 FIRE SERVICES 100 PERSONNEL SERVICES 43,617.31 43,617.31 .00 6 723,394 679,776.69 200 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES .00 .00 .00 0 3,500 3,500.00 300 LEASE OBLIGATIONS .00 .00 .00 0 0 .00 400 SUPPLIES 90.50 90.50 .00 1 13,800 13,709.50 500 OTHER EXPENSES .00 .00 .00 0 400 400.00 600 ADMINSTRATIVE EXPENDITURES .00 .00 .00 0 2,000 2,000.00 700 MAINTENANCE 1,514.21 1,514.21 .00 2 62,700 61,185.79 800 PROFESSIONAL CONSIDERATION 656.28 656.28 .00 2 28,139 27,482.72 900 CAPITAL OUTLAY .00 .00 .00 0 75,400 75,400.00 DEPT 132 TOTAL ******** 45,878.30 45,878.30 .00 5 909,333 863,454.70 POLICE SERVICES 100 PERSONNEL SERVICES 20,825.88 20,825.88 .00 7 308,667 287,841.12 200 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES .00 .00 .00 0 2,000 2,000.00 300 LEASE OBLIGATIONS 354.24 354.24 .00 8 4,250 3,895.76 400 SUPPLIES .00 .00 .00 0 9,000 9,000.00 500 OTHER EXPENSES .00 .00 .00 0 1,000 1,000.00 600 ADMINSTRATIVE EXPENDITURES 39.69 39.69 .00 2 2,100 2,060.31 FUND 100 GENERAL FUND CITY OF SOUTHLAKE REPORT PRINT DATE- 11/10/92 DEPT/CATEGORY EXPENDITURE REPORT PERIOD ENDING 10/31/92 PAGE 3 FISCAL MONTH 01 8.33% ACCOUNT MTD *********** YEAR-TO-DATE *********** ANNUAL CATEGORY DESCRIPTION ACTUAL ACTUAL ENCUMBERED %BUD APPROPRIATION BALANCE 700 MAINTENANCE .00 .00 .00 0 33,500 33,500.00 800 PROFESSIONAL CONSIDERATION 95.62- 95.62- .00 2- 6,335 6,430.62 900 CAPITAL OUTLAY .00 .00 .00 0 12,000 12,000.00 DEPT 133 TOTAL ******** 21,124.19 21,124.19 .00 6 378,852 357,727.81 PUBLIC SAFETY SUPPORT 100 PERSONNEL SERVICES 9,776.61 9,776.61 .00 8 128,290 118,513.39 200 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES .00 .00 .00 0 3,600 3,600.00 300 LEASE OBLIGATIONS .00 .00 .00 0 0 .00 400 SUPPLIES .00 .00 .00 0 3,750 3,750.00 500 OTHER EXPENSES 6.10 6.10 .00 6 100 93.90 600 ADMINSTRATIVE EXPENDITURES 53.92 53.92 .00 4 1,350 1,296.08 700 MAINTENANCE 121.79 121.79 .00 2 5,050 4,928.21 800 PROFESSIONAL CONSIDERATION 130.00- 130.00- .00 2- 6,030 6,160.00 900 CAPITAL OUTLAY .00 .00 .00 0 13,700 13,700.00 DEPT 142 TOTAL ******** 9,828.42 9,828.42 .00 6 161,870 152,041.58 BUILDING 100 PERSONNEL SERVICES .00 .00 .00 0 0 .00 200 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES .00 .00 .00 0 0 .00 400 SUPPLIES .00 .00 .00 0 0 .00 500 OTHER EXPENSES .00 .00 .00 0 0 .00 600 ADMINSTRATIVE EXPENDITURES .00 .00 .00 0 0 .00 800 PROFESSIONAL CONSIDERATION .00 .00 .00 0 0 .00 900 CAPITAL OUTLAY .00 .00 .00 0 0 .00 DEPT 143 TOTAL ******** .00 .00 .00 0 0 .00 PLANNING & ZONING 100 PERSONNEL SERVICES 15,974.71 15,974.71 .00 6 273,205 257,230.29 200 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 687.00 687.00 .00 1 55,900 55,213.00 300 LEASE OBLIGATIONS .00 .00 .00 0 7,000 7,000.00 400 SUPPLIES .00 .00 .00 0 425 425.00 500 OTHER EXPENSES 1,937.20 1,937.20 .00 7 28,500 26,562.80 600 ADMINSTRATIVE EXPENDITURES .29 .29 .00 0 0 .29- 700 MAINTENANCE 499.18 499.18 .00 0 177,500 177,000.82 800 PROFESSIONAL CONSIDERATION .00 .00 .00 0 3,200 3,200.00 900 CAPITAL OUTLAY .00 .00 .00 0 338,000 338,000.00 DEPT 144 TOTAL ******** 19,098.38 19,098.38 .00 2 883,730 864,631.62 STREETS 100 PERSONNEL SERVICES 1,959.93 1,959.93 .00 4 53,150 51,190.07 200 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES .00 .00 .00 0 3,400 3,400.00 400 SUPPLIES 86.85 86.85 .00 2 4,650 4,563.15 500 OTHER EXPENSES 716.61 716.61 .00 4 16,200 15,483.39 600 ADMINSTRATIVE EXPENDITURES 2.90 2.90 .00 3 100 97.10 700 MAINTENANCE 364.89 364.89 .00 2 16,600 16,235.11 FUND 100 GENERAL FUND CITY OF SOUTHLAKE REPORT PRINT DATE- 11/10/92 DEPT/CATEGORY EXPENDITURE REPORT PERIOD ENDING 10/31/92 PAGE 4 FISCAL MONTH 01 8.33% ACCOUNT MTD *********** YEAR-TO-DATE *********** ANNUAL CATEGORY DESCRIPTION ACTUAL ACTUAL ENCUMBERED %BUD APPROPRIATION BALANCE 800 PROFESSIONAL CONSIDERATION .00 .00 .00 0 1,495 1,495.00 900 CAPITAL OUTLAY .00 .00 .00 0 44,000 . 44,000.00 DEPT 145 TOTAL ******** 3,131.18 3,131.18 .00 2 139,595 136,463.82 PARKS AND RECREATION 100 PERSONNEL SERVICES 4,241.32 4,241.32 .00 5 84,564 80,322.68 200 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES .00 .00 .00 0 950 950.00 300 LEASE OBLIGATIONS .00 .00 .00 0 0 .00 400 SUPPLIES 84.01 84.01 .00 11 800 715.99 500 OTHER EXPENSES .00 .00 .00 0 300 300.00 600 ADMINSTRATIVE EXPENDITURES 6.24 6.24 .00 1 800 793.76 700 MAINTENANCE 25.00 25.00 .00 0 0 25.00- 800 PROFESSIONAL CONSIDERATION 179.23 179.23 .00 3 6,325 6,145.77 900 CAPITAL OUTLAY .00 .00 .00 0 0 .00 DEPT 146 TOTAL ******** 4,535.80 4,535.80 .00 5 93,739 89,203.20 PUBLIC WORKS ADMIN 100 PERSONNEL SERVICES 9,821.08 9,821.08 .00 7 133,543 123,721.92 200 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES .00 .00 .00 0 41,400 41,400.00 400 SUPPLIES 121.39 121.39 .00 4 2,700 2,578.61 500 OTHER EXPENSES 12.72 12.72 .00 0 2,900 2,887.28 600 ADMINSTRATIVE EXPENDITURES 383.22 383.22 .00 7 5,800 5,416.78 800 PROFESSIONAL CONSIDERATION 22.00 22.00 .00 0 5,045 5,023.00 900 CAPITAL OUTLAY .00 .00 .00 0 6,500 6,500.00 DEPT 150 TOTAL ******** 10,360.41 10,360.41 .00 5 197,888 187,527.59 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND 100 TOTAL ******** 221,629.70 221,629.70 .00 5 4,499,392 4,277,762.30 FUND 400 GO BOND DEBT SERVICE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE REPORT PRINT DATE- 11/10/92 DEPT/CATEGORY EXPENDITURE REPORT PERIOD ENDING 10/31/92 PAGE 12 FISCAL MONTH 01 8.33% ACCOUNT MTD *********** YEAR-TO-DATE *********** ANNUAL CATEGORY DESCRIPTION ACTUAL ACTUAL ENCUMBERED %BUD APPROPRIATION BALANCE 500 OTHER EXPENSES 10,599.16 10,599.16 .00 4 250,963 240,363.84 600 ADMINSTRATIVE EXPENDITURES .00 .00 .00 0 665,435 665,435.00 DEPT 000 TOTAL ******** 10,599.16 10,599.16 .00 1 916,398 905,798.84 NON DEPARTMENTALIZED FUND 400 TOTAL ******** 10,599.16 10,599.16 .00 1 916,398 905,798.84 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE Water and Sewer Enterprise Fund Comparative Statement of Revenues and Expenses for the period ended October 31, 1992 and October 31,1991 To Date Percent To Date Total Percent 1992-93 Actual Collected/ Actual Actual Collected/ REVENUES Budget 10/31/92 expended 10/31/91 9/30/92 expended Water Sales-residential $1,677,540 $166,598 9.9% $141,083 $1,490,403 9.5% Water Sales-commercial 419,385 48,734 11.6% 43,924 328,942 13.4% Sewer Sales 205,454 16,302 7.9% 14,293 97,953 14.6% Sanitation Sales 258,000 23,120 9.0% 16,863 19,816 85.1% Other utility charges 145,067 22,381 15.4% 11,324 147,218 7.7% Miscellaneous 22,118 36 0.2% 6,092 51,556 11.8% Interest Income 25,970 1,522 5.9% 2,731 24,565 11.1% Total Revenues $2,753,534 $278,693 10.1% $236,310 $2,160,453 10.9% EXPENSES Water $1,605,572 $30,545 1.9% $25,546 $1,063,222 2.4% Sewer 559,601 51,868 9.3% 28,518 693,241 4.1% Sanitation 232,200 0 0.0% 15,596 206,396 7.6% Debt Service- Revenue Bonds 79,719 0 0.0% 0 89,423 0.0% Other-Line Oversizing 25,000 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% Transfers-other funds 267,295 0 0.0% 0 159,446 0.0% Total Expenses $2,769,387 $82,413 3.0% $69,660 $2,211,728 3.1% Net Income/(Loss) ($15,853) $196,280 $166,650 ($51,275) 'UND 200 WATER FUND CITY OF SOUTHLAKE REPORT PRINT DATE- 11/10/92 REVENUE REPORT PERIOD ENDING 10/31/92 PAGE 3 FISCAL MONTH 01 8.33% OBJECT ACCOUNT CURRENT YEAR-TO-DATE ESTIMATED UNREALIZED I DESCRIPTION ACTUAL ACTUAL %BUD REVENUE BALANCE 000 NON DEPARTMENTALIZED 500 MISCELLANEOUS 00.00 MIS-INCOME 36.25 36.25 1 5,618 5,581.75 02.00 MIS-INSPECTION FEES 15,900 15,900.00 513.00 MIS-RETURNED CHECK CHG 600 600.00 500 MISCELLANEOUS 36.25 36.25 22,118 22,081.75 600 UTILITY CHARGES 511.00 WATER SALES-RESIDENTIAL 166,597.78 i 166,597.78 10 1,677,540 1,510,942.22 512.00 WATER SALES-COMMERICAL 48,734.32 ' 48,734.32 12 419,385 370,650.68 513.00 WATER TAP 14,400.00 14,400.00 20 72,000 57,600.00 514.00 BULK WATER 1,712.48 1,712.48 10 17,500 15,787.52 551.00 SEWER SALES 16,302.16 16,302.16 8 205,454 189,151.84 552.00 SEWER TAP 1,725.00 1,725.00 12 15,000 13,275.00 570.00 GARBAGE SALES 23,119.52 23,119.52 9 258,000 234,880.48 570.50 RECYCLING RECOVERY 582.00 METER BOX 35.00 35.00 35.00- 591.00 METER TEST ' 592.00 UNAPPLIED CASH 593.00 SERVICE CHARGE 1,365.00 1,365.00 13 10,305 8,940.00 594.00 LATE CHARGES 3,098.85 3,098.85 11 28,262 25,163.15 595.00 DELINQENT ACCT COLLECTIONS 596.00 RECONNECT FEE 45.00 45.00 2 2,000 1,955.00 600 UTILITY CHARGES 277,135.11 277,135.11 10 2,705,446 2,428,310.89 800 NON-OPERATING REVENUE 307.00 TRANSFER IN-WW/IMPROVE 800 NON-OPERATING REVENUE 900 INTEREST ?10.00 INTEREST EARNED 1,521.82 1,521.82 6 25,970 24,448.18 900 INTEREST 1,521.82 1,521.82 6 25,970 24,448.18 000 * NON DEPARTMENTALIZED 278,693.18 278,693.18 10 2,753,534 2,474,840.82 TOTAL WATER FUND 278,693.18 278,693.18 10 2,753,534 2,474,840.82 FUND 200 WATER FUND CITY OF SOUTHLAKE REPORT PRINT DATE- 11/10/92 DEPT/CATEGORY EXPENDITURE REPORT PERIOD ENDING 10/31/92 PAGE 5 FISCAL MONTH 01 8.33% ACCOUNT MTD *********** YEAR-TO-DATE *********** ANNUAL CATEGORY DESCRIPTION ACTUAL ACTUAL ENCUMBERED %BUD APPROPRIATION BALANCE 500 OTHER EXPENSES .00 .00 .00 0 372,014 372,014.00 DEPT 000 TOTAL ******** .00 .00 .00 0 372,014 372,014.00 NON DEPARTMENTALIZED 100 PERSONNEL SERVICES 23,104.95 23,104.95 .00 8 304,727 281,622.05 200 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES .00 .00 .00 0 35,000 35,000.00 300 LEASE OBLIGATIONS .00 .00 .00 0 6,000 6,000.00 400 SUPPLIES 33.35 33.35 .00 0 8,700 8,666.65 500 OTHER EXPENSES 5,934.33 5,934.33 .00 1 1,024,320 1,018,385.67 600 ADMINSTRATIVE EXPENDITURES 678.33 678.33 .00 5 14,600 13,921.67 700 MAINTENANCE 593.68 593.68 .00 1 60,300 59,706.32 800 PROFESSIONAL CONSIDERATION 200.00 200.00 .00 3 6,300 6,100.00 900 CAPITAL OUTLAY .00 .00 .00 0 145,625 145,625.00 DEPT 147 TOTAL ******** 30,544.64 30,544.64 .00 2 1,605,572 1,575,027.36 WATER 100 PERSONNEL SERVICES 2,379.55 2,379.55 .00 4 54,689 52,309.45 200 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES .00 .00 .00 0 10,000 10,000.00 300 LEASE OBLIGATIONS .00 .00 .00 0 5,000 5,000.00 400 SUPPLIES .00 .00 .00 0 2,100 2,100.00 500 OTHER EXPENSES 512.43 512.43 .00 4 11,500 10,987.57 700 MAINTENANCE 48,976.49 48,976.49 .00 10 471,412 422,435.51 800 PROFESSIONAL CONSIDERATION .00 .00 .00 0 1,200 1,200.00 900 CAPITAL OUTLAY .00 .00 .00 0 3,700 3,700.00 DEPT 148 TOTAL ******** 51,868.47 51,868.47 .00 9 559,601 507,732.53 SEWER 200 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES .00 .00 .00 0 232,200 232,200.00 DEPT 149 TOTAL ******** .00 .00 .00 0 232,200 232,200.00 SANITATION FUND 200 TOTAL ******** 82,413.11 82,413.11 .00 3 2,769,387 2,686,973.89 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE UTILITY BILLING MONTHLY REPORT OCTOBER 31, 1992 THIS LAST YEAR MONTH THIS MONTH ACCOUNTS BILLED: WATER $217,573.51 $181,797.88 SEWER 15,317.91 11,982.37 GARBAGE 22,811.75 16,795.14 SALES TAX 1,646.81 1,221.40 RECYCLE 0.00 0.00 OTHER 3,763.67 3,822.84 TOTAL $261 ,113.65 $215,619.63 NUMBER OF CUSTOMERS: WATER 2,719 2,377 SEWER 606 377 GARBAGE 2,742 2,411 TOTAL ACCOUNTS BILLED 2,914 2,555 CONSUMPTION BILLED (IN 000'S): WATER 50,077 41,110 SEWER 12,734 0 NEW CUSTOMERS 54 48 AMOUNTS COLLECTED DURING MONTH $270,132.92 $200,925.64 FINAL BILLINGS 49 46 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE SALES TAX REVENUES six year comparison 1992-93 collected budget balance budget to datebalance percent $579,000 $50,956 $528,044 91.20% FISQ4 FISCAL:.i.olscAL. ..,:...::IiFIF:AL:.,:7,.•,':: it.,,,k:.,::,,iii,ix, . .. % Inc, MONTH .'!.:.:',ii$7.../8.a-s.i.:.:.-:::88/89.!:::';::'; (Dec) •:;'.:''... .:::1.:7....,jg-,...'. .:§•...•.',../797:,,,„::-.-,::.:::-. %(DeIncc) ..2''''''..'''.•'1..:::.`4'7••*0..../-V1'._::.;•1:::::::' (Dec) '''::.91/92 %(DeIncc) il.'927'..?::•:':3.]].:::'',E... %(DeIncc) YE October ......„.,.„ ...: • O -21.7% ••:.::i'•. ..;•7;.,•,.,17..6! 3.5.1°7-- '';'.:...!•!'•$.‘.,::.•4L4),,.,...:.,,:0...'$..1.H:. 6.0% 50;'•,?;.,•:6....11' 9.0% %(-1D6:7n%c '...:..:-:F'•:.$10...S........'...C.'..7,....7'..:'...A:.'..1 :il:i.$3.: :31:&li71.::;?7...:.:..:.: .j ; 1-..•:!..:•:• :.,,,:s.29 -24.8%.:.„ . :...::::::::::•.....-.:.:::-. November .':':.!!,;. ....',:•.2..:;64::..._:7'..;.:•*i-'i.:..1"ii.•4::....5.. ..4Z's'....8'..:'.:• ---31.9% ,1.1.:1.,:24i17.:3::'! 593% i ::....::::'.••'••••: •'i:it 51.0% t7-:7;9 -."'...'" December .:•:!iiii.:16,..•;.3..::2....3.i';-. ;:.,.17;839:! 9.2% ...2Itti5.:.2.,... 18.1% ::'!..:28..',4..;.6...4..‘::. 35.2% :.'i.:i.':.'3....3.....'4.....73' ..,...,,,,..:............ 16.9% ...-1,',..:::.:.::::.:::-:•.,....:::::::::,.:::::::::!....:!::::.:.....:i ,:..:,.,.... .. 4749.0. -- :.i :io...,...i:: ::..,:.....: :62.71: .--,.,::i;:i:it.4-....0.0:0.1....91....26, -15.1% .-',.... ..:.1•:.',iii*i January .,,....:.•:..,......•..:;.:::-::.,::.267. 50‘,...,: -18.2% ,'•':. 34,:. .:. :';'.' 32711 :.'. : ?..''':...:-:': .:!•:.:.:•:.1 :.:.:::.•46....::..::3:.: 28.8:'1!.,.!ii,'•:. ,•••.'''.;4....‘1.:'81....711:.' February '.:..:i..1..'.3,46.. .ii:.......:::i'11:5•:;89.::41.:.1'. 20.7% ,.'l:'•1.;:2:.i.i.,..5.ii.i.:.r....7.;:.:...4::..„.:1! 61.0 0 .::.:.:.:......:....;.i............. 78.4% .......„....... ,. • . ... ... . , 58.5% „..:39;657i:. 107.5% i11:1;1. i9.i,..:::..,-....-,.....:,,. 7.5% ...: .:: .'-):.:..,:488 13.8% March -...1:::,-:'.•9325:::ii:i:;:•.:1:4:?7-78...' April ::;']'37:;.8.45; ....ii:.::.48;6:35.. 28.5% .:.::;::13‘....7.: ,2.:01......::• -23.5% iii!::::::4...1,445..: 11.4% ..,.57...;5..,43 38.8% ,...:.:.:-.,....,...,.::, .:.:::..".....:-.1-:.. .. May 'i:.45..;51..0.:':il.'."....'2:...7. 8..:24i 79.4% '....'::...:..:-3...1,..50.1... 13.2% iii..q36....:',:.16.:..2.....7....1..: 16.3% :....:.... .41t02::,..0 12.0% 13.8%..:::37S94:.'8.4% .::..:ii-,..744.4.7..: 55.7% !!.1•:.!!.i.'!:....•':..!...:., :. June -':-:•:'22 Ji•95 ::.::.!.2410511i::::' 1.2% ....;:i:::.:i41?.3f19.:,..5:: July ... .- 20.1% :;...$1.5:.1i3..:::7„.:4...: 33.0% :..,:l.:::,i.47.:.:10i7 -8.5% -1i:j:-:•:!S... .H....1;.:!..:.:).:..7.... 9.2% August • .."......':.:',': .:11111:!:Ei:. :-...... --..-4 ...i.::.•-•,,, ,....:.30- ...... ,... ..:...,..,. .. ... ....:.:.:.g:..„4„...,:;..:75. ..:.:ii!;!: yz:;699 -6.1% 1,9 . .:, •:.•!•:•••:'•:.3.::.'.....:-6,...,:.9 8%,..,'.•.:,! 40 !3 . ...::'!:....5, 51H:9... ::' ':'!..;..:':i:i'':'52'.';'!.•.59' '....'• •u;6- • 12.5% .:.:::..48...,.,..7....,.31 35.5% ......... . ... ..... . September ::-::......19..141i.:-..;:...:31294.: 63.0% '::.:.:..':.:32.i,,:i..•:',1:4:99.,,...,:. 4.2% .3119 04'.' 13.9% • '.:,!4.2741 15.5% .$280. TOTAL ,901 $..54, 99.. $..:.3..9.:.6:..,.140....6 P :- 27.1% . .,..418;1.....„4:„..8...;• 13.1% •$51:0...'.;036 13.8% $510....0.. ..: 6...,.:.1 9.0% '::. ....... 11.0% .,....,, i;.;.:::..:-..•.:.:.::.. .:'.:i.:':...........:,.,...:.'. .... City of Southlake, Texas CITY MANAGER MEMORANDUM •, November 11, 1992 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Michael H. Barnes, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Award of bid for plugging of wells at City Hall On Tuesday, November 10, 1992 at 10: 00 a.m. , bids were opened and read aloud for the plugging of two wells at the city hall pump station site. Attached is the bid tabulation and the recommendation from Cheatham and Associates to award the bid for the plugging of the wells at city hall. The wells are being plugged because the State will not let the City operate the wells within 150 feet of gasoline tanks and because one Of the wells (Trinity) has a high concentration of sodium. The bid consisted of a base bid and an alternate bid. The base bid required the contractor to remove the existing pumps and well pipe and to plug the wells as per State requirements. The pumps and pipe were to remain the property of the City and were to be stored at one of the tower sites. The alternate bid had the same requirement as the base bid with the exception that the contractor could salvage the pumps and well pipe. Two bids were received with the low bid coming from Millican Well Service. Millican is an area contractor who is licensed to plug wells and has a reputation of doing quality work. Millican's low bid was the alternate bid at $18, 400. Staff has determined that since the alternate low bid is lower than his base bid by $5,200 and within the budget it would be to the City's advantage to accept the alternate bid as the low bid. Staff does not feel that the City could get more than $5, 200 if we salvaged the material ourselves. In the 1992-93 budget $20, 000 was budgeted in the water budget for the plugging of the wells. Therefore, staff confirms Cheatham and Associates recomme o�' llican Well Service be awarded the alternate low b' at $18 ,400. Please place th' on the November 17 agenda for consideration by the City Council. If you have any questions or need further information, please contact me. MHB/kb KUGGDYG HLLab, I, CHEATHAM AND ASSOCIATES November 10, 1992 Mr. Mike Barnes, P.E. Director of Public Works City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Avenue Southlake, TX 76092 Re: Plugging of (2) Existing Water Wells Southlake, Texas Job No. 001-209 Dear Mike: We have tabulated the bids for the subject project and the low bidder was Millican Well - Service with a base bid of$23,600.00, and an alternate bid of 18,400.00 The base bid was for the salvaged materials to be retained by the City. The alternate bid was for the contractor to salvage any materials from the two wells. Since there was a savings to the City of$5,200.00, we recommend awarding the contract to the low bidder for his alternate bid of$18,400.00. If you have any questions or comments, please give us a call. Respectfully, g Eddie Cheatham, P.E. \wells.418 Enclosure ENGINEERS•PLANNERS• SURVEYORS A Subsidiary Firm of Southwest Planning and Design,Inc. 1170 Corporate Drive West • Suite 207 • Arlington,Texas 76006 817/633-1023 • Metro 640-4329 • PLUGGING (2) EXISTING WELLS-JOB NO.001-418 CHEATHAM&ASSOCIATES BID TABULATION SHEET 1 OF 1 OWNER: CITY OF SOUTHLAKE BID DATE: 11/10/92 MILLIGAN WELL SERVICE LAYNE-TEXAS - - _ w P.O.BOX 820487 ROUTE 12,BOX 12797 JOB TITLE: PLUGGING(2)EXISTING WELLS FORT WORTH,TX 78182 TYLER,TX 75708 PHONE: 817/838-8503 PHONE:903/592.8177 FAX: FAX: 903/597-9469 JOB NO: 001-418 AMT.BID: $23,600.00 AMT.BID: $32,550.00 ITEM ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT PLAN UNIT COST UNIT COST UNIT COST UNIT COST NO. QUANTITY PRICE PRICE PRICE PRICE 1 FURN MAT'ULABOR FOR PLUGGING-TRINITY LS. 1 $14,600.00 $14,600.00 $19,130.00 $19,130.00 $0.00 $0.00 2 FURN MAT'ULABOR FOR PLUGGING-PALUXY LS. 1 $9,000.00 $9,000.00 $13,420.00 $13,420.00 $0.00 $0.00 TOTAL BASE BID(ITEMS 1-2) $23,600.00 $32,550.00 $0.00 $0.00 ALTERNATE BID (^ 1A FURN MAT'ULABOR&SAVO EXT MAT'L-TRINIT LS. 1 $11,600.00 $11,600.00 $18,130.00 $18,130.00 $0.00 $0.00 2A FURN MAT'ULABOR&SAVG EXT MAT'L-PALUX LS. 1 $6,800.00 $6,800.00 $12,420.00 $12,420.00 $0.00 $0.00 11144 { TOTAL ALTERNATE BID(ITEMS 1A-2A) $18,400.00 $30,550.00 $0.00 $0.00 W • O • City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM November 10, 1992 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Karen P. Gandy, Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: ZA 92-41 Zoning Change Request REQUESTED ACTION: Rezoning request for 5.45 acres situated in the L.H. Chivers Survey, Abstract No. 300, Tract 3A4 LOCATION: Northeast corner of N. White Chapel Blvd. and Hwy. No. 114 OWNER/APPLICANT: David Hardy CURRENT ZONING: "AG," Agricultural REQUESTED ZONING: "C-2," Local Retail Commercial LAND USE CATEGORY: Mixed Use (Residential and/or Commercial, No Industrial) NO. NOTICES SENT: Six (6) RESPONSES: Two (2) in favor: * Harold Knight, 190 W.N.W. Parkway * James R. Little, Town and Country Food Stores representative One (1) undecided: * Mr. Blevins, property owner to the East Spoke in Public Hearing at P & Z: * Jeroll Shivers, 1800 N. White Chapel Blvd. , questioned extent of the commercial use (i.e. depth of the lot) . P & Z ACTION: October 22, 1992; Approved (6-0) COUNCIL ACTION: November 3, 1992; Approved (7-0) , First Reading, Ordinance No. 480-78. STAFF COMMENTS: The owner has a potential commercial user for the existing building. During Council's discussions, it was established that the existing building would be upgraded to meet commercial code. The Council raised the issues of upgrading the parking lot to an all weather surface and requiring the applicant to meet the masonry ordinance due to the change in use from residential to commercial. A separate memo addressing these issues is attached for your review. 11, ' 7 A-I KPG .' --' )... •nr -w- sutrvC) •esT Mr 120i�'-'I . ?r }• 1 l / �- .` 11 • r— ;:wt 0 r t r }t - � w.,r ^J • dr— >tr •i.` _ := am � \y/' .� I: ` � ' �p — a— J Ail.' � i Este S 1,�— :.\ wr\ �3� r�R.? ►� O E ,: ,1'� r : ? '� § E 5..C4.cT. JiEu+�� �� r�., '}�fi ^w r; J SW r(. USl •n n)• /{^�,1�i —— — Su NST M AO r SWVC••6fT M ]N .1 -E• .DS-M • �T� E Wi �L—I .E - W \® \ •.Qr 'ram1K.. ? • _- ,)!r. E�-L 1 •r ,! —'oak. I.�St�- — -- — • ,} o.l r T war I�„ i I l________ \ �tr r.� n._ I — 1 fCHOOI — —. • -, " EAST SOK STRETI.;—• i •2�` I I ... .\=.. ......„...___.._ o\ om/ if" f7 --- •I- -r >. ).� i .�_._.— j14 aill 1. IS i M .} .e� 1 }oak.• • II. •— n.c I I •Idakc I• S O,r 'pp�t 2.}A.1• }'' •,•r .1••-fi 7-77..ir-j----- .?1 ..0. WEST i It Lle�.r• 7Z Sur vET MISTM.K2O - JSZA.c • - /—__ 20 ake •f)r - •-T. 1 . a 2 — II 017.c •i ew. ))ake. v.•NIO)E L.IE •'r Sat- j ' C_Q_nwC ':. CO-OCN'=RS A@§A1.©8s -. Cit.-UV:7in I— _—__..—°r_ _ suavE• •SSY R• SOO ; sWTE♦.857 N.299 cr • m 1'• W. I aCi )• �y NI Ss As Thlr:. r _ IK St E t „ L�,.{! ' / �I ,I ram? 44,I�,`— Alt,'3 II-tI �� '1Y\ :� � , x!•6 !�",v ` z ' t •� RA ( �.JI } !.. }n.• Sr.t J tom\ 73 r .JACK D. 3'I ' a� I t1 pal E ® G� �J. / '�►�t.. 402^ 'a •ja •c i I JOFWSON ''' -y V i• v L z,.0 S. /y,— ElE11ENTAi ,t( - l20 6_ I -tl— K,,y�, i' L )ake/.3Y! ..S r lY.c 1 5 , HH't-- -- ir>. 1' yn •rl r ec+a G.c) c -t3)oo Hu i xc __ago .Cr. fys Si y lake 2• � T P_�I •L� ^ a�1 D i'Q , ' ` . •y^�•,.�L " , i OMAS - ..-GrC0m 1 I s.,,EFT --Ni_- _ )rtST w�uo I. I I .o- FIR- LSD. _— UR1,T PO 1 • i : ����: 5T1 ' IA i •• • iG Ic I I �� I,. I L--Ir hi Lt4i5e. liS • y41 1)•c hair♦ ST. 007 I CEJC.GiA. r 1 Sut T . ra 1 s OA I i su.vc• : 'is,r...„..„..., ,. . . . . _ , ,.... x: Xz "'-0� 2 -- J Y t r—�t_ _— 11 `1 �I, ) f 'in, I ,_L^ - 4— `I, CITY , • tAI 3.. 11 ` -- -- /O — ` —. T — HALL T-- S rt - j` �►„ ( +'E. _. i IC6—-=y ak — ,.____.,4 4•, say --s l x'�$_ \ TRACT LOCATION MAP :1 • au I I•. �$ - - - :r t e I1 4111 Bear Creek Communities • Shivers, J; ' "AG" - TR 1A3' L TR 1 35.0 At. } . • 1.103 @ �, + "" • _ Knight, H.' .1. \\S: -14 .. .. . . • . Clow, J.L. - R I. TR 6C . 32 (' / 1.7 AC • V Blevins, E.L. O "C-2" Tillery, G. . 33 3 TR 3A C • Town & Country f TR TR 3.2 AC s Food Store TR 3 3TA 3A5 TR 6A I 45 A 1.5 AC 1\ 2.55 C "AG" - "C-2" - TR 3A1 - "C-2" • 56.33 @ - . \k2 . " . ilk • aBlevins, E.L. S TR 3A3 TqTF 2.0 AC • 'f 1 Gyp TA 6J ` 4 , 5.72 @ TA 3A2A .1./ % • .798 @ • ... .ZoL :10y TR39-1.B T� jQ- 1 IAD Q J2L� 2.780 @ TR 30 IvEa 10° .67AC COVEY 1 TRACT :. 1 2.30@ a , •�v 0 . . - 9 G 1263 • 7A _ 3 cf TRACT 2 I 427.85' I •3I I v Ia.. ct v o 5 .4 5 Acres ti 1 //1 EXHIBIT A AGREEMENT OF LIMITED PARTNERSHIP D/FW-WHITE CHAPEL TWO, LTD . DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY Being a tract of land out of the L. H. CHIVERS SURVEY, Abstract No. 300, in Tarrant County, Texas , about 4-1/2 miles Northwest of Grape- vine, Texas, and being. a part of an 80. 3 acre tract as recorded in Volume 935, Page 97, Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas, and being described by metes and bounds as follows : BEGINNING at an iron pin in the East line of County Road No. 3016 (White Chapel Rd. ) , said point being 25. 0 feet East of the Northwest corner of the above mentioned 80 . 3 acre tract ; THENCE S. 00. degrees 14 minutes E. 604 . 72' feet along the East line of said County Road to a concrete monument in the R. O.W. line of State Highway No. 114; THENCE S. 31 degrees 11 minutes E. 128 . 63 feet along said R. O.W. line to a concrete monument for corner; THENCE S. 62 degrees 09 minutes E. 259 . 56 feet along said R. O.W. line to an iron pin for corner; THENCE N. . 00 degrees 06 minutes W. 717 . 46 feet to an iron pin for corner; THENCE N. 89 degrees 54 minutes E. 131. 13 feet to an iron pin for corner; THENCE N. 00. degrees 17 minutes W. 118. 8 feet to an iron pin in the North line of the above mentioned 80. 3 acre tract; THENCE S. 89 degrees 56 minutes W. along said North line of said 80. 3 acre tract 42.7., 85 feet to the POINT• OF BEGINNING and containing 5. 45 acres of land. 7A-5 City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM November 12, 1992 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Greg Last, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Parking Lot Paving Requirements Over the past year there have been many discussions between the fire, building inspections, and public works departments concerning what paving is required for parking lots and fire lanes . There still exists some confusion between actual requirements by ordinance and policy decisions needed where the ordinances do not address certain issues . The fire lanes are addressed in Ordinance No. 304 . This allows the Fire Chief to require fire lanes on developments where needed. Fire Dept. has a policy regarding construction of fire lanes (5" concrete or 5" asphalt) and is currently requiring this on new construction. This construction policy is being added in the ordinance proposed by the Fire Dept. Staff . The zoning ordinance states : "All parking and vehicle use areas shall be of an all weather surface material and constructed in accordance with applicable codes . " The definition of "all weather surface" is as follows : "A dust free surface constructed of cement, asphalt, brick or other commonly accepted pavement which may be approved by the Administrative Official . " Staff does not feel that this includes gravel . All new construction has been required to pave their parking areas . The zoning ordinance does not address "retrofit" requirements for parking areas on existing buildings changing uses . Staff has been working under the assumption that it would be a financial hardship that would prohibit the use if we required new paved parking on existing buildings. This would particularly apply to buildings to be acquired by the state for future R.O.W. expansion. 7 /4 -6 Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager Parking Lot Paving Requirements November 12, 1992 Page 2 Staff has allowed gravel parking on the property at White Chapel and S.H. 114 due to the reasons noted. If the Council would like for us to make a change in our policy for dealing with these issues, we will proceed accordingly. Please bring this to the Council members attention for their direction in this matter. GL/gh cc: Lee Roberts, Building Official Mike Barnes, Director of Public Works Jerry Williams, Deputy Director Fire Services 719- DOCLI4ENT: PARK/LOT.CEH FOLDER: PLANNER o CITY OF SOUTH— ' , ORDINANCE NO. 480-78 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 OK SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS BEING APPROXIMATELY A 5.45 ACRE TRACT OF LAND OUT OF THE L.H. CHIVERS SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 300, TRACT 3A4 , AND MORE FULLY AND COMPLETELY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" FROM "AG" AGRICULTURAL TO "C-2" LOCAL RETAIL COMMERCIAL 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 C of Southlake, Texas is - - • - • - ity acting under its Charter e 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 WHEREAS, the hereinafter described property is currently zoned as "AG" Agricultural 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 480.78101w1kb 7/9-S. I'agc 1 r 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, WHEREAS, 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 amended so that the permitted uses in the hereinafter described areas be altered, changed and amended as shown and described below: Being approximately a 5.45 acre tract of land out of the L.H. Chivers Survey, Abstract No. 300, Tract 3A4, and more fully and completely described in Exhibit "A, " attached hereto and incorporated herein. From "AG" Agricultural to "C-2" Local Retail Commercial District. 480.78/ORD/kb 7 /J Page 2 �f� 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 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 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 violations and all pending litigation, both civil and criminal, whether pending in court or not, under such ordinances, same shall 480.78/ORD/kb 7 A_/O Page 3 0 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 , 1992. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY PASSED AND APPROVED on the 2nd reading the day of , 1992 . MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: CITY ATTORNEY DATE: ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE: 480.78/ORD/kb 9fit" Page 4 City of Southlake,Texas — - - i CITY MANAGE1. MEMORANDUM �� November 11, 1992 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Billy Campbell, Director, Department of Public Safety SUBJECT: Modification of Ordinance 554 Attached is the recommended restructured Section 14 of Ordinance No. 554, with the key portion of the amendment being: (a) (2) - provided structured and scheduled fire training to comply with those standards regulating firefighting certification as set forth by the Texas Commission on Fire Protection Personnel Standards and Education or the State Fire Marshal's Association. This paragraph commits the City to provide proper training as recognized by those appropriate State commissions and eliminates a time schedule that may be unrealistic to keep because of situations or incidents outside of our control. These recommended changes have gone through Council on first reading without comment. n..67 BC/mr Attachment wp\xeio\vo1od554.3 ORDINANCE NO. 554 AN ORDINANCE CREATING A POLICE RESERVE FORCE, A FIRE RESERVE FORCE, AND AN AUXILIARY SERVICE FORCE FOR THE CITY OF SOUTHLAXE, TEXAS; PROVIDING FOR THE APPOINTMENT - OF MEMBERS THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE POLICE RESERVE FORCE, THE FIRE RESERVE FORCE, AND THE AUXILIARY SERVICE FORCE; PROVIDING FOR SUSPENSION OF THE MEMBERS OF THE POLICE RESERVE FORCE, THE FIRE RESERVE FORCE, AND THE AUXILIARY SERVICE FORCE OR REDUCTION IN ' RANK OR DISMISSAL THEREFROM BY THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY; REQUIRING AN OATH OF OFFICE BY POLICE RESERVE OFFICERS AND REQUIRING RESERVE OFFICERS TO MEET ALL REQUIREMENTS OF STATE LAW; PROVIDING FOR CERTIFICATION AND TRAINING OF POLICE RESERVES AND FIRE RESERVES; PROVIDING FOR TERMINATION OF POLICE RESERVE, FIRE RESERVE, OR AUXILIARY SERVICE FORCE; PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OR AMENDMENT OF SPECIFIC ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; 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 WHEREAS, the City of Southlake has heretofore established a Department of Public Safety which is staffed by paid police officers and firefighters who are employees of the City, for the • purpose of providing police, fire, and other emergency services to the citizens of Southlake; and - - WHEREAS, the City Council deems it in the best interests of the citizens to utilize reserve, volunteer, or auxiliary officers to assist the City in providing police, fire, and other emergency services; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to adopt this ordinance setting forth guidelines and requirements for a police reserve force, a fire reserve force, and auxiliary service force. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: • must be of good character and have the physical anitity to perrorm the duties of the position for which the applicant seeks appointment. SECTION 14 Every person appointed to the Fire Reserve Force shall be a minimum of eighteen (18) years of age, except as otherwise provided . herein, and shall be certified as-a- Volunteer Firefighter by the Texas Commission on Fire Protection Personnel Standards and Education, the Texas Fire Marshal's Office, or other State Board or Commission having jurisdiction, within (12) months of appointment, Persons who are at least sixteen (16) years of age and less than eighteen (18) years of • age may be appointed as "Junior Firefighters" subject to the conditions stated herein. Those members who are under eighteen (18) years of age shall have written • permission of their parents to participate as a member of the Fire • Reserve Force. As a condition of being appointed as a Junior Firefighter, such volunteer shall be subject to and shall comply with all additional and special restrictions as required by policy or law which may be determined to be necessary for the safe and proper performance of their duties. SECTION 15 The Director of Public Safety shall prescribe the uniforms and badges of the members of the Fire Reserve Force and shall direct 7 _Q ORDINANCE NO.53 - /`"/ i ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 554 OF THE CITY OF :OUTHLAKCE; MODIFYING THE TRAINING REQUIREMENTS FOR HEMMERS OF THE FIRE RESERVE FORCE; PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; • PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR. PUBLICATION IN PAMPHLET FORM; AND PROVIDING AN :::::: acity 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 has determined that it is appropriate to modify the training requirements and training time periods for members of the City's Fire Reserve Force: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: SECTION 1. That Section 14 of Ordinance No . 554 of the City of Southlake is amended to read as follows : "SECTION 14 • (a) A person appointed to the Fire Reserve Force shall be : ( 1 ) a minimum of eighteen ( 18) years of age, except as otherwise provided in this ordinance; and ( 2) provided structured and scheduled fire training to comply with those standards regulating firefighting certification as set forth by the Texas Commission on Fire Protection Personnel Standards and Education or the State Fire Marshal's Association. (b) A person who is at least sixteen (16) years of age and less than eighteen (18) years of age may be appointed as a "Junior Firefighter" if the person: (1 ) has the written permission from the person's parents; and A:\F:RE9'9.3L 7 ~3 40FIELL ,NG , BRRRETT TEL : 817-560-3953 Oct _5 . y% 14 : 35 No .012 P . : - ( 2) complies with all additional and special restrictions as required by policy or law determined to be necessary for the safe and proper conduct of assigned duties. " SECTION 7. Cumulative Clause. This ordinance shall be cumulative of all provisions of ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, except where the provisions of this ordinance are in direct conflict with the provisions of such ordinances , in which event the conflicting provisions of such ordinances are hereby repealed . SECTION 8. Severability Clause. It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance are severable, and if any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section of this ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional by the valid judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences , paragraphs and sections of this ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by the City Council without the incorporation in this ordinance of any such unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section. SECTION 10. Pamphlet Form Publication Clause . 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 11. Newspaper Publication Clause. The City Secretary of the City of Southlake is hereby directed to publish the proposed _ yam -Li / r FIELDING . BARRETT TEL : 817-560-3953 Oct 15 ,92 14 :35 No .012 P .0= ordinance or its caption 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. SECTION 12. Effective Date Clause. 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 FIRST READING ON THIS DAY OF , 1992. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY PASSED AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING ON THIS DAY OF , 1992 . MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney Date: ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE: 7J--5 City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM November 10, 1992 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Karen P. Gandy, Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: ZA 92-53 Plat Showing REQUESTED ACTION: Plat Showing for Lot 1, J. A. Freeman No. 529 Addition, being 8.638 acres out of the J. A. Freeman Survey, Abstract No. 529 LOCATION: 1950 E. Continental Blvd. OWNER/APPLICANT: MEMO Industrial Planning, Inc. CURRENT ZONING: "I-1," Light Industrial LAND USE CATEGORY: Industrial NO. NOTICES SENT: Thirteen (13) RESPONSES: None P & Z ACTION: November 5, 1992; Approved (7-0) subject to the Plat Review Summary dated October 29, 1992 and recommending the following changes: P & Z Recommendation: (Delete per Staff's recommendation after a field inspection of the site with the City Engineer) "14. Provide a 20' drainage easement along the east side adjacent to Lot 1 of Greenlee." STAFF COMMENTS: Attached please find the Second Plat Review Summary dated November 12, 1992. Staff still recommends deleting the above referenced item. KPG gA- • 1 'GU "' Un I ogjl AK B A • 2At- 1e11 1 21 ?ti ul tA2A 7A1A {kt 2Atr 2As / 1c ' 1 � 2A1 i ;irt.i:teel , ' 7 . . j1 r r'' r 16 1� IA • ir f. 4 I 11;a14: 4\\\\ t t Y1 to l i Ila t� ® J®!nH R1. f�IP8( r Mdr' 1 I ,> s. H / / 3 •1J- 3fl ' np t�� 61 GC MI 31 I / 1 . 61 I 1 \� ifet I k 0E1 �� 11. to 11DA r II J.W. 11L LI I 333 3 II 111 note" A-JI11 GI { 'I ■Awo.R. iI W KA 2A m m 1 US I GA 1 1A2 83 e9 681 W 1 IA X 1 1 ° i11 g14 I \\ I , , Tail �A2 I I �.t. He 0 Q L! I—, II I DST mutxorrAL aw /L 1 ^ \ IA6 .�' I I A III IA :�L. �_- --—eu ._- - -- f—-—� ��� \ ♦sorter -tma I lPJ'FI'JnV(.T LI a uMr IA 1K tllm 181A \\\ \\ I • J �� I MOA ;MO \\ \\ '/ I 14 14 _ -Irl= \\ \ ��v Y'Jr, I Iw 2e 1 1 ID 1 1 IAA r � j1�_ I 1K H5 >e 1BI • "' ■ Ir.-lit Sian .11M63 �� I4.4 I1A. 16O 1WIMR1i t II A IAA I..7at, 7.1." ' 1 3 I ir I � 1193 tale •`tE 1 � I a,I In 2N� 8 xi t `�Q rI�rl�l�®GPI DECKER PP:: G ,Al_` �UCOil CALri.1� D,e, A-4. I 2 ' ; .f� .�,1 P:ZiSE'LArSE E .D®bw N eaICQ3o4 I 'e' 1 v,�"" l,X�`'�( a.rtcr -I.0 ........-.. to r _,I�pY A'f ' tfj Al le ' 3 . ' ' I 1ocATIàN I MAP ! 1 .. , 0, .... . 00 I 1 ' , ..... ..--.. Ai RA-2 � + 2.975 _ :� v ,�I TR 6 t 4 E0,1N 8.882 AC J - Fa„EY cj �529 Lemons, Nolan ELFtii p' TR 691 Corporation 6 8 AC 3.003 g (---------\ "I-1" "I-1" ) . . . Lamon Chris "I-1" BUS • Davis, Sondra TR 68 Wester \-\ \\\ ,{ Bank TR 6 1�3 O - 11.4 AC TA 6C TA 60 A. AC GREY Sun Square Dev. Inc. 3 AC 3 AC 4 "I-1" "I-1" "I-1" 1 • Texas Cormerc 6E Bank N. A. F.D.I.C. 4.0 c "I-1" "I-1" Lakeport Heal Est. Ea1ins, Randall TA 184J1 TR 164K3 T Ape Avi- ion .46 @ 3 .46 @ "I-i�' iR13100 6 EKE TR 164J TR 184K j "I-]-' H 430, .46 @ .46 AC "1-1,' TR 1910E . �J a6C" "I-17I TR 184C TR 184K1 .45 AC "M 1 . 145 @ • Explorer Pipeline Co. .46 AC .515 AC ;.. TR 1810E TA 1610A iB TR 1B1A TR 184P TR 1B4K2A .45 AC .45 AC -c as 15.6 A .46 AC 46 @ I TR 1910G -- TR i610C ( TR TA 184K2 .45 AC �9 45 AC fiC- TR 1840 "I-2'' .46 @ t� TA 1812 TA 1515 Tq LB TR 1B4U TR 184K28 I .45.-AC PhD . 4 AC 6F .46 @ .46 @ j TA 1812A `. TR 1914 R TR46E ADJACENT OWNERS & ZONING T84T TR 1a I Q1\_.3 is! .46 @ 46 ACC u .q ; City of Southlake,Texas PLAT REVIEW SUMMARY CASE NO: ZA 92-53 REVIEW NO: TWO DATE OF REVIEW: 11/12/92 PROJECT NAME: Plat Showing- Lot 1, J.A. Freeman No. 529 Addition OWNER/APPLICANT: ENG/SURVEYOR: MEMO Industrial Planning Inc Owen Ayres & Associates Inc . 1950 E . Continental Blvd. 2110 Walnut Hill Lane Southlake, Texas 76092 Suite 134 Irving, Texas 75038 Phone: ( 817) 488-4444 Phone: (214 ) 570-5577 Fax: ( 817 ) 488-0672 Fax: (214) 580-8297 CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 11/9/92 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 GREG LAST AT ( 817) 481-5581, EXT. 744 . 1 . Owner' s dedication needs to match the title of the plat. 2 . Owner' s notary needs to include title of person signing plat. (See standard format Appendix 2 . ) 3 . The Survey abstract number indicated along the south survey line should be Abst. 438 rather than 436 . 4 . Existingeasements on the properties to the east should be shown in accordance with plats . 5 . Label existing R.O.W. all along East Continental Boulevard. 6 . R.O.W. dedication should be 42 ' from the centerline of apparent existing R.O.W. This will be 24 ' since existing R.O.W. is 36 ' and centerline is 18 ' from the property pins . 7 . There appears to be two notaries for the owner, unless the surveyor' s name is Geary Bailey. 8 . Lot area did not change after the change in R.O.W. dedication. Area shown on lot should be net of R.O.W. dedication. 9 . Add utility to 20 ' drainage easement crossing site. * Original signatures will be required on both blackline mylars prior to filing the plat. Also required are two sets of owner' s dedications and notaries with original signatures on 8 . 5" x 11" or 14" paper. * Denotes Informational Comment cc: MEMO Industrial Planning Inc. Owen Ayres & Associates Inc. A- 4 • C' nnl a coat,O.D.la1 001CA • .. 0 NO !W DwM..CI•I.KITI c0✓..D.0.•01 I V,..II N/INN N.N..,II.N.N •n..1 ,n•.�^..Ar•.......N. _ _ .1.0.1«r.•..,.K.r•u..,..•u•'�lr.•Y w r.eC•.•.w•ti 11rHY.•� VO 1!1 w N.Cw.., ,r..�t..r.C.a.l..r.••.Ilr. a�N G..:Y. ... Y.V I..IOW T..w� r..•w'M ✓r1...NUV....a•I,NII w.r.rV..o.•.rN,..w v.IC ',1n.•.. sown.Pr ,...pw..w ww....•✓• wl.0 ..............1.44 .V..D...W.•.V1V,...C.....,lrw Hr..r•rn.,rw.rq.N �, 0.....w IV....N rw... ...r•Nw 11 Ws.wC n,34.......N 1..4 w,.........I.I.n C1...,.••.rr. .M• 1rq• U. .AID SILL a wnn Oft ma . w 1II. IC.nt n.,W IDIIr....a wtr.,�..r Po ,..rl w r.rN n I.OD r1.1 '"..1.y• ..r{ 0.11.111.11VV111 •I..r r..C..V•Yaw1•woo...Pr rat all L� •n -.Lr T ••I•M w V.r,.w.1311.1.n...OOP w......1 Y..r VI.....C.r., TMOCI Min V•.,a. Y.VI.Co.*...A. ..I•'V 1.......I..,.{uu.l iru• Ia. .n.,WI—.M1 Y.AI ....1/W3 r.nb.r...r*w•1•..1 •N DN•.••.•M 1.In.•... -- ._.. _. — ma*.V....•.111w•.•1111w re 0..•Yvr•.leer.C....,I rN. 2^M1....a Lear, Ca......1�..w' N68'A 16. l781,J56• .. ]R ..••I..Imo..�.•A,.r..1 V 113 II Fs...•ier...•... 1..r+•4A•....r...,v. r• SLAYS.D.I n.T.runa . V..;DO.V n V b•.. •0.. . •n•...•••oM•••PA..l..n....w•..w.A /I.TI o• •"• 1 I.•r.,...r..Vwu...)••.I INN NY V r.D•N Yr.1.M.A.C.., r l... COMITY CA •urt r T1.1.C1...11.•I•l A.IS r1 1.n......N..../W I....w....w TM Y I.11.4 ti.C .•Y.a..••.w. 1 . .44 Iaw 3 *,I ..n1..•....•.1...1•er...ltl...•.•...r 1.N {,r.,...V.r..I,.,.V1.r.ti..ynN r+..w... .......r.•nr•r.., - ! .V I ! Iw w..r...M.,.wn.•n so.A.W I•.•.v.n: ..I.... w.'..In• iw1.C1 I.w. r1 14 P. W 11 I.I.r•.•1,1.1 INI.Vv......,. GYM w .n..w,....Lrr.I M... ...r M MF.M+w....o•11V111.V1v1111.4..w...•....AA ono N V W wVrw.•1.. wow.. LOT 1 •.w.11...wV..1r.a.M1/C.71 MnYM.OM 0111or+..0: 1 .. I— C Derr aw.6 a11-1111.....IN w Lin....Al r,I.r.I Yu. I T I ^' 0.638 ACRE i !w. I M•.....r�ti 376.203.2 SQUARE' IL1 MOW..1.I.O•I.MOW ALL w.11,1.1111.I1lII.r7: . ,• •.I )MAC i•.rt.I.....Iu•V,V Mr...s.,ti w 1.e.0•a.V..•r/.1.A.M N....N 7 O :• 1.4..IT•ut•- •' .. I. CI..V t..n... Cw..., \•r.,.N 11.11..00.44.6.11..•eft's..Ira mown..rn.r..✓w • 1 1 'n ...c. I a 4 •• ( `O ww.u•.. •. ••� Jr•••-a..•.•n,..a•I W..w r.1..,1 n Nu.wu.Tomes C.n..7.r..r .•S • lI t7 .. Iw .. r... I III IT.TI W TIa..1 1 1f tO $ . I 11 .n I I C Coa.r1•w 1.•.urt. 1 I 'r. 11 t. I or I I or., 4 ......1. 1. •.a...r.. .....A.. .. No Y, rl..., ...... G„".'" Co 8` ...........r....,.............,�...._. 11 .• 1' 1 ti.. a r•..�...r no..•wONNI .N.,...AL.,. r J N....4/.M n w I•.........4.<.r..IV 0..v.r•.I.•.aw•.i.....Y 8 •ss..N.V.MP n....nave.Nr..M.•1••••M W....•I.V Loyola., JL 1I I I SW.1.m1•.A,.D.n0 IL.{M VACS .,A. V. n V • .,ter,..M II." • I I 11.•r l..r•1.In{.,.w Tru1 _a,S ..111 �n IKST�JIl�':B me .,. • • Iv.. Gt�OULEVAAO •( COUNTY RQAO.NO. 3009 ) --f= =..g.1 I M��+�.. h-. '-- [N+•�-- I, t° SHO LOT 1, J. A. FREEMAN WING NO. 529 ADDITION 8.100 ACRE SUBDIVISION SITUATED IN THE JOHN A. IRELY4Y SURVEY • ABSTRACT NO. 6YB . CRY orJDL7NlAA2 TARRANT COUNTY. TEXAS INS VIAL VOID.0 CA81M7��.SOO(��.DUCE_ ........ rearFor . - H- • • zA \ ii LI seen s97ANMI 6 1 �Iii I83 19 1 11 �ORTHWEST PKWY IAST xIx1 I 364 38 x 7Arl 1 II:..S: e. IAN t 393 m \ 30 + 3D�(r.u, Ina) 7AZ� 6C`CATT SOl1T4.AKE xw. d 7A_ � r^x 2 � 187A 187 18 3 '� 40 I879 � ... ----- --` Ull 9 � 7E ODS ggUg' rr2A 7A3A1 21,I, 1%,. . •_a...' �:�•,.A, 1B1 I ` �_ 6A4/ 1 1 7A3 7A7A 7AIA 1 g1ZA1B 2A 7 1C 1 1 1 7AJA 7A11 ,4 J I. 11 2- 1�. itA �d' �`- p0 Ira 1 1 0 IlE to ~ J _ 1 I M pOW 1 hOUvt, 4E I p ,u�M //�� _a' nr nn 3A lA _yQ YJOHN 1 . FREEM W I g I nAN' P s N S / 38 I 1 11D I 1 91411. \ 3 4F _5A. -------- ---- 1 C I / g.:;: l II • �4�A.(,1 I `�� 1181 66/ SKI V 2f IA3 1 0 DSAt r 1 na 1 383 3 1 J.OV. HALE ; ��Q, SLAW" A-60J 6A1 6 III its.RAIRBOM ST_ 1 III Ir. A2A • 7A 79 xt 1 II / SAIA I "TM I y IA7 683 w 1/ \, 681 6A1 I 1A 2C I Ira, -. 1 1 II 40 6F ® 1 '1 682 i 6C 6D ..�r7ai1 F1 • '" t O � , , ,, ) 7A7 ; 1, 1.; I ` N%B�S'�ODUISI IAI , , _O . A EAST COKTINENTAL 6lw ----------- a' _- -- _- I -^__ _,{ I Y /��.�SVRIEY A-/O1J 1 CLAR�I I 16 t 18 181 1A :. Y ffi IA 164A -1 ^MODrii IB1A `�.` •' U -2 �- I ,�- 7s�0 _1B4Q tam I6M '9136C1 ) In2 Ins -16a , ds IjI �. 1641 1644 i lir -181 ]A Wl ! Ip.. w , Ie4 164e t t� I . ti 1 I 10TAM I IM %a Ka 7161T -1421 181 �`.c413‘ .'.. o- 11. �11,�� IBIS •t644 l6iT-16u I t`S� !. 1 lea lass -tips I • J I - teal 16Q7 ten 1 -.mg �' Cr • 7E1 Ie O 164JA IBA 'BM -U66I I - IA 1 I II I 164111 164a 1696 16S -160S3 I IAt 16W2 1643 Ile MB -IBM 1 2E4 160 1647 I 'Rut 1 4 164A 'MA4H' -)464 tall I 4 fi ,S I v/ roA Al4A2' I 716 183 1818 49 4i 1E I _IA1 1 717A HARRISON DECKER , N 1 _ SURVEY A-436 5U Arr J 7� t / bill n1,,-grAS,la A n TRACT LOCATION MAP -a�E Job ' 7JN G013 3®N `— G a Y� Ci • •/fY A-591 I ', SWW0T r''' 18 3 YL`" Y� ►Np 5t a ../ .9 I I a� $Row 4 A 1------) -t 6,.. I .) /I.• oP, 2 �_�O 5� ..(I/ c...._ lF1A . LAST S. TML r(L ' �0 ' I r I /// /I * ,, \ WH �/ a ��_ . \i r , , R 7r IT1����CCC g if) SUyAr •.nr JII r 2 a � '1 I- 'I,JI 2A1 2ArH Ali, f 3l/`�(y . . , • v�� i I ,,t I , ul•I e v 4O .111 a a SAI ' Pf'' 1 0 •��: .� ' I •' 1- 111`•1 .A. �� 4p• Ir I J �. . /I (:: h r 1. N �� •VE• •.�` Su I • e O I 3 490/I '..1:,). 1; . 1111\dr' . ;y • 615 : I O/.t/a dm• . .? .. .A, •nosa ' (.0 ,i mp,. -13 G. % AI: I. W. 'G�1 rcr I �,y` tto6 6uFJ,y,Cr AB91r�5I:O! 62SAc .1•l'� 6• 6A1 A; 2A l _ _ 6B htll I • �, Q BAc Z O a 6 • 6r T60All .' "•. .a I 6C D �= • _ _— RI AC I ¢I a I Rf•l: _" �� SURVEY ABST N41013 OKrtI[.H W!, r Ri - • 7 �I 14 � a pl�'01 I 6E Sr'.A CONTINEN-AL .i t.•. 41& �. • • r/, _ I '-+r' I ! r 21 1 I+ 91 rtl IIBI; ':. 11 -_ - A'Za;71• 2` i •. IA IB4J� .IB4B Iew Ieq I� i ce, .I:"p it 1I 194C- I:. I-LgE� I:Ipn�� • � 'I • ', 1 Ac 63 Ac IB4F .4N2 IBq�J IB104 �- /f • �'I al I.atf ._r PA. ffffff 1e4. .- Ie•loc ,915!I' r]b A ate T1 ]az v1 -� 24 r) • y I I I4 IBa IBS Ty, rLL II i 2 19�L : M IBr I I I y H. II �1 IB4K P.104 , F Y4 I 1A1�/1 3''/. I '.C3:. �I iB4 A.I F r I I I -l�P N.% I `�. Ea iB, 'I. 1 h 1334 it 4466 4c K( ( I 1�'1 R' n I (o-N—'lroT(E• h {ER \.-y! Jj,� Ial — • m 2. U•. 11 LL -.* I.i99fl l l I! S, -_F.-_. .n A IB4D SURVEY '%SY . Er 8- girl �ti-- ! Sl I4B I :,C 1 7C I: :` P I . 2E6 3161 C - 4i I.4,A IBin :7 1 g'L __ . Mob 1 ,E 43mAi E7A --i IS— IAI 'K:-.11Zij 4Nlll'i. QvOM.S®NI L. 30Ac .,%,/ SUfjvEY AR•T 41.453 Ar, 7 J 26 I fd •_ e`-....:-::-7. SU•vEr AB N. 591 — L , 2 I OO. / , ��$��,. )7 c r Q rI• :e .. ., , `/ 1716 AC 6 Q MAP .. TOPOGRAPHY . IL ..„ 3. a L C . l 7D �p E4 .4 �e US / s.. �� - fV.. TING F ,, �• I I/• C•'PORATE I1 72 Ac 4 �� C]A11 ' • l O ( 7) 65 - 1023 ,� ` shall extend for no longer than a five-year period. f B. Other Downstream Improvements: The developer of any tract -,/ of land within a watershed serviced by a critical structure �``' as outlined in the City Conceptual Drainage Plan shall participate in the cost of improving that structure on a percentage formula having a per-acre of watershed coefficient and a land use coeffic- ient as follows. 1. Within the watershed serviced by said critical structure, areas shall be delineated showing the more intense land use of the existing zoning or the proposed land use plan. 2. The "CA" shall be determined for the entire watershed as a whole to the point of design for. the critical structure. 3. The "CA" factor shall be determined for the subject tract. 4. The "CA" factor, for the subject tract shall be taken as a percentage of the "CA" factor for the entire watershed. This shall be the percentage responsibility of the subject tract. 5. This percentage shall then be multiplied with the cost of the critical structure to obtain the dollar amount of contribution required by the subject tract. Section 6.07 Construction of Off-Site Improvements A. Remaining capacity in critical structure: When the critical structure being impacted by the proposed development still has capacity to handle the increase in runoff created by the development, the developer shall not be responsible for the construction improvements to the structure or replacement thereof. The developer will be responsible for satisfying the monetary obligation for participation as outlined in the previous section. B. No capacity remaining: Should the proposed development create runoff which exceeds the capacity of the critical structure, it shall be the responsibility of the developer to construct the ultimate improvements needed to said structure. 1. ' Prior Contributions: The City shall be responsible for transferring all funds from previous developments contri- bution to the specific structure to the developer who must construct said improvements. 2. Future Refunding: The City shall be responsible for procur- ing additional participatory funds from other developers within said watershed and transferring these funds to the developer responsible for constructing the improvements. This shall only extend for a period of five years from the 6-3 4 City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM November 10, 1992 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Karen P. Gandy, Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: Masonry Variance Request/MEMO Industrial Planning 1950 E. Continental Blvd. MEMO Industrial Planning, Inc. has requested a variance to the Masonry Ordinance NO. 557 requiring that "all exterior walls fronting a public right-of-way shall be constructed using a masonry material, covering at least eighty percent (80%) of said walls, exclusive of all windows, doors, roofs, glass construction materials, or sidewalk and walkway covers . " Their request pertains ,to the proposed 15, 000 sq. ft. storage building located in the Northeast corner of the site. The proposed 19 ,000 sq. ft. office/warehouse will meet the above stated requirement. Attached is a copy of the concept plan approved by the City Council on November 3, 1992 . Please place this request on the City Council ' s agenda for November 17 , 1992 . Should the Council approve this request, a minute order will be the only documentation necessary to note their approval . KPG D I 7 1 D I D 1 • 1 3 1_ 2 1 - _ 1 _.._ LOT A IV I-1 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONING OO V N L.U.D.••INDUSTRIAL 2 Y i LTD A LDT I C •�. ,z C cli i F i I-I LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONING yy Fs}Af E"'Mu'RE!m. _ IDI I J l 4 A L.U.D.•INDUSTRIAL 51.I..D.1. I-I LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONING kit fl 2 a II A L.U.D.-INDUSTRIAL 1 D i t 1-1 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONING ' % I D • I.U.D.-HOUSTRIAL • N 11 I.-. 1 Isg L_ III P000 P KIN..!. Rr Len L A ^ IS'U LAMENT �i UMW 5 OU 14'00" E 955429' NNW.A I'., o i (IiI[ O o 1 p O IJ U sJ 7 ) u u 0 u1».n.0 u 0 n �,) n NM.NnIRa.0 r ppa.Oa. a A [ 6----Dfill r - - a go i 3 :! - U X+-«-1'ullt KM[MORNS �,� mNn..nv nnla C (7 - ••• • Nnl min.MA IF i o C I-1 LID.T LDVSRILL[ullxp p '�nn 1 CC ' ' C L•U.I. IIwfIR1AL LL V 6.65 ACRES iv Malt wne� ....'�...,....-\ . . - i to ll d Z o �A,Dp jI�,Y Ii1�11p v ^' 81 ] =P pi ll.'Er :____ ,-Li4O tNix�Y�t[�ICli4TFB��IJ4iDtxe. o - TIMBERLINE COURT W Za - 1 `+ 9 aN Y U (2,- V3 T4....M.M.x... I ✓fllb.t'N531 .M.,-m �� r� ti - in J Q C __ IM.a..,. 1 Manx.,�.. if' <_ Q Cr I I -0' to ga ew_s Ig Lc- Q • t 1 I— I "i— itc 1 b 1 1 1— e— • ifa} .- 'I z 0 [ 0. O (•) ll lJ 0 CLVT.rs•l}� V u� f U_S) (") U (1 j (• "( I • ' ..i 3 L J Q T: LL s•u," "uWAANI N 00'I6'O0'8 953.25' 7— MN.I1.2. a J 2 E-1 Z LLI G 4! a a 1-1 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONING - .L•�- v EE W aILIGHiT�I:DU5TR L AM .I+aA.a...,.. 1. 1I Z c I . a.1+1. aA Men NA. ® o e N L E .o.. to Al [ ■ I-1 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONING AA` r1' III MIDI._ [ ...DI® LRCATION NAP Of SO iHLAKE. TE%AS I.N.D.N INDUSTRIAL ..alu Aa CONCEPT PLAN NORTH\= cl aao. ..+ xolrx� VICINITY NAP C1 A • 8 I T I 5 I 5 I • I 3 I 2 I I City of Southlake,Texas •! MEMORANDUM November 10, 1992 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, city Manager FROM: Karen P. Gandy, Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: ZA 92-54 Final Plat REQUESTED ACTION: Final Plat of Timarron, Phase 2, being a total of 58.594 acres and being developed in two sections. Section 1 is 16.812 acres situated in the Hiram Grandberry Survey, Abstract No. 581 and the O.W. Knight Survey, Abstract 899 and also being a replat of Lots 1R and 2R of The Glory Place Addition. Section 2 is 41.782 acres situated in the Hall Medlin Survey, Abstract No. 1037 and the Hall Medlin Survey, Abstract No. 1038. Section 1 will be marketed as The Highlands and will have thirty-two (32) residential lots and one (1) common green; Section 2 will be marketed as Bent Creek and will have fifty-five (55) residential lots and three (3) common greens. LOCATION: The Highlands is North of E. Continental Blvd. and Bent Creek is South of E. Continental Blvd. OWNER/APPLICANT: Timarron Land Corporation, Inc. CURRENT ZONING: "R-P.U.D. ," Residential Planned Unit Development NO. NOTICES SENT: None required P & Z ACTION: November 5, 1992; Approved (7-0) subject to the Plat Review Summary dated November 5, 1992, and recommending the following changes: P & Z Recommendation: (Delete) 10. "Lot 1, Block 1 and Lot 51, Block 2 are reverse frontage lots. The ordinance requires a side setback equal to the adjacent front setback." P & Z Recommendation: (Change "should" to "will") 18. "Lot lines should not have deflections." P & Z Recommendation: (Developer to work with Staff on Block 7, Lot 22) 20. "Although there are several lots which do not exactly meet the requirements for radial or perpendicular lot lines, we, feel the lotting generally meets the intentions of this requirement with the exception of Lots 1 and 4, Block 5, and Lot 22, Block 7. These should be revised." Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager ZA 92-54, Timarron Final Plat, Ph. 2 f November 10, 1992 Page Two P & Z Recommendation: (Delete) 23. "Lot 26, Block 7 is a reverse frontage lot. The ordinance requires a side setback equal to the adjacent front setback." STAFF COMMENTS: Attached please find the Second Plat Review Summary dated November 12, 1992. KPG • g�- 2 City of Southlake,Texas PLAT REVIEW SUMMARY CASE NO: ZA 92-54 REVIEW NO: TWO DATE OF REVIEW: 11/12/92 PROJECT NAME: Final Plat - Timarron - Phase 2, Sections 1 & 2 OWNER/APPLICANT: ENG/SURVEYOR: Timarron Land Corporation Carter & Burgess, Inc. 300 E . Carpenter Freeway 7950 Elmbrook Drive Suite 1425 Suite 250 Irving, Texas 75062 Dallas, Texas 75247 Phone: (214 ) 791-3333 Phone: (214) 638-0145 Fax: (214 ) 541-0800 Fax: (214 ) 638-0447 CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 11/9/92 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 GREG LAST AT ( 817) 481-5581, EXT. 744 . GENERAL 1 . Provide a summary for phase two showing total lots and percentage of total lots for setbacks less than 35 ' and lot widths less than 85 feet. This will be required for all phases throughout the development of the P.U.D. where development regulations require an analysis . (See attached example. ) • I SECTION 1 1 . Add the note required in 3 . 06-C to the owner' s dedication. 2 . Provide minimum finish floor elevations on Lots 37, 38, 39 , 44, 45, 47 , 48, 50 and 52 of Block 2 . 3 . Lot 1, Block 1 and Lot 51, Block 2 are reverse frontage lots . The ordinance requires a side setback equal to the adjacent front setback. (25 ' B.L. shown as recommended by P & Z . ) SECTION 2 1 . Label easements in Lots 5 and 12, Block 5 of Phase I . 2 . The subdivision name, plat record volume and page and the lot lines, lot and block numbers, and existing easements within 200 ' need to be shown on the property to the west (Monticello) and south (in Colleyville. ) k-3 City of Southlake,Texas 3. Add the note required in 3 . 06-C to the owner's dedication. 4 . Lot 26, Block 7 is a reverse frontage lot. The ordinance requires a side setback equal to the adjacent front setback. ( 25 ' B.L. shown as recommended by P & Z . ) 5 . Minimum finish floor elevations should be provided on Lots 19-25, Block 5; 41 and 42 , Block 9 . 6 . Dimension offsets and deflections in easements on Lot 21 & 22, Block 5 and Lot 41, Block 9 . * Although there are a few lots which do not exactly meet the requirements for radial or perpendicular lot lines, we feel the lotting generally meets the intentions of this requirement. * We recommend this plat not be filed until the construction plans have been substantially approved. This will ensure adequate easements and finish floor elevations . * The Developer' s Agreement for this addition should consider perimeter street and drainage, and park dedication requirements . * Original signatures will be required on both blackline mylars prior to filing the plat. Also required are two sets of owner' s dedications and notaries with original signatures on 8.5" x 11" or 14" paper. * Denotes Informational Comment enc: Example summary of Development Regulation Analysis cc: Timarron Land Corporation Carter & Burgess, Inc. gc-Li DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS SUMMARY Number of Lots Number of Lots Total Number of with Front Yards with a Lot Width Project Phase Lots Between 25' and Between 50' and 35' 85' Phase 1, Section 1 66 25 10 Phase 1, Section.2 92' 51 4 Phase 2, Section 1 32 24 1 Phase 2, Section 2 55 18 4 Total to Date 245 118 19 Percent of Total 100% 48% 8% * Number of lots does not include the 3 lots replotted in Phase 2, Section 2. gc-s • .a ! ` 'I FINAL PLAT � — ~--� ' . ._. I>' ` `/ �TIMARRON x _ PHASE 2, SECTION 1 - , ' ' r-— .44.74,- %.) 4._ . I; .i\e: 77; _Amp_.. .,,,,.. . ,,..m THE HIGHLANDS s 7Aliiii 71,,,, 1:.,..:.........,7,....,...:.:;::::4..„,...:,,,: t MIN .---1-----1:: EI,ti1 7( ;�_ -.) -t lin& '2 ;l2. •‘;`. ,?.! V'''-'*.:17r1,:: la I Ili ,;:Eck aj 1� � W. Con-l-inenta Cilvd. / e'' -- -- ►---- 'I t'. d III1 N. gh t...-� _ _ i.\ t ,4 t. t......4.1,„4, _ ,_,..___;J!1: -.-pitztp, -., jor ii ,,. ....__IF:!_i_=,...._i. 11:1 :• il ,„c,:_ ..t,, . .. .,,,, _ 1 : . •trilli, ,... 0_,..„.._.;...„,r,____L,„ 1, i: ahlrj, ..„„..,..„ . ; , ..,., ...,....‘„• ,, I . ii 4.4.. 01 in, TIMARRON r t d 1 - _ .- la �=t •11.1-.. PHASE ,2, SECTION 2 ,, lire, 1 11 , .; o'er. - Ts p. -, nu J 0014--01 7..,'•_1 •t•Flia,ItMft 1 BENT CREEK I; - rY: °,; ' '1 I �+h itotortoih, _:{.�4_ '� tl\ �1 LI_j I - -:= ::‘ Ilr LL-,--,:::‘,/ ..;,?., , ----_,---7--_-__ .:._ . 1/, r- .ivol - "/ .2,,.- ,. ..,, 74.,,,, -L. • . .. -- -,..-. filk /' �.• \ ` ti, i1J r :s\\. 1 Y �,.:_ -- --, -,. v.. •••.,, - , 11.7p.# , 'les. .0.- ......__:_. „-...., .-4.. 4.. . __s_ -: Ak, --: / %. 101)0 % L k s+ a i1 4 1 a City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM November 10, 1992 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Karen P. Gandy, Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 577 / Overnight Camping Attached please find the proposed Camping Ordinance prepared by the City Attorney' s office per Council ' s discussions at their October 6, 1992 meeting. This ordinance defines "camping" and "recreational vehicles" and makes it unlawful for any person to camp on any public or private property unless the property is properly designated as a recreational campsite or campground. It also makes it unlawful for any person to occupy a recreational vehicle for living quarters or office space except as permitted in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. An amendment to the zoning ordinance will be necessary to eliminate the language currently prohibiting the use of any recreational vehicle for "living, sleeping or housekeeping purposes when parked or stored on a residential or agricultural lot, nor in any location not approved for such use. " {Section 35 . 9 (c) } . The Council has previously received a draft copy of an ordinance amending the above stated section of the zoning ordinance and establishing a specific use permit for a recreational campsite or campground permitted in the "AG" district. This proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance will appear on the Planning and Zoning Commission' s agenda December 3, 1992 for their recommendation and review. During discussion of these ordinances, attention should be given to the specific language in the camping ordinance to prevent any conflict with the camping privileges at Bicentennial Park proposed in the Park Use Policy, also under consideration on the November 17, 1992 agenda. Please place the First Reading of the Overnight Camping Ordinance No. 577 on the City Council agenda for November 17, 1992 . KPG • ORDINANCE NO.677 AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING OVERNIGHT CAMPING IN THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE; 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 Southiake, Texas is a home rule city acting under its charte adopte y e e ectora e -sxan to Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constit 'e • nd 1 Chapter 9 of the Local Government Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southiake has determined that unregulated overnight camping within the corporate limits of the City imposes a safety burden on the City, constitutes a health hazard, adversely affects the aesthetics of the City and constitutes a nuisance to residences and businesses operating in the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council therefore deems it necessary to adopt this ordinance regulating camping within the City as provided herein. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: SECTION 1 The following words and phrases shall have the definitions ascribed to them below: 1. "Camping" shall mean the use by persons of public or private property for the specific purpose of setting-up and maintaining temporary living quarters or shelters, either by use of camping gear (such as tents, portable grills, sleeping bags, cots. lanterns. etc.) or by the parking of recreational vehicles. 2. "City" shall mean the City of Southlake. slakell\camping.ord Page 1 3. "Recreational vehicles" shall include, but are not limited to, travel trailers, vans, campers on pickups and trucks, trailers, buses, motor homes or other vehicles commonly used for camping purposes. SECTION 2 It shall be unlawful for any person to camp on any public or private property within the corporate limits of the City unless such property is properly designated as a recreational campsite or campground in an appropriate zoning district of the City or unless otherwise permitted in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. SECTION 3 It shall be unlawful for any person to occupy a recreational vehicle in the City for the purpose of utilizing same as office space. The connection of any utilities to a recreational vehicle shall constitute prima facie evidence that said recreational vehicle is being utilized as living quarters or office space. SECTION 4 Any camp or recreational vehicle maintained or used in violation of this ordinance, is hereby declared to be a nuisance and may be abated by the City. In addition to the criminal penalties provided in this ordinance, the City may pursue civil enforcement remedies against any nuisance defined herein. SECTION 5 This ordinance shall be cumulative of all provisions of ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, except where the provisions of this ordinance are in direct conflict with the provisions of such ordinances, in which event the conflicting provisions of such ordinances are hereby repealed. slakctt\camping.ord Page 2 ��C- 3 SECTION 6 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 he 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 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 Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) 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 any other ordinances affecting health and/or safety 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 slakcl[\camping.ord Page 3 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. 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 FIRST READING ON THIS DAY OF , 1992. - MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY PASSED AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING ON THIS DAY OF , 1992. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY slaketl\camping.ord Page 4 1 • APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney Date: ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE: • slakelI\camping.ord Page 5 ORDINANCE NO. 480-I AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 480, AS AMENDED, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, BY REGULATING CAMPING AND PARKING OF MAJOR RECREATIONAL VEHICLES; 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. 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 of Southlake has heretofore adopted Ordinance No. 480, as amended, as the Zoning Ordinance for the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake now deems it necessary to amend Ordinance No. 480, as amended, to specifically regulate camping and the parking of major recreational vehicles within the City of Southlake; and WHEREAS, -the City Council has given published notice and held public hearings with respect to the amendment of the Zoning Ordinance as required by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS: SECTION 1 That Section 35.9 of Ordinance No. 480, as amended, is hereby amended by revising Paragraph c thereof to read as follows: slakclt\camping.ord Page 1 � w "c. Except as provided below, no such equipment shall be used for living, sleeping or housekeeping purposes when parked or stored on a residential or agricultural lot, nor in any location not approved for such use. Notwithstanding the above, major recreational equipment meeting the above parking requirements may be occupied by out of town guests for living, sleeping or housekeeping purposes no more than twice in any calendar year with the duration of each visit being limited to two weeks. SECTION 2 That Section 45.1 of Ordinance No. 480, as amended, is hereby amended by adding the following specific use thereto: SPECIFIC USE DISTRICT WHERE PERMITTED "36. Recreational campsite or campground AG SECTION 3 This ordinance shall be cumulative of all provisions of ordinances of the City of Southlake. Texas, except where the provisions of this ordinance are in direct conflict with the provisions of such ordinances, in which event the conflicting provisions of such ordinances are hereby repealed. SECTION 4 It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the phrases. clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance are severable, and if any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section of this ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional by the valid judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences. paragraphs and sections of this ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by the City Council without the incorporation in this ordinance of any such unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section. slakell\campingl.ord Page 2 v L-8 SECTION 5 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 6 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 camping or the parking of recreational vehicles 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 7 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 8 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) clays 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 of Secretary shall slake[\campingl.ord Page 3 M additionally publish this ordinance in the official City newspaper one time within ten days after passage of this ordinance, as required by Section 2.13 of the Charter of the City of Southlake. SECTION 9 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 FIRST READING ON THIS DAY OF , 1992. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY PASSED AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING ON THIS DAY OF , 1992. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY slake[[\campingl.ord Page 4 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney Date: ADOPTED: • EFFECTIVE: slakelI\campingl.ord Page 5 � 1G1_U 11VU 7 DI'1 I51tL l I I ILL Ol f —JOV—' J 1`IU V 11 1 7L lU of IYU .UIV r .uz ram" FIELDING, BARRETF & TAYL.OR CARYAN E.ADIUNs ATTORNEYS SUSAN H.HkLWWAY Ro13I ICT M.Au RON 8851 HIGHWAY 80 WEST,sU1'ils 300 Sum;S.Jos • DANI[iI.R.HARRtin* FORT WORM'.TriXAS 76116 WAYN1!K.OLsox &.T/.AB8nI ELAM T I.E1'11oNE(817)560-0303 '1lN G.Skim.*** DAV]u Fiu.DING J.MANIC SUDDER711 JosErtimauGAMR[irr FAX(A17)Sti03953 E.ALLENTAYE.OR.IL E.GLIiNN OID . Imam P.WAarlt it DWAYNH D.Hrrr WENDY R.WA.SON *BOARD ClRTJI I U YH]ISUNAi.IN1 iR 'IRIAI.1,AW— OP COUN.i3I, TFxAS BOARD OP LOOM,SPECIALVATION ANAI.Enas MLIN+LY CJVII.TRiA[.QV-MUST— NATIONAL BOARD OF'DUAL ADVOCACY "BOARD CERTIFIED C[VR.APP6L[ATELAW- 71OCAR BOARD OF[MAL SPtiCIALV.AT ON November 11, 1992 Mr. Curtis Hawk City Manager City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Ave. Southlake, Texas. 76092 Dear Curtis: Attached is the latest redl ined draft of the Lone Star Gas Franchise Ordinance. You will note the following changes: (1) Section_.1. I have no problem with Lone Star's suggested changes. (2) Section 2. I have no problem with Lone Star's suggested changes. (3) Section 3. No changes. (4) Section 4. I eliminated the redundant indemnification language. (5) section 5. The language in my first draft is exactly as approved by Lone Star for the City of Burleson. However, I have no problem with most of Lone Star's requested changes. In the first paragraph, I eliminated the last four lines as they requested; however, Lone Star wants to eliminate the phrase in the first sentence [[without claim for reimbursement or damages against City". Although it is not a deal breaker, I would prefer to see this language included in this provision. In the second paragraph of Section 5, we can eliminate (3) as Lone Star requests, but I would like to note that this provision. was placed in Burleson's ordinance at Lone Starts request. (6) Section 6. This is the indemnification clause. I have changed it slightly to be more comprehensive and include language that was previously in Section 4 . r 1GL1J 11YV s I LA V 11 JVV tlJJ+1 IYU V 11 7 JL iV`Jf 1YU V£ r V7 Mr. Curtis Hawk November 11, 1992 Page 2 (7) Section 7 . No changes. (8) Section 8. I have changed the language as Lone Star requested. Again, this language was included in Burleson's ordinance at Lone Starts request. (9) ,section 9. No changes. (10) Section 10. At issue is the following language: "provided, however, City shall not grant more favorable conditions, including franchise fee, to any other gas utility franchisee than are herein granted to company. " In Burleson, Lone Star did not object to the omission of this language. However, it appears that Lone Star has been advised to insist on the inclusion of this provision. First let me point out that this provision seems silly because I do not think there are any other providers of natural gas in this area. But given that, I do not think we should include this provision because, by doing so we are binding the governmental powers of future councils, and I do not think it is proper. (11) Section 11. No changes. (12) Section 12. The date has been changed to reflect the proper termination date. (13) Section 11. No changes. (14) jection 14. In this section, Lone Star requested that we clarify whether or not the contract would be terminated if they fail to pay money. I corrected this by eliminating the phrase "other than the payment of money" from Section 14. There are no changes in the remaining portions of the Ordinance. Please call if you have any questions. It is my understanding that you will call me after you have spoken with Vernie Henderson. Sincerely, Bets 4144101 BE/cf Enclosure fs/bhare/esrihaWkO1.ltr U e- ti 114L ORDINANCE NO. 511 v ~� AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A FRANCHISE TO LONE STAR GAS COMPANY, A DIVISION OF ENSERCH CORPORATION, IT SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, TO FURNISH AND SUPPLY NATURAL GAS TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC IN THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS, FOR THE TRANSPORTING, DELIVERY, SALE, AND DISTRIBUTION OF NATURAL GAS IN, OUT OF, AND THROUGH SAID MUNICIPALITY; PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF A FEE OR CHARGE FOR THE USE OF THE STREETS, ALLEYS AND PUBLIC WAYS; REPEALING ALL PREVIOUS NATURAL GAS FRANCHISE ORDINANCES; PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE CUMULATIVE OF ALL ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. • •EREAS, the City of Southlake is a home rule city acting under its charter adopted by the electorate pursuant to Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter 9 of the Local Government Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake desires to enter into a franchise agreement with Lone Star Gas Company for the furnishing and supplying of natural gas to the general public. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF Southlake, TEXAS: SECTION 1 That the City of Southlake, Texas (hereinafter referred to as "City' ) hereby grants to Lone Star Gas Company, a Division of ENSERCH CORPORATION (hereinafter referred to as "Company") , its successors and assigns, consent to use and occupy the present and future streets, alleys, highways, public easements and public ' ::::;::;:for thoroughfares,.::i��t� ```:� ads' flf' C�'�:.::::::. the purpose of laying maintaining, constructing, using, operating, and replacing thereon pipelines and all other appurtenant equipment needed and necessary to deliver gas in, out of, and through said City and to sell gas f:\apps\wp50\share\csr\lonestar.ord 5&- 3 to persons, firms, and corporations, including all the general public, within the City corporate limits, and consent being granted. for a term of twenty (20) years from and after the effective date of this ordinance. SECTION 2 an::»em`'rjenc::;;?°�>:: om pan,:;<:>shal <; ::rova de: :v::::::.�: :: : : : :•::::::}:;:{:.;::...iY.iJiiii : iii:.iiiiiiiii[:•v:•i:4:::4:•J•iiiii:iiiii :•i:•iiiii•: ?:CiiiiiY'iiiiii:?<•i:?J:?:<iL!✓.•::? :iAii:iiii::...iY.Yryiiiiiiii.i:i:•i:•iiii:^:: :?::h:i:.: :> e>:::doneiiiiN thein::>Cit:.:::::>::street:s:::> advance:::>no�:a�ce:<::to::<::��,;t:. :::��r:>ar3:.::<::wpm'.�s:>:::to..:�. ............................................................ .......................:........... The location of all mains, pipes, laterals, and other appurtenant equipment toCbe<> ocated1n;theP.i:.ibliil:c> rWht o ay shall be fixed xed under the supervision of the City or an authorized committee or agent appointed by said City. Before Company extends or replaces iyi}}}Y;:;i:r i:ti}:�y::L•: :�iiiii:;i:•i:;{:; its existingmains n`:<sthe`:'{<public r . ht-of:-wa:.:::s it will file with the City a written work description including sketched drawings, showing the pipe material type, location, estimated depth and size of lines and the estimated date and time of all construction • .................................. .................................. ................................. activity. Construction plans shall be reviewed by appropriate City staff and returned with any comments within ten (10) working days. Company shall not commence work until plans are approved by the City or t il :t.::h.::e»p:::..ars:: :hav:.::.:.e �e'..:nio..:r t:."..'i1."..e:..i:Wi...t:..:h"..i.i.it:'..he..:i:> C::....:i...i:tyif.....:o....r...:.>more... than >1G 'orr nig<<days For emergency repairs, the City shall be notified within a reasonable time. SECTION 3 Company shall lay, maintain, construct, operate, and replace its pipes, mains, laterals, and other equipment so as to interfere as little as possible with traffic and shall promptly clean up and restore to its approximate original condition, at its cost, all thoroughfares and other surfaces which it may disturb. All f:\apps\wp50\share\csr\lonestar.ord construction work shall meet federal, state, and City rules and regulations in existence at the time any work is undertaken, and Company shall warrant their repairs and restoration of any streets, thoroughfares or alleys. SECTION 4 When Company shall make or cause to be made excavations or shall place obstruction in any street, alley, or other public place, the public shall be protected by barriers, lights, and signs, which shall be placed, erected, and maintained by Company. All construction and maintenance signs and barricades at work sites shall be consistent with the standards and provisions of the Texas Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. In the event of injury of Company, Company shall indemnify and held harmless City, its officers, agents, servants, and qmpleyees, from any and all liability in connection herewith. SECTION 5 Company shall at its own cost and expense, without claim for reimbursement or damages against the City, when requested by the City, lower, relocate, or relay existing gas mains or street service lines located in City right-of-way where necessary due to any street construction or reconstruction by or on behalf of the City. lines. Covered City utility lines ine3ude, but arc not limited to, water, sanitary scwor, storm drains, street lights, and traffic sg -carts. f:\apps\wp50\share\csr\lonestar.ord When Company is required to relocate its mains, laterals, and other facilities to accommodate construction, and: (1) the relocation is the result of a construction or improvement to the Federal-Aid System (or any successor thereto) ; and (2) Company is eligible for reimbursement for its costs and expenses incurred as a result of such construction and improvement from the Federal Government or the State of Texas, as permitted by law pursuant to any reimbursement program; and rcimburscd for relocation cxpcn3e3; and (3) City requests reimbursement for costs and expenses incurred as a result of such construction or improvement; then Company's costs and expenses shall be included within any such application for reimbursement, provided that Company submits the appropriate documentation to the City prior to such application. City shall make a reasonable effort to provide sufficient notice to Company to allow the submittal of appropriate cost information to the City. SECTION 6 Company shall indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the City, its officers, agents, servants, and employees, at Company's own expense from and against any and all property loss or damage and/or personal injury, including death, in connection with the user and _ vi'i?i:1?$iii}i:iiY:i:.Y;'^iii: •}ii}.:.iiii:L•.i::tiiii operation, :t`s ion, mamnt nance: < existence or location of its gas distributing pIantor system. f:\apps\wp50\share\csr\lonestar.ord SECTION 7 In addition to the rates charged for gas supplied, Company may make and enforce reasonable charges, rules, and regulations for service rendered in the conduct of its business including a charge for services rendered in the inauguration of natural gas service, and may require, before furnishing service, the execution of a contract therefor. Company shall have the right to contract with each customer with reference to the installation of., and payment for, any and all of the gas piping from the connection thereof with the Company's main in the streets or alleys to and throughout the Customer's premises. Company shall own, operate, and maintain all service lines, which are defined as the supply lines extending from the Company's main to the Customer's meter where gas is measured by Company. The Customer shall own, operate, and maintain all yard lines and house piping. Yard lines are defined as the underground supply lines extending from the point of connection with Company's customer meter to the point of connection with Customer's house piping. SECTION 8 Company shall not be required to extend mains on any street more than one hundred (100) feet for any one Customer of gas; provided that no extension :of a will be required if the customer will 'fiatuse 1c3a gas than normally ncedcd for space heating and water heating, or the equivalent ....c........r.... a............a...... m....n...........m'.......m.:. ...................................................................... lines. f:\apps\wp50\share\csr\lonestar.ord SECTION 9 Company shall be entitled to require from each and every Customer of gas, before gas service is commenced, a deposit in an amount calculated pursuant to the Company' s Quality of Service Rules as may be in effect during the term of this franchise. Said deposit shall be retained and refunded in accordance with such Quality of Service Rules and shall bear interest, as provided in Tex.Rev.Civ.Stat.Ann. Article 1440a (Vernon Supp. 1989) as it may be amended from time to time. Company shall be entitled to apply said deposit, with accrued interest, to any indebtedness owed Company by the Customer making the deposit. SECTION 10 The rights, privileges, and franchises granted by this ordinance are not to be considered exclusive, and City hereby expressly reserves the right to grant, at any time, like privileges, rights, and franchises as it may see fit to any other person, firm, or corporation for the purpose of furnishing gas for light, heat, and power to and for City and the inhabitants thereof. SECTION 11 Company shall furnish reasonable and adequate services to the public at reasonable rates and charges therefor; and Company shall maintain its property, equipment, and appliances in good and safe order and condition. Company' s property and operations in the City shall be subject to such regulation by the City as may be reasonably necessary for the protection of the general public. f:\apps\wp50\share\csr\lonestar.ord SECTION 12 Company, its successors and assigns, agrees to pay and City agrees to accept, on or before the 1st day of June, 1993 , and on or before the same day of each succeeding year during the life of this franchise, the last payment being made on the 1st day of June, 2012, a sum of money which shall be equivalent to four percent (4%) .............. of the gross receipts received by Company from the sale of gas to its residential and commercial customers within the corporate limits of said City (expressly excluding governmental accounts and receipts derived from sales to all other classes of customers in said City) during the preceding calendar year, which annual payment shall be for the rights and privileges herein granted to Company, including expressly, without limitation, the right to use the streets, alleys, highways, and public ways of said City. The initial payment for the rights and privileges herein provided shall be for the period January 1 through December 31, 1993 , and each succeeding payment shall be for the period January 1 through December 31 of the respective year in which the payment is made. And it is also expressly agreed that the aforesaid annual payment shall be in lieu of any and all other and additional occupation taxes, easement, and franchise taxes or charges (whether levied as an ad valorem, special, or other character of tax or charge) , in lieu of municipal license and inspection fees, street taxes, and street or alley rentals or charges, and all other and additional municipal taxes, charges, levies, fees, and rentals of whatsoever kind and character which City may now impose or hereafter levy and collect, excepting only the usual general or special ad valorem f:\apps\wp50\share\csr\lonestar.ord taxes which City is authorized to levy and impose upon real and personal property. Should City not have the legal power to agree that the payment of the foregoing sums of money shall be in lieu of taxes, licenses, fees, street or alley rental or charges, easement or franchise taxes or charges aforesaid, then City agrees that it will apply so much of said sums of money paid as may be necessary to satisfy Company' s obligations, if any, to pay any such taxes, licenses, charges, fees, rentals, easement or franchise taxes or charges. In order to determine the gross receipts received by Company from the sale of gas to residential and commercial customers within the corporate limits of City, Company agrees that on the same date that payments are made, as provided in the preceding paragraph of this Section 12, it will file with the City Secretary Clcrk a sworn report showing the gross receipts received from the sale of gas to its residential and commercial customers within said corporate limits during the calendar year preceding the date of payment. City may, if it sees fit, have the books and records of Company examined by a representative of said City to ascertain the correctness of the sworn reports agreed to be filed herein. SECTION 13 Company shall not give unreasonable preference or advantage as to the rates of services to anyone with a service classification, nor discriminate against anyone on account of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. f:\appa\wp50\share\csr\loneetar.ord SECTION 14 The City Council shall have the option to declare this ordinance terminated at any time for failure of the Company to comply with any term, condition or provision of this ordinance, in accordance with the following procedures: (a) If the Company continues to violate or fails to comply with the terms and provisions of this ordinance for a period of thirty (30) days after the Company shall have been notified in writing by the City to cure such specific alleged violation or failure to comply, then the City may pursue the procedures set forth below to declare that the Company has terminated all rights and privileges consented to in this ordinance; provided, however, that if the Company is alleged to be in violation of any provision of this ordinance other than the payment of money and if the Company commences efforts to cure such alleged violation(s) within thirty (30) days after receipt of written notice and shall thereafter prosecute such curative efforts with reasonable diligence until such curative efforts are completed, then such alleged violation(s) shall cease to exist and this ordinance shall not be declared to be terminated. (b) Any such termination shall be declared only by a written decision of the City Council after an appropriate public proceeding before the City Council, which shall accord Company due process and full opportunity to be heard and to respond to any such notice of alleged violation or failure to comply. All notice requirements shall be met by providing the Company at least an additional fifteen (15) days prior written notice of any public hearing f:\apps\wp50\share\csr\lonestar.ord concerning the proposed termination of this ordinance. In addition, fifteen (15) days notice by publication shall be given of the date, time and place of any public hearing to interested members of the public. (c) The City Council, after full public hearing and upon finding a violation or failure to comply may either declare this ordinance terminated or excuse the violation or failure to comply upon a showing by the Company of mitigating circumstances of good cause for said violation or failure to comply. (d) Neither the Company's acceptance of this ordinance, Company's appearance before the City Council at any public hearing concerning proposed termination of this ordinance nor any action taken by the City Council as a result of any such public hearing, including a declaration of termination or a finding of a violation or failure to comply, shall be construed to waive or otherwise affect the Company's right to seek a judicial determination of the rights and responsibilities of the parties under this ordinance. (e) The Company shall not be excused from complying with any of the terms and condition of this ordinance by the previous failure of the City to insist upon or to seek compliance with such terms. SECTION 15 When this franchise ordinance shall have become effective, all previous ordinances of said City granting franchises for gas distribution purposes which were held by Company shall be automatically cancelled and annulled, and shall be of no further force and effect. f:\apps\wp50\share\csr\lonestar.ord SECTION 16 This ordinance shall be cumulative of all provisions of ordinances and of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Southlake, Texas, as amended, except where the provisions of this ordinance are in direct conflict with the provisions of such ordinances and such Code, in which event the conflicting provisions of such ordinances and such Code are hereby repealed. SECTION 17 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 18 All rights and remedies of the City of Southlake are expressly saved as to any and all violations of the provisions of any ordinances affecting natural gas franchises 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, f:\apps\wp50\share\csr\lonestar.ord same shall not be affected by this ordinance but may be prosecuted ' until final disposition by the courts. SECTION 19 In order to accept this franchise, Company must file its written acceptance of this franchise ordinance within sixty (60) days after its final passage and approval by said City. If this franchise ordinance is not accepted by Company within sixty (60) days, the franchise ordinance shall be rendered null and void. SECTION 20 This ordinance shall become effective on December 5, 1992 , provided that prior to December 5, 1992 , Company' s written acceptance is filed with the City. If Company' s written acceptance is filed with City after December 5, 1992 , this ordinance shall become effective on the date Company' s written acceptance is filed with the City. PASSED AND APPROVED ON THE 1ST READING THE DAY OF , 1992. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY f:\apps\wp50\share\csr\lonestar.ord PASSED AND APPROVED ON THE 2ND READING THE DAY OF , 1992 . MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney Date: ADOPTED: EFFECTIVE: f:\apps\wp50\share\csr\loneetar.ord City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM November 11, 1992 . TO: HONORABLE MAYOR FICKES AND COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: Sandra L. LeGrand SUBJECT: Resolution No. 92-50, Appointment as Alternate Municipal Court Judge P Resolution No. 92-50 allows for the appointment of Relief/Alternate Municipal Court Judge. Carmen Blankenship currently serves in that position. Her appointment was made by resolution in 1989 for a two year term. When Southlake became a Court of Record, the reappointment was never made. Curtis Hawk suggested Council talk with Judge Brad Bradley in regard to this appointment. /sl i - • 9a- / - `• City of Southlake, exas RESOLUTION NO.92-50 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, APPOINTING A RELIEF MUNICIPAL JUDGE; SETTING COMPENSATION AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 30.487 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE; AS DETERMINED IN CITY OF SOUTHLAKE ORDINANCE NO. 522; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. EREA : • nance o. - • the City of Southlake, establishes the Municipal Court in Southlake as a Municipal Court of Record; and, WHEREAS, in an Election held in the City of Southlake, Texas, on January 19, 1991, it was determined that the Municipal Court Judge shall be elected by the voters of Southlake, with a two year term of office; and, WHEREAS, in Ordinance No. 522 , Section 5, states a municipal judge in the Southlake Court of Record must be a licensed attorney in good standing and must reside within the City of Southlake or a contiguous city. A person may not serve as a municipal judge while that person holds other office or employment with the City government; and, WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 522, Section 5, also states the City Council may appoint persons as' relief municipal judges and set their compensation as set forth in Section 30 .487 of the Government Code; now, THEREFORE, IT BE RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, THAT: Section 1 . The findings in the preamble are found to be true and correct and the City Council does hereby incorporate said findings into the body of this resolution as if copies in their entirety. Section 2 . The City Council of the City of Southlake, Texas, hereby appoints , to serve as relief Municipal Judge for Southlake, to serve in the absence of the Municipal Court Judge. The compensation will be set forth by the City Manager, in conjunction with the FY 1992-93 Annual Budget. Section 3 . This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 1992. qa —. City of Southlake,Texas ;,; Resolution No. 92-50 Appointment of Relief Municipal Court Judge page two CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS By: ATTEST: Sandra L. LeGrand City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney City of Southlake, Texas • • la City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM November 11, 1992 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Michael H. Barnes, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Drainage Easement and Agreement with Michael Benton In Phase V of SouthRidge Lake Subdivision (SRL) , a portion of this phase drains to Shady Oaks, travels south approximately 450 feet and crosses Shady Oaks at an existing 36" RCP. The 36" RCP is too small for existing flows much less additional flows created from Phase V of SRL. The Drainage Ordinance (Section 6. 07b) requires that if no capacity is remaining in the existing drainage structure the developer will be responsible for making the necessary improvements. The developer can be reimbursed for the improvements on a prorata basis by other developments that occur in that watershed. The City is responsible for procuring funds from other developers that develop in that watershed. There is a five year time limit on collecting these funds. Arvida, SRL's developer, has designed improvements (see attached map) to provide for the drainage in that watershed. To properly drain this basin, additional piping will be required across Shady Oaks. The existing drainage flows at a skewed angle across Michael Benton's property without benefit of a drainage easement. Mr. Benton has requested that the new pipe improvements be moved to the south approximately 36 feet so that the water will flow perpendicular to his property. Attached is an agreement that Mr. Benton has requested. The city attorneys revised the agreement based on Mr. Benton's requests. The city attorneys have stated that in order to comply with the attached agreement Mr. Benton will have to dedicate a drainage easement which he has agreed to do. The agreement states that all improvements will be installed as per the plans and that the developer will pay for those improvements. The agreement also states that the City will be responsible for repair of any damages to the property caused by any increased flow of water over the property with the exception of the 100 year storm. This may sound onerous for the City but the City would be responsible for the repairs caused by the increase in runoff because the City is requiring the improvements. Staff has discussed the agreement with the city attorneys and find the agreement acceptable. /Oa. -i Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager Drainage Easement and Agreement with Michael Benton November 12, 1992 Page 2 Please place this on the November 17 agenda for consideration by the City Council. If you have any questions or need further information, please contact me. MHB/kb c:ipfreslm tbenWn.eas 0 IS oU C,`_1e Lt &es • Phase V I,• • W yl I 1 4. -:.P • ad ci I 4 WITH 6 X 8 WIRE 7.5 ACRES b1 1i TYPE f1-HEADWA� RELAY EXISTING 30' RCP !lc ADD o �W ( 2ND 30 RCP (45 L.F.) nos) 659.0 GUARDRAIL b 1 1� (BOTH SIDES - FURNISHED BY CITY $ I 141 REMOVE EXISTING CULVERT , g c Ai o $ ` N I izn O O O N O f p Q O + (+V N N 41 M + I O 8 I 1 I I I I I • I- . 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 ' 1 I _ Lf. 2 _36' RCP 01.07L I�•`1 .."" ._..._.. .._..—..� _.._.:_ r ..�.. ._..._.. ..�--.._.._..�, - ! • � "--Ij - • -- _-- -_ E_XISINC_PAVEMENT1_ —' --- ` Ill U...----REGRADE EXISTING CHANNEL iO MATCH EXISITNO GROUND Ic SOD SHADY OAK DRIVE --X-- X---- X--T A- -- ------- - 12' 18' ROCK RIP-RAP W T ROCK RIP-RAP WI WTH TREVIRA SPUNBOND 1 MATH TREVIRA SPUNBOND I TYPE 'B' HEADWALL TYPE 1125 1 TYPE 1125 F(DS - 658.6 X • 1 31' 4:1 SIDESLOPE� I 5J' I x 1 LOT 10, BLK 1 ►•• 1 LOT 1, BLX 1 SOUTHLAKE ESTATES I I SOUTHLAKE ESTATES I BERMUDA S00—""‘".....--..-- VOL 388-75, PG. 8 I VOL 388-75, PG. 8 I 14' 8 657.2,\\\\\\\\ I 1 . FF 657.9 `( X I ' \ EXISTING J X n CVHOUSE I �' x , s ti x F • y I Re ' rok. 1rac )— c3 V I jtLlljN(,, tiHKKtI I Itt_ = 251f—DOU—JiDJ 1'dCV 1Z . L 1J =J1 IYO .U15 t' .0 2 DRAINAGE AGREEMENT STATE OF TEXAS T COUNTY OF TARRANT $ This agreement is entered into between Michael N. Benton ("Property Owner") and the City of Southlake, Texas ("City") for drainage construction on property located at 615 Love-Henry Court, Southlake, Texas. WHEREAS, Property Owner is the sole owner of a tract of land located at 615 Love-Henry Court in Southlake, Texas (the "Property") , which Property is situated at the intersection of Love-Henry Court and Shady Oaks Road, within the City of Southlake, Texas; and WHEREAS, the developer of Southridge Lakes Phase IV ("Developer") to the west of Shady Oaks Road is currently in the process of constructing drainage improvements in conjunction with the development of said subdivision; and WHEREAS, the natural flow of water currently flows from the west side of Shady Oaks Road under and across Shady Oaks Road and onto the Property in the area of an existing RCP drainage pipe which traverses Shady Oaks Road; and WHEREAS, the Property Owner has requested that the Developer remove the existing RCP drainage pipe underneath Shady Oaks Road and construct two new RCP pipes further to the south underneath Shady Oaks Road in order to direct the flow of water onto the southern portion of the Property, whereupon the water will again slake\easeTlrtt.01 Page 1 ;J L UiNb. tiHK.Kb I I ILL : tf i (- oU-� o:1 NOV i1 y1 iJ =.s1 NO .Ulf V .U5 0- eventually flow into the natural drainageway across the Property: and WHEREAS, Property Owner has executed a drainage easement to the City authorizing the construction and maintenance of drainage improvements at a location parallel to and south of the existing fence dividing Property Owner's residence from the remainder of the Property in order to accomplish the above purpose. NOW, THEREFORE, KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: 1. Property Owner hereby consents to the construction of two 36-inch RCP pipes underneath Shady Oaks Road adjacent to the drainage easement. Property Owner hereby further consents to the construction of a drainage swale which will be excavated and will extend approximately 120 feet onto the Property and within the drainage easement. The drainage swale will be filled with rock rip-rap for approximately the first 30 feet and the remaining approximately 90 feet will be sodded with bermuda grass. The drainage water will be permitted to flow southeastward upon exiting the drainage pipes under Shady Oaks Road and the rock rip-rap in the drainage easement. The cost of the above construction shall be borne by the Developer, at no expense to Property Owner. 2 . The City will be responsible for repair of any damages to the Property caused by any increased flow of water over the Property. Property Owner will be responsible for normal maintenance, such as mowing, within any portion of the drainage easement which is left in its natural condition and not otherwise stake\eesement.01 Page 2 /0 — t improved with structures, in accordance with the City of , Southlake's drainage ordinance. 3 . The Developer will fill and sod the existing drainage area after the new drainage area is constructed in accordance with this agreement. 4. The City represents to Property Owner that the drainage improvements covered in this agreement will allow for the adequate flow of water without any water damage to the residence on the Property excepting the 100 year event rainfall . In the event that, as a result of the improvements covered in this agreement, normal rainfall poses a threat to the residence on said Property, the City will take immediate corrective action at its sole expense. This agreement is executed this day of November, 1992. PROPERTY OWNER Michael N. Benton CITY OF SOUTHLAKE B. y City Manager ATTEST: City Secretary City of Southlake, Texas STATE OF TEXAS § slake\easement.01 Fage 3 /D a- .� iN COUNTY OF BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority in and for said County, Texas, on this day personally appeared Michael N. Benton, known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she executed the same for the purposes and consideration therein expressed. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE, this day of 19 Notary Public in and for the State of Texas My Commission Expires: Type or Print Notary's Name • sleke\easement.01 Page 4 City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM November 11, 1992 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Michael H. Barnes, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Interlocal Agreement Between City of Southlake, City of Keller and K.I.S.D. for Provision of Sanitary Sewer to Florence Elementary KISD has had problems in the past with their package treatment plant at Florence Elementary meeting the Texas Water Commission's (TWC) discharge requirements. TWC has strongly urged them, for the last two years, to upgrade their treatment plant or convert to a gravity system. Although the treatment plant is operating properly now KISD still wants to convert to the gravity system. Attached is a utility easement that Keller Independent School District (KISD) is giving the City of Southlake. KISD is giving Southlake this easement in order to install a gravity sewer line (see attached map) from their existing package treatment plant through Southlake and into Keller's sewer system. As discussed in the Southlake/Keller/KISD Interlocal Agreement, KISD is paying for all of the improvements of the gravity sewer lineand Southlake will inspect and take over maintenance of the improvements when completed. As a result, the residents in Cimarron Acres will be able to connect to the line in the future. At sometime in the future, a sewer line can be extended north to Johnson Road to provide sewer service to the residents in Vista Trails as well. Since Southlake residents will be able to connect to the gravity system, which flows to the City of Keller's sewer system, an agreement between the City of Keller, K.I.S.D. , and the City of Southlake needs to be approved detailing the responsibilities of each party. The attached agreement, as prepared by the city attorney, outlines the parameters between Keller, K.I.S.D, and Southlake. The agreement basically states: 1. KISD is granting the City of Southlake a utility easement. 2 . KISD is agreeing to pay all engineering, surveying, and construction cost of the sewer line. 3 . The City of Southlake will review and approve construction plans and will not charge KISD the 3% inspection fee. 4 . City of Keller will not charge sewer prorata or impact fees to Southlake. 5. KISD will dedicate the sewer line to Southlake. { Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager Interlocal Agreement Between City of Southlake, City of Keller and K.I.S.D. for Provision of Sanitary Sewer Service to Florence Elementary November 12, 1992 Page 2 6. Keller will bill the City of Southlake each month from water meter readings sent to them by Southlake. Keller will bill Southlake based upon sewer charges that the City of Keller has adopted. The City of Keller has reviewed the agreement and finds it acceptable. The City of Keller will act on this item at their November 17 meeting. K.I.S.D. has dedicated the easement and authorized the expenditure of funds for the project, and is waiting on the cities of Keller and Southlake to accept the agreement to award the construction contract. (It is my understanding that the contract was bid the last week in October. ) K. I.S.D. will be required to sign the agreement prior to start of construction. Staff considers this agreement to be beneficial to all parties. Please place this on the November 17 agenda for consideration by the City Council. If you have any questions or need further information, please contact me. MHB/kb c:I wpfilalmemoslkeller.agr . • -- --- - - -- 0 v - - , - - \ lq 4G2 - -- 1 — 1 4G 7A fc (j\ 4B 4K 7C1 1B 18 1C1 1C '32 = J 1\1 _: � , 1J 1 A 14 P • 4.CI "— - � �_ ..._ . B1 . == I ELEMENTARY 1G 1B1B 420.o.3 en, 1B1B1 I `- 1 B1-B2 I 1H 1B1 —� 1B1C �- 1.05....vorsiww...*.a.schaa. z o -� 1B1A . L.L F4- � ' > sfffr oCCY \l�- li.1—Grt in--L.-ATTE iii ) ) J 1 w ii (,- IN ' i p,..'1..:,.. F.) .1_ . NOT TO SCAT 1 . JORDAN DRIVE )----__. CITY OF SOUTHLAKE PERMANENT UTILITY EASEMENT THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TARRANT KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That We, the Keller Independent School District, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten ($10 ) Dollars and other good and valuable consideration in hand paid by Grantee herein, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged and confessed, have granted, sold and conveyed, and by these presents do grant, sell and convey to the CITY OF . SOUTHLAKE,. Grantee herein, of Tarrant County, Texas a permanent and perpetual easement for the purpose of installing, repairing, maintaining, altering, replacing, relocating, and operating utilities in, into, upon, over, across and under that land in Tarrant County, Texas described as follows , to-wit : Permanent Utility Easement: See attached Exhibit 'A' for metes and bounds description. See attached Exhibit ' B' for graphic depiction. together with the right of ingress and egress as necessary for such purposes . Such permanent easement shall include the right to excavate upon such property, but Grantee shall replace any fences, improvements, or other fixtures upon said property without cost of Grantor, or current owner thereof; and shall restore the property as nearly as possible to its condition prior to entry thereon. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the above described easement, together with all and singular, the rights and appurtenances thereto, anywise belonging unto the said Grantee, its successors and assigns forever; and I/We do hereby certify that I/We are the owners of the property described herein and bind myself/ourselves , my/our heirs and assigns , to warrant and to forever defend all and singular the premises unto the said Grantee, its successors and assigns, against every person whomsoever lawfully claiming or to claim same or any thereof . EXECUTED this the day of • Page One of Four • /?, • THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TARRANT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared \v `� �v��� known to me to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same for the purposes and consideration therein expressed. GIVEN under my hand and seal of office on this the day of (�G�� , A.D. 19 Notary Public in and for the State of Texas My commission expires : Accepted by City of Southlake, this the day of A.D. 19 . By: Mayor, City of Southlake, Texas Return to: City Secretary City of Southlake 667 N. Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 Document: EASESTD Folder: EASEMENT Date: April 7. 1992 /0 EXHIBIT A UTILITY EASEMENT BEING a tract of land situated in the J.G. ALLEN SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 18, in the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas and being situated in a called 10 acre tract of land as described in a WarrantyDeed from Royal E. Smith, Jr. and wife, Marilyn Smith to the Keller Independent School District as dated May 2nd, 1974 and filed May 7th, 1974 in the Deed Records of Tarrant County, Texas and being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows: BEGINNING at a point for corner, said point being the southwest corner of said 10 acre tract, said point also being in the north line of CIMMARRON ACRES, an Addition to the City of Southlake, Texas, according to the Map thereof in Volume 388-181 at Page 008 of the Plat Records of Tarrant County, Texas; THENCE North, departing said north line of CIMMARRON ACRES and along the west line of said 10 acre tract, for a distance of 260.0 feet to a point for corner; THENCE East, departing said west line of the 10 acre tract, for a distance of 57.14 feet to a point for corner; THENCE South for a distance of 260.0 feet to a point on the south line of said 10 acre tract, same being on the north line of said CIMMARRON ACRES; THENCE West, along the south line of said 10 acre tract and the north line of said CIMMARRON ACRES, for a distance of 57.14 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; CONTAINING 14,856 square feet or 0.341 of an acre of land, more or less. Prepared By: Owen Ayres & Associates, Inc. � . 41 GEARY BAfLEY Geary Bai ey Registered Pro onal Land Sulthi No. 4573 <: 9 57 3 opcsO d •sl.Ji-��� r o PEARSON ROAD . D W -( NW. COR. J.G.ALLEN M SURVEY m D I- A -I D to'3 Z m n o z2 • 1 z to O i 1A 0-*I a 60' n u C N NORTH 260.0' L r HARRELL DRIVE o 1064.0 ' n O _ o Z rn • • SOUTH 260.0' m z cn v • -p -I Z T • 'A-i KELLER INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT XI 1 '1 • v IO ACRES 0 r r- 0 FILED 5-07-1974 p o K w . ro ��-QC�(� D v Tr! mac),ys 0 o Z �� G-L • 33 • m r z m tD 1 N i0 O • U1 r !1f' F1 m )0° II =IELDING, BARRETT TEL : 817-560-3953 Nov 12 ,92 15 :37 No .016 P .02 INTERWCAL_COOP RATION AOREElSENT FOR T1TE PROVISIONS OF SANITARY SLOWER SERVICES STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TARRANT § THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the City of Southlake, Texas, a home rule municipal corporation, located in Tarrant County, Texas (hereinafter referred to as "Southlake") , the City of Keller, Texas, a home rule municipal corporation, located in Tarrant County, Texas (hereinafter referred to as "Keller") and the Keller Independent School District, a political subdivision of the State of Texas (hereinafter referred to as "K.I.S.D. ") . WHEREAS, Article 4413 (32c) of the Revised Civil Statutes of Texas, authorizes school districts and cities in the State of Texas to contract with and between one another for the providing of various governmental functions and services, including those in the area of public health and sanitation; and WHEREAS, K. I. S.D. has located Florence Elementary on a tract of land lying within the corporate limits of the City of Southlake; and WHEREAS, the City of Southlake does not currently have a sanitary sewer collector main located within an acceptable distance of the Florence Elementary School campus; and WHEREAS, Florence Elementary School is currently treating its wastewater through a package treatment plant rather than through connection to a public type sanitary sewer system; and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of K.I.S.D. has determined that - 1 - / ?- 4LLtl1Nb , tiHKKLI I ILL : ti1 (-5bU-S95., NOV 11 ,�1 15 =S( NO .U16 P .03 it would be more efficient and appropriate to discontinue use of a package sewer treatment plant and to ensure that all wastewaters generated on the Florence Elementary School campus are processed through a public equivalent sanitary sewer system; and WHEREAS, the City of Keller has a sanitary sewer collection main lying within an acceptable distance of the campus of Florence Elementary School; and WHEREAS, the City of Keller has agreed to extend sanitary sewer collection and treatment service to the Florence Elementary School campus if K.I.S.D. bears the cost of installing the necessary public works improvements to connect the Florence Elementary School campus to the appropriate point on the Keller sanitary sewer system; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Southlake has agreed to permit K.I.S.D. to connect its Florence Elementary School campus to the City of Keller sanitary sewer system under the terms and conditions set forth below; and WHEREAS, the cities of Southlake and Keller and K. I.S.D. have reached agreement on the method by which this provision of sanitary sewer service will occur and have determined that it is appropriate to memorialize this agreement in a written instrument. NOW, THEREFORE, KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: The City of Southlake, the City of Keller and K.I.S.D. , for the mutual consideration herein after stated, agree as follows: I. K.I.S.D_ hereby grants to the City of Southlake a 57. 14 foot wide permanent utility easement from the existing K.I.S. D. package =IELDING , BARRETT TEL : 817-560-3953 Nov 12 ,92 15 :37 No .016 P .04 treatment plant for a distance of approximately 260 feet for the purpose of allowing the installation of a gravity sewer line. A legal description of the easement to be conveyed is attached hereto and incorporated herein for all purposes as Exhibit MA" to this Agreement. II. K.I.s.D. agrees to pay all costs associated with the engineering, design and construction of the gravity sewer line connecting the existing Florence Elementary School campus to the City of Keller sewer collection system. III. The City of Southlake shall have the right to review and approve the construction plans and the alignment of the gravity flow sanitary sewer line to be constructed by K.I.S.D. under the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The City of Southlake will inspect the construction of the line for those portions of the line lying within the corporate limits of the City of Southlake. The City of Southlake will not charge K. I.S.D. the normal three percent (31) inspection fee customary for this service. Iv. The City of Keller will not charge a sewer pro rata or impact fee for any connections made by any individual or party to the gravity sanitary sewer line constructed within the corporate limits of the City of Southlake pursuant to this Agreement. The City of Keller may charge such pro rata or impact fees as it deems necessary or appropriate for any portions of this line lying outside the corporate limits of the City of Southlake. - 3 - /t - 7° =1ELDING, BARRETT TEL : 817-560-3953 Nov 12 ,92 15 :6r No .u1F. F' .U* V. At the completion to construction of the gravity sanitary sewer line which forms the basis of this Agreement, K.I.S.D. will dedicate the line to the City of Southlake and the City of Southlake will maintain the portion of sewer line that is within the public rights-of-way or utility easements dedicated to the City of Southlake from this time forward. VI. The City of Southlake will read the water meters each month on all customers of any type within the City of Southlake who have connected to the gravity sanitary sewer line extension which forms the basis of this Agreement and shall transmit the readings to the City of Keller on a monthly basis. The City of Keller will bill the City of Southlake for each sewer connection on a monthly basis based upon the system of charges that the City of Keller levies upon its own system for the provision of comparable service excluding pro rata charges and impact fees. The City of Southlake agrees that it will pay bills received for the provision of sanitary sewer service to residents and businesses located physically within the corporate limits of the City of Southlake within fifteen (15) days following receipt of same. VII. This Agreement and any of its terms and provisions, as well as the rights and duties of the parties hereto shall be governed by the laws of the State of Texas. In the event that any cause of action is filed by either party arising out of the terms of this Agreement, venue for said lawsuit shall be in Tarrant County, ^ 4 — =IELDING, BARRETT TEL: 817-560-3953 Nov 12 ,92 15 :37 No .016 P.06 Texas. VIII. In the event that any portion of this Agreement shall be found to be contrary to law, it is the intent of the parties hereto that the remaining portions shall remain valid and in full force and effect to the extent possible. IX. The undersigned officers and/or agents of the parties hereto are the properly authorized officials and have the necessary authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the parties hereto, and each party hereby certifies to the other that any necessary resolutions or orders extending said authority have bee duly passed and are now in full force and effect. EXECUTED in multiple originals - this the day of , 1992. CITY OF SOUTHLAKE BY: SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME on this day of , 1992. Notary Public in and for the State of Texas My Commission Expires: Type or Print Notary's Name APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: Attorney for the City of Southlake - 5 - FIELDING , BARRETT TEL : 817-560-3953 Nov 12 ,92 15:37 No .016 P .07 CITY OF KELLER BY: Mayor ATTEST: City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney KELLER INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT BY: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: Attorney for Keller Independent School District slake\flocenca.agr • — 6 - • 1V The City of Keller will not charge a sewer pro rata or impact fee for any connections made by any individual or party to the gravity sanitary sewer line constructed within the corporate limits of the City of Southlake pursuant to this Agreement. The City of Keller may charge such pro rata or impact fees as it deems necessary or appropriate for any portions. of this line lying outside the corporate limits of the City of Southlake. It is understood by and between the parties that the City of. Southlake shall retain the right to authorize such connections as it deems appropriate within the corporate limits of the City of Southlake. V. City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM November 12, 1992 TO: Curtis Hawk, City Manager FROM: Chris Terry, Asst. to the City Manager SUBJECT: PARK USE POLICY REVISIONS City staff has reviewed the recommended changes to the current Park Use Policy that have been made by the Parks & Recreation Board. The focus of the revisions is to address a proposed fee structure to cover the new Community Building at Bicentennial Park. Some terminology has been added to address the responsibilities of the Parks and Recreation Coordinator position that will be on staff beginning in January. Specific changes involve the assessment of charges to groups that may wish to use the Community Building. This fee change from $10 . 00 to $15 .00 for the Community Building appears on page 2, item A.2 . and page 2, item B. 1. Other additions include the rental offer of TV/VCR use for $5. 00 and tennis racket rental for $2 .50 per hour per person. New sections addressing building scheduling and access appear on page 2, item C. The Parks & Recreation Board felt that the slight fee increase for the new building was justified in view of increased janitorial services that will be required to maintain the Community Building. A copy of the current policy (EXHIBIT A) , and proposed revisions (EXHIBIT B) , are attached. Parks & Recreation Board Chair, Janet Murphy plans to appear before City Council to answer any questions regarding the suggested changes . CT !0C - c EXHIBIT A BICENTENNIAL PARK Park Use Policy Bicentennial Park offers recreational facilities for all citizens of Southlake and other non-profit organizations within the City. It is located on North White Chapel Road just North of FM1709 . For information and reservations, please call 481-5581 ext. 703: the City Manager' s Office, City Hall, 667 North Carroll Avenue. DEFINITIONS : For the purpose of this park use policy, a non-profit organization is defined as : a. An organization holding a valid non-profit charter approved by the State of Texas . A copy of this charter is required; or b. An organization sponsored by a public school district within the City of Southlake. FACILITIES AND FEES: I . Southlake Civic Center A. Non-profit organizations operating within the City of Southlake • 1 . The Civic Center_ may be reserved for regular meetings . An annual registration fee of $25.00 is to be paid in September each year. A list of regular meeting dates must be submitted with the registration. A security deposit of $50 . 00 is required at the time of registration. This deposit is refundable if the facility has been left clean and in order and the key returned on time. If the facility is not left clean and in order or if the key is not returned within one-half hour following a meeting, the security deposit will be revoked and must be replenished prior to the next meeting. Users are responsible for all damages occurring to the facilities through user' s negligence or negligence of guests, invitees , etc. Payment of the security deposit does not release the user from this responsibility. 2 . Special activities, such as fund raising events or holiday parties, will be scheduled on a first come basis at a rate of $10 . 00 per hour, three hours minimum. toe - A Park Use Policy Page 2 3 . No group may reserve the Civic Center for regular meetings from 1: 30 p.m. on Friday to midnight Sunday. These hours are reserved on a first come basis only. 4 . Access to the facility is limited to the scheduled group when meetings are in session. B. Other citizens or groups 1. The Civic Center may be reserved for functions such as family reunions or birthday parties at the rate of $10 . 00 per hour, three hours minimum. 2 . A security deposit of $50.00 is required with the reservation. This deposit is refundable if the facility is left clean and in order and the key returned on time. 3 . Access to the facility is limited to the scheduled group when functions are in progress . C. Keys 1. The Civic Center shall be locked when not in use. 2 . The key will be available at police dispatch at Southlake City Hall and must be returned there within one-half hour after the reserved time. 3 . Failure to return the key will result in forfeit of the security deposit. II. Balifields There are three ballfields available to the citizens of Southlake and non-profit organizations operating within the City. Groups outside the City will be given consideration on an as available basis at a negotiated rate. The Southlake Baseball Association, the Southlake Girls Softball Association, and any activity sanctioned/sponsored by the City of Southlake Parks and Recreation Board shall be exempt from the following fees . A. Lighting Fees 1 . Field #1 is a tournament-size, lighted field and Field #2 and #3 are smaller, lighted fields . Each field can be reserved for a base rate of $5 . 00 per hour for a minimum of two hours , paid in advance. • ( oa - 3 Park Use Policy Page 3 B. Field Preparation Fees 1 . If the . City Park personnel are requested to prepare the ballfields for play (i .e. , drag it, chalk it and place bases) , the following fees will be paid in advance: Weekday games : $25 . 00 Weekend Games : $37 .50 III . Concession Stand Citizens of Southlake an non-profit organizations within the City must request the concession stand in advance and must provide volunteers to staff and stand. The City of Southlake may have a contract granting a particular vendor exclusivity. Organizations should check with City staff before procuring supplies for the concession stand. There must be at least one adult present in the concession stand while it is open. IV. Tennis Courts Use of the tennis courts will be on a first-come basis for one hour periods when others are waiting. V. Overnight Park Use The park may be reserved on an overnight basis subject to approval by the City Council. In deliberating the merits of the use the Council shall consider the factors outlined in Zoning Ordinance #480, Section 45.5 . Council shall specifically consider the length of time for the use, any fees or deposits to be charged and security to be provided. VI . Insurance Requirements for Specific Activities Any organization or association that desires to utilize the athletic fields belonging to the City of Southlake for the purpose of establishing an organized program of athletic competition, such as soccer leagues, softball leagues, little leagues, or other comparable activities on a continuing, scheduled basis for structured athletic competition shall be required to provide proof of insurance. Such organizations shall have a general liability policy, naming the City as additional insured, in an amount of at least One-Million Dollars ($1, 000 , 000) with such policy specifically designed to cover the cost of defense and of liability for injuries suffered by competitors in the organized athletic activity. Organizations subject to this provision shall be required to lnc - `f Park Use Policy Page 4 deposit proof of insurance in a form acceptable to the City Manager with the City Secretary prior to commencing use of City athletic fields. The requirements set out above are designed and intended to be applicable only to formal organizations and leagues who sponsor and control organized continuing athletic activities on a seasonal basis. The insurance requirement is not applicable to individual citizens or groups of citizens' who desire to use athletic fields on a one time basis. The purpose of this regulation is to protect the City against any costs which might arise from an organized program of league activities with its increased risk of competitor injury due to volume of activity. NO ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES WILL BE SOLD OR CONSUMED IN THE PARK. Park Use Policy approved by the City Council, City of Southlake, on March 5, 1991. EXHIBIT B PROPOSED PARK USE POLICY 4110 Bicentennial Park, located on White Chapel Blvd. north of FM 1709 , offers recreational facilities for all citizens of Southlake and other non-profit organizations within the City. For information and reservations, call 481-5581 ext. 703; or write to the City Manager's Office, City Hall, 667 N. Carroll Ave. , Southlake, TX 76092 . DEFINITIONS: For the purpose of this Park Use Policy, a non-profit organization is defined as: 1. Non-profit organization a. An organization holding a valid non-profit charter approved by the State of Texas (a copy of this charter is required when renting the park facilities) ; or b. An organization sponsored by a public school district within the City of Southlake. 2 . Coordinator The full-time City of Southlake paid staff personnel responsible for parks and recreation coordination. FACILITIES AND FEES: I. The Lodge in the Park and Community Building. A. Non-profit organizations operating within the City of Southlake. 1. The Lodge may be reserved for regular meetings during weekdays (Monday through Friday) . The Coordinator will be responsible for handling all reservations and scheduling. An annual refundable registration fee of $25 . 00 is to be paid prior to the first usage of the facility and renewable each year by October 1. A list of regular meeting dates must be submitted with the registration fee. A security deposit of $50 . 00 is required at the time of registration and may be left on file for the duration of the regularly scheduled meeting dates . The security deposit will be refunded if the facility has been left clean and in order, and all keys issued are returned to the Coordinator or police dispatch at City Hall on time. No group or individual may reserve the Lodge or Community Building for regular meetings from 4 :30 p.m. on Friday to 12 : 00 midnight Sunday. These hours are reserved on a first-come basis only, and �, Park Use Policy 41/0 Pg. 2 reservations cannot be made more than six (6) days in advance. No group or individual may use the facility for more than three (3) consecutive weekends, not to exceed twelve ( 12) weekends in a fiscal year. 2 . The Lodge will be scheduled for special activities, such as fund-raising events or holiday parties, on a first-come basis at a rate of $10 . 00 per hour (three hour minimum) . The Community Building will be scheduled for special activities on a first-come basis at a rate of $15.00 per room per hour (three hour minimum) , or $75 .00 per hour for the entire building (three hour minimum) . A waiver of fees for a single use is at the discretion of the Coordinator. A TV/VCR in a locking cabinet with wheels is available for a fee of $5 . 00 per use. The request for the use of the TV/VCR must be submitted with the facility use request. B. Other citizens or groups . 1110 1. The Lodge may be reserved for functions such as family reunions or birthday parties at the rate of $10 . 00 per hour )three hour minimum) . The Community Building may be reserved for special functions at the rate of $15 . 00 per room per hour (three hour minimum) , or $75 . 00 per hour for the entire building (three hour minimum) . 2 . A security deposit of $50 . 00 is required with the reservation. This deposit is refundable if the facility is left clean and in order (as determined by the Coordinator) and all keys returned within o -half hour following the end of the function to e Coordinator's office at Bicentennial park or to olice dispatch at City Hall. C. S edulin and Access . 1 . The ge shall be locked when not in use. 2 . The keys will be available and can be obtained from the Coordinator or police dispatch at City Hall. 3 . Access to The Lodge or to the room(s) in the Community Building is limited to the scheduled 1111 group when meetings are in session. l () � - 7 Park Use Policy • Pg. 3 4 . Access to The Lodge and Community Building is controlled by the Coordinator. Multiple activities and/or groups may be scheduled at the same time. No group may schedule the Community Building for a use that precludes the use of the other available meeting rooms . 5 . If the facility is not left clean and in proper order (as determined by the Coordinator) , or if the keys are not returned within one-half hour following a meeting, the security deposit will be forfeited and another security deposit must be submitted prior to further use of the facility. 6 . Users of the facility(ies) are responsible for all damages occurring to the facility, its furnishings, equipment and other property related to the use of the facility, through user's negligence or the negligence of guests, invitees, etc. Payment of the security deposit does not release the user of the facility from responsibility for damages . Any user found in violation will not only forfeit the . security deposit, but may be denied further use of the facility. II. Ballfields. There are three ballfields available to the citizens of Southlake and non-profit organizations operating within the City. Groups outside the City will be given consideration on an as available basis . The Southlake Baseball Association, ' Southlake Girls Softball Association, and any activity sanctioned/sponsored by the City of Southlake shall be exempt from the following fees . A. Lighting Fees . 1. Field #1 is a tournament size, lighted field and Field #2 and #3 are smaller, lighted fields . Each field can be reserved for a base rate of $5. 00 per hour for a minimum of two hours, paid in advance. B. Field Preparation Fees. 1. If Bicentennial Park personnel are requested to prepare the ballfields for play (i.e. drag it, chalk it, and place bases) , the following fees will • be paid in advance: ( dc ` g Park Use Policy Pg. 4 Weekday games : $25 . 00 Weekend games: $37 . 50 III . Concession Stand. Citizens of Southlake and non-profit organizations within the City must request the concession stand in advance and must provide volunteers to staff the stand. The City of Southlake may have a contract granting a particular vendor exclusivity. Organizations should check with City staff with staff before procuring supplies for the concession stand. There must be at least one adult present in the concession stand while it is open. IV. Tennis Courts . Use of the tennis courts will be on a first-come basis for one hour periods when others are waiting. Tennis rackets may be rented from the Coordinator's office at the rate of $2 . 50 per hour per person. V. Overnight Park Use. The park may be reserved on an overnight basis subject to approval by the City Council. In deliberating the merits of the use, the Council shall consider the factors outlined in Zoning Ordinance #480 , Sec . 45 .5 . Council shall specifically consider the length of time for the use, any fees or deposits to be charged and security to be provided. VI . Insurance Requirements for Specific Activities . Any organization of association that desires to utilize the athletic fields belonging to the City of Southlake for the purpose of establishing an organized program of athletic competition, such as soccer leagues , softball leagues, little leagues, or other comparable activities on a continuing basis for structured athletic competition shall be required to provide proof of insurance. Such organizations shall have a general liability policy, naming the City as additional insured, in an amount of at least one million dollars ($1,000,000) with such policy specifically designed to cover the cost of defense and of liability for injuries suffered by competitors in the organized athletic activity. Organizations subject to this provision shall be required to deposit proof of insurance in a form acceptable to the City Manager with the City Secretary prior to commencing use of City athletic fields . The requirements set out above are designed and intended to be applicable only to formal organizations and leagues who Park Use Policy 11/1 Pg. 5 sponsor and control organized continuing athletic activities on a seasonal basis . The insurance requirement is not applicable to individual citizens or groups of citizens who desire to use athletic fields on a one time basis . The purpose of this regulation is to protect the City against any costs which might arise from an organized program of league activities with its increased risk of competitor injury due to volume of activity. VII . Alcoholic Beverages . No alcoholic beverages will be sold or consumed in Bicentennial Park. I acknowledge that I have received a copy of the Park Use Policy, I have read it and understand it, and agree to follow all proedures, policies, and restrictions as set forth in the Park Use Policy. 1110 • Organization Date Printed name Signature (OC - ( O 4 City of Southlake,Texas MEMORANDUM November 12 , 1992 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Michael H. Barnes, P.E. , Public Works Director RE: Tarrant County Street Reconstruction Program for 1993 Each year the Tarrant County requests that the cit4es submit their list of streets they are requesting for the County to reconstruct. In the 1992-93 year, $143, 000 was budgeted to reconstruct and seal coat city streets using County crews. Of the $143 , 000, $93 , 000 was budgeted for reconstruction of streets and $50, 000 was budgetedfor ting e st is proposed for reconstruction were T.hhnson Road and ontinental, from South Carroll Road to South Kimball or a out 1 , inear feet of streets. The streets to be seal coated are all the streets in Crosstimber Hills Subdivision or about 21, 000 linear feet of streets. The County has requested that the City submit their list of streets to be reconstructed or seal coated to them as soon as possible. The above streets do not have to be approved at this time, but the City does need to give to the County the length and type of construction to be performed so that they can prepare their work schedule for next year. Please place this item on the Council's next agenda. If you have any questions, please contact me. (''A MHB/lc c:I wpfileslmemosltarrn:93.srr .ir vq �c«uv;�;.,. OCT 1 51992 .-. a OFFICE OF H me CITY SECRETARY, TARRANT COUNTY NORTHEAST GOVERNMENT COMPLEX 06 COPY BOB HAMPTON 645 GRAPEVINE HIGHWAY ✓ ��I COUNTY COMMISSIONER HURST,TEXAS 76054 /tv L1 PRECINCT NO.3 (817)485-9331 October 9, 1992 Honorable Mayor Gary Fickes City of Southlake 667 North Carroll Avenue Southlake, Texas 76092 Dear Mayor Fickes: This year, as in the past, I am asking the cities of Precinct 3 to consider their needs for county assistance on reconstruction and construction of streets located in their incorporated area and forward those requests to my office. If you are requesting work on more than one project, please identify your city's priority for each project. Our priority in providing assistance will be work on thoroughfares, arterials and major collectors. We are expecting many requests due to difficult economic times; therefore, we are asking city councils to establish their priorities with this in mind. In addition, our workload on county projects will affect the level of assistance we are able to provide. For our records and information, please indicate who will be authorized to sign the interlocal agreements on behalf of the city. After I review and assess all requests, the staff from our transportation department will contact your staff regarding the estimated costs and scheduling for the projects. An interlocal agreement will be developed as we approach a "start date" for the project. Under the county's cooperative purchasing program, materials may be purchased directly form the vendor at the county's contract prices. /Ddz Page 2 We appreciate the opportunity to work with you in this cooperative effort and look forward to another productive year. Yours truly, Bob Hampton County Commissioner Precinct Three cc: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager /Dd- PAST TARRANT COUNTY RECONSTRUCTION PROJECTS BUDGET YEAR PROJECT LENG 88-89 So. Carroll from 1709 to Continental , 00 89-90 No. Kimball (all) 9 ,000 ' Shady Oaks (all) 10,500 ' 90-91 So. Kimball (all) 5,600 ' E & W Highland 13,000 ' 91-92 N. Peytonville - 1709 to Raven Bend 5,800 ' S. Peytonville - 1709 to 1,000 ' 1,000 ' STREETS PROPOSED IN PAST NOT RECONSTRUCTED 90-91 E. Continental-White Chapel to Kimball 5,0001 Johnson Road - (all) 5,300 ' Carroll - Dove to Burney 3,300 ' 91-92 Burney - Carroll to Lonesome Dove 3, 100 ' City of Southiake,Texas MEMORANDUM 1111 November 11, 1992 TO: Curtis E. Hawk, City Manager FROM: Michael H. Barnes, Director of Public Works - SUBJECT: Street Selection for 1.5 million dollar Street Bond Program In July of this year, staff met with the "Southlake Citizens for Better Roads" committee to discuss the selection of roads to be included in the first phase of the 4.5 million dollar bondyrogram passed in May of this year. There was a consensus that the following roads should be reconstructed in the first phase of the street bond program: Description of Road / /5 1. N. Carroll from SH114 to Dove $ 75,0 0 0 2. N. Carroll-from FM1709 to SH114 225,000 3 . Peytonville Road-from FM1709 to Continental 350,000 • 4 . N. Carroll-from Dove to Burney 125,000 5. Realign the intersections of Dove and White Chapel and Carroll and FM1709, and the R.O.W. acquisition along Peytonville Road 225,000 Total $1,500, 000 The above roads and cost estimates are the same as what was proposed to the Council for the Bond Election. The cost estimates includes all fees such as construction, engineering, surveying, and right-of-way acquisition. On November 10, 1992 the City received 1.5 million dollars for the first phase of construction for the bond program. Therefore, final selection of the streets needs to be approved by the Council. If the Council agrees with the selection by the committee as stated above, staff will bring to the Council at their next meeting a construction schedule and an engineering contract with Cheatham and Associates to start the design of the roads. Please place this on the November 17 agenda for consideration by the City Council. If you have any questions or need further information, please contact me. kb